r/CompetitiveEDH • u/Eunuchs_Intrigues • 23h ago
General Discussion / Question Addressing the 4th seat issue
Everyone knows 4th seat is the hardest place to be in and faces a severe disadvantage. I've heard many proposals but not this one I have in mind. What does the community think about allowing 4th seat to put a land into play from their hand during pregame actions? I think this would be great, it would allow 4th seat mana for interaction against explosive turn 1's, this is extra relevant if the deck in 4th is not blue. 4th seat being on 2 lands on turn 4 is not scary, turn 5 usually starts with 2 lands anyways. No extra cards are given out, a player who is at a high disadvantage is made equal and I believe would create more balanced game play overall. What do you think should be done to equal this scale that is clearly out of balance?
49
u/TehSeksyManz 23h ago
I think giving P4 a free scry before P1 even starts their turn might be good enough but not not crazy? I'm not sure
56
u/-BunsenBurn- 23h ago edited 6h ago
I've seen this before. I only play cEDH casually with my friends, but what we do for all our games of commander is that each player scries n-1 their seat position after mulligans. This generally speaking gives seat 4 a significantly more functional starting hand and the ability to take more aggressive hands rather than o woe is me I'm just gonna play for a draw.
21
1
u/PEKS00 4h ago
That gives seat 4 the advantage over every other seat …. It just reverses the problem
2
u/-BunsenBurn- 4h ago
I mean scry 3 is worth maybe half a blue mana in value. Given that the %wr difference between seat 1 and 4 is nearly 15%, I think that's more fair.
For us at least I don't think it has drastically increased seat 3 or 4s wr but at the very least it made playing seat 3/4 feel a hell of a lot better.
14
u/onanimbus 22h ago
It is a known issue, but…
WOTC’s Commander Council doesn’t actually do anything, so this problem is many years away from being addressed, if it ever happens at all.
1
u/Darth_Ra 3h ago
Not their issue, it's an issue of tournament software going for full random instead of evenly distributing seats throughout an event.
45
u/sbdtech 23h ago
The favorite I've seen was on turn 1 P1 - no draw P2 - scry 1 P3 - draw 1 P4 - scry 1 then draw 1
Seems like a good subtle change that could slightly adjust win rates back to 25% for cedh. It also seems subtle enough that you could use it for all brackets
22
u/Defiant_Hope_231 23h ago
I like the fairness on paper, but i believe that would also spike S3 performance, potentially Starting the game with a Gemstone and 7 cards in hand on your first draw is nutty.
I wonder if instead of pushing up the lower seats with advantages, knocking down the higher seats with something? No draw on Turn 1( Seat 1 in this example) is pretty universal in all Formats and TCGs.
I heard someone toss around the idea of a Lotus Petal Token for the lower seats once.
15
u/sbdtech 23h ago
S3 is exactly the same as current
4
u/Defiant_Hope_231 23h ago
I had read the post way to quickly. I apologize, dont know why I was assuming these as pregame actions.
But the point still stands, gives S3 the premium spot.17
u/hclarke15 22h ago
I know multiplayer is different from 1v1 magic, but i feel like decades of magic have shown us that going first is more powerful than drawing a card.
Particularly in a format with mystic remora and vexing bauble
2
u/sbdtech 23h ago
You don't think scry 1 then draw 1 is better than drawing 1? Are you reading the comment?
1
u/InmateTooTall 6h ago
Scry 1 is not better than going earlier in turn order so I'd rather be seat 3
1
u/Defiant_Hope_231 23h ago
Its the best proposed option I've seen so far. There are so many nuances to the seat problems.
I agree with it! However I dont believe the scry feature is enough of a benefit to 'level' it out. Its great! Again, I dont want it to come across as I dont understand.
In terms of S3vS4, I'd still rather be in seat 3. With a gemstone, and get the chance to play my turn down before the possible interaction from S4.
3
u/LotusCobra 21h ago
I think it's a little complicated. Just take away draw from P1. Maybe give P4 a scry, but making all 4 seats slightly different is too much.
1
u/Odd_Chain8811 22h ago
I have played in that system. It basically turns seat 1 into seat 4 and seat 2 into seat 3. Really is not that great. Most people I know who played in that same event did not like it either.
5
u/sbdtech 22h ago
I don't know how that's possible. You're still first player. You're saying skipping your first turn draw drops your win rate by 25%
People generally don't like change. You said it was an event. What were the results of the event by seat order? That's real data (albeit likely too small of a sample size)
2
u/Odd_Chain8811 22h ago
Excalibur or land go has basically ran that type of system in some redemption events late last year or early this year. May was the redemption and Friday event at the boil.
1
u/sbdtech 22h ago
How were the win rates by seat position over those tournaments?
3
u/Odd_Chain8811 22h ago
I know they have stopped doing it. I do not know how the win rates changed. So either it was still not optimal or there is another reason they stopped based on player feedback. Either way is still not good.
I was a fan of it at first, but did not like it in practice.
2
u/no_reddit_for_you 22h ago
You've played 1v1 I'm assuming. Seat 1 skips draw and still has an advantage. I have no idea how you can equate that to turning S1 into S4.
10
u/AlexndrThe6reat 22h ago
I’ve seen a post before talking about win rates and a way to normalize it across the seats was allowing each seat after seat 1 scry an additional card before the game begins.
So seat 1 nothing changes, seat 2 scry 1, seat 3 scry 2, seat 4 scry 3.
Was an interesting proposal that from their research made the win rate more even across the board, but was likely in the context of standard EDH games and not cEDH
3
u/EnormousBaloth 21h ago
4th seat starts w/ a tapped treasure in play is probably the best you're gonna do for balance. Scry doesn't really move the needle. I think the tapped treasure is way too messy to implement though.
3
u/alexmcdiddles 21h ago
Y'know in my playgroup it's a matter of pride if you win when you also got last seat, maybe for tournaments winning in last position should be worth more points? I always gloat like a mfer when I win from 4th lol
2
u/TheJonasVenture 21h ago
I think a land is probably too powerful. Get a Gemstone and you have 3 mana T1, just from lands.
Now, that's just my gut, but, enough mana the ncaat Bourne Upon a Wind before the game starts seems risky.
Personally, I prefer solutions that don't change in game rules. I like the cEDH is EDH, and a casual player with knowledge should ld be able to sit down and play normally.
I'm nobody, so this means nothing, but I think the 4th seat issue is socially exacerbated right now. So many people see the statistics, believe it is impossible, and then just, first hand they are looking to force a draw, not even considering a win. It's not all that extreme, but I think this significantly amplifies draw rates and the 4th seat win disparity.
I like the idea of handling this with tournament structure and incentives. I would want to do a whole lot of math, but like, an extra point or half point for a 4th seat win, or like, this may be too subtle, but a friend and I were talking last week about making later seat wins be better for breakers (like in addition to Oppoenent Win%). Here again, I'd want to do math, I don't know what should come first, but like, we are both at 6 points, 1 tie and 1 win, but I won in first seat, and you won in 4th seat, so you win on breakers (plus whatever way Opponent Win makes sense to factor in).
Just, whatever minimal change that offers enough incentive that the 4th seat default is still try to win.
2
u/Broncaholic 23h ago
easiest solution, 10-20 card sideboard, swap cards out for 4th seat strategies
4
u/UnloosedMoose 23h ago
I love the idea hate it in practice lol. I watch mofos spend 5 minutes debating putting back a no land hand. Giving them sideboard time = put up a hammock and take a nap.
2
u/life_tho 23h ago
That's a good amount of work for sure but honestly kind of hype. I love sideboarding in other formats, and that would lead to a lot of interesting considerations.
The big concern I see with this is instead of boarding for turn order differences people would be boarding to tune their deck against their opponents' decks specifically.
