Well If this is true (which I really dont care if it is) I dont care much cause Really 6 weeks is plenty Time. I mean when you think about it Powerful effects (The ones that will make those crazy combo decks that will do ungodly on day 1) Will Be pretty Obviously to 70% of the people going to Atlanta anyway. I mean when people First saw Dr. light Alot of people said he was broke. with places like this and other Vs sites its alot of people will give what they think about the set and that is the most important thing for Atlanta.

Think about it, I mean say there was a Turn 4 Win combo in X-men. Say the pros get it early. Now Say somone (likely) Stumbles upon the Combo and posts it online. This 1 person totally Nullifies all those Pros testing cause now everyone knows. Much like how the people where "shocked" by LightCombo shouldnt have been as people where talking about that very deck Idea for the past Month.


So it really doesnt matter as long as we have people who arent pros and like to talk about the Cool things they found in the Set.

Even if we find out the combo, we don't have time to make a perfect version of the deck while the pro's do.

You will most likely ave 3+weeks to tweek the deck and with such a limited amount of cards to choose from it shouldnt take that long to make the Choice.

Kids these days, back in my day we used 60 playing cards and a sheet of paper for a dozen type 2 decks.

Its easier now. All you need is 60 cards, 60 sleeves, and (depending on your handwriting skills) a printer.

Much less confusing then "Is my ace of spades Savage Beatdown or is it my searcher?"

Shh im 22 now i get to talk about back in the day.

And thats really a pain when your testing a decks matchup against a wide open meta.

By switching a paper decklist i can change match ups in seconds instead of printing 60 more proxies and resleeving.

Would look something like this

Aces = dove

3's = royharper
4's = terra
5's = Garth
6 of diamonds = speedy
rest of 6's = redstar
etc...

Well............that does sound easier.
I'm talking about when your tweaking the crap out of a deck though.

I felt obligated to chime in, because I think many of the posts in this thread grossly understate the importance of time.

Having been to all the Pro Circuits and a few Magic Pro Tours, I think I have a pretty good idea of what preparing for a tournament is like. Also, having built quite a few decks, many of which were awful and scrapped in playtesting, I think it's important to recognize that some of the best decks come a lot later in playtesting than others. Sometimes understanding a format is a long process of throwing the best decks you currently have against each other and realizing that a different strategy could trump them all. Then, of course, building that deck, and trying it out, working out the kinks, etc.

That being said, time is exponentionally valuable for making constructed decks in an undefined format. One week might be the week you think Deck A is clearly the best, while each successive week might change your outlook.

This next point might seem odd, but it bears saying:

Some people have real lives apart from card games.

Groundbreaking, I realize. Why this is important might not be obvious at first, but allow me to give a bit of my experience as an example. I'm currently enrolled in my last semester at law school, which, as you can imagine, is pretty involving. When I prepare for CCG events, I can't just set aside 6 weeks in a row to playtest all day, all night. Most of the CCG prep "work" I do, personally, is theoretical, as I try to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of cards, strategies, and eventually actual decks. I theorize in my spare time, on the train, when I'm not paying attention in class, whenever.

It follows fairly logically that the longer I have to theorize about a format, the better my understanding of the format will be. This would seemingly hold true for anyone with an actual life outside of card games.

I suppose the argument could be made that maybe I'm just slow, or dumb, and *anyone* should be able to solve an entire format in whatever time they're given, but I just don't buy that. If you look at the history of VS, successive PCs of the same format show improvement in decks, often introducing decks that were 100% legal, but just "undiscovered" at the previous event. Were we all just bad, then, or do time and ingenuity play a part? I think they do.

Even assuming extra time would not produce a *better* product, it surely would produce it at a more relaxed pace.

Also, we have no idea how complex the X-Men set may be. If it introduces cards that significantly change the way we think about basic aspects of the game, six weeks might not be enough to grasp it all.

It wouldn't surprise me if someone was paid to leak the spoiler, because I think that knowledge is valuable. I wish I had it, I'd feel a lot more confident about my PC ATL chances than I do currently knowing that others may have extra time to work when I cannot.

Maybe it's paranoia, but I feel like anyone ludicrous enough to say "We still have 6 weeks, it's not that big a deal" is either delusional or might very well have the spoiler themselves.

-Craig Edwards

I don't know if it's already been mentioned, but, seriously folks, don't be ignorant, look at such things as card lists, on this and other sites. You will see quotes listed on cards that don't appear on the cards themselves. They were quotes that would've been on the card specs that didn't make it onto the card for space purposes. There's no way the web site could've known this unless they got the spoiler ahead of time.

This way, we get the full spoiler with all the pictures in about 2 or 3 days after the pre-release, thanks to the fact that the folks at UDE make the spoiler available to certain groups.

And then it isn't too much of a stretch before people end up getting these spoilers plenty in advance. I doubt that they already have the spoilers NOW, but it isn't too far fetched. Hell, I remember when I used to talk to a pro player on AIM all the time and he was telling me about having the set early. When I first heard it, I thought it was unfair, but, believe it or not, I got over it. I bet you all will, too.

The fact of the matter is that life isn't fair, so why would you expect UDE to be? Just because someone else got something and you didn't, and you're forced to cram your playtesting into a shorter timespan because of it, doesn't mean you should get your panties in a twist. Live with it.

Take yourself back to August/Sep and ask which set MKKO was from when it won a 10K?

How long did it take. It takes time for decks to come out as many of you will find.

I do know of at least one pro that definitely has the spoiler and has likely had it since PCLA, where I first heard the rumors about leaks. I do not have access to it.

I don't think a lot of non-pros have an idea of how complicated even a small format can be. We're pretty lucky in that Avengers' best decks are clear cut already. Basically, people testing for the PC have to find ALL of the good decks for the new format from the new set, and they have to do it in about five weeks. If they miss one, they're screwed. If they misbuild one deck in testing, they're screwed. Not only that, they should have all the decks built at the top level at least two weeks before the tournament in order to decide what deck they want to play. Also, as the decks get built, you have to rebuild old decks in order to compensate for metagame changes in your testing. Five weeks (really three, because you need the last two to decide on your deck) is not enough time to do this right. Three months is.

(I am staying out of the blame game, that post with its quote was good enough for all of us.)

With the Big Three from MAV most probably getting even more power from the new set, how likely will X-men exclusive decks be able to knock them off? Wouldn't it need to be a really really good set to beat all three? Or does it have a good chance of containing more than one instant answer since all three are the same type?

This gives me another excuse why I won't make day 2 in Atlanta :)

Part of that can also be that, based on the results of the event, it becomes clear that there are certain 'trends' towards what people are playing. When you go into an 'unknown' format you have to GUESS what people will be playing. If everyone determines the 'best' deck and techs against it ... perhaps no one ends up playing the 'best' deck in the first place?

Or, more likely, in the first event the 'best' deck is played. Then, MOST people will be playing that deck, so a deck which isn't AS good, but does well against the best deck shows up in the later event.

Knowing what deck beats the best deck is only useful if people are playing the best deck. Outside of leaking the 'deck to beat' early ... you can't bet that it will be there in force, so you just play the best deck instead.

Part of the reason that there are meta shifts after large events is because there are people at events who DON'T do extensive testing. Thus, you have to consider that, in the top of the field, you need the deck that does well against other well tested opponents.

But you also need to be able to beat the 'scrubs' to get up to that point. Expecting the scrubs to have cracked the format isn't a good idea. On the other hand, in later events, expecting the scrubs to play decks that have been succesful at earlier events is a good idea.

So teching against the 'best deck' when the format has just started is only useful as far as teching for the mirror. On the other hand, once the cat's out of the bag, then you decide whether to run the inferior against a diverse field, but superior against a wall of carbon copies or to run the 'carbon copy' yourself.

While some of it may be a result of having more time, MOST of it has to do with responding to the 'condensed' play testing lesson that takes place during any given PC. And the knowledge that people who don't have time or a team to playtest their stuff to 'perfection' will likely latch on to strategies that are 'proven' at the PC.

Not saying that time doesn't matter, it does ... but this point of the argument has little to do with time. Merely that a PC will always dramatically shift the metagame, if only because most teams will 'sit' on their special tech until the metagame, and that the decks which do well there will be broadcast and be seen by a large number of players. The assumption that there can be a 'best' deck in a format ignores that it all comes down to metagame. While there can be a deck that will have the best record against all possible decks, that doesn't mean there is not a deck which will have a winning record against it [albeit a worse record against 'all other decks' on average].

No ammount of time can 'solve' the meta ... because other people are also trying to solve the meta. The more people solve it ... the more the meta is changed to make the solution wrong. If no one is playing CS, then having a deck that beats CS and little else isn't going to help you. On the other hand, if everyone was still playing CS, that deck could get someone to day 2 easily ...