PDA

View Full Version : Cant remember the format name - just read!



Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:48 PM
As topic title, I forgot the freaking name. But basically, I have competed (for fun) in tournaments and friendlies where every deck was limit 1 on every card (except land/resources in general).

Could this ever be considered as a true tournament format? It would vary so much from the metagame that it would have an interesting impact on how players value single cards.

Thoughts?

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 05:50 PM
Highlander. THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!

Blare731
05-11-2013, 05:50 PM
I think there has been talk about this format and yet the name escapes me as well. I believe Kyle or Corey said something about it and how new Tournament styles were definitely in the works other than draft.

Erebus
05-11-2013, 05:50 PM
It's normally called "Singleton"

Some games give it a specific name.

It's popular enough in most games that I can see it getting a niche tourney.

I also hope they do "Pauper" format, which is normally a no rare or limited rare format.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 05:51 PM
Its the same way the MtG spinoff Commander works. I for one will be encouraging a healthy amount of Commander style play in friendly matches! Maybe when the cardpool expands a little though :-/

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:51 PM
Highlander. THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!

YES! Thanks, can't believe I forgot.

Erebus
05-11-2013, 05:52 PM
I keep seeing commander and thinking it's Emperor.

I used to love Emperor format! :)

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:53 PM
What are the differences? I am sure theres plenty of formats I have missed (especially since I only played certian TCG's).

Erebus
05-11-2013, 05:57 PM
Commander was a Singleton/Highlander Format where you picked a legendary creature to be your "Commander" you could only play colors in your deck that matched your commander. And your commander was always considered to be in your hand (played from a remove from play zone).

Emperor was a variation of 3 v 3, where each side had 2 Knights and 1 Emperor. Creatures could only attack adjacent players, and optionally spell range was limited.

So basically one side had to get through the others sides Knight to attack the Emperor, if you killed the opposing sides Emperor you won.


Both formats had additional optional rules, but those are the main concepts.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 06:04 PM
OH I MISS EMPEROR TOO!

Thats it, organising a Emperor Commander format!

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 06:14 PM
Ah, right. The 3 v 3 thing was the missing link for me.

I think a version where all colours and no legends could be cool too, but I wouldn't know what to call it.

Erebus
05-11-2013, 06:17 PM
I think Magic called it Prismatic?

It was a version of Singleton/Highlander where you had to use all 5 colors... I think there was a minimum of each color.

S117
05-11-2013, 08:10 PM
Remember, too, that no matter what some of these we can run by ourselves. Like start up a game and advertise 'Highlander' and your opponent knows to bring that type of deck. Same for pauper, tribal etc...

Not like offical support wouldn't be awesome (Offical tourneys, PvE possibly? Etc etc.). Because of course unoffically...well that way you are trusting your opponent to be honest and bring a deck built that way...or even read the freakin' description before sitting down for a game (Had this happen on MTGO many, many times).

EDIT: Prismatic had no restricion on legends. But yeah. 250 cards at least. 20 at least from every color.

Shoubushi
05-11-2013, 08:18 PM
Remember, too, that no matter what some of these we can run by ourselves. Like start up a game and advertise 'Highlander' and your opponent knows to bring that type of deck. Same for pauper, tribal etc...

This is exactly right. They have said they want players to have the ability to create basically any game type that they want. Even if they don't create an easy way to play that format, us players will be able to create them ourselves to play with others.

MugenMusou
05-11-2013, 08:43 PM
Nice to have multiple format and with so many people potentially be playing this game, may be it make sense but also have to be a bit careful not to spread people to too many different places/format when there aren't enough player pool.

S117
05-11-2013, 08:47 PM
Well the majority of formats are simple deck building restrictions that shouldn't be too hard to code. And even one offical tournament per month or so for these specialized formats should be enough...

C-Drive
05-11-2013, 09:50 PM
Just noticed this while going through the official site: http://hextcg.com/game/tournaments/


Constructed Formats

As we release new sets and our card pool grows, our constructed formats will expand. Examples include all commons tournaments and highlander tournaments (maximum number of any card in a deck is one). And, for the PvE players: tournaments that allow all PvE content!

Blare731
05-11-2013, 09:51 PM
I knew I saw it somewhere!

mauvebutterfly
05-11-2013, 10:08 PM
Actually, it would be really cool if some of the PvE stuff was pauper/highlander restricted. Or, if that's too frustrating a restriction for everyone, make it an optional bonus achievement, possibly with either PvE cards or alternate artwork of some staple common cards.

Blare731
05-11-2013, 10:20 PM
Actually, it would be really cool if some of the PvE stuff was pauper/highlander restricted. Or, if that's too frustrating a restriction for everyone, make it an optional bonus achievement, possibly with either PvE cards or alternate artwork of some staple common cards.

They said as well that they will definitely have tournaments where you can unleash your PvE decks full wrath. (Equipment and Cards)

JMFD
05-11-2013, 11:51 PM
The idea of having different deck rules for PvE dungeons would be an excellent way to add achievements and titles.

Example:

Beat X dungeon with regular deck win prize.

Beat X dungeon with all commons win prize (Possible larger prize or access to a different prize pool.) + "Pauper" Title.