New tournament organization suggestion for Magic League

Readonlyfile · Joined: 12 Nov 2005 Posts: 1

If you haven't already guessed, i'm definately a rogue deckbuilder. I may not be a very good player, nor a builder, but, I do share a few things in common with both types.

1- I have fun playing the game.
2- I have fun building decks.

Now, one of the things that makes deckbuilding fun is that you put alot of thought and time into making a deck. This in itself is virtually nonexistent when a metagame is present. People simply copy the winning decks save for a card or two and play with it, very little time or thought put into it.
This creates a problem. It makes it almost pointless to deckbuild at that point because everyone is playing the same decks. Now, a solution to create a broader metagame and a bit more of a challenge for all players in the realm of deckbuilding.

Tournaments should be organized by similar deck types first. EG, all the Vore or BW Discard players play each other until one remains. After all this, you're left with one player for each deck type. These players play one another as usual. The result is a tournament top that while, a few decks may be consistently in the top numbers, those decks are almost always different or in a drastically different order. The reason for this is because only the best players/deckbuilders are the only ones who make it through to the top, not just everyone playing the same deck and depending largely on luck.

GRAH · Joined: 31 Aug 2004 Posts: 599

1. That's pretty much not possible by any means. It would be overcomplicated to do and is impossible to code, plus it makes no rules for rogue decks.

2. Life isn't fair. If you're a good enough player, then you should be able to beat bad matchups. You should not have to get paired against the mirror just to proceed, and in addition, it skews normal tournaments. There's a reason RL tournaments are not run as such.

Dr_Moo · Joined: 26 Nov 2004 Posts: 950

I'm really growing weary of so-called "rogue deckbuilders" thinking that they are better than people who play archetypes (and yes, your post says that you are). Everyone has deck ideas, and most of them are bad. Most people choose to play decks that they know are good, and they are successful. When one of your ideas become archetype, then you're a good deckbuilder. There's nothing good or noble about playing your own creations. I've done a shitton of both. It does feel more rewarding to win with something you built yourself, but the key word there is 'win'. If you build something that wins, good job. Until then, shut up.

nico · Administrator Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 822

It is funny indeed, how people call themselves good, and don't want to play vs the tier 1 decks. If your deck is different and good it will win, period. If it is not good enough, then it is back to the drawing board and start all over again.
Another option if you don't wanna change, then call for casual matches only, and avoid the top decks.

Greetz Nico

TybudX · Joined: 11 Aug 2005 Posts: 57

Tiered rounds of play do a lot more to show who the best players/deckbuilders are than the 'bye system' that you suggest.

Throughout a tourney, people will play, say, 5 to 9 rounds, then may or may not cut to a top eight. Along the way, they may or may not play against similar decks to their own. They may or may not play aginst the field that they expected to see in that tourney. Maybe their preparation, ie. deckbuilding, led them to make the right choices with regards to their deck, whether it be one of their design or somebody elses' 'winning deck, save for a card or two'. Maybe it didn't.

Maybe, despite these factors, their testing and prior knowledge, ei. lucksacking like a net-deck whore, led them to win in matches that they should have lost, due either to the opposing player being better (showing deck building superiority on the players end) or due to them playing better (showing better lucksacking than the oppenent, who designed his own amazing deck from scratch, Fog of Gnats included).

So no, wait. I guess you are entirely right. I would much rather be able to design a completely rogue deck that is only expected to be able to beat the top two or three decks, instead of having to actually play through round after round of bad matchups against random opponents. That way, when everybody else is done playing their 5-9 round tourney, I could be there at the end with my hate-deck monstrosity that doesn't fit into one of the established archtypes, ready to get my one match win for the day. All because I'm such a great deck builder that I can make one deck that will beat one other deck.

After all, isn't that the truest test of being smarter than some other guys who have beaten you countless times wihtout needing to bend the rules completely in their favour?

Oh, wait. Get a new hobby. You suck.

ninjew · Joined: 27 Aug 2005 Posts: 43

I'd like to start by saying that I'm a rogue deckbuilder. And I avoid playing tier decks. That said, your idea is the worst idea I've heard in a long time.

The entire point of building a rogue deck is to build something that can consistently win in the metagame. If you can't beat all the decks, then go back and fix your deck. The thing I love most about magic is deckbuilding, the act of analyzing the metagame and creating something that can beat or reply to most of what's out there is the best part of the game in my opinion (probably why i don't play in real life anymore, just pass my creations on to friends willing to spend $$).

So in summary, be a better deck builder. Take the metagame into account when you build. Quit whining about netdecking.