Since we're having this great discussion can I take this opportunity to say the one thing I don't like about xcb is that I always want to have more discussion of the format as I'm prepping for it, but obviously that doesn't make sense if we're all trying to compete. This discussion after the fact is almost as good and I hope we can have more like it.
Something I've considered before, but wasn't sure how to implement, is some sort of team format. I agree with your general point, and discussion among teammates could lead to pre-submittal discussion.
I welcome suggestions for how a team format could be run.
My only thought on a team format is that I worry that there aren't enough of us to do it well. Seems like we get 10 or fewer players a week and with teams of two that bring things down to very few submissions.
It did bring to mind a 'team' format - Have you done a round of XCB2HGLR - players submit two decks of two cards each. Games are played using the 2 headed giant rules. Land rule.
vs. 01 Anachronity: Counter 1 Ascendant and Bargain. T2 Marit Lage FTW. 6-0
vs. 02 CalvinSchwa: Turn 2 Marit Lage beats Iona. 6-0
vs. 03 Magus of the Aesthetic: Counter Rude Awakening, win easily? 6-0
vs. 04 ManyCookies: Draw noted, legit, 2-2.
vs. 05 MyNameIsFourteen: Threat of Disallow slows the cats. Turn 2 Marit Lage. 6-0
vs. 06 Superbajt: EOT Stage can only be Disallowed once, not stopped. 6-0
vs. 07 Personman: Sigarda and Voidstone don't stop MARIT LAGE! 6-0
I have to be honest, I didn't put a lot of work into this. Two counters and Marit Lage just seemed... obviously good, I guess? Depths/Stage just wins fast.
Maybe we should switch with team PHM to another topic?
When considering this, I also thought about 2HG. While interesting, in reality it could be done with just one player simulating both as another format for game. Maybe in the future?
You don't need to decrease number of submissions if you play teams. They could be like PT teams, collection of player plyatesting together, each having their own results. To ensure not decreasing number of submissions, we could even forbid teammates to submit identical decks. We could introduce seasons and scoring (for example like in F1 GP) to compare teams.
One problem I see is this could distort the scores between people in and out of teams. The problem is the score between teammates. Normally, making a deck that 6-0s one match and 0-6es an other is superior to drawing all matches. However, some team could build decks A and B, where B is deliberately beaten by A and draws as many other matches as possible to decrease number of points for other decks, while A is built to score points. It's possible to make it by accident, and how would some player feel if a deck would have better score than his deck just because it won with their owner's teammate?
You could introduce mechanisms to make it better for players outside (Teammates don't play each other; Each player outside of team gets some bonus points) but it could easily be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, if it was too much bonus. An idea: the match with a teammate is always scores 3 points.
I haven't been around for a 2HG round if it's been done, sounds fun! (And @Superbajt, the 2HG suggestion was for a normal single-player format, not a team format).
As for actual teams, could be interesting... I think it might need to be an external thing though? Like maybe some months of the now-established Limited PHM game could be Team Sealed, with teams of 3 say, and you have to submit decks from one sealed pool that don't overlap, and which are only scored against decks from other teams.
It would need to be longer than a week, I think - people take time to do stuff online.
Suggestions for it:
1) Own thread, definitely a good idea
2) Teams score the *average* of the two submissions (which must still have a 0 card overlap)
3 (kinda unrelated)) Crazy format - 2HG Pair Up! ; players are sorted (into some kind of order) and paired up with the previous and next decks in two different grids as one of the heads of a Giant. You get the total score of the two teams you were on.
So you don't know what half your deck is going to be, essentially.
While I'm thniking of wierd formats, another couple that were inspired by the un subgame cards:
The Countdown is At One - plyaers start with 1 life. (someone else may have suggested this already)
We Have To Go Deeper: Players submit 3 cards in order. At the start of the game, players play a magic subgame starting at 10 life, using only their first two cards. All players who do not win the subgame loose 10 life in the main game. At the start of the subgame, players play a magic sub-subgame starting at 5 life, using only their first card. All players who do not win the sub-subgame lose 5 life in the subgame. All these games are played with the Land Rule. (This may actually be a terrible format but I like the idea of battling with one card, letting that battle have a consequence for a battle where you add one more card, and so on. Maybe the idea could be tweaked to make the consequence more interesting)
1) Anachronity - 6 - Progenitus races the Ascendants.
2) CalvinSchwa - 3 - On the play Progenitus comes down before Iona and wins the race. On the draw Iona naming green shuts off my entire hand.
3) Three is for me.
4) ManyCookies - 0 - Instant speed Voidstone Gargoyle naming Rude Awakening shuts off my entire hand.
5) MyNameIsFourteen - 0 - Render Silent shuts off my entire hand.
6) Superbajt - 0 - Disallow shuts off my entire hand. (Council's Judgement only shuts off Progenitus.)
7) Personman - 0 - Instant speed Voidstone Gargoyle naming Rude Awakening shuts off my entire hand.
8) WhammeWhamme - 0 - Disallow shuts off my entire hand.
I also like the discussion happening (even though I'm pretty late) so here are the other decks I tried out. Four Lotus Vales Verdant Touch was my first hand but that loses to even more submitted hands than the deck I landed on. I saw Mycosynth Lattice / Titania's Song on the Important Cards list but I couldn't cast both turn 1 and leaving half your combo on the board seemed like a losing plan.
So, uh, somehow I was still in the weaker-than-usual "gimmick round" mindset when I made that hand, and it didn't register that, y'know, it's a full 5ch non-land-rule round in addition to the special rule.
I'm pretty sure I have a perfect score here. Just, the opposite sort of perfect than you're supposed to get...
It did bring to mind a 'team' format - Have you done a round of XCB2HGLR - players submit two decks of two cards each. Games are played using the 2 headed giant rules. Land rule.
We have! Hands are posted here. The additional twist at the time was that the middle card of three submitted appeared in both hands.
While I'm thniking of wierd formats, another couple that were inspired by the un subgame cards:
The Countdown is At One - plyaers start with 1 life. (someone else may have suggested this already)
We Have To Go Deeper: Players submit 3 cards in order. At the start of the game, players play a magic subgame starting at 10 life, using only their first two cards. All players who do not win the subgame loose 10 life in the main game. At the start of the subgame, players play a magic sub-subgame starting at 5 life, using only their first card. All players who do not win the sub-subgame lose 5 life in the subgame. All these games are played with the Land Rule. (This may actually be a terrible format but I like the idea of battling with one card, letting that battle have a consequence for a battle where you add one more card, and so on. Maybe the idea could be tweaked to make the consequence more interesting)
Those formats are definitely un-inspired (no dig - I'm just a punster at heart and I'm not above taking the low-hanging fruit). I've added them to my list of format ideas that I draw from.
By the way, I'm not sure I've mentioned it before, but even if I don't comment on each format suggestion, I do keep track of them and a lot of the recent formats have been inspired by or were verbatim ideas that someone posted in these threads.
One more, inspired by two things - the section of the rules that says there may be bonus points awarded for deck construction things and a round we played many years ago where the first letters of the cards of your deck had to spell out LOVE.
Scrabbleverse: 3 cards, land rule. The first letters of the English names of the cards in your deck must spell out a legal Scrabble word. In each match, regardless of the outcome, the player who's word has a higher scrabble score value gets a bonus N match points. (N should probably be 1 or 2, but I leave that to the moderator)
One more, inspired by two things - the section of the rules that says there may be bonus points awarded for deck construction things and a round we played many years ago where the first letters of the cards of your deck had to spell out LOVE.
Scrabbleverse: 3 cards, land rule. The first letters of the English names of the cards in your deck must spell out a legal Scrabble word. In each match, regardless of the outcome, the player who's word has a higher scrabble score value gets a bonus N match points. (N should probably be 1 or 2, but I leave that to the moderator)
Noted, thanks!
Those rules are surprisingly not that different from the round of the same name played many years ago: hands, rules.
Thanks to the team for diligently posting and updating results.
By the time I was ready to put together the grid, there was only a single outstanding match and not a single disagreement regarding score. I didn't even have to search through posts to find updates because people updated their lines when disputes were resolved.
Just wanted to say I really appreciate this effort and it makes things come together a lot more smoothly at the end.
Thanks!
I second 'Scrabbleverse' or something similar; that sounds pretty fun.
Although if we do that, we'll also probably want to specify which dictionary we're using. I think there's like an official Scrabble dictionary out there?
I second 'Scrabbleverse' or something similar; that sounds pretty fun.
Although if we do that, we'll also probably want to specify which dictionary we're using. I think there's like an official Scrabble dictionary out there?
I welcome suggestions for how a team format could be run.
BWTeysa, Orzhov Scion
GWRhys the Redeemed
GUKruphix, God of Horizons
GRXenagos, God of Revels
GThrun, the Last Troll
GStompy
It did bring to mind a 'team' format - Have you done a round of XCB2HGLR - players submit two decks of two cards each. Games are played using the 2 headed giant rules. Land rule.
vs. 02 CalvinSchwa: Turn 2 Marit Lage beats Iona. 6-0
vs. 03 Magus of the Aesthetic: Counter Rude Awakening, win easily? 6-0
vs. 04 ManyCookies: Draw noted, legit, 2-2.
vs. 05 MyNameIsFourteen: Threat of Disallow slows the cats. Turn 2 Marit Lage. 6-0
vs. 06 Superbajt: EOT Stage can only be Disallowed once, not stopped. 6-0
vs. 07 Personman: Sigarda and Voidstone don't stop MARIT LAGE! 6-0
I have to be honest, I didn't put a lot of work into this. Two counters and Marit Lage just seemed... obviously good, I guess? Depths/Stage just wins fast.
