Tag Archives: casual

The Future of the Gamer’s Gauntlet Commander League and You

I’m back from my honeymoon. My wife Jen and I had an amazing time in case you’re wondering, but it’s nice in some way to get back to the trappings of ‘normal’ life. It’s also awesome to get back to writing after a break. I genuinely missed this, even though often I feel I put forth unfinished or uninspired work. Perhaps it’s just the perfectionist in me saying that.

This week I’m going to use this blog as a bit of a platform to talk at length about the GG Commander League and it’s future. We are approaching our final week of the first season, and overall there have been mixed results regarding the use of a points system, the vaguely proposed payout after next week, and generally how much fun it is. After a high attendance of 24 at the start of the year, yesterday we only had 14. Still a respectable number, but I worry that people have stopped attending voluntarily because they either don’t like what’s going on or they feel that they aren’t going to get a payout because of their middle of the pack standing, which is far from accurate. I blame myself mostly for this mindset(if it’s true), because we were not forthcoming enough about the payout aside from repeating “It is NOT top heavy” like a weird mantra. Hell, some people might not even understand how to interpret that. For the quickly approaching change of Commander seasons, think of the first as sort of a beta, where things mean well, but don’t always work out the way you intended or have ‘bugs.’

Along with the input from several trusted minds, I’ve complied a small list of ways to improve the league in general. These are all macro level decisions, and although I may cite examples of how to implement the following changes, nothing is set in stone, and I will continue to polish the proposed alterations via input from those who matter most here, the players. In fact, if you’re attending next week, I may be handing out an actual survey to gauge overall interest in various ways to proceed, so give a little thought to what method(s) you like best.

First off, regardless of anything else that may happen, the most obvious thing to do is to change several of the individual points in the interest of diversification and ‘bug’ fixing. Several points are worded in such a way that people can take advantage of them. For example, ‘Outta Here,’ along with other points dealing with player elimination, all are written in a way that allows a player to kill himself for 2 or more points.  This sort of silliness will not be present in season 2. Also, to diversify the points that one can earn, we will likely be adding different ways to earn points to balance out the imbalance between the categories. For example, there are too many ways to earn points based on control of a spell or permanent changing control, and perhaps not enough dealing with the attributes of creatures.

Tweaking points isn’t the only thing that could be done, however. There are several paths we could pursue to make the points system more interesting and/or competitive. One is to create ‘tiers’ of similar accomplishments, similar to our current incarnations of ‘Attention’ and ‘Intention.’ The tiers would be exponential in nature, meaning that awarded points would go something like 1,3,6,10 for various levels of accomplishment. This would inflate the number of points going out, but encourage specialization in deckbuilding, and not ‘farmer’ decks that have five cards for each category that get to tier one in a bunch of categories.

A second large scale change that would cull the metagaming of the point system is to vastly simplify the static points that can be earned. For example, the only points that are awarded every week would be Outta Here, I’m Da Best, and Generalissimo(and perhaps a Bounty award we have been tossing about, but we’ll take some input on that before we do it). The remainder of the points would be divided into groups based on what style of point they are. For example, we could have Creature Stuff, Non-Creature Permanent Stuff, Players, End of Game State, and Wacky Stuff. From there, a number of them are picked at random from each column, making each week into an unknown set of variables by which players get points. This way, we could have a very large list of interesting ways to trigger points without the incredible burden of having to keep track of ALL of it every game.

Lastly, an alteration that would be very simple to enact is to make every point one can earn beyond killing someone be ‘The first player to…’ This sort of change makes for an endlessly changing dynamic of alliances, where the player ‘ahead’ in terms of earning a particular point is always the bad guy.  Games will go faster, as people will farm less since the available points will dry up rather fast, leading to perhaps the addition of a third round each week.

I know that is alot to take in, but please give it some thought if you enjoy the league. Your opinion does matter to those who run it, and we will continue to polish it until it is a product to be proud of. Note that in almost every case, a combination of these changes could happen. We could have Tiered points along with the randomness of Column picking AND ‘First To.’ wouldn’t THAT make for crazy games?

