Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Aug-21 1:18 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The Ban of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-11 1:11 am 

Joined: 2019-Jul-10 11:07 pm
Age: Egg
I saw this article: https://articles.edhrec.com/edh-update-banned-list-changes/, and I feel frustrated at the ban of Paradox Engine. It is said that this card is problematic regardless of who the commander is which I believe to be a false statement. For one, no commanders other than Urza, Lord High Artificer are mentioned specifically in the article and since Urza is a problem, why not make the two a specific ban? No commander decks can have both Urza and Paradox Engine or search for either from outside the game. Secondly, there are a number of commanders that don’t have tap or mana abilities, so I see no abuse with them. Thirdly, Paradox Engine needs other cards to be powerful. If you allow a single opponent to accumulate a decent to large number of nonland permanents with mana abilities and then somehow lose after they play a Paradox Engine then one or more the following is true:
1. You’re opponent was lucky (hard to prove if this is a consistent occurrence)
2. Your deck needs a higher percentage of cards that are answers or tutor for answers to Paradox Engine or a game winning combo piece
3. Your deck needs a faster and/or more consistent game winning strategy
4. Your opponent has a better deck than yours (usually true if you consistently lose, though it could be a bad matchup if you find other decks you use are more competitive in matchups)

Every commander deck can have cards with tutor effects so getting answers for Paradox Engine shouldn’t be difficult. There is a ton of removal for artifacts in general. There are also split second options that can either neutralize Paradox Engine or Urza, and possibly other commanders. While I don’t want to list every split second card and interaction here is a link to them: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?text=+%5BSplit%5D+%5Bsecond%5D. Note not all of these cards can stop Paradox Engine or the Commander you face, but there are a fair number that will either temporarily halt a Paradox Engine Combo or permanently stop one. For those of you who don’t know, split second cards cannot be responded to meaning they cannot be countered not can spells or abilities from anywhere be used in response to save the target of a split second card or counter its effect. Some of these cards aren’t cheap, but most aren’t terribly expensive to purchase. Paradox Engine is a combo enabler, but with the exception of Urza, Lord High Artificer I have yet to see any number of specific cards that easily win you the game alongside Paradox Engine. The consistently and speed it takes to achieve these infinite or even finite combos should also be considered. Also whether the combos can or can’t be disrupted easily and or require a decent to large number of permanents on the battlefield. A list should be made of all the cards and/or combos that supposedly make Paradox Engine too overpowered to exist in Commander. Until such a list can be sent in a reply and backed up with solid reasoning and evidence supporting each inclusion on said list, I would request that you amend the ban list so that Paradox Engine is only banned in decks that use it in conjunction with Urza, Lord High Artificer.
Sincerely - MtgMan85


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-11 2:43 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
MtgMan85 wrote:
I saw this article: https://articles.edhrec.com/edh-update- ... t-changes/, and I feel frustrated at the ban of Paradox Engine. It is said that this card is problematic regardless of who the commander is which I believe to be a false statement. For one, no commanders other than Urza, Lord High Artificer are mentioned specifically in the article and since Urza is a problem, why not make the two a specific ban? [...] I would request that you amend the ban list so that Paradox Engine is only banned in decks that use it in conjunction with Urza, Lord High Artificer.

I suspect you might be misunderstanding something. EDHRec is a third-party site. The author of that article is not a member of Commander's Rules Committee nor its Advisory Group. They are just one of many Commander players like you or I making commentary on the ban without first-hand insight into the RC or CAG's internal discussions and reasoning. I was hearing plenty of grumbling about Paradox Engine even before Modern Horizons, so attributing the ban to Urza alone is certainly a mistake and an incomplete assessment of Paradox Engine's situation.

The RC's explanation of the Paradox Engine ban is very different and makes no mention of Urza anywhere. You can read it here:

Sheldon wrote:
Paradox Engine is a card that has proven to be intensely problematic. Not only does it provide easy wins seemingly out of nowhere, it has demonstrated the potential to unintentionally wreck games. Easily inserted into any deck, it combines with cards which players already have heavy incentives to play, generating a great deal of mana with virtually no deck building cost. While we don’t ban cards which are only problematic if you build around them, Paradox Engine has clearly demonstrated that it doesn’t need to be built around to be broken.

I doubt Sheldon would be talking about how it's “easily inserted into any deck” to create problems if the only problem was Urza decks. Instead we're talking about how decks already regularly play mana rocks and mana dorks. Urza was likely only an example case of an ubiquitous problem, and at worst was probably the final straw rather than the whole cause.

