I missed this little part actually, and I honestly don't know where that's coming from.
I care a great deal about these forums, and I'm trying to make some positive change... But things are slow, and as Innus stated... We're doing all this work for charity. I happen to have a fair bit of free time on my hands, so it makes it a little easier for me... But at the same time, I still need to go to work, come back home, make dinner, walk the dog and all that jazz AND see friends and socialize and then on top of it spend many hours cleaning up a lot of spam and putting out a lot of fires.
I'm not looking for sympathy here, I know exactly what I signed up for. But I'm not superman, and since this work isn't paying my bills, things are going to move a little more slowly in terms of positive change. And I'm definitely all for constructive ideas on how to improve the forums, and the Decks to Watch is something that I totally agree with and I've pitched to the higher-ups again (citing the thread in SYM as a source of user popularity reference). If you have any more ideas, please... Post them. I love seeing ideas.
To be honest, Juju is the only user to complain to me on a frequent basis (well... actually the only one ever) about Swans being in the Competitive forum. The irony is that in terms of how I view Swans, I'm on the same page as him... The difference being, if we start drawing too many lines, decks that are competitive and have a shot at titles don't get discussed and as a result, don't get that title.
Competitive is a word that comes from it's derivitive: Compete. To compete means it is being put into a contest... In this case, a contest against other decks. While it has some glaring weaknesses against certain decks, the deck HAS shown the ability to compete in certain metagames.
As said, we are working on getting a forum restructuring soon... So hopefully this "problem" will be averted for the remainder of time, lol.
Alright... I'm finally back and have some time to address some of the issues here.
First of all, I am not disagreeing that Swans isn't a serious Type II competitor. I've been in agreement with that point from the very start... That being said, I've got a friend who is developing a pretty potent version of Swans and is mopping the floor with a LOT of decks... I'm not saying that it's the next greatest thing in Magic, but the deck is competitive... In the grand scheme of things? Perhaps not. But this brings me to my next point...
In regards to people complaining about how it didn't have a showing at PT Hollywood: In terms of the Competitive level of this forum, how many users do you figure here are regularly attending high Pro Tour events? Very, very few. Most of our competitive play is restricted to FNM... And as a result, if you can expect to see it do well at an FNM, and since most of the players play at FNM... It doesn't take much to connect the dots here.
In regards to the Decks to Watch subforum. I am fully behind this plan and I desperately want to get it implemented as soon as possible. We have been working on the idea, and until we get the kinks sorted out we don't really have the time to move threads all over the place and end up having to move them back to other places again.
You have to be somewhat realistic in terms of expectations in the forum. Yes, I totally want to increase the quality of posts and the level of strategy in these forums... This has been my keen desire from the get-go. However, complaining every five seconds about the same problem isn't helping anything. The Type II forums are not nearly as "competitive" as they should be right now. Progress is slow... And the simple fact of the matter is that when you get over 20 PMs in your inboxes a day reporting posts that are flames or spam or mismade threads... It makes it very difficult to implement changes in a timely fashion.
I spend probably 3-4 hours each day trying to clean up/watch this place. When things are quiet, I try and hone the ideas/proposals to the higher-ups. Keep in mind, other than being able to move/sticky/rename/edit/delete/infract threads (or posts), in terms of the actual structuring of the forum I don't have any physical power in that regard... Meaning I need to get an idea that is feasible and workable enough to convince not only the rest of the Type II moderating staff, but the admins as well. It doesn't happen overnight and believe me... I want changes to be made and I am up for the task of making them so long as I'm given a chance to.
I understand to a degree the frustration of seeing a deck you feel does not belong in Competitive... But at the same time, what does it really matter in the end? The top decks are stickied, and the not-so-good decks are down at the bottom... I'm not saying this setup is perfect, and as said, I want it changed... But really, is it THAT unbearable? We as the mods have never pretended that these decks are incredible or amazing... But they ARE an option when you're trying to decide what to bring to your next FNM.
