Oh yeah, and if you think that Sol Ring's busted, but Mana Crypt is fine because of the drawback, you're not thinking enough. Sol Ring is only busted if it doesn't let game go long - a first turn sol ring will be mostly irrelevant by turn 5-6 when everybody's acceleration has kicked in. If you're using sol ring to end the game before it gets to turn 5-6, mana crypt's drawback is irrelevant.
Thank you for that. The fact that he wrote off Mana Crypt made me think that the author doesn't understand the format very well. If the game lasts long enough for Mana Crypt to be a factor to your life total, then you aren't using it right.
I read all of your point rebuttals and the only point of fact I really see you driving in is that "Sol Ring is unbalanced". That is true. That does not mean it is broken in the format. Decks aren't forced to build around it or build against it. In fact, it should not effect the build of your deck whatsoever. I highly doubt there's a deck in EDH that can't go off with out a Sol Ring.
Judging by the disdain for Sol Ring and the cards being named with it's abuse (Mayael?!), I would say that you guys are just getting schooled by better players and deck builders who utilize Sol Ring to do a couple turns earlier what they inevitably would have done anyway.
Keep 'aggressively mulling' to get your Sol Rings, I will just play the seven I'm given... keeping a one land hand, because it's EDH not Grand Prix Madrid.
Except he can't, because it isn't quantifiable in such a chaotic environment.
Then why even propose something like it as the premise of an article?
When I read the title and clicked on it to start reading, I was expecting to see some hard analysis showing Sol Ring is mathematically on the same power level as one or more cards currently on the banned list. Instead, the entire mathematical content of the article was "this card is very high above the normal curve for cost vs. benefit" and "slightly more than 1/4 of the time, someone is going to cast this Turn 1 in a 4-player game".
Both of those points are 100% accurate and very important for building the case for banning Sol Ring, but that's where the math stops. The rest of the article is devoted to counterpoints to the most common arguments for keeping it. That's all well and good, but I would rather the author had stuck to his premise and put forth more evidence directly in support of his position.
Sol Ring is a staple in EDH. Almost all decks run it, because with EDH, you need to get mana. It is much harder to get mana, and this gives new and old players access to it.
First turn Sol Ring is not bad. Its what they do thats bad. And 3 on 1 kinda makes it even, don't ya think?
It seems to me like a lot of these comments on Sol Ring being not that good are based on casual playgroups with decks and themes that maybe arent built to be very powerful. Try Sol Ring again in a meta filled with degenerate combo decks and see how far ahead a turn 1 Sol Ring gets you then. You guys say "by turn 4 his permanants are burning" what if he doesnt care because by turn 4 he is comboing the entire table at once?
Both of those points are 100% accurate and very important for building the case for banning Sol Ring, but that's where the math stops. The rest of the article is devoted to counterpoints to the most common arguments for keeping it. That's all well and good, but I would rather the author had stuck to his premise and put forth more evidence directly in support of his position.
To be fair to the author, I found the following two mathematical points in the article...
Let's say each deck has three cards which can answer Sol Ring before it becomes a problem (judging from the deck database this is a very generous estimate even in decks of the appropriate colors). In that case, there is still less than a ten percent chance that anyone can answer the Sol Ring before it untaps
However, this doesn't explain why it's a problem that a single player has a 10% of having an answer. I mean, there are plenty of games where my deck has 0% of answer to a card, and I just lose. But, why is this 10% relevant for Sol Ring?
Looking at a few dozen decklists without Sol Ring, the average number of cards that Sol Ring lets you cast on turn two is 17. Furthermore, the standard deviation is 4, meaning that almost no deck has fewer than thirteen options if it untaps after casting Sol Ring turn one.
While this may be a true statement, it doesn't (a) qualify what cards those are, and (b) how back-breaking those cards are in a game. Specifically, the effect of being able to cast them on turn two versus "normally" without a Sol Ring. Certainly there is anecdotal evidence of how this play can be abused to "get ahead" in the early game; but to what extent does that effect spread to the rest of the game?
But, beyond that, I don't feel enough is given to the mathematical analysis on the strength of Sol Ring. Edit: For example, I would have expected some mathematical analysis on the possibility of these back-breaking Turn X plays early in the game, such as while mulliganing to five may ensure a 60% chance of having Sol Ring, what's the chance of assembling the rest of such a play? Because there's a hell of an opportunity cost in mulliganing to five just for a Sol Ring. Or even just having it in an opening hand of seven, you still have to get the rest of the pieces together by turn two or turn three.
