EC 2013: Deck lists

Of course it was an ironic answer to an ironic comment from Ankha.

I'd prefer if he'd explained in a different way why he does not like the organizers decission instead of doing an ironic comment.

My apologies if the sense of my post was misunderstood.

There is _always_ room behind the sauna.

BenPeal wrote:

There is _always_ room behind the sauna.

But is there always a sauna?

As a judge, you have the first hour to wander around and try to "guess" what decks are played. It's not easy (because you have 100+ decks to guess on first glance), but it's doable.

It can give you a good idea of what is played, but sadly, you'll be missing all the "combo" decks, the toolbox stuff, and, as a general rule, all the unusual and unexpected.

Maybe the judge(s) will have time to walk the tables and gather as much information as possible. It's not that much, but it's still something.

Or the players could chit chat for hours after the games and try to remember what this guy was playing.

Still, it won't be as good as decklists

Ankha wrote:

I forgot one must not use irony on this forum (but I did force myself to use a smiley... hey, nobody noticed it?)

There is nothing wrong with a bit of irony. But anyone who reads such a post before the first coffee in the morning will not grasp the irony. That is why I recommend using *euro smiley*, for the sake of communication between native and non-native english speakers.

*euro smiley*

On-topic: I suggest that only the cheaters hand in their decklists, so that those of us who are not douchebags don't have to do the writing.

It's a somewhat tricky issue.

I've run the Ropecon tournaments (60-90 players) with this same system for about a decade now: decklists required only from finalists. I've never heard a single word about anyone suspecting cheating, and all the finalists have always been solid players with solid decks. I'd be very, very surprised if any cheating had been going on with them. Now, it's always possible that someone has cheated over the years. On the other hand, a determined cheater can also do it with decklists, so I don't see it as a huge issue and enjoy the reduced hassle and lowed barrier of entry for new players this system provides. In this game, the table environments vary so tremendously that cheating is difficult to begin with; you may end up just making your deck worse .

So, it's worked for me, and I intend to continue doing it this way. I like being able to publish the decks of all the finalists, not just the winner, because I feel that seeing all 5 finalists gives a better picture of the general metagame.

That said, the points raised about it making large-scale analysis (by Extrala) impossible are of course valid. And also, it does make cheating a tiny bit more difficult (even though I personally don't see that as being an important concern).