Maybe I'm alone in this but I feel like a lot of decks on here aren't really qualified for any kind of tournament play, and we have the casual section for things like that. I feel the mods here all have a pretty good idea of what a casual deck versus a competitive deck looks like.
Just want to clarify: I'm not against casual decks being posted on here, just against them being in competitive forums.
So we should up any format specfic but not teir one competative decks in the casual deck forum? How do we determine competitiveness? Decks that fit the current meta in each format? Decks that are competitive at local meta but maybe not pro tour level?
I am not right to shoot this down but you need better guidelines then "must be competative".
Imo i like that when i visit the standard subform i can find stuff like "zada combo" sure it might not be competative at pro level but how many decks really are? If you want a forum/list of competative list go find the pro tour top 8 listings. And what about commander? Thats a casual format imo, unless playing french. So commander subform can only be competative french banlist decks?
The only time you should force a deck into casual is if it's truly a kitchen table only deck and that's really hard to do. For instance there's a deck that was moved from here not to long ago that was mono red {Scapeshift}. Now that's a casual deck but you can't say the guy who has an {Emrakul, the Aeons Torn} Manifest combo deck in modern is strictly a casual deck when he may actually play it at his shop and do very well with it
I agree with this. On top of that, it should happen without argument if the deck builder refuses help. Decks can be tweaked from the casual section to be competitive for instance they can post their lists like this
Deck Name
Deck List
Notes: Looking to get into standard and want to make this deck more competitive any help appreciated
Or
Notes: want to build modern what is your opinions on this list? What needs to be dropped or added?
Instead we have people who get upset when you say "hey man that 4 drop goblin is kinda slow In the format" and their response is usually something like "if I wanted your opinion I would have asked for it."
Quote from: Taysby on November 06, 2015, 04:42:17 PM
The people who won't buy tangos because they're expensive aren't making competitive lists. That's a budget list that should be in casual.
And if I'm not playing battles because I'm running G/B and there isn't one?
And who says budget lists should be in casual? Should anyone opting not to buy Goyfs in modern be relegated to Casual?
The forums are formats. Casual is a format.
Quote from: GlowackAttack on November 06, 2015, 04:55:12 PM
Maybe it's possible that we reorganize it?
Currently it is
- DECKS (magic the gathering) -
Commander
Standard
Modern
Legacy
Casual
It could be grouped
-COMPETITIVE-
Commander
Standard
Modern...
-CASUAL-
Competitive
Standard
Modern
Know what I mean?
I like this idea. Problem for the app users where would it be posted to one of them?
Quote from: griffin131 on November 06, 2015, 05:11:31 PM
Quote from: Taysby on November 06, 2015, 04:42:17 PM
The people who won't buy tangos because they're expensive aren't making competitive lists. That's a budget list that should be in casual.
And if I'm not playing battles because I'm running G/B and there isn't one?
And who says budget lists should be in casual? Should anyone opting not to buy Goyfs in modern be relegated to Casual?
The forums are formats. Casual is a format.
Exactly.
I don't mind. You can tell if a list is competitive or not.
Ive said it before and i will say it again. Nowhere in the rules for posting does it say a deck list must be of a certain level of competitiveness to be allowed to be posted in a given section. Either have the rules for posting changed and clearly stated, or stop being an elitist and get on with life.
If you want t1 deck list then Goto mtgtop8 and then get a bunch of results for decks at mtgo that win small insignificant tournament s
Note: speaking for myself here.
Sometimes you just have an idea that you'd like to try in a format. Like my Zada combo thing in standard. I got a little carried away with it: so I posted a modern list as well and I asked: would this work in modern? I got constructive feedback, people liked it. I am open to criticism, however I don't have tons of cash to shell at a deck. The standard deck ended up costing about €30,- and I had fun one FNM. Yeah, I won only 1 or 2 games standard, and I realized there are way more competitive builds, so dropped it. Should I have asked for casual help, I'd never gotten those 2 games in I think. In the subforums dwell people that know the format, it's the place where you get the info.
I'd rather see people discuss decks intended for a specific format on that particular subforum. When you spot a "weak" deck, be constructive. Say why you think it folds to like 95% of the meta, suggest things that make it competitive if possible.
If all you have to say is: "take this back to your kitchen table where it belongs", skip the thread.
That's my $0,02...
Quote from: Kaylesh on November 07, 2015, 07:37:48 AM
Note: speaking for myself here.
