Discussion Forum

Mill is one that I have repetitively made and have been disappointed to leave uncategorized.

[QUOTE=whitey_mcfly]Mill is one that I have repetitively made and have been disappointed to leave uncategorized.[/QUOTE]

You beat me to it. I was about to say mill.

I think what I'll do is build up a couple of days worth in a list in my first post then add them in bulk in a day or two.

I'm not sure if this is put under any other deck type, but reanimator?

What about Red/white decks and Vampire decks that run both burn and lifegain? what would you classify that as?

[QUOTE=Sully_72]What about Red/white decks and Vampire decks that run both burn and lifegain? what would you classify that as?[/QUOTE]

Life Drain and Aggro. That's 2 that I want added also.

i think it's importance to differentiate deck TYPES and deck ARCHETYPES..

types: control, combo, mill, etc

archetype: boros, jund, vamps, goblins, etc..

"Leveler" is quickly becoming a popular deck type. Throw that one in there.
"EDH", even though we have a "Highlander" type. Just to differentiate.

[QUOTE=MajinKirby]"Leveler" is quickly becoming a popular deck type. Throw that one in there.
"EDH", even though we have a "Highlander" type. Just to differentiate.[/QUOTE]

what IS the difference? all my highlanders are EDH.

[QUOTE=Seras]i think it's importance to differentiate deck TYPES and deck ARCHETYPES..

types: control, combo, mill, etc

archetype: boros, jund, vamps, goblins, etc..[/QUOTE]

If this gets done, I say that the archetype must be optional.

Also not sure if I should ask this here, but when I use the Bulk Import feature (I'm loving it) and click on "Return to deck", I have to click on "Edit This Deck" to continue making the deck, why?

mill
singleton
random cards i own and made into a deck
zoo instead of creature based
maybe an experimental catagorie

also i agree having to go back to click edit this deck is annoying
just a minor tweek
bulk importer rocks!
new random decks rocks
site rocks...
also a small request or suggestion:
it wood be cool to have a mainboard, sideboard, and a section for cards you are considering
so that people could see them and post their thoughts

[QUOTE=DedWards]If this gets done, I say that the archetype must be optional.

Also not sure if I should ask this here, but when I use the Bulk Import feature (I'm loving it) and click on the link that goes back to the deck, I have to click on "Edit This Deck" to continue making the deck, why?[/QUOTE]

Thanks for pointing that - in future please post a thread in the suggestions/bugs forum for problems like that :) I'll add it to our dev list.

Back on topic now please folks! :p

[QUOTE=DedWards]If this gets done, I say that the archetype must be optional.[/QUOTE]

I think my post may have been a bit confusing

I was not suggesting an extra "archetype" category for decks but rather pointing out that ppl shouldn't suggest deck "types" that aren't actually types but rather archetypes.

ex: red/white and vamps are not deck types.

aggro is a good one to add

I'm adding the deck types to the list as we get them so if you disagree with any on the list make it known before I add them to the site in a couple of days! ;)

[QUOTE=Seras]I think my post may have been a bit confusing

I was not suggesting an extra "archetype" category for decks but rather pointing out that ppl shouldn't suggest deck "types" that aren't actually types but rather archetypes.

ex: red/white and vamps are not deck types.[/QUOTE]

I misunderstood youand I agree with you here.

Dredge is one I would like added and reanimator (I know that is is said already),they could be under a type called graveyard-based, to make the list smaller as combo-based (there is a huge amount of subtypes under this) already is present.

yes, graveyard-based is a great example of using the type to cover several subtypes/archetypes.

+1

I think people are going over board on this. There are deck TYPES and Archetypes. TYPES should be what matter: Not Boros, Dredge Zoo, etc etc.

These are Types:
Creature Based
Control
Combo
Aggro
Graveyard Based
Etc Etc

Your Archetype SHOULD be what your Deck is called.

My 42 Land Deck is CALLED 42 Lands because that IS the Archetype, what is its TYPE? Its Aggro. That is how people should do it... Such as naming their deck 'My Vampire Deck' and then having it listed as Type: Creature Based or Aggro. There are a million Archetypes and using them in place of a decks actual Type is really going to get out of hand. Reanimator is YES a Graveyard Based deck but it shouldnt have Reanimator as a Type, it should be Graveyard Based. Thats how people SHOULD post their decks, clearing stating what the Archetype of the deck is as the name followed by a Type that is very open and broad.

ya...that's what we just said

[quote=Seras]ya...that's what we just said[/quote]
I know, but if there is not an overwhelming response to the same issue... why pay attention to it? Im just supporting you.

Ok, so Graveyard-based it is! ;)

The new type = Youlostthegame.

I agree but appreciate that "Prison" was added to the type list not too long ago and hope this is kept; otherwise decks like my pet deck Stax, which are functionally different from control, have no home :-(

(Also - thank you for adding Prison!)

Please don't forget Tempo as an important type. For example, some Ramp decks are Tempo: they win by managing the pace of the game.

These would be two incredibly useful options that technically are not types:

Untyped (or Miscellaneous if you prefer)
Undecided

Folks like me could use "Undecided" when we're in the beginning stages of deck composition, to mark a deck which could be maybe aggro, maybe tempo, where we are not sure yet what Type is most appropriate.

We could store lists of cards under Miscellaneous. For example, "My Trade List" instead of My Deck could be put in Miscellaneous type, or "Cards I'm Considering as Options for my Stax deck" could be a Miscellaneous list (right now I have such a list stored as a Trash type deck, which isn't quite right).

Thanks so much for all you do! :)

I think I like miscellaneous better, it covers those random deck types out there (a lot of aggro-combo is very difficult to just generalize, it all plays differently.)

I think token-gen should be a type, I just don't see where that could go under with current categories.

[quote=Airbard]I think token-gen should be a type, I just don't see where that could go under with current categories.[/quote]
Thats just under Aggro listing or Creature Based.

Just want to revive this - is the list on the first post acceptable?

Cheers

How about Standard, Legacy, Vintage, and Extended?

This is for deck types, not formats.

Cheers

Ian

Right

It's been a week and no one really replied (Thanks TFG tho!) so I've added the deck types that are listed in the first post.

Cheers

Ian

Lately I have built a number of Spawn decks, and noticed there isn't a creature token deck option. Is there anything in the options I am not seeing that means the same thing?

[QUOTE=Ardez]Lately I have built a number of Spawn decks, and noticed there isn't a creature token deck option. Is there anything in the options I am not seeing that means the same thing?[/QUOTE]

creature based, or swarm.
(here's hoping you remember your Coat of Arms for eldrazi swarm)

How about a deck that relies on zendikar's quest cards-the Quest type

Metalcraft type
Infect

poison would be nice especially with the new set out.

Archmage Ascension deck, im building one right now and need some ideas

http://forums.mtgvault.com/showthread.php?t=3056

Two that I would suggest are:

Deck Challenge and Extraction/Disabler

Deck Challenge is hopefully obvious. Extraction/Disabler is a deck type I've heard of/seen before and actually use myself. They are decks that win by picking apart an opponent's library and "Extract" or "Disable" their win conditions.

Will take a look at adding all these new suggestions. Thanks guys.

Ian

well im not sure wat to put this under but turbo fog decks dont seem to fit under any catagory
so maybe a stall deck catagory

[QUOTE=drsmugles]well im not sure wat to put this under but turbo fog decks dont seem to fit under any catagory
so maybe a stall deck catagory[/QUOTE]

Yeah, the argument could be made that they'd be contol or prison...but Stall fits much better. Plus, a bunch of other decks could fall into that type.

i'd like to add to the suggestions by saying "infect" is definitely a deck-type. its win conditions and they way it plays are quite different from most decks.


however, don't fall into the trap of putting every single infect deck under one banner.

the three archetypes should suffice:

infect/control
infect/aggro
infect/combo

then you've got all your bases covered.

one problem with that: that implies every single alt-win con out there needs its own deck type specification. That's just too much. If you're planning on winning by infecting someone, say so in the comments or the title, but it really doesn't need to be a broad deck type.

Speaking of, how many deck types are we looking to have total? There's such a thing as too much.

I've been playing for a while now, but i've never really known that there were specific deck types, I just always called them the name of what they did, like soldier deck or discard, or dragon, or ect...
but just to clarify what do these mean exactly?
Mill
Aggro
Leveler
EDH
Singleton
Zoo
Experimental

I understand what the obvious ones are like life drain or creature base, but the ones like mill or edh and singleton and stuff i dont know what they mean. And believe aggro means aggressive, but im not sure for that.

Mill: the action of moving cards from the library to the graveyard.(also used for deck based around this mechanic)

EDH: Elder Dragon Highlander, special game format http://mtgcommander.net/rules.php (was renamed to 'commander' by wizards recently).

Singleton: deck format where only one copy of each card is allowed(except for basic lands)

Thank you for clearing that up for me, I built my decks on here and was confused about all the different deck types they had. So if I play vintage I can only have a couple different specific deck types that they give me on here since some of the types are actual different rules for playing, correct?

yes some are based on different formats rather than a specific strategy

Updated the first post to include the current deck types! Good feedback peeps, keep it up!

