I just had the idea come to mind. Could there be a format where every card is rated on a 0-10 scale. To make a deck you could used anything every printed (excluding un-type sets) but you would be allowed 20 points or so to build your deck (maybe less points to keep everything in line).
So say you want to play Black Lotus, thats fine, but its worth 10 points. Stuff like basic lands would be 0 points along with unplayable stuff like Deep Water. But other playables might be around 5 like Force of Will, duals like Underground Sea, playable creatures like Tarmogoyf.
Obviously the points system would be a very long process. But a good majority of commons/uncommons and even some rares would get a 0-1.
I think using this idea as a frame work, could make for a really fun format. The challenge would be to change the grading system slightly
so you could run 4x cards instead of playing it as a highlander/singleton format.
Maybe this reality is actually an alternate reality of a reality in which New Phyrexia was the joke expansion and Mirrodin Pure was the obvious expansion, except our reality is the Time Shifted reality which is opposite of that other reality which is that actual reality.
This sort of format would be more like fantasy football. You have a certain point cap and have to assign values to cards. You have a draft and then after the initial draft you could pick up cards on waivers to fill out the rest of your deck. I think it'd be fun. You draft JTMS but what if someone else wisely drafts Mana Leak and Stoneforge Mystic and a 3rd party drafts the Swords and Hawks. Who all are then rolled by a Kuldotha Red drafter or something.
The other way you could do it is have cards get more expensive the more they win matches. So a card that wins twice as much as it loses is worth twice normal value for example. Players would have a point cap in this too. These sorts of formats wouldn't prevent good cards from being played, they'd just make for different versions of the staple decks.
I like the idea in theory, but it's not practical for a variety of reasons. Beyond the subjectivity of the rankings, you would have to revisit the rankings for every card once a new set is released or a new interaction is explored. Take something like Survival of the Fittest - how would you regulate the format once a card like Vengevine got spoiled? It wasn't immediately obvious how broken that interaction was, but it completely warped the Legacy metagame for several months. Or, take a card like Trygon Predator, which is like a 2 in an unpowered metagame but a 7 in today's Vintage metagame.
Heck, even Ancestral Recall is really only as good as the cards you could potentially draw with it.
Heirloom on MTGO, where cards are legal based on their value in tix, is a similar concept, and the list of legal cards is ridiculously unwieldy.
I have heard vague rumors of a moustache-dispensing vending machine in a distant laundromat, across the street from a tattoo parlor. However, this information is shaky, and time is of the essence.
I think the idea is very cool and opens up an entirely new way to design formats. Taking a few cues from miniatures gaming, I would suggest using an open ended scale though. That is, don't set an upper limit for the number of points a card could be assigned.. This would allow you to assign very high points numbers to the most powerful cards and then run tournaments that automatically exclude those cards without the need for separate formats. For example, you could assign 200 points to a Lotus. Then you could run tournaments with a 100 point cap, a 200 point cap, a 500 point cap, or a 1,000 point cap, for example. A system like that would basically replace the need for a B&R list.
While I like the idea, it has three problems I can see:
1) Who maintains the values? How often will it be updated? The B&R list is hardly paid attention to, how much more when every card has to be evaluated.
2) It ignores certain card interactions. For example, let's take grindstone. How much would you value gridnstone? Seriously, the damn thing has no use competitively. How much should it be valued then? Likewise, painter's servant is garbage. A cute gimmick, butits fairly useless. A deck can have 40 painter's servants for all I care.
Combined together, now that's a problem.
Oath of druids is incredibly playable. Its an archetype on its own. But without orchard that deck just turns into mush against a creatureless deck. I'd go so far to say that without token generation, Oath is a barely playable card that would heavily rely on opponents playing aggro.
Now do you evaluate things like those?
3) Deck checking. Deck checking now becomes an incredibly tedious proposition. Not only do you have to check if the list is correct, you have to check if the values are correct. If this were an online proposition where the computer can do checks automatically. IRL? Good luck with that.
I'm not sure the history or details of it because I don't play, but there is a 60 card highlander format alive and well in Melbourne, Australia where certain cards are worth certain amounts of points and decklists are restricted on playing so many points worth of cards. The majority of cards have no points value, so only particularly powerful pieces like brainstorm have pieces, also combo pieces like flash and hulk. I think that would be the way to go, a short list of the most powerful cards with points for only them.
I'm not sure the history or details of it because I don't play, but there is a 60 card highlander format alive and well in Melbourne, Australia where certain cards are worth certain amounts of points and decklists are restricted on playing so many points worth of cards. The majority of cards have no points value, so only particularly powerful pieces like brainstorm have pieces, also combo pieces like flash and hulk. I think that would be the way to go, a short list of the most powerful cards with points for only them.
Bolding added for emphasis.
In tournament Magic, the banned and restricted list serves this purpose. I can see how a points system would be useful for something like Eternal Highlander, but in 4-of Magic it just seems like it would either be redundant or irrelevant; as somewhat mentioned upthread, a format where the best decks are essentially pauper with all the points allocation spent on insane cards just doesn't seem fun.
Is this Melbourne Highlander scene casual or tournament? There's a big difference between beer-and-pretzels EDH and "you win prize for each opponent you knock out" EDH, for example.
Maybe this reality is actually an alternate reality of a reality in which New Phyrexia was the joke expansion and Mirrodin Pure was the obvious expansion, except our reality is the Time Shifted reality which is opposite of that other reality which is that actual reality.
1) Who maintains the values? How often will it be updated? The B&R list is hardly paid attention to, how much more when every card has to be evaluated.
I think the 4 times a year like the DCI does would be fine. Sure you might have a period of time when something is printed that makes an old card nuts. But you could have your points updates a month after a new set is released to address anything like that.
2) It ignores certain card interactions. For example, let's take grindstone. How much would you value gridnstone? Seriously, the damn thing has no use competitively. How much should it be valued then? Likewise, painter's servant is garbage. A cute gimmick, butits fairly useless. A deck can have 40 painter's servants for all I care.
I would think that the points would take into account a cards ability to interact with another card in degenerate ways. For example (regardless of actual points values and deck points caps) you would set up those cards so if you put 1 copy of each into the deck, you are basically at your limit for the whole deck.
3) Deck checking. Deck checking now becomes an incredibly tedious proposition. Not only do you have to check if the list is correct, you have to check if the values are correct. If this were an online proposition where the computer can do checks automatically. IRL? Good luck with that.
Software would have to address this. There are ways to scan written material into text files, after that you would just load them into the software.
I think the idea is very cool and opens up an entirely new way to design formats. Taking a few cues from miniatures gaming, I would suggest using an open ended scale though. That is, don't set an upper limit for the number of points a card could be assigned.. This would allow you to assign very high points numbers to the most powerful cards and then run tournaments that automatically exclude those cards without the need for separate formats. For example, you could assign 200 points to a Lotus. Then you could run tournaments with a 100 point cap, a 200 point cap, a 500 point cap, or a 1,000 point cap, for example. A system like that would basically replace the need for a B&R list.
I like this idea. Leaving the deck points cap up to the players/TO's sounds interesting. But you might still have to set caps to make your points systems effective. so there might be a 10 point, 20 point, 50 point formats (or whatever values you come up with).
Seems like a LOT of work that only someone who rolls pen-paper role play games could love.
Do decks that stay way under the total get some kind of bonus? I assume this would be used for some type of league.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
Another thing that might help keep combo in check is to assign higher points values to many of the universal utility cards like tutors or card filters (Demonic Tutor, Brainstorm, etc.). Being able to only include a restrictive amount of search would prevent combo from becoming too consistant.
this doesnt even work in tactical war games. Its impossible that every card is appropriately costed. I really hate any variant formats that are based around a new way to balance magic. The reason magic variants have been successful is because they are based around a novel idea that is immediately easy to grasp and fun. 2HG, EDH, pauper, etc. These ideas works because the rules are boiled down to the simplest interpretation. A point based system is the exact opposite of that, now add in rating every card in magic ever made accurately in a new format that no one has ever played. Completely implausible and no payoff.
