A friend of me posted a picture of Chromanticore on Chromanticore a while ago. There was also one with two Chromanticores bestowed on the same creature. Can't find the pictures anymore, unfortunately. He won the draft too.
I've gotten no further than bestow Chromanticore -> creature gets killed -> Chromanticore gets killed -> get it back with Pharika's Mender -> opponent concedes. Still a long way off.
On the brag side, this weekend I had a deck that contained Doomwake Giant, Fated Intervention, Prognostic Sphinx, Fleecemane Lion and Reaper of the Wilds.
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.
Alright, I'm giving away a Jace to anyone who can show me a Theros Block draft screenshot (not Photoshopped) where they kill an opposing Chromanticore by bestowing Chromanticore (either because you or opponent previously bestowed a Nautilus on it).
I'm disgusting myself. After getting that first-draft, p1p1 black lotus, and not doing very well in draft since, I decided to stop drafting vintage masters... so what to do with my lonely VMA pack? Why, open it, that's what...
I've seen people picking Triton Shorestalker last. Calling it the worst blue common in Journey into Nyx. That's how I came across it - I got it 13th and 15th pick, but my deck was a bit light on playables so I decided to jam it in there.
WELL THE PEOPLE WHO HATE IT ARE SO WRONG. Triton Shorestalker is the nuts. It is godly. It is unbeatable. It is, quite simply the best. I just took down a 8-4 draft cube with no game losses with this beauty:
Now, this is a pretty solid list apart from the shorestalker. 3 ramp creatures give the deck a bunch of consistency. It has a bunch of bestow creatures which are strong on their own or bestowed. It has 18 creatures, so my board is never empty. The combat tricks are decent. Turn 2 RampGuy into turn 3 Ravenous Leucrocota into turn 4 Nyxborn Wolf, swing with 5/5 vigilance would seem a common play, since I have 3 rampers and 2 of the other pieces. I didn't make that play once. Pretty much every game went like this:
Turn 1 Shorestalker
Turn 2 Mana Dude
Turns 3-6: Put everything on Shorestalker. Win Game.
I wasn't running super hot. I mulled down to 5 two times and 6 once in 6 games. Didn't matter. Shorestalker saved me every time. A few games, I didn't draw Shorestalker, but repeated the pattern with Cloaked Siren or Agent of Horizons. One opponent, after getting beaten down on the 5th turn by a shorestalker two straight games, called it ohmygodtritonshorestalker.dec. One opponent scooped on turn 3 when I enchanted a shorestalker with Ordeal of Nylea, then played Satyr Grovedancer.
Triton Shorestalker, y'all. Unbeatable magic card. Respect the power.
After winning my last 7 8-4s (All THS, 1 split), I've gone from 1970-ish to 2013 in Limited rating. Calling me "pleased" with this would be somewhat of an understatement.
In order to not make this into "100% bragging", and maybe a bit useful for someone, I checked what decks I had played in the events. Apparently, I'm a fan of U. Without ever forcing it, I played UX in every event:
3x UW
2x UG
1x UB
1x UR
I'm happy to answer any questions, but I understand perfectly that this probably will just be viewed as a bit obnoxious, and/or possibly a lie. I just wanted to let off joy though, as I don't really interact with any people off-line that understand that reality of the situation.
I've argued with people over the number of cards in a deck many times, and I feel that having a high number of "good cards" is better than having a small number of "really good" cards. I laugh at the people who argue that with a smaller deck you're more likely to draw what you need, because if you get in that situation you're gonna NOT end up drawing it many many more times than you would.
Good job. I know it's not a lie But I'm a bit envious. I had two good runs a couple of months ago, both times peaking at 1993 before losing again, never reaching that elusive 2k Bleh.
Sweet run, Goliat! I have a pet project of trying to understand what Elo rating means in Magic before they disappear completely. To that end, any chance you recorded any information about your rating during that run?
For instance, if you conceded in the split and your rating went from 1970->2013, depending on the sequence your average opponent was in the 1725-1740 range. If you won out your average opponent was about 1675 during your winning streak.
Good job. I know it's not a lie But I'm a bit envious. I had two good runs a couple of months ago, both times peaking at 1993 before losing again, never reaching that elusive 2k Bleh.
I peaked in 1998... nice girl, band, long, luxurious hair... wait, what are we talking about? 6/30/2014 5:15:02 PM
Sweet run, Goliat! I have a pet project of trying to understand what Elo rating means in Magic before they disappear completely. To that end, any chance you recorded any information about your rating during that run?
For instance, if you conceded in the split and your rating went from 1970->2013, depending on the sequence your average opponent was in the 1725-1740 range. If you won out your average opponent was about 1675 during your winning streak.
I am no mathemagician, but I don't think that is remotely accurate... I think if you're at 1970, you gain virtually no points unless your opp is also in the 1875+ range.
I am usually very wrong.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My helpy helpdesk of helpfulness.
My Decks: EDH: Sygg, River Cutthroat , Road to Scion
Grimgrin, Corpseborn Modern: Polytokes IRL: Progenitus Polymorph , Goblins
Well, I'm no mathematician either (I'm a mighty pirate), but my possibly wrong math said an advantage of about 250 (2000 vs 1750) points should mean about an 80% win rate. 80% of 16 points is about 13, so at a 16k event like an 8-4, you would lose 13 points for a loss and gain 3 points for a win.
And I'm sad... I peaked in the 1830's - along with other has-beens like John Murrel and Sam Hall Lord
While I didn't record my rating cricketHunter, I often checked it after matches the latest week. The rating change would lie in the range of 1-5, with a couple of exceptions. I'm sure you could estimate the average rating of my opponent by making some simplifications (estimate the average rating-gain (1.8) and assume an average rating on my part of 1990). As an caveat, I'm not entirely sure I was at 1970 when starting the run. I may have been at 1965-ish instead.
I've argued with people over the number of cards in a deck many times, and I feel that having a high number of "good cards" is better than having a small number of "really good" cards. I laugh at the people who argue that with a smaller deck you're more likely to draw what you need, because if you get in that situation you're gonna NOT end up drawing it many many more times than you would.
I recently started to draft on MTGO and I am slowly sliding in. Played swiss THS block yesterday and went undefeated all three games, my first"tourney" win ever. First picked Dawnbringer Charioteers, second picked deicide, 3rd pick Master of the Feast, ding!ding!ding! In the end, I definately missed on removal an combat tricks, but to my surprise, literally nothing was going around so I HAD to run the cuttthroat manuevers and other subpar cards, but still:
I think everyone here understands how the ratings work mathematically (I mean, it's only a simple Google search away), what cricketHunter is trying to figure out (I think) is what the average Magic Online drafter's rating is (no, it's not 1600), how much of the field is 1700+, 1800+, etc. That sort of stuff.
@Sene
You're probably right about cricketHunters intention. I didn't really have a lot of time this morning, so I didn't think it trough. For what it's worth, I believe a rating-estimation based on 24 matches would be pretty much useless. A long-time player's recording of rating-results over many years would be a good start of a realistically achievable data set.
@Maveric78f
It's my belief that it's not public for the same reasons MTGO is one of the worst pieces of software out there when adjusting for cost and expectation. The people behind hit haven't caught on to, or been unable to act upon, the fact that most people like to show of their achievements and "level up". If the MTGO is ever "fixed", some sort of achievement system will hopefully be a part of that "fix". It seems the ELO-ratings won't be though, as they're not available on V4.
In other new, I won another 8-4 with RW, putting me at 2020. I'm pretty sure I will feel horrible when the streak ends...
I've argued with people over the number of cards in a deck many times, and I feel that having a high number of "good cards" is better than having a small number of "really good" cards. I laugh at the people who argue that with a smaller deck you're more likely to draw what you need, because if you get in that situation you're gonna NOT end up drawing it many many more times than you would.
Aaaaaaand... the ball is dropped. Lost round 1 with a mediocre UG-deck. Back to 2005.
@Sene
Not planning on retiring the account. Way too much hassle to transfer all my cards, and any sort of "bonuses" like QPs or "most wins in a format which might qualify you to some not-yet-to-be-announced-thing" would be lost. There isn't all to much upside to retiring an account, except for vanity.
I've argued with people over the number of cards in a deck many times, and I feel that having a high number of "good cards" is better than having a small number of "really good" cards. I laugh at the people who argue that with a smaller deck you're more likely to draw what you need, because if you get in that situation you're gonna NOT end up drawing it many many more times than you would.
I guess I didn't mean retire it altogether, just sit on it for a month or so until they remove the ratings. But I guess it's a pretty low chance that they decide to publish a "final top 10" or the like anyway
@Sene
You're probably right about cricketHunters intention. I didn't really have a lot of time this morning, so I didn't think it trough. For what it's worth, I believe a rating-estimation based on 24 matches would be pretty much useless. A long-time player's recording of rating-results over many years would be a good start of a realistically achievable data set.
@Maveric78f
It's my belief that it's not public for the same reasons MTGO is one of the worst pieces of software out there when adjusting for cost and expectation. The people behind hit haven't caught on to, or been unable to act upon, the fact that most people like to show of their achievements and "level up". If the MTGO is ever "fixed", some sort of achievement system will hopefully be a part of that "fix". It seems the ELO-ratings won't be though, as they're not available on V4.
In other new, I won another 8-4 with RW, putting me at 2020. I'm pretty sure I will feel horrible when the streak ends...
Congrats on peaking at 2020, that's insanely good!
I believe it's not public because Wizards makes more money off the casual market than the pros (by sheer volume) and has to pander to the masses. The masses get called "noobs" and made fun of for their poor ratings, sadly because a lot of Magic players lack basic social skills and emotional stability. I think making the information private was an attempt to prevent shaming of newer players and bad players.
@Sene
You're probably right about cricketHunters intention. I didn't really have a lot of time this morning, so I didn't think it trough. For what it's worth, I believe a rating-estimation based on 24 matches would be pretty much useless. A long-time player's recording of rating-results over many years would be a good start of a realistically achievable data set.
@Maveric78f
It's my belief that it's not public for the same reasons MTGO is one of the worst pieces of software out there when adjusting for cost and expectation. The people behind hit haven't caught on to, or been unable to act upon, the fact that most people like to show of their achievements and "level up". If the MTGO is ever "fixed", some sort of achievement system will hopefully be a part of that "fix". It seems the ELO-ratings won't be though, as they're not available on V4.
In other new, I won another 8-4 with RW, putting me at 2020. I'm pretty sure I will feel horrible when the streak ends...
Congrats on peaking at 2020, that's insanely good!
I believe it's not public because Wizards makes more money off the casual market than the pros (by sheer volume) and has to pander to the masses. The masses get called "noobs" and made fun of for their poor ratings, sadly because a lot of Magic players lack basic social skills and emotional stability. I think making the information private was an attempt to prevent shaming of newer players and bad players.
Thank you
You're absolutely right on the "shaming of players with low rating" as their reasoning for making the ratings private. It was the reason they gave when they removed them, and it seemed to be the legitimate reason.
However, they absolutely should have replaced it with something, and also let you view some of your account's statistics (win% for different formats, average # of mulligans, longest win streak, etc.). People love that stuff, and most of this is information they already have reasonably easy access to. While I'm not familiar with every modern multiplayer game, it is my understanding that almost every single one has some sort of rating system in place. There is a reason for this. The ELO-system is far from perfect, but I'm certain that there is a middle road where you minimize the bashing of lower rated players, while giving most everyone a feeling of accomplishment.
I understand that you might not actually be supporting the currently hidden ratings. I'm just presenting my own viewpoint and ideas.
I've argued with people over the number of cards in a deck many times, and I feel that having a high number of "good cards" is better than having a small number of "really good" cards. I laugh at the people who argue that with a smaller deck you're more likely to draw what you need, because if you get in that situation you're gonna NOT end up drawing it many many more times than you would.
Just got this in Scheduled Theros Block Sealed. After laughing like crazy I created a 5 color control Deck. Elspeth, Temple and two Gods :D. What do you think was the right deck?
Well it would help immensely if we could see your commons by color. Do you have any green mana fixing? Without Nylea's Presence and/or Market Festival and stuff like that, I wouldn't try for 5cc. Elspeth is amazing but Gods aren't necessarily that good. Pharika is pretty bad. Mogis is solid but not worth forcing colors for. Chromanticore is amazing with the right mana fixing but nigh unplayable without it.
Can't tell if your white is even playable... can only see Mortal Ardors. Christ almighty though, you have a sick RB removal suite. Double Bolt, double Asphyxiate, Lightning Strike...
Somebody passed me Indulgent Tormentor 3 packs into pack 2 tonight at FNM...This deck went crazy. 3 Siege Wurms is just goofy. I also had a chuckle when a guy tried to Titanic Growth his squid token to kill my wurm. I responded with a Growth of my own and his response: "Welp."
Challenge accepted.
I've gotten no further than bestow Chromanticore -> creature gets killed -> Chromanticore gets killed -> get it back with Pharika's Mender -> opponent concedes. Still a long way off.
On the brag side, this weekend I had a deck that contained Doomwake Giant, Fated Intervention, Prognostic Sphinx, Fleecemane Lion and Reaper of the Wilds.
Unless it was bestowed with Crystalline Nautilus.
Alright, I'm giving away a Jace to anyone who can show me a Theros Block draft screenshot (not Photoshopped) where they kill an opposing Chromanticore by bestowing Chromanticore (either because you or opponent previously bestowed a Nautilus on it).
... and get a mox emerald!
WELL THE PEOPLE WHO HATE IT ARE SO WRONG. Triton Shorestalker is the nuts. It is godly. It is unbeatable. It is, quite simply the best. I just took down a 8-4 draft cube with no game losses with this beauty:
1 Hero of Leina Tower
2 Golden Hind
1 Kiora's Follower
1 Leafcrown Dryad
1 Satyr Grovedancer
1 Ordeal of Nylea
2 Mortal's Resolve
1 Crypsis
1 Agent of Horizons
1 Feral Invocation
2 Nyxborn Wolf
2 Ravenous Leucrocota
1 Staunch-Hearted Warrior
1 Cloaked Siren
1 Thassa's Emissary
1 Pheres-Band Thunderhoof
1 Nessian Game Warden
6 Island
1 Coastline Chimera
1 Benthic Giant
1 Floodtide Serpent
1 Mnemonic Wall
1 Renowned Weaver
2 Nylea's Presence
1 Skyreaping
Now, this is a pretty solid list apart from the shorestalker. 3 ramp creatures give the deck a bunch of consistency. It has a bunch of bestow creatures which are strong on their own or bestowed. It has 18 creatures, so my board is never empty. The combat tricks are decent. Turn 2 Ramp Guy into turn 3 Ravenous Leucrocota into turn 4 Nyxborn Wolf, swing with 5/5 vigilance would seem a common play, since I have 3 rampers and 2 of the other pieces. I didn't make that play once. Pretty much every game went like this:
Turn 1 Shorestalker
Turn 2 Mana Dude
Turns 3-6: Put everything on Shorestalker. Win Game.
I wasn't running super hot. I mulled down to 5 two times and 6 once in 6 games. Didn't matter. Shorestalker saved me every time. A few games, I didn't draw Shorestalker, but repeated the pattern with Cloaked Siren or Agent of Horizons. One opponent, after getting beaten down on the 5th turn by a shorestalker two straight games, called it ohmygodtritonshorestalker.dec. One opponent scooped on turn 3 when I enchanted a shorestalker with Ordeal of Nylea, then played Satyr Grovedancer.
Triton Shorestalker, y'all. Unbeatable magic card. Respect the power.
Standard: UUMono Blue DevotionUU
Modern:
RRBurnRRLooking for something new!In order to not make this into "100% bragging", and maybe a bit useful for someone, I checked what decks I had played in the events. Apparently, I'm a fan of U. Without ever forcing it, I played UX in every event:
3x UW
2x UG
1x UB
1x UR
I'm happy to answer any questions, but I understand perfectly that this probably will just be viewed as a bit obnoxious, and/or possibly a lie. I just wanted to let off joy though, as I don't really interact with any people off-line that understand that reality of the situation.
Here's to 1 more 8-4!
For instance, if you conceded in the split and your rating went from 1970->2013, depending on the sequence your average opponent was in the 1725-1740 range. If you won out your average opponent was about 1675 during your winning streak.
6/30/2014 5:15:02 PM
I am no mathemagician, but I don't think that is remotely accurate... I think if you're at 1970, you gain virtually no points unless your opp is also in the 1875+ range.
I am usually very wrong.
My Decks:
EDH: Sygg, River Cutthroat , Road to Scion
Grimgrin, Corpseborn
Modern: Polytokes
IRL: Progenitus Polymorph , Goblins
Just a friendly reminder that I will drive this car off a bridge
Peaked in 1993... The SNES maybe? Or Lego? That's what I cared about in 1993, anyway. Real old-timers may answer with Magic.
And I'm sad... I peaked in the 1830's - along with other has-beens like John Murrel and Sam Hall Lord
While I didn't record my rating cricketHunter, I often checked it after matches the latest week. The rating change would lie in the range of 1-5, with a couple of exceptions. I'm sure you could estimate the average rating of my opponent by making some simplifications (estimate the average rating-gain (1.8) and assume an average rating on my part of 1990). As an caveat, I'm not entirely sure I was at 1970 when starting the run. I may have been at 1965-ish instead.
I recently started to draft on MTGO and I am slowly sliding in. Played swiss THS block yesterday and went undefeated all three games, my first"tourney" win ever. First picked Dawnbringer Charioteers, second picked deicide, 3rd pick Master of the Feast, ding!ding!ding! In the end, I definately missed on removal an combat tricks, but to my surprise, literally nothing was going around so I HAD to run the cuttthroat manuevers and other subpar cards, but still:
1 Tormented Hero
1 Nyxborn Eidolon
1 Viper's Kiss
1 Favored Hoplite
1 hopeful eidolon
2 Oreskos Sun Guide
1 Bloodcrazed Hoplite
1 Akroan Skyguard
1 Ordeal of Erebos
1 Spirit of the Labyrinth (rare)
1 deicide (rare)
1 Herald of Torment (rare)
2 Eagle of the Watch
1 Nightmarish End
1 Dawnbringer Charioteers (rare)
1 Cutthroat Maneuver
1 Dreadbringer lampads
1 Griffin Dreamfinder
1 Celestial Archon (rare)
Could be wrong, though.
You're probably right about cricketHunters intention. I didn't really have a lot of time this morning, so I didn't think it trough. For what it's worth, I believe a rating-estimation based on 24 matches would be pretty much useless. A long-time player's recording of rating-results over many years would be a good start of a realistically achievable data set.
@Maveric78f
It's my belief that it's not public for the same reasons MTGO is one of the worst pieces of software out there when adjusting for cost and expectation. The people behind hit haven't caught on to, or been unable to act upon, the fact that most people like to show of their achievements and "level up". If the MTGO is ever "fixed", some sort of achievement system will hopefully be a part of that "fix". It seems the ELO-ratings won't be though, as they're not available on V4.
In other new, I won another 8-4 with RW, putting me at 2020. I'm pretty sure I will feel horrible when the streak ends...
@Sene
Not planning on retiring the account. Way too much hassle to transfer all my cards, and any sort of "bonuses" like QPs or "most wins in a format which might qualify you to some not-yet-to-be-announced-thing" would be lost. There isn't all to much upside to retiring an account, except for vanity.
Congrats on peaking at 2020, that's insanely good!
I believe it's not public because Wizards makes more money off the casual market than the pros (by sheer volume) and has to pander to the masses. The masses get called "noobs" and made fun of for their poor ratings, sadly because a lot of Magic players lack basic social skills and emotional stability. I think making the information private was an attempt to prevent shaming of newer players and bad players.
Thank you
You're absolutely right on the "shaming of players with low rating" as their reasoning for making the ratings private. It was the reason they gave when they removed them, and it seemed to be the legitimate reason.
However, they absolutely should have replaced it with something, and also let you view some of your account's statistics (win% for different formats, average # of mulligans, longest win streak, etc.). People love that stuff, and most of this is information they already have reasonably easy access to. While I'm not familiar with every modern multiplayer game, it is my understanding that almost every single one has some sort of rating system in place. There is a reason for this. The ELO-system is far from perfect, but I'm certain that there is a middle road where you minimize the bashing of lower rated players, while giving most everyone a feeling of accomplishment.
I understand that you might not actually be supporting the currently hidden ratings. I'm just presenting my own viewpoint and ideas.
Can't tell if your white is even playable... can only see Mortal Ardors. Christ almighty though, you have a sick RB removal suite. Double Bolt, double Asphyxiate, Lightning Strike...
1 Runeclaw Bear
1 Titanic Growth
1 Sign in Blood
1 Netcaster Spider
1 Yisan, the Wanderer Bard
1 Reclamation Sage
2 Mind Rot
1 Xathrid Psyblade
1 Gargoyle Sentinel
1 Juggernaut
2 Living Totem
2 Shaman of Spring
1 Accursed Spirit
1 Charging Rhino
1 Indulgent Tormentor
1 Carnivorous Moss-Beast
3 Siege Wurm
4 Generator Servant
1 Gobln Roughrider
1 Krenko's Enforcer
2 Broodkeeper
1 Scrapyard Mongrel
2 Hoarding Dragon
4 Lightning Strike
1 Sacred Armory
1 Stoke the Flames
1 Burning Anger
1 Cone of Flame
8-0 for rounds, 16-2 for games
I had burn to kill everything and played turn 3 Hoarding Dragon at least 5 times.