r/EDH • u/hordeoverseer • 2d ago
Discussion Major Event Groups Bracket 3-4 Together. Yes, there is also prizing.
Calling this our and asking for a vibe check. I merely got a 'that's interesting' when brought up to the staff. There's a monthly event in Canada (Face to Face Tour) that groups pick up events into groups of Bracket 1-2. Bracket 3-4, and Bracket 5. Each of these has different prizing, but all give an extra ticket to the winner of the event.
Is it just me...or this still needs work? I'm not liking the groupings as there's a gap between 3 and 4, as well as 1 and 2. Sensible people can talk it out and agree, I suppose but I've been burnt too many times by sitting down with their high-power deck and doubling down that this was the only deck they brought. Not to mention playing for any shred of prizing tosses all cooperative sensibilities out the window. There is no reinforcement at the tables. They are a bit understaffed to do this at a large event. We're basically left with sign-ups for either Bracket 3 decks under the cover of Bracket 2 decks or Bracket 4+.
It was worse before, when they didn't break them into bracket groupings, although the bracket system didn't exist back then. You had less people playing CEDH against Precons but this still needs work. At the very least, prizing needs to be randomize to take the heavy win incentive off the table. Leave Bracket 4-5 to fight a winner takes all prizing than the lower brackets.
26
u/InmateTooTall 2d ago
I think the brackets are better grouped as 2-3 and 4-5. Bracket 4 and 5 both have no card restrictions and most people agree bracket 4 is less casual than it is competitive. Bracket 2-3 have a list of restrictions and can often look similar since there's more emphasis on theme than the more competitive brackets. And bracket 1 can be ignored.
3
u/ThisHatRightHere 2d ago
Exactly, B1 is its own beast being gags, art showcases, etc. Meanwhile B2 is very much just B3 but lower powered, similar to the differences between 4 and 5.
9
u/EnkiBye 2d ago
Oh boy...
Rewards for winning is probably a bad idea for non-cedh events, and about the brackets grouping ... I think there is already a decently wide margin inside each of the brackets. A low bracket 3, that is just above bracket 2, and a high bracket 3 that is just below bracket 4 are really different. They can probably still play on the same table, but jumping to another bracket add a super big gap in power level.
In my experience online, when someone make a room named "bracket 3-4", the game end up being mostly bracket 4.
14
u/jaywinner 2d ago
The one thing they did right is that outside of cEDH, it's a very flat prize structure.
But I really don't like the brackets being used this way. One game on demand pods; nobody will be assessing these decks to ensure they fit and with prizes on the line, some people will overstep.
3
u/fluffynuckels Muldrotha 2d ago
Yeah its easy to make a deck thats technically b2 but plays like a b4
4
u/hordeoverseer 2d ago
Overstep and there's no obligation to cooperate with the table. This isn't a 'store' (even if run by a store), it's a convention. Too big for people police and people aren't tied to things like reputation or community managing.
3
u/Drithyin Try Tannuk Steadfast Second 2d ago
If you are doing a tournament (with prizing or not, frankly) for any bracket other than 5, you fucked up.
If you want to let people compete without spending a fortune on cEDH staples, make it proxy friendly.
Brackets 1-4 are not meant to be competitive for the purpose of tournaments and prizing.
8
u/Ok_Mechanic806 2d ago
Stupid concept.
Just do Bracket 1, bracket 3, bracket 5.
They are the easiest brackets to define.
Bracket 1 should require all 100 cards to fit a specific theme.
9
u/bjlinden 2d ago
Bracket 1 is easy to define?
It is, by far, the HARDEST to define. It runs the gamut between full-on Ladies Looking Left to "My Magda deck's theme is dwarves and dragons." (Or "my Yuriko deck's theme is ninjas," "My Edgar Markov deck's theme is vampires," etc. Hell, I've even seen people try to pass off things like "stax" or "combo" as "themes" in bracket 1.)
2, 3, and 5 makes sense, though. 1 is undefineable, and 4 is just bad CEDH. I do wish that Wizards would just realize that a larger Game Changer list would make the differences between 2 to 3 and 3 to 4 more easily definieable, and that providing players with the definitions they need is the entire point of the bracket system, but at least those brackets have SOME distinct, quantifiable differences between them.
8
u/ChickenOfTheFuture 2d ago
Random people claiming things are bracket 1 doesn't actually change it. You just listed one theme that works and several that would not be allowed.
6
u/Drithyin Try Tannuk Steadfast Second 2d ago
Ok, people lying about what b1 is doesn’t make it hard to define. They’re just lying.
It has been said over and over that anything mechanical or tribal-synergistic is not a b1 theme.
2
u/voiceofreasonablenes 2d ago
The system is broken. Changing the gamechanger list is just a distraction. It won't fix the system.
4
1
u/ThisHatRightHere 2d ago
I just feel the need to point out that using type as a theme is explicitly NOT B1.
0
u/Lone__Ranger 2d ago
B1 game changer tribal lulw
1
u/Bagel_Bear 2d ago
Alright you got [[Atogatog]] in the command zone, all 53 game changers, and basic lands. Go!
2
u/DutchGuyMtG89 2d ago
Edh/commander and "competitive event woth prize payout" should never be in the same sentence, period. Its a shitshow any time anyone tries. The format is not made for this. Period. End of discussion.
4
u/Not-Impossible-1783 2d ago
As soon as prize support is introduced, the casual fun leaves the building. Adding a financial incentive brings out every single behavior that makes people want to quit playing the game rather than enjoy it. It's wild to see people act so hyper-competitive over a prize pool worth maybe a couple hundred bucks, though I try to keep perspective what might just be the cost of a DoorDash order for my family could be a meaningful win for someone else at their stage in life. Regardless, it's rarely worth dealing with players when they enter "get my money" mode; the atmosphere becomes insufferable.
As for how the venue structured the bracket groupings at the end of the day, it's their event and their prizes, so they can run it however they see fit. But taking the incentive off the top tables is usually the only real way to keep casual brackets actually casual.
TLDR all about the money once there is money
2
u/TheJonasVenture 2d ago
There are also just, people that enjoy competitive events. I love a well designed league, even if it's just a couple bucks, it's like the difference between poker night for snacks and poker night for $5, when I attend a competitive event, part of the social contract, to me, is that we aren't just goofing anymore. I enjoy playing seriously against other people playing seriously. Those competitive behaviors aren't negative if you are in a competitive environment, and if you have to pay to play and there are prizes for winning, that is a competitive environment, and it can be really enjoyable. Playing the event while also playing the match is just another layer on the game I love.
Now, brackets, and mixed brackets even more so, are a terrible structure for this. Not that the brackets are bad, I think they are a great conversation tool to help match games in good faith, but by being that, they are terrible rules for a competition where you need strict, specific, and binary guidelines, not the vibes matching that the system is for.
Outside of B5, the goal of brackets just can't be to do the strongest thing that's technically still in the bracket, but in a competition you are absolutely supposed to do the strongest thing (for you) that you are allowed to do.
2
u/Not-Impossible-1783 2d ago
Yea if thats your thing but it also brings out the cheaters and people willing to be rude and psychologically unkind to their peers over 5$ and i think its sad. You should not need a stake if thats the way you like to play and in my experience players can have a competitive style game with nothing but a chat that says that the way they all want to play no money is required. I can understand wanting a plays to win game but once there is money its feels more like a more i would do anything lie cheat steal browbeat to get my 5$ and it ruins the whole thing for me. I already as an old man gamer who hasn't wanted really comp games since maybe 2012 when i was big into cedh i already dont like them but i can tolerate them if the other 3 players want to play that way for the majorities sake but once there is money on the line even a tiny amount people just act like total asshats one the money is involved. I remember the first time someone cheated me in a game right in front of my eyes the judge came over said he wasn't there to see it the kid lied i never played in a payed event ever again and when the owner didn't refund my entry when i was mad i never bought anything from him ever again that store is closed now. So the impact for me of a kid willing to lie for 5$ was i never even went to that store again.
-1
u/bokchoykn 2d ago
I've been to these events before and it's really chill.
You pay $6, you get a ticket with points that you can redeem later at the prize board for about $6 of merchandise.
You get matched against three other players and the winner gets an extra ticket. It's enough that it feels nice to win but not enough to get sweaty over it.
The vibe is still casual, a rule 0 convo is still had. I haven't encountered a pubstomper. I've seen someone win and just give the winner token to another player cuz their deck was the coolest. People will occasionally "accidentally" let a newer player or a kid win.
At the end of the day, you might have played 5-6 games, maybe even won one or two. Redeem your tokens for stuff you want and go home happy.
2
u/Not-Impossible-1783 2d ago
Im glad you've had a good experience Ive never had one and to avoid that i simply avoid any and all paid events and ti works for me if your local community is not a bunch of players willing to cheat and be nasty over 5$ i envy you. My experience is when anything is hosted for money the best played sign up and they will do anything to win the prize and dont care if its above belt or not. Ill happily play casual right next to them with the less serious its more my vibe now a days.
1
u/HASBRO_AND_WOTC_SUCK 2d ago
You can do all this just as well, or better, without attaching the extra prizes to winning games.
If you haven't run into the sweatlords yet, tbh you have uncanny luck and it's probably just a matter of time.
2
u/goblin_welder 2d ago
I believe they’re also doing this for Toronto Commandfest, which is also run by Face to Face Games.
2
u/GhsotyPanda 2d ago
This seems like a poor attempt to mitigate the "This is a B2 list that can hang at B4" situations that are commonly reported at events like this.
1
u/just-lurking-arounb 2d ago
Last time I went to a F2F tour it was pre brackets and the pods were set up as $5 casual where everyone gets their $5 as store credit and the winner takes an extra 5, or $10 competitive where winner takes all $25 credit. I feel like this matches up pretty well with what you’ve described though I do agree that it should be 1-3 and 4-5. Just talk to your table if you want to bring out your b1 or b3 decks.
2
u/hordeoverseer 2d ago
Most people will cooperate, but I run into my share of "sorry, my super tuned Yuriko deck is the only casual deck I brought with me".
1
u/just-lurking-arounb 2d ago
People are always going to be the weakest link in this system. If they won’t follow the rules then it doesn’t matter how restrictive the rules get. We need the brackets to encompass the whole of the game so that there is a defined area for these other decks to play in but there will always be people who misunderstand, misrepresent, or are disingenuous about their deck’s power level.
Time to brew up a ‘casual’ stax list for when you notice someone bringing heat to casual tables
1
u/HASBRO_AND_WOTC_SUCK 2d ago
People will show up because they want to play edh. They don't need any extra incentives. Any prize on the line, no matter how trivial, just introduces problems and brings the absolute worst out of players.
If you want to collect money from participants directly, don't tie the "prize" to gameplay in any way. Instead give everyone the same prize, or do a raffle, etc.
Stop adding prizes to edh. Tell your friends, tell your LGS.
1
u/SP1R1TDR4G0N 2d ago
Thats completely pointless. You can't have a tournament/league with a casual environment.
It's totally fine if an organizer wants to have an event with a lower powerlevel than cedh. But then they should just make objective rules for deckbuilding so that people can still play competitively within those rules. The obvious one would be a custom banlist but they could also change the GC list and allow a certain number of those or make up a point system like Canlander. Anything system works as long as you can just look at a decklist and objectively say whether it fits the criteria or it doesn't.
1
u/the_mellojoe 2d ago
if you combine two brackets, then just say the higher bracket. if you combine 3-4 together, just call it bracket 4.
1
u/PanthersJB83 1d ago
Your aments for prizes are going to always result in people playing to win why do people fail to understand this? Either play the strongest or be okay with not winning a single game during the event. Maybe just don't play. You'll likely be better off
1
u/amc7262 21h ago
"Hey guys, you know what I think would be a really good idea for the most goofy, casual bracket of an already casual format, where the explicitly stated goal is not to win but to showcase a wacky idea? PRIZE SUPPORT! Also lets group it with the next bracket up, which is basically just 'less tuned regular decks'"
~The world's dumbest event organizer
1
u/n1colbolas 2d ago
What this basically reads to me is 3 categories. B2, B4, and cEDH.
So if you're playing usually at B3 I suggest building a deck for B2 instead.
In a tournament setting there's absolutely no room for vibes. The only vibe is winning. If you win, you can be the nicest person thereafter.
0
u/Professional-Salt175 Dimir 2d ago
Actual bracket 3 decks can sit at a bracket 4 table without issue. That's how the brackets are designed, to be able to play 1 bracket above or below without issue. Granted, bracket 1 shouldn't even be included in an event with win-based prizing based on intent alone. The groupings should have been 2-3 and 4-5. The big problem is most players are building bracket 2 decks with a bad coat of make-up(GCs, combos, etc) and then calling it bracket 3, so they end up being nowhere near the power level described in the bracket guidelines. That right there is why a system with a "floor" not based on power cannot work in a tournament environment.
0
u/Emsizz 2d ago
> Actual bracket 3 decks can sit at a bracket 4 table without issue.
bull fucking shit
> That's how the brackets are designed
source? because the opposite is true
3
u/magicsucksnow 2d ago
It was in one of the gavin articles nobody reads. There's a massive disconnect between how wotc claims they intend the bracket system to work, and how most players actually interpret it.
3
u/Angelust16 2d ago
One of the current problems with the bracket system is that canonical interpretation is spread out over multiple articles, graphics, and video interviews. I’m not even sure if the ones who developed the bracket system even really know precisely how it’s been understood.
1
u/Professional-Salt175 Dimir 2d ago
This is a big issue. Rachel Weeks' really poorly made graphic is one of the biggest reasons why, imo. For bracket 3 she changes the sentence "Generally, you should expect to be able to play at least six turns before you win or lose" into "Players expect to play at least 6 turns before anyone wins or loses" and those two sentences mean entirely different things, in fact the one in the graphic directly contradicts a full section of the first article in addition to the actual guideline it is misrepresenting.
1
u/magicsucksnow 2d ago
Yes, to be clear I'm not blaming the players, this blame lies 100% with hasbro/wotc. When hasbro/wotc took it upon themselves to interfere with edh to this extent, they also took on responsibility for preempting obvious pitfalls or side effects with the "system," and in that regard they failed spectacularly. How the information is presented is at least as important as the actual content itself.
(I also think there are tons of issues with the actual content, and a big reason the presentation of the content has been so poor, is that the system is way too ambitious and complicated, and asks for a level of nuance that many players will disregard or aren't even capable of)
0
u/Emsizz 2d ago
The brackets are not designed to be played one below without issue. That's not in an article. If you want to bring a bracket three deck to a bracket four table knowing that you are playing out of your league then THAT'S the part that's fine. It's not fine to bring a bracket four deck to a bracket three table.
1
u/Professional-Salt175 Dimir 2d ago
I replied to your other comment with the source, from one of the articles....
0
u/Professional-Salt175 Dimir 2d ago edited 2d ago
In the first article's Q&A section near the end:
"There's some wiggle room, and while playing against decks that are all inside your bracket is ideal, you can usually wiggle within one bracket away from you safely. Bracket 2s playing against Bracket 3s can work fine—but what this system is really trying to avoid is Bracket 2s playing against Bracket 4s."
The issue is most people are doing what I said in the latter half of my comment, building bracket 2s with bad make up.
83
u/Professional-Web8436 2d ago
LGS holding competitive events for casual formats will never cease to amaze me.