There was recently a thread discussing the Swans deck in the competitive forum of Type 2.
THIS THREAD IS NOT FOR DISCUSSION OF SWANS IN COMPETITIVE!!!
However, the idea was proposed that there be a "Decks to Watch" sub-forum for tier 1.5/tier 2 decks in the Type 2 forums. You know, the decks that fall between truly Competitive and Decks for Critique. Kind of a way to know what decks are proven to work, but aren't necessarily proven to be the best of the best and may still require a bit more work. Does anyone else think this is a good idea? Any ideas on how to make it work right? Please discuss. And I repeat, DO NOT DISCUSS THE SWANS DECK IN COMPETITIVE! We don't want this thread to get locked. -Jack
Having seen the controversy over 'Swans in Competitive', I would think that there is sufficient support for the idea. I think it would provide an excellent place to discuss hyped decks after a set's prerelease, before any true results are available. Furthermore, it allows people to report on decks that have been performing well at FNMs and other local tournaments, without needed to place them in Decks for Critique, because they don't want feedback on card choices, they want to inform people of its potential viability.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Lurking since Guildpact. Procrastinating for...
Current Decks
I voted no. I might have changed my vote, since now I remember the recent crackdown on the competitive forum, so even outdated/promising decks get the axe.
Because as of now, promising/teir 2 lists are comprised to the archives/decks for critique, neither of which seems very appropiate.
If the mods want to play upkeep for yet another sub forum (as in- making sure the threads keep busy, etc), then why not.
Hey kids! Don't like rules? Tired of having your lulz censored by terrible, terrible people called "moderators"? Big fan of metal? Check out Metaln☺☺☺☺! This is probably the worst possible forum to advertise it on!
Added bonus: we're holding a songwriting contest in march with a registry drive going on right now! Check it out, plus the opportunity to earn $50!
I always thought the stickied decks were the Tier 1 decks / decks to beat, and the other deck in Competetive Tier 2, like the Swan decks.
That is how the sub-forum is set up. However, a deck like Seismic Swans that has put up zero results since it has been legal are not technically competitive. Theoretically, sure, but theoretically powerful decks would fit very well into Decks to Watch. That's why the idea was proposed. -Jack
But I like the idea of a forum like that, if it stayed talkative.
No, I was just stating that I liked the idea and pointed to the equivalent on Phailmax: Pre-archetype threads. It's clunky and useless, and quickly gets lost in the pages. We can beat them, right?
Of course. This place is far better than 'max. I am totally for this subforum.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey kids! Don't like rules? Tired of having your lulz censored by terrible, terrible people called "moderators"? Big fan of metal? Check out Metaln☺☺☺☺! This is probably the worst possible forum to advertise it on!
Added bonus: we're holding a songwriting contest in march with a registry drive going on right now! Check it out, plus the opportunity to earn $50!
Sounds like a good idea. Random decks that people make up are for decks for critique. Decks that show tournament results go to type 2 competitive. But there are those decks like MBC and swans and who knows, maybe RDW soon, that will have little showing at tournaments, but are not simply random decks for critique. They are proven decks but have not yet had a good showing in the competitive market. Since non competitive decks should not be posted in competitive, and the "decks to watch" are too good to be swept away by the random decks posted in decks for critique, I think they should have thier own special place.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
INTO THE RAY OF THE SUN, MARCH OUR HERO, HUNTING THE DARKLORD, REBORN FROM THE BLOOD OF HIS GOD... HIS GOD... THE WARMASTER KRON.
RIDE FOR THE FALL OF HIS POWER FIGHTING THE STORM, THE ROAR OF THE THUNDER, ALLY OF THE SUN AND THE MOON... GREAT SWORDMASTER RULE!
I've been pushing for this idea basically since I got back on the job. After the Swans controversy (that keeps happening and happening and happening...) I think it's definitely being considered a lot more heavily now. I've read the entire thread thus far and please guys, keep posting ideas. I've been trying to come up with as much on my own as possible, but the more heads working on this idea the better, since it'll make a more solid/practical/useful plan, and therefore it'll become more likely to implement a system like this.
I've always thought that it should perhaps be divvyed up by turning "Competitive" into "Top Tier Archetypes" and then having "Other Archetypes"... What I had in mind would be to set up the forum like this:
Type II (Place to discuss general Type II topics, such as why card prices are what etc.)
- Subforum to Type II: Competitive (This would turn into literally a strategy forum... Almost like Decks for Critique in that posters could post a thread like "What should my sideboard against Faeries be?" as opposed to asking those questions in the Official thread.
-- Subforum to Competitive: Top Tier Archetypes (All the Top Tier Official Threads)
-- Subforum to Competitive: Other Archetypes (Popular decks that don't exactly have a place in todays metagame)
-- Subforum fo Competitive: Archives (What it is now
- Decks for Critique (Long rant incoming)
I'm looking at making this forum a little more strict in terms of quality... You can't just post a deck and say "Hey, tell me about it"... People will also be encouraged to post their COMPETITIVE decks when looking for an actual critique... The idea being that I want the official deck threads to discuss general card choices (such as Merfolk, Ponder vs. Ancestral Vision) as opposed to being a deck for critique thread essentially... The whole idea is to develop the deck, not just "optimize the bad ones to current spec"
Take what happened with Reveillark for instance. I remember a poster suggesting Gargadon at one point for the deck, and it got buried under a ton of other posts of deck critique and people just showcasing their decks. Imagine how a LOT of people would have done if they had caught onto the new tech a little sooner... It's not like it's really NEW... People just overlooked it, and obviously the really good players didn't. But that being said, we can ALL be that "really good player" if everyone puts their heads together.
That, and I'm also looking into getting more writers for Primers/Articles for Type II. We really don't have anything for people to read in regards to the new format. I'm trying to find the time (and a subject I want to cover) to do some writing work myself and get the ball rolling... But I think if we could get enough people interested to do some form of Type II Primer or just a general article each week in regards to something Type II, I think that would be fantastic as I honestly believe it is the most popular constructed format in the game.
So those are some of my ideas/views on how things should be done. As said, I don't expect everyone to agree with all of this, but I really do think it would largely improve the forum ASSUMING people would devote the energy to it (as having subforums in subforums in subforums is just plain irritating to be honest).
I'm looking at making this forum a little more strict in terms of quality... You can't just post a deck and say "Hey, tell me about it"... People will also be encouraged to post their COMPETITIVE decks when looking for an actual critique... The idea being that I want the official deck threads to discuss general card choices (such as Merfolk, Ponder vs. Ancestral Vision) as opposed to being a deck for critique thread essentially... The whole idea is to develop the deck, not just "optimize the bad ones to current spec"
Take what happened with Reveillark for instance. I remember a poster suggesting Gargadon at one point for the deck, and it got buried under a ton of other posts of deck critique and people just showcasing their decks. Imagine how a LOT of people would have done if they had caught onto the new tech a little sooner... It's not like it's really NEW... People just overlooked it, and obviously the really good players didn't. But that being said, we can ALL be that "really good player" if everyone puts their heads together.
That, and I'm also looking into getting more writers for Primers/Articles for Type II. We really don't have anything for people to read in regards to the new format. I'm trying to find the time (and a subject I want to cover) to do some writing work myself and get the ball rolling... But I think if we could get enough people interested to do some form of Type II Primer or just a general article each week in regards to something Type II, I think that would be fantastic as I honestly believe it is the most popular constructed format in the game.
So those are some of my ideas/views on how things should be done. As said, I don't expect everyone to agree with all of this, but I really do think it would largely improve the forum ASSUMING people would devote the energy to it (as having subforums in subforums in subforums is just plain irritating to be honest).
