I've never been to a shop or posted on a forum or read an article where "Ana", "Ceta", et. al. were used; it's not lexicon.

I had a thought. Keep the 5 mono threads, keep the 10 dual threads (which will exist at some point) and make another single thread for 3 color, and another single thread for 4/5 color.
For the 2 new threads, I'll create a post for each color combo, then, as people add their builds, I'll just link from the first posts to the specific builds.
I think that will reduce the number of threads in a positive way, and keep things organized, in a way that people can find what they are looking for.

Hopefully, this should work out, and not flood the forum with threads.

A thread for each of the mono-colors.
A thread for dual colors.
A thread for three colors.
A thread for four and five colors.

Thoughts?

So we keep an individual thread for each of the 10 guild colors but we will in turn cram all 10 tri-color decks into one thread? That seems a bit ambiguous... The only reason I can see that making sense is if the guild color decks prove to be more popular.

Nope - that's been changed - 1 thread for the guilds as well, with the first 10 posts for each color combo - as people post lists, I'll link each list (with poster name and deck name) to the deck list.

Okay

Actually both "BUG, RUG, USA, and Junk" (the last goes unnamed because...... well because) and the ceta cycle are correct. Both systems are very commonly used depending on where you go, and both are "correct" naming conventions. Well as correct as unofficial gets.



The ceta cycle thing came about exactly as sixty described.



Junk got its name from ...... well people throwing a bunch of random good cards together on a regular basis and getting a "pile of junk". To the point where it became a running joke.

The other 3 are extremely obvious and they are very commonly used unofficial names for those tri-colored decks. To the point where you can google search "USA control deck mtg" and get control. Or "red, white, and blue control".

The fifth never got named here...... because there is no easy name and no running joke. Yay?

So I'm thinking since the iPad version is now officially released, the 2015 deck threads should probably be unlocked and be ready for discussion.

Well...I still think we need to figure out the best way to do this. I mean, alot of people (it seems) are not planning on getting the premium cards....so, it might be better to have each user setup their own thread with their own decks.

Just a thought

I don't think that would be a very good idea. That would start spreading things out way too thin imo.

I would list the lists like last year at the top of the thread for each color. So in mono colors have all the "Standard Content" and below that the "Premium Content" (where previously we would have had "Promo Cards" lists). For dual-colored threads list each card for the 2 colors and separate lists for each premiums for each color (as well as the dual colored cards and premiums separate for each).

When discussing decks, just put in the post "Premium Deck Build" or "Standard Deck Build". Even if not everyone does this I'm sure we can easily figure out if a deck is "premium" or "standard" when we see it does or does not have premium cards in it.

Like I said, I'm open to anything, but having the separate threads for the single/dual colors seemed to no go well.

I'm fine with those threads getting unlocked, but, do we want the 5 single color threads, and 10 dual color threads, and one for everything else (3/4/5 color)?

OK - how about this.
We've got the 5 mono-color threads.
I'll break the dual thread into 10 (one for each combo).
I'll break the tri thread into 10 (one for each combo).
Keep the 4/5 color as one thread.

Let's keep them all locked for another day or two, while people can voice their ideas...if nothing better comes up, then I'll move on it, and we'll have 26 deck threads.

Sound good all?

Sounds like a good idea to me!

25 threads somehow seems a little excessive to me - it's basically the entire front page. Unfortunately I haven't got a better solution then that so maybe just ignore me? Is there any chance we could condense them a little? Like I don't see why the mono-coloured decks couldn't be a single thread and maybe split the others into 2 groupings a piece? Something like this;

Mono-Coloured Decks -
Dual Colour Decks Pt1 -
Dual Colour Decks Pt2 -
Alara Decks
Whatever the Non-Alara Tri-Colour Decks are called
Four/Five Colour Decks

I don't know I'm just spit balling here.

I still think my "base-X" idea has potential. If your deck has more sources of blue mana than any other color, then post it in the "base-blue" thread. What you end up with is a dedicated thread for each color and all its potential splashes.

The only problem I see is that (for example) Ur decks will be in a separate thread from Ru decks.

There's no perfect way to do it, but a separate thread for each color just feels right to me.

Interpret and improve upon this idea.

And there's the problem. There really is no good/easy way to do this.

Right now, on the iPad, I've got 3 going. , and
The (once I get the darn gates) will be pretty even, although, so far, it's been more a few times and more a few times.

Neb and I chatted about this a bit as well. I mean, most of what we'll be talking about here is going to be decks, decks and more decks, at least for a while. So, personally, I don't have a problem with basically everything being decklists (remember, with expansion/deck packs, we ended up with 21 in past games). So, 26 is not that much of a stretch, it's just different since they are all dropping at once.

So - from what I'm seeing, there are really 3 options:
1) What is in place now*
2) 26 threads
3) The Hakeem Solution.


*What is in place now is 5 mono-threads, and 1 thread for all dual decks, and 1 thread for all tri decks. With table links in the OP's to the specific lists.

We could do an option 1/3 hybrid, where any deck that's mainly 1 color could go in the mono-thread (which would be renamed) and anything that's really more of a 2 color split on the dual one. And so on.

Each has it's pro's and con's.

Edit: I think the main goal that everyone will agree with is not to have 100's of random threads each with one deck in them.

I got it! Abject chaos! Let's just let people post however they want to post! Even if there is a clear thread for say mono-red decks let's just let people make an entirely new thread to post there mono-red deck!

I mean it's going to happen anyway...

Edit: That came out sounding more bitter then I expected. I meant it as a joke.

Oh - and then there's option 4) Each person who wants to makes their own thread, and posts all of their decks there.

Or Garren's Chaos idea!
It does sound bitter, unless you read it with a British accent, then it sounds fine

Option 2 is probably best; the ten dual-colored threads will see the highest traffic, followed by the five mono-colored threads. The other ones should be comparatively quiet. Fifteen active threads with eleven much less active ones shouldn't be a problem, IMO.

Ha! As I was thinking about it, I was actually thinking that "The Hakeem Solution" is the best. With 26 threads, we know some will be off of P1...and, when that happens, I think it's more likely to lead to the chaos option, as people won't see a place to put their deck, and will start up a new thread.
If we just had 5, and had people put their deck in the main deck color, then it's very likely that all 5 will be on P1, and that will prevent the 100's of random decks from popping up....