Alternate 5CB plays out exactly like Vintage 5CB, except for one key difference: The ban list. in Vintage 5CB, the most influential mana producing cards has always been Black Lotus and Mishra's Workshop. There have been times where people in the Vintage 5CB threads have suggested banning Black Lotus. Now here is your chance!
RULES
0. Overview
Five Card Blind (5CB) is a weekly Magic tournament, run entirely within this forum. To compete, players submit five-card decks which are played against each other. Scoring assumes optimal play, without randomness or concealed information.
1. Game Rules
1.1. Except for the changes described in these rules, games follow the rules of Magic.
1.2. Players' decks contain exactly five cards, which begin the game in hand. Players do not mulligan or sideboard.
1.3. Players' libraries begin the game empty. A player does not lose the game as a result of being unable to draw a card.
1.4. A random effect produces the result that least benefits the owner of the source of the effect.
1.5. Each player plays two games (one match) against each other player.
1.5a. Each player is the starting player once per match.
1.5b. If no player can win, the game is a draw.
1.5c. Games are played with perfect information.
1.5d. Games are played optimally; players attempt to win, draw, or extend the game – in that order.
2. Tournament Rules
2.1. Players submit their decks to the 5CB moderator.
2.1a. A player may submit multiple decks, but only the most recent deck is counted.
2.1b. An illegal deck is not counted. The removal of an illegal deck does not affect deck distribution (see Rule 2.4).
2.1c. The moderator determines the result of each match. Players may challenge results, but not after the results of the first round belonging to a new month have been posted (see Rule 2.5a).
2.1d. A player may name his or her deck. If a player does not, the moderator may name it.
2.2. Decks are subject to some restrictions.
2.2a. A player may not submit a deck that can – against any deck – win the game or force more than one card in an opponent's hand to change zones before an opponent's second turn.
2.2b. A player may not submit a deck that can't win both games of a match against at least one deck satisfying 2.2a and 2.2c.
2.2c. A deck may include any number of any card legal in Vintage (Type 1), with the exception of banned cards.
2.2d. A deck may include any number of any card that will become legal in Vintage upon release of a set that has been revealed fully and officially since the start of the round.
2.3. Points determine tournament standings.
2.3a. Players are ranked – first to last – in order of decreasing number of points.
2.3b. For each match, a player earns 3 points per game win and 1 point per drawn game. However, a player earns only 2 points for a split match (one win, one loss).
2.3c. A table of match results is posted each round. Its rows represent players and its columns represent opponents. Match results reflect the combined result of both games played in a match; 3 is a game win, 1 a drawn game, and 0 a game loss. 2 may be used instead of 3 to denote a split match. A player's points are listed at the end of his or her row.
2.4. In rounds of twenty or more players, players are divided randomly into equally-sized heats of n players, where n is the number of players divided by ten (rounded down).
For example, twenty-five players are divided into heats of twelve and thirteen.
2.4a. Except in the finals, a player only plays against players in his heat.
2.4b. The top four players of each heat advance to the finals, where they play again (with the same decks).
2.4c. Tiebreakers for advancement to the finals are as follows: number of matches in which a player wins both games, number of game wins, points scored against higher-scoring decks. If a tie is unresolved, the tied decks advance.
2.5. The player with the most POTM points over the course of a month is the Player of the Month.
2.5a. A month includes all rounds for which decks are due during that month.
2.5b. Each round, each player receives POTM points equal to their average match result for that round, rounded down to 1 decimal place. For example, a player scoring 6-6-6-6-X-0-0-0 in a round with 8 decks receives 3.4 points (24/7).
CHANGES VERSION 0.2 (09/12/11)
RULES CHANGE
2.2a. A player may not submit a deck that can – against any deck – win the game or force any number of cards in an opponent's hand to change zones before an opponent's second turn.
I need your help in figuring out what other cards should be put on the ban list. Should I copy/paste the other cards listed in Vintage 5CB's ban list? Will this feel any different than playing Vintage 5CB? Discuss!
Commandeer and Shelldock Isle decks rarely do well from what I've seen. They're simply a valid strategy. Painter's Servant has been run only once in months (by me) to little success. My suggestions for bans to make this feel different (in addition to what you have):
The five Moxen- They aren't legal in Legacy for a reason. These are staples for speed. Vampire Hexmage- Hexdepths Meddling Mage- Skips the discard rule Thoughtseize- There are other discard spells, but only one hits everything for 1 mana. Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre- Almost every large mana deck's kill condition because it's nearly unstoppable and shuffles right back. Chancellor of the Annex- Every type of deck is better with this card, and can be used with Shining Shoal or Foil to break card advantage. Karakas- Singularity is the less stupid and every version of this card. Anurid Scavenger- Fast recursion on an efficient threat with protection. What. City of Traitors- Keeping another tab on the fast mana. Ancient Tomb at least hurts you.
Without heavy bans and/or stricter rules, this is simply "the Vintage thread with no Black Lotus."
Legacy appears in the title by name only. I don't seek to fully emulate the Legacy Magic format. Also, when suggesting bans, posting specific deck examples also helps. Thanks.
I do want to make an all encompassing rule (or ban) that deals with selective discard. Which route should be taken?
Choice A - Ban certain cheap discard spells. Choice B - Make all discard illegal before an opponent's second turn. Choice C - Limit what selective discard can do. (i.e. Opponent chooses which nonland, noncreature card when targeted by Duress)
Another thing of note is the artifact mana source / land mana source dynamic. Foil, Commandeer, and Chancellor of the Annex can punish those that rely on an artifact only mana source approach. There are also land destruction cards. Having a deck that can deal with both artifact mana sources and land mana sources can be troublesome.
You could make discard illegal before an opponent's first turn. Thus you could play Distress, but not Duress.
While Foil and Commandeer punish artifact mana, decks with both artifact and nonartifact mana are even more resilient to Annex (they just miss a turn).
In regards to naming decks, each of these abuses one or more of the named cards...
In regards to City of Traitors, It gives you 2 mana with a drawback that's almost negligible in 5CB, especially alongside Mana Crypt and the Moxen. Any other 2 mana source has a drawback that matters.
Just for clarity, a link to the original 5CB rules would be useful, as well as a list of any additional banned cards (ex, is necropotence banned like in Legacy constructed?).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Some facts of magic:
-Terror is an emotion which, when experienced, results in death.
-The pox was a disease notorious for having killed one-third, rounded up, of Europe’s population. Smallpox, on the other hand, killed only a single person.
-A person riding a horse cannot be stopped by foot soldiers, large animals, walls, archers, or even catapults.
Changed the name to Alternate 5CB to prevent confusion. I'm holding off on commenting until some more discussion takes place, then I'll put my opinion in. Thanks for the feedback!
This is a fairly different approach, but something that would get *me* interested in participating, and that might solve the problem you're trying to solve without having to guess ahead of time what the perfect ban list is:
Start with a Ban List of just Black Lotus.
Each round, ban 1 card from the winning deck.
How to choose the 1 is fairly unimportant; you could either go with moderator discretion and a policy of trying to hit the 'most important' card when possible, or you could have players mark which card in their deck should be banned if they win, or whatever.
This way you get an ever-changing format in which the cards that are *actually* the best naturally end up banned.
EDIT: I just read the other 5CB thread and saw Catmurderer make basically exactly this suggestion. The evolving ban list is original to neither of us of course, but the idea of banning exactly 1 card out of a 5CB deck each week seems to be a new one that we both thought of recently. High five, Catmurderer!
In regards to evolving bans, I'm all for it. The one thing I would say is either use no ban list at all or the current 5CB ban list plus Channel and Black Lotus. In my opinion, the way to best choose the bans would be the card (other than a basic land) that shows up in the most decks. That way someone winning off a good meta call wouldn't ban a card that shouldn't be banned. It would also mean the format stays fresh: if everyone's doing the same thing, it goes away, and people have to find something new.
This is a fairly different approach, but something that would get *me* interested in participating, and that might solve the problem you're trying to solve without having to guess ahead of time what the perfect ban list is:
Start with a Ban List of just Black Lotus.
Each round, ban 1 card from the winning deck.
How to choose the 1 is fairly unimportant; you could either go with moderator discretion and a policy of trying to hit the 'most important' card when possible, or you could have players mark which card in their deck should be banned if they win, or whatever.
This way you get an ever-changing format in which the cards that are *actually* the best naturally end up banned.
EDIT: I just read the other 5CB thread and saw Catmurderer make basically exactly this suggestion. The evolving ban list is original to neither of us of course, but the idea of banning exactly 1 card out of a 5CB deck each week seems to be a new one that we both thought of recently. High five, Catmurderer!
lol, high five.
This is exactly what I would have suggested.
Unbanning everything can be interesting because of how dramatically the meta can change from week to week.
Land destruction can become incredibly powerful one week, then hand discard becomes a pain... etc.
I've seen this work very well.
(One note, compared to other games Ive played this forum loves Black Lotus. It is a great enabler, but it also adds a certain power level to the decks which I think has been explored thoroughly. Maximizing your deck so that you end up with the best possible lands and threats is a interesting dynamic which I have not seen in the recent games.)
----
In regards to what to ban, it can either go two ways. Ban the enabler or ban the threats. A good moderator can make the call.
Example:
1. Black Lotus/Channel/Ulamog/Lich's Mirror/Chancellor of the Annex
What to ban?
Here I would say Black Lotus because it provides the explosiveness for the deck.
2. Hickory Woodlot/Channel/Ulamog/Lich's Mirror/Chancellor of the Annex
Here I would ban Channel.
3. Shelldock Isle/LED/Ulamog/Force of Will/Misdirection
A deck like this would really be up to the moderator. If the results hinged on Forcing all of the opponents' spells then I would ban that. If the LED/Shelldock combo was unstoppable, I would ban LED (Because it is what combos so well with Shelldock).
FWIW, I like Heart of Draco's suggestion too. On the one hand, there's something nice about the 'prize' of getting to say "I broke [card x] and now it's banned", but banning very popular cards is perhaps a better way to keep things fresh.
One issue that I can see with it is that maybe there's some card (thoughtseize comes to mind) that a lot of different decks want to play, but it isn't the defining card of any of them. Some broken Meddling Mage deck wins the round, but Thoughtseize gets banned and then MM is still around next week.
I'm not sure which way to go (or if Draco9 is even interested in an evolving ban list : )
I'm not sure if I agree with leaving the bans entirely up to the moderator. The purpose of the moderator, to me at least, is having a common point of contact for submitting decks. The card blind community as a whole determines the state of the game. The community collectively has more insight on the relative health of the metagame and what problem cards arise.
Banning one card from the winning deck each week, there is an unintended consequence to that. There's no incentive to come up with a deck designed to beat last week's winning deck if the winning deck is no longer valid. If the winning deck becomes the same a few weeks in a row, then I can see banning some cards from it.
I do agree that having an updated ban list would vitalize the metagame for the long term. I think a compromise can be made. How about creating a set schedule?
Month 1 Week 1: Normal Week Week 2: Normal Week Week 3: Normal Week Week 4: Special Week
Month 2 Week 1: Normal Week (Month 1's changes go into effect.) Week 2: Normal Week Week 3: Normal Week Week 4: Special Week
While Special Week is running, compile statistical data about the frequency of cards used, and what cards are used in the winning decks. Gather feedback on what players find as overpowered or "not fun", then put up a poll during Week 4 to determine what should get banned for next month, what should get unbanned, suggestions for special formats, etc.
Player of the Month goes largely uninterrupted, because it rewards people who figured out the metagame with the ban list in the given month. Having the bans placed on a monthly schedule also prevents the ban list from piling up too high. An average of 12 bans a year is small compared to an average of 52 bans a year.
---
Edit: Expanded the ban list, made a stricter rule on discard in an attempt to encourage slower decks.
Alternate 5CB plays out exactly like Vintage 5CB, except for one key difference: The ban list. in Vintage 5CB, the most influential mana producing cards has always been Black Lotus and Mishra's Workshop. There have been times where people in the Vintage 5CB threads have suggested banning Black Lotus. Now here is your chance!
RULES
0. Overview
Five Card Blind (5CB) is a weekly Magic tournament, run entirely within this forum. To compete, players submit five-card decks which are played against each other. Scoring assumes optimal play, without randomness or concealed information.
1. Game Rules
1.1. Except for the changes described in these rules, games follow the rules of Magic.
1.2. Players' decks contain exactly five cards, which begin the game in hand. Players do not mulligan or sideboard.
1.3. Players' libraries begin the game empty. A player does not lose the game as a result of being unable to draw a card.
1.4. A random effect produces the result that least benefits the owner of the source of the effect.
1.5. Each player plays two games (one match) against each other player.
2. Tournament Rules
2.1. Players submit their decks to the 5CB moderator.
2.2. Decks are subject to some restrictions.
2.3. Points determine tournament standings.
2.4. In rounds of twenty or more players, players are divided randomly into equally-sized heats of n players, where n is the number of players divided by ten (rounded down). 2.5. The player with the most POTM points over the course of a month is the Player of the Month.
RULES CHANGE
2.2a. A player may not submit a deck that can – against any deck – win the game or force any number of cards in an opponent's hand to change zones before an opponent's second turn.
BAN LIST
Black Lotus
City of Traitors
Lion's Eye Diamond
Mishra's Workshop
Karakas
Ghost Quarter
Shelldock Isle
Strip Mine
Wasteland
Foil
Force of Will
Magus of the Moon
Meddling Mage
Trinisphere
Channel
Empty the Warrens
Show and Tell
Vampire Hexmage
BAN LIST
Black Lotus
Lion's Eye Diamond
Mishra's Workshop
Ghost Quarter
Strip Mine
Wasteland
Channel
Force of Will
Show and Tell
Unmask
I need your help in figuring out what other cards should be put on the ban list. Should I copy/paste the other cards listed in Vintage 5CB's ban list? Will this feel any different than playing Vintage 5CB? Discuss!
(Don't submit decks yet, please.)
No longer staff here.
The five Moxen- They aren't legal in Legacy for a reason. These are staples for speed.
Vampire Hexmage- Hexdepths
Meddling Mage- Skips the discard rule
Thoughtseize- There are other discard spells, but only one hits everything for 1 mana.
Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre- Almost every large mana deck's kill condition because it's nearly unstoppable and shuffles right back.
Chancellor of the Annex- Every type of deck is better with this card, and can be used with Shining Shoal or Foil to break card advantage.
Karakas- Singularity is the less stupid and every version of this card.
Anurid Scavenger- Fast recursion on an efficient threat with protection. What.
City of Traitors- Keeping another tab on the fast mana. Ancient Tomb at least hurts you.
Without heavy bans and/or stricter rules, this is simply "the Vintage thread with no Black Lotus."
I do want to make an all encompassing rule (or ban) that deals with selective discard. Which route should be taken?
Choice A - Ban certain cheap discard spells.
Choice B - Make all discard illegal before an opponent's second turn.
Choice C - Limit what selective discard can do. (i.e. Opponent chooses which nonland, noncreature card when targeted by Duress)
Another thing of note is the artifact mana source / land mana source dynamic. Foil, Commandeer, and Chancellor of the Annex can punish those that rely on an artifact only mana source approach. There are also land destruction cards. Having a deck that can deal with both artifact mana sources and land mana sources can be troublesome.
I'm not sure about banning the five Moxen. Artifact decks, such as Smokestack, gain an advantage since they can ramp with Mana Vault, Mana Crypt, and etc. If I ban City of Traitors, what about Crystal Vein?
While Foil and Commandeer punish artifact mana, decks with both artifact and nonartifact mana are even more resilient to Annex (they just miss a turn).
In regards to naming decks, each of these abuses one or more of the named cards...
Vampire Hexmage, Thoughtseize, Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth, Dark Depths, Chancellor of the Annex
Karakas, Leyline of Singularity, Black Lotus, Anurid Scavenger, Silence
Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth, Calciform Pools, Smallpox, Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre, Chancellor of the Annex
Mox Ruby, Painter's Servant, Soldevi Digger, City of Traitors, Pyroblast
City of Traitors, Elixir of Immortality, Mana Crypt, Smokstack, Lodestone Golem
Just to name a few.
In regards to City of Traitors, It gives you 2 mana with a drawback that's almost negligible in 5CB, especially alongside Mana Crypt and the Moxen. Any other 2 mana source has a drawback that matters.
-Terror is an emotion which, when experienced, results in death.
-The pox was a disease notorious for having killed one-third, rounded up, of Europe’s population. Smallpox, on the other hand, killed only a single person.
-A person riding a horse cannot be stopped by foot soldiers, large animals, walls, archers, or even catapults.
More facts of magic
Start with a Ban List of just Black Lotus.
Each round, ban 1 card from the winning deck.
How to choose the 1 is fairly unimportant; you could either go with moderator discretion and a policy of trying to hit the 'most important' card when possible, or you could have players mark which card in their deck should be banned if they win, or whatever.
This way you get an ever-changing format in which the cards that are *actually* the best naturally end up banned.
EDIT: I just read the other 5CB thread and saw Catmurderer make basically exactly this suggestion. The evolving ban list is original to neither of us of course, but the idea of banning exactly 1 card out of a 5CB deck each week seems to be a new one that we both thought of recently. High five, Catmurderer!
lol, high five.
This is exactly what I would have suggested.
Unbanning everything can be interesting because of how dramatically the meta can change from week to week.
Land destruction can become incredibly powerful one week, then hand discard becomes a pain... etc.
I've seen this work very well.
(One note, compared to other games Ive played this forum loves Black Lotus. It is a great enabler, but it also adds a certain power level to the decks which I think has been explored thoroughly. Maximizing your deck so that you end up with the best possible lands and threats is a interesting dynamic which I have not seen in the recent games.)
----
In regards to what to ban, it can either go two ways. Ban the enabler or ban the threats. A good moderator can make the call.
Example:
1. Black Lotus/Channel/Ulamog/Lich's Mirror/Chancellor of the Annex
What to ban?
Here I would say Black Lotus because it provides the explosiveness for the deck.
2. Hickory Woodlot/Channel/Ulamog/Lich's Mirror/Chancellor of the Annex
Here I would ban Channel.
3. Shelldock Isle/LED/Ulamog/Force of Will/Misdirection
A deck like this would really be up to the moderator. If the results hinged on Forcing all of the opponents' spells then I would ban that. If the LED/Shelldock combo was unstoppable, I would ban LED (Because it is what combos so well with Shelldock).
One issue that I can see with it is that maybe there's some card (thoughtseize comes to mind) that a lot of different decks want to play, but it isn't the defining card of any of them. Some broken Meddling Mage deck wins the round, but Thoughtseize gets banned and then MM is still around next week.
I'm not sure which way to go (or if Draco9 is even interested in an evolving ban list : )
Banning one card from the winning deck each week, there is an unintended consequence to that. There's no incentive to come up with a deck designed to beat last week's winning deck if the winning deck is no longer valid. If the winning deck becomes the same a few weeks in a row, then I can see banning some cards from it.
I do agree that having an updated ban list would vitalize the metagame for the long term. I think a compromise can be made. How about creating a set schedule?
Month 1
Week 1: Normal Week
Week 2: Normal Week
Week 3: Normal Week
Week 4: Special Week
Month 2
Week 1: Normal Week (Month 1's changes go into effect.)
Week 2: Normal Week
Week 3: Normal Week
Week 4: Special Week
While Special Week is running, compile statistical data about the frequency of cards used, and what cards are used in the winning decks. Gather feedback on what players find as overpowered or "not fun", then put up a poll during Week 4 to determine what should get banned for next month, what should get unbanned, suggestions for special formats, etc.
Player of the Month goes largely uninterrupted, because it rewards people who figured out the metagame with the ban list in the given month. Having the bans placed on a monthly schedule also prevents the ban list from piling up too high. An average of 12 bans a year is small compared to an average of 52 bans a year.
---
Edit: Expanded the ban list, made a stricter rule on discard in an attempt to encourage slower decks.