Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Jul-21 6:19 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 5:09 am 

Joined: 2019-Jul-09 4:45 am
Age: Wyvern
Creating a ban list for a casual format is probably excruciatingly hard. You have such a large array of players to please while also trying to keep games for the most part fair and fun for all parties involved. The latest banlist has worked hard to promote fairness with the banning of Iona and Paradox engine, while also providing a new interesting build around card in Painter's Servant. The issue with this list is the continual look on Commander only being for casual people. I believe that the real problem with Iona and Paradox engine was the lack of player communication before a game. Too many games were played where a Karador exhumed an Iona on turn 2 and killed a mono-colored deck and too many 20-minute turns were taken with Paradox engine that ended with a dead table or worse, everyone still alive after the monstrous turn that casual players with their tribal chairs and Minotaur tribal got outraced and killed before they got to do anything fun. But I don't think the problem was with the cards. I think that players should discuss before the game what type of game they are looking for. Level 9 decks will still be powerful and Chairs will still be bad. The combos have just changed. Instead of Paradox Scepter Thrasios being the most powerful Commander deck there is room for Flash hulk variants to come in. The unbanning of painter's servant allows for turn three deaths using grindstone. Or turn 5 with sphinx's tutelage. And I don't think painter's servant should be banned. I believe that the players should know their playgroup and what to expect from their friends or be willing to ask the people they sit down with what the power level of their deck is and choose whether or not they want to play in a pod with those cards. People playing Paradox Scepter Thrasios enjoy winning as much as the chair decks enjoy losing. It isn't fun when games aren't competitive. Iona players... are people too...kind of. But overall this format we love in commander should allow people ranging from Chairs, to pre-cons, to the Doomsday Timetwister combo decks should all be able to use the cards they want.

And remember. If you really hate Iona, Counterspell, blasphemous act, snuff out, beast within, swords to plowshares.

Paradox engine: Nature's claim, disenchant, counterspell, vandalblast. Black, phyrexian tribute? Gate to phyrexia,? maybe just nevinryals disk.

It all dies to removal


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 1:04 pm 

Joined: 2019-Jul-08 5:49 pm
Age: Wyvern
Thank you


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 1:26 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Feb-07 3:37 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Danbury, CT
Hi!

I had some trouble reading through your post; it's a pretty fierce text wall, and you're digging really deep into reddit and Discord references that I don't think are reliable. There's also some stuff in this post that's not true (for example, Sphinx's Tutelage doesn't actually combo with Painter's Servant), or is kinda misleading (Painter's Servant / Grindstone might kill a player on t3... but that doesn't win the game, and there are already other cEDH combos that consistently win t3).

I agree with you that player communication before the game is really important, and that there are probably other cards that could reasonably be unbanned. But past that, I'm having trouble understanding what you're trying to say here.

_________________
The deck-o-pedia


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 3:35 pm 

Joined: 2019-Jul-08 5:49 pm
Age: Wyvern
Sphinx Toot combos w PS, just not if they draw a land. Otherwise it will repeat. They can also trigger another attempt by drawing a card. It's not as hard as Grindstone but definitely more powerful vs multicolor thanks to PS.

It's nice to hear that you admit PS/Grindstone killing a player on turn 3 is a viable threat. Yes, that doesn't win the game, but it does create a loser, and force someone to wait possibly a very long time before they get a seat at the table again, which was pretty much the whole reason Iona got the ban, according to the philosophy document.

At least with Iona in play, the lock didn't keep them from drawing, saving a hand, playing lands or artifacts; Grindstone PS will completely eliminate a player, which in my eyes is much less enjoyable.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 3:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Jan-02 5:25 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Costa La Haya, capital del ducado Holanda
"Run more answers" isn't good deck advice. "Dies to removal" isn't a ban criterium in any format.

_________________
"Our words are backed with OBLIVION STONE!"


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 4:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 12:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oakland, CA
Nice Cards wrote:
Sphinx Toot combos w PS, just not if they draw a land. Otherwise it will repeat.

Right, so, if your opponent has no lands in their deck, Sphinx's Tutelage combos with Painter's Servant to mill their entire deck. If they have at least one land in the top four cards of their deck (fairly likely), the 'combo' mills at most four cards.

I notice some people here echoing some misinformation that I heard in the Command Zone podcast 'emergency' episode - specifically the idea that Sphinx's Tutelage is a combo with Servant or that real-world money has somehow 'disappeared' as a result of the Engine ban. It could be a coincidence, but I think they have a fair amount of influence on the part of the playerbase that is active online and thus the part we are more likely to hear from on this forum (as well as Reddit / Discord).

It's also interesting to watch and compare to their other video which was recorded earlier (before the announcement) but released later; I perceived the tone to be far more supportive of the potential changes before they became a reality. There are a lot of indications the 'emergency' episode was rushed - it aired in between regular episodes; Jimmy implied that Circle of Protection: Green was a green card costing 1G; they were both looking right at a copy of Sphinx's Tutelage on their phone and still thinking that it only stops milling if you hit two lands with it. I would like to think that if they had given it more time, they might not have presented it with the negative tone that seems to have been amplified by a few others around the internet.

But maybe it's not fair to put any blame on them either. And it's not as though a few people coming here and accusing the Rules Committee of ruining the format (or even the global economy) is anything new.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 4:49 pm 

Joined: 2019-May-15 8:39 am
Age: Hatchling
tobeheard wrote:
And remember. If you really hate Iona, Counterspell, blasphemous act, snuff out, beast within, swords to plowshares.

Paradox engine: Nature's claim, disenchant, counterspell, vandalblast. Black, phyrexian tribute? Gate to phyrexia,? maybe just nevinryals disk.

It all dies to removal


Part of the stated reason for bans in the philosophy thread is the mention that making players feel like they *have* to run specific and/or narrow answers to certain cards is a consideration, however the larger one in this case is the fact that Iona actively locks people out of the game, to the point where one or more people just don't get to play. On top of this there are ways to cheat her into play for which "counterspell" is not an answer and her ability can't be responded to once she's in play. There's also the much more blatant point you missed: The Iona player has the benefit of knowing what colors people are running before declaring a color. If she's on the color that most of the table's removal spells are on, "dies to removal" is a far worse argument than it already was.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 5:19 pm 

Joined: 2019-Jul-08 5:49 pm
Age: Wyvern
The OP provided removal answers in every color; you can counter the cheat, or respond to the cheat before it's cheated, ie burn Kaalia. Remember this is EDH--a social game--not 1v1. If your friends let mono player suffer they will have to live with that. If they help a person, maybe they will not be first to be targeted next game.

Also I don't watch TCZ but I have to agree, there is nothing frightful about PC and Sphinx Toots comboing.

The main point of OP was also to be conservative and ban less, EDH doesn't need shakeup like standard or modern from WotC. It needs stability and our trust


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 8:01 pm 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
RC: No changes, the format is in a good place.
Community: ZOMG U GUISE THERE ARE SO MANY BROKEN THINGS LOOK OUTSIDE YOUR PLAYGROUP

RC: We're listening to the community and banning stuff
Community: ZOMG U GUISE QUIT BANNING STUFF YOUR PLAYGROUP DOESN'T LIKE


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 12:49 am 

Joined: 2019-Jan-27 5:38 pm
Age: Wyvern
AnIzzetBro wrote:
tobeheard wrote:
And remember. If you really hate Iona, Counterspell, blasphemous act, snuff out, beast within, swords to plowshares.

Paradox engine: Nature's claim, disenchant, counterspell, vandalblast. Black, phyrexian tribute? Gate to phyrexia,? maybe just nevinryals disk.

It all dies to removal


Part of the stated reason for bans in the philosophy thread is the mention that making players feel like they *have* to run specific and/or narrow answers to certain cards is a consideration, however the larger one in this case is the fact that Iona actively locks people out of the game, to the point where one or more people just don't get to play. On top of this there are ways to cheat her into play for which "counterspell" is not an answer and her ability can't be responded to once she's in play. There's also the much more blatant point you missed: The Iona player has the benefit of knowing what colors people are running before declaring a color. If she's on the color that most of the table's removal spells are on, "dies to removal" is a far worse argument than it already was.


all decks need to have removal, one way or another


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 2:14 am 

Joined: 2019-Jul-09 4:45 am
Age: Wyvern
I think that there has been much discussion on the quote "dies to removal". I agree with point Nice Cards and Chiky have both stated. The point of the removal for paradox engine is that the combo is very easy to interrupt with a correctly timed removal spell. Iona is an issue for mono-colored decks but as Nice Cards said, "emember this is EDH--a social game--not 1v1" and the removal spells show a way in all colors to solve that issue.

I apologize to Kemev for not clarifying on the diffing deep into reddit or Discord. Paradox Scepter Thrasios was the best CEDH deck. Doomsday is a card that allows decks to win remarkably early. Twister loops are also a strategy that wins in CEDH. And Flash Hulk is the new most powerful deck in CEDH. I dissagree with your statement that there are consistent turn 3 wins in CEDH. There are some if you have the perfect 5 in your hand but the only early turn wins right now are flash hulk, and demonic consultation with Lab Man.Lastly Kennev. The point I am making is that there will always be powerful things you can do in this format, more powerful than a paradox engine or Iona, and I wish that we played them all. I just want want there to be more player discussion when we sit down at the table so it is on us as players to make sure we have a good time. Not the rules committee.

Thank you all for the great discussion on my post.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 4:36 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-May-11 11:02 am
Age: Drake
cryogen wrote:
RC: No changes, the format is in a good place.
Community: ZOMG U GUISE THERE ARE SO MANY BROKEN THINGS LOOK OUTSIDE YOUR PLAYGROUP

RC: We're listening to the community and banning stuff
Community: ZOMG U GUISE QUIT BANNING STUFF YOUR PLAYGROUP DOESN'T LIKE


Those are two different groups making those complaints. People rarely speak up online when they're happy.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 8:06 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
tobeheard wrote:
It all dies to removal

This will forever be a bad reason not to ban something.

_________________
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: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 9:32 am 

Joined: 2019-May-15 8:39 am
Age: Hatchling
Nice Cards wrote:
The OP provided removal answers in every color; you can counter the cheat, or respond to the cheat before it's cheated, ie burn Kaalia. Remember this is EDH--a social game--not 1v1. If your friends let mono player suffer they will have to live with that. If they help a person, maybe they will not be first to be targeted next game.

Also I don't watch TCZ but I have to agree, there is nothing frightful about PC and Sphinx Toots comboing.

The main point of OP was also to be conservative and ban less, EDH doesn't need shakeup like standard or modern from WotC. It needs stability and our trust


So let's take a look at that, shall we. In the case of Kaalia, let's assume we're running removal that can hit Kaalia and she isn't Greaved up. At what point do we know for a fact that they have Iona in hand? What if Kaalia isn't the only creature or permanent on the battlefield that needs an answer? Do we always gun for the Kaalia because *eventually* one of the things that drops will probably be Iona or do we gun for the thing that might actually kill us in the next couple of turns?

What if we burn our removal on Kaalia and she just comes right back next turn and now we have no removal for her because we already burned it? Yes, you should he running reasonable amounts of removal/disruption, but 1.) You aren't always guaranteed to have it when you need it and 2.) There are typically workarounds to the removal itself. These are the reasons "dies to removal" is not in and of itself a viable argument against a card being problematic.

To the second point: EDH is *supposed* to be a social format, yes. And if everyone abided by that then we'd see more people actively avoiding strategies that lock people out of playing the game, but obviously that hasn't been the case. On top of that you assume that you can rely on other people to deal with Iona *for* you which makes two erroneous assumptions: 1.) The entire rest of the table also has as vested an interest as you in getting rid of Iona and 2.) That they haven't been spending their removal and other answers on other players (including yourself) in the meantime.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban List and Player Relations
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 11:38 am 

Joined: 2019-Jul-09 4:45 am
Age: Wyvern
AnIzzetBro, you seem to be very intent on Kaalia. If you sit down and see a Kaalia you could look at my previous point and ask them what their top end targets are, not their entire deck but if they say Iona then maybe Kaalia should be your only target if you are afraid of it. But in Kaalia maybe you should be more worried about master of cruelties anyway. You need to have a way to remove permanents in EDH or you are just going to be smothered by any powerful card whether it be Iona, or Contamination, or Paradox engine. And if you have played the game long enough that every player has run out of removal, then the game needs to end. There will always be three losers for every winner in a pod. For everyone saying that removal is a weak argument against a banning is correct. I added that note to show you that the cards are not unbeatable, not that they are not powerful. Lastly about your point on other things on the board, this is where critical decision making is important. It doesn't matter if someone has just resolved a Vorinclex, if you are more afraid of the Kaalia, then hit Kaalia. Use your own decision making skills to decide what is more important.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 38 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: