I have mixed feelings on Extort. On the one hand, it's kind of perfect for the long, slow, grindy style I enjoy torturing my playgroup with. On the other hand, I've never actually *won* with such a strategy; I mean, 40 life is a lot to slowly poke at, and usually what I do is to stall them until I naturally draw into one of my combos. And the people at my FLGS would rather beat the combo player than the blue player, because of (and I quote) "weapons of mass destruction". so yeah, gaining 6-10 life is not gonna protect me from Uril or Karador or Krenko's 8973147651 tokens.
The second ability is sweet though; I've been wanting to get a Replenish for the longest time, and this is a decent substitute.
EDIT: I was also thinking about the 'whenever you gain life target creature gets +1/+1, whenever an opponent loses life blahblah'. Doesn't seem too off for Ghost Dad's ability, actually.
Teysa, Orzhov Scion
Radha, Heir to Keld
Krenko, Mob Boss
Rakdos, Lord of Riots
Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind
Rhys the Redeemed
Brion Stoutarm
The Mimeoplasm
2) Wheels. Soul of the Harvest and Primordial Sage are beyond awesome, of course (hint: you need them for your combo), your only real burst card draw is Slate of Ancestry, and there *will* come times when you have 11 lands in hand and no way to continue... urrrghhhh...
Before I ran elfball with her, I also used to have a more traditional style, what I like to call the 2-4-6 build. If you've played Wolf Run Ramp back in Standard, you know how this goes. Radha into Skyshroud Claim and friends, into <insert 6/7 CMC fatty of your choice>. Crazy fun to play, and really easy to mulligan with; you'll know a perfect hand when you se it. I think there was an SCG article on that build, but I'm not sure...
I myself am considering going down this route (not the mana denial, mind you, just the group hug) with Sasaya, Orochi Ascendant. 7 lands in hand is not so hard when you're drawing 4 cards a turn, and I do feel that her ability coupled with traditional green ramp outpaces Azusa's ability. But it could just be me, I dunno.
Filter lands are only ramp insofar as any mana-producing land is ramp. But I think that's kinds besides the point of the question.
It's important to note, however, that both signets and filters benefit more from Mana Reflection, which is nice. You pay one to get four, which is better than the two-for-zero that most other mana rocks and lands give you.
IMO, the initial 1 mana investment is the drawback of producing both colours, as well as coming into play untapped. Allows for a turn 3 signet into diamond, for example (although it's admittedly a terrible example, since you could just cast the diamond turn 2. But at least now you have 2 mana open for something else!)
It confuses me that people are still complaining about combo because of its lack of interaction. It seems pretty obvious to me that those sort of herp derp I win combos would be the easiest to interact with: Your aggro creatures interact with their life total. In other words, You. Beat. Them. To. Death.
I would furthermore argue that the best way of preserving an interesting board state is removing the biggest threat to it, AKA the guy who wants to combo off and kill you all. A strategy can hardly be considered unfun or unacceptable if its piloter doesn't live long enough to execute it.
"But most players can't evaluate threat levels properly!" you may protest, but honestly, in that case it's not the fault of the combo player that he's winning so often, is it?
So, in comes this. Not sure if I agree or not. On the one hand, a deck that loses to Shadow of Doubt, Scrabbling Claws, or Jester's Cap gets laughed down. On the other hand, how do I feel about decks that sandbag on an infinite combo in their deck, waiting for the time to get the most laughs when they pull it out, and otherwise they have a standard good-stuff complement of 6 drops as "alternate win-cons"?
I'm not really enjoying myself. I like it when people try to win the game, because I'm also trying to win the game, and it's a contest. You know, a game. If I find out that the rules were something other than each player trying to win as consistently as possible, I feel cheated.
So I'm torn. I want opponents to build the best deck against me. In the case of combo, that will almost certainly either need alternate win-cons or 12+ combo pieces. I also want the alternate win-cons to be actually good, because watered-down goodstuff is lol-fest. Is a combo deck like that possible? Not sure.
The cause of combo games being unfun may be from the fact that combo is a bad archetype, not a good one.
One of the recurring taunts in my playgroup is "So you tried to win, eh?", usually spoken as my sac outlet gets exiled, or I Bog the Mimeoplasm, or Craterhoof Behemoth and friends get Evacuated.
