Welcome to episode 345 of Against the Odds. Roundup of other Magic-related subreddits and sites.Playing Magic during the coronavirus pandemic.No posts that are just pictures of cards.Buy/sell/trade in the consolidated thread.No sexually explicit content or violence/disturbing imagery.The rules listed in this sidebar are a brief summary meant to give youĪ general idea of our subreddit rules.Hello, everyone.
#Tezzenetor mtg goldfish standard how to#
How to identify what set a card is from.We have a card-information bot in this subreddit which can fetch The bot will automatically post a comment in reply, with links for that card.įree discussion thread every weekend Upcoming Set Releases Name in your post or comment and put it in double brackets, like this: Images, up-to-date text, rulings, and more.March of the Machine: The Aftermath May 12, 2023.The Lord of the Rings: Tales of Middle-Earth June 23, 2023.The Lost Caverns of Ixalan November 2023.Magic: The Gathering, including card images, symbols, and text, is © Wizards of the Coast, LLC, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc.
r/magicTCG is not produced, endorsed, supported by, or affiliated with Wizards of the Coast. Magic: The Gathering is many things, and one of those things is that it's a competitive game. Data analysis is today an integral part of most competitive games and sports.
Arguably it began with baseball and the rise of sabermetrics, and it has since then gone on to become ubiquitous.īut I hardly think that this revolution has made competitive games any less fun. After all, we still have a lively competitive scene for "solved" metas like with fighting games or RTS games, where every element has been analyzed in excruciating detail. Part of me worries that Wizards is adverse to technology when it comes to their design methodologies. Like when I introduced RoboRosewater (which generates Magic cards) as a creative design aid, I drew lots of attention from various people in different game companies, but Wizards never showed any interest in the idea. They saw it and they were very curious about it, but I don't think they saw any value in it. That's interesting because data mining and machine learning are shaping both game design and competitive game play in big ways these days. I wonder how/if these trends will affect Wizards' approach to things in the future. I think that their design process could be much more responsive and agile if they embraced these emerging technologies.įirst of all, I'd like to know if they have the right to demand goldfish to cease with the data analyses. It would be like stock brokers being asked to stop analyzing the market. It makes no sense.Īlso, even if you have all the stats, there is still metagame. If a certain deck wins too much, there is always a deck that preys on the "best" decks in the format. And even then, even if we all were to play the same decks, the skill will determine the winner. And yet, even then, there is always the chance of one player getting lucky and winning.
I want to provide some clarification on the situation: It's like that non-sense they try to push: "In Magic, there is always a degree of luck present, so basically anyone can show up for a GP or a tournament and win it." Of course, the chances being very small, but don't gainsay yourself by such actions.Īnyways, I think WotC should have no authority over what somebody does with the publicly available data and I see no reason why mtggoldfish should stop publishing it. R&D contacted us and asked us to remove the matchup win percentages and analysis. This was the feature that said Jeskai was 55% favored against Abzan Aggro. This feature was removed back in September. The motivation for removing the data from Magic R&D at Wizards of the Coast: The winning decklists, the metagame breakdown, the strategy articles, and basically everything you see on the site today is unaffected and will continue to be there.
0 kommentar(er)
