The MCC Discussion Thread

[Rithaniel]

Hey guys. Round 1 Judgments are coming, but myself and void are both a little bit behind schedule. So, I'm adding an extension of about 12 hours to the judging deadline.

[bravelion83]

I'm way behind schedule too for June Round 3, in which void is also involved. As for me, I've had multiple personal issues to deal with in the last few days. I won't fix any new judging deadline for June Round 3, but to void and myself: let's do it as soon as our real lives allow.

[Rithaniel]

Alright, Round 1 judgments are complete and Round 2 has been posted.

[Riria]

@Rithaniel I just noticed that you assigned cards to players in a way that forms a connected digraph with a single cycle. Coincidence or purposeful? :D

[slimytrout]

@Rithaniel I don't wish to be overly critical, but it seems to me a little unfair to give people different assignments that they have literally no control over. In my case, while I quite enjoy the flavor of netn10's Round 1 entry, it will definitely be challenging fulfill the prompts while also -- to borrow the parlance of improv comedy -- saying "yes, and..." to the flavor text which places it on "a plane of solitary existence." More broadly, it appears that those entrants who (in effect) provided open-ended story prompts are actually making life easier for their competitors, while those entrants who produced narrower prompts are improving their own odds by giving their competitors a more difficult challenge. I wonder if there wouldn't have been a way to give entrants more choice as to what prompt they pursued rather than assigning them one specifically.

[Riria]

I might be misreading the flavor text, but my impression at least is that the solitary plane of Genesis is sort of like a dnd-style pocket demiplane. Sort of like the place Nicol Bolas is trapped in. And the broader world that interfaces with Genesis is in fact open-ended.

[Rithaniel]

@Rithaniel I don't wish to be overly critical, but it seems to me a little unfair to give people different assignments that they have literally no control over. In my case, while I quite enjoy the flavor of netn10's Round 1 entry, it will definitely be challenging fulfill the prompts while also -- to borrow the parlance of improv comedy -- saying "yes, and..." to the flavor text which places it on "a plane of solitary existence." More broadly, it appears that those entrants who (in effect) provided open-ended story prompts are actually making life easier for their competitors, while those entrants who produced narrower prompts are improving their own odds by giving their competitors a more difficult challenge. I wonder if there wouldn't have been a way to give entrants more choice as to what prompt they pursued rather than assigning them one specifically.

Oh, don't worry about being overly critical, I don't mind. But the reason for the Round 1 subchallenge of "the card has more flavor text than rules text" was to specifically head off this potential issue that you are observing. With more detail in the flavor description, there are more places where you can branch off. You're given a prompt, but, as Riria points out, the "world" is not a single plane, strictly speaking. You are deciding part of the direction of the story, and so you decide, in part, what the "world" even is. You could focus on the "plane of solitary existence," if you would like that challenge, or you could introduce a secondary plane that is interacting with the first. Or you could focus on the "forgotten civilization" from the flavor text. Or you could get meta with it and make Genesis a single character in a larger story about isolation and companionship. To use a word from the flavor text of Genesis, there are many "possibilities."

@Rithaniel I just noticed that you assigned cards to players in a way that forms a connected digraph with a single cycle. Coincidence or purposeful? :D

Purposeful :]

[slimytrout]

Yeah, I'm certainly not saying that my situation is impossible, and I'm also not looking for the challenge to be edited to fit my desires -- I'm sure I can make it work somehow. My larger point is that obviously some entries are going to be easier to work with than others in terms of the story hooks they provide. Obviously not everyone will agree on the exact ordering, but just to pick two examples off the top of my head:

1) mercantile plane where everything can be bought for the right price
2) lifeless husk of a world where the only movement is ash blowing in the wind

Both of those (I think) sound cool and one could make an interesting card out of them, but one of them is much easier to branch off of. I'm really commenting on the fact that this sort of setup, where person A produces some sort of jumping-off point for person B, whether it's flavor, mechanics, etc., ultimately produces perverse incentives, especially since it seems like the challenges will be continuing in this mode. From an individual's point of view, the best thing is to produce an individual card that meets the flavor requirements, but actually shuts down further story arcs, since someone else will be forced to deal with the mess, kind of like playing a game of exquisite corpse where the goal is to screw over the next person rather than help them.

[Rithaniel]

Okay, I see your objection. You're afraid of people gaming the system so they can win.

The issue there is that the hypothetical players are prioritizing winning over having fun. This is a thing that happens in casual MtG, too, where one player will make a deck that always wins, but which is unfun to play against. The friend group will then work against that deck by just not playing if the person is going to play that deck. If we think that "gaming the system" is an issue, we might have to step in, in an analogous way. We have a small group, here, it's only 8 players. So we can probably just agree to not do something so rude to each other.

Besides, if there is unpleasant or boring lore being applied to a card, that card would be easier to score poorly. Flavor comprises 3 points in the rubric, and that is often times enough to send a card from first place to last. If a card is really going to be awful for this game, well, the game is already set up in such a way that the card will have more difficulty passing.

[slimytrout]

I think you're right and I'm overthinking this -- I'm definitely a person who likes to think about game theory (shocking given that I'm hanging out here on an MtG site, I know) so I'm sure I'm projecting a bit, since the thought almost immediately occurred to me of "how can I write this story into a total dead end?" (not that I'm going to follow through on that temptation).

[Rithaniel]

Well, you're right, it is a valid thing that could crop up, and if I were going to try and formalize this month of the MCC for future games with arbitrary play groups, it would be something that would have to be addressed. I'm not entirely sure how one would address it, though.

I'm also on the fence about whether I should include some mention of this in the round clarifications. Some kind of statement of an honor rule that players should adhere to, maybe?

[void_nothing]

My judgments for the June MCC round 3 should be all complete tomorrow.

[bravelion83]

My judgments for the June MCC round 3 should be all complete tomorrow.

Mine too.

[bravelion83]

Both void_nothing's judgments and mine for June Round 3 are now in (you can find them at the bottom of the round thread), and also Round 4 for June are all up. Happy desparking to the surviving players!

[Raptorchan]

No offense, this may be a stupid question, but aren't current MCC challenges a bit too long? I distinctly remember them lasting for no longer or not so longer than a month, but now we have almost two months long challenges...

[bravelion83]

No offense, this may be a stupid question, but aren't current MCC challenges a bit too long? I distinctly remember them lasting for no longer or not so longer than a month, but now we have almost two months long challenges...

Yes, they are. This is a long-standing pet peeve of mine in particular, and in fact I'm feeling very bad for the June MCC. I'm probably the one who cares about this the most as a host and I feel like I've failed again. But as I also always say, real life always comes first, and both I and void_nothing have been slowed down by that in judging. Each one of us has their own daily problems they have to deal with, and sometimes there are so many of those that they take most of your time and you've got little to no time left for leisure, because let's not forget that here we're all volunteers, no one of us is paid for this, and the reason why we (or at least I) keep on doing it is purely because I have fun in playing, judging, and hosting this contest in particular, but I'm sure you could say the same for anyone who plays, judges, or hosts any of the contests going on here in this subforum.

If you have any suggestions about how to make sure we fit better to the schedule, I'm all for hearing them. But if I were you, first I'd take a look a few pages ago in this same thread, because I can distinctly remember this specific point coming up not too long ago, and not for the first time. Things like just passing to a bimonthly contest (meaning one every two months instead of one each month) have already been discussed and refused, both by the moderator of this subforum (and that would already be enough) and also by long-standing involved members such as myself. We want to keep the contest on a monthly basis, and in its original 4-round structure. The cadence I've spelt out in the guidelines document stands, just like all of that document in its entirety. I can only speak for myself in saying the following, but I do recognize there is indeed a problem with what you mention and I will do whatever it takes to save this contest. It's been my own home for too long by now, first on Salvation and now here. The very last thing I want to see is it first slowing down and then fully dying. I will never allow that to happen, you can be sure of that.

I apologize for the June MCC in particular, as I was the host, and I will try to take active steps to avoid it and stick closer to the ideal cadence in the next MCC that I will host (probably the one for Wilds of Eldraine in September). I can't speak for other hosts or for the moderators, but what I can do, I will do about this, and it's not the first time I'm saying things like these and trying to point people's attention towards this problem. Thank you for having given me another chance to do so, and if you have any realistic ideas, again, I'm very open to hear them.

[Raptorchan]

Thanks for the answer. The only suggestion I can come up with is to shorten the design submission period, since players need much less time to design a card than judge does to properly judge all submissions.
By the way, I considered volunteering to host September (Eldraine themed) MCC but I guess then I can take August instead?

[void_nothing]

By the way, I considered volunteering to host September (Eldraine themed) MCC but I guess then I can take August instead?

Yeah, you can definitely have August. Thank you for stepping up!

[bravelion83]

Considering the prerelease for Wilds starts on September 1st and the release is the 8th, I assume the whole set will be known at the very latest on August 25th, with previews starting probably around the midpoint of August. Given that, I will have all the time I need in the second half of August to prepare the challenges, so I think I can already officially claim September to be the WOE month. With Raptorchan taking August we have the next two months of MCC covered and that feels very good to me.

[Rithaniel]

Courtesy ping for @haywire. You have about 24 hours left in round 2 of the July round.

Also, for anybody else playing. If you want to make any last-minute edits, you're looking at the same timeframe.

[haywire]

@Rithaniel I am so sorry, I've had some stuff come up and dropped off all the CCCG stuff for the last couple weeks. Sorry for delaying the MCC, and with such an interesting concept for the competition too.

also @Riria am sorry that I didn't give your premise the chance to get explored further.

[Rithaniel]

@Rithaniel I am so sorry, I've had some stuff come up and dropped off all the CCCG stuff for the last couple weeks. Sorry for delaying the MCC, and with such an interesting concept for the competition too.

also @Riria am sorry that I didn't give your premise the chance to get explored further.

Don't worry, we haven't gotten our judgments in yet, so you haven't held us up. In fact, if you want, you can still get a card in for the round. Just get it in quickly.

[void_nothing]

Yup, that sort of thing is the organizer's call - but I'd totally be amenable to that. Any excuse to make me finish my June final judgments anyhow...

@haywire do you think you can get an entry in within a day or less?

[haywire]

@Rithaniel @void_nothing I can have it in by midnight tonight (or earlier if that's helpful, just need a few hours really)

[void_nothing]

I can't speak for Rith, but since this is a forum that 99% of the time runs by deadlines on or around midnight, that shouldn't be a problem. I'm just happy to have a full complement of contestants!