You're missing the point. In this particular instance, what is the functional difference between a strong spell killing you and a combo doing so? How is one stealing and the other isn't? This isn't striking you as intellectually unsound yet? Your complaint is entirely about losing. The how is completely irrelevant.
Better yet, topdeck Repay in Kind, then target opponent with the Sign in Blood he couldn't use on himself.
It depends, I don't appreciate tables that are a race to combo, but I don't appreciate durdlefests either so I keep Mike+Trike at arm's reach for when I run into one of those.
This is a reminder to please remain civil to each other even when you disagree with the way that others like to play the game. There are a lot of borderline flaming/trolling posts in the previous page.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
I play infinite combos in my decks and i'm fine dying to one, but i dislike decks that have no other purpose than running fast for the combo kill ignoring everything else, or the uncreative combos like mike/trike, kiki/pester, sanguine/exquisite etc.....
But i just don't enjoy them, if i die to it im ok with it and i wont complain... Everyone have to run disruption anyway...
A question for everyone who mentions some ephemeral 'creative' or 'original' combo: What qualifies?
Is there really any combination of cards that could -ever- qualify, unless it's the very first time you (personally) have seen a combo using some brand-new card? And why does it matter? This concept confuses and enrages me.
A question for everyone who mentions some ephemeral 'creative' or 'original' combo: What qualifies?
Is there really any combination of cards that could -ever- qualify, unless it's the very first time you (personally) have seen a combo using some brand-new card? And why does it matter? This concept confuses and enrages me.
While I'm totally fine with playing infinites and be on the receiving end of them, there are some of them which kind of saddens me a little, from a deckbuilder's perspective. But this is just me, so take it with a pinch of salt. I like combos to be on theme with the commander. Like for example if the commander is Zedruu the Greathearted, combos that are on theme with the commander are:
2) Zedruu donates Price of Glory to an opponent. Cast Sacred Ground and combo off with infinite mana/landfall during an opponent's turn.
Combos which aren't really on theme with Zedruu are Kiki combos, Isochron+Dramatic Reversal combos etc. It is not like these combos are bad per say, I like to see all kinds of synergy and combos but they don't seem to gel well in Zedruu. Another example is the Samut Yisan combo which goes like
Yisan fetches Kiki-Jiki, combos off with Restoration Angel. (5 counters)
This is awesome in a Samut, Voice of Dissent deck. But I'll give this combo a thumbs down if a player puts it in another Naya deck that doesn't use tap-untap creatures as the primary focus of the deck. The combo is just in that deck because it is on color only.
Which is kind of why I don't really like to pilot/make cEDH styled decks, most if not all of them run combos based off their efficiency instead of being inline with the commander. Taigam, Ojutai Master runs Isochron combo, Tasigur runs Isochron combo, Kess runs Isochron combo. Don't get me wrong, cEDH decks are great decks and players who made them are awesome players who can build decks with such consistency. It just feels so "uncreative" (at least to me) to have the deck runs and ends the same just like another deck with a totally different commander.
Totally what nekorin said, if i catch the sanguine bond combo on a Karlov deck or Licia, no problem, every piece has sinergy with the idea of the deck, but is just a matter of opinion, as i said, if i lose to a random "uncreative" combo i wont complain, but is just a little sad...
It shows your opponents that you don't care about having a good time, it shows that for you it's only about winning.
You're playing MTG, the sole purpose of the game is about winning
Also claiming that playing combo isn't caring about "having a good time" is incorrect. People have a good time playing combo.
Honestly at this point the combo deck discussion is about as fruitful as the "Men should put the toilet seat up"/"Women should put the toilet seat down" debate. Both sides think they're "right". The reality is neither is right or wrong. As long as you don't complain at a sanctioned event about being "robbed" of a win because of a combo, cause that would just be plain silly. Degenerate cards are banned on the banlist, if they're not considered too degenerate, they're not banned.
You're playing MTG, the sole purpose of the game is about winning
Also claiming that playing combo isn't caring about "having a good time" is incorrect. People have a good time playing combo.
What? No, the goal is not to win.
People play recreational games as a form of recreation, to enjoy themselves.
And good for them. It's the rest of the table I am talking about.
Honestly at this point the combo deck discussion is about as fruitful as the "Men should put the toilet seat up"/"Women should put the toilet seat down" debate. Both sides think they're "right". The reality is neither is right or wrong. As long as you don't complain at a sanctioned event about being "robbed" of a win because of a combo, cause that would just be plain silly. Degenerate cards are banned on the banlist, if they're not considered too degenerate, they're not banned.
When people act all "git gud" then there is a wrong side
And no, that's not really how the banlist for EDH works.
The debate is going in circles because combo players won't accept other point of views. Not everyone want to win every time. Not everyone want to have the best deck possible. Not everyone want to end the game as soon as possible. Not everyone is competitive.
Maybe is just me but I find that players who don't mind combos & infinites are generally more accepting on all types of strategies, playstyles and opinions of other players as compared to players who advocate restrictions placed on what to play and what not to in playgroups?
Maybe is just me but I find that players who don't mind combos & infinites are generally more accepting on all types of strategies, playstyles and opinions of other players as compared to players who advocate restrictions placed on what to play and what not to in playgroups?
I have plenty of formats where i can "enjoy" combo. When i play commander i just want to see the kind of strategies and decks that combo push away.
Well I only play EDH and not other formats, I don't really have other formats which I can play the awesome card synergies I'm so fond of. Furthermore, even those synergies which I like aren't even viable in all other formats besides commander.
Like the 0-1-2-3-4 module combo which I love to call it
Well I only play EDH and not other formats, I don't really have other formats which I can play the awesome card synergies I'm so fond of. Furthermore, even those synergies which I like aren't even viable in all other formats besides commander.
Like the 0-1-2-3-4 module combo which I love to call it
Where else can I play such a combo besides commander? So awesome yet so fragile.
I don't speak for everyone of course, but I don't think many people who dislike combos, dislike extremely convoluted and difficult to assemble combos like that. It's mostly the decks that are randomly shoehorning in common, well-known 2-piece combos.
Personally I actually don't mind the fast tuned combo decks as much as the decks that are mostly innocuous but have 1-2 infinites that they "only use if 'necessary'" or whatever. The fast combo decks at least usually let you know immediately what's going on, and then you either disrupt it or lose, and then next game you can either gang up on them, switch decks, request that they switch decks, or don't play with them. They don't bait you into what looks like a low-powered game only to abruptly end it, and they don't condescendingly hold back on their combo in the name of "letting you have your fun".
The debate is going in circles because combo players won't accept other point of views. Not everyone want to win every time. Not everyone want to have the best deck possible. Not everyone want to end the game as soon as possible. Not everyone is competitive.
Maybe is just me but I find that players who don't mind combos & infinites are generally more accepting on all types of strategies, playstyles and opinions of other players as compared to players who advocate restrictions placed on what to play and what not to in playgroups?
This has generally been my experience in playing with the variety of people you find on Cockatrice/xMage. When you join a game titled "No inf/mld/extra turns", it's almost inevitable that SOMETHING you do is going to get the creator salty - they're super picky about what they want to play against. Then when you join a cEDH game or a game with no restrictions, you get way more "good play dude" even when you're crushing people/getting crushed.
I don't speak for everyone of course, but I don't think many people who dislike combos, dislike extremely convoluted and difficult to assemble combos like that. It's mostly the decks that are randomly shoehorning in common, well-known 2-piece combos.
Personally I actually don't mind the fast tuned combo decks as much as the decks that are mostly innocuous but have 1-2 infinites that they "only use if 'necessary'" or whatever. The fast combo decks at least usually let you know immediately what's going on, and then you either disrupt it or lose, and then next game you can either gang up on them, switch decks, request that they switch decks, or don't play with them. They don't bait you into what looks like a low-powered game only to abruptly end it, and they don't condescendingly hold back on their combo in the name of "letting you have your fun".
I get what you mean, usually those decks will give off the "what the hell" kind of feeling. Like seeing a vampire tribal deck running MikeTrisk, or a zombie deck with no apparent life gain elements suddenly pop up a Sanguine Bond + Exquisite Blood.
Honestly, you think that running this is the same as running 10+ tutors, Mikaeus+Triskelion, Kiki-jiki+Conscript and many other 2 card combo?
Nope it isn't, but sad case is combo players often get the same treatment/scorn even if they win via a 5+ card combo (at least in my case, but now not that bad since the playgroup has changed). It just gives off the vibe that as long as the win isn't via combat phase it wouldn't be approved, be it infinite or not. Like what I experienced when I play Gitrog.
Basalt Monolith + Mesmeric Orb + Gitrog on field. Self mill with Eldrazi bros reshuffling back until get 80+ draw triggers. Draw deck, drop a Glacial Chasm and cast Sickening Dreams discarding 70+ cards. Gets called out for ruining fun due to infinite combo.
I don't speak for everyone of course, but I don't think many people who dislike combos, dislike extremely convoluted and difficult to assemble combos like that. It's mostly the decks that are randomly shoehorning in common, well-known 2-piece combos.
Personally I actually don't mind the fast tuned combo decks as much as the decks that are mostly innocuous but have 1-2 infinites that they "only use if 'necessary'" or whatever. The fast combo decks at least usually let you know immediately what's going on, and then you either disrupt it or lose, and then next game you can either gang up on them, switch decks, request that they switch decks, or don't play with them. They don't bait you into what looks like a low-powered game only to abruptly end it, and they don't condescendingly hold back on their combo in the name of "letting you have your fun".
I get what you mean, usually those decks will give off the "what the hell" kind of feeling. Like seeing a vampire tribal deck running MikeTrisk, or a zombie deck with no apparent life gain elements suddenly pop up a Sanguine Bond + Exquisite Blood.
Honestly, you think that running this is the same as running 10+ tutors, Mikaeus+Triskelion, Kiki-jiki+Conscript and many other 2 card combo?
Nope it isn't, but sad case is combo players often get the same treatment/scorn even if they win via a 5+ card combo (at least in my case, but now not that bad since the playgroup has changed). It just gives off the vibe that as long as the win isn't via combat phase it wouldn't be approved, be it infinite or not. Like what I experienced when I play Gitrog.
Basalt Monolith + Mesmeric Orb + Gitrog on field. Self mill with Eldrazi bros reshuffling back until get 80+ draw triggers. Draw deck, drop a Glacial Chasm and cast Sickening Dreams discarding 70+ cards. Gets called out for ruining fun due to infinite combo.
To be fair, Mesmeric Orb + Basalt Monolith is ridiculously easy to do to mill your own deck, and especially easy when you have Gitrog as your commander that forever can be played in the game. It is a fun ruiner since it can't really be interacted with very easily and ends the game out of nowhere.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"People are the worst. The worst thing about music is that people play it." - Mike Patton
Yep, I do get it when that playgroup said that Mesmeric Orb combo ruins fun. But it is the 2nd one that make me feel that anything that isn't turning creatures sideways isn't really welcomed, the complaints aren't really justified in this case imo. Stopped playing with them after that, and I now have an awesome playgroup that are ok with combos.
Yep, I do get it when that playgroup said that Mesmeric Orb combo ruins fun. But it is the 2nd one that make me feel that anything that isn't turning creatures sideways isn't really welcomed, the complaints aren't really justified in this case imo. Stopped playing with them after that, and I now have an awesome playgroup that are ok with combos.
