Welcome to the community helpdesk for the Modern forum!
This is an open forum discussion area for questions, comments, concerns, or suggestions you might have for this forum. Nothing is off-limits, but we ask that you keep all comments civil. As with all threads, all other MTGS Forum Rules apply here.
The following items should not be discussed in this thread. Violators will be reminded/warned/infracted accordingly.
Suggesting, debating, and/or challenging site rules.
Discussions about Modern as a format and about the game itself.
One suggestion I have is that there should be a "standardized" template for primers, possibly just available for download as a .txt file; formatting was the largest issue I had when I did a primer take-over and re-write for esper control, and I suspect it will also be the most frustrating part during the upcoming primer re-write over this winter break (when I finally run out of grading to do).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes, I am a local area mod. WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
Primary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Yeah, see I eventually just set up a "forum thread" environment in emacs and then I just export as a .txt and copy/pasta now. But going through and defining all the syntax was a pain in the ass.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes, I am a local area mod. WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
Primary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
I have a suggestion / question about the name of the "Developing Competetive" subforum.
Mostly, why is that it's name and could you perhaps alter it?
The reason for that is that, the as it is, doesn't quite indicate what the forum is about:
Development of decks that have proven to be competitve with actual tournament placings, results or success in dailies.
However "Developing Competitive" just indicates what it says on the tin:
Development of decks with competitive play in mind.
This leads to people frequently starting threads to do exactly that, not knowing that there's more to that subforum that just competitvely developing and discussing decks.
Sure, they /should/ have read the stickies etc., but really...who does that, especially when the name seemingly is so clear?
For one you could technically just lock the ability to create new threads in that subforum (I don't know if this is convenient or technically possible, it may create more hassle or work for you guys than the few accidental posts do).
But renaming it to something like "Competitively Proven Decks" (just an example off the top of my head :3 ) may also help to prevent people from making threads there on their own to brew of a new deck or discuss a rogue strategy / deck that doesn't actually belong in there.
Just an idea / question that crossed my mind, as it's not really in important problem, if any at all, but I kept wondering why it is the way it is. ^^
Ps: wouldn't it technically be "Developing Competitively", since the competitive is referring the developing, hence being an adverb?
An honest grammar question here, I may very well be wrong, but I'm interested in knowing why.
Tired of losing to natural Tron or getting turn 2'd by Infect?
Standard infinite combos giving you a headache and the opponent always has Force of Will?
No matter the issue, there is one simple trick to solve all of your Magic problems!!
~~~To get in on the secret to eternal luck, skill and victory, just follow this link!!~~~
1. A number of users, staff and regular members included, decided on the name because it was neutral (doesn't make them sound bad or non-competitive) and inclusive of a huge range of different decks (some currently very viable, others just enjoying fringe viability after an older heyday).
2. People do start threads there, but I wouldn't call it "frequent". We probably get one new thread there every 1-2 weeks, which is easily moved to Deck Creation. By contrast, Deck Creation sees roughly a new thread per day.
3. Grammatically, it's being used as a noun. Or used as an adjective with the "Decks" implied. I don't think anyone put a lot of serious thought into the grammar behind it, but given that this is the first time I've heard someone mention it, it sounds like most users understand what it means.
4. It's six versus half-a-dozen on locking the forum to new posts. It really doesn't create much hassle for us when we move them, and there are times where we'll want users to actually post new stuff there (typically when recreating primers).
5. Renaming it is on the table if there is enough momentum, but we'd have to do a lot of discussion about an appropriate new name. For example, "Competitively Proven Decks" isn't quite accurate because it makes many of the decks sound better ("Proven") than they are. I get what you are hinting at in a title like that, but it's just an example of how a seemingly fitting title actually has lots of small issues. I know you aren't directly suggesting it: just giving an example of how this has played out in the past.
Generally speaking, we wouldn't rename subforums unless there was a major change in forum structure, or there was considerable user desire to do so. Let me know if you have any other questions!
I noticed that the metagame update on Modern Nexus shows Knightfall making its way up to tier 2. I had asked Torpf about the potential for overlap with the Bant Company thread back when he made the primer for Knightfall, which he mentioned we could address should the deck put up results. So perhaps we should address the overlap before Knightfall is put in tier 2. There are two main builds centered around includin nacatl/bolt or not, only one of which overlaps with the Bant Company thread.
However, I feel like there is no sense having a Bant company thread separate from Knightfall as it is basically just one of the builds under that strategy. I'd be ok with merging or even just archiving the thread if the Knightfall thread is going to include discussion (as it does now) of both builds.
Any comment on resolving the overlap here? Naya Company, Bant Company and Knightfall all seem to have some overlap here. Thoughts?
(edit: I'll update the Bant Company primer shortly if we end up keeping it, but it seems somewhat superfluous)
I noticed that the metagame update on Modern Nexus shows Knightfall making its way up to tier 2. I had asked Torpf about the potential for overlap with the Bant Company thread back when he made the primer for Knightfall, which he mentioned we could address should the deck put up results. So perhaps we should address the overlap before Knightfall is put in tier 2. There are two main builds centered around includin nacatl/bolt or not, only one of which overlaps with the Bant Company thread.
However, I feel like there is no sense having a Bant company thread separate from Knightfall as it is basically just one of the builds under that strategy. I'd be ok with merging or even just archiving the thread if the Knightfall thread is going to include discussion (as it does now) of both builds.
Any comment on resolving the overlap here? Naya Company, Bant Company and Knightfall all seem to have some overlap here. Thoughts?
Incidentally, Knightfall is still Tier 2 if we exclude those two lists and categorize them as Bant Company instead.
The GP Day 2 numbers are more problematic because it's impossible to separate out the different "Knightfall" types from the rest. Depending on how those numbers broke down, we could definitely see Knightfall drop out of Tier 2 if enough of them were Bant Company.
Based on this, I'm not sure the best way to proceed. My instinct is to just promote the Knightfall thread because I'm not super familiar with all the different builds in the Bant Company list. The metagame data suggests a variety of Knightfall takes are all viable, but that only a single Bant Company iteration (the Knightfall one) is Tier 2. Putting Bant Company into Tier 2 thus strikes me as misleading.
I think my inclination would be to either separate out the Bant lists from Naya blue (bolt and nacatl) in new "Bant Knightfall" or "Naya Knightfall" threads, or just put them all under a single Knightfall thread.
The convention on the forum seems to be separating out similar deck strategies which use different colour combinations into separate threads. For instance, Twin has Rug, Grixis and UR threads as the lines of play with each are somewhat different within the Twin strategy. Given that convention, it makes sense to me to divide knightfall along Nacatl / bolt inclusions (Naya blue Knightfall) and exclusions (Bant Knightfall).
Then again, given the relatively small representation presently, I could see keeping it all one thread.
edit: I don't consider Bant company to be a separate deck from Bant Knightfall - no reason to not play the combo. If the bant company thread stays, it would have to be updated to Bant Knightfall imo.
So knightfall kinda falls into torpfs territory since its his deck thread, and Zoo's knightfall falls into mine, because thats my pet deck (see what I did there?) Its worth noting the 2 play out so differently that Id agree they should be separate. Zoo's is, well, zoo with an oops I win combo that can be drawn, and it litterally uses the same zoo core as every zoo deck with 3 extra cards. Bant's uses tempo/control to get there, and selectively gets the combo as well. Just the very nature of using Bolt vs Visions is a big indicator of that.
But I'd have to hear torpfs feelings on it. I'd gladly update the zoo thread to have a "Knightfall" component into the primer, should Torf want to make it clear that "Bant company/knightfall" is that, bant.
So knightfall kinda falls into torpfs territory since its his deck thread, and Zoo's knightfall falls into mine, because thats my pet deck (see what I did there?) Its worth noting the 2 play out so differently that Id agree they should be separate. Zoo's is, well, zoo with an oops I win combo that can be drawn, and it litterally uses the same zoo core as every zoo deck with 3 extra cards. Bant's uses tempo/control to get there, and selectively gets the combo as well. Just the very nature of using Bolt vs Visions is a big indicator of that.
But I'd have to hear torpfs feelings on it. I'd gladly update the zoo thread to have a "Knightfall" component into the primer, should Torf want to make it clear that "Bant company/knightfall" is that, bant.
For reference, the Zoo lists we've seen on MTGO using the Knightfall combo also run Geist because they're already in blue. Not sure if that matters but it's another datapoint to consider.
Well thats normal in zoo. If you run blue, you use geist main, negate in the board. Its always been that way. Just the 2 werent good enough reason to go into blue before. Combo pushes enough its worth looking at.
I have no problem separating the two threads and turning Knightfall into a Bant Knightfall thread while the Zoo thread can encompass any 4 colour lists with Nactal. It would make a proper place for both decks to go and not have the discussions spread out like they currently are. We could always link to each others threads in the primers.
edit: I don't consider Bant company to be a separate deck from Bant Knightfall - no reason to not play the combo. If the bant company thread stays, it would have to be updated to Bant Knightfall imo.
If we want to split up the Knightfall thread then it can just take over as Bant Knightfall I guess. I've been working on an update for the primer in my limited spare time anyways, and it wouldn't be that hard to just remove anything pertaining to the Zoo version.
Is the search feature down? I'm searching for cards/words I know exist and the results are coming back with nothing. I've tried on two separate computers with the same results.
Is the search feature down? I'm searching for cards/words I know exist and the results are coming back with nothing. I've tried on two separate computers with the same results.
Are you searching within threads or just across the subforums?
So i'll be staying toronto for a couple of months and would like to test out my deck in tournaments here, i play modern and standard.
Ive researched quite a few stores and will check them out..... one by one probably lol, but does anyone have any suggestions as to which store has the most population when it comes to modern and/or standard magic fnms/thursday night modern/draft etc...
So i'll be staying toronto for a couple of months and would like to test out my deck in tournaments here, i play modern and standard.
Ive researched quite a few stores and will check them out..... one by one probably lol, but does anyone have any suggestions as to which store has the most population when it comes to modern and/or standard magic fnms/thursday night modern/draft etc...
This could be a better place for the Modern Community section, but I suggest Face to Face Toronto (location, facebook) They're going to have the largest selection as well as the largest events most of the time.
I just created an account and have general question about this forum. Not sure if this is the right place to ask but I constantly get redirected to ads and am unable to return. Therefore I have to close my current tap and search for my current topic of interest again. Is this normal for mobile devices (ios)?
What I know is that it might just be a shady business practice of the current ad-provider or a virus on my device.
I just created an account and have general question about this forum. Not sure if this is the right place to ask but I constantly get redirected to ads and am unable to return. Therefore I have to close my current tap and search for my current topic of interest again. Is this normal for mobile devices (ios)?
What I know is that it might just be a shady business practice of the current ad-provider or a virus on my device.
It's a bad ad. I escalated it to our ad team. By chance, do you have a URL for the bad ad?
It got annoying to the point were I stopped using the mobile site. The ads redirected me and some of them contained sexual content. I can´t replicate it at the moment but I will make sure to copy the URLs next time.
what are the mods opinions on linking to a tournament report I posted on reddit in a deck thread?
just wanted to ask before doing it just in case
You can link to another site with content, but we ask that you also provide a sizable chunk of the content on here. If this is a one time thing, instead of just posting the link and saying "go read my writeup", we ask that you put at least an abstract so people can get the gist of it here and understand it without having to click on the link. We understand if you put a lot of work into it and don't want to copy over all of the formatting.
what are the mods opinions on linking to a tournament report I posted on reddit in a deck thread?
just wanted to ask before doing it just in case
You can link to another site with content, but we ask that you also provide a sizable chunk of the content on here. If this is a one time thing, instead of just posting the link and saying "go read my writeup", we ask that you put at least an abstract so people can get the gist of it here and understand it without having to click on the link. We understand if you put a lot of work into it and don't want to copy over all of the formatting.
when I get the chance I'll post an abstract of it with actual content then, thanks for clarification
This is an open forum discussion area for questions, comments, concerns, or suggestions you might have for this forum. Nothing is off-limits, but we ask that you keep all comments civil. As with all threads, all other MTGS Forum Rules apply here.
The following items should not be discussed in this thread. Violators will be reminded/warned/infracted accordingly.
Yes, I am a local area mod.WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVEPrimary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Yes, I am a local area mod.WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVEPrimary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Mostly, why is that it's name and could you perhaps alter it?
The reason for that is that, the as it is, doesn't quite indicate what the forum is about:
Development of decks that have proven to be competitve with actual tournament placings, results or success in dailies.
However "Developing Competitive" just indicates what it says on the tin:
Development of decks with competitive play in mind.
This leads to people frequently starting threads to do exactly that, not knowing that there's more to that subforum that just competitvely developing and discussing decks.
Sure, they /should/ have read the stickies etc., but really...who does that, especially when the name seemingly is so clear?
For one you could technically just lock the ability to create new threads in that subforum (I don't know if this is convenient or technically possible, it may create more hassle or work for you guys than the few accidental posts do).
But renaming it to something like "Competitively Proven Decks" (just an example off the top of my head :3 ) may also help to prevent people from making threads there on their own to brew of a new deck or discuss a rogue strategy / deck that doesn't actually belong in there.
Just an idea / question that crossed my mind, as it's not really in important problem, if any at all, but I kept wondering why it is the way it is. ^^
Ps: wouldn't it technically be "Developing Competitively", since the competitive is referring the developing, hence being an adverb?
An honest grammar question here, I may very well be wrong, but I'm interested in knowing why.
Standard infinite combos giving you a headache and the opponent always has Force of Will?
No matter the issue, there is one simple trick to solve all of your Magic problems!!
~~~To get in on the secret to eternal luck, skill and victory, just follow this link!!~~~
1. A number of users, staff and regular members included, decided on the name because it was neutral (doesn't make them sound bad or non-competitive) and inclusive of a huge range of different decks (some currently very viable, others just enjoying fringe viability after an older heyday).
2. People do start threads there, but I wouldn't call it "frequent". We probably get one new thread there every 1-2 weeks, which is easily moved to Deck Creation. By contrast, Deck Creation sees roughly a new thread per day.
3. Grammatically, it's being used as a noun. Or used as an adjective with the "Decks" implied. I don't think anyone put a lot of serious thought into the grammar behind it, but given that this is the first time I've heard someone mention it, it sounds like most users understand what it means.
4. It's six versus half-a-dozen on locking the forum to new posts. It really doesn't create much hassle for us when we move them, and there are times where we'll want users to actually post new stuff there (typically when recreating primers).
5. Renaming it is on the table if there is enough momentum, but we'd have to do a lot of discussion about an appropriate new name. For example, "Competitively Proven Decks" isn't quite accurate because it makes many of the decks sound better ("Proven") than they are. I get what you are hinting at in a title like that, but it's just an example of how a seemingly fitting title actually has lots of small issues. I know you aren't directly suggesting it: just giving an example of how this has played out in the past.
Generally speaking, we wouldn't rename subforums unless there was a major change in forum structure, or there was considerable user desire to do so. Let me know if you have any other questions!
I noticed that the metagame update on Modern Nexus shows Knightfall making its way up to tier 2. I had asked Torpf about the potential for overlap with the Bant Company thread back when he made the primer for Knightfall, which he mentioned we could address should the deck put up results. So perhaps we should address the overlap before Knightfall is put in tier 2. There are two main builds centered around includin nacatl/bolt or not, only one of which overlaps with the Bant Company thread.
However, I feel like there is no sense having a Bant company thread separate from Knightfall as it is basically just one of the builds under that strategy. I'd be ok with merging or even just archiving the thread if the Knightfall thread is going to include discussion (as it does now) of both builds.
Any comment on resolving the overlap here? Naya Company, Bant Company and Knightfall all seem to have some overlap here. Thoughts?
(edit: I'll update the Bant Company primer shortly if we end up keeping it, but it seems somewhat superfluous)
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
The majority of these Knightfall finishes are Bant decks without Company, or blue Zoo decks with Geist. Only two of the MTGO Knightfall decks in November were Bant Company lists:
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mtgo-standings/modern-daily-2015-11-02
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mtgo-standings/modern-constructed-league-2015-11-16
Incidentally, Knightfall is still Tier 2 if we exclude those two lists and categorize them as Bant Company instead.
The GP Day 2 numbers are more problematic because it's impossible to separate out the different "Knightfall" types from the rest. Depending on how those numbers broke down, we could definitely see Knightfall drop out of Tier 2 if enough of them were Bant Company.
Based on this, I'm not sure the best way to proceed. My instinct is to just promote the Knightfall thread because I'm not super familiar with all the different builds in the Bant Company list. The metagame data suggests a variety of Knightfall takes are all viable, but that only a single Bant Company iteration (the Knightfall one) is Tier 2. Putting Bant Company into Tier 2 thus strikes me as misleading.
Thoughts?
The convention on the forum seems to be separating out similar deck strategies which use different colour combinations into separate threads. For instance, Twin has Rug, Grixis and UR threads as the lines of play with each are somewhat different within the Twin strategy. Given that convention, it makes sense to me to divide knightfall along Nacatl / bolt inclusions (Naya blue Knightfall) and exclusions (Bant Knightfall).
Then again, given the relatively small representation presently, I could see keeping it all one thread.
edit: I don't consider Bant company to be a separate deck from Bant Knightfall - no reason to not play the combo. If the bant company thread stays, it would have to be updated to Bant Knightfall imo.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
But I'd have to hear torpfs feelings on it. I'd gladly update the zoo thread to have a "Knightfall" component into the primer, should Torf want to make it clear that "Bant company/knightfall" is that, bant.
For reference, the Zoo lists we've seen on MTGO using the Knightfall combo also run Geist because they're already in blue. Not sure if that matters but it's another datapoint to consider.
If we want to split up the Knightfall thread then it can just take over as Bant Knightfall I guess. I've been working on an update for the primer in my limited spare time anyways, and it wouldn't be that hard to just remove anything pertaining to the Zoo version.
MTGO/MTGA: Tyclone
My Primers ~ GWx Vizier Company ~ Knightfall ~ RG Eldrazi ~ Green's Sun's Zenith
More Brews ~ Modern Four Horsemen ~ Gitrog Dredge
Are you searching within threads or just across the subforums?
Ive researched quite a few stores and will check them out..... one by one probably lol, but does anyone have any suggestions as to which store has the most population when it comes to modern and/or standard magic fnms/thursday night modern/draft etc...
MTGO/MTGA: Tyclone
My Primers ~ GWx Vizier Company ~ Knightfall ~ RG Eldrazi ~ Green's Sun's Zenith
More Brews ~ Modern Four Horsemen ~ Gitrog Dredge
What I know is that it might just be a shady business practice of the current ad-provider or a virus on my device.
Ktken is better at handling that kinda question than I. I'll ping him.
It's a bad ad. I escalated it to our ad team. By chance, do you have a URL for the bad ad?
just wanted to ask before doing it just in case
MTGO/MTGA: Tyclone
My Primers ~ GWx Vizier Company ~ Knightfall ~ RG Eldrazi ~ Green's Sun's Zenith
More Brews ~ Modern Four Horsemen ~ Gitrog Dredge
when I get the chance I'll post an abstract of it with actual content then, thanks for clarification