The point system isn’t the only thing up in the air. The payout hasn’t actually been announced yet, mainly because we didn’t know exactly how to design one that wasn’t top heavy, and secondarily because we weren’t sure if people wanted random prizes, or how much money we would have. I’m sure you all know by now, but I’ll reiterate: This is a 100% payout league, meaning GG doles out 100% of the cash taken in over the course of the season in store credit in both weekly prizes and final payout. We’ve decided that for this season, we would use a predetermined amount of money for the final payout, and anything we had in excess of that would be given out on the last week. Don’t take anything here as gospel, but the amount reserved for the final payout is likely $400, with the following payout schedule:

  • 1st: 16%
  • 2nd 12%
  • 3rd-4th: 8%
  • 5th-8th: 5%
  • 9th-12th: 4%
  • 13th-20th: 2.5%

I think that all adds up to 100%, but really the point is to show how level the payout actually is. Paying out to 20th place is paying just about the top 40% of players! $400 might not seem like a ton considering how much we’ve taken in, and you’d be right. However, we have given out a fair amount in weekly prizes using the formula of $10 + (x-12)*$2.50. Basically, the full $5 enters the final payout pool per player up to 12 players, where we begin using this formula, and for each player over 12, only $2.50 of their fee is reserved, with the other half given back that week.

The remaining money over the cap we set is all being doled out on the final week as well(as in, next Monday!). There will be probably between $125-$175 in additional prizes, and you must be present to win, so show up if you can! Our chosen method is weighted random draw, though after some thought, I really hate it. We are proceeding with it because that is how we said we would though. Expect small changes to the payout next season, including fun ways to dole out money that don’t involve randomness.

The weighted random payout is quite simple. For every player that attends Monday, they will get one entry into the  draw for each week they earned at least one point during the league. This might seem strange, but what we’re aiming at is rewarding players who had a bad season, but were also dedicated and showed up most weeks. If you just attended once or twice, you certainly have a good shot, and since the league payout is to 20th, you might have won something anyway! The exact amount of credit for each draw is TBA because we don’t know how much we will have in that pool until the day of, but there will likely be several draws for fair amounts of cash!

If there are any other changes you’d like to see for the next season, including things not mentioned here like length of league, time limits, or a second day(all things we are talking about as well), I encourage you to speak to either Dan or I about it. This is your Commander league, and we will shape it as you see fit. Questions about this post are also appreciated, either here on wordpress, my Facebook page@ http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nigel-Higdons-MTG-Blog/169226936496423 , or in person. Thanks for reading!

Nigel

 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Commanding Commander Primer

Building a Commander deck can be incredibly easy, or incredibly complex. It all depends on your personal style, and how much you let that affect the deckbuilding process. I envy the people that just jam the 55-60 cards they enjoy the most into their decks because really, the game is about having fun, and who cares if maybe your deck isn’t ‘optimal,’ whatever that means. The best part of being part of ‘those people,’ is that they never get stressed when their deck doesn’t do what it was intended to do, because really it wasn’t designed with a specific purpose in mind beyond “I want to play these spells.”

I’m part of the other end of the spectrum. Perfection in form and function are my goals when building a deck, and I seek endlessly to improve upon existing designs to create a better gaming experience for everyone. It doesn’t hurt that I usually rack up a ton of points and kills along the way from a successful design, so long as we have fun first. This mindset can make it a truly arduous task to create even the simplest decks. After all, there are sometimes thousands of cards to choose from, and many have very, very subtle differences that can have an impact on the other 98 cards in the deck. Often, I try to force myself to accept the more freewheeling style of deckbuilding, to situate myself somewhere in the middle between purely logical decisions and those made on intuitive impulses. It never fails me to slowly drift back towards perfectionism in design over time however.

It is walking this line between two theories that inspired me to write this article, perhaps the first of a series that explores the depths of the decision making process when designing an EDH deck, using decks I’ve built and played at GG’s league as examples.

Where To Start?

There are two typical ways I begin to design a Commander deck. Either I see a specific spell combination or interaction that I think is interesting, cool, unusual, or fun, or I see a potential General that is a part of an overall theme, be it tribal, or linked to the abilities of the card itself. Think of it as either building from the ground up, or the top down.

Ground Up

Building from the ground up is usually the starting point for a brand new idea. I see a General with potential for interaction with a large variety of cards, like the Mimeoplasm, or Sharuum, the Hegemon, and start to build the core of a deck directly around it. I try not to consider just how many cards I can link to the General since I’m not actually trying to make a 99 card deck with nothing but lands and cards that have synergy with the chosen general. What is actually happening is the formation of the core of a deck; those cards that the deck will collectively be centered around.

For example, I’ve thought for a long time about building a Glissa, the Traitor deck. Glissa is a very obvious choice for a ground up style deck. She has a fairly narrow interaction that is excellent with a specific range of cards. Here’s a quick sample of the skeleton of a Glissa core:

  • Oblivion Stone
  • Lifespark Spellbomb
  • Executioner’s Capsule
  • Engineered Explosives
  • Necrotic Spellbomb
  • Nihil Spellbomb
  • Horizon Spellbomb
  • Ratchet Bomb
  • Expedition Map
  • Wayfarer’s Bauble
  • Thornbite Staff

There are plenty of other great interactions available to Glissa, but these are the ones that have a very basic theme, or in this case, two. This core can draw cards and destroy stuff. Yes, this is only a dozen or so cards, but that is what cores usually are, and they end up being what defines how your deck functions since when you do draw them, you are certain to have the interaction you desired with your general. You can play around with the other 20-30 spells, but unless you stray very far from your overall theme of artifacts in your yard and your opponents’ creatures dying, this is what your deck will do. This can be very important is determining whether you should even spend more time going forward. Sometimes, I’ll build a deck and realize I don’t even like what it does. The previously mentioned Glissa, the Traitor deck is a prime example of this in action. When I finally built it, I realized all it did was draw cards and blow up stuff. It had no ability to close out games, or truly take advantage of a full grip and a crippled opponent other than serving for three with Glissa.

The other way to build from the ground up is to make your deck ‘thematic’ in some way, whether it be creature type, spell type, or a milling deck. These decks do not start with the General at times since finding the correct colors to best suit your theme is more important. Take Treefolk as a theme for a moment. One might think that having a Treefolk deck means having a Mono-Green deck because Verdeloth the Ancient is pretty good, but someone else could say that a B/G deck is more interesting with Colfenor. Still someone else might like Doran, and believes that there are enough good white cards that play well with Treefolk to want Doran over Colfenor. The point is, don’t bottleneck yourself into a color combinaton before finding out if it’s actually the one you want to use when you’re building on theme.

Top Down

Top Down is a far more difficult method for achieving success, and can often lead down a fairly dark path in terms of just how much fun everyone has. Building from the top means focusing in on some very specific interactions, like Starstorm + Reprecussion, or Stuffy Doll + some doubling effect like Rage Reflection, Furnace of Rath, or Gratuitous Violence. I say that this approach can lead to the dark side of Commander(unfun stuff happening) because often, when you assemble your desired cards, at least one person really stops having fun, usually because they are dead or under the control of someone else. Mindcrank + Bloodchief’s Ascension, or Academy Ruins + Mindslaver are common example of how people end up doing unfun stuff to people, not because they are winning the game, but because they cut short an enjoyable game by assembling a two card combo with the intent of just killing everyone.

Building this way isn’t always nasty and mean. My first Commander deck was Zo-Zu, the Punisher. It was built from the top down, and had several of the aforementioned cards like Stuffy Doll, Fire Servant, and other fun stuff. People disliked the deck, but only mainly because of the general, who played a support role by pecking away at life totals until people were in range of the long guns. There were no tutors in the deck(Gamble was an option though), and that kept each draw fairly fresh and different. I often killed everyone at once, myself included, and people never seemed to get tired of seeing it, even after the inevitable groaning from seeing Zo-Zu on turn three every time.

