I have been following this debate and I read the article in its entirety. In the 1st paragraph we have the following:
During one particular tournament a four very good professional players entered the tournament with classic worthy decks such as grindstone, fish, and Oath combo, and proceeded to take out all the competition. From what I can gather, ShardFenix, the organizer of this fine event was very upset over this state of events. I believe he was upset because these four Pros, Spikes, Sharks, or whatever you want to call them were somewhat rude, overconfident, and perhaps condescending towards the event as a whole and the regular players.
To me, this sounds like an attack on 4 players. Except 2 of those players decided to respond and you have said neither were the actual offender. If Endless was one of the 4 referred to above, then yes, I believe the comments were targeted at him directly. That is my read.
In response to your assertion that someone bringing a $500 deck to a $5 tournament goes, I have to disagree with you. I am not a huge tribal classic player. If I'm home and playing at the time of this PRE, I am going to have to put a deck together. I happen to be a classic player which means that I have many of the expensive cards. Hence, when deck building with a goal of building the best deck possible for this event, I will invariably run some of the expensive cards because often they are the best card. I'm not trying to shark anyone. I'm only trying to have fun. As I get more accustomed to the format or the types of decks people are playing, I will do as the author does and tone down my deck to match. BUT, if I lose with my Oath deck to a good Goblins build, I will probably be trying to improve my oath deck for the next tournament.
Again it comes down to rules needing to be formalized and decided upon and despite it being mostly Shard's baby the regular players have an investment in how it goes down so hence the discussion (not argument as I don't think there is any animus here.)
I have to agree with Tempest on this one. It is very easy to come off as arrogant without even meaning to. Just by not acknowledging valid criticism. No need to defend tech because deck building is always (eventually) a communal sport even if the initial efforts and creativity are individual. It isn't until people play with their decks that the real analysis can begin.
You are right that you didn't mention people by name. And you are right that they came out on their own and admitted to being the people you "referred" to. What you did do however was describe these people as not being friendly, as being condescending, as "Sharks," etc. Well, 2 of the 4 have chosen to post in the comments and it has been mentioned that neither of those players were offensive or rude at all by other participants at the tournament. So, I'm not sure if you made that up or if there is something I'm missing, but even if you didn't name names, you did make brash and apparently false accusations.
I just read your response to Endless_Nameless and immediately realized that my original response was somewhat misguided. I am glad you are playing devil's advocate here, but until that response (where you explain your philosophy on PREs), it was not apparent that you weren't "picking sides."
Personally, I belive that ShardFenix needs to either run an invite-only tournament where he brings in only his friends, or deal with whatever decks people bring as long as they fit within the rules. This argument is just a silly extension of the ever present "What is casual?" debate and I think we all know that argument isn't going to be resolved anytime soon.
I think maybe you skimmed or misread or just plain didn't understand the criticisms. None of them were leveled directly at Endless. His teammates are the ones mentioned as being rude, etc. And I agree entirely that they were within their rights to come crashing the little PRE that no one previously cared about except the regular community members who happen to like the format. I would never say exclude anyone based on their affiliations either. But I will say rudeness should be dealt with accordingly.
As far as innovation goes most of the regulars spend a lot of time creating and testing new decks to find different ways to play within the format rules. That someone brought an old tried and true deck and won with it is not surprising. However, when you spend $500 to win a $5 tourney there is something seriously wrong whether you recognize it or not.
As you say and as many people have said the format rules need fixing or the structure of the tourney needs fixing or both. Clearly it will take a bit of time before the right combination is found.
As for your diatribe, I say more power to you. Speaking up is the only way to get consensus. Even if it means airing the dissenting opinions first.
Did I call anyone out? The only person I mentioned by name is Shardfenix and I did so only because it is his tournament and he started the entire discussion. I let the others be annonymous.
It's not my fault if they chose to identify themselves and defend themselves quite effectively imho.
My job, as I see it, is to continue the discussion in a constructive way, and I think I have done that.
Did I say you can't? I love Oath of Druids. I think Survival of the Fittest might be too broken for tourney but never Oath. I just noted the rage factor. Also lets be real. The PRE is not tourney play like your DE/PEs are tourneys. There are tourneys and there are Tourneys. With no real prize on the line I can see people getting upset over the high power/high cost decks. And as I said I have had people quit on me in a rage over my $5 shock lands. (Now some of them are higher but for a long time that was the average price.)
Seriously. If you want to play a casual game of magic, do it in the casual room. If you are hosting a tournament, prepare to face the best decks. If you don't like the best decks, either ban cards until there is a new best deck or don't play.
Not only is Endless_Nameless a nice guy, but from what I've read here, he brought a new, interesting (albeit expensive) deck into a tournament environment. And didn't do well with it. Why is he taking heat?
If I wanted to bring tournament Merfolk, there shouldn't be a problem as long as I'm playing by the rules. There is no "spirit of the game" issue because even as though its a non-sanctioned PRE, you are still billing it as a tournament and you are giving prizes. You are welcome to be innovative like AJImpy, but you should expect to face well tuned decks.
Now, as for the article itself, I think you hit on some really great points. Don't take my diatribe as a criticism of the article, more as criticism of the comments and the participants who feel entitled to choose what other people play. Also, I'm not sure you needed to single people out in your article. You could've made the same points without pointing fingers.
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I really do appreciate it and I think it helps for a better overall understanding of everyone's perspectives and interests.
I know it probably sounds like I have multiple personalities, but the quotes you mentioned from my article are not my feelings but are my understanding of how Shardfenix and others felt about the situation. I know at first they were stirring up the casual vs tier 1 spike debate. I don't really have much attachment to that debate because everyone defines casual in their own way. No one wins that debate.
However that is how the discussion about Tribal began, so I felt it was appropriate to include that piece of the debate in my article even if it is not something I feel strongly about.
For the PREs that don't cost anything to enter, I will try to match the power level of the event. If I get destroyed one week, I'm likely to amp up the power level for the next week. If I have a couple of matches where I win too easily, and I feel that I didn't give my opponent a shot at winning, I might just retire that deck or tone it down for the next week. I'm willing to do that for PREs when I wouldn't think about toning a deck down for a daily event or a 2-man queue. I DO NOT expect my opponents to share this philosophy. Some people play goblins or merfolk every week trying to take home the top prize and I'm fine with that. That's how they enjoin the event, while I get more out of the deckbuilding process of the event. To each their own.
However I know there are some players out there that care about having too many super powerful decks in this type of event. I try to respect their feelings as well. It's a difficult process to try to make everyone happy.
"During one particular tournament a four very good professional players entered the tournament with classic worthy decks such as grindstone, fish, and Oath combo, and proceeded to take out all the competition."
"Why would anybody show up to this tournament next week with a deck that isn't as powerful as Oath, Fish, or Painter/Grindstone."
It was lines like that in your article which made me want to correct the power issue with some cards. I believe that my oath deck did work as a fun yet competitive tribal deck.
Restrict the broken cards certainly, but just don't throw a blanket label on "classic" cards as bad.
Just taking out eather vial would do a lot to slow down goblins and merfolk, probably more for merfolk now. Bazaar of Baghdad was restricted because it was unfun. I can't see why the same couldn't be done for vial if that's the issue with it too.
Just because a card costs $50 doesn't mean it shouldn't see play in the format. I think it adds spice to the format. I play a tribe that I've yet to see anyone else play, and I play my cards in a manner that no one else has yet. I win some games, and I lose some games (66% loss rate in the tourney so far).
Sorry to continue here, I just feel that I needed to clear my name. When you spoke of the "four players" I'm certain that I was one of them. You spoke of them in the light that they were ruining something good. I truly don't believe I was. I think anyone that played me in the tourney would attest to the fact that I was certainly not rude. I think my decks results would attest to the fact that it's by far not overpowered for the format.
On a side note I do understand your argument about needing something to distinguish the format. When I look at my oath list I play in classic tourney play and the list I play in the PRE, Other than lands and Oath itself, the lists share 2 cards. Hard to believe that wouldn't be considered a real distinction.
I think merfolk/goblins/elves might lack some of the distinction you're speaking of though. If that's the problem, find that cards that enable their combos and restrict/ban them. It would be an easy solution to fix your issue.
Ban list:
Grindstone
eather vial
Goblin recruiter
Goblin Lackey
Glimpse of Nature
With those 5 cards being nixed you're going to see big changes in the types of decks and play available.
Hey, I've already changed two cards as per suggestions here: Acidic Slime (100% oversight on my part) and Volrath’s Stronghold. And the Slime is stellar. Remember: Being open to criticism is a two-way street!
My main concern is not that the power level of Classic Tribal decks are too strong, my concern is that the tribal restriction is not a big enough restriction to make Tribal Classic significantly different than regular classic. Sure, that restriction takes out a few creatureless decks but in the end, you're left with a bunch of decks that are really good in classic being also really good in classic tribal.
Without a full compliment of Force of Will, AEther Vial, Daze and Standstill, I believe that the overall power level of merfolk comes back into line with the other tribes.
Goblins are another story because in my opinion both Goblin Recruiter and Goblin Lackey are quite broken, not to mention the myriad of other goblin options. Without Vial things get a bit easier, but still, it's hard to weaken goblins so that it is in line with other tribes. Goblins might need some bannings even after you add my proposed tribal restrictions.
Elves, like merfolk work best because of noncreature support, namely Glimpse of Nature. In an environment that expects creatures and without Glimpse of Nature, Elf combo decks can be disrupted.
Once again, my point is not that they are too strong, my point is that I want there to be a real distinction between the decks we use for classic and classic tribal.
LED's were included in my previous article where I covered Land and Land related cards such as LEDS and lotus petal. If you look at my last decklist, LED's are included in there as well.
Hmmm I don't recall you saying anything at all but it was your clan mates that were the ruckus creators, your deck seemed fairly tiered to me but I didn't get a real good look. It might not stand up to merfolk but every deck has it's weaknesses. Vial is definitely a culprit. The last event I played in 2 of the 3 games I played vs Vial Fish, killing the vial early really hosed my opponent who was then unable to out play me with counters. Sadly game three ended up with him slowly getting creature advantage as my Noxious Ghouls never came up to trigger the Patriarch's Bidding for the win. 10 turns of defensive play ended when I got frustrated with drawing lands and cast bidding anyway.
I will also echo what Flippers said by pointing out that people see $50 cards and it triggers an anger response in casual tourney/play. Heck Ive had people see a shock land and quit in a rage.
I'm sure this isnt aimed at you endless_nameless your deck is nice and Oath was a shocker but as you say once you figure out how to get round it it's not really as bad as one might think.
I think the price is partly to blame for Oath's hatred and the fact it's classed as a classic staple makes peoples heads turn.
I also agree on AEther Vial, it should be banned
By the way my goblins were no where near type one ;), that was a great game by the way all the way to the end it was so close.
I have always said I thought this was a mistake. I am glad others are speaking up for Swiss as it is the most appropriate form for casual tourneys in my opinion.
I was the player that played oath the last two weeks. With all the fuss about classic decks being over powered I think my results tell a far different story than has been told here.
First try I got knocked out round one to T1 goblins
Second try I got knocked out round two to T1 merfolk.
Just because my deck uses *classic* cards in it, doesn't mean it's a runaway powerhouse. Oath can only bring a single creature into play each turn, and only if you've already got more down. If I drop oath early, the opposing player just doesn't cast anything until they have an entire army ready to drop in one turn. They drop their army, and then one creature per turn I can bring creatures into play. I don't play this list to smash on people, but because I like playing with some of the less castable creatures. I've never once been rude to anyone whom I've played. Infact I've played a total of 3 people in the two events I've entered, one of whom is a puremtgo writer.
From a strictly power basis, there's absolutely no other winable tribes other than merfolk elves and goblins. Those tribes are competitive in classic/vintage, with merfolk lists currently winning quite a few classic Daily events and Premier events. If you're looking to restrict cards, I'd worry less about painters servant and more about eather vial or some of thier enablers.
Okay, if anything I'm guilty of hearsay.
I personally didn't witness any rude behavior during the tournament in question.
What I did was try to summarize my understanding of the situation based on secondary information. (what others wrote and commented about the event)
I actually thought I toned it down from the original sources, but apparently it was still shocking enough to evoke a response.
Maralen seems really terrible. Even if it gets you the BoW, it gets your opponent the answer for it.
I have been following this debate and I read the article in its entirety. In the 1st paragraph we have the following:
During one particular tournament a four very good professional players entered the tournament with classic worthy decks such as grindstone, fish, and Oath combo, and proceeded to take out all the competition. From what I can gather, ShardFenix, the organizer of this fine event was very upset over this state of events. I believe he was upset because these four Pros, Spikes, Sharks, or whatever you want to call them were somewhat rude, overconfident, and perhaps condescending towards the event as a whole and the regular players.
To me, this sounds like an attack on 4 players. Except 2 of those players decided to respond and you have said neither were the actual offender. If Endless was one of the 4 referred to above, then yes, I believe the comments were targeted at him directly. That is my read.
In response to your assertion that someone bringing a $500 deck to a $5 tournament goes, I have to disagree with you. I am not a huge tribal classic player. If I'm home and playing at the time of this PRE, I am going to have to put a deck together. I happen to be a classic player which means that I have many of the expensive cards. Hence, when deck building with a goal of building the best deck possible for this event, I will invariably run some of the expensive cards because often they are the best card. I'm not trying to shark anyone. I'm only trying to have fun. As I get more accustomed to the format or the types of decks people are playing, I will do as the author does and tone down my deck to match. BUT, if I lose with my Oath deck to a good Goblins build, I will probably be trying to improve my oath deck for the next tournament.
Again it comes down to rules needing to be formalized and decided upon and despite it being mostly Shard's baby the regular players have an investment in how it goes down so hence the discussion (not argument as I don't think there is any animus here.)
I have to agree with Tempest on this one. It is very easy to come off as arrogant without even meaning to. Just by not acknowledging valid criticism. No need to defend tech because deck building is always (eventually) a communal sport even if the initial efforts and creativity are individual. It isn't until people play with their decks that the real analysis can begin.
You are right that you didn't mention people by name. And you are right that they came out on their own and admitted to being the people you "referred" to. What you did do however was describe these people as not being friendly, as being condescending, as "Sharks," etc. Well, 2 of the 4 have chosen to post in the comments and it has been mentioned that neither of those players were offensive or rude at all by other participants at the tournament. So, I'm not sure if you made that up or if there is something I'm missing, but even if you didn't name names, you did make brash and apparently false accusations.
I just read your response to Endless_Nameless and immediately realized that my original response was somewhat misguided. I am glad you are playing devil's advocate here, but until that response (where you explain your philosophy on PREs), it was not apparent that you weren't "picking sides."
Personally, I belive that ShardFenix needs to either run an invite-only tournament where he brings in only his friends, or deal with whatever decks people bring as long as they fit within the rules. This argument is just a silly extension of the ever present "What is casual?" debate and I think we all know that argument isn't going to be resolved anytime soon.
I think maybe you skimmed or misread or just plain didn't understand the criticisms. None of them were leveled directly at Endless. His teammates are the ones mentioned as being rude, etc. And I agree entirely that they were within their rights to come crashing the little PRE that no one previously cared about except the regular community members who happen to like the format. I would never say exclude anyone based on their affiliations either. But I will say rudeness should be dealt with accordingly.
As far as innovation goes most of the regulars spend a lot of time creating and testing new decks to find different ways to play within the format rules. That someone brought an old tried and true deck and won with it is not surprising. However, when you spend $500 to win a $5 tourney there is something seriously wrong whether you recognize it or not.
As you say and as many people have said the format rules need fixing or the structure of the tourney needs fixing or both. Clearly it will take a bit of time before the right combination is found.
As for your diatribe, I say more power to you. Speaking up is the only way to get consensus. Even if it means airing the dissenting opinions first.
Did I call anyone out? The only person I mentioned by name is Shardfenix and I did so only because it is his tournament and he started the entire discussion. I let the others be annonymous.
It's not my fault if they chose to identify themselves and defend themselves quite effectively imho.
My job, as I see it, is to continue the discussion in a constructive way, and I think I have done that.
Did I say you can't? I love Oath of Druids. I think Survival of the Fittest might be too broken for tourney but never Oath. I just noted the rage factor. Also lets be real. The PRE is not tourney play like your DE/PEs are tourneys. There are tourneys and there are Tourneys. With no real prize on the line I can see people getting upset over the high power/high cost decks. And as I said I have had people quit on me in a rage over my $5 shock lands. (Now some of them are higher but for a long time that was the average price.)
