Funny[sic] for me is losing against something like Tooth and Nail tutoring something like Deadeye Navigator+Palinchron. I like that I need to focus in a game and make sure my opponent doesn't combo through.
Not funny[sic] is losing to creature based decks that attacks for the win. Thats just plain boring. If I wanted to die to creature damage I would play 8 player drafts. But the players in my playgroup rarely plays creature decks like that, so I'm fine I guess
Bad:
-Single haymaker wins, like killing a player with craterhoof from an otherwise non-threatening board of a few creatures
-"I don't care what you play" wins that just tutor out a combo
-Cards that abuse the format to win fast like serra ascendant targeting one player
-Sudden infinite combos that ignore the board state up until that point
...
Examples of good wins:
-Making a token army, then next turn playing a spell that makes the token army go exponential
-Playing strong midrange creatures, then making them hard to remove through a not-your-commander card, then swinging for the win over a few turns
-Using the opposing creatures and your own to assemble an insurmountable board state through clones/steal effects
-Ramping into big creatures and then dropping something that costs 7+ every turn
-Board wiping and playing draw spells until the other players are exhausted of resources and you can try to drop your own strong threats.
-Playing cards like blightsteel colossus on turn 7 or later.
I just wanted to highlight these two posts. Maelstrom and Carthage would hate playing together, even with similarly-powered decks, because the parts of the game they find fun are fundamentally opposed. Playing their preferred styles, each would be irritated by the other's wins. If they were both (rather strangely) altruistic, each could try to build a deck designed to win in ways the other finds fun. So Carthage might build a deck designed to win via T&N, and Maelstrom might build FattyRamp.dec. This, too, would fail to satisfy, as now neither would enjoy winning.
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
EDH Pantheon UBRG Yidris, Eye of the Storm WBR Kaalia, Herald of Apocalypse UBG Damia, Sage of Nightmare WBG Karador, the Bridge Between WU Grand Warden Augustin IV RG Omnath, Locus of Awakening BG Nath Addict UR Niv Mizzet, Brain Aflame B Kokusho, the Mourning Star U Memnarch is All
The only pet peeve I have are players that clearly have an agenda to just go after one player in particular for whatever reason. I think in EDH everyone's time is valuable, you gotta' think most ppl probably only play 1-2 times a week, so I like to see players who can win while maintaining a good experience for everyone at the table, I respect ppl most who can do that.
I've never had an issue with taking an L, I usually don't expect to win; I have very little expectations outside being able to play my deck out and have a good experience. However the one thing I have almost no tolerance toward now are the bad apples that simply can't take any personal accountability to the things that happen in game, it's the ridiculous people who blame you for them not winning based on something you destroyed like 8 turns ago. Constructive criticism and some mild guidance if someone didn't think something through is always welcome, but players way too often overstep when their egos make them take offense to every single play they don't approve (which is 99% anything done to them).
What is not fun when losing is when someone just rushes into the "typical" (mileage may vary) game-winning assembly combo and won because everyone else was tapped out trying to assemble their more fun, "elaborate" game plans (be it some crazy 14-card combo or simply assembling threatening, but not immediately game-ending fatties).
What is (extra)-fun is when someone successfully completes his elaborate plan despite all the interaction/disruption/wrenches everyone was throwing at each other's elaborate plans (and when I say that I don't mean 3 players throwing that at 1 I meant a wrench-royale).
What is acceptable if that someone assembles a "typical" combo after all the wrench-royale is done and its clear that player isn't capable of reviving/reassembling the initial elaborate plan in reasonable time. The win itself may be unmemorable, but the game itself was and honestly that is what makes the game fun (it's just extra-fun when someone doesn't have to resort to TNN-instant-win because his fatty board got wiped 3 times over).
How did he attach the auras to a shrouded creature?
Shroud prevents a permanent from being targeted. Auras only target when they're being cast. When they're put onto the battlefield through some means other than that (Sun Titan, for example) they enter the battlefield attached to whatever. Since it's not targeting, you can put them on a creature with shroud/hexproof just fine; there is no conflict.
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
Spite &/or Kingmaker if an opponent targets me in response to a lethal effect, in a way that cannot prevent them from losing the game, I will not play with that player again. This also applies to one opponent causing another opponent to win through gross incompetence (if an opponent is presenting lethal on board, and a second opponent with answers removes my Birds of Paradise instead, because s/he does not recognize the threat despite being told about it, as an example).
