09/08/2011 Feature: "Modern Metagame Breakdown"

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Feature Article, which goes live Monday morning on magicthegathering.com.
Re: PT Philly Modern Metagame Breakdown

You talk about percentages as if they are the be-all end-all, without qualifying any of those stats.  You mentioned that one deck had a worse matchup against another deck, a result inferred by the win%.  However, you perform no statistical test to verify whether that win% is statistically significant.
This article is extremely sloppy, and you should be using some form of proper statistics. Otherwise, you're just making conclusions with no real basis.
Well, the thing I'd like to see is something like "win record over the entire tournament of players with a 50% win/loss record or better."  Otherwise you have the problem that, hypothetically, 20 busy players who grabbed Twelvepost without preparation went 0-7 and gunked up the averages.  Probably not a HUGE issue at a major tournament with mostly strong players, but still.
I echo Guesseppe. There are ways of checking whether the results are random or significant. Rather than leaving that up in the air (as it is in the article), the author must do the actual statistical analysis himself. Presenting win percentages looks like it is useful, but the numbers are highly deceiving without the significance checks.
You talk about percentages as if they are the be-all end-all, without qualifying any of those stats. 

This article is extremely sloppy, and you should be using some form of proper statistics. Otherwise, you're just making conclusions with no real basis.



You'd expect anything better from the staff who thought that the best solution to the "sitting on rating problem" was Planeswalker Points?
No reference whatsoever to the non-existence of control decks?

We can shove some of it on the "undefined formats are bad for control decks" effect, but you'd still think control decks shouldn't be such an obviously bad choice that only 2% of the field plays them.
So Zoo is the best deck in Modern.
How to Autocard
card: [c]cardname[/c]-> [c]Vampire Nighthawk[/c] -> Vampire Nighthawk
well splintertwin seems one of the best to me as it just requires a lucky card draw and 2 cards to win, which you have a potential of 8 creatures and then just need 1 of 4 twins and not have either countered.

so all you need is a decent defense until you get the combo on table.

but then it becomes like everyone playing cawblade against each other. which to me doesnt seem fun but in my opinion tournaments arent so much about just having fun.

although i am amazed that infect doesnt get much more play as the couple infect decks i ran seem to win pretty fast and now my friends groan if i use one of them, lol
In unrelated news, "Hate Bears" wins first place for awesome deck names.
No reference whatsoever to the non-existence of control decks?

We can shove some of it on the "undefined formats are bad for control decks" effect, but you'd still think control decks shouldn't be such an obviously bad choice that only 2% of the field plays them.



This article is a bit depressing because it really gives me the feeling that WotC think this format is ok. Plenty of pros are discussing the ban list now and during the PT (they should have discussed it when the bloated list was announced).

I'm getting worried about the B&R announcement on the 20th. If they don't unban control cards that are so obviously not overpowered here (Jace, Vision in particular) the format is really not for me. If they insist on keeping combo down by making even more bans (instead I clearly believe they should first try unbanning several cards that should make control decks viable and let those keep combo decks in check).

Even if they ban Cloudpost, neuter Splinter Twin, take out a red ritual, there will be other fast combo decks in the format (Protean Hulk maybe). As more and more cards get added to the format, will they "manually" try to fix it by banning more and more each time? It just seems better to just try to go for a minimal ban list and let the format sort itself out, and it seems pretty reasonable to say that for that to work you have to have the usual aggro / combo / control metagame... Instead of "anti-combo aggro" (Zoo + counters!) versus Combo... Even Splinter Twin can arguably be said to be anti-combo Combo, that is how warped the PT metagame was. Sure, there are many different decks - I'm not sure I would call that variety.

Ivo.
Performance or Twelvepost: 40,26 %, 385 matches.

No better evidence can be gathered to show how utterly fair the deck is. Any control player trying to argue for the ban of Cloudpost or Emrakul is simply asking for the ban of paper in behalf of rock. It's natural for every deck to have bad matchups, pick another deck when your bad matchup is on its heyday and move on. After this results, no one will pick up their posts, making control a good choice.

I do agree that playing against "turn two attack with Nexus, SHOAL, oops I win" isn't fun at all by the third time on either side of the match. Todd Anderson's banning proposal was very good (save the 12post bans) and his tone was polite and respectful. I support this kind of suggestions, rather then the usual "OMG Wizards hate control format sucks I'm qutting Magic".
If Limited gets in the way of printing good Constructed cards... Screw limited
Sign In to post comments