Seriously. If you want to play a casual game of magic, do it in the casual room. If you are hosting a tournament, prepare to face the best decks. If you don't like the best decks, either ban cards until there is a new best deck or don't play.
Not only is Endless_Nameless a nice guy, but from what I've read here, he brought a new, interesting (albeit expensive) deck into a tournament environment. And didn't do well with it. Why is he taking heat?
If I wanted to bring tournament Merfolk, there shouldn't be a problem as long as I'm playing by the rules. There is no "spirit of the game" issue because even as though its a non-sanctioned PRE, you are still billing it as a tournament and you are giving prizes. You are welcome to be innovative like AJImpy, but you should expect to face well tuned decks.
Now, as for the article itself, I think you hit on some really great points. Don't take my diatribe as a criticism of the article, more as criticism of the comments and the participants who feel entitled to choose what other people play. Also, I'm not sure you needed to single people out in your article. You could've made the same points without pointing fingers.
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I really do appreciate it and I think it helps for a better overall understanding of everyone's perspectives and interests.
I know it probably sounds like I have multiple personalities, but the quotes you mentioned from my article are not my feelings but are my understanding of how Shardfenix and others felt about the situation. I know at first they were stirring up the casual vs tier 1 spike debate. I don't really have much attachment to that debate because everyone defines casual in their own way. No one wins that debate.
However that is how the discussion about Tribal began, so I felt it was appropriate to include that piece of the debate in my article even if it is not something I feel strongly about.
For the PREs that don't cost anything to enter, I will try to match the power level of the event. If I get destroyed one week, I'm likely to amp up the power level for the next week. If I have a couple of matches where I win too easily, and I feel that I didn't give my opponent a shot at winning, I might just retire that deck or tone it down for the next week. I'm willing to do that for PREs when I wouldn't think about toning a deck down for a daily event or a 2-man queue. I DO NOT expect my opponents to share this philosophy. Some people play goblins or merfolk every week trying to take home the top prize and I'm fine with that. That's how they enjoin the event, while I get more out of the deckbuilding process of the event. To each their own.
However I know there are some players out there that care about having too many super powerful decks in this type of event. I try to respect their feelings as well. It's a difficult process to try to make everyone happy.
maybe ban women and black people too because stereotyping is a great idea?
Ban Team Rocket?
If you can't play a $50 card in tourney play, where can you play it?
"Being open to criticism is a two-way street!"
Not if you're the one having articles published. :p
"During one particular tournament a four very good professional players entered the tournament with classic worthy decks such as grindstone, fish, and Oath combo, and proceeded to take out all the competition."
"Why would anybody show up to this tournament next week with a deck that isn't as powerful as Oath, Fish, or Painter/Grindstone."
It was lines like that in your article which made me want to correct the power issue with some cards. I believe that my oath deck did work as a fun yet competitive tribal deck.
Restrict the broken cards certainly, but just don't throw a blanket label on "classic" cards as bad.
Just taking out eather vial would do a lot to slow down goblins and merfolk, probably more for merfolk now. Bazaar of Baghdad was restricted because it was unfun. I can't see why the same couldn't be done for vial if that's the issue with it too.
Just because a card costs $50 doesn't mean it shouldn't see play in the format. I think it adds spice to the format. I play a tribe that I've yet to see anyone else play, and I play my cards in a manner that no one else has yet. I win some games, and I lose some games (66% loss rate in the tourney so far).
Sorry to continue here, I just feel that I needed to clear my name. When you spoke of the "four players" I'm certain that I was one of them. You spoke of them in the light that they were ruining something good. I truly don't believe I was. I think anyone that played me in the tourney would attest to the fact that I was certainly not rude. I think my decks results would attest to the fact that it's by far not overpowered for the format.
On a side note I do understand your argument about needing something to distinguish the format. When I look at my oath list I play in classic tourney play and the list I play in the PRE, Other than lands and Oath itself, the lists share 2 cards. Hard to believe that wouldn't be considered a real distinction.
I think merfolk/goblins/elves might lack some of the distinction you're speaking of though. If that's the problem, find that cards that enable their combos and restrict/ban them. It would be an easy solution to fix your issue.
Ban list:
Grindstone
eather vial
Goblin recruiter
Goblin Lackey
Glimpse of Nature
With those 5 cards being nixed you're going to see big changes in the types of decks and play available.
Hey, I've already changed two cards as per suggestions here: Acidic Slime (100% oversight on my part) and Volrath’s Stronghold. And the Slime is stellar. Remember: Being open to criticism is a two-way street!
Absolutely. And going from ZZZ to ZZW to EEE instead of ZWE also hurts the amount of Worldwake that will be in circulation.
My main concern is not that the power level of Classic Tribal decks are too strong, my concern is that the tribal restriction is not a big enough restriction to make Tribal Classic significantly different than regular classic. Sure, that restriction takes out a few creatureless decks but in the end, you're left with a bunch of decks that are really good in classic being also really good in classic tribal.
Without a full compliment of Force of Will, AEther Vial, Daze and Standstill, I believe that the overall power level of merfolk comes back into line with the other tribes.
Goblins are another story because in my opinion both Goblin Recruiter and Goblin Lackey are quite broken, not to mention the myriad of other goblin options. Without Vial things get a bit easier, but still, it's hard to weaken goblins so that it is in line with other tribes. Goblins might need some bannings even after you add my proposed tribal restrictions.
Elves, like merfolk work best because of noncreature support, namely Glimpse of Nature. In an environment that expects creatures and without Glimpse of Nature, Elf combo decks can be disrupted.
Once again, my point is not that they are too strong, my point is that I want there to be a real distinction between the decks we use for classic and classic tribal.
LED's were included in my previous article where I covered Land and Land related cards such as LEDS and lotus petal. If you look at my last decklist, LED's are included in there as well.
Hmmm I don't recall you saying anything at all but it was your clan mates that were the ruckus creators, your deck seemed fairly tiered to me but I didn't get a real good look. It might not stand up to merfolk but every deck has it's weaknesses. Vial is definitely a culprit. The last event I played in 2 of the 3 games I played vs Vial Fish, killing the vial early really hosed my opponent who was then unable to out play me with counters. Sadly game three ended up with him slowly getting creature advantage as my Noxious Ghouls never came up to trigger the Patriarch's Bidding for the win. 10 turns of defensive play ended when I got frustrated with drawing lands and cast bidding anyway.
I will also echo what Flippers said by pointing out that people see $50 cards and it triggers an anger response in casual tourney/play. Heck Ive had people see a shock land and quit in a rage.
I'm sure this isnt aimed at you endless_nameless your deck is nice and Oath was a shocker but as you say once you figure out how to get round it it's not really as bad as one might think.
I think the price is partly to blame for Oath's hatred and the fact it's classed as a classic staple makes peoples heads turn.
I also agree on AEther Vial, it should be banned
By the way my goblins were no where near type one ;), that was a great game by the way all the way to the end it was so close.
I have always said I thought this was a mistake. I am glad others are speaking up for Swiss as it is the most appropriate form for casual tourneys in my opinion.
Actually no Gaea's Blessing kills the combo.
I was the player that played oath the last two weeks. With all the fuss about classic decks being over powered I think my results tell a far different story than has been told here.
First try I got knocked out round one to T1 goblins
Second try I got knocked out round two to T1 merfolk.
Just because my deck uses *classic* cards in it, doesn't mean it's a runaway powerhouse. Oath can only bring a single creature into play each turn, and only if you've already got more down. If I drop oath early, the opposing player just doesn't cast anything until they have an entire army ready to drop in one turn. They drop their army, and then one creature per turn I can bring creatures into play. I don't play this list to smash on people, but because I like playing with some of the less castable creatures. I've never once been rude to anyone whom I've played. Infact I've played a total of 3 people in the two events I've entered, one of whom is a puremtgo writer.
From a strictly power basis, there's absolutely no other winable tribes other than merfolk elves and goblins. Those tribes are competitive in classic/vintage, with merfolk lists currently winning quite a few classic Daily events and Premier events. If you're looking to restrict cards, I'd worry less about painters servant and more about eather vial or some of thier enablers.