That is a good example of how everyone has different feelings on what is a acceptable for how they lose, infinite or non infinite. Personally I think your win with Retreat to Hagra is fine, because it is on theme with your commander and it gives your opponent(s) many chances to interact with to stop it before they lose all the life from Retreat to Hagra. That is totally fair, and if they have problems with that they might want to consider playing a different game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"People are the worst. The worst thing about music is that people play it." - Mike Patton
@ nekorin, nice to see you found a playgroup that accepts you with what you play... It's fairly difficult to have fun if people do not accept you for the way you want to play.. but not much can be done about that sometimes... salty people can just be salty about everything...
--
Now I want to adres something here that I wanna ask the people against infinite combo... lets sketch a deck here, its green/white, as per example..
The decks main focus is small creatures with low power overall and using cards on theme with those..
So you start to build it and think about cards that can help you stay on the board and get back what you need to stay alive and such..
- Reveillark - seems like a good card with creatures with 2 power or less...
- Karmic Guide - One of the few good reanimation creatures that works wel with Reveillark as wel...
- Saffi Eriksdotter - cause its on point with low power and helps stay alive..
- Sun Titan - Because it reanimates low cost creatures...
- Mirror Entity - to boost your creatures to huge stats...
I think we all know where I am going at with this, right?
You see how a seamless non-combo idea can lead to a combo deck quite easily... ^^
Now I get that if you build it with all kinds of tutors and search, etc that it wil more likely be a combo oriented deck that just looks up/searches this to win, but what if your deck doesn't and you literally draw into this, what then? Are you now what was said to be a deck that just has a combo and pulls a win out of nowhere because of that? OR is this not a problem for those against combo, cause it's within theme?
Am just asking, to make sure what people think about these kind of interactions and build ideas, etc...
Lark and saffi immediately set off alarms of "there's probably an infinite going on here". Saffi in particular I never see anyone include other than for an infinite combo.
If you are running lark and free ways to kill lark, I assume you are trying to go infinite, even if the combo pieces are themselves often good enough to include as value goodstuffs.
I keep some available in most decks in case the game goes on too long. But i never strive to win that way other than that scenario. Cutting grass with scissors would be more interesting than playing tutorsforcombo.Dec
So you play the game, to have fun and not to win? Why did it matter that you lost to a combo player at 2 life I wonder?
Also who says some others might not have enjoyed the game even if you didn't?
I am all for being for or against combo, but at least be consistent in your reasoning.
Why?
There doesn't need to be any reasoning for the way people feel about things.
Just because you think there's a hole in the argumentation doesn't mean people cannot feel that way about it.
It's perhaps worthwhile to consider what about infinite combos makes them so disputed.
An infinite combo is: getting value for free....infinitely. That value is card draw, mana, damage, taps/untaps,...basically in one way or another: board state.
I think it's worth drawing a line in the sand: How much "value for free" is too much value? Too warping of the game? I think there are different degrees that should be considered here.
For example, a really efficient spell, say Athreos, God of Passage. Wow, a 5/4 indestructible with sweet recursion for only 3 mana. What if your deck consisted of this kind of 'free value' throughout - major upside when going against decks that don't have the same efficient mana costing spells for the same boad state impact.
Another example, Edric, Spymaster of Trest - huge free value if your deck is tuned for it. Cards is the generally the key to success in the game I understand - it's where board state emerges from. When up against decks that don't have that same kind of impact, Edric will stomp.
Another example, a combo like Rings of Brighthearth + Basalt Monolith gives infinite mana, but does nothing for the player if there is no cards to cast with that mana. The board state still needs to be present.
Finally, a combo like Zealous Conscripts + Kiki-Jiki Mirror Breaker which slams down a win pretty quick still requires the necessary board state in order to achieve that win.
So I guess what I'm trying to get across here is that infinite combos are aimed to win outright. For each example, the 'line in the sand' that represents how much free value the player is getting is notched up. Groups that say 'no infinite combos' are just drawing that line in the sand....but I would suggest that there are non-infinite plays that can be more oppressive as infinite plays.
Ultimately I think it comes down to the power level of the meta that you are playing in. The general 'available access' to board state. The easily it becomes to access the cards and mana a meta needs to win, the more like they are willing to allow infinite combos. Likewise, the metas that tend to have less access to cards and mana tend towards not permitting the 'free value' plays. I think this is becase, ultimately, the more cards and mana access a meta has, the less impact 'free value' has on the meta itself - it's able to cushion the impact better.
Anyways, these are my views on the matter. There is nothing wrong with either way you choose to play - no infinite comobos or infinite combos, private banlists, proxies, or whatever else so long as the meta/group follows by the same rules. My meta doesn't play with Commander damage for example, we general enjoy not having voltron generals swing with toolbox decks - the private rule helps dissuade that particular style of build. Again, nothing wrong with that build, only out of preference that we don't care for it.
Combos were, are and will be a part of the game. I have no problem getting rekt by some infinite combos, I even enjoy it "Wow?! Those cards together make me loose the game?!?! I never saw it comming, congratulations,I will borrow your idea for my deck"
I dont play full combo in my decks, I'm more of a timmy player, but I can enjoy some, if I win with or loose against combos.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I can not win the game and my opponents can not lose the game.
I have always been a little against combos. I don't want every game of commander to always be an arms race. Combo is the strongest archetype due to multiple opponents and high starting life total for this format but it was not designed in such a way to be played with combo in mind.
If you ask me, if you do play in a combo heavy meta, you might want to play with the concept of custom banned lists or possibly moving the starting life totals down to see if it allows more aggro strategies. The current commander banned list is just not designed for a competitive meta where combo is the focus so I guess if you are ok with things being broken its fine but I would suggest an alternative rule set for that kind of environment.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
When people lose to aggro, control, or stax strategies, they tend to see it coming and, at some point along the way, have resigned to probable defeat.
Combos can end the game out of nowhere, and people are cheated of the opportunity to accept their likely defeat.
This is all just a guess, though. Threat assessment is a skill that takes practice, but threat assessment can be hard in a game full of combo decks, and this can lead to frustration for some.
I enjoy playing combo at competitive tables and I have a blast without it at the casual ones.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Better yet, topdeck Repay in Kind, then target opponent with the Sign in Blood he couldn't use on himself.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
StaffCurrently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
But i just don't enjoy them, if i die to it im ok with it and i wont complain... Everyone have to run disruption anyway...
Is there really any combination of cards that could -ever- qualify, unless it's the very first time you (personally) have seen a combo using some brand-new card? And why does it matter? This concept confuses and enrages me.
While I'm totally fine with playing infinites and be on the receiving end of them, there are some of them which kind of saddens me a little, from a deckbuilder's perspective. But this is just me, so take it with a pinch of salt. I like combos to be on theme with the commander. Like for example if the commander is Zedruu the Greathearted, combos that are on theme with the commander are:
1) Zedruu donates Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite to an opponent. Cast Karmic Guide and combo off with Ashes of the Abhorrent due to Karmic guide having 0 toughness when it ETBs causing the ETB trigger able to target itself in the gy.
2) Zedruu donates Price of Glory to an opponent. Cast Sacred Ground and combo off with infinite mana/landfall during an opponent's turn.
Combos which aren't really on theme with Zedruu are Kiki combos, Isochron+Dramatic Reversal combos etc. It is not like these combos are bad per say, I like to see all kinds of synergy and combos but they don't seem to gel well in Zedruu. Another example is the Samut Yisan combo which goes like
This is awesome in a Samut, Voice of Dissent deck. But I'll give this combo a thumbs down if a player puts it in another Naya deck that doesn't use tap-untap creatures as the primary focus of the deck. The combo is just in that deck because it is on color only.
Which is kind of why I don