Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Dec-12 3:02 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Banlist Discussion Stuff
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 2:55 am 

Joined: 2012-Jun-07 5:38 pm
Age: Drake
cryogen wrote:
Of course it was. You don't see anyone playing it, do you?


Not sure if this was meant to be a troll post, but to clarify, Shaman of Forgotten Ways is not banned in edh/commander.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banlist Discussion Stuff
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 3:20 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2013-Aug-06 1:27 pm
Age: Drake
Is the next unban going to be Biorhythm? :wink:

I still have no problem with Library of Alexandria. :)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banlist Discussion Stuff
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 4:06 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
crimsonwings3689 wrote:
cryogen wrote:
Of course it was. You don't see anyone playing it, do you?


Not sure if this was meant to be a troll post, but to clarify, Shaman of Forgotten Ways is not banned in edh/commander.

Not sure if this was meant to be a troll post, but to clarify, Shaman of Forgotten Ways is banned in EDH/Commander.

We know this because Sheldon is Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. I mean, has anyone ever seen the two of them in the same room together?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banlist Discussion Stuff
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 8:26 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2017-Mar-11 6:43 am
Age: Dragon
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
crimsonwings3689 wrote:
cryogen wrote:
Of course it was. You don't see anyone playing it, do you?


Not sure if this was meant to be a troll post, but to clarify, Shaman of Forgotten Ways is not banned in edh/commander.

Not sure if this was meant to be a troll post, but to clarify, Shaman of Forgotten Ways is banned in EDH/Commander.

We know this because Sheldon is Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. I mean, has anyone ever seen the two of them in the same room together?



You deserve this.

Seriously though, this thread is getting silly. I think what's got the collective goats of some EDH players, is that they see the banlist as a balance oriented tool- where most of it simply exists to make getting to a certain gamestate that much harder- so that everyone else at the table has a better chance of keeping up. But with that in mind, this thread comes from an offtopic derailing of a thread probably posted in the wrong subforum (thus derailing that subforum)- so we've finally run it out into the gutters. Which is a shame, since this is a popular subject and given the right angle, this thread could have been a pretty sweet thought exercise or something.

_________________
niheloim wrote:
Wall of Chat. 2U
Creature- Wall

Defender
Wall of chat exceeds at using a lot of words to mischaracterize opposing view points.

Warp Riders (Ephara Solar Flare)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 9:01 am 

Joined: 2011-Feb-15 7:09 am
Age: Drake
Gath Immortal wrote:
8<

That being said, based on their 1v1 ban list, wotc can please stay the hell away from paper EDH, because I'd rather have a the ban list curated by people who do nothing but take cards off of it, than a group of people who clearly have no friggin clue what they're doing and ban cards like humility, which basically no one cares about, and ban some broken cards but leave most of the really good ones still available for abuse.

Yeah, I never want to see WotC in control of paper EDH if this is any indication of how they'd handle it.

Not arguing with this bit. Funny how everyone seized on the other bit and went ape shit.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 9:04 am 

Joined: 2011-Feb-15 7:09 am
Age: Drake
OldVig wrote:
Funny how everyone seized on the other bit and went ape shit.

Oh but of course this is teh internets. Ignore me, normal flaming is resumed.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 1:19 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
OldVig wrote:
Gath Immortal wrote:
8<

That being said, based on their 1v1 ban list, wotc can please stay the hell away from paper EDH, because I'd rather have a the ban list curated by people who do nothing but take cards off of it, than a group of people who clearly have no friggin clue what they're doing and ban cards like humility, which basically no one cares about, and ban some broken cards but leave most of the really good ones still available for abuse.

Yeah, I never want to see WotC in control of paper EDH if this is any indication of how they'd handle it.

Not arguing with this bit. Funny how everyone seized on the other bit and went ape shit.

There really is no point in discussing agreement.

"I think X is the case"

"I also think X is the case"

"Oh. Good for us I guess"

Although, I did remark about the fact that Humility is in fact insanely good in EDH and finds its way into almost every truly competitive deck that isn't hampered too badly by it.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-11 11:42 pm 

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

Although, I did remark about the fact that Humility is in fact insanely good in EDH and finds its way into almost every truly competitive deck that isn't hampered too badly by it.


humility is far less likely to end a game on the spot than say, armageddon, or cataclysm, which are both legal on that list iirc, that was really my issue. It's not that humility isn't a good card, sure it is, but getting banned before cards that when played properly end the game on the spot for 4 mana? I didn't agree with that at all

Quote:
Seriously though, this thread is getting silly. I think what's got the collective goats of some EDH players, is that they see the banlist as a balance oriented tool- where most of it simply exists to make getting to a certain gamestate that much harder- so that everyone else at the table has a better chance of keeping up. But with that in mind, this thread comes from an offtopic derailing of a thread probably posted in the wrong subforum (thus derailing that subforum)- so we've finally run it out into the gutters. Which is a shame, since this is a popular subject and given the right angle, this thread could have been a pretty sweet thought exercise or something.


to be fair, that's exactly what it is in most other formats, which is probably where the conflict with the RC's methods come from. The problem is that no one wants to completely balance the format out either, because that list would actually be 100+ cards long. If you want a thought exercise: Lately the argument bounces back and forth between "ban all the fast mana" or "ban all the tutors" or in my case "ban all of the egregious combo cards that are immense value without the combos".

I'm cool with options A and C, but I think banning all the tutors is missing the point. Tutors allow you to find the problem cards yes, but in a super casual game, tutors are usually used to find fun cards or find answers to stop the game from ending, not to go "hey let's go get that thing that ends the game on the spot". In my area when I'm playing a casual game, Greater Good or Necropotence are infinitely more dangerous and possibly game ending than Survival of the Fittest, because the worst thing that happens with survival is usually "chain pitch dudes, attempt Living Death". Greater Good on the other hand, usually drops with something like a 20/20 Malignus on board and gives that player immediate huge advantage because he only spent 4 mana to cast greater good and eat something he played the turn prior and has 12+ mana left to dump the cards with.

Fast mana should definitely go though. I feel like decks are just too warped by their existence, to the point where I question making a deck every time I run out of crypts or vaults to stuff in them.

and since i'm on about things, I guess I'll hit on your earlier points

Quote:
Extra Turns- This can't be fixed by bannings- It's up to each playgroup to moderate excessive turns in their own way. That said, many decks that I've played actually finish the game on the first extra turn- which makes the whole thing kindof moot. We all know that extra turns exist, we all know that they potentially break the game, we all built our decks to fight them, we all have discussions with our playgroups about where "the line" is, and when it is crossed.


then your playgroup is extraordinarily lucky. Any time I see a time spell that doesn't exile itself I have to immediately assume it will get regrowth'd or cast out of yard somehow. I've never played with anyone running time spells that wasn't using them dickishly. As far as answers, if you're not blue, you don't have one, got grave hate? cool, do you have it when you need it? a lot of times you just don't.

Actually, let's get side-tracked for a second. Why does every EDH argument on one side end up being "well if you have removal/grave hate it's not a problem"? This is a stupid pointless argument that always irritates the crap out of me. You're playing a 100 card deck, unless 50% of it is dedicated to removal and grave hate or tutors for said cards, you're not guaranteed reliable access to said cards when a threat gets played. If 50% of your deck IS removal/gravehate and tutors for those, it's probably not a very interesting deck then is it? Most (blue) CONTROL decks I find might have 25% of their decks containing instant speed answers, and probably less than that, especially in other colors that aren't blue.

On average, I'd guess (based on play experience, obviously in varies by meta) less than 10% of each player's (non-control) deck at the table is instant speed removal or gravehate particularly in a casual environment. Now let's assume the person playing the offending card isn't an idiot, and waits either until most of them are tapped out, or their resources are expended from dealing with someone else, or he has back-up, or he can flash it in or some combination of those and suddenly he's basically getting it uncontested. Dies to removal is a stupid argument.

Quote:
Deadeye- Has been in the community's crosshairs since it was printed. Quite possibly the reason that Containment Priest and Hallowed Burial were designed. It's a known quantity, and is often attacked and teched out by playgroups. The fear of it over-centralizing the game is valid, but so far, there's just enough tech to keep it relatively speaking in line for a 6 drop recursion engine starter that strains it's owner's mana.


and speaking of Dies to Removal... Here's my second least favorite argument: 6 mana is a lot. It's really not. Locally most players routinely reach 12+ mana before a game ends, I'm usually sitting on 15-25 mana or more (unless I had bad luck) because mana is power. If you're playing competitively sure 6 mana is way too much, but this is not a card that should ruin games of hermit druid hot potato. I'd actually argue that ending games at or before the 8 mana mark is counterintuitive to the battlecruiser nature of the format. Obviously everyone's games are different, but in a format with mana dorks that can produce upwards of 50 mana a turn, mana isn't that much of a constraint.

