new format
General forum
Posted on Aug. 17, 2016, 5:04 p.m. by michaelmerik
is there a way to post a new mtg format to tappedout
Not that I know of. However, I believe if you show enough interest in the format (maybe put up a deck page, some forums) then it may be possible.
August 17, 2016 5:07 p.m.
michaelmerik says... #5
The concept is like pauper but all uncommon including lands, it probably wouldn't stick, but I think it would be a fun format with restrictions that would create challenge to deck building.
August 17, 2016 5:16 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #6
So it would be better to do as a challenge in the challenges forum than proposing a whole new format for decks.
August 17, 2016 7:36 p.m.
Shane.Allen says... #7
I'm personally not interested, I have never been a fan of these Limited Budget type formats, I think it takes the essence out of what Magic is. God, I hate the Reserved List and the Banned Lists too, but I'm all for people to playing what they want. But I mean, I even hate Casual too.
August 17, 2016 7:40 p.m.
Daedalus19876 says... #8
I would be interested if I played formats other than Commander, sorry. I will say that it's entertaining to put price caps on Commander decks; I've built several under a $25 budget (including lands and commanders).
August 17, 2016 8:27 p.m.
This thread was moved to a more appropriate forum(auto-generated comment)
August 17, 2016 9:06 p.m.
Shane.Allen says... #10
I never saw a need to play formats that have caps on prices or are budget. I just never felt the need to play those formats, its much more interesting to see just how powerful you can make your deck.
August 17, 2016 9:49 p.m.
michaelmerik says... #11
Just because its all uncommon doesn't make it budget. Yeah it has that the one restriction of no commons, rares, or mythic, but there is no price cap or ban list. Leaving a lot of possibilities open for play.
August 17, 2016 10:01 p.m.
Shane.Allen says... #12
Okay, I'll agree with you on the Budget bit, there are many expensive uncommons, but to say it's a lot of possibilities to play is misleading. You've eliminated commons, rares and mythics, three out of four card types limits the possibilities quite a bit. This is just my opinion on these type of things.
August 18, 2016 6:28 a.m.
michaelmerik says... #13
Ill agree it is a limited format after looking further into it the player would be fighting that restriction especially in lands.The most glaring problem is urzatron it has the least amount of restrictions for land base. I haven't done enough deck building in this concept but if you like I can post deck ideas here of a varying range to analyze viability of the format. Like I said earlier I don't think this format would stick but its worth looking in to as a possible option for something new. Even if it fails at least its being researched to know weather it fails or not.
August 18, 2016 3:14 p.m.
Daedalus19876 says... #14
Shane.Allen: Personally, I like budget formats for a few reasons. (Not necessarily formats that exclude a rarity, because many of the most interesting mechanics are on cheap rares.)
First, it encourages creativity - if you have no price cap, there are a few cards that are just the unambiguous BEST at their job. Consider Legacy or Modern decks - everyone that can runs Tarmogoyf or Dark Confidant or Path to Exile, etc.
If you impose a budget, suddenly all of the best cards (more or less) are exiled, and you have to be clever to build with what's left. It's still a competitive, complex game to build the absolute best decks while excluding the "easy" choices.
Second, it places everyone on an equal playing field. Consider EDH, my format of choice. Every deck - every single one - is better if you can add a Mana Crypt and the appropriate Dual Lands. One can build a hyper-competitive EDH deck by looking up the "50 Most Played Cards in EDH" and spending $10000 - which I find to be shameful.
And because one player has more money, they simply have better decks - which is not how the victory margins should be decided, imho. Instead, a person should win based on their quality as a deckbuilder and game-player. Imposing a budget - or a ban list to remove expensive cards - achieves this goal.
August 18, 2016 6:37 p.m.
Shane.Allen says... #15
Daedalus19876 While you make points about the prices of certain cards I can not agree with you on the restricting / banning of cards simply makes all decks even, here are a few examples.
EDH: A format I excel at and will spend any amount of money one to perfect my deck, some of the most powerful completive decks are mono-blue, Azami, Lady of Scrolls, Arcum Dagsson, Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir likely Karn, Silver Golem which is colorless, all these decks don't use dual lands and beat decks that are far more expensive.
Pauper: I do not play this but if I did I would play either Delver of Secrets Flip, or INFECT. Both are the top two decks in the format.
To make it even funnier both of those are top decks in Legacy & Modern, so a blue common and the modern Infect build is full of commons, so that sort of brakes the idea that people will be more creative if you ban cards, people who want to will just play the deck that makes it easiest to do so.
yeaGO says... #2
you are free to suggest one here. we tend to make sure that its something that's going to stick around rather than trying to keep up with every little trend. but please feel free to open a discussion.
August 17, 2016 5:06 p.m.