Sometimes you just have an idea that you'd like to try in a format. Like my Zada combo thing in standard. I got a little carried away with it: so I posted a modern list as well and I asked: would this work in modern? I got constructive feedback, people liked it. I am open to criticism, however I don't have tons of cash to shell at a deck. The standard deck ended up costing about €30,- and I had fun one FNM. Yeah, I won only 1 or 2 games standard, and I realized there are way more competitive builds, so dropped it. Should I have asked for casual help, I'd never gotten those 2 games in I think. In the subforums dwell people that know the format, it's the place where you get the info.
I'd rather see people discuss decks intended for a specific format on that particular subforum. When you spot a "weak" deck, be constructive. Say why you think it folds to like 95% of the meta, suggest things that make it competitive if possible.
If all you have to say is: "take this back to your kitchen table where it belongs", skip the thread.
That's my $0,02...
Finally this was a rant I can fully support!
Jesus this is splitting hairs, just scroll a little bit
Quote from: Taysby on November 07, 2015, 12:05:36 PM
Quote from: griffin131 on November 06, 2015, 05:11:31 PM
Quote from: Taysby on November 06, 2015, 04:42:17 PM
The people who won't buy tangos because they're expensive aren't making competitive lists. That's a budget list that should be in casual.
And if I'm not playing battles because I'm running G/B and there isn't one?
And who says budget lists should be in casual? Should anyone opting not to buy Goyfs in modern be relegated to Casual?
The forums are formats. Casual is a format.
You completely missed my point. If your deck needs a card to improve, but you're too cheap to spend $4 on it, then it's a casual deck.
If you want to build twin, but don't want to buy serum visions because of the price, it's a casual deck.
If you don't put key cards in a list, it will affect it, no doubt. However, cheaper decks are not necessarily bad/casual. Think Soul Sisters in modern, or some cheaper legacy list. (Lands vs fish for example).
so the proposition is that budget builds and homebrews should be casual?
Quote from: mickeven on November 07, 2015, 12:34:34 PM
so the proposition is that budget builds and homebrews should be casual?
If you put it like that I feel even more strongly against it. The thing about magic is that everyone can build. Not everyone is as good, but you don't have to be employed by a major team to be able to build a deck. Let alone ask advice on it.
Kay im with you 100%. im against that propostion.
I guess i better build my UW jace, gideon, hangerback standard deck with a dozen fetch lands and tango lands so i can post my deck. It will be over 600-700 bucks, will that be competative enough i can post in standard again? Gonna fill the rest of the deck with lifelink creatures and ojutai's.
Quote from: Taysby on November 07, 2015, 12:05:36 PM
Quote from: griffin131 on November 06, 2015, 05:11:31 PM
Quote from: Taysby on November 06, 2015, 04:42:17 PM
The people who won't buy tangos because they're expensive aren't making competitive lists. That's a budget list that should be in casual.
And if I'm not playing battles because I'm running G/B and there isn't one?
And who says budget lists should be in casual? Should anyone opting not to buy Goyfs in modern be relegated to Casual?
The forums are formats. Casual is a format.
You completely missed my point. If your deck needs a card to improve, but you're too cheap to spend $4 on it, then it's a casual deck.
If you want to build twin, but don't want to buy serum visions because of the price, it's a casual deck.
I got your point. But you're using the name of a format (Casual) to describe budget decks.
If I want to play modern on a budget, referring me to the Casual format forum won't help - I'll get suggestions about non Modern cards.
Quote from: griffin131 on November 07, 2015, 02:08:48 PM
Quote from: Taysby on November 07, 2015, 12:05:36 PM
Quote from: griffin131 on November 06, 2015, 05:11:31 PM
Quote from: Taysby on November 06, 2015, 04:42:17 PM
The people who won't buy tangos because they're expensive aren't making competitive lists. That's a budget list that should be in casual.
And if I'm not playing battles because I'm running G/B and there isn't one?
And who says budget lists should be in casual? Should anyone opting not to buy Goyfs in modern be relegated to Casual?
The forums are formats. Casual is a format.
You completely missed my point. If your deck needs a card to improve, but you're too cheap to spend $4 on it, then it's a casual deck.
If you want to build twin, but don't want to buy serum visions because of the price, it's a casual deck.
I got your point. But you're using the name of a format (Casual) to describe budget decks.
If I want to play modern on a budget, referring me to the Casual format forum won't help - I'll get suggestions about non Modern cards.
And there's our problem. The casual page can't give the advice you're looking for as let's say the modern page.
I posted my new deck, in standard guys. I hope it's competitive enough even though its only 800 bucks but uses some cards less then a dollar. I hope thats ok, and it won't be considered casual.
Lol are you guys kidding? Or just being immature asses for no reason?
Burn is a comp cheap deck. Soul sisters is a semi comp cheap deck. There's tons of cheap semi comp decks out there. What Taysby is saying is that if you chose to play {Lightning Strike} instead of {Lightning Bolt} it is no longer competitive as it's strictly worse.
Llama the Treasure Hunt list was fake the guy entering it on mtgtop8 said he did it as a joke while he waited for the real results. Yes Gerry T wrote an article on it but it was false
Comp decks don't need to be $$$$$ they just need to be literally competitive. That means no {Flesh to Dust} in a std deck or any bad draft commons that have legit strictly better cards in them.
Lastly we all here can judge the competitiveness of a deck basically on first reaction. If a list has 68 cards in it and are mostly singletons and the odd 3 of draft jank 4 mana 3/5 vanilla creature we can tell that that deck is not worthy of a noncasual thread.
Post decks that you want to play, post brews, have fun but if your deck is mono 8 drop hydras with no ramp or is just a bunch of bad draft commons expect it to be moved.
Quote from: Mattao19 on November 07, 2015, 07:06:53 PM
Lol are you guys kidding? Or just being immature asses for no reason?
Burn is a comp cheap deck. Soul sisters is a semi comp cheap deck. There's tons of cheap semi comp decks out there. What Taysby is saying is that if you chose to play {Lightning Strike} instead of {Lightning Bolt} it is no longer competitive as it's strictly worse.
Llama the Treasure Hunt list was fake the guy entering it on mtgtop8 said he did it as a joke while he waited for the real results. Yes Gerry T wrote an article on it but it was false
Comp decks don't need to be $$$$$ they just need to be literally competitive. That means no {Flesh to Dust} in a std deck or any bad draft commons that have legit strictly better cards in them.
Lastly we all here can judge the competitiveness of a deck basically on first reaction. If a list has 68 cards in it and are mostly singletons and the odd 3 of draft jank 4 mana 3/5 vanilla creature we can tell that that deck is not worthy of a noncasual thread.
Post decks that you want to play, post brews, have fun but if your deck is mono 8 drop hydras with no ramp or is just a bunch of bad draft commons expect it to be moved.
I am joking, playing devil's advocate really. If you look at the deck it is totally not competitive. I was planning to make the same mono-red argument, just cause a deck is cheap doesn't mean it can't be good. And my 800 buck deck would be total trash, it's just a bunch of expensive cards. Competitive=\= cost.
*why can't we be friends plays in the background*
This whole thread is a giant waste of time
Motion to have it deleted
Because this forum needs more segregation and animosity
If someone's new and brewing, and they want help, and they go to competitive events and they come here for help.
Where does anyone come off judging whether their deck deserves help or not. Why is it necessary to move it, so we have to chase more things down in the already clunky forums.
I'm sorry, but I figure we could all just help each other out a little bit more than that.
Posting 'this belongs in casual' takes more of your precious time than simply scrolling on past, and is probably less useful. If Piotr wanted those things in casual there would be a rule stating thats where it must go. If the mods wanted them there they would be moved there. Simply saying 'how dare you post a deck I dont think is super competitive in a section that doesnt actually have rules against doing so' is just wasting everyones time, and makes yourself look like a dick in the mean time. The forum is for everyone and you get out of it what you put in. It isnt fair, however, to make everyone else use it in the way that you would prefer.
Simply put, I believe the easiest solution is if you dont like something but it doesnt break any rules, just ignore it
I just decided to peruse some of the quality comments on some of the standard decks
Dude muggy this is hilarious
Yeah, if the decks are standard they are standard. It doesn't matter how bad or slow they are.
Someone made them, generally with the intention of playing them.
As far as I can tell no one plays to lose, they may play for fun. But standard or modern decks are decks built with the intent of being played in those formats.
Unless your literally spamming the thread with vanilla decks or 60 lands. Nothing needs be done
Many repost from their deck builder, if it's standard legal and intended to play standard - it's standard.
Instead of discriminating, make suggestions of how to help a brew work, then leave it up to the deck creator to determine if they want to make those changes
Sometimes you may see a shell in std that you enjoy but want to tweak it yourself for playing, repost your version, but don't say to someone you can't have it here because I won't win a tournament with it.
I usually test like crazy on untapped before I build it on paper. I'm MAYBE considering hangar back for my landfall deck, but also am trying to not force myself into the land of Jace and other expensive staples.
May my deck run better with Jace? Probably, but I also have concerns around cost, and maybe the deck does fine without 4x Jace and hangarbacks, I know through a ton of testing that unfortunately omnath is too slow and is usually a dead card or a win more card for the deck.
Tldr; does it really bother you that much?
is my legacy deck casual, because i don't want to shell out 300$ for 3 {Tundra} or because i can't afford 3 more {Force of Will} right now? No my deck is a legacy deck, made to be played in legacy tournaments. I might not win, but that does not change the fact that it is a legacy deck. What your saying is that unless you can afford a play-set of Tarmagoyfs or Force of wills for their respective colors they are not competitive, and therefor should be put into casual. I disagree if a deck is made to be played in standard, it is standard ect.
Quote from: Taysby on November 08, 2015, 12:09:04 AM
If you know what you need and are working towards it, that's different. Choosing to not just because you don't want to spend money on cardboardboard is different.
My point Taysby is who are you (or anyone, not just you) to tell me i cant post my modern legal deck in the modern section, for example, because you and whoever else dont believe that it is competitive enough? If anyone has a problem with it, well thats just it, its their problem, not mine, and it is not their place to tell me how I should or shouldnt use the forum, so long as I am not breaking the rules. Whether or not I want to shell out money or not is irrelevant.
I agree, wanting to or not wanting to shelling out money is irrelevant. The decks that aren't competive are the decks that look more like draft decks or kitchen table decks. 'Modern' decks playing 4 copies of Darien king of kjeldor and your curve STARTING at 4 aren't modern decks. Standard Decks playing 4 copies of omnath and hoping to god they draw it otherwise they can't reasonably win aren't standard decks. These are casual decks. The point here isn't to be discriminatory it's to get people to use the right section of the forum.
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on November 08, 2015, 12:30:36 AM
Quote from: Taysby on November 08, 2015, 12:09:04 AM
If you know what you need and are working towards it, that's different. Choosing to not just because you don't want to spend money on cardboardboard is different.
My point Taysby is who are you (or anyone, not just you) to tell me i cant post my modern legal deck in the modern section, for example, because you and whoever else dont believe that it is competitive enough? If anyone has a problem with it, well thats just it, its their problem, not mine, and it is not their place to tell me how I should or shouldnt use the forum, so long as I am not breaking the rules. Whether or not I want to shell out money or not is irrelevant.
Clap clap clap clap
Quote from: Kaalia with haste on November 08, 2015, 12:39:50 AM
I agree, wanting to or not wanting to shelling out money is irrelevant. The decks that aren't competive are the decks that look more like draft decks or kitchen table decks. 'Modern' decks playing 4 copies of Darien king of kjeldor and your curve STARTING at 4 aren't modern decks. Standard Decks playing 4 copies of omnath and hoping to god they draw it otherwise they can't reasonably win aren't standard decks. These are casual decks. The point here isn't to be discriminatory it's to get people to use the right section of the forum.
Your dead wrong.
If they believe that can win, or even accomplish what they want in a modern tournament there isn't thing wrong with posting it, getting suggestions and moving forward with it.
This is a brand of elitism and I don't like It.
Quote from: Kaalia with haste on November 08, 2015, 12:39:50 AM
I agree, wanting to or not wanting to shelling out money is irrelevant. The decks that aren't competive are the decks that look more like draft decks or kitchen table decks. 'Modern' decks playing 4 copies of Darien king of kjeldor and your curve STARTING at 4 aren't modern decks. Standard Decks playing 4 copies of omnath and hoping to god they draw it otherwise they can't reasonably win aren't standard decks. These are casual decks. The point here isn't to be discriminatory it's to get people to use the right section of the forum.
Well, as you rightly point out, those decks likely don't have a shot at winning. By the time you start playing, you've already lost.
However: wouldn't it be great explaining to the guy who took his time to try and build around his favorite card?
I agree Commander and casual are better suited for "homage" decks, but let's say some guy REALLY loves a certain card that he wants to run competitively, could we improve on the deck so that it becomes fringe instead of jank?
I happened to do just the same with Zada. Started out jank, moved to somewhat fringe, and I know now you build lacks speed. I did see a R(W)DW employ Zada and Arcbond as I did, in a faster shell. I actually learned a lot that moment. My shell was too slow, too much focus on the combo.
That sort of feedback up front could have changed my deck a bit, made it more competitive, without having to change around a lot after already spending my budget for the deck.
Quote from: Kaalia with haste on November 08, 2015, 12:39:50 AM
I agree, wanting to or not wanting to shelling out money is irrelevant. The decks that aren't competive are the decks that look more like draft decks or kitchen table decks. 'Modern' decks playing 4 copies of Darien king of kjeldor and your curve STARTING at 4 aren't modern decks. Standard Decks playing 4 copies of omnath and hoping to god they draw it otherwise they can't reasonably win aren't standard decks. These are casual decks. The point here isn't to be discriminatory it's to get people to use the right section of the forum.
The Casual section isn't for Standard decks. It's for decks that are looking to play in the Casual format.
The Standard section is for Standard decks, regardless of their power level.
Casual section uses banned cards
Quote from: Taysby on November 08, 2015, 02:21:37 PM
You're still missing my point. If you know your deck needs a card to improve, but you refuse to buy it, then by definition, it is not competitive. If you have a janky home brew idea, that's fine, but build it with Aether vials if that would improve it.
Competitive means making it as good as possible.
I'm staying out of the discussion if it shouldn't be allowed in the modern section, just that it isn't a competitive deck if you refuse to improve it.
No one disagrees with that.
The disagreement is where you've decided that only your definition of competitive decks are allowed in the Modern section. Anyone else has to go to the Casual format section where they can get non Modern cards recommended.
You've decided that only competitive decks should be allowed in the Modern/Standard/whatever sections. Why? Where did you get that idea?
Do you understand that Casual and Modern are both formats?
Quote from: Taysby on November 08, 2015, 02:21:37 PM
You're still missing my point. If you know your deck needs a card to improve, but you refuse to buy it, then by definition, it is not competitive. If you have a janky home brew idea, that's fine, but build it with Aether vials if that would improve it.
Competitive means making it as good as possible.
I'm staying out of the discussion if it shouldn't be allowed in the modern section, just that it isn't a competitive deck if you refuse to improve it.
Who authorizes your definition as competitive.
I can refuse to use any card on any principle or for any reason including price, and still take it and make it competitive.
Just because the format dictates something, that doesn't account for the changes that constantly take place in any format.
Fetches for example do not force the win over people making the choice to not use them, generally it just makes it more consistent.
Is that a way of saying more competitive sure.
Does it make the other deck casual
NO IT DOESNT
If I want to take a competitive landfall trash deck to a tournament and I want help making it the best landfall pos ever then I have the RIGHT to post the deck in the section that is made available to ALL standard decks MODERN decks or LEGACY decks
Some people simply can't afford cards.
Some times cards are placeholders for ones they plan to get.
And some people want to make new Decks that change the format
Keep on with that linear thinking and assume all things stay the same.
It's not a refusal to improve it, it's a persons ingenuity to make a deck that may or not work for them
I do and if someone refuses to buy a card no matter how much better a choice may be on any principle
It's choice and has nothing to do with competitiveness
Do they have bad judgement sometimes sure
But does not make what the purpose of the deck is for any less potent
I'm saying you aren't in a position t make the call your making
Quote from: Taysby on November 08, 2015, 03:58:53 PM
So a legacy deck that runs {cancel} over force of will is still competitive?
Powerful no, competitive is left to the aggressiveness and attitude of the player.
The competitiveness is a level of the event and players that play at a different level of thinking.
Cards are cards, some are better some are worse.
Give the same deck to a pro and to a noob and see what happens. Even if the deck sucks the competition is in the plays the player makes.
Are there better choices, but people have the will to decide what choices they want to pool from but it's not your right to decide at what level they want to enter in at
I think you are missing the point Taysby. People (usually new members) post decks asking for improvements in modern and legacy sections and for numerous reasons they dont look great. 9 times out of 10 the first response they get goes something like 'this shouldnt be here it should be in casual' or 'this deck is bad, card x is bad and card y is bad'
All this does is either confuse the person, because they think 'what did i do wrong? It said i can post modern legal decks here' or it pisses them off and they start to push back and it inevitably leads to people thinking they dont wanna accept help, when they are just defending themselves from a bully (from their perspective). Either way they are less likely to return.
My first tournament in competitive play was during
Cold snap, ravnica, and time spiral
Back then there was no Mtg top 8
There was barely any Internet forums
And if there was an advanced search for gatherer I wasn't aware of it.
If you wanted to know cards you bought inquest or you had your fat pack inserts
That being said not many did either of those.
It was a state regionals, not even sure they do those anymore.
There was no real way telling for me that there was a dragon storm combo, tarmogofy beatdown etc...
You know what I took?
A mono black zombies
I mean why not?
I had {four damnation}
Four {slaughter pact}
Four {korlash, heir to the blackblade}
Now did I know that my deck wouldn't be as powerful??
No, but did I have every intent of being competitive?
Was I? I can tell you this I sure didn't roll over and play dead even coming in dead last.
My play ability back then was probably at my lowest.
I didn't but what's to be said I didn't come back from that and continue to play the same deck but just want to make it better?
Was it a fun deck? Yes. Was it powerful in its own right? Sure. Maybe it would have never ever ever beat a dragon storm deck.
Maybe
But they sure couldn't just sit around and twiddle there thumbs.
I think it stands to reason that ANY deck can be made more competitive, and that the player decides how that is done, not mass approval
Quote from: Taysby on November 08, 2015, 06:37:25 PM
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on November 08, 2015, 05:51:12 PM
I think you are missing the point Taysby. People (usually new members) post decks asking for improvements in modern and legacy sections and for numerous reasons they dont look great. 9 times out of 10 the first response they get goes something like 'this shouldnt be here it should be in casual' or 'this deck is bad, card x is bad and card y is bad'
All this does is either confuse the person, because they think 'what did i do wrong? It said i can post modern legal decks here' or it pisses them off and they start to push back and it inevitably leads to people thinking they dont wanna accept help, when they are just defending themselves from a bully (from their perspective). Either way they are less likely to return.
I'm ok with that. As long as they are trying to improve is all I care about
I'm not trying to say they have to play checks over painlands or similar discussions that have no correct answer. But not playing hallowed fountain over azorious guildgate crosses the line to casual.
I'm not trying to say those decks should be moved to a different section. I'm just saying it's not a competitive deck.
Im not arguing with your point, it is a valid one. Im just saying it is irrelevant to this discussion.
I do believe that's still the same as splitting hairs over
Less competitive or more competitive
Guildgates are less competitive than shocks
But the deck is still for competition
Quote from: Taysby on November 08, 2015, 06:37:25 PM
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on November 08, 2015, 05:51:12 PM
I think you are missing the point Taysby. People (usually new members) post decks asking for improvements in modern and legacy sections and for numerous reasons they dont look great. 9 times out of 10 the first response they get goes something like 'this shouldnt be here it should be in casual' or 'this deck is bad, card x is bad and card y is bad'
All this does is either confuse the person, because they think 'what did i do wrong? It said i can post modern legal decks here' or it pisses them off and they start to push back and it inevitably leads to people thinking they dont wanna accept help, when they are just defending themselves from a bully (from their perspective). Either way they are less likely to return.
I'm ok with that. As long as they are trying to improve is all I care about
I'm not trying to say they have to play checks over painlands or similar discussions that have no correct answer. But not playing hallowed fountain over azorious guildgate crosses the line to casual.
I'm not trying to say those decks should be moved to a different section. I'm just saying it's not a competitive deck.
But who cares? That's not what the thread is about. The thread is about moving those decks.
But noncompetitive decks hurt people's eyes.
You only need to define it if you think they should be moved.
There's literally no argument for moving decks from one format forum to another unless the deck was posted under the wrong format.
A deck designed for Modern doesn't want recommendations based on the Casual ban list, regardless of how competitive you deem it to be.
I think we all know what is and isn't competitive in a format, or have a good idea. If it doesn't seem to be competitive at all, then give the person some information on why it isn't. If they decline your helpful advice, have it get moved to casual. Obviously people on budgets should be able to post budget decks in the format, and if they say it's budget, it may not be competitive for top lists, but it may be with their play group. So having their list in the format it is in is helpful for them. Just remember, this is a community and there are a lot of new people joining in, they may not know what they are doing.
Ultimately, some list do deserve to be moved, but only if there is a good reason for it to be moved, not just because it isn't competitive you your eyes.
Quick question. Where does it say in any of the sections (modern standard legacy ) only post competitive decks?
Quote from: Rass on November 09, 2015, 04:01:26 PM
Quick question. Where does it say in any of the sections (modern standard legacy ) only post competitive decks?
It doesn't.
I think some people are confused by the Casual format and see that forum and assume that anything outside of Casual is competitive.
Guys we need a tiny leaders forum also
A cube was asked for first.
Is this competitive or casual cube?
Yes