Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Nov-15 1:03 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 5:41 am 

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
Swmystery wrote:
Gath Immortal wrote:
Sure, but if all you're using tutors for is to increase your clock speed, I'd argue you're already building/playing against the spirit of the format as outlined by the RC. I like tutors because they allow me to consistently find fun things to play with or keep me from getting screwed over on lands/cards, rather than simply digging for the same cards that always win me the game. If we're banning based on the spirit of the format, I'd kill combos before tutors.


But you have already accepted the bold is impossible. Here:

Gath Immortal wrote:
I also don't think infinites can be eliminated from the format, and wouldn't want to kill ALL of them, some of them are actually interesting and interactive.


Whereas as Maluko has pointed out, removing the upper crust of tutors is very possible. Even just removing the "top tier" of infinites probably runs to +30 cards. "I'd do Y before X" doesn't work when both sides accept Y can't be done.

I would also point out that although I don't doubt you on what you use tutors for, I consistently see players use them for 1) answers to dangerous threats and 2) win conditions, of the infinite and non-infinite variety. These are not players I would naturally think of when I think of people not doing EDH right. There is a difference of experience here.


You missed the part where I was inferring what I wanted to do, which was cut out the uninteresting and uninteractive portion of the top tier that also consistently finds itself jammed in every deck they fit in. I do not accept that it can't be done, I think it's certainly the more difficult path but also the more rewarding one, and if you missed my list:

Player's Can't Take Extra Turns

Palinchron
Kiki-Jiki
Deadeye Navigator
Tooth & Nail
Mikaeus the Unhallowed
Mind Over Matter

That list takes U/x or U/G/x decks, goes back in time and castrates their grandpas, and creates a brand new meta where combo is infinitely less efficient because those ARE the best combos in the format. What else would you add?

Sid the Chicken wrote:
I'd prefer "most likely to be running roughshod over a non-cutthroat meta", since technically EDH supports decks like Hermit Druid that can win faster. Thank god we haven't made Flash Hulk legal.


what he said. and to add my own point, tutors on their own generally don't run over casual decks.

_________________
Maluko wrote:
We need a clear set of objective rules so that everybody always knows what to expect, and how to prepare for it. As of now, I think I spend more time arguing with players about the format than I do playing fun and interactive games of Commander. And last time I read, this was not the format's purpose.

QFT


Last edited by Gath Immortal on 2016-Dec-27 6:51 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 6:24 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Aug-20 7:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Hampshire
Gath Immortal wrote:
Player's Can't Take Extra Turns

Palinchron
Kiki-Jiki
Deadeye Navigator
Tooth & Nail
Mikaeus the Unhallowed
Mind Over Matter

That list takes U/x or U/G/x decks, goes back in time and castrates their grandpas, and creates a brand new meta where combo is infinitely less efficient because those ARE the best combos in the format. What else would you add?

I doubt those could be called the best combos in the format. I'd prefer "most likely to be running roughshod over a non-cutthroat meta", since technically EDH supports decks like Hermit Druid that can win faster. Thank god we haven't made Flash Hulk legal.

_________________
"The President's job - and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this - is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it." -- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide tot he Galaxy Radio Transcripts predicting the future.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 6:48 am 

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
Sid the Chicken wrote:
Gath Immortal wrote:
Player's Can't Take Extra Turns

Palinchron
Kiki-Jiki
Deadeye Navigator
Tooth & Nail
Mikaeus the Unhallowed
Mind Over Matter

That list takes U/x or U/G/x decks, goes back in time and castrates their grandpas, and creates a brand new meta where combo is infinitely less efficient because those ARE the best combos in the format. What else would you add?

I doubt those could be called the best combos in the format. I'd prefer "most likely to be running roughshod over a non-cutthroat meta", since technically EDH supports decks like Hermit Druid that can win faster. Thank god we haven't made Flash Hulk legal.


that's probably a better way to put it, my post-op pain med addled brain is a bit less eloquent than I'd like it to be right now :P

_________________
Maluko wrote:
We need a clear set of objective rules so that everybody always knows what to expect, and how to prepare for it. As of now, I think I spend more time arguing with players about the format than I do playing fun and interactive games of Commander. And last time I read, this was not the format's purpose.

QFT


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 6:55 am 

Joined: 2011-Aug-18 3:35 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Tutors are far more egregious than combos in the format. It's a singleton format for a reason. Regardless of what people tutor out with them, they are the 2-10th copies of spells in a deck that is supposed to be singleton. If you're playing with ten copies of every spell in your deck, you're missing the point whether you're grabbing toolbox or constructing your combo.

It's really easy to say "I don't like two card combos so play another deck or we'll play without you" or "go masturbate in the corner while we see who really won/takes second this game" Meanwhile, tutors aren't seen nearly as threatening so you'd be laughed at for saying that about using tutors even though they're the real reason combo is as prevalent or decks play out the same every game. Good luck assembling a specific two or three card combo in a 99 card deck without tutors. People certainly wouldn't mind them as much if they were assembled by dumb luck instead of a dozen tutors.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 6:59 am 

Joined: 2016-Aug-15 1:21 pm
Age: Drake
I don't find tutors to be a problem, but I've never seen Tooth and Nail used. Whether or not a tutor is used in a degenerative way is based on the card(s) they fetch. I think all the mana rocks that need to be banned are on the ban list. I would rather see some bans that just flat out kill degenerative combos instead of seeing tutors or mana rocks banned.

As for Painter's Servant, it was banned because it combos with two cards. Iona combos with it to just lock everyone down, and not being able to answer the combo the moment it gets played means that there's zero counter play. It also combos with Grindstone by instantly milling an entire player's deck, ignoring the many ways Grindstone can be untapped. The ban on Painter's Servant kills two combos that I'm sure a lot of people would call against the vision of the format.

Honestly, with that in mind, I think considering a ban for Mycosynth Lattice might be reasonable. It and Darksteel Forge can throw together some very degenerative three card combos, and there are plenty of tutors to help get all three combo pieces out (Hellkite Tyrant, Shatterstorm, Austere Command, Creeping Corrosion, Fracturing Gust, Bane of Progress, Magus of the Disk, Pulverize, Serenity, Purify, Akroma's Vengeance, Hammer Mage, Obliterate, Jokulhaups, Subterranean Tremors, Nevinyrral's Disk, and to a lesser extent Seeds of Innocence).

_________________
Commanders:
-The Ur-Dragon-Five Color Dragon Tribal Deck
-Nekusar, the Mindrazer-Hardcore Mill Deck
-Nahiri, the Lithomancer-Monowhite Soldier/Equipment Deck
-Sharuum the Hegemon-Esper Artifact Themed Deck
-Karador, Ghost Chieftain-Kamigawa Spirit Reanimator Tribal Deck
-Zedruu the Greathearted-Predictability is Weakness Themed Deck
-Nissa, Vastwood Seer/Nissa, Sage Animist-Monogreen Land Based Deck


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 7:59 am 

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
Epsilon wrote:
People certainly wouldn't mind them as much if they were assembled by dumb luck instead of a dozen tutors.


from my experience people like "win the game because luck sack" even less than "win the game because timed dropping my combo with tutors correctly through counterspells and hate cards" but I suppose everyone is different. I despise 40+ minute games that come down to "suddenly everyone died cuz topdeck"

Epsilon wrote:
It's really easy to say "I don't like two card combos so play another deck or we'll play without you" or "go masturbate in the corner while we see who really won/takes second this game"


this is exactly the shitty attitude I wish the format's rules management and vision would do away with. I've done the same thing plenty of times, but i'm sorry, it's a terrible half-assed way of policing a play group. If you dont want these things in your format, ban them, dont reduce your players to yelling and arguing about it instead of playing games.

_________________
Maluko wrote:
We need a clear set of objective rules so that everybody always knows what to expect, and how to prepare for it. As of now, I think I spend more time arguing with players about the format than I do playing fun and interactive games of Commander. And last time I read, this was not the format's purpose.

QFT


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 3:04 pm 

Joined: 2011-Aug-18 3:35 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Every game is won off a "luck sack"... You're certainly not winning off your first 7 cards so you do have to draw into SOMETHING to get you the rest of the way. Removing tutors at least makes that "combo off" turn closer to double digits rather than turn 3-5. It also makes it less likely that you choose that as your win con since they're too difficult to set up in such a large deck.

How is that a "shitty attitude"? My idea of fun is not the same as your idea of fun. You CAN'T create rules to cater to one persons idea of fun. The majority should not suffer because one player is into degenerate things but you also can't ban ever potential combo piece because then the list goes into the hundreds of cards. Having groups police themselves is really the only option with only the most awful cards getting banned. No one should have to endure games with "unfun" players just because the cards they're playing aren't banned. Players should find other players with similar playstyles rather than trying to ban those with opposing playstyles from the format.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 8:49 pm 

Joined: 2013-Jun-23 10:18 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
This is exactly the shitty attitude I wish the format's rules management and vision would do away with. I've done the same thing plenty of times, but i'm sorry, it's a terrible half-assed way of policing a play group. If you dont want these things in your format, ban them, dont reduce your players to yelling and arguing about it instead of playing games.


The bold can't be done- not safely, anyway. There are a lot of things the RC would personally prefer people didn't use- Stax pieces, MLD, fast combo, excessive tutoring are but some. Removing all of them would run to a list that would be triple digits- too long even for those of us who don't favour a minimalist banlist.

_________________
Current Commanders: 7/32.

Daretti, Scrap Savant (Red Artefacts).
Ephara, God of the Polis (Azorius Men O'War)
Etrata, the Silencer (Dimir Blink)
Rubinia Soulsinger (Bant Polymorphs).
Kess, Dissident Mage (Grixis Treasure).
Sek'Kuar, Deathkeeper (Jund Apostles).
Mathas, Fiend Seeker (Mardu Judo).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 10:12 pm 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Ultimately, what draws me personally to commander is that it's unsolved. It's a real Wild West of a format where unusual decks can and do win regularly. If the RC did away with their laissez faire approach to a ban list and tried to truly regulate what decks were "acceptable", not only would the ban list be unmanageably large, but the charm of the format would be lost.

I want to play with and against decks like stax or combo from time to time, because they are puzzles to solve, and make me a better player. Those decks I use that are "less friendly" get self-moderated - no matter how much I enjoy playing Selvala v2 creature combo or Selvala v1 pillowfort/lifegain, I am aware that either is a deck to play every game, or even every game night. Most other players I play, whether my own close knit playgroup or at the occasional LGS commander night, seem to follow a similar philosophy with their stronger decks.

_________________
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: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-27 11:05 pm 

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
Ultimately, what draws me personally to commander is that it's unsolved. It's a real Wild West of a format where unusual decks can and do win regularly. If the RC did away with their laissez faire approach to a ban list and tried to truly regulate what decks were "acceptable", not only would the ban list be unmanageably large, but the charm of the format would be lost.

I want to play with and against decks like stax or combo from time to time, because they are puzzles to solve, and make me a better player. Those decks I use that are "less friendly" get self-moderated - no matter how much I enjoy playing Selvala v2 creature combo or Selvala v1 pillowfort/lifegain, I am aware that either is a deck to play every game, or even every game night. Most other players I play, whether my own close knit playgroup or at the occasional LGS commander night, seem to follow a similar philosophy with their stronger decks.


EDH is not unsolved in the slightest. The best decks are Hermit Druid, Doomsday, Ad Nauseam and Rector/Omniscience combo decks followed by whatever flavor of U/x or U/G/x control deck packed wth two card table kills you want to play. Stax MIGHT be able to win a game or two here and there, but these decks are disgustingly resilient and make up the top end of the format almost exclusively.

If you decide that you don't want to play competitively, the format is still solved, you're just wilingly ignoring deck optimization for the sake of theme and fun, which is totally cool and the best part of the format. Once you reach the "casually optimized" part of the format however, you're basically all playing with the same top 10-20% of the available card pool in every deck because of how good the card pool is. This is why we see deadeye navigator, or purphoros or craterhoof or necropotence etc. etc. in almost every deck that has those colors after a certain point, they're optimal. optimal is boring.

Swmystery wrote:
Gath Immortal wrote:
This is exactly the shitty attitude I wish the format's rules management and vision would do away with. I've done the same thing plenty of times, but i'm sorry, it's a terrible half-assed way of policing a play group. If you dont want these things in your format, ban them, dont reduce your players to yelling and arguing about it instead of playing games.


The bold can't be done- not safely, anyway. There are a lot of things the RC would personally prefer people didn't use- Stax pieces, MLD, fast combo, excessive tutoring are but some. Removing all of them would run to a list that would be triple digits- too long even for those of us who don't favour a minimalist banlist.


then the rules need to explicitly outline in big bold letters "THIS IS WHAT YOU SHOULDN'T DO" and beat people over the head with it rather than just providing a minimalist ban list that doesn't help anything, because the format's intent simply doesn't matter to a lot of people who just use the fact that "x isn't banned, so i can play with it" to do whatever the hell they want. The format does need SOME regulation.

Epsilon wrote:
Every game is won off a "luck sack"... You're certainly not winning off your first 7 cards so you do have to draw into SOMETHING to get you the rest of the way. Removing tutors at least makes that "combo off" turn closer to double digits rather than turn 3-5. It also makes it less likely that you choose that as your win con since they're too difficult to set up in such a large deck.


I actually highly doubt that. U/G/x would still be the most versatile and powerful deck in the format if you banned all the mirage tutors, survival and dtutor unless you instated a blanket ruling of "players cannot search libraries except for basic lands" because behind those are Eladmri's Call, Diabolic Intent, Merchant Scroll, Intuition, Fact or Fiction, Lim-Dul's Vault, Impulse, Telling Time, Gamble, Momir Vig Simic Visionary, Captain Sisay, Arcum Dagsson, Sidisi Undead Vizier, Runescarred Demon, Scroll Rack, Green Sun's Zenith, Chord of Calling (which btw is one of the best tutors in top tier EDH, consider THAT for banning...), Wargate, Natural Order, the list goes on and on and on and on.

banning tutors is just as invasive as banning combo pieces

Quote:
How is that a "shitty attitude"? My idea of fun is not the same as your idea of fun. You CAN'T create rules to cater to one persons idea of fun. The majority should not suffer because one player is into degenerate things but you also can't ban ever potential combo piece because then the list goes into the hundreds of cards. Having groups police themselves is really the only option with only the most awful cards getting banned. No one should have to endure games with "unfun" players just because the cards they're playing aren't banned. Players should find other players with similar playstyles rather than trying to ban those with opposing playstyles from the format.


yeah, except that that bolded part ain't happening, because no one can agree on what those cards are, and I'm frustrated to no end because I've been yelling it til I'm blue in the face for the last 2-3 years: PLAYERS CANT TAKE EXTRA TURNS, DEADEYE, PALINCHRON, MIND OVER MATTER, KIKI JIKI, TOOTH & NAIL, MIKAEUS.

Those cards are the lynchpin of every U/G/x combo deck and would cut their balls off immediately, cause a huge high end meta change because U/G/x goes from being Tier 1 in casual play to being pretty much on the same level as every other degenerate goodstuff deck. U/G/x is out of goddamn control and needs to be cut down to size, and one card isnt gonna change that.

_________________
Maluko wrote:
We need a clear set of objective rules so that everybody always knows what to expect, and how to prepare for it. As of now, I think I spend more time arguing with players about the format than I do playing fun and interactive games of Commander. And last time I read, this was not the format's purpose.

QFT


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 2:58 am 

Joined: 2008-Jan-25 8:26 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Calgary
Here's a thought: What if MTGO wasn't a horrible wasteland?

What if it gave you the power to tweak the game rules or banned lists, like you can at the kitchen table (or, to a lesser extent, at the LGS)?

What if it gave you the power to apply realistic (as in, polite and reasonable) social pressure to the people you play with?

I don't have problems with T&N into Mike+Trike or Kiki+whatever, or with Rector-Omniscience or what have you. If someone does it once and doesn't get over it then the table will do something about it, either through Archenemy (esp with anti-combo decks), through the previously mentioned realistic social pressure, or through outright "you aren't allowed to play that sh*t here" - usually in that order. MTGO doesn't work that way. The social-enforcement side of it exists, but it takes a lot more effort and I was never able to made it work.

The LGS experience can work that way, especially for pickup games, provided that communication happens. And it's not fair to expect that everyone is after the exact same thing. If a bunch of people want to play at the Hermit Druid / Rectorniscience level and you're the odd one out, then so be it. If a bunch of people want to play at the dollar-rare level and you have a Hermit Druid deck, then get over yourself and sit it out. In either case, grow up and accept that people like different things than you.

If a store chooses to run Commander events and expressly reward last-man-standing "winning" then it will attract the arms-race mentality and probably won't fit the philosophy of the format.

Realistically, what percent of what we're talking about has to do with Internet semi-anonymity and/or a lack of communication and expectation setting?

I don't see Commander itself as an arms race, that's something that happens without the appropriate expectation setting. The most recent major overhaul to my favorite deck was a de-powering. The deck had no two-card combos, it had all sorts of redundant 3+ card combos based on shared synergies. It played few tutors. And it didn't win that often, but when it did it was always a combo. Now it tries to do bigger, splashier things, and wins even less. But I have more fun now, and I hear less grumblings since I don't seal the late game up with yet another combo.

_________________
"(P)art of the joy of Commander (is) being forced to work with what we (have), even if it (isn't) optimal. Optimal usually isn't that interesting." - papa funk


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 6:57 am 

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
tarnar wrote:
The LGS experience can work that way, especially for pickup games, provided that communication happens. And it's not fair to expect that everyone is after the exact same thing. If a bunch of people want to play at the Hermit Druid / Rectorniscience level and you're the odd one out, then so be it. If a bunch of people want to play at the dollar-rare level and you have a Hermit Druid deck, then get over yourself and sit it out. In either case, grow up and accept that people like different things than you.


When a major subsection of the format experiences games this way, that is not acceptable. LGS players get shafted by this format explicitly because there is no set guideline for everyone to follow. You either play with whoever shows up and accept that someones probably going to give you shitty experience, or clique up and only play with the same group of people every week and i'm sorry but that isn't right. EDH is the only format that exists where players can walk into a store looking for a game and either wish they hadnt because they are completely outclassed or completely waste their time because people have no interest in playing against their deck. No other format has this problem, and it's one in dire need of fixing

_________________
Maluko wrote:
We need a clear set of objective rules so that everybody always knows what to expect, and how to prepare for it. As of now, I think I spend more time arguing with players about the format than I do playing fun and interactive games of Commander. And last time I read, this was not the format's purpose.

QFT


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 7:11 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
Gath, the format you're describing sounds like the unholy love-child of Modern and EDH. Such a format (modern frames only, banning criteria based on ubiquity/violating the turn four threshold) seems to offer everything that you want. Maybe, as I mentioned earlier, there need to be two Commander formats: classic and Modern. Basically every card you take umbrage with is outside of the card pool that would be available. Kiki-Jiki would probably be less obnoxious, but it and Tooth and Nail could go on the list from the outset, much like Modern started with glimpse of nature, dread return and co. banned. This would also solve the MTGO problem. Yes, you'll lose some commanders, but how many people who would want such a format play with commanders that aren't modern legal anyways?

_________________
specter404 wrote:
Basically, when it comes to commander, I want you to stab me through the heart, not cut off my balls.

Gath Immortal wrote:
Twenty Kavus and a Dream is not a legacy deck.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 7:12 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
EDH is the only format that exists where players can walk into a store looking for a game and either wish they hadnt because they are completely outclassed or completely waste their time because people have no interest in playing against their deck. No other format has this problem, and it's one in dire need of fixing

Not quite true. Vintage (and I imagine Legacy) are this way as well.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 7:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
Carthain wrote:
Gath Immortal wrote:
EDH is the only format that exists where players can walk into a store looking for a game and either wish they hadnt because they are completely outclassed or completely waste their time because people have no interest in playing against their deck. No other format has this problem, and it's one in dire need of fixing

Not quite true. Vintage (and I imagine Legacy) are this way as well.


I'm not so sure about that. Unless you're showing up like I did to tournaments with my Mortal Combat or Psychogenic Probe (soldier of fortune ftw) decks in the pre-netdeck era, you have a decent idea going in what you will see. Most people who play legacy or vintage do some research before going to play and will show up with some variation of the more popular and effective decks in the format, in my experience. Especially as those events usually cost money. Unless you're a real dingus, like I used to be.

_________________
specter404 wrote:
Basically, when it comes to commander, I want you to stab me through the heart, not cut off my balls.

Gath Immortal wrote:
Twenty Kavus and a Dream is not a legacy deck.


Last edited by kirkusjones on 2016-Dec-28 7:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 26 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: