there is plenty of tutoring available to combat tuck effects.
Pray tell, how will White tutor back it's (non-Heliod) general? Or how will Boros, for that matter, unless they happen to draw their one Gamble? Do you want every deck to be "85 cards and 15 tutors.dec" ? I sure as hell don't...
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.
Pray tell, how will White tutor back it's (non-Heliod) general? Or how will Boros, for that matter, unless they happen to draw their one Gamble? Do you want every deck to be "85 cards and 15 tutors.dec" ? I sure as hell don't...
I play monored myself and have Planar Portal, Gamble, and Imperial Recruiter all capable of tutoring up my commander if it's tucked. One other thing that shouldn't be ignored is that there are many artifacts and spells that shuffle the library, which takes a tucked commander off the bottom and makes it fair game to be drawn naturally.
It's a bit of a stretch to think that having the commander in play is absolutely necessary to a deck being able to win. Some decks are built more around the commander then others: Voltron decks that play ~6 creatures and then jam dozens of aures and equipment are especially vulnerable to tuck, but also play many ways to protect themselves from it by playing shroud/hexproof/protection from a color granting cards. Other decks may not be too fazed if their commander is tucked; my own decks often play enough creatures that it's possible for me to close out a game without playing my general using only a few dragons or a big enough Comet Storm.
Between Tuck/Exile/Destroy there will always end up being one that is favored above the others; making tuck not work on commanders only makes exile the new king.
I was playing EDH tonight and wanted to share a story about the first time I saw the newly unbanned Metalworker in a game.
I'm playing against a Kurkesh deck and he plays metal worked on turn 3. On his next turn, reveals 6 artifacts from hand adding 12 mana to play Gilded Lotus, Grim Monolith, and Myr Incubator. End of turn, tap the artifacts for mana and sac Incubator to exile 41 artifacts to get that many tokens. I was attacked and had a blocker so I went to only 1 life before my 5th turn and was killed before my 6th turn. This was not a deck built around Metalworker, it was just a previously built Kurkesh deck that slotted the card in.
It took me a while to read through (mostly) all of this thread, so I might be a bit late for commenting the last changes to the ban list.
However, I like to state, that (although I never played with Braids, Cabal Minion, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary or Erayo, Soratami Ascendant)
to me it's a loss to the whole concept to cut the "banned only as a commander" rule.
It seems that all of us (including the RC) agrees that those cards where completely okay to play as part of the 99.
At one point in history the RC decided to implement this rule and as many others, I thought it was good.
The rule was simple and everybody that was able to understand MTG (at least a little bit) should understand it.
So: Why was it necessary to change this?
I can imagine the very next legend comming out to be way to stong as a commander, but perfectly fair as part of the 99. The RC would have no other chance as to ban it completely.
What a pity...
It might be only me, but I would go even further and implement the rule "banned only as part of the 99, legal as commander".
But this may be a different discussion.
To me the ban list does not look consistent. Changes are made without good reasons and the list should be updated completely.
It's not about this card or that card, but about a well elaborated concept.
PS: sorry for my bad english
I'm going to go on record as saying that I support these changes. Kokusho is finally free. Metalworker is rightly unbanned. Rofellos was frankly too good for the format even as one of the 99, so he probably needed to go. The only real losses are Braids and Erayo, which are very real blows to some of my decks too.
Perhaps one of the reasons they made this change was to eliminate the possibility of "banned in the 99 but legal as a commander", which IMO would have actually introduced needless complexity. IDK.
As a whole the changes are net positive. Three steps forward two steps back isn't ideal, and it could have been better, but progress is progress.
And secretly, big thanks to SurgingChaos for leading the charge to unban Kokusho all those years ago. The right people have finally been convinced. And also secretly, I'm glad I abandoned my mono-green deck before a fourth key card was hit with the banhammer. I know the RC isn't targeting green ramp, but it sure is a strange coincidence.
I will flat out pay the RC $500 bucks per person for this rule change. At one of my play groups, tuck = a trip to the exile zone. But... they don't play commander damage.... so... yeah.
If they don't play by the rules now, why would they play by them if they changed?
Pray tell, how will White tutor back it's (non-Heliod) general? Or how will Boros, for that matter, unless they happen to draw their one Gamble? Do you want every deck to be "85 cards and 15 tutors.dec" ? I sure as hell don't...
If they are not now, tuck/no-tuck won't change it.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
I will flat out pay the RC $500 bucks per person for this rule change. At one of my play groups, tuck = a trip to the exile zone. But... they don't play commander damage.... so... yeah.
If they don't play by the rules now, why would they play by them if they changed?
Pray tell, how will White tutor back it's (non-Heliod) general? Or how will Boros, for that matter, unless they happen to draw their one Gamble? Do you want every deck to be "85 cards and 15 tutors.dec" ? I sure as hell don't...
If they are not now, tuck/no-tuck won't change it.
I have friends in other play groups that worship the RC, their banlist, and rules?
I agree. We should all only play g/x decks because they are the most objectively fun and anyone who disagrees does not know the truth about EDH. Everyone should just play their decks because interaction beyond high fiving about how many land are in play is unfun and equivalent to casting Stasis while kicking puppies. I for one will never play with anyone who casts tutors, removal spells, blue cards, things I arbitrarily decide I don't like but will probably cast myself later.
My dear Braids...they banned my cardboard crush completely ;_;
There's always her truer bluer version. Make it stax anyways, just for fun. Phase her out every round so only you benefit, while you bring in Winter Orb, Tangle Wire, and mana source after mana source for free! Just to honor the dream.
There's always her truer bluer version. Make it stax anyways, just for fun. Phase her out every round so only you benefit, while you bring in Winter Orb, Tangle Wire, and mana source after mana source for free! Just to honor the dream.
Isn't the black one her true version since the blue one is from Planar Chaos?
@ Sheldon and Papa Funk: I don't particularly like this thread either. There are many times where I think of something to add to this discussion and I don't bother posting it because its not worth trying to reason with people who are unreasonable, immature, and self-entitled. I can't imagine what you must think of some of the things that are said here; its embarrassing. There are many members here that fully appreciate the unprecedented level of access we have to the people who govern our format.
@Everyone else: If what you are writing in a forum post is something that you would never say to a person's face then perhaps you should reconsider what you are writing. Just because you hide behind the anonymity of the internet does not relieve you of the responsibility of acting civil. Please think before you post.
As for that actual announcement, these changes seem fine to me:
Unbanning Metalworker - This is a good move. Artifact decks are increasingly harder to pilot through an ever-increasing field of artifact sweepers. The card is actually pretty fair for 99 card decks and I'm glad to see it back.
Unbanning Kokusho - This is also a good move. I don't think that Kokusho is particularly bad either as a general or as one of the 99, so unbanning it as a commander seems fine.
Banning Rofellos - I'm fine with this. It was banned previously through the 'makes too much mana too early' rule and I can see where this card lives right on the edge of banning.
Banning Braids and Erayo - I don't particularly understand these bans. I get that they are the kinds of generals that don't make the kinds of games that the RC is trying to promote, but I think that these were the perfect poster boys (girls?) as to why having a separate list for banned commanders makes sense. I understand wanting to simplify things for newer players, but I think that once you understand the basic mechanical differences between EDH and "normal" Magic then the concept of "banned as a commander only" is not that difficult to get. In the end, I won't really miss either card (never really played with Erayo, but I really liked Braids).
There's always her truer bluer version. Make it stax anyways, just for fun. Phase her out every round so only you benefit, while you bring in Winter Orb, Tangle Wire, and mana source after mana source for free! Just to honor the dream.
Inspiration has struck!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey guys so I've actually moved on from commander on to 60 card decks so I don't have any commander decks.
Anyway I've started my own gameplay channel in which I play games (Magic also)
Do away with limitations on what mana you can produce.
100 cards becomes the minimum deck size.
Allow hybrid mana cards to be used in either color identity.
30 life starting life total
Fixed for order of likelihood of ever happening
Hi! Judging from your list, the life change is the least likely to happen. Could you perhaps comment on the reluctancy of the RC to consider this change? I recall Sheldon ignoring/dismissing it in a past Q&A. My playgroup has been playing in such a modified environment and if anything, games are much more stable. What is the RC's official stance on this?
1) Annoyance
2) Dont care because they don't run them
3) Psudo acceptance
Sorry to go back to this but I need to point out that in the grand scheme of things these 3 responses are all the same, disgruntled acceptance is one step away from annoyance and the people who don't care / didn't run them probably also didn't care that much when they were a thing...
Sorry to go back to this but I need to point out that in the grand scheme of things these 3 responses are all the same, disgruntled acceptance is one step away from annoyance and the people who don't care / didn't run them probably also didn't care that much when they were a thing...
In the spirit of simplifying the list:
1) Don't care annoyed acceptance.
I haven't seen it discussed in a while, so I'd like to bring back up Craterhoof Behemoth - why hasn't this card been banned yet? I was watching some French 1v1, and the finals were two Prossh Elfball decks that just made tokens and tutored into Craterhoof every game - and this is generally what happens in multiplayer EDH as well. As a competitive mono-green EDH player I hate it as well, because I can't justify not going tutor -> Craterhoof when it just wins me the game. And these are games that would have been enjoyable otherwise - but again, when everyone else at the table's looking at their 1-card TNN Gx combo, or their 1-card Palinchron combo, it's hard justifying not doing so.
In my opinion, this format would be a lot more enjoyable if all of the fast mana, Top, Palinchron, TNN, and Craterhoof were banned. The issue with fast mana is that it leads to high-variance games where people just sometimes go off, Top really stretches the game out due to people not using it properly, and Palinchron, TNN, and Craterhoof all represent relatively simple 1-card combos. I'd also put Kiki-Jiki, DEN, and Lark on a watchlist due to their combo interactions with a rapidly increasing number of cards (increasing their potential for 1-card combohood).
Honestly, that's the thing I hate most in this format - knowing that certain spells when resolved, will just win the game. I feel that a good ban list will take the time to remove these offenders, as well as the fast mana that causes games to be high variance.
And note I'm not anti-combo; I'm just against combos that are trivially easy to set up. TNN, Palinchron, and Craterhoof combo all by themselves, and Kiki's issue is that he now combos by himself and 5 or 6 individual cards that are all easily tutorable creatures. I like combos which take time and effort to set up, not ones where someone lays down a card and ends the game for the table.
I haven't seen it discussed in a while, so I'd like to bring back up Craterhoof Behemoth - why hasn't this card been banned yet? I was watching some French 1v1, and the finals were two Prossh Elfball decks that just made tokens and tutored into Craterhoof every game - and this is generally what happens in multiplayer EDH as well. As a competitive mono-green EDH player I hate it as well, because I can't justify not going tutor -> Craterhoof when it just wins me the game. And these are games that would have been enjoyable otherwise - but again, when everyone else at the table's looking at their 1-card TNN Gx combo, or their 1-card Palinchron combo, it's hard justifying not doing so.
In my opinion, this format would be a lot more enjoyable if all of the fast mana, Top, Palinchron, TNN, and Craterhoof were banned. The issue with fast mana is that it leads to high-variance games where people just sometimes go off, Top really stretches the game out due to people not using it properly, and Palinchron, TNN, and Craterhoof all represent relatively simple 1-card combos. I'd also put Kiki-Jiki, DEN, and Lark on a watchlist due to their combo interactions with a rapidly increasing number of cards (increasing their potential for 1-card combohood).
Honestly, that's the thing I hate most in this format - knowing that certain spells when resolved, will just win the game. I feel that a good ban list will take the time to remove these offenders, as well as the fast mana that causes games to be high variance.
And note I'm not anti-combo; I'm just against combos that are trivially easy to set up. TNN, Palinchron, and Craterhoof combo all by themselves, and Kiki's issue is that he now combos by himself and 5 or 6 individual cards that are all easily tutorable creatures. I like combos which take time and effort to set up, not ones where someone lays down a card and ends the game for the table.
Rather than asking they be banned, you could just decide to not run those cards. There's no reason to go with the banhammer when some self-discipline will do. And maybe if you went that route, others in your group will as well.
I do run Craterhoof in some decks, and I run TnN in one or two as well, but I don't even own Palinchron (and likely never will), and I specifically avoid putting Zealous Conscripts and Kiki-Jiki in the same deck. I can't imagine I'd ever run Triskelion, but if I did, I wouldn't run it in a deck with Black Mikaeus.
TNN's a fair card as long as you're not fetching Dead-Eye+Palinchron/Kiki+Conscripts/Mikaeus+Triskelion (aka you're playing monogreen or GW), but in most Gx's it's pretty broken. The issue with all these cards is that they're pretty innocuous. You put TNN in a deck thinking "Hey, I can tutor for fun stuff like Xenagos!" and then you just end up realizing that Kiki+Conscripts wins the game. You put Palinchron in a deck thinking "Hey, it's a free 4/5 flyer!" and then suddenly you realize you had lands that made more than 1 mana on the field. You put Craterhoof in a token deck thinking "Sweet! It's Overrun on a stick!", and suddenly you're tutoring for it and Avenger everytime the turn gets back to you with a couple 1/1s.
It's not enjoyable to see these cards everywhere, but everyone runs them so you can't justify not doing so. They're definitely the type of cards that should be banned for their impact on the format, I feel.
You put Palinchron in a deck thinking "Hey, it's a free 4/5 flyer!"
No you don't.
Also, I see no reason why Craterhoof should be banned. It's very reliant on you already having a large board state to be anything more than an Overrun, which is far from overpowered at 8 mana.
If people only run Palinchron for degenerate 1-card combos, why bother keeping it legal? I mean, nobody runs Great Whale and it's fairly obvious why (requires an additional card to combo).
As for Craterhoof - it only takes a couple 1/1s on the battlefield, and then drop it on same turn as Avenger to suddenly be swinging for 60-80+. That's the biggest problem.
Palinchron doesn't combo by itself. It takes a mana doubler or a land like Gaea's Cradle. While those things are often easy to get, they do not make him a one-card-combo.
Craterhoof and Avenger on the same turn requires an enormous amount of mana, and unless you already had an excellent board state spot removal stops it from going anywhere fast.
These cards do not need banning, playgroups just need to be better at policing themselves.
If Craterhoof is pumping your board for +9, you were already winning to the point that a regular Overrun would also win you the game in most cases. If Avenger is already on the board and you get to untap into a Craterhoof, plenty of other things would have also won you the game or your opponents just aren't playing well. If you play them both on the same turn, you have enough mana to be winning the game in any number of other ways. If you use Tooth and Nail or Defense of the Heart, you could outright win the game on the spot if you're in either red or black.
Craterhoof Behemoth being the most common finisher in green doesn't make it the only one.
It doesn't mean every deck would be "85 cards and 15 tutors.dec," but if you're committed to making your commander the lynch pin of the deck: it falls apart without them. Put so damn resilience in there, son. Or make a plan B.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing: R8whackR WUBGAtraxa Stax-Superfriends *Under Construction*WUBG
I hate when people say they are going to TaN for Craterhoof and Avenger and "end the game". You can't do that without haste on your tokens unless you already had a ton of creatures on the board, in which case, you should be winning anyway. Surprise. Craterhoof is better than Overrun. That is why Overrun is at uncommon and Craterhoof is at mythic. If there wasn't a difference between a rarer card with the same intended functionality, I'd be astonished.
And once again, so many people are saying "this card annoys me" instead of actual reasons it should be banned. There are cards that are staples because they are the best or most efficient at what they do. It is why they cost more money than other cards and it is why many players who are looking for a slot to fill with goodstuff run them. A card seeing a lot of play in the format does not qualify it for banning in any way. I'd say that it shouldn't even come close to being discussed on the sole basis that "you see it a lot" and it shows a clear misunderstanding of the purpose of bans.
As for Rofellos, I've already been vocal about my disappointment in losing him. I've also said that since the banning was NOT for any reason related to his power as 1 of the 99, I am going to continue to play him unless someone has a real problem with it. If you want to argue about "too much mana too fast" being why he was banned, look again. The RC would not unban Metalworker while in the same breath banning Rofellos for too much mana too quickly. Seriously think for half a second before you make assertions that are clearly false. The rule change was purely to 'simplify' the ban list, which I strongly disagree with, but was the reasoning nonetheless.
I am just dumbfounded how people can comment and not understand the nature of the list changes. It makes no sense to say, "Oh yeah, these cards were oppressive and too powerful and real problems to the format." No. Just no. They were banned as a commander and in a, in my opinion, misguided attempt at improving the format by making it more user friendly, they were banned completely.
Nothing. To. Do. With. Power. Stop talking about them like their potency as 1 of the 99 was at all a consideration in this decision and, frankly, don't be surprised when people want to still play these 3 cards because this decision sets a horrid precedent that cards don't actually need to be bad/toxic/unhealthy/too centralizing for the format in order to be banned, they just need to not be programmable into MTGO.
If Craterhoof comes over for 60/80+ damage you would probably have lost the next turn anyway.
If he has 60 creatures on the battlefield the second Craterhoof comes down… You might have messed up somewhere along the lines.
The biggest problem always comes down to the same thing: not enough answers or wrong threat assessment.
I disagree a bit with that. 60+ damage doesn't meen he needs to have 60 creatures on board. Having 7 1/1 doesn't necessary win you the game, but having 7 9/9 with trmaple which hit for 63 (if not blocked) does. So if crater wouldn't come, you wouldn't probably loose in the next turn. I am not saying that createrhoof is banworthy, but wasting my Damnation or Wrath of god on bunch of 1/1 is stupid. And if I don't play blue or some instant destroy, I would actually loose the game the moment he hits the board. In mono green, creater probably doesn't hurt as much as he does in Prossh, Riku and similar decks, which can give haste.
So, maybe you have those answers, but would you use them on 7 1/1 tokens? probably no. Are they big threat? Nope, they are not. Does this make you less aware of threat assassment or having not enough answers? No. And still ,you will lose the game.
I may have misquoted it a bit. My reply was more on the discussion that tooth and nail always fetched for craterhoof and generic x. The second someone announces tooth and nail I am already searching for a solution. Most of my decks run some sort of fog effect just to prevent shenanigans like that, and those come in multiple colours and forms. Combat is an integral part of the game, might as well be prepared for it. Craterhoof just ups the pace abit :). I from my part start killing of 1/1s the second there are more then four. A preventive measure maybe, cost me already a game or 2 but saved me innumerable times.
I won't argue with this, because I agree with that. Problem is that not in every deck I run things that can shoot 1/1 creatures and I won't be wasting some wrath effect on them ( I will if another opponent or two have good creature position). True is that if someone cast TnN, in my group, they are generally searching for combo. It doesn't even need to include Craterhoof. Things like Palinchron combos, Mikaeus with Triskelion etc. And I rarely run cards such as Fog.
Still TnN cost 9 mana which is a lot, but we are talking about green and its ramp with things such as Sol Ring and Mana Crypt allowed. Now we can talk for hours about these two and fast mana, and if they were banned, TnN or Craterhoof wouldn't be so OP and bla bla bla. The problem isn't that people use those cards, the problem is they are using it to search for specific combos which are in 99% game ending.
EDIT: looks like I can't write properly, just fixed few things
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Pray tell, how will White tutor back it's (non-Heliod) general? Or how will Boros, for that matter, unless they happen to draw their one Gamble? Do you want every deck to be "85 cards and 15 tutors.dec" ? I sure as hell don't...
I play monored myself and have Planar Portal, Gamble, and Imperial Recruiter all capable of tutoring up my commander if it's tucked. One other thing that shouldn't be ignored is that there are many artifacts and spells that shuffle the library, which takes a tucked commander off the bottom and makes it fair game to be drawn naturally.
It's a bit of a stretch to think that having the commander in play is absolutely necessary to a deck being able to win. Some decks are built more around the commander then others: Voltron decks that play ~6 creatures and then jam dozens of aures and equipment are especially vulnerable to tuck, but also play many ways to protect themselves from it by playing shroud/hexproof/protection from a color granting cards. Other decks may not be too fazed if their commander is tucked; my own decks often play enough creatures that it's possible for me to close out a game without playing my general using only a few dragons or a big enough Comet Storm.
Between Tuck/Exile/Destroy there will always end up being one that is favored above the others; making tuck not work on commanders only makes exile the new king.
I was playing EDH tonight and wanted to share a story about the first time I saw the newly unbanned Metalworker in a game.
I'm playing against a Kurkesh deck and he plays metal worked on turn 3. On his next turn, reveals 6 artifacts from hand adding 12 mana to play Gilded Lotus, Grim Monolith, and Myr Incubator. End of turn, tap the artifacts for mana and sac Incubator to exile 41 artifacts to get that many tokens. I was attacked and had a blocker so I went to only 1 life before my 5th turn and was killed before my 6th turn. This was not a deck built around Metalworker, it was just a previously built Kurkesh deck that slotted the card in.
I'm going to go on record as saying that I support these changes. Kokusho is finally free. Metalworker is rightly unbanned. Rofellos was frankly too good for the format even as one of the 99, so he probably needed to go. The only real losses are Braids and Erayo, which are very real blows to some of my decks too.
Perhaps one of the reasons they made this change was to eliminate the possibility of "banned in the 99 but legal as a commander", which IMO would have actually introduced needless complexity. IDK.
As a whole the changes are net positive. Three steps forward two steps back isn't ideal, and it could have been better, but progress is progress.
And secretly, big thanks to SurgingChaos for leading the charge to unban Kokusho all those years ago. The right people have finally been convinced. And also secretly, I'm glad I abandoned my mono-green deck before a fourth key card was hit with the banhammer. I know the RC isn't targeting green ramp, but it sure is a strange coincidence.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
If they are not now, tuck/no-tuck won't change it.
I have friends in other play groups that worship the RC, their banlist, and rules?
There's always her truer bluer version. Make it stax anyways, just for fun. Phase her out every round so only you benefit, while you bring in Winter Orb, Tangle Wire, and mana source after mana source for free! Just to honor the dream.
Isn't the black one her true version since the blue one is from Planar Chaos?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
@Everyone else: If what you are writing in a forum post is something that you would never say to a person's face then perhaps you should reconsider what you are writing. Just because you hide behind the anonymity of the internet does not relieve you of the responsibility of acting civil. Please think before you post.
As for that actual announcement, these changes seem fine to me:
Unbanning Metalworker - This is a good move. Artifact decks are increasingly harder to pilot through an ever-increasing field of artifact sweepers. The card is actually pretty fair for 99 card decks and I'm glad to see it back.
Unbanning Kokusho - This is also a good move. I don't think that Kokusho is particularly bad either as a general or as one of the 99, so unbanning it as a commander seems fine.
Banning Rofellos - I'm fine with this. It was banned previously through the 'makes too much mana too early' rule and I can see where this card lives right on the edge of banning.
Banning Braids and Erayo - I don't particularly understand these bans. I get that they are the kinds of generals that don't make the kinds of games that the RC is trying to promote, but I think that these were the perfect poster boys (girls?) as to why having a separate list for banned commanders makes sense. I understand wanting to simplify things for newer players, but I think that once you understand the basic mechanical differences between EDH and "normal" Magic then the concept of "banned as a commander only" is not that difficult to get. In the end, I won't really miss either card (never really played with Erayo, but I really liked Braids).
Inspiration has struck!
Anyway I've started my own gameplay channel in which I play games (Magic also)
Twitch:
https://www.twitch.tv/dies_to_doom_blade
Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/user/UpsidedownHandshake
Hi! Judging from your list, the life change is the least likely to happen. Could you perhaps comment on the reluctancy of the RC to consider this change? I recall Sheldon ignoring/dismissing it in a past Q&A. My playgroup has been playing in such a modified environment and if anything, games are much more stable. What is the RC's official stance on this?
Makes budget deck
Vorosh BUG
Sygg
Molimo
Intent RUG
Rith RWG
Purphoros
Sorry to go back to this but I need to point out that in the grand scheme of things these 3 responses are all the same, disgruntled acceptance is one step away from annoyance and the people who don't care / didn't run them probably also didn't care that much when they were a thing...
1) Don't care annoyed acceptance.
In my opinion, this format would be a lot more enjoyable if all of the fast mana, Top, Palinchron, TNN, and Craterhoof were banned. The issue with fast mana is that it leads to high-variance games where people just sometimes go off, Top really stretches the game out due to people not using it properly, and Palinchron, TNN, and Craterhoof all represent relatively simple 1-card combos. I'd also put Kiki-Jiki, DEN, and Lark on a watchlist due to their combo interactions with a rapidly increasing number of cards (increasing their potential for 1-card combohood).
Honestly, that's the thing I hate most in this format - knowing that certain spells when resolved, will just win the game. I feel that a good ban list will take the time to remove these offenders, as well as the fast mana that causes games to be high variance.
And note I'm not anti-combo; I'm just against combos that are trivially easy to set up. TNN, Palinchron, and Craterhoof combo all by themselves, and Kiki's issue is that he now combos by himself and 5 or 6 individual cards that are all easily tutorable creatures. I like combos which take time and effort to set up, not ones where someone lays down a card and ends the game for the table.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
Rather than asking they be banned, you could just decide to not run those cards. There's no reason to go with the banhammer when some self-discipline will do. And maybe if you went that route, others in your group will as well.
I do run Craterhoof in some decks, and I run TnN in one or two as well, but I don't even own Palinchron (and likely never will), and I specifically avoid putting Zealous Conscripts and Kiki-Jiki in the same deck. I can't imagine I'd ever run Triskelion, but if I did, I wouldn't run it in a deck with Black Mikaeus.
TNN's a fair card as long as you're not fetching Dead-Eye+Palinchron/Kiki+Conscripts/Mikaeus+Triskelion (aka you're playing monogreen or GW), but in most Gx's it's pretty broken. The issue with all these cards is that they're pretty innocuous. You put TNN in a deck thinking "Hey, I can tutor for fun stuff like Xenagos!" and then you just end up realizing that Kiki+Conscripts wins the game. You put Palinchron in a deck thinking "Hey, it's a free 4/5 flyer!" and then suddenly you realize you had lands that made more than 1 mana on the field. You put Craterhoof in a token deck thinking "Sweet! It's Overrun on a stick!", and suddenly you're tutoring for it and Avenger everytime the turn gets back to you with a couple 1/1s.
It's not enjoyable to see these cards everywhere, but everyone runs them so you can't justify not doing so. They're definitely the type of cards that should be banned for their impact on the format, I feel.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
Also, I see no reason why Craterhoof should be banned. It's very reliant on you already having a large board state to be anything more than an Overrun, which is far from overpowered at 8 mana.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
If people only run Palinchron for degenerate 1-card combos, why bother keeping it legal? I mean, nobody runs Great Whale and it's fairly obvious why (requires an additional card to combo).
As for Craterhoof - it only takes a couple 1/1s on the battlefield, and then drop it on same turn as Avenger to suddenly be swinging for 60-80+. That's the biggest problem.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
Craterhoof and Avenger on the same turn requires an enormous amount of mana, and unless you already had an excellent board state spot removal stops it from going anywhere fast.
