I could see the potential for a new 'mid table' event, with the egregious tribes and combos that could negate a tribe barred. Goblins, Elves, Humans, Merfolk, you could make a case for Slivers too. Maybe soldiers, they have plenty of synergistic elements. We'd need some extensive discussion on what was doable.
In other news, my enforced absence from the event is at an end, my new computer is currently being delivered.
I'm all for formalizing the definition of online Pauper as "draftable as a common in a set released in Magic Online" and forgetting about all paper definitions, but these troubling exceptions exist:
-Serrated Arrows
-Gorilla Shaman
-several other cards that don't matter (Legions of Lim-Dul, Mistfolk, Snow Devil, Sea Eagle, Casting of Bones, Headless Horseman, Commander lands, etc. Less than 20 total.)
They were only released as commons in Duel Decks and Theme Decks and stuff like that.
Yet, others more recently that fit this description have not been made legal in Pauper. (Blue Elemental Blast as a promo, etc).
It annoys me so much that I stopped playing Pauper years ago.
I like the idea of tiers. In order to develop criteria in order to separate the tribe into various tiers, it's good to define them. The top tier, call it Major League, should include the big 3 - Humans, Elves, and Goblins - and any tribe that can reasonably hang with them in best builds. Werewolves or Treefolk, for example, can't reasonably hang with those tribes, so I would find a criteria that matches that assumption and work with it. After that I would prefer two additional tiers, but you just prefer one: the Underdogs. Relegating Werewolves and Treefolk to Underdog, however, mean decks like Spider won't be able to hang competitively with them (Spider being a largely worse green midrange tribe than Treefolk, and even if I'm wrong, I think you get my point). So, are you stating you want to help Werewolves at the expense of Spiders (and many others)? What makes them more special? Obviously we have limitations in the number of rotating sub-formats that Tribal can support to make certain tribes shine more, so even making three tiers, as I suggest, will still leave some tribes on the outside looking in. Dividing everything into three tiers, unfortunately, further requires time (I'll volunteer) and will incite arguments as to which tribe belongs where. I would love, for diversity and deckbuilding sake, to have a mid-major tier and respective monthly sub-format for the Werewolves of the world, along with the Underdog format for those tribes that still wouldn't stand much chance. The number of different decks month in and month out would grow enormously. One problem with watering down the tribes, however, is that the non-tribal cards come more to the forefront in importance.
While I feel it better serves "truth" as to more closely grouping around power levels, I know there are costs. Let me know if you want me to try to break this down for you.
You might get your chance--I wouldn't be surprised if the Conspiracy Misdirection shows up in the Legendary Cube Prize Packs as a way to make sure the new cards are available (by making at least one chase card).
Speaking of ridiculously-priced Masques-block cards, Rishadan Port is getting a judge foil soon (one ended up in a pack of WMCQ foils), so that'll be a MOCS foil in the relatively-near future (probably first-half 2016).
Some teasers:
* There's a larger sample size of Cloud of Faeries Turn 2 plays
* New statistics gathered include win percentage of casting a spell in a game regardless of the number of times in the game and also "noncasted" win percentage which looks at how well players did when they didn't cast a spell that they had cast in other games.
* Links to full CSVs of data presented in the tables so you can look up other cards you're interested in.
I like both of these decks a lot, and it was hard to pick!
I think pfirpfel's deck is probably the stronger of the two, objectively, as in it would win more matches against a field of random opponents. The strategy of tutoring for an assortment of goodstuff is a tried and true one, and were a different person the judge, I could see this deck winning. However, I have to give the (very slight) nod to Dawwy's deck for its creativity, assembling a solid engine out of (for the most part) a bunch of junk, which is the very ethic of my entire column. I don't think Dawwy's deck includes a single mythic or planeswalker — a feat worty of bonus points, at least when I'm the judge. I also always enjoy synergy-heavy approaches, which this deck certainly takes. If I were taking my own pass at the concept, I would tinker with the numbers a bit, perhaps reducing a few of the 4-ofs to make room for a couple of situational toolbox cards. But it's a minor quibble.
Thank you both for your submissions, and Dawwy, let me know either on here or by email when a good time is for me to give you your prize through MtGO. (With some exceptions, I'm often free after 4:30pm on weekdays.) I can be reached at cottonrhetoric at gmail dotcom if needed.
Sure, that's true. These are MM Misdirections though. I'm happy they're so cheap! I would just like to own them on MTGO again, but they have to come down first.
I know that Masques block had a poor release or whatever (the exact details of which I don't understand, was it like packs randomly assorted with all the sets?), but someone should do something about those cards. My friend from the Netherlands mailed me some paper cards to get my collection going, and send me two Misdirections for the Vintage deck I'm trying to make. I looked them up, and the MTGO ones are worth 100 dollars more. That's unreal, I don't know of any cards with that large of a discrepancy other than the power nine.
I don't know what I was expecting for leagues, but now that I only play Vintage they'll likely never matter to me anyway. I do think it's pretty crazy that so many things have been going wrong recently, but we're all paying more for it.
I took another look at those League prizes, I doubt I'd play in a Vintage league for that. MAYBE I would, if I really just couldn't take the Tournament Practice room anymore. I mean, the Vintage MTGO Swiss events have routinely featured a player who made top eight at the last two Vintage Championships, we're getting top-notch competition for free. Yes, prizes aren't as much, but they're a lot more if you factor in the free entry, plus they're longer if that's your thing.
I feel like 10 matches in a league would be too much. 5 is a pretty good amount for my schedule: I could do a round a night, skip a day or two, and still finish a league a week. My expectation was something like what they have started out with that can appeal to folks that don't have even 2-3 hours to grind out in a day. It's basically an FNM that is spread out with so-so prize support. Is the convenience of that worth $8? Some weeks it will be.
Now a "Super League" that is 9 rounds to simulate Day 1 of GP..that could be neat, but I wouldn't expect it to be the standard.
I'm very glad you enjoyed it. I always liked his art, but I never knew how important he was to Magic's success until I read "So Do You Wear a Cape?" (which I still recommend, it's less than ten dollars to download, and worth much more).
Green mages don't have many reasons to complain these days in terms of green playability. Green has been the dominant color in Standard for most of the year.
While the event is still going on (or right after it's completed) click on the "Details" button for it. In the uppper right, check off "Show past rounds". Once the event is complete, if you click on the match results it will open up another window letting you replay the games. Once you log off the client though you cannot go back and see replays of past events as far as I know. You need the client open when the event completes and cannot log off as long as you want to keep watching the replays for the event.
How do you watch event replays? I know it's possible, but I've never known where to go. This article looks really interesting, and it's nice to see someone trying to gather all that data.
1) Do you have numbers on how often Delver cast Cloud of Faeries on turn 2 and how much that correlated to their wins?
For all Cloud of Faeries cast, here's Turn, Total Cast, Cast in Winning Games:
1 0 0
2 4 2
3 3 3
4 13 9
5 13 12
6 7 6
7 8 8
8 7 7
9 10 10
10 4 4
11 0 0
12 1 1
So it was only cast 4 times on turn 2, and 2 of those times it was in winning games. I will say when I was collecting data on an earlier event working on the scripts I have, I think the numbers were higher for that turn. I don't have an easy way to see what decks they were but I did look back at the original game logs and all 4 of these were for Delver decks.
Another Cloud of Faeries stat - considering players who cast Cloud of Faeries in any game, in games in which they did not cast it, their record was 2-5.
2) Can you isolate Cloud/Snap and see how they relate to Delver vs. Combo?
I don't have an easy way to see stats for specific deck archetypes, but will think about how to do this in the future.
3) Do you have the count on Vines of Vastwood's being cast in Stompy as it relates to wins?
In total it was cast 20 times, and 5 of those times were in winning games. As I said I don't have an easy way to correlate to an archetype.
4) Where any Mogg Conscripts also cast on turn 1?
Mogg Conscripts was cast 4 times on Turn 1, 1 time was in a winning game. In total it was cast 11 times, 6 times in winning games.
Do you have access to Horizon Canopy? If so, I'd replace 2-3 of the Sunpetal Groves with them. I'd then consider cutting to make room for 2 Birds of Paradise to help you curve to a 3 drop a little faster. Maybe a combination of going down to 22 lands and -1 Thalia?
If you don't want to put in more Birds, how about some cuts to include Dryad Militant? It provides a little aggression on T1, plays nicely with Liege and the ability is useful hate on Snaps, slows Delve creatures down and hates a little on Goyf?
If you could be talked out of Hurricane, maybe play some copies of Brave the Elements? The majority of your creatures are White, so it provides a ton of utility in a lot of situations. Dromoka's Command is another strong option.
I could see the potential for a new 'mid table' event, with the egregious tribes and combos that could negate a tribe barred. Goblins, Elves, Humans, Merfolk, you could make a case for Slivers too. Maybe soldiers, they have plenty of synergistic elements. We'd need some extensive discussion on what was doable.
In other news, my enforced absence from the event is at an end, my new computer is currently being delivered.
I'm all for formalizing the definition of online Pauper as "draftable as a common in a set released in Magic Online" and forgetting about all paper definitions, but these troubling exceptions exist:
-Serrated Arrows
-Gorilla Shaman
-several other cards that don't matter (Legions of Lim-Dul, Mistfolk, Snow Devil, Sea Eagle, Casting of Bones, Headless Horseman, Commander lands, etc. Less than 20 total.)
They were only released as commons in Duel Decks and Theme Decks and stuff like that.
Yet, others more recently that fit this description have not been made legal in Pauper. (Blue Elemental Blast as a promo, etc).
It annoys me so much that I stopped playing Pauper years ago.
The thought just occurred to me that our sponsors, MTGOTraders, would probably like to see a new subformat in order to sell more cards for new decks.
I like the idea of tiers. In order to develop criteria in order to separate the tribe into various tiers, it's good to define them. The top tier, call it Major League, should include the big 3 - Humans, Elves, and Goblins - and any tribe that can reasonably hang with them in best builds. Werewolves or Treefolk, for example, can't reasonably hang with those tribes, so I would find a criteria that matches that assumption and work with it. After that I would prefer two additional tiers, but you just prefer one: the Underdogs. Relegating Werewolves and Treefolk to Underdog, however, mean decks like Spider won't be able to hang competitively with them (Spider being a largely worse green midrange tribe than Treefolk, and even if I'm wrong, I think you get my point). So, are you stating you want to help Werewolves at the expense of Spiders (and many others)? What makes them more special? Obviously we have limitations in the number of rotating sub-formats that Tribal can support to make certain tribes shine more, so even making three tiers, as I suggest, will still leave some tribes on the outside looking in. Dividing everything into three tiers, unfortunately, further requires time (I'll volunteer) and will incite arguments as to which tribe belongs where. I would love, for diversity and deckbuilding sake, to have a mid-major tier and respective monthly sub-format for the Werewolves of the world, along with the Underdog format for those tribes that still wouldn't stand much chance. The number of different decks month in and month out would grow enormously. One problem with watering down the tribes, however, is that the non-tribal cards come more to the forefront in importance.
While I feel it better serves "truth" as to more closely grouping around power levels, I know there are costs. Let me know if you want me to try to break this down for you.
You might get your chance--I wouldn't be surprised if the Conspiracy Misdirection shows up in the Legendary Cube Prize Packs as a way to make sure the new cards are available (by making at least one chase card).
Speaking of ridiculously-priced Masques-block cards, Rishadan Port is getting a judge foil soon (one ended up in a pack of WMCQ foils), so that'll be a MOCS foil in the relatively-near future (probably first-half 2016).
Just wanted to note that I've submitted my next article, featuring data from this event: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mtgo-standings/pauper-daily...
Some teasers:
* There's a larger sample size of Cloud of Faeries Turn 2 plays
* New statistics gathered include win percentage of casting a spell in a game regardless of the number of times in the game and also "noncasted" win percentage which looks at how well players did when they didn't cast a spell that they had cast in other games.
* Links to full CSVs of data presented in the tables so you can look up other cards you're interested in.
I like both of these decks a lot, and it was hard to pick!
I think pfirpfel's deck is probably the stronger of the two, objectively, as in it would win more matches against a field of random opponents. The strategy of tutoring for an assortment of goodstuff is a tried and true one, and were a different person the judge, I could see this deck winning. However, I have to give the (very slight) nod to Dawwy's deck for its creativity, assembling a solid engine out of (for the most part) a bunch of junk, which is the very ethic of my entire column. I don't think Dawwy's deck includes a single mythic or planeswalker — a feat worty of bonus points, at least when I'm the judge. I also always enjoy synergy-heavy approaches, which this deck certainly takes. If I were taking my own pass at the concept, I would tinker with the numbers a bit, perhaps reducing a few of the 4-ofs to make room for a couple of situational toolbox cards. But it's a minor quibble.
Thank you both for your submissions, and Dawwy, let me know either on here or by email when a good time is for me to give you your prize through MtGO. (With some exceptions, I'm often free after 4:30pm on weekdays.) I can be reached at cottonrhetoric at gmail dotcom if needed.
Pretty soon I will have three copies of one show and tell :)
I love Thawing Glaciers. If that card is playable in commander, that makes me more interested. :) Nice work man, these always look sweet!
Sure, that's true. These are MM Misdirections though. I'm happy they're so cheap! I would just like to own them on MTGO again, but they have to come down first.
Misdirection was also reprinted in Conspiracy as was Stifle.
I know that Masques block had a poor release or whatever (the exact details of which I don't understand, was it like packs randomly assorted with all the sets?), but someone should do something about those cards. My friend from the Netherlands mailed me some paper cards to get my collection going, and send me two Misdirections for the Vintage deck I'm trying to make. I looked them up, and the MTGO ones are worth 100 dollars more. That's unreal, I don't know of any cards with that large of a discrepancy other than the power nine.
I don't know what I was expecting for leagues, but now that I only play Vintage they'll likely never matter to me anyway. I do think it's pretty crazy that so many things have been going wrong recently, but we're all paying more for it.
I took another look at those League prizes, I doubt I'd play in a Vintage league for that. MAYBE I would, if I really just couldn't take the Tournament Practice room anymore. I mean, the Vintage MTGO Swiss events have routinely featured a player who made top eight at the last two Vintage Championships, we're getting top-notch competition for free. Yes, prizes aren't as much, but they're a lot more if you factor in the free entry, plus they're longer if that's your thing.
I feel like 10 matches in a league would be too much. 5 is a pretty good amount for my schedule: I could do a round a night, skip a day or two, and still finish a league a week. My expectation was something like what they have started out with that can appeal to folks that don't have even 2-3 hours to grind out in a day. It's basically an FNM that is spread out with so-so prize support. Is the convenience of that worth $8? Some weeks it will be.
Now a "Super League" that is 9 rounds to simulate Day 1 of GP..that could be neat, but I wouldn't expect it to be the standard.
I'm very glad you enjoyed it. I always liked his art, but I never knew how important he was to Magic's success until I read "So Do You Wear a Cape?" (which I still recommend, it's less than ten dollars to download, and worth much more).
Cool Beans Joe, big fan of Myrfors for his early role in the Magic art direction. Thanks for the interview.
Green mages don't have many reasons to complain these days in terms of green playability. Green has been the dominant color in Standard for most of the year.
Green has Utopia Vow for Ulamog. I know that's terrible but so is Grab the Reins.
The treasures are BETWEEN foil rare and mythic in rarity. So it might be one in every 216 packs (one per case).
It'd be nightmare to match up two 9-0s. In reality, it'd probably would never happen. A 9-0 would play a 6-3 or something.
While the event is still going on (or right after it's completed) click on the "Details" button for it. In the uppper right, check off "Show past rounds". Once the event is complete, if you click on the match results it will open up another window letting you replay the games. Once you log off the client though you cannot go back and see replays of past events as far as I know. You need the client open when the event completes and cannot log off as long as you want to keep watching the replays for the event.
How do you watch event replays? I know it's possible, but I've never known where to go. This article looks really interesting, and it's nice to see someone trying to gather all that data.
1) Do you have numbers on how often Delver cast Cloud of Faeries on turn 2 and how much that correlated to their wins?
For all Cloud of Faeries cast, here's Turn, Total Cast, Cast in Winning Games:
1 0 0
2 4 2
3 3 3
4 13 9
5 13 12
6 7 6
7 8 8
8 7 7
9 10 10
10 4 4
11 0 0
12 1 1
So it was only cast 4 times on turn 2, and 2 of those times it was in winning games. I will say when I was collecting data on an earlier event working on the scripts I have, I think the numbers were higher for that turn. I don't have an easy way to see what decks they were but I did look back at the original game logs and all 4 of these were for Delver decks.
Another Cloud of Faeries stat - considering players who cast Cloud of Faeries in any game, in games in which they did not cast it, their record was 2-5.
2) Can you isolate Cloud/Snap and see how they relate to Delver vs. Combo?
I don't have an easy way to see stats for specific deck archetypes, but will think about how to do this in the future.
3) Do you have the count on Vines of Vastwood's being cast in Stompy as it relates to wins?
In total it was cast 20 times, and 5 of those times were in winning games. As I said I don't have an easy way to correlate to an archetype.
4) Where any Mogg Conscripts also cast on turn 1?
Mogg Conscripts was cast 4 times on Turn 1, 1 time was in a winning game. In total it was cast 11 times, 6 times in winning games.
Do you have access to Horizon Canopy? If so, I'd replace 2-3 of the Sunpetal Groves with them. I'd then consider cutting to make room for 2 Birds of Paradise to help you curve to a 3 drop a little faster. Maybe a combination of going down to 22 lands and -1 Thalia?
If you don't want to put in more Birds, how about some cuts to include Dryad Militant? It provides a little aggression on T1, plays nicely with Liege and the ability is useful hate on Snaps, slows Delve creatures down and hates a little on Goyf?
If you could be talked out of Hurricane, maybe play some copies of Brave the Elements? The majority of your creatures are White, so it provides a ton of utility in a lot of situations. Dromoka's Command is another strong option.
Feldon to Urza and Mishra: "This aggression will not stand, man."
"The Feldon just wants his Wife back." wait....awww. :[
Cheers bingobongo, I'm keeping my eye out for you online.
Yep lands matter. :D