So I'm assuming you only play sanctioned Constructed then?
I also play-test sanctioned formats and play competitive EDH. Unsanctioned Vintage tournaments with unlimited proxies are also fun for me. I play some limited too, when the EV is too high to ignore.
Is it annoying to you that 99+% of EDH players prefer playing in groups where everyone's deck is "not optimized" because they don't want to play against Azami/Hermit Druid/Ad Naus all the time?
I don't care whether they can actually beat the best decks. I only care whether, within the confines of what their Commander allows them to do, they have maximised their chances. By all means come at me with tribal Zuberas, but that better be the strongest, most powerful and consistent Zubera list you could possibly come up with.
Example:
If your deck absolutely cannot go over 10% against Ad Naus no matter what you do, so be it. No fault on your part. Some decks have weaknesses and that's fine. Or maybe you deliberately chose to prioritize something else, dropping from 50% against Ad Naus to 30% in exchange for raising your Hermit match-up from 20% to 60%. That's fine too. EDH is a big format and compromises have to be made.
But if your deck could have a 50% Hermit match-up but your configuration drops that to 25% with no corresponding benefit just because you don't own the cards, think that playing good cards is "cheap" or just have an unhealthy love of suboptimal options, that irks me to no end. To the point where I would probably not want to play against you at all. The people playing sub-optimally by choice are basically dead to me, but the people who simply lack cards are fine opponents as long as they proxy up the list of their dreams, instead of presenting me with a toned down facsimile. Print out four Imperial Recruiters! A full set of P9! All the duals you want! I would rather play against a pile of 100% proxies than a deck of authentic WotC cards running Shock over Lightning Bolt in a format where both are legal.
I'm not sure I understand the un-optimized deck issue. Unless you no longer play the game for fun and only for purely competitive purposes... Then I suppose I could understand it.
Isn't running a non-'top tier' deck running an unoptimized deck? It doesn't matter how much money you pump into the deck, Reset Tide isn't going to take the next SCG Open.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Decks:
Modern
Modern Warp / UR Control / UR Storm / Naya Breachshift / ElectroBalance
Legacy
Solidarity / Lands / Sneak and Show / Grixis Delver / Reanimator / Belcher / Storm / Dredge
Isn't running a non-'top tier' deck running an unoptimized deck?
A top tier deck is simply the best archetype in the format. It has nothing to do with optimisation. I could cut a Pack Rat for a Doom Blade in Black Devotion and it would still be top tier, but no longer optimised. By contrast, an optimised deck is simply a deck that exists in the most powerful form it could possibly take. I can build an optimised Dimir Inspiration deck, and it might be the best Inspiration deck that could possibly be built in Standard, but it still wouldn't be top tier.
Because either A. He is a new player that hasn't invested that heavily in magic. Or B because he is playing on a budget?
The notifications say this was a reply to me, though I was not quoted. I will assume it is a response to my annoyance at non-optimised decks. The correct answer is: neither A nor B.
Basically I see playing against unoptimised decks as equivalent to sparring against a boxer with an injury. He's weaker than he should be, so the match is a complete waste of time. I learn nothing useful and feel no sense of satisfaction at the end of the game. Aside from the experience having no upside, I might even pick up a few bad habits that hurt me down the line. The only way to come out ahead when facing an unoptimised deck is to not play at all.
Wow. That's a really boring way to look at playing magic. Of course you want to make the best deck possible, but that becomes kind of boring (and expensive). I have a friend that is a "terrible" deckbuilder. He forces a R/G playstyle no matter what deck he builds, he just loves combattricks that much. But I still have fun playing against him, although I know that his deck isn't meta, and it isn't optimal I won't turn him down if he wants to play against my optimized deck. You sound like you would stop being friends with a person like that, and that your magic playing has become a grind more than a hobby. You should try to find a casual EDH group and try to build a fun deck.
Of course you want to make the best deck possible, but that becomes kind of boring (and expensive).
Been doing it since Mirage, and I haven't gotten bored yet. (Disclaimer: I took a break from 2006-2009 to focus on the game VS System, which was even more competitive than MtG)
that your magic playing has become a grind more than a hobby.
If I ever find myself unable to have fun with MtG, I would quit in a heartbeat. It would give me more time for my other hobbies: competitive fighting games and competitive Yomi. Also creating perfect JRPG save files.
You should try to find a casual EDH group and try to build a fun deck.
I did find one of those, but I didn't enjoy myself. I found a different group which was vastly more competitive, and have been enjoying EDH much more since making the switch.
I play lots of casual and i have three decks that just piss my friends off. my land destroy (molten rain, destructive urge, invisible stalker,etc), my artifact deck (one of those unbeatable ones) and of coarse, control!
Bant EDH decks. I've seen interesting decks of EVERY possible combination, but NOT in Bant. They're all in the same mold due to a lack of actually interesting generals.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
My Friend uses a Dragonlord Atarka turn 3 commander deck with Atarka as His commander. He can ramp her up to a 50/50 double strike, first strike. So I die by commander AND life. So it's no fun to play against. He completely broke Atarka and I can't kill her cause she will come back and shoot my creatures for 5 again. :/ Really sucks.
Sorry, but I'm curious as heck as to how he can consistently ramp up to a 7 mana commander in EDH.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
While I respect it from a deckbuilding perspective, one of my friends plays Tron Eggs in Modern. I'm just thankful that he was willing to play the faster Emrakul and Grapeshot kills and stopped taking forever to find a single Pyrite Spellbomb.
The deck that I absolutely hate playing against and have no respect for is Burn. The deck is so redundant that it doesn't really matter what they draw, so consistent that all games are basically the same, and so linear that the games aren't even interesting.
Land destruction irks me. But only the stone rain type effects. If you armageddon with three creatures in play I'm good. If you power out a turn one deus of calamity I'm good. It's the goddamn single destroy lands until you canmt do squat and beat down with a 2/2 10 times decks I can't stomach.
I can deal with stone rain effects, its when they start using legacy banned crap like Strip Mine that it gets annoying.
There are very few decks I actually don't like playing against. The only one I can think of is Pauper Delver/Mono Blue Control. Damn, but that deck is boring.
Of course you want to make the best deck possible, but that becomes kind of boring (and expensive).
Been doing it since Mirage, and I haven't gotten bored yet. (Disclaimer: I took a break from 2006-2009 to focus on the game VS System, which was even more competitive than MtG)
that your magic playing has become a grind more than a hobby.
If I ever find myself unable to have fun with MtG, I would quit in a heartbeat. It would give me more time for my other hobbies: competitive fighting games and competitive Yomi. Also creating perfect JRPG save files.
You should try to find a casual EDH group and try to build a fun deck.
I did find one of those, but I didn't enjoy myself. I found a different group which was vastly more competitive, and have been enjoying EDH much more since making the switch.
Wow... by your definition, I have never played a competitive game of Magic in my entire life, despite playing in 6 PT Qualifiers.
My Teysa deck is my favorite EDH deck, and has never been optimized. I don't own a Scrubland, a Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, a Chains of Mephistolophes, or a Candleabra of Tawnos. My Azami deck won five EDH tournaments before I retired it, yet it was never optimized because I never owned a Force of Will or a Mana Drain. No standard list I have ever played has been a "top-tier" deck because I like builds that go against the meta. Bloodcrank in Zend/Scars. G/W Tokens in Scars/Innistrad. B/W Exquisite Blood combo in Innistrad/RtR. B/W Extort in RtR/Theros.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
He used Xenagos, God of Revels and Relentless assault to ramp her to a big number. He also has a Ob Nixilis, Unshackled deck that has Sanguine blood and Exquisite thirst. He pings us for 1 drains us for 40,000,000,000. Not fun. He's a jerk to play against, all his decks are so broken. He has a milling deck that at turn 4 he can mill 1/4 of your deck, He has 3 tiers of decks, I call them the wreck your face, chilling decks, and Make sure your dead after your dead. He's a pain in the a**.
Wow... by your definition, I have never played a competitive game of Magic in my entire life, despite playing in 6 PT Qualifiers.
You can play non-competitively in a PTQ environment. I myself went through a phase of wanting to make Zur's Weirding good back in Onslaught and IIRC got as far as top 8 of a PTQ with it. But I knew Zur's Weirding wasn't the optimal choice for those tournaments, so I hardly consider those competitive games. I was just clowning around.
Think of it like plays in a game. There is only ever one correct play, given the gamestate and all available information. Every other play is wrong, but wrong plays can still lead to a win. So it is with competitive play. To be truly competitive is to optimize for winning with zero regard for any other consideration. Anything else is less than competitive, but they can still find success even in a competitive environment (just look at all the 61-card decks that have ever made top 8).
Bant EDH decks. I've seen interesting decks of EVERY possible combination, but NOT in Bant. They're all in the same mold due to a lack of actually interesting generals.
See, that's because you've never played against my Rubinia Soulsinger Kleptomaniacal deck..
I have a negative reaction to stock decklists. Not so much in regular formats, but why netdeck for EDH?
Honestly, I like playing against almost all decks except the money decks.
Every format has at least 1: put as much expensive cards in there as you can and win because of value.
What gets to me isn't the strategy (there isn't any) but simply the unfairness when it comes down to playing it from an affordability perspective.
Don't get me wrong, I can actually afford legacy stuff or JUND/JUNK modern decks. But it just feels empty to win or lose with/against them.
It just doesn't feel as if it was a player testing his skill against another as much as whoever had the bigger wallet wins.
An example that kind of irks me everytime are the adults playing at our LGS. They bring in the top decks (300+$ in value) over for FNM and crush the younger players. The younger players can actually beat them, and often do in limited. But they can't afford the cards and lose by sheer price tags.
I find it more fun to play against EGGS/AD NAUSEAM decks than money decks. At least I get to see how their strategies work and that is more interesting to me than someone dropping 8 planeswalkers in a row.
I'm usually the last person to say a deck takes no skill play, but burn hardly takes a lick of skill to play.
Under most circumstances I'd say you're right, but some of the best Burn players have the skill to turn unfavorable situations into winning ones.
See Patrick Sullivan against Maverick in the top 8 of an Open a couple years back.
The problem with defining this format by what is "fun" is that everyone seems to define fun as what they don't lose to. If you keep losing to easily answered cards, that means you should improve your deck. If you don't want to improve your deck, then you should come to peace with the idea that you are going to lose because you chose to not interact with better strategies.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I also play-test sanctioned formats and play competitive EDH. Unsanctioned Vintage tournaments with unlimited proxies are also fun for me. I play some limited too, when the EV is too high to ignore.
I don't care whether they can actually beat the best decks. I only care whether, within the confines of what their Commander allows them to do, they have maximised their chances. By all means come at me with tribal Zuberas, but that better be the strongest, most powerful and consistent Zubera list you could possibly come up with.
Example:
If your deck absolutely cannot go over 10% against Ad Naus no matter what you do, so be it. No fault on your part. Some decks have weaknesses and that's fine. Or maybe you deliberately chose to prioritize something else, dropping from 50% against Ad Naus to 30% in exchange for raising your Hermit match-up from 20% to 60%. That's fine too. EDH is a big format and compromises have to be made.
But if your deck could have a 50% Hermit match-up but your configuration drops that to 25% with no corresponding benefit just because you don't own the cards, think that playing good cards is "cheap" or just have an unhealthy love of suboptimal options, that irks me to no end. To the point where I would probably not want to play against you at all. The people playing sub-optimally by choice are basically dead to me, but the people who simply lack cards are fine opponents as long as they proxy up the list of their dreams, instead of presenting me with a toned down facsimile. Print out four Imperial Recruiters! A full set of P9! All the duals you want! I would rather play against a pile of 100% proxies than a deck of authentic WotC cards running Shock over Lightning Bolt in a format where both are legal.
Isn't running a non-'top tier' deck running an unoptimized deck? It doesn't matter how much money you pump into the deck, Reset Tide isn't going to take the next SCG Open.
Modern Warp / UR Control / UR Storm / Naya Breachshift / ElectroBalance
Solidarity / Lands / Sneak and Show / Grixis Delver / Reanimator / Belcher / Storm / Dredge
A top tier deck is simply the best archetype in the format. It has nothing to do with optimisation. I could cut a Pack Rat for a Doom Blade in Black Devotion and it would still be top tier, but no longer optimised. By contrast, an optimised deck is simply a deck that exists in the most powerful form it could possibly take. I can build an optimised Dimir Inspiration deck, and it might be the best Inspiration deck that could possibly be built in Standard, but it still wouldn't be top tier.