This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, The Math of Banning Sol Ring in Commander. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.
i see where your coming from in this, with the obvious abusive qualities of sol ring, though I never believed it a threat. this is usually because i've never drawn it turn one and my mana acceleration is quick enough that sol ring only helps a small amount towards what i'm already doing. But do understand the point of banning it,: if i draw sol ring turn one, turn two i can hit 6 mana with harrow, and two of the any two cost fetches (or accelerators) in my deck, turning into a turn three abusive card, such as damia, which leads to turn 4 full hand and game over. and allows for a remarkable amount of flexibility with play. Not to mention the dozen other cards you can play, such as a turn two Ruhan, and as a general, you've already got a three turn timer to control and reestablish yourself in the game, something not easily done. As far as non-permanant threats, it allows for (at least in my own deck) a turn two buried alive followed by a turn three living death, eliminating opposition, fetching my best cards, and (in 1v1 at least) a game ending move. Sure, the circumstnces are fairly picky, and absolutely based on chance, but it CAN happen, and really does show how broken soul ring is. Though banning it won't do much, many people don't care for the ban list in casual edh play anyway. but i loved the article.
Though i do not disagree with the power of sol ring, it does not deserve to be banned according to the 3 principles of EDH banning
1. it's perfectly understandable by all players (aka, its not an Un-card)
2. it is not prhibitively expensive (32.10 to buy a precon, if you can't find a single. last time i looked JTMS cost twice that and was still legal)
3. its power level in multiplayer is, as you mentioned; though not in this specific context, far less then that in one v one.
sure, it's a powerful card. but it does not deserve to be officially banned as put forth by the three criteria.
Let us have our Sol Rings. Quit whining about losing to an explosive start, shut up, shuffle up, and play again. I'm seriously tired of the arguments to ban things because people lose to them. You lose sometimes in Magic, ****ing face it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I will flay the skin from your flesh and the flesh from your bones and scrape your bones dry. And still you will not have suffered enough." -Greven il-Vec, to Gerrard
An unanswered sol ring for 1-2 turns IS a huge problem. Turn 2 GAAIV? Rewind mana?
Players like you who whine and belly ache are the problem. I suggest an alternate banning. Ban players like the poster of this article who piss and moan and ruin the fun for everyone else from every group they attempt to insinuate themselves in. "Oh NO! Someone can get explosive draws in the most explosive format ever! AND IT'S RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE AND ACCESSIBLE TO EVERYONE! WHATEVER SHALL WE DO?" Goddamn it I hate reading posts of magic players like you. And by the way, the answer is nothing.
Again, more attacks on his percieved character. I am missing an argument here.
People get to play their cards because of Sol Ring. Being able to play cards is fun, hence Sol Ring is a fun card. Stop trying to ban fun cards.
Now I am unsure if you're being satirical or not. That's how ridiculous this statement is.
If you get a fast start with Sol Ring and get an advantage, it's only a matter of time before someone else gets it and the same thing happens to somebody else, because it's in just about every deck. It all evens out in the end. It's not like it's a competive format where you have to stop playing when you are beaten by a lucky draw. If someone beats you because of a Sol Ring draw, just shuffle up and play again; sooner or later you'll draw your own and good times will fallow.
The tempo isn't quite the same when you get it early game, compared to late game. A turn 2 four drop is far more backbreaking than a turn 5 seven drop. Would you say the same about hermit druid?
Bannings should be focused on cards that create oppressive unfair and unfun game states, espeshally ones that are super effective. While Sol Ring is super effective, there is nothing unfun or oppressive about So Ring, so it should not be banned.
It does create unfair gamestates for everyone else playing. The fast mana rocks are banned in 1v1 specifically for this reason. Just because a fun move can be made with a card ("Oh hey, hermit druid grabbed my land"), doesn't mean it isn't busted and wont be used in completely degenrate and warping ways.
Again, still unsure whether this post was supposed to mock people who had a similar mindset, or if it was serious, either way I was surprised by all the personal attacks. You would think a person within a minority group typically subjugated to personal attacks would be more mindful.
Here's a solution: Go make your own format where Sol Ring is banned, and stop trying to impose your will on the other thousands of players who like playing with it.
EDH/Commander is a social format, right? So why don't people use their social skills to discuss what they like and don't like, instead of adopting a list with 60+ banned cards?
Try Sol Ring again in a meta filled with degenerate combo decks and see how far ahead a turn 1 Sol Ring gets you then. You guys say "by turn 4 his permanants are burning" what if he doesnt care because by turn 4 he is comboing the entire table at once?
Then you say "GG" and play again, asking him to use a different deck because that wasn't very fun. If he refuses to change decks, start another game with out him. EDH is supposed to promote social gaming. Fun gaming. If the majority of the players are not having fun due to one player, it is that player's responsibility to change his play style or leave.
Now, if the majority of the players want to play the Turn 4 table blazing combos, then you should probably do so yourself. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. If you don't want to play that way... then don't.
Two premises:
1) Sol Ring is incredibly powerful, accelerating you two mana essentially for free. It's clearly better than the moxen and arguably better than black lotus.
2) It's often difficult to get ahead with Sol Ring in multiplayer games. If you start doing powerful things with Sol Ring, people will gang up on you and negate much of the advantage you gained.
Even though Sol Ring is containable in a lot of situations, I think it should be banned because it's an inherently broken card. My playgroup is pretty competitive and a lot of our games revolve around tutoring and aggressively mulliganing for Sol Ring and Mana Crypt. It would nice to have such unfair cards banned.
Also, in a lot of situations, Commander politics are self-correcting enough to mitigate Sol Ring's power, especially in 2-3 player games. A lot of people argue that Commander is primarily a multiplayer format, but the official banned is inevitably going to be used for some 1v1 games. Is banning the most broken mana accelerant in the game really too much to ask?
So aggressive mulliganing into Sol Ring is a good practice in Commander? Where is the advantage to going down to 4-5 cards (that is aggressive mulliganing) just to have Sol Ring? If your opponent wants Sol Ring that bad, isn't losing 2+ cards drawback enough?
Then you say "GG" and play again, asking him to use a different deck because that wasn't very fun. If he refuses to change decks, start another game with out him. EDH is supposed to promote social gaming. Fun gaming. If the majority of the players are not having fun due to one player, it is that player's responsibility to change his play style or leave.
Now, if the majority of the players want to play the Turn 4 table blazing combos, then you should probably do so yourself. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. If you don't want to play that way... then don't.
This post brings me back around to my first one.
If the answer to someone playing an unfun deck is to either ask them to change decks or stop playing with them, then why isn't that the answer to every powerful card?
How do you tell the difference between "unfun enough to ask them to change decks" and "unfun enough that this card can't be allowed in the format anymore"?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am no longer on MTGS staff, so please don't contact me asking me to do staff things. :|
If the answer to someone playing an unfun deck is to either ask them to change decks or stop playing with them, then why isn't that the answer to every powerful card?
How do you tell the difference between "unfun enough to ask them to change decks" and "unfun enough that this card can't be allowed in the format anymore"?
Because in this case, Sol Ring is NOT the card winning the game. There is no possible way you beat your opponent with a Sol Ring. Removing Sol Ring from the deck does not stop the deck from being unfun and beating you... it just slows it down a turn or two.
Powerful cards are okay to play with. They are fun. It is when a card is BROKEN that it needs to be banned. In this singleton format of 100 card builds, a single mana accelerator that can be used by any deck in the format in a space that is already dedicated to a Land is not broken. It may provide unbalance, but unbalance simply ADDS to the format with explosive and chaotic plays that you wouldn't see in a Standard meta.
Sol Ring is EDH. It embodies the power of the format while promoting an unbalance that provides erratic and exciting game states.
How do you tell the difference between "unfun enough to ask them to change decks" and "unfun enough that this card can't be allowed in the format anymore"?
By using your own discretion.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Bio-units terminate noise exchange. It is time for you to ingest sandwiches from my compartment.
Power 9 cards are banned because of affordability. To most of us that doesn't matter, since we cannot afford them. If I could afford them, I don't think I would whine either. I can afford Sol Ring. And anyone who has purchased a Commander deck now has one as well.
If someone in my game plays a turn 1 ring, congrats to them. They won the mana lottery! But that doesn't mean they won the game. In fact, experience reveals they are about as likely to lose due to hate as they are to win due to acceleration.
If your deck is degenerate enough that it can actually, reliably abuse a turn 1 Sol Ring to the extent that it is relevent to winning in multiplayer, then it is your deck that is unfun, not the card.
Edit: Also, if math is important here, take note of what the majority is saying.
If the answer to someone playing an unfun deck is to either ask them to change decks or stop playing with them, then why isn't that the answer to every powerful card?
How do you tell the difference between "unfun enough to ask them to change decks" and "unfun enough that this card can't be allowed in the format anymore"?
I think the simple answer here is some cards are simply guilty of being the reason the deck is unfun rather than the enabler of the things that made the deck unfun. Biorhythm is a non-interactive culprit. Sol Ring is simply a chaos element, which is not inherently unfun.
Trying to keep a lid on the worst offending cards is a good focus for the banned list, trying to make EDH balanced is a fool's errand.
An easy solution to those of you belly aching about fast combo decks is this, let him/her go off and win then say okay you win the rest of us are going to continue playing as if you weren't part of the game. I despise fast combo kills (I love combos though that I can build up to) and those that play them only care about winning not the fun of the game, so let them have their win and keep having fun without them.
Oh yeah, and if you think that Sol Ring's busted, but Mana Crypt is fine because of the drawback, you're not thinking enough. Sol Ring is only busted if it doesn't let game go long - a first turn sol ring will be mostly irrelevant by turn 5-6 when everybody's acceleration has kicked in. If you're using sol ring to end the game before it gets to turn 5-6, mana crypt's drawback is irrelevant.
Thank you for that. The fact that he wrote off Mana Crypt made me think that the author doesn't understand the format very well. If the game lasts long enough for Mana Crypt to be a factor to your life total, then you aren't using it right.
And here's where the whole reading comprehension thing comes in to play. The author doesn't "write off" Mana Crypt. He specifically points out that it is similar and that a banning discussion could be held. Then he makes the claim that the discussion for Mana Crypt is a different and more complicated one.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Abilities exist independently of their source. It's like shooting a guy after he throws a grenade. The grenade is still coming. But if you remove the target, the ability is countered upon resolution. It's like a grenade, if the guy you threw your grenade at disappears, it won't explo.... wait what?
New fave mod quote:
...six and a half YEARS ago! There is absolutely no reason to dig up a thread after that long a period of inactivity. -Carsten
You listed a lot of points but, staggeringly in my opinion, you completely overlooked the most important one:
...What other format, precisely, can one PLAY Sol Rings in?
Vintage: restricted. does anyone even play this format any more? My mental picture of Vintage is a couple guys sitting around with binders and wondering why there's no one else who can afford to play with them. That, and the sound of crickets.
Legacy, Modern, Extended, Standard, Pauper, Peasant, basically you name it other than EDH: Banned.
So really you're just saying you want to turn a mostly-useless piece of cardboard into an entirely-useless piece of cardboard. Just because some people get whiney about someone going t1 sol ring, signet, go.
That happens occasionally in my playgroup. Know what the response is? It's called politics. If one person jumps out to too fast a lead, you gang up on him and beat him down until he either starts to play less provocatively, or loses enough permanents that he's no longer the front-runner. This is why EDH pods of 4-5 are best, as they allow coalitions of all opponents to be so strong when combined that if you get really douchey, you can generally be reined in. There's no call to ban a format staple over this. Especially when it's the only format where we can put the damned thing to any use.
ditto for the most part. I dont think it is damaging anything enough to warrant getting banned, at least not that I have seen. Yea its good, really really really good, but I dont think its so awful to see someone play it that the game isnt fun.
just ma two cents, i'll probably keep playing it regardless unless it becomes an issue..
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The true mind can weather all the lies and illusions without being lost. The true heart can tough the poison of hatred without being harmed. Since beginning-less time, darkness thrives in the void but always yields to purifying light.
I invision a future where one is not mighty when he can silence a crowd with brutality,
but when he leaves them speechless with wisdom.
I don't think banning sol ring would make EDH/Commander a better format. The entire point of the format is to play casual magic with friends using some interesting deckbuilding restrictions. It's designed to induce variance.
If someone makes a deck that can combo a table of people on turn 4 consistently they are dodging the point of EDH. You aren't supposed to beat everyone as fast as possible. There's no reward for doing so. The banlist is designed to prevent the most degenerate un-fun situations from occurring, but it is not comprehensive enough to cover every single card or interaction.
If you want to make a fast mana combo deck, then yes you want Sol Ring. Also, your peers may not like your deck and ask you to change since you are going against the spirit of a format named after legendary dragons that cost a ton of mana to play. You know who likes playing with Sol Ring? The same people that like playing casual magic. Some games you get your ring and can do silly stuff faster than you should, some games your opponents get it, and sometimes a pivotal ring gets blown up before someone can really abuse it.
It's a powerful card, but if you look at EDH from the perspective of a casual game format that is designed to induce variance then it really is fine.
And here's where the whole reading comprehension thing comes in to play. The author doesn't "write off" Mana Crypt. He specifically points out that it is similar and that a banning discussion could be held. Then he makes the claim that the discussion for Mana Crypt is a different and more complicated one.
"The life loss attached to Mana Crypt is a real liability to decks interested in the long game. " - The Author
Mana Crypt is not a different argument. The only difference here is that the majority of players can't get their hands on a Mana Crypt. If each player had to choose between a Sol Ring and a Mana Crypt for their deck, the player who chooses Sol Ring is actually mentally investing in a long game. The Mana Crypt player would be the one trying to combo out turn 4.
The life loss attached to Mana Crypt is NOT a real liability, unless you're focused on playing a lengthy game. If you do plan on playing a lengthy game, then I would suggest that you are not using the Sol Ring in your deck to a BROKEN advantage.
Many of the play techniques listed in this article are bad points to make. Arguing a late game factor into the Mana Crypt/Sol Ring comparison goes against the point of the cards being powerful game enders. Pointing out aggressive mulling for a mana accelerator that you described as a way to play a Harmonize on turn 2 is a stupid point.
We needed more valid points in here. Not "I don't read that as an endorsement of Sol Ring in the format so much as a resignation that Wizards doesn't have the power to ban it,". Are you serious?
I definitely agree with this thread, but I do believe that Sol Ring is a little less powerful than it's perceived to be in a melee. In my circle, we usually ban cards like this when we play single player (and teeter between starting at 30 and 40 life, because aggro decks are simply inferior when you start at 40). A few cards that I've personally justified being on the ban list 1v1:
sol ring
strip mine
mind twist
These are definitely insane 1v1, and so we banned them. But to be honest, they haven't been a major problem in a melee. Yes, they're still really good, but I think casual melees have a measure of diplomacy which can prevent them from going off. Untapping Sol Ring turn 2 won't really enable you to take on 3+ people at once, and if you use it to pick on one person specifically, you pretty much become a target to everyone. Not to mention triple the answers for the sol ring alone, which you got to believe someone's going to have.
That being said, I think there definitely should continue to be multi-player and single-player banned lists. I think every commander deck should have a "sideboard" for playing 1v1 or melees.
And here's where the whole reading comprehension thing comes in to play. The author doesn't "write off" Mana Crypt. He specifically points out that it is similar and that a banning discussion could be held. Then he makes the claim that the discussion for Mana Crypt is a different and more complicated one.
I actually discuss this in the article. Mana Crypt provides a comparable tempo boost, but the damage it inflicts on you is relevant and causes good tension. There is enough of a difference that I was not comfortable grouping them together.
What did I not understand?
You can't both claim that Mana Crypt's drawback is relevant and that the acceleration it provides is problematic. It just reveals a fundamental lack of understanding of the format.
In a regular deck, sol ring's mana acceleration isn't irrelevant, but it's not problematic either. You'll get a few turns to be ahead of everyone else, then someone will wipe the board, and your temporary advantage will be lost. In fact, getting an early advantage is really terrible in EDH - you just inflict more or less useless damage to players and incite grudges, and you'll be down some cards when the real game starts. Woop dee do!
In decks that aim to end the game quickly and (generally) non-interactively, sol ring is a problem, but in those games mana crypt has no drawback whatsoever. You can't say that sol ring is a problem because it lets you do broken things, and at the same time claim that mana crypt has a drawback that balances it. Sol ring is only a problem in the decks where mana crypt has no drawback.
Non-interactive decks are a problem. As others have said, the solution is social. I have a friend who's a vintage player and obsessed with one-turn kill combos. He always has a deck that will just kill a whole table super fast. From time to time when he's having a bad day, he'll bring out his combo deck, we'll have a very short game where he wins, then he'll be happy and switch back to an interactive deck. If he always played the combo decks, we'd just not play with him. Go goldfish. He knows this, too, and doesn't need to be told.
Basically, the author doesn't know how to play EDH. And he's welcome to play the crappy format he plays where sol ring is a problem, and ban sol ring at his kitchen table. But don't try and impose your will on the rest of the world.
Basically, the author doesn't know how to play EDH. And he's welcome to play the crappy format he plays where sol ring is a problem, and ban sol ring at his kitchen table.
This is exactly what I got out of this article. I even read it twice to make sure I wasn't missing something the first time around. It starts off based on the mathematics of an unbalanced card... but then it uses unbalanced situations to perpetuate the points.
Who mulligans down to 5 cards JUST to get a Sol Ring? That increases your chances to get Sol Ring, but decreases your chances to have stuff to play. The real math here is that you made many rebuttals to previous points in favor of Sol Ring, but you never really made any strong points to actually ban the card.
I feel like I could have written a better article against Sol Ring and I am 100% for it's inclusion in EDH.
Thank you for that. The fact that he wrote off Mana Crypt made me think that the author doesn't understand the format very well. If the game lasts long enough for Mana Crypt to be a factor to your life total, then you aren't using it right.
I read all of your point rebuttals and the only point of fact I really see you driving in is that "Sol Ring is unbalanced". That is true. That does not mean it is broken in the format. Decks aren't forced to build around it or build against it. In fact, it should not effect the build of your deck whatsoever. I highly doubt there's a deck in EDH that can't go off with out a Sol Ring.
Judging by the disdain for Sol Ring and the cards being named with it's abuse (Mayael?!), I would say that you guys are just getting schooled by better players and deck builders who utilize Sol Ring to do a couple turns earlier what they inevitably would have done anyway.
Keep 'aggressively mulling' to get your Sol Rings, I will just play the seven I'm given... keeping a one land hand, because it's EDH not Grand Prix Madrid.
LISTEN TO MAH SONGZ!
@BillyTheFridge
Then why even propose something like it as the premise of an article?
When I read the title and clicked on it to start reading, I was expecting to see some hard analysis showing Sol Ring is mathematically on the same power level as one or more cards currently on the banned list. Instead, the entire mathematical content of the article was "this card is very high above the normal curve for cost vs. benefit" and "slightly more than 1/4 of the time, someone is going to cast this Turn 1 in a 4-player game".
Both of those points are 100% accurate and very important for building the case for banning Sol Ring, but that's where the math stops. The rest of the article is devoted to counterpoints to the most common arguments for keeping it. That's all well and good, but I would rather the author had stuck to his premise and put forth more evidence directly in support of his position.
I'm Mike, from The Mana Pool.
Check out my Tapped Out profile and comment on my decks!
First turn Sol Ring is not bad. Its what they do thats bad. And 3 on 1 kinda makes it even, don't ya think?
To be fair to the author, I found the following two mathematical points in the article...
However, this doesn't explain why it's a problem that a single player has a 10% of having an answer. I mean, there are plenty of games where my deck has 0% of answer to a card, and I just lose. But, why is this 10% relevant for Sol Ring?
While this may be a true statement, it doesn't (a) qualify what cards those are, and (b) how back-breaking those cards are in a game. Specifically, the effect of being able to cast them on turn two versus "normally" without a Sol Ring. Certainly there is anecdotal evidence of how this play can be abused to "get ahead" in the early game; but to what extent does that effect spread to the rest of the game?
But, beyond that, I don't feel enough is given to the mathematical analysis on the strength of Sol Ring. Edit: For example, I would have expected some mathematical analysis on the possibility of these back-breaking Turn X plays early in the game, such as while mulliganing to five may ensure a 60% chance of having Sol Ring, what's the chance of assembling the rest of such a play? Because there's a hell of an opportunity cost in mulliganing to five just for a Sol Ring. Or even just having it in an opening hand of seven, you still have to get the rest of the pieces together by turn two or turn three.
i see where your coming from in this, with the obvious abusive qualities of sol ring, though I never believed it a threat. this is usually because i've never drawn it turn one and my mana acceleration is quick enough that sol ring only helps a small amount towards what i'm already doing. But do understand the point of banning it,: if i draw sol ring turn one, turn two i can hit 6 mana with harrow, and two of the any two cost fetches (or accelerators) in my deck, turning into a turn three abusive card, such as damia, which leads to turn 4 full hand and game over. and allows for a remarkable amount of flexibility with play. Not to mention the dozen other cards you can play, such as a turn two Ruhan, and as a general, you've already got a three turn timer to control and reestablish yourself in the game, something not easily done. As far as non-permanant threats, it allows for (at least in my own deck) a turn two buried alive followed by a turn three living death, eliminating opposition, fetching my best cards, and (in 1v1 at least) a game ending move. Sure, the circumstnces are fairly picky, and absolutely based on chance, but it CAN happen, and really does show how broken soul ring is. Though banning it won't do much, many people don't care for the ban list in casual edh play anyway. but i loved the article.
1. it's perfectly understandable by all players (aka, its not an Un-card)
2. it is not prhibitively expensive (32.10 to buy a precon, if you can't find a single. last time i looked JTMS cost twice that and was still legal)
3. its power level in multiplayer is, as you mentioned; though not in this specific context, far less then that in one v one.
sure, it's a powerful card. but it does not deserve to be officially banned as put forth by the three criteria.
YOU FIND A NEW GOD
EDH
GUBVorosh, the HunterGUB
BRGKarrthus, Tyrant of JundBRG
GMolimo, Maro-SorcererG
UThada Adel, AcquisitorU list soon
BEndrek Sahr, Master BreederB
Ah, always good to start with a insult.
An unanswered sol ring for 1-2 turns IS a huge problem. Turn 2 GAAIV? Rewind mana?
Again, more attacks on his percieved character. I am missing an argument here.
Now I am unsure if you're being satirical or not. That's how ridiculous this statement is.
The tempo isn't quite the same when you get it early game, compared to late game. A turn 2 four drop is far more backbreaking than a turn 5 seven drop. Would you say the same about hermit druid?
It does create unfair gamestates for everyone else playing. The fast mana rocks are banned in 1v1 specifically for this reason. Just because a fun move can be made with a card ("Oh hey, hermit druid grabbed my land"), doesn't mean it isn't busted and wont be used in completely degenrate and warping ways.
Again, still unsure whether this post was supposed to mock people who had a similar mindset, or if it was serious, either way I was surprised by all the personal attacks. You would think a person within a minority group typically subjugated to personal attacks would be more mindful.
My H/W list
Then you say "GG" and play again, asking him to use a different deck because that wasn't very fun. If he refuses to change decks, start another game with out him. EDH is supposed to promote social gaming. Fun gaming. If the majority of the players are not having fun due to one player, it is that player's responsibility to change his play style or leave.
Now, if the majority of the players want to play the Turn 4 table blazing combos, then you should probably do so yourself. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. If you don't want to play that way... then don't.
LISTEN TO MAH SONGZ!
@BillyTheFridge
So aggressive mulliganing into Sol Ring is a good practice in Commander? Where is the advantage to going down to 4-5 cards (that is aggressive mulliganing) just to have Sol Ring? If your opponent wants Sol Ring that bad, isn't losing 2+ cards drawback enough?
Then by all means ban Sol Ring in your play group, but don't push your agenda on the rest of the community.
This post brings me back around to my first one.
If the answer to someone playing an unfun deck is to either ask them to change decks or stop playing with them, then why isn't that the answer to every powerful card?
How do you tell the difference between "unfun enough to ask them to change decks" and "unfun enough that this card can't be allowed in the format anymore"?
Because in this case, Sol Ring is NOT the card winning the game. There is no possible way you beat your opponent with a Sol Ring. Removing Sol Ring from the deck does not stop the deck from being unfun and beating you... it just slows it down a turn or two.
Powerful cards are okay to play with. They are fun. It is when a card is BROKEN that it needs to be banned. In this singleton format of 100 card builds, a single mana accelerator that can be used by any deck in the format in a space that is already dedicated to a Land is not broken. It may provide unbalance, but unbalance simply ADDS to the format with explosive and chaotic plays that you wouldn't see in a Standard meta.
Sol Ring is EDH. It embodies the power of the format while promoting an unbalance that provides erratic and exciting game states.
LISTEN TO MAH SONGZ!
@BillyTheFridge
By using your own discretion.
If someone in my game plays a turn 1 ring, congrats to them. They won the mana lottery! But that doesn't mean they won the game. In fact, experience reveals they are about as likely to lose due to hate as they are to win due to acceleration.
If your deck is degenerate enough that it can actually, reliably abuse a turn 1 Sol Ring to the extent that it is relevent to winning in multiplayer, then it is your deck that is unfun, not the card.
Edit: Also, if math is important here, take note of what the majority is saying.
I think the simple answer here is some cards are simply guilty of being the reason the deck is unfun rather than the enabler of the things that made the deck unfun. Biorhythm is a non-interactive culprit. Sol Ring is simply a chaos element, which is not inherently unfun.
Trying to keep a lid on the worst offending cards is a good focus for the banned list, trying to make EDH balanced is a fool's errand.
And here's where the whole reading comprehension thing comes in to play. The author doesn't "write off" Mana Crypt. He specifically points out that it is similar and that a banning discussion could be held. Then he makes the claim that the discussion for Mana Crypt is a different and more complicated one.
New fave mod quote:
ditto for the most part. I dont think it is damaging anything enough to warrant getting banned, at least not that I have seen. Yea its good, really really really good, but I dont think its so awful to see someone play it that the game isnt fun.
just ma two cents, i'll probably keep playing it regardless unless it becomes an issue..
I invision a future where one is not mighty when he can silence a crowd with brutality,
but when he leaves them speechless with wisdom.
If someone makes a deck that can combo a table of people on turn 4 consistently they are dodging the point of EDH. You aren't supposed to beat everyone as fast as possible. There's no reward for doing so. The banlist is designed to prevent the most degenerate un-fun situations from occurring, but it is not comprehensive enough to cover every single card or interaction.
If you want to make a fast mana combo deck, then yes you want Sol Ring. Also, your peers may not like your deck and ask you to change since you are going against the spirit of a format named after legendary dragons that cost a ton of mana to play. You know who likes playing with Sol Ring? The same people that like playing casual magic. Some games you get your ring and can do silly stuff faster than you should, some games your opponents get it, and sometimes a pivotal ring gets blown up before someone can really abuse it.
It's a powerful card, but if you look at EDH from the perspective of a casual game format that is designed to induce variance then it really is fine.
"The life loss attached to Mana Crypt is a real liability to decks interested in the long game. " - The Author
Mana Crypt is not a different argument. The only difference here is that the majority of players can't get their hands on a Mana Crypt. If each player had to choose between a Sol Ring and a Mana Crypt for their deck, the player who chooses Sol Ring is actually mentally investing in a long game. The Mana Crypt player would be the one trying to combo out turn 4.
The life loss attached to Mana Crypt is NOT a real liability, unless you're focused on playing a lengthy game. If you do plan on playing a lengthy game, then I would suggest that you are not using the Sol Ring in your deck to a BROKEN advantage.
Many of the play techniques listed in this article are bad points to make. Arguing a late game factor into the Mana Crypt/Sol Ring comparison goes against the point of the cards being powerful game enders. Pointing out aggressive mulling for a mana accelerator that you described as a way to play a Harmonize on turn 2 is a stupid point.
We needed more valid points in here. Not "I don't read that as an endorsement of Sol Ring in the format so much as a resignation that Wizards doesn't have the power to ban it,". Are you serious?
LISTEN TO MAH SONGZ!
@BillyTheFridge
sol ring
strip mine
mind twist
These are definitely insane 1v1, and so we banned them. But to be honest, they haven't been a major problem in a melee. Yes, they're still really good, but I think casual melees have a measure of diplomacy which can prevent them from going off. Untapping Sol Ring turn 2 won't really enable you to take on 3+ people at once, and if you use it to pick on one person specifically, you pretty much become a target to everyone. Not to mention triple the answers for the sol ring alone, which you got to believe someone's going to have.
That being said, I think there definitely should continue to be multi-player and single-player banned lists. I think every commander deck should have a "sideboard" for playing 1v1 or melees.
Ah yes, reading comprehension.
What did I not understand?
You can't both claim that Mana Crypt's drawback is relevant and that the acceleration it provides is problematic. It just reveals a fundamental lack of understanding of the format.
In a regular deck, sol ring's mana acceleration isn't irrelevant, but it's not problematic either. You'll get a few turns to be ahead of everyone else, then someone will wipe the board, and your temporary advantage will be lost. In fact, getting an early advantage is really terrible in EDH - you just inflict more or less useless damage to players and incite grudges, and you'll be down some cards when the real game starts. Woop dee do!
In decks that aim to end the game quickly and (generally) non-interactively, sol ring is a problem, but in those games mana crypt has no drawback whatsoever. You can't say that sol ring is a problem because it lets you do broken things, and at the same time claim that mana crypt has a drawback that balances it. Sol ring is only a problem in the decks where mana crypt has no drawback.
Non-interactive decks are a problem. As others have said, the solution is social. I have a friend who's a vintage player and obsessed with one-turn kill combos. He always has a deck that will just kill a whole table super fast. From time to time when he's having a bad day, he'll bring out his combo deck, we'll have a very short game where he wins, then he'll be happy and switch back to an interactive deck. If he always played the combo decks, we'd just not play with him. Go goldfish. He knows this, too, and doesn't need to be told.
Basically, the author doesn't know how to play EDH. And he's welcome to play the crappy format he plays where sol ring is a problem, and ban sol ring at his kitchen table. But don't try and impose your will on the rest of the world.
Edit: oops billythefridge beat me to it.
This is exactly what I got out of this article. I even read it twice to make sure I wasn't missing something the first time around. It starts off based on the mathematics of an unbalanced card... but then it uses unbalanced situations to perpetuate the points.
Who mulligans down to 5 cards JUST to get a Sol Ring? That increases your chances to get Sol Ring, but decreases your chances to have stuff to play. The real math here is that you made many rebuttals to previous points in favor of Sol Ring, but you never really made any strong points to actually ban the card.
I feel like I could have written a better article against Sol Ring and I am 100% for it's inclusion in EDH.
LISTEN TO MAH SONGZ!
@BillyTheFridge