Author Topic: Should Playtester be able to compete at NATS? (Read 7867 times)

RTSmaniac · « **on:** March 27, 2011, 10:25:03 PM »

Are you sure you want to be a playtester?

What unfair disadvantage do the rest of us have when it comes to facing playtesters on the National Tournament scene?

As playtesters, these cardslingers get to see and help create new cards for NATS booster draft and this years 2011 sealed deck.

Are any playtesters going to be playing Sealed Deck at NATS? Who wants to face a playtester 1 on 1 in sealed deck with cards theyve seen for a year?

On a side note- just to be fair...how many non playtesters know about the cards already?

1998
Sealed Deck - 2 player Ron Sias, MI
Sealed Deck - Multiplayer Ron Sias, MI
1999
Sealed Deck - 2 player Daniel Horton
Sealed Deck - Multiplayer Ron Sias, MI
2000
Sealed Deck - 2 player Nicholas Campbell, MO
Sealed Deck - Multiplayer Aaron Torres, KS
2001
Sealed Deck - 2 player Dave Daugherty, OH
Sealed Deck - Multiplayer Brandon Knick, VA
2002
Sealed Deck - 2 player 36 Roy Cannaday, VA
Sealed Deck - Multiplayer Josiah Fiscus, PA
2003
Sealed Deck - 2 player 58 Brad Dembo, PA
Booster Draft
Brad Dembo (PA)
Joseph Pfeister (AZ)
Joshua Meneely (PA)
RNRS booster

2004
Sealed Deck Michael Bell, CT
Booster Draft
1st - Ken Shartle (FL)
2nd - Michael Bell (CT)
3rd - Tim Keller (FL)

RNRS booster
1st - Adam Erickson (MN)
2nd - Josiah Stroh (OH)
3rd - Sean Flynn (GA)

2005
Sealed Deck 62 Seth Mick, MN
Booster Draft
1st - John Nesfeder (KS)
2nd - Michael Welch (WI)
3rd - Jacob Weisenberger (MN)
RNRS booster
1st - Emmanuel Echavarria (CT)
2nd - Michael Welch (WI)
3rd - Ben Shadrick (TX)

2006
Sealed Deck 58 Claude Fong, NY
Booster Draft
1st - Sarah Harris (WV)
2nd - John Westhuis (NJ)
3rd - Elizabeth Gamble (NC)
RNRS booster
1st - Ben Shadrick (TX)
2nd - Tim Mierzejewski (PA)
3rd - Sara Harris (WV)

2007
Sealed Deck 60 Chad Soderstrom, TX
Booster Draft
1st - John Earley (MN)
2nd - Kyle Hamilton (MO)
3rd - Zack Zeiss
RNRS booster
1st - Ben Shadrick (TX)
2nd - Eric Wolfe (CA)
3rd - Ben Arp (WA)

2008
Sealed Deck 46 Michael Huerter, PA
Booster Draft
1st - Jacob Fountain
2nd - Gabe Isbell (IA)
3rd - Ben Shadrick (TX) and Nick Gonyea (TN) - tie
RNRS booster
1st - Gabe Isbell (IA)
2nd - Jonathan Greeson (NY)
3rd - Jeremy Kemp (IA)

2009
Sealed Deck 26 Sam Nurge - MA
Booster Draft
1st - Sam Nurge (CT)
2nd - Ben Shadrick (TX)
3rd - Andrew Kramer (CA)
RNRS booster
1st - Josh Randolf (OR)
2nd - Sam Nurge (CT)
3rd - Ben Nicholls (MN)

2010
Sealed Deck 32 Brandon Abbott - CA
Booster Draft
1st - Tyler Stevens (GA)
2nd - Matt Stupienski (CT)
3rd - Tim Mierzejewski (SC)
RNRS booster
1st - Shawn Capron (MD)
2nd - Tyler Stevens (GA)
3rd - Mark Underwood (KY)

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #1 on:** March 27, 2011, 10:36:20 PM »

Who said that the set would be in Sealed Deck?

SomeKittens · « **Reply #2 on:** March 27, 2011, 10:41:11 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on March 27, 2011, 10:36:20 PM

Who said that the set would be in Sealed Deck?

Regardless, if it's used at Nats, there's an advantage difference.

Isildur · « **Reply #3 on:** March 27, 2011, 10:45:27 PM »

IF the set is sealed deck then I would agree 100% that there is an unfair advantage compared to the rather slight one in Booster. The key to sealed deck imo is knowing the decks VERY well thats half the reason I won last year with 3 prophets packs.

Your side note I would assume is there are a splattering of people who know cards but I doubt any one besides play testers and their play groups have seen the full list.

Master KChief · « **Reply #4 on:** March 27, 2011, 10:53:31 PM »

i agree. in some ccg's playtesters and members of the R&D team are now allowed to play in official tournaments.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #5 on:** March 27, 2011, 11:08:07 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 27, 2011, 10:53:31 PM

i agree. in some ccg's playtesters and members of the R&D team are not allowed to play in official tournaments.

fixed

and i was just guessing about sealed...dont listen to me too much, just causing some ruckus.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #6 on:** March 27, 2011, 11:12:36 PM »

I honestly don't see that it's made a difference. The players that won that were playtesters (of which there were few) are really good players, and I don't doubt that it really helped them win.

Also, booster this past year was done well, with Bryon warning people to bring NT Lost Souls.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #7 on:** March 27, 2011, 11:40:29 PM »

I completely agree- as I was doing the research, I noticed my results didnt help my hypothisis until i started looking at the RNRS and there were a few more trends but other than that...

I also dont want to take away any victories from anyone because i feel everyone that won well deserved it. My ideas are based on what MKC said...

Quote from: Master KChief on March 27, 2011, 10:53:31 PM

i agree. in some ccg's playtesters and members of the R&D team are not allowed to play in official tournaments.

My question to the playtesters would be... Do you feel that in becoming a playtester and playing in events like boosterdraft that you may have any advantage over your opponents because of seeing and playtesting with the cards in advance?

Isildur · « **Reply #8 on:** March 28, 2011, 12:25:32 AM »

For Booster Draft and a new pack its 50/50 you basically the only advantage is you know what you can get in the packs. Booster Draft is random by nature so knowing the cards really cant give you that much as an advantage. Now tins are another story lol (first time playing foof at nats lol) that becomes alot more helpful as you can very likely guess how their deck works and what counters ect the tins have. Also helps with the drafting process as you know possibly what random counters may help you down the road. Child of Wisdom ftw

Professoralstad · « **Reply #9 on:** March 28, 2011, 12:28:18 AM »

I think that the random nature of Booster Draft minimizes the chance that we'll have any particular advantage. There are so many ways to lose a game of Booster Draft, even if you would beat everyone else at your table in a 2P game with those decks 9 out of 10 times, you could still find that the LS's just don't show up, or everyone seems to have the perfect defense when they need it, etc., etc. With the past two sets, I don't think there was really advantage at all. Each player had a reasonable max of 5 of the new cards in his deck (assuming that he took all of the new cards he could and perhaps one extra was passed to him), and the distribution was just as random for the playtesters as it was for everyone else (no one but Rob new how the packs were packaged, so if someone got a GoH at Nats, they didn't know that the person before them had just drafted a Mayhem). The biggest advantage of being a playtester is knowing how cards from the new set work together, but you will rarely have that chance. I suppose in some situations a playtester may draft, for example, a Herod from Apostles hoping that they would get a Herod's Treachery/Dungeon in the TexP pack, but I would guess the situations like that were pretty rare.

When it comes to the tin sets, there is probably a bit more advantage for the playtesters, since seeing one of the cards that a person has would tip them off to what else they have. But in this case, there is at most 1/5th of the deck that is new cards, and the random nature of the other cards would likely mitigate this advantage quite a bit.

As for Sealed Deck, if the new set was a starter deck, then playtesters would have a clear advantage. I can think of two possible solutions for this: 1) Don't use the new cards 2) Release the set list a week before Nationals so that everyone gets a chance to see the new cards before the tournament. I would support the second option, because I think that the idea of using the new set has been fun and has made BD one of the most popular categories at Nationals the past few years.

As for the category winners, the first Nats where the new cards were allowed was 2007 with FoOF. I don't think any of the people on those lists was a playtester when they placed, for RNRS or tournament placings.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #10 on:** March 28, 2011, 12:33:28 AM »

Thank you for posting ProfA. I honor you. Bless you my friend.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #11 on:** March 28, 2011, 12:47:41 AM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on March 28, 2011, 12:28:18 AM

As for the category winners, the first Nats where the new cards were allowed was 2007 with FoOF. I don't think any of the people on those lists was a playtester when they placed, for RNRS or tournament placings.

In the case of tins, it didn't really matter, since you got your cards before drafting. You already knew what you would get from the new set, and could go after assisting cards. With disciples, I would have taken Good Samaritan first round had I known about Kindness. Although, I didn't play booster this past nats...but had I...

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #12 on:** March 28, 2011, 12:50:11 AM »

Was that California?

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #13 on:** March 28, 2011, 12:50:55 AM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on March 28, 2011, 12:47:41 AM

Quote from: Professoralstad on March 28, 2011, 12:28:18 AM
As for the category winners, the first Nats where the new cards were allowed was 2007 with FoOF. I don't think any of the people on those lists was a playtester when they placed, for RNRS or tournament placings.
In the case of tins, it didn't really matter, since you got your cards before drafting. You already knew what you would get from the new set, and could go after assisting cards. With disciples, I would have taken Good Samaritan first round had I known about Kindness. Although, I didn't play booster this past nats...but had I...

Did you not read his post? >:c. If I saw someone had Jacob and an artifact, I would know not to attack them if at all possible for fear of Uzzah. Other players may sadface.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #14 on:** March 28, 2011, 01:02:51 AM »

Fail. I disagree though. The main thing is drafting cards. Worrying about what your opponent has is not as important.

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #15 on:** March 28, 2011, 01:04:38 AM »

I'm pretty bad at this game, so knowing what the cards are before hand doesn't really help me much

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #16 on:** March 28, 2011, 01:07:33 AM »

I verymuch remember whats being drafted in packs for example i dont draft sites first pick but i remember what colors i see if someone else gets it so i can draft some heros for it. ex. gold hero or gold site which one u draft first?

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #17 on:** March 28, 2011, 01:12:01 AM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on March 28, 2011, 01:02:51 AM

Fail. I disagree though. The main thing is drafting cards. Worrying about what your opponent has is not as important.

If I know there is a possibility someone has the same tin color as me (such as Syrians and Romans in FOOF), I might alter my strategy somewhat.

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #18 on:** March 28, 2011, 02:16:33 AM »

It's pretty easy to see here. With tins and new sets playtesters do indeed have an unfair advantage on deck building/drafting. New players not knowing about Kindness is a perfect example. If the new set is sealed, and I get paired up against a playtester in the later rounds I would think, I would definitely say he has an unfair advantage on me. The playtester has a huge upper hand the first few rounds at least while everyone is learning their cards/abilities. IF the new set is a starter deck that is being used for sealed deck for this year's nationals, then I would say playtesters should not be allowed to participate in the category. Even if you are not an official playtester, like me for example with Eric. On previous sets we have playtested them, if I did that with this set then I would play the other category that day, or judge.

Michael_of_the_Star · « **Reply #19 on:** March 28, 2011, 02:35:03 AM »

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on March 28, 2011, 02:16:33 AM

It's pretty easy to see here. With tins and new sets playtesters do indeed have an unfair advantage on deck building/drafting. New players not knowing about Kindness is a perfect example. If the new set is sealed, and I get paired up against a playtester in the later rounds I would think, I would definitely say he has an unfair advantage on me. The playtester has a huge upper hand the first few rounds at least while everyone is learning their cards/abilities. IF the new set is a starter deck that is being used for sealed deck for this year's nationals, then I would say playtesters should not be allowed to participate in the category. Even if you are not an official playtester, like me for example with Eric. On previous sets we have playtested them, if I did that with this set then I would play the other category that day, or judge.

I understand the concern, but because there are many unofficial playtesters, so is that mean all of us can be judge for that category? If we cannot judge this category, then we technically done for the day. It would be too boring for us to miss out on this. I hope I make myself clear. Thank you.

Michael Leung

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #20 on:** March 28, 2011, 03:23:08 AM »

Another thing to consider is the sheer number of people who actually do see the cards at somepoint during the playtest proccess -

If you consider that we've been averaging around 100 people the last few nationals, say 80 of them play Booster/Sealed - Right now we're looking at the 15 Elders out of those 80 being unable to play. Add in 1 person from each Elders playtest group that they play with and you're already looking at around 40% of that category being DQ'ed. And thats assuming that each Elder only playtests with 1 other person. Now for me that's actually true - and I know Chris hasn't shown them to anyone. I doubt Kevin has either - But I know that Roy and Bryon both playtest with thier groups, so that more than balances out. Then if you consider everyone who might have had a card or two revealed to them, but not the whole list, and suddenly you're looking at a huge percentage of the playerbase.

Raise your hand if you know one of the cards in the new set. I'm sure its more than just us Elders and PT groups.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #21 on:** March 28, 2011, 03:39:47 AM »

Tim accidentally leaked the name of one card at the T2 only (and by leaked I mean he was logged into the boards while people were crowded around him and there was a thread in the PTB side). Am I DQ'd?

Wait, I'm DQ'd for a different reason? >:c

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #22 on:** March 28, 2011, 03:44:02 AM »

You're DQ'd cause you abused Eleazar's Sword.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #23 on:** March 28, 2011, 03:47:37 AM »

You're just DQing me because you're racist and I'm going to be foreign.

Wait, MN finally got nats? Like it should have last year? Nevermind. I just Eleazar's Sword is the reason.

TechnoEthicist · « **Reply #24 on:** March 28, 2011, 07:34:41 AM »

Quote from: RTSmaniac on March 27, 2011, 10:25:03 PM

2007
Booster Draft
1st - John Earley (MN)

Yet I have the trophy....hmmm....4 years later and still not fixed....as to this argument, and I can honestly say I don't know any of the playtest cards, but I won't be at nationals this year so I feel my opinion may not be warranted. We would have to see after this year depending on things if a playtester actually won a category (say sealed for example) where the majority of the cards are new. I agree that playtesters should feel free to play in Booster because you get at most maybe 10% of your deck from the new set...unless people REALLY don't know what they are doing when drafting...

News:

Author Topic: Should Playtester be able to compete at NATS? (Read 7867 times)

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Rawrlolsauce!

Warrior_Monk

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!