I'm a competitive combo player with two decks (Ezuri Claw of Progress, Bruse Tarl/Silas Renn) and I always try to win by or on turn ~4. The fault is not with the combo player for building a consistent deck. The fault is with the casual players who are unwilling to include even a modicum of early-game interaction to disrupt combo players. You need to include answers for different archetypes so you have some chance of winning against all of them, or run a hyper-linear combo deck that forces others to interact with it.
Until the turn I untap with Bruse, the deck is doing nothing absurd - why not cast a Lightning Bolt or Abrade targeting Bruse so I can't one-shot you? Or maybe blow up one of my signets to keep me off my mana? If I'm playing Ezuri, why aren't you casting one of those removal spells targeting him immediately? I get it, most non-competitive players want to do something splashy and cool, but you still have to adhere to general deckbuilding principles in EDH/Commander - one of which is "how do I not die?" Cut down on the number of unnecessary bad creatures in your deck, add more interaction, lower your curve, and then your complaints about losing to combo *might* have merit.
While i can win that early It is usually sometime after turn 10 that I pull it off. Of course, if 3 opponents (Heck even 2) cannot disrupt you by turn 10, i feel you deserve a win. Combo is really not much different from playing Superfriends and getting a few emblems off. if tehy cannot stop you, 90% of the time it is their fault.
My buddy who pays linvala is actually pretty good at shutting my combos down.
To put it bluntly, infinite combos are one of those things that fall into the bucket of alternate win conditions that read "I have won the game, but haven't actually won the game until I declare or do X." It's basically like Annihilator and eldrazi titans of Zendikar: You know you can answer it, but unless you can answer it the game is basically over and there is no point to continuing to play. The trouble is a number of people get sucked up in the moment of glory and want to drag it out, thus killing the entire experience.
Let me put it this way: If someone lands Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre in a four player commander game, the first thought is "Oh, if we exile that we are okay". The same situation happens if someone lands that final piece to some infinite combo like a Phyrexian Altar or a Purphoros, God of the Forge. The reality is the game just ended unless somehow, someone in one of their singleton decks managed to pull a single card that happens to do just what they need. With minimal tutors, one would need to be spending a lot of slots on removal to guarantee they can answer one of those game ending threats. Commander is removal heavy, but against indestructible that tends to require a special type of removal to deal with. Namely, exile effects, enchantment effects like Song of the Dryads, or really good bounce effects like Condemn or Reflector Mage.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
This story just make me want to hate combo even more. Basically this terrible player with this terrible deck was almost able to win against a table because combo are easy mode.
Now this remind me that almost the same thing happened to my playgroup a lot of time ago. A terrible player was, well, terrible, and couldn't make a deck as strong and as consistent as ours (and we are not playing competitively, mind you) and was too arrogant to accept advices. At the end he just put Triskaeus and some tutors into his deck and suddenly his win rate boosted up from 5% to 30%.
And people here ask why combos are hated and refute to listen reasons
One combo should not be winning games. As I have said I run multiple ways to combo off, but they don't all require the same cards. Sometime a simple Rite of replication kicked on Vela is enough.
If you have no disruption for one card (two if he is not run mickey as his general) You deserve to lose. Trikaeus is easy to deal with. Name a color and I can tell you how to deal with it.
A lot of players don't play enough instant-speed removal. Take Food Chain Prossh. Once you have infinite mana, just cast Comet Storm, Earthquake, Hurricane, Pestilence, Exsanguinate...Or use the infinite tokens with Blood Artist. Or use Coat of Arms and something that grants haste. That takes all of one turn.
So, essentially, when dealing with some infinite combos, no matter what color you're in, you're playing blue. (In that your removal spells are more like counterspells.) It's gotten so bad that I make a rule not to consider sorcery-speed removal "removal".
Fortunately, you have a few options. You can use instant-speed removal or counters, or you can (the other thing a lot of new players gripe about) play Stax, setting up answers to infinite combos (Taxing is pretty effective, though you need to make Prossh cost at least 6 more, and most taxes only tax noncreature spells because creturz mattur.) before they're played. But I say ¿por qué no los dos?
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!
A lot of players don't play enough instant-speed removal. Take Food Chain Prossh. Once you have infinite mana, just cast Comet Storm, Earthquake, Hurricane, Pestilence, Exsanguinate...Or use the infinite tokens with Blood Artist. Or use Coat of Arms and something that grants haste. That takes all of one turn.