These cards do not need banning, playgroups just need to be better at policing themselves.
Craterhoof Behemoth being the most common finisher in green doesn't make it the only one.
R8whackR
WUBGAtraxa Stax-Superfriends *Under Construction*WUBG
And once again, so many people are saying "this card annoys me" instead of actual reasons it should be banned. There are cards that are staples because they are the best or most efficient at what they do. It is why they cost more money than other cards and it is why many players who are looking for a slot to fill with goodstuff run them. A card seeing a lot of play in the format does not qualify it for banning in any way. I'd say that it shouldn't even come close to being discussed on the sole basis that "you see it a lot" and it shows a clear misunderstanding of the purpose of bans.
As for Rofellos, I've already been vocal about my disappointment in losing him. I've also said that since the banning was NOT for any reason related to his power as 1 of the 99, I am going to continue to play him unless someone has a real problem with it. If you want to argue about "too much mana too fast" being why he was banned, look again. The RC would not unban Metalworker while in the same breath banning Rofellos for too much mana too quickly. Seriously think for half a second before you make assertions that are clearly false. The rule change was purely to 'simplify' the ban list, which I strongly disagree with, but was the reasoning nonetheless.
I am just dumbfounded how people can comment and not understand the nature of the list changes. It makes no sense to say, "Oh yeah, these cards were oppressive and too powerful and real problems to the format." No. Just no. They were banned as a commander and in a, in my opinion, misguided attempt at improving the format by making it more user friendly, they were banned completely.
Nothing. To. Do. With. Power. Stop talking about them like their potency as 1 of the 99 was at all a consideration in this decision and, frankly, don't be surprised when people want to still play these 3 cards because this decision sets a horrid precedent that cards don't actually need to be bad/toxic/unhealthy/too centralizing for the format in order to be banned, they just need to not be programmable into MTGO.
EDH:
G[cEDH] Selvala, Heart of the StormG
URW[cEDH] Narset, the Last AirmericanURW
GWUSt. Jenara, the ArchangelGWU
UBGrimgrin, Chaos MarineUB
GOmnath, Mana BaronG
URWNarset, Justice League AmericaURW
GWUBAtraxa, Countess of CountersGWUB
GWUEstrid, Enbantress PrimeGWU
I disagree a bit with that. 60+ damage doesn't meen he needs to have 60 creatures on board. Having 7 1/1 doesn't necessary win you the game, but having 7 9/9 with trmaple which hit for 63 (if not blocked) does. So if crater wouldn't come, you wouldn't probably loose in the next turn. I am not saying that createrhoof is banworthy, but wasting my Damnation or Wrath of god on bunch of 1/1 is stupid. And if I don't play blue or some instant destroy, I would actually loose the game the moment he hits the board. In mono green, creater probably doesn't hurt as much as he does in Prossh, Riku and similar decks, which can give haste.
So, maybe you have those answers, but would you use them on 7 1/1 tokens? probably no. Are they big threat? Nope, they are not. Does this make you less aware of threat assassment or having not enough answers? No. And still ,you will lose the game.
I won't argue with this, because I agree with that. Problem is that not in every deck I run things that can shoot 1/1 creatures and I won't be wasting some wrath effect on them ( I will if another opponent or two have good creature position). True is that if someone cast TnN, in my group, they are generally searching for combo. It doesn't even need to include Craterhoof. Things like Palinchron combos, Mikaeus with Triskelion etc. And I rarely run cards such as Fog.
Still TnN cost 9 mana which is a lot, but we are talking about green and its ramp with things such as Sol Ring and Mana Crypt allowed. Now we can talk for hours about these two and fast mana, and if they were banned, TnN or Craterhoof wouldn't be so OP and bla bla bla. The problem isn't that people use those cards, the problem is they are using it to search for specific combos which are in 99% game ending.
EDIT: looks like I can't write properly, just fixed few things