Like I said, I've got a buddy who's playing Swans... And since theres a LOT of mana ramp in my neck of the woods, Swans generally mops the floor with them making it a good choice for him. Is it perfect? No... Will it win a pro tour? Almost positively not... But still, it is a competitive choice in the not so grand scheme of things.
Ultimately, I really think people need to define what their idea of "netdecking" is. My definition of "netdecking" is copying card for card a list that a pro player has played. That's my personal definition. As I mentioned on my first post, during Mirrodin and then into Kamigawa, I played a lot of Tooth and Nail. Did I netdeck? No... Believe it or not, my build evolved into Tooth and Nail on my own merit, through my own playtesting and choices (it started off as Mindslaver.dec). So when my final list was optimized and a full fledged Tooth and Nail deck that I built off my own blood and sweat, does that count as a netdeck?
No... I built it, I customized it, I created it myself. As someone else mentioned, all great decks came from somewhere... And they weren't Tier 1 forever... At some first FNM or whatever, Fearies were a "rogue deck" so to speak... Now that it is considered one of the (if not THE) strongest decks in the format, many people will adopt the deck and play it themselves.
And as said... Some people will still play "rogue" or "suboptimal" lists for certain decks... I know a guy who plays Jace in his Faeries deck. Is it the right call? I don't think so... *But* it has worked out well for him. Is he a netdecker for playing Faeries as a whole, regardless of some particular card choices?
So where is the line? At what point do you become a "netdecker" for playing a particular strategy? There are thousands upon thousands of competitive players, and they wouldn't BE competitive if they didn't utilize the more powerful strategies presented in each set of cards. As said, many players have evolved their "homebrew" Faerie deck into a full out competitive deck... These players aren't netdeckers are they? Even though they built it from the ground up themselves? Heck, even the players who take the PRINCIPLE of the deck and apply it to their metagame, are they considered netdeckers? There are still deckbuilding challenges when netdecking... I look at Gindy's list and there are choices that I would make to change the list... I would adapt it according to what *I* feel is best. Am I better than Gindy? I would imagine not... But there I still hold to my beliefs and opinions about what is right/wrong, and *that* is where the deckbuilding skill is in... Some people would argue that he is the pro and that his word should be taken over mine, but for my particular metagame, is Gindy the expert or am I? That's what it comes down to... Even tweaking the best netdecks takes skill. It takes even more skill to consistently win large events as well, regardless of whether you "netdecked".
As others have said, people take what they want from the game... Whether they get the thrill out of playing, winning, deckbuilding, comboing off... Whatever, everyone has a different idea of what the game should be like. There is no right/wrong in Magic in my eyes... According to the definitions of many players in here, I netdeck Faeries. I don't consider myself to be a "netdecker", even though I took the principle of Faeries, I am adapting it according to my playstyle and what I feel are the correct card choices for it. At the same time, I'm developing my own homebrew deck. Is it better than Faeries? Probably not... It's a strong deck and I've been mostly keeping it to myself and my playgroups, but with a little time, who knows? Maybe my deck will become the next netdeck and that's one of the thrills I get from playing Magic. I want to win yes, and in some circumstances I will play the best deck available... But if I feel I've caught onto something new that people will play, then I'll give that a go and see where it takes me.
If people netdecked my deck, I would feel proud and honoured... No joke. I'd be jumping around like a monkey with a banana because people are playing my deck. It's paying tribute to great players with innovative ideas by playing their decks... I don't see the harm in that. And as others have pointed out, by "going with the flow" sometimes you open yourself up since other players will know what you're playing and how to fight it. By playing homebrew, if you're good, you can slip inbetween the cracks, make something new that's good and that might even get played on a more large-scale basis.
So my rant has kind of gone long enough and I don't know if that made total sense... But to recap, basically I feel that there is no right/wrong whether you play homebrew or proven archetype. What it comes down to still is the strength of the deck itself (since netdecks have been proven already, this is less of an issue... But with homebrew you are relying completely on your own brainpower when it comes to building the deck which can be a good or a bad thing, but always a source of pride), and the biggest thing is skill. To win a tournament you need skill, and you need to know what you're doing. Playing homebrew or netdeck won't help you if you don't have the player skill to back it up.
As a final note, in the competitive environment you need to take into account the definition of COMPETITIVE.
Players.
Play.
To.
Win.
If there is a deck that will maximize the odds of being able to win, many players will take it. If you feel your best odds are to play homebrew, power to ya. But don't gripe when players choose to maximize their chances by playing a tried and true strategy. If netdecking happened all the time in casual, I could see a problem... But in a COMPETITIVE environment, you can't bash players for wanting to maximize their chances of winning. They are playing to win.
Nevermind the fact that you can't just run a deck on "autopilot"... I saw a lot of people at regionals scrub out using "netdecks" because of bad play mistakes... You still need the skill to win a tournament, it just wont win it for you.
And as said... You can try and go rogue, but generally speaking, most of the workable deck concepts end up being used/tried by many people before the good ones become the "netdecks" and the bad ones just become... well, bad.
Well it depends what your definition of "netdecking" is. The distinction being between playing a certain archetype at it's optimal ability, vs. literally copy/pasting a deck from the internet and playing that.
The reason I ask is because many people have a different idea of what netdecking is... Just because someone is playing an optimal Faeries list doesn't mean they necessarily netdecked it. I remember back during Mirrodin days when Tooth and Nail came to be... I ended up playing Tooth and Nail rather competitively, and yet I pretty much developed the deck from scratch (It started off as Mindslaver.dec... lol).
So as said, a definition for what you consider netdecking would be helpful. Because in the case of the former, I know that I will play what I feel has at least a very good shot at winning, yet at the same time I know I need to have fun while playing it. So if Faeries happens to be that deck, I'll play that deck... etc. etc.
In regards to the latter (being strictly copying a list), some players have a very hard time with deckbuilding but love competitive magic. I personally don't see it as something bad to netdeck in this literal fashion (although I personally don't do it), it's rather flattering. Imagine you won Worlds this year with a unique deck, and suddenly EVERYONE began netdecking that deck... Wouldn't you feel proud? They're paying respect to the individual who designed it by playing an identical copy... So I don't really see this as a bad thing.
The arguments in terms of originality etc. are kind of useless when dealing with those people, as they are playing to win and don't particularly care for the idea of being original. I'm not even saying it's a bad thing... They're just focused on a goal and they feel their best shot at reaching that goal is to utilize a creation someone else has made.
As said, if Hannes has incurred financial losses due to this, I will happily raise money/make a personal donation to try and help out. It's not fair that some people deliberately exploited something that they knew they shouldn't have (yes, they stumbled onto it by accident, but all three ended up going gung-ho on it... Even talking about clunking rumour threads).
I don't think the threads themselves are the problem... It's more the users. I'm by no means trying to imply I'm an angel in spam threads, but at least I don't go ahead and hog tons of bandwidth by posting up a ton of the same pic over and over and over again...
I'll volunteer to be the clan rep. It wasn't so much him participating in the thread (heck, I participated more than anyone else in there)... he literally was one of the few who caused the actual PROBLEM that brought the site down.
As said, I'll volunteer for clan rep. That being said, I'll need a bit of a briefing in all the stuff I'll be supposed to do... But I'm pretty sure it entails posting stuff for clan contests etc. correct?
yeah.. it's called the Mental hospital Mike.. Either that or your Own personal Asylum
How did you know?!?!!? lol
In all seriousness, breaking the site like that deserves a banning. They should have realized immediately that what they were doing was VERY detrimental to the site... Yet they continued doing it.
I find that unacceptable, and even though I am kidding around about it, it does make me feel a little bad about feeding that thread as much as I did... But what's done is done, and sometimes you think some things are harmless, something harmless turned into something very harmful. I don't know how much this may cost Hannes... Because if it uploaded 9000 terrabytes, doesn't the server get charged based on how much space it uses?
I could be wrong... But still, I'd like to know if possible and would happily make a contribution towards reperations if there are any financial damages.
