Can somebody please briefly outline an example of the most common draw-in situation in a large pro type tournament? Don't have any experience with those, only FNM, and keeping track of a lot of rounds realistically is really difficult with made-up results.
So lets say you have a 64 man swiss tourney cut to top 8. I believe that's 6 rounds, and any more is 7 rounds. Its currently round 6, so far there have been 0 draws, which is abnormal, but meh.
After round 1 you have:
1-0: 32
0-1: 32
After round 2 you have:
2-0: 16
1-1: 32
0-2: 16
After round 3:
3-0: 8
2-1: 24
1-2: 24
0-3: 8
After round 4:
4-0: 4
3-1: 16
2-2: 24
1-3: 16
0-4: 4
After round 5:
5-0: 2
4-1: 10
3-2: 20
2-3: 20
1-4: 10
0-5: 2
Cuts are to top 8.
In terms of cuts, the WER looks at 4 things, first it checks points. Most points go in. If multiple players have equal points, it then checks opponent match win percentage, and the player who played better opponents gets higher seed. If those are equal, it checks your game win percentage (so more 2-0s are better, and 1-1s are bad), and if those are equal, it looks at opponent game win percentage. We'll only need to worry about the first one.
So our tournament has these players:
5-0: 2
4-1: 10
3-2: 20
2-3: 20
1-4: 10
0-5: 2
We only care about the 5-0s and 4-1s. There are 12, lets letter them A-L.
A-B (5-0)
C-D (4-1)
E-F (4-1)
G-H (4-1)
I-J (4-1)
K-L (4-1)
If every game is played out, and every person on the left wins, A is 6-0, and B, C, E, G, I, and K are 5-1. They all get in. That leaves 1 spots for a 4-2s. These will almost certainly be either D, F, H, J, or L but it could be one of the 10 winners in the 3-2 bracket. Such a 3-2 player would have to have played at least one of the current 5-1s though. Essentially it all comes down to opponent wins.
Wow what happens if all top 12 players tiebreak?
A-B (5-0)
C-D (4-1)
E-F (4-1)
G-H (4-1)
I-J (4-1)
K-L (4-1)
A and B are 5-0-1. Everyone else is 4-1-1. A and B get in, and of C-L, 6 get in. Essentially, it comes down to who out of C-Ls opponents did best. And the only person affected badly is the 3-2 player who won in round 6 and had the best standing, and even then, only maybe.
Now it does get more confusing with byes, since if there are 3+ people with 4-0-1 coming into round 5, the 5-0 guys must draw to be certain they get in.
Top 8 guys ID, 9 & 10 played cause of bad tiebreakers.
The guys 11 to 32 did have a chance to make top 8 if EVERYONE PLAYED. But because of ID shenanigans they didn't.
This isn't strictly true. Only the top guys from 11-32 going into round 13(?) had a chance. The guy in 32nd after round 12 had no more chance than the guy in 1006th.
Then the next question is... where is this incredible store that gives 100% value?!?!?
Most stores have to turn a profit, so offering them at the same value you sell them at equals no profit. Our store offers 50% on cards under $10, and 70% on cards over $10.
Actually as long as the store credit doesn't buy singles, the store is turning a profit.
The owl was a 1/1. What makes SGO, AoB, etc. better is that they draw a card, yes, but they also block 1/x and 2/x aggro creatures. That's super helpful. Even so, with only filtering and no draw, I doubt this is more than fringe played.
Nai didn't actually explain anything; all he did was say that Condoms' words were "scathing" and got upset that Condoms didn't actually offer any "help" towards the issues he was complaining about/pointing out. Basically Nai told us that Condoms was CI-banned for no other reason than the staff got butthurt because he didn't spruce up his language to their Special Snowflake Standards.
There are two arguments to this:
1. You know the rules, you know their standards. Don't post if you are breaking them
2. He was spamming, unconstructive, meme, complaint type posts are generally seen as spam.
For review, here is every one of Condoms' posts in the previous thread:
"Or even if they can't justify it!
Sooooo, does this mean we can now be imfracted for trolling not jst users, but corporations/companies? That's crazygonuts."
"That's pretty accurate."
"So, no one answered my question. We can now be infracted for "trolling" companies, groups, and other non tangible entities such as but not limited to political parties, interest groups, etc? That's insane. What about all the posts in entertainment criticizing those in the entertainment industry or sports world?
Wow."
"Wow. This is an Internet forum. Infracting people for strongly criticizing the things I listed is beyond ridiculous. Beyond it.
I assume the entertainment subs should soon be littered with retroactive infractions under this new wonderful interpretation of the rules then?"
"Basically all I'm getting at this point is "well infract as we see fit based on if we agree with your opinion and no you won't know if what you are posting is okay"
I guess everyone should never say anything negative about anything?
Hooray special snowflakes!"
"Former New England tight end Aaron Hernandez is a murderer and scum of a human being. What a waste of top talent.
The above is slander in your definition, algebra.
You are seriously missing the point. Neither is really slander, unless maybe the mtgstaff decides so based on who know what criteria."
Truly scathing stuff. Here, staff; have a burn heal.
He sounds like the special snowflake to me. I mean, none of that was constructive, none of that was useful, and yeah, all of it was annoying. The post by cz that I quoted, that was a useful, constructive post. "Nyeh nyeh, mods are literally hitler" is not.
Where have you been? They just spent a page of the thread arguing about DTR and the Gutter. Checkbox tried to move it back to Condoms. He said he didn't think the posts made by Condoms were non-constructive. One of the points of CI involves people discussing mod action and questioning justifications. This isn't a magical Christmas land where if the mods say it's offensive it actually is offensive. That's why we're here talking about it. For example, Nai explained in some detail why he thought Condoms's posts weren't helpful, opening up the issue to scrutiny and discussion.
I've been lurking. And yes, Nai explained that, to which Checkbox responded with what amounts to "nyeh nyeh you're wrong [insert thinly veiled jab at mtgs staff here]"
This isn't a magical Christmas land where if the mods say it's offensive it actually is offensive. That's why we're here talking about it.
And actually, yes it is. There is a forum for discussion of whether the mods are right, but until that discussion is concluded, what the mods said is canon.
this isn't really about the gutter, its about Condoms. Since when is reductio ad absurdum considered "not constructive"? Are we only allowing MTGS-Approved Forms of Debate now?
Did anyone say that? I think they said that poisoning the well and making numerous posts before anyone official could respond was not constructive. You know, insulting people and spamming, more or less. Those things are always against the rules. Now, whether or not you think he was spamming or insulting doesn't matter, the staff thinks it was, there is the justification.
Can we get a card search bar on the main page? Like right next to search mtgsalvation, just a bar that says Search Cards or something (you'd need to move the twitter/fb buttons though).
The search bar throughout the site works for cards as well.
The spoilers page has some issues, mana symbols are overlayed on the text, which looks really sloppy, and the planechase symbol appears in strange places (I think its where // is for split cards)
Added this to the list, thanks.
Ah, totally missed the tab
and heyoo, quote nesting is gorgeous.
Just saw this, decided to comment on it cold (I've read very little of this thread so far).
I'm using the latest version of google chrome.
My first thought was that the forum style needs some work. That's a big thing, but I assume something that's already being worked on somewhere. There's a black background with silver that uses square cornered and streamlined buttons, its nice and clean. Then you get the forum style which is blue on white with round cornered buttons. Although its still a clean look, its a totally different one, and the two clash in style. That's just a matter of updated forum buttons and such, an easy thing that's not so much a bug as my personal preference.
Oh lord the trading stuff is cool, I'm in love with it and I don't even trade.
Can we get a card search bar on the main page? Like right next to search mtgsalvation, just a bar that says Search Cards or something (you'd need to move the twitter/fb buttons though).
The spoilers page has some issues, mana symbols are overlayed on the text, which looks really sloppy, and the planechase symbol appears in strange places (I think its where // is for split cards)
The upload an image button is screwing with me, make it look different please :3
Also, is there going to be anything beyond the mtgs swirl as a mod symbol and the flame for curse liaisons, that took me a while to figure out and is easy to skip over.
Hey guys! The other day I played a fairly standard deadeye deck at a SCG open invitational (extremely small turn out, but still). I came in third, but it's really difficult to fight against the blitz and hyper-Aggro decks with this kind of a deck. I can post the list I was running if you'd like.
Here recently I was thinking: what about a white splash? That gives us access to verdict, centaur healer, azorius charm, Lyev Skyknight, Resto Angel, etc. if the mana is too difficult, what about dropping red entirely? Skyknight, healer, and Thragtusk are all still great targets for deadeye, and the white might give us a little more survive-ability.
With the splash, we'll still have arbor elf, verdant haven, chromatic lantern, and farseek to fix. But in order to fight Aggro, we probably won't want to waste turns playing ramp, rather would want to drop removal, flash dudes, and board wipes.
Anyway, I'd like to hear some thoughts about it.
When I was playing the deck, we had a huge amount of RDW variants at my LGS, Rakdos wins, zombies, etc. I found that huntmaster+thrag+ the 8+ sweepers I ran was enough, is that still doing too little for you? I also ran pillar of flame, and all of my boardwipes were 2 cost with the option to overload. Aggro was by far the hardest MU, that and mill (which is now becoming way too common where I play). Hopefully I'll be able to sleeve up a version of this deck and play it with the new goodies that GTC have given us, but we'll see.
This. It's something any competent tech company would have done ages ago. The year is 2013, applications should not be defined in terms of singular operating systems anymore; the quickly changing OS scene should make Wizards to make their software more platform-independent, and accessibility is a HUGE issue for those who want to take their game to the next level, but don't have a WINDOWS (TM) machine.
Obligatory "the league of legends (read: most played MMO in the world) client just got a mac beta last month, and it is years old." A huge number of large games are plagued by client issues.
In my opinion there aren't enough. I didn't play during those days but I wish for cards like boil to come back. Maybe not as powerful but I remember seeing cards that showed color hate of enemy colors. As for counters they need to be a part of the game because you need to be able to learn how to play around them and be a better player.
The problem is that those cards basically invalidate archtypes. More recently, kor firewalker was enough to relegate RDW to 2nd tier in zendikar block when goblins/RDW was strong enough to (slightly) impact the legacy version of the deck.
Just gonna say be very careful with fatpack boxes, they have a piece of cardboard in the lid that can easily catch on cards when you close it, ruining cards.
So lets say you have a 64 man swiss tourney cut to top 8. I believe that's 6 rounds, and any more is 7 rounds. Its currently round 6, so far there have been 0 draws, which is abnormal, but meh.
After round 1 you have:
1-0: 32
0-1: 32
After round 2 you have:
2-0: 16
1-1: 32
0-2: 16
After round 3:
3-0: 8
2-1: 24
1-2: 24
0-3: 8
After round 4:
4-0: 4
3-1: 16
2-2: 24
1-3: 16
0-4: 4
After round 5:
5-0: 2
4-1: 10
3-2: 20
2-3: 20
1-4: 10
0-5: 2
Cuts are to top 8.
In terms of cuts, the WER looks at 4 things, first it checks points. Most points go in. If multiple players have equal points, it then checks opponent match win percentage, and the player who played better opponents gets higher seed. If those are equal, it checks your game win percentage (so more 2-0s are better, and 1-1s are bad), and if those are equal, it looks at opponent game win percentage. We'll only need to worry about the first one.
So our tournament has these players:
5-0: 2
4-1: 10
3-2: 20
2-3: 20
1-4: 10
0-5: 2
We only care about the 5-0s and 4-1s. There are 12, lets letter them A-L.
A-B (5-0)
C-D (4-1)
E-F (4-1)
G-H (4-1)
I-J (4-1)
K-L (4-1)
If every game is played out, and every person on the left wins, A is 6-0, and B, C, E, G, I, and K are 5-1. They all get in. That leaves 1 spots for a 4-2s. These will almost certainly be either D, F, H, J, or L but it could be one of the 10 winners in the 3-2 bracket. Such a 3-2 player would have to have played at least one of the current 5-1s though. Essentially it all comes down to opponent wins.
Wow what happens if all top 12 players tiebreak?
A-B (5-0)
C-D (4-1)
E-F (4-1)
G-H (4-1)
I-J (4-1)
K-L (4-1)
A and B are 5-0-1. Everyone else is 4-1-1. A and B get in, and of C-L, 6 get in. Essentially, it comes down to who out of C-Ls opponents did best. And the only person affected badly is the 3-2 player who won in round 6 and had the best standing, and even then, only maybe.
Now it does get more confusing with byes, since if there are 3+ people with 4-0-1 coming into round 5, the 5-0 guys must draw to be certain they get in.
This isn't strictly true. Only the top guys from 11-32 going into round 13(?) had a chance. The guy in 32nd after round 12 had no more chance than the guy in 1006th.
Actually as long as the store credit doesn't buy singles, the store is turning a profit.
I'd actually love to hear mod input on this, as this doesn't sit kosher with me.
There are two arguments to this:
1. You know the rules, you know their standards. Don't post if you are breaking them
2. He was spamming, unconstructive, meme, complaint type posts are generally seen as spam.
He sounds like the special snowflake to me. I mean, none of that was constructive, none of that was useful, and yeah, all of it was annoying. The post by cz that I quoted, that was a useful, constructive post. "Nyeh nyeh, mods are literally hitler" is not.
I've been lurking. And yes, Nai explained that, to which Checkbox responded with what amounts to "nyeh nyeh you're wrong [insert thinly veiled jab at mtgs staff here]"
And actually, yes it is. There is a forum for discussion of whether the mods are right, but until that discussion is concluded, what the mods said is canon.
Did anyone say that? I think they said that poisoning the well and making numerous posts before anyone official could respond was not constructive. You know, insulting people and spamming, more or less. Those things are always against the rules. Now, whether or not you think he was spamming or insulting doesn't matter, the staff thinks it was, there is the justification.
Ah, totally missed the tab
and heyoo, quote nesting is gorgeous.
I'm using the latest version of google chrome.
My first thought was that the forum style needs some work. That's a big thing, but I assume something that's already being worked on somewhere. There's a black background with silver that uses square cornered and streamlined buttons, its nice and clean. Then you get the forum style which is blue on white with round cornered buttons. Although its still a clean look, its a totally different one, and the two clash in style. That's just a matter of updated forum buttons and such, an easy thing that's not so much a bug as my personal preference.
Oh lord the trading stuff is cool, I'm in love with it and I don't even trade.
Can we get a card search bar on the main page? Like right next to search mtgsalvation, just a bar that says Search Cards or something (you'd need to move the twitter/fb buttons though).
The spoilers page has some issues, mana symbols are overlayed on the text, which looks really sloppy, and the planechase symbol appears in strange places (I think its where // is for split cards)
The upload an image button is screwing with me, make it look different please :3
Also, is there going to be anything beyond the mtgs swirl as a mod symbol and the flame for curse liaisons, that took me a while to figure out and is easy to skip over.
When I was playing the deck, we had a huge amount of RDW variants at my LGS, Rakdos wins, zombies, etc. I found that huntmaster+thrag+ the 8+ sweepers I ran was enough, is that still doing too little for you? I also ran pillar of flame, and all of my boardwipes were 2 cost with the option to overload. Aggro was by far the hardest MU, that and mill (which is now becoming way too common where I play). Hopefully I'll be able to sleeve up a version of this deck and play it with the new goodies that GTC have given us, but we'll see.
Obligatory "the league of legends (read: most played MMO in the world) client just got a mac beta last month, and it is years old." A huge number of large games are plagued by client issues.
The problem is that those cards basically invalidate archtypes. More recently, kor firewalker was enough to relegate RDW to 2nd tier in zendikar block when goblins/RDW was strong enough to (slightly) impact the legacy version of the deck.
You can remove those.