It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:59 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Making your own format
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:46 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2015
Posts: 222
Identity: Deceased
Magic is this great game where you can make up your own formats. Like multiplayer stuff.

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/ar ... 2016-02-17

Except online. In MTGO we cut the 10 least popular formats each year. It is basically impossible to do something like what they suggest in the article if you online play online.

They should do someting for casual players online.....


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:15 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 07, 2013
Posts: 457
Maybe thinking of a customized banned / restricted list for free form? One that you can share with other players and enforce on your match making?


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:52 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Dec 07, 2013
Posts: 3433
Well, find some buddies interested in playing this new format, and meet and play according to your rules. I've never tried anything like this, but it might actually be easier to find a playgroup online than in real life. I mean, there's millions (thousands?) players online, so maybe just put it on Facebook or something, and find some like-minded souls.

_________________
Go draft, young man, go draft!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 7:55 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 02, 2015
Posts: 85
Location: NYC
Identity: Wolf
There have been new formats tried and sometimes proven since long before niche formats were created for the client. The thing is, to run a tournament where there are prizes on the line, there needs to be some way to ensure fair play. That's not so easy.

_________________
Winter.Wolf and Telir on MTGO, Paul Leicht on puremtgo.com and Telir on the soon to be defunct MTGO forums.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 2:56 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2015
Posts: 69
It's too bad online can't have things like Attack Right and Left, Spell Range, Handicaps for Life and Card totals, etc....








at least not anymore.....

_________________
V/R

Treamayne


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 6:10 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 02, 2015
Posts: 85
Location: NYC
Identity: Wolf
It did have some of those... but they stripped out all functionality when they made 4.

_________________
Winter.Wolf and Telir on MTGO, Paul Leicht on puremtgo.com and Telir on the soon to be defunct MTGO forums.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2016 11:23 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2015
Posts: 69
As I recall, we lost those after 2.5. At least I don't recall them ever being added back to version 3.

_________________
V/R

Treamayne


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2016 5:47 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 02, 2015
Posts: 85
Location: NYC
Identity: Wolf
They were in 3.0. They were a little less accessible but they were there.

_________________
Winter.Wolf and Telir on MTGO, Paul Leicht on puremtgo.com and Telir on the soon to be defunct MTGO forums.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:14 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 18, 2015
Posts: 8
Pauper started as a player run format and made it through to being an "official" format. When it was player run we had our own ban list and everything.

Checking deck legality was simplified because you could use the existing formats (std,modern,vintage etc) and scream if opponent plays anything other than a common.

Once wotc was told of a way to monetise the format it suddenly gained importance. This is critical. If it doesn't make money for wotc it will get no support.

I can't say I am a fan of how wotc have mangled/supported the pauper format. They may not be the best guardians of "fun" formats because "fun" adversely hits their profit margin. (tribal wars i'm looking at you)

Checking deck legality of any new formats is probably best done by some external program. Maybe playing these formats would be better done on some other platform too.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:47 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2015
Posts: 69
I can't say I am a fan of how wotc have mangled/supported the pauper format. They may not be the best guardians of "fun" formats because "fun" adversely hits their profit margin. (tribal wars i'm looking at you)


How could Tribal affect a profit margin negatively? It has a loyal fan base and a weekly PRE that has been going for years (which could have been an official tournament bringing in entrance money if WotC supported the format). Also, Store sales for tribal products went way up (e.g. Lorwyn/Innistrad). Though their experimental Standard Lorwyn Tribal was not a success (like Kaleidoscope) Tribal classic was always doing great until the removed the Multi-player room in V3.

Tribal is (arguably) the oldest "casual" format in magic (There were articles in the first year of Dualist and I was playing Tribal Merfolk during The Dark, they had 'Lords' in Alpha), and has been popular enough to have multiple Blocks of expansions inspired by the theme. That does not sound like a net negative to the bottom line. It sound more like a failure of management, planning and ability.

_________________
V/R

Treamayne


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:38 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 18, 2015
Posts: 8
>How could Tribal affect a profit margin negatively?

The pre's are using the system resources for free (at the expense of paying players / profit margins).

If all players were playing pre's instead of paid events how long before the system collapsed?

>It sound more like a failure of management, planning and ability.

Agreed!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 6:03 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2015
Posts: 69
>How could Tribal affect a profit margin negatively?

The pre's are using the system resources for free (at the expense of paying players / profit margins).
If all players were playing pre's instead of paid events how long before the system collapsed?


Well, I understood that you were saying that they don't support the casual format because of negative impact. The negative impact you show above is because they do not support he casual format. If they were better stewards of casual play, and there were an official venue for tribal classic (maybe a tribal league?), then we would not need a Pre, would we? Then that potential lost revenue would flow back to them.

So, again I say, it seems they only lose revenue by failing to support the casual formats. Granted we don't have numbers on how much the cost (monetary or manhours) of setting things up would be. However, they already used to have the deck check coded, the league base is coded. Also, once it is set up it will just continue to draw more tickets without further manhour requirements*.

TLDO: Not supporting seems like the worst all around business decision, and they continue to fail to communicate what other reasons on which they might be basing these abysmal decisions.

_________________
V/R

Treamayne


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 1:18 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 02, 2015
Posts: 85
Location: NYC
Identity: Wolf
Oh I think they have communicated just fine how they feel about casual. I don't think it is printable but they have managed through neglect and active abuse to get their feelings across. I am sure not all in the company feel that way but it seems pretty clear to me that if casual players just suddenly stopped playing MTG altogether, WOTC would not deign to notice at all. In fact if someone mentioned it they would say "What Casual players?" Because there is this philosophy that pervades a certain tier of mtg culture which is those who do not play for the $$ must just be scrubs and there is no need to cater to scrubs. My bitter 2.0.

_________________
Winter.Wolf and Telir on MTGO, Paul Leicht on puremtgo.com and Telir on the soon to be defunct MTGO forums.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 9:48 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 07, 2013
Posts: 457
Oh I think they have communicated just fine how they feel about casual. I don't think it is printable but they have managed through neglect and active abuse to get their feelings across. I am sure not all in the company feel that way but it seems pretty clear to me that if casual players just suddenly stopped playing MTG altogether, WOTC would not deign to notice at all. In fact if someone mentioned it they would say "What Casual players?" Because there is this philosophy that pervades a certain tier of mtg culture which is those who do not play for the $$ must just be scrubs and there is no need to cater to scrubs. My bitter 2.0.



To clear this up it is the Online side that does not value casual play. The paper side they very much embrace it as their largest group of customers. (well, the largest customers of their customers)


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 5:39 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 02, 2015
Posts: 85
Location: NYC
Identity: Wolf
No I disagree. I think they disregard it at best and scorn it at worst. A few years ago I would have said both valued that side of magic but things have changed dramatically.

_________________
Winter.Wolf and Telir on MTGO, Paul Leicht on puremtgo.com and Telir on the soon to be defunct MTGO forums.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 8:44 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2015
Posts: 69
All I have seen from the Paper side in a long time is FNM, FNM, Pre-release, FNM, Sanctioned random event #24601, FNM....

_________________
V/R

Treamayne


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:23 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 07, 2013
Posts: 457
No I disagree. I think they disregard it at best and scorn it at worst. A few years ago I would have said both valued that side of magic but things have changed dramatically.


You do realize that the Commander product they put out every year is for casual? Not only that but they have removed any incentive for competitive players to buy it. I think removing that incentive is a mistake and will eventually lead to poor enough sales that they cancel it but it is still geared toward casual. Also Conspiracy is geared toward casual which they are now doing two years in a row.

I will say them removing planes walker duel decks was a step back. I am just curious what it is a few years ago they did in paper that supported casual more than they are doing now?


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 7:34 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 02, 2015
Posts: 85
Location: NYC
Identity: Wolf
Slippery Slope. Yes they do things that counterindicate their general direction but all the weight is on the other end. Also while Commander is currently controlled by a "casual" rules group there are plenty of players who take it very seriously. To the point that the arms race has made it almost unplayable for some of us.

_________________
Winter.Wolf and Telir on MTGO, Paul Leicht on puremtgo.com and Telir on the soon to be defunct MTGO forums.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:01 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 07, 2013
Posts: 457
Slippery Slope. Yes they do things that counterindicate their general direction but all the weight is on the other end. Also while Commander is currently controlled by a "casual" rules group there are plenty of players who take it very seriously. To the point that the arms race has made it almost unplayable for some of us.



That is not Wizards though, that is the players. It is what happens when anything becomes popular, you get more players.

I am all for a good bashing, but I just don't see how you can play out this angle that in paper they are supporting casual less. Especially when they are making actual products just for casual.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 2:35 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 02, 2015
Posts: 85
Location: NYC
Identity: Wolf
I dislike bashing. I want Wizards to be pro the kitchen table players (and used to write articles arguing the very same point you are attempting to make back in the day because I thought this was their position. Evidence has proven those articles wrong.) and forget the pros (they can handle their own messes) but that's not how it works. I understand you don't see it but imho the only thing Wizards does for casual is tied to the collector aspect of the game rather than players (FTV series and what not). The same thing goes for the commander decks though they learned from backlash that they can't make them quite as precious as the ftv sets. Also I don't think Wotc is a house united on this subject (or any subject really.) I am certain that some WOTC higher ups do their best to help out where they can but actions and policies speak louder than words.

_________________
Winter.Wolf and Telir on MTGO, Paul Leicht on puremtgo.com and Telir on the soon to be defunct MTGO forums.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group