The Other 40ish

No deck really needs to function purely from the power it’s core cards provides. Even something like an Elf deck doesn’t even WANT all the Elves it could choose from. It wants a little raw power, and a bit of support to shore up bad draws or problematic strategies opponents will use against you. I once had a Commander deck centered around Elves in fact. I waffled back and forth between Green and Green/Black for a long time. In the end, I felt that Nath, although a generally inferior General to Ezuri, allowed Black to support the rest of the deck very well. Black provided Living Death and Patriarch’s Bidding to undo board sweepers, Prowess of the Fair to discourage them in the first place, just a smattering of tutoring power to get the cards I wanted, and a few neat Black Elves I wanted access to anyway. If my deck was nothing but synergy, with three people watching me build up some massive Elf army, it was a certainty that someone would get nervous watching me build a bigger arsenal than the Russians did and just proactively Wrath, or cripple me in some other way without actual provocation. A deck almost always wants, or NEEDS, support to survive what other players will do to them.

Staples

Some spells just scream to be included in a Commander deck. A Green deck almost always wants Primeval Titan, Cultivate and Kodama’s Reach. A Black deck almost always wants Demonic and Vampiric Tutors. Every deck wants a Sol Ring(a card I think should be banned. Draws including it are so much more powerful than ones without that it sometimes just isn’t fun. It also is a mandatory inclusion in 99% of Commander decks). You don’t have to include any one particular card in any deck, but experience from building dozens of decks has taught me that, at least for me, I tend to include some of the same cards in most decks of a certain color, dependent on what it is paired with. Harmonize makes every Green deck when not paired with Blue. Seer’s Sundial, Mind’s Eye, or Liar’s Pendulum makes the cut when I’m not Blue as well. White has the best removal overall. Swords to Plowshares, Path to Exile, and Condemn just trumps almost everything. I could go on and on about staples, but all you really have to know is that it’s OK to have them. They are in every deck because they ARE powerful, and there’s nothing wrong with having 10-15 cards in your deck that feel very ‘old hat.’ They provide stability and power to your overall strategy without overshadowing it.

Shoring Up

This was mostly covered above in the intro to Support, but it’s worth reiteration, with a reminder that your deck does not function in a vacuum. Other people are out there to kill you, and you need to play accordingly. If your Elf deck can’t remove an Enchantment, how are you going to beat Moat? Or the 15 Wrath effects your combined opponents have? Interacting is the heart of Commander, and it serves you best when you interact with their problematic cards you can’t beat. There is nothing wrong with having the trio of Decimate, Hull Breach, and Beast Within in a R/G deck. It may not be directly supportive of your plan, but since you face the unknown, it’s a good idea to take the equivalent of a broad shotgun blast of removal rather than the stopping power of an accurate rifle shot.

The Icing

This is the fun part. Usually when building a deck, I end up with 5-10 spots leftover, and nothing that I really feel the need to include. What you do now depends on how you started. If you built from the Ground Up, now is the time to consider some very specific favorable interactions you can create without going overboard and screwing up the ideology of your deck. These slots are usually the ones I constantly tinker with, trying out different ideas within the same shell. Often times it just won’t work out, like Vicious Shadows in my Wort deck from a few weeks back. Sure, it’s a great card, and is generally considered great Top Down design with Red removal. The problem was that it went too far towards the dark side of design, and when I played it, people died quickly and in an unfun way. Other times, we find a winner. Being a part of the ‘Icing’ is how I discovered how awesome Wort, the Raidmother is in the first place. Don’t be afraid to do something weird with the remaining 10% of your deck; it can be the starting point for brand new concepts and ideas if it turns out you like what’s happening.

All of the above is really just a primer on what’s going on mentally as I construct Commander decks. I know that not everyone thinks the way I do about this, but it never hurts to see things from a new point of view. This primer also prepares a reader for an upcoming mini-series I’m working on, where I break down a deck I’ve built using the concepts presented here, and probably tinker with it a little, showing a easy way to look at an entire Commander deck on the table without just jamming everyone onto a mana curve that really doesn’t make a ton of sense.

Up first(probably), my current pet deck, Wort, the Raidmother!

Nigel

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized