Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Nov-12 4:12 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-13 10:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
:facepalm:

Edit: You are evaluating the card Forbid -- yet, from your descriptions it seems you don't actually understand the rules on how it works. How can you call for a ban on a card that you don't understand how it works?


Last edited by Carthain on 2016-Jun-13 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-13 10:58 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
If forbid is countered, it does not resolve and remains in the graveyard. It is also not even close to banable. I really suggest reading up on card evaluation, because you keep showing you really don't get it. :(

_________________
Deepglow Skate
Antis wrote:
I'm seriously suspicious of any card that makes Doubling Season look fair and reasonable.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-13 11:19 am 

Joined: 2016-Feb-13 2:14 pm
Age: Dragon
Location: Orlando, Florida
Since you'restill not getting it, I'm going to break this down all the way for you.

RaiRai wrote:
Well, having people vote on it should count for it part of the ban, and if it met 4 out 7 of the criteria, it would act as a nail in the coffin if it only met 3 out of 7 of the criteria.
That's not how this works. Either a card is a problem or it isn't. A good example of this is Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. For how it typically gets into play, it causes way too much grief and pain for everyone involved. It turns a normal game of Commander into stop the Emrakul, or die to the Emrakul.

RaiRai wrote:
I just mentioned the cards i mentioned as example, like I would want Vampire hexmage and or dark depths banned because nobody really runs that combo, although Forbid is an exception.
If nobody runs it, why is it a problem? And Forbid isn't a problem, and I'm about to explain why.

RaiRai wrote:
Forbid:
1.it costs 3 mana and is easily played turn two or three, and has a buyback cost of discarding two cards
2. Its cheap at 2.50 to .01 eg format friendly
3. It does have a broken interaction with cards that have madness or madness like effect, allowing them to be played for their madness cost. Good combo but severely broken.
4. If this card is countered, it still returns to the graveyard and its buyback cost is enabled, unless exiled permanently.
5. Its a common from an older set, so its moderately easy to acquire
6. This card is infrequently or rarely played in most decks and amongst playgroups and online

1. Three mana for a counterspell is pretty common, therefore it doesn't meet your own requirement of being too cheap. A one mana counterspell that countered everything with no drawback would be too cheap, but not worth banning still.
2. Price of card has no bearing really anything other than the Power Nine.
3. Having a discard outlet for madness isn't broken, as none of the cards with madness are degenerate themselves.
4. Wrong. Read how buyback works. The spell has to resolve in order for buyback to function.
5. Older set? 1999 is old, but not hard to aquire by any means. You know what cards are a pain to get, but aren't expensive except for a few cards? Legends and Arabian Nights. They both had a pretty limited run, with few reprints. But only a few cards from those cards are on the list, and that's because of degeneracy, not price. Also, Forbid is an uncommon, not a common.
6. Largely irrelevant.

RaiRai wrote:
(I only mentioned Kaalia cause I loathe her as a commander creature, and the fact that out of my playgroup she always had the automatic victory especially 3 vs 1 working against her.)
Then all of you need to play more cheap spot removal. Kaalia should die to three players every time.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-13 1:23 pm 

Joined: 2011-Sep-30 6:08 am
Age: Elder Dragon
RaiRai wrote:
I’m here today to propose an idea for a new card banning criteria since some things even need to change,
The only measuring stick for the success of a casual format is its popularity. Under the current banning criteria, Commander has exploded in popularity. From square one, the premise that "some things even need to change" is complete unsupported.

Just like your threads calling for the banning of specific cards, you just don't understand what you're talking about.

Step back and ask yourself what you want the ban list to accomplish for the format. Ask yourself if what you want is a reasonable format-wide goal. Ask yourself how the current ban list (not the criteria) fail to deliver on this. If you can recognize a pattern among cards where the current ban list doesn't line up with what it should accomplish, then compare those cards to the existing criteria. If you can explain your entire chain of logic and derive a new criterion from start to finish there, then maybe you will have something worth talking about.

_________________
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
Cryocerete (sp?)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-13 4:10 pm 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
You dont seem to understand the purpose of banning cards, card interactions, the format philosophy or the rules committee. You also seem to struggle with grammar and sentence structure, that's nothing to do with your argument and I'm no expert, but you may want to work on that to make reading your posts easier.

I'm not privy to the internal interactions of the RC, but I am led to believe Sheldon is part of it. I also know that Sheldon writes articles for star city in which he discusses many things about commander, including the ban list criteria and reasoning for it:
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/commander/24889-Commander-Official-Banned-List-And-Format-Philosophy.html

He also writes quite a lot of articles which discuss the commander league he plays in at his LGS, the commander draft he's doing at the moment, the many games he has played at Armada, and the trials he has done when testing cards which are being considered for banning. This is just one member of the RC but it is clear that the diversity of decks and strategies encountered in his "play group" is fairly large.

Next, you need to learn the rules. On more than one occasion the cards you mention do not do the things you think they do, this shows inexperience with the spells you are discussing, which means your credibility in discussing them is hampered. Forbid is the most recent example. In additional you don't seem to have a particularly broad knowledge of magic cards, which also hampers your ability to find alternate solutions.

You mention Hexmage + Dark Depths as a " broken" card interaction, and that hexmage has many other broken interactions, yet I struggle to think of a single example. It can kill planeswalkers, but that's far from broken. There are some cumulative upkeep tricks you can do, but that's more neat than broken.

As to the Depths example itself, Marit Lage does not have protection. You can sac, bounce or exile the token and it takes a full 2 swings at the same players to kill them. When you can tinker blightsteel into play about as fast or faster, Marit is cute.

In my opinion, the banned list should be used to keep the very worst of things out of the format. Only cards which are extremely damaging and have very little counter play (biorhythm) or are way too expensive and powerful to include (power nine). The banned list is not to stop someone from being a jerk, because you cant fight a person's nature. If people want to do dickish things they will, and some groups actually enjoy that.

My final and most important suggestion to you, is to really investigate the cards you want banned. Think long and hard about how to beat them, ask other people how you beat them, ask about them in the strategy section on this site. I used to believe dead-eye navigator was the worst card in the format. It was not until someone said "hey, you know you can respond to the soulbond trigger right?" that I realized it was beatable (still really annoying though).

Only when you have exhausted all other options should you look for a card to be banned.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-13 9:08 pm 
EDH Rules Committee

Joined: 2006-May-18 5:21 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
specter404 wrote:
I'm not privy to the internal interactions of the RC, but I am led to believe Sheldon is part of it. I also know that Sheldon writes articles for star city in which he discusses many things about commander, including the ban list criteria and reasoning for it:
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/commander/24889-Commander-Official-Banned-List-And-Format-Philosophy.html


He's also introduced all the members of the RC! (though Kevin isn't on the committe any more, since he went off to create Duel Commander.)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 1:34 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
papa_funk wrote:
specter404 wrote:
I'm not privy to the internal interactions of the RC, but I am led to believe Sheldon is part of it. I also know that Sheldon writes articles for star city in which he discusses many things about commander, including the ban list criteria and reasoning for it:
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/commander/24889-Commander-Official-Banned-List-And-Format-Philosophy.html


He's also introduced all the members of the RC! (though Kevin isn't on the committe any more, since he went off to create Duel Commander.)

There really hasn't been any change to that list, has there? No Kevin, so is it still just you five?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 1:39 am 

Joined: 2009-Apr-21 3:38 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Palm Springs Area, CA
I would just like to say that my Damia would be really upset if Forbid were banned... but only Damia.


All in all, these conversations are reminding me heavily of when I first started playing EDH. We soft banned Dwarves Miner and Dwarves Blast Miner because we were running with the worst mana bases possible and an early miner completely wrecked people who were trying to get going with Ravnica Bounce lands. The issue was a player issue, not a card issue.

_________________
3DH4L1F3


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 5:41 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-May-04 6:05 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Wisconsin
I think the banned list only matters in pick-up games where people aren't as familiar with each other or the opposing decks. This is when people are either hooked or turned away from the format. For the format to maintain its presence in the realm of casual magic, a player's first few experiences with EDH need to as high quality as possible. Of course the quality of a game is subjective to any given player's tastes, but the banned list should encourage a scenario that the average casual player would enjoy. Do I agree with the current banned list? No from a personal stand point, but EDH is a group game with a community of players. And when I look at the format in that way, I think the banned list serves its purpose in attracting new players, so I don't complain.

Once you have a playgroup, it's relatively easy to adjust the rules of the format to the satisfaction of the other members. And if not, is the banned list that detrimental to your experience? I'm guessing not.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 5:43 am 

Joined: 2014-Sep-13 7:28 am
Age: Elder Dragon
RaiRai wrote:
Well, having people vote on it should count for it part of the ban, and if it met 4 out 7 of the criteria, it would act as a nail in the coffin if it only met 3 out of 7 of the criteria.

If there's 7 criteria (not including vote), why vote when it's 3/7 'bad' criteria? That makes the minority of points negative.

RaiRai wrote:
Forbid:
1.it costs 3 mana and is easily played turn two or three, and has a buyback cost of discarding two cards
2. Its cheap at 2.50 to .01 eg format friendly
3. It does have a broken interaction with cards that have madness or madness like effect, allowing them to be played for their madness cost. Good combo but severely broken.
4. If this card is countered, it still returns to the graveyard and its buyback cost is enabled, unless exiled permanently.
5. Its a common from an older set, so its moderately easy to acquire
6. This card is infrequently or rarely played in most decks and amongst playgroups and online

Ruling: 3 Positives vs. 3 Negatives, time for the tiebreaker of a community vote
Of course this is merely an example, and voting should only come down when it is needed.

Okay, if there's 6 criteria and it meets half bad, i could see a vote. But not at 7.
But my question to you here, is that if you don't have total faith/acceptance of the RC, then how can you know if all bannable cards are going to be banned? You said forbid was 3/6 bad qualities and 3/6 good qualities (even though i have trouble believing #2 and #5 are in any way significantly different) but what if the RC says it's 1 bad quality and 5 good qualities? There would never be a vote, and then therefore the RC would still be in control. Which, *not that the members of the RC are deceitful*, means that the RC can knowingly rate a card at 1/6 bad points to keep it legal if they want when they know it's actually like 5/6 bad points.

Like what would this accomplish? If the RC publicly said "This card is fucking whack, 6/6 bad points, we should ban it" - are they allowed to without a vote? Because if they are, they have total control. If not, then the commander population may have to deal with a card being legal that might truthfully suck, but the popular vote was "lol! i love shitting on dorks with my Emrakul!".
*not that i'm saying Emrakul is necessarily well-liked or popular*

I just think there are a lot of problems with trying to make it a voting thing.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 6:24 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
We've done two public polls on MTGS and both times the publicly voted list was largely in line with the actual ban list. Public vote is not necessary because the RC has a good grasp on what they're doing.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 8:54 am 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
niheloim wrote:
I would just like to say that my Damia would be really upset if Forbid were banned... but only Damia.

I'm rebuilding my Damia from a sultai goodstuff to more discard focused, the biggest benefit I gain from this discussion is a reminder that I need to dig out a forbid to put in that deck.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 9:40 am 
EDH Rules Committee

Joined: 2006-May-18 5:21 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
There really hasn't been any change to that list, has there? No Kevin, so is it still just you five?


We gained and lost an ObsidianDice in the middle, but it's currently the same five.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 1:04 pm 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
papa_funk wrote:
cryogen wrote:
There really hasn't been any change to that list, has there? No Kevin, so is it still just you five?


We gained and lost an ObsidianDice in the middle, but it's currently the same five.

That's what I thought. I had factored in ODice, but I was second guessing that I was missing anyone.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Idea for a revised card ban critera
AgePosted: 2016-Jun-14 4:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2013-Oct-26 9:21 am
Age: Dragon
Location: Xenia, OH, USA
I really don't think the banning criteria needs to change, personally... The banlist is currently where it needs to be. As new cards are printed, I'm sure the RC examines each card in the list, compared with new cards and either makes a determination (like "Yeah, Emrakul stays banned") or puts a card on a mental watch list.

That being said, the only card that is not currently banned that I would love to see banned is Deadeye Navigator, though I understand why it is not. While annoying, it isn't used enough to be a real problem.

As an aside to that though, I wouldn't be upset if every copy of DEN was assembled into one place and that place just happened to immolate.

_________________
You know you've said something right when Sheldon hits you with a QFT...

http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?p=233412#p233412


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: