There is a lot of depth to this deck. I think your article is enough to get people interested in it, while giving them an idea on how to fight other decks. Their next step is to pick up the deck and practice with it (which you suggest).
Like all decks, knowing them through practice will help bring up your win percentage. This deck doesn't accidentally win like some others, but is rewarding to know that you can make the right play with so many options.
I think I speak for everybody when I say that we were secretly rooting for a video of the awe-inspiring AJ v Erman Horses v Goblins (or something) final to end all finals.
I know sometimes I find it hard to get Pauper or Classic games to fire when I'm online never mind a lesser supported format. That may however be partly down to the fact that I look in the TP room because of my uncertainty and previous bad experiences with 'Casual'.
I have reentered MTGO in the last month after a year's virtual absence. With the intent to play 3-4 times per week and usually having about an hour to spend on-line, I am averaging one night per week where I can not find a Tribal game within 10-15 minutes.
Other nights I have been able to squeeze in three games against three different opponents in an hour.
It is not on life support yet, but I feel like I am standing at the edge of the spiral staircase.
I see "The deck may not contain more than 15 total copies of cards from Tempest and Stronghold". What are the rules on cards from other sets? There's nothing specific that the deck must only be built from Exodus block cards.
Well in that case I think I move more to your side of the debate.
Given the impending PRE and the publicity from this debate and your articles I'd be tempted to leave it at that. I'm not sure Tribal is a viable cometative format to be honest. Not once the real 'Spikes' turn their attention towards it. Regardless of the number of new players it would bring I'm not sure it's a good idea. I think I agree with LE in principle but I'm not sure the format would support it.
For my benefit, and also anyone else who doesn't play Tribal but has been following the debate and thinking about giving it a try, how should a person build a deck or advertise their game to get an opponent.
At a basic level I don't want to spoil anyones gaming experience by going Mountain, Lackey, pass when they are holding a grip full of Myr however I don't want to be the one marshalling the Myr against Forest, elf-dude, pass or Island, Merr-dude pass, either.
Perhaps it's just me but I find the minefield of unwritten laws in casual far worse than any rulebook or game mechanic. At least in full blown competitive play there is no doubt that you are both playing to win and can use whatever card, rule, combo, etc that the formats rules allow.
I can't make next saturday, its my wifes company trip to Kings Island, home of the worlds best wooden roller coaster The Beast. But if its weekly I'll try.
I wholeheartedly support this endeavour. Regrettably, I'm going to be rather busy this saturday with prior commitments, so good luck to everyone attending!
Tribal is not as popular as it was: Partly this is a factor of the greater variety of available formats, partly history, partly Lorwyn. However, I've still been able to log on at any time of day and get a tribal classic game going shortly after asking for one, and if I'm willing to spend a few minutes, get one going in the multi room as well. It is not in the best of health, but neither is it on its last legs.
"Baleeting someone because they played a combo you didn't like is silly (though understandable from the emotional aspect of it) but I just wonder if combo is really so strong in Tribal then isn't the format moot?"
I was actually speaking more generally than Tribal wars (because I understood your question to be about any PREs) - to be excat I mainly do that in Commander (singleton multiplayer) where - I think - combo is at the weakest (in a format with classic-style card legality) if your commander can't find it. I suppose Tribal Wars does have a problem with combos...
"How does the CASUAL player handle slummers in PREs without just calling the whole thing a wash?"
To answer your question I do not really think they can. I suppose you could ban all previous winners (it is quite subjective how far is to far in most other measures) but a lot of PREs ain't large enough for that to be a possibility.
On the other hand even if none is slumming, how does that prevent all but 1 casual player from not winning? Is it still a wash for the others?
Just because the winners casual deck is in the spirit of the format does not mean that anybody else got a great change of winning against that deck (e.g. a expensive deck got a greater chance to win - simply because the deck is constructed from a deeper pool). Is that unfair/slumming?
Firstly I'd like to say how much I've enjoyed both of the articles in this debate. Both have been thought provoking and as yet I'm still undecided as to who I'd vote for, if there was a vote. It couldn't be done all the time but I think this style of article writing should be used every time the situation allows.
Moving onto the topic under discussion...
The facts, as I understand them, are that tribal is in danger as it's player base has shrunk to a point where very few players are looking to experiment in the format. However much the current players like the games they are playing at the moment the vicious cycle of few players, making it difficult to get a game, meaning less people play is in motion. Tribal itself is basically not designed for or able to support proper competative play. I'm not sure if this is just a function of the lack of a sideboard and a banned list that requires a review or if it's an issue with some tribes being far superior in the card pool they can draw from. Nobody wants to see Tribal dissapear however we have two opinions of the effect on the format that starting competitive play would introduce.
The closest thing that I can draw on as a model is Pauper. I got interested in and started playing Pauper before it was sanctioned. There is no doubt in my mind that Pauper has changed since those days. Pauper decks have evolved as a direct result of the sanctioning. They have become more tuned, more focused, more expensive. If your measurement of a deck is it's raw power then they have become 'better'. I've never fully understood the Spike/Johnny/Timmy clasifications but there is no doubt that Pauper has been Spiked. That is not to say that there were not competative (and good) players playing in the Pauper PRE's before the sanctioning. The players doing well in Pauper now are a lot of the names that were doing well in the PRE's. They have just had to 'step up' from playing 20 person tournaments where nothing but honour is available to playing 100+ person tournaments with tangible prizes. The players, I beleive, have evolved as have the decks required to compete in that environment.
I'm sure that making the format competitive will increase the player base. I'm with LE on this. The chance to win prizes in a previously non competitive format with no defined meta will interest the competitive players, competitive deck designers and those looking to pick up 'easy' prizes in the formats infancy. What I'm not so sure of is how long this increased player base will last. It will see the definition of some of the 'best' decks available and people will look at those as the decks to beat. A lot of the 'new' players will play nothing but those best decks. There will be more games available but less diversity in the decks played in those games. The less well represented tribes will be unable to score many 'wins' and therefore be played less and less. This will drive away some of the 'casual' players of the format. If Tribal as a format can't sustain a healthy metagame because of flaws in it's basic concept then the competitive players will drift away also.
The 'what is casual' debate has been going for years and will never have a resolution so it is pretty much meaningless to include it here. All competitive formats still have a casual following it's just that the 'line in the sand' that separates the two is impossible to define. On a personal note I simply don't play casual anything (apart from my recent look at the commander format). I have very limited MTGO time and I get my enjoyment from close games that matter. I'd rather spend my 2 Tix on a queue entry fee and see my Goblin deck go down to a Painter/grindstone combo on turn 2 and 3 in a 0-2 match than sit there for 15 minutes waiting for a game that ends on a turn x concession because I played a card that my opponent doesn't think should be played in 'their' version of the 'casual' rules that are defined only in 'their own mind'. That might just be me however.
So for my money the question that should be being asked is not 'Does Tribal need a non casual environment to help it survive?' it's more important to be asking 'Would a non casual environment save Tribal or just put it into remission?'
Rambled a bit (as usual) and it's not structured or edited (as usual) but there you go.
EDIT: Small edit here. I was under the impression that Tribal, as a format, was loosing it's will to live. If that is not the case then I fall much more into the AJ camp of 'the people playing are having fun leave them the format they are having fun playing' than the LE camp of 'Change is needed and perhaps it's competitive play'.
There is a lot of depth to this deck. I think your article is enough to get people interested in it, while giving them an idea on how to fight other decks. Their next step is to pick up the deck and practice with it (which you suggest).
Like all decks, knowing them through practice will help bring up your win percentage. This deck doesn't accidentally win like some others, but is rewarding to know that you can make the right play with so many options.
Good article.
I can definitely make that happen in a future article.
I want to see some reports with the rats and crusher decks!
Noooo!
