Future of the TCG & OCG Section

[The Warden]

Alrighty; since I'm now the new mod of this section, I have been considering ideas on what I should do with it. But given that transparency is a basic requirement of everything I do now as a mod, I feel I should be asking you guys about what you feel needs to be done with the TCG & OCG section as a whole so I can better understand what is required for the well-being of these sections. So feel free to open discussions about the future of TCG & OCG as a whole. And let's keep this civil, please.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

I think an important thing that needs to be done is for OPs to contain the thread creator's opinions within them.

 

In the past, there have been many threads along the line of just including the card, and nothing more. These hold back discussion. Rather than posting something like baby tiragon, saying "does anybody have any ideas for this," posts should be along the lines of having baby tiragon, and saying "this is something I thought of for baby tiragon, what are everyone's thoughts on this? Any other ideas?"

 

This has been brought up over and over, and yet still is a common issue.

 

(This doesn't apply to new spoilers/leaks, as adding more requirements to those threads just makes people spend extra time on them and results in duplicate threads)

[The Warden]

Yes, that is something I have noticed to be a repeat occurrence as well, and thus it's something I do plan on addressing in the near future.

[Darj]

I half agree with Parenthesis there. I agree some input should be included when posting a card in the section to spark discussion, rather than just dropping a card an a "discuss", if not nothing else at all. But I'm not too sure about making it mandatory to include an specific application, use, trick, etc. because, well, sometimes at least in my case, I spot a card that I believe could have potential, but I'm not entirely sure how, and thus I cannot really come up with such specific application, use, etc. but... that's exactly why I want to bring the card up to discussion, to see if there if other users have or get any ideas.

 

If that's among the lines of what Parenthesis means, then I apologize beforehand for not getting it.

 

 

EDIT:

Just checked the section rules again, and this is already addressed there. That means it just has to be enforced.

 

 

Another thing that occurs to me is that the section could be more like CC in that you should post at least 1 meaningful contribution in a card's thread, but once you do, any following post(s) you make are allowed to be more lax, as long as it's not blatant spam of course. IDK if this already is an unspoken rule, though.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Wow, congrats on modship.

 

I feel like the TCG and OCG are pretty different at this point so breaking them into different sections might be an idea. 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Wow, congrats on modship.

 

I feel like the TCG and OCG are pretty different at this point so breaking them into different sections might be an idea.

 

Strong disagree.

 

90% of OCG discussion is just talking about OCG content in the context of present/future TCG, so splitting the section will only divide the member base, creating two sections with less activity than what we currently have, while also killing the overlap that presently exists.

[VCR_CAT]

Strong disagree.

 

90% of OCG discussion is just talking about OCG content in the context of present/future TCG, so splitting the section will only divide the member base, creating two sections with less activity than what we currently have, while also killing the overlap that presently exists.

 

Or it'd just be a pointless change entirely.

 

Either everyone would just be in the TCG section (minus, like, a couple people), or if the given sub-forum that specific card discussion is directed (current OCG-only to OCG), it's really just going to be people in the OCG forum talking about cards in the context of TCG.

 

It's honestly just a pointless cosmetic change, really, that does nothing but further complicate things for no good reason.

 

 

 

 

Also, re: threads - I feel like there needs to be a sort of Advanced Clause Lite enforced. Nothing big, but I've been seeing a few too many half-sentence posts that actually don't contribute anything. If someone's answering a question or something, if they're actually contributing to the discussion and it only took a few words that's probably fine (in the bounds of the normal rules), but there's quite a few here and there that... really don't contribute anything. Like, this isn't Misc., people. C'mon.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

We already have a universal rule against posts under 10 words outside Misc, though it largely hasn't been enforced here because we haven't had a TCG/OCG mod.

[VCR_CAT]

We already have a universal rule against posts under 10 words outside Misc, though it largely hasn't been enforced here because we haven't had a TCG/OCG mod.

 

Content should be more important than word count, imo. A short post can actually contribute to the conversation, but a long post can still be a shitpost, and there's been a few too many shitposts as of late.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

I feel like what constitutes a "shitpost" beyond word count would be largely subjective and be more trouble to enforce than it's worth to stop people from trying to be funny. 

[VCR_CAT]

I feel like what constitutes a "shitpost" beyond word count would be largely subjective and be more trouble to enforce than it's worth to stop people from trying to be funny. 

 

If you want to be only funny and have nothing to contribute to the discussion, there's always Misc.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Humour can be a creative and relevant contribution to a discussion in of itself, and humourlessness as a rule wouldn't necessarily do anything to foster strategic creativity. Relevancy is also a subjective scale, and holding people to strict relevancy risks barring loosely associated connections that would further a holistic understanding of the subject at hand. To an extent, everything is relevant to everything else because the universe is interconnected, and people getting policed for connecting dots that others don't would be stifling and would make the section worse. 

 

Examples could include anything from not being able to talk about vehicular manslaughter in a thread about Vehicroids to not being able to talk about any card interactions at all in a thread about a single card because that'd be derailing the topic from a strict focus on Megalosmasher X.

"No you cannot talk about Rescue Rabbit bringing out 2 copies of Megalosmasher X because Rescue Rabbit is a *COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CARD*, you can ONLY talk about Megalosmasher X and its properties in a vacuum!" 

 

These are of course absurd examples but having to draw a line on relevancy I feel is bound to result in arbitrary measures taken and resultant dissonance, confusion, and problems, as with anything that can't be enforced through specific, objective criteria like the 10-word rule. The great thing about letting members dictate what they think is relevant to a discussion and post accordingly is you can pick and choose for yourself what you want to take and leave as part of your understanding. What you'd consider a shitpost can be disregarded without polluting a personal Platonic ideal for Megalosmasher X and its true meaning within the fibre of the cosmos that may or may not include Rescue Rabbit. 

[Premier Alexander Romanov]

As one of the people that posts cards when they are revealed, I didn't realize that the "share your opinions" rule was even a thing.

I did try to add "Discuss." at the end of such posts, and occasionally expressed opinions, but I will try to do more in the future.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Posting a newly released card is always a huge service to this section, and it being done quickly can often be more important than providing a framework for the card's discussion that is more or less understood by now as "here's a brand spanking new card, whatcha gon' do with it?" 

 

For bringing up older cards that we already know about but have since undergone further innovations from the thread author or others, providing a framework makes more sense. 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

As one of the people that posts cards when they are revealed, I didn't realize that the "share your opinions" rule was even a thing.I did try to add "Discuss." at the end of such posts, and occasionally expressed opinions, but I will try to do more in the future.

As I mentioned before, reveal posts should be exempt.

 

Multiple people racing to post the new leak becomes even messier when they need to add some stuff on the end about their own thoughts, and will just create double posts.

[VCR_CAT]

Humour can be a creative and relevant contribution blah blah blah blah

 

If you bothered to really read what I said, you would have noticed I said "ONLY funny".

 

Lmao dude, I'm not saying "NO HUMOR EVER", I'm saying this isn't Misc. and really shouldn't be a place for what is basically just shitposting.

[Darj]

Regarding the pseudo-Advanced Clause vs. funny post:

Why not both? Start with your witty comment, joke, funny picture, etc. and then follow up with a contribution, idea, experience with the card/combo or whatever. Or if you really have nothing else to add, point out or acknowledge that whatever you would say was already mentioned and highlight that point, IDK. That way you would let everyone know that at least you read the comments. Needless to say, don't resort to this to blatantly play around the "advanced clause", if such thing is ever implemented.

[VCR_CAT]

Regarding the pseudo-Advanced Clause vs. funny post:

Why not both? Start with your witty comment, joke, funny picture, etc. and then follow up with a contribution, idea, experience with the card/combo or whatever. Or if you really have nothing else to add, point out or acknowledge that whatever you would say was already mentioned and highlight that point, IDK. That way you would let everyone know that at least you read the comments. Needless to say, don't resort to this to blatantly play around the "advanced clause", if such thing is ever implemented.

 

LMAO JFC PEOPLE

 

Like, notice I said "ONLY FUNNY", Like YEAH OF COURSE you can be funny and still talk about it, but there are still a lot of like, half-sentence posts that really just throw down a quip and then don't say anything about the card or contribute to the discussion at all. THAT'S what I'm talking about!

[Darj]

LMAO JFC PEOPLE

 

Like, notice I said "ONLY FUNNY", Like YEAH OF COURSE you can be funny and still talk about it, but there are still a lot of like, half-sentence posts that really just throw down a quip and then don't say anything about the card or contribute to the discussion at all. THAT'S what I'm talking about!

 

That was more in response to Polaris, you know? I just didn't bother to quote him appropriately and wanted to address the topic in a more general way. My mistake.

Also you kinda ninja'd me.

[Sleepy]

As a little advice towards the section more than anything else, I'd like to have the way new releases have been posted lately to be toned down a notch.

Like, I understand when people post a bunch of cards of a same archetype, but I've seen that the race to be the first one to post something has resulted in a few threads of "here's 3 to 8 new cards that were just announced so discuss them all here. They have nothing to do with each other but they were all from the same set so there".

Mainly speaking of the Link set cards.

 

Yes it feels kinda good when you get to be the one that brought the news, but come on. I've got to see at some point more than one thread along the lines of "new cards/the rest of...".

It is not a super recurrent issue, but I've seen it exist.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

I personally don't think TCG and OCG should get divided. It's not like we are getting a crazy amount of activity that needs further sorting out. Besides, a card can be talked about from both an OCG and a TCG standpoint within the same discussion. I even hardly grasp why we have an extra sub-section in TCG, which discusses important events and some other miscellaneous stuff that's official I suppose, but does it really warrant being over there and not part of here?

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Then the usual enforcement of rules, like no 5-word posts and leave, post when your card being discussed is fictional or official, and generally try to be civil with others.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

About posting a specific goal/intent/opinion on a card, it can be a double edged sword. In the past and at least talking from personal experience, I've started topics impartially, saying I'd give my personal thoughts at a latter time but wanted the conversation to flourish with others' thoughts for now, and have my thread fall silent forever once I do post my thoughts.

Making me feel that sometimes leaving a blank might be better. Though it also could depend on a talent. Black usually posts cards with good impressions and detailed explanations on them and they thrive pretty well, so IDK.

 

I don't think it should be necessarily a rule. It almost sounds like something that'd be held on a case by case basis. 

Are threads from people genuinely clueless about how to utilize a certain card, no matter how old or obscure it is, really too bad a thing to have around? 

If somebody just wants input, I take it that it is a potentially good way to socialize with something in-topic in the section.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

 

Just me talking from a very casual standpoint. Can't say I'm very well versed on what this place really needs to innovate and improve.

[The Warden]

Yes, I am pondering ways of dealing with the leak race stuff. First and foremost I'd like to apply a "cooldown period" if you will where the news of leaks will be posted in the News section, thus alerting everyone, but that people should wait at least 15 minutes before flooding the section. Singular cards generate short discussion comapred to bundles, so I'd like it if people could hold off flooding the section with leaks the second they're announced to leaked archetypes can all be posted together rather than apart.

 

One of my given plans is to have News become a main subforum where new banlists, as well as Guess The Name cards or leaked images with no effects can be posted, because if there is nothing to discuss about the card itself, then it doesn't belong in the Discussion subforum.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

So what exactly happens to the already-existent banlist and theory subforum? It becomes news and news becomes gone?

[The Warden]

Dissolution. My ideal plan is for Theory to become a part of Discussion while Banlist becomes a part of News.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

If you bothered to really read what I said, you would have noticed I said "ONLY funny".

 

Yes, and as *I* said "Humour can be a creative and relevant contribution to a discussion in of itself.", though obviously that didn't register with you as you actually went ahead and quoted that as "Humour can be a creative and relevant contribution blah blah blah blah" before criticizing me for "not bothering to read what you said". I did and responded accordingly, you didn't and went out of your way to make it clear that you didn't. 

 

LMAO JFC PEOPLE

 

I'd much rather have witty half-sentence quips than whatever this is. 

 

Like, notice I said "ONLY FUNNY", Like YEAH OF COURSE you can be funny and still talk about it, but there are still a lot of like, half-sentence posts that really just throw down a quip and then don't say anything about the card or contribute to the discussion at all. THAT'S what I'm talking about!

 

Any post can be said to necessarily be a contribution to any discussion, as any post can be said to be "about the card" in question within a thread about a card because relevancy isn't an objective thing and connected dots can be interpolated after the fact to make what wasn't about the card, about the card.

 

If you bothered to really read what I said, you would have noticed I said "ONLY funny".

 

Lmao dude, I'm not saying "NO HUMOR EVER", I'm saying this isn't Misc. and really shouldn't be a place for what is basically just shitposting.

 

Elaborate on what, specifically, constitutes shitposting, why it's necessarily a problem, and your plans for its enforcement. Omitting "JFC" and "LMAO" from your suggestions might serve you better if you want to be taken any more seriously than a screeching 4-year-old that's every bit as capable of the same shitposting. 

[Blake]

Yes, I am pondering ways of dealing with the leak race stuff. First and foremost I'd like to apply a "cooldown period" if you will where the news of leaks will be posted in the News section, thus alerting everyone, but that people should wait at least 15 minutes before flooding the section. Singular cards generate short discussion comapred to bundles, so I'd like it if people could hold off flooding the section with leaks the second they're announced to leaked archetypes can all be posted together rather than apart.

 

One of my given plans is to have News become a main subforum where new banlists, as well as Guess The Name cards or leaked images with no effects can be posted, because if there is nothing to discuss about the card itself, then it doesn't belong in the Discussion subforum.

I feel like you have the general right direction here, but I think there's a slightly better execution.

 

Make the topics that announce the sets actually matter. As-is, they usually get posted b the first person to see them... and never really get used unless there's leaks of info, not cards themselves. I tried to give them a purpose in the past by adding the checklist in about 2-4 weeks before release and giving predictions, so that the topic would serve some purpose.

 

Laks can then go in those threads, before individual cards or archetypes get posted in discussion later if they merit it.

 

I know the wiki has a checklist, but I still think they should be put into and maintained in the OP of those set announcement threads, mostly because Wikis are a pain in the ass.

 

We could also try and make archetype discussions a thing. Not as to deckbuilding, but it reduces potential clutter to keep a hub discussion for archetypes as we go, especially things like SPYRAL or Kaiju. However, I doubt this one works as well, because it's often that archetypal cards end up being better outside of a deck, once again like Kaiju.