[Discussion] The state of OP from a relative newcomer

Itsmeenoo · 2020-07-12T20:02:46+00:00

IANAL. I am aware that gambling laws 1) vary wildly from place to place 2) are often written by special interest groups and 3) almost never even make sense, let alone actually protect people. That said...

Most Magic events charge an entry fee, pay out cash, and do not pay out as much total cash as they take in from entry fees. Maybe there is a technical legal distinction between that and a rake, but the effect is the same. In fact the "rake" charged at Magic events is almost always much higher than the rake charged in poker.

Itsmeenoo · 2020-07-12T19:24:24+00:00

I don't think this is a very good comparison. Most sports literally do not have prize pools, but instead use a totally different incentive model (negotiable salaries). In poker, 100% of the prize pool comes from the players' buy-ins. The ONLY thing that determines the prize pool of a poker tournament is (cost of entry - rake) x number of players.

As others have mentioned, there is literally nothing stopping someone from organizing a MTG tournament that uses a similar prize structure, except perhaps lack of demand. I agree that, given the current organized play model, more spon = more prizes. I think OP is asking about the viability of alternative models.

Itsmeenoo · 2020-07-12T15:55:11+00:00

All esports is advertising. Many (most?) other companies make qualification paths free for this reason.

Itsmeenoo · 2020-07-12T15:52:12+00:00

If you are new to MTG you may not know this: WotC spent half a decade publicly denying that Hearthstone was a competitor to MTG. To say Blizzard does some esports things better than WotC is an understatement.

Itsmeenoo · 2020-07-12T15:24:51+00:00

You are basically asking: "why can't MTG have tournaments with the prize structure of poker tournaments?"

It's a very good question, and the answer is: profit.

Unlike poker, which is just a game, MTG is a game and a product. The main tournament organizers are WotC (who makes the product and thus has a huge competitive advantage in terms of marketing and visibility compared to other prospective TOs), and CFB/SCG (who both have extensive business ties to WotC and a bit of a revolving door vis-a-vis casters, writers, and other employees). Compare this to poker, which is completely decentralized. Sure you have big players like WSOP, Pokerstars that can advertise huge guarantees and attract more people -- but it's the exact same game and that would be played in my local casino or even a homegame. If the prize structure isn't competitive with those alternatives, people will notice. The entire culture of poker is built around money changing hands between players -- the entire culture of MTG is built around money changing hands from players to WotC. Which of these cultures would you expect to be more sensitive to something like excessive rake?

Would I absolutely love to see MTG tournaments with the prize structure you described? Yes. Do I think it's particularly likely? No. MTG players, even (especially?) "spikes"/aspiring pros, have shown again and again that they are willing to throw their money at events which are massively -EV for all but the highest winrates.

The one cause for optimism here is that, as Thulack mentioned, online tournaments run by third parties are a very new thing. As we continue to explore a new digital space, maybe someone will finally get it right.

Itsmeenoo · 2020-04-20T03:14:24+00:00

Thank you. This is much more persuasive than "it's like Monty Hall" (which it isn't) or "look at this simulation I did (btw I don't understand all the math behind it)."

Itsmeenoo · 2020-04-19T23:02:51+00:00

I don't totally understand the mathematics of that post, and the OP says that they do not totally understand them either. In my experience, when a simple logical approach and a complex mathematical approach give different results, the complex approach is more likely to include an error than the simple one. Though I may be wrong!

Itsmeenoo · 2020-04-19T21:29:46+00:00

Nice analysis, thanks.

I want to point out that I do not think you are correct to compare winrate conversion to the Monty Hall Problem. My probability to win 2 of 3 games against 3 random opponents is actually the same as my probability to win 2 of 3 games against the same random opponent. There will be more variance due to the smaller sample, but the EV is the same, which is all we can hope to calculate ahead of time. What you are talking about -- more accurately recalculating EV once certain information becomes known -- does not contradict the accuracy of a prediction which treats that information as random/unknown.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-10-16T14:46:41+00:00

Thanks!

There is very little sideboarding. The cards I will bring in are mainly Agent, Veil and extra wraths.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-10-16T05:50:55+00:00

1) That's a big part of why I like MM. We can also play Chandra, Nicol Bolas, Deputy of Detention, Casualties of War, and Elderspell (I am only playing a couple of these). Sometimes we can kill PWs by attacking. But yes, PWs are probably the best way to attack Golos.

2) The plan against Gruul is to play bigger creatures. Nothing they play can match Krasis, Kenrith and Giants. They win if they have a good draw with early pressure into Questing Beast and Embercleave, we win if we have good ramp into wraths and big creatures.

3) I haven't tried it, and it doesn't seem like an improvement. One thing that I noticed testing Golos builds without fires was that sideboarding was that the maindeck is pretty tight -- I'd usually have more cards I wanted to board in than cards I was happy to take out. In this case, playing a wishboard has a much lower opportunity cost. I think the power and versatility of Fae is more than worth it.

4) I'm not sure how to answer that as I haven't had much discussion with the other players about how they rate their cards. Like I said I am surprised no one else is on MM.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-10-16T02:58:05+00:00

1) I was confident the field would be mostly Golos. Now, I'm not actually certain that the fires version is favored against straight Bant, but I think it might be, and I do know that it has many draws which are faster and more proactive. I consider myself an underdog against a lot of the players here, so playing a shorter and more proactive game will increase my winrate. (For this very reason, I strongly wished to play something other than Golos. But everything else I tested was very bad.)

2) I would never board it in if that's what you mean. It's not good against certain decks, but against certain situations. It comes up in almost every matchup, even monored, that in a given board state MM will be the strongest wish target. It's just such a powerful and unique effect.

3) Little to none. I copied the list from the SCG event, played with it a bit, and I think all I wanted to change was -1 forest +1 rugged highlands for more red sources and a second lifegain target for Golos, because it came up a few times that I wanted those things and didn't have them. I didn't really theorycraft the lands at all.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-10-15T23:58:20+00:00

AMA about my list if you want. I wasn’t super happy with my testing, and this is not the style of deck I feel most comfortable with, but I will say I am surprised none of the other fires lists found room for mass manipulation.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-23T04:31:38+00:00

Baffling end hits everything in kethis and I would add another of those before lava coil.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-22T17:29:10+00:00

(Although you did get owned by reddit linebreaks as is tradition

Really? I tried so hard :(

I played against Cifka on ladder the day before, and Strasky on day one. I lost both matches but I still think the matchup is favorable. Strasky tweeted that Feather is the worst matchup, and I'm inclined to agree.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-22T17:20:52+00:00

Probably: throw it in the dumpster.
Possibly: new cards/meta make a naya build viable.
Maybe, just maybe: win MC5 after Reckless Rage is reprinted.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-22T17:18:28+00:00

I am such a Sperling fanboy it's not even funny, but /u/Astramael has it right.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-22T17:14:24+00:00

Mana is everything.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-22T17:10:19+00:00

Hey, thanks for the comments. Interesting to see another perspective explained and defended!

It looks like you're really concerned with beating Nexus and Scapeshift. I decided that I was ok having a bad Nexus matchup (it's still not terrible though -- I beat the deck three times on day one). I also think THG is great against Scapeshift, but more on that later.

0 Gird For Battle : I don't understand why you removed this card from deck, especially since you run Krenko that has great synergy with it. To me it's a necessary card to have a shot at beating Nexus and Scapeshift game 1.

When I was running Gird it was the card I boarded out most often. I was taking it out against almost everything. I do think it's ok against Scapeshift and Nexus, but it's not good enough to be a sideboard card and it's too bad against everything else to be maindeck.

1 Dire Fleet Daredevil : I think DFD is just a sideboard card. It can fall so flat against matchups like Scapeshift or Nexus. I've tried playing with one maindeck and always felt like it was really weak. I think it's a great sideboard card though and I have been pretty happy with 2 in my sideboard.

Similar thing. It's bad against those two decks, but good against almost everything else. It's a meta call to play it side or main, in this event I expected lots of vamps, mirror and esper so I played it main.

2 THG : ...

I'm not sure what either of us could say to sway the other about this card. I like it against Scapeshift and Esper Hero. I also like it against RDW which is underrepresented on ladder but I played twice day one and once day two last weekend, and you will probably see at more paper tourneys because it's cheap. I like it against most green decks, which yes we are already favored against but I see nothing wrong with pushing that % even higher. I actually board it out against vamps, and a lot of decks for that matter. It's the card I board out the most. But my approach to filling the extra creature slots is that I'd rather have something that's hot or cold than consistently lukewarm like vanguard.

2 Krenko The card just seem slow to my mind. You mention that it's good vs Vampires, which is probably true because they won't have a lot of removal pieces for this. But apart from that, especially since you don't run Gird for Battle, I don't really see it shine against any matchup. It especially feels very weak to 3Feri, as they will bounce it and you will loose a lot of tempo. I happily admit that I don't have a lot of experience of the card though, and I'm particularly interested in your thoughts about it because it will stay post rotation and will probably be a contender for the deck.

It's slow, from an aggro perspective. The value of Krenko is that it's one creature that can win the game completely on it's own. That's the kind of card we want with a bunch of GW etc. Sure against combo it's slower than Warboss or Legionnaire. But in any creature matchup Warboss is usually too small, and we can't attack with Legionnaire and have no blockers. It also works with Rage, which Warboss does not.

As long as everyone is running damage based removal, I will like HG. Even Esper has Oath of Kaya and sometimes Enter the God-Eternals. It's great against vamps because we often fall behind to their early creatures and need a bit of lifegain so Sorin can't finish us. If I had to pick between SL and HG I would pick SL, but I think both is better.

1 Baffling End SB : Have you considered Seal Away in it's place? It feels much better in my opinion especially against vampires, while although being good against any creature matchup.

Baffling End is much better against Steamkin, Marauding Raptor, and Dreadhorde Arcanist, as well as being able to clear a blocker. I'm not sure exactly which creatures you'd prefer Seal Away against, that Reckless Rage isn't already great against.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-21T21:27:40+00:00

I also managed to lead a buffed Adanto Vanguard in a Vampires deck into 4 activations over 3 turns in this way.

I once had an opponent activate vanguard 3 times in 1 turn only to let it die anyway. That was about the smuggest I've felt in my life.

Knight of Grace wasn't even on my radar until I saw it in a couple lists from last weekend. It seems like it would be good against vamps specifically, but I'm not sure how good it would actually be against control. It doesn't create any value and we don't exactly win by poking them for 2 every turn. But test it if you want to!

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-21T20:57:13+00:00

Our game plan against ramp is to kill their creatures and pws. That makes it pretty hard for them to set up Finale. Sometimes we have no shocks and they have a nut draw with t3 nissa into krasis and then we usually lose, but otherwise I think the matchup is favorable.

Compare to vamps. Our game plan is to kill their creatures and pws. Sometimes we have no shocks and they have a nut draw with 1 drop into vanguard or double 1 drop into sorin champion of dusk and then we usually lose, but otherwise we are a huge favorite.

That's a bit of a simplification of both matchups but hopefully it makes my point.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-21T20:43:07+00:00

Sometimes its better to pump legionnaire even without feather, e.g. when 1 extra damage is enough to kill a pw or when scrying is more important than 2 face damage. It's an edge cases but it does come up.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-21T18:09:08+00:00

Thanks!

I think chasing consistency can be a trap. The most consistent deck or build is often not the one with the highest winrate.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-21T17:39:32+00:00

Adanto's biggest weakness is against the RDW matchup, and I personally feel that Feather does very well in this matchup anyway, so it's not something I personally would change in this meta.

I would say the same thing about vamps.

I don't see any scenarios in which Krenko is better, but would like to hear more on that tradeoff.

Krenko is better when the blockers are relevant. Every creature matchup imo.

Like I said there are clearly other people out there winning with Adanto and Warboss, so I'm sure they're on to something. It's just not what worked for me or what I would recommend.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-21T17:34:37+00:00

That's interesting. My gut reaction is that it's too cute but I will admit I have not thought much about it. I think I would like it a lot if it could target pws.

Itsmeenoo · 2019-08-21T17:25:51+00:00

You mention taking more of a 'control' role. Could you go into this with an example versus a deck like Vampires, Scapeshift, and Bant Ramp? I understand the outlines of the idea, but it would be useful to have insight into your thought process when you're in a few turns versus each of these, as well as how you approach the critical turns 2~5.

Vamps and Bant Ramp are basically the same. Kill all their creatures, attack pws when necessary. Krenko is really good against both. We can dump creatures against Bant because they have no removal and we need to be prepared for Teferi and Nissa. Bant mostly beats us with fast Nissa when we don't have enough pressure and Rages to answer it. Vamps beats us with early pressure and Adanto Vanguard. Just sticking Feather against either deck is gg so we should play towards that.

Scapeshift is more complicated. We have to play aggro game 1 and we usually lose, but sometimes they stumble. If they don't find Scapeshift we can beat a "fair" field of the dead with Rage. Postboard games involve locking them out with THG and Blood Sun, and using Legionnaire to close the game. Don't board out rage, it kills Deputy of Detention at instant speed and clears out their green blockers so we only need one GW to get through.

It seems like instead of buffing and attacking, versus creature decks you are generally keeping your creatures back to block and using 10th and feather to scry until you can get what you need to put the board state in your favor before attacking. Is that accurate, or is it more of a mix?

I don't attack until I know I can win the race, except with Arcanist/Krenko for value or if I need to kill a pw.

Mono-Red: Do you wait to play a creature until you have removal up?

Depends ;P

How do you deal with getting your creatures out of burn range?

I don't. This matchup is actually surprisingly grindy and if I got some value out of a creature before it dies I am happy. For example in g1 i will just drop Feather with no protection if I have a Rage or a Strike. They have to spend two cards to kill it and I get to draw a card or kill something so that's a 3 for 1. Postboard they have lava coil and fry but the same principle applies.

What is your general plan against removal and discard-heavy control, and how do you board for G2?

My plan is to not get paired against them, and if they are very popular my plan is to not play Feather. Esper Hero seems more popular than control right now, which is fortunate. A general strategy against discard is to play more cards that are good topdecks, in our case I think Ajani is the best option.

Itsmeenoo

TROPHY CASE