|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 1:26AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2008
|
You people are extrapolating to a huge degree. Many people like to do their testing with physical cards. You really don't have to fire up magic online to test you know, some people have friends with which to play they game.
It's very strange that nobody noticed that he played an illegal card while testing, but to err is human.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 1:49AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2007
|
You people are extrapolating to a huge degree. Many people like to do their testing with physical cards. You really don't have to fire up magic online to test you know, some people have friends with which to play they game.
It's very strange that nobody noticed that he played an illegal card while testing, but to err is human.
In fact, we have reason to believe that his testing for his deck was with cardboard Magic and not a case of fabricating mtgo results. Behold:
"I untapped and showed my opponent Wildfire. My opponent conceded."
Showing an opponent a card in your hand is not possible on Magic Online outside of in-game actions like revealing to a Silvergill Adept or the after-game action of revealing your entire hand. Now, it's possible JVL's language is not literal, and that by "show" he meant "cast". But to me this creates enough doubt to assume that he was playing with real cards.
I do want to add that despite not suspecting JVL of fraud, I think the recurring criticism of BoaB is legitimate. I don't even care about the issue myself, I just see people complaining all the time. It seems like the most commonly voiced greivances are 1) The series has lost its sense of budget and 2) the testing sessions are a joke. JVL is a pretty cool guy and I don't think he needs to get booted to fix the column. How about sticking to an explicit budget and theorizing matchups with sideboard strategy instead of doing whatever he wants and showcasing 2-3 meaningless games?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 2:00AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Mar 14, 2012
|
It's very hard to believe that neither of the people he played against remembered that ponder was banned. And another gripe, why only one game against Tron? Was the opponent too embarassed to continue?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 3:25AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Jan 31, 2012
|
I'm going to avoid jumping on the bandwagon here, mistakes happen, to err is human and all that.
What I am curious about though is why this isn't checked automatically? When putting a deck into your fancy deckshowing thingy, why doesn't it ask about the format and say "these cards are illegal in this format"? Pretty much all sites I've been to where I've entered a deck does it, write the name of the card, the script finds the real card for you, adds a link, just like yours does, and then tells me which formats the deck is legal in, and why, or, if I've put in the format already it'll shout at me for doing wrong.
Doesn't seem like it'd be that hard to do, and it would avoid these kinds of mistakes in the future, because it isn't the first time, and it isn't a one-time thing.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 5:00AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2007
|
Good grief this comment thread is sad.
There's no way Jacob has falsified testing for this or any other article. Indeed, I can't help suspecting that it's the need to carry out tests every week that means he sometimes ends up playing paper games against non-expert opponents instead of building the deck on MtGO and giving it a ten match workout.
Missing Ponder's illegality is an easy mistake to make for any player who doesn't play Modern much since it's legal in Standard. Is that really worth an entire thread full of badly articulated hate?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 5:24AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2003
|
There's no way Jacob has falsified testing for this or any other article. Indeed, I can't help suspecting that it's the need to carry out tests every week that means he sometimes ends up playing paper games against non-expert opponents instead of building the deck on MtGO and giving it a ten match workout.
Err, no way? How is there, exactly, no way? It's not that difficult to think up random games, especially against predictable decks like Tron and Affinity. It's not that I think this is necessarily true. I don't think Jacob is pulling our collective leg. However, the format of the column continues to represent a problem. There is no way that Jacob can put out a new deck every week while still remaining competitive and within a budget. He has proven that throughout the course of his career here. So, and I've been saying this for ages now, reduce quantity and increase quality. There is no need to produce a new deck every week. Build a deck one week, then just play it for a week. Talk about strategy, talk about sideboarding, talk about how to play the deck, talk about budget alternatives.
Zindaras' meta is like a fossil, ancient and its secrets yet to be uncovered. Only men of yore, long dead, knew of it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 6:01AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Aug 20, 2003
|
Can we now please wish Jacob well in his future endeavors and brink back the magic online focused, multiple weeks per deck column? His effort to build bad tournament decks are just embarrassing by now.
There are times that is possible to build budget decks that can beat your local sanctioned metagame. But they are the exception, no the rule. This guy has to come week after week with new tournament "worthy" decks, with no real time to test(testing online is just faster).
If ate least posted the FNM that he goes with this decks, it would be more believable. But it's just sad.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 6:02AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Jan 21, 2004
|
Is it the purpose of this column that the deck HAS to be able to stand up to the best decks in the format? What happened to just building fun, cheap decks that win a decent percentage of non-sideboarded games? I find it hard to believe that this column caters to the hardcore tournament crowd because they're already playing one of the best decks in the format. Budget players <> Tournament players (there are exceptions but I think this is the general rule) so why the pressure to make tournament-viable decks week in and out (which apparently leads to crummy articles). I think this article could support a new deck each week if it didn't have to crush the tournament opposition.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 6:19AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2010
|
I like JVl. But recently, I find his articles a bit lacking. In fact, perhaps as recent as the start of the year. Writing for the mothership is supposed to be the pinnacle of a Magic-related field. It should not be lacking in professionalism as such. So how could such a problem arise?
This raises a few questions.
Is JVL doing any legitimate research?
If so, did he use Gatherer to conduct his research?
Are there any checks on the writer to maintain professionalism?
Are the articles ever vetted seriously?
I do feel that physical games are more engaging than online, but surely someone could call out on ponder being a banned card in modern. If no one does, he/she has been clearly out of the magic scene/hasn't been reading/JVL could have cooked up some games of his own.
I understand that coming up with competitive decks every week is a huge task. But one thing that the higher powers above never realized is that budget decks does not mean competitive decks, vice versa. It will never be, because Modern and Standard Magic is based on a hierarchy. It's high society. The most expensive decks wins the most games, and is clearly the most successful.
Building on a Budget, as a weekly theme, is a dead man walking. Chucking JVL away isn't the end all, be all. But it is clear that he is at wits' end. you can't be budget and win the majority of the games. Having fun is one thing, and winning games play a majority part of having fun.
And Trick is right. This cannot happen again. There are many extremely good writers out there dying to write for the mothership. Give Gavin Verhay a chance. Keep people like Noel, Adam, Maro, and Zac. These people are dynamic, they keep reinventing themselves so they don't stay stale. The rest have to be re-evaluated.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 14, 2012 - 6:43AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Jul 26, 2011
|
Before making accusations, you guys might want to remember that BoaB is no longer an MTGO-specific column. Pieces of cardboard don't check for format legality every time you try to shuffle them.
^This. I don't even bother checking the Ban lists. I ONLY use hardcopy cards; I would NEVER pay for a commodity that can be lost with a couple of corrupted files. Does it make it harder to playtest? Duh, yes. Do I feel more secure? Duh, yes!
|
|
|