|
Neal
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: November 26, 2002, 02:09:48 am » |
|
i am interested zherbus told me about it..thanks! please email me njwang@uci.eduwhen the offical dates been set |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nimrod
Guest
|
|
« Reply #31 on: November 26, 2002, 03:42:12 am » |
|
What is the problem with making Decklists and SB public with names? We have done it that way since the days of BD and it was far more interesting and complex than trying to do it t2 style.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Neal
Guest
|
|
« Reply #32 on: November 26, 2002, 12:41:19 pm » |
|
i think just posting them publicly is fine......... however when u post the dekcs dont post whos deck it is...... that way when the game comes u can show ur opponent ur SB after the games
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Grand Inquisitor
Guest
|
|
« Reply #33 on: November 26, 2002, 01:15:31 pm » |
|
i think neal's on to something. if we had whoever's running the tournament publish the decklists with id #'s, all you'd have to do is remember what your opponent wished for and check after the match.
we could still see all the decks beforehand and make comments on the meta and predictions on the winner. its just that when it came time to play your opponent you wouldn't know his deck.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Redman
Guest
|
|
« Reply #34 on: November 26, 2002, 10:42:28 pm » |
|
The decklists without names has been tried in the past, the 5th TOC I believe it was. All it did was discourage tournament reports, for fear of revealing what you were playing too soon.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Abra_Volta
Guest
|
|
« Reply #35 on: November 26, 2002, 11:50:23 pm » |
|
I'm not a very knowledgable Apprentice user but is this scenario possible:
All decklists are made public like they have been.
When a player Wishes for a card, can Apprentice make a "temporary" card (kinda like a token) that is able to be in the deck/graveyard, etc...
Then when people go to sideboard it keeps there technique relatively free from any scouting methods.
Of course, I could just be stupid, but I don't know Apprentice that well.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Cartman316 _420
Guest
|
|
« Reply #36 on: November 27, 2002, 12:04:35 am » |
|
I want to play.
~Cartman
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Neal
Guest
|
|
« Reply #37 on: November 27, 2002, 05:00:37 pm » |
|
why dont you have tournament reports when the tournaments over then?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Redman
Guest
|
|
« Reply #38 on: November 29, 2002, 12:14:03 am » |
|
Quote why dont you have tournament reports when the tournaments over then? It's a possiblity, but waiting 2 months to hear anything about the progress of the tourney isn't much fun. Besides, most of the enthusiasm for the tourney is a direct product of exciting match reports. When the tourney reports dissapear, people forget there is a tourney even going on. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nimrod
Guest
|
|
« Reply #39 on: December 02, 2002, 04:13:15 am » |
|
Sigh, just reveal both the decklists with SB and the players, it makes for far more interesting games and an overall tourney, doing like so will keep us in the right times of t1 (like wishes) without cheating.
Also, a great deal of the ToC are the reports, and, as I have been saying since the days of BD, reports with secrets are waaay too boring. "Then in game 2, I played *secret-SB-tech #1* and then he played *card A*, but my tech won me the game, I cant say how because I would give too many details", excuse me, but that kind of reports are both boring and, well, aint much of a report anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