We WILL update this list one day - working on a few bigger things atm tho :)

Ian

[QUOTE=NightLoki]one problem with that: that implies every single alt-win con out there needs its own deck type specification. That's just too much.[/QUOTE]

well... mill is an alternate win-con and it has its own deck-type.


an honest-to-goodness infect deck will function and be build very differently from an equivalent non-infect deck.

i'm just saying, the whole deck philosophies are different from normal.

it's worth at least having "poison" in there at the very least, even if the admins consider "infect" to be too broad.


also it's worth considering that poison represents one of the few ways that you can actually win the game. life being 0, no cards to draw, or 10 poison counters, or some specific card mechanic.... that's fairly key.

Not an archetype suggestion, but preexisting archetypes really should be sorted alphabetically.

Either that or organizing deck archetypes within some sort of hierarchy:

Deck Type:

Formats:
Standard
Extended
Legacy
Vintage
Classic
EDH
Pauper
Singleton

Themes:
Aggro
Burn
Combo
Control
Discard
Extraction
Mill
Prison
Stall
Stompy
Tempo

Other:
Article Deck
Casual
Competitive
Experimental
Multi-player
Rogue
Tournament

etc..

EDIT:
Also, Infect is a gimmick, and gimmicks shouldn't be given a deck type. Much in the same manner, Leveler should be removed from the list (unless Leveler is an archetype I'm unfamiliar with, that doesn't have anything to do with the Level Up gimmick). However, having said that, poison counters are a win-con, and rare as it may be, that makes it worth a mention. Many decks can fit within different archetypes to varying degrees, just a matter of what user's want to use to represent their deck.

EDIT 2:
Also also, I just thought.. a Tagging system might be more appropriate, and would provide more relevance to meta search functions within the Vault.

Awesome list, thanks for the hard work :D I will take a look at these and maybe use the drop down subcategories a bit like the set dropdown on the card search page.

Cheers

It is an awesome list, and I love the whole idea. I would like to add in the deck type "Tempo" as well. Other than that...great idea.

[quote=SavajCabbaj]EDIT 2:
Also also, I just thought.. a Tagging system might be more appropriate, and would provide more relevance to meta search functions within the Vault.[/quote]

YES. I want to do this, I really do. Another one of those things I kept pushing back because it wasn't vital, just a "nice to have". It will get done eventually! :P

[QUOTE=Gary]YES. I want to do this, I really do. Another one of those things I kept pushing back because it wasn't vital, just a "nice to have". It will get done eventually! :P[/QUOTE]

It's a really cool feature, and opens some really powerful options for future overhauls to the search engine. Imagine the following scenario:

I'm trying to build an extraction deck (it's been in the back of my mind for a few days / weeks now, I'm horrible at maintaining temporal relevance in hindsight) but am fairly unfamiliar with what exactly makes that theme tick. If both decks and individual cards could be tagged by users, then I could take two approaches to find my niche.

The benefit to tagging cards (and perhaps the most powerful benefit to tagging search data in the Vault), I could go into the card search and search all cards tagged as "Extraction" and view a sorted list of what cards other players use in decks also tagged "Extraction." Top of the list being cards that appear with the greatest frequency.

Similarly, I could search for all decks tagged as "Extraction" and view what other tags those decks have been given, and quickly get an understanding of what other themes play nice with extraction.. a process that could take hours of otherwise sifting through every deck list I can find on the Vault and Google, to determine for myself what sub-themes are present.. the community can do that work for me through participating in what we already participate in.

There are of course other benefits, but just as an example ^-^ I'm all for the feature, if and when you want to implement it! It's features like this that truly underscore the "Vault" part of our community's namesake :D

you cant forget new commander types
and on the east coast at least everyone carries around 30 card decks to sport different creatures like 3o card drake decks 30 card spider decks so you can use more specific card categories

Dont know how relevant it would be but what about pauper decks, you know the decks that are made out of only commons

[QUOTE=Jameson0830]Dont know how relevant it would be but what about pauper decks, you know the decks that are made out of only commons[/QUOTE]

I could have SWORN that Pauper was a decktype already...

midrange, tempo, deck challenge repsonse, community project, , you should also be able to classify by format, limited, multiplayer, standard, legacy, extended, modern, pauper etc.

Thanks for all the comments in here guys!

Just to let you know, in v3 I'm working on a tagging system so you can all add as many types/genres/colors/silly names to a deck as you like. This will allow for better search results by filtering, allow you to have multiple types stored against a deck and the best part is we won't have to keep to a strict list of deck types because you can add anything you like as a tag! :)

What about token or an infinite loop? I never know what to categorize them as.

Closing thread. V3 allows you to tag decks with as many keyword tags as you like instead of a single deck type, thus nullifying the need to add types to the list!