MTG Salvation

I'm brainstorming how I would like to revitalize this thread and I want input from the community. What did you think about the previous format? Were there parts that you liked or parts that you would change? What changes would you make? What fresh ideas do you have?

The always on aspect of how it was running most recently seemed to burn people out. I know I stopped paying attention to it and I was a pretty regular voice in here for a long time. Making it more periodic seems like a good plan. I'd go for either an annual or biannual update with a similar voting format.

There are some flaws with the system but I don't know that those can be nicely fixed, like the [non]competitive disconnect that MTG_JARY mentioned a couple posts up. My preference would be to focus this towards less competitive play. The entirely open voting process means you're going to get people participating who aren't familiar with cEDH and there are more objective metrics for evaluating cards at that level. Crowd sourcing a list seems like a better fit for lower levels of competition. All of that said they're all valid ways to play the format and the thread is open to anyone who wants to participate. Short of breaking this into multiple lists there's really no way to push that.
I'd also allow for cost as more of a consideration. This is presumably a resource for players, and the players who are most likely to need it aren't going to have some of the higher budget cards (e.g. Moat) outside of proxies. The players who do have those cards are likely more established and less likely to need this kind of resource.

Quote from Weebo »

The always on aspect of how it was running most recently seemed to burn people out.

This. I was never interested in participating for this reason. Just seemed exhausting.

So what I was thinking as of now is to do one update every three months. I agree with Weebo about our previous system. I think that it was good in the sense that we could focus on one section at a time, but it rotated too quickly.

I'm thinking three months would be decent because it gives everything a chance to settle and because it would coincide with new sets. But the question would should run it. The old method would result in cycling through the entire list in almost four years. That's entirely too long, so I was looking at doing just one update, basically a one month on two month off cycle where the all voting and changes took place over a month-long period. But perhaps that is still too quick and perhaps a six month cycle is better. (Or maybe a trial run of three month periods to get the list back in a good place then revert to six month cycles.)

I just want to point out that assuming you keep the previous system in place where you do two weeks per selection and do noncreatures / creatures as seperate it takes...

5 colors * 2 weeks per selection * 2 creatures / noncreatures = 20 weeks
Colorless * 2 weeks per section * 2 for creatures / non + multicolored * 2 weeks per section * 2 for creatures / non + lands * 2 weeks per section

This adds up to 26 weeks to run. 365 days per year / 7 days per week = 52.14 weeks / year. It takes 26 weeks to run through all of the top 50 list so if you plan to do it more than once a year with the old system, you have already turned into it running nonstop. If you change the system to run somehow differently than it was all of this is thrown out the window but I figured I would point out that as it was either you run it once a year and it runs half the year to run or you run it nonstop.

Quote from ISBPathfinder »

I just want to point out that assuming you keep the previous system in place where you do two weeks per selection and do noncreatures / creatures as seperate it takes...

5 colors * 2 weeks per selection * 2 creatures / noncreatures = 20 weeks
Colorless * 2 weeks per section * 2 for creatures / non + multicolored * 2 weeks per section * 2 for creatures / non + lands * 2 weeks per section

This adds up to 26 weeks to run. 365 days per year / 7 days per week = 52.14 weeks / year. It takes 26 weeks to run through all of the top 50 list so if you plan to do it more than once a year with the old system, you have already turned into it running nonstop. If you change the system to run somehow differently than it was all of this is thrown out the window but I figured I would point out that as it was either you run it once a year and it runs half the year to run or you run it nonstop.

Well the other problem was that we were forcing every section. If we could do an on/off system where we just opened it up to any changes people want then it might feel more organic and less forced.

There are pros and cons to forcing it to be more discussion and post based. There may be some who like to participate by voting but don't like to be harassed for their viewpoint. I can recall a few heated debates it seems like when we got to black for a few different cards including but not limited to some cards like Dark Confidant. With how the previous system ran it did take someone to nominate and support it but the advantage is that someone who primarily just read content here on salvation could still participate without the fear of interaction that sometimes comes from voicing your opinion that might not be the popular opinion.

Actually, I was thinking that in the light of EDHREC being a thing now, this thread has been obsoleted. I assume the fundamental purpose of this thread was to list various 'goodstuff' cards that are worthy considerations for decks that can run them, like Demonic Tutor. Now that EDHREC provides that same function as well as providing aggregate lists, this thread seems superfluous. I could be wrong in my assumption, though.

And no, I don't think EDHREC has usurped the need for scoeri's excellent deck database. Looking at a specific, tuned list with possible commentary is very different than an aggregate of cards commonly run with a given commander.

Quote from GloriousGoose »

Actually, I was thinking that in the light of EDHREC being a thing now, this thread has been obsoleted. I assume the fundamental purpose of this thread was to list various 'goodstuff' cards that are worthy considerations for decks that can run them, like Demonic Tutor. Now that EDHREC provides that same function as well as providing aggregate lists, this thread seems superfluous. I could be wrong in my assumption, though.

And no, I don't think EDHREC has usurped the need for scoeri's excellent deck database. Looking at a specific, tuned list with possible commentary is very different than an aggregate of cards commonly run with a given commander.

Whether or not this thread is largely obsolete, it is OUR list on OUR site. We aren't going to just tell people to vote elsewhere.

Quote from cryogen »

Whether or not this thread is largely obsolete, it is OUR list on OUR site. We aren't going to just tell people to vote elsewhere.

Keep your shirt on. No need for caps.

I mean... you already link to offsite resources. I was just thinking out loud that the time investment into such an undertaking would have diminishing returns in a world where a more robust option exists. But yeah, it's not my site, so feel free to do whatever.

Quote from GloriousGoose »

Keep your shirt on. No need for caps.

I mean... you already link to offsite resources. I was just thinking out loud that the time investment into such an undertaking would have diminishing returns in a world where a more robust option exists. But yeah, it's not my site, so feel free to do whatever.

I wasn't trying to be defensive, simply emphasizing that it's something the site has done for years as a resource and should continue doing. EDHREC is a great resource and by all means it should get the credit it deserves, but that doesn't mean we can't continue to do what we have been doing.

Quote from GloriousGoose »

Actually, I was thinking that in the light of EDHREC being a thing now, this thread has been obsoleted. I assume the fundamental purpose of this thread was to list various 'goodstuff' cards that are worthy considerations for decks that can run them, like Demonic Tutor. Now that EDHREC provides that same function as well as providing aggregate lists, this thread seems superfluous. I could be wrong in my assumption, though.

And no, I don't think EDHREC has usurped the need for scoeri's excellent deck database. Looking at a specific, tuned list with possible commentary is very different than an aggregate of cards commonly run with a given commander.

I don't want to trash talk some other resource but I have not once found any useful information from EDHRec. I don't know if thats due to my preferred commander choices, playstyle, or experience with the format but I stopped trying to use them because I found they don't have a relivant way to weigh the information they are processing. In a lot of cases they are taking really junk lists and just adding them all in without taking any weight from if a deck is updated a lot, generates discussion, or is a primer of some sort. You get people who just fire off lists into the void and are added into EDHRec with seemingly equal weight.

I have on the other hand on occasion needed to fill a slot or two or make some changes and look through this list to see if anything strikes me or something obvious that would work for the deck.

I always valued this thread. I thought it was some of the highest quality in terms of resources. EDHrec doesn't actually fill this service, it lists popularity not power. There is basically no reason that any deck should run a watery grave rather than a Underground Sea but edhrec has the shock as seeing 40% more play.

This thread was always higher quality.

That being said. I dont know how one would get this thread off the ground again. I feel the old way of constantly grinding was too slow to really show new cards in the format, and made it so it depended on people voting literally all the time. For it to be a good resource, I'd think it would have to be a huge poll (or split into many poll threads) that does all colors and cards at once. That way you could do like a yearly update and say "this is poll month" and front load the work on it.

Quote from Lantern »

I always valued this thread. I thought it was some of the highest quality in terms of resources. EDHrec doesn't actually fill this service, it lists popularity not power. There is basically no reason that any deck should run a watery grave rather than a Underground Sea but edhrec has the shock as seeing 40% more play.

This thread was always higher quality.

That being said. I dont know how one would get this thread off the ground again. I feel the old way of constantly grinding was too slow to really show new cards in the format, and made it so it depended on people voting literally all the time. For it to be a good resource, I'd think it would have to be a huge poll (or split into many poll threads) that does all colors and cards at once. That way you could do like a yearly update and say "this is poll month" and front load the work on it.

That's kind of what I was thinking. Just do one mass update at set intervals. It's just figuring out what that process would work best.

I think there's a lot of flaws with the system.

As mentioned, the constant rolling updates were way too much. Also only doing one category at a time meant, if I cared about x card, it might be ages until it was eligible, at which point I had forgotten.

But also I don't think the idea is as relevant as it used to be. Sure, edhrec prioritizes low-cost cards over top-tier expensive cards, but the fact that you're getting a list customized around your specific commander makes up for that times about a thousand. Plus it can go much deeper than 50, filter deeper by type, etc.

Edhrec also has a vastly larger voting pool. It has some minor failings but it has way more info, more flexible filtering, and it's faster updating and with much more input.

There's also the problem that, for most actual top 50 cards, most savvy deck builders know them basically from memory, obseleting the list for enfranchised players. Which means many of them (I.e. myself) stop caring about this thread pretty quickly in favor of deeper-dive resources like edhrec and primers if they're making an actual deck.

So I see basically two uses for a top 50 list - a quick reference for "what stuff should I put in my trade binder" and an entry point for new players who just wanna make a goodstuff deck or see what the format is about.

As someone who isn't new and rarely trades, it doesn't hold much interest for me.

Quote from DirkGently »

I think there's a lot of flaws with the system.

As mentioned, the constant rolling updates were way too much. Also only doing one category at a time meant, if I cared about x card, it might be ages until it was eligible, at which point I had forgotten.

But also I don't think the idea is as relevant as it used to be. Sure, edhrec prioritizes low-cost cards over top-tier expensive cards, but the fact that you're getting a list customized around your specific commander makes up for that times about a thousand. Plus it can go much deeper than 50, filter deeper by type, etc.

Edhrec also has a vastly larger voting pool. It has some minor failings but it has way more info, more flexible filtering, and it's faster updating and with much more input.

There's also the problem that, for most actual top 50 cards, most savvy deck builders know them basically from memory, obseleting the list for enfranchised players. Which means many of them (I.e. myself) stop caring about this thread pretty quickly in favor of deeper-dive resources like edhrec and primers if they're making an actual deck.

So I see basically two uses for a top 50 list - a quick reference for "what stuff should I put in my trade binder" and an entry point for new players who just wanna make a goodstuff deck or see what the format is about.

As someone who isn't new and rarely trades, it doesn't hold much interest for me.

Your latter use is why I want to get it up and running again, since there is a demand for "hey I'm just getting into the format what cards should I invest in" resources.

I guess I just enjoy the irony of all this fuss over this resource of all things, while this site's true gold like the Stax Primer is now buried from sight barring some odd necromancy.

This list is obsolete though. Not because it wasn't good or maintained, but because the average commander today is way more idiosyncratic in its design, more specific in its end goals and has access to way more tools in the era of modern edh than in 2011. I feel like a list of generic 'best stuff' just isn't what most decks need anymore, whereas the hidden gems thread is still useful.

Quote from TheAmericanSpirit »

I guess I just enjoy the irony of all this fuss over this resource of all things, while this site's true gold like the Stax Primer is now buried from sight barring some odd necromancy.

This list is obsolete though. Not because it wasn't good or maintained, but because the average commander today is way more idiosyncratic in its design, more specific in its end goals and has access to way more tools in the era of modern edh than in 2011. I feel like a list of generic 'best stuff' just isn't what most decks need anymore, whereas the hidden gems thread is still useful.

Lots of these cards are still very useful in the colors that can run them. Its somewhat hard to say that Eternal Witness can't make any green list for example and some of that is what this list is for. Sometimes if you want to double check that you aren't forgetting an easy include card in a list or if you are making a cut to a list this can be very useful. I am not saying you should build a deck based on a list like this but its a useful resource still. The point of keeping updates and voting going is to keep the resource relevant and up to date.

I mean I'd love to see the list back in some context - It's an easy comparison with edhrec, but the value of these lists is far greater to me - there's absolutely no meta-analysis with edhrec, it just pulls lists and gives the stats on what cards appear in which. Here, you get a reasonably well weighed up list as voted on by people who play well educated games with well-built decks.

TL:DR; I trust a peer reviewed academic article more than I trust a facebook clickbait link.

On a commander specific level, EDHREC is absolute entry level. Pop open Daxos the Returned and see the system in action. The card pool is aggressively polluted by countless lists that just took the precon, swapped a few cards around and dumped it online. There are more lists running Underworld Coinsmith than Skybind, a ridiculous auto-include. Razaketh, the Foulblooded, probably the most game-ending card in my meticulously maintained list, doesn't even show up - all of five (out of over a thousand!) decks registered there run him.

The top card sections are a bit variable. For example, Naya's all about the dinosaurs because of XLN/RIX dino mania. As such, an argument could be made for reanimating this list here as a manually curated take on the idea. I do agree that it would probably have to be a periodic megavote thing, with my proposal of the system being a per-category vote on inclusions that starts with the current best cards as options, but with the possibility for the voter to add other cards from the category, and cast a total of up to 25 or however many votes. It's not ideal, but this is a bit hard to conceptualise in a practical manner.

After some thoughts and discussion, I am going to run this basically how the old one was ran. So here is the plan:

Week One: Nomination week (which may actually last two weeks depending on how active the discussion is going at the end of the week). Each user may nominate three cards and support three cards, which I'll attempt to track in the first post. There is no restriction on the category, we are going to try and clean up the list as much as possible. Like before, once a card has received two addiditional users supporting it, the card will be in the vote during Week Two. It is strongly encouraged that you also have in mind a card that you want to remove from the existing list as well.

Week Two: For each card that receives enough support we will go through the applicable lists and nominate/support cards to remove (like Week One, each person has three nominate and support votes).


Week Three: There will be an active poll group of cards that have at least one card to add and one card to remove. The "winner(s)" will be determined based on how many cards can potentially be removed. For example, if the black creatures poll had three creatures voted to add but only one to remove, then we can add at most one of those creatures. But if the blue spells poll had five cards to add and three that were voted to remove, we could change up to three cards potentially.



This poll is intended to be just the first step in updating the lists. There may be hiccups or things we realize don't work as well as they could, and if that occurs we will address them separately. All cards legal in Commander are eligible for vote with the exception of new cards from RNA.

I'm going to start with the low-hanging fruit: Plaguecrafter is just strictly better than Fleshbag Marauder so that needs to change.

Quote from cryogen »

I'm going to start with the low-hanging fruit: Plaguecrafter is just strictly better than Fleshbag Marauder so that needs to change.

I would say that zombie creature type on Fleshbag makes that statement false.

Looking at the current standard I also see a few other potentials:

• Doom Whisperer
  
• Midnight Reaper
  
• Ravenous Chupacabra
  
• Pitiless Plunderer

I am not sure I like any of them enough for me to nominate any of them though as of right now.

I will nominate Ravenous Chupacabra and Pitiless Plunderer. Both very, very solid cards.

I'll support Plaguecrafter, Pitiless Plunderer, and Ravenous Chupacabra. I've seen all three of them do excellent work. Plunderer in particular caught me off guard.

I'll nominate Underrealm Lich as well. Great card selection, supports GY strats very well, is resilient thanks to the activated ability, and it has a pair of relevant creature types. One of the best EDH cards in recent years.