Thanks for the compliment Good luck to all the competitors, and thanks for everyone's votes and interesting cards to vote for over the month.
My final card was designed because I imagined a buddy-cop movie with a strait-laced Azorius rules stickler being paired up with a bitter, loose cannon Boros veteran, and the idea amused me (:
Great, now I'm going to have that image stuck in my head all day...
Although I think an "Odd Couple" show with an Izzet teacher and a snooty Azorious lawyer might be good too. They'd of course have a Selesnyan hippie for a neighbor next door.
You really just need to embrace the rage. I keep a small colony of hamsters next to my computer and every time I lose a match to mana screw I throw one against the wall.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
I hope you don't mean me for my commentary on one of your cards Tahn I didn't mean to appear rude and I do enjoy your designs. It's sad to see you go.
Oh, not at all! I wouldn't want you to think that. [Edit: I don't even know what comment you're referring to.] To clarify: I've concluded from certain things that someone suspects me of cheating the voting system, then cheated the voting system himself as what I guess he sees as some form of justice. That's not the kind of game I want to play.
You really just need to embrace the rage. I keep a small colony of hamsters next to my computer and every time I lose a match to mana screw I throw one against the wall.
I've looked over the rest of the month; the voting just looked odd initially because there were four people who seemed to be voting amongst themselves a lot more often than they were voting for anyone else. This was moderately concerning because it comes across as, possibly, those people aren't giving people outside their "circle" a fair shake.
After looking through the entire month, though, it looks like that was just a fluke of the first week and a half or so. So there's not actually anything to worry about, Tahn.
As far as how I vote, I've said in the past that I don't normally vote for people ahead of me in the leaderboard. It doesn't matter who is ahead of me, I just have higher standards - basically, "is this finished WotC-grade material" - for the people ahead of me. That said, normally my votes aren't enough to switch who wins, mostly because it's very rare that anyone votes the same way as me.
On another voting-related note, we have a lot of disqualified votes (at first count, it's 6 - one person voted three times, three other people voted once) so I'd appreciate it if someone would double-check things.
@Tahn: Don't think poorly of MD for that. We have HAD cases of such political voting in the past (which led to the whole recreation of the DCC system,) so it's perfectly fair to become suspicious of patterns. Obviously, when there's not actually cheating it will become evident after a while.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
As far as how I vote, I've said in the past that I don't normally vote for people ahead of me in the leaderboard. It doesn't matter who is ahead of me, I just have higher standards - basically, "is this finished WotC-grade material" - for the people ahead of me. That said, normally my votes aren't enough to switch who wins, mostly because it's very rare that anyone votes the same way as me.
Well, it's up to you how you vote - that being said, I am going to lay out my reasons arguing against this approach.
Personally, I try to be as fair as I can be - I vote for the cards I think are the best and ignore the standings. It's in the interest of everyone that the votes represent the best two cards and not the two competitors I most want to get votes.
For example, whilst this "my votes aren't important so I can tactically vote how I like" thinking doesn't work if everyone uses it. If the contest is about making good cards, hold them all to the same standard. If it's about improving your own chances, then vote for people behind you. There's no reason why you should use your relative table position as an arbitrary delineator of card quality, other than to suppress votes to people who you are in competition with. Otherwise, why use yourself? Why not me, or Maokun, or any other arbitrary competitor?
I am proud to have accumulated a joint top vote score in September despite not resorting to anything other than voting for the cards and voting frequently for some of my closest competitors, when they made top-quality cards. I hope that people voted for my cards when they thought they were the best, and not only when it served their goals.
More generally, a great way of making this would be to have submissions made privately and the identity of creators not known when voting occurred. That being said it's a lot of extra work and I think an honour system is probably better. It is, after all, only a game.
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!
The thing is, the standards aren't that much higher - even for people behind me, I won't vote for cards where the name got changed irregularly (that is, one name appears at the top and another appears throughout the rules text), cards that don't have rarities (usually), cards with massively incorrect templating, or cards where people are misspelling relatively common words.
And, as far as why I use myself as the line to break on... one of the running jokes I was making about myself prior to this month (hey, I can't use it anymore - I tied for first, finally) was that in most of the contests here, I'm good enough to make the top 8 consistently, but not good enough to win. A lot of the people who end up ahead of me do it consistently. (And even when they're behind me, I tend to apply higher standards to them anyway, because they have won when I hadn't.)
Finally... the standards I'm applying to people ahead of me are the standards I try to hold myself to when I'm making cards anyway. Sometimes I make cards that are "eh, this idea is stuck in my head, I don't care if it's not printable"... but I try to keep those days to a minimum.
I want to say it was about fifth on my list, partly because it actually felt more white than green. (Green removal, at this point, seems more like "Target creature gains deathtouch until end of turn. You may have it fight another creature." to me.)
I want to say it was about fifth on my list, partly because it actually felt more white than green. (Green removal, at this point, seems more like "Target creature gains deathtouch until end of turn. You may have it fight another creature." to me.)
Eh, that's fair enough. I think Aura based removal could bleed into green, though. The big thing is that I originally planned +3/+3 which would have felt more green. Reflecting on it, not sure why I backed down from there.
Mwonvuli Soilwaker2G Creature - Human Shaman(R) XG, T: Target land becomes a X/X colorless Elemental creature until end of turn. It's still a land.
Land creatures you control get +1/+1 and have trample.
2/2
This is repeatable land removal for XG, where X is zero for 0/0s.
maybe a coincidence, but not an amazing one. it's kind of an obvious design that i've come up with myself actually and have seen others do before
It sure is getting alot of votes for such an "obvious" design that apparently a substantial amount of others have done before.
EDIT: Let me be blunt. I don't like it. Unless Prophylaxis can provide a link to where he designed/posted Bait prior to my post, it looks suspicious to me. That's my viewpoint. It doesn't mean I'm right. It's just my outlook on it. But if he can do that, then I certainly recant and apologize.
The card is a simple and obvious design. Your thread is four weeks old. I haven't seen any other indication of Prophylaxis mimicing other designs this month. Occam's Razor.
Great, now I'm going to have that image stuck in my head all day...
Although I think an "Odd Couple" show with an Izzet teacher and a snooty Azorious lawyer might be good too. They'd of course have a Selesnyan hippie for a neighbor next door.
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
Deprive
Moved to Discussion thread - Gerrard's Mom
That said, I'm not playing in the DCC again. A certain someone has made me feel rather unwelcome.
I'm taking a break from it for October as I have a trip to GP San Jose to plan!
I run a Tumblr for Magic-related statistics, graphs, and quizzes. Come check it out!
Oh, not at all! I wouldn't want you to think that. [Edit: I don't even know what comment you're referring to.] To clarify: I've concluded from certain things that someone suspects me of cheating the voting system, then cheated the voting system himself as what I guess he sees as some form of justice. That's not the kind of game I want to play.
After looking through the entire month, though, it looks like that was just a fluke of the first week and a half or so. So there's not actually anything to worry about, Tahn.
As far as how I vote, I've said in the past that I don't normally vote for people ahead of me in the leaderboard. It doesn't matter who is ahead of me, I just have higher standards - basically, "is this finished WotC-grade material" - for the people ahead of me. That said, normally my votes aren't enough to switch who wins, mostly because it's very rare that anyone votes the same way as me.
On another voting-related note, we have a lot of disqualified votes (at first count, it's 6 - one person voted three times, three other people voted once) so I'd appreciate it if someone would double-check things.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
Well, it's up to you how you vote - that being said, I am going to lay out my reasons arguing against this approach.
Personally, I try to be as fair as I can be - I vote for the cards I think are the best and ignore the standings. It's in the interest of everyone that the votes represent the best two cards and not the two competitors I most want to get votes.
For example, whilst this "my votes aren't important so I can tactically vote how I like" thinking doesn't work if everyone uses it. If the contest is about making good cards, hold them all to the same standard. If it's about improving your own chances, then vote for people behind you. There's no reason why you should use your relative table position as an arbitrary delineator of card quality, other than to suppress votes to people who you are in competition with. Otherwise, why use yourself? Why not me, or Maokun, or any other arbitrary competitor?
I am proud to have accumulated a joint top vote score in September despite not resorting to anything other than voting for the cards and voting frequently for some of my closest competitors, when they made top-quality cards. I hope that people voted for my cards when they thought they were the best, and not only when it served their goals.
More generally, a great way of making this would be to have submissions made privately and the identity of creators not known when voting occurred. That being said it's a lot of extra work and I think an honour system is probably better. It is, after all, only a game.
I run a Tumblr for Magic-related statistics, graphs, and quizzes. Come check it out!
And, as far as why I use myself as the line to break on... one of the running jokes I was making about myself prior to this month (hey, I can't use it anymore - I tied for first, finally) was that in most of the contests here, I'm good enough to make the top 8 consistently, but not good enough to win. A lot of the people who end up ahead of me do it consistently. (And even when they're behind me, I tend to apply higher standards to them anyway, because they have won when I hadn't.)
Finally... the standards I'm applying to people ahead of me are the standards I try to hold myself to when I'm making cards anyway. Sometimes I make cards that are "eh, this idea is stuck in my head, I don't care if it's not printable"... but I try to keep those days to a minimum.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
I almost voted for yours actually. It was probably 3rd or 4th on my list.
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
Eh, that's fair enough. I think Aura based removal could bleed into green, though. The big thing is that I originally planned +3/+3 which would have felt more green. Reflecting on it, not sure why I backed down from there.
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
I would totally have voted for it if it had Ninjutsu.
Samesies. It's just not a Ninja without it.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
This is repeatable land removal for XG, where X is zero for 0/0s.
Just sayin'.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Most Nominated for Random Categories, 2013
It sure is getting alot of votes for such an "obvious" design that apparently a substantial amount of others have done before.
EDIT: Let me be blunt. I don't like it. Unless Prophylaxis can provide a link to where he designed/posted Bait prior to my post, it looks suspicious to me. That's my viewpoint. It doesn't mean I'm right. It's just my outlook on it. But if he can do that, then I certainly recant and apologize.
you should also consider that folks sometimes subconsciously echo stuff they've noticed and liked. it happens and isn't anyone's fault
Prophylaxis could've easily have just made up that card up on the spot too, he's got skills like that
Forgiven, it's only a matter of probability that you'll see designs from different people that are similar. it really does just happen by chance
[Clan Flamingo] Tier Archivist
[15:21] <@CC> Remember, if you argue, you are an idiot.
Untrophied Wins:
Perfect MCC Scores: 2
---------------------------------------------------------------