Planeswalker points



  • A new system of rating was announced by wizards: http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/159b
    This system is called Planeswalker points. It helps you keep track of your own rating in a more flashy, achievement sorta way. I think it's gimmicky but cool. I can also so say I'm a freaking level 36 Sorcerer (haha it's like I'm playing WoW or everquest.)

    http://www.wizards.com/Magic/PlaneswalkerPoints/

    (For more serious players this new system gives out invitations and byes to huge events. So it's not 100% useless and for show.)

    Always having that one card and getting there since 2004.

    0


  • Haha I'm level 40. 8738 points putting me 27th in BC.

    Troll extraordinaire. PT Paris scrub out.

    0


  • It's a very pretty looking system lol. Let's see, it shows me as level 35, so that's not too bad I think :)



  • im a guildmage, level 27

    –-----------------------------
    What goes up must come sideways

    0


  • Not to shabby



  • What are your guys actual points at?

    Troll extraordinaire. PT Paris scrub out.

    0


  • My points are at 2814



  • I need another 33 till lvl 30 go me.



  • 29 guildmage here as well 848 total points



  • There is a lot of fluff in that article. Here is my own analysis of the changes for casual players (correct me if I'm wrong):

    1. The old system was entirely skill-based. The new system is participation-based with bonuses for not losing.

    2. The old system was weighted to consider your opponent's rating. The new system isn't; a win against Brian Kibler is now worth the same as the kid who likes dragons.

    3. The old system was weighted so that FNM was least important, and other casual events (Game Day, Prerelease, Launch, etc.) were worth two or three times more. The new system is the opposite; FNM is worth two or three times more than those events.



  • my points are 617 at level 27.

    –-----------------------------
    What goes up must come sideways

    0


  • @Jason:

    1. The old system was entirely skill-based. The new system is participation-based with bonuses for not losing.

    Well here's the thing. For a game such as Chess (which I believe this rating system was modelled after), that game is indeed all about skill because the pieces are even on both ends. But for a game like Magic, which is part skill and part luck, it's that luck factor that can screw up a player's rating.

    @Jason:

    1. The old system was weighted to consider your opponent's rating. The new system isn't; a win against Brian Kibler is now worth the same as the kid who likes dragons.

    Let's say we have Brian Kibler vs. little Sally 5 year old. Brian is forced to mull to 1 because all he got was lands, and all he drew were lands. Sally only attacks with a Runeclaw Bear for 10 turns for the win. Does that mean Sally earned that victory against a Pro level player? This is just an extreme example, but how many times have you felt that you were a better player than your opponent but lost because of bad draws? Is it fair to be punished for the randomness of the game?



  • I don't think the system represents any skill at all anymore. You may it feel it does because you had a pretty good rank before and now you are high on the leaderboards, but I know some of the people in the top 20 in BC and they are self admitted bad players but show up at every FNM (store owners and staff) and rarely ever do well. I imagine this is true for every local.

    I suppose the die-hards are going to feel finally rewarded for their years of slogging, but how will the previously top ranked players feel being knocked down by the local bump on the log.

    Maybe being old is finally being recognized as a skill. :P

    me for reference.

    level: 34
    points: 2383
    events: 125 <- many with x1 multiplier due to late filing or registration

    So what do you guys feel? Is participation the ranking system we want? I like knowing when I'm beating someone who's had more success in the game. Beating someone who has a high rank now means much less.

    By the way, byes at FNMs (9 points) all of a sudden are really helpful; where byes netted you no rank change previously.

    "Men will beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks." _MLK

    0


  • The old system actually had gameday, prerelease, launch all as the same as fnm. The only thing that was 16k, or double fnm, were the random saturday events that weren't a special wizards tournament.

    Troll extraordinaire. PT Paris scrub out.

    0


  • Sure, for lifetime ratings it's kind of funny. But at the same time BC is a terrible example, noone is really all that high to begin with which will reflect in their world rank.

    Where it will improve things is the Seasonal competitive rating, which in reality is all that matters. People aren't going to be able to show up at events, lose a bunch, and qualify for big events. You're still going to have to win to get enough points to do anything with it. I had two bad tournaments in Vancouver last year, which lost me over 100 rating points. If it weren't for those I would have been able to go to Nationals.

    The old system wasn't as skill reflective as everyone on the forums seems to think. For people who went to PTQ's, all it basically said was "who did well at the LAST big event." The way different tournaments were weighted made the loss at a 32k tournament HUGE. I had a PTQ where I finished 4-3, which isn't good by any stretch. But I also went and lost about 50 points. I mean, really? Losing that much with a winning record? Getting top decked by someone playing a Valakutesque deck for a 29 point rating loss is pretty balls. That definitely happened, I lost 29 points in one game. Then I won my next 2. My net rating for those 3 games? -8.

    The new system is far less participation based as people seem to think. If you goto FNM, win once, you'll only get like 15 points. Which is nothing, it really might as well be zero. Last FNM I went 5-0, which got me 51 points. Compare that to my Grand Prix Paris gain of 264! FNM can influence this, but you have to win a lot for it to make any difference. The new system also rewards you for continuing to play after you pick up 2 losses if you're trying to qualify for something, which is something I look forward to.

    Troll extraordinaire. PT Paris scrub out.

    0


  • Good to know. Upon further reading, Wizard's "Tournament Organizer's Handbook" says Game Days are 16K, but Al had M12 Game Day listed as 8K. I also read Prerelease and Launch was 16K long ago, hence my confusion.

    Even with the corrections, FNM has gone from among the least weighted events, to a considerable one.



  • At the same time the only way it really matters how weighted it is, if you win matches. So it still favors good players by a lot. Obviously it helps people who play as much as possible, but it gets people playing which is ultimately what Wizards wants.

    Troll extraordinaire. PT Paris scrub out.

    0


  • 2 things on this one.

    1. i dont get why you and carl replied specifically to me, when i was replying to whoever said post the points and not just level

    2. your examples, having been experiences youve had, just prove that Magic is a game of luck AND skill, and ratings in general are arbitrary (to an extent). you did pretty bad at the GP correct? and you got a lot of points due to the nature of the event (and/or enough game wins to make a fair set of points). where as you do amazingly well at FNM, and dont get as many points, again due to the nature of the event.

    –-----------------------------
    What goes up must come sideways

    0


  • I did bad at the PT. I had 8 match wins at the GP, to 5 losses. Which yes, isn't great. But it's a far cry from bad. And I replied to Carl, not you.

    Troll extraordinaire. PT Paris scrub out.

    0


  • make that 3 things.

    3. just because a player says their rating (now or then) is X, doesnt mean their good. they very well may be, but as before, game of Luck AND skill.

    hell, i placed 2nd at an FNM once with kuldatha red against all odds (i pretty much only faced decks with mass removal and/or JtMS + Stoneforge), and that doesnt make me a good player per se, it really just means im lucky. there's always some skill involved, but that skill just could be knowing how to play the deck you choose to play well enough.
    on that note, i attribute that 2nd place finish almost entirely to sheer dumb luck.

    –-----------------------------
    What goes up must come sideways

    0


  • hence the question mark and bracketed statement in case i was outright wrong.

    yeah, true enough.

    –-----------------------------
    What goes up must come sideways

    0

Log in to reply