Jeremy(Archidekt Moderator)
33 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Hi all,"},{"attributes":{"header":3},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nDuring a livestream today, WotC announced details surrounding the new Commander Bracket system. I'd encourage you all to either check out the VOD or "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://discord.com/channels/494339685452087296/934178547055079444/1338949888926552148"},"insert":"read the article on it here"},{"insert":". \n\nThe tl;dr is that EDH decks can now be classified as falling into Bracket 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. There are some hard rules about what can and cannot exist in any given bracket, but some is also left to the deckbuilder's discretion regarding their intentions for the deck. Which bracket your deck falls into can help you make sure your games are with other decks of vaguely similar power levels. \n\nGavin Verhey from WotC emphasized that this system is in beta and something that you can choose to totally ignore if it's not going to be helpful to you and your playgroup. Regardless, we wanted to make sure Archidekt provides you with tools for identifying and displaying your decks' brackets if you so choose.\n\nHere's what we've done:"},{"attributes":{"header":3},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nAt the top of the deck page, if your format is set to Commander/EDH, you'll now see your estimated bracket displayed. This will either be \"1 or 2\", \"3\" or \"4 or 5\" since those can easily be distinguished by number of Game Changers (if you don't know what that means, read the article linked above). At at this time, we're only estimating brackets based on Game Changers since mass land denial, tutors, and combos aren't as objective. We expect to account for these in some form in the future."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"If you'd like to set your deck to a particular bracket rather than leave it as estimated, you can do so from your deck settings."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Any Game Changers in your deck are identified by an orange color tag with a diamond icon in their upper right-hand corner."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"If you've set a deck's bracket (rather than just leaving it as estimated), it will appear on your deck's link wherever it's shown on the site."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\n"},{"insert":{"image":"https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/934178547055079444/1338949889350041701/image.png?ex=67b03d82&is=67aeec02&hm=d235548f6b35439b7d64993c7809aff0abdccd929944ab986100b5cd85a10499&="}},{"insert":"\n"},{"insert":{"image":"https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/934178547055079444/1338949889790312639/image.png?ex=67b03d82&is=67aeec02&hm=ca975ec5bd8dd8598f43242e0f9070166e8881d724fd5788c10c1bb02bf0e11a&="}},{"insert":"\n"},{"insert":{"image":"https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/934178547055079444/1338949890071597146/image.png?ex=67b03d82&is=67aeec02&hm=09d9909dc9ac86abdd3736d828325e550e9e5dc87e919c0e5144e5aa1ffc311f&="}},{"insert":"\nWhat's next?"},{"attributes":{"header":3},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\nWe're open to adding additional support for the bracket system in the future, but this seemed like a good baseline for what's needed in the builder. This is all very new, so any feedback you have regarding its implementation is appreciated! If you'd like to discuss the Commander Bracket system more generally, come join us over in "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://discord.gg/rYDFFVCmGr"},"insert":"our community Discord server"},{"insert":".\n\nThe Archidekt Team"},{"attributes":{"header":3},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\n"}]}
Edited 2/14/2025, 6:26:50 PM
68
curmevexas 33 days{"ops":[{"insert":"In search/viewing all my decks, I'd love to have bracket (or estimated brackets) as a sort order option.\n"}]}
68
michael(Alpha User)
32 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Bracket is doable, estimated bracket would be tough. The esitmated bracket requires all the card data so that the estimation can be run on those cards, which if you're trying to order a list of 10, 20, 50+ decks, you could imagine why that isn't super feasible (same reason we don't allow sorting on price).\n\nBut I can add order by bracket for decks which have them set manually. We put this out without having time to get feedback from users, so we'll be collecting feedback in our discord (among other places) over the next few days, and likely will add some QoL stuff like this soon.\n\nIf you have any more suggestions, feel free to send them our way!\n"}]}
8
bertuzzi 33 days{"ops":[{"insert":"The speed and quality of this development team is incredible. my congratulations! Would it be possible to add the brackets to the deck list? It's good to see in a folder, for example :\n\n"},{"attributes":{"link":"https://imgur.com/a/tfrFoFV"},"insert":"https://imgur.com/a/tfrFoFV"},{"insert":"\n\n\n"}]}
Edited 2/11/2025, 8:38:40 PM
21
HagenRA 32 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Would the team be looking to integrate with tools like commanders spellbook for finding combos? (I'm sure that is something you'd thought of) \n\nAnd will there be plans to also have an icon to mark which cards were found to be part of said combo or to highlight the combo on mouse over (Granted all the necessary cards of the combo are present) ?\n\nGoes without saying amazing work in getting it out so fast and having created such an amazing tool!\n"}]}
Edited 2/12/2025, 2:27:49 AM
11
Deathwarp6 33 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Just read the article, awesome that you guys work so fast!\n"}]}
7
darkelf25 32 days{"ops":[{"insert":"How about an option to turn off the \"game changer\" tag? It's annoying, because I didn't put that tag there and I really don't care for it, since I play with the same playgroup? Seriously, please give us an option to disable that diamond tag.\n"}]}
5
chalice7 32 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Would love to see a filter or search within advanced searches/ syntax for game changers\n"}]}
5
TheSentinel001 31 days{"ops":[{"insert":"I could be wrong exactly, but the advanced searches/syntax is governed completely by ScryFall, not Archideck, so it's up to SF's developers to add that as part of their database entries.\n\nNot saying it's not doable, just that Archideck has little to no control over that part of the card search tab.\n"}]}
-1
Eingangbush 32 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Would like to hover over the suggested bracket and there could be a mouseover text pointing out the gamechangers on my deck. \n"}]}
4
GFSnilrem@yahoo.com 6 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Really like the new system. I like that I can set the value and override the estimate and that the estimate is taking account of more and more criteria.\n\nI am not sure how you have your 'few tutors' filter set but it appears to be very low (something like 3+ cards that 'search' for non-land cards). I would like to suggest the large manual process of rating all tutors in the game and using a weighted system for 'few tutors'. Specifically I would assign all these cards point values, and would say any deck with 7+ points fails the 'few tutors' criteria.\n\nNarrow tutors like Fighter Class or Trophy Mage would be worth 1 or 2 points.\nBroad tutors like Demonic tutor or grim servant would be worth 3 points.\nRepeatable tutors like Artificer's Intuition or Birthing Pod would be worth 4 or 5 points.\n\nI might move things up if they tutor to play or down if they tutor to top of library but that might get a little too subjective. Maybe a community project like Salt Score could work here? I think this is why game changes is listed as an exact number (up to 3) and tutors isn't... because some tutors are more tutor than others.\n\nSome decks may even count cards like Genesis Wave as a tutor.\n\nYou also appear to have missed some 'tutor' cards, namely the 'Reveal cards from the top of your library until' cards like Demonic Consultation or Evolutionary Leap (I don't know that I would count Empty the Laboratory as a tutor, but I would count Evolutionary leap and Demonic Consultation is for sure). Lim-Dul's Vault is also a tutor in my book\n"}]}
1
Grazzyx 28 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Loving the bracket system! Very cool to see it rolled out to the decks I already have so I can sort them on my own. I am curious how you’re having the site evaluate the brackets atm? My Urza deck with multiple game changers is a 4, but so is my Ojer Axonil deck with none whatsoever, no infinites, etc. I do think my Ojer is a 4, I’m more interested in the behind the scenes of how those equate based on deck lists for your algorithm\n"}]}
0
Jeremy(Archidekt Moderator)
27 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Glad to hear you're enjoying it! From any deck page, click on the bracket we display at the top. We now provide a full explanation of how we've estimated your bracket. \n\nTaking a look at your Ojer list, it looks like you play Blood Moon which is considered mass land denial and only present in Brackets 4 and 5. If you don't feel this accurately represents your deck, you can always change your bracket from the one we estimate to one you choose from your deck settings!\n"}]}
0
Reyos 31 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Mass land denial is objective though, I think you may have misunderstood the use of the words. Mass land denial isn't about decks that include a lot of land denial, it's about single cards that deny mass amounts of land. The examples are things like Armageddon, Blood Moon (denies access to colors rather than land outright) as the article says:\n\nBasically, any cards and common game plans that mess with several of people's lands or the mana they produce should not be in your deck if you're seeking to play in Brackets 1–3.\n\nThat's pretty objective.\n"}]}
0
BaleKenyon 32 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Great job rolling this out so quickly! Is there a way to search decks by bracket?\n"}]}
0
BogusBogmeyer 32 days{"ops":[{"insert":"Alrund's Epiphany could be considered a Game Changers too, I think.\n"}]}
0