Variant formats have to be boiled down to the simplest possible wording and ruling: No mythic rares, no spells that say "draw a card", no dual lands, etc. These rules allow for zero interpretation and don't require a person to see if they meet the rules.
Is this Melbourne Highlander scene casual or tournament? There's a big difference between beer-and-pretzels EDH and "you win prize for each opponent you knock out" EDH, for example.
I haven't looked into it that heavily but I believe there's monthly tournaments. Not sure how serious they are though. It's a 1 on 1 format as well I believe.
Question, would there also be a card number limit in your format? For example, lets say that Lightning Bolt was worth 1 point, with a deck cap of 20. Could you run 20 bolt?
If there isn't a card number cap, then any card that costs 0 points could be a problem (Hehe, 60 Memnites.dec)
So say you want to play Black Lotus, thats fine, but its worth 10 points. Stuff like basic lands would be 0 points along with unplayable stuff like Deep Water. But other playables might be around 5 like Force of Will, duals like Underground Sea, playable creatures like Tarmogoyf.
Obviously the points system would be a very long process. But a good majority of commons/uncommons and even some rares would get a 0-1.
Edit: This is a very interesting idea posted by MisterMind
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/metagames/viewtopic.php?t=16&mforum=metagames
I think using this idea as a frame work, could make for a really fun format. The challenge would be to change the grading system slightly
so you could run 4x cards instead of playing it as a highlander/singleton format.
4 Ancestral Recall
4 Black Lotus
4 Tinker
4 Flash
4 Protean Hulk
Three points:
3 Demonic Tutor
3 Imperial Seal
3 Mox Emerald
3 Mox Jet
3 Mox Pearl
3 Mox Ruby
3 Mox Sapphire
3 Sol Ring
3 Time Vault
3 Time Walk
3 Vampiric Tutor
3 Worldgorger Dragon
3 Yawgmoth's Will.
2 Balance
2 Channel
2 Crucible of Worlds
2 Gifts Ungiven
2 Mana Crypt
2 Mind Twist
2 Memory Jar
2 Mystical Tutor
2 Strip Mine
2 Survival of the Fittest
2 Tainted Pact
2 Time Spiral
2 Timetwister
2 Tolarian Academy
2 Wheel of Fortune.
One point:
1 Enlightened Tutor
1 Fastbond
1 Force of Will
1 Grim Tutor
1 Intuition
1 Lim-Dul's Vault
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Mana Drain
1 Mana Vault
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Mishra's Workshop
1 Natural Order
1 Necropotence
1 Oath of Druids
1 Personal Tutor
1 Price of Progress
1 Skullclamp
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Yawgmoth's Bargain
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
No. It may work for tactical wargames, but not for a CCG with over ten thousand uniques in it.
Level 1 Judge. I tweet. Member of clan <Limited>. The Dunning-Kruger effect.
The other way you could do it is have cards get more expensive the more they win matches. So a card that wins twice as much as it loses is worth twice normal value for example. Players would have a point cap in this too. These sorts of formats wouldn't prevent good cards from being played, they'd just make for different versions of the staple decks.
considering he is a mod for the vintage forums and actively supports the community there, i think that is highly unlikely.
it would probably require more than 20 points simply because 20 points is effectively pauper with 4 tarmogoyfs.
Heck, even Ancestral Recall is really only as good as the cards you could potentially draw with it.
Heirloom on MTGO, where cards are legal based on their value in tix, is a similar concept, and the list of legal cards is ridiculously unwieldy.
I believe the P9, among others, would still be restricted.
Signature courtesy of Rivenor and Miraculous Recovery
EDH Altered Cards by Galspanic (Seriously, this guy's awesome.)
My Pauper Cube
Tapped-Out Simulator
My Trade Thread
-Decks-
Commander:
GWR Rith, the Awakener RWG
U Kami of the Crescent Moon U (Flagship Deck)
BW Teysa, Orzhov Scion WB
Under Construction:
UBR Crosis, the Purger RBU
Cube:
WUBRGX Pauper XGRBUW
1) Who maintains the values? How often will it be updated? The B&R list is hardly paid attention to, how much more when every card has to be evaluated.
2) It ignores certain card interactions. For example, let's take grindstone. How much would you value gridnstone? Seriously, the damn thing has no use competitively. How much should it be valued then? Likewise, painter's servant is garbage. A cute gimmick, butits fairly useless. A deck can have 40 painter's servants for all I care.
Combined together, now that's a problem.
Oath of druids is incredibly playable. Its an archetype on its own. But without orchard that deck just turns into mush against a creatureless deck. I'd go so far to say that without token generation, Oath is a barely playable card that would heavily rely on opponents playing aggro.
Now do you evaluate things like those?
3) Deck checking. Deck checking now becomes an incredibly tedious proposition. Not only do you have to check if the list is correct, you have to check if the values are correct. If this were an online proposition where the computer can do checks automatically. IRL? Good luck with that.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Bolding added for emphasis.
In tournament Magic, the banned and restricted list serves this purpose. I can see how a points system would be useful for something like Eternal Highlander, but in 4-of Magic it just seems like it would either be redundant or irrelevant; as somewhat mentioned upthread, a format where the best decks are essentially pauper with all the points allocation spent on insane cards just doesn't seem fun.
Is this Melbourne Highlander scene casual or tournament? There's a big difference between beer-and-pretzels EDH and "you win prize for each opponent you knock out" EDH, for example.
Level 1 Judge. I tweet. Member of clan <Limited>. The Dunning-Kruger effect.
i support iron man magic. whenever a card gosin the graveyward, tear it up. you can play with all the black lotuses you want, but it'll cost you!
No not at all. Just a different type of format that came to mind.
I think the 4 times a year like the DCI does would be fine. Sure you might have a period of time when something is printed that makes an old card nuts. But you could have your points updates a month after a new set is released to address anything like that.
I would think that the points would take into account a cards ability to interact with another card in degenerate ways. For example (regardless of actual points values and deck points caps) you would set up those cards so if you put 1 copy of each into the deck, you are basically at your limit for the whole deck.
Software would have to address this. There are ways to scan written material into text files, after that you would just load them into the software.
I like this idea. Leaving the deck points cap up to the players/TO's sounds interesting. But you might still have to set caps to make your points systems effective. so there might be a 10 point, 20 point, 50 point formats (or whatever values you come up with).
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
Do decks that stay way under the total get some kind of bonus? I assume this would be used for some type of league.
Signature courtesy of Rivenor and Miraculous Recovery
EDH Altered Cards by Galspanic (Seriously, this guy's awesome.)
My Pauper Cube
Tapped-Out Simulator
My Trade Thread
-Decks-
Commander:
GWR Rith, the Awakener RWG
U Kami of the Crescent Moon U (Flagship Deck)
BW Teysa, Orzhov Scion WB
Under Construction:
UBR Crosis, the Purger RBU
Cube:
WUBRGX Pauper XGRBUW
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=399504
Variant formats have to be boiled down to the simplest possible wording and ruling: No mythic rares, no spells that say "draw a card", no dual lands, etc. These rules allow for zero interpretation and don't require a person to see if they meet the rules.
I haven't looked into it that heavily but I believe there's monthly tournaments. Not sure how serious they are though. It's a 1 on 1 format as well I believe.
You are allowed 7 points and the list of stuff worth any points isn't too long I think but pretty good from what I'm told.
Here's someone's post about it from mid 2008, I can't find anything more recent atm but its probably out there if you look.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=2850380&postcount=5
EDIT: Here's the current points list with discussion about it.
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/metagames/viewtopic.php?t=16&mforum=metagames
I think that makes for a nice compromise between not making things to complicated and yet still having a format based on weighted cards.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
If there isn't a card number cap, then any card that costs 0 points could be a problem (Hehe, 60 Memnites.dec)