When considering this, I also thought about 2HG. While interesting, in reality it could be done with just one player simulating both as another format for game. Maybe in the future?
You don't need to decrease number of submissions if you play teams. They could be like PT teams, collection of player plyatesting together, each having their own results. To ensure not decreasing number of submissions, we could even forbid teammates to submit identical decks. We could introduce seasons and scoring (for example like in F1 GP) to compare teams.
One problem I see is this could distort the scores between people in and out of teams. The problem is the score between teammates. Normally, making a deck that 6-0s one match and 0-6es an other is superior to drawing all matches. However, some team could build decks A and B, where B is deliberately beaten by A and draws as many other matches as possible to decrease number of points for other decks, while A is built to score points. It's possible to make it by accident, and how would some player feel if a deck would have better score than his deck just because it won with their owner's teammate?
You could introduce mechanisms to make it better for players outside (Teammates don't play each other; Each player outside of team gets some bonus points) but it could easily be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, if it was too much bonus. An idea: the match with a teammate is always scores 3 points.
As for actual teams, could be interesting... I think it might need to be an external thing though? Like maybe some months of the now-established Limited PHM game could be Team Sealed, with teams of 3 say, and you have to submit decks from one sealed pool that don't overlap, and which are only scored against decks from other teams.
It would need to be longer than a week, I think - people take time to do stuff online.
Suggestions for it:
1) Own thread, definitely a good idea
2) Teams score the *average* of the two submissions (which must still have a 0 card overlap)
3 (kinda unrelated)) Crazy format - 2HG Pair Up! ; players are sorted (into some kind of order) and paired up with the previous and next decks in two different grids as one of the heads of a Giant. You get the total score of the two teams you were on.
So you don't know what half your deck is going to be, essentially.
The Countdown is At One - plyaers start with 1 life. (someone else may have suggested this already)
We Have To Go Deeper: Players submit 3 cards in order. At the start of the game, players play a magic subgame starting at 10 life, using only their first two cards. All players who do not win the subgame loose 10 life in the main game. At the start of the subgame, players play a magic sub-subgame starting at 5 life, using only their first card. All players who do not win the sub-subgame lose 5 life in the subgame. All these games are played with the Land Rule. (This may actually be a terrible format but I like the idea of battling with one card, letting that battle have a consequence for a battle where you add one more card, and so on. Maybe the idea could be tweaked to make the consequence more interesting)
1) Anachronity - 6 - Progenitus races the Ascendants.
2) CalvinSchwa - 3 - On the play Progenitus comes down before Iona and wins the race. On the draw Iona naming green shuts off my entire hand.
3) Three is for me.
4) ManyCookies - 0 - Instant speed Voidstone Gargoyle naming Rude Awakening shuts off my entire hand.
5) MyNameIsFourteen - 0 - Render Silent shuts off my entire hand.
6) Superbajt - 0 - Disallow shuts off my entire hand. (Council's Judgement only shuts off Progenitus.)
7) Personman - 0 - Instant speed Voidstone Gargoyle naming Rude Awakening shuts off my entire hand.
8) WhammeWhamme - 0 - Disallow shuts off my entire hand.
I also like the discussion happening (even though I'm pretty late) so here are the other decks I tried out. Four Lotus Vales Verdant Touch was my first hand but that loses to even more submitted hands than the deck I landed on. I saw Mycosynth Lattice / Titania's Song on the Important Cards list but I couldn't cast both turn 1 and leaving half your combo on the board seemed like a losing plan.
I'm pretty sure I have a perfect score here. Just, the opposite sort of perfect than you're supposed to get...
- Rabid Wombat
By the way, I'm not sure I've mentioned it before, but even if I don't comment on each format suggestion, I do keep track of them and a lot of the recent formats have been inspired by or were verbatim ideas that someone posted in these threads.
Follow me to be notified when weekly Perfect Hand Magic results are posted
Scrabbleverse: 3 cards, land rule. The first letters of the English names of the cards in your deck must spell out a legal Scrabble word. In each match, regardless of the outcome, the player who's word has a higher scrabble score value gets a bonus N match points. (N should probably be 1 or 2, but I leave that to the moderator)
Those rules are surprisingly not that different from the round of the same name played many years ago: hands, rules.
Follow me to be notified when weekly Perfect Hand Magic results are posted
By the time I was ready to put together the grid, there was only a single outstanding match and not a single disagreement regarding score. I didn't even have to search through posts to find updates because people updated their lines when disputes were resolved.
Just wanted to say I really appreciate this effort and it makes things come together a lot more smoothly at the end.
Thanks!
Follow me to be notified when weekly Perfect Hand Magic results are posted
Although if we do that, we'll also probably want to specify which dictionary we're using. I think there's like an official Scrabble dictionary out there?
- Rabid Wombat
https://scrabble.hasbro.com/en-us/tools
I'm excited to build a Jund 'zoo' deck (12 pts)
... but I keep finding something else instead.
- Rabid Wombat