Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Nov-19 6:52 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Aug-29 1:26 pm 

Joined: 2007-Dec-12 7:36 pm
Age: Dragon
Genomancer wrote:
Crucible has its proponents on the rules committee, and has been given a serious look at lately. It may be unbanned at some point, but not this time around: there are more pressing issues to deal with and, as yet, the majority still believes that unbanning it wouldn't have a positive impact on the format.


Geno you're such a tease! Really wondering what the B&R changes will be. Seems like not CoW or 8-10 mana spells. Hitting some two card combos then?

_________________
iceage4life on MODO
Paper Decks: Sisay, Oona, Intet, Soknar, Sharuum the Gegemon, Nath, Sir Shandlar of Eberyn (Peasent)
Online: Garza Zol, Venser, Sisay, Ghost Council


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-08 1:02 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 12:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oakland, CA
Genomancer wrote:
* Grindstone is banned
* LED is banned

While not as problematic as hulk, neither of these is nearly as big of a loss for casual players. Many other two-card combos fall within the realm of "fair game", but the LED/Salvagers and Grindstone/Painters Servant combos are made up of cheap components which are easy to tutor up and quick to hit play. Because they come down so soon, they can be online before opponents can be expected to have disruption available... and make up the top tier of combo options.

While we don't want to make the banned list longer than necessary, these were felt to be acceptable additions. The complementary combo parts (Salvagers and Painters Servant) were felt to have more "legitimate EDH uses."

I like this method of busting combos: take out the less "legitimate EDH" card, keep the other. It keeps the ban list relatively short while protecting the format from unfunness and allowing for the continuation of funness.

Let's see this implemented on Crucible next time around. Fastbond is clearly far less "legitimate" than either Crucible or Strip Mine. The existence of both Crucible and Strip Mine in the format is only relevant in duels, which should really have their own ban list anyway.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-08 1:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-May-04 1:02 am
Age: Dragon
Location: Orlando, FL
Crucible is bad, mmmkay?
And not just for strip mine, I hear its infi life with zuran orb + fastbond

_________________
RIP Academy & EDH - June '10


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-08 1:33 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-May-04 6:05 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Wisconsin
As much as I like loam... I agree this card should get banned perhaps. I wasteland/stripmine with loam is annoying the way it is not to mention MoI etc.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-08 3:04 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 12:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oakland, CA
urielxvi wrote:
Crucible is bad, mmmkay?
And not just for strip mine, I hear its infi life with zuran orb + fastbond

I guess you missed the part where just about everyone who calls for Crucible to be unbanned agrees that Fastbond ought to be banned.

Anyway, one more 3 card infinite life combo is not going to hurt EDH.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 7:01 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2007-Sep-21 8:22 am
Age: Elder Dragon
intreped wrote:
one more infinite combo is not going to hurt EDH.


Actually, yes it will. While you guys keep blowing off the rules committee's repeated commentary that Crucible has its opponents, it does go infinite on turn 1. That's turn 1 guys, and you're telling me it's not undercosted for its effect on the game?

I understand the lock argument, but that really isn't "fun" either because typically you are taking out other peoples' lands (sometimes 2 and 3 at a time) and with dust bowl, strip mine, wasteland, etc in the format Crucible really IS a powerhouse with a Strip Mine in the graveyard.

So wait, we could remove strip mine and fastbond or something...but those cards actually are a healthy part of our metagame. So let's look at what the rules committee is trying to accomplish and respect that choice. Just because another card is a good candidate for banning in the event that crucible was unbanned doesn't mean that is a good option. I guess I draw the line at cards that can hard lock too early and cards that can infinite too early and cards that are undercosted for their effect on THIS game...this game being EDH. As far as I can see Crucible is meeting every single requirement for being banned. Plus Crucible has the added detriment of making the play of a general unstoppable and completely nerfs Land Destruct strategies. Both of those are preeeeeeeety damn powerful in this format, eh?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 10:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 12:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oakland, CA
warble wrote:
intreped wrote:
one more infinite combo is not going to hurt EDH.

If we were speaking, I could maybe pretend that you just misheard me, but this is a forum. You must have actually gone in and deleted the pieces of text that made my point valid. Shame on you.

Why is Fastbond a "healthy part of our metagame?" I've never seen it used as a simple accelerator. It's always part of some infinite combo deck that wants to go off before people can set up any disruption. That's unhealthy.

I'm not sure of the "infinite on turn 1" thing you're talking about with Crucible, but I bet it involves Fastbond. Care to prove me wrong? Maybe its something convoluted with Mishra's Workshop, Elvish Spirit Guide, Concordant Crossroads, Metalworker and some other piece?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 3:08 pm 

Joined: 2008-Jun-20 7:38 am
Age: Elder Dragon
intreped wrote:
warble wrote:
intreped wrote:
one more infinite combo is not going to hurt EDH.

If we were speaking, I could maybe pretend that you just misheard me, but this is a forum. You must have actually gone in and deleted the pieces of text that made my point valid. Shame on you.

Why is Fastbond a "healthy part of our metagame?" I've never seen it used as a simple accelerator. It's always part of some infinite combo deck that wants to go off before people can set up any disruption. That's unhealthy.

I'm not sure of the "infinite on turn 1" thing you're talking about with Crucible, but I bet it involves Fastbond. Care to prove me wrong? Maybe its something convoluted with Mishra's Workshop, Elvish Spirit Guide, Concordant Crossroads, Metalworker and some other piece?


Fastbond, Crucible, Zuran Orb, at lease 4 mana, and a land.

_________________
Current Generals:
Rafiq, Sharuum, Nekusar, Kresh, Mayael, Kaalia, Maelstrom Wanderer, Ghave, Ruhan, Mimeoplasm, Genju of the Realm, Phelddagrif, Derevi, Oloro, Jenara, Karrthus, Marath, Tariel, Riku, Karador, Numot, Damia, Sliver Overlord, Karn, Silver Golem


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 3:33 pm 
EDH Rules Committee
User avatar

Joined: 2006-May-09 4:17 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Calgary, AB
Hellfire, I wish this topic would go away ;) [Not in the sense that I'm going to lock it... the discussion is polite, and it would just crop up again later anyway... ]

That said... Crucible isn't banned cause of its interactions with Fastbond, and of the two Fastbond is the more legitimate EDH card anyway. Without Crucible, Fastbond is much harder to abuse... without Fastbond, Crucible is still problematic in several of other ways. Both can be be abused, but Fastbond requires more creativity and when it IS abused the results are more interesting than the yawn-inspiring results of Crucible abuse.

So IF it was a case of banning one of the two, Crucible would be the one to go.

_________________
Remember: Most legendary creatures have a gender, and most non-legendary ones don't! Use proper pronouns! ;)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 4:47 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 12:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oakland, CA
Genomancer wrote:
Crucible isn't banned cause of its interactions with Fastbond
IF it was a case of banning one of the two, Crucible would be the one to go.

Alright then. I'm tempted to argue the legitimacy of Fastbond, but that first sentence clearly indicates that it would be pointless.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 5:23 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2007-Sep-10 2:51 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Rittman, OH USA
Fastbond is the MOST nuts with Future Sight/Magus of the Future in my opinion.

_________________
My card alter blog: The Phyrexian Renaissance


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 8:40 pm 

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 3:27 pm
Age: Drake
Location: UCLA
warble wrote:
intreped wrote:
one more infinite combo is not going to hurt EDH.


Actually, yes it will....

As far as I can see Crucible is meeting every single requirement for being banned.


I disagree pretty strongly on this one... Here were the three "rules for banning"

# Its power level in multiplayer EDH is signficantly higher than both what's expected for its mana cost AND it's power level in other formats (due to different rules or game sizes). [Examples include Panoptic Mirror and Biorythm]
# it's dollar cost is prohibitive for most players and the card usually detracts from the playing experience of everyone in the game [The Power 8].
# it belogs to a class of cards which can't be consistantly interpreted by all players [Silver bordered cards, dexterity cards]


Crucible matches none of these. Do you disagree? Do you feel that it matches all three? Now, there are other reasons for banning a card, such as the nebulous "unfun" tag, but to say that Crucible meets all the rules for banning is disingenuous.

Three card combos in EDH that go infinite are simply not reasons for banning cards. If that were the case, we should ban every card, since Earthcraft + Squirrel Nest + ANY CARD makes an infinite number of squirrels. Similarly Niv-Mizzet + Curiousity + ANY CARD can draw your entire deck. There are a ton of nigh-infinite three card combos (literally, more than there are cards in magic, if we don't consider the basic land needed for Earthcraft + Squirrel Nest as part of the combo)

Crucible + Stripmine is not a very strong combo. 3 lands, Stripmine, and Crucible is a hand that will get you destroyed in a multiplayer game.

I can see arguments that Crucible and Braids is too strong. Or that Crucible + fetchlands makes colors too easy. But to complain about a 3 card combo that doesn't even win the game, like Fastbound/Stripmine/Crucible is nonsensical. Do you realize your chances of drawing this in a 100 card highlander deck? Do you realize how difficult it is to consistently tutor for 3 cards with different mana costs and permanent types? Why would you want to make your decks bad by trying to do such a thing?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-09 9:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Feb-27 4:47 pm
Age: Wyvern
Location: Madison, WI
I personally believe that the issue of Crucible of Worlds also has a good deal to do with whether you look at the format through the eyes of a duel player or a multiplayer player.

I, as a person who usually only play 1v1, see Crucible of Worlds in the same light as Academy Ruins: a utility card to make a few good cards in the deck into game-winners. Both have obvious direct combinations (Crucible: Strip Mine, Wasteland; Ruins: Mindslaver) but also have great deals of synergy with other cards common in the format (Crucible: Fetchlands, Fastbond, Zuran Orb; Ruins: EE, Mind Stone). Both cards also have the advantage of re-use of resources, and, somewhat ironically, are synergistic with each other as well.

The difference between the two is cost for the effects to achieve their "power" combos. Crucible, most importantly, requires much fewer of two resources: time and mana. In return, it needs one additional card (Fastbond) for the hard lock. However, in general use, the requirements for Crucible to provide assistance are much less intense than Ruins: Ruins requires the loss of a draw and 2-3 mana sources, while Crucible provides no usage drawback.

Do I feel that this means there should be change? I feel that in multiplayer EDH, Crucible is weaker, as the aforementioned general use of the card loses much more power in comparison to Academy Ruins. I could see Crucible in a multiplayer EDH match and not being much of a threat.

The thing is, the card would fall into my "auto-include" category and would be in each of my EDH decks; every deck runs Strip Mine + Wasteland, and even without that, something like the constant reoccurance of fetchlands (and subsequent thinning of the deck) would be a strong reason for me to easily add them. I believe it would also make a card like Armageddon playable in one of my decks notorious for being weak against LD.

I would rather see it remain banned, personally. It runs the fine line that Mindslaver could be considered to be running, but is on the other side of the line. (referring to "usually detracts from the playing experience") I would not put up a fight if it were unbanned, simple because I do not think the power is much of an issue, but the tone it can make in the game makes me weary.

I would enjoy being able to protect my two most important combo enablers through the synergy of Ruins / Crucible, though :)

_________________
-bjx
Generals: Merieke Ri Berit / Sharuum


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-10 4:57 am 

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 3:27 pm
Age: Drake
Location: UCLA
Bradleyjx makes some very cogent points. However I feel that we're all somewhat missing the issue here.

Perhaps the rules committee members who feel that Crucible of Worlds should stay banned could enlighten us with their arguments to that effect? It would make the discussion more focused if we knew what the reasons for the banning are. Otherwise we might argue in circles about some issue (for example, Stripmine + Fastbound + Crucible) which perhaps no one on the rules committee cares about, while some other issue (for example "there's no fun way to use Crucible") is the core reason why it is banned.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Sep-10 7:28 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2007-Sep-21 8:22 am
Age: Elder Dragon
billyh wrote:
warble wrote:
As far as I can see Crucible is meeting every single requirement for being banned.


I disagree pretty strongly on this one... Here were the three "rules for banning"

# Its power level in multiplayer EDH is signficantly higher than both what's expected for its mana cost AND it's power level in other formats (due to different rules or game sizes). [Examples include Panoptic Mirror and Biorythm]

Crucible matches none of these. Do you disagree?


^^

I was just talking about the power level, not the other rules. Sorry I didn't specifically say that.

As for that, yes it does match all the requirements for a power level banning. If it is "some early turn" and you have fastbond crucible...it doesn't matter what turn...and a fetch in your graveyard you can have 15 lands in play to use at the expense of a bunch of life. But...that's 15 lands you say that's not crucible? Yeah, it was fastbond crucible combo-ing with air dude. That's what it combos with...the life-blood of EDH. Sure, zuran orb is good to use because then you get INFINITE life so maybe a good use of that 15 mana was to tutor up zuran and get infinite life? Seems like a plan, dude! At that point you're free to destroy crucible, it's already ruined the game. You can feel free to disagree, but a lot of people don't want to see 25-30 lands and infinite life staring them in the face on turn 2 or 3...or even 14 lands and an opponent at 15 life for that matter. They might consider that game to be a little bit of a waste of their time.

Not saying in other formats that sort of play isn't horribly ineffective, almost worthless perhaps. But in EDH you get the turns and you're playing the horribly expensive casting cost win conditions and cards by the dozen so when you start pumping out one per turn...or in worst case like 3 or 4 per turn...at turn 2 it's not really a game, it's just waiting for the guy with 15 lands and infinite mana and life to win/lock everyone out of the game.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 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: