Topics

[Spring Weekend Erfurt]

Spring Weekend Erfurt

General information (Saturday):

Place: Erfurt
Store: Comic Attack
Date: Saturday, 28.05.2016
Number of registered players: 18
Number of rounds: 5 with Top 8 afterwards


Decklists at MTGPulse:

http://mtgpulse.com/event/24756#333145


Top 8 Bracket:

Quarters:

1 Mielke, Fabian vs. 8 Klein, Alexander    

4 Franke, Joern vs. 5 Hollbach, Thomas  

3 Broda, Daniel vs. 6 Simon, Tobias  

2 Münch, Jan vs. 7 Heinrich, Luca  


Semis:

1 Mielke, Fabian vs. 4 Franke, Joern  

3 Broda, Daniel vs. 2 Münch, Jan  


Finals:

1 Mielke, Fabian vs. 2 Münch, Jan    

________________

General information (Sunday):

Place: Erfurt
Store: Comic Attack
Date: Sunday, 29.05.2016
Number of registered players: 17
Number of rounds: 5 with Top 8 afterwards


Decklists at MTGPulse:

http://mtgpulse.com/event/24734#333275


Top 8 Bracket:

Quarters:

1 Ziemes, Malte vs. 8 Schumann, Tino  

4 Hoyme, Justus Karl vs. 5 Vogel, Alexander  

3 Hofer, Max vs. 6 Demel, Kai

2 Dünisch, Jan vs. 7 Sabel, Dion


Semis:

1 Ziemes, Malte vs. 4 Hoyme, Justus Karl

6 Demel, Kai vs. 2 Dünisch, Jan  


Finals:

1 Ziemes, Malte vs. 2 Dünisch, Jan    



Thanks a lot to Jan Münch for the great support!

[Metagame Masters 6]

Metagame Masters 6

General information:

Place: Berlin
Store: Der andere Spieleladen
Date: Saturday, 04.06.2016
Number of registered players: 35
Number of rounds: 6 with Top 8 afterwards


Decklists at MTGPulse at:

http://mtgpulse.com/event/24856#333852


Top 8 Bracket:

Quarters:

1 Templin, Paul vs. 8 Platt, Karl Florian    0-2

4 Schlichting, Hendrik vs. 5 Doernbach, Luca    1-2

3 Klein, Alexander vs. 6 Gottschalk, Steffen    2-0

2 Hofer, Max vs. 7 Hoyme, Justus Karl    0-2


Semis:

8 Platt, Karl Florian vs. 5 Doernbach, Luca    1-2

3 Klein, Alexander vs. 7 Hoyme, Justus Karl    1-2


Finals:

5 Doernbach, Luca vs. 7 Hoyme, Justus Karl    2-1


(Meta Breakdown, Coverage, Tournament Stats will follow.)

[Metagame Masters 5]

Metagame Masters 5

General information:
Place: Berlin
Store: Der andere Spieleladen
Date: Saturday, 27.02.2016
Number of registered players: 52
Number of rounds: 6 with Top 8 afterwards


The decklists of the Top 8 Players can be found at MTGPulse at:

http://mtgpulse.com/event/23505#321334

[Metagame Masters 4]

Metagame Masters 4

General information:
Place: Berlin
Store: Der andere Spieleladen
Date: Saturday, 7.11.2015

Tournament details:
Number of registered players: 45
Number of rounds: 6 with Top 8 afterwards
Tournament start: 11:15
Begin of first round: 11:30
Begin of first Top 8 round: 18:55


The decklists of the Top 8 Players can be found at MTGPulse at:

http://mtgpulse.com/event/22063#308148

Last Saturday our Slovakian friends had their Highlander Cup.
59 Players were competing and Pavol Gana (with Reanimator) prevailed as the winner. Congratulations!

The final standings after round 6, as well as the players of the Top 8 can be found here:
http://www.mtg.sk/turnaje.php?vTurnajID=6159


During this week Dalibor will upload the top 8 lists on MTGPulse. You will find the link here in this thread.

A rough Meta breakdown is also available:

UW Control/UWb Control	8
Abzan/BG Midrange	8
MonoR	7
Reanimator (Grixis, Ubg, 5C, MonoB)	4
4c Blood/Jund	4
UR/URw Control	3
Oath/ANT/Storm Combo	3
BUG/UB/UG Control	3
MonoU	2
MonoG	2
Jeskai Tempo	2
Bant	2
RG Beats	2
White Weenie	2
Esper Control	1
WU Aggro	1
Grixis Control	1
GW Aggro	1
4C (w/o R) Midrange	1
Stax	1
Boros	1

Eventually this will be differentiated as soon as I got the deck lists.

Many thanks to Dalibor for the information!


Regards,

Dr. O

[Why this report?]

Why this report?

For some time now the council deals with the topic "Archetype definition". Especially for the meta breakdown, the uploading of decklists on MTGPulse or the statistical analysis of tournaments some kind of uniformity is needed. Even regular tournament participants sometimes have problems to classify their decklists, define and label their decks. To help our players with the classification and maybe also simplify the entrance into the format for new players, we worked on this topic in detail, interviewed proplayers and studied articles.


Term differentiation

Archetype: The following article primarily defines archetypes. Archetypes are the roughest possible classification. In MtG we differentiate between 7 forms of archetypes: 1. Aggro, 2. Control, 3. Combo, 4. Midrange, 5. Aggro-Control, 6. Combo-Control, 7. Aggro-Combo.

Deck name/ Decktype: The decktype (or deck name) is the label of a deck given by the player. Over time some kind of deck names are generally accepted and therefore became very common. Other decktypes derived from other formats like for example Legacy or Vintage. Since the decktype is defined by the player and therefore underlie subjective preferences, it is hard to categorize them. Depending on the player the same deck could have totally different deck names/ decktypes.
Examples: Reanimator, 4C Blood, Captain America or Junk

Category/ Archetype category: The archetype categories or just categories are a kind of classification used on MTGPulse. You will find them on the right side of the screen. The categories are independent of the proper archetype or deck name and are normally given by the admin. These categories should help visitors to orientate on the page and find the appropriate decks swiftly.


Aggro/ Control/ Combo – Triangle

Originally the game Magic: the Gathering assumed 3 main archetypes:



These 3 main archetypes operates on a rock-paper-scissors principle. Aggro beats Control, Control win out over Combo and Combo is superior to Aggro.

Aggro:
Aggressive decks wins through the classical way. They want to get the life total of the opponents to zero. They normally do this through attacking or via damage spells. To this, they are mostly rely on few resources. In aggressive decks you rarely find spells above 4 mana.
Strengths:
Mostly Aggro is not interested in the opponents board. Their plan is it, to bring as many threats as possible to the board or pressure the opponent with rapid loss of life. They are therefore dependent on swiftness and continuity. They rarely remove/ counter the opponents threat and interact sparely with the fellow player. His deck plan is independent of the opponents one.
Weaknesses:
Aggro is lesser dependent on resources than any other deck.  Hence it has to rely completely on swiftness the own spells have to be inexpensive. Quantity stands clearly above quality. As a result Aggro have to choose less efficient but instead cheap spells to not lose on speed. If Aggro is not able to beat the opponent quickly, falls behind on the board because of permanents with a higher quality or meets a deck plan, that is opposed to the aggressive one (e.g. life gain, protection, mass removal), before the resource hand cards is ebbed away, it loses.
Examples for Aggro decks: RDW, White Weenie

Control:
Combo also focus on time. It sees their win options in the late game. Classical Control decks are playing counter, removal and tutors.
Strenghts:
Control gathers resources, restricts the enemies possibilities and tries to protect and seal itself flexibly against threats. The direct way to victory is of secondary importance. The main goal is to stay alive, answer or control threats and to generate card advantage. Only if Control is save or is able to protect, it tries to end the game with some effective finishers.
Weaknesses:
Control decks often are dependent strongly on interacting with the opponent and on enough time. If Control is not able to buy enough time, it will be overrun. When the enemy completely refrain from interactions or use strategies, that Control cannot answer (e.g. counter vs. dredge, removal vs. non-creature plans), it can exploit the card advantage to a lesser extent ("dead" cards). It has to rely on their few and often expensive finishers.
Examples for Control decks: UW Control, Staxx

Combo:
As "Combo" is referred to as a strong synergy between at least two cards, that normally a. directly leads to a win, b. creates a loop, that leads to a win or c. to a substantial advantageous situation towards the opponent. Pure Combo decks play in addition to the Combo parts only cards of the other archetypes, that support their combo (e.g. tutors, deck manipulation, can trips / card draw) or to protect (e.g. discard, counter) it. The main deck plan never uses the classical fight.
Strengths:
The Combo decks mainly contains cards, that support the combo or enables it and can often keep up with the speed of an Aggro deck. Similar like Aggro, they are independent of the opponents deck plan. The Combo player is interested firstly in the oppontent, when he influences, interfere or disrupt their combo. Only for this reason, the Combo player plays some few Control elements. The slots should serve mainly their combo and their supportive spells.
Weaknesses:
Since Combo only relies on their "synergetic play" to win, it has more problems than decks with alternative plans. The synergy, which should lead to a dominance in the game, is also their big weak point.
Additionally Combo needs to handle economically with their Control elements. It only plays their Control cards to protect their combo or to remove a threat, which hinders it. Therefore Combo needs to consider essentially more thorough, which threat is crucial for the match and which ones can be ignored. Normally the Combo decks tries to end the game before the opponent can profit from their cards.
Combo plays cards, that have little impact if looked at alone more often. Often Combo pieces are just a danger in connection with another one. All in all the cards in a Combo deck are mostly "necessary" but rarly "useful".
Examples for Combo decks: Eggs, TPS, Hightide


The fourth archetype

Over time and with increasing number (and therefore also quality) of cards, a fourth archetypes has evolved, which cannot be integrated into the Aggro/ Control/ Combo - Triangle.



Midrange:
Midrange or Goodstuff is a melting pot for cards from every previous main archetypes. It chooses from the best representatives of his neighbors. Midrange decks only appear in formats with a big card pool. They have to set them apart from the others with quality and flexibility of their occupied slots. However Midrange wins mostly through combat. Play strength and efficiency stands above speed. Therefore Midrange orientates on the classical mana curve, with a focus on turn 3 to 5.
Strengths/ Weaknesses:
Midrange can't be sorted into the archetype triangle, because it has no distinct strengths or weaknesses. It can slow down Aggro with their Control elements, but also lose games because of the lack of speed. It can answer Combo decks specifically or just don't draw the specific answer. In the best case Midrange wants to bring advantageous cards to the battlefield, generate card advantage and disrupt the opponents deck plan simultaneously. Each card should be an "allrounder", which preferably could win the game on its own. This can look quite differently, depending on whether Midrange uses more Control cards or relies on a more aggressive plan.
The slots are not occupied with a specific goal, since Midrange tries to answer all decks as flexible as possible. Therefore it may have the right answer for his opponent or draws them in situations, where their strength cannot be applied efficiently. Midrange relies on answers and get lost in the direct ambition. Hence each card has the additional possibility to win via a beat down plan instead of with value and card advantage. Overall it could be said, that Midrange cannot disrupt and control as well as a Control deck and cannot end the game as effective and precisely as Aggro or Combo decks could do. Therefore it stands as independent archetype between the big 3, because of its play strength and distinct differentiation on par with them.
Examples for Midrange decks: 4c Blood, Grixis Midrange


Combinations

The three main archetypes can be combined and this leads to bipolar deck types: Aggro-Control, Combo-Control, Aggro-Combo.
Here again the special role of Midrange becomes clear, since it stays for its own and is not combinable. Rather it is already a combinational deck, since it uses the best cards of all labels.
The three subtypes, which are built from the 3 main types can be classified as follows:



Like Midrange the combined types does not have obvious strengths or weaknesses. Their problems are mostly dependent on the colors or from the chosen sub strategy.

Important: In the Highlander format often combos are integrated. A deck will get only the label "Combo" if it will distinctly get supported and protected by the appropriate cards or enables it.

Aggro-Combo:
Aggro-Combo combines the aggressive elements with at least one combo. The aggressive deck plan should (like the bigger representatives) lead to a rapid life loss of the opponent. For Aggro-Combo this is mostly an aggressive creature strategy. If this doesn't work, it can switch to the Combo plan with its typical Combo supporting cards.
Strengths/ Weaknesses:
These decks normally are not interested in the actions the opponent does and purely rely on speed. Since they use the slots in equal shares for Aggro elements and the combo (plus the combo supporting cards), there is no time nor space for interactive cards and answers.
Their main problem is their consistence and card quality. They have to use cheap and inflexible cards to keep their speed up and not to lose sight on their deck plan. Which plan they have to follow is mostly more dependent on the draw than fitted to the situation.
Examples for Aggro-Combo decks: Affinity Combo, Dredge, Pattern Rector

Aggro-Control:
Aggro-Control also relies on speed. But these decks don't only use cheap aggressive elements, but also chose Control cards, which mostly don't have a mana cost above 3.
Aggro-Control decks tries to find a balance between Aggro and Control. This could look quite different. For example lists work with small flash or evasion creatures ("Clocks"), which are protected by counter and removal. But also strategies with damage spells and counter backup (CounterBurn) falls in this category.
Strengths/ Weaknesses:
In contrast to Midrange or Aggro-Combo, Aggro-Control has a distinct focused plan. The Aggro part does not consist of flexible allrounders, but of cards that lead to a rapid and continuous life loss. The Control elements are indeed cheap in the first place, but only serves one task: protect and generate card advantage.
Disadvantages are therefore the card quality.
Like each bipolar archetype, Aggro-Control is also less constant than the representatives of the main archetypes, since it has to split the slots to the two types. If it is not able to expand their speed advantage, it loses to the qualitatively better cards of the opponent.
Examples for Aggro-Control decks: Izzet Counterburn, Dimir Tempo

Combo-Control:
Combo-Control is overall named as the strongest archetypes by pro players. Overall the lists differ only a little from pure Combo decks. This combination profits in a better way, because Combo is supported by Control anyway and the connection between these two works very easily.
Strengths/ Weaknesses:
The big difference to pure Combo lists lies in the use of the Control elements. They are not only used to enable the combo or to protect it, but like in Control to stay alive, control the opponent and dominate him. They play much more Control elements than Combo decks and uses them more. Additionally Combo-Control decks are not totally dependent on their combo. Many Control cards also enables a classical Control finishing strategy. It's effectively an upgrade to Control decks, as long as you don't have to use 50% of the slots for the combo.
Nevertheless these decks have a speed problem again. Very aggressive and fast decks with a lot of disruption effects are unimpressed by the Control strategy and don't let them the time to stabilize or do their combo.
Examples for Combo-Control decks: Oath lists, Reanimator, Scapeshift


Why is it so difficult to categorize?

In no other format the categorizing is so difficult like in Highlander. This has many versatile reasons.

1. Highlander is a very small format. Especially the competitive part only consists of a few people at each place. The majority of the community are casual ("kitchen table players").
Casual players work on their decks in another way. They play the cards they like and which they know. They think less about play strength, speed or flexibility of strategies. Therefore now and then they bring up niche decks, but rarely serious tournament decks. Their decks follow a too strict deck plan, which cannot keep up with the meta (Combos, Tribals) or are totally unfocused ("pet cards"). Overall we can call these decks "Goodstuff without good stuff". Known/ loved /fun counts more than efficiency.
--> Casual-Play

2. The minimum number of cards in Highlander is 100 cards. These are 100 slots, that I are available and have to be filled with cards for my desired deck strategy. Certain archetypes can achieve this easier than others. Aggressive cards can be recognized simply by the mana costs and the potential damage for the opponent.
A combo however might only take two slots, if there are no redundant cards. So I need support (tutors, cantrips, card draw) to enable my combo. This will be done through Control cards. Then the combo has to be protected, etc.
While the Aggro deck consists of many distinct Aggro cards, the Combo deck has one or maybe a few combos, that only represents maybe 5% of the deck. The remaining cards are Control cards. What Combo cards does a deck need to have to be still labeled as Combo? How big has to be the part in the deck? When is the deck a Combo-Control deck?
This thought is often thought of the other way around too. Many players build a deck of a classic archetype and integrate popular combos because of the high number of slots. These combos will be not supported or only with a few cards. The key questions stays the same. Is the deck a x-Combo deck or a x-deck with a combo?
--> many slots/ unfocused


Why are some archetypes played more often than others?

1. Not only casual player rely on their pet cards and are playing them even on bigger events despite low chances of winning. Also competitive Highlander players love to play known and proven decks. They improve them and perfect each slot. But players, that rely on their pet decks don't bring up new deck strategies. To bring a completely new deck into the format needs 3 big requirements: a. The pilot have to have a good knowledge about the format and a good overview of the card pool. b. The deck has to be seen. That mainly works though tournament placements. The pilot therefore has to bring sufficient play skills to lead his deck to the win (or into the top 8 ) or has to "merchandise" the deck and find a player, who brings the deck to a good placement. c. The deck might take time until it got a shell, which is good enough for a tournament. Since many players lose interest quickly, they abandon this strategy. Because there are only few competitive Highlander players and these also have to fulfill the criteria a. to c., the format rarely sees completely new decks, that promote the appropriate archetype.
--> pet decks

2. It is always difficult to exclude decks from the format completely, because we would like to give the biggest possible deck choice to the players. This does of course do not mean that an outstanding deck should be protected. Nevertheless, you should keep in mind that the biggest strength of combo decks, i.e. the need of only a few cards for a advantageous game situation and a fast win, also is their biggest weakness. Because you kill them, if you take at least one of their key cards completely. A ban against a combo deck is always easier, more obvious and more effective than against any other deck type. Midrange and aggro decks deal with a banning of their favorite card in a much easier way. The opposite is true for unbannings. The right card will possibly create a new combo deck. The right card for midrange and aggro will often have only a small impact. To ban against or for a certain archetype is differently difficult.
At the moment our main "problems" are Midrange with an obvious over presence and the Aggro depletion. Each card, that we ban against Midrange will be replaced easily by one of the many alternatives. Each card that we unban to strengthen Aggro, also benefits our Midrange decks.
--> bannings

3. An additional problem is the available card pool and the new expansions. While in the past WotC wanted to reach limited and constructed formats to an equal share and also considered this in their single card design aspects, they nowadays rely on selling the product as total package. Now they support more these formats, for which stores and suppliers needs booster packages. Grand Prix tournaments, PPTQs and other competitive events more and more are held in Limited or Standard/Modern. Which means formats, that are bound to strong rotation. For the actual PPTQ season store owners only can choose from these formats.
A new edition therefore can be separated for the Highlander format into "viable" and "useless". Even if the overall power level of the cards has increased, in each edition only few playable cards and even less "broken" cars are included. The new set does not only have to compete with old representatives of that kind of card, but also has to be interesting enough to try out new deck plans.
Since these cards are too strong or useless for WotC's potential target audience, there are maybe only 10 cards per set, which are useful for Highlander. And these 10 cards are uneven distributed between the archetypes. The chances are high; that 2/3 of the 10 cards are good for Midrange. Maybe 3 are good enough for Aggro or Control decks. With a bit of luck there is one card that supports Combo. Obviously this does not explain the depletion of Aggro decks, but it explains the bad basis for the distribution of the archetypes.
--> archetype distribution in the previous and new sets

4. An additional reason for the unequal distribution is obviously the card price. Certain archetypes need colors with single cards that are unaffordable. Because we have talked about the price problem in other topics before, I will not into it at this point.
--> card price


I used the following articles:

http://www.starcitygames.com/article/29240_The-Guide-To-Macro-Archetypes.html

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/print.php?Article=26620

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/print.php?Article=7115

http://www.channelfireball.com/home/pvs-playhouse-aggro/

http://mtg-talk.tumblr.com/post/81400613616/kill-bill-explains-the-five-deck-archetypes-of

http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom%2Facademy%2F22

http://mtgbudgetbro.blogspot.de/2013/03/how-not-to-build-a-deck-types-of-decks.html

[Highlander Cup Trials]

The next Highlander Cup Season is here and you can win One-Round-Byes through Cup Trials again. In this thread Vazdru will collect the announced trials. If you are interested to organize a trial in your city, please contact us at the given email address or Vazdru directly. In the official fact sheet you can find out how you or your TO can sign up such a trial and what you have to consider. This sheet will also be send to the responsible TOs.

Highlander Cup Trials


1. What are Highlander Cup Trials?

The Highlander Cup belongs to the biggest magic events in Germany. For the Highlander format several times a year such a tournament is offered, where players can win attractive material prizes. The Cup usually takes place as part of a multi-day event, where also tournaments of other meaningful formats can be visited.


For this season the Highlander Cup will be on Sunday, 28.06.2015 in Maintal, Germany.

Bürgerhaus Bischofsheim
Dörnigheimer Weg 21
63477 Maintal
Germany


Highlander Cup Trials are smaller local tournaments, where Highlander interested players can win One-Round-Byes for the Cup. These tournaments can be registered and held by independent stores all over the world. A Bye enables the individual player to start the tournament with a "Win" for the first round.


2. Prizes:

The winner of a Cup Trial receives a One-Round-Bye for the appropriate Highlander Cup of the season, which he was held for. Additional prizes will be defined by the particular tournament organizer.


3. Rules for the tournament organization:

Stores have the possibility to host exactly one Cup Trial for the particular season. The venue has to be publicly accessible.


The Tournament organizer will therefore send the following date to Highlandertrials@web.de:
Where should the trial take place? (City and address)
When should the trial take place? (Date and time)
Who is the contact person? (Name of the tournament organizer)
email address of the contact person (valid and actual email address for information exchange)


The trials have to be hold in the space of time from 2.5.2015 to 22.6.2015.


A Cup Trial has to be announced and published at least one week before the event.


4. Rules for the tournament process:

Since the Highlander Cup is aligned towards the Highlander format, the only valid format for the trial is Highlander as well.


Players and tournament organizers have to follow the rules according to magicplayer.org. The rules and actual banning list can be found under the following link:
http://www.highlandermagic.info/


In addition the rules of the DCI (Magic Tournament Rules, Comprehensive Rules) have to be followed. Only deviations which are defined by the rules of magicplayer.org are an exception to these rules.

The Comprehensive Rules: http://magic.wizards.com/en/gameinfo/gameplay/formats/comprehensiverules

The Magic Tournament Rules:
http://wpn.wizards.com/en/resources/rules-documents


The Winner (i.e. the Player with the rank 1) receives a One-Round-Bye for the Highlander Cup of the actual season.


Byes are not cumulative. A trial winner receives exactly one Bye for the first round of the particular Cup.


The trial must have a minimum number of participants of 8 persons.


The Rules Enforcement Level of a Cup Trial will be defined by the tournament organizer and will be announced with the tournament.


The TO have to send a copy of the final standings (including the dropped players for a transparent overall player number) and the name, DCI number and contact data of the winner to Highlandertrials@web.de, after the event took place and before the deadline  (see Point 3. "Rules for the tournament organization": 22.6.2015). Only the winner of the particular trial has the right to get the Bye.


The deck list of the player with rank 1 has to be send after event by the TO as well. This could be a copy of the deck list/ typewritten deck list send to the email address Highlandertrials@web.de or uploading the list as an event on MtgPulse.com (sending the link to the mentioned email address). Even if only the transmittal of the first placed list is required, it is aimed to publish the Top 3 lists. Tournament organizers are therefore asked to go after these lists.


At a number of participants of 64 or more players, the number of byes increases to two (one for the first AND one for the second placed player). All of the required submissions like for example contact details and deck lists are in this case also necessary for the runner-up!


5. Checklist for the tournament organizer:

Submission before the trial implementation:
- address of the venue
- date and time
- name of the Tournament organizer / responsible contact person
- email address of the contact person


Submission after the trial implementation:
- copy of the final standings
- complete name of the trial winner
- DCI number of the trial winner
- email address of the trial winner (if not available: address and phone number)
- deck list of the first placed (and place 2 and 3)


6. Contact:

The official contact persons are Philip Koerte and Gerry Stahl. The mentioned email address within this document will lead to a direct approach with this persons.

email: Highlandertrials@web.de


Organization, administration and responsibility for the Cup of the actual season lies with:

JK Entertainment
Jens Arndt
Eschersheimer Landstr. 267
60320 Frankfurt am Main
Germany
Phone: 069 40564967
email: info@jk-store.de

[Metagame Masters 2]

Metagame Masters 2

General information:
Place: Berlin
Store: Der andere Spieleladen
Date: Saturday, 11.4.2015

Tournament details:
Number of registered players: 47
Number of rounds: 6 with Top 8 afterwards
Tournament start: 11:15
Begin of first round: 11:30
Begin of first Top 8 round: 19:00


The decklists of the Top 8 Players can be found at MTGPulse at:

http://mtgpulse.com/event/19676#278302


A list of the participants including decktype:

Rank	Name	Archetype	Points	Rank after Swiss
1.	Franke, Jörn	Jeskai Midrange	14	1.
2.	Dölle, Dennis	Izzet	14	3.
3.	Templin, Paul	RDW	13	5.
4.	Kötter, Carsten	TPS	13	7.
5.	Bruch, Tobias	4c Oath Control (without R)	14	2.
6.	Dethloff, Jan	Dark Bant	13	4.
7.	Fischer, Tom	4c Blood	13	6.
8.	Schumacher, Stefan	Jeskai Midrange	13	8.
9.	Mielke, Fabian	Izzet Midrange	13
10.	Muench, Jan	UW Control	12
11.	Severin, Thoralf	Eggs	12
12.	Markworth, Sören	Izzet Midrange	12
13.	Gottschalk, Steffen	RDW	12
14.	Ziemes, Malte	4c Blood	10
15.	Schmolke, Felix	Bant	10
16.	Dünisch, Jan	4c (without R)	10
17.	Wittmann, Tobias	Temur Midrange (with Scapeshift)	10
18.	Doernbach, Luca	Jeskai Twin	9
19.	Schumann, Tino	Jund	9
20.	Lange, Oliver	Izzet Aggro	9
21.	Herbst, Antje	Abzan Midrange	9
22.	Paetz, Jens	Abzan Combo	9
23.	Hollbach, Thomas	5c Control	9
24.	Volk, Antje	WW	9
25.	Praße, Stefan	5c Goodstuff	9
26.	Klein, Alexander	4c Aggro (without U)	9
27.	Heinsius, Matthias	Esper Control	7
28.	Eckstein, Frank	GW Midrange	7
29.	Hartmann, Michael	Esper Midrange	7
30.	Stelzer, Adrian	UW Control	7
31.	Nagel, Randy	Abzan Midrange	6
32.	Unger, Isaak	5c Combo	6
33.	Jenke, Patrick	5c Staxx	6
34.	Ehrich, Niclas	Mono Black Suicide	6
35.	Weber, Adrian	Temur	6
36.	Weber, Jérôme	Mardu Aggro	6
37.	Breuer, Michael	WW	4
38.	Herrmann, Roy	4c Reanimator (without W)	0
39.	Snootspill, Snootspill	5c Reanimator	Drop
40.	Wagner, Tino	Abzan Midrange	Drop
41.	Lehmann, Leon	4c Blood	Drop
42.	Khalifesoltani, Pascal	Bant	Drop
43.	Wieske, Oliver	4c Loam (without B)	Drop
44.	Hinkel, Thomas	RDW	Drop
45.	Rössler, Tobias	TPS	Drop
46.	McCrae, John	Naya Aggro	Drop
47.	Zohren, Cédric	Naya Aggro	Drop

Additionally the member Tabris made a Video Coverage, which he will publish commentated within the next weeks.