Group Hug if one of my opponents wins as a direct result of another opponent playing 'hug' effects, I will never play against the group hug deck again.
Chaos I occasionally design these types of decks, though I do so for the express purpose of demonstrating why Grip of Chaos should be banned in Legacy, or similar (logistical reasons)
Luck if I have a dozen answers to my opponents single threat in my deck, and I do not see any one of them, or a way to find them through the entire game, it was a miserable game
Other than that, I do not really care how an opponent wins.
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
As long as none of the players at the table is playing "Solitaire" i'm fine with losing.
I see no point in playing/building decks that don't interact with anything else on and off the board.
Ofc there are things i'm not a big fan of, like MLD and infinites (especially infinite turns) but as long as they fit the playgroup and i felt like participating in an entertaining game until then, feel free to seal the deal.
Basicallly i just want to play games that allow each player to play the game (so no stax, mld) and I don't like games that end out of nowhere for the exact reason Acropalypse mentioned. Therefore I also don't like infinite combo except for two cases:
It is such an elaborate and hard to assemble combo that it earns style points
A combo between two cards that is not specifically tutored for, one of which makes perfect sense to play without the other in the deck. This makes the combo nothing more than a nuclear option to break through stalemates, which I feel is fair to include one or two in a deck.
And last but not least: if it does end, make it fast! I hate decks that make the winning play, only to need 10 more turns to actually seal the deal.
The ideal game of commander for me is a game where there is a lot of interaction, the pendulum of who appears to be winning swings back and forth, and ultimately someone wins through a clever play and proper threat assessment, preferably by taking some risk and seeing it pay off. If the game is like that, then I don't care if I win or lose.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
Assuming that every player has disruption, some sort of ramp (artifact or not). And you're playing in a meta without half the decks running ad nauseam or similarly effective decks and there are atleast someone attemping to play control. most players will often be at around 9 mana or higher when the game ends. (not that unusual to live until turn 8...).
What i generally dislike about a lot of the mentality on this forum, and sometimes randoms i play with is the over-reliance on infinite combos. Like somehow it is the only possible way to end games.
I'm fine with loosing to infinite combos once in a while, but if you bring 4+ decks for "variety". But all those decks just tutor up some 2 card combo and combo out turn 5-7 (or turn 9 for your casual deck) every single game, I personally wouldn't enjoy loosing to you.
It is kinda the same as with overly linear strategies... You either wipe the floor with the other players or you do nothing all game (killed before you can assemble your combo). Or because someone used sadistic sacrament on you and took out your combo pieces.
Consistency of said combos is also a big factor. a combo with more than 2 pieces takes some effort, but 1 card i wins such as T&N and ad nauseam (or to some degree mind over matter + azami), get really stale as they can be fetched with a single tutor. Or just top-decked for the win without a single nonland permanent on the field.
The fact that boardstates aren't relevant most of the time in the presence of infinite combos is possibly the biggest reason i generally dislike loosing to it.
_____
I enjoy losses where i felt i had a fighting chance, or the game was a back and forth experience and more than 1 player had a chance to win during the duration of the game.
I don't mind if I lose, so long as I got to take part in a game worth talking about.
Can you elaborate? What makes a game worth talking about? What would prevent a game from being worth talked about?
I'm looking for specifics.
For me, games that end because someone successfully pulls off some tedious, well-known two card combo are not worth talking about. The 73rd time you've seen Kiki/Conscripts, Mike/Trike or Deadeye/Palinchron or Lattice/Vandalblast is no more interesting or memorable than the previous 71 or so times you've seen those stunts. Such games are boring and anti-climactic.
Nor are games that are won because one person starts off with so great an advantage early on that the game is effectively over after a couple turns.
Nor are games in which someone playing a much more powerful, competitive and tuned deck preys on players who aren't prepared for, and haven't built around, that sort of deck.
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win. Does anyone who has been playing this format for more than a month ever react to those wins with statements like "Palinchron + Deadeye... gee, that's really cool!" without tons of irony?
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win. Does anyone who has been playing this format for more than a month ever react to those wins with statements like "Palinchron + Deadeye... gee, that's really cool!" without tons of irony?
But you are missing the point. It doesnt really matter which combo you win with. Its the way you did it. Lets be honest you are not going to draw-go from turn one to nine without doing anything but play lands, then on turn 9 play TnN and win. If you are, then your opponent must really suck. In my plaugroup combos are getting stopped for like 8+ times before someone hits the jackpot. Its easy to stop TnN into Mike/trike or Dead/palin. Its not easy to protect it though. The difference between you and me on this matter seems to be that for you the new combo that took 2 hours to play and you havent seen before is "cool", to me thats just boring because I would have had to play second tier cards in that game to let the game go on for so long.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win. Does anyone who has been playing this format for more than a month ever react to those wins with statements like "Palinchron + Deadeye... gee, that's really cool!" without tons of irony?
But you are missing the point. It doesnt really matter which combo you win with. Its the way you did it. Lets be honest you are not going to draw-go from turn one to nine without doing anything but play lands, then on turn 9 play TnN and win. If you are, then your opponent must really suck. In my plaugroup combos are getting stopped for like 8+ times before someone hits the jackpot. Its easy to stop TnN into Mike/trike or Dead/palin. Its not easy to protect it though. The difference between you and me on this matter seems to be that for you the new combo that took 2 hours to play and you havent seen before is "cool", to me thats just boring because I would have had to play second tier cards in that game to let the game go on for so long.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
I've seen that happen. 3 players caught in a melee-a-trois while the Temur player literally had nothing but lands, and some small critters he had just in case we directed our attention that way. I win the melee a trois, it's turn 9, and Mr Temur plays Tooth and Nail for Kiki-Conscripts.
You're also forgetting that this thread is about "YOUR OPINION" and an opinion cannot be factually wrong. Every playgroup plays differently and some playgroups despise Tooth and Nail for how stupid a card it is, being an instant-win-unless-you-got-an-instant-answer card on it's own. And, as specified many, many times before, there's literally no other card in Commander who can boast the same qualities - every other card needs to have something on the field aside from "enough mana to be cast".
This is why I don't mind two card combos that get played in a more natural way throughout a game, but I loathe tooth and nail. And I presume this goes for a lot of people. That your group is fine with it is YOUR opinion, which is perfectly fine, but there's no need to call people "noobs" just because they tap out because they want to play their own game of magic as well.
Oh and this is discounting any sudden Sol Ring/Mana Crypt/Ritual shenanigans that might bump the TnN player to 9 suddenly.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win. Does anyone who has been playing this format for more than a month ever react to those wins with statements like "Palinchron + Deadeye... gee, that's really cool!" without tons of irony?
But you are missing the point. It doesnt really matter which combo you win with. Its the way you did it. Lets be honest you are not going to draw-go from turn one to nine without doing anything but play lands, then on turn 9 play TnN and win. If you are, then your opponent must really suck. In my plaugroup combos are getting stopped for like 8+ times before someone hits the jackpot. Its easy to stop TnN into Mike/trike or Dead/palin. Its not easy to protect it though. The difference between you and me on this matter seems to be that for you the new combo that took 2 hours to play and you havent seen before is "cool", to me thats just boring because I would have had to play second tier cards in that game to let the game go on for so long.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
I don't want to make this a thread strictly about Tooth and Nail, but no other card compares. Call me a noob all you want, but my opinion is still valid, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who holds such an opinion. For me, EDH is about memorable games where hopefully, the winning play has all of us on the edge of our seats, not a resolution of a single spell. My playgroup's power level sits around 75%, Ad Nauseam, Doomsday and Hermit Druid have yet to make an appearance. We're all busy guys who only get together to play once a week or so, we play casually ("oh you forgot your upkeep trigger, go ahead and take it"), we play to win but we also just enjoy playing, seeing the interactions, the progression of board state, finally getting off that janky 4 card combo, etc. Plenty of people have differing opinions and thats just fine, I don't whine and cry when T&N wins a game, I just wish it was more fun.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH Pantheon UBRG Yidris, Eye of the Storm WBR Kaalia, Herald of Apocalypse UBG Damia, Sage of Nightmare WBG Karador, the Bridge Between WU Grand Warden Augustin IV RG Omnath, Locus of Awakening BG Nath Addict UR Niv Mizzet, Brain Aflame B Kokusho, the Mourning Star U Memnarch is All
My playgroup ended up having a long and slightly salty discussion the other night about Tooth and Nail, specifically when used in combination with an insta-win such as Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion. Ultimately what it boiled down to was they those of us on the losing end were not frustrated with losing so much as how we lost. The win basically came out of nowhere and completely ignored what had been, in our opinions, a pretty interesting progression of board state. Big moves were made, even bigger responses came out of nowhere, what was a gruesome slugfest ended in the least satisfying way possible.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win. Does anyone who has been playing this format for more than a month ever react to those wins with statements like "Palinchron + Deadeye... gee, that's really cool!" without tons of irony?
But you are missing the point. It doesnt really matter which combo you win with. Its the way you did it. Lets be honest you are not going to draw-go from turn one to nine without doing anything but play lands, then on turn 9 play TnN and win. If you are, then your opponent must really suck. In my plaugroup combos are getting stopped for like 8+ times before someone hits the jackpot. Its easy to stop TnN into Mike/trike or Dead/palin. Its not easy to protect it though. The difference between you and me on this matter seems to be that for you the new combo that took 2 hours to play and you havent seen before is "cool", to me thats just boring because I would have had to play second tier cards in that game to let the game go on for so long.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
I don't understand how you can possibly see players asking "do you have an answer to my instant win" as interesting gameplay.
Wow, you cast tooth and nail and the table didn't have a counterspell or instant speed removal, what a game. What meaningful decisions!
To me this greatly reduces the impact of playskill and politics, instead choosing to favor lucky table positioning( going right after the blue player will suck ) and luck in card draw.
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win. Does anyone who has been playing this format for more than a month ever react to those wins with statements like "Palinchron + Deadeye... gee, that's really cool!" without tons of irony?
But you are missing the point. It doesnt really matter which combo you win with. Its the way you did it. Lets be honest you are not going to draw-go from turn one to nine without doing anything but play lands, then on turn 9 play TnN and win. If you are, then your opponent must really suck. In my plaugroup combos are getting stopped for like 8+ times before someone hits the jackpot. Its easy to stop TnN into Mike/trike or Dead/palin. Its not easy to protect it though. The difference between you and me on this matter seems to be that for you the new combo that took 2 hours to play and you havent seen before is "cool", to me thats just boring because I would have had to play second tier cards in that game to let the game go on for so long.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
I don't understand how you can possibly see players asking "do you have an answer to my instant win" as interesting gameplay.
Wow, you cast tooth and nail and the table didn't have a counterspell or instant speed removal, what a game. What meaningful decisions!
To me this greatly reduces the impact of playskill and politics, instead choosing to favor lucky table positioning( going right after the blue player will suck ) and luck in card draw.
Boy, it must be a real drag to play in your group? What is it? 400 copies of T&N? No, sorry, 300 copies of T&N and 300 each of Mike and Trike.
Geeze, let's be realistic. I play a lot of MTG on the nights that I get to, and I'd say maybe 1-2 games max are ever decided by an "unwelcomed" combo. So, I can fit 5 games in and on average 1 of them ends due to a haymaker. Oh, the humanity.
Here's a thought for everybody. Stop dwelling on the negative experiences and embrace the positive ones. A bad loss is only one where you want to win. If you play EDH with the mindset of winning, you're gunna have a bad time.
The fundemental problem is the only way to interact with tooth and nail is a blue counterspell. Only if you know you are up against said players where any Extract variant will work before hand. That makes it very linear in deck building if everyone played U/x x x x whatever. Other than those examples, stopping the card/combo would be to not let that player reach 9 mana. How is that done? MLD and Stax effects. This, to Me, makes TnN and its 'I win now' variants so cheesy. But shuffle up lets play again, see if there is more to your 100 cards than the 3, if not well boring, I will go play somewhere more entertaining.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
If the trip is just familiar combos, to me the trip is itself really boring. Like, "driving through rural Nebraska with a broken CD player and nothing on the radio but hog futures reports" boring. If someone wins by an actually cool combo that is complicated to get into play and still manages it, that's fine, but if the deciding factor is "Did I manage to catch everyone when they're tapped out or out of counters?" I find that about as enjoyable as watching infomercials. That sort of crap is not what I play Commander for.
YMMV, obviously. You think combo wins are cool, I think they are largely tedious, predictable and unoriginal. We probably wouldn't enjoy the same games, which is fine.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
If the trip is just familiar combos, to me the trip is itself really boring. Like, "driving through rural Nebraska with a broken CD player and nothing on the radio but hog futures reports" boring. If someone wins by an actually cool combo that is complicated to get into play and still manages it, that's fine, but if the deciding factor is "Did I manage to catch everyone when they're tapped out or out of counters?" I find that about as enjoyable as watching infomercials. That sort of crap is not what I play Commander for.
YMMV, obviously. You think combo wins are cool, I think they are largely tedious, predictable and unoriginal. We probably wouldn't enjoy the same games, which is fine.
You dont seem to get what I am trying to say. The trip aint the combo. The trip is the other 96 cards in the deck that you chose to put in there to reach the destination. You can play TnN in more than one deck. For you any deck with TnN is the same. Thats nowhere near the case for me. I will play playing a lot differently against a TnN Tasigur, than a TnN Edric. Anyway, I think we are going off-topic, so I will stop it here for my part.
You dont seem to get what I am trying to say. The trip aint the combo. The trip is the other 96 cards in the deck that you chose to put in there to reach the destination. You can play TnN in more than one deck. For you any deck with TnN is the same. Thats nowhere near the case for me. I will play playing a lot differently against a TnN Tasigur, than a TnN Edric. Anyway, I think we are going off-topic, so I will stop it here for my part.
I can't recall playing against Tooth and Nail but as far as I'm concerned, the problem is less with the ability to tutor a game-ending combo into play as it is that the combo itself (should it arise through that means or through normal play) 'solves' any complex board state and the interesting set of in-play interactions with just "Whatever. I win." The complex interactions don't get to continue, remain unresolved, and the deck vs deck dynamics also just end because the game also ends.
Look at the pattern that various board wipes have in that situation: Every board wipe comes with trade offs that are made at deck-building time that come with different pros and cons, and none of them are perfect for dealing with every possible threat or every possible counterplay. Regeneration, indestructibility, death triggers, threatening non-creature permanents, Ghostway, Boros Charm. And even the aftermath is not 'clean'. Recursion makes the graveyard state matter. Life totals up to that point remain as they were, creating more or less pressure on certain players. And other resources like hand size and mana development remain as they were and will also continue to affect play.
It can certainly be exciting to pull out a combo win when you're about to lose, when it starts happening regularly, it's less exciting because it means those early plays aren't meaningful and it can push metagames in an unhealthy direction. I can understand an argument that some instant-win combo can be a healthy part of metagames for a similar reason that luck of the draw is the same: You always want weaker players to have a chance to win since it will keep them interested in playing, unlike games of pure skill where the winner is almost always the strongest player. However there is a limit.
Strategically, yes, it's better to not tap out and to hold open as flexible an answer as you can to whatever possible immediate threats as you can as much of the time as you can. Not knowing if someone is going to untap: win means that strategically, it's better to develop your board more slowly so you can stop someone from going off. However you can't always hold up an answer and you will rarely have the resources to hold open enough answers to stop everything.
If your point is that everyone else should have had their fun by the time Tooth and Nail or fill-in-the-blank combo ends the game, I think that is an unreasonable expectation.
If nothing else, I choose to try to build and play my decks in such a way that does not further escalate the arms race.
You dont seem to get what I am trying to say. The trip aint the combo. The trip is the other 96 cards in the deck that you chose to put in there to reach the destination. You can play TnN in more than one deck. For you any deck with TnN is the same. Thats nowhere near the case for me. I will play playing a lot differently against a TnN Tasigur, than a TnN Edric. Anyway, I think we are going off-topic, so I will stop it here for my part.
I can't recall playing against Tooth and Nail but as far as I'm concerned, the problem is less with the ability to tutor a game-ending combo into play as it is that the combo itself (should it arise through that means or through normal play) 'solves' any complex board state and the interesting set of in-play interactions with just "Whatever. I win." The complex interactions don't get to continue, remain unresolved, and the deck vs deck dynamics also just end because the game also ends.
Exactly. It's anti-climactic. The game ends with no real drama and no particular payoff for anyone other than the combo player. I am less concerned with whether I win (though, all things equal, I would prefer to win, as would most players) than whether the game is fun and interesting, and I don't feel either applies when the game ends that way. Which is why I go out of my way to avoid including tired "iWin" combos in my decks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I just wanted to highlight these two posts. Maelstrom and Carthage would hate playing together, even with similarly-powered decks, because the parts of the game they find fun are fundamentally opposed. Playing their preferred styles, each would be irritated by the other's wins. If they were both (rather strangely) altruistic, each could try to build a deck designed to win in ways the other finds fun. So Carthage might build a deck designed to win via T&N, and Maelstrom might build FattyRamp.dec. This, too, would fail to satisfy, as now neither would enjoy winning.
Losing to infinite combos is by no means a problem for me, it's just when an hour of what I consider to be satisfying gameplay is completely ignored by a single spell to pull a win out of nowhere, it feels like a last-minute half-assed ending to what was up until then a great story. Imagine if Jaws ended by the shark just beaching himself for the convenience of the island, Sauron gives up his search for the Ring to go backpacking and "find himself".
Oh and the majority of players in my group have at least 3 decks, if not 10+, I used to get tired of losing the same way to the same deck over and over again, but both the variety of decks our playgroup has and our general acceptance of the fact that winning the same way everytime is boring, I haven't encountered such an annoyance in a while.
UBRG Yidris, Eye of the Storm
WBR Kaalia, Herald of Apocalypse
UBG Damia, Sage of Nightmare
WBG Karador, the Bridge Between
WU Grand Warden Augustin IV
RG Omnath, Locus of Awakening
BG Nath Addict
UR Niv Mizzet, Brain Aflame
B Kokusho, the Mourning Star
U Memnarch is All
I've never had an issue with taking an L, I usually don't expect to win; I have very little expectations outside being able to play my deck out and have a good experience. However the one thing I have almost no tolerance toward now are the bad apples that simply can't take any personal accountability to the things that happen in game, it's the ridiculous people who blame you for them not winning based on something you destroyed like 8 turns ago. Constructive criticism and some mild guidance if someone didn't think something through is always welcome, but players way too often overstep when their egos make them take offense to every single play they don't approve (which is 99% anything done to them).
GWRUB[EDH] Reaper KingGWRUB
GW[Legacy] BEARS (#1 Threat in America)GW
UR[Legacy] Arcane MeleeUR
I'm looking for specifics.
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
What is not fun when losing is when someone just rushes into the "typical" (mileage may vary) game-winning assembly combo and won because everyone else was tapped out trying to assemble their more fun, "elaborate" game plans (be it some crazy 14-card combo or simply assembling threatening, but not immediately game-ending fatties).
What is (extra)-fun is when someone successfully completes his elaborate plan despite all the interaction/disruption/wrenches everyone was throwing at each other's elaborate plans (and when I say that I don't mean 3 players throwing that at 1 I meant a wrench-royale).
What is acceptable if that someone assembles a "typical" combo after all the wrench-royale is done and its clear that player isn't capable of reviving/reassembling the initial elaborate plan in reasonable time. The win itself may be unmemorable, but the game itself was and honestly that is what makes the game fun (it's just extra-fun when someone doesn't have to resort to TNN-instant-win because his fatty board got wiped 3 times over).
How did he attach the auras to a shrouded creature?
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
How does Tooth and Nail "come out of nowhere"? Assuming it's entwined, it costs nine mana. To be able to cast it so takes significant time and/or ramp. Someone doing the actions required to get to that amount of resources should be a massive warning that they're going to be doing something potentially game winning.
There are some things I can sympathsise with objecting to "out of nowhere" wins with as they're much chepaer mana wise and thus less telegraphed(e.g. EOT Ad Nauseam, untap, win due to having half my deck in hand), but T&N's mana cost means that while you might not be expecting that exact win, you should be expecting something like it.
Other than that, I do not really care how an opponent wins.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
This. I agree 100 %. If someone has acces to nine mana and all the other players tap out, its not TnN's fault, its the other players.
I see no point in playing/building decks that don't interact with anything else on and off the board.
Ofc there are things i'm not a big fan of, like MLD and infinites (especially infinite turns) but as long as they fit the playgroup and i felt like participating in an entertaining game until then, feel free to seal the deal.
And last but not least: if it does end, make it fast! I hate decks that make the winning play, only to need 10 more turns to actually seal the deal.
The ideal game of commander for me is a game where there is a lot of interaction, the pendulum of who appears to be winning swings back and forth, and ultimately someone wins through a clever play and proper threat assessment, preferably by taking some risk and seeing it pay off. If the game is like that, then I don't care if I win or lose.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
Assuming that every player has disruption, some sort of ramp (artifact or not). And you're playing in a meta without half the decks running ad nauseam or similarly effective decks and there are atleast someone attemping to play control. most players will often be at around 9 mana or higher when the game ends. (not that unusual to live until turn 8...).
What i generally dislike about a lot of the mentality on this forum, and sometimes randoms i play with is the over-reliance on infinite combos. Like somehow it is the only possible way to end games.
I'm fine with loosing to infinite combos once in a while, but if you bring 4+ decks for "variety". But all those decks just tutor up some 2 card combo and combo out turn 5-7 (or turn 9 for your casual deck) every single game, I personally wouldn't enjoy loosing to you.
It is kinda the same as with overly linear strategies... You either wipe the floor with the other players or you do nothing all game (killed before you can assemble your combo). Or because someone used sadistic sacrament on you and took out your combo pieces.
Consistency of said combos is also a big factor. a combo with more than 2 pieces takes some effort, but 1 card i wins such as T&N and ad nauseam (or to some degree mind over matter + azami), get really stale as they can be fetched with a single tutor. Or just top-decked for the win without a single nonland permanent on the field.
The fact that boardstates aren't relevant most of the time in the presence of infinite combos is possibly the biggest reason i generally dislike loosing to it.
_____
I enjoy losses where i felt i had a fighting chance, or the game was a back and forth experience and more than 1 player had a chance to win during the duration of the game.
RWU Narset, jeskai burn
RUB Marchesa the black rose
R Daretti, reanimator goodstuff
BU Vela, ninja assasin
UG Ezuri, woodland critters.
For me, games that end because someone successfully pulls off some tedious, well-known two card combo are not worth talking about. The 73rd time you've seen Kiki/Conscripts, Mike/Trike or Deadeye/Palinchron or Lattice/Vandalblast is no more interesting or memorable than the previous 71 or so times you've seen those stunts. Such games are boring and anti-climactic.
Nor are games that are won because one person starts off with so great an advantage early on that the game is effectively over after a couple turns.
Nor are games in which someone playing a much more powerful, competitive and tuned deck preys on players who aren't prepared for, and haven't built around, that sort of deck.
Nor is any win by any typical Leovold deck ever.
In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win. Does anyone who has been playing this format for more than a month ever react to those wins with statements like "Palinchron + Deadeye... gee, that's really cool!" without tons of irony?
But you are missing the point. It doesnt really matter which combo you win with. Its the way you did it. Lets be honest you are not going to draw-go from turn one to nine without doing anything but play lands, then on turn 9 play TnN and win. If you are, then your opponent must really suck. In my plaugroup combos are getting stopped for like 8+ times before someone hits the jackpot. Its easy to stop TnN into Mike/trike or Dead/palin. Its not easy to protect it though. The difference between you and me on this matter seems to be that for you the new combo that took 2 hours to play and you havent seen before is "cool", to me thats just boring because I would have had to play second tier cards in that game to let the game go on for so long.
As you said "In that case, the TnN player wins, but it's still a boring, unmemorable win". It sure is. We can agree on that. But not because of TnN. Because three noobs chose to tap out (without FoW or PoN) when someone has acces to 9 mana.
When on a roadtrip, the destination isnt important, the trip itself is.
I've seen that happen. 3 players caught in a melee-a-trois while the Temur player literally had nothing but lands, and some small critters he had just in case we directed our attention that way. I win the melee a trois, it's turn 9, and Mr Temur plays Tooth and Nail for Kiki-Conscripts.
You're also forgetting that this thread is about "YOUR OPINION" and an opinion cannot be factually wrong. Every playgroup plays differently and some playgroups despise Tooth and Nail for how stupid a card it is, being an instant-win-unless-you-got-an-instant-answer card on it's own. And, as specified many, many times before, there's literally no other card in Commander who can boast the same qualities - every other card needs to have something on the field aside from "enough mana to be cast".
This is why I don't mind two card combos that get played in a more natural way throughout a game, but I loathe tooth and nail. And I presume this goes for a lot of people. That your group is fine with it is YOUR opinion, which is perfectly fine, but there's no need to call people "noobs" just because they tap out because they want to play their own game of magic as well.
Oh and this is discounting any sudden Sol Ring/Mana Crypt/Ritual shenanigans that might bump the TnN player to 9 suddenly.
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.
I don't want to make this a thread strictly about Tooth and Nail, but no other card compares. Call me a noob all you want, but my opinion is still valid, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who holds such an opinion. For me, EDH is about memorable games where hopefully, the winning play has all of us on the edge of our seats, not a resolution of a single spell. My playgroup's power level sits around 75%, Ad Nauseam, Doomsday and Hermit Druid have yet to make an appearance. We're all busy guys who only get together to play once a week or so, we play casually ("oh you forgot your upkeep trigger, go ahead and take it"), we play to win but we also just enjoy playing, seeing the interactions, the progression of board state, finally getting off that janky 4 card combo, etc. Plenty of people have differing opinions and thats just fine, I don't whine and cry when T&N wins a game, I just wish it was more fun.
UBRG Yidris, Eye of the Storm
WBR Kaalia, Herald of Apocalypse
UBG Damia, Sage of Nightmare
WBG Karador, the Bridge Between
WU Grand Warden Augustin IV
RG Omnath, Locus of Awakening
BG Nath Addict
UR Niv Mizzet, Brain Aflame
B Kokusho, the Mourning Star
U Memnarch is All
I don't understand how you can possibly see players asking "do you have an answer to my instant win" as interesting gameplay.
Wow, you cast tooth and nail and the table didn't have a counterspell or instant speed removal, what a game. What meaningful decisions!
To me this greatly reduces the impact of playskill and politics, instead choosing to favor lucky table positioning( going right after the blue player will suck ) and luck in card draw.
Boy, it must be a real drag to play in your group? What is it? 400 copies of T&N? No, sorry, 300 copies of T&N and 300 each of Mike and Trike.
Geeze, let's be realistic. I play a lot of MTG on the nights that I get to, and I'd say maybe 1-2 games max are ever decided by an "unwelcomed" combo. So, I can fit 5 games in and on average 1 of them ends due to a haymaker. Oh, the humanity.
Here's a thought for everybody. Stop dwelling on the negative experiences and embrace the positive ones. A bad loss is only one where you want to win. If you play EDH with the mindset of winning, you're gunna have a bad time.
People suck, but Commander is great.
If the trip is just familiar combos, to me the trip is itself really boring. Like, "driving through rural Nebraska with a broken CD player and nothing on the radio but hog futures reports" boring. If someone wins by an actually cool combo that is complicated to get into play and still manages it, that's fine, but if the deciding factor is "Did I manage to catch everyone when they're tapped out or out of counters?" I find that about as enjoyable as watching infomercials. That sort of crap is not what I play Commander for.
YMMV, obviously. You think combo wins are cool, I think they are largely tedious, predictable and unoriginal. We probably wouldn't enjoy the same games, which is fine.
You dont seem to get what I am trying to say. The trip aint the combo. The trip is the other 96 cards in the deck that you chose to put in there to reach the destination. You can play TnN in more than one deck. For you any deck with TnN is the same. Thats nowhere near the case for me. I will play playing a lot differently against a TnN Tasigur, than a TnN Edric. Anyway, I think we are going off-topic, so I will stop it here for my part.
Look at the pattern that various board wipes have in that situation: Every board wipe comes with trade offs that are made at deck-building time that come with different pros and cons, and none of them are perfect for dealing with every possible threat or every possible counterplay. Regeneration, indestructibility, death triggers, threatening non-creature permanents, Ghostway, Boros Charm. And even the aftermath is not 'clean'. Recursion makes the graveyard state matter. Life totals up to that point remain as they were, creating more or less pressure on certain players. And other resources like hand size and mana development remain as they were and will also continue to affect play.
It can certainly be exciting to pull out a combo win when you're about to lose, when it starts happening regularly, it's less exciting because it means those early plays aren't meaningful and it can push metagames in an unhealthy direction. I can understand an argument that some instant-win combo can be a healthy part of metagames for a similar reason that luck of the draw is the same: You always want weaker players to have a chance to win since it will keep them interested in playing, unlike games of pure skill where the winner is almost always the strongest player. However there is a limit.
Strategically, yes, it's better to not tap out and to hold open as flexible an answer as you can to whatever possible immediate threats as you can as much of the time as you can. Not knowing if someone is going to untap: win means that strategically, it's better to develop your board more slowly so you can stop someone from going off. However you can't always hold up an answer and you will rarely have the resources to hold open enough answers to stop everything.
If your point is that everyone else should have had their fun by the time Tooth and Nail or fill-in-the-blank combo ends the game, I think that is an unreasonable expectation.
If nothing else, I choose to try to build and play my decks in such a way that does not further escalate the arms race.
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
Exactly. It's anti-climactic. The game ends with no real drama and no particular payoff for anyone other than the combo player. I am less concerned with whether I win (though, all things equal, I would prefer to win, as would most players) than whether the game is fun and interesting, and I don't feel either applies when the game ends that way. Which is why I go out of my way to avoid including tired "iWin" combos in my decks.