I think I speak for everybody when I say that we were secretly rooting for a video of the awe-inspiring AJ v Erman Horses v Goblins (or something) final to end all finals.
I'm a GMT player too but then so is AJ.
I know sometimes I find it hard to get Pauper or Classic games to fire when I'm online never mind a lesser supported format. That may however be partly down to the fact that I look in the TP room because of my uncertainty and previous bad experiences with 'Casual'.
Personally, I can't get a game of tribal to save my life! Maybe that's to do with my GMTing or something?
I have reentered MTGO in the last month after a year's virtual absence. With the intent to play 3-4 times per week and usually having about an hour to spend on-line, I am averaging one night per week where I can not find a Tribal game within 10-15 minutes.
Other nights I have been able to squeeze in three games against three different opponents in an hour.
It is not on life support yet, but I feel like I am standing at the edge of the spiral staircase.
I see "The deck may not contain more than 15 total copies of cards from Tempest and Stronghold". What are the rules on cards from other sets? There's nothing specific that the deck must only be built from Exodus block cards.
Well in that case I think I move more to your side of the debate.
Given the impending PRE and the publicity from this debate and your articles I'd be tempted to leave it at that. I'm not sure Tribal is a viable cometative format to be honest. Not once the real 'Spikes' turn their attention towards it. Regardless of the number of new players it would bring I'm not sure it's a good idea. I think I agree with LE in principle but I'm not sure the format would support it.
For my benefit, and also anyone else who doesn't play Tribal but has been following the debate and thinking about giving it a try, how should a person build a deck or advertise their game to get an opponent.
At a basic level I don't want to spoil anyones gaming experience by going Mountain, Lackey, pass when they are holding a grip full of Myr however I don't want to be the one marshalling the Myr against Forest, elf-dude, pass or Island, Merr-dude pass, either.
Perhaps it's just me but I find the minefield of unwritten laws in casual far worse than any rulebook or game mechanic. At least in full blown competitive play there is no doubt that you are both playing to win and can use whatever card, rule, combo, etc that the formats rules allow.
I can't make next saturday, its my wifes company trip to Kings Island, home of the worlds best wooden roller coaster The Beast. But if its weekly I'll try.
It's actually next Saturday. Will you then be busy too? I think that you should be there (if you can of course).
LE
This is true, except for the 'if' clause. ;) 'Given that Jitte is banned'?
I wholeheartedly support this endeavour. Regrettably, I'm going to be rather busy this saturday with prior commitments, so good luck to everyone attending!
Tribal is not as popular as it was: Partly this is a factor of the greater variety of available formats, partly history, partly Lorwyn. However, I've still been able to log on at any time of day and get a tribal classic game going shortly after asking for one, and if I'm willing to spend a few minutes, get one going in the multi room as well. It is not in the best of health, but neither is it on its last legs.
Can we submit more than one decklist and do we give names to our own decks?
Well it's a Tempest block deck so ... no.
I should be able to play at that time, I think. It's fair to say that for Classic purposes, my mana-base will be shaky as hell!
"Baleeting someone because they played a combo you didn't like is silly (though understandable from the emotional aspect of it) but I just wonder if combo is really so strong in Tribal then isn't the format moot?"
I was actually speaking more generally than Tribal wars (because I understood your question to be about any PREs) - to be excat I mainly do that in Commander (singleton multiplayer) where - I think - combo is at the weakest (in a format with classic-style card legality) if your commander can't find it. I suppose Tribal Wars does have a problem with combos...
"How does the CASUAL player handle slummers in PREs without just calling the whole thing a wash?"
To answer your question I do not really think they can. I suppose you could ban all previous winners (it is quite subjective how far is to far in most other measures) but a lot of PREs ain't large enough for that to be a possibility.
On the other hand even if none is slumming, how does that prevent all but 1 casual player from not winning? Is it still a wash for the others?
Just because the winners casual deck is in the spirit of the format does not mean that anybody else got a great change of winning against that deck (e.g. a expensive deck got a greater chance to win - simply because the deck is constructed from a deeper pool). Is that unfair/slumming?
Are spoiled zendikar commons legal to use? i doubt it but figured I'd ask.
Firstly I'd like to say how much I've enjoyed both of the articles in this debate. Both have been thought provoking and as yet I'm still undecided as to who I'd vote for, if there was a vote. It couldn't be done all the time but I think this style of article writing should be used every time the situation allows.
Moving onto the topic under discussion...
The facts, as I understand them, are that tribal is in danger as it's player base has shrunk to a point where very few players are looking to experiment in the format. However much the current players like the games they are playing at the moment the vicious cycle of few players, making it difficult to get a game, meaning less people play is in motion. Tribal itself is basically not designed for or able to support proper competative play. I'm not sure if this is just a function of the lack of a sideboard and a banned list that requires a review or if it's an issue with some tribes being far superior in the card pool they can draw from. Nobody wants to see Tribal dissapear however we have two opinions of the effect on the format that starting competitive play would introduce.
The closest thing that I can draw on as a model is Pauper. I got interested in and started playing Pauper before it was sanctioned. There is no doubt in my mind that Pauper has changed since those days. Pauper decks have evolved as a direct result of the sanctioning. They have become more tuned, more focused, more expensive. If your measurement of a deck is it's raw power then they have become 'better'. I've never fully understood the Spike/Johnny/Timmy clasifications but there is no doubt that Pauper has been Spiked. That is not to say that there were not competative (and good) players playing in the Pauper PRE's before the sanctioning. The players doing well in Pauper now are a lot of the names that were doing well in the PRE's. They have just had to 'step up' from playing 20 person tournaments where nothing but honour is available to playing 100+ person tournaments with tangible prizes. The players, I beleive, have evolved as have the decks required to compete in that environment.
I'm sure that making the format competitive will increase the player base. I'm with LE on this. The chance to win prizes in a previously non competitive format with no defined meta will interest the competitive players, competitive deck designers and those looking to pick up 'easy' prizes in the formats infancy. What I'm not so sure of is how long this increased player base will last. It will see the definition of some of the 'best' decks available and people will look at those as the decks to beat. A lot of the 'new' players will play nothing but those best decks. There will be more games available but less diversity in the decks played in those games. The less well represented tribes will be unable to score many 'wins' and therefore be played less and less. This will drive away some of the 'casual' players of the format. If Tribal as a format can't sustain a healthy metagame because of flaws in it's basic concept then the competitive players will drift away also.
The 'what is casual' debate has been going for years and will never have a resolution so it is pretty much meaningless to include it here. All competitive formats still have a casual following it's just that the 'line in the sand' that separates the two is impossible to define. On a personal note I simply don't play casual anything (apart from my recent look at the commander format). I have very limited MTGO time and I get my enjoyment from close games that matter. I'd rather spend my 2 Tix on a queue entry fee and see my Goblin deck go down to a Painter/grindstone combo on turn 2 and 3 in a 0-2 match than sit there for 15 minutes waiting for a game that ends on a turn x concession because I played a card that my opponent doesn't think should be played in 'their' version of the 'casual' rules that are defined only in 'their own mind'. That might just be me however.
So for my money the question that should be being asked is not 'Does Tribal need a non casual environment to help it survive?' it's more important to be asking 'Would a non casual environment save Tribal or just put it into remission?'
Rambled a bit (as usual) and it's not structured or edited (as usual) but there you go.
EDIT: Small edit here. I was under the impression that Tribal, as a format, was loosing it's will to live. If that is not the case then I fall much more into the AJ camp of 'the people playing are having fun leave them the format they are having fun playing' than the LE camp of 'Change is needed and perhaps it's competitive play'.
I'm in! Most definately!
LE
classicquarter.com hosts a non pauper version of the contest on their site.
Because those are the rules WotC sent us.
Puremtgo.com writers can participate.