...and if it's game 3 they lose the match
I think the SCG did this in the player's championship did this and I loved this.
The negative is I think it would hurt control players, but could cause players to choose more aggro decks so they don't pick up losses
What other pros and cons am I missing?
I hate ties and want to get rid of them
I guess it might be fun if you enjoy aggro or burn.
I love my midrange grindy decks though. I don't think I'd enjoy these rules at all.
I also love my fetch lands and shock lands...but in a format like this where every point of damage taken means SO much more...I'd have a heck of a hard time wanting to play them.
I think I'd end up taking something like 20 basic mountains and a bunch of burn.
But so would most everyone else...and that just makes for a stale environment IMHO.
1) There are other routes to victory than life totals. Milling and poison counters are two of the more prevalent ways, but there are a host of alternate victory cards.
2) Life totals may not be representative of the game state. A player may be sitting at 10 life while the opponent is at 5, but the opponent is threatening lethal damage and they are not.
3) It may encourage Stalling if a player only has to have more life to win game 3 rather than actually having to close it out as a round gets close to time.
All hail our burn overlords. Id rather chew off my own arm than play that format. I can't stand doing endless burn match ups, and there are many decks that don't even start winning by turn 5. The only good thing I can see coming from this is it would make sure that the number of mill players is ACTUALLY 0
All hail our burn overlords. Id rather chew off my own arm than play that format. I can't stand doing endless burn match ups, and there are many decks that don't even start winning by turn 5. The only good thing I can see coming from this is it would make sure that the number of mill players is ACTUALLY 0
I think that the OP was referring to the 5 turns after the round goes to time. He doesn't want a draw if a player can't win by the end of the fifth turn in extra turns.
That said, this would actually occasionally cause draws if this causes a player to lose Game 2 during turns when they've won Game 1.
The thing is, the requirement is to win the game in the allotted time. At the end of that time, if no one wins, no one wins. The problems that come from that system are far lesser than the problems created by making life totals the only thing to matter.
Though, it might make Turbo Fog more viable with extensive life gain.
STATISTICS.
All of these "Let's eliminate bad cards" crusades are simply ignorant. And when they start to devolve into "WotC is conspiring to give us crappy cards," they just become embarrassing. MATH is conspiring to give you crappy cards.
I played a game yesterday that shows this is a faulty way to run things. i was sitting at 1 life with the boardstate to kill, my opponent was sitting with a bolt in hand, but i had previously destroyed all their red sources. so my 1 life meant more to them than me. I like to look at it like i look at edh, Life totals don't matter until there is only one player above 0.
I think it would be great to eliminate draws. Intentional draws just encourage gaming the standings and benefit those that set up favorable "agreements" with their friends. Unintentional draws are pretty unfun.
Since only a few % of matches go to time, it seems better to just have some way to pick a winner after extra turns. Also would encourage slow control deck players to pick up the pace in game 3.
What happens if a player has a platinum angel out? the player with the angel doesnt care about his life total. and all the damage in the world doesnt make the other guy more of a winner at time
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from DEADMANSEVEN »
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it put an evasive creature in its deck over a narrow hate card.
Quote from DARCYKUN »
If a card isn't worth your opponent removing, it's not worth putting in your deck.
Someone recently scooped to me when the life totals were 70-8 (not in my favor).
I don't like draws either, but I don't think the solution is to change the way a winner is determined. Better is to change the conditions of contest such that a draw is not a positive outcome or not a possible outcome.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Because we cannot prevent draws in paper Magic we allow IDs. If we could prevent draws we would not have IDs in paper Magic. " Scott Larabee.
I guess I don't really see the issue with a draw. As DunstilBrejik noted, the requirement for tournament play is to win a match in the allotted time. A draw being worth more than a loss but substantially less than a win is a fine compromise - it's not a "positive outcome", it's just not as bad as a negative one. Yes, there will be situations where players who are undefeated can intentionally draw late in a tournament to ensure advancement, but repeated draws will make it difficult for players to advance, and forcing a match to end allows the tournament to continue on. If there are one or two matches going when the round goes to time, it is far more fair to the other players in the tournament if those players draw after the 5 turns than to make everyone wait for them to finish their matches.
The only way that I can see to make it so that a draw is not a possible outcome is to make rounds untimed, which would make rounds take much longer.
After playing other games that end like that it really is great that you don't have to worry about a tie, but it makes you incredibly salty when you own the board and could win next turn but just happen to have less life at the current moment. When I first started playing magic I hated the draw system but have grown to see it really is better than giving a win to someone who may not even be ahead. I also am slightly biased because I love playing mill ;).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Trying to make crappy pet cards work since 2002.
I'm usually typing quickly at work or on my phone so I appolize from the crummy grammar
I see only one major problem with that idea, and that is that it creates a perverse incentive for players to slow-play and stall.
That's what makes it a non-starter
All other arguments that I've read or that I can think of can be boiled down to it being another feature of the game. If you win by mill or poison, then a life-total tiebreaker only really represents a marginal disadvantage. Most of your matches aren't going to go to time (especially if you're playing infect, painter, or against burn), and if they do, it's just another disadvantage of playing a deck that usually has a lower life-total than the opponent, and it's not an insurmountable disadvantage if you can play your deck quickly.
I think that the OP was referring to the 5 turns after the round goes to time.
I think you ought to reread his post. He clearly wants each game decided in five turns.
I mean, I guess.
The "I hate ties and want to get rid of them" made it seem like it was an issue with going to extra turns. If it really is a "every game is decided in 5 turns", then
a) This format would be very different, and not something I'd be interested in, and
b) Not something I could see SCG ever trying
I can't really see them deviating from the MTR anyways, but it's at least less egregious if it's extra turns that he's referring to.
I can't really see them deviating from the MTR anyways...
Very likely the OP is misinformed. But he clearly makes the distinction between losing games and losing matches, and seems to understand the difference.
Wait.. is he seriously suggesting that every game should have a set number of turns?
The whole game would be warped around exploiting the arbitrary rules. And it still doesnt stop draws because people could just end up with the same life total.
I read it as instead of a draw after 5 turns that the winner would be decided by most life. I don't really think he implied you would need to finish a game in 5 turns. Although with that being said I wish there WAS a time limit once you get to time in the round. Nothing is more frustrating than when time gets called in the round and it takes an additional 30 minutes for the last game going to finish.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Trying to make crappy pet cards work since 2002.
I'm usually typing quickly at work or on my phone so I appolize from the crummy grammar
Assuming you means the "extra 5 turns", you run into the "Hey guys, let's have this be the last round of Risk" effect, where people do something that wouldn't win them the game under any real situations, but wins since they don't have any there is no opportunity for recourse.
It's clear that he means extra 5 turns based on context.
Part of the MTR is that when a round goes to time the players get 5 turns to complete the game, otherwise it's a draw. However, that only applies to swiss rounds. In elimination rounds (typically the Top X), draws aren't possible, so whoever has the higher life total after the 5 turns is the winner.
Quote from "Magic Tournament Rules" »
In single-elimination rounds, matches may not end in a draw. If all players have equal game wins, the player with the highest life total wins the current game. In the event all players have equal life totals (or are between games and the game wins are tied), the game/match continues with an additional state-based action: if a player does not
have the highest life total, he or she loses the game.
It's clear that he means extra 5 turns based on context.
Part of the MTR is that when a round goes to time the players get 5 turns to complete the game, otherwise it's a draw. However, that only applies to swiss rounds. In elimination rounds (typically the Top X), draws aren't possible, so whoever has the higher life total after the 5 turns is the winner.
Quote from "Magic Tournament Rules" »
In single-elimination rounds, matches may not end in a draw. If all players have equal game wins, the player with the highest life total wins the current game. In the event all players have equal life totals (or are between games and the game wins are tied), the game/match continues with an additional state-based action: if a player does not
have the highest life total, he or she loses the game.
There is a reason that every single major tournament has untimed top 8 matches. Even WOTC realizes thats a stupid and arbitrary rule.
They just need to have something there in case someone wants to run a single elimination Magic tournament for some silly reason.
Looking at life totals to decide a winner after the five turns would discourage the use of life as a resource. This would removed a very interesting and risky dimension of play and make years of cards printed with this sort of thing in mind obsolete.
You also discourage multicolour decks, budget land bases become worse, black as a colour becomes worse, and control would be worse.
I encourage the OP to look into more formats, and to play decks with different playstyles to understand why this would be detrimental to mtg.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
They call me Hank Hill because I bring the pro-pain.
Looking at life totals to decide a winner after the five turns would discourage the use of life as a resource. This would removed a very interesting and risky dimension of play and make years of cards printed with this sort of thing in mind obsolete.
You also discourage multicolour decks, budget land bases become worse, black as a colour becomes worse, and control would be worse.
I encourage the OP to look into more formats, and to play decks with different playstyles to understand why this would be detrimental to mtg.
While, I mostly agree that determining a winner based on life total is not the best idea, I think it's off the mark to think it would have much of an impact on deckbuilding. Very few people are going to change their build based on what might happen if they go to time. With the exception of heavy-control decks, I can't see it being an issue worth considering while building. At worst, I think people would simply pay closer attention to the round time and protect their life total more actively if they think the current game will still be going when time is called.
I think the SCG did this in the player's championship did this and I loved this.
The negative is I think it would hurt control players, but could cause players to choose more aggro decks so they don't pick up losses
What other pros and cons am I missing?
I hate ties and want to get rid of them
I love my midrange grindy decks though. I don't think I'd enjoy these rules at all.
I also love my fetch lands and shock lands...but in a format like this where every point of damage taken means SO much more...I'd have a heck of a hard time wanting to play them.
I think I'd end up taking something like 20 basic mountains and a bunch of burn.
But so would most everyone else...and that just makes for a stale environment IMHO.
2) Life totals may not be representative of the game state. A player may be sitting at 10 life while the opponent is at 5, but the opponent is threatening lethal damage and they are not.
3) It may encourage Stalling if a player only has to have more life to win game 3 rather than actually having to close it out as a round gets close to time.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
That said, this would actually occasionally cause draws if this causes a player to lose Game 2 during turns when they've won Game 1.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
Though, it might make Turbo Fog more viable with extensive life gain.
Since only a few % of matches go to time, it seems better to just have some way to pick a winner after extra turns. Also would encourage slow control deck players to pick up the pace in game 3.
I'm assuming the OP only plays Standard?
As already mentioned, this also doesnt eliminate the potential for draws to occur.
I don't like draws either, but I don't think the solution is to change the way a winner is determined. Better is to change the conditions of contest such that a draw is not a positive outcome or not a possible outcome.
The only way that I can see to make it so that a draw is not a possible outcome is to make rounds untimed, which would make rounds take much longer.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
I'm usually typing quickly at work or on my phone so I appolize from the crummy grammar
I think you ought to reread his post. He clearly wants each game decided in five turns.
No interest on my part.
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com/
RUGLegacy Lands.dec
RUGBLegacy Lands.dec
RGLegacy Lands.dec
WUBRG EDH Lands.dec
UBR EDH Artificer Prodigy
B EDH Relentless Rats
That's what makes it a non-starter
All other arguments that I've read or that I can think of can be boiled down to it being another feature of the game. If you win by mill or poison, then a life-total tiebreaker only really represents a marginal disadvantage. Most of your matches aren't going to go to time (especially if you're playing infect, painter, or against burn), and if they do, it's just another disadvantage of playing a deck that usually has a lower life-total than the opponent, and it's not an insurmountable disadvantage if you can play your deck quickly.
The "I hate ties and want to get rid of them" made it seem like it was an issue with going to extra turns. If it really is a "every game is decided in 5 turns", then
a) This format would be very different, and not something I'd be interested in, and
b) Not something I could see SCG ever trying
I can't really see them deviating from the MTR anyways, but it's at least less egregious if it's extra turns that he's referring to.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
Five turn games would certainly eliminate the need to ever go to time!
Very likely the OP is misinformed. But he clearly makes the distinction between losing games and losing matches, and seems to understand the difference.
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com/
RUGLegacy Lands.dec
RUGBLegacy Lands.dec
RGLegacy Lands.dec
WUBRG EDH Lands.dec
UBR EDH Artificer Prodigy
B EDH Relentless Rats
The whole game would be warped around exploiting the arbitrary rules. And it still doesnt stop draws because people could just end up with the same life total.
I'm usually typing quickly at work or on my phone so I appolize from the crummy grammar
Part of the MTR is that when a round goes to time the players get 5 turns to complete the game, otherwise it's a draw. However, that only applies to swiss rounds. In elimination rounds (typically the Top X), draws aren't possible, so whoever has the higher life total after the 5 turns is the winner.
There is a reason that every single major tournament has untimed top 8 matches. Even WOTC realizes thats a stupid and arbitrary rule.
They just need to have something there in case someone wants to run a single elimination Magic tournament for some silly reason.
You also discourage multicolour decks, budget land bases become worse, black as a colour becomes worse, and control would be worse.
I encourage the OP to look into more formats, and to play decks with different playstyles to understand why this would be detrimental to mtg.