Hey folks, winter is dying -- thank god. With spring comes 'spring cleaning' and new activities. There are several situations in what I'm dubbing the 'spring cleaning 2011'....I would like community feedback before I pull the trigger. I am also posting brief tidbits on what ya'll can expect in the near future. Keep comments civil and on-target. Do not feel obligated to answer all aspects of this OP.
*** 1. Established Decks (top priority) This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
3. All Proven/Established OP's A general refresh and update would be appreciated. I know I'm not 100% up to date with Merfolks. I'm going to go through it and refresh it for Late Feb/early March 2011. Can other OP's under established/proven see the same treatment?
4. Tempo Decks Horizons, Thresh, Bant.dec ---> how are we doing? Do you need a refresh/new thread? Does dark horizons blend well with regular horizons? How will activity and discussion work in these threads? I would rather blend "dark" and "light" decks together to avoid these stalemate situations. Same idea with UGb thresh vs UGr/UGw.
5. Counterbalance.dec How are things here? Do we need to split this thread up? Thopter Combo got its own thing and went with it. What's the situation in this thread?
6. Developing vs Casual This will never go away, but I want to get people's take on the situation. Developing decks should look to "compete" in the format. That's my take on things. I occasionally step into threads and give input + occasionally point out whether or not a deck is going to "make it" or not. 90% of the time, budget concerns will make your deck casual by default. Are there concerns involving this aspect of the legacy forum? I feel very in the dark towards this area, so opinions on how to further distinguish each section + other concerns are welcome.
7. Subforum Revamp I have sent in a request to Annorax for changing up our Legacy thread. Neither I nor Cabal_chan have the power to move around folders/subforums. The current revamp will be:
a. Proven Decks
b. Established Decks
c. Developing Decks
d. Casual Decks
e. Archives
Articles, Events, and Q&A will all be cut. I have salvaged the most important posts from Q&A and bumped them to archives + linked them to the new main sticky thread dealing with new legacy players.
8. Deck Rankings March 2011 Cabal_chan is busy working out the new elite list of decks. This will be rolling out hopefully sometime soon. Proven already saw Vengevine-Survival fall because of the B/R situation and lack of salvaging itself. SCG 5k's also show us fresh data post-Vengevine.
9. Online MTGS Tourney Cabal_chan runs these. There will be a new thread up about the upcoming event. Giving you a heads up. Consult that particular thread for details, I do not coordinate/know details.
I mean, hell, we're all on a forum for something that most people would describe as a "children's card game"...do what makes you happy. You are never too old to enjoy yourself.
9. Online MTGS Tourney Cabal_chan runs these. There will be a new thread up about the upcoming event. Giving you a heads up. Consult that particular thread for details, I do not coordinate/know details.
1. Established Decks (top priority)
This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
I don't know why we would archive these. Whether there's constant activity or not, these are the top decks in the format and there should be a dedicated place for their discussion.
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks
Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
No offense meant, but I feel this is an extremely bad idea. Decks become proven/established by tournament results. Tiers have nothing to do with forum activity and it should not factor into deck classification at all. If you were referring to something other than moving "developing" decks to "established or proven" based on forum activity, then I misinterpreted and I apologize.
1. Established Decks (top priority) This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
I actually thought about this occasionally too; some decks see almost no play and there's even less discussion. I for one wouldn't notice if you removed a number of decks overnight. Well, I would notice, but it wouldn't phase me.
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
I think you are mostly referring to the Nightmare Effect. The other Stickied decks don't see a lot of activity. It seems like it is in a position to move up because of the power of Tortured Existence and Krovikan Horror.
3. All Proven/Established OP's A general refresh and update would be appreciated. I know I'm not 100% up to date with Merfolks. I'm going to go through it and refresh it for Late Feb/early March 2011. Can other OP's under established/proven see the same treatment?
For sure, we need a new primer for Dredge. The OP for that thread is for LED Dredge, which is largely unplayed.
Merfolk and Goblins probably need a tune up.
The Zoo thread should mention Big Zoo, which has been placing a lot in smaller events, so there is some potential in certain metas.
Is T.E.S. really one of the Proven Competitive decks? I don't think I've seen it place in an event for quite a while. I have definitely seen ANT place despite Mystic Tutor getting banned.
I don't think I have any comments on the other points but has NO and Tell/NO Show (UG Show and Tell) placed enough to deserve a thread in Established Competitive?
1. Established Decks (top priority)
This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
The reason a lot of these sit stagnant is because there's not a whole lot of change or inovation to the top decks.
I mean, the most recent change to Merfolk was Corallhelm, which was almost a year ago. Goblins even longer.
Generally these lists are so productive already discussion only occurs when something happens, like a new viable card, or a banning. I would personally leave them.
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks
Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
This I agree with. If there are enough people playing it, they're playing it for a reason.
3. All Proven/Established OP's
A general refresh and update would be appreciated. I know I'm not 100% up to date with Merfolks. I'm going to go through it and refresh it for Late Feb/early March 2011. Can other OP's under established/proven see the same treatment?
This makes sense. Probably contact the OP, and if they're not willing to do it, post it in the thread to see who would be willing to.
4. Tempo Decks
Horizons, Thresh, Bant.dec ---> how are we doing? Do you need a refresh/new thread? Does dark horizons blend well with regular horizons? How will activity and discussion work in these threads? I would rather blend "dark" and "light" decks together to avoid these stalemate situations. Same idea with UGb thresh vs UGr/UGw.
Funnily enough I wrote the primer on Tempo Thresh, and included all color variations, however discussion leaked out of that thread. May as well lump them together.
5. Counterbalance.dec
How are things here? Do we need to split this thread up? Thopter Combo got its own thing and went with it. What's the situation in this thread?
Decks like 4C Counterbalance play a different game than ThopterCombo, so I believe they should be seperated, as a lot of card choices are different, as is the SB.
6. Developing vs Casual
This will never go away, but I want to get people's take on the situation. Developing decks should look to "compete" in the format. That's my take on things. I occasionally step into threads and give input + occasionally point out whether or not a deck is going to "make it" or not. 90% of the time, budget concerns will make your deck casual by default. Are there concerns involving this aspect of the legacy forum? I feel very in the dark towards this area, so opinions on how to further distinguish each section + other concerns are welcome.
In all honesty, this is not like Standard, where budget discussion is axed. There have been more than 1 occasions where I've come accross budget discussion in proven decks, which I find to be fine, because how wide the Legacy format is. I mean, you wouldn't have a Merfolk thread and than a Budget Merfolk thread, the questions would be asked in the 1 thread.
7. Subforum Revamp
I have sent in a request to Annorax for changing up our Legacy thread. Neither I nor Cabal_chan have the power to move around folders/subforums. The current revamp will be:
a. Proven Decks
b. Established Decks
c. Developing Decks
d. Casual Decks
e. Archives
Articles, Events, and Q&A will all be cut. I have salvaged the most important posts from Q&A and bumped them to archives + linked them to the new main sticky thread dealing with new legacy players.
8. Deck Rankings March 2011
Cabal_chan is busy working out the new elite list of decks. This will be rolling out hopefully sometime soon. Proven already saw Vengevine-Survival fall because of the B/R situation and lack of salvaging itself. SCG 5k's also show us fresh data post-Vengevine.
9. Online MTGS Tourney
Cabal_chan runs these. There will be a new thread up about the upcoming event. Giving you a heads up. Consult that particular thread for details, I do not coordinate/know details.
For sure, we need a new primer for Dredge. The OP for that thread is for LED Dredge, which is largely unplayed.
Merfolk and Goblins probably need a tune up.
The Zoo thread should mention Big Zoo, which has been placing a lot in smaller events, so there is some potential in certain metas.
Is T.E.S. really one of the Proven Competitive decks? I don't think I've seen it place in an event for quite a while. I have definitely seen ANT place despite Mystic Tutor getting banned.
I don't think I have any comments on the other points but has NO and Tell/NO Show (UG Show and Tell) placed enough to deserve a thread in Established Competitive?
Primers will have to come from the community. As much as I would like to write them myself, I don't know alot of the decks well enough to write a good primer (which defeats the purpose of writing one).
Or we change what we consider a primer, and what the thread is actually for. Does the primer need to be a large, indepth post that covers every aspect? Or are a few tournament lists and a basic description good enough?
With streamlined decks, 'new' discussion is hard. Maybe the best path forward is to have the thread be more of a 'helpdesk' for people playing the deck.
As for Proven/Established, I'm working on the tidying up the meta results from the last two months. I'll post that in another thread, so we don't burden the general conversation here too much.
I think the issue with the top deck threads isn't that they aren't getting discussed to an extent and furthering their development, but rather that the OP isn't changing the primer to help players "new" to the deck with furthering it's development, so when they suggest something they don't know what has been or hasn't been discussed, and I feel the OP should reflect that.
This is the Burn primer. As it has been developed the OP has changing the first post to help users know what is happening within the archetype. Goblin Guide used to be a "silly" idea for burn(believe it or not), but after much testing the OP now reflects the positives of it.
And I feel the same should be done with every primer. Rather, that the person holding the OP should take the responsibility to be constantly changing the primer in respect to how the metagame for the deck develops.
Another example is the dredge(Ichorid) primer; there is no mention of the use of Ichorid-less Dredge, which is currently being developed on.
Primers will have to come from the community. As much as I would like to write them myself, I don't know alot of the decks well enough to write a good primer (which defeats the purpose of writing one).
Or we change what we consider a primer, and what the thread is actually for. Does the primer need to be a large, indepth post that covers every aspect? Or are a few tournament lists and a basic description good enough?
With streamlined decks, 'new' discussion is hard. Maybe the best path forward is to have the thread be more of a 'helpdesk' for people playing the deck.
As for Proven/Established, I'm working on the tidying up the meta results from the last two months. I'll post that in another thread, so we don't burden the general conversation here too much.
I can help out with a Dredge primer; the OP is completely irrelevant to mainstream Dredge. However, I don't know the match ups and the proper sideboarding (no one wants to test Dredge T_T) well, so I'll need to ask some other veterans of the deck for help.
I apologize if it sounded like I was expect the mods to update the primers; I'm aware it comes from the community. I just wanted to point out the weak points that were obvious to me.
The reason a lot of these sit stagnant is because there's not a whole lot of change or inovation to the top decks.
I mean, the most recent change to Merfolk was Corallhelm, which was almost a year ago. Goblins even longer.
Generally these lists are so productive already discussion only occurs when something happens, like a new viable card, or a banning. I would personally leave them.
I feel like this is correct - it's much more interesting for most people to develop and discuss their pet decks, rather than get shot down in top deck discussion.
Also, just because a deck isn't discussed doesn't mean that it isn't a good deck. As long as the primer is up-to-date and useful, I see no reason not to leave the wealth of information to sit. If these decks cease to be competitive, then that's a different matter and they should be archived.
Hence, I agree with your "getting primers for decks updated" - they need to at least be up to date to the banning of Survival. I would suggest PMing OPs/posting in each thread with a time limit for the rewrite to be taken on or completed. If it's not done so, the thread would be archived for being out of date.
Re: the new subforums, I see no issue with cutting the Q&A and articles links. Not as sure about the events one, but if you think that's correct I have no issue. I also don't mind the "proven" decks being inside the "established" SF.
I'll spend the next couple of weeks updating the Goyf-Sligh primer if that is still going to stay in Established Competitive. Also, can we move the Forgemaster Combo thread to Developing? It might get more traffic there.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
And all that the Lorax left here in this mess
was a small pile of rocks, with one word...
UNLESS.
Whatever that meant, well, I just couldn't guess.
thanks to The Highlight Studios for the amazing avatar
1. Established Decks (top priority)
This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
I don't see why we shouldn't keep them around; we can leave them sitting there at the bottom of the page where nobody cares. Even if the OP doesn't have a primer just having a decklist there is helpful to some new people or others who want a reference for what a list looks like.
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks
Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
I'm for this. And there is a LOT of clutter in developing competitive; some threads haven't had posts for several months if not years. IMO it should be cleaned up so to speak and if a thread hasn't had a post for over a month it should be archived or deleted. There's just so much stuff there that isn't going anywhere as well. Developing competitive should be for serious decks that really are looking to compete with the top decks in legacy i.e. countertop, TES, ANT, goblins, merfolk, zoo, etc. etc.
3. All Proven/Established OP's
A general refresh and update would be appreciated. I know I'm not 100% up to date with Merfolks. I'm going to go through it and refresh it for Late Feb/early March 2011. Can other OP's under established/proven see the same treatment?
I second this. The goblins thread is quite old and the creator of the thread hasn't updated it since they posted it on October 30th, 2007 which is quite dated.
4. Tempo Decks
Horizons, Thresh, Bant.dec ---> how are we doing? Do you need a refresh/new thread? Does dark horizons blend well with regular horizons? How will activity and discussion work in these threads? I would rather blend "dark" and "light" decks together to avoid these stalemate situations. Same idea with UGb thresh vs UGr/UGw.
IMO all the tempo decks have defining characteristics to keep them separate. New horizons is the only list to run terravore. Canadian thresh is well canadian thresh it's the only list with fire//ice and lightning bolt. Dark thresh has dark confidant. New horizons also completely eschews nimble mongoose in favor of knight of the reliquary. New horizons also runs over 20 lands while the other versions run 18-19. So IMO they should be separate.
5. Counterbalance.dec
How are things here? Do we need to split this thread up? Thopter Combo got its own thing and went with it. What's the situation in this thread?
Thoptertop and Gerry T's Supreme Blue countertop are completely different IMO and should have separate threads because there are lots of different card choices. Same with NO countertop being different from Gerry T countertop.
6. Developing vs Casual
This will never go away, but I want to get people's take on the situation. Developing decks should look to "compete" in the format. That's my take on things. I occasionally step into threads and give input + occasionally point out whether or not a deck is going to "make it" or not. 90% of the time, budget concerns will make your deck casual by default. Are there concerns involving this aspect of the legacy forum? I feel very in the dark towards this area, so opinions on how to further distinguish each section + other concerns are welcome.
I agree. Developing competitive decks as I stated earlier should look to compete with the top decks in legacy at a reasonable level i.e. it doesn't just beat counterbalance.dec because its curve is outrageous while getting steamrolled by goblins, merfolk, and zoo.
7. Subforum Revamp
I have sent in a request to Annorax for changing up our Legacy thread. Neither I nor Cabal_chan have the power to move around folders/subforums. The current revamp will be:
a. Proven Decks
b. Established Decks
c. Developing Decks
d. Casual Decks
e. Archives
Articles, Events, and Q&A will all be cut. I have salvaged the most important posts from Q&A and bumped them to archives + linked them to the new main sticky thread dealing with new legacy players.
I agree with the changes. Subforums in mass numbers is never a good thing.
8. Deck Rankings March 2011
Cabal_chan is busy working out the new elite list of decks. This will be rolling out hopefully sometime soon. Proven already saw Vengevine-Survival fall because of the B/R situation and lack of salvaging itself. SCG 5k's also show us fresh data post-Vengevine.
Yay C_C you're awesome.
9. Online MTGS Tourney
Cabal_chan runs these. There will be a new thread up about the upcoming event. Giving you a heads up. Consult that particular thread for details, I do not coordinate/know details.
Thank you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
1. I feel like the top tier decks need to remain in their proven section due to the sheer amount of new people requesting lately what the lists look like, or what a deck is. Removing the decks that represent the top tier of the format would almost definitely cause confusion with new players and to just those generally trying to examine the top tier decks. I guess you could just leave those that are currently active in the metagame, but that is basically all of them so...
3. I feel like some of the OPs could use a little spiffing up with the metagame shifts as of recent. I can't say for the others, but I know that Goblins is a bit lacking on a few points, such as post-M10 changes like Mogg Fanatic and Goblin Cheiftain and Lorwyns additions.
Can't wait for C_cs new list
All the rest seems solid and I hope it all goes well
There's alot of replies so far (<3), so I'll have to avoid breaking up quotes to reply.
@Articanus
That's the system we had been using. Unfortunately people move on, lose interest, etc. I'd love for people to pitch in, but that doesn't seem to have happened. We need to reexamine how it's handled.
@Qwerty
1) Same way as listed in the Legacy rules, though Waren and I fudge around with what the cut off is. It doesn't take much effort to move threads. I just lacked the time to number crunch to determine what needed moving.
2) Activity is a problem. I'm not 100% how to solve this for threads.
3) Given that we seem to lack people dedicated to keeping the OP up to date (heck, we lack people that will write portions for me to edit into the OP), how these are handled will have to be changed.
6) This was the original intent of Casual. However, it didn't turn out that way. I didn't want to alienate posters by demanding they strive to make their decks competitive or get tossed into Casual. Maybe Casual should be changed to Budget?
8) Excel is lovely. Unfortunately, data doesn't enter itself. I also don't have any of those fancy macro skills.
9) We'll see. I hope so. I have the sinking suspicion alot of the older poster base is no longer here.
@Zirath
No problem. As you said, content really should come from the community. The problem is no one is contributing. Maybe the solution is to make a simpler OP with sample lists and other minor details, and have the thread be more Q&A focused as opposed to strict deck development.
From a purely organizational standpoint, top decks that have not changed or had much activity should probably become a wiki. You might have a sticky thread that links to the threads of the top decks.
Casual could just be renamed "Non-Competitive Decks" I can create an expensive deck that is not competitive, so "Budget Decks" would not be a good name for that forum.
From a purely organizational standpoint, top decks that have not changed or had much activity should probably become a wiki. You might have a sticky thread that links to the threads of the top decks.
Casual could just be renamed "Non-Competitive Decks" I can create an expensive deck that is not competitive, so "Budget Decks" would not be a good name for that forum.
The issue for me is a distinction between "competing" and "you stand no chance". This is a fundamental problem with developing competitive. There are some people who get upset when their pet deck/initial idea doesn't stand a chance. To me, "competitive" takes on the established decks toe-for-toe, but it more rogue in nature. That's developing to me. I do not feel "budget merfolks" or "zoo without duals" qualify, but again that's me. I have seen a rare cheap deck do very well (FairyNinjaFae probably the best "cheap" deck posted). However, drawing a line in the sand on competitive is extremely grey.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
That which nourishes me, destroys me
10th at SCG: Syracuse (2014), GP:NJ Last-Chance Grinder Winner (2014):: Former Legacy Mod
I mean, hell, we're all on a forum for something that most people would describe as a "children's card game"...do what makes you happy. You are never too old to enjoy yourself.
If you need any help with updating the Merfolk primer, I can help.
Thanks. I will actually sit and talk magic with some quality pilots in my meta. I know people who have won 5k's/placed with the deck, so I pick their brain if available. If I feel I need more advice, I'll be sure to contact you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
That which nourishes me, destroys me
10th at SCG: Syracuse (2014), GP:NJ Last-Chance Grinder Winner (2014):: Former Legacy Mod
I mean, hell, we're all on a forum for something that most people would describe as a "children's card game"...do what makes you happy. You are never too old to enjoy yourself.
Thanks. I will actually sit and talk magic with some quality pilots in my meta. I know people who have won 5k's/placed with the deck, so I pick their brain if available. If I feel I need more advice, I'll be sure to contact you.
I've t8'ed with the deck multiple times too.
On another note, I don't know if this has been brought up yet or not, but the OP of the Dark Horizons primer is banned, so someone should remake it.
I can help out with a Dredge primer; the OP is completely irrelevant to mainstream Dredge. However, I don't know the match ups and the proper sideboarding (no one wants to test Dredge T_T) well, so I'll need to ask some other veterans of the deck for help.
I apologize if it sounded like I was expect the mods to update the primers; I'm aware it comes from the community. I just wanted to point out the weak points that were obvious to me.
I can answer any questions you have regarding dredge. I can also help you write up the primer itself if you want me too. Just send me a couple pm's and Ill get ya what you need.
The issue for me is a distinction between "competing" and "you stand no chance". This is a fundamental problem with developing competitive. There are some people who get upset when their pet deck/initial idea doesn't stand a chance. To me, "competitive" takes on the established decks toe-for-toe, but it more rogue in nature. That's developing to me. I do not feel "budget merfolks" or "zoo without duals" qualify, but again that's me. I have seen a rare cheap deck do very well (FairyNinjaFae probably the best "cheap" deck posted). However, drawing a line in the sand on competitive is extremely grey.
I think developing competitive includes any deck that you would take to a legacy tournament. If it's budget merfolk, that's fine if it's intended for tournament play. If it's just for kitchen table casual play, move it to casual. Not every player has an unlimited budget, but many of them still want to play in tournaments.
Sidenote: I don't understand the reason for the Legacy Casual forum. It's redundant with the actual casual forum, plus it gets almost no traffic anyway.
I am always puzzled by why UW Tempo gets no discussion here. The thread on the Source is pretty popular.
The UW Tempo discussion at The Source was perpetuated by the cult of personality of its creators for a long time. It is a deck OF that website more than anything else. It is a pretty cool deck, but it is hard to understand for transients who pass through here. I bet that one would benefit from an exhaustive primer.
Also, the additional casual forum is necessary imho simply because the line between legacy and casual is very blurry for neophytes.
My feelings on deck forums is it should pretty much be one forum for Proven, one for everything Tier 2 and below. This would allow all developing competitive decks to sit at the top of the T2 because they're actually going to have people talking about them and tweaking (same with "established" decks), but it could also let casual decks get a look and perhaps a tweak or two to bring new life into Legacy.
At the same time, it separates all the T1 decks and talkers into the closed little world of Legacy chalk talk, exactly where we should be ^.^
I also don't really like the idea of the Events forum going away, will event listings be allowed in Legacy General now?
I think developing competitive includes any deck that you would take to a legacy tournament. If it's budget merfolk, that's fine if it's intended for tournament play. If it's just for kitchen table casual play, move it to casual. Not every player has an unlimited budget, but many of them still want to play in tournaments.
Sidenote: I don't understand the reason for the Legacy Casual forum. It's redundant with the actual casual forum, plus it gets almost no traffic anyway.
Casual was my attempt to step up the standards of Developing. People were posting casual kitchen table stuff in Developing and crowding out actual competitive deck development. However, it ended up feeling like I was driving people away by moving what they considered 'competitive' to a forum labeled 'casual' (apparently that's a big slap in the face).
Maybe it should be re-purposed and used for Budget discussion. It's something Warden and I are still trying to figure out (and hence the reason for this thread; to get the most valuable input from you guys). Making sure we make, keep, and help people improve and become valuable posters is important.
I am always puzzled by why UW Tempo gets no discussion here. The thread on the Source is pretty popular.
Like Finn said. I'm not 100% concerned about it. My major goal is to make sure the top level decks are covered. I haven't seen UW Tempo Top 8 for months.
Whatever happens with updating the OP's/ primers for the Established and Proven decks, I think it's important to keep the sections with breakdowns of a given deck's chances in match-ups against various other top decks.
I know I've always found these to be the go-to place when play-testing with friends when we're all trying to figure out a deck's performance in a given match-up, what to side-board, etc. It's also very helpful for newer legacy players who may know what decks to expect in their meta but who may be having a hard time coming up with answers.
They can also sometimes help you decide what deck to play for a given meta by looking at which match-ups are generally favorable or unfavorable without having to pour through pages and pages of forums.
And Warden, I'd love to see some more match-ups listed for Merfolk when you get the chance! Your primer actually helped me get into Merfolk Fish and competitive legacy in general, so many thanks!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sig by me!
Currently Playing:
:symr::symg::symb: Living End Modern
:symu:, :symu::symw: Merfolk Fish ("Marine Freaks") Legacy, Modern
Death and Taxes Legacy
***
1. Established Decks (top priority)
This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks
Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
3. All Proven/Established OP's
A general refresh and update would be appreciated. I know I'm not 100% up to date with Merfolks. I'm going to go through it and refresh it for Late Feb/early March 2011. Can other OP's under established/proven see the same treatment?
4. Tempo Decks
Horizons, Thresh, Bant.dec ---> how are we doing? Do you need a refresh/new thread? Does dark horizons blend well with regular horizons? How will activity and discussion work in these threads? I would rather blend "dark" and "light" decks together to avoid these stalemate situations. Same idea with UGb thresh vs UGr/UGw.
5. Counterbalance.dec
How are things here? Do we need to split this thread up? Thopter Combo got its own thing and went with it. What's the situation in this thread?
6. Developing vs Casual
This will never go away, but I want to get people's take on the situation. Developing decks should look to "compete" in the format. That's my take on things. I occasionally step into threads and give input + occasionally point out whether or not a deck is going to "make it" or not. 90% of the time, budget concerns will make your deck casual by default. Are there concerns involving this aspect of the legacy forum? I feel very in the dark towards this area, so opinions on how to further distinguish each section + other concerns are welcome.
7. Subforum Revamp
I have sent in a request to Annorax for changing up our Legacy thread. Neither I nor Cabal_chan have the power to move around folders/subforums. The current revamp will be:
a. Proven Decks
b. Established Decks
c. Developing Decks
d. Casual Decks
e. Archives
Articles, Events, and Q&A will all be cut. I have salvaged the most important posts from Q&A and bumped them to archives + linked them to the new main sticky thread dealing with new legacy players.
8. Deck Rankings March 2011
Cabal_chan is busy working out the new elite list of decks. This will be rolling out hopefully sometime soon. Proven already saw Vengevine-Survival fall because of the B/R situation and lack of salvaging itself. SCG 5k's also show us fresh data post-Vengevine.
9. Online MTGS Tourney
Cabal_chan runs these. There will be a new thread up about the upcoming event. Giving you a heads up. Consult that particular thread for details, I do not coordinate/know details.
10th at SCG: Syracuse (2014), GP:NJ Last-Chance Grinder Winner (2014):: Former Legacy Mod
That thread is now up at http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=306189.
(Siggy adapted, DarkHunter1357 (deviantART))
This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
I don't know why we would archive these. Whether there's constant activity or not, these are the top decks in the format and there should be a dedicated place for their discussion.
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks
Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
No offense meant, but I feel this is an extremely bad idea. Decks become proven/established by tournament results. Tiers have nothing to do with forum activity and it should not factor into deck classification at all. If you were referring to something other than moving "developing" decks to "established or proven" based on forum activity, then I misinterpreted and I apologize.
Trade Thread
Modern
RWGBurnGWR
GUInfectUG
GRTronRG
UWGifts TronWU
URBGrixis DelverBRU
RGWZooWGR
Legacy
BUWTinFinsWUB
UROmniTellRU
BURTESRUB
GElves!G
GBPSIBG
RGBelcherGR
UBRGWDredgeWGRBU
UBAffinityBU
RBurnR
Vintage
UBGDoomsdayGBU
0Martello Shops0
GElves!G
UBTPSBU
UBelcherU
0Dredge0
I actually thought about this occasionally too; some decks see almost no play and there's even less discussion. I for one wouldn't notice if you removed a number of decks overnight. Well, I would notice, but it wouldn't phase me.
I think you are mostly referring to the Nightmare Effect. The other Stickied decks don't see a lot of activity. It seems like it is in a position to move up because of the power of Tortured Existence and Krovikan Horror.
For sure, we need a new primer for Dredge. The OP for that thread is for LED Dredge, which is largely unplayed.
Merfolk and Goblins probably need a tune up.
The Zoo thread should mention Big Zoo, which has been placing a lot in smaller events, so there is some potential in certain metas.
Is T.E.S. really one of the Proven Competitive decks? I don't think I've seen it place in an event for quite a while. I have definitely seen ANT place despite Mystic Tutor getting banned.
I don't think I have any comments on the other points but has NO and Tell/NO Show (UG Show and Tell) placed enough to deserve a thread in Established Competitive?
The reason a lot of these sit stagnant is because there's not a whole lot of change or inovation to the top decks.
I mean, the most recent change to Merfolk was Corallhelm, which was almost a year ago. Goblins even longer.
Generally these lists are so productive already discussion only occurs when something happens, like a new viable card, or a banning. I would personally leave them.
This I agree with. If there are enough people playing it, they're playing it for a reason.
This makes sense. Probably contact the OP, and if they're not willing to do it, post it in the thread to see who would be willing to.
Funnily enough I wrote the primer on Tempo Thresh, and included all color variations, however discussion leaked out of that thread. May as well lump them together.
Decks like 4C Counterbalance play a different game than ThopterCombo, so I believe they should be seperated, as a lot of card choices are different, as is the SB.
In all honesty, this is not like Standard, where budget discussion is axed. There have been more than 1 occasions where I've come accross budget discussion in proven decks, which I find to be fine, because how wide the Legacy format is. I mean, you wouldn't have a Merfolk thread and than a Budget Merfolk thread, the questions would be asked in the 1 thread.
However, I do believe they should be sperated.
This sounds like it makes sense.
Kool
Already posted there
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the amazing sig.
NO RUG: Primer
Tempo Thresh: Primer
Primers will have to come from the community. As much as I would like to write them myself, I don't know alot of the decks well enough to write a good primer (which defeats the purpose of writing one).
Or we change what we consider a primer, and what the thread is actually for. Does the primer need to be a large, indepth post that covers every aspect? Or are a few tournament lists and a basic description good enough?
With streamlined decks, 'new' discussion is hard. Maybe the best path forward is to have the thread be more of a 'helpdesk' for people playing the deck.
As for Proven/Established, I'm working on the tidying up the meta results from the last two months. I'll post that in another thread, so we don't burden the general conversation here too much.
(Siggy adapted, DarkHunter1357 (deviantART))
For example, http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=241878
This is the Burn primer. As it has been developed the OP has changing the first post to help users know what is happening within the archetype. Goblin Guide used to be a "silly" idea for burn(believe it or not), but after much testing the OP now reflects the positives of it.
And I feel the same should be done with every primer. Rather, that the person holding the OP should take the responsibility to be constantly changing the primer in respect to how the metagame for the deck develops.
Another example is the dredge(Ichorid) primer; there is no mention of the use of Ichorid-less Dredge, which is currently being developed on.
I can help out with a Dredge primer; the OP is completely irrelevant to mainstream Dredge. However, I don't know the match ups and the proper sideboarding (no one wants to test Dredge T_T) well, so I'll need to ask some other veterans of the deck for help.
I apologize if it sounded like I was expect the mods to update the primers; I'm aware it comes from the community. I just wanted to point out the weak points that were obvious to me.
I feel like this is correct - it's much more interesting for most people to develop and discuss their pet decks, rather than get shot down in top deck discussion.
Also, just because a deck isn't discussed doesn't mean that it isn't a good deck. As long as the primer is up-to-date and useful, I see no reason not to leave the wealth of information to sit. If these decks cease to be competitive, then that's a different matter and they should be archived.
Hence, I agree with your "getting primers for decks updated" - they need to at least be up to date to the banning of Survival. I would suggest PMing OPs/posting in each thread with a time limit for the rewrite to be taken on or completed. If it's not done so, the thread would be archived for being out of date.
Re: the new subforums, I see no issue with cutting the Q&A and articles links. Not as sure about the events one, but if you think that's correct I have no issue. I also don't mind the "proven" decks being inside the "established" SF.
thanks to The Highlight Studios for the amazing avatar
This has been brewing for a while, but now it's very apparent. There's a glaring lack of activity with some of the better decks in the format. For whatever the reason, they're just sitting there. Personally, I feel like I could archive 50% the established deck threads today and nobody would complain tomorrow. Am I wrong?
As a resource, I could salvage these decks' OP's into a sort of "other decks of legacy that you'll run into but nobody posts about" thread. It's a terrible mock-title, but look at the situation. If there's no activity in threads at the top tier of legacy, I am not particularly pressed to keep them around. Your thoughts?
I don't see why we shouldn't keep them around; we can leave them sitting there at the bottom of the page where nobody cares. Even if the OP doesn't have a primer just having a decklist there is helpful to some new people or others who want a reference for what a list looks like.
2. "Upgrading" Developing Decks
Going with the above, there are less deserving decks that at least show activity. Sticky-Developing decks, I'm looking at you. If you've been looking for a chance to crack the top tier, you might earn it through activity and discussion in your respective threads. Nevertheless, the same rules apply: activity falls down, you'll be out. Please voice your opinion about this line of thought.
I'm for this. And there is a LOT of clutter in developing competitive; some threads haven't had posts for several months if not years. IMO it should be cleaned up so to speak and if a thread hasn't had a post for over a month it should be archived or deleted. There's just so much stuff there that isn't going anywhere as well. Developing competitive should be for serious decks that really are looking to compete with the top decks in legacy i.e. countertop, TES, ANT, goblins, merfolk, zoo, etc. etc.
3. All Proven/Established OP's
A general refresh and update would be appreciated. I know I'm not 100% up to date with Merfolks. I'm going to go through it and refresh it for Late Feb/early March 2011. Can other OP's under established/proven see the same treatment?
I second this. The goblins thread is quite old and the creator of the thread hasn't updated it since they posted it on October 30th, 2007 which is quite dated.
4. Tempo Decks
Horizons, Thresh, Bant.dec ---> how are we doing? Do you need a refresh/new thread? Does dark horizons blend well with regular horizons? How will activity and discussion work in these threads? I would rather blend "dark" and "light" decks together to avoid these stalemate situations. Same idea with UGb thresh vs UGr/UGw.
IMO all the tempo decks have defining characteristics to keep them separate. New horizons is the only list to run terravore. Canadian thresh is well canadian thresh it's the only list with fire//ice and lightning bolt. Dark thresh has dark confidant. New horizons also completely eschews nimble mongoose in favor of knight of the reliquary. New horizons also runs over 20 lands while the other versions run 18-19. So IMO they should be separate.
5. Counterbalance.dec
How are things here? Do we need to split this thread up? Thopter Combo got its own thing and went with it. What's the situation in this thread?
Thoptertop and Gerry T's Supreme Blue countertop are completely different IMO and should have separate threads because there are lots of different card choices. Same with NO countertop being different from Gerry T countertop.
6. Developing vs Casual
This will never go away, but I want to get people's take on the situation. Developing decks should look to "compete" in the format. That's my take on things. I occasionally step into threads and give input + occasionally point out whether or not a deck is going to "make it" or not. 90% of the time, budget concerns will make your deck casual by default. Are there concerns involving this aspect of the legacy forum? I feel very in the dark towards this area, so opinions on how to further distinguish each section + other concerns are welcome.
I agree. Developing competitive decks as I stated earlier should look to compete with the top decks in legacy at a reasonable level i.e. it doesn't just beat counterbalance.dec because its curve is outrageous while getting steamrolled by goblins, merfolk, and zoo.
7. Subforum Revamp
I have sent in a request to Annorax for changing up our Legacy thread. Neither I nor Cabal_chan have the power to move around folders/subforums. The current revamp will be:
a. Proven Decks
b. Established Decks
c. Developing Decks
d. Casual Decks
e. Archives
Articles, Events, and Q&A will all be cut. I have salvaged the most important posts from Q&A and bumped them to archives + linked them to the new main sticky thread dealing with new legacy players.
I agree with the changes. Subforums in mass numbers is never a good thing.
8. Deck Rankings March 2011
Cabal_chan is busy working out the new elite list of decks. This will be rolling out hopefully sometime soon. Proven already saw Vengevine-Survival fall because of the B/R situation and lack of salvaging itself. SCG 5k's also show us fresh data post-Vengevine.
Yay C_C you're awesome.
9. Online MTGS Tourney
Cabal_chan runs these. There will be a new thread up about the upcoming event. Giving you a heads up. Consult that particular thread for details, I do not coordinate/know details.
Thank you.
Currently Playing:
Retired
3. I feel like some of the OPs could use a little spiffing up with the metagame shifts as of recent. I can't say for the others, but I know that Goblins is a bit lacking on a few points, such as post-M10 changes like Mogg Fanatic and Goblin Cheiftain and Lorwyns additions.
Can't wait for C_cs new list
All the rest seems solid and I hope it all goes well
Standard:
:symr:/:symg: Valakut 2.0 (Wolf Run Green)
Legacy:
:symr:/:symb: Vial Goblins
:symr:/:symg:/:symw: Zoo
:symg:/:symw:/:symr: Maverick
Commander:
:symg:/:symb:/:symw: Karador, Ghost Chieftain
There's alot of replies so far (<3), so I'll have to avoid breaking up quotes to reply.
@Articanus
That's the system we had been using. Unfortunately people move on, lose interest, etc. I'd love for people to pitch in, but that doesn't seem to have happened. We need to reexamine how it's handled.
@Qwerty
1) Same way as listed in the Legacy rules, though Waren and I fudge around with what the cut off is. It doesn't take much effort to move threads. I just lacked the time to number crunch to determine what needed moving.
2) Activity is a problem. I'm not 100% how to solve this for threads.
3) Given that we seem to lack people dedicated to keeping the OP up to date (heck, we lack people that will write portions for me to edit into the OP), how these are handled will have to be changed.
6) This was the original intent of Casual. However, it didn't turn out that way. I didn't want to alienate posters by demanding they strive to make their decks competitive or get tossed into Casual. Maybe Casual should be changed to Budget?
8) Excel is lovely. Unfortunately, data doesn't enter itself. I also don't have any of those fancy macro skills.
9) We'll see. I hope so. I have the sinking suspicion alot of the older poster base is no longer here.
@Zirath
No problem. As you said, content really should come from the community. The problem is no one is contributing. Maybe the solution is to make a simpler OP with sample lists and other minor details, and have the thread be more Q&A focused as opposed to strict deck development.
(Siggy adapted, DarkHunter1357 (deviantART))
Casual could just be renamed "Non-Competitive Decks" I can create an expensive deck that is not competitive, so "Budget Decks" would not be a good name for that forum.
The issue for me is a distinction between "competing" and "you stand no chance". This is a fundamental problem with developing competitive. There are some people who get upset when their pet deck/initial idea doesn't stand a chance. To me, "competitive" takes on the established decks toe-for-toe, but it more rogue in nature. That's developing to me. I do not feel "budget merfolks" or "zoo without duals" qualify, but again that's me. I have seen a rare cheap deck do very well (FairyNinjaFae probably the best "cheap" deck posted). However, drawing a line in the sand on competitive is extremely grey.
10th at SCG: Syracuse (2014), GP:NJ Last-Chance Grinder Winner (2014):: Former Legacy Mod
ゆっくりしていってね!!!
Thanks. I will actually sit and talk magic with some quality pilots in my meta. I know people who have won 5k's/placed with the deck, so I pick their brain if available. If I feel I need more advice, I'll be sure to contact you.
10th at SCG: Syracuse (2014), GP:NJ Last-Chance Grinder Winner (2014):: Former Legacy Mod
I've t8'ed with the deck multiple times too.
On another note, I don't know if this has been brought up yet or not, but the OP of the Dark Horizons primer is banned, so someone should remake it.
ゆっくりしていってね!!!
I can answer any questions you have regarding dredge. I can also help you write up the primer itself if you want me too. Just send me a couple pm's and Ill get ya what you need.
Like Squandered Resources on Facebook for updates on article releases, deck lists, and more!
Getting Started in Legacy and Legacy Budget Primer 5!
Special thanks to Bornnover for the banner used in those articles.
I think developing competitive includes any deck that you would take to a legacy tournament. If it's budget merfolk, that's fine if it's intended for tournament play. If it's just for kitchen table casual play, move it to casual. Not every player has an unlimited budget, but many of them still want to play in tournaments.
Sidenote: I don't understand the reason for the Legacy Casual forum. It's redundant with the actual casual forum, plus it gets almost no traffic anyway.
I am always puzzled by why UW Tempo gets no discussion here. The thread on the Source is pretty popular.
Commander/EDH:
WU Hanna, Ship's Navigator WU
GW Saffi Eriksdotter GW
BW Selenia, Dark Angel BW
W Heliod, God of Sun W
Retired:
Jenara, Asura of War Thada Adel, Acquisitor Jaya Ballard, Task Mage Lin Sivvi, Defiant Hero Lyzolda, the Blood Witch Akroma, Angel of Wrath Nath of the Gilt-Leaf Tajic, Blade of the Legion Selvala, Explorer Returned Maga, Traitor to Mortals
Tiny Leaders:
W Mangara of Corondor W
Also, the additional casual forum is necessary imho simply because the line between legacy and casual is very blurry for neophytes.
At the same time, it separates all the T1 decks and talkers into the closed little world of Legacy chalk talk, exactly where we should be ^.^
I also don't really like the idea of the Events forum going away, will event listings be allowed in Legacy General now?
Washington State University Alumni
Legacy
GWR Enchantress RWG
UUU Omni/Enter UUU
GUBW Lands WBUG
R4G Belcher G4R
GUW Bant WUG
Trade Thread
Casual was my attempt to step up the standards of Developing. People were posting casual kitchen table stuff in Developing and crowding out actual competitive deck development. However, it ended up feeling like I was driving people away by moving what they considered 'competitive' to a forum labeled 'casual' (apparently that's a big slap in the face).
Maybe it should be re-purposed and used for Budget discussion. It's something Warden and I are still trying to figure out (and hence the reason for this thread; to get the most valuable input from you guys). Making sure we make, keep, and help people improve and become valuable posters is important.
Like Finn said. I'm not 100% concerned about it. My major goal is to make sure the top level decks are covered. I haven't seen UW Tempo Top 8 for months.
The Events forum shouldn't really be there in the first place, since there's a general events forum elsewhere on the site.
People will be allowed to post events in Legacy General.
(Siggy adapted, DarkHunter1357 (deviantART))
I know I've always found these to be the go-to place when play-testing with friends when we're all trying to figure out a deck's performance in a given match-up, what to side-board, etc. It's also very helpful for newer legacy players who may know what decks to expect in their meta but who may be having a hard time coming up with answers.
They can also sometimes help you decide what deck to play for a given meta by looking at which match-ups are generally favorable or unfavorable without having to pour through pages and pages of forums.
And Warden, I'd love to see some more match-ups listed for Merfolk when you get the chance! Your primer actually helped me get into Merfolk Fish and competitive legacy in general, so many thanks!
Sig by me!
Currently Playing:
:symr::symg::symb: Living End Modern
:symu:, :symu::symw: Merfolk Fish ("Marine Freaks") Legacy, Modern
Death and Taxes Legacy
RDW/ Burn ("Peking Duck w/ 8 Pancakes") Legacy, Modern
:symu::symb::symr: Worldgorger Dragon Vintage
:symu::symr::symw: Narset EDH
:symw::symu::symb::symr::symg: Cube