Messages

I am I the only one who thinks building 5CC with a full nonbasic suite, should be punished?

Well, one appealing quality (to me at least) of the the highlander format is exactly this! The availability and viability of multicolored decks. I feel the whole format stands and falls with the amount of non-basic hate viable. Note the use of the word "viable". This is where Enlightened Tutor plays its part.

The thing is: you want non-basic hate in the format, but you don't want it te be too good (read: easily splashable/tutorable).

In this regard, Mystical Tutor is in fact even scarier than Enlightened Tutor because it gets Price of Progress.

As an aside, I'd also appreciate the unbanning of Yawgmoth's  Will.

Thanks very much!

@pyhttu:

Dr. Nick has mad doctor skillz! I always liked that guy!

I did play in the tournament and got 7th place. I guess the metagame in Mannheim is quite healthy as of now. Average play skill is good, though obviously there are better players and worse ones (Note that Christian Hauck who is a very good player that went top 8 at the last HL GP and got 4th place at German Nationals only placed 11th - granted this was partly because he was screwed at the wrong moment ).

Deck quality is rather high, I'd say. You seldomly encounter complete piles. Our attendance varies between 20 and 30 players which is a good thing. But it could be more. I'm looking at you out there! Come to our tourneys!

The meta right now slightly tips on the Aggro/Aggro-Control side of the spectrum, which I feel is a good thing because it minimizes the viability of jank builds and punishes "sloppy" deckbuilding.

Does this answer your question? I'm asking this because I wasn't quite sure what exactly you meant with your question.

Hi everybody!

Here are the standings of our last HL-tournament from Mannheim:

1. Thomas, Alexander - UW-Skies
2. Gerber, Christoph - PatternRector
3. Nessel - 5C Aggro
4. Korbel, Jochen - 5C Aggro
5. Guenzel, Achim - Mono U Fish
6. Czolk, Stefan - Bant Midrange
7. Stier, Thomas - 5C Aggro
8. Stief, Maximilian - UR Counterburn
9. Schreiber, Martin
10. Kannegiessser, Thomas - Esper Control
11. Hauck, Christian - Naya Aggro
12. Burger, Julian
13. Hoischen, Boris - 5C GoodStuff
14. Nowack, Jonathan - GWB Rock
15. Hauck, Manuel - Mono Black Control
16. Tarka, Lukas - Mono Black Aggro
17. Heiser, Jan
18. Lamla, Gabriel - Elves
19. Dubbsen, Robo - ArtifactBlue
20. Iacone, Giuseppe - Mono Red
21. Gölz, Markus - PatternRector
22. Rölle, Christian
23. Kleefels, Adrian
24. Balikci, Hüseyin - BudgetBlack

You can find the top 5 decklists in our forum.

Nice deck!

I had a similar one not too long ago. I also felt that the aggro matchup was worst. My plan against aggressive creature decks was Oath of Druids. Obviously that meant neither to play Cloud of Faeries (Emerald Charm instead) nor Dark Confidant or Hexmage. The addition of green however allowed for very powerful cardchoices (e.g. Regrowth, Eternal Witness, Oath of Druids, Pernicious Deed and some more).

Hello everybody!

This time, with the international (well... yet just european) community in mind, I've written my report and the results in English. Below are the links to the Mannheim HL-forum.

So, feel free to browse through our results and if you like then go on and read my report .

Hello everybody!

Lately I’ve been browsing the internet on the lookout for Germany’s highlander scene. The result of my endeavor: There’s isn’t much of it.
So maybe I lost my googlemojo and miss the HL-Mekka by just an inch whenever I try to find it. But maybe â€" only maybe â€" there just isn’t much to find. That is besides magicplayer.org - of course - and some T8 lists.

That means there isn’t much reliable data that let’s us define tiers for highlander (for those of you that don’t know the concept of “tiers”: tier approximately means rank. You can find it being used for example in the IT-, financial or Automotive-Branch. It is also used in other “nerdesque” sports à la Street Fighter: Sagat would be god tier, Ryu and Rufus would be Tier A whereas Dan would end up being bottom tier.

I propose the following project: Let’s define the hypothetical highlander metagame that we would have if we had similar tournament attendances as the Legacy or Standard format.
   
You ask: “Why?” “What’s that !$§% good for?” “I know little Timmy always brings his BigWurm.dec to the tourneys, good ol’ Johnny has his “High Tide” deck and that arrogant prick Spike always pilots some kind of aggrodeck.”
Bottom line is: You know your meta.

I hear you guys.

You’re completely right. This project does not tell you anything about “your” highlander format. That will always be locally different and (because of low attendance) rather random.
What this project can do however, is to provide an ideal type. This will give us a deeper understanding of the format. A format, whose whole potential is yet to be discovered.

Allright my fellow magickers! What are the steps that must be taken? Just follow me…

Tiers in Magic are defined through matchup statistics. Let’s construct the following scenario:
3 decks called A, B and C
Deck A beats deck B
Deck A beats deck C
Deck B beats Deck C
Therefore deck C loses against the other two decks

We conclude:
Deck A = top tier
Deck B = mid tier
Deck C = bottom tier

Granted, this is a simplified model. Because of the random factors that are intrinsic to every magic game, we should rather construct the matchup concept as a probability variable. For example deck A beats deck B on a 6 to 4 basis. Or let’s sum that up to 100%: Deck A vs. deck B = 60:40

The matchup outcomes must be computed through test runs. So we need to play a series of games between to contenders. In the end we want to derive a trend from those tests so that we are able to say: Out of 100 games between two decks, deck A won 72 games whereas deck B won just 28 games. This can be expressed in matchup context: A vs. B is approximately 70:30

The above already shows us one way to build a matchup. It is the empirical prove of a matchup.

However we also want to look beyond mere statistical probabilities. We want to analyze the inner workings of a deck-vs-deck matchup. Therefore we must extract the essence of a matchup. I’ll give an example:

Empirical evidence: 20 games of MonoRedBurn vs. UW-Control yielded the following results: 13:7. This leads us to a matchup of 65:35

Theoretical evidence: MonoRedBurn beats UW-Control because UW-Control has no relevant clock on the burn deck. Furthermore it runs too many dead cards (like WoG, Moat etc.). Only in about one quarter of the games is UW-Control able to resolve relevant threats (cards that gain life, e.g. Baneslayer Angel et. al.)

(the above example is only a guess. I haven’t (yet) tested the matchup in a more analytical and precise way.)

Now that we know “what” exactly we must do, we need to know with “which deck archetypes” we have to do our testing.
I propose the better placing lists from the last HL-GrandPrix. Decklists that placed in tournaments with less than 20 players should not be taken into consideration.

Here are the standings from HL GP 7 after swiss

1. Reanimator 7-0-1
2. UWG Oath Control 6-0-2
3. UG AggroControl 6-1-1
4. Naya Zoo 6-1-1
5. Mono U Staxx 6-1-1
6. UG AggroControl 6-1-1
7. Bant Aggro 6-2-0
8. 5c Good Stuff
____________________________
9. Bant Aggro 6-2-0
10. 5c Staxx 6-2-0
11. Naya Zoo 6-2-0
12. Dark Bant AggroControl 5-0-3

Metagame Breakdown

23x 4-5c Goodstuff
15x UW(b/r) Control
12x Naya
12x Monorot (b)
9x UG(r)
7x Elves!
6x Staxx
5x Reanimator
5x Boros
4x RG Beats
4x WW
3x Mono U Control
3x Bant
2x GW
2x 4-5c Zoo
2x GBw Recursion
2x Oath Control

I will do my own testing. I’m very thankful to those that want to provide help and test matchups on their own. Please post your results!
To get things started and minimize working time I propose test series of 20 games per matchup. That should give solid insight for a specific matchup.
(We should start testing matchups within the field of decks that placed top 8 at the GP)

Hello everybody!

Here's my report (which is written in German): http://highlanderforum.kilu.de/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=42

It was fun in FFM and I hope I can go again, although the way to the banking town is a bit far.

I hope you enjoy my report!

Here's a link to the winning team's tournament report from a 2HG-Highlander competition held in Mannheim.

I hope you enjoy it!

http://highlanderforum.kilu.de/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=34

(the report is written in German)

Here's my report for the tournament (its written in german). I piloted my Scapeshift deck to 3rd place.

http://highlanderforum.kilu.de/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=31&p=87#p87

(you need to be registered to view the forum)

I am the one who played the Scapeshift deck. Here's the list I played. Obviously the list has to change post bannings.
If I had to play the deck now, i'd swap some cards. However I find the following list provides a good base.

GBwr Scapeshift

Mana [35]

2x Snow-Covered Forest
2x Snow-Covered Swamp
1x Snow-Covered Plains

1x Murmuring Bosk
1x Scrubland
1x Temple Garden
1x Overgrown Tomb
1x Savannah
1x Bayou

1x Verdant Catacombs
1x Polluted Delta
1x Bloodstained Mire
1x Marsh Flats
1x Misty Rainforest
1x Wooded Foothills
1x Windswept Heath

2x Snow-Covered Mountain
2x Mountain
1x Blood Crypt
1x Badlands
1x Stomping Grounds
1x Taiga
1x Sacred Foundry
1x Plateau

1x Valakut, The Molten Pinnacle

1x Library of Alexandria
1x Wasteland
1x Boseiju, Who Shelters All
1x Phyrexian Tower

1x Urborg
1x Bojuka Bog

Landfetcher [12]

1x Into the North
1x Farseek
1x Rampant Growth
1x Nature's Lore
1x Three Visits
1x Sakura Tribe Elder
1x Edge of Autumn
1x Search for Tomorrow

1x Kodama's Reach
1x Skyhroud Claim
1x Yavimaya Dryad
1x Wood Elves

Tutoring [13]

1x Demonic Tutor
1x Rhystic Tutor
1x Grim Tutor
1x Beseech the Queen
1x Dimir House Guard
1x Diabolic Tutor
1x Liliana Vess

1x Eladamri's Call
1x Imperial Recruiter
1x Primal Command

1x Crop Rotation
1x Sylvan Scrying
1x Explorer's Map

Win [3]

1x Scapeshift
1x Vampire Hexmage
1x Dark Depths

Disruption / Protection [4]

1x Duress
1x Thoughtseize
1x Inquisition of Kozilek
1x Persecute

Planeswalker [7]

1x Elspeth, Knight Errant
1x Gideon Jura
1x Ajani Vengeant
1x Sarkhan Vol
1x Sarkhan the Mad
1x Sorin Markov
1x Chandra Nalaar

Removal [8]

1x Vindicate
1x Maelstrom Pulse
1x Oblivion Ring
1x Faith's Fetters
1x Putrefy
1x Mortify
1x Krosan Grip
1x Consuming Vapors

Sweeper / Croud Control [7]

1x Wrath of God
1x Damnation
1x Pernicious Deed
1x Moat
1x The Abyss
1x Humility
1x Firespout

Utility Creatures [2]

1x Academy Rector
1x Knight of the Reliquary

Recursion [4]

1x Eternal Witness
1x Regrowth
1x Life from the Loam
1x Crucible of Worlds

Draw / Card Quality [5]

1x Mirri's Guile
1x Sensei's Divining Top
1x Sylvan Library
1x Dark Confidant
1x Harmonize