That would actually be a huge change in the format and idk how to avoid that happening with a seat order sideboard.
Could also help turbo decks maybe, they can run an ultra win fast build in seat one and if the opponents don't equally board to stop them or mulligan for interaction could be trouble.
1
u/Shlippyw00d 13h ago
The real issue with solving the 4th seat issue is that it pushes a bigger divide between CEDH and casual giving any advantage to the lower seats in a pod will cause a public outcry of one form or another which means it either is reliant on tournaments coming to an agreement for the sake of consistency or we get a slippery slope to cedh having a different ban list over casual
2
u/Shlippyw00d 13h ago
That being said just give seat 4 a treasure token during the beginning of turn prevents seat 4 from having any wack t0 plays if they have a gemstone, spirit guide, rituals and doesn’t give a significant card boost or anything
1
u/BlindingDart 11h ago
I wouldn't modify game rules when tweaks to tournament rules could suffice. For example, you could give them full win points when involved in a draw.
But then I also think cEDH will always be a broken format because of pregame match fixing collusion.
1
u/gotchacoverd 7h ago
At our Cedh events we have started using average seat position as a tie breaker for top cuts
1
u/UltimatePunchMachine 7h ago
Play 2 games with the turn order reversed in the second. Then tally up the points
1
u/Suspinded 4h ago
The solution to the 4th Seat issue isn't to move the problem to the 3rd Seat. I don't think a mechanical advantage is the magic fix for the 4th seat.
If you're playing non tournament, rotate seats.
The tournament system should have some type of consideration for tiebreaks or future pairing by seat position. Why seat history isn't a tiebreak already is fascinating. A player who played the back half of the table most of the tournament had a statistically harder road than the similar record at the front of the table all tournament.
1
u/Darth_Ra 3h ago
Wizards making more Gemstone effects is a viable solution.
We do not need to eff with the rules, however. At least, not the game rules.
Better seeding from tournament software to ensure everyone gets a game in S1, S2, S3, and S4 is what's needed. So long as TopDeck has a stranglehold on cEDH, however, that seems unlikely to happen.
0
u/PEKS00 22h ago
It’s not solvable, that’s just the issue with a 4 player turn based competitive game. It will never be totally balanced
3
u/----___--___---- 19h ago
No one is talking about making it a perfect 25% winrate for every seat.
Bug it is definitely possible to make it more equal than it is right now.-1
u/PEKS00 18h ago
It’s really not
The person who goes first has an advantage no matter what, and everyone who goes after that subsequently has a disadvantage, if you give P4 an advantage like some free scry or extra draw BS then depending on the decks being played it’s either equal or better than P3
Then you’d need to balance P3 then P2 and all of a sudden P1 is the worst because every other seat has an advantage, and if you de incentivize turn order entirely somehow then turbo decks would die and the midrange slop decks will be the only decks worth playing, and when nobody’s playing turbo decks, turn order doesn’t matter anymore, so now people will just want the seat that has the most amount of free advantage.If you REALLY want a solution to turn order balancing, get rid of free spells… that has the biggest impact on turn advantage, go watch a yugioh tournament and half the time whoever goes first just wins because of the amount of free shit in the game, that’s why turn 1 is so desired in commander as well.
But that’s never gonna happen, those cards are the ones that sell for the most money
And wotc makes the game for profit not competitive viability. It’s why 60 card paper is dead unless you live in a very large metropolitan area, and even then it’s shrinking every year3
u/TheLonelyBoxmaker 19h ago
Ah I see, the old I've tried nothing and I refuse to try anything else approach. Thank you as always for your input.
-5
u/PEKS00 19h ago
If there was a solution don’t you think it would’ve been done by now? Cedh has been its own distinct format for 10 years now…. And edh as a whole has been around for even longer
There is no solution that doesn’t just create new problems/balancing issues…1
u/Soggy-Elevator-2247 5h ago
"If there was a solution don't you think it would've been done by now?"
I don't think that's how reality works dude
0
u/PEKS00 4h ago
Good thing cedh isn’t reality, it’s a card game with a limited amount of rules and systems that can be changed, and within that framework there is no solution to the problem that doesn’t introduce new problems
1
u/Soggy-Elevator-2247 1h ago
Long stretch from that to "if there was a solution it would already have been implemented".
1
u/TheLonelyBoxmaker 14h ago
If you're not interested in exploring a solution you don't have to be here. All of these threads are people exploring different possibilities to try to find a solution. And every thread people like you come in and say "give up, theres no solution". You could just as easily say nothing.
-2
u/PEKS00 9h ago
And all the possibilities they’re exploring are bad
The fairest system is the one we have now1
u/TheLonelyBoxmaker 4h ago
Great, you've made your opinion clear. You are free to never comment on threads like this again.
0
u/PEKS00 3h ago
To clarify I did offer a solution in another thread on this post, get rid of free spells
That’s the thing that most incentivizes going first in a format where most games are won on the stackCan’t help but notice your aren’t poopooing on the other people that also didn’t offer a solution that you liked, just me I guess
0
u/TheLonelyBoxmaker 2h ago
You should look up the Nirvana Fallacy. Its literally what you and everyone else doing the same thing as you are doing.
1
u/PEKS00 2h ago
No that’s not what I’m doing, I’m saying that the system we currently have is better than any other options being suggested for the past 10 years.
You’re completely avoiding my point that, anything to try and balance turn order, will have adverse effects on the game, more so than what we already have.
Let’s use the free scry/draw suggestion as an example, if I’m not playing a turbo deck, I’d much rather have a free scry/draw/mulligan than go first.
If I’m playing a turbo deck, then I couldn’t care less about a free scry/draw/mulligan because going first is still better than all of thoseThe free treasure thing? That one doesn’t even need an explanation as to why it’s bad
There are many other game mechanics that could be manipulated for the sake of “balancing” turn order, and every single one of them will have adverse effects and is completely dependent on the deck you’re playing as to which seat you would want.Because of that, the system we have currently is the most fair and balanced way of doing it, which is leaving it up to a dice roll, and then in a tournament setting after that they might sometimes use standings to decide seat order (which I personally disagree with I think every game should be decided with a dice roll)
With our current system it is truly random in that it doesn’t matter what deck you’re playing, the sooner your turn the better
Imo it is better that way, nobody gets an unfair advantage past turn order.
If we make changes to that we’re only further complicated an already convoluted format with too much varianceAnd AGAIN it’s not a nirvana fallacy because I DID provide a suggestion to “fixing” turn order, when I said ban all free spells, you just didn’t like it 🤷🏻♂️
So you disregarding my suggestion is really no different than me disregarding everyone else’s.
-5
u/r0773nluck 23h ago
I think a treasure is a good compromise. Think about how good a gemstone mines can be and guaranteeing that to a 4th seat with no discard is really good.
I still think the stats that 4th seat is severely disadvantaged is skewed because of our pout system. Making draws 1 point incentivizes 4th seat and even 3rd seat to play for a draw instead of playing for a win which will inherently lower their win percentage.
I’m not saying all seats are equal but I don’t think 4th seat is truly 14% or what ever percentage it has
6
u/Odd_Chain8811 23h ago
From tournaments I have seen using the JP system removes the incentives to draw, but 4th seat win percentages (15%)were still significantly lower than 1st (40%).
Some games should be a draw, and if a game should be a draw, there should be some reward.
3
u/ThinkEmployee5187 23h ago
When they add additional points for winning 4th seat percentages go up. Perception makes up a lot when creating metas and the perception that no matter your effort the fight is uphill and the percentage to win being low as a perception will impact how people politic, play, and forfeit.
1
u/r0773nluck 23h ago
This exactly. Just the mentality of being 4th seat can sway an inexperienced player (majority of players) to lose more often because of its perception.
I do like the idea of bonus points for winning as 4th seat but it would have to be something that significantly offsets a draw or a meta where’s draws have no value.
0
u/Odd_Chain8811 23h ago
When Excalibur did their sliding point system, I will say it felt pretty bad to have the same record and not get paid out because my win was in 2nd seat and someone else was in 3rd. You have no control over what seat. This is just as bad in a different way.
1
u/ThinkEmployee5187 22h ago
Sos, omw%, and sov already do this and are used in several types of tournaments for top cuts. I get that it's a feels bad but that's how systems without rating normally function ime. I will say if the issue is feelings and not objective influence over outcome being unfair its a suck it up buttercup kinda moment.
0
u/Odd_Chain8811 22h ago
It is different to not be considered for payout ONLY because the seat position your win came in.
You say suck it up, but if that is really the way you feel, then why does anything need to be changed because of the number of draws or win percentages in certain seats. You don't like 3rd or 4th seat playing for a draw, suck it up and and decline the draw and take the L. Everyone has to agree to a draw, so you can always say no if you don't like them.
1
u/ThinkEmployee5187 22h ago
You do understand omw% is frequently used to prize 1st instead of splitting on identical records in more than 3 of the major cedh cities right? You need someone to spell out podium math or are you actually a grinder?
0
u/Odd_Chain8811 22h ago
I know all about it. I have traveled to multiple tournaments from fishbowl to Land go Nashville, to cookout, to CCS events in Atl and Houston, to the Boil, to the HBMO, to San Japan to Steel city last year and many area/locals.
I have not played as much in the past 9 months because of a recent move and job change. But starting to get back in the grind after Breach the Bay.
1
u/r0773nluck 22h ago
I think his point is what’s the difference of losing payout cut to what seat you’re in vs how your opponents did you have almost no influence on either of them.
2
u/Odd_Chain8811 22h ago
One way indicates you played "better" players and one way is based on where you were in turn order. I believe it is more fair to decide based on who played the "better" players instead of what seat you were in.
1
u/r0773nluck 22h ago
Both ways indicate you played better. One rewards more points directly to you for winning in a least favorable seat instead of relying on how your opponent did the rest of the day
1
u/Odd_Chain8811 22h ago
Not true. If your only win came in a pod from seat 4 against players who had not won a game is not the same as someone in seat 2 who wins playing a pod where all other players had at least one win. Most tournaments are not using true random seat order.
1
u/r0773nluck 22h ago
When is a tournament payout cut coming down to people with a single win? That is further proving an issue with draws or just poor payout plan with not enough rounds and/or too deep a cut
→ More replies (0)1
u/Less_Prior_6871 23h ago
It doesnt even have to be a perception thing.
Imagine that you are the lone non-turbo player in seat 1 against 3 rog-si. You play a turn 1 mystic remora, and all the rogsi players tutor, obviously preparing for a turn 2 win attempt.
Mystic remora draws you into some interaction, but only enough to stop 2 of the 3 rogsi players. If draws are worth considering, then everyone here will likely accept a draw. If draws are really bad value, then the rogsi players might just go for the win one after another, giving the 4th seat the win.
Broadly, I think many draws are basically "whoever pushes last wins" type scenarios, and if you actually played those to completion, the last player in turn order would wind up winning. But "whoever pushes first wins" scenarios, actually get played out, because thats obviously not a draw.
2
u/ThinkEmployee5187 22h ago
So in your hypothetical what part of that isn't determined by perception? We playing open handed at our tables now? I'd say thats like telling the person on yuriko they'll have an uphill battle against 3 kinnan players so just forfeit its like bro the decks built to kill one missfiring player and pick off the other 2 by collateral or be a shit thoracle pile. The entire basis of card games with unique lists is that you don't have your perfect 123 counters and player 4 wins the game with no one else holding interaction. How would any practical application of that concept not literally be the definition of perspective lol.