So, essentially, when dealing with some infinite combos, no matter what color you're in, you're playing blue. (In that your removal spells are more like counterspells.) It's gotten so bad that I make a rule not to consider sorcery-speed removal "removal".
Fortunately, you have a few options. You can use instant-speed removal or counters, or you can (the other thing a lot of new players gripe about) play Stax, setting up answers to infinite combos (Taxing is pretty effective, though you need to make Prossh cost at least 6 more, and most taxes only tax noncreature spells because creturz mattur.) before they're played. But I say ¿por qué no los dos?
Earthquake and hurricane, you are killing yourself.
But i get what you are saying.
I'm not generally opposed to infinite combos in multiplayer commander. My group skews toward blue and we know what decks have infinite combos. As such, we know how to prepare to combos and someone often has a response.
My real complaint is with hyper-consistent decks. If you play a "respond-or-win" card, that's fine. If you can reliably (70%+) draw, revive, or search for another "respond-or-win" card every 2-3 rounds, though, that's where things get annoying on my end. For that reason, repetitive recursion engines (meren, emeria, genesis) and the redundant beaters of a well-made Xanagos deck bothers me more than many decks with combos.
The major problem is the same kind of problem that eventually pops up: everyone wants something different out of EDH. Infinite combos can mean a lot of things to a play group but generally, the biggest thing I find is that the introduction of infinite combos can spark an arms race. Everyone starts scrambling to upgrade their decks and the group will stop being casual. And by upgrade, I mean that everyone goes and starts getting their own combos. Understandably, not everyone is okay with this thought or what it will do to their group.
Also, while infinite combos can be dealt outside of running them yourself, the alternatives are not things that a lot of people want to do. People don't just want to gang up on the guy running combos every game. That will just make them start saying "Why don't we just get rid of this guy/this deck so we can play how we want?". It makes the combo player into an unwelcome obstacle to their fun. The other method would be tuning up their decks in general. Running more removal, more draw, overall more efficient cards. However, that commonly makes people feel like that their changing their decks to from what they want to play to what they have to play in order to stand a chance.
Also, money. Money can be a big factor in all of this. Not everyone has money to tune up their decks how they like. So when they face off against someone who does have a deck worth hundreds to thousands of $$$, it just rubs salt in the wound that they can't play at a level they wish to.
But all of this is highly relative. For just as many people who complain of infinite combos, there are just as many who shrug and say "So? It's just part of the game.". It all just depends on the players, their situation, their feelings and their outlook.
I enjoy having giant creatures to beat people to death with. I find that combo decks are often quite non interactive and linear which is not what I play EDH for.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH BRGKresh the BloodbraidedBRG, A box of lands and ideas.
Modern: RG Titanshift. A deck made of cards too stupid for EDH.
Retired: Lots. More than I feel you should suffer through or I should type out.
That's why. It's a very shabby way to treat your playgroup. Do it enough times, they'll eventually ask you to stop coming. When they do, don't blame them.
You have a point, i did initially stop aiming to play with Evil Adam for this exact reason. His deck was just too string and no fun to play against. And it is not even his deck that did it, it is Derevi. I tunnel vision derevi players thanks to Evil Adam. WotC made a broken creature and then reprinted it in Commader anthologies. Derevi is broken. EXTREMELY broken.He should have the tap/untap or put into play. Not both.
I play combo decks and I lose to aggro decks, control decks, tempo decks, stax decks and other combo decks there is a lot of oversimplification in this thread that is frustrating to read but oh well I have a rather large group of people I play with on the regular with a bunch of different styles of deck, which reading though a lot of these posts makes me all the more happy because some of the decks I play against would make some of you very angry on the regular.
I play a lot of infinite combos due to the need to be competitive. Why bring a bow and arrow tech deck to an assault rifle tech deck fight? I see so many bringing group hug, plain aggro, or a deck with a single cool combo and they complain when they loose. They lost because they wanted to win in their own race. The race the the rest of us play is NASCAR speed while they are riding bicycles. What did they expect? I paid $5 to win and bring my top game, thus it's a disservice to them for me to play on handicap. They are crappy decks and cards to match. I don't care if the cards you play do X or Y, will it win? If no, go play casual somewhere else. I am seriously tired of hearing constant complaining about fairness in combos as they want to play in their constructed sandbox on their comfort to win level. What's worse to me is that it's the older crowd. Grow up! This is not high school anymore. News flash, there are no cheat codes in magic for them to win with ease.
"Welcome....to the real world"
If your question was geared towards: 'why, philosophically, people hate combos?' The answer was addressed on this thread: because when someone wins with a combo it 'feels' as if they didn't deserve to win. They had nothing going on, suddenly that bloodchief ascension got its counters and he played mindcrank and the game was over. This certainly feels bad, but most combo wins just happen because the other players 'allow' them (don't see the combo coming). Finally, there is this misconception that combos are just easy to play. That is complete bull*****. Play one combo deck and you will see. Even decks with two-card combos such as a splinter twin/kiki-jiki still take time to master and understand.
If your question was geared towards: 'why people hate when I play combos?' The answer is simple - you're playing with the wrong people. Some playgroups accept and cherish combos, others do not. Find the one that does what you like to do and enjoy it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
.
Would you like to read Commander stories? Check my latest stories, coming from Lorwyn and Innistrad: Ghoulcaller Gisa and Doran, The Siege Tower! If you like my writing, ask me to write something for your commander as well!
If your question was geared towards: 'why, philosophically, people hate combos?' The answer was addressed on this thread: because when someone wins with a combo it 'feels' as if they didn't deserve to win. They had nothing going on, suddenly that bloodchief ascension got its counters and he played mindcrank and the game was over. This certainly feels bad, but most combo wins just happen because the other players 'allow' them (don't see the combo coming). Finally, there is this misconception that combos are just easy to play. That is complete bull*****. Play one combo deck and you will see. Even decks with two-card combos such as a splinter twin/kiki-jiki still take time to master and understand.
If your question was geared towards: 'why people hate when I play combos?' The answer is simple - you're playing with the wrong people. Some playgroups accept and cherish combos, others do not. Find the one that does what you like to do and enjoy it.
Not everyone can just find a new playgroup
And it is both question, but the second is better worded "why do people hate when i play combo when they also play combo?"
When combos are allowed and people are playing to win, it generally becomes the only way to win.
You aren't going to beat combo with aggro in a multiplayer format with 40 life. Aggro is almost irrelevant at the speed you can combo off in edh.
So that's one thing.
Another is how often combos completely invalidate the buildup of the game. Instead of incremental damage and building a strong board state, they often win from nothing. It's a story with a bad ending. "Oh, we didn't have the answer to his empty board -> game win in hand, guess that's it".
One of the thing that helped edh grow as a format was the way it unlocked a huge portion of the card pool. Instead your deck curving from 1-5, you could ramp and play slow and run all the cool effects and bigger mana spells that were useless in other formats.
Combos invalidate this. Those cards go back to being useless if people are aiming to just combo off.
Combos lead to lame gameplay and lame deckbuilding.
Not exactly true, I play cards in memnarch that are not good anywhere else except decks like mine. I go long or can go short if someone plays group hug draw. My deck needs to be controlled to win against it. I can counter to stop opposition to my combos. Many non blue decks cannot stop me unless the run some type of control. It is true, 40 life helps me big time. Although certain decks don't care about life totals, thus it's up to the skill of the players. It's takes great skill to combo off without opposition, timing, counter control, and luck of draw. I prefer high skill games that don't go for 2 hours each. Boring.....
The major problem is the same kind of problem that eventually pops up: everyone wants something different out of EDH.
I think the bigger problem is the unwillingness of some people to understand that some people really don't like to play against these combo's.
That has to be the most infuriating thing to me. Especially when they act as if I cannot play Magic, or as if my decks suck and God knows what.
Damnit; I play 2 legacy combo-decks, one aggro deck and even a control-deck. You don't have to tell me how to play this game.
We had a game a couple months ago where everyone had just started to build their boards (land, artifacts, enchantments, creatures, maybe even a planeswalker, and the game had just started to be interactive, when someone Tooth and Nailed Mike and Trike. Just like that, the game was over. Nothing anyone had done mattered. No prior damage mattered; no spells anyone had played. All invalidated in one boring display that amounted to "let's shuffle up and start from scratch again." And then the guy said he had to leave - which was probably good for him, because I guarantee the next game would have been Archenemy, only without the schemes.
We also had another game, in which a mono-blue player sat there drawing cards and ignoring damage and spells. He didn't bother to counter anything or bounce anything - until he had his combo. And because he had played solitaire and ignored us, he had counterspells available to protect his combo. He didn't need to interact until that moment, and all he had to do was negate any interaction on our part.
And finally, the last time I played, someone made us watch him play solitaire as he took one extra turn after another after another, while we all sat there unable to do anything other than stop one of the extra turns. It was boring.
All three of these examples share something in common. I play Magic to interact with people. I do run some combos (non-infinite) to get extra mileage. And I even include very few infinite game-ending combos, but almost always three or more cards and never with the intent to tutor them. I'm not entirely opposed to combos; I think they have a place in the game. The problem I have is when someone disregards and disrespects the other players by wasting their time. If your group loves combo, great. But if not, if someone wants to play solitaire or show how smart they are - in essence, if they want to be antisocial - don't play a social game.
I love people who say "nothing that happened mattered because of the combo." It really betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the nuances of the game. If you want to just play creatures and attack, I'm pretty sure pokemon is a better option.
I love people who say "nothing that happened mattered because of the combo." It really betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the nuances of the game. If you want to just play creatures and attack, I'm pretty sure pokemon is a better option.
You sound like exactly the type of player I would play against once and then avoid for the rest of my life.
You aren't clever for having figured out that combo is a good way to win at multiplayer, or for realizing that the opponent casting removal spells on non-combo pieces leaves them with fewer for combo pieces.
Public Mod Note
(ISBPathfinder):
Infraction for Flaming / Trolling. Please dont let things get personal.
I love people who say "nothing that happened mattered because of the combo." It really betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the nuances of the game.
I agree with this but I'm sympathetic to that mindset. It can be demoralizing to build up a board state and then lose to a combo because you can't interact with it if you're not prepared for it. The fundamental problem isn't that infinite combos exist, it's that there exist different levels of power in deck power and player skill. You don't bring a nuke to a knife fight.
Infinite combos are fine in my book. Game has to end somehow. The only problem I have with them is if they take a long time to execute like storm or multiple turns. They're fun to pilot but tedious to watch after the third or fourth time. I have limited play time and I prefer to be engaged in a game rather than voyeurism.
I love people who say "nothing that happened mattered because of the combo." It really betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the nuances of the game. If you want to just play creatures and attack, I'm pretty sure pokemon is a better option.
You sound like exactly the type of player I would play against once and then avoid for the rest of my life.
You aren't clever for having figured out that combo is a good way to win at multiplayer, or for realizing that the opponent casting removal spells on non-combo pieces leaves them with fewer for combo pieces.
I generally avoid playing with people that start frothing at the mouth when I don't play by their special rules, so that's perfectly fine with me.
I love people who say "nothing that happened mattered because of the combo." It really betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the nuances of the game.
I agree with this but I'm sympathetic to that mindset. It can be demoralizing to build up a board state and then lose to a combo because you can't interact with it if you're not prepared for it. The fundamental problem isn't that infinite combos exist, it's that there exist different levels of power in deck power and player skill. You don't bring a nuke to a knife fight.
Infinite combos are fine in my book. Game has to end somehow. The only problem I have with them is if they take a long time to execute like storm or multiple turns. They're fun to pilot but tedious to watch after the third or fourth time. I have limited play time and I prefer to be engaged in a game rather than voyeurism.
The only people I see consistently complaining about combos are, in fact, the ones least willing to play any interaction. Seriously, as long as power levels are consistent then combo can exist just fine with other archetypes.
I don't have an issue with combos like that, but I do have an issue with people who lock down the table so they can get their combo off. I'm not opposed to it but it rubs me the wrong way.
My biggest (and really only) issue with infinite combos is that they invalidate almost everything that happened in the game up to that point. When you have a hard-fought back-and-forth contest where players are playing for little advantages and trading resources to for incremental gains, it is very disheartening to have all that erased in one fell swoop. We prefer games where deck synergies and themes have time and room to evolve and infinite combos would make that otherwise impractical to compete with.
With that said, if we a play a game where we all decide that its no-holds-barred (or at least, no-holds-barred for us), then we have decks that are meant to control the game and prevent other people from going off until we can finish the game with an infinite combo (mostly because its the easiest way to win at that point). During those matchups, we are all fighting a different resource war. The decks look more like the 1v1 cEDH decks that most people would expect; lots of counters, removal, card draw, digging, tutors, and a lot less creatures, synergy cards, or 'do-nothings' that would otherwise be too slow to have an effect on the game. These kinds of games are fun every once and a while; they are just not our cup of tea so we don't play this way very often.
I don't have an issue with combos like that, but I do have an issue with people who lock down the table so they can get their combo off. I'm not opposed to it but it rubs me the wrong way.
Personally, I'd rather have a lockout that was setup so the player can give the coup de grace. Then again, I have been on the receiving end of too many lockouts that didn't have an actual endgame, so I'm biased.
The major problem is the same kind of problem that eventually pops up: everyone wants something different out of EDH.
I think the bigger problem is the unwillingness of some people to understand that some people really don't like to play against these combo's. That has to be the most infuriating thing to me. Especially when they act as if I cannot play Magic, or as if my decks suck and God knows what.
Damnit; I play 2 legacy combo-decks, one aggro deck and even a control-deck. You don't have to tell me how to play this game.
I'd argue at that point you're just with dealing out-and-out jerks. Any reasonable player will respect another's wishes and do one of two things: alter their play and be accommodating (switch out decks/just remove the combos from their deck) or just respectfully leave if they're not compatible with the current proceedings.
No one should ever be wanting to have fun at another's expense.
I treat combos the same way I treat the rest of EDH. If I've seen it enough, it's just boring. I'm fine for the game to end, and I run plenty of kill-switches in my decks. If you're going for the same combo every time, it's guaranteed not the combo I mind, it's that you're boring and I think you're a bad person because you're boring (to me).
It doesn't help that we have forums like these where people attempt to collect all the infinite combos in single threads as a tool for people to use just so they don't have to think of the synergies themselves. While I appreciate the strength of the information age, it also accelerates the wear on these sorts of situations. I get it, you've just started playing and you're fascinated with Niv-Mizzet/Mindmoil, Trikaeus, etc. I'd just rather not wait for you to get to a point (if you will at all) where you're bored by these plays at all.
Again, just my opinion. If I wanted to watch reruns of the same combos, I can just watch legacy dredge do it's business.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-This signature intentionally left blank to increase general intrigue and mystery-
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
While i can win that early It is usually sometime after turn 10 that I pull it off. Of course, if 3 opponents (Heck even 2) cannot disrupt you by turn 10, i feel you deserve a win. Combo is really not much different from playing Superfriends and getting a few emblems off. if tehy cannot stop you, 90% of the time it is their fault.
My buddy who pays linvala is actually pretty good at shutting my combos down.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
Let me put it this way: If someone lands Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre in a four player commander game, the first thought is "Oh, if we exile that we are okay". The same situation happens if someone lands that final piece to some infinite combo like a Phyrexian Altar or a Purphoros, God of the Forge. The reality is the game just ended unless somehow, someone in one of their singleton decks managed to pull a single card that happens to do just what they need. With minimal tutors, one would need to be spending a lot of slots on removal to guarantee they can answer one of those game ending threats. Commander is removal heavy, but against indestructible that tends to require a special type of removal to deal with. Namely, exile effects, enchantment effects like Song of the Dryads, or really good bounce effects like Condemn or Reflector Mage.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
One combo should not be winning games. As I have said I run multiple ways to combo off, but they don't all require the same cards. Sometime a simple Rite of replication kicked on Vela is enough.
If you have no disruption for one card (two if he is not run mickey as his general) You deserve to lose. Trikaeus is easy to deal with. Name a color and I can tell you how to deal with it.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
So, essentially, when dealing with some infinite combos, no matter what color you're in, you're playing blue. (In that your removal spells are more like counterspells.) It's gotten so bad that I make a rule not to consider sorcery-speed removal "removal".
Fortunately, you have a few options. You can use instant-speed removal or counters, or you can (the other thing a lot of new players gripe about) play Stax, setting up answers to infinite combos (Taxing is pretty effective, though you need to make Prossh cost at least 6 more, and most taxes only tax noncreature spells because creturz mattur.) before they're played. But I say ¿por qué no los dos?
On phasing:
But i get what you are saying.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
I'm not generally opposed to infinite combos in multiplayer commander. My group skews toward blue and we know what decks have infinite combos. As such, we know how to prepare to combos and someone often has a response.
My real complaint is with hyper-consistent decks. If you play a "respond-or-win" card, that's fine. If you can reliably (70%+) draw, revive, or search for another "respond-or-win" card every 2-3 rounds, though, that's where things get annoying on my end. For that reason, repetitive recursion engines (meren, emeria, genesis) and the redundant beaters of a well-made Xanagos deck bothers me more than many decks with combos.
Also, while infinite combos can be dealt outside of running them yourself, the alternatives are not things that a lot of people want to do. People don't just want to gang up on the guy running combos every game. That will just make them start saying "Why don't we just get rid of this guy/this deck so we can play how we want?". It makes the combo player into an unwelcome obstacle to their fun. The other method would be tuning up their decks in general. Running more removal, more draw, overall more efficient cards. However, that commonly makes people feel like that their changing their decks to from what they want to play to what they have to play in order to stand a chance.
Also, money. Money can be a big factor in all of this. Not everyone has money to tune up their decks how they like. So when they face off against someone who does have a deck worth hundreds to thousands of $$$, it just rubs salt in the wound that they can't play at a level they wish to.
But all of this is highly relative. For just as many people who complain of infinite combos, there are just as many who shrug and say "So? It's just part of the game.". It all just depends on the players, their situation, their feelings and their outlook.
Sadly, there is no true right or wrong answer.
BK'rrik Goodstuff
GWSythis Enchantress
URYusri Coin Flip
BRGKorvold Tokens
BGUYarok Lands Matter
WUBRaffine Looter
BRGKresh the BloodbraidedBRG, A box of lands and ideas.
Modern:
RG Titanshift. A deck made of cards too stupid for EDH.
Retired: Lots. More than I feel you should suffer through or I should type out.
You have a point, i did initially stop aiming to play with Evil Adam for this exact reason. His deck was just too string and no fun to play against. And it is not even his deck that did it, it is Derevi. I tunnel vision derevi players thanks to Evil Adam. WotC made a broken creature and then reprinted it in Commader anthologies. Derevi is broken. EXTREMELY broken.He should have the tap/untap or put into play. Not both.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
"Welcome....to the real world"
Multiplayer Decks- Memnarch - Animar, Soul of Elements - Zur, the Enchanter - Atraxa, Praetors' Voice - Food Chain Tazri - Teysa Karlov
Modern BUMill and Bant Spirits.
Thank you Xenphire for the signature!
If your question was geared towards: 'why people hate when I play combos?' The answer is simple - you're playing with the wrong people. Some playgroups accept and cherish combos, others do not. Find the one that does what you like to do and enjoy it.
Read my other stories as well (some ongoing):
Reaper King (a horror story), Kaalia of the Vast (an origin story), Sequels for Innistrad (Alternative sequels for Inn), Grey Areas (Odric's fanfic), Royal Succession (goblins),The Tracker's Message (eldrazi on Innistrad) and Ugin and his Eye (the end of OGW).
Not everyone can just find a new playgroup
And it is both question, but the second is better worded "why do people hate when i play combo when they also play combo?"
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
You aren't going to beat combo with aggro in a multiplayer format with 40 life. Aggro is almost irrelevant at the speed you can combo off in edh.
So that's one thing.
Another is how often combos completely invalidate the buildup of the game. Instead of incremental damage and building a strong board state, they often win from nothing. It's a story with a bad ending. "Oh, we didn't have the answer to his empty board -> game win in hand, guess that's it".
One of the thing that helped edh grow as a format was the way it unlocked a huge portion of the card pool. Instead your deck curving from 1-5, you could ramp and play slow and run all the cool effects and bigger mana spells that were useless in other formats.
Combos invalidate this. Those cards go back to being useless if people are aiming to just combo off.
Combos lead to lame gameplay and lame deckbuilding.
Multiplayer Decks- Memnarch - Animar, Soul of Elements - Zur, the Enchanter - Atraxa, Praetors' Voice - Food Chain Tazri - Teysa Karlov
Modern BUMill and Bant Spirits.
Thank you Xenphire for the signature!
I think the bigger problem is the unwillingness of some people to understand that some people really don't like to play against these combo's.
That has to be the most infuriating thing to me. Especially when they act as if I cannot play Magic, or as if my decks suck and God knows what.
Damnit; I play 2 legacy combo-decks, one aggro deck and even a control-deck. You don't have to tell me how to play this game.
We also had another game, in which a mono-blue player sat there drawing cards and ignoring damage and spells. He didn't bother to counter anything or bounce anything - until he had his combo. And because he had played solitaire and ignored us, he had counterspells available to protect his combo. He didn't need to interact until that moment, and all he had to do was negate any interaction on our part.
And finally, the last time I played, someone made us watch him play solitaire as he took one extra turn after another after another, while we all sat there unable to do anything other than stop one of the extra turns. It was boring.
All three of these examples share something in common. I play Magic to interact with people. I do run some combos (non-infinite) to get extra mileage. And I even include very few infinite game-ending combos, but almost always three or more cards and never with the intent to tutor them. I'm not entirely opposed to combos; I think they have a place in the game. The problem I have is when someone disregards and disrespects the other players by wasting their time. If your group loves combo, great. But if not, if someone wants to play solitaire or show how smart they are - in essence, if they want to be antisocial - don't play a social game.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
You sound like exactly the type of player I would play against once and then avoid for the rest of my life.
You aren't clever for having figured out that combo is a good way to win at multiplayer, or for realizing that the opponent casting removal spells on non-combo pieces leaves them with fewer for combo pieces.
I agree with this but I'm sympathetic to that mindset. It can be demoralizing to build up a board state and then lose to a combo because you can't interact with it if you're not prepared for it. The fundamental problem isn't that infinite combos exist, it's that there exist different levels of power in deck power and player skill. You don't bring a nuke to a knife fight.
Infinite combos are fine in my book. Game has to end somehow. The only problem I have with them is if they take a long time to execute like storm or multiple turns. They're fun to pilot but tedious to watch after the third or fourth time. I have limited play time and I prefer to be engaged in a game rather than voyeurism.
[Primer] Erebos, God of the Dead
HONK HONK
I generally avoid playing with people that start frothing at the mouth when I don't play by their special rules, so that's perfectly fine with me.
There's a difference between using combos and having a power mismatch. I have a deck that uses Deranged Hermit/Eternal Witness/Urabrask the Hidden/Phyrexian Altar/Victimize as one of its win conditions; not exactly top shelf stuff. But even if I was using T&N there are reasonable ways to stop it. Rest in Peace/Leyline of the Void are practically EDH staples. A simple Blood Artist or Burning-Tree Shaman stops the Reveillark/Karmic Guide loops. Torpor Orb shuts down a ton of decks. Ethersworn Canonist or Thalia, Guardian of Thraben are excellent hatebears against storm.
The only people I see consistently complaining about combos are, in fact, the ones least willing to play any interaction. Seriously, as long as power levels are consistent then combo can exist just fine with other archetypes.
With that said, if we a play a game where we all decide that its no-holds-barred (or at least, no-holds-barred for us), then we have decks that are meant to control the game and prevent other people from going off until we can finish the game with an infinite combo (mostly because its the easiest way to win at that point). During those matchups, we are all fighting a different resource war. The decks look more like the 1v1 cEDH decks that most people would expect; lots of counters, removal, card draw, digging, tutors, and a lot less creatures, synergy cards, or 'do-nothings' that would otherwise be too slow to have an effect on the game. These kinds of games are fun every once and a while; they are just not our cup of tea so we don't play this way very often.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
Personally, I'd rather have a lockout that was setup so the player can give the coup de grace. Then again, I have been on the receiving end of too many lockouts that didn't have an actual endgame, so I'm biased.
I'd argue at that point you're just with dealing out-and-out jerks. Any reasonable player will respect another's wishes and do one of two things: alter their play and be accommodating (switch out decks/just remove the combos from their deck) or just respectfully leave if they're not compatible with the current proceedings.
No one should ever be wanting to have fun at another's expense.
BK'rrik Goodstuff
GWSythis Enchantress
URYusri Coin Flip
BRGKorvold Tokens
BGUYarok Lands Matter
WUBRaffine Looter
It doesn't help that we have forums like these where people attempt to collect all the infinite combos in single threads as a tool for people to use just so they don't have to think of the synergies themselves. While I appreciate the strength of the information age, it also accelerates the wear on these sorts of situations. I get it, you've just started playing and you're fascinated with Niv-Mizzet/Mindmoil, Trikaeus, etc. I'd just rather not wait for you to get to a point (if you will at all) where you're bored by these plays at all.
Again, just my opinion. If I wanted to watch reruns of the same combos, I can just watch legacy dredge do it's business.