- Any member of the MTGSalvation forums can submit a deck for the contest, including judges. - A submitted deck has to contain the card of the current round and has to be built around the card in some way. While no negative points are given for an uncommented deck, giving judges insight on your ideas and tricks improves their understanding of your deck. - Contestants can only submit one deck per round. But as long as judging has not started yet, you can edit your deck, change it alltogether or withdraw it. - This is "Casual". -> Only the cards banned in Vintage, silver bordered & celebration cards are banned. There is no Restricted list. If you want to add four Black Lotus, go for it - it should be noted though, that some of the judges might not be too keen on seeing too many broken cards in decks.
- The cards to build around in all rounds have already been selected.
2) Time - Contestants have six days to build and post their decks for each round.
- Judges consult to select the top decks that will be judged for that round during the next day. - The next seven days, judges will test and rate the top decks. - A ranking of the contestants’ scores will be posted and the winner of the round will be announced.
3) Judging
- There are four judges in each round. Three judges will be participate in each round: DLink123, Discard1119 & PeterRiviera. The fourth judge will either be: G L J, Megiddo or me.
- In each round judges will rate up to eight decks. The number of decks rated is equal to half the decks submitted (rounded up) or eight, whichever is smaller.
- From the time the entry period in a given round ends, the judges have 24 hours to post a number of the decks they want to rate equal to the number of decks going to be rated plus one.
- From among the decks that received votes, those with the most votes will be rated.
- If votes fail to define the to be tested decks directly, in descending order decks with the most votes are locked in until more decks share their number of votes than there are places left for decks to be tested. From among those the remaining places will be chosen by dice roll (made by me with the dice-tag, #s assigned alphabetically). - Each deck's judge-scores will be arithmeticaly averaged to determine its score for the round. - Judges cannot rate their own decks. -> If a judge's deck made a round's top 8, he or she will refrain from rating that particular deck and only rate the other decks.
- Judges are out-of-contest for the final-ranking. - Judges are encouraged to add some comments as to why they chose a certain deck for rating or not. - Judges are encouraged to add some comments as to why they gave a certain score to a certain deck.
- Judges are encouraged to add some suggestions how a rated deck could be improved.
Each judge awards up to 25 points to each tested deck he or she is allowed to rate, based on the following system:
Creativity/Originality: 0 to 5 points How creative and original is your deck. Effectiveness/Card adherence: 0 to 5 points How well does it use the selected card? Synergy/Tuning: 0 to 5 points How well do the cards combine in the deck; elegance and card selection. Power/Capacity to win: 0 to 5 points Can the deck deliver the goods? Interaction/Protection: 0 to 5 points How well does the deck interact and deal with other decks.
Format/Thematic: up to 2 points bonus (can't go over 25) 1 point for any format adherence other than Vintage & Legacy; 1 point for incorporation of theme/flavour.
Interpretation of this is up to the judges, individually.
4) Championship rules - Eight rounds will be played. - To be included in the final ranking, a player has to gather scores in atleast three of the eight rounds. (If too few players meet this criteria, it will be lowered accordingly.) - At the end of the season, the player within the final ranking having the highest arithmetical average of top 8 scores becomes the Champion. Example: ExpiredRascalsparticipates in all eight rounds, has his decks scored five times and gets f.e. 23 points each round. Gaea's Regentparticipates in three rounds, gets tested in two of these three rounds and gets twice 24 points. All other players have an average < 23. -> Despite having a lower average than Gaea's Regent, ExpiredRascals wins, because Gaea's Regenthasn't met the criteria of having atleast three scores.
tl;dr: For each round, a card is scheduled. Anyone can enter the contest and submit a deck using that card.
Contestants can post their decks during an entry period of six days. In the following eight days the judges (PeterRiviera, Discard1119, DLink123 and one of G L J, Megiddo or myself) will elect the best decks submitted, to test and rate these decks. After (planned) eight rounds the contest will have a winner.
For those interested in the contest's history: Seasons 1, 2, 3 & 4.
this being an official thread you can necro it, for as long as Season 5 runs.
who are the judges for round zero, I can't find it anywhere :s
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
I'd like to start with a shortened Round 0 (out-of-contest, only four days to submit decks, only two decks to test) judged by Discard1119, DLink, G L J, Megiddo either this Sun- or Monday.
among others, you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Each reality is but the dream of another, and each sleeper a god unknowing.
We define the boundaries of reality; they don't define us.
lol alright, I knew it was somewhere, but I couldn't find it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Could we put something in the rule section saying that this contest allows optional sideboards?
Edit: And that budget of the deck is not considered part of judging?
I dunno about you; but if a deck has 3-4 cards above the price of $75 each I'm probably going to grade it a little harder. I've got no problem with budget decks, but if I would have to drop $300-$400 into a casual deck it better win every game it plays.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Gah, Iit's weird. I felt dirty putting in a few cards in my deck (lightning Helix, the tutor and the planeswalker, as well as a few lands) as they were above what I'd spend with my budget. I didnt add duals but they would have helped I guess...
I dunno about you; but if a deck has 3-4 cards above the price of $75 each I'm probably going to grade it a little harder. I've got no problem with budget decks, but if I would have to drop $300-$400 into a casual deck it better win every game it plays.
The contest has traditionally not considered budget as a part of judging.
Budget ≠ Casual
I would never build these decks in real life as they are out of my personal budget, but that doesn't mean someone else can't. Casual is all-inclusive, and money should not factor into a contest in which we'll be judging with proxies or virtual cards.
This is "Casual". -> Only the cards banned in Vintage, silver bordered & celebration cards are banned. There is no Restricted list. If you want to add four Black Lotus, go for it - it should be noted though, that some of the judges might not be too keen on seeing too many broken cards in decks.
All I'm saying is that if you want to throw $300-$400 dollars into a deck, I'm probably going to test it against decks of similar value.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
All I'm saying is that if you want to throw $300-$400 dollars into a deck, I'm probably going to test it against decks of similar value.
Why are you assuming that higher priced cards automatically = broken? There are many fair cards that are high in price solely due to lack of supply, like Moat which goes for over $250 for 1 copy. Yet, there are also completely broken cards like Balance and Wheel of Fortune that you could find for $1 and $8 respectively.
I believe the proper method of testing would be against decks of equal power, not of price. Price does not always correlate with power, and the creativity and originality of this contest should not be stifled due to budget concerns.
There's a fine line between including 4 Taiga and including 4 Black Lotus. I hope both participants and judges can tell the difference.
All I'm saying is that if you want to throw $300-$400 dollars into a deck, I'm probably going to test it against decks of similar value.
I would tend to agree, as last season I had a deck that operated similarly to High Tide that included a single copy of Candelabra of Tawnos. A few of the judges gave the deck lower scores because of the inclusion of a 300$ card.
I'd like to echo DLink here. I don't want to see the exact same problems that we had to resolve last time. Taking prices into consideration is just unfair to the participants. I'd be a hell of a lot harder on a deck with 4 fastbond or 4 Balance than a deck with original duals. Price is not, should not, and has never been a valid axis of judging in this contest, and it is unfair to the participants for one judge to hold them to an errant standard. We had significant issues with this last time around, I think it would be wrong to not take the time to learn from the past.
Just got to say, you've definitely earned distinction as an MTGS hero
Quote from Stardust »
Because he's the hero MTGS deserves, and the one it needs right now. So we'll global him. Because he can take it. Because he's not just our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. An expired rascal.
Quote from LuckNorris »
ExpiredRascals you sir are a god-like hero.
Quote from Lanxal »
ER is a masterful god who cannot be beaten in any endeavour.
Why are you assuming that higher priced cards automatically = broken? There are many fair cards that are high in price solely due to lack of supply, like Moat which goes for over $250 for 1 copy. Yet, there are also completely broken cards like Balance and Wheel of Fortune that you could find for $1 and $8 respectively.
I believe the proper method of testing would be against decks of equal power, not of price. Price does not always correlate with power, and the creativity and originality of this contest should not be stifled due to budget concerns.
There's a fine line between including 4 Taiga and including 4 Black Lotus. I hope both participants and judges can tell the difference.
I'm not collating higher price with brokenness of the card. Nor am I saying that low prices mean non-broken cards. If, however, someone decides to submit a deck with a silly high price tag, it better reliably win. Because who would realistically spend $300-$400 on a deck that doesn't win? If the deck costs that much and doesn't win, then shouldn't it be seen as a warning sign that the deck isn't that good? EDIT: That's not even considering dual lands, actually, I wasn't thinking so much dual lands as other extremely expensive and hard to acquire cards.
Since you mentioned dual lands, I'd like to mention that there are so many cheap alternatives to them that a person can still create a realistic, strong, and flexible mana base without them. It seems rather uncreative to simply toss in the traditional 8 fetch lands + 12 dual lands and simply call it done (unless of course, the deck actually needs it to function ala 3 color legacy decks)
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
I'm not collating higher price with brokenness of the card. Nor am I saying that low prices mean non-broken cards. If, however, someone decides to submit a deck with a silly high price tag, it better reliably win. Because who would realistically spend $300-$400 on a deck that doesn't win? If the deck costs that much and doesn't win, then shouldn't it be seen as a warning sign that the deck isn't that good? EDIT: That's not even considering dual lands, actually, I wasn't thinking so much dual lands as other extremely expensive and hard to acquire cards.
If a deck doesn't win, yes, that's a sign the deck is not winning. (Sorry, I had to.) Independant of its worth.
We don't expect people to own or buy the decks they enter. -> Price does not matter. What matters is wether a deck is solely winning on the back of some powerful cards that have little to do with the deck.
The question in italics [d'oh @ quote formating -> underlined] thus is first and foremost moot, second-rate it's also presumptuous. It's not your money - what do you care?
Since you mentioned dual lands, I'd like to mention that there are so many cheap alternatives to them that a person can still create a realistic, strong, and flexible mana base without them. It seems rather uncreative to simply toss in the traditional 8 fetch lands + 12 dual lands and simply call it done (unless of course, the deck actually needs it to function ala 3 color legacy decks)
You need to drop the 'realistic'. That's no bench-mark here.
On the creativity, I agree, but I know that I don't put much emphasis on working land-bases in my scores. How much you want to make it part of your judging, is your thing (for now).
@ DLink123: I don't think it's necessary to mention budget and sideboards explicitly in the rules.
I did. I think all you technically need is the deck, but giving the Judges an idea as to how to play the deck, what it's supposed to do, and some insight as to how you embraced the theme is probably a pretty good idea.
Note that alltho Dark Ascension prerelease tournaments were already held, the set is not legal in Vintage until its release, what we don't care about. =P
- This is "Casual". -> Only the cards banned in Vintage, silver bordered & celebration cards are banned. There is no Restricted list. If you want to add four Black Lotus, go for it - it should be noted though, that some of the judges might not be too keen on seeing too many broken cards in decks.
Kinda important to know, since that's kind of the center of my deck... =D
I actually really like what I made, and I think I'm going to build it for casual paper magic. I'm really happy with it.
Hmm my bad then I guess. The only reason I was so sure of my reply was because I asked if DKA was legal to Blut already...and his reply made it seem like the answer was no.
I see where G L J is coming from, I am not too good at this competition but I like to build with cards that I enjoy playing with and quite frankly I can't afford to play with full sets of dual lands. That being said, I do miss out on a lot because I am not accustomed to using some of the "better" cards.
As for sideboards, I don't think they should be required. I don't know what all kind of decks are out there really, other than the ones that me and my friends play. So unless I know that the deck I build has some huge gaping flaw (which most do) I won't include a sideboard (at least not a reasonably well thought out one).
stupid question coming in. Where can I submit the deck please? I dont see a thread for that open anywhere and this one is for discussion. I remember last season included a thread just for this. thanks for info
wow, after reading through all the harsh comments from DLink123 I seriously have to ask whether it was necessery at all? If I get the point of the competition which is -> fun, -> casual, -> compete I am rather wandering which one of these values were imbued into the final thoughts summary. My suggestion for future rounds - less flip outs, more on topic. We are not on an elementary school right.
Anyway, congrats to Megiddo, ExpiredRascals, Gaea's Reagent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Please don't comment on decks of the current round, unless you want to point out a rules problem.
For reference:
- Round 0 (29.1.12 to 13.2.12)
- Round 1 (20.2.12 to 8.3.12)
- Round 2 (12.3.12 to)
- Round 3 (26.3.12 to)
- Round 4 (")
- Round 5 (")
- Round 6 (")
- Round 7 (")
- Round 8 (")
1) Main rules
- A submitted deck has to contain the card of the current round and has to be built around the card in some way. While no negative points are given for an uncommented deck, giving judges insight on your ideas and tricks improves their understanding of your deck.
- Contestants can only submit one deck per round. But as long as judging has not started yet, you can edit your deck, change it alltogether or withdraw it.
- This is "Casual". -> Only the cards banned in Vintage, silver bordered & celebration cards are banned. There is no Restricted list. If you want to add four Black Lotus, go for it - it should be noted though, that some of the judges might not be too keen on seeing too many broken cards in decks.
- The cards to build around in all rounds have already been selected.
- Contestants have six days to build and post their decks for each round.
- Judges consult to select the top decks that will be judged for that round during the next day.
- The next seven days, judges will test and rate the top decks.
- A ranking of the contestants’ scores will be posted and the winner of the round will be announced.
- There are four judges in each round. Three judges will be participate in each round: DLink123, Discard1119 & PeterRiviera. The fourth judge will either be: G L J, Megiddo or me.
- In each round judges will rate up to eight decks. The number of decks rated is equal to half the decks submitted (rounded up) or eight, whichever is smaller.
- From the time the entry period in a given round ends, the judges have 24 hours to post a number of the decks they want to rate equal to the number of decks going to be rated plus one.
- From among the decks that received votes, those with the most votes will be rated.
- If votes fail to define the to be tested decks directly, in descending order decks with the most votes are locked in until more decks share their number of votes than there are places left for decks to be tested. From among those the remaining places will be chosen by dice roll (made by me with the dice-tag, #s assigned alphabetically).
- Each deck's judge-scores will be arithmeticaly averaged to determine its score for the round.
- Judges cannot rate their own decks. -> If a judge's deck made a round's top 8, he or she will refrain from rating that particular deck and only rate the other decks.
- Judges are out-of-contest for the final-ranking.
- Judges are encouraged to add some comments as to why they chose a certain deck for rating or not.
- Judges are encouraged to add some comments as to why they gave a certain score to a certain deck.
- Judges are encouraged to add some suggestions how a rated deck could be improved.
How creative and original is your deck.
Effectiveness/Card adherence: 0 to 5 points
How well does it use the selected card?
Synergy/Tuning: 0 to 5 points
How well do the cards combine in the deck; elegance and card selection.
Power/Capacity to win: 0 to 5 points
Can the deck deliver the goods?
Interaction/Protection: 0 to 5 points
How well does the deck interact and deal with other decks.
1 point for any format adherence other than Vintage & Legacy; 1 point for incorporation of theme/flavour.
- Eight rounds will be played.
- To be included in the final ranking, a player has to gather scores in atleast three of the eight rounds. (If too few players meet this criteria, it will be lowered accordingly.)
- At the end of the season, the player within the final ranking having the highest arithmetical average of top 8 scores becomes the Champion. Example: ExpiredRascals participates in all eight rounds, has his decks scored five times and gets f.e. 23 points each round. Gaea's Regent participates in three rounds, gets tested in two of these three rounds and gets twice 24 points. All other players have an average < 23. -> Despite having a lower average than Gaea's Regent, ExpiredRascals wins, because Gaea's Regent hasn't met the criteria of having atleast three scores.
For each round, a card is scheduled. Anyone can enter the contest and submit a deck using that card.
Contestants can post their decks during an entry period of six days. In the following eight days the judges (PeterRiviera, Discard1119, DLink123 and one of G L J, Megiddo or myself) will elect the best decks submitted, to test and rate these decks. After (planned) eight rounds the contest will have a winner.
this being an official thread you can necro it, for as long as Season 5 runs.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
among others, you.
lol alright, I knew it was somewhere, but I couldn't find it.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Edit: And that budget of the deck is not considered part of judging?
R: Copypasta Sauce {Browbeat}
UR: Mana Cache , One Spell to Bind them All {Magnetic Theft}
UG: Epic Struggle , All-In-Poison {Metamorphosis}
UW: Planar Overlay , Decree of the Bailiff {Saprazzan Bailiff}
BG: Thought Gorger , Dark Chroma {Umbra Stalker}
UBR: Dwarven Shrine
WUBRG: Dissipation Field , Maelstrom Nexus
I dunno about you; but if a deck has 3-4 cards above the price of $75 each I'm probably going to grade it a little harder. I've got no problem with budget decks, but if I would have to drop $300-$400 into a casual deck it better win every game it plays.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
The contest has traditionally not considered budget as a part of judging.
Budget ≠ Casual
I would never build these decks in real life as they are out of my personal budget, but that doesn't mean someone else can't. Casual is all-inclusive, and money should not factor into a contest in which we'll be judging with proxies or virtual cards.
R: Copypasta Sauce {Browbeat}
UR: Mana Cache , One Spell to Bind them All {Magnetic Theft}
UG: Epic Struggle , All-In-Poison {Metamorphosis}
UW: Planar Overlay , Decree of the Bailiff {Saprazzan Bailiff}
BG: Thought Gorger , Dark Chroma {Umbra Stalker}
UBR: Dwarven Shrine
WUBRG: Dissipation Field , Maelstrom Nexus
All I'm saying is that if you want to throw $300-$400 dollars into a deck, I'm probably going to test it against decks of similar value.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
Why are you assuming that higher priced cards automatically = broken? There are many fair cards that are high in price solely due to lack of supply, like Moat which goes for over $250 for 1 copy. Yet, there are also completely broken cards like Balance and Wheel of Fortune that you could find for $1 and $8 respectively.
I believe the proper method of testing would be against decks of equal power, not of price. Price does not always correlate with power, and the creativity and originality of this contest should not be stifled due to budget concerns.
There's a fine line between including 4 Taiga and including 4 Black Lotus. I hope both participants and judges can tell the difference.
R: Copypasta Sauce {Browbeat}
UR: Mana Cache , One Spell to Bind them All {Magnetic Theft}
UG: Epic Struggle , All-In-Poison {Metamorphosis}
UW: Planar Overlay , Decree of the Bailiff {Saprazzan Bailiff}
BG: Thought Gorger , Dark Chroma {Umbra Stalker}
UBR: Dwarven Shrine
WUBRG: Dissipation Field , Maelstrom Nexus
I would tend to agree, as last season I had a deck that operated similarly to High Tide that included a single copy of Candelabra of Tawnos. A few of the judges gave the deck lower scores because of the inclusion of a 300$ card.
Multiplayer:
MonoBlack
Mono-Red
Cycling
Crush of Wurms
Zoo
Immortal Coil
Control
Reanimator
Mono-G
Cruel Ascension
Landfall
Esper Spirits/Tokens
Phantom Vigor
Not Explicitly Multiplayer:
Allies
Bant
Artifacts
Body Count: GRRRUUUUUUUUUUU
إن سرقت إسرق جمل
Level 1 Judge
My Cube for use with 6th ed. Rules
I'm not collating higher price with brokenness of the card. Nor am I saying that low prices mean non-broken cards. If, however, someone decides to submit a deck with a silly high price tag, it better reliably win. Because who would realistically spend $300-$400 on a deck that doesn't win? If the deck costs that much and doesn't win, then shouldn't it be seen as a warning sign that the deck isn't that good? EDIT: That's not even considering dual lands, actually, I wasn't thinking so much dual lands as other extremely expensive and hard to acquire cards.
Since you mentioned dual lands, I'd like to mention that there are so many cheap alternatives to them that a person can still create a realistic, strong, and flexible mana base without them. It seems rather uncreative to simply toss in the traditional 8 fetch lands + 12 dual lands and simply call it done (unless of course, the deck actually needs it to function ala 3 color legacy decks)
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
If a deck doesn't win, yes, that's a sign the deck is not winning. (Sorry, I had to.) Independant of its worth.
We don't expect people to own or buy the decks they enter. -> Price does not matter. What matters is wether a deck is solely winning on the back of some powerful cards that have little to do with the deck.
The question in italics [d'oh @ quote formating -> underlined] thus is first and foremost moot, second-rate it's also presumptuous. It's not your money - what do you care?
You need to drop the 'realistic'. That's no bench-mark here.
On the creativity, I agree, but I know that I don't put much emphasis on working land-bases in my scores. How much you want to make it part of your judging, is your thing (for now).
@ DLink123: I don't think it's necessary to mention budget and sideboards explicitly in the rules.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
And Chalice of Life is not legal yet for this contest as DKA has not been released to the public.
R: Copypasta Sauce {Browbeat}
UR: Mana Cache , One Spell to Bind them All {Magnetic Theft}
UG: Epic Struggle , All-In-Poison {Metamorphosis}
UW: Planar Overlay , Decree of the Bailiff {Saprazzan Bailiff}
BG: Thought Gorger , Dark Chroma {Umbra Stalker}
UBR: Dwarven Shrine
WUBRG: Dissipation Field , Maelstrom Nexus
I'd like verification of that, these two quotes from Blut's post seem to contradict that: (especially the smiley)
Kinda important to know, since that's kind of the center of my deck... =D
I actually really like what I made, and I think I'm going to build it for casual paper magic. I'm really happy with it.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
Thanks for the fast reply Blut! Thought I might have to make another deck for a bit there, and that made me sad.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
R: Copypasta Sauce {Browbeat}
UR: Mana Cache , One Spell to Bind them All {Magnetic Theft}
UG: Epic Struggle , All-In-Poison {Metamorphosis}
UW: Planar Overlay , Decree of the Bailiff {Saprazzan Bailiff}
BG: Thought Gorger , Dark Chroma {Umbra Stalker}
UBR: Dwarven Shrine
WUBRG: Dissipation Field , Maelstrom Nexus
As for sideboards, I don't think they should be required. I don't know what all kind of decks are out there really, other than the ones that me and my friends play. So unless I know that the deck I build has some huge gaping flaw (which most do) I won't include a sideboard (at least not a reasonably well thought out one).
Cards for sale: Check them out!
Anyway, congrats to Megiddo, ExpiredRascals, Gaea's Reagent.