You are currently viewing HCRealms.com, The Premier HeroClix Community, as a Guest. If you would like to participate in the community, please Register to join the discussion!
If you are having problems registering to an account, feel free to Contact Us.
Originally posted by Cronos1388 Yeah but after Gilly top 8ed I didn't go to PCQs and see about 90% of the field Common Enemy.
Well maybe that's because my first PCQ was a week after Indy but maybe not. All I remember is that my friend built Common Enemy right after Chicago.
As I understand it, the first CE lists were played by Anthony Justice and Matt Oldaker and etc and were titled 'Secret Deck'. The deck went from there to Nick Little and Gabe Walls and then to Gilly (and Kibler and Reeves and others) through them.
I was there, it was the first PCQ of all time in Knoxville Tennessee. I played a wack version of Curve Sentinels and they played a wack version of Common Enemy. It was Russ Pippin and Matt in the finals, I think Russ had straight FF.
I was there also, Matt won with Doom. Obviously though I didn't play in the constructed I had to be content finishing 9th in the constructed. Ah well no complaints.
Originally posted by markslack As I understand it, the first CE lists were played by Anthony Justice and Matt Oldaker and etc and were titled 'Secret Deck'. The deck went from there to Nick Little and Gabe Walls and then to Gilly (and Kibler and Reeves and others) through them.
Didn't someone post the deck here as well and title it "Unbeatable Deck"
Originally posted by Cronos1388 Didn't someone post the deck here as well and title it "Unbeatable Deck"
I don't know. If someone did it wasn't any of the guys who had 10k or PC level success with it. I would imagine it was someone with a similar idea with a much less tuned version.
Originally posted by markslack Yes, but Sam Gilly was the first person to top 8 a 10k with it (at the first Chicago, actually).
actualy, at san deigo, the 10k before, both josh witinan and i top eighted with it. http://metagame.com/vs.aspx?tabid=46&ArticleId=297 . admittadly my list was terrible, but josh's is closer to what would eventualy become the norm.
Originally posted by jimi_berluti actualy, at san deigo, the 10k before, both josh witinan and i top eighted with it. http://metagame.com/vs.aspx?tabid=46&ArticleId=297 . admittadly my list was terrible, but josh's is closer to what would eventualy become the norm.
The original common enemy was piloted by myself and Russ Pippin in Knoxville. Matt Oldaker displayed (and ultimatly beat both of us in the top 4 and finals) with the formnamed Oldaker Doom. Our version was a much more aggressive version, and did not play Mystical Paralysis/Reign of Terror. We then improved it with some items from Heath Baker, making our preferred 5 drop Mr Fantastic and adding some equipment; I took 9th place at the first ever 10K with that. Andthony Justice and Oldaker then took the deck and improved it further to the soft control version that Kibbler piloted to win the first PC Indy.
I absolutely love the random point values given here. I think the guys from the BCS could learn a thing or two about how best to arbitrarily assign point values.
I suppose that you're trying to cross the Mindripper style of quality finishes over top finishes with some sort of higher emphasis on the top finishes. A noble goal, but what makes you think that the system you've come up with is in anyway fair at all? As the pants hater pointed out, some of the equivalences seem whacked out. And given the level of competition can vary between 10ks (compare Toronto to just about any US 10k), awarding points equally to them skews the results.
Sorry to burst your bubble dude, but there's nothing random about any point values given out in this system. If you had read the very first post it tells exactly how points are given out and a lot of people really like the old Mindripper style of points. Originally it started out without any bonus points for finishing higher but almost everyone agreed last year that actually winning a big event is worth more than just 1 point more than coming in 2nd place or even just 7 points more than coming in 8th, so thats how that came about. If you also thought about it for more than a minute you'd realize that there is no feasible way to to give out points based on the level of competition at each tournament. A 10k is a 10k, whether its held in Toronto or Atlanta, and if more people decide to travel to Atlanta rather than Toronto or vice versa, there's nothing anyone can do about that either. The professional tournament structure is set up by UDE and its workin pretty well so far. If you have the time to create and organize a system you think is better than this please go right ahead, nobody's making you read this post or even telling you its the best and only way to go, its just me doing something interesting and putting something out there that a lot of people are curious about.
If you're open to changing the point accrual format for tracking player of the year, I've seen a format that has worked well to track tournament accomplishments. The idea:
Award each player one point for every player s/he finishes ahead of in each event. In this case, finishing first at the Toronto 10K would net 81 points, first at the Atlanta 10K would net 98 points, and first at PC Indy '05 would net 348 points.
This idea would at least reflect the size of each event, applying more weight to larger events. This should apply the appropriate weight to PCs and give larger 10Ks more credit.
If you like it, run with it. If it's similar to or the same as this 'Mindripper' thing you mention, ignore it. :) In either event, thanks for putting in the work to create the standings in the first place.
Originally posted by jimi_berluti actualy, at san deigo, the 10k before, both josh witinan and i top eighted with it. http://metagame.com/vs.aspx?tabid=46&ArticleId=297 . admittadly my list was terrible, but josh's is closer to what would eventualy become the norm.