I think this is a fantatic idea. I remember during rav, there was a big thread on the :symb::symw: aggro archtype, and the regular posters became very possessive about it. I saw several times when someone wanted to discus their own version of the deck, and all they were greeted with was "WE already discussed this 12 pages back, WE decided it wasn't good."
So, yes, I believe that emphasizing Decks for critique use for this purpose would be great.
I also think your suggested layout would be perfect.
I'm wondering who exactly (and how) decides what goes into the "popular archetypes/decks to watch" section and on what basis.
For example, what would go there now? (Besides swans) MBC? White Martyr Control? Kithkin? Millfolk? Pyromancer/Dstorm? How do you decide what decks are "popular" enough when they aren't T8ing and are hardly represented in large tournaments? And what about decks that do hit a random top8 like Wizards?
There may be a good answer here, but you need to have one. Basically how do you distinguish nearly competitive or "decks to watch that might get good" in an impartial way, from people's random (and often untested) pet builds?
I would imagine a completly rogue deck, such as :symr::symu: fey (just picking something completly random), would be a deck for critique. It's pretty much unheard of, but and it probably needs help.
But if a deck is a recognized archtype, even if it isn't top8ing random tournies, it should be in established archtypes.
Type II (Place to discuss general Type II topics, such as why card prices are what etc.)
- Sub forum to Type II: Competitive (This would turn into literally a strategy forum... Almost like Decks for Critique in that posters could post a thread like "What should my sideboard against Faeries be?" as opposed to asking those questions in the Official thread.
-- Sub forum to Competitive: Top Tier Archetypes (All the Top Tier Official Threads)
-- Sub forum to Competitive: Other Archetypes (Popular decks that don't exactly have a place in todays metagame)
-- Sub forum to Competitive: Archives (What it is now
Best bet is this
Competitive forum:*Notices, Tournament Announcements, and links to the sub forums*
----The Proven and Absolute: The Decks that Top 8 on a consistent Basis
----The Up and comings: The decks that are started to move up and have the best bet of knocking off the Provens and absolute.
----New Born's and growing: Brand spanking new ideas:)
----Yee Ole Archives: Duh name:-p
The only Flaw is that no matter WHAT you do the lowest tier section will never get enough traffic to get them off the ground unless someone else takes it to a top event. Basicly People want others to do there own work...
Type II (Place to discuss general Type II topics, such as why card prices are what etc.)
- Subforum to Type II: Competitive (This would turn into literally a strategy forum... Almost like Decks for Critique in that posters could post a thread like "What should my sideboard against Faeries be?" as opposed to asking those questions in the Official thread.
-- Subforum to Competitive: Top Tier Archetypes (All the Top Tier Official Threads)
-- Subforum to Competitive: Other Archetypes (Popular decks that don't exactly have a place in todays metagame)
-- Subforum fo Competitive: Archives (What it is now
- Decks for Critique (Long rant incoming)
I'm looking at making this forum a little more strict in terms of quality... You can't just post a deck and say "Hey, tell me about it"... People will also be encouraged to post their COMPETITIVE decks when looking for an actual critique... The idea being that I want the official deck threads to discuss general card choices (such as Merfolk, Ponder vs. Ancestral Vision) as opposed to being a deck for critique thread essentially... The whole idea is to develop the deck, not just "optimize the bad ones to current spec"
Take what happened with Reveillark for instance. I remember a poster suggesting Gargadon at one point for the deck, and it got buried under a ton of other posts of deck critique and people just showcasing their decks. Imagine how a LOT of people would have done if they had caught onto the new tech a little sooner... It's not like it's really NEW... People just overlooked it, and obviously the really good players didn't. But that being said, we can ALL be that "really good player" if everyone puts their heads together.
So those are some of my ideas/views on how things should be done. As said, I don't expect everyone to agree with all of this, but I really do think it would largely improve the forum ASSUMING people would devote the energy to it (as having subforums in subforums in subforums is just plain irritating to be honest).
The wisdom of Crowds, you know.
