1. The line between different levels of competitiveness is blurry.
Competitiveness is hard to define, and there's more than one way to define it. For Modern, we look at major events, their Top 8s and metas. It's not meant to be a sharp division between 'this is good to play and this isn't. It's more of a guideline to the more popular/better performing decks (based on score).
2. The metagame often changes faster than the staff is willing to modify the forum structure. As a result, the forum organization generally lags behind the metagame by quite a bit.
After we get major tournament results, we've been fairly good about getting the forums changed if need be. Keep in mind that regular moderators, even global moderators, cannot create new sub forums. Only admins have that power.
4. There's sometimes more discussion in a thread for a deck than is healthy for a single thread, but the deck isn't good enough to get its own subforum. As an example, there are currently more posts in the G/x Birthing Pod thread than in any Standard Competitive deck subforum
Yes, this is something that clashes with the current set up. As it is, there isn't a 100% satisfactory way to deal with it.
3. Metagame information should be handled via a sticky on the main format forum with a maintained first post instead of via the organization of the subforums.
This is done for Legacy. This is also done for Modern, contingent upon there being results, such as Worlds.
My concern with this is that it doesn't address when people share budget lists in an existing archetypes thread.
I'm not sure I quite understand. You mean for Developing Competitive and Deck Creation?
Established is structured so that it won't be an issue.
If a deck exists in Developing/Creation, I don't think making a [Budget] version of it would be a problem. They are two completely different threads. You wull get breakdown when you have multiple budget discussions in a single budget archetype thread, but I think we can cross that when we get there.
The idea of [Budget] tags was liked by most of the replies, so that's what we'll go with.
We'll use the tags for all three deck discussion sections. The rules could be worded as such...
"Please use [Budget] in your thread title if you have budget constraints for your deck. Budget is what you, the thread creator, wants it to be. From Pauper-esque to running a cheaper manabase, etc. Please make your constraints clear in the opening post so discussion is on topic."
I think that covers concerns about defining budget; it's up to the thread starter. I don't expect everyone to start using these off the bat, and so we'll be lenient with their enforcement.
Just a reminder. If you disagree with someone, that's fine. If it turns into the goading and flaming, that's not fine. That's when you walk away or ignore.
I don't want to see this happen again. I'll deal with last night's incidence when I get home. Thank you.
Given that Modern can have a steep entry fee, I think the userbase and mods are in agreement that we should allow budget discussions.
The question is how to set it up? Amongst ourselves (the mods), we thought up two ways of handling it.
Dedicated budget subforum.
Use existing subforums, but require the use of [Budget] tags as an identifier.
Of course, you guys are the end users and know what would work best. The two options above are by no means the only ones, hence the purpose of this thread.
So please, use this to discuss the merits of budget discussion and the best way to roll it out. We are listening, as always!
EDH is over here: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/forumdisplay.php?f=377
Also, you may want to expand on your post. People can't offer good suggestions if you don't at least have a deck idea.
Competitiveness is hard to define, and there's more than one way to define it. For Modern, we look at major events, their Top 8s and metas. It's not meant to be a sharp division between 'this is good to play and this isn't. It's more of a guideline to the more popular/better performing decks (based on score).
After we get major tournament results, we've been fairly good about getting the forums changed if need be. Keep in mind that regular moderators, even global moderators, cannot create new sub forums. Only admins have that power.
Yes, so we do the best with what we have to give players an idea of what they will likely see in a tournament.
Yes, this is something that clashes with the current set up. As it is, there isn't a 100% satisfactory way to deal with it.
If slow response to changing sub forums is a concern, I don't see how making sub forum criteria based on discussion popularity would resolve it.
Same issue as #1.
This is done for Legacy. This is also done for Modern, contingent upon there being results, such as Worlds.
Are you talking about Standard specifically, or about Standard, Extended, Modern, Legacy, Vintage, etc?
I'm not sure I quite understand. You mean for Developing Competitive and Deck Creation?
Established is structured so that it won't be an issue.
If a deck exists in Developing/Creation, I don't think making a [Budget] version of it would be a problem. They are two completely different threads. You wull get breakdown when you have multiple budget discussions in a single budget archetype thread, but I think we can cross that when we get there.
The idea of [Budget] tags was liked by most of the replies, so that's what we'll go with.
We'll use the tags for all three deck discussion sections. The rules could be worded as such...
"Please use [Budget] in your thread title if you have budget constraints for your deck. Budget is what you, the thread creator, wants it to be. From Pauper-esque to running a cheaper manabase, etc. Please make your constraints clear in the opening post so discussion is on topic."
I think that covers concerns about defining budget; it's up to the thread starter. I don't expect everyone to start using these off the bat, and so we'll be lenient with their enforcement.
As always, looking for your feedback!
I will make a draft rules this evening for you to give your feedback on.
I don't want to see this happen again. I'll deal with last night's incidence when I get home. Thank you.
Just an idea that was kicked around, but never finished.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=5212091&postcount=120
Sort of our take on the Infinite Consortium from the book series.
Either way, the planeswalker group/guild idea is still open.
Given that Modern can have a steep entry fee, I think the userbase and mods are in agreement that we should allow budget discussions.
The question is how to set it up? Amongst ourselves (the mods), we thought up two ways of handling it.
- Dedicated budget subforum.
- Use existing subforums, but require the use of [Budget] tags as an identifier.
Of course, you guys are the end users and know what would work best. The two options above are by no means the only ones, hence the purpose of this thread.So please, use this to discuss the merits of budget discussion and the best way to roll it out. We are listening, as always!