EPTMagic: The Gathering - Page 631
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
sung_moon
United States10110 Posts
| ||
|
RoieTRS
United States2569 Posts
On November 17 2015 07:59 Naracs_Duc wrote: There is already room for events where you don't own the cards needed. Casual events that allow proxies, kitchen table magic, etc... There are lots of support for those types of games. And there is lots of support for high payout high risk events that require plane tickets, qualifier tournaments, etc... In your local meta where you're as likely to find people run paper print out proxies as you do seeing people bring in fakes--yeah, theres room. But when you're talking about a broadcasted, premier event whose only purpose is to show who has the best 75 cards with the specific rule of no proxies and no fakes--it disparages the soul of the game to do so. There are already events where you are allowed those types of cards. There's no need to bring those types of cards to actual competitive events. Then they should stop calling them 'competitive' events if they are not upholding the spirit of competition. Like even playfields and events that don't switch formats half-way through. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
 | ||
|
Shotcoder
United States2316 Posts
On November 30 2015 05:28 RoieTRS wrote: Then they should stop calling them 'competitive' events if they are not upholding the spirit of competition. Like even playfields and events that don't switch formats half-way through. Should we stop calling what you're doing cheating and call it piracy or copyright infringement so it makes you feel better about it? | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On November 30 2015 05:28 RoieTRS wrote: Then they should stop calling them 'competitive' events if they are not upholding the spirit of competition. Like even playfields and events that don't switch formats half-way through. Your logic is a joke, especially if you still think Wizards should just take $100 for a flat 4 copies of every single card, after all the development work they do, to just shell it out gratis. I don't know why anybody takes you seriously, especially now that you've said events aren't competitive specifically because they don't allow cheating. Just as a public service to anyone who might have wanted to argue with you, you don't deserve it. | ||
|
GoSuNamhciR
126 Posts
| ||
|
BallinWitStalin
1177 Posts
On November 30 2015 05:28 RoieTRS wrote: Then they should stop calling them 'competitive' events if they are not upholding the spirit of competition. Like even playfields and events that don't switch formats half-way through. Wat. How does this even make sense? Tournaments that switch formats encourage well-rounded magic skills (limited vs. constructed, etc.). If everyone knows the rules and formats going in, then it is inherently a level-playing field. Honestly man that's just kind of a dumbass comment :/ | ||
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
On November 30 2015 08:14 Shotcoder wrote: Should we stop calling what you're doing cheating and call it piracy or copyright infringement so it makes you feel better about it? If we look at it from this angle it's no different from game devs only allowing purchased copies of the game play on official servers. Wizards requires you to have purchased your cards in order to play in DCI events. Don't like the rules don't play the game. | ||
|
Shotcoder
United States2316 Posts
On November 30 2015 11:36 Fecalfeast wrote: If we look at it from this angle it's no different from game devs only allowing purchased copies of the game play on official servers. Wizards requires you to have purchased your cards in order to play in DCI events. Don't like the rules don't play the game. That was part of the point, you just explained it better than I did haha | ||
|
RoieTRS
United States2569 Posts
On November 30 2015 11:20 BallinWitStalin wrote:] Wat. How does this even make sense? Tournaments that switch formats encourage well-rounded magic skills (limited vs. constructed, etc.). If everyone knows the rules and formats going in, then it is inherently a level-playing field. Honestly man that's just kind of a dumbass comment :/ If a premeir ssbMelee tournament had the ruleset that only the characters pichu, zelda, bowser, and kirby starting round 5 until round 9... If premeir broodwar tournaments played 3 rounds of fastestmappossible and then 5 rounds of 1v1... I could make the same dumb argument. "The winners are more well-rounded" but your event would be the laughing stock of any competitive game. But somehow mtg is exempt from this criticism? On November 30 2015 11:36 Fecalfeast wrote: If we look at it from this angle it's no different from game devs only allowing purchased copies of the game play on official servers. Wizards requires you to have purchased your cards in order to play in DCI events. Don't like the rules don't play the game. That would be fine except this copy of the game is several thousand USD... for one deck. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
Feel free to disrespect all DCI tournaments as having an unfair business model, but they wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the model. Play magic on (whatever the most recent free thing is, I don't keep up to date) with your friends if you object to the business model. Don't be unrealistic in here about sanctioned tournaments or formats. If you don't like the rules that this copy of the game is several thousand USD, don't play the sanctioned version and keep out of sanctioned events. Simple. You've made your stance clear. Please do not shit up the thread further with rehashed complaints that you don't like the business model. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
Limited is as much of a level playing field as you're ever going to get in competitive TCG play in that you can walk into a tournament owning zero cards and still have a shot at winning. And Magic's limited community is quite large so there's a lot of support for it. But at the end of the day, constructed is still way more popular, and that's not WotC's fault. If the entire competitive community agreed that limited formats were fairer and that competitive Magic should predominantly or exclusively be limited play, WotC might acquiesce to that, but that will never happen. People like playing Standard, even if the rotation game is terrible. On December 01 2015 03:10 RoieTRS wrote: If premeir broodwar tournaments played 3 rounds of fastestmappossible and then 5 rounds of 1v1... You're forgetting that once upon a time, Proleague matches had both 1v1 and 2v2. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
On December 01 2015 03:23 TheYango wrote: You're forgetting that once upon a time, Proleague matches had both 1v1 and 2v2. Can't imagine why that ever stopped. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
Also interesting is the fact that boosters haven't changed prices over the years despite significant inflation since the introduction of the game. Which means that wizards is SOMEWHAT justified in their price-inflationary measures like mythics even though I personally hate it. PS: Team GP's are hilarious  | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On December 01 2015 03:34 Dandel Ion wrote: If you already have bought all the expensive cards, you don't really want a level playing field anymore. Pretty simple. I mean even at lower/casual levels where people don't necessarily own a lot of expensive cards, Standard tends to be more popular than limited, IIRC. Limited can be super daunting to people. It certainly doesn't help that the limited format that's easiest to get into at face value (Sealed) has a stigma of being luck-based and not as skillful when that's not really true. On December 01 2015 03:39 Sn0_Man wrote: Also interesting is the fact that boosters haven't changed prices over the years despite significant inflation since the introduction of the game. Which means that wizards is SOMEWHAT justified in their price-inflationary measures like mythics even though I personally hate it. The price of boosters has changed over the years. They were $2.95 for a long time, went up to $3.29 in 9th Edition, and are $3.95 now (I think there were a couple increases in the middle there, but I wasn't playing so I don't know the exact times/increments). | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22610 Posts
| ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On December 01 2015 07:30 Gorsameth wrote: I would certainly say that Sealed is decently luck based. Now with a large enough sample size the factor of luck decreases but do most people play Sealed often enough to mitigate that? I would hazard they don't. Sample size really doesn't matter given each tournament is a sample size of two as far as the pool is concerned (day 1 and day 2). I mean sure, if you play sealed enough you get good at it, but someone following a piece of paper tier list can do just about as well (if that tier list is any good). | ||
|
BallinWitStalin
1177 Posts
| ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
The kicker, my final deck had Snapcaster Mage and only 3 spells: Geistflame, Grasp, and Blasphemous Act.* It was a PTQ and I went like 2-2 drop since X-2 couldn't top 8. Even the games I won weren't fun (I just played fliers and my opponent durdled), it was a shitshow. *+ Show Spoiler + For those unfamiliar, that's 2 spells that already have Flashback and one that costs 11 to flashback with Snapcaster. | ||
|
Whole
United States6046 Posts
| ||
| ||