Anyways. Yes. This would be great/fine/etc. A place to put archetypes that aren't exactly competitive and not have them subjected to most of the general ... randomness[? I think I mean 'stupidity'. Not sure. Like 'Your deck is close to Reveillark, why don't you just run that?' + etc] of the DFC would be great.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
my mouth is full of winsome lies -
and eyes are full of death besides
but luckily the soul is wise -
it sees beyond my blindness and
forced failure makes a better guise,
so as i come again alive,
it feels like life's a decent plan
I'm wondering who exactly (and how) decides what goes into the "popular archetypes/decks to watch" section and on what basis.
For example, what would go there now? (Besides swans) MBC? White Martyr Control? Kithkin? Millfolk? Pyromancer/Dstorm? How do you decide what decks are "popular" enough when they aren't T8ing and are hardly represented in large tournaments? And what about decks that do hit a random top8 like Wizards?
There may be a good answer here, but you need to have one. Basically how do you distinguish nearly competitive or "decks to watch that might get good" in an impartial way, from people's random (and often untested) pet builds?
I think it needs a general consensus. Deck like UW control, warrior aggro, Rouges, Blink 187 etc should go in here
THIS THREAD IS NOT FOR DISCUSSION OF SWANS IN COMPETITIVE!!!
However, the idea was proposed that there be a "Decks to Watch" sub-forum for tier 1.5/tier 2 decks in the Type 2 forums. You know, the decks that fall between truly Competitive and Decks for Critique. Kind of a way to know what decks are proven to work, but aren't necessarily proven to be the best of the best and may still require a bit more work. Does anyone else think this is a good idea? Any ideas on how to make it work right? Please discuss. And I repeat, DO NOT DISCUSS THE SWANS DECK IN COMPETITIVE! We don't want this thread to get locked. -Jack
Want a cool banner like mine?
Go to Heroes of the Plane Studios!
Vizzerdrix Count = 183, 3 in Italian, 2 Foil
Current Decks
WKithkin-Block
GEpic Druids-Casual
Cheap T2 Staples
My only concern is that it would fragment the type two forums.
Overall though, I like it.
Because as of now, promising/teir 2 lists are comprised to the archives/decks for critique, neither of which seems very appropiate.
If the mods want to play upkeep for yet another sub forum (as in- making sure the threads keep busy, etc), then why not.
Art Page
Alters for sale
Added bonus: we're holding a songwriting contest in march with a registry drive going on right now! Check it out, plus the opportunity to earn $50!
I don't really see the point you're making.
But I like the idea of a forum like that, if it stayed talkative.
Want a cool banner like mine?
Go to Heroes of the Plane Studios!
Vizzerdrix Count = 183, 3 in Italian, 2 Foil
No, I was just stating that I liked the idea and pointed to the equivalent on Phailmax: Pre-archetype threads. It's clunky and useless, and quickly gets lost in the pages. We can beat them, right?
Of course. This place is far better than 'max. I am totally for this subforum.
Added bonus: we're holding a songwriting contest in march with a registry drive going on right now! Check it out, plus the opportunity to earn $50!
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
That's basically the "Decks for Critique" forum.
RIDE FOR THE FALL OF HIS POWER FIGHTING THE STORM, THE ROAR OF THE THUNDER, ALLY OF THE SUN AND THE MOON... GREAT SWORDMASTER RULE!
Posting in DFC doesn't really give good enough critique, and definitely does not give very good discussion on a deck.
Mods?
I've always thought that it should perhaps be divvyed up by turning "Competitive" into "Top Tier Archetypes" and then having "Other Archetypes"... What I had in mind would be to set up the forum like this:
Type II (Place to discuss general Type II topics, such as why card prices are what etc.)
- Subforum to Type II: Competitive (This would turn into literally a strategy forum... Almost like Decks for Critique in that posters could post a thread like "What should my sideboard against Faeries be?" as opposed to asking those questions in the Official thread.
-- Subforum to Competitive: Top Tier Archetypes (All the Top Tier Official Threads)
-- Subforum to Competitive: Other Archetypes (Popular decks that don't exactly have a place in todays metagame)
-- Subforum fo Competitive: Archives (What it is now
- Decks for Critique (Long rant incoming)
I'm looking at making this forum a little more strict in terms of quality... You can't just post a deck and say "Hey, tell me about it"... People will also be encouraged to post their COMPETITIVE decks when looking for an actual critique... The idea being that I want the official deck threads to discuss general card choices (such as Merfolk, Ponder vs. Ancestral Vision) as opposed to being a deck for critique thread essentially... The whole idea is to develop the deck, not just "optimize the bad ones to current spec"
Take what happened with Reveillark for instance. I remember a poster suggesting Gargadon at one point for the deck, and it got buried under a ton of other posts of deck critique and people just showcasing their decks. Imagine how a LOT of people would have done if they had caught onto the new tech a little sooner... It's not like it's really NEW... People just overlooked it, and obviously the really good players didn't. But that being said, we can ALL be that "really good player" if everyone puts their heads together.
That, and I'm also looking into getting more writers for Primers/Articles for Type II. We really don't have anything for people to read in regards to the new format. I'm trying to find the time (and a subject I want to cover) to do some writing work myself and get the ball rolling... But I think if we could get enough people interested to do some form of Type II Primer or just a general article each week in regards to something Type II, I think that would be fantastic as I honestly believe it is the most popular constructed format in the game.
So those are some of my ideas/views on how things should be done. As said, I don't expect everyone to agree with all of this, but I really do think it would largely improve the forum ASSUMING people would devote the energy to it (as having subforums in subforums in subforums is just plain irritating to be honest).
I think this is a fantatic idea. I remember during rav, there was a big thread on the :symb::symw: aggro archtype, and the regular posters became very possessive about it. I saw several times when someone wanted to discus their own version of the deck, and all they were greeted with was "WE already discussed this 12 pages back, WE decided it wasn't good."
So, yes, I believe that emphasizing Decks for critique use for this purpose would be great.
I also think your suggested layout would be perfect.
For example, what would go there now? (Besides swans) MBC? White Martyr Control? Kithkin? Millfolk? Pyromancer/Dstorm? How do you decide what decks are "popular" enough when they aren't T8ing and are hardly represented in large tournaments? And what about decks that do hit a random top8 like Wizards?
There may be a good answer here, but you need to have one. Basically how do you distinguish nearly competitive or "decks to watch that might get good" in an impartial way, from people's random (and often untested) pet builds?
But if a deck is a recognized archtype, even if it isn't top8ing random tournies, it should be in established archtypes.
Best bet is this
Competitive forum:*Notices, Tournament Announcements, and links to the sub forums*
----The Proven and Absolute: The Decks that Top 8 on a consistent Basis
----The Up and comings: The decks that are started to move up and have the best bet of knocking off the Provens and absolute.
----New Born's and growing: Brand spanking new ideas:)
----Yee Ole Archives: Duh name:-p
The only Flaw is that no matter WHAT you do the lowest tier section will never get enough traffic to get them off the ground unless someone else takes it to a top event. Basicly People want others to do there own work...
Good Luck.
Edit: Archive inserted.
The wisdom of Crowds, you know.
Anyways. Yes. This would be great/fine/etc. A place to put archetypes that aren't exactly competitive and not have them subjected to most of the general ... randomness[? I think I mean 'stupidity'. Not sure. Like 'Your deck is close to Reveillark, why don't you just run that?' + etc] of the DFC would be great.
and eyes are full of death besides
but luckily the soul is wise -
it sees beyond my blindness and
forced failure makes a better guise,
so as i come again alive,
it feels like life's a decent plan
I think it needs a general consensus. Deck like UW control, warrior aggro, Rouges, Blink 187 etc should go in here
Great, let's all vote on it!
techoverrated.