Please can we standardize deck filenames

[Lodici]

Here are four examples showing different ways a deck file might be named -

• Theme-Deck_DPA_G_60_Teeth-of-the-Predator.dec
• UBmagarena.dec
• RW_Flash_40.dec
• Reanimation.dec

I am looking to improve the deck selection during the duel setup and names like "Theme-Deck_DPA_G_60_Teeth-of-the-Predator.dec" are a pain because of the length and all the encoded info. If this happened to be the standard way of naming deck files then I could strip off all the prefix info but it is not so I can't. Embedding data in the file name is also a pretty dubious way to go, IMO.

Utimately (and this may be a long ways down the line) I would like to be able to present a list of decks to the player using clear and colorful names, like "Teeth of the Predator", with the ability to sort and filter the decks list based on size, card type, card name, color, keywords etc, all of which can be extracted automatically from the contents of the deck file itself, not using some dodgy data embedded in the filename.

In the meantime, can we come up with a standard way of naming the deck files that is geared towards displaying the names in a more friendly and consistent way. Thanks.

[melvin]

From the point of view of deck selection, what would be a good naming convention?

[Lodici]

From the point of view of deck selection, what would be a good naming convention?

Something like "{name}[__{other stuff}].dec" would be good, where a double underscore is the delimiter, although it could be anything that is valid across all OSes and that will consistently isolate the filename. So...

• Theme-Deck_DPA_G_60_Teeth-of-the-Predator.dec
• UBmagarena.dec
• RW_Flash_40.dec
• Reanimation.dec

would become

• Teeth-of-the-Predator__Theme-Deck_DPA_G_60.dec
• magarena__UB.dec
• Flash__RW_40.dec
• Reanimation.dec

[hong yie]

number of cards in deck is important, i only play against decks with 60 cards. sometime i also notice the deck creator, as there're several similar theme decks made by several creators with minor twists.

[Lodici]

number of cards in deck is important, i only play against decks with 60 cards. sometime i also notice the deck creator, as there're several similar theme decks made by several creators with minor twists.

Understood, but wouldn't you rather have the decks presented to you in a multi-column format similar to the card explorer? For example...

Code: Select all

| {deck name} | {deck size} | {deck color} | {author/theme} | {description}


which would make it much easier to isolate decks based on a specific property such as size, color, etc., simply by sorting or filtering on the appropriate column.

[Lodici]

The filename format should only contain info that cannot be determined from the contents of the file, so you might also want to add "{author}" or "{theme}" to the filename since this is not available anywhere else AFAIK. It would be even better if you could add these fields to the content of the deck file but I am not sure whether the deck file format is following some sort of standard which additional properties/fields would break.

[jerichopumpkin]

that sounds really good to me!

[ember hauler]

wouldn't you rather have the decks presented to you in a multi-column format similar to the card explorer?

This idea is so cool! Would be very nice to have deck selector like this.

Here are more ideas:
1. To check and display if the deck is legal in vintage, legacy, modern etc. Would be helpful when choosing the deck to play against.

2. To display deck rating from Project Firemind, if the deck is presented there. This great service is constantly testing decks against each other, so the relative strength is measured. And what is more important, the decks are played by Magarena AI, so human player would know what to expect from a particular deck.

[Lodici]

1. To check and display if the deck is legal in vintage, legacy, modern etc. Would be helpful when choosing the deck to play against.

I am not sure whether we have the information to determine this. Perhaps @shawnieboy or @melvin will know.

2. To display deck rating from Project Firemind, if the deck is presented there. This great service is constantly testing decks against each other, so the relative strength is measured. And what is more important, the decks are played by Magarena AI, so human player would know what to expect from a particular deck.

I think this would be awesome and a real feather in the cap for Magarena. If the Firemind service provides an API then it should be fairly straightforward.

It would also be great if you could categorize decks as "beginner", "advanced", "expert" etc based on how difficult they are to play in terms of strategy, mechanics, effectiveness against AI, etc. Probably not feasible though.

[ember hauler]

1. To check and display if the deck is legal in vintage, legacy, modern etc. Would be helpful when choosing the deck to play against.

I am not sure whether we have the information to determine this. Perhaps @shawnieboy or @melvin will know.

Project Firefind has this feature, perhaps we could use the same or similar code.

2. To display deck rating from Project Firemind, if the deck is presented there. This great service is constantly testing decks against each other, so the relative strength is measured. And what is more important, the decks are played by Magarena AI, so human player would know what to expect from a particular deck.

I think this would be awesome and a real feather in the cap for Magarena. If the Firemind service provides an API then it should be fairly straightforward.

We could ask Mike about this, he is the guy behind Firemind. He is helpful and responsive.

It would also be great if you could categorize decks as "beginner", "advanced", "expert" etc based on how difficult they are to play in terms of strategy, mechanics, effectiveness against AI, etc. Probably not feasible though.

Right, based on the score the deck gets in Firemind it's fairly easy to categorize them.

But the potential of Magarena + Firemind is HUGE.
Based on stats of several hundred, if not thousand games, one could get not only the relative power of the paricular deck (i.e. how often the deck wins), but also the speed of the deck (i.e. how many turns it usually takes for this deck to win), or the comparison of this deck and other decks (for example, this deck usually defeats this and this, but beaten by this and this).

So based on the stats from Firemind the player of Magarena could choose the right deck to play against, to get more fun!

We could start from simple things like universal deck names between to programs, and then progress toward some interfaces, interactions and APIs. Firemind is a web app, this should be doable.

[Huggybaby]

IIRC MWS has a way where you can write all the notes you want regarding a deck. It's a cool feature but I only ever got one or two people to use it.

And two thumbs WAY up about renaming the decks.

[ShawnieBoy]

1. To check and display if the deck is legal in vintage, legacy, modern etc. Would be helpful when choosing the deck to play against.

I am not sure whether we have the information to determine this. Perhaps @shawnieboy or @melvin will know.

Project Firefind has this feature, perhaps we could use the same or similar code.

Project Firemind uses an API from Tappped Out - However it's not perfect as it doesn't implement Restricted cards, only banned (So 4 x All the different Moxes is fine in a Vintage deck!!)

Making our own version of the banned/restricted lists for Vintage and Legacy should be simple enough though, as they're fairly small.

We'd need something fairly major for other deck legalities though, we don't assign cards to sets, so we'd only have card names to go by. I really don't fancy assembling lists of each card in each set >.< There must be a simpler way.

[Lodici]

Project Firemind uses an API from Tappped Out...

Thanks for the link and explanation.

Making our own version of the banned/restricted lists for Vintage and Legacy should be simple enough though, as they're fairly small....I really don't fancy assembling lists of each card in each set >.< There must be a simpler way.

Could we design something along the same lines as card scripts so that we don't have to? Leave it to the excellent and ever-growing Magarena user base to create the lists as and when required?

[ShawnieBoy]

It would depend which format would be most helpful for you.
At its simplest, you could have a set-named txt file per set, with a list of all the names of cards in that set. Each format would then be a txt file with a list of all legal sets by name.

These lists could then also be used as filters in the card explorer to filter by set.

I'd love a system that would also list cards that aren't yet implemented, and have an in-game script submission

[Lodici]

It would depend which format would be most helpful for you.
At its simplest, you could have a set-named txt file per set, with a list of all the names of cards in that set. Each format would then be a txt file with a list of all legal sets by name.

The simpler the better! I envisage a new directory, "sets", which will contain the txt files you describe. When Magarena starts up (or maybe just on demand) it will parse these files into an internal object structure so that it can easily be used where required - for example, as a filter in the card explorer. The idea being that anyone who feels so inclined can contribute new sets without requiring a rebuild of the source code. It seems pretty straightforward - we just need to design the format for the sets file. Any ideas or examples welcome!

I'd love a system that would also list cards that aren't yet implemented,...

It would be simple enough to display the "unimplementable.tsv" file in game if that would be any help.

...and have an in-game script submission

If you mean some sort of script editor then that sounds like a lot of work!