Burn isn't that hard IMO. Not to discredit its pilots; obviously there is still a learning curve. For the most part though the decision making is pretty linear: do I save this spell? This has lots of intricacies, but compared to Delver or Affinity I'd say it's pretty straightforward.

But it definitely takes skill and knowledge either way.

A lot of them come down to mulligans though. Knowing when to mulligan with an aggro deck is so important, far more than with any combo or control deck.

They have no end game, so if their early game isn't strong or resilient enough, they become overwhelmed as the game drags on. Like I said, not trying to discount any aggro decks, just that knowing how to mulligan for them is probably about 80% of the match. You can essentially beat yourself with an aggro deck if you don't mulligan properly.

@watermelon, no I am fine giving advise on it if need be.

Yeah, I kinda think you're just showing a poor knowledge of various aggro decks. You're completely right for some of them, but so very, very wrong for others.

I played vigor bloom for a while. I wouldn't mind being linked there too. xD

I can legit rehearse the deck front to back. I think scorp can too, but he has literately has the worst sense of when to combo out.

Imagine if he played storm. I would laugh my ass off.

I get two decks, huh? How flattering. The scheme is working.

If people care, I play Jeskai Ascendancy pretty well. Yes, it's still a thing.

My tempo suckadge can be confirmed. Please don't let me play Storm. Please.

Also, let's not be hating on what other people know about decks. It doesn't matter, because I win anyway. :)

GlistenerAgent You've got competition, cause chief's got 3 or 4 :) Could I add you in Storm?

Storm

[[hub:storm]]

I mean, anyone could be listed under anything. I play Twin, Control and Burn with reasonable proficiency, and know the basics and some more about everything else, but it's not a competition.

I propose to pool all the BGx decks together. It's not like they're so significantly different that Scorprix couldn't play Abzan well. Of course, there are play style differences, but all of the BGx people could help you.

I wouldn't add me to Storm. Haven't played that deck enough.

do these categories map to the deck hubs? should they?

I think there's just one for every single commonly seen and somewhat seen modern deck.

but sometimes they span formats, other times they mix (Aggro, Control).... are they hubs? categories? deck techs?

None of the above. It's a list of users who can be contacted for advice. If someone said 'hey I want to build an affinity deck but I have questions' then they could consult this and find the right person to ask.

yes so in your above statement, wat is affinity? is it Affinity?

Uhhh? Affinity as in the modern deck, as in the deck that the hub is based around. I mean it's not referring to the hub necessarily. Its referring to the deck that the hub is based on.

you're saying its referring to a deck but its not. a deck is a stack of paper cards that people shuffle and battle other decks with. it sounds like a class of deck. i'm trying to gauge whether the hub system can encompass the type of archetype organization that you're all discussing.

we're talking in circles, maybe someone else can jump in.

Its a class of deck.

right so now I'm just going to repeat my second comment verbatim in this thread that's turning into Just Chatting. :P

OH! Sorry

I didn't realise your intention. The hub system COULD do what FAMOUS is trying to do but it has one major problem - people do stop practising with certain decks and they do become inactive. Therefore this is information that needs updating regularly.

On each hub you could have a list of knowledgeable users that play that deck class? It would be tricky to do though!

Edit: yes, yes give me a minute to type haha. Im behind you.

now we're on track. type away =)

So at the moment we have the hubs. The modern format primer is linked through the modern format sort of 'hub'. I know it's not a hub in the same way as others, but I think you get what I mean.

The other hubs span different formats - modern, legacy, vintage etc. Delver for example is a big player in a lot of formats.

Linking to the format primer on deck hub pages wouldn't be right. Linking to knowledgeable users seems more reasonable but again - its unlikely one user can answer questions about the hub in multiple formats.

How would this be formatted?

Goal: link people who are familiar with a specific Modern archetype who can provide assistance to new players of that archetype.

These should not link to deck hubs or whatever association you wanted them to have. People just randomly tag those onto their non competitive decks, but this is focused towards competitive players (like the format primer).

GlistenerAgent - I think the intention is to link to knowledgeable users on the hub pages? So this doesn't link to hubs. Hubs link to this? Sort of like that.

yeah i was thinking i could just make the registry of users as experts a formal feature of the site, and maybe you couldn't register as an expert until you've had an account for 6 months.

but to me there's a big problem in front of that goal and its that the archetypes don't seem to map to the hub system, or even to be captured at all. but that is what the intention of the hub system is.

sure, mis-tagging is going to happen but that's not really the end of the world, or shouldn't be.