|
qbert posted:You can watch it right now. Just go to SCG's Twitch page and hit past broadcasts. can you ballpark a time stamp? NM 31:20 for those who care. http://www.twitch.tv/scglive/b/542646349 Molybdenum fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Jun 30, 2014 |
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Kraus posted:I'm studying for my L1 currently, and while reading through the IPG, I came to the section on improper randomization. For 40, 4. For 60, 5. Not 200, 240 since I assume you mean battle of wits? Make 4 stacks of 60 and riffle them, then mix them around. do each one internally twice then cross them over twice between each set (assuming a net, that would be 10 riffles) For edh you want to do it 8 times. That said, by riffle do you mean "sort of just pushing them together" or bridge shuffling them, or is riffling where you solitaire them out randomly? Not sure what that word means... My estimates go off a bridge shuffle since I don't value any of my cards since they are all worthless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
Gensuki posted:For 40, 4. For 60, 5. Not 200, 240 since I assume you mean battle of wits? Make 4 stacks of 60 and riffle them, then mix them around. do each one internally twice then cross them over twice between each set (assuming a net, that would be 10 riffles) Yeah, I did mean 240 or 250 for Battle of Wits. The wincon number popped into my head first. Do you have the math for this? Could you PM it to me?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
Kraus posted:I'm studying for my L1 currently, and while reading through the IPG, I came to the section on improper randomization. We don't use set numbers. Do you believe a player knows the position of any card in their deck after shuffling? Then it's improper.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
StainlessBanner posted:New to magic and need some advice. I started about three weeks ago through the Duels iOS app and taught myself the basics of how to play. I then began watching a bunch of Twitch streams of drafts and that's helped me quite a bit too where I've now got an online account and am exclusively playing the Planeswalkers format. I found a good deck build online that I've played well with but I'd like to get better at building my own so that I can move into drafting. Ideally I'd like to start in with the 2015 core set but right now I feel like I would have a tough time picking out what cards to take in a draft. The online streamers are always like "oooh that's a good card" and that's where I would fail miserably. My personally constructed decks in Planeswalkers have bit the dust pretty fast. I know this is really general but can anyone give a new player some advice or at least point me in the right direction? (At least outside of go to FNM or watch streams If you want to play limited (as opposed to playing constructed, which most people probably do), then there's a lot to learn. Its not to hard to research what the best decks in standard are, buy one of those decks, master it, then grind with it in constructed, but learning how to play limited can be a bitch. You could start by reading up on the basics of magic drafting and playing, google the vanilla test, and "who's the beatdown". The Limited Resources Podcast is excellent, you could browse through past episodes where they touch on the basics. Once you do that though, and you read up on the primers of M15 when spoiler season is over, there's really nothing you can do but start drafting, you are going to need reps to get decent. Also, do not ever play the 4-3-2-2 drafts. The payout for that format is mathematically terrible. Play nothing but Swiss (which has the 3-2-2-2-1-1-1-0 payouts) until you really get good, then jump to 8-4. You probably shouldn't try making that leap until you have a ton of drafts behind you, though. Also, sealed isn't a bad way to play limited. Northjayhawk fucked around with this message at 03:18 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:14
|
|
) TIA
|
Molybdenum posted:can you ballpark a time stamp? That's a beautiful thing. Occasionally fortune smiles on the bold All Spells player and gives him a hand and topdecks as awesome as that Game 1.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:We don't use set numbers. Do you believe a player knows the position of any card in their deck after shuffling? Then it's improper. IPG makes mention of a specific number of times in the Improper Shuffling section. It has to be true then that if a number of times (1) is insufficient, then there must be a number of times where it becomes sufficient.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
holy poo poo this jay-z conversation e: and now chapin is planning a collab with kanye, jay-z and beyonce A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:holy poo poo this jay-z conversation "Do you know who would cast Jace? Jay-Z." Chapin is the best magic player in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Kraus posted:Yeah, I did mean 240 or 250 for Battle of Wits. The wincon number popped into my head first. Do you have the math for this? Could you PM it to me? Sorry, there's no math. I based it on how many times I have to shuffle a deck before a test hand looks different than the "1st" hand, that is, at least 6 of the first 10 cards drawn are different. This is of course not scientific at all and is very biased.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Kraus posted:IPG makes mention of a specific number of times in the Improper Shuffling section. It has to be true then that if a number of times (1) is insufficient, then there must be a number of times where it becomes sufficient. Statistically, 7 riffle shuffles sufficiently randomizes a 52 card playing deck. Eight should be enough for a 60 card deck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:We don't use set numbers. Do you believe a player knows the position of any card in their deck after shuffling? Then it's improper. If you cut my deck behind your back, the I don't know the position of any card in my deck, but that doesn't mean a single cut qualifies as good shuffling. It's entirely possible to shuffle enough to eliminate my knowledge of where my cards are but not enough to truly randomize - that's the whole basis of mana weaving.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Boxman posted:"Do you know who would cast Jace? Jay-Z." This Legacy match is so boring and everyone knows it, so instead the commentators have been bullshitting about rap for the past 20 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:37
|
|
|
The conversation they were having earlier about the folly of playing Mother of Runes in Legacy was amazing. "Here's my turn one Griselbrand. Oh you have a Mom? That's pretty good. Daddy's home, and he's been drinking." But holy poo poo this Jund player is really bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:If you cut my deck behind your back, the I don't know the position of any card in my deck, but that doesn't mean a single cut qualifies as good shuffling. It's entirely possible to shuffle enough to eliminate my knowledge of where my cards are but not enough to truly randomize - that's the whole basis of mana weaving. Here, read MTR 3.9 (Shuffling Cards) "Decks must be randomized at the start of every game and whenever an instruction requires it. Randomization is defined as bringing the deck to a state where no player can have any information regarding the order or position of cards in any portion of the deck. Pile shuffling alone is not sufficiently random. Once the deck is randomized, it must be presented to an opponent. By this action, players state that their decks are legal and randomized. The opponent may then shuffle it additionally. Cards and sleeves must not be in danger of being damaged during this process. If the opponent does not believe the player made a reasonable effort to randomize his or her deck, the opponent must notify a judge. Players may request to have a judge shuffle their cards rather than the opponent; this request will be honored only at a judge’s discretion. If a player has had the opportunity to see any of the card faces of the deck being shuffled, the deck is no longer considered randomized and must be randomized again. At Competitive and Professional REL tournaments, players are required to shuffle their opponents’ decks after their owners have shuffled them. The Head Judge can require this at Regular REL tournaments as well." Does this make things more clear for you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Kraus posted:I'm studying for my L1 currently, and while reading through the IPG, I came to the section on improper randomization. Not to chime in on the randomization discussion, but do not study the IPG for your L1. It is not needed. The L1 exam only covers Regular REL judging and there will be some tricky questions, so familiarize yourself thoroughly with the Regular REL packet and maybe speak to another judge about it, but you have enough to study for without getting into the IPG as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:Not to chime in on the randomization discussion, but do not study the IPG for your L1. It is not needed. The L1 exam only covers Regular REL judging and there will be some tricky questions, so familiarize yourself thoroughly with the Regular REL packet and maybe speak to another judge about it, but you have enough to study for without getting into the IPG as well. I'm a fast reader with good recollection of what I've read, despite the density of information. I'm just reading everything, because my mentor has tossed some IPG questions my way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
Hey does anyone have a link to the highest res version of the jace/sorin playmat image?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
hah, ran into some fool who was trying to scam me. I won game 1 in an 8-4, its game 2 and I just cast a spell that is going to end the match. He sends me a chat asking if I want to split, and he'd give me 4 packs. This is match one. This is not the championship match of the 8-4. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, I tell him "this is match 1". (ignoring the fact that no one is going to split right before a win, and also ignore that in a championship split you give 2 packs, not 4) He replies "so, you want to do it?" This guy is obviously trying to take advantage of tired or distracted double-queuers or something. I tell him off and block him, and now I'm sitting there waiting for him to time out, which is fine, I've got other things to keep me busy, like typing this. I assume his backup plan is to hope I go afk and forget to win this match. Northjayhawk fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
Oops All Spells is back in the Quarterfinals against Miracles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
qbert posted:Oops All Spells is back in the Quarterfinals against Miracles. not going well either :/
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Well that certainly costs a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
 Also, this. Interesting design.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Cool card, but they could've easily dropped the -3 ability and maybe brought him down to 3 or 4 loyalty in order to drop the mana cost to 3BG or 2BG. As it stands now, another cool BG Timmy rare that will never see play because it's overcosted. Edit: Yeah, it'll be great for Kitchen table, but it would be cool to see some Standard or even Modern play. Mat Cauthon fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Rap Record Hoarder posted:Cool card, but they could've easily dropped the -3 ability and maybe brought him down to 3 or 4 loyalty in order to drop the mana cost to 3BG or 2BG. As it stands now, another cool BG Timmy rare that will never see play because it's overcosted. BG Timmy rares do see play, though. Just you know... by Timmys.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
Unless he slots into some weird B/G devotion build I can't see Garruk being cast in standard. E:Beaten. Honestly though I'd probably try to play that devotion deck. U/G devotion was a lot of fun, even if not terribly competitive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
Hahaha, I hope this isn't the last time we see a planeswalker that can give opponents an emblem. Also, first four-ability walker since JtMS! That connection alone probably drove the cost too high.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
If the next block brings significant ramp, things could get kinda uncomfortable in standard e: I mean, he slots into G/b devotion and Junk reanimator right now (can obzedat's aid him back). Those abilities are pretty fricking powerful, certainly enough to be worth a look
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
 Oh poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Pretty sure everyone knew Chord was coming. Disappointing. This card could be a lot better if they didn't add such a situational +1 for the "flavor". That forced them to add another +1 and that pushed the cost into the "very unlikely" territory pretty fast.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
Zorak posted:
Also Garruk is pretty ok. He's seven mana, but you get something worth seven mana. Bugsy posted:Oh poo poo indeed, I thought they might not re-print it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
Zorak posted:
Oh poo poo indeed, I thought they might not re-print it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
come to think of it, I know plenty of walkers that don't see play because they are too weak, but I can't think of a walker that hasn't seen play because they were too expensive. e: oh right, nicol bolas. yeah ok sometimes walkers can be just too expensive A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 05:13 on Jun 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
I wonder if they could have written Garruk's two +1s as a single ability that gives you the option (choose one of the following), either blow up a walker or put a beast into play. Is there some sort of precedent for walkers not having modal abilities like that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
Zorak posted:
Where was this spoiled at?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
He's also a pretty major flavour fail if his top +1 doesn't instantly win you the match by destroying your opponent. Chord of calling on the other hand... That's actually surprising, even though convoke is a thing again in M15. I guess they're really apologising for Theros block.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
At least the All Spells player died with style. He drew his card for the turn blind, emptied his hand building up a mana pool, then flipped over the card to reveal...Summoner's Pact.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:come to think of it, I know plenty of walkers that don't see play because they are too weak, but I can't think of a walker that hasn't seen play because they were too expensive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Oldsrocket_27 posted:Where was this spoiled at? Star City Games
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 05:12
|
|