(Oct. 01, 2017 8:51 PM)Kei Wrote: (Oct. 01, 2017 3:01 AM)Wombat Wrote: This is why I'm a proponent for listing the full decks of the finalists - with the current way the list is formatted you know what combos were used by the placers, but not what the particular construction of a deck was. Specifying that the combo was only used during Deck Format doesn't solve this problem either - if a combo was used in both stages you have no way of knowing whether it was in someone's deck at all.
I understand the reasoning behind your desire for this, but I think the reason why I'm a little bit against doing it is because while I acknowledge the context of a players entire deck does provide valuable information to a certain degree, it doesn't necessarily hold enough value for it to be considered a necessary inclusion on "winning combos" lists since they literally were not combos that won battles. It's similar to us not requiring winning players to explain their launch techniques or decision-making thought processes; the thread is called "winning combos" after all, not "winning strategies".
Listing a players entire deck also offers less value if it is listed independently of the deck it was used against. So, do we add more responsibility on to hosts/judges and make them record all of that information? I find explanations like this one and this one that provide the entire context of Deck Format battles to be very interesting, but the level of interest in them from the community is low if the number of responses to some of my more detailed tournament reports is any indication, unfortunately. In any case, my point is that while there is indeed some ambiguity in just having the combinations that won battles listed like we do currently, I think it provides enough information to judge the state of the metagame to a relatively accurate degree without requiring the intense level of scrutiny and detail seen in full Deck Format battle reports.
Sorry to bring up an old post, but I'm siding with wombat here. Focusing entirely on a blader's combos, and not the composition of their decks is a bit like only listing the movesets of pokemon that scored KOs, but not Pokemon teams. There is a lot to be learned from a blader's combos, but it's only a part of the larger picture. From what I understand, as someone who hasn't played deck format before, a deck is a combination of blades designed to cover eachother's weaknesses, and therefore take on a wide variety of metagame threats. I think that deck composition is important metaknowledge because, similar to the way certain drivers pair well with certain disks and layers, there are no doubt certain combos that pair well with each other in a deck. A complete deck shows a blader's logic in finding these synergies, and I believe that by not sharing that information we are holding ourselves back from making those connections on a wider scale.
To put my argument a different way, imagine that instead of listing "winning combos" we listed "winning parts," and posted a list of layers, disks, frames, and drivers without reporting which parts were used together. We would get
some information, as we could tell which parts are performing well, and knowledgeable bladers could maybe guess combos from the list, but we wouldn't know for sure how each combo was supposed to function, and the use of novel parts or combos would be entirely occluded. We could make a "top tier parts list" but not a "competitive combos" list, and it's not hard to understand that one of those is much more useful than the other.
Something I think we should consider is that standard beybattles and deck format battles are
different formats. When you pick a blade for a standard battle, you have to take into account different factors than when you have a deck of three blades to switch between, therefore your thought processes and part selections should be entirely different. Because of this, deck format should have a different meta than 1v1 battles, and perhaps a different banlist(but i shouldn't get ahead of myself here.) Maybe there are certain combos whose weaknesses would make them too risky for use in a 1v1 battle, but because you'd have an entire deck to cover those weaknesses in deck format, their strengths could be exploited. Contrarily, there may be a dominant bey in the standard meta due to it's versatility, but, in deck format, it may be overshadowed by less versatile beys that can exploit deck format's ruleset better. In my opinion, deck format should be considered a separate meta, and we do not get enough information about it without full decklists.
As a last thought, I want to take a moment here to argue against a specific point brought up by Kei. While it is true that "listing a players entire deck also offers less value if it is listed independently of the deck it was used against," saying that is a lot like saying that listing a players entire combo offers less value if it is listed independently of the combos it was used against. We still post winning combos because it can be
assumed that those combos likely faced off against other winning and meta combos on that list, and as such decklists would provide enough information to examine the deck format meta without so much extra bookkeeping.
In summary, I think deck selection is a vital part of the burst meta as long as we have deck format finals, and it doesn't have nearly as much writing on it as it should. I don't think we need full detailed reports of all the intricacies of every specific deck and deck matchup in order to gain enough significant useful information, and I think that as long as we have deck format finals, we should stop thinking of this game as a single metagame, and separately report combos by their formats so that we may examine each meta in its own context. If you made it all the way to the end of this, thanks for sticking with me and listening to my 2 cents.
![[Image: izt9hKq.png]](https://i.imgur.com/izt9hKq.png)
![[Image: beybase-signature-is-beyblade-a-sport-Article.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/VLksgt2k/beybase-signature-is-beyblade-a-sport-Article.jpg)
![[Image: IMG_4160.jpg]](https://s18.postimg.org/nic9di51l/IMG_4160.jpg)
![[Image: jFAMV2B.png]](https://i.imgur.com/jFAMV2B.png)
![[Image: CudNqmI.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/CudNqmI.jpg)
![[Image: 2aj5k50.jpg]](https://i68.tinypic.com/2aj5k50.jpg)
![[Image: 1fftwi.jpg]](https://i66.tinypic.com/1fftwi.jpg)
![[Image: ig94b9.jpg]](https://i63.tinypic.com/ig94b9.jpg)
![[Image: KiuCdmN.png]](https://i.imgur.com/KiuCdmN.png)
It's been up since July bud lol
![[Image: C098iGb.png]](https://i.imgur.com/C098iGb.png)
