It's a lot like these event designs for the prereleases.
Kinda fun (oh I get to pick a color!), ulterior annoying (but I don't want to pick a color..) and ultimately pointless (I come here for the new cards, I'd participate anyways).
All in all not bad. But we need to make sure things stay normal most months.
People get confused, they want structure. Having different tasks and challenges keeps it fresh enough.
However, can't say no to some quirky structure change to shake things up a bit every now and then.
I've thought up a round that sticks to the traditional structure, but does have really 'new' challenges and tasks.
So maybe, if Eventide does it tradionally I could organize the month after that, with the good old formular plus challenges that are a little bit out there.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
I would have to chime in that I hope we don't do vs rounds in Round 2 again. Providing reasonable judgings is very time-consuming, and doubling the load is tough. I definitely don't want to discourage innovation, I just think it would be a good idea to get prior buy-off on major changes. In my opinion, volunteer time is the #1 limiting resource for running contests in this format, so we should generally try to keep our requirements for that resource down if possible.
Vaguely on topic, I have been thinking a bit about the distinction between our various contests. My impression is that the MCC is primarily a series of mechanically-linked challenges, while the CCL is designed to build on flavorful prompts. Is that something I should try to spell out more in the CCL guidelines, or is it an artificial distinction that wouldn't really serve any purpose? Is the difference in contest structure enough to differentiate the contests? I am thinking I need to write up a better guide for CCL Hosting to make it more accessible, and it may make sense to do something similar for the MCC as well.
As far as my turn at the plate next month, I'm planning on a "traditional" month. Depending on the number of Judges and Players, I might consider changing Round 1 to Top 3 or 5 instead of Top 4, but that would be the extent of it. Also, someone is going to need to show me the secret handshake in the next few days so I can post the Judge Signup by the 23rd. I know that looks early, but this is February.
RE: CCL vs MCC.
The biggest differences between the CCL and the MCC, to me, are time consumption and judging. For Hosts, the CCL involves coming up with six or seven Rounds of challenges that tie around a central theme or story, while the MCC is only four Rounds. From my experience, the CCL does tend to lean more towards flavor, while the MCC trends towards design. The CCL, if you make it into the Top 8, often runs halfway into the next month, if not longer. The MCC is more time consuming for Judges than players, since there is no "peer review" as in the CCL. Of course, a full critique for the CCL can be "I don't like it," with no further explanation needed. In the MCC, you may not like the card, but you have to explain why. I don't think I've ever spent less than two hours doing MCC Judgings, and most times, it takes longer.
I could elaborate further, but I'll put that on hold for now, since I still have eight cards to review in roughly thirty hours.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
May your games be chaotic and your decks be Rogue.
I would have to chime in that I hope we don't do vs rounds in Round 2 again. Providing reasonable judgings is very time-consuming, and doubling the load is tough. I definitely don't want to discourage innovation, I just think it would be a good idea to get prior buy-off on major changes. In my opinion, volunteer time is the #1 limiting resource for running contests in this format, so we should generally try to keep our requirements for that resource down if possible.
This. The last thing I want to do is give the judges too big a workload, mainly because real life.
As far as my turn at the plate next month, I'm planning on a "traditional" month. Depending on the number of Judges and Players, I might consider changing Round 1 to Top 3 or 5 instead of Top 4, but that would be the extent of it. Also, someone is going to need to show me the secret handshake in the next few days so I can post the Judge Signup by the 23rd. I know that looks early, but this is February.
Top 3 or 5? It would have to depend on the number of players. Granted, the numbers haven't reached the heyday of the FCC (where it actually went over 100 a few times. Thus the reason for the structure for rounds 1 and 2).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
my other complaint is that the lack of "Go Advanced" makes it slightly harder to edit in big posts and not being able to turn off avatars/sigs makes it hard to do at work
my other complaint is that the lack of "Go Advanced" makes it slightly harder to edit in big posts and not being able to turn off avatars/sigs makes it hard to do at work
That's why I always type in my judgings in Word, then I copy and paste.
Speaking of which, those will be up this afternoon.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Yea, granting flying was from an earlier version of the card that turned all your creature cards into dragons. Then I thought that was dumb, since it's not really a tribal deck if you can throw any creature in there.
1) Someone needs to edit the days on Round 3. The dates are fine, buy the days don't line up.
2) Can someone PM me the info I need for the MCC Hammer account to start the March threads?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
May your games be chaotic and your decks be Rogue.