Wow. That's a really boring way to look at playing magic. Of course you want to make the best deck possible, but that becomes kind of boring (and expensive). I have a friend that is a "terrible" deckbuilder. He forces a R/G playstyle no matter what deck he builds, he just loves combattricks that much. But I still have fun playing against him, although I know that his deck isn't meta, and it isn't optimal I won't turn him down if he wants to play against my optimized deck. You sound like you would stop being friends with a person like that, and that your magic playing has become a grind more than a hobby. You should try to find a casual EDH group and try to build a fun deck.
Been doing it since Mirage, and I haven't gotten bored yet. (Disclaimer: I took a break from 2006-2009 to focus on the game VS System, which was even more competitive than MtG)
I wouldn't stop being friends with him. I just would never play MtG with him.
If I ever find myself unable to have fun with MtG, I would quit in a heartbeat. It would give me more time for my other hobbies: competitive fighting games and competitive Yomi. Also creating perfect JRPG save files.
I did find one of those, but I didn't enjoy myself. I found a different group which was vastly more competitive, and have been enjoying EDH much more since making the switch.
I'm sorry but I want to push your face in, not wait for you to get 10 gates.
Life Gainer Decks
mill
control
Turbo Fog
UW Exile Control
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)http://oi60.tinypic.com/20htuol.jpg
The deck that I absolutely hate playing against and have no respect for is Burn. The deck is so redundant that it doesn't really matter what they draw, so consistent that all games are basically the same, and so linear that the games aren't even interesting.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I can deal with stone rain effects, its when they start using legacy banned crap like Strip Mine that it gets annoying.
Legacy Burn
NO Combo Elves
Reanimator
Trades
Burn Primer
:symg:Free Gaea's Cradle:symg:
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
Wow... by your definition, I have never played a competitive game of Magic in my entire life, despite playing in 6 PT Qualifiers.
My Teysa deck is my favorite EDH deck, and has never been optimized. I don't own a Scrubland, a Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, a Chains of Mephistolophes, or a Candleabra of Tawnos. My Azami deck won five EDH tournaments before I retired it, yet it was never optimized because I never owned a Force of Will or a Mana Drain. No standard list I have ever played has been a "top-tier" deck because I like builds that go against the meta. Bloodcrank in Zend/Scars. G/W Tokens in Scars/Innistrad. B/W Exquisite Blood combo in Innistrad/RtR. B/W Extort in RtR/Theros.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You can play non-competitively in a PTQ environment. I myself went through a phase of wanting to make Zur's Weirding good back in Onslaught and IIRC got as far as top 8 of a PTQ with it. But I knew Zur's Weirding wasn't the optimal choice for those tournaments, so I hardly consider those competitive games. I was just clowning around.
Think of it like plays in a game. There is only ever one correct play, given the gamestate and all available information. Every other play is wrong, but wrong plays can still lead to a win. So it is with competitive play. To be truly competitive is to optimize for winning with zero regard for any other consideration. Anything else is less than competitive, but they can still find success even in a competitive environment (just look at all the 61-card decks that have ever made top 8).
See, that's because you've never played against my Rubinia Soulsinger Kleptomaniacal deck..
I have a negative reaction to stock decklists. Not so much in regular formats, but why netdeck for EDH?
Every format has at least 1: put as much expensive cards in there as you can and win because of value.
What gets to me isn't the strategy (there isn't any) but simply the unfairness when it comes down to playing it from an affordability perspective.
Don't get me wrong, I can actually afford legacy stuff or JUND/JUNK modern decks. But it just feels empty to win or lose with/against them.
It just doesn't feel as if it was a player testing his skill against another as much as whoever had the bigger wallet wins.
An example that kind of irks me everytime are the adults playing at our LGS. They bring in the top decks (300+$ in value) over for FNM and crush the younger players. The younger players can actually beat them, and often do in limited. But they can't afford the cards and lose by sheer price tags.
I find it more fun to play against EGGS/AD NAUSEAM decks than money decks. At least I get to see how their strategies work and that is more interesting to me than someone dropping 8 planeswalkers in a row.
RETIRED - GAME SUCKS
Modern:
UUUMerfolksUUU
RGoblinsR
Ad Nauseam
BR 8 Racks RB
WUB Mill BUW
Legacy:
XOps! All splels! X
What I think of MaRo
Under most circumstances I'd say you're right, but some of the best Burn players have the skill to turn unfavorable situations into winning ones.
See Patrick Sullivan against Maverick in the top 8 of an Open a couple years back.