Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Jul-17 12:47 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 7:30 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
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

Is that really true though? In 60-card formats there is no variance in decks, skill, or interests? How much of the other formats do you play, Gath? I play solely EDH, so I have no personal experience there.

Regardless, I don't think bannings or any other universally enforceable guidelines can solve this particular problem, nor should they. It speaks to me of a homogeneity that would make me lose interest in the format quickly. Never being outclassed sounds boring, because one of the best parts of magic is learning to play better, and being able to say that you can compete at a level you couldn't before. I don't care about winning so much, but knowing you're in the game when you previously wouldn't have been is intensely satisfying, and not something I'd have taken away by the artificial removal of decks that could provide the next challenge.

Equally, part of my goal as an EDH player is to help others grow their game when they want to, and oppression is not a way to growth. So I keep my stronger decks packed away for the most part, except when the group is ready or very occasionally when I ask permission.

My experience of EDH seems to differ greatly from yours, Gath. If the format was changes in the way you seem to want, I would enjoy it less.

_________________
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-28 7:33 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
kirkusjones wrote:
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) 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.

Okay, I'll give you it's different degrees -- but it's not hard to imagine someone with either a highly tuned vintage/legacy deck being asked not to play in a local group's casual game of the format. And, something like that is more likely to be encountered when trying to do EDH.

But -- we also kind of tell people to ask about what kind of games/decks people want/are playing. That way you can try to fit in with a random group you are joining. Which, is not really any different from playing Standard. Is it a tuned deck, or a casual one?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 7:43 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
I played legacy for about five or six years before coming over to EDH. I still follow legacy closely, so I can tell you with some degree of confidence that there is a lot less variance in the format than the cardpool of that size would have you believe. The current tier one decks are either some form of aggro-prison (Death & Taxes, Eldrazi), blazing fast combo (BR Reanimator and to a lesser extent, Infect) and control (Miracles). Most decks that play blue run what has come to be known as the "cantrip cartel" (brainstorm, ponder, sometimes sensei's divining top) or are tuned to beat those decks with cards like chalice of the void. You'll most likely run into someone playing one of the many flavors of Delver-based tempo as well, with a sprinking of stuff like storm, dredge and everyone's favorite budget option: burn. Stastics have born out that the more rounds in the event, the better the decks running blue perform, as they run the best cards to improve consistency. Sure, Eldrazi and D&T and the rest steal the whole show from time to time, but you've got a better chance against the field if yiu run brainstorm and friends.

Carthain - I make a distinction between the competitive format generally referred to as Legacy and the more casual players who construct decks using that cardpool. I don't know if I've ever been to a shop that has a casual legacy or vintage night.

_________________
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 7:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
kirkusjones wrote:
Carthain - I make a distinction between the competitive format generally referred to as Legacy and the more casual players who construct decks using that cardpool. I don't know if I've ever been to a shop that has a casual legacy or vintage night.

So... you're applying your own restrictions on a term to my comment, and then tell me how I'm wrong? That doesn't seem very fair.

I've known people who has either "inherited" or purchased a previous players collection, and then learn to play and make decks - and with a bit of help (myself, other players, store employees) they can find out what "format" their deck is valid in. Thus we have someone (through a series of non-outrageous events) who knows what format their deck is in, but may not have spent time researching what that means, or even if there's a difference between competitive & casual builds.

Just because you make a certain distinction doesn't mean that my point isn't valid.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 9:23 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
kirkusjones wrote:
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?


kiki, deadeye, time spells, mikeaus the unhallowed and tooth & nail are all modern legal. Modern EDH would change nothing for me except get rid of a lot of really fun cards and leave most of my least favorite ones still as the top dogs. as far as my banning criteria, it tends to be a combination of "This card is so easy to win with in so many different situations playing optimally without it is akin to shooting off my own kneecaps in preparation for the boston marathon" and "is so braindead stupid easy to use I could down a bottle of horse tranquilizers and literally do nothing but play with my phone/dick all game then suddenly win the second everyone taps out by flopping my unconscious hand on the table".

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


my assumption when I made that statement was that the people in question actually know what legacy is. Twenty Kavus and a Dream is not a legacy deck, simply being format legal doesn't make it format playable, and if you didn't come with a playable Legacy deck, then you didn't actually come to play legacy, you came to throw 60 card jankball at people, and that it's own thing under the kitchen table umbrella. What you're talking about is the period of time where a casual player first learns and understands what Legacy actually means, the first time he runs Twenty Kavus and a Dream up against Fish or Storm or MUD.

For EDH players at an LGS, that's not just a first time "oh, this is what this format ACTUALLY is" it happens pretty much every week because it constantly changes with the introduction of new players, and it's not just happening to newbies, it's happening to everyone pretty much every other week.

_________________
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 10:28 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
Twenty Kavus and a Dream is not a legacy deck.


Sig'd. Both here and on the legacy site I frequent. Thanks for that. I am tempted to build the deck and enter it into a legacy tournament.

_________________
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 11:04 am 

Joined: 2009-Jul-02 4:25 pm
Age: Drake
If you people socialize in real life the same way you post on this forum, I would imagine the reason you can't find games that you enjoy is because you are toxic individuals. /micdrop /unsubscribe


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 11:15 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
Carthain wrote:
kirkusjones wrote:
Carthain - I make a distinction between the competitive format generally referred to as Legacy and the more casual players who construct decks using that cardpool. I don't know if I've ever been to a shop that has a casual legacy or vintage night.

So... you're applying your own restrictions on a term to my comment, and then tell me how I'm wrong? That doesn't seem very fair.

I've known people who has either "inherited" or purchased a previous players collection, and then learn to play and make decks - and with a bit of help (myself, other players, store employees) they can find out what "format" their deck is valid in. Thus we have someone (through a series of non-outrageous events) who knows what format their deck is in, but may not have spent time researching what that means, or even if there's a difference between competitive & casual builds.

Just because you make a certain distinction doesn't mean that my point isn't valid.


I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying your experience with what legacy is is vastly different from mine. I grew up on the East coast of the United States, where there has been a strong competitive legacy scene for a long time. My apologies if it came off as me dismissing your experience as incorrect. This, however, does not make Gath's "twenty kavus and a dream" any less funny.

Back on topic, I think the format is fine in its current state. There will be road bumps and people will have crappy experiences from time to time, but overall, I think we still play the best format in Magic.

_________________
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 4:15 pm 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Maluko wrote:
This doesn't happen with wanderers like me who interact with different players every Commander game. Subjective stuff doesn't work for us. We need a clear set of objective rules so that when we play Commander, everybody always knows what to expect, and how to prepare for it.
Do you honestly think thats possible outside a 'win at all costs' tournament level of play? If people want to make and play theme decks, is any objective rules list going to stop that from having a terrible game against a tuned deck? Arent you really saying 'people need to be ready for anything I want play. No complaining, legal is legal'? Abolishing any sort of subjective just seems to gravitate towards competitive play, no?
Quote:
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.
I get that's not desirable, but I dont think thats true of most of the playerbase. Do you feel the need to argue? Why not just stand up and play somewhere or someone else?

_________________
sir squab wrote:
My... history of buying Magic cards is probably a tapestry of bad financial decisions >_>
niheloim wrote:
No, I think he's right. I'm just all butt-hurt over prophet.


Last edited by MRHblue on 2016-Dec-29 7:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 7:21 pm 

Joined: 2014-Sep-13 7:28 am
Age: Elder Dragon
tgambitg wrote:
With the rise of artifact decks, the only real card I feel needs to be considered for banning with new information is Arcum Dagsson... He does the exact same thing as another card on the banlist, Tinker, but he is repeatable, and ends games very quickly.

How is a 4 mana summoning sick creature that has to target other creatures in order to only receive noncreatures the same as "As an additional cost, sac an artifact. Go cheat out an any artifact"? Not even close to exact.

In all the sates and shops i've ever played in, i've only seen one Arcum and i now own it (the deck originally belonged to a friend). It's so soft to removal and not very great as far as tiers go.

cryogen wrote:
Whether we're talking about optimizing a deck with a $400 Tropical Island or a $1,000 Library of Alexandria, the card is either out of your price range or it is.

I'm so far off topic with this statement, but i just want everyone to know that you don't have to pay anything like that. You can get a Trop for like $140-170 and a Library for under $600, assuming you don't mind some play. I just picked up a Library last month for $400 and another last week for $300.

In regards to the PTBE: total crap, if you ask me. You may remember i've argued with you against it before and it may be one of the most unethical (totally using this word incorrectly i bet) things in the format.

Gath Immortal wrote:
Honestly, I'd be happy to see more experimentation with adding cards to the ban list.

Create a league and stop trying to ruin the only format i seriously play.

cryogen wrote:
There will always be a replacement card when you ban something, but if you remove the "best" cards then the "next best" aren't so bad. Slowing the game down a turn or two by removing Sol Ring and Mana Crypt won't stop players from continuing to load up their decks with Signets, Talismans, et al, but you have given the rest of the table more time to react. Similarly, banning Tooth and Nail won't stop someone from Mike and Trike, but it makes you have to work harder for it.

This is spot on. I do not advocate for more bans, but i've never advocated that banning anything perceived as a problem automatically means that "oh there's plenty of other cards for them to wreck you with". In fact, many of the powerful cards are almost unique.

I don't think Tooth and Nail, Survival of the Fittest, Necropotence, Sol Ring/Mana Crypt/Mana Vault, Leovold, Triskelion, Hermit Druid, Gaea's Cradle, Dead-eye Navigator, Palinchron, Doomsday, Consecrated Sphinx, Ad Naeuseam, Iona, et al (i'm just naming cards i hear about all the time...) should be banned but i think a person would be oblivious to claim they are easily replaced.

Gath Immortal wrote:
So let's talk about modern for a second. Once upon a time, there was a deck that was way too good, called pyromancer's ascension. It worked because pyromancer's ascension is an insane card. so to deal with the deck, they banned Ponder, Preordain, Rite of Flame, and Seething Song. Guess what? it's still a deck. Know why? because pyromancer's ascension still exists.

if you ban the things that get you to the combo, people will just use different cards to get there, and in EDH there are an infinite number of good dig spells. The answer to the popular infinites is to ban the infinites, not the tutors for the infinites

Ponder and Preordain are way too powerful for modern, you're not actually making a point.

Ascension still exists because it's an interesting card and nothing else really does that. You may also notice that the deck is not hugely dominating, so maybe the bans worked as intended. Instead of killing a deck, they moderate it.

Maluko wrote:
Likewise, there are cards that are probably against some of the principles of the format's philosophy but are still allowed to roam free (for example, I have yet to understand how Protean Hulk goes against the format's philosophy while Survival of the Fittest doesn't).

This has actually been discussed ad nauseam, if you still don't understand then look it up.

Hulk is a creature, he cheats creatures into play in any number of combos, and now consider the incidental clones (shit, what do i search my deck for with MY copy of Hulk?), reanimation/gy recursion (lol my Hulk dies i put Eternal Witness into play targeting Hulk), and sac outlets (Greater Good for the function AND flavor (or rather, the meat AND the eggs)).

If you don't understand how these two cards are different, that is YOUR problem.

To be honest, i don't think Hulk should even be banned, though.

Maluko wrote:
First, what evidence do you have that Sol Ring is the poster child of the format? Just because it was printed in all Commander precons?

Duh, you answered your own question.
Maluko wrote:
Then I'm afraid to burst your bubble, but if that's your reasoning, then that honor goes to Command Tower, since it was printed in all Commander precons and even Commander's Arsenal.

Even commander 2014? Then i'm afraid to burst your bubble...

Drrakus wrote:
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 (stuff).

3 card combos are not offensive and this combo, while awesome and i play it in Mishra, is so janky and you whiff to any 2 mana bounce or exile spell. Yuck.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-28 10:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-25 1:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
MRHblue wrote:
Do you honestly think thats possible outside a 'win at all costs' tournament level of play? If people want to make and play theme decks, is any objective rules list going to stop that from having a terrible game against a tuned deck? Arent you really saying 'people need to be ready for anything I want play. No complaining, legal is legal'? Abolishing any sort of subjective just seems to gravitate towards competitive play, no?

Like I said before, it's not about stopping casual decks from playing against competitively tuned ones. It's a matter of probability. 95% of all competitive EDH decks play the same playset of cards that have been discussed before in this thread, such as Sol Ring and legacy-banned tutors. If you removed those, you would still face competitively tuned decks, but the probability of doing so would certainly be lower, and if you eventually did, the chances of those decks winning and wrecking the table on turn 4 would also be lower. This is what I'm arguing about, giving more chances to casual players of actually enjoying a game while allowing competitive players to, well, still be competitive.
MRHblue wrote:
I get that's not desirable, but I dont think thats true of most of the playerbase. Do you feel the need to be argue? Why not just stand up and play somewhere or someone else?

Because many of us, like me, don't have a choice. Not everyone plays Commander at my store, limiting the amount of games you can actually play and with whom you can play against. So you're faced with the decision of playing with the players you have at hand and hope the game is enjoyable, or leave the store.

Sovarius wrote:
This has actually been discussed ad nauseam, if you still don't understand then look it up.

Hulk is a creature, he cheats creatures into play in any number of combos, and now consider the incidental clones (shit, what do i search my deck for with MY copy of Hulk?), reanimation/gy recursion (lol my Hulk dies i put Eternal Witness into play targeting Hulk), and sac outlets (Greater Good for the function AND flavor (or rather, the meat AND the eggs)).

If you don't understand how these two cards are different, that is YOUR problem.

To be honest, i don't think Hulk should even be banned, though.

First of all, yes, I know. I watched that discussion. Second, Survival also searches for combos (and even comes online faster), causes repetitive tutoring and shuffling (things frowned upon by many players and even the RC) and is very hard to destroy (like you mentioned, Eternal Witness and her ilk).

I'm not arguing if it should be banned or not (although I believe it should), I'm arguing that both cards have a very similar level of degeneracy in gameplay and even deckbuilding, and yet they're on opposite sides of the ban list. And you, like everyone else in that thread, have just failed to explain the justification for this.

Sovarius wrote:
Even commander 2014? Then i'm afraid to burst your bubble...

Very well, I stand corrected. That, however, still doesn't justify how an overpowered card that should have never been printed by today's standards would ever be a poster child for a format meant for casual deckbuilding and interactive gameplay.

_________________
Name: Night of the Ninja
General: Yuriko, the Tiger's Shadow
Archetype: Aggro

Name: Enraged Wilds
General: Marath, Will of the Wild
Archetype: Aggro-Control

Name: Draconic Domination
General: The Ur-Dragon
Archetype: Midrange


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-29 12:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
kirkusjones wrote:
I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying your experience with what legacy is is vastly different from mine. I grew up on the East coast of the United States, where there has been a strong competitive legacy scene for a long time. My apologies if it came off as me dismissing your experience as incorrect. This, however, does not make Gath's "twenty kavus and a dream" any less funny.

Nope, a good joke is a good joke :)

That said - it does seem pretty apparent that our experiences, and how people migrate into the different formats is different. Also - I just remembered about one time when someone did really well with 5c Wizard tribal in a Vintage tournament (against decks like -- I forget the exact metagame at the time, but powered up ones like Slaver, TPS, Dragon, etc.) So... Twenty Kavus and a Dream may be excessive - don't discount rogue builds ;)

kirkusjones wrote:
Back on topic, I think the format is fine in its current state. There will be road bumps and people will have crappy experiences from time to time, but overall, I think we still play the best format in Magic.

I'll generally agree to that. There's a few cards that I'd rather see banned - but from watching other people ask for cards to be banned - it's often just local metagame pockets (and that I may be sick of seeing .. I'm sure my brother is partly to blame for that); nothing that requires a format wide fix.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-29 12:35 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Maluko wrote:
Very well, I stand corrected. That, however, still doesn't justify how an overpowered card that should have never been printed by today's standards would ever be a poster child for a format meant for casual deckbuilding and interactive gameplay.

How does it go against casual deckbulding? Or interactive gameplay? It doesn't hinder someone else's options, so it doesn't go against interactive gameplay.

I can read your argument - but I don't see how it makes sense.

Also - That's not the reason it's considered the "poster child" for the format. cryogen (on page 4) answered why it's the poster child for the format (which predates the precons.)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-29 1:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-25 1:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Carthain wrote:
Maluko wrote:
Very well, I stand corrected. That, however, still doesn't justify how an overpowered card that should have never been printed by today's standards would ever be a poster child for a format meant for casual deckbuilding and interactive gameplay.

How does it go against casual deckbulding? Or interactive gameplay? It doesn't hinder someone else's options, so it doesn't go against interactive gameplay.

I can read your argument - but I don't see how it makes sense.

Also - That's not the reason it's considered the "poster child" for the format. cryogen (on page 4) answered why it's the poster child for the format (which predates the precons.)

It doesn't. But it also doesn't favor it. In other words, if you're trying to promote a format based on interactive and fun gameplay, Sol Ring would be (or is) a very bad poster child because it doesn't do any of those things. It is terribad at promoting interaction (or, if you want to go the Archenemy route, positive interaction), and it's often complained by players that it should be banned because of power levels, so it's also bad at promoting fun. For example, Queen Marchesa would make a fantastic poster child for Commander. It's a legendary creature central to the story of a multiplayer draft format and brings a mechanic that is (in my opinion) fun and makes players interact with each other through combat damage.

On another note, regarding cryogen's argument, I don't buy, and have never bought, the "relic" argument. Just because you can use Sol Ring in Commander but not in any other format doesn't mean you should.

_________________
Name: Night of the Ninja
General: Yuriko, the Tiger's Shadow
Archetype: Aggro

Name: Enraged Wilds
General: Marath, Will of the Wild
Archetype: Aggro-Control

Name: Draconic Domination
General: The Ur-Dragon
Archetype: Midrange


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-29 1:45 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Maluko wrote:
On another note, regarding cryogen's argument, I don't buy, and have never bought, the "relic" argument. Just because you can use Sol Ring in Commander but not in any other format doesn't mean you should.

Whether you buy it or not - that's where it first became the poster child for the format.

Sure, it doesn't promote the ideals - but it is indicative (in part) of the format. You can play some older cards that are often too powerful in other formats. This is due in part to the singleton nature of the deck building, and in part due to the way multiplayer politics often work out.

Sure, there are other cards that could do a better job today -- but when there actually was a "hey, look at this format. See, you can even use <card>" persuasion to try and get people to play, Sol Ring was the most common substitution in that phrase.


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

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 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: