I agree with Stsung, and I think there is a home for Grim Monolith, it's likely the most busted mana artifact in the format from a raw power level, arguments could be made for lotus petal or coalition relic, but I tend to think this one takes the cheddar on raw power. Before cloudpost this card was used to put accelerated U on the map. The issue I have with cards like this is that they're the worst top decks in the late game, but I think as a builder of decks we can avoid this by paying payoff cards to reward drawing them late, for instance reshape, transmute artifact, daretti, goblin welder, master transmuter, koldotha forgemaster, etc , or upheaval, wildfire, and burning of xinye etc; in one context you would be building a U or MUD based combo control deck more than likely and in the other essentially RU prison (board control with lighter permission). MUD is also viable, but far more midrange than its aggressive and prison style brethren in Vintage...the difficulty I've had building it is that it lacks the cohesion, redundancy of effect to make it either a true control or aggro deck...this is not a problem per se but you may mulligan aggressively matchup dependent because the deck will be less focused...much like Stsung talked about in her 5CAggro(aggro/control [midrange]) or what she alluded to as being the true power of 4CBlood...it's a swtich deck and you can play either aggro or control with it matchup dependent (watch me play vs. WW and RDW...not perfect play but I think it displays how I've boarded the deck to play control moreso than aggro, etc).
I agree with Stsung, and I think there is a home for Grim Monolith, it's likely the most busted mana artifact in the format from a raw power level, arguments could be made for lotus petal or coalition relic, but I tend to think this one takes the cheddar on raw power. Before cloudpost this card was used to put accelerated U on the map. The issue I have with cards like this is that they're the worst top decks in the late game, but I think as a builder of decks we can avoid this by paying payoff cards to reward drawing them late, for instance reshape, transmute artifact, daretti, goblin welder, master transmuter, koldotha forgemaster, etc , or upheaval, wildfire, and burning of xinye etc; in one context you would be building a U or MUD based combo control deck more than likely and in the other essentially RU prison (board control with lighter permission). MUD is also viable, but far more midrange than its aggressive and prison style brethren in Vintage...the difficulty I've had building it is that it lacks the cohesion, redundancy of effect to make it either a true control or aggro deck...this is not a problem per se but you may mulligan aggressively matchup dependent because the deck will be less focused...much like Stsung talked about in her 5CAggro(aggro/control [midrange]) or what she alluded to as being the true power of 4CBlood...it's a swtich deck and you can play either aggro or control with it matchup dependent (watch me play vs. WW and RDW...not perfect play but I think it displays how I've boarded the deck to play control moreso than aggro, etc).
Hi folks,
I have been without internet, phone and TV due a disruption of my cable provider since Sunday!
Which is always a desaster, but especially this time, because I wanted to post about lowman's plans on Sunday.
I was so happy to be online again that I did NOT write in open office and copy the text here later, and guess what, it happened again, the whole text I had been writing on since 60 min was swallowed again!
And this time I'm pretty sure it was the ******* 'twitch merge' thing. I'm so angry that I think about abandoning MTGSalvation forum. Any suggestions for a type of forum like here? I don't think that the structure of reddit works well for us as main forum. Even you, Stsung, did just link to 'other places' like youtube and puremtgo, we need that 'other place' for our forum. Besides, I like our unique Chainsaw Massacre picture and logo and all the other art and would like to preserve that.
Now in keywords the 2nd try:
- I did not agree to create a 'Committee of Public Safety' (if that does not ring a bell, google French Revolution:-)
In the conversation we had, lowman, you talked about a council that 'proposes' bannings and unbannings and take care of the watchlist.
Now it's one, that decides about them!
I see no advantage in excluding newer players like Boozemongoose, C4R1S ( they won events already, too) or anybody else from the votings. What about Golden_Lin!? She played here longer than dawts,lowman and stsung all together.
Why should her vote not count?!
I see absolutely no advantage in having a discussion about the bannings for 1-2 h in a chat channel that is lost immediately afterwards. That is one of the main functions of our forum, to preserve a discussion, so everybody can read it afterwards. It is also better for players that are no English native speakers.
It just takes time to form your thoughts in a different language ( and correct most of the spelling and grammar mistakes:-) I'm writing now 2 h on this text.
I wrote this on the 20th of August:
Now for the un-bannings, as host, I want to satisfy the demand of the majority of players, so if you want to change the ban list you must rather convince the other players than me.
4 in the council may not represent the majority of our players, in fact the council does not represent our player base at all, because there are no newer players or budget players.
We are 9-10 players usally at a regular event at the moment, and maybe have a player base of 15, max. 20 players. Last time we had a maximum of 12 votes for a card ( correct me, please, if I remember that wrong, Sensei) .
Do we really need 'senators' for us, who decide? Wouldn't it be rather a chance to involve as much of the players as possible in the discussion?
I'm open for a change, block solution or a compromise. German Highlander has a ban list which you, lowman, thinks is much better than ours. We could play the last 3 events before the votings with their rules, and then vote if we want to adopt them completely or play this format regularly once or twice per month or not at all. They have the big data lowman was missing in our small community.
I think this way all players have at least the chance to experience some differences, to make up their minds.
I hope you see the power of Eladamri's Call and then decide to add this card to your decks which have access to green and white mana. As the Sensei notes above, this card is currently underplayed and I tend to agree.
I feel like if Eladamri's Call was RW RU or WU, it would have easily been banned. Mystical Tutor is banned and casting it puts you down a card.
ML, your numbers are correct. 12 voted for un-bans and 9 voted for bans. Also, you can go into profile > preferences > Show censored content.
So, if I understand your logic correctly, what you intended for me to do is generate a council of a smaller subset of the player base just to discuss the cards, have no decision making authority over what cards should be banned/unbanned or watched, but then go back to an open voting system. The most salient question is why would I waste my time or 6 other folks time--why wouldn't we just put the cards to a vote and be done with it; while I admire your egalitarian approach to this process, I cannot see why such a council is anything but superfluous if it does not make said decisions...matter of fact, it would be complete nonsense.
I'm trying to bring order to how this process works, by bringing the most informed of your players to a table to vote, not on what they like, but on what they know or have come to objectively see as fair and balanced. This is why I did not per se use the duration of their play in the format, but their results...results imply knowledge...to overcome ones opposition on a more continual basis is not likely the best way to learn, but it does display a higher level of mastery and tacitly implies a wider knowledge of the game...this was the manner in which I came to this conclusion. I think I've seen several players state that we need a codified process that is both efficient and enlightened to make healthy choices for the format and widen the meta. I appreciate everything you've done to keep 100c alive on Gatherling, but frankly your approach to card evaluation is generally very subjective and your notions of democratic process are akin to the ancient Greeks who fruitlessly squabbled until their city states were driven under the hegemony of others due to continual in-fighting. I've gathered folks I truly believe can be objective about the format, keep it healthy, fun, and thriving for you and really all of the community. But, frankly, you're impeding progress here man.
I told you I wanted to do something, other players showed an interest in developing a more codified process, you charged me with doing it, and now it's a different story...I've continued to show my proof of a need for a relook on this issue, by jamming the same deck I've cited as the being the best under current bannings...think I've won 4/5 tournaments I've played it in, dawts didn't do too much worse with it (maybe even better), If I did it ten times would that be enough proof...
Regardless, I'm under and over it brother...do what you will with the ban list, I'm done trying to help the format grow or see itself more clearly. Thanks for all the great games to the community, you all rock, and keep your eyes peeled if you're interested in playing some Canadian, German, or Australian Highlander, I'm likely to start running some smaller events off of challonge and advertised through reddit.
Take it easy everyone
--KB
2:43 PM lowman02: it's variance laden
2:45 PM lowman02: yeah I suppose we'll see on it--hopefully, we see this format clearly and go in the direction that German Highlander has gone which isn't perfect, but is far more balanced and healthy
2:45 PM ML_Berlin: go ahead and make a council
Kyle,
there was obviously a misunderstanding about the function and work of the council. You wrote in this forum, that 'I charged' you to create this committee you designed. So, it was important for me to make clear that it wasn't my idea to stop the democractic principles of our community! I did not intend to replace the democractic voting process with some 'expert round'. I asked all players in our forum if they really agree to the idea of this council. I may look dogmatic here, but I think, at the very least, for such a change there must be a vote of the community to do so. Otherwise I could just proclaim myself as God-king and announce the bannings I like.
And yes, democracy is exhausting
However, what about the reasonable compromise to test the German Highlander Ban list and possibly use it in the future? They have thousands of games and hundreds of players regularly, and provide the objective data in big numbers that you miss here.
While I agree reddit has more advantages than Salvation, I don't believe it is cut&dried black&white.
Reddit will archive your posts after six months.
Posts more than a week old are hidden if it doesn't get an upvote in the last week. With a small user base, it is easy for a very relevant post to not get an upvote in a week.
All users on Salvation are MTG players while few users of Reddit are. You will have "stumble" traffic either way.
I am not a huge fan of reddit either but to be completely honest I like it more than this forum. I like having a stable, simple URL (not like this one which can arbitrarily change at any time as we have seen with our tinyurl). I like the ability to have different threads so it's easier to follow certain discussions without having to read all that everyone's had to say about everything. On the other hand, I also think it's good to have multiple "bases". We don't have to abandon this thread.
My questions were not rhetorical! I'm asking you all what we should do. If for any reason you don't want to 'speak in public' = write in this forum, please send me a private message.
I recommend that ML Berlin posts his weekly results to Reddit, and we keep most other discussions on this site (because this site is better and has more features).
This approach has the highest chance of attracting new players.
2 topics with several questions. Forum:
I don't like reddit, but I would post results there. Learning how to 'program' reddit to use our logos, rather scares me off, too. I prefer the forum structure here for easier reference, reddit seems much more unstructured, but not the rest of MTGSalvation. But if there is no other place like this, I would rather stay.
Who thinks our ban list is 'oldfashioned'= needs a radical change?
Who thinks the 7 wise men should create our ban list via 'the council' as proposed by lowman?
Is German Highlander an acceptable alternative/ compromise?
Should we test the format in the forthcoming events? And then vote if we want to use that instead?
I hoped that BoozeMongoose himself would write again, to clear this misunderstanding. He clearly said to me that he thinks all players should be able to vote! He wrote:
Hey all!
So at first, I have no problem with the council-idea, if its just for bannings/unbannings suggestions since i rarely played highlander or commander formats and maybe under- or overvalue cards.
if its just for bannings/unbannings suggestions We Germans often use just when we mean actuallyonly in English.
He wanted suggestions and then be able to vote for or against.
Like I first expected how the 'council' works, too. So, it's actually 3:1, if we assume lowman comes back after a positive vote for his council idea.
However, there are more questions like if we should test and/or adopt German Highlander. No comment, neither positive or negative, so far from anybody.
Looks like cancelled then..
It's always the same stressful debates, one fraction wants the freedom to use all the cards, especially those already banned in other formats, raise the power level, etc. And the others try to preserve the old format, are satisfied with the status quo or can't afford the newly unbanned cards anyway( or don't want to buy cards that can only be used here, then). I suggested as compromise to test and switch to German Highlander format and ban list, although I'm sceptical about their ban list but they have big 'paper' events regularly, and personally I would be glad to rely on their independent and greater data instead of fighting and disharmony in our little community. Just to avoid bad blood. Although lowman praised their banlist as much better balanced than ours( which is unless 4 cards still the original from Wotc!), he decided to quit playing in our event. Which really surprised me, not only because I thought we were friends, and he was a very dedicated player, also because the community were still discussing the issue in the forum and no decision has been made, yet. It was not my intention to alienate him or anybody else!
At this point, I definitely regret to bring this issue up, because it seems less than a handful of players cares about anyway.
Came back to see what was going on in forum and in general with the format...looks like we're still where we were before...Here's a suggestion, set up an online poll, give a time limit (2 weeks seems reasonable) and then go with the majority vote. This would likely be more efficient then an open ended dialogue without actual outputs. German Highlander does have a far better ban list then our own; rather it increases the viability of multiple other archetypes whereas under our own we're limited (if you want to win consistently) to a smaller subset of the how the game can be played. If you don't feel like following the link these are the cards that differ in both ban lists:
Birthing Pod (illegal in GHL, but legal in 100CS)
Natural Order (illegal in GHL, but legal in 100CS)
Channel (illegal in 100CS, but legal in GHL, same for all that follow)
Crucible of Worlds
Demonic Consultation
Demonic Tutor
Dig Through Time
Fastbond
Intuition
Life from the Loam
Lion's Eye Diamond
Mana Drain
Memory Jar
Merchant Scroll
Mind's Desire
Mystical Tutor
Necropotence
Oath of Druids
Stoneforge Mystic
Timetwister
Tolarian Academy
Treasure Cruise
Trinisphere
Wheel of Fortune
Windfall
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Yawgmoth's Will
GHL is a more powerful format...that's a fact...however, as with most powerful formats, there tends to be greater variance the more radical or draw dependent the build (for instance Channel is a busted card; however, how bad is it to have an opener with emrakul or blightsteel in it and no channel--if you haven't felt the pain of a 7 card mulligan, then give it a shot sometime...it's a bitter pill...on the low variance draw (under .02) that you can assemble this combo by T2 and your opponent doesn't bolt, bolt you in response or sequentially, then sure you'll win the game...more often than not though the effects/cards you want will come in a piecemeal manner, while more fair/consistent strategies will just pummel you with the clowns...staying alive isn't easy with these decks and your dead draw count is far higher). I tend to test 100C decks pretty exhaustively...it's my favorite format, so why not...one of the things I tend to do with a deck is port it over to legacy and play some matches against real legacy decks...oddly enough my best results generally come while playing against the unfair decks for instance legacy storm, reanimator, hightide combo, sneak and show, because most of the decks I've run historically in the 100C event have been proactive and disruptive/flexible; beating these decks is easier because if you understand or learn how these strategies work then you can tend to limit their possible lines to victory while your own consistent win con (damage) can shine through. Anyway, the differences above between GHL and 100CS provide stronger control and combo, control options for players and deck builders. Notably Storm is viable under this ban list; which I tend to think is fine, because it's a cool deck, but very easily hated out and generally just slower (on average not on its best draw) than just going aggro. This ban list would keep the "fair decks" (4CBlood) in check (to an extent, the deck is still great), and would establish a wider, viable playset of tier 1 decks--this creates health in the format by opening up the meta to additional natural strategies that can viably win any matchup, but naturally prey upon fair creature and PW decks (they will generally lose horrifically to control, if the control player plays and builds well). This will lead to a meta that has the possibility of bad matchups for any one given deck, which is good, you don't want one deck to dominate a format...it just losses its excitement at that point (Noting that Socnelas took down the CSM last week with my 4C Build [minus one Liliana and plus one Chandra]).
Anyway that's my thoughts on the matter, we should just adopt the GHL ban list because it's based on more objective data, and because this "process" we've historically used doesn't really work at all (it's been 2 weeks...nothing happened). And maybe nothing happening is what you all want: that's cool...but, you'll lose just as many players that way. ML, you're cool and we're on friendly terms, I just have no desire to play this format anymore until we fix the imbalance that exists in it--and I won't--that's all.
I've offered numerous suggestions, and brought this trend up for the better half of a year...I'm tired of running my mouth to no effect. I am a dedicated player of the format--this is true--what is more true is that I'm a disciple of it--I have spent a lot of time learning it and studying it, so when things that I've found through great effort are cast aside as baubles--well that might lead one to not give a ***** anymore about the format.
What you need right now is not more nonsense dialogue--you need a voting or polling system and a plan of action and then hold your player base accountable for rendering their decisions in a timely manner...otherwise, you'll continually be ineffectual in exacting any sort of change or balance.
I will enjoy the format regardless of whether these cards are banned or un-banned, but I appreciate that others may wish to open up more archetypes which can compete against the "natural state" deck.
Hey all,
It has been an honour to be the host for such a long time. But, it may be a good idea after so many years to change the captain on the bridge(insider joke, because lowman is a captain of the US Army:-). He will replace me as host for the future. He definitely has the energy to give the event new impulses and we all know his deep knowledge about Magic. Thanks to all for the good times!
It's certainly an honor to host and ML thank you for the many years of hosting to this point and really keeping the format alive for so long; from conversation, I know we'll continue to see you at events which is a good thing man. Despite my rally to alter the format in a different direction, one that I think positively impacts the range of viable/good decks, I still firmly believe in the democratic approach to solving it. That said, linked right here is a voting tool: Ban List Voting Poll. I ask that by next Saturday everyone get's to this google poll and provides their votes for either independent cards or adoption of the German Highlander Ban list. The list does not include the most busted cards in MTG, ie the cards that were deemed to broken for German Highlander were not even offered up in this poll; for instance the Power 9, Skullclamp, Jitte are no where to be found on this poll because what they do tends to wreck games way too rapidly. However, if you think I've missed a card then please feel free to contact me at brekyl02@yahoo.com, put a note up here in MTGS, or hit me up on MTGO chat. We'll stick with the current ban list for at a minimum of 2 weeks until the voting can be completed and folks have 1 week after completion of voting to retool their decks or make new ones. Voting is up now and closes at 0001 EST on 8 OCT 17, so please take the time to make it to the polls. Additionally, you do not have to answer all questions if not desired, however, the final question: What is your user name is required to stop duplicate voting or nonsense voting as it is a duplicate poll. This may happen regardless but I'll toss all duplicate votes or unnamed votes out at the end. Hope my stint as host of the 100CS community is just as fruitful as ML's has been and that you all continue to enjoy slinging electron cardboard at each other from a big ol'pile of count 100. Thanks guys and see you all tomorrow.
Hey all,
It has been an honour to be the host for such a long time. But, it may be a good idea after so many years to change the captain on the bridge(insider joke, because lowman is a captain of the US Army:-). He will replace me as host for the future. He definitely has the energy to give the event new impulses and we all know his deep knowledge about Magic. Thanks to all for the good times!
Wow. Thank you for all you have done! From finding a sponsor to hosting off of free WiFi in the coffee shop while you were in the middle of an unexpected move.
Congratulations to Johnny on the win after a hiatus from the event. Recording of the matches I was able to catch will be up momentarily at this link: CSM 3.51.
Below is the winner's trophy, the lovely lady Atarka, and long may she reign.
Tell your friends about the event and run up that "play more" hype. If we hit 20 players next week, then I'll throw in 16 treasure chests for the winner's purse. Unless you're Michelle_Wong and you got burned out
Take it easy everyone and have a good week. Thanks for hitting the polls and if you haven't get there
May I ask if you believe that Grim Monolith is a potent card that has not yet found a home in our format?
I agree with Stsung, and I think there is a home for Grim Monolith, it's likely the most busted mana artifact in the format from a raw power level, arguments could be made for lotus petal or coalition relic, but I tend to think this one takes the cheddar on raw power. Before cloudpost this card was used to put accelerated U on the map. The issue I have with cards like this is that they're the worst top decks in the late game, but I think as a builder of decks we can avoid this by paying payoff cards to reward drawing them late, for instance reshape, transmute artifact, daretti, goblin welder, master transmuter, koldotha forgemaster, etc , or upheaval, wildfire, and burning of xinye etc; in one context you would be building a U or MUD based combo control deck more than likely and in the other essentially RU prison (board control with lighter permission). MUD is also viable, but far more midrange than its aggressive and prison style brethren in Vintage...the difficulty I've had building it is that it lacks the cohesion, redundancy of effect to make it either a true control or aggro deck...this is not a problem per se but you may mulligan aggressively matchup dependent because the deck will be less focused...much like Stsung talked about in her 5CAggro(aggro/control [midrange]) or what she alluded to as being the true power of 4CBlood...it's a swtich deck and you can play either aggro or control with it matchup dependent (watch me play vs. WW and RDW...not perfect play but I think it displays how I've boarded the deck to play control moreso than aggro, etc).
Take it easy.
KB
I agree with Stsung, and I think there is a home for Grim Monolith, it's likely the most busted mana artifact in the format from a raw power level, arguments could be made for lotus petal or coalition relic, but I tend to think this one takes the cheddar on raw power. Before cloudpost this card was used to put accelerated U on the map. The issue I have with cards like this is that they're the worst top decks in the late game, but I think as a builder of decks we can avoid this by paying payoff cards to reward drawing them late, for instance reshape, transmute artifact, daretti, goblin welder, master transmuter, koldotha forgemaster, etc , or upheaval, wildfire, and burning of xinye etc; in one context you would be building a U or MUD based combo control deck more than likely and in the other essentially RU prison (board control with lighter permission). MUD is also viable, but far more midrange than its aggressive and prison style brethren in Vintage...the difficulty I've had building it is that it lacks the cohesion, redundancy of effect to make it either a true control or aggro deck...this is not a problem per se but you may mulligan aggressively matchup dependent because the deck will be less focused...much like Stsung talked about in her 5CAggro(aggro/control [midrange]) or what she alluded to as being the true power of 4CBlood...it's a swtich deck and you can play either aggro or control with it matchup dependent (watch me play vs. WW and RDW...not perfect play but I think it displays how I've boarded the deck to play control moreso than aggro, etc).
Take it easy.
KB
I have been without internet, phone and TV due a disruption of my cable provider since Sunday!
Which is always a desaster, but especially this time, because I wanted to post about lowman's plans on Sunday.
I was so happy to be online again that I did NOT write in open office and copy the text here later, and guess what, it happened again, the whole text I had been writing on since 60 min was swallowed again!
And this time I'm pretty sure it was the ******* 'twitch merge' thing. I'm so angry that I think about abandoning MTGSalvation forum. Any suggestions for a type of forum like here? I don't think that the structure of reddit works well for us as main forum. Even you, Stsung, did just link to 'other places' like youtube and puremtgo, we need that 'other place' for our forum. Besides, I like our unique Chainsaw Massacre picture and logo and all the other art and would like to preserve that.
Now in keywords the 2nd try:
- I did not agree to create a 'Committee of Public Safety' (if that does not ring a bell, google French Revolution:-)
In the conversation we had, lowman, you talked about a council that 'proposes' bannings and unbannings and take care of the watchlist.
Now it's one, that decides about them!
I see no advantage in excluding newer players like Boozemongoose, C4R1S ( they won events already, too) or anybody else from the votings. What about Golden_Lin!? She played here longer than dawts,lowman and stsung all together.
Why should her vote not count?!
I see absolutely no advantage in having a discussion about the bannings for 1-2 h in a chat channel that is lost immediately afterwards. That is one of the main functions of our forum, to preserve a discussion, so everybody can read it afterwards. It is also better for players that are no English native speakers.
It just takes time to form your thoughts in a different language ( and correct most of the spelling and grammar mistakes:-) I'm writing now 2 h on this text.
I wrote this on the 20th of August:
4 in the council may not represent the majority of our players, in fact the council does not represent our player base at all, because there are no newer players or budget players.
We are 9-10 players usally at a regular event at the moment, and maybe have a player base of 15, max. 20 players. Last time we had a maximum of 12 votes for a card ( correct me, please, if I remember that wrong, Sensei) .
Do we really need 'senators' for us, who decide? Wouldn't it be rather a chance to involve as much of the players as possible in the discussion?
I'm open for a change, block solution or a compromise. German Highlander has a ban list which you, lowman, thinks is much better than ours. We could play the last 3 events before the votings with their rules, and then vote if we want to adopt them completely or play this format regularly once or twice per month or not at all. They have the big data lowman was missing in our small community.
I think this way all players have at least the chance to experience some differences, to make up their minds.
I feel like if Eladamri's Call was RW RU or WU, it would have easily been banned. Mystical Tutor is banned and casting it puts you down a card.
ML, your numbers are correct. 12 voted for un-bans and 9 voted for bans. Also, you can go into profile > preferences > Show censored content.
So, if I understand your logic correctly, what you intended for me to do is generate a council of a smaller subset of the player base just to discuss the cards, have no decision making authority over what cards should be banned/unbanned or watched, but then go back to an open voting system. The most salient question is why would I waste my time or 6 other folks time--why wouldn't we just put the cards to a vote and be done with it; while I admire your egalitarian approach to this process, I cannot see why such a council is anything but superfluous if it does not make said decisions...matter of fact, it would be complete nonsense.
I'm trying to bring order to how this process works, by bringing the most informed of your players to a table to vote, not on what they like, but on what they know or have come to objectively see as fair and balanced. This is why I did not per se use the duration of their play in the format, but their results...results imply knowledge...to overcome ones opposition on a more continual basis is not likely the best way to learn, but it does display a higher level of mastery and tacitly implies a wider knowledge of the game...this was the manner in which I came to this conclusion. I think I've seen several players state that we need a codified process that is both efficient and enlightened to make healthy choices for the format and widen the meta. I appreciate everything you've done to keep 100c alive on Gatherling, but frankly your approach to card evaluation is generally very subjective and your notions of democratic process are akin to the ancient Greeks who fruitlessly squabbled until their city states were driven under the hegemony of others due to continual in-fighting. I've gathered folks I truly believe can be objective about the format, keep it healthy, fun, and thriving for you and really all of the community. But, frankly, you're impeding progress here man.
I told you I wanted to do something, other players showed an interest in developing a more codified process, you charged me with doing it, and now it's a different story...I've continued to show my proof of a need for a relook on this issue, by jamming the same deck I've cited as the being the best under current bannings...think I've won 4/5 tournaments I've played it in, dawts didn't do too much worse with it (maybe even better), If I did it ten times would that be enough proof...
Regardless, I'm under and over it brother...do what you will with the ban list, I'm done trying to help the format grow or see itself more clearly. Thanks for all the great games to the community, you all rock, and keep your eyes peeled if you're interested in playing some Canadian, German, or Australian Highlander, I'm likely to start running some smaller events off of challonge and advertised through reddit.
Take it easy everyone
--KB
2:43 PM lowman02: it's variance laden
2:45 PM lowman02: yeah I suppose we'll see on it--hopefully, we see this format clearly and go in the direction that German Highlander has gone which isn't perfect, but is far more balanced and healthy
2:45 PM ML_Berlin: go ahead and make a council
there was obviously a misunderstanding about the function and work of the council. You wrote in this forum, that 'I charged' you to create this committee you designed. So, it was important for me to make clear that it wasn't my idea to stop the democractic principles of our community! I did not intend to replace the democractic voting process with some 'expert round'. I asked all players in our forum if they really agree to the idea of this council. I may look dogmatic here, but I think, at the very least, for such a change there must be a vote of the community to do so. Otherwise I could just proclaim myself as God-king and announce the bannings I like.
And yes, democracy is exhausting
However, what about the reasonable compromise to test the German Highlander Ban list and possibly use it in the future? They have thousands of games and hundreds of players regularly, and provide the objective data in big numbers that you miss here.
Reddit will archive your posts after six months.
Posts more than a week old are hidden if it doesn't get an upvote in the last week. With a small user base, it is easy for a very relevant post to not get an upvote in a week.
All users on Salvation are MTG players while few users of Reddit are. You will have "stumble" traffic either way.
We now have 4 in favor of a binding Council (me, Lowman, stsung and Booze Mongoose). Anyone else want to vote in favour of a binding Council?
It's beyond presumptuous of you to think you know my intentions for the community when
1) I literally said While I agree reddit has more advantages than Salvation
2) I have actually posted to reddit about S100
https://www.reddit.com/r/MTGO/comments/5ivoj9/free_event_33_tix_given_out_sat_dec_24th_xmas_eve/
https://www.reddit.com/r/MTGO/comments/3y3dfu/free_player_run_event_dec_26th_20_tickets_prize/
https://www.reddit.com/r/MTGO/comments/3x8r37/free_playerrun_event_saturday_1926_20_tickets/
3) I manage the S100 Facebook page
4) You've participated in this event 12 times to my 102
This approach has the highest chance of attracting new players.
Forum:
I don't like reddit, but I would post results there. Learning how to 'program' reddit to use our logos, rather scares me off, too. I prefer the forum structure here for easier reference, reddit seems much more unstructured, but not the rest of MTGSalvation. But if there is no other place like this, I would rather stay.
Now for the bannings/council/German Highlander:
Nobody commented about German Highlander.
http://highlandermagic.info/index.php?id=bannedlist
Who thinks our ban list is 'oldfashioned'= needs a radical change?
Who thinks the 7 wise men should create our ban list via 'the council' as proposed by lowman?
Is German Highlander an acceptable alternative/ compromise?
Should we test the format in the forthcoming events? And then vote if we want to use that instead?
4 players have already voted yes and no one has voted no.
if its just for bannings/unbannings suggestions We Germans often use just when we mean actuallyonly in English.
He wanted suggestions and then be able to vote for or against.
Like I first expected how the 'council' works, too. So, it's actually 3:1, if we assume lowman comes back after a positive vote for his council idea.
However, there are more questions like if we should test and/or adopt German Highlander. No comment, neither positive or negative, so far from anybody.
Looks like cancelled then..
It's always the same stressful debates, one fraction wants the freedom to use all the cards, especially those already banned in other formats, raise the power level, etc. And the others try to preserve the old format, are satisfied with the status quo or can't afford the newly unbanned cards anyway( or don't want to buy cards that can only be used here, then). I suggested as compromise to test and switch to German Highlander format and ban list, although I'm sceptical about their ban list but they have big 'paper' events regularly, and personally I would be glad to rely on their independent and greater data instead of fighting and disharmony in our little community. Just to avoid bad blood. Although lowman praised their banlist as much better balanced than ours( which is unless 4 cards still the original from Wotc!), he decided to quit playing in our event. Which really surprised me, not only because I thought we were friends, and he was a very dedicated player, also because the community were still discussing the issue in the forum and no decision has been made, yet. It was not my intention to alienate him or anybody else!
At this point, I definitely regret to bring this issue up, because it seems less than a handful of players cares about anyway.
You are correct about Booze Mongoose. I mis-read his original message, apologies for the confusion.
Came back to see what was going on in forum and in general with the format...looks like we're still where we were before...Here's a suggestion, set up an online poll, give a time limit (2 weeks seems reasonable) and then go with the majority vote. This would likely be more efficient then an open ended dialogue without actual outputs. German Highlander does have a far better ban list then our own; rather it increases the viability of multiple other archetypes whereas under our own we're limited (if you want to win consistently) to a smaller subset of the how the game can be played. If you don't feel like following the link these are the cards that differ in both ban lists:
Birthing Pod (illegal in GHL, but legal in 100CS)
Natural Order (illegal in GHL, but legal in 100CS)
Channel (illegal in 100CS, but legal in GHL, same for all that follow)
Crucible of Worlds
Demonic Consultation
Demonic Tutor
Dig Through Time
Fastbond
Intuition
Life from the Loam
Lion's Eye Diamond
Mana Drain
Memory Jar
Merchant Scroll
Mind's Desire
Mystical Tutor
Necropotence
Oath of Druids
Stoneforge Mystic
Timetwister
Tolarian Academy
Treasure Cruise
Trinisphere
Wheel of Fortune
Windfall
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Yawgmoth's Will
GHL is a more powerful format...that's a fact...however, as with most powerful formats, there tends to be greater variance the more radical or draw dependent the build (for instance Channel is a busted card; however, how bad is it to have an opener with emrakul or blightsteel in it and no channel--if you haven't felt the pain of a 7 card mulligan, then give it a shot sometime...it's a bitter pill...on the low variance draw (under .02) that you can assemble this combo by T2 and your opponent doesn't bolt, bolt you in response or sequentially, then sure you'll win the game...more often than not though the effects/cards you want will come in a piecemeal manner, while more fair/consistent strategies will just pummel you with the clowns...staying alive isn't easy with these decks and your dead draw count is far higher). I tend to test 100C decks pretty exhaustively...it's my favorite format, so why not...one of the things I tend to do with a deck is port it over to legacy and play some matches against real legacy decks...oddly enough my best results generally come while playing against the unfair decks for instance legacy storm, reanimator, hightide combo, sneak and show, because most of the decks I've run historically in the 100C event have been proactive and disruptive/flexible; beating these decks is easier because if you understand or learn how these strategies work then you can tend to limit their possible lines to victory while your own consistent win con (damage) can shine through. Anyway, the differences above between GHL and 100CS provide stronger control and combo, control options for players and deck builders. Notably Storm is viable under this ban list; which I tend to think is fine, because it's a cool deck, but very easily hated out and generally just slower (on average not on its best draw) than just going aggro. This ban list would keep the "fair decks" (4CBlood) in check (to an extent, the deck is still great), and would establish a wider, viable playset of tier 1 decks--this creates health in the format by opening up the meta to additional natural strategies that can viably win any matchup, but naturally prey upon fair creature and PW decks (they will generally lose horrifically to control, if the control player plays and builds well). This will lead to a meta that has the possibility of bad matchups for any one given deck, which is good, you don't want one deck to dominate a format...it just losses its excitement at that point (Noting that Socnelas took down the CSM last week with my 4C Build [minus one Liliana and plus one Chandra]).
Anyway that's my thoughts on the matter, we should just adopt the GHL ban list because it's based on more objective data, and because this "process" we've historically used doesn't really work at all (it's been 2 weeks...nothing happened). And maybe nothing happening is what you all want: that's cool...but, you'll lose just as many players that way. ML, you're cool and we're on friendly terms, I just have no desire to play this format anymore until we fix the imbalance that exists in it--and I won't--that's all.
I've offered numerous suggestions, and brought this trend up for the better half of a year...I'm tired of running my mouth to no effect. I am a dedicated player of the format--this is true--what is more true is that I'm a disciple of it--I have spent a lot of time learning it and studying it, so when things that I've found through great effort are cast aside as baubles--well that might lead one to not give a ***** anymore about the format.
What you need right now is not more nonsense dialogue--you need a voting or polling system and a plan of action and then hold your player base accountable for rendering their decisions in a timely manner...otherwise, you'll continually be ineffectual in exacting any sort of change or balance.
Take it easy everyone --KB
I like your points.
I will enjoy the format regardless of whether these cards are banned or un-banned, but I appreciate that others may wish to open up more archetypes which can compete against the "natural state" deck.
It has been an honour to be the host for such a long time. But, it may be a good idea after so many years to change the captain on the bridge(insider joke, because lowman is a captain of the US Army:-). He will replace me as host for the future. He definitely has the energy to give the event new impulses and we all know his deep knowledge about Magic. Thanks to all for the good times!
It's certainly an honor to host and ML thank you for the many years of hosting to this point and really keeping the format alive for so long; from conversation, I know we'll continue to see you at events which is a good thing man. Despite my rally to alter the format in a different direction, one that I think positively impacts the range of viable/good decks, I still firmly believe in the democratic approach to solving it. That said, linked right here is a voting tool: Ban List Voting Poll. I ask that by next Saturday everyone get's to this google poll and provides their votes for either independent cards or adoption of the German Highlander Ban list. The list does not include the most busted cards in MTG, ie the cards that were deemed to broken for German Highlander were not even offered up in this poll; for instance the Power 9, Skullclamp, Jitte are no where to be found on this poll because what they do tends to wreck games way too rapidly. However, if you think I've missed a card then please feel free to contact me at brekyl02@yahoo.com, put a note up here in MTGS, or hit me up on MTGO chat. We'll stick with the current ban list for at a minimum of 2 weeks until the voting can be completed and folks have 1 week after completion of voting to retool their decks or make new ones. Voting is up now and closes at 0001 EST on 8 OCT 17, so please take the time to make it to the polls. Additionally, you do not have to answer all questions if not desired, however, the final question: What is your user name is required to stop duplicate voting or nonsense voting as it is a duplicate poll. This may happen regardless but I'll toss all duplicate votes or unnamed votes out at the end. Hope my stint as host of the 100CS community is just as fruitful as ML's has been and that you all continue to enjoy slinging electron cardboard at each other from a big ol'pile of count 100. Thanks guys and see you all tomorrow.
--KB
Wow. Thank you for all you have done! From finding a sponsor to hosting off of free WiFi in the coffee shop while you were in the middle of an unexpected move.
Final Winner: Johnny Rogue -5
Lost once:
BoozeMongoose -3
mathguy31415 -3
Congratulations to Johnny on the win after a hiatus from the event. Recording of the matches I was able to catch will be up momentarily at this link: CSM 3.51.
Below is the winner's trophy, the lovely lady Atarka, and long may she reign.
Tell your friends about the event and run up that "play more" hype. If we hit 20 players next week, then I'll throw in 16 treasure chests for the winner's purse. Unless you're Michelle_Wong and you got burned out
Take it easy everyone and have a good week. Thanks for hitting the polls and if you haven't get there
--KB