If I remember correctly, after you check the "Yes, post a poll with this thread" box and specify the number of options, press "Submit New Thread". You will be given an option to structure your poll thereafter.
Considering most of the combo pieces are Wizards, and as he already mentioned, most of them are just interactions with the Commander + Lab Maniac, having that many win-cons doesn't seem to be taking up that much space in the deck. Stuff like Future Sight and Top are things he'd probably win outside of combos, anyway. The Myr Turbine win is the only one that seems questionable (to me anyway).
Several things stood out when I read the OP's post: -
1. The OP is adding more win conditions because control options aren't helping
2. The deck gets hated out a lot
2. Too many moving parts (more on this later)
There are several approaches in handling decks getting hated out a lot. Assuming that OP is not going for political strategies, I did not feel that adding more win conditions would be the right way of resolving the underlying problem; I felt that improving the deck's efficiency would be a better fix. To begin with, the OP's rationale for adding more win condition is "(a) lot of control doe(s) not mean the deck is always going to win... so yea, maybe one or two more good win cons to just push me over the top". I find this reasoning to be slightly flawed as it implies that because control options does not work, adding more win conditions (beyond those already in the deck) is the answer. In fact, I'd argue that the high density of win conditions is not helping the deck deal with the hate because of the excess of moving parts.
From the list of win conditions there, a few cards stand out as being fairly lacklustre on its own: -
It is difficult to see how the above serves any role when you are getting hated on (with the possible exception of intruder alarm). I do't know about other players but when I hate Azami, I will start doing so at the early game where the above cards are unlikely to help.
I won't comment on Laboratory Maniac as the OP explicitly mentioned including it as a major win condition. Aphetto Alchemist does not serve much other roles on its own. Intruder Alarm, on its own, can arguably help against certain aggro decks but even then, there is a good chance that it backfires. Myr Turbine is a lot of mana to invest in for a card that gives you a 1/1 the turn you play it. Psychosis Crawler may deal a fair bit of damage over time but as most Magic players have figured out during the Necropotence era, "the only damage that matters is your last damage". If anything, Psychosis Crawler is more likely to aggravate your opponents against you (YMMV). Diviner's Wand is a decent card draw though since there are no infinite mana combo in this deck, it is difficult to see how damaging this could be. Even the auxiliary ability to draw a card would make me gravitate towards Azure Mage more. Knowledge Pool (yes, I also suggested this earlier but only to provide a somewhat helpful suggestion which can probably be tutored by Treasure Mage) is a pretty clunky combo piece that seals the win but otherwise, it does not really do that much on its own either.
There are several other good options mentioned in this thread though -- extra turn options are pretty decent on its own as would the addition of one card win conditions.
That is... a lot of win conditions -- I feel that too many win conditions may actually dilute the deck's strategy. That said, more often than not, something like Bribery would suffice. If you must go the combo route and if you are already playing Teferi, consider Knowledge Pool. You may not win immediately but with that, you will probably win... eventually.
Would the community be for or against making an official shift though?
I think the best you'll get is what other MTGS players feel about this (we must constantly remind ourselves that there are a wider subset of players out there).
Has anyone ever considered or actually play commander while adhering to both banlists (official and french) when constructing decks?
I can see why a lot of people would be against this idea as the decks power level can drop substantially.
I used to do it but I have stopped doing so for some time for the simple reason that it is difficult to get a consensus between different playgroups. I have opted for a more direct solution to this problem -- I build multiple decks.
However, streamlining the rules prevents the splintering of the format overall. Personally I despise it when a "multiplayer" deck faces against a "french" deck or when a "french" deck plays in a multiplayer game. The games are so awkward and unfun.
I do not think we can call this "splintering of the format" in any meaningful sense. Personally, I despise it when a Standard Deck faces a Vintage Deck or when a Vintage Deck plays in a Standard tournament. Games are similarly awkward and unfun. The ban lists are different for a reason -- Standard, Legacy, Modern and Vintage are different things altogether.
My list follows the official banlist, but I would be more than happy to remove my sol ring and vampiric tutor if it meant that I would play in a more "balanced" and integrated environment.
It would be tough to get a consensus in many playgroups, to be honest. I mean, you are free to do it but it would be difficult to expect all playgroups to follow your lead just for the sake of integrating the format.
I was actually thinking of something similar (tho on a more local scale), with actual price pool, and paypal fees (although I didn't delve into the legality of such thing yet).
If you are planning to run this on this forum, accountability will be an issue and I have a feeling that the mods will want to bring this up with the admin. That said, if you must have prizes, the safest way to go about it (while avoiding these issues) would be to make it a free tournament with possible prizes but get someone to sponsor the event instead; finding the sponsor would be another issue altogether though.
I just figured it'd be prize enough to see your name on here with your deck ^.^
It should be pointed out that during ancient Olympics, winners of the tournament get some olive branches -- which is likely to decay pretty quickly To be fair, this is no Olympics so....
On that point though, if you do want to factor in prizes, expect a lot more headaches on this area.
One problem that I think we're going to run into is judging. I mean, it's fine to do a casual feel and let people police themselves, I just don't know if that is going to work for this. I guess if there aren't any prizes involved people will be less stiff about it...
If you are talking about rulings issue, in the middle of the game, I found you some judges here. As for an arbitrator to judge those "he said; she said" arguments, what the other people said -- I simply assumed that most of the participants are mature functioning adults
2d10s for me. I have something like 6-8 d10s for some reason so splitting the dice in a 4-player game should be easy enough. We do have life gain but rarely (if ever) going into the triple digits (unless you count arbitrarily large life gain where which we start using the dice to count the points of damage taken instead (if it even matters).
As opposed to Toxic Stench's "Target nonblack creature" part? (Don't feel bad, I missed that initially too.)
As for the original post Urdjur has put together another excellent list. Well done sir. I had to laugh at Executioner's Capsule honorable mention given the back & forth we've had over it and similar artifacts in my Merieke deck. What are your thoughts on Fissure, Aftershock, and Turn to Slag?
Huh.... That is interesting. I might have been conned in some of my EDH games then D:
Ghastly demise is nearly always better than [CARD]toxic stench
[/CARD]. It scales around as well as skred too I think - depending on your level of recursion though.
That may be true but Ghastly Demise is quite severely limited by the "target nonblack creature" part.
I omit counters and bounce since they are not really removal in my book).
1 CMC Flood: The strongest tapper in Pauper. All bi or mono blue decks must run this card.
3 CMC >Tier 2 Arc Lightning: Kills 1-3 targets at sorcery speed, typically an X/1 and an X/2 if you're lucky, for 3 mana. Also direct damage. Firebolt: Kills 2 targets at sorcery speed and different points in time with max 2 toughness for 6 mana total, which is perfectly reasonable (comparing with Fireball for instance). Direct damage possible. Crippling Fatigue: Kills 2 targets at sorcery speed at different points in time with max 2 toughness for 5 mana and 3 life, no reg. Strangling Soot: Kills 2 targets with no more than 3 toughness at instant speed at different points in time for 8 mana. Stinkweed Imp: Reusable deathtouch that works very well with the many flashback spells. A useful tool against untargetables or as a constant "Seal of Doom" against all aggro. Also a hard threat to handle with equipment, Rancor or Moldervine Cloak. Unmake: No card advantage on this one, but a step up in power from Terminate, which motivates the higher CC.
Quotes with relevant parts shown only. Initial comments after a quick scan.
Technically, if you omit counter magic and bounce, you should probably omit Flood since tapping is arguably less of a removal than bounce / countermagic -- also, the UU per turn may be a tad heavy for a 5 colour deck. YMMV. Depending on your definition of removal, I am a fan of innocent blood -- which has the added bonus of bypassing hexproof and potentially acting as a sacrifice outlet. At 2 mana, I am a fan of Toxic Stench in certain decks though I concede that its utility is not very universal -- it totally shines in late game though where graveyards should be sufficiently fat (at the right times, at least) and threats similarly fat.
I may be mistaken but I have a feeling that Firebolt actually has CMC 1 instead of CMC 3. Personally, I would sooner run Judge Unworthy or Magma Jet as I do prefer the added advantage of scry but I suppose it depends on preference.
The Qualifiers referred to in that link specifically allowed English-printed cards only. To date, I have not been aware of a NA tournament circuit that requires Japanese cards.
I know that there was an official region-wide tournament for the Japanese version a few days ago (where players would meet up to play at Singapore) but I did not actually get to join because it was coincidentally during my exam season. I am not sure if it applies in NA though. That said, I thought that the Japanese cards are available in North America and played there too.
You mean those decks that people constantly complained were overpowered in Standard, at meta saturation rates of 30% and 20% respectively?
In a way, I guess my point is that despite being ostensibly "overpowered", due to the chance-reliant nature of CFV, non-meta decks stand a decent chance against these meta decks. True, the newer Narukami decks provide insane card advantage in the form of a highly consistent removal suite but even then, that deck is not perfectly "safe" if the random gods decide to smite them. One may argue that Magic likewise has a chance element in the form of mana screw / mana flood / colour screw / etc. though I would argue (and would be willing to prove) that the element of chance is significantly lower in Magic.
This is the point I was getting at with regard to Swiss tournaments. Say that this tournament is run and the top 4 are all GP, but after the numbers are crunched of 50-odd matches, it's revealed that those 2-3 Sephiroth decks had an average win rate of 60% vs GP, while all builds of GP were roughly 50-50 against each other. Might this data induce some of the weaker GP players to switch over to Sephiroth, thus diversifying the metagame and forcing the GP holdouts to change up their card selection as well?
You are probably right though it is worth noting that even when that happens, the target demographics of CFV consist of a significant majority those who are probably into the anime (I am a partial exception). Given that Sephiroth made little (if any) major appearance in the anime and given that a significant majority of the target CFV playing demographic play the clans that the main characters play, it is uncertain that real data would hold much sway (it does not help that the clans that the main characters play tend to be good in their own right). Note that I am not disagreeing with you but I am simply arguing that for a large portion of the target demographic would be a lot less sensitive to actual data. To contrast, few players would play, say, Rhys or Melira just because they are main characters in the Lorwyn and New Phyrexia arcs respectively.
(Incidentally, I believe the answer is probably no, due to the way Bushiroad structures their game design -- archetypes are much less fluid in CFV, due to each clan having their own 1-2 gimmicks and hybrid clan decks being pretty much impossible. For example, if I don't like the way my GWB deck is performing in Magic, I can switch it over to Jund and still be able to keep a lot of the staple cards like Goyf, Pulse, duals, etc. Whereas in CFV if I'm sick of GP mirror matches all the time I have to re-buy my entire deck from scratch, then if that clan turns out to do worse than GP I no longer have a use for the cards I bought for that deck, or any other cards that will ever be printed for that clan in the future, barring power creep or GP cards going on the ban/restrict list. It's true in Magic as well that 90% of cards are crap in Constructed, but that's mostly due to Limited considerations and not WotC specifically pushing a Constructed archetype that turned out to be a total dud.)
I agree with most of your points but to balance things out, I would like to point out that power creep may be intentional on Bushiroad's part given that cards don't actually phase out like they do in Magic's standard -- and BSR, being a profit seeking corporation needs to... well, sell more cards Sure, the argument is moot for the more eternal Magic formats but given that Standard is one of the more popular format around, my point probably still stands.
It's good that you have a healthy locals though. Mine died a while back, according to a friend who used to go (it was gone by the time I started going regularly to that store), because of some issues with the store location and people QQing over double crit sack.
My sympathies, I suppose. We do have players who dislike the chance based element of VG. However, players who (eventually learn to) enjoy the game tend to start by accepting (indeed embracing) the chance-based nature of the game and the resulting lottery-based nature of its tournaments. Playing competitively (or at least with a heavy focus on winning) will most likely set players up for disappointment as soon as the they lose the random gods favour. Even in our tournaments, seeing a player survive with a timely heal trigger or killing a player with three damage using an unexpected double critical is usually a source of amusement.
TL;DR: CFV is probably not for everybody though those who enjoy it tend to be those that do not take the game too seriously (though to be fair, the same could be said of Magic).
Everything I say is about the English meta, as I live in the US. Some guy compiled the results of a bunch of pie charts from last year's Qualifier events here and concluded that GP was about 25% of the meta on average, with that % increasing in the top cut. (The Indonesia chart was particularly sad, with 50% GP, 30% Naru, and 20% "everything else".)
Interestingly, I was under the impression that regardless of locations, players do play with both the Japanese and English version of the game (i.e. TCG and OCG). Personally, I can't read a single Japanese character at all and I maintain two Japanese and one English decks.
I'd make a few conjectures on the link you sent me now though I admittedly started VG after that date. I would argue that the results would have been far worse if it was Swiss. While I did argue that the other clans would stand a higher chance of "striking the lottery", so to speak, under the 1 round-double elimination system, I would not go so far as to say that playing a meta clan would not increase your chances of winning.
For the record, I feel that the ratios are not that bad if you consider the MtG meta at certain points (Jund and Faeries anybody?)
Interesting. I have never been to an event (at least not one with a significant competitive aspect) at an anime convention, so I can't speak to whether people in NA stick around the M:TG area or wander off to other parts of the convention after they're mathematically eliminated. In events I've been to where the first prize is significantly more valuable than any prizes for side events (e.g. PTQs), people gradually drift out as they drop out of contention, so that by the time the top 8 cut occurs, the event hall is completely deserted aside from the judges, the players still in it, and people who are friends/sharing a car with them.
Given that players do have to take the trouble to go to the venue, I think most players try to make the most of their trip. Some will eventually "drift off", so to speak, but there is often no shortage of players that will be sticking around.
Of course, monetarily, the first prize is going to be worth significantly more than any prizes for side events but I think players tend to see the top prizes as "lottery prizes", so to speak and settle for the more realistic gains from the side events (and the social experiences too). That, and as mentioned, given that you came all the way to the venue, it makes little sense to go home just because you because got knocked out
Then again, everything I've heard indicates that the general Japanese mindset (in CFV at least) is significantly less oriented around competing than the NA mindset. (Remind me, have decks other than DOTE/MLB been able to consistently place yet?)
There are some good minor clan builds floating around which somehow get overlooked (just because no main characters in the anime plays them :rolleyes:) but due to the luck based nature of this game, I wouldn't say that they consistently place. For example, assume that there are two-three Sephiroth decks (NN) and ten MLB decks (RP) floating around. Even if Sephiroth has a marginally higher chance of winning, statistically, due to the sheer size of population, MLBs are more likely to consistently place relative to the Sephiroths.
That said, as I might have mentioned before, Narukami and OTT does pretty well in our English tournaments (the BLOOD and CoCo can be a pain to handle). Based on the tournament results which I gleamed from the LGSes where I play, I am sensing that Aqua Force (especially Maelstrom) and Nova Grappler (especially Illuminal) might see some representation in the top 8 soon.
That's all fine and good. But I've never seen a single CFV game last more than 15 minutes.
Actually, it does happen, albeit infrequently. I have had matches drawn out for about 30 minutes with matches of Oracle, Genesis and Bermuda going against each other (especially the more draw intensive variants).
Considering that a single clan (GP) dominated the NA standings anyway even with Best of 1/Double Elim, it doesn't follow that Best of 2/Swiss would quash deck diversity or discourage casual players. A bad player can still dreamcrush a pro with random double crit using a trial deck, but that should be an uncommon scenario, not something to strive for!
Interesting, I was not aware that Gold Paladin was dominant in NA. Was this in the English or Japanese meta?
But back to the point, mind you, I am not claiming that double elimination is anwhere close to a perfect solution to this nor did I say that double crits are "something to strive for". I even went on to mention that veteran players should win more games in their careers (i.e. the long run). I would argue that if best of 1/double elimination resulted in a single clan dominated meta, it is likely that Swiss would make it a lot worse.
If tournaments are run as Swiss: Bad players don't have to go home after an hour, and have a reasonable shot of being matched against people of their similar skill level. Good players can lose a game or two and still feel like they have a chance to be in it. More people hanging around the venue for longer means more people for the tournament organizer to sell cards, supplies, and food to. More games played means we have more meta-data (if such a thing is relevant) to shut up all the people who whine about Deck X being overpowered if in fact it is not. Seems like a win for everyone.
I won't speak for the scene in NA (since I am not from NA) but from where I am playing, players that are knocked out don't usually "go home after an hour", so to speak. At larger events, the main event tend to be treated as a side event of sorts where knocked out players would simply wander off to mingle and play with some random strangers (saying "shikata ga nai" or something to that effect). Since the events tend to be run next to anime-related events (trust me, the organisers do get something out of this), winning is more of a bonus since it is sort of an open secret that Vanguard is an extremely luck based game with even the best decks going all "tsun" at the most critical moments and all "dere" at casual tables. I am not qualified to say that this is true of shop tournaments though since shop tournaments I join tend to be run in Best of 1/Swiss, anyway
I can accept the some players may take a more calculated approach towards the game but at the same time, I think it is worth pointing out that there are equally valid rationale for running the tournament differently, especially if the intent is different.
This is just a conjecture but I have a feeling that the preference for double elimination lies in the chance reliant nature of Weiß Schwarz and Vanguard (and probably Victory Spark) to begin with. WS and VG tend to be a lot more luck-based in that damage is almost never a certainty in both games (as damage is almost never a certainty with trigger and climax cards (for WS) and critical and heal triggers (for VG). I suspect that this randomness was intentionally built into these games to provide a good opportunity for newbies to randomly trounce veteran players. The double elimination method amplifies the chance-reliant nature of the rounds, allowing veteran players to be randomly booted off (though they should still win more games with their decks in their careers, theoretically).
True, this can be bad because it does not reward skill appropriately in favour of luck. On the other hand, the apparent intent is to help encourage casual players into the fold and discourage an overcompetitive scenario (is it worth spending X amount of money if you have a y% chance of losing a random trial deck?). A Swiss-run VG tournament will almost consistently have Narukami and Kagero (at least for the Japanese meta) in the top percentile weekly. Especially for WS, I would argue that the intent of these games (especially WS) was never designed to be competitive in the same way that Magic was designed to be competitive; I started WS purely because I liked a particular anime series but this is neither here nor there.
Incidentally, WS matches are often best of one for the simple reason that Weiß Schwarz games are really that long. One game can easily gobble up thirty minutes assume that players take reasonable amount of time to perform reasonable calculations; there are many instances where all that planning goes down into the drain anyway because of the random climax gods. It takes a bit longer for non-Japanese reading players, mind you, given that you will have to spend some time asking your opponent what card does what -- the English version of WS is still at its infancy and is available for a relatively small number of series only, at this point. A best of three format can be a nightmare with some matches taking up to one and a half hours while lucky / unlucky players who finished their matches in about 45 minutes sit on their hand while waiting for the next round to start.
I believe that in the pauper EDH community that I play in, this is a staple (sometimes appearing in monoblue or bi-coloured decks) due to the versatility that it offers for a common.
Several things stood out when I read the OP's post: -
1. The OP is adding more win conditions because control options aren't helping
2. The deck gets hated out a lot
2. Too many moving parts (more on this later)
There are several approaches in handling decks getting hated out a lot. Assuming that OP is not going for political strategies, I did not feel that adding more win conditions would be the right way of resolving the underlying problem; I felt that improving the deck's efficiency would be a better fix. To begin with, the OP's rationale for adding more win condition is "(a) lot of control doe(s) not mean the deck is always going to win... so yea, maybe one or two more good win cons to just push me over the top". I find this reasoning to be slightly flawed as it implies that because control options does not work, adding more win conditions (beyond those already in the deck) is the answer. In fact, I'd argue that the high density of win conditions is not helping the deck deal with the hate because of the excess of moving parts.
From the list of win conditions there, a few cards stand out as being fairly lacklustre on its own: -
It is difficult to see how the above serves any role when you are getting hated on (with the possible exception of intruder alarm). I do't know about other players but when I hate Azami, I will start doing so at the early game where the above cards are unlikely to help.
I won't comment on Laboratory Maniac as the OP explicitly mentioned including it as a major win condition. Aphetto Alchemist does not serve much other roles on its own. Intruder Alarm, on its own, can arguably help against certain aggro decks but even then, there is a good chance that it backfires. Myr Turbine is a lot of mana to invest in for a card that gives you a 1/1 the turn you play it. Psychosis Crawler may deal a fair bit of damage over time but as most Magic players have figured out during the Necropotence era, "the only damage that matters is your last damage". If anything, Psychosis Crawler is more likely to aggravate your opponents against you (YMMV). Diviner's Wand is a decent card draw though since there are no infinite mana combo in this deck, it is difficult to see how damaging this could be. Even the auxiliary ability to draw a card would make me gravitate towards Azure Mage more. Knowledge Pool (yes, I also suggested this earlier but only to provide a somewhat helpful suggestion which can probably be tutored by Treasure Mage) is a pretty clunky combo piece that seals the win but otherwise, it does not really do that much on its own either.
There are several other good options mentioned in this thread though -- extra turn options are pretty decent on its own as would the addition of one card win conditions.
My two cents, at least.
Have you considered swapping Helm of Awakening with Etherium Sculptor (if you haven't already)?
I think the best you'll get is what other MTGS players feel about this (we must constantly remind ourselves that there are a wider subset of players out there).
Onto your actual question though: -
First thoughts: I sense gratuitous use of emoticons here but more on topic: -
I used to do it but I have stopped doing so for some time for the simple reason that it is difficult to get a consensus between different playgroups. I have opted for a more direct solution to this problem -- I build multiple decks.
I do not think we can call this "splintering of the format" in any meaningful sense. Personally, I despise it when a Standard Deck faces a Vintage Deck or when a Vintage Deck plays in a Standard tournament. Games are similarly awkward and unfun. The ban lists are different for a reason -- Standard, Legacy, Modern and Vintage are different things altogether.
It would be tough to get a consensus in many playgroups, to be honest. I mean, you are free to do it but it would be difficult to expect all playgroups to follow your lead just for the sake of integrating the format.
PMed with permission and whanot.
If you are planning to run this on this forum, accountability will be an issue and I have a feeling that the mods will want to bring this up with the admin. That said, if you must have prizes, the safest way to go about it (while avoiding these issues) would be to make it a free tournament with possible prizes but get someone to sponsor the event instead; finding the sponsor would be another issue altogether though.
It should be pointed out that during ancient Olympics, winners of the tournament get some olive branches -- which is likely to decay pretty quickly
On that point though, if you do want to factor in prizes, expect a lot more headaches on this area.
If you are talking about rulings issue, in the middle of the game, I found you some judges here. As for an arbitrator to judge those "he said; she said" arguments, what the other people said -- I simply assumed that most of the participants are mature functioning adults
fzian used a software to do the matchups D: A chess software D:
A week would be recommended to account for the possibility that participants have a life beyond MtG
For my part, I set aside a little more than a week.
Otherwise, notepad on a laptop.
Huh.... That is interesting. I might have been conned in some of my EDH games then D:
That may be true but Ghastly Demise is quite severely limited by the "target nonblack creature" part.
Quotes with relevant parts shown only. Initial comments after a quick scan.
Technically, if you omit counter magic and bounce, you should probably omit Flood since tapping is arguably less of a removal than bounce / countermagic -- also, the UU per turn may be a tad heavy for a 5 colour deck. YMMV. Depending on your definition of removal, I am a fan of innocent blood -- which has the added bonus of bypassing hexproof and potentially acting as a sacrifice outlet. At 2 mana, I am a fan of Toxic Stench in certain decks though I concede that its utility is not very universal -- it totally shines in late game though where graveyards should be sufficiently fat (at the right times, at least) and threats similarly fat.
I may be mistaken but I have a feeling that Firebolt actually has CMC 1 instead of CMC 3. Personally, I would sooner run Judge Unworthy or Magma Jet as I do prefer the added advantage of scry but I suppose it depends on preference.
I know that there was an official region-wide tournament for the Japanese version a few days ago (where players would meet up to play at Singapore) but I did not actually get to join because it was coincidentally during my exam season. I am not sure if it applies in NA though. That said, I thought that the Japanese cards are available in North America and played there too.
In a way, I guess my point is that despite being ostensibly "overpowered", due to the chance-reliant nature of CFV, non-meta decks stand a decent chance against these meta decks. True, the newer Narukami decks provide insane card advantage in the form of a highly consistent removal suite but even then, that deck is not perfectly "safe" if the random gods decide to smite them. One may argue that Magic likewise has a chance element in the form of mana screw / mana flood / colour screw / etc. though I would argue (and would be willing to prove) that the element of chance is significantly lower in Magic.
You are probably right though it is worth noting that even when that happens, the target demographics of CFV consist of a significant majority those who are probably into the anime (I am a partial exception). Given that Sephiroth made little (if any) major appearance in the anime and given that a significant majority of the target CFV playing demographic play the clans that the main characters play, it is uncertain that real data would hold much sway (it does not help that the clans that the main characters play tend to be good in their own right). Note that I am not disagreeing with you but I am simply arguing that for a large portion of the target demographic would be a lot less sensitive to actual data. To contrast, few players would play, say, Rhys or Melira just because they are main characters in the Lorwyn and New Phyrexia arcs respectively.
I agree with most of your points but to balance things out, I would like to point out that power creep may be intentional on Bushiroad's part given that cards don't actually phase out like they do in Magic's standard -- and BSR, being a profit seeking corporation needs to... well, sell more cards
My sympathies, I suppose. We do have players who dislike the chance based element of VG. However, players who (eventually learn to) enjoy the game tend to start by accepting (indeed embracing) the chance-based nature of the game and the resulting lottery-based nature of its tournaments. Playing competitively (or at least with a heavy focus on winning) will most likely set players up for disappointment as soon as the they lose the random gods favour. Even in our tournaments, seeing a player survive with a timely heal trigger or killing a player with three damage using an unexpected double critical is usually a source of amusement.
TL;DR: CFV is probably not for everybody though those who enjoy it tend to be those that do not take the game too seriously (though to be fair, the same could be said of Magic).
Interestingly, I was under the impression that regardless of locations, players do play with both the Japanese and English version of the game (i.e. TCG and OCG). Personally, I can't read a single Japanese character at all and I maintain two Japanese and one English decks.
I'd make a few conjectures on the link you sent me now though I admittedly started VG after that date. I would argue that the results would have been far worse if it was Swiss. While I did argue that the other clans would stand a higher chance of "striking the lottery", so to speak, under the 1 round-double elimination system, I would not go so far as to say that playing a meta clan would not increase your chances of winning.
For the record, I feel that the ratios are not that bad if you consider the MtG meta at certain points (Jund and Faeries anybody?)
Given that players do have to take the trouble to go to the venue, I think most players try to make the most of their trip. Some will eventually "drift off", so to speak, but there is often no shortage of players that will be sticking around.
Of course, monetarily, the first prize is going to be worth significantly more than any prizes for side events but I think players tend to see the top prizes as "lottery prizes", so to speak and settle for the more realistic gains from the side events (and the social experiences too). That, and as mentioned, given that you came all the way to the venue, it makes little sense to go home just because you because got knocked out
There are some good minor clan builds floating around which somehow get overlooked (just because no main characters in the anime plays them :rolleyes:) but due to the luck based nature of this game, I wouldn't say that they consistently place. For example, assume that there are two-three Sephiroth decks (NN) and ten MLB decks (RP) floating around. Even if Sephiroth has a marginally higher chance of winning, statistically, due to the sheer size of population, MLBs are more likely to consistently place relative to the Sephiroths.
That said, as I might have mentioned before, Narukami and OTT does pretty well in our English tournaments (the BLOOD and CoCo can be a pain to handle). Based on the tournament results which I gleamed from the LGSes where I play, I am sensing that Aqua Force (especially Maelstrom) and Nova Grappler (especially Illuminal) might see some representation in the top 8 soon.
Actually, it does happen, albeit infrequently. I have had matches drawn out for about 30 minutes with matches of Oracle, Genesis and Bermuda going against each other (especially the more draw intensive variants).
Interesting, I was not aware that Gold Paladin was dominant in NA. Was this in the English or Japanese meta?
But back to the point, mind you, I am not claiming that double elimination is anwhere close to a perfect solution to this nor did I say that double crits are "something to strive for". I even went on to mention that veteran players should win more games in their careers (i.e. the long run). I would argue that if best of 1/double elimination resulted in a single clan dominated meta, it is likely that Swiss would make it a lot worse.
I won't speak for the scene in NA (since I am not from NA) but from where I am playing, players that are knocked out don't usually "go home after an hour", so to speak. At larger events, the main event tend to be treated as a side event of sorts where knocked out players would simply wander off to mingle and play with some random strangers (saying "shikata ga nai" or something to that effect). Since the events tend to be run next to anime-related events (trust me, the organisers do get something out of this), winning is more of a bonus since it is sort of an open secret that Vanguard is an extremely luck based game with even the best decks going all "tsun" at the most critical moments and all "dere" at casual tables. I am not qualified to say that this is true of shop tournaments though since shop tournaments I join tend to be run in Best of 1/Swiss, anyway
I can accept the some players may take a more calculated approach towards the game but at the same time, I think it is worth pointing out that there are equally valid rationale for running the tournament differently, especially if the intent is different.
True, this can be bad because it does not reward skill appropriately in favour of luck. On the other hand, the apparent intent is to help encourage casual players into the fold and discourage an overcompetitive scenario (is it worth spending X amount of money if you have a y% chance of losing a random trial deck?). A Swiss-run VG tournament will almost consistently have Narukami and Kagero (at least for the Japanese meta) in the top percentile weekly. Especially for WS, I would argue that the intent of these games (especially WS) was never designed to be competitive in the same way that Magic was designed to be competitive; I started WS purely because I liked a particular anime series but this is neither here nor there.
Incidentally, WS matches are often best of one for the simple reason that Weiß Schwarz games are really that long. One game can easily gobble up thirty minutes assume that players take reasonable amount of time to perform reasonable calculations; there are many instances where all that planning goes down into the drain anyway because of the random climax gods. It takes a bit longer for non-Japanese reading players, mind you, given that you will have to spend some time asking your opponent what card does what -- the English version of WS is still at its infancy and is available for a relatively small number of series only, at this point. A best of three format can be a nightmare with some matches taking up to one and a half hours while lucky / unlucky players who finished their matches in about 45 minutes sit on their hand while waiting for the next round to start.
I am not that good in economics but if it is just some basic undergraduate stuff, I think I should be able to help.