Nothing for nothing but that isnt something to be proud of man. More so when that thread crashed the site for 8+ hours -_-
Hey, I didn't crash it. Just because some people decided to get stupid doesn't put me in the same boat as them... I was trying to add a little comedy to the situation but clearly that didn't come across well.
Besides, I have... ummmmmmmmmm... "Other" places/ways to vent my... uhhhh.. crazy side.
Yeah but I think when it has to do with bbcode the text limit is ignored... and since they were layering a ton of mana symbols inside themselves (which I still don't totally understand) I *think* it ignored the text limit, yet managed to spam it up to epic proportions.
Well, I hereby claim I win the the 50k race thread, since I have the most posts in it RIP 50k thread...
This thread has basically started off as a spam fest, and now that virtually every deck in Competitive has been listed, I'm going to close this thread. If you want ideas for what kind of deck to play, read each deck in the Competitive forum and decide for yourself what you think might suit you. Having people just ring off deck-names doesn't really accomplish anything.
I'm DEFINITELY going to grind to try and get into nats. Luckily I found a bunch of players from ottawa looking for a VERY competitive level playtesting group, so we formed our little alliance and are going to meet up every tuesday to playtest.
I'm going to refine whatever I choose to play and try and squeek in there... Although I am considering grinding via. sealed deck, as that *is* one of my very strong points.
I missed this little part actually, and I honestly don't know where that's coming from.
I care a great deal about these forums, and I'm trying to make some positive change... But things are slow, and as Innus stated... We're doing all this work for charity. I happen to have a fair bit of free time on my hands, so it makes it a little easier for me... But at the same time, I still need to go to work, come back home, make dinner, walk the dog and all that jazz AND see friends and socialize and then on top of it spend many hours cleaning up a lot of spam and putting out a lot of fires.
I'm not looking for sympathy here, I know exactly what I signed up for. But I'm not superman, and since this work isn't paying my bills, things are going to move a little more slowly in terms of positive change. And I'm definitely all for constructive ideas on how to improve the forums, and the Decks to Watch is something that I totally agree with and I've pitched to the higher-ups again (citing the thread in SYM as a source of user popularity reference). If you have any more ideas, please... Post them. I love seeing ideas.
Competitive is a word that comes from it's derivitive: Compete. To compete means it is being put into a contest... In this case, a contest against other decks. While it has some glaring weaknesses against certain decks, the deck HAS shown the ability to compete in certain metagames.
As said, we are working on getting a forum restructuring soon... So hopefully this "problem" will be averted for the remainder of time, lol.
First of all, I am not disagreeing that Swans isn't a serious Type II competitor. I've been in agreement with that point from the very start... That being said, I've got a friend who is developing a pretty potent version of Swans and is mopping the floor with a LOT of decks... I'm not saying that it's the next greatest thing in Magic, but the deck is competitive... In the grand scheme of things? Perhaps not. But this brings me to my next point...
In regards to people complaining about how it didn't have a showing at PT Hollywood: In terms of the Competitive level of this forum, how many users do you figure here are regularly attending high Pro Tour events? Very, very few. Most of our competitive play is restricted to FNM... And as a result, if you can expect to see it do well at an FNM, and since most of the players play at FNM... It doesn't take much to connect the dots here.
In regards to the Decks to Watch subforum. I am fully behind this plan and I desperately want to get it implemented as soon as possible. We have been working on the idea, and until we get the kinks sorted out we don't really have the time to move threads all over the place and end up having to move them back to other places again.
You have to be somewhat realistic in terms of expectations in the forum. Yes, I totally want to increase the quality of posts and the level of strategy in these forums... This has been my keen desire from the get-go. However, complaining every five seconds about the same problem isn't helping anything. The Type II forums are not nearly as "competitive" as they should be right now. Progress is slow... And the simple fact of the matter is that when you get over 20 PMs in your inboxes a day reporting posts that are flames or spam or mismade threads... It makes it very difficult to implement changes in a timely fashion.
I spend probably 3-4 hours each day trying to clean up/watch this place. When things are quiet, I try and hone the ideas/proposals to the higher-ups. Keep in mind, other than being able to move/sticky/rename/edit/delete/infract threads (or posts), in terms of the actual structuring of the forum I don't have any physical power in that regard... Meaning I need to get an idea that is feasible and workable enough to convince not only the rest of the Type II moderating staff, but the admins as well. It doesn't happen overnight and believe me... I want changes to be made and I am up for the task of making them so long as I'm given a chance to.
I understand to a degree the frustration of seeing a deck you feel does not belong in Competitive... But at the same time, what does it really matter in the end? The top decks are stickied, and the not-so-good decks are down at the bottom... I'm not saying this setup is perfect, and as said, I want it changed... But really, is it THAT unbearable? We as the mods have never pretended that these decks are incredible or amazing... But they ARE an option when you're trying to decide what to bring to your next FNM.
Like I said, I've got a buddy who's playing Swans... And since theres a LOT of mana ramp in my neck of the woods, Swans generally mops the floor with them making it a good choice for him. Is it perfect? No... Will it win a pro tour? Almost positively not... But still, it is a competitive choice in the not so grand scheme of things.
No... I built it, I customized it, I created it myself. As someone else mentioned, all great decks came from somewhere... And they weren't Tier 1 forever... At some first FNM or whatever, Fearies were a "rogue deck" so to speak... Now that it is considered one of the (if not THE) strongest decks in the format, many people will adopt the deck and play it themselves.
And as said... Some people will still play "rogue" or "suboptimal" lists for certain decks... I know a guy who plays Jace in his Faeries deck. Is it the right call? I don't think so... *But* it has worked out well for him. Is he a netdecker for playing Faeries as a whole, regardless of some particular card choices?
So where is the line? At what point do you become a "netdecker" for playing a particular strategy? There are thousands upon thousands of competitive players, and they wouldn't BE competitive if they didn't utilize the more powerful strategies presented in each set of cards. As said, many players have evolved their "homebrew" Faerie deck into a full out competitive deck... These players aren't netdeckers are they? Even though they built it from the ground up themselves? Heck, even the players who take the PRINCIPLE of the deck and apply it to their metagame, are they considered netdeckers? There are still deckbuilding challenges when netdecking... I look at Gindy's list and there are choices that I would make to change the list... I would adapt it according to what *I* feel is best. Am I better than Gindy? I would imagine not... But there I still hold to my beliefs and opinions about what is right/wrong, and *that* is where the deckbuilding skill is in... Some people would argue that he is the pro and that his word should be taken over mine, but for my particular metagame, is Gindy the expert or am I? That's what it comes down to... Even tweaking the best netdecks takes skill. It takes even more skill to consistently win large events as well, regardless of whether you "netdecked".
As others have said, people take what they want from the game... Whether they get the thrill out of playing, winning, deckbuilding, comboing off... Whatever, everyone has a different idea of what the game should be like. There is no right/wrong in Magic in my eyes... According to the definitions of many players in here, I netdeck Faeries. I don't consider myself to be a "netdecker", even though I took the principle of Faeries, I am adapting it according to my playstyle and what I feel are the correct card choices for it. At the same time, I'm developing my own homebrew deck. Is it better than Faeries? Probably not... It's a strong deck and I've been mostly keeping it to myself and my playgroups, but with a little time, who knows? Maybe my deck will become the next netdeck and that's one of the thrills I get from playing Magic. I want to win yes, and in some circumstances I will play the best deck available... But if I feel I've caught onto something new that people will play, then I'll give that a go and see where it takes me.
If people netdecked my deck, I would feel proud and honoured... No joke. I'd be jumping around like a monkey with a banana because people are playing my deck. It's paying tribute to great players with innovative ideas by playing their decks... I don't see the harm in that. And as others have pointed out, by "going with the flow" sometimes you open yourself up since other players will know what you're playing and how to fight it. By playing homebrew, if you're good, you can slip inbetween the cracks, make something new that's good and that might even get played on a more large-scale basis.
So my rant has kind of gone long enough and I don't know if that made total sense... But to recap, basically I feel that there is no right/wrong whether you play homebrew or proven archetype. What it comes down to still is the strength of the deck itself (since netdecks have been proven already, this is less of an issue... But with homebrew you are relying completely on your own brainpower when it comes to building the deck which can be a good or a bad thing, but always a source of pride), and the biggest thing is skill. To win a tournament you need skill, and you need to know what you're doing. Playing homebrew or netdeck won't help you if you don't have the player skill to back it up.
As a final note, in the competitive environment you need to take into account the definition of COMPETITIVE.
Players.
Play.
To.
Win.
If there is a deck that will maximize the odds of being able to win, many players will take it. If you feel your best odds are to play homebrew, power to ya. But don't gripe when players choose to maximize their chances by playing a tried and true strategy. If netdecking happened all the time in casual, I could see a problem... But in a COMPETITIVE environment, you can't bash players for wanting to maximize their chances of winning. They are playing to win.
And as said... You can try and go rogue, but generally speaking, most of the workable deck concepts end up being used/tried by many people before the good ones become the "netdecks" and the bad ones just become... well, bad.
The reason I ask is because many people have a different idea of what netdecking is... Just because someone is playing an optimal Faeries list doesn't mean they necessarily netdecked it. I remember back during Mirrodin days when Tooth and Nail came to be... I ended up playing Tooth and Nail rather competitively, and yet I pretty much developed the deck from scratch (It started off as Mindslaver.dec... lol).
So as said, a definition for what you consider netdecking would be helpful. Because in the case of the former, I know that I will play what I feel has at least a very good shot at winning, yet at the same time I know I need to have fun while playing it. So if Faeries happens to be that deck, I'll play that deck... etc. etc.
In regards to the latter (being strictly copying a list), some players have a very hard time with deckbuilding but love competitive magic. I personally don't see it as something bad to netdeck in this literal fashion (although I personally don't do it), it's rather flattering. Imagine you won Worlds this year with a unique deck, and suddenly EVERYONE began netdecking that deck... Wouldn't you feel proud? They're paying respect to the individual who designed it by playing an identical copy... So I don't really see this as a bad thing.
The arguments in terms of originality etc. are kind of useless when dealing with those people, as they are playing to win and don't particularly care for the idea of being original. I'm not even saying it's a bad thing... They're just focused on a goal and they feel their best shot at reaching that goal is to utilize a creation someone else has made.
I don't think the threads themselves are the problem... It's more the users. I'm by no means trying to imply I'm an angel in spam threads, but at least I don't go ahead and hog tons of bandwidth by posting up a ton of the same pic over and over and over again...
As said, I'll volunteer for clan rep. That being said, I'll need a bit of a briefing in all the stuff I'll be supposed to do... But I'm pretty sure it entails posting stuff for clan contests etc. correct?
How did you know?!?!!?
In all seriousness, breaking the site like that deserves a banning. They should have realized immediately that what they were doing was VERY detrimental to the site... Yet they continued doing it.
I find that unacceptable, and even though I am kidding around about it, it does make me feel a little bad about feeding that thread as much as I did... But what's done is done, and sometimes you think some things are harmless, something harmless turned into something very harmful. I don't know how much this may cost Hannes... Because if it uploaded 9000 terrabytes, doesn't the server get charged based on how much space it uses?
I could be wrong... But still, I'd like to know if possible and would happily make a contribution towards reperations if there are any financial damages.
Hey, I didn't crash it. Just because some people decided to get stupid doesn't put me in the same boat as them... I was trying to add a little comedy to the situation but clearly that didn't come across well.
Besides, I have... ummmmmmmmmm... "Other" places/ways to vent my... uhhhh.. crazy side.
Well, I hereby claim I win the the 50k race thread, since I have the most posts in it
I'm going to refine whatever I choose to play and try and squeek in there... Although I am considering grinding via. sealed deck, as that *is* one of my very strong points.