One of my playgroup actually removed Curiosityfrom his Niv deck because he said it was a boring combo. His opinion is his own, but what I do know is that he has combo-killed us all off with Mindmoil enough times to prove that his deck isn't any weaker for it.
I believe that much of the issue with combo players is the lack of playgroup awareness (more on that below). I would just point out that if someone deliberately isn't playing to win (assuming they aren't trolling), out of a genuine desire to enjoy interactivity or whatever, then the onus is on everyone else to raise their skill level and their deck level to actually offer a challenge.
I personally love combo decks, but I think that dedicated combo decks don't have a place in most EDH circles mostly because most people don't want to play that kind of game in format that most consider casual.
I think that every game of Magic is successful because there is a chosen set of "rules of engagement" whether it be a particular format (Vintage, Standard, Modern, Legacy), a game of Limited (Draft, Cube, Sealed), or some other other set of limiting factors (Pauper, 5-Color, Tribal). Each one of those sets of "rules of engagment" has a pretty narrow definition such that when you sit down with someone and you want to Draft or play Standard or whatever, you generally know what to expect.
The issue with the Commander format is that it means so many different things to so many people that players have not found a standardized set of "rules of engagement". You could very well sit two people down with two Commander decks and it might look like one person is playing Vintage and the other player is playing a bad "Reject Rare" deck...
The essence of the format then becomes "build your deck for how you want to play the game, then find like-mided people who agree to those same rules of engagement". Then everyone who plays gets a game that meets their expectations of what the Commander format should be.
Back to the OP, people who hate combo are really just looking for other people who will play under a different set of rules of engegement. Leave them be and find others who want to play the game as you do.
I feel this point requires a little more expansion.
Any player of any playgroup has the ability to choose whether or not they want to follow the 'rules of engagement', as Forgotten One puts it. Whether or not they actually do is outside the scope of this argument, but consider that playgroup reactions to an overly competitive player vary with the type of deck being played.
The Uril player who gets a turn 1 Sol Ring into Signet is going to elicit a lot of groans when the big man hits the table turn 2, especially if all the other decks at the table are Atog tribal or what-have-you. But while the aggro decks might be unhappy about losing to a monster like Uril so early, they adapt. They learn that Fleshbag Marauder is a card, and maybe they start playing a couple more sweepers. It's all, as the Joker puts it, "part of the plan".
In a more competitive meta, there's no issue; the Sol Ring's going to get Spree'd, or maybe you Force of Will Uril. No problem.
Now consider the combo deck. The turn 1 Hermit Druid is going to get Swords'd, and Nevermore comes out naming Tooth and Nail. Still no problem. While combo answers generally require a wider range of answers to stop, in a developed meta with a wide variety of threats, people would be packing those answers anyway.
But when Atog tribal meets T1 Hermit Druid, it's a different story, one that we've all already heard multiple times in this thread, so I won't bother repeating it.
The crux is this: The god draw from the overcompetitive aggro deck is going to get complaints of - you guessed it - having a god draw, but the ubercombo deck's god draw is getting complaints of 'dude, your deck is overpowered, play another'.
All good decks (excepting the beardiest ones, but as I said, that's a player problem) have the ability to self-regulate, but it's more critical for the combo player to have the feel for the exact level of his playgroup, and adjust his level of play accordingly. It's the lack of this playgroup awareness that is causing combo to be getting such a bad rap recently.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Can't wait to slam it turn 2 and command my playgroup to GET ON YOUR KNEES, WORMS!
The second ability is sweet though; I've been wanting to get a Replenish for the longest time, and this is a decent substitute.
EDIT: I was also thinking about the 'whenever you gain life target creature gets +1/+1, whenever an opponent loses life blahblah'. Doesn't seem too off for Ghost Dad's ability, actually.
Teysa, Orzhov Scion
Radha, Heir to Keld
Krenko, Mob Boss
Rakdos, Lord of Riots
Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind
Rhys the Redeemed
Brion Stoutarm
The Mimeoplasm
1) Haste, because paying 7 for Akroma's Memorial is really way too overkill. Fervor and Fires of Yavimaya are great options, as is Mass Hysteria, if you're into that sort of thing (I guess it's safer to run now, due to the lack of Primeval Titans running around anymore).
2) Wheels. Soul of the Harvest and Primordial Sage are beyond awesome, of course (hint: you need them for your combo), your only real burst card draw is Slate of Ancestry, and there *will* come times when you have 11 lands in hand and no way to continue... urrrghhhh...
Before I ran elfball with her, I also used to have a more traditional style, what I like to call the 2-4-6 build. If you've played Wolf Run Ramp back in Standard, you know how this goes. Radha into Skyshroud Claim and friends, into <insert 6/7 CMC fatty of your choice>. Crazy fun to play, and really easy to mulligan with; you'll know a perfect hand when you se it. I think there was an SCG article on that build, but I'm not sure...
Hellkite Tyrant: Badass art, cool-as-heck ability, horribly derivative name...
I myself am considering going down this route (not the mana denial, mind you, just the group hug) with Sasaya, Orochi Ascendant. 7 lands in hand is not so hard when you're drawing 4 cards a turn, and I do feel that her ability coupled with traditional green ramp outpaces Azusa's ability. But it could just be me, I dunno.
Speaking of which, if you're going to be drawing 4 cards a turn, you might as well play Masumaro, First to Live and Multani, Maro-Sorcerer for the lols...
Runed Stalactite will pump up Lovisa herself, and make things randomly Samurai for Godo.
It's important to note, however, that both signets and filters benefit more from Mana Reflection, which is nice. You pay one to get four, which is better than the two-for-zero that most other mana rocks and lands give you.
Animate Dead (of course, the PDS version :p)
Bitterblossom
Phyrexian Arena
Salvaging Station
I would furthermore argue that the best way of preserving an interesting board state is removing the biggest threat to it, AKA the guy who wants to combo off and kill you all. A strategy can hardly be considered unfun or unacceptable if its piloter doesn't live long enough to execute it.
"But most players can't evaluate threat levels properly!" you may protest, but honestly, in that case it's not the fault of the combo player that he's winning so often, is it?
(*who's a good liddle Necrotic Sliver? who's killed 3 planeswalkers in 1 game? yes you are! YES YOU ARE!*)
One of the recurring taunts in my playgroup is "So you tried to win, eh?", usually spoken as my sac outlet gets exiled, or I Bog the Mimeoplasm, or Craterhoof Behemoth and friends get Evacuated.
One of my playgroup actually removed Curiosityfrom his Niv deck because he said it was a boring combo. His opinion is his own, but what I do know is that he has combo-killed us all off with Mindmoil enough times to prove that his deck isn't any weaker for it.
I believe that much of the issue with combo players is the lack of playgroup awareness (more on that below). I would just point out that if someone deliberately isn't playing to win (assuming they aren't trolling), out of a genuine desire to enjoy interactivity or whatever, then the onus is on everyone else to raise their skill level and their deck level to actually offer a challenge.
I feel this point requires a little more expansion.
Any player of any playgroup has the ability to choose whether or not they want to follow the 'rules of engagement', as Forgotten One puts it. Whether or not they actually do is outside the scope of this argument, but consider that playgroup reactions to an overly competitive player vary with the type of deck being played.
The Uril player who gets a turn 1 Sol Ring into Signet is going to elicit a lot of groans when the big man hits the table turn 2, especially if all the other decks at the table are Atog tribal or what-have-you. But while the aggro decks might be unhappy about losing to a monster like Uril so early, they adapt. They learn that Fleshbag Marauder is a card, and maybe they start playing a couple more sweepers. It's all, as the Joker puts it, "part of the plan".
In a more competitive meta, there's no issue; the Sol Ring's going to get Spree'd, or maybe you Force of Will Uril. No problem.
Now consider the combo deck. The turn 1 Hermit Druid is going to get Swords'd, and Nevermore comes out naming Tooth and Nail. Still no problem. While combo answers generally require a wider range of answers to stop, in a developed meta with a wide variety of threats, people would be packing those answers anyway.
But when Atog tribal meets T1 Hermit Druid, it's a different story, one that we've all already heard multiple times in this thread, so I won't bother repeating it.
The crux is this: The god draw from the overcompetitive aggro deck is going to get complaints of - you guessed it - having a god draw, but the ubercombo deck's god draw is getting complaints of 'dude, your deck is overpowered, play another'.
All good decks (excepting the beardiest ones, but as I said, that's a player problem) have the ability to self-regulate, but it's more critical for the combo player to have the feel for the exact level of his playgroup, and adjust his level of play accordingly. It's the lack of this playgroup awareness that is causing combo to be getting such a bad rap recently.