The answer is very simple: You cannot fix this problem.
The truth is the ban list does not protect casual players against combo players. Therefore, once a combo player shows up in your meta, the only "solution" you have is to quit playing EDH with that player.
I've had a player combo on 3-4...so I said, "Thank you, now we'll play for 2nd place."
I need to single this out so we can talk about it because I am thankful as **** that no one I play with plays like this because it is the most childish, arrogant, disrespectful behavior I have ever read about. Okay now we are going to play the real game, the game that matters but only if someone wins in a valid method.
I've dealt with players like that. The irony here is that they are more obsessed with winning than the "dirty combo players."
Yeah, this kind of attitude is something I've seen in other games too - it occurred at times in the Warhammer 40k community back when I used to play (not the play on obviously as it's a 1-on-1, but the "casuals" getting really unpleasant about you winning) - but the people who are most concerned about who won or lost the game, and how the game was won or lost, are usually among those that shout the loudest about how "casual" and "not competitive" they are. If they lose the game to something they don't like, they get really pissed off. Conversely, when I'm playing EDH against "competitive" players, the response from people upon loosing, no matter how it happened, is "you win, well played, now lets shuffle up and have another game" - which strikes me as a far more casual approach to the game....
That's not to say all casual players are like this - the vast majority are not - but more often than not, when I've come across someone getting really angry about how a game played out, or suggesting things like playing on because they didn't like a win, it was from someone who claimed to be casual (hint, if you're acting like that, you're not taking the game casually).
That "we'll keep going without you" happens to me a lot. Like, y'all tried ramping into dragons instead of interacting at all... not my fault I was able to
take infinite turns on turn 4. Normally those players are the type to complain about the "spirit of the format" (tf even is that) and so on.
I really don't get the "play for second" nonsense either. At least politely declining a fast combo player from joining your slow paced battle cruiser group is not a one-two punch of wasting his time and also demeaning him.
Yeah, this kind of attitude is something I've seen in other games too - it occurred at times in the Warhammer 40k community back when I used to play (not the play on obviously as it's a 1-on-1, but the "casuals" getting really unpleasant about you winning) - but the people who are most concerned about who won or lost the game, and how the game was won or lost, are usually among those that shout the loudest about how "casual" and "not competitive" they are. If they lose the game to something they don't like, they get really pissed off. Conversely, when I'm playing EDH against "competitive" players, the response from people upon loosing, no matter how it happened, is "you win, well played, now lets shuffle up and have another game" - which strikes me as a far more casual approach to the game....
That's not to say all casual players are like this - the vast majority are not - but more often than not, when I've come across someone getting really angry about how a game played out, or suggesting things like playing on because they didn't like a win, it was from someone who claimed to be casual (hint, if you're acting like that, you're not taking the game casually).
In general I see the divide in players as both on the "casual-competitive" axis and the "young-mature" axis. It's the young/casual section of players that have strict, unwritten rules of how you're allowed to win. Competitive players tend to be in it for the skill challenge and mature/casual players can settle things like adults. And don't misunderstand me, I mean "young" as in emotional age. I've had a 30+ year old guy throw a tantrum because his G/W dragons deck lost to my 100% non-combo Maelstrom Wanderer deck (believe me, it is hard to not accidentally build a combo into that deck).
I can't help but feel Eldrazi ramp is just casual Commander.
Eldrazi with annihilator still die to removal. Usually not red or green removal, but removal. The only two Eldrazi with annihilator that really have some protection from removal are
And of course, anything with annihilator is going to be expensive. Land destruction is a thing. You can also just create a couple tokens every turn.
TBH, any halfway decent Stax deck can stop Eldrazi just by going after the Eldrazi deck's manabase (and exiling them from the graveyard so they can't be reanimated, of course). In fact, I'm usually having this conversation with players playing BFCs complaining about Stax.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
I personally just stopped attending edh when the players became too obsessed with winning instead of having a fun game and talking.
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
There really isn't a solution other than to find like minded players, which is often a continuous search because as collections grow most people refuse to power down decks, only have them get stronger.
That "we'll keep going without you" happens to me a lot. Like, y'all tried ramping into dragons instead of interacting at all... not my fault I was able to
take infinite turns on turn 4. Normally those players are the type to complain about the "spirit of the format" (tf even is that) and so on.
Your deck will probably beat their deck 100% of the time.
Just leave the table. You weren't playing a game in the first place, they had no way to affect the outcome.
I personally just stopped attending edh when the players became too obsessed with winning instead of having a fun game and talking.
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
There really isn't a solution other than to find like minded players, which is often a continuous search because as collections grow most people refuse to power down decks, only have them get stronger.
I agree. In my hometown I've made friends with a group of like-minded players who I enjoy Commander with. We talk, kick back, enjoy long fun games that are just players messing around until someone wins and start again. In Miami, I had a horrible time and stopped attending EDH because it was nothing but a Legacy version of commander that felt just as bad as Yugioh.
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
Have you ever played Vintage with a deck of equal power level as your opponent? Vintage is magic at its best, unless you are playing with uneven deck power levels. IE a low tier standard legal deck vs a fully powered tier one vintage deck. But when things are balanced, it's a lot of fun to play.
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
Have you ever played Vintage with a deck of equal power level as your opponent? Vintage is magic at its best, unless you are playing with uneven deck power levels. IE a low tier standard legal deck vs a fully powered tier one vintage deck. But when things are balanced, it's a lot of fun to play.
No, it's an awful format that frequently results in magic being unable to be played.
Dredge mulling for bazaar
Shops playing 3 spheres and you never getting to cast a spell
Mentor decks getting card advantage over you and never letting you resolve a meaningful threat
Just because the decks are strong doesn't make the game good. I find it's the exact opposite. The shops player dropping 3 spheres then a clock then more spheres for example, or a dredge deck mulling to bazaar, it just highlights all the ways magic is awful as a game.
I personally just stopped attending edh when the players became too obsessed with winning instead of having a fun game and talking.
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
There really isn't a solution other than to find like minded players, which is often a continuous search because as collections grow most people refuse to power down decks, only have them get stronger.
I agree. In my hometown I've made friends with a group of like-minded players who I enjoy Commander with. We talk, kick back, enjoy long fun games that are just players messing around until someone wins and start again. In Miami, I had a horrible time and stopped attending EDH because it was nothing but a Legacy version of commander that felt just as bad as Yugioh.
I have a group of the former that falls into the later.
The one thing I will agree with is generally people in groups that play together enough change decks and power them up according to what people they plat with a lot are doing, and that isn't a bad thing necessarily.
I feel like the people who complain about losing in EDH to stronger decks are the same people who got trophies for losing as kids.
If you do not like losing against the same people, try playing with different people, don't try and coerce them to weaken their decks for your sake, unless they are a close friend, but that's a different scenario.
I feel like the people who complain about losing in EDH to stronger decks are the same people who got trophies for losing as kids.
If you do not like losing against the same people, try playing with different people, don't try and coerce them to weaken their decks for your sake, unless they are a close friend, but that's a different scenario.
lol this is a casual game. Even those who get a rush out of winning are just as bad. Even then, winning is relative in EDH. I get more fun flashing in a surprise Mechanized Production on a Thopter in Silas Renn than destroying everyone on turn 4 with Azami infinite turns into Mind Over Matter Lab Maniac.
I personally just stopped attending edh when the players became too obsessed with winning instead of having a fun game and talking.
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
There really isn't a solution other than to find like minded players, which is often a continuous search because as collections grow most people refuse to power down decks, only have them get stronger.
I agree. In my hometown I've made friends with a group of like-minded players who I enjoy Commander with. We talk, kick back, enjoy long fun games that are just players messing around until someone wins and start again. In Miami, I had a horrible time and stopped attending EDH because it was nothing but a Legacy version of commander that felt just as bad as Yugioh.
I have a group of the former that falls into the later.
The one thing I will agree with is generally people in groups that play together enough change decks and power them up according to what people they plat with a lot are doing, and that isn't a bad thing necessarily.
You should be able to see why playing a sphere effect every turn starting from the first turn is bad gameplay on your own.
I personally just stopped attending edh when the players became too obsessed with winning instead of having a fun game and talking.
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
There really isn't a solution other than to find like minded players, which is often a continuous search because as collections grow most people refuse to power down decks, only have them get stronger.
I agree. In my hometown I've made friends with a group of like-minded players who I enjoy Commander with. We talk, kick back, enjoy long fun games that are just players messing around until someone wins and start again. In Miami, I had a horrible time and stopped attending EDH because it was nothing but a Legacy version of commander that felt just as bad as Yugioh.
I have a group of the former that falls into the later.
The one thing I will agree with is generally people in groups that play together enough change decks and power them up according to what people they plat with a lot are doing, and that isn't a bad thing necessarily.
You should be able to see why playing a sphere effect every turn starting from the first turn is bad gameplay on your own.
As someone who has had fun playing against a first turn Trini in Commander, you are probably talking to the wrong person.
I feel like the people who complain about losing in EDH to stronger decks are the same people who got trophies for losing as kids.
If you do not like losing against the same people, try playing with different people, don't try and coerce them to weaken their decks for your sake, unless they are a close friend, but that's a different scenario.
lol this is a casual game. Even those who get a rush out of winning are just as bad. Even then, winning is relative in EDH. I get more fun flashing in a surprise Mechanized Production on a Thopter in Silas Renn than destroying everyone on turn 4 with Azami infinite turns into Mind Over Matter Lab Maniac.
I am not good enough to do anything like that, I just enjoy getting out of my apartment and seeing people other than those I work with. I couldnt care less if I get beat every time.
That is obvious it is a format where you can have multiples of the same stuff.
What I am saying is you are just describing something you think is not fun and extrapolating that to the entire game and I disagree. You also talk about these strategies in a vacuum like it is impossible for the other deck to not lose to them.
That is obvious it is a format where you can have multiples of the same stuff.
What I am saying is you are just describing something you think is not fun and extrapolating that to the entire game and I disagree. You also talk about these strategies in a vacuum like it is impossible for the other deck to not lose to them.
It pretty much IS impossible to win against these strategies in many cases.
You either have the few specific answer cards like a turn one FOW, or you lose. That's what it takes to be successful in vintage. The deck needs to be oppressively strong and nearly impossible to beat.
That's competitive magic. It's not a good game to play competitively.
I feel like the people who complain about losing in EDH to stronger decks are the same people who got trophies for losing as kids.
If you do not like losing against the same people, try playing with different people, don't try and coerce them to weaken their decks for your sake, unless they are a close friend, but that's a different scenario.
lol this is a casual game. Even those who get a rush out of winning are just as bad. Even then, winning is relative in EDH. I get more fun flashing in a surprise Mechanized Production on a Thopter in Silas Renn than destroying everyone on turn 4 with Azami infinite turns into Mind Over Matter Lab Maniac.
I am not good enough to do anything like that, I just enjoy getting out of my apartment and seeing people other than those I work with. I couldnt care less if I get beat every time.
Same for me. But because it's casual and chatting, having a good time (while making good plays, but ultimately goofing off) it's more fun to have a long enough game making unique moves and having flashy or quirky wins that are on theme or impressive. At least for me. How you win matters more in EDH than whether or not you do, or how fast, or how total.
I feel like the people who complain about losing in EDH to stronger decks are the same people who got trophies for losing as kids.
If you do not like losing against the same people, try playing with different people, don't try and coerce them to weaken their decks for your sake, unless they are a close friend, but that's a different scenario.
lol this is a casual game. Even those who get a rush out of winning are just as bad. Even then, winning is relative in EDH. I get more fun flashing in a surprise Mechanized Production on a Thopter in Silas Renn than destroying everyone on turn 4 with Azami infinite turns into Mind Over Matter Lab Maniac.
I am not good enough to do anything like that, I just enjoy getting out of my apartment and seeing people other than those I work with. I couldnt care less if I get beat every time.
Same for me. But because it's casual and chatting, having a good time (while making good plays, but ultimately goofing off) it's more fun to have a long enough game making unique moves and having flashy or quirky wins that are on theme or impressive. At least for me. How you win matters more in EDH than whether or not you do, or how fast, or how total.
In my opinion having a fun game has nothing to do with winning or losing, so I do not get bent out of shape when people beat me, as long as they follow the below criteria:
1. Have showered recently
2. Are not using too many proxies (I played a guy not too long ago who had his entire deck (sans basic lands) that were proxies printed off of a computer
3. Take your turns swiftly
4. Understand how your deck's combo works so we do not spend time trying to figure it out or googling card rules and information.
(I played a guy the other day who broke rules 2,3, and 4 all at once)
That "we'll keep going without you" happens to me a lot. Like, y'all tried ramping into dragons instead of interacting at all... not my fault I was able to take infinite turns on turn 4. Normally those players are the type to complain about the "spirit of the format" (tf even is that) and so on.
Not your fault? Whose deck were you playing then. I assume you made the deck yourself.
The spirit of the format is explained clearly by the EDH-RC if you'd cared to actually look into the format you are playing.
If people do that all the time it's a clear indicator they don't really want to play with you but just allow your presence to be polite.
I really don't get the "play for second" nonsense either. At least politely declining a fast combo player from joining your slow paced battle cruiser group is not a one-two punch of wasting his time and also demeaning him.
People don't always warn you that they will play a highly competitive combo-deck.
And for everyone else I will copy a post I've read on Reddit:
All wincons have, effectively, a "check"; when you present the wincon, you go around the table and ask "Do you have a check for this wincon? If not, I win." What usually happens when a playgroup bans a wincon can be summarized as "the check for said wincon is not easily presentable in this meta", usually because the check is either limited among decks or because the wincon presents itself suddenly enough that any check that would normally occur cannot due to timing or speed.
So, to take an example (not saying if I would ban this or not), lets say Food Chain in Prossh. Well, first off, the wincon is an enchantment, which limits the amount of removal. The win condition wins almost immediately without passing the turn, since it's trivial to find a way to win with infinite tokens and infinite mana. The components are the commander, which is always available, a single enchantment, and some method of utilizing infinite tokens and infinite mana which is trivial. So, in order to respond to this wincon, you need an instant speed enchantment removal spell and you have no idea when this wincon will come, so it's difficult to hoard a response.
Why is this not fun for some people? It's because when a check/response required is narrow enough, it feels like 90% of the responder's cards don't matter. It feels like, rather than playing a widespread strategy or finding synergies, it feels like you're just rolling dice to see if you happened to draw the correct card with the correct timing. One of the biggest pet peeves of players is the feeling that they wasted their time playing or building their decks. Certain wincons make it so that all of the focus is on a very narrow section of a responder's deck, which plays into the feeling that they wasted their time. For example, "why does it matter that I built this sweet, niche tribal deck if the only thing that matters is whether I drew Krosan Grip at this specific moment?" or "I spent 15 turns struggling to build up a board through feuds and mass board wipes only to get suddenly robbed with a combo out of nowhere."
Obviously, this will depend on people's tastes, but that's my general theory on why people heavily dislike certain wincons.
If all you want to do is player 4 games of goldfish while sitting at a single table, I don't know what to tell you. Sure, it's great to see your deck do its thing, but magic is a game with a set of end points. If you're unwilling to acknowledge that player has reached that goal, how is that any different to my choosing to ignore your removal spell, attack on my planeswalker, etc if I don't like it?
Immature actions like that ruin the fun of the game just as much.
If all you want to do is player 4 games of goldfish while sitting at a single table, I don't know what to tell you. Sure, it's great to see your deck do its thing, but magic is a game with a set of end points. If you're unwilling to acknowledge that player has reached that goal, how is that any different to my choosing to ignore your removal spell, attack on my planeswalker, etc if I don't like it?
Immature actions like that ruin the fun of the game just as much.
That's ironic.
Because 9 out of 10 combo-decks are the prime example of goldfishing.
If all you want to do is player 4 games of goldfish while sitting at a single table, I don't know what to tell you. Sure, it's great to see your deck do its thing, but magic is a game with a set of end points. If you're unwilling to acknowledge that player has reached that goal, how is that any different to my choosing to ignore your removal spell, attack on my planeswalker, etc if I don't like it?
Immature actions like that ruin the fun of the game just as much.
That's ironic.
Because 9 out of 10 combo-decks are the prime example of goldfishing.
Most dedicated combo decks I've seen run more interaction that the typical "casual" deck. And they have to. They're designed to deal with other equally fast decks - both in terms of stopping their opponents comboing off, and fighting through their opponents interaction to win themselves.
Now, to be fair, I am coming at the from the cEDH perspective of building such decks to play against their equivalents. I have both "casual" and "competitive" decks but I generally limit to playing each deck against decks on a similar level to them. Playing a cEDH deck against decks not designed to compete would indeed be rather goldfishy, but that's just seal clubbing, not being competitive, and I'd agree that people who knowingly play a top tier competitive deck like this are utter douchebags.
I should also note, that winning with a combo is by no means a sign of a "competitive" deck. You can have perfectly casual EDH decks, full of archetypical EDH cards that aim for 8-10 turn or even longer games that happen to use an infinite combo as one of their wincons. I can't see how winning like that is any different from, say, attacking for lethal combat damage on those turns.
I've dealt with players like that. The irony here is that they are more obsessed with winning than the "dirty combo players."
That's not to say all casual players are like this - the vast majority are not - but more often than not, when I've come across someone getting really angry about how a game played out, or suggesting things like playing on because they didn't like a win, it was from someone who claimed to be casual (hint, if you're acting like that, you're not taking the game casually).
take infinite turns on turn 4. Normally those players are the type to complain about the "spirit of the format" (tf even is that) and so on.
Check out my competitive Ezuri, Claw of Progress primer!
In general I see the divide in players as both on the "casual-competitive" axis and the "young-mature" axis. It's the young/casual section of players that have strict, unwritten rules of how you're allowed to win. Competitive players tend to be in it for the skill challenge and mature/casual players can settle things like adults. And don't misunderstand me, I mean "young" as in emotional age. I've had a 30+ year old guy throw a tantrum because his G/W dragons deck lost to my 100% non-combo Maelstrom Wanderer deck (believe me, it is hard to not accidentally build a combo into that deck).
Eldrazi with annihilator still die to removal. Usually not red or green removal, but removal. The only two Eldrazi with annihilator that really have some protection from removal are
Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre: Standard indestructible. Still dies to Gild, Tragic Slip, Swords to Plowshares, and Grave Pact, and can be countered.
Emrakul, the Aeons Torn: Banned, but since I have a word count to fill, I should mention that Emmy still dies to Wrath of God/Damnation, Spine of Ish Sah, Nevinyrral's Disk, Nekrataal, Notorious Assassin, Royal Assassin...The biggest problem is her Time Walk works like a pseudohaste. (And in fact, using Cloudstone Curio to bounce her for infinite turns is why she's banned, so, the pseudohaste is getting off light.)
And of course, anything with annihilator is going to be expensive. Land destruction is a thing. You can also just create a couple tokens every turn.
TBH, any halfway decent Stax deck can stop Eldrazi just by going after the Eldrazi deck's manabase (and exiling them from the graveyard so they can't be reanimated, of course). In fact, I'm usually having this conversation with players playing BFCs complaining about Stax.
On phasing:
It's substantially more expensive to play competitively like that AND the game is just worse, like how vintage format produces some of the worst gameplay magic has to offer.
There really isn't a solution other than to find like minded players, which is often a continuous search because as collections grow most people refuse to power down decks, only have them get stronger.
Your deck will probably beat their deck 100% of the time.
Just leave the table. You weren't playing a game in the first place, they had no way to affect the outcome.
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
Have you ever played Vintage with a deck of equal power level as your opponent? Vintage is magic at its best, unless you are playing with uneven deck power levels. IE a low tier standard legal deck vs a fully powered tier one vintage deck. But when things are balanced, it's a lot of fun to play.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
No, it's an awful format that frequently results in magic being unable to be played.
Dredge mulling for bazaar
Shops playing 3 spheres and you never getting to cast a spell
Mentor decks getting card advantage over you and never letting you resolve a meaningful threat
Just because the decks are strong doesn't make the game good. I find it's the exact opposite. The shops player dropping 3 spheres then a clock then more spheres for example, or a dredge deck mulling to bazaar, it just highlights all the ways magic is awful as a game.
I have a group of the former that falls into the later.
The one thing I will agree with is generally people in groups that play together enough change decks and power them up according to what people they plat with a lot are doing, and that isn't a bad thing necessarily.
If you do not like losing against the same people, try playing with different people, don't try and coerce them to weaken their decks for your sake, unless they are a close friend, but that's a different scenario.
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
You should be able to see why playing a sphere effect every turn starting from the first turn is bad gameplay on your own.
As someone who has had fun playing against a first turn Trini in Commander, you are probably talking to the wrong person.
Then their clock wasn't the same as the vintage decks.
You don't get to play spells when the vintage deck does it.
I am not good enough to do anything like that, I just enjoy getting out of my apartment and seeing people other than those I work with. I couldnt care less if I get beat every time.
What I am saying is you are just describing something you think is not fun and extrapolating that to the entire game and I disagree. You also talk about these strategies in a vacuum like it is impossible for the other deck to not lose to them.
It pretty much IS impossible to win against these strategies in many cases.
You either have the few specific answer cards like a turn one FOW, or you lose. That's what it takes to be successful in vintage. The deck needs to be oppressively strong and nearly impossible to beat.
That's competitive magic. It's not a good game to play competitively.
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
In my opinion having a fun game has nothing to do with winning or losing, so I do not get bent out of shape when people beat me, as long as they follow the below criteria:
1. Have showered recently
2. Are not using too many proxies (I played a guy not too long ago who had his entire deck (sans basic lands) that were proxies printed off of a computer
3. Take your turns swiftly
4. Understand how your deck's combo works so we do not spend time trying to figure it out or googling card rules and information.
(I played a guy the other day who broke rules 2,3, and 4 all at once)
Not your fault? Whose deck were you playing then. I assume you made the deck yourself.
The spirit of the format is explained clearly by the EDH-RC if you'd cared to actually look into the format you are playing.
If people do that all the time it's a clear indicator they don't really want to play with you but just allow your presence to be polite.
People don't always warn you that they will play a highly competitive combo-deck.
And for everyone else I will copy a post I've read on Reddit:
Immature actions like that ruin the fun of the game just as much.
Because 9 out of 10 combo-decks are the prime example of goldfishing.
Most dedicated combo decks I've seen run more interaction that the typical "casual" deck. And they have to. They're designed to deal with other equally fast decks - both in terms of stopping their opponents comboing off, and fighting through their opponents interaction to win themselves.
Now, to be fair, I am coming at the from the cEDH perspective of building such decks to play against their equivalents. I have both "casual" and "competitive" decks but I generally limit to playing each deck against decks on a similar level to them. Playing a cEDH deck against decks not designed to compete would indeed be rather goldfishy, but that's just seal clubbing, not being competitive, and I'd agree that people who knowingly play a top tier competitive deck like this are utter douchebags.
I should also note, that winning with a combo is by no means a sign of a "competitive" deck. You can have perfectly casual EDH decks, full of archetypical EDH cards that aim for 8-10 turn or even longer games that happen to use an infinite combo as one of their wincons. I can't see how winning like that is any different from, say, attacking for lethal combat damage on those turns.