_________________
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: The Ban of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-11 6:40 am 

Joined: 2019-May-15 8:39 am
Age: Hatchling
MtgMan85 wrote:
I saw this article: https://articles.edhrec.com/edh-update- ... t-changes/, and I feel frustrated at the ban of Paradox Engine. It is said that this card is problematic regardless of who the commander is which I believe to be a false statement. For one, no commanders other than Urza, Lord High Artificer are mentioned specifically in the article and since Urza is a problem, why not make the two a specific ban? No commander decks can have both Urza and Paradox Engine or search for either from outside the game. Secondly, there are a number of commanders that don’t have tap or mana abilities, so I see no abuse with them. Thirdly, Paradox Engine needs other cards to be powerful. If you allow a single opponent to accumulate a decent to large number of nonland permanents with mana abilities and then somehow lose after they play a Paradox Engine then one or more the following is true:
1. You’re opponent was lucky (hard to prove if this is a consistent occurrence)
2. Your deck needs a higher percentage of cards that are answers or tutor for answers to Paradox Engine or a game winning combo piece
3. Your deck needs a faster and/or more consistent game winning strategy
4. Your opponent has a better deck than yours (usually true if you consistently lose, though it could be a bad matchup if you find other decks you use are more competitive in matchups)

Every commander deck can have cards with tutor effects so getting answers for Paradox Engine shouldn’t be difficult. There is a ton of removal for artifacts in general. There are also split second options that can either neutralize Paradox Engine or Urza, and possibly other commanders. While I don’t want to list every split second card and interaction here is a link to them: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Sear ... Bsecond%5D. Note not all of these cards can stop Paradox Engine or the Commander you face, but there are a fair number that will either temporarily halt a Paradox Engine Combo or permanently stop one. For those of you who don’t know, split second cards cannot be responded to meaning they cannot be countered not can spells or abilities from anywhere be used in response to save the target of a split second card or counter its effect. Some of these cards aren’t cheap, but most aren’t terribly expensive to purchase. Paradox Engine is a combo enabler, but with the exception of Urza, Lord High Artificer I have yet to see any number of specific cards that easily win you the game alongside Paradox Engine. The consistently and speed it takes to achieve these infinite or even finite combos should also be considered. Also whether the combos can or can’t be disrupted easily and or require a decent to large number of permanents on the battlefield. A list should be made of all the cards and/or combos that supposedly make Paradox Engine too overpowered to exist in Commander. Until such a list can be sent in a reply and backed up with solid reasoning and evidence supporting each inclusion on said list, I would request that you amend the ban list so that Paradox Engine is only banned in decks that use it in conjunction with Urza, Lord High Artificer.
Sincerely - MtgMan85


I can tell you for a fact that that Urza is not the sole reason that Paradox Engine has its reputation. I can also tell you from experience that watching a Sisay player spend ten minutes searching their deck makes for entirely unenjoyable games.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Ban of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-11 8:14 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I have never even seen an Urza deck, and PE was making games bad. Not at the kitchen table, but in LGSs.

_________________
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 of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-12 1:18 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-08 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Rouen, France
I've seen PE in a very basic Urza deck played by someone who wasn't fully educated as to how it works.

He gets PE & Urza out and I ask him why he's not tapping everything in response to the PE trigger to make boatloads of mana. He looks at me blankly. I explain in detail. He replies that that's stupid (I happen to agree) and removed it from his deck without any prompting from me.

And he's correct, it is stupid. It's stupid in Urza. It's stupid in Sisay. It's insanely stupid in my silly GR token deck with Cryptolyth Rites or Earthcraft. It's stupid with everything in Commander and leads very quickly to games states that devolve into the PE player just winning by tapping and untapping because they have set their deck up to leverage PE.

It's an insta-win card disguised as a cog and the only surprising thing about the ban is that it took so long.


Edit: I realise that this is all anecdotal and shouldn't be confused with evidence, but rather than say "I've seen it be stoopid, so it's stoopid!", maybe I should be asking "Other than going off, which is where I see it being used most, what applications for PE are out there?"

If there's something fun and engaging, share it, because I'd honestly love to see it.

Otherwise, this ban is A-Ok in my book. My 2c.

_________________
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: The Ban of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-12 1:40 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Paradox Engine is a card I never got to use (but wanted to) and never actually wound up seeing used, but now I feel like I've been granted a mercy. :P

_________________
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: The Ban of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-12 2:36 am 
User avatar

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

I can tell you for a fact that that Urza is not the sole reason that Paradox Engine has its reputation. I can also tell you from experience that watching a Sisay player spend ten minutes searching their deck makes for entirely unenjoyable games.


honestly if you were to ban urza or ban cards because of urza, it would have to be the result of the Winter Orb / Static Orb synergy because that interaction completely breaks any kind of downside those cards have.

_________________
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: The Ban of Paradox Engine
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-12 6:20 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Gath Immortal wrote:
honestly if you were to ban urza or ban cards because of urza, it would have to be the result of the Winter Orb / Static Orb synergy because that interaction completely breaks any kind of downside those cards have.

No doubt. If I see Urza, my first question would be 'Running any orbs?' If yes, I get up. Pass on that nonsense. Its like Food chain in Prosh

_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users 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:  
cron