If you have questions, comments or concerns about the Standard Forum rules, how they're enforced, or the forum setup, please post them here. The Standard moderating team will do our best to answer, and to fix the problem (if there is one).
Before anything else is said, I'd just like to comment that this is gorgeous. I love this level of organization, and I hope it will make these forums that much more accessible to players and users.
I guess OP wants it to be 'keyworded' like "dies" was. What word would you replace ETB with though?
When Aegis Angel is born?
When Huntmaster of the Fells arrives?
When Kitchen Sphinx lands?
When Faerie Imposter busts in?
When Dread Cacodemon pops in?
When Malfegor shows up?
Just a simple question: if in the Market Street forums, in which having people to learn all the rules is way more important than here, you have just to click a button that says "I agree", why is a special group needed here?
because market street (namely the trading) can lead to legal concerns (ripping constituting as mail fraud) which would probably explain that.
The competitive subgroup is structured the way it is, so that not everybody can post and only people who really care about competitive can post in a forum where everybody is on the same page.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Game: Bioshock: Infinite
Mabbz on MTGO | Demgrinds on Twitch & Twitter | Helpdesk
Well, I think you partially missed my point:
-Market Street forums: more rules, SERIOUS legal concerns, easy to get in as just press "I agree" and you're in.
-Standard competitive forums: less rules, no legal concerns (for the most part), harder to get in as you need to join a group located in another page and wait to be approved by a group moderator.
Not to be disruptive or anything, but am I missing something? Just looking for an explanation
Greetings,
Frozen_Fire
We could have done what Market Street does, but it would have taken work by the site technician, of which we didn't have at the time.
So we did the best we could and made the group. The plus side to the group is that I can view who is all a member of it and go in and remove them at will (which I haven't had to do yet, but the ability to without having to ban a user from Standard is nice).
We could have allowed it to be an auto-join group, but we want to be able to deny someone access if they are removed from the group the first time.
I can't find anything on this now, but wasn't there a standard set a few months ago as to what constitutes an "established" deck on the competitive subforums?
I know there was extensive discussion of the line between established and proven, with some decks being promoted or demoted as a result, but I'm wondering more what the line is between established and standard deck creation.
I ask because we now have over a dozen decks/primers listed in the Established section, and this puzzles me a bit because I fail to see how any decks can be "established" before a single competitive game has been played. People have definitely put a lot of thought into these decks, written nice primers, etc, but at this point they are primarily theorycrafting. Testing might range from goldfishing to cockatrice/MWS playtesting with a friend, but nothing so rigorous as actually running the decks through multiple competitive events.
Isn't it a little early to be listing established decks for the upcoming standard?
I don't understand why its against policy to discuss a deck idea, the information is out there. Who is reading strategic ideas who wouldn't be interested in what's to come
I agree. It'd be pointless to discuss in-depth the impact a spoiler would have on an individual deck in a general post, since individual deck discussion would get lost in all the other stuff.
Can we get some feedback/explanation regarding this policy? It seems counter intuitive to have to wait to discuss deck ideas when a lot of people would be wanting to plan around it and get some new tech going when the set is still new to have some competitive advantage.
The issue with discussing it in the regular SDC threads etc. is that some people are still working on decks for FNM or other tournaments in April, and we don't want a bunch of confusion between those discussions and the spoiler discussions. We're not saying anyone can't discuss spoilers, it's just a matter of discussing it in the right place.
You know, I think this policy sounds nice because it makes it easy to avoid any confusion.
But this is a complicated game, played by people who know how to think. If they're confused, they will learn quickly.
This rule is highly impractical--at this point, BotG has been out for some time, discussion has slowed. A new release revitalizes otherwise stagnant build threads.
Forcing that revitalization to take place in an isolated environment takes context away from the build strategy.
What sort of problems were happening that this rule was implemented to fix, exactly? As a precautionary measure it seems like the height of over administration.
To me it says "We don't think you can figure out whether a card being discussed is new or not based on context and even mouseover images."
Gee thanks, I guess I won't bother creating a new thread because it will become defunct as soon as JOU releases. Not to mention the playerbase brainstorming a build is already in the Standard thread in the Standard forum. A new thread just for spoiled cards probably won't see the same posters (who have a history with the build), nor the same longevity. Thus it will come release time, and any information discussed in the "new cards" forum will have to be re-hashed.
Needless clutter and time-wasting policing of a non-problem.
Keep in mind, this has been the policy for a long time. I'm not sure exactly how long, but it was in effect when I got here (and I was warned for it myself once during my first few months on MTGS). So I'm not the best person to answer the question of "why did this policy come about" but I can say it has pros and cons. I do understand the arguments against it, but on the other hand, I think there's a real benefit to having the separation.
To me it says "We don't think you can figure out whether a card being discussed is new or not based on context and even mouseover images."
I can assure you I don't believe that, the other staff don't believe that, and that's not why we have rules in place.
In any case, I'm certainly willing to discuss revisiting the policy with the other staff members for future spoiler seasons if there are many users who feel the same way. So anyone who has feedback on this, please feel free to post it here.
Im all for abolishing that rule. Most builds are already fleshed out when the spoiler season starts. It just requires reading a few pages back and to be honest it is just natural talking about the newly spoiled cards that could affect your deck in the corresponding threat since those are people who actually know the deck and have experience with it. That is not always the case in the new card discussion section.
Yeah, I am sorry if I took an inflammatory tone. But it was more disruptive to the thread to quell talk of new cards than it was to be discussing them, from a poster's perspective. Thanks for the response!
I agree, spoilers should be allowed in the deck discussion. It makes no sense that we can't discuss future deck strategies when the info is available to everyone.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: Fog Maze
Modern: WUBRG Infect
Legacy: WUBRG Belcher
5 Color control, aggro and combo. Taste the Rainbow!
I noticed in the rules that the following is not to be discussed here:
"Prices and Speculation (that includes "what should I buy" threads)"
I was interested in discussing which cards in RTR block & M14 can be expect to retain value after rotation in the fall, and I am not sure where is the proper place to discuss this. Thanks for any help on this.
I don't know if there's a specific thread for that topic over there, it's not my area, so you should take a look at their rules etc. before posting, but that would be the place for any price/spec discussion. Hope that helps.
My question is similar to tchntm43's, but rather than monetary value I'm more concerned of um... metagame impact, I guess? I'm going to wait until rotation to construct a standard deck but I would like to have some playsets of cards that will most likely be useful. Should I also go to Market Street Cafe?
Nah. Market Street is purely for trade/$$$ related stuff.
If you're asking about what cards will be good for the post-rotation metagame, that's tricky, but the Speculation forum might be a good place for that.
So, I have some competitive deck posts that I really want to make... but I am scared to death of breaking a rule, missing a thread that I should have posted in etc... also, I can't find instructions for how to link to cards anywhere (which is required for the competitive section. Is someone going to throw my account in ChannelFireball jail if a n00b makes some mistakes, or I am just being overly paranoid? BTW, I specifically want to post some analysis on a revamp of post-M15 Bant Walkers - the original did well in sanctioned tourneys, but I am looking for feedback on the revamp, so don't know which forum is appropriate anyway
So, I have some competitive deck posts that I really want to make... but I am scared to death of breaking a rule, missing a thread that I should have posted in etc... also, I can't find instructions for how to link to cards anywhere (which is required for the competitive section. Is someone going to throw my account in ChannelFireball jail if a n00b makes some mistakes, or I am just being overly paranoid? BTW, I specifically want to post some analysis on a revamp of post-M15 Bant Walkers - the original did well in sanctioned tourneys, but I am looking for feedback on the revamp, so don't know which forum is appropriate anyway
For the most part it's not as bad you probably think it is. Mostly the only way you get into real trouble on here is by flaming or trolling. Usually for things like not posting a thread in the right place, not using decktags, we'll usually give 0-point warnings for.
As for discussion of "post M15 Bant Walkers". If there is a thread in either Established or Competitive, that would be a good place. Standard Deck Creation might be a good place as well. In Standard Deck Creation it isn't the end of the world if there's a Bant Walker's thread from a week ago and you post a new thread. I tend to be a lot more okay with multiple threads talking about the same deck as long as there aren't two discussions about it going on literally at the same time. Worst case scenario if you post a thread for a deck and that thread already exists, I'll probably either merge the threads together or lock the newer one and explain that there is already a thread on the topic.
Hi there! As a noob, I was wondering why the colors of mana aren't added to the Deck names in the SDC Table of Contents? It sure would help those of us who haven't memorized all the deck names!
Thanks!
BGStandard Green AggroGB
UWRGModern Saheeli CobraGRWU
UBRGLegacy StormGRBU
Wizards Certified Rules Advisor
because market street (namely the trading) can lead to legal concerns (ripping constituting as mail fraud) which would probably explain that.
The competitive subgroup is structured the way it is, so that not everybody can post and only people who really care about competitive can post in a forum where everybody is on the same page.
Mabbz on MTGO | Demgrinds on Twitch & Twitter | Helpdesk
We could have done what Market Street does, but it would have taken work by the site technician, of which we didn't have at the time.
So we did the best we could and made the group. The plus side to the group is that I can view who is all a member of it and go in and remove them at will (which I haven't had to do yet, but the ability to without having to ban a user from Standard is nice).
We could have allowed it to be an auto-join group, but we want to be able to deny someone access if they are removed from the group the first time.
BGStandard Green AggroGB
UWRGModern Saheeli CobraGRWU
UBRGLegacy StormGRBU
Wizards Certified Rules Advisor
Probably into Junk Rites
BGStandard Green AggroGB
UWRGModern Saheeli CobraGRWU
UBRGLegacy StormGRBU
Wizards Certified Rules Advisor
I know there was extensive discussion of the line between established and proven, with some decks being promoted or demoted as a result, but I'm wondering more what the line is between established and standard deck creation.
I ask because we now have over a dozen decks/primers listed in the Established section, and this puzzles me a bit because I fail to see how any decks can be "established" before a single competitive game has been played. People have definitely put a lot of thought into these decks, written nice primers, etc, but at this point they are primarily theorycrafting. Testing might range from goldfishing to cockatrice/MWS playtesting with a friend, but nothing so rigorous as actually running the decks through multiple competitive events.
Isn't it a little early to be listing established decks for the upcoming standard?
Rancored Elf will cancel your order if prices go up. Read about him and other shady vendors here.
My Trade Thread!
Can we get some feedback/explanation regarding this policy? It seems counter intuitive to have to wait to discuss deck ideas when a lot of people would be wanting to plan around it and get some new tech going when the set is still new to have some competitive advantage.
You don't have to discuss spoilers in a general post; you can make a deck-specific thread in Standard New Card Discussion. Examples:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/standard-type-2/standard-new-card-discussion/552257-bant-superfriends
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/standard-type-2/standard-new-card-discussion/535121-minotaur-tribal
The issue with discussing it in the regular SDC threads etc. is that some people are still working on decks for FNM or other tournaments in April, and we don't want a bunch of confusion between those discussions and the spoiler discussions. We're not saying anyone can't discuss spoilers, it's just a matter of discussing it in the right place.
But this is a complicated game, played by people who know how to think. If they're confused, they will learn quickly.
This rule is highly impractical--at this point, BotG has been out for some time, discussion has slowed. A new release revitalizes otherwise stagnant build threads.
Forcing that revitalization to take place in an isolated environment takes context away from the build strategy.
What sort of problems were happening that this rule was implemented to fix, exactly? As a precautionary measure it seems like the height of over administration.
To me it says "We don't think you can figure out whether a card being discussed is new or not based on context and even mouseover images."
Gee thanks, I guess I won't bother creating a new thread because it will become defunct as soon as JOU releases. Not to mention the playerbase brainstorming a build is already in the Standard thread in the Standard forum. A new thread just for spoiled cards probably won't see the same posters (who have a history with the build), nor the same longevity. Thus it will come release time, and any information discussed in the "new cards" forum will have to be re-hashed.
Needless clutter and time-wasting policing of a non-problem.
I can assure you I don't believe that, the other staff don't believe that, and that's not why we have rules in place.
In any case, I'm certainly willing to discuss revisiting the policy with the other staff members for future spoiler seasons if there are many users who feel the same way. So anyone who has feedback on this, please feel free to post it here.
Modern: WUBRG Infect
Legacy: WUBRG Belcher
5 Color control, aggro and combo. Taste the Rainbow!
"Prices and Speculation (that includes "what should I buy" threads)"
I was interested in discussing which cards in RTR block & M14 can be expect to retain value after rotation in the fall, and I am not sure where is the proper place to discuss this. Thanks for any help on this.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/market-street/market-street-cafe
I don't know if there's a specific thread for that topic over there, it's not my area, so you should take a look at their rules etc. before posting, but that would be the place for any price/spec discussion. Hope that helps.
Trades.
Decks
RWU Zedruu the Greathearted EDH RWU
If you're asking about what cards will be good for the post-rotation metagame, that's tricky, but the Speculation forum might be a good place for that.
Link explaining how to link to cards (aka cardtags or decktags):
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/standard-type-2/65376-card-deck-tag-and-magic-symbol-explanation-thread
For the most part it's not as bad you probably think it is. Mostly the only way you get into real trouble on here is by flaming or trolling. Usually for things like not posting a thread in the right place, not using decktags, we'll usually give 0-point warnings for.
As for discussion of "post M15 Bant Walkers". If there is a thread in either Established or Competitive, that would be a good place. Standard Deck Creation might be a good place as well. In Standard Deck Creation it isn't the end of the world if there's a Bant Walker's thread from a week ago and you post a new thread. I tend to be a lot more okay with multiple threads talking about the same deck as long as there aren't two discussions about it going on literally at the same time. Worst case scenario if you post a thread for a deck and that thread already exists, I'll probably either merge the threads together or lock the newer one and explain that there is already a thread on the topic.
Abzan!
Modern
Life & Death
Commander
Elves
Liliana's Zombies
DO NOT POST DECKLISTS HERE