What is your stance on grouphug? Do you love it or hate it?
To me, grouphug goes against the entire point of magic. Okay, maybe not the entire point. I suppose you can have fun making no attempt, or a feeble attempt, at winning. You are essentially there to prop up the other 3+ players and then, in my experience, "team up" with the player who is not doing well or who targeted you with the least amount of spells/attacks. But regardless, there is a very limited attempt to win. A lot of grouphug players I have inquired to about their position have basically told me some variant of "I don't mind coming in second!" or "As long as I'm not last" when asked why they play what they play.
Grouphug warps the game. In fact, in my experience it makes the game a lot less fun. Your deck's synergies and efficiencies are a lot less noticeable when everyone is being boosted. It is much harder to gain any semblance of a tempo advantage. And thus, in my opinion, many EDH games of mine have been more or less ruined by Grouphug players. To note, I play neither weak decks nor unfair decks, but they are all designed to have a good chance of winning. Very few of them have more than say a 75%+ win rate, and the ones that do I rarely break out. So I would say I play semi-competitively and at times casually. Regardless of what type of deck I am playing, grouphug is unsettling. It either makes my strong deck weaker compared to other players, or makes my weaker decks be able to catch up, but boosts other player's powerful decks so hard that I've lost any chance to compete.
A lot of magic is about the nuance of tempo, and I think that Grouphug fundamentally ruins that. And furthermore, I think that it is silly and somewhat aggravating to play against people in a strategy game that aren't at least putting in SOME effort to win. Akin to playing someone in chess that purposefully leaves his power pieces vulnerable because he's "just having fun" or something.
Anyway, that is my opinion, I would like to hear from others so:
Do you play a group hug deck? Why? And do you make any serious attempt to win?
Do you have group hug decks in your meta? What are they like?
Do you like or dislike playing versus Grouphug decks?
I really dislike group hug for the sake of group hug decks for much the same reasons as you mention. It warps the game, penalises good deckbuilding and ultimately turns into a kingmaker. I don't mind group hug effects if the person using them is breaking the symmetry somehow - as a simple example, Howling Mine in a Masumaro, First to Live deck (everyone gets cards, but you also get a bigger general) - as they're playing said cards as part of a clear path to victory, but the "I'm helping everyone" thing just annoys me.
Group hug is instantly enemy #1 in my eyes because if you think edh as 1v3 game the massive resource advantage group hug gives means you just get crushed.
I absolutely hate playing in pods with group hug. It disproportionately advantages the player next in turn order after the hug deck, and either they or the deck best equipped to run away with free resources (usually me, the combo player) are going to win, if they aren't the same player. Hug decks completely warp a pod, taking away a huge portion of the game's skill-testing by making deck-building decisions about tempo, filtering, and ramp largely irrelevant. MtG is a game, at its heart, of timing and resource management. When you drown every player in resources, a huge portion of the game just goes away.
I will punt any grouphug player out of the game as soon as I possibly can. That said, if a grouphug player manages to win via their own hug strategies, that I will definitely applaud. It's no easy feat and requires some pretty good deckbuilding.
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.
And if I ever face to face with you guys my policy in my decks are have a few group hug cards so it's fun.
But anyway for when my opponents on group hug, i keep an eye on them to make sure they don't pull any tricks. And if a hug is helping a opponent to much I get rid of it as soon as possible.
And if I ever face to face with you guys my policy in my decks are have a few group hug cards so it's fun.
But anyway for when my opponents on group hug, i keep an eye on them to make sure they don't pull any tricks. And if a hug is helping a opponent to much I get rid of it as soon as possible.
I ignore if it helps me a lot.
The first bolded part is counting on you doing the second bolded part. This is how "false hug" decks do their thing - lulling enough players into prioritizing the free resources over dealing with the hugger that by the time the trigger is pulled, it's too late to stop the hugger's endgame.
Something i don't like about grouphug is that it's getting stale very fast. I have thought of building a hug deck every once in a while, but always dropped the idea, because i'd propably take it apart after a game or two.
This is how "false hug" decks do their thing - lulling enough players into prioritizing the free resources over dealing with the hugger that by the time the trigger is pulled, it's too late to stop the hugger's endgame.
If they aren't trying to win I have a problem with it. If they're trying to win I have no problem at all. It's a strategy like stax or anything else that requires you to adapt and find a way to overcome it.
A lot of magic is about the nuance of tempo, and I think that Grouphug fundamentally ruins that. And furthermore, I think that it is silly and somewhat aggravating to play against people in a strategy game that aren't at least putting in SOME effort to win. Akin to playing someone in chess that purposefully leaves his power pieces vulnerable because he's "just having fun" or something.
I feel the complete opposite of your bolded statement. I believe your tempo argument is justified, but I completely disagree with it. Multiplayer Commander games have HORRIBLE tempo and pacing compared to the rest of the other magic formats, including duel commander; I simply use my group hug deck to shift the game about 6 or 7 turns forward from the start, since flashy plays are what define commander IMO, and my group hug deck enables my pod to do that.
Then again, Group Hug breaks two fundamental rules of magic: helping your opponents, and eliminating probability/risk due to the massive amounts of ramp/ card draw.
PhroX mentioned that Grouphug penalizes good deckbuilding; my response to that statement is that every deck can have a bad day, where unfortunate shuffling and mana screw causes multiple mulligans and an unfun game, a situation we have all been in and have gotten our asses kicked because of it. Group hug effectively ends that problem, giving everyone a decent shot at the game.
But what is really saddening to me in this thread is the lack of "the social aspect of the game" and common sense. If you see someone throw down their Pheldagriff or Kyanios and Tiro of Meletis deck before the game starts, ask them to choose a different deck! Don't chase off someone from the table due to a goofy archetype, just explain that you don't like kingmaker strategies and want to win on your own accord and they will listen.
We have this discussion about every 6 months here, and I always find it funny for pointing out the tryhard spikes of the website :p.
I frankly take umbrage to the suggestion that I'm a "tryhard spike."
I'm a combo player looking to cause crazy exponential or geometric progression math nonsense on the stack and field, and my play/brew style ends up somewhere firmly in the middle between average EDH and comp EDH. I play more regularly online than in paper, since it's easier to pop in for a quick pick-up game in the middle of a busy day that way. The social option your saying we've ignored isn't available in that context - you often have to restart the game/lobby to accomplish that, and although I personally am fine switching decks on request (60+ decks all across the casual<>comp scale, finding something I feel like playing for almost any taste is usually easy) many players will just storm out in a tantrum if you even hint at questioning their deck selection.
The problem with the rest of your argument, to me, is that it's not true that Group Hug "effectively ends that problem, giving everyone a decent shot at the game."
Group Hug disproportionately gives the advantage to ME, the combo player, who is better equipped to run away with free resources than most other archetypes. That tempo screw gives me windows of opportunity for victory much more quickly than it accelerates the rest of the pod, which results in boring as hell matches where instead of facing the challenges of timing my shots and breaking through on engine pieces I can get away with just half-heartedly mashing whatever I like through the rest of the table's efforts. There's no tension, no work required of the combo player once a hug deck joins the pod. I don't play EDH, nor combo themes, to faceroll. That's boring and not at all compelling, and Group Hug removes all of the excitement of wrestling the control decks and fencing with the rest of the table for an opportunity to go off. The only way for me to prevent my archetype steamrolling over the other players with Hug in the pod is to condescend to everyone by deliberately misplaying, holding back, and so on, and I feel like that's insulting.
I don't understand the mindset of players who play grouphug or chaos decks without intending to win, which does lead me to wonder how common that mindset is and if perhaps we're arguing against a straw-man. In a long time playing Magic, I've only ever really encountered one deck I would have characterized as this sort of deck, and that was a Gahiji, Honored One deck that intended to give resources to all its opponents so they could fight each other to death. I guess it technically even had a win condition, just not a very practical one.
That having been said, I tend to play a lot of control-oriented decks, so I hate people getting more resources. Group hug is one of the worst matchups for several of my decks simply because they accelerate the rest of the table beyond my ability to respond to threats. I would say that having a group hug deck in the meta warps things in favor of combo or mid-range while penalizing control and aggro. That frustrates me, but it would seem to just be part of the rock-paper-scissors of multiplayer magic, and Wizards has been pushing it as a legitimate strategy.
If there is some unicorn out there who plays group hug just because they like to watch the world burn, then I hate them with all the passion of everyone else on this thread. Maybe I've just been very lucky in my playgroups?
Group Hug disproportionately gives the advantage to ME, the combo player, who is better equipped to run away with free resources than most other archetypes. That tempo screw gives me windows of opportunity for victory much more quickly than it accelerates the rest of the pod, which results in boring as hell matches where instead of facing the challenges of timing my shots and breaking through on engine pieces I can get away with just half-heartedly mashing whatever I like through the rest of the table's efforts. There's no tension, no work required of the combo player once a hug deck joins the pod. I don't play EDH, nor combo themes, to faceroll. That's boring and not at all compelling, and Group Hug removes all of the excitement of wrestling the control decks and fencing with the rest of the table for an opportunity to go off. The only way for me to prevent my archetype steamrolling over the other players with Hug in the pod is to condescend to everyone by deliberately misplaying, holding back, and so on, and I feel like that's insulting.
Sorry for calling everyone a tryhard spike. I actually never even considered the MtGO players' perspective with this topic, as all my games are in person. I have not run into anyone who hates Group hug in any of the states I've lived either.
To be honest, I haven't personally run my Phelddagrif deck in about 8 months; I usually give it to my friend in person. It's a messed up archetype, but the reason I chose it was my college playgroup was so bad at magic that anything to speed up the game instantly made it better. Everyone in my playgroup loves it, so I guess to each their own. But I did pick up the habit if the randoms at any LGS I go to are okay with group hug when we are selecting our decks.
And if I ever face to face with you guys my policy in my decks are have a few group hug cards so it's fun.
But anyway for when my opponents on group hug, i keep an eye on them to make sure they don't pull any tricks. And if a hug is helping a opponent to much I get rid of it as soon as possible.
I ignore if it helps me a lot.
The first bolded part is counting on you doing the second bolded part. This is how "false hug" decks do their thing - lulling enough players into prioritizing the free resources over dealing with the hugger that by the time the trigger is pulled, it's too late to stop the hugger's endgame.
Actually I just missed 2 sentences
Let the group hugs stay until I don't need them anymore.
And unless the group hug player is winning I get rid of them as soon as possible despite them being useful.
I hate blanket group hug. It makes the power disparity between the strongest and weakest decks that much wider. I was trying a new deck a few weeks back and I basically had to spend my resources destroying the group hug's board state so I wouldn't fall behind everyone else, but even then Tempting Wurm just gave the decks with the best top-end free rein to do whatever. What's the point of building a reliable mana base at that point?
The idea of getting people to the point where their deck can function is one I do like and it's what my Derevi deck is built for: mainly helping the weakest decks get past their early-game mana hurdles, etc.
What I'd like to see is a Temple Bell version of Geier Reach Sanitarium. Mass looting still benefits well-tuned decks to the expense of weaker decks due to certain synergies and recursion, but in the vacuum, it makes a weaker hand better, but it hardly changes a stronger hand.
Play groups and composition will vary. If it's a group with a bunch of newer players who haven't really tuned their decks to work, 1-2 Howling Mine variants will make those games a more enjoyable experience. (And even in this case, it helps the players with the best top-end the most.) But as soon as one player is playing anything remotely tuned, proactive, or combo-centric, that player will acrue more value over time and the dynamic becomes unhealthy.
Again, my Derevi deck was built on the desire to help people get their decks going and get past stumbles on mana while remaining a real threat later in the game. It's possible to build a deck if you want to be helpful that doesn't make it harder for the weaker decks to win. Even a simple "stop the leader from winning" control deck will help the slower decks by extending the game so they have time to do their thing.
Ultimately, it's each players' responsibility to make sure their deck is reliable enough to function to their satisfaction. Played too often hug-type effects (even targeted aid) is a disservice to these players. In my case, I want to create positive play experiences which is a moving target during the course of a game.
I don't mind playing against group hug decks if they're built to win, but I don't like playing against decks built to mess around in multiplayer, whether by group hug, chaos, or some other nonsense.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
UG Arixmethes Combo UGR Wanderer UGB Tasigur Control URB Jeleva Storm RW Gisela Control
But what is really saddening to me in this thread is the lack of "the social aspect of the game" and common sense. If you see someone throw down their Pheldagriff or Kyanios and Tiro of Meletis deck before the game starts, ask them to choose a different deck! Don't chase off someone from the table due to a goofy archetype, just explain that you don't like kingmaker strategies and want to win on your own accord and they will listen.
I take issue with auto assuming K&T decks are Group Hug. They are quickly establishing themselves as great commanders for stax strategies. Sure your opponents will draw cards or drop lands after you destroy their lands but you get to do both.
Yeah symmetrical group hug cards like that, especially the mana doublers, are horrible to see in every EDH game. Last time I saw a hearbeat of spring land it meant the one who came after immediately won the game because he suddenly had 14 mana to start his turn with.
Now, the "I hug everyone but I get more than you do" cards like Kynaios and Tiro and Selvala, those I don't mind. Everyone gets stuff but you get more, thats how hug decks should be built to stay fun.
Also I love Ryperior74 saying "I'll just kill the hug player if I don't need them anymore." Yeah, chances are they already either ruined the game by that point, OR they got enough an advantage that it doesn't matter.
Rule #1 of Group Hug: KILL IT. They'll either poison the game or they'll win because nobody looks at them.
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.
Yeah symmetrical group hug cards like that, especially the mana doublers, are horrible to see in every EDH game. Last time I saw a hearbeat of spring land it meant the one who came after immediately won the game because he suddenly had 14 mana to start his turn with.
This is nothing more than poor threat assessment. It's really no different to me than someone 'geddoning when someone else has a better board state. I find people's absolute hate towards symmetrical advantage interesting and somewhat irrational. I get it if a player has no intention of winning, but every card named in this thread can be used as part of a legitimate strategy.
For example, I've played extensively against a Kami of the Crescent Moon deck loaded with symmetrical group draw. People think it's stupid until they all lose to that deck, which happened often as the deck was well constructed and the pilot knew what he was doing.
However, if someone is playing any deck/strategy that has no intention of winning, then I find that it is perfectly reasonable to get annoyed.
I enjoy playing with/against a group hug deck from time to time. It's pretty fun to see how they enable others at the table and also to see how much you can do with the boosted potential they give.
That being said, from the moment I first saw Zedruu the Greathearted, I was suspicious of that player. The two possibilities here are that they genuinely want to empower players for fun, or they're pulling the strings of the rest of the table to use them as they set up for a win somehow. The more dangerous one always being a possibility means you better be prepared for me to take you out if you're playing this kind of deck. Can't take the chance you're not as benevolent as your cards make you seem.
From a casual standpoint its like "Chaos" a fun little archtype to deal with which can help.
From a competitive standpoint. I think its a waste, I have talked amongst various players and those who sit down and proclaim they have a cedh "Group Hug" just get their eyes rolled at them. They try to help and play politics (which is another dig against it). Its like running though a Lions den with Slim Jims and BBQ sauce in your pocket.
The closest thing I have to a Group Hug deck is Braids, Conjurer Adept. The commander herself is a group hug effect, and I run things like Howling Mine, Mikokoro, Center of the Sea and Temple Bell... but I also have about six extra turn spells, so, y'know, it balances out.
Not to reiterate too much what others have said, but hug cards can have a role in strategies that break their symmetry, like nekusar. I don't really think that counts as group hug though, whether you're playing nekusar or multani or whatever.
I do want to differentiate symmetrical and asymmetrical effects - one of my pet peeves and people who play symmetrical effects like heartbeat of spring and think that, because they're "helping" me, I should be nice to them. Um, no. If I think the symmetrical mana boost is going to help other players more than me (which it probably is, I don't tend to run many big expensive bombs that everyone else seems to love) then I'm absolutely incentivized to kill you. On the other hand, if you're playing asymmetrical hug effects (like phelddagrif, my favorite example) then it depends entirely on how he's being used. Crucially, effects like phelddagrif are a LOT less likely to accidentally give someone the win by fueling their deck, so they're less likely to draw my ire. K&T gets more play recently than good ol' phelddagrif though.
Group hug decks tend to help most the decks that want to ramp, play lots of threats, and run few answers. Which is basically the opposite of what I usually want to do. Hug also tends to increase entropy within a game, which is generally bad for those of us who want the game to be about skill instead of coin flipping. So, group hug tends to be my enemy.
Anyway, in summary and in conclusion, group hug is dumb and sucks, but Phelddagrif is awesome.
I play group hug and chaos (but not in the same deck...), and sometimes approach games with alternate win conditions in mind, such as 'play this new card I just added' or 'the store closes in 30 minutes, let's speed things up' and even 'X hates this deck. Let's play it to spite him/her.' If I actually win in a more traditional sense, all the better.
While some hugs may give the combo players an easy win, these same hugs tend to fill hands with answers to those combos, at least in decks that run answers (a whole other discussion). I play K&T hugs, with a less-developed plan similar to Arkhaic's above. The archetype enables the silliness that makes me enjoy Magic.
To me, grouphug goes against the entire point of magic. Okay, maybe not the entire point. I suppose you can have fun making no attempt, or a feeble attempt, at winning. You are essentially there to prop up the other 3+ players and then, in my experience, "team up" with the player who is not doing well or who targeted you with the least amount of spells/attacks. But regardless, there is a very limited attempt to win. A lot of grouphug players I have inquired to about their position have basically told me some variant of "I don't mind coming in second!" or "As long as I'm not last" when asked why they play what they play.
Grouphug warps the game. In fact, in my experience it makes the game a lot less fun. Your deck's synergies and efficiencies are a lot less noticeable when everyone is being boosted. It is much harder to gain any semblance of a tempo advantage. And thus, in my opinion, many EDH games of mine have been more or less ruined by Grouphug players. To note, I play neither weak decks nor unfair decks, but they are all designed to have a good chance of winning. Very few of them have more than say a 75%+ win rate, and the ones that do I rarely break out. So I would say I play semi-competitively and at times casually. Regardless of what type of deck I am playing, grouphug is unsettling. It either makes my strong deck weaker compared to other players, or makes my weaker decks be able to catch up, but boosts other player's powerful decks so hard that I've lost any chance to compete.
A lot of magic is about the nuance of tempo, and I think that Grouphug fundamentally ruins that. And furthermore, I think that it is silly and somewhat aggravating to play against people in a strategy game that aren't at least putting in SOME effort to win. Akin to playing someone in chess that purposefully leaves his power pieces vulnerable because he's "just having fun" or something.
Anyway, that is my opinion, I would like to hear from others so:
Do you play a group hug deck? Why? And do you make any serious attempt to win?
Do you have group hug decks in your meta? What are they like?
Do you like or dislike playing versus Grouphug decks?
Username: Cabz
Most Used (of many dozens) EDH Decks:
Brago, King Eternal - Stax
Grenzo, Dungeon Warden - Aggro Combo
Wort, the Raidmother - Spellslinger Swarm Control
Animar, Soul of Elements - Tempo Combo
Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder - Spellslinger
Exodia the Forbidden One:
Oona, Queen of the Fae - Combowins.dec
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.
And if I ever face to face with you guys my policy in my decks are have a few group hug cards so it's fun.
But anyway for when my opponents on group hug, i keep an eye on them to make sure they don't pull any tricks. And if a hug is helping a opponent to much I get rid of it as soon as possible.
I ignore if it helps me a lot.
The first bolded part is counting on you doing the second bolded part. This is how "false hug" decks do their thing - lulling enough players into prioritizing the free resources over dealing with the hugger that by the time the trigger is pulled, it's too late to stop the hugger's endgame.
Most Used (of many dozens) EDH Decks:
Brago, King Eternal - Stax
Grenzo, Dungeon Warden - Aggro Combo
Wort, the Raidmother - Spellslinger Swarm Control
Animar, Soul of Elements - Tempo Combo
Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder - Spellslinger
Exodia the Forbidden One:
Oona, Queen of the Fae - Combowins.dec
Selvala, Explorer Returned is very good at this.
I feel the complete opposite of your bolded statement. I believe your tempo argument is justified, but I completely disagree with it. Multiplayer Commander games have HORRIBLE tempo and pacing compared to the rest of the other magic formats, including duel commander; I simply use my group hug deck to shift the game about 6 or 7 turns forward from the start, since flashy plays are what define commander IMO, and my group hug deck enables my pod to do that.
Then again, Group Hug breaks two fundamental rules of magic: helping your opponents, and eliminating probability/risk due to the massive amounts of ramp/ card draw.
PhroX mentioned that Grouphug penalizes good deckbuilding; my response to that statement is that every deck can have a bad day, where unfortunate shuffling and mana screw causes multiple mulligans and an unfun game, a situation we have all been in and have gotten our asses kicked because of it. Group hug effectively ends that problem, giving everyone a decent shot at the game.
But what is really saddening to me in this thread is the lack of "the social aspect of the game" and common sense. If you see someone throw down their Pheldagriff or Kyanios and Tiro of Meletis deck before the game starts, ask them to choose a different deck! Don't chase off someone from the table due to a goofy archetype, just explain that you don't like kingmaker strategies and want to win on your own accord and they will listen.
I'm a combo player looking to cause crazy exponential or geometric progression math nonsense on the stack and field, and my play/brew style ends up somewhere firmly in the middle between average EDH and comp EDH. I play more regularly online than in paper, since it's easier to pop in for a quick pick-up game in the middle of a busy day that way. The social option your saying we've ignored isn't available in that context - you often have to restart the game/lobby to accomplish that, and although I personally am fine switching decks on request (60+ decks all across the casual<>comp scale, finding something I feel like playing for almost any taste is usually easy) many players will just storm out in a tantrum if you even hint at questioning their deck selection.
The problem with the rest of your argument, to me, is that it's not true that Group Hug "effectively ends that problem, giving everyone a decent shot at the game."
Group Hug disproportionately gives the advantage to ME, the combo player, who is better equipped to run away with free resources than most other archetypes. That tempo screw gives me windows of opportunity for victory much more quickly than it accelerates the rest of the pod, which results in boring as hell matches where instead of facing the challenges of timing my shots and breaking through on engine pieces I can get away with just half-heartedly mashing whatever I like through the rest of the table's efforts. There's no tension, no work required of the combo player once a hug deck joins the pod. I don't play EDH, nor combo themes, to faceroll. That's boring and not at all compelling, and Group Hug removes all of the excitement of wrestling the control decks and fencing with the rest of the table for an opportunity to go off. The only way for me to prevent my archetype steamrolling over the other players with Hug in the pod is to condescend to everyone by deliberately misplaying, holding back, and so on, and I feel like that's insulting.
Most Used (of many dozens) EDH Decks:
Brago, King Eternal - Stax
Grenzo, Dungeon Warden - Aggro Combo
Wort, the Raidmother - Spellslinger Swarm Control
Animar, Soul of Elements - Tempo Combo
Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder - Spellslinger
Exodia the Forbidden One:
Oona, Queen of the Fae - Combowins.dec
That having been said, I tend to play a lot of control-oriented decks, so I hate people getting more resources. Group hug is one of the worst matchups for several of my decks simply because they accelerate the rest of the table beyond my ability to respond to threats. I would say that having a group hug deck in the meta warps things in favor of combo or mid-range while penalizing control and aggro. That frustrates me, but it would seem to just be part of the rock-paper-scissors of multiplayer magic, and Wizards has been pushing it as a legitimate strategy.
If there is some unicorn out there who plays group hug just because they like to watch the world burn, then I hate them with all the passion of everyone else on this thread. Maybe I've just been very lucky in my playgroups?
Sorry for calling everyone a tryhard spike. I actually never even considered the MtGO players' perspective with this topic, as all my games are in person. I have not run into anyone who hates Group hug in any of the states I've lived either.
To be honest, I haven't personally run my Phelddagrif deck in about 8 months; I usually give it to my friend in person. It's a messed up archetype, but the reason I chose it was my college playgroup was so bad at magic that anything to speed up the game instantly made it better. Everyone in my playgroup loves it, so I guess to each their own. But I did pick up the habit if the randoms at any LGS I go to are okay with group hug when we are selecting our decks.
Actually I just missed 2 sentences
Let the group hugs stay until I don't need them anymore.
And unless the group hug player is winning I get rid of them as soon as possible despite them being useful.
The idea of getting people to the point where their deck can function is one I do like and it's what my Derevi deck is built for: mainly helping the weakest decks get past their early-game mana hurdles, etc.
What I'd like to see is a Temple Bell version of Geier Reach Sanitarium. Mass looting still benefits well-tuned decks to the expense of weaker decks due to certain synergies and recursion, but in the vacuum, it makes a weaker hand better, but it hardly changes a stronger hand.
Play groups and composition will vary. If it's a group with a bunch of newer players who haven't really tuned their decks to work, 1-2 Howling Mine variants will make those games a more enjoyable experience. (And even in this case, it helps the players with the best top-end the most.) But as soon as one player is playing anything remotely tuned, proactive, or combo-centric, that player will acrue more value over time and the dynamic becomes unhealthy.
Again, my Derevi deck was built on the desire to help people get their decks going and get past stumbles on mana while remaining a real threat later in the game. It's possible to build a deck if you want to be helpful that doesn't make it harder for the weaker decks to win. Even a simple "stop the leader from winning" control deck will help the slower decks by extending the game so they have time to do their thing.
Ultimately, it's each players' responsibility to make sure their deck is reliable enough to function to their satisfaction. Played too often hug-type effects (even targeted aid) is a disservice to these players. In my case, I want to create positive play experiences which is a moving target during the course of a game.
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
UGR Wanderer
UGB Tasigur Control
URB Jeleva Storm
RW Gisela Control
Agreed, you shouldn't assume deck archetype solely from the commander. The K & T deck I built contains a small 'group hug', including Kami of the Crescent Moon, Dictate of Karametra, Rites of Flourishing, Heartbeat of Spring, and Ghirapur Orrery, but it is built to lull opponents into playing their big threats... So that I can take them. Magus of the Unseen, Daring Thief, Cytoplast Manipulator, Sower of Temptation, Willow Satyr, Beguiler of Wills, Dominus of Fealty, Empress Galina, Rubinia Soulsinger... the list goes on and on. Match them with a defensive suite of Propaganda, Ghostly Prison, Dissipation Field, Gwafa Hazid, Profiteer, and a sacrifice suite of Brion Stoutarm, Greater Good, Ashnod's Altar and High Market etc. and I'm sitting in Valuetown.
I ramp you, you play stuff. I steal your stuff, and eat it when it's no longer useful. Problem?
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
Now, the "I hug everyone but I get more than you do" cards like Kynaios and Tiro and Selvala, those I don't mind. Everyone gets stuff but you get more, thats how hug decks should be built to stay fun.
Also I love Ryperior74 saying "I'll just kill the hug player if I don't need them anymore." Yeah, chances are they already either ruined the game by that point, OR they got enough an advantage that it doesn't matter.
Rule #1 of Group Hug: KILL IT. They'll either poison the game or they'll win because nobody looks at them.
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.
This is nothing more than poor threat assessment. It's really no different to me than someone 'geddoning when someone else has a better board state. I find people's absolute hate towards symmetrical advantage interesting and somewhat irrational. I get it if a player has no intention of winning, but every card named in this thread can be used as part of a legitimate strategy.
For example, I've played extensively against a Kami of the Crescent Moon deck loaded with symmetrical group draw. People think it's stupid until they all lose to that deck, which happened often as the deck was well constructed and the pilot knew what he was doing.
However, if someone is playing any deck/strategy that has no intention of winning, then I find that it is perfectly reasonable to get annoyed.
That being said, from the moment I first saw Zedruu the Greathearted, I was suspicious of that player. The two possibilities here are that they genuinely want to empower players for fun, or they're pulling the strings of the rest of the table to use them as they set up for a win somehow. The more dangerous one always being a possibility means you better be prepared for me to take you out if you're playing this kind of deck. Can't take the chance you're not as benevolent as your cards make you seem.
From a competitive standpoint. I think its a waste, I have talked amongst various players and those who sit down and proclaim they have a cedh "Group Hug" just get their eyes rolled at them. They try to help and play politics (which is another dig against it). Its like running though a Lions den with Slim Jims and BBQ sauce in your pocket.
I do want to differentiate symmetrical and asymmetrical effects - one of my pet peeves and people who play symmetrical effects like heartbeat of spring and think that, because they're "helping" me, I should be nice to them. Um, no. If I think the symmetrical mana boost is going to help other players more than me (which it probably is, I don't tend to run many big expensive bombs that everyone else seems to love) then I'm absolutely incentivized to kill you. On the other hand, if you're playing asymmetrical hug effects (like phelddagrif, my favorite example) then it depends entirely on how he's being used. Crucially, effects like phelddagrif are a LOT less likely to accidentally give someone the win by fueling their deck, so they're less likely to draw my ire. K&T gets more play recently than good ol' phelddagrif though.
Group hug decks tend to help most the decks that want to ramp, play lots of threats, and run few answers. Which is basically the opposite of what I usually want to do. Hug also tends to increase entropy within a game, which is generally bad for those of us who want the game to be about skill instead of coin flipping. So, group hug tends to be my enemy.
Anyway, in summary and in conclusion, group hug is dumb and sucks, but Phelddagrif is awesome.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
While some hugs may give the combo players an easy win, these same hugs tend to fill hands with answers to those combos, at least in decks that run answers (a whole other discussion). I play K&T hugs, with a less-developed plan similar to Arkhaic's above. The archetype enables the silliness that makes me enjoy Magic.
My favorite asymmetrical cards are Heartwood Storyteller and Well of Ideas.
Cheers!
Krichaiushii on PucaTrade.