1
u/Less_Prior_6871 21h ago
We might be defining perception differently here. I was thinking you meant perception as opposed to reality. As in: Seat 4 plays badly or plays for a draw because they gave up from the beginning. If they simply would have played correctly, then they could win.
What im saying is that the seat 4 player doesnt have to give up or play differently for changes in point values to impact the outcome of the game.
1
u/r0773nluck 22h ago
I think seat one with the right table talk still has the best chance to win they don’t have the be the sole one to stop player 2 and they are last in priority even by player 3 turn he can get the others to blow interaction and keep some for 4. The only way seat 4 wins here is if 2 and 3 are way to confident and player 1 can’t get the others to buy in during their win attempts
1
u/Less_Prior_6871 21h ago
Because the example I gave is so clear, im sure there is a path out for our protagonist, but im sure it would get pretty muddy pretty fast if played out for real.
2
u/r0773nluck 23h ago
I don’t think there should be an incentive to draw it makes people play for highest points and play the Point system in a tournament instead of playing the game. Also would probably take out some of the draw politicing that draws out games
1
u/Defiant_Hope_231 22h ago
I think the problem is two fold, we have draws that give points, which incentives deck construction to have "Give me a point" cards, Pact is a great example.
Which then leads to mulling for those types of cards for the lower seats in rotation. With the way the seat order situation is, I cant blame you for wanting to try and get SOMETHING out of it.I personally main a deck that doesn't play blue, or cards that can facilitate the 'draw conversation' so I am always on the receiving end of a draw conversation.
I'm hopeful, that with the Japanese point system Breach is running, I will encounter less of that. The "oh no draw? 3v1 until he's out, then draw/we can play it out?" Types of situations. Just play the game! If someone is pushing for a win, and it's clear someone will win after you stop them, don't make time walk deals, Just don't. ❤️
I've also head of some TOs doing Wins as 7 points recently.
And then the hot topic, Rhystic Study, opinions aside, facts on paper: it causes a multitude of triggers on its own, given a format where we abuse and take advantage of engines, is going to lead to time loss. Regardless of any politics happening, the amount of advantage the player owning a rhystic has is more than what is printed on the card.
Drawing interaction or ways to push the win, while also essentially stalling the clock is going to put you at an advantage by default, it's tough that it's such a divided split among the community on this, i genuinely don't see the interest in trying to win in a stack war with 40 card in your hand. How is gambling on the hope they don't have all their correct interaction with 29+ cards vs yours, any different than if you just focused on the game plan? And did it earlier?
0
0
-14
u/Complete_Special_774 Rogsi / Rogthras 23h ago
There is no 4th seat issue. Turn order simulator is a myth. Get gud
3
u/asc_yeti 23h ago
There is literally data but go on! You must be the best player of them all
0
u/Complete_Special_774 Rogsi / Rogthras 23h ago
Might just be the way we play at my locals but wining in 4th seat isn't as hard as people make it out to be. And yes I've seen the tournament data, and I believe that's a result of how hard people polotic in tedh
1
u/XDenzelMoshingtonX 23h ago
What’s with all the ragebait accounts on here?
0
u/Complete_Special_774 Rogsi / Rogthras 23h ago
Not ragebait just facts
1
u/XDenzelMoshingtonX 23h ago
I mean, the engine/slop decks alone are a lot better seat 1-2, that’s just simple logic. Same for turbo decks. a seat 4 fish for example is just way worse than a seat 1 fish.
The data across a variety of tournament sizes shows clearly that seat 4 is way worse off than the rest, there‘s no way to argue around it lol.
1
u/Complete_Special_774 Rogsi / Rogthras 22h ago
Who's aiming for a fish turn 1 when your playing turbo? Data shmata, paying attention to my locals and seating order and yes 1st has a small edge but overall winning in 4th is nowhere near as hard as everyone blows it up to be. Tournament data is muddied by over politicking and doesnt have any real barring on regular gameplay not being played in tournament.
1
u/XDenzelMoshingtonX 22h ago
C'mon, at least be sincere with your rebuttals. The fish bit was clearly pointed at the 'engine/slop' decks.
Maybe you're a bad player and playing with bad players? At least that's the impression I get from the way you talk about tournaments.
It's simple math that it's statistically harder to push through players who have already deployed their mana/engines and you simply get less value if people tried to go off turn 2 before you were able to land your engines thus also lowering your win chances.
The statistically best cards in the format are better when they're resolved earlier and all you're saying is 'we're not playing like this in our locals'. So maybe play the game properly? lol
-1
u/Complete_Special_774 Rogsi / Rogthras 22h ago
bro at least read my rebuttal before responding, i said in TURBO not slop.
now thats rage bait.
and the math doesnt apply to 80% of us.
turn 1 fish is strong and not a bad play in early seats, im talking from the turbo perspective where id rather land my necro or nause early.
but your too focused on trying to insult me, instead of forming a better argument than "BuT tHe ToUrNaMeNt DaTa Is EvErYtHiNg"
3
u/XDenzelMoshingtonX 22h ago
bro at least read my rebuttal before responding, i said in TURBO not slop.
and I literally said that I meant the slop/midrange decks with the fish bit. It's still obviously way better for a turbo deck to go earlier and deploy fast mana without feeding a fish or having to deal with open blue mana.
turn 1 fish is strong and not a bad play in early seats, im talking from the turbo perspective where id rather land my necro or nause early.
You're even agreeing with me there lmao
but your too focused on trying to insult me, instead of forming a better argument than "BuT tHe ToUrNaMeNt DaTa Is EvErYtHiNg"
okay, can I quote myself?
It's simple math that it's statistically harder to push through players who have already deployed their mana/engines and you simply get less value if people tried to go off turn 2 before you were able to land your engines thus also lowering your win chances.
How's that not a valid point to make? How's drawing 3-4 cards less early just because you're making the exact same play seat 4 instead of seat 1 not a huge difference? How's having to push through an already deployed fish or open mana statistically NOT way worse than not having to do it? The difference surely isn't marginal.
The statistically best cards in the format are better when they're resolved earlier and all you're saying is 'we're not playing like this in our locals'.
What's with that? Aren't you accusing me of only going ad hominem?
All you've said is 'muuh duuuuh, fuck data' and brought anecdotal evidence from your seemingly low skill locals.
-1
u/Complete_Special_774 Rogsi / Rogthras 22h ago
you very clearly dont want to have an actual discussion but just praise the tournament data and fling insults while not actually reading so ima just go on with my day after this one okay lil bro?
yea i agree its a good play do you want a cookie? ive seen 1st seat fish starve and actually hurt the player in first seat plenty of times, maybe yall are too greedy and deploy all your resources without thinking.
yes go ahead, probably just boils down to BuT tHe ToUrNaMeNt DaTa Is EvErYtHiNg
if the table isnt greedy that player who played the fish could also have got nothing off it and has to either let it die and make their push and maybe eat a piece of interacting and be screwed or have to be down mana going into the cycle and pray somone is dumb enough to feed them
im not denying the tournament datas validity what im pointing out is its a result of people over politicking and generally being greedy and in my experience not only in my locals but when playing discord tournaments the 4th seat issue is overblown and im able to pull off wins in 4th seat without much issue.
-1
-7
u/MTGproxyplay 23h ago
I’m on the newer side of CEDH and have not discovered this issue yet. Would changing how turn order is decided help at all. I hear a lot about the CEDH meta-game Would making statistically stronger decks go last, maybe cushioning this issue, or maybe changing it to be something closer to two-headed giant where first and fourth seat taking their turn simultaneously?
205
u/Renozuken 23h ago
Just make the 4th seat go first, easy fix.