no no no... if a deck is well built it does not have an "unlucky" match up at all. There's only unlucky draw, like those no-land open hand, or like you run 20 removals but don't draw a single one in 4 turns. Best of 5 only rewards more consistent, all around builds - I believe the tourney wants to see and show case more of these, rather than extreme/gamble decks with obvious weaknesses or mistakes. Basically
If a deck has great mana base, great land count but getting color or mana screwed, that's what we call unlucky.
If a slow deck doesn't have enchantment hate at all and paired with mill opponent, that's not unlucky.

My main beef with that is that I don't want to discourage the gambles and risks. Mardu véhicules would do even better with best of five and such. I really love seeing the outlier decks swinging at the fences

The thing about that though is that the decks that win games based on all the planets aligning correctly once in a blue moon aren't likely to make it into the top 8 to begin with, because doing so means having things line up correctly multiple times before they even get into the top 8.

I dunno, if you decide to avoid enchantment hate and correctly judge the meta (like this tourney, there was like 1 Tutelage deck) and just completely concede that matchup and then he randomly makes the top 8 and you get matched with him, that'd be an unlucky matchup. Sometimes I'm willing to have a deck that beats what I perceive to be the dominant deck rather than a Jack-of-all-trades, Master-of-None type deck.

I wouldn't begrudge anyone for running a ****Vehicles.dek if they expected the Top 8 to have 5+ vehicles, even if they roll over like a dog to PW.dek.

This was my first mtg tournament of any kind and I honestly had no idea what it's all about. I played enchant control that was good vs planeswalker control, go wide, and game planned on seeing vehicle decks with 7 artifact answers. I was doubtful the deck could win it all but I liked it and felt it had top 8 potential. I felt annoyed that I was matched up with decks that sat squarely in the weaknesses of my oddball deck (hexproof/counters/cards that get over 4 toughness and dodge my sweeps) but I learned a few things.

1. This. Without a SB, adding answers for everything you may see just makes your deck less likely to win because of the non-synergy or missing more key pieces that do what you need. I had too many specific answers. Hoping to avoid your weakness in a tournament sounds bad, but if you are strong vs the majority of the meta it will give you a good chance and that's all you can ask for.
2. You will be matched with your weakness even if you plan/call the meta correctly, Kryder will make sure of this.
3. Have fun. I went with a fun deck because I wanted to win with something from left field. I wasn't satisfied with my wins but that wasn't my only goal. I had fun and learned what it's about.

As far as suggestions go, making a "go first" flip would be sweet but I just don't see how we can make that happen without a fair bit of hassle. Maybe have some sort of prize for the guy that plays second the most? Even if it's not an actual prize the honor only award would be a sort of acknowledgement to the fact it stinks. Could even be a tiebreaker for top 8 maybe? SOS seems like a stronger tiebreaker but tracking going second and 0-2 perhaps it could somehow add to the SOS?
Doesn't seem like it would be difficult to track, add a column to the sheet and ask the contestant to report who played first in the post as part of their wins.

As far as recording wins, on xbox you can use the DVR to record the last 30 seconds to 5 minutes. If there is a recording problem perhaps exporting the last 30 seconds of the game could be an alternative to any video stream issues.

Planeswalkers,

OK, I've thrown some ideas at the test group (including some of yours), and I'm confident of announcing the following changes that will most likely be implemented in the next tournament:

1. No recording/streaming will be required. It will still highly encouraged, as if there is a dispute I'll need some way of adjudicating, but I'll deal with that as needed.

2. Sideboards will be allowed for part of the tournament. More to come on this later, but I've been looking into the best way to implement this and I'm going to do the exact opposite /sarc.

3. Deck building skill will be challenged in this next tournament. More to follow.

4. EDIT: Top 8 will be best of 5 games (this is a definite inclusion). Sorry, I forgot to add that here earlier.

Remember, this still might change, though I am 95% these changes will make it in (the sideboarding still requires some discussion and I'm still reaching out to some people for their perspectives).

Anyways, hype it up, leave your comments, and get your coins together for AlmondCat!

1. Well i can see more people joining the tournament, as long as most of the veterans doing it since people appreciate to watch it (xbox finals were awesome).

