Main site (German)   |    HighlanderMagic.info
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Login with username, password and session length
14018 Posts in 1016 Topics- by 444 Members - Latest Member: Dracomnis
Poll
Question: Which mulligan do you prefer?
Spoils Mulligan - 36 (42.4%)
Free Mulligan - 49 (57.6%)
Total Voters: 83

Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Community Poll regarding the mulligan    (Read 14567 times)
Tabris
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 860



View Profile
« on: 07-03-2014, 02:14:16 AM »

Hey guys,


we (the council) want you to tell us your opinion about the current mulligan and also give you the opportunity to have a voice for the upcoming vote regarding changing it back to the old mulligan or keep the current one. Six months passed since this huge change and we would like to hear your thoughts and include the outcome of this poll in our decission.
Logged
fogxanic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: 07-03-2014, 03:36:39 PM »

I vote spoils. I didn't find any button for voting?
Logged

crazycentury
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: 07-03-2014, 03:56:26 PM »

same here - no button. Spoils.
Logged
Tabris
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 860



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: 07-03-2014, 04:27:24 PM »

I fixed it. Try again.
Logged
Wasser
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: 07-03-2014, 07:59:10 PM »

no spoil.
Logged
Jack Sabbath
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: 08-03-2014, 02:05:57 PM »

A comparison of the meta games of the Grand Prixes in Hanau:

Please note, that I call every deck with at least 3 colors and less than 10 basics 'greedy'.


With Spoils:

GP XI - 28th December 2012

1 Tendrils Oath
1 BUGw Aggro
1 RDW
1 WW
1 BUG Oath
1 RBGW Goodstuff
1 Jund
1 Ur-Control

.. that's in strategies:
1 Mono-Red
1 Mono-White
3 Greedy Goodstuff
1 Greedy Control
1 Two-colored control
1 Greedy Combodeck

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
6 (!!)

Total card statistics

Different cards total:
439

The most healthy meta, that i've ever seen in my life.


GP XII - 20th April 2013

1 BUGw Oath
1 GB Elves
1 4 Color Goodstuff (No Blue)
2 4 Color Goodstuff (No Red)
1 UR Control
1 5 Color Aggro
1 UW Control

.. that's in strategies:
1 Two-colored Midrange
4 Greedy Goodstuff
1 Greedy Control
1 Two-colored ControlAggro
1 Two-colored Control

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
5

Total card statistics

Different cards total:
359


With Free mulligans:

GP XIII - 29th December 2013

3 Greedy 4 Color Midrange (No Blue)
1 Greedy Naya
1 Greedy Jund
2 UR Control
1 UB Reanimator

.. that's in strategies:
5 Greedy Goodstuff
2 Two-colored Control
1 Two-colored Combo Control

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
3

Total card statistics

Different cards total:
347


Conclusion:

The fact that the majority of the succeeding decks are 'Greedy Goodstuff' Decks after the spoils mulligan clearly shows that the 'Free Mulligan' failed to solve the the problem why it was even proposed - to reduce the amount of 'Greedy Goodstuff' decks!

In fact, the meta with spoils had even less 'Greedy Goodstuff' decks. With 'Spoil mulligans' it was even possible to have success with a tribal and Mono-Colored decks, while the 'Free mulligan' we have with 'Greedy Goodstuff' and 'UR Control' two dominant strategies.

The fact that the total amount of different cards reduced even though many playable cards have been printed in the last editions also supports, that the meta is reducing.
Note, that red (and partly black) was really underrepresented in the GP XII, which usually reduces the amount of different played cards (of course the played cards reduce, if you look at only 3.8 colors instead of 5).
Even though is underrepresentation doesn't occure in GP XIII the amount of different played card is still lower.

Indepent if I like the new 'Free mulligan' or not - it degenerates the vivid meta the Highlander once had.


edit: Devided Mono-R and Mono-W into seperate strategy, moved Reanimator to another strategy.
edit: Seperated UR and UW.
« Last Edit: 09-03-2014, 02:28:37 AM by Jack Sabbath » Logged
ChristophO
HL Council Member
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 307


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: 08-03-2014, 03:50:45 PM »


First of all, Cherrypicking only 3 Top 8 results from tournaments does not proove anything. That is not enough data to conclude anything.
More importantly I also strongly disagree with your analyss especially of the Free Mulligan tournament.

Jan Dethloff's Naya Deck is an aggro Deck, not a Midrange Goodstuff deck like the 4c Blood lists. It has a much bigger focus on agressively costed creatures that are just being used for attcking (e.g. 3/3 creatures for two mana). The Deckname chosen by the player also gives a certain hint (Facetime).

Also the UB reanimator deck from Gunnar Geißler is not a control deck. It is an A+B combo deck planning to beat the opponent by reanimating an unfair fatty. His deck neither plays fact or fiction nor Jace2.0 to blue control Deck staples. The deck is also playing no removal spells (besides a Smother) and no Sweepers at all. How is this deck supposed to take on a controling role? Maybe by using the single "counterspell" (Muddle the mixture) in the deck?

Instead of carefully looking at the decks you are talking about or at least discussing in an open-minded way you jump to faulty conclusions and make an gonzo post to push your personal agenda.
Logged
Jack Sabbath
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: 08-03-2014, 05:21:37 PM »

I picked the last three Grand Prixes.. And the hanau grand prixes just are the biggest tournaments in the format. Feel free to do this kind of analysis for other tournaments. At least I evaluated something instead of using my format impressions as an argument.
It is evident that every mainstream format defines itself over big tournaments. That's where netdecks are born and the meta is set up. That is because a deck needs to be highly competitive to reach the top 8 in a tournament with 130 other players.

This Naya is of course a midrange deck. It plays 5 mana donks + aether vial and the high mana slots consists of 9 4-drops and 2 5-drops. Please compare the mana curve of Mono-R or Mono-W with this Naya. You can observe a clear difference.
Who ever said that midrange decks can't play watchwolfes or kird apes?

Yes, you could argue that UB is a combo control deck. But its definitely not a pure combo deck since a combo is usually ending the game, where reanimator is playing a usual game where it wants to stabilize.. it just tries to bypass the high mana cost of its creatures.
If you call Reanimator a combo deck, then you should also call BUG oath a combo deck, since the plan 'bypassing the casting cost' is exactly the same.

However, if you call this Reanimator deck a control deck or not doesn't change anything in the conclusion.
« Last Edit: 08-03-2014, 05:24:31 PM by Jack Sabbath » Logged
tonytahiti
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 269


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: 08-03-2014, 06:19:38 PM »

when jan dethlofss facetime deck is a midrange deck, then my name is jon finkel. everything that relies quite heavily on 1 OR 2 drops is an aggro deck, midrange relies on 3 and 4 drops etc.
Logged

Winner - Pro HL Cup, Prague 2002
Winner - Highlander Regional Masters, Phuket 2006
Winner - Sunrise Trophy Run, Hawaii 2006
Winner - North Dakota HL Championships 2007
Winner - Tahiti "One And Only"-Cup #3, 2009
Winner - Gio di Gio Seria, Florenz, 2016
Winner - Jail or be Jailed, Berlin, 2017
Aureus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: 08-03-2014, 07:04:16 PM »

.. that's in strategies:
2 Mono-Colored Decks
3 Greedy Goodstuff
1 Greedy Control
1 Two-colored control
1 Greedy Combodeck

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
5 (!)

A mono colored deck is not a strategy at first but just ... a mono colored deck.
And the difference between your “greedy” control deck and your two colored control deck is not a strategical one. Adding one or more colors to a deck doesn`t automatically mean a strategical shift.
All in all your strategy-sheme is totally random and misguiding. It`s a foolish try to glorify the pre-free-mulligan era.
Logged
Jack Sabbath
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: 08-03-2014, 09:47:54 PM »

when jan dethlofss facetime deck is a midrange deck, then my name is jon finkel. everything that relies quite heavily on 1 OR 2 drops is an aggro deck, midrange relies on 3 and 4 drops etc.


Is this the kind of argueing style that we're having here? Really? Look at the deck, he plays more than enough 3-,4- and even 5-drops! But sure, if you want to call it pure aggro instead.. just exchange 'Greedy midrange' with 'Greedy goodstuff' and the rest of my statistics stay the same.
By the way: I explored that my post didn't even call Naya a midrange deck.. it called it a goodstuff deck. Any doubts on that?

.. that's in strategies:
2 Mono-Colored Decks
3 Greedy Goodstuff
1 Greedy Control
1 Two-colored control
1 Greedy Combodeck

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
5 (!)

A mono colored deck is not a strategy at first but just ... a mono colored deck.
And the difference between your “greedy” control deck and your two colored control deck is not a strategical one. Adding one or more colors to a deck doesn`t automatically mean a strategical shift.
All in all your strategy-sheme is totally random and misguiding. It`s a foolish try to glorify the pre-free-mulligan era.



Yes, I agree on that that Mono-R and Mono-W are completely different strategies. So I should change the strategy count from 5 to 6.

----------------------

In general the statistics show that the 'Greedy goodstuff' decks didn't reduce as a deck to beat.. Wasn't this the reason why people were argueing for the new mulligan?
« Last Edit: 08-03-2014, 09:56:47 PM by Jack Sabbath » Logged
ChristophO
HL Council Member
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 307


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: 08-03-2014, 10:45:04 PM »

Mana curve of Dethloff Zoo:
24 25 9 8 2 (2.1 Avg)
(Ghor-Clan is no 4 drop)

Mana curve of the 4cBlood Midrange:
12 20 15 13 4 (2.6 Avg.)

Mana curve of the RDW from 2 years ago (K. Lorenz):
18 22 18 6 (2.1 Avg.)
Fireblast as 0, SoM Dragon as 4)

Mana curve of WW from 2 years ago (Niznansky):
17 22 12 9 (Avg. 2.2)
(Dismember as 1, Procession as 3)

I did not check for Cards with X costs and did not check for further cards that are in "wrong spot" of the mana curve. I got the values from the mtgpulse  function.

This Naya is of course a midrange deck. It plays 5 mana donks + aether vial and the high mana slots consists of 9 4-drops and 2 5-drops. Please compare the mana curve of Mono-R or Mono-W with this Naya. You can observe a clear difference.
Who ever said that midrange decks can't play watchwolfes or kird apes?

However, if you call this Reanimator deck a control deck or not doesn't change anything in the conclusion.

 
« Last Edit: 08-03-2014, 11:19:07 PM by ChristophO » Logged
Jack Sabbath
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: 08-03-2014, 11:25:05 PM »

Mana curve of Dethloff Zoo:
24 25 9 8 2 (2.1 Avg)
(Ghor-Clan is no 4 drop)

Mana curve of the 4cBlood Midrange:
12 20 15 13 4 (2.6 Avg.)

Mana curve of the RDW from 2 years ago (K. Lorenz):
18 22 18 6 (2.1 Avg.)
Fireblast as 0, SoM Dragon as 4)

Mana curve of WW from 2 years ago (Niznansky):
17 22 12 9 (Avg. 2.2)
(Dismember as 1, Procession as 3)

I did not check for Cards with X costs and did not check for further cards that are in "wrong spot" of the mana curve. I got the values from the mtgpulse  function. Jack, You might do the stuff you ask people to do yourself first before you make shit up next time. It might be less embarassing  Roll Eyes

This Naya is of course a midrange deck. It plays 5 mana donks + aether vial and the high mana slots consists of 9 4-drops and 2 5-drops. Please compare the mana curve of Mono-R or Mono-W with this Naya. You can observe a clear difference.
Who ever said that midrange decks can't play watchwolfes or kird apes?

However, if you call this Reanimator deck a control deck or not doesn't change anything in the conclusion.

 



So you're basically saying that my statistics is wrong because rated Naya as Midrange? Yes, I don't remember exactly, but I think I named it midrange in the very first version of that post. However, I changed it quickly to 'Greedy goodstuff' and I did that definitely before you mentioned it (I'm sure there are logs in case of doubt).
So again: You're saying that my statistics is wrong because of something that I don't say?

I made a statistic and you're onlyarguement is 'you categorized two decks incorrectly?'. Well, I said it before - my statistics looks of the reason why the free mulligan was introduces is now realized. The reason was multicolor Goodstuff decks. Maybe you don't need to call Naya Midrange, but in my opinion Naya fulfills the definition of these problem decks. It's also exactly playing 3 basics (one of each color). I call it greedy.
« Last Edit: 08-03-2014, 11:28:16 PM by Jack Sabbath » Logged
ChristophO
HL Council Member
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 307


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: 09-03-2014, 12:22:00 AM »



Jack, I quoted you in my last post. The Zoo deck (of Dehtloff) is neither a goodstuff deck nor a midrange deck. It is an aggro deck with a low curve like RDW and White Weenie which you claimed had lower curves and I just prooved is wrong. If the Zoo deck had to play against RDW the deck on the draw would be in the controling role most of the games while in a game between 4c Blood Midrange the Midrange deck would always be in the controling role trying to conserve its life total and winning with the stronger (costlier cards).

If you only had mislabeled a deck that would be no problem. But you have deliberatedly made the free-mull tournament look bad with your "statistics".

You also still have not acknowlegded  that Gunnar played a combo not a control deck.

I have also pointed out in my very first reply that just looking at one single top8 is not enough to make a menaingful comparison. For example to make a forcast for a vote you need to ask 1000 people (not Cool. I agree that big tournaments are the most meningful and that you picked the biggest ones. Nevertheless the avaiable data simply does not allow a conclusion as you wish (even if all the decks were labeled properly). Again this wouzld be no problem if you had not written your first post in such a gonzo way.

Also, the main reason the mulligan was changed to the free-mull was to diminish the amount of games with perfect curves making the construction of a good mana curve in your deck more important and to slow down the games a little bit. A secondary reason was to stop the 5c Aggro decks (so that decks like the Dehtloff Zoo deck are possible) which also worked splendidly (have a look into the discussion thread regarding the latest GP).


 
Logged
Tiggupiru
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 351


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: 09-03-2014, 12:27:39 AM »

As cute as this debate is to watch, it's nearly pointless. Making this poll now is also premature in my opinion. You see, changing the mulligan changed EVERYTHING. The old decklists doesn't really translate too well when you introduce game changer like this. Even basic stuff like correct land count are probably still very much a mystery for most of the decks.

Had I played in the last GP, I too would have opted to play a deck that has as few bad cards as possible just because there is no time to figure out what niche decks have become playable, what new decks have suddenly become viable or what I could be playing against. Simple good stuff just is really good when the format is new and this is exactly what HL is right now. A fresh format.

I am not saying greedy midrange good stuff is not going to dominate later (although I am very surprised if it does), but drawing any big conclusions from one relevantly sized tournament is like saying Mythbusters make valid scientific experiments.

If I ruled the universe, I would make this poll much later and keep the new mulligan on the watchlisted until then.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

 

Wizards of the Coast® and Magic: the Gathering® are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. (WotC).
Magic: the Gathering®, the five mana-symbols, the tap-symbol and most cards and artworks are © WotC.

© 2004-2007 by connexo websolutions   |   Imprint