Designer commentary for my Round 3 card - Landbind is an idea I've had knocking around (originally called Bond) since before Soulbond. I made it simpler and used "paired" templating technology to make it clearer. Most cards with Landbind would just power up the creature once a pairing was made, but a few cards would buff the land (e.g. adding tapping for any colour) or both (like the example card I posted).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI L3 Judge; Regional Coordinator, British Isles & South Africa
I run a Tumblr for Magic-related statistics, graphs, and quizzes. Come check it out!
If Profani/Trivmvirate doesn't post scores in the next few hours, I'll take over his reviews tomorrow evening. However, he is the February host, so we may also have to make a decision as to what to make Round 4 afterwards.
EDIT: Replacement crits completed. I haven't added scores yet to see who would advance, and we still haven't heard from our host.
Brainstorming for what task to employ for Round 4 should probably start.
Quality — "...or to activate an ability of a creature..."
My wording was correct. Smokebraider, Vedalken Engineer, and Primal Beyond all say that the kind of entity you're restricted to spending the mana on needs to be plural because you could spend some of the mana on one ability and the rest on another.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Host, December 2015: A Winter Wonderland? - R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL April 2014: A Game of Fate - Signup|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinal|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL December 2012: Spy Games - Signup|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL November 2010: The Perfect Crime - Signup|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL August 2009: A Commander's Journey: Signups|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
I've got tons of art from the web. Want art for a render? PM me! Want to create your own collection? Start here!
Kinda fun (oh I get to pick a color!), ulterior annoying (but I don't want to pick a color..) and ultimately pointless (I come here for the new cards, I'd participate anyways).
All in all not bad. But we need to make sure things stay normal most months.
People get confused, they want structure. Having different tasks and challenges keeps it fresh enough.
However, can't say no to some quirky structure change to shake things up a bit every now and then.
I've thought up a round that sticks to the traditional structure, but does have really 'new' challenges and tasks.
So maybe, if Eventide does it tradionally I could organize the month after that, with the good old formular plus challenges that are a little bit out there.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Vaguely on topic, I have been thinking a bit about the distinction between our various contests. My impression is that the MCC is primarily a series of mechanically-linked challenges, while the CCL is designed to build on flavorful prompts. Is that something I should try to spell out more in the CCL guidelines, or is it an artificial distinction that wouldn't really serve any purpose? Is the difference in contest structure enough to differentiate the contests? I am thinking I need to write up a better guide for CCL Hosting to make it more accessible, and it may make sense to do something similar for the MCC as well.
RE: CCL vs MCC.
The biggest differences between the CCL and the MCC, to me, are time consumption and judging. For Hosts, the CCL involves coming up with six or seven Rounds of challenges that tie around a central theme or story, while the MCC is only four Rounds. From my experience, the CCL does tend to lean more towards flavor, while the MCC trends towards design. The CCL, if you make it into the Top 8, often runs halfway into the next month, if not longer. The MCC is more time consuming for Judges than players, since there is no "peer review" as in the CCL. Of course, a full critique for the CCL can be "I don't like it," with no further explanation needed. In the MCC, you may not like the card, but you have to explain why. I don't think I've ever spent less than two hours doing MCC Judgings, and most times, it takes longer.
I could elaborate further, but I'll put that on hold for now, since I still have eight cards to review in roughly thirty hours.
Top 3 or 5? It would have to depend on the number of players. Granted, the numbers haven't reached the heyday of the FCC (where it actually went over 100 a few times. Thus the reason for the structure for rounds 1 and 2).
my other complaint is that the lack of "Go Advanced" makes it slightly harder to edit in big posts and not being able to turn off avatars/sigs makes it hard to do at work
That's why I always type in my judgings in Word, then I copy and paste.
Speaking of which, those will be up this afternoon.
Thanks for another good mcc, see you next month!
1) Someone needs to edit the days on Round 3. The dates are fine, buy the days don't line up.
2) Can someone PM me the info I need for the MCC Hammer account to start the March threads?
I run a Tumblr for Magic-related statistics, graphs, and quizzes. Come check it out!
Judgings are up.
EDIT: Replacement crits completed. I haven't added scores yet to see who would advance, and we still haven't heard from our host.
Brainstorming for what task to employ for Round 4 should probably start.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/custom-card-contests-and-games/546762-mcc-february-2014-round-4-finals?comment=2
Diablo III Reaper of Souls in 27 Days! And click for judgings
*17
My wording was correct. Smokebraider, Vedalken Engineer, and Primal Beyond all say that the kind of entity you're restricted to spending the mana on needs to be plural because you could spend some of the mana on one ability and the rest on another.