2. Now idea what part means. Maybe top 8? Idk. I'm just a bit concerned that you are allowing it in the exact moment recording is no more required.

3. What? Are you trying to steal my job? Well it seems it will be a completely different tournament.

Sideboarding is an essential Part of Magic in real life tournaments and it put's more
depth in the strategy, for me this would be the the most important point for future tournaments.

As an small addition, the right for the loser (out of a best of 3/5) to choose whether to start or draw would be also nice, because
it is an common rule and provides more fairness for matchup's.

Damn, you reminded me of something...check out the post above again.

Hahaha you are killing my Kryder.

A big part of why I hadn't taken part in some of the previous tournaments was specifically because I hadn't set things up to be able to record/stream.

I finally get off my lazy bum and get things set up to do it, and now it isn't required anymore.


Curious as to how the whole SB thing will be handled. Only for part of the tournament huh?

The first thing that comes to mind when you say this is that SBing will be allowed for the games played by the top 8? That way the top 8 doesn't come down to who you get paired against?

That way if you say ran a deck without enchantment hate for example, and manage to make it into the top 8 because there is only one person playing Tutelage/whatever you don't end up in a lose/lose situation if you get paired up against them in the top 8 where you can't afford to just give them the match and move on.

Yay, my suggestion made it ! It's only logical.

Also I believe you shouldn't have said "recording is not required" , just something like " the recording requirement will be more lenient from now on".
That way you lift the requirement, but keep the pressure on. In the end the rule change is the same, but your wording determines how people behave towards it. It's amazing how such a little thing can completely change the dynamic.

You could have gotten this advice earlier, if I was in the test group. Just something to think about

I've already got that covered; "Remember, this still might change...".

And you are part of a test group here by participating in the discussion. Congrats, you don't get anything but a better tournament experience, but congrats nonetheless!

1. Great! Because sometimes the game runs slow because of **** internet and messes up recording.
2. Nice! but worried about "part of tournament" only.
3. Confused. I'm guessing some kind of roll out? No Origins?
4. No problem with it. Although I'd also like to follow the current tournament rules for top 8. Like the the top 2 seeds only need to win twice, the 3nd and 4th need to win thrice, and rest needs 4 wins. Not really sure of the details but you get what I mean.

Is this an actual thing for the real tournaments? Because that's dumb af.

I can't believe my only organized play is going to happen in King of the Hill run by Gem! Say it ain't so!

Gem > Kryder


there, i said it.

oh wow dispel and fragmentize demand is going to skyrocket!

1. I believe the only reason "streaming" games became a requirement in our tournaments was to appease Wizards of the Coast for marketing purposes in exchange for coins that most of us do not need. The winner of a match OR the community should notify Kryder (or whoever else is in charge of score keeping), and if there are any lies, the community will correct it. So, streaming should be optional and reporting should be encouraged for the winner but could also be done by the community.

2. I've always hated the feeling of being stuck with a 60 card deck throughout an entire tournament without the option of even the slightest alteration. I also believe I could be stuck with the wrong 15 card sideboard as well. With that being said, poor deck building and having poor foresight into the meta-game is the fault of the player themselves (including me), so I do not support sideboarding, especially if it will discourage players from entering.

3. Restarting the game until someone can get to be on the play or draw is relevant so long as there is sideboarding. When I played Covert in EMN tournament, we had VERY similar decks and who ever was on the play wins. He was on the play twice in the swiss and the pendulum swung in my favor in the finals. We are still 50/50 in games. Also, for control players, being on the play with a Spell Shrivel to counter Tutelage or Liliana OR GIDEON is very important as we do not have a 2-mana spell to interact with those cards. I do not support "restarting the game" without sideboards. These two things must go hand in hand.

4. The top 8 should ALL be a best of 5 match. Players worked very hard and were very committed for making it that far and should be given the best chance of redemption. For example, if XxunbeatablexX2's game v. Mobius was best of 3 we would just assume Mobius's deck was clearly better but his opponent almost came back from the pit to win the match 3 games in a row. This would also give Covert a chance at finally winning a tournament too. This is the only new change I will support!

Didn't you already say you were skipping this next tourney, tho?

I can still have a say in the matter.