There are very few things that set me off during a game but people ignoring the Study tax is one of them. I think I said something like "wait, you gave him another card?" Which was met with silence. So who knows, maybe he was just trying to help a buddy or annoy me. I didn't bring it up again. And it didn't end up helping him in the end.
You and I are really thinking on the same lines here, because I had the same thought about suspensions yesterday! The length has to be greater than 2 weeks, but I believe something like that could work, if Blippy agrees (I can keep count on the suspensions for him). Sometimes, make a hot card lose steam a little bit is the right answer: players who abuse it will find some other stuff to do in the meantime, and maybe after some months, they will not be so eager to get into the now un-suspended card again. Or if they will, at least it will be after a period where that card wasn't there, so the result will be that the tournament will not feel clustered, on average.
Worth thinking about.
Very interesting approach and very nice article.
However, like Splendid Belt, I'm also not sure how accurate and/or reliable is the "WS30" and "WSL". And what it really represents or what it could be useful to?
Your same WS30 could be decreasing in value as a new set is release or some cards are banned, and new decks show up decreasing the value of half of the WS30 cards but introducing 10 news cards. In this case should you change the WS30 every 3 months? or enlarge it with, let say, the top 10 cards of each color (still in standard)?
Concerning the Copperline Gorge, unlike Gabriel Strasburg, this seems to me a very legitimate choice, since 2 known factors may positively influence the value of this card: 1)the release of Cavern of souls (and the massive return of ramp and titans (Red and Green especially) 2) the potential (even if likely not) ban of Delver of Secret or some components of the deck. At least for a limited time, RG ramp could be the next predominant deck.
Also, maybe you could be more specific in terms of investment time for the Gorge. To me the target time would be the first set of tournaments after AVR is legal, and/or after the next bans (in june?) beyond these points, and especially if you reach you 4$ target, you should consider sell the card. The release of M13 should also be a crucial point, if titans are not reprinted or if great R/G cards are newly printed you could revised your position on the Gorge. All to say that you have pretty well defined landmarks to decide to sell or not the Copperline Gorge. Just saying to keep them for "few months" may be a little bit too hazardous?
I was watching that game and it seemed like triplets wasn't really chatting (it was late so its a little foggy in my memory) but it seemed like they had their own agenda that included helping Thada until convenient to turn on them.
I do know Thada was going on and on about how powerful coffers was before they took it. Might have added to why they did when it seemed to be a mistake. (They tapped all but one mana for the Take Possession.) Maybe they ran out of gas and had no counters but if they were bluffing they might have lived. Imho stealing a land with TP is rather pointless but I guess they figured it would give them more mana to spend since all lands were swamps thanks to the Urborg.
LOL @ last sentence. Yeah, I mean, my comment was more for the sake of your own sanity. You could drive yourself bonkers if you tilted on every misplay opponents make.
And to be honest, who knows, it could also be because of your comment in game that the player insisted on not paying to spite you. It is a political format after all, right? I have no idea how you framed your inquiry, but politically you get more flies with honey. If you said, "wtf, why the hell aren't you paying the tax, asshat?!" you may not get a positive response. If, on the other hand, you said: "please start paying for Rhystic Study if you can, that way Thada doesn't run off ahead of us in card advantage," it's less evocative and might get you what you want.
You are probably right. I think that if I was looking from the Triplet player's perspective things might have been different: I was ramping out an Elder Dragon and beating the crap out of Thada, so maybe Triplet was trying to help the Thada player? If the Triplet player had interacted or said anything at all I might have been able to get a sense about what they were trying to accomplish, if anything. The second time the Triplet player didn't pay the tax I called him out on it, but didn't get a response, and he kept doing it. Who knows.
I've just become frustrated with it because I've been seeing it a lot. Does giving the Thada player extra cards seem like the "right" play? Of course not. But as you said, it is a casual-ish format and I shouldn't get worked up about it. Doesn't mean I won't kick the dog the next time it happens tho! :) (I'm joking for all you animal lovers out there. I would actually kick my kids.)
Thanks guys for the continued support. Props Zach for getting up the strength to do this. Even if it wasn't something major, going to the hospital is an ordeal.
Awesome that you guys got some more in depth opinions from WotC about TM. Nice work!
Yay Whiffy on the relationship front! Does she know about your Magic side?
Ok thanks for the suggestions. The reason I didn't use the tools you suggested was because I didnt think they would work with the new cards yet. For instance, linking etc. would not link to anything if the cards werent on the site yet which I dont think they were when I wrote this.
Really like the way this was structured, and frankly, would have been overjoyed to see additional individual evaluations (buy/sell/hold) on other members of the indices. This kind of article just gets my joy going.
Generally, I agree with Harriet Vane / Dorothy L Sayers about editors ;), but I have to say thanks for the quick turnaround. The article arrived late, and probably full of typos, and JXC turned it around really fast. Well played, sir.
I have no way of knowing how accurate your analysis is, but I like the way you present it (both verbally and visually). Really interesting idea, and well explained. Already looking forward to the next instalment.
I think you're a little too worked up over Rhystic Study. If you want tight play, move on to a more competitive format where the aim is perfect play and wins. Not only is Commander a casual format, but also, you can't really know what the other players' game plans are and what may be perceived as bad playing and/or inaccurate threat assessment might be perfectly in line with their strategic goals. I mean, would you ever run Maralen of the Mornsong? Seems incredibly bad, but maybe it was (and not paying the tax was) some part of a group hug style theme? I don't know. Yet, I think you're a little too worked up over something you have no control over. =p
I think your articles would really benefit from better visuals. For a start, if you're presenting a decklist you should use the list creator that Josh made for us:
Couple of statistics regarding elves from the past 2 months:
Percentage of elf decks: 17.6%
Percentage of decks that include Nettle Sentinel: 3.7%
Percentage of elf decks that include Nettle Sentinel: 21.1%
Percentage of decks that include Priest of Titania: 15.0%
Percentage of elf decks that include Priest of Titania: 84.2%
Percentage of decks that include Heritage Druid: 7.5%
Percentage of elf decks that include Heritage Druid: 42.1%
Percentage of decks that include Elvish Archdruid: 15.0%
Percentage of elf decks that include Elvish Archdruid: 84.2%
Percentage of decks that include Ezuri, Renegade Leader: 8.4%
Percentage of elf decks that include Ezuri, Renegade Leader: 47.3%
I don't know how proposed banning of Nettle Sentinel would do *anything* to the meta, since it's clearly a very marginal player in Tribal Apocalypse and 4 out of 5 elf decks don't include him.
If you want to engineer a meta that would actually seem different to players who are supposedly sick of elves, you won't accomplish this by banning single cards like Nettle Sentinel, Heritage Druid or even a win condition such as Ezuri (since there are bunch of win conditions for elves (Biorythm, Staff of Domination, Joraga Warcaller, Umbral Mantle etc. even simply attacking with bunch of elves pumped by regular lords).
To actually make elves deck different, you need to ban mana lords (Priest of Titania + Archdruid) who are present in almost any build. So it's either a drastic measure (which I am against it) or there won't be almost no change in a meta.
the original blue karoo from Visions will still allow you to go infinite mana, right? and it's more fair because it's the only land that can do it (2 if you add a Tolaria West)
I don't see your logic on why access to a sideboard would lead to permission strategies?
I am extremely dubious that any format where every single deck benefits from running 4 cavern of souls is likely to ever be dominated by permission, to be completely honest.
I also disagree with the idea that a sideboard makes the format less challenging. It reduces the possibility of people easily going X-0 with extreme linear strategies that nobody has any hate for sure, but those decks also get to sideboard, so it's not like just giving "straight" decks extra toys.
I stand by the idea that it is currently not possible to deal with extreme linears in tribal because you simply don't know which ones you're going to face, and you can't fit 4 firespout, 4 ancient grudge, 4 grafdiggers cage, or whatever into your deck. It isn't something that particularly bothers me though. I think the wall-belcher deck is very cool, and the living death decks don't seem too powerful. I'd probably support the idea of banning punishing fire because it just colds so many decks, but I don't really play often enough to have a grasp on how dominating it's been. I remember when I used to play a lot, I was an extremely strong advocate of banning moat, which certain players brought every single week and just froze out half of the decks. I don't know whether punishing fire has reached that level (and I'm glad that everybody seems to have forgotten moat!).
Thanks for sharing this information. I really like your way of expressing the opinions and sharing the information. It is good to move as chance bring new things in life, paves the way for advancement, etc. But it is well known to everyone that moving to new location with bulk of goods is not an easy task to move or shift from one place to other place because I have experienced about that and I face the problem like that. There I go to village near to my city faced that problem there. CCDP study guide// CCVP study guide// CCNP security study guide// CCIE security study guide//
Indeed, SBEs (state-based-effects) are only checked upon resolution of a spell or ability, before the active player gets priority. This means you can have creatures with zero (or less) toughness during the resolution of a spell so long as they have positive toughness when you are done resolving that spell.
I think complaining about a format in this type of setting is natural. Also people seem to complain about whatever is popular. Today's champion of creativity is tomorrow's vilest villain. It's the nature of the beast.
The danger as I see it is catering too much to the whining. That just encourages more whining and makes the rules so darn complex that it becomes hostile to new players who don't know the written and unwritten rules.
Although I'm no longer able to play in this tournament because of a job change, I still have a vested interest in its success.
There are very few things that set me off during a game but people ignoring the Study tax is one of them. I think I said something like "wait, you gave him another card?" Which was met with silence. So who knows, maybe he was just trying to help a buddy or annoy me. I didn't bring it up again. And it didn't end up helping him in the end.
I, for one, hope you will find a way to come back. People still think of you every time someone dares to approach the sacred tribe of Walls! :)
You and I are really thinking on the same lines here, because I had the same thought about suspensions yesterday! The length has to be greater than 2 weeks, but I believe something like that could work, if Blippy agrees (I can keep count on the suspensions for him). Sometimes, make a hot card lose steam a little bit is the right answer: players who abuse it will find some other stuff to do in the meantime, and maybe after some months, they will not be so eager to get into the now un-suspended card again. Or if they will, at least it will be after a period where that card wasn't there, so the result will be that the tournament will not feel clustered, on average.
Worth thinking about.
Very interesting approach and very nice article.
However, like Splendid Belt, I'm also not sure how accurate and/or reliable is the "WS30" and "WSL". And what it really represents or what it could be useful to?
Your same WS30 could be decreasing in value as a new set is release or some cards are banned, and new decks show up decreasing the value of half of the WS30 cards but introducing 10 news cards. In this case should you change the WS30 every 3 months? or enlarge it with, let say, the top 10 cards of each color (still in standard)?
Concerning the Copperline Gorge, unlike Gabriel Strasburg, this seems to me a very legitimate choice, since 2 known factors may positively influence the value of this card: 1)the release of Cavern of souls (and the massive return of ramp and titans (Red and Green especially) 2) the potential (even if likely not) ban of Delver of Secret or some components of the deck. At least for a limited time, RG ramp could be the next predominant deck.
Also, maybe you could be more specific in terms of investment time for the Gorge. To me the target time would be the first set of tournaments after AVR is legal, and/or after the next bans (in june?) beyond these points, and especially if you reach you 4$ target, you should consider sell the card. The release of M13 should also be a crucial point, if titans are not reprinted or if great R/G cards are newly printed you could revised your position on the Gorge. All to say that you have pretty well defined landmarks to decide to sell or not the Copperline Gorge. Just saying to keep them for "few months" may be a little bit too hazardous?
She knows EVERY fobial i have and is still still sticking around, go go flightless bird.
george
I was watching that game and it seemed like triplets wasn't really chatting (it was late so its a little foggy in my memory) but it seemed like they had their own agenda that included helping Thada until convenient to turn on them.
I do know Thada was going on and on about how powerful coffers was before they took it. Might have added to why they did when it seemed to be a mistake. (They tapped all but one mana for the Take Possession.) Maybe they ran out of gas and had no counters but if they were bluffing they might have lived. Imho stealing a land with TP is rather pointless but I guess they figured it would give them more mana to spend since all lands were swamps thanks to the Urborg.
LOL @ last sentence. Yeah, I mean, my comment was more for the sake of your own sanity. You could drive yourself bonkers if you tilted on every misplay opponents make.
And to be honest, who knows, it could also be because of your comment in game that the player insisted on not paying to spite you. It is a political format after all, right? I have no idea how you framed your inquiry, but politically you get more flies with honey. If you said, "wtf, why the hell aren't you paying the tax, asshat?!" you may not get a positive response. If, on the other hand, you said: "please start paying for Rhystic Study if you can, that way Thada doesn't run off ahead of us in card advantage," it's less evocative and might get you what you want.
You are probably right. I think that if I was looking from the Triplet player's perspective things might have been different: I was ramping out an Elder Dragon and beating the crap out of Thada, so maybe Triplet was trying to help the Thada player? If the Triplet player had interacted or said anything at all I might have been able to get a sense about what they were trying to accomplish, if anything. The second time the Triplet player didn't pay the tax I called him out on it, but didn't get a response, and he kept doing it. Who knows.
I've just become frustrated with it because I've been seeing it a lot. Does giving the Thada player extra cards seem like the "right" play? Of course not. But as you said, it is a casual-ish format and I shouldn't get worked up about it. Doesn't mean I won't kick the dog the next time it happens tho! :) (I'm joking for all you animal lovers out there. I would actually kick my kids.)
Thanks guys for the continued support. Props Zach for getting up the strength to do this. Even if it wasn't something major, going to the hospital is an ordeal.
Awesome that you guys got some more in depth opinions from WotC about TM. Nice work!
Yay Whiffy on the relationship front! Does she know about your Magic side?
You're right, they won't link yet, but the formatting would still look neater (at least in my opinion).
Ok thanks for the suggestions. The reason I didn't use the tools you suggested was because I didnt think they would work with the new cards yet. For instance, linking etc. would not link to anything if the cards werent on the site yet which I dont think they were when I wrote this.
I do appreciate the suggestions though, thanks.
Really like the way this was structured, and frankly, would have been overjoyed to see additional individual evaluations (buy/sell/hold) on other members of the indices. This kind of article just gets my joy going.
Generally, I agree with Harriet Vane / Dorothy L Sayers about editors ;), but I have to say thanks for the quick turnaround. The article arrived late, and probably full of typos, and JXC turned it around really fast. Well played, sir.
I have no way of knowing how accurate your analysis is, but I like the way you present it (both verbally and visually). Really interesting idea, and well explained. Already looking forward to the next instalment.
I think you're a little too worked up over Rhystic Study. If you want tight play, move on to a more competitive format where the aim is perfect play and wins. Not only is Commander a casual format, but also, you can't really know what the other players' game plans are and what may be perceived as bad playing and/or inaccurate threat assessment might be perfectly in line with their strategic goals. I mean, would you ever run Maralen of the Mornsong? Seems incredibly bad, but maybe it was (and not paying the tax was) some part of a group hug style theme? I don't know. Yet, I think you're a little too worked up over something you have no control over. =p
I think your articles would really benefit from better visuals. For a start, if you're presenting a decklist you should use the list creator that Josh made for us:
http://jamuraa.com/pure/deck_new.php
It's easy to use, and makes a big difference to your presentation.
Also, try linking some cards or putting in some other pictures to break up the text / videos.
You're previewing what drafting a new format might look like, which definitely has value, but many readers will be put off slightly by the appearance.
Hope that came across as constructively as it was intended!
Man, I miss being able to freeze out half the decks through a single card choice. Good times.
Couple of statistics regarding elves from the past 2 months:
Percentage of elf decks: 17.6%
Percentage of decks that include Nettle Sentinel: 3.7%
Percentage of elf decks that include Nettle Sentinel: 21.1%
Percentage of decks that include Priest of Titania: 15.0%
Percentage of elf decks that include Priest of Titania: 84.2%
Percentage of decks that include Heritage Druid: 7.5%
Percentage of elf decks that include Heritage Druid: 42.1%
Percentage of decks that include Elvish Archdruid: 15.0%
Percentage of elf decks that include Elvish Archdruid: 84.2%
Percentage of decks that include Ezuri, Renegade Leader: 8.4%
Percentage of elf decks that include Ezuri, Renegade Leader: 47.3%
I don't know how proposed banning of Nettle Sentinel would do *anything* to the meta, since it's clearly a very marginal player in Tribal Apocalypse and 4 out of 5 elf decks don't include him.
If you want to engineer a meta that would actually seem different to players who are supposedly sick of elves, you won't accomplish this by banning single cards like Nettle Sentinel, Heritage Druid or even a win condition such as Ezuri (since there are bunch of win conditions for elves (Biorythm, Staff of Domination, Joraga Warcaller, Umbral Mantle etc. even simply attacking with bunch of elves pumped by regular lords).
To actually make elves deck different, you need to ban mana lords (Priest of Titania + Archdruid) who are present in almost any build. So it's either a drastic measure (which I am against it) or there won't be almost no change in a meta.
the original blue karoo from Visions will still allow you to go infinite mana, right? and it's more fair because it's the only land that can do it (2 if you add a Tolaria West)
I've been having some success with alluring scent out of the board for aggro match-ups, it's great for breaking through a stalled board,
Nobody forgot Moat. Apparently Wotc heard you and banned it at the end of 2010.
I don't see your logic on why access to a sideboard would lead to permission strategies?
I am extremely dubious that any format where every single deck benefits from running 4 cavern of souls is likely to ever be dominated by permission, to be completely honest.
I also disagree with the idea that a sideboard makes the format less challenging. It reduces the possibility of people easily going X-0 with extreme linear strategies that nobody has any hate for sure, but those decks also get to sideboard, so it's not like just giving "straight" decks extra toys.
I stand by the idea that it is currently not possible to deal with extreme linears in tribal because you simply don't know which ones you're going to face, and you can't fit 4 firespout, 4 ancient grudge, 4 grafdiggers cage, or whatever into your deck. It isn't something that particularly bothers me though. I think the wall-belcher deck is very cool, and the living death decks don't seem too powerful. I'd probably support the idea of banning punishing fire because it just colds so many decks, but I don't really play often enough to have a grasp on how dominating it's been. I remember when I used to play a lot, I was an extremely strong advocate of banning moat, which certain players brought every single week and just froze out half of the decks. I don't know whether punishing fire has reached that level (and I'm glad that everybody seems to have forgotten moat!).
That ended up a bit longer than i intended!
Thanks for sharing this information. I really like your way of expressing the opinions and sharing the information. It is good to move as chance bring new things in life, paves the way for advancement, etc. But it is well known to everyone that moving to new location with bulk of goods is not an easy task to move or shift from one place to other place because I have experienced about that and I face the problem like that. There I go to village near to my city faced that problem there.
CCDP study guide//
CCVP study guide//
CCNP security study guide//
CCIE security study guide//
Indeed, SBEs (state-based-effects) are only checked upon resolution of a spell or ability, before the active player gets priority. This means you can have creatures with zero (or less) toughness during the resolution of a spell so long as they have positive toughness when you are done resolving that spell.
I think complaining about a format in this type of setting is natural. Also people seem to complain about whatever is popular. Today's champion of creativity is tomorrow's vilest villain. It's the nature of the beast.
The danger as I see it is catering too much to the whining. That just encourages more whining and makes the rules so darn complex that it becomes hostile to new players who don't know the written and unwritten rules.
Although I'm no longer able to play in this tournament because of a job change, I still have a vested interest in its success.