Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Sep-15 2:30 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 10:17 am 

Joined: 2016-Sep-26 7:18 am
Age: Hatchling
Whats up guys! So I have a question for those on the rules committee. I was wondering when you where gonna actually be consistent with your bans. The fact you did not ban either Karn or Mycosynth lattice proves you have no clue what your doing. I don't care that Iona was banned. I honestly dont think that she deserved the ban but it is what it is. What I do care about is that you are consistent and yesterday proves you are not. Karn/Lattice is a much more efficient combo that is easier to get out and tutor and can go in any deck so why did you let that stay and ban Iona? If you cant show consistency in your banning's, maybe its time for Wizards to take over the ban list. If you cant be consistent in your own criteria on what to ban, you have no business residing over the format.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 11:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Welcome to the forums!

The single question that keeps entering my head throughout the entire post is, "Consistent with what?" It seems that banning the karn/lattice combo would itself be the inconsistent move, since the RC has long given up on the philosophy of banning cards that create overpowered combos and as of yesterday has eliminated all such cards from the banlist.

Furthermore, why Karn-Lattice specifically? Lattice has been around since the beginning of the format and stupid things involving it all far predate Karn. You've got Vandalblast, Null Rod, Creeping Corrosion, Kill Switch, Kataki, and Hellkite Tyrant just for starters. And the "you can play it in any deck" argument is invalid because there are multiple other game-winning combos that can be played in any deck, and every color combo has its own ways to do it.

_________________


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 12:15 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Sep-19 1:30 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Pretty much what Kong said. The second part to that is that neither piece can be your commander, and if you start banning every two-card combo that banlist is going to balloon in size to crazy levels. (And even 2-card combos involving your commander don't get banned often, as shown by Godo, Bandit Warlord and Helm of the Host.)

And finally, Iona, Shield of Emeria was banned not due to combo, but because it can lock players out of the game entirely, creating non-fun situations all by itself. And, unlike most other non-fun situations, Iona doesn't have to be built around for it, it just happens naturally with it in any deck.

_________________
Useful threads: Colorless CI landsGraveyard HateRoR's Greatest Hits
My Decks: Zombiepocalypse (Thraximundar) ♦ Thrun stands alone (voltron) ♦ Ashling the Burninator ♦ Doran beatdown (treefolk/plant tribal) ♦ Mine! (UB theft/clone) ♦ Vampire Beatdown (Edgar Markov) ♦ BW Enchantments (Daxos the Returned)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 8:09 pm 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Friendly tip, creating a new account just so you can ask an insulting question is a sure fire way to get ignored by pretty much anyone that question is directed towards.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 10:35 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
Friendly tip, creating a new account just so you can ask an insulting question is a sure fire way to get ignored by pretty much anyone that question is directed towards.

Surprisingly, the account that asked this was 2016!

_________________
Decks: Chaos colored dragons, Mathas, the Instigator (politics and mayhem).
Beloved precons: Atraxa, Praetors' Voice; Saskia the Unyielding; Freyalise, Llanowar's Fury.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 1:23 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
It is interesting I admit, if you base what needs banning around the new philosophy document, there are a LOT of cards that meet pretty much all those criteria.

_________________
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: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 3:06 am 

Joined: 2012-Jun-07 5:38 pm
Age: Drake
Gath Immortal wrote:
It is interesting I admit, if you base what needs banning around the new philosophy document, there are a LOT of cards that meet pretty much all those criteria.


^This

Disrespectful and combative OP post aside, the new criteria, or rather, the new philosophy document posted by Sheldon, seems to apply to a very wide variety of cards. There are PLENTY of boogeymen in the format. Last I checked, Cyclonic Rift was the #1 played blue card via edhrec, can enable a win out of nowhere, creates a resource disparity, forces people to run counters or Teferi's protection to get around it... and it's still legal.

Omniscience? Expropriate? Palinchron? All have a similar potential.

Laboratory Maniac? Helix Pinnacle? Cards that provide alternate win conditions that, like Coalition Victory, end the game regardless of the effort and time spent playing a given game.

It just seems... inconsistent. Where there are a plethora of 2 card combos in the format that just win, something like Paradox Engine, which served as a cog in a value/combo engine, was banned despite literally doing nothing on it's own. It gave even red and white decks access to a unique piece of tech that could make up for the disadvantage they have against the power level of the other 3 colors (if they got it out first or got to make use of it first).

That Painter's Servant is back is potentially ok, but it does introduce yet another 2 card combo, and it's abusability hasn't been fully fleshed out yet. It doesn't help at all that mill is in blue, which has access to plenty of artifact tutors, also happens to have the access to the boogeymen cards I mentioned above and that have Wash Out and Hibernate as Upheaval effects with Servant.

Power creep is a thing, and it's been going on for a long time now. No one plays Vizzedrix outside of trying to be funny. The format is casual at heart, but the power of cards are stronger now than they once were. You can't ban all of the problematic cards, but the ones I mentioned are among the worst, yet they still persist. Blue still has access to an instant speed boardwipe (Cyclonic Rift) that invalidates all but opposing lands outside of narrow answers that amount to "run counters/blue, copy it (mostly blue), Teferi's Protection (white), or get wrecked... yet a value/combo engine piece that needs numerous other pieces to do anything gets banned... seems like it doesnt add up.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 7:37 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Gil_Nutz wrote:
If you cant show consistency in your banning's, maybe its time for Wizards to take over the ban list. If you cant be consistent in your own criteria on what to ban, you have no business residing over the format.

A) Any list of things with any subjective terms could be described as 'inconsistent' if you want to. Its a pretty meaningless criticism.

B) You think WotC does not hear the exact same thing about Modern, like every ban list? Ha!

And welcome back to the fold I guess

_________________
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: Banning Inconsistencies
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 1:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Aug-20 7:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Hampshire
Gil_Nutz wrote:
you have no business residing over the format.

[NITPICK]Pretty sure you mean "presiding".[/NITPICK]

Gil_Nutz wrote:
maybe its time for Wizards to take over the ban list.

Oh HELL no. I'm not saying everything the RC does is great - I've disagreed with things they've done in the past and I disagree with unbanning Painter's Servant - but I have absolutely no faith in WotC.

_________________
"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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 29 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: