|
HootTheOwl posted:...What do you think tier zero is? Because to me they're hands-down best decks that need immdiate bans. Like Eldrazi, Hogaak, and that Oko pile. I don't think just because a deck is the best deck hands down it automatically needed a ban but I think banning Lurrus was fine also and that those two decks were the clear cut best 2 decks in the format before the ban.
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 16:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:11 |
|
|
Lurrus wasn't a problem because it made any deck the "best deck", it was a problem because it was in a ton of decks and forced loads of cards out of the format because they cost more than 2.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 16:40
|
|
|
Tier zero in yugioh means the deck made up 65% of a tournament, which i doubt hammer did. Grixis might have tho It sucks mtg hides all that data bc its actually very useful definition but nope, you just have to go on guesswork
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 16:51
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:Tier zero in yugioh means the deck made up 65% of a tournament, which i doubt hammer did. Grixis might have tho It's because tournaments barely exist, and ladder play isn't a good metric of deck strength. Our own Dr Richard Garfield recently wrote an article about this: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/blogs...sBKdnTjA7idPMxQ Edit lol whoops I forgot we were going talking about Modern so ladder play is less relevant but the article is still very good
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
they're going to ban SFM again aren't they
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 20:29
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Grixis was the other Tier 0 deck and it was good because of it's hammer matchup. (also another Lurrus deck) If a deck has a bad matchup against another good deck then it's not tier 0
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
Lone Goat posted:It's because tournaments barely exist, and ladder play isn't a good metric of deck strength. Theoretically you could use the data from modern challenges to determine tier status, arent those a more cultivated environment?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 20:51
|
|
|
Barry Shitpeas posted:If a deck has a bad matchup against another good deck then it's not tier 0 Agree. T0 decks would be necessarily resistant to teching or metagame shifts trying to target it. A T1 deck that is too prevalent will promote another deck in the metagame that has a strong matchup, or that has strong tech (main deck or sideboard) to keep it in check.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 21:17
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:Theoretically you could use the data from modern challenges to determine tier status, arent those a more cultivated environment? Challenges are just tournaments right? X rounds of Swiss play (cut to a top 8 isn't necessary)? That'll be closer to getting you there, yes. Tier lists are sometimes subjective, especially when people can't agree on the definition of zero, but if you had all the matchups you could see a W/L matrix of all the decks that are played and that would get you information. There's a twitter that would do exactly that for Arena formats but they haven't updated this calendar year https://mobile.twitter.com/mtg_data?lang=en
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 21:42
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:Theoretically you could use the data from modern challenges to determine tier status, arent those a more cultivated environment? They publish the top 64 (32?) from the format challanges, leagues though are curated to reduce reposing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
a deck has to pretty handily capture over half the format to be T0, otherwise the power differential isnt there (because if it was they would be playing it often enough to reach that mark). T0 is a combination of incredibly high power (high enough that theres no reasonable other options) and then because of that power, the play rate follows. you can see some illustrative examples when you look at yugioh, where decks like TeleDAD had 95%+ top cut showing (meaning regionals etc were 15/16 or 16/16 TeleDAD top cuts). as an example in the opposite direction, because dragon rulers and spellbooks existed at the same time, neither could be T0. they both ended up sucking up the vast majority of rep though, at slightly below 50% (with a small edge to drulers because they didnt have to preboard as hard for spellbooks game 1 as the other way around) and then rogue decks (like the supposedly perfectly positioned antimeta evilswarm) left to suck up singular percentage points, all combined. if youre not seeing a single deck suddenly swooping up tons of top cut spots its by definition not T0 because its clearly not that much better than the entire rest of the field.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
T1 is better but I feel like T2 is more fun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
kalel posted:T1 is better but I feel like T2 is more fun.  T2 usually, at least to me, has much cooler play patterns and win conditions then just pure hyper efficiency. I'm not sure where it places, but modern belcher is really cool and fun, but it's also pretty much the only viable true combo deck so I'm not sure if that by default bumps it up a few tiers
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 22:11
|
|
|
by the way that statement applies to James Cameron's films as well
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 22:16
|
|
|
with all this tier creep we're going to need to start talking about deck tiers in negative numbers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 22:24
|
|
|
I'll never understand the obsession with tiering things. Obviously you want to know what the best decks are, but who the gently caress knows what the difference between a T3 and a T2 deck is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2022 23:53
|
|
|
Hammer is still good, AspiringSpike is still putting out black based grindy midrange decks that your local grinders are going to pilot. They should have also banned ephemerate to go with lurrus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 00:01
|
|
|
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. One card value engines in the sideboard. I watched Unholy Heats glitter in the dark near Hanweir Battlements . All those moments will be lost in time, like tiers in rain. Time to ban.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:I'll never understand the obsession with tiering things. Obviously you want to know what the best decks are, but who the gently caress knows what the difference between a T3 and a T2 deck is. Me. Subscribe to my patreon to find out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 00:41
|
|
|
Not sure what tier my decks are in, but I know for a fact that the decks I beat and lose to are all several tiers above mine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 00:58
|
|
|
I enjoyed that Garfield article about ranks and tournaments. When I started playing Arena I was kind of thrown off that there weren't really any tournaments at all. I experienced big gap in playing from the early 2000s to now. I was used to FNM that were structured like little low-stakes tournaments, and watching big events. The endless grind for rank just feels aimless and unending - having discrete events that you can succeed or fail in is something that feels more familiar to me. But it sounds like this is less common in digital card games now and organizing discrete, scheduled tournaments requires a lot more effort on WOTCs part and less user friendly for casual players. The periodic events they do on Arena are cool and feel like something to work towards, but they aren't really tournaments. I suppose you can eventually get to that level by being in Mythic a bunch and winning in a qualifier event? I don't really know how it works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 01:59
|
|
|
Fantastic Foreskin posted:Me. Subscribe to my patreon to find out. I rank this post a Low A-tier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 04:03
|
|
|
kalel posted:speaking of which, are there any good modern content creators on YouTube? by which I mean Aspiring Spike
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 04:27
|
|
|
kalel posted:they're going to ban SFM again aren't they nah
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
lol https://mobile.twitter.com/coL_Amazonian/status/1502016266084790280 lmao https://twitter.com/SethManfield/status/1502021385325064192
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:10
|
|
|
I know there's not really a better way to deal with it then "play it out as Arena does it" other than rescheduling the whole tournament or rushing out something that might not be tested, but that's pretty hilarious and just sorta seems not right for a major tournament
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
Jesus christ wizards how do you gently caress up that bad and not immediately prioritize fixing it before the big tournament that it will hugely affect
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
Lone Goat posted:lol Arena, you were the chosen one! you were supposed fix stupid MODO bugs, not join them!
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:41
|
|
|
MC is the digital pro tour right? So like theyre playing for money? Seems like maybe just going with it if itll gently caress people out of placing is not correct. Im guessing anyone whose affected gets a free invite to the next MC
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:43
|
|
|
Arena Dev during prioritization: we're not going to fix it, so let's hope that Shatterskull and Magma Opus just aren't registered in the Mythic championship *checks lists* Aw, beans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:44
|
|
|
They should at least let people change their deck list now, or at least sub out those cards if they wish 1:1
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:48
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:MC is the digital pro tour right? So like theyre playing for money? Yes and LOL. Hinata is the 7th most popular Alchemy deck, with 9 players on it. RIP
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:49
|
|
|
After the tourmanent, it'll turn out that they only consider you negatively affected by it if you actually triggered the bug, but not if you held back from casting the spell because your opponent could nullify it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:52
|
|
|
I was gonna say that at a big tournament maybe you could get people to just like honour system it, maybe pretend the creature's been destroyed if it comes up? But then I remembered Arena doesn't even have chat and there's probably no coverage of these matches.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 22:53
|
|
|
Is this the same bug with Skalds that's been in forever? For example you go face with a burn spell, triggering Skalds to put a counter on a creature. Your opponent responds by removing the creature and your burn spell disappears.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 23:15
|
|
|
the hits just keep on coming https://twitter.com/fireshoes/status/1502041003448061952 conjured Curse of Leeches definitely worked fine before so they did something to gently caress it up recently
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
Should of stuck to paper mechanics, they weren’t ready for this nonsense because they are not a software company
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2022 23:55
|
|
|
Koirhor posted:Should of stuck to paper mechanics, they weren’t ready for this nonsense because they are not a software company It makes the Goblin combat phase issue look cute in comparison
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2022 00:07
|
|
|
Wooper posted:Is this the same bug with Skalds that's been in forever? Yes, to be clear, because what everyone's initial reading of the post is going to be "oh so if a spell has 2 targets and you remove one of them the spell is countered even though that's not how it should work", that is NOT the bug. The bug also doesn't actually fizzle the spell, which is the other "oh that must be what happens" interpretation. The bug is that if you have a burn spell that divides damage on the stack, and then while this is on the stack ANY target of ANY effect/spell becomes illegal anywhere in the game, that burn spell deals 0 damage to all targets. It doesn't fizzle, all other parts of the burn spell still resolves correctly, it just changes the damage to 0. You can target a random 1/1 token with a spell and then sacrifice the token in response, which will cause the 8 damage pointed at your two big creatures to become 0 from Shatterskull Smashing. It is mindboggling why this bug would ever happen in the first place, and also apparently this has been reported like 4 months ago and never addressed, so it's not some new discovery.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2022 00:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:11 |
|
|
some genius put "rather than crash the game, become 0" somewhere to meet a deadline and then they got covid and died. no one else can read the code.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2022 00:36
|
|
