Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Oct-13 5:48 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-29 8:58 am 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I got most of the way through, up to the first few posts of page 5, so I apologise if Ive missed an important point since there.

I wanted to add in regards to tutors, if you take away the best black tutors you will push the game further into the grips of UGx decks. Blue gets to draw so many more cards than anyone else, and while black has some good life for cards draw effects it is the tutors which allow you to get the card quality you need to combat the card quantity of the ug decks.

I also would hate to see Mike banned. He may be half of the 2 card combo poster, but most of his combos are 3 cards and are as unachievable with Melira, and are completely disruptable with removal, counters or grave hate.

I do however fully support the removal of time magic from the format. It takes zero effort or intelligence to play a time walk, it is at least a free explore and at worst an avenue to solitaire. Even just killing the ones that dont self exile would make a big dent in the power and proclivity of UGx, because in reality if you're playing blue and not playing time warp and co then youre playing a worse deck (but are in my opinion a more fun player)

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-29 12:14 pm 

Joined: 2016-Aug-15 1:21 pm
Age: Drake
Maluko wrote:
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.


This is what I think matters when what to actually ban is looked at. There will always be people who run the well tuned decks, and there will always be people who don't have a lot of options on where to play.

Most of the bans that I see are either cards that mechanically interact with the format in a bad way, or ones that are able to be broken in combo with other cards. The bans on combo pieces look to me like they're directed at cards that don't have any kind of equal (Protean Hulk, Recurring Nightmare, Painter's Servant), and I think that's a good stance to look at things for future bans.

Some of the cards I would agree with Gath on as far as seeing banned would be Deadeye Navigator, Craterhoof Behemoth, and Tooth and Nail. They all look to be on another level compared to other cards that try to do the same, unless I'm missing something. As for the extra turn stuff...nobody in my play group uses any of those cards, so I'm more indifferent towards them. If UGx decks are that much of a majority, then I think taking the them down a notch might give some more variety that I thought was what the format was supposed to be (People building decks they want to play, not decks that are most popular or have the best chance of winning, and it sounds to me like UGx decks are that kind of deck).

_________________
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-29 1:15 pm 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Maluko wrote:
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.
Then I guess we dont agree about what the issue is. Because I think the power level issue will always be there, and losing to a tuned deck on 6 or 7 isnt appreciably better than 4, because a lot of it I see has to do with how they lose. Saying 95% of anything in this format really isnt useful, because we have no data to support it.
Quote:
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.
I get thats an issue in some places, but strongly disagree its across a large part of the stores / metas. So what it seems like is a few people want to improve their 'semi-competitive' metas by banning what they think the top 'broken' cards are, but don't seem to see how that would affect other groups. They think since its better for them, its better for everyone. Disregarding the folks who want a minimal ban list, just 'taking the top off' the current cEDH lists wont improve the game for most people, and would be a giant shift in what the ban list is designed for. Seems liks a net negative.

_________________
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.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2016-Dec-29 9:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-25 1:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
MRHblue wrote:
Then I guess we dont agree about what the issue is. Because I think the power level issue will always be there, and losing to a tuned deck on 6 or 7 isnt appreciably better than 4, because a lot of it I see has to do with how they lose. Saying 95% of anything in this format really isnt useful, because we have no data to support it.

Do you honestly believe a competitively tuned deck has an equal number of chances of winning on turn four and on turn seven? Players have more balanced resources in later turns and are able to stop combos and other degenerative plays with more ease than early turns. Not to mention you will have revealed a lot more of your strategy on later turns, so the entire table can react accordingly if they suspect you're running combo.

And you don't need data to support that. You only need to talk to players in the same situation as me, and they will laugh at you if you show them a 'competitively tuned deck' without broken mana rocks and tutors.
MRHblue wrote:
I get thats an issue in some places, but strongly disagree its across a large part of the stores / metas. So what it seems like is a few people want to improve their 'semi-competitive' metas by banning what they think the top 'broken' cards are, but don't seem to see how that would affect other groups. They think since its better for them, its better for everyone. Disregarding the folks who want a minimal ban list, just 'taking the top off' the current cEDH lists wont improve the game for most people, and would be a giant shift in what the ban list is designed for. Seems liks a net negative.

Aren't you, like, doing the same thing right now? Disregarding the folks who are trying to reach a consensus over what should be socially acceptable for irregular playgroups? Besides, what evidence do you have that the current and "minimalist" ban list brings the most happiness for the format and its players? Because what I'm getting from this thread, and my own experience, is that Commander still has a long way to go to make players understand its philosophy.

_________________
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-31 10:10 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Maluko wrote:
Do you honestly believe a competitively tuned deck has an equal number of chances of winning on turn four and on turn seven?
No, and thats not what I said. I said it does not matter in terms of other peoples fun.
Quote:
Players have more balanced resources in later turns and are able to stop combos and other degenerative plays with more ease than early turns. Not to mention you will have revealed a lot more of your strategy on later turns, so the entire table can react accordingly if they suspect you're running combo.
Quite true, but a power level issue will be there in later stages too. Taking the top off wont change that.

Quote:
And you don't need data to support that. You only need to talk to players in the same situation as me, and they will laugh at you if you show them a 'competitively tuned deck' without broken mana rocks and tutors.
I have no doubt people you play with would agree, thats due to a lack of perspective on your part, not on your view being correct. Of course they are going to play those cards, but removing a few (as has been postulated) wont have a significant outcome to people who push the envelope. You would need a large shift, which I am posting about as a net negative.
Quote:
Aren't you, like, doing the same thing right now? Disregarding the folks who are trying to reach a consensus over what should be socially acceptable for irregular playgroups?
I dont see anyone here trying to reach a consensus on whats socially acceptable, because its not possible. Thats always going to be an opinion. So people are trying to legislate their opinion as rule. And yes I am posting in defense of the rules set I see as the best. Yes the RC has setup an arbitrary ban list, as any would be. No I dont think it would be improved by catering more towards competitive play. You cant play the middle, they picked a side. I happen to be on that side.
Quote:
Besides, what evidence do you have that the current and "minimalist" ban list brings the most happiness for the format and its players? Because what I'm getting from this thread, and my own experience, is that Commander still has a long way to go to make players understand its philosophy.
I have none, but do on seek a change. People who want one should have some, or take it upon themselves to make betterment for their group. Please do so without negative impact on the rest of us. Plenty of people understand just fine, and plenty don't, but using a few of the same people making the same arguments over and over isnt representative of a larger issue without data. I don't think you have any because I think the groups who choose to play competitively, and choose to use the RCs ban list exclusively, is going to run pretty short. Those people should take some initiative and fix their issues.

_________________
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.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-01 9:14 am 

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
MRHblue wrote:
I have none, but do on seek a change. People who want one should have some, or take it upon themselves to make betterment for their group. Please do so without negative impact on the rest of us. Plenty of people understand just fine, and plenty don't, but using a few of the same people making the same arguments over and over isnt representative of a larger issue without data. I don't think you have any because I think the groups who choose to play competitively, and choose to use the RCs ban list exclusively, is going to run pretty short. Those people should take some initiative and fix their issues.


Hell No. I and everyone else here have every right to lobby their opinion and share it with others who *gasp* might have a similar opinion, or other ideas on how they'd like the format to change and to rally together to try and enact that change. If you don't like it you're more than welcome to continue arguing your point of view, otherwise do us a favor and get out. You don't get to shit on people for wanting to make change and demand they stop just because you don't like what you're hearing.

As to point b: https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH/

there is literally an entire subreddit full of people dedicated to doing exactly what you think is a short list of trolls under bridges in isolated pockets of the player base.

_________________
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: 2017-Jan-01 9:34 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Nov-27 4:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Midgard
Gath Immortal wrote:
As to point b: https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH/

there is literally an entire subreddit full of people dedicated to doing exactly what you think is a short list of trolls under bridges in isolated pockets of the player base.

I couldn't help noting that the regular Commander subreddit has just around four times as many subscribers as the competitive one. Maybe those numbers mean nothing, but they could mean something.

_________________
Current:
Decklists are posted here. They can all be found in the Decklist Forum.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-01 9:37 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2015-Mar-18 12:55 pm
Age: Drake
Segrus wrote:
Gath Immortal wrote:
As to point b: https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH/

there is literally an entire subreddit full of people dedicated to doing exactly what you think is a short list of trolls under bridges in isolated pockets of the player base.

I couldn't help noting that the regular Commander subreddit has just around four times as many subscribers as the competitive one. Maybe those numbers mean nothing, but they could mean something.
Gath Immortal wrote:
MRHblue wrote:
I have none, but do on seek a change. People who want one should have some, or take it upon themselves to make betterment for their group. Please do so without negative impact on the rest of us. Plenty of people understand just fine, and plenty don't, but using a few of the same people making the same arguments over and over isnt representative of a larger issue without data. I don't think you have any because I think the groups who choose to play competitively, and choose to use the RCs ban list exclusively, is going to run pretty short. Those people should take some initiative and fix their issues.


Hell No. I and everyone else here have every right to lobby their opinion and share it with others who *gasp* might have a similar opinion, or other ideas on how they'd like the format to change and to rally together to try and enact that change. If you don't like it you're more than welcome to continue arguing your point of view, otherwise do us a favor and get out. You don't get to shit on people for wanting to make change and demand they stop just because you don't like what you're hearing.

As to point b: https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH/

there is literally an entire subreddit full of people dedicated to doing exactly what you think is a short list of trolls under bridges in isolated pockets of the player base.

Just adding onto what Segrus said, but one subreddit does not a community make. There's almost 7800 players in there, true, but you can't seriously believe that accounts for even a majority of the competitive players.

_________________
The QFT Section
Sheldon wrote:
The cards didn't just warp the way the games were played, they warped how I was conceiving and perceiving the format. That's the sign of a problem.

Carthain wrote:
The idea that you should be able to build your deck however you want and still be competitive is false, and a bad idea to have. Taken to the extreme, that's like making a deck with no removal in it, and then complaining that you can't win because stuff your opponents play gets in your way.


Last edited by Wolfsbane706 on 2017-Jan-01 10:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-01 10:04 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Nov-27 4:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Midgard
Wolfsbane706 wrote:
Just adding onto this, but one subreddit does not a community make. There's almost 7800 players in there, true, but you can't seriously believe that accounts for even a majority of the competitive players.

I'm...not entirely sure if you're pointing this out to me, but if you are: true, there's a distinct possibility there's more than 7800 competitive players for Commander; of course, there's probably a distinct possibility there's more than about 30,000 Commander players (the number of subscribers for the regular Commander reddit). So that argument really goes both ways, and returns us back to zero--which is kinda where I left my previous post.

_________________
Current:
Decklists are posted here. They can all be found in the Decklist Forum.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-01 10:08 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2015-Mar-18 12:55 pm
Age: Drake
Segrus wrote:
Wolfsbane706 wrote:
Just adding onto this, but one subreddit does not a community make. There's almost 7800 players in there, true, but you can't seriously believe that accounts for even a majority of the competitive players.

I'm...not entirely sure if you're pointing this out to me, but if you are: true, there's a distinct possibility there's more than 7800 competitive players for Commander; of course, there's probably a distinct possibility there's more than about 30,000 Commander players (the number of subscribers for the regular Commander reddit). So that argument really goes both ways, and returns us back to zero--which is kinda where I left my previous post.

It wasn't meant to be directed at you, sorry. It's a pain getting posts out on mobile.

_________________
The QFT Section
Sheldon wrote:
The cards didn't just warp the way the games were played, they warped how I was conceiving and perceiving the format. That's the sign of a problem.

Carthain wrote:
The idea that you should be able to build your deck however you want and still be competitive is false, and a bad idea to have. Taken to the extreme, that's like making a deck with no removal in it, and then complaining that you can't win because stuff your opponents play gets in your way.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-01 10:19 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Nov-27 4:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Midgard
Wolfsbane706 wrote:
It wasn't meant to be directed at you, sorry. It's a pain getting posts out on mobile.

I entirely feel your pain.

_________________
Current:
Decklists are posted here. They can all be found in the Decklist Forum.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-01 8:57 pm 

Joined: 2013-Jun-23 10:18 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Wolfsbane706 wrote:
Just adding onto what Segrus said, but one subreddit does not a community make. There's almost 7800 players in there, true, but you can't seriously believe that accounts for even a majority of the competitive players.


I consider this forum a community- likeminded individuals who are interested in the same sort of games, roughly speaking- and I'm pretty sure we number less than 7.800.

_________________
Current Commanders: 6/32.

Daretti, Scrap Savant (Red Artefacts).
Rubinia Soulsinger (Bant Polymorphs).
Kess, Dissident Mage (Grixis Treasure).
Sek'Kuar, Deathkeeper (Jund Apostles).
Marisi, Breaker of the Coil (Naya Midrange).
Mathas, Fiend Seeker (Mardu Judo).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-02 3:11 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-08 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Rouen, France
Swmystery wrote:
Wolfsbane706 wrote:
Just adding onto what Segrus said, but one subreddit does not a community make. There's almost 7800 players in there, true, but you can't seriously believe that accounts for even a majority of the competitive players.


I consider this forum a community- likeminded individuals who are interested in the same sort of games, roughly speaking- and I'm pretty sure we number less than 7.800.


Just to be pernickerty: 28363 users (though cut all the bots & inactives and you'll probably get around 30 users! :D )

_________________
Current decks:
Sydri's random pile of cards with "Artifact" on them
Scarab God Zombie Horde
Sissay 5c Superfriends
Morophon Eldrazi (5C Devoid)
Grenzo's Goblins


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-02 3:45 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
Hell No. I and everyone else here have every right to lobby their opinion and share it with others who *gasp* might have a similar opinion, or other ideas on how they'd like the format to change and to rally together to try and enact that change.
Of course you do, but don't expect it to happen. And don't expect those of us who like the current arrangement just fine to sit idle.
Quote:
If you don't like it you're more than welcome to continue arguing your point of view, otherwise do us a favor and get out. You don't get to shit on people for wanting to make change and demand they stop just because you don't like what you're hearing.
I am not shitting on anyone, or attempting to stop any discussion. I am offering a useful alternative that too many of that idea dismiss: Put in the work to create something you love without messing up the current format.

Quote:
there is literally an entire subreddit full of people dedicated to doing exactly what you think is a short list of trolls under bridges in isolated pockets of the player base.
I don't think they are trolls, and didnt say anything negative about them outside their lack of perspective on how their ideas are negative to the many others.

_________________
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 2017-Jan-02 3:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vision of the Format
AgePosted: 2017-Jan-02 3:46 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2015-Mar-18 12:55 pm
Age: Drake
Swmystery wrote:
Wolfsbane706 wrote:
Just adding onto what Segrus said, but one subreddit does not a community make. There's almost 7800 players in there, true, but you can't seriously believe that accounts for even a majority of the competitive players.


I consider this forum a community- likeminded individuals who are interested in the same sort of games, roughly speaking- and I'm pretty sure we number less than 7.800.

I misspoke. The actual point was the bit about 7800 players not really being a majority.

_________________
The QFT Section
Sheldon wrote:
The cards didn't just warp the way the games were played, they warped how I was conceiving and perceiving the format. That's the sign of a problem.

Carthain wrote:
The idea that you should be able to build your deck however you want and still be competitive is false, and a bad idea to have. Taken to the extreme, that's like making a deck with no removal in it, and then complaining that you can't win because stuff your opponents play gets in your way.


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

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 32 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: