December 04, 2021, 06:19:16 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37]
1081  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Shuffling In T1... on: March 27, 2004, 03:12:28 pm
I stand corrected, knew I should have checked the comprehensive rules instead of just the floor rules, good catch Kowal.


1082  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Shuffling In T1... on: March 27, 2004, 07:03:54 am
Ok, Rule 114.3 of the DCI floor rules says
Players present their decks to their opponents for additional shuffling and cutting.

So, as you can see it says that additional shuffling and cutting must occur and makes no reference whatsoever to it being active or inactive at certain REL levels, and to my knowledge the REL level only affects the penalties dispensed for various forms of cheatery.
1083  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Shuffling In T1... on: March 27, 2004, 02:03:43 am
Using perfect riffles to stack a deck isn't exactly the same in magic, as you and I noted it is extremely difficult to do, but with enough practice one can learn to do it discreetly. In magic, rather than doing perfect riffles a certain number of times to return the deck to it's original order, a very specific card order is memorized by the cheater, and a set number of perfect riffles will set it to an ideal stacking. However, as I said earlier, this looks incredibly sketchy as well as it involves resetting the deck after every match to it's original card order, so next round it can be riffled a set number of times again, and the process is repeated indefinitely.
1084  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Shuffling In T1... on: March 27, 2004, 01:45:01 am
Also, as far as stacking while pile shuffling, one can *really* easily de-randomize just by changing the order of the shuffle.

What do you mean exactly by "changing the order of the shuffle"? Like stacking your deck in a way other than "Spell, Land, Spell, Spell, Land"? If so I have never seen a deck stacked differently than that, other than that is basically shipping god hand to the top 7 cards. The reason why it's the predominant stacking method is because it is very easy to do, in between rounds cheaters can't sit there and meticulously place every card in every place necessary without looking a little sketchy. The stacking which I described earlier can be accomplished very discreetly in what looks to be pile shuffling. If you were referring to shuffling your deck after it is returned to you, or something to that extent, you're only allowed to cut your deck once after it is returned to you before starting the game. Also, even if you see your opponent riffle shuffling their deck right before your eyes it's not a solid garuntee. A person with enough practice can perform a "perfect riffle" shuffle and stack their deck, although this is considerably more difficult than the way that utilizes pile shuffling as it does involve suspiciously ordering all your cards perfectly so that two or three perfect riffles will put them in the correct places

I also don't think I know of any judge that would call somebody for pile shuffling their opponents deck, I'm also fairly sure I've never read anywhere that it's against the rules. If your deck does become stacked as a result of your opponent pile shuffling, I'm going to have to agree with Morefling that it's going to be fairly obvious that you did indeed not sufficiently randomize and had stacked your deck. That's the beauty of the three pile shuffle, it's only an issue if your opponent did indeed cheat, if not, it's just a regular shuffle.
1085  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Shuffling In T1... on: March 26, 2004, 11:10:27 pm
Dxfiler wrote:
He hands me his slavery and I instinctively start to shuffle... he points out 2 things: 1) Don't shuffle during a testing game.

Nobody has really commented on point 1, but the worst thing you can do during a test game is NOT shuffle. When you intutition for AK, cast AK, gee, no surprise all your AKs are stuck together.

When testing, you should always shuffle well or your results will be tainted. You don't need to go overboard, but if you're going to spend a couple hours playtesting a couple dozen games, take the extra 30 seconds each game and shuffle "enough" for testing.


You're quite right about the matter, I'm not sure if that's exactly what Dave meant by no shuffling, I've had TAL mention these points to me as well, and the problem was me taking too long shuffling, and also taking too long shuffling for unimportant shuffles like for fetch lands, but I think the "extra 30 seconds each game and shuffle "enough" for testing." you mentioned is more towards what he was suggesting. Of course I don't speak for TAL or Dave on this matter.

I think kl0wn has an important point that the opponent shuffling your deck is simply the inverse of him shuffling his own deck. I don't think I buy the 'trust everyone' dynamic, but anyone who can dodge the simplest anti-cheating measure is indeed misapplying their skills. The best way is to watch while the opponent shuffles looking for any irregularities (preferably his eyes are on your hands rather than his own), and then multiple-cut his deck. Multi-part cutting makes it impossible to predict which part of his deck will end up on top, eliminating the advantage of stacking while being both simple and very harmless to other players' cards.

I must admit that it if the decks were worth less this issue would be mostly moot to me, but I barely trust myself to shuffle my deck. My roommates are astonished that I trust my Power to anything less than an all-hard-plastic set of sleeves. I find it comparable to trusting a half dozen random people test drive your car during the day with you sitting in the back seat hoping they don't wreck everything. In a format where my deck is worth more than the maximum possible prize, trusting a half dozen or more random, grimy-handed Magic players to abuse the hell out of my investment is not only risky, it's unnecessary.

Multi-part cutting 4L.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you on this matter Dr. Sylvan, the typical stacking doesn't necessarily give God hands, but produces good draws rather, to the order of "spell, land, spell, spell, land" (having done deck checks myself at PTQ's on a few occasions I can attest that this is what is primarily looked for when attempting to determine if a deck is stacked) continuously repeating throughout the deck, so if you cut the deck, even multiple times, the order is only *slightly* thrown off. however, by pile/riffle shuffling the order can be thrown off, and if it's perfectly stacked, 3 pile shuffling will not only not damage your opponent's cards, it will create two piles of spells, one pile of land. creating RIDICULOUS clumps if your opponent did indeed stack their deck, which their right to cut once when their deck is presented back to them will not be sufficient to undo the fact that all their mana is clumped.

3 pile shuffle 4L
1086  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Shuffling In T1... on: March 26, 2004, 07:41:28 pm
As it was explained to me, the shuffling rule was placed after there were serious problems in Japan with shuffling an opponents deck before a match was seen as a sign of disrespect. I think that if you pile shuffle your opponent's deck that's perfectly acceptable, it certainly won't damage the cards, and since you choose the number of piles you can almost insure that any stacking will be negated. Having seen the way that you shuffle prior to matches I'd feel perfectly comfortable with you shuffling my cards as your form of shuffling doesn't put any bend on the cards. I've been told by a high level jude that breaking into piles of three is the most effective way to negate any stacking effects. Good to see you posting Dave, it's Mike Lydon btw.
1087  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / [Discussion]Fact or Fiction in general on: March 26, 2004, 03:07:50 pm
I'm not quite sure what is the question you're posing here gimbles. Are you simply saying that FoF is a broken card? That's really not a debateable point, few non-broken cards end up on the restricted list and I think FoF certainly warranted a spot (unlike say, chrome mox, which I felt was debateable). Do you have a gripe about FoF being moved to sideboards in some cases as wish targets? Or are you arguing that FoF has lost something without three of it's FoF bretheren and it's not as powerful as a one of in decks. Clarification would be appreciated. thanks.
1088  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / how far is too far to drive for a mox? on: March 26, 2004, 04:56:47 am
I think the reason why the tourneys are normally held in various places in Connecticut is to fall under the spheres that Massachusetts RI CT and New York gamers will drive too. It's unfortunate that you guys are from Maine, but that's about the same haul for Massachusetts folk, maybe more, and definitely longer for people from NY, RI and CT. But my personal theory is, if the prizes are good enough, and they figure their chances are good enough, they would drive a ridiculous length. If you're worried about just getting jonesed on your power throw in a disclaimer on your tourney announcement, something to the effect of, "If we get 25+ people we'll put up (some random peice of power) as the prize, and if we don't A box of mirrodin will be the grand prize. At least that way you're assured not to be giving out a mox for a 10 person tourney.
1089  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / New T1 Agro deck (Ravager/Atog), 70% turn three kills on: March 26, 2004, 12:22:01 am
Glimmervoid>foothills I'm thinking
1090  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / T1 in RI? on: March 25, 2004, 11:28:23 pm
Yeah, I'm personally not a huge fan of gamer's haven either having had some unfortunate experience with the store owner Howie which I won't delve into right now. OK Rich YA GOT ME, the store is just over the Norwood/Walpole border, but unfortunately none of the neighboring towns, such as walpole for instance, offer any sort of gaming store. And yes, Rob Zero is not the optimal place to play magic, but if you feel compelled to play there for some reason it's in norwood center next to a bar/restaurant called Napper Tandy's, again, it's not marked "Rob Zero" but actually some sort of "collectibles and cards" or something to that effect and only open for a few evening hours Friday/Saturday. If I lived in RI I'd personally just stick to YMG Providence.
1091  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / [Single Card Discussion] Arcbound Ravager on: March 25, 2004, 11:04:00 pm
I think it would be interesting to build a intruder/welder/ravager deck and run it against the gauntlet, the deck could even include thirst for knowledge, amazing with welder and it could even include lightning greaves to protect your ravagers and win faster and it can protect your welders. Just some thoughts.

Having contemplated the idea and spoken about it with Jacob briefly, he surmised that the idea was terrible, and after some thought I came to the same conclusions. Intruder alarm is really just too clunky a card to be playing I believe.

It just ends up being like a bad control slaver deck. I'd rather run the mindslavers which are good even if I don't have the whole combo working and the pentavus allows for a solid lock, which, even if it gets the whole combo out, ravager/intruder alarm/welder does not provide, there's still the distinct possibility that your opponent can just chump block the ravager with a gorilla shaman or some other variety of dork.
1092  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / [Deck Discussion] Does bazaar have a place in control? on: March 25, 2004, 10:52:07 pm
Secondly, just because one Slavery deck won doesn't mean it's automatically the top deck.

You're quite right Razvan, But I think it's halfway reasonable to assume that the deck will grow to be more popular as at the time of the tournament it only comprised a small percentage of the metagame, after two controlslaver decks made the top eight of a large tournament I think it's not going out on a limb to think that the number of people playing slaver decks will most likely take a jump.

A Mindslaver activating is game against just about every deck...

This is indeed normally the case, but certainly not always, I've definitely seen plenty of control slaver games go south even after a mindslaver turn. The Control Slaver player could run out of artifacts to welder into play, usually as the result of being pushed to take a slaver turn before the a more ideal scenario is available, and lose his slaver lock. Psychatog strikes me as one of those decks that just has GLARING weakness. Again it's been a while since I've seen an up to date deck with tog, but cards that I believe it runs like deep analysis and psychatog just allow for some sick tricks which I'm sure you are all aware of so I will not bore you with the details.

I don't for a moment claim to be an expert on any of the tog decks, so I'll make sure to throw in the disclaimer that my opinions regarding tog decks lack validity.
1093  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Artifacts Public Enemy #1 on: March 25, 2004, 07:02:05 pm
the thing about the furnace dragon is you need artifacts to make it worthwile too, you'll probably hurt yourself alot by playing it most times. what about shattering pulse?
1094  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / [Deck Discussion] Does bazaar have a place in control? on: March 25, 2004, 04:37:51 pm
It strikes me that in order to make the bazaars worth running, you need to include a number of "bazaar friendly cards" like squee/deep analysis/fiery temper. Now we're talking about a number of extra slots filled up just to make the bazaar an effective card in the deck and I just feel like those slots are better spent on the cards in existing control decks. I could see a deck like Insane Scrub's definitely having some potential as the increasing card quality while simultaneously providing Dr. Teeth with some more food could be powerful in helping him get to berserk kill range, which I noticed isn't present in his list. I'm not a tog player and don't keep up on it's ever evolving forms so it's quite possible that he has his own reasons that my ignorant self has clearly overlooked. I'm also not sure how powerful tog decks are now that control slaver has scored a major tournament win, A mindslaver activating and resolving is usually game over for the tog player, especially if the slaver player can get a tog in play.
1095  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Worse Than Fish.dec on: March 25, 2004, 04:22:55 pm
It seems like people are constantly underestimating the sheer power of oxidize, the previous standard cards for destroying artifacts were shatter and rack and ruin. Rack and Ruin has the benefit of being able to take out two artifacts very efficiently at instant speed, but on rare occasion that can be seen as a drawback when your opponent only has one threatening artifact in play. Oxidize's only drawback is that it happens to be green, so if your deck is already making excellent use of green, as Jacob's list does with the inclusion of the boas and other top notch creatures, I don't see any reason NOT to include oxidize. I think it will also be a card that endures and shows up in multiple formats, it takes care of cards such as masticore and makes welding Jar useless which is really a nice bonus that shatter or rack and ruin can't claim. I've already seen it used extremely effectively against type II/block affinity decks.
1096  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / T1 in RI? on: March 25, 2004, 12:19:45 am
There's a small store which is only open about two nights a  week in Norwood Center, it's disguised as sports card store, it's mostly just drafting and occasionally some regular gaming. TAL lives in Norwood and plays magic there whenever possible, but often times we end up drafting in the Dunkin Donuts on Route 1, the only 24 hour non-pharmacy business within Norwood. There's also gamer's haven in the Lincoln Mall in Lincoln RI which has a reasonably active type I community to my knowledge.
1097  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / Worse Than Fish.dec on: March 24, 2004, 04:20:46 am
What would you play in the suggested black splash? The typical cards that get splashed for are Demonic Tutor, Yawg Will and Mind Twist. I don't think any of these is particularly powerful in the context of fish. There's nothing terribly powerful to tutor for, no powerful cards coming from the graveyard with will and mind twist just doesn't fit the deck at all. Perhaps Dark Ritual and negator? Turn one ritual followed by turn two standstill would only work to make the negator even more broken in that situation. Perhaps Hippie would fit in nicely, making him curious turns his evasion damage into a double whammy. Sinkhole could contribute to the mana denial already present in Fish. Maybe even a psychatog deserves a place in here somewhere, he would benefit from standstill as well as from fish's typical strenght of card advantage. But at this point you're basically smashing two budget decks together and hoping it creates some sort of uber-deck, which in my experience rarely pans out. Let me know what you've come up with Roadtrippin' and Gimbles
1098  Eternal Formats / Miscellaneous / [Discussion] How good is Fish? on: March 23, 2004, 04:31:08 pm
I don't think you should really be bashing the deck because you think it's not viable without cards like Null Rod and FOW, Hulk wouldn't be viable without tog, does that make it a weak deck? Long wouldn't have been viable w/o Mind's Desire or Tendrils of Agony, Dragon wouldn't be viable without Worldgorger Dragon. I think you can remove a few powerful cards most decks in the format and they would no longer be viable. And what would you propose be used instead of weenies if you feel that using weenies is sub optimal? The whole game plan of the deck is to drop some very early guys, not big, but often with a nice ability, then work like hell to establish card advantage and a control lock while the little men kick ass. Dropping a grim lavamancer turn 1 and standstill turn two is often a welcome sight for the fish player. Of course Fish is a deck designed to beat a metagame, most aggro type II decks would probably run all over fish. Fortunately for TAL, his deck strikes me as being a good matchup against fish, if he's able to welder a pentavus in play that makes it near impossible for the fish player to win, and his abundance of fire/ice in his match against Jacob certainly accounts for his ability to squeeze in 18 points of welder damage by contintually clearing Jacob's team out of the way, and as TAL mentioned, Jacob's hand wasn't exceptional.
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.044 seconds with 19 queries.