Also, tech is all fine and dandy, but realistically no one with half a brain is going to tap out to play deadeye, cast it on a bad board for it, or not have back up when it gets played. Even without having combo potential in deck soul bonding deadeye to anything that generates value is going to put that player in a position to take over the game in short order. And this is assuming they don't have Mystic Snake, Draining Whelk, Glen-Elendra Archmage, or Venser, Shaper Savant to bond to and really put a damper on people's plans.

Quote:
Kiki- Similar to Navigator, recursion is something that R, W, and U get to do very well. It goes infinite, and the number of tech cards to hate it out are expansive. Kiki has become a non-issue.

Big Mike- This feels like more of an extension of the Hulk debate. Mike + Triskellion is a known quantity, but having tried- Recurring Mike is hard in a salted playgroup, comboing with Mike is even harder, because he gives anything that he would combo off with +1/+1 requiring a third card that is a functional sac outlet. If that outlet requires mana, Mike combos become fireballs (which are very acceptable in EDH), if it's free- it can go infinite, but the windows for disruption are huge. Powerful cards simply exist in EDH, and after you get blown out by them, they tend to be on your radar- banning is only sensible when "tech better" doesn't work- and Mike (like Kiki) really doesn't come even close to that edge.


I keep hearing tech cards, but usually what that amounts to is "3-4 narrow answers I may or may not have access to at the time", so basically Dies to Removal. Sure, you can kill kiki-jiki or mike before they get to do anything, but what you keep ignoring is the worst case scenario. The worst case scenario for pretty much every card on my list is "game ends due to combo or burying opponents in an avalanche of card advantage". And what are those tech cards? Torpor Orb? Grafdigger's Cage? Containment Priest? Rest in Peace? Aether Flash? There are a long list of tech cards you could use against any of the cards on my list, but other than the ones that have flash, my response remains the same "why I am I playing my win con with your tech cards on board?"

Quote:
Hulk- Sheldon recognized in the latest Commanderin' podcast that this was a gamble, but honestly- I've had a hard time justifying Hulk in many lists- because the power level of 6 drops is waaaay different than it was in 2009.


I'm trying really hard not to sound offensive on this one, REALLY hard, so I'll make it MEMEish: but if you can't find a use for the best green tutor in the format I can't help but feel like your doing it wrong.

_________________
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: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-12 1:50 am 

Joined: 2009-Apr-21 3:38 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Palm Springs Area, CA
Gath Immortal wrote:

Actually, let's get side-tracked for a second. Why does every EDH argument on one side end up being "well if you have removal/grave hate it's not a problem"? This is a stupid pointless argument that always irritates the crap out of me. You're playing a 100 card deck, unless 50% of it is dedicated to removal and grave hate or tutors for said cards, you're not guaranteed reliable access to said cards when a threat gets played. If 50% of your deck IS removal/gravehate and tutors for those, it's probably not a very interesting deck then is it? Most (blue) CONTROL decks I find might have 25% of their decks containing instant speed answers, and probably less than that, especially in other colors that aren't blue.

On average, I'd guess (based on play experience, obviously in varies by meta) less than 10% of each player's (non-control) deck at the table is instant speed removal or gravehate particularly in a casual environment. Now let's assume the person playing the offending card isn't an idiot, and waits either until most of them are tapped out, or their resources are expended from dealing with someone else, or he has back-up, or he can flash it in or some combination of those and suddenly he's basically getting it uncontested. Dies to removal is a stupid argument.


If each deck is running an adequate amount of removal/answers then in the aggregate no single strategy should be overwhelmingly better in the meta.

Dies to removal isn't going to win many arguments, but in practice it is the answer to most everything thats going on in EDH. When it fails it's usually because the group isn't running enough interaction.

Gath Immortal wrote:

Quote:
Hulk- Sheldon recognized in the latest Commanderin' podcast that this was a gamble, but honestly- I've had a hard time justifying Hulk in many lists- because the power level of 6 drops is waaaay different than it was in 2009.


I'm trying really hard not to sound offensive on this one, REALLY hard, so I'll make it MEMEish: but if you can't find a use for the best green tutor in the format I can't help but feel like your doing it wrong.

I had a hard time slotting the one copy of hulk that I have. But not because I couldn't justify it. Its just a tutor when you're not looking to combo and I find tutors to be fairly boring.

I ended up putting it in Karador, though I might switch it over to my mono green Seton, Krosan Protector deck if it proves to silly with the ghost chieftain.

_________________
3DH4L1F3


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-12 3:13 am 

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
Quote:
Dies to removal isn't going to win many arguments, but in practice it is the answer to most everything thats going on in EDH. When it fails it's usually because the group isn't running enough interaction.

I ended up putting it in Karador, though I might switch it over to my mono green Seton, Krosan Protector deck if it proves to silly with the ghost chieftain.


It's funny you mention the first part, because without all the tutors everyone wants banned, there'd be no consistent method of getting those answers outside of overstuffing the deck with them. I still disagree in principle though, you're not guaranteed access to the correct removal at the correct time and it's fairly easy to manipulate people into baiting it out early when every card you play is a threat. From watching the competitive side of my area, yes removal is far more common, but they also only need two cards to win the game, the rest of the deck is tutors, card advantage, ramp and answers, there's no room for theming or creativity really.

And as far as Hulk in abzan goes, if you have karmic guide and a sac outlet you can probably find ways to chain out the majority of your deck from there if it's anything like the average reanimator decks in those colors.

_________________
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: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-12 3:50 am 

Joined: 2017-May-09 1:04 pm
Age: Wyvern
Gath Immortal wrote:
there's no room for theming or creativity really.


This made me sad for some reason :(

I feel I'm blessed with a pretty good meta, we are given a wide berth with how creative we can get with decks. Almost nobody runs anything oppressive or competitive.

That said, different folks different strokes. If that's how you like to play magic, that is your prerogative.

That said, I have nothing of value to add to this conversation so I'll see my way out.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-12 4:15 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
Uktabi_Kong wrote:

Although, I did remark about the fact that Humility is in fact insanely good in EDH and finds its way into almost every truly competitive deck that isn't hampered too badly by it.


humility is far less likely to end a game on the spot than say, armageddon, or cataclysm, which are both legal on that list iirc, that was really my issue. It's not that humility isn't a good card, sure it is, but getting banned before cards that when played properly end the game on the spot for 4 mana? I didn't agree with that at all
Armageddon only ends the game on the spot if you already have a very dominant position. It's also one of the most anti-social and unfun cards in the game, so literally nobody will ever run it unless they intend to abuse it. Same with Cataclysm. And the thing about Humility isn't that it wins on the spot but rather the reverse: it is the best possible card at preventing creature-based strategies from being able to win. It's particularly popular in control and combo for this very reason.

Quote:
or in my case "ban all of the egregious combo cards that are immense value without the combos".
Yeah, you will never be able to do that. Also, none of the combo cards you mentioned are even remotely as egregious as you seem to imply.

Quote:
Fast mana should definitely go though. I feel like decks are just too warped by their existence, to the point where I question making a deck every time I run out of crypts or vaults to stuff in them.
That's a player problem, not a format problem. Especially since Vault is a worse Dark Ritual in all but the most competitive decks. And fast mana certainly isn't format warping in the vast majority of decks. It doesn't actually change what those deck do fundamentally, it changes the speed and efficiency of it.

Quote:
I've never played with anyone running time spells that wasn't using them dickishly.
From your post history, it seems like you've never played with anyone running any type of powerful cards that wasn't using them dickishly. That being said, time spells are inherently antisocial, in much the same way mass LD is. A creative player can find a way to use them fairly, but most of the time they're just dick cards in general, and blatantly so.

Quote:
Deadeye

I'm missing something here. A big creature, easy to interact with and remove, does nothing without other powerful creatures and mana, and can go bonkers with those things. Why is that even close to banworthy? You wanna talk about cards that do more crazy things than DEN for far less mana? How about Deepglow Skate? Or Craterhoof Behemoth? Or old Avacyn? Not to mention that every single annoying pairing DEN can make is achievable by other cards, often single cards.

Quote:
Kiki

Big Mike

These cards are like DEN, except less impactful, way easier to interact with, require worse cards to combo off with, and make some pretty sweet generals. Trying to get them banned is a sad joke.

Quote:
I'm trying really hard not to sound offensive on this one, REALLY hard, so I'll make it MEMEish: but if you can't find a use for the best green tutor in the format I can't help but feel like your doing it wrong.
I'm trying really hard not to sound offensive on this one, REALLY hard, but if you think that Hulk is a better tutor than Tooth and Nail, Survival of the Fittest, or arguably even Defense of the Heart, I can't help but feel like you're doing it wrong. Depending on the deck, even cards like Green Sun's Zenith and Chord of Calling can be FAR better than Hulk.

Gath Immortal wrote:
it's fairly easy to manipulate people into baiting it out early when every card you play is a threat.
Why is it the rules committee's problem that you know your opponent is running Mike&Trike or Kikiscripts yet you decide to waste your removal on something else? This sounds like either you/your group sucks at threat assessment, or the people you're fighting are just building way stronger decks than you.

Quote:
From watching the competitive side of my area, yes removal is far more common, but they also only need two cards to win the game, the rest of the deck is tutors, card advantage, ramp and answers, there's no room for theming or creativity really.
And this is surprising why? Are you actually complaining that competitive decks aren't doing things that don't directly lead to victory? Not to mention that the competitive player who makes his win condition based on any of the cards you mentioned (except maybe Hulk) is going to lose to actually good decks.

Gath Immortal wrote:
Stuff about removal

In all your talks about running answers, you are forgetting one major fact: EDH (or at least its banlist) is based on multiplayer matches. You don't have to run 50% of your deck as removal. Even in 1v1, having 12 sources of removal is enough to essentially guarantee one or two in your opening hand. Depending on the deck 12 can certainly be a bit much, but 5-6 isn't, and if 3+ people are running that much removal, the odds of nobody having an answer when Mr Combo puts his Dark Mike into play are practically zilch.

Also, even if we're assuming that in the specific games you play you need far more removal... tough shit. That's what metagaming is. You find that the amount of removal you have isn't enough to take on the threats you have to deal with? Run more removal, or more efficient removal, or more versatile removal. Too many big fat creatures stopping your day? Maybe drop some of your Go For the Throat effects and get yourself some more Damnations. Or maybe Damnation is too slow and you need more instant answers like Doom Blade. Or maybe Doom Blade just can't hit the stuff that you need to die so you should make some switches to Beast Within. You could even save up space in deckbuilding by including cards that aren't primarily in the deck for removal purposes but can still function as removal, like Primal Command or Crystal Shard. Or maybe even removal isn't the correct answer but giving yourself a different gameplan to counteract what your opponent is doing is.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: American 1v1 rules change
AgePosted: 2017-May-12 5:53 am 

Joined: 2009-Apr-21 3:38 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Palm Springs Area, CA
Gath Immortal wrote:
Quote:
Dies to removal isn't going to win many arguments, but in practice it is the answer to most everything thats going on in EDH. When it fails it's usually because the group isn't running enough interaction.

I ended up putting it in Karador, though I might switch it over to my mono green Seton, Krosan Protector deck if it proves to silly with the ghost chieftain.


It's funny you mention the first part, because without all the tutors everyone wants banned, there'd be no consistent method of getting those answers outside of overstuffing the deck with them. I still disagree in principle though, you're not guaranteed access to the correct removal at the correct time and it's fairly easy to manipulate people into baiting it out early when every card you play is a threat. From watching the competitive side of my area, yes removal is far more common, but they also only need two cards to win the game, the rest of the deck is tutors, card advantage, ramp and answers, there's no room for theming or creativity really.
For sure. Getting really competitive can mean you run the 1 or 2 win cons and the rest is protection and disruption. And thats boring.


This is really where it comes down to a group building properly. I, myself, could never expect to always have an answer or the mana for it. But if my group is working, then in many instances (not all) someone will have an answer for what someone else is doing. The baiting you speak of is part of the joy of playing the game.

When I look at deck composition I generally want 5-10 ramp cards at mostly 3 mana or less. 3-5 spot removal spells of various types, preferably instants. 3-5 mass removal spells. The key is to see where you can innovate with your choices rather than running only the best of each type.

Quote:
And as far as Hulk in abzan goes, if you have karmic guide and a sac outlet you can probably find ways to chain out the majority of your deck from there if it's anything like the average reanimator decks in those colors.
Yeah. I figured it would work well with the deck, which is why it went in. I've been holding on to it for awhile waiting for it to be unbanned, but never thought much about which deck to put it into.

I don't want Karmic Guide to be my first choice though, which is part of my reluctance to slot the card. I'm really going to have to look at my other green decks... I might be worth putting it into my UG Ezuri instead.

_________________
3DH4L1F3


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banlist Discussion Stuff
AgePosted: 2017-May-12 3:11 pm 

Joined: 2011-Aug-18 3:35 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
I mean, the tuck rule change caused a huge upheaval in the community for a bit, but it really didn't end up effecting gameplay all that much in the long term


Are you serious?

I can now play a commander centric deck without risking getting completely removed from the game for 1-3 mana.

I can now run a diverse selection of counter spells with different effects instead of starting with Spell Crumple and friends and then not having space for anything thematic in that slot.

I now have to focus on that problematic player rather than holding three mana up to tuck his commander while focusing on the rest of the table.

It has forced people to play smarter and run a diversity of answers rather than a one size fits all.

It has forced people to actually talk about what is expected rather than just packing everything that tucks to deal with that Uril or Zur player.

It has allowed me to remove all non-ramp tutors from my decks since I don't need to have a way to fish out my commander every other game.

Whether you think it was a good or bad change, it most certainly changed a LOT about how the format is played and how decks are constructed. Denying an impact is just showing a lack of awareness to what it's done.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banlist Discussion Stuff
AgePosted: 2017-May-13 3:24 pm 

Joined: 2008-Apr-15 11:51 am
Age: Wyvern
Quote:
Even in 1v1, having 12 sources of removal is enough to essentially guarantee one or two in your opening hand. Depending on the deck 12 can certainly be a bit much, but 5-6 isn't, and if 3+ people are running that much removal, the odds of nobody having an answer when Mr Combo puts his Dark Mike into play are practically zilch.


I'mma math at you for a second. So, you say that 12 sources of removal is "essentially guaranteed" in your opening hand. However, plugging your claims into a hypergeometric multivariate calculator (read: using spreadsheet functions) gives us the following (to 3 decimals):

Code:
Turns Percentage to NOT have removal
0      39.251
1      34.132
2      29.631
3      25.680
4      22.217
5      19.188
6      16.541
7      14.233
8      12.224
9      10.478


So, while it is a slim chance, 1 out of every 10 games will have you NOT drawing any of your recommended removal at turn 9.

As for your second statement, that nobody will have an answer to Mikaeus the Unhallowed the turn he drops (i.e. turn 6, assuming no ramp), that is fairly accurate, being a 0.453% chance. However, that chance is for 3 players in a 4-player game to see one removal card in total among the three of them, regardless of what particular kind of removal it may be. No point in having a removal spell if it's a Disenchant, y'know? So, let's make the assumption that, out of your assumed 12 removal cards, 6 of them affect creatures in some way (Swords to Plowshares, Darksteel Mutation, Pongify, Remove Soul, whatever).

For a 1v1 situation, the chance to have appropriate removal on turn 6 goes from a 16.541% chance to a 41.958% chance, about 2.5 times worse. To refer back to the multiplayer game, we end up with a 7.387% chance for none of the combo victims to have appropriate creature removal at hand, again assuming no ramping has been played and Mikaeus drops turn 6. If we imagine Johnny Combo manages to squeak Mikey out turn 4 because he dropped a Sol Ring turn 1 (that bastard), we can see he goes off without a hitch 11.313% of the time, or just north of one out of every 10 games.

Again, this is assuming only one removal card is drawn between all 3 players, so if any other creature hits the board that might be perceived as being in the same threat-level zip code as Mikey, that spell could be already burned. Thus, those percentages shift drastically in favor of the Mikaeus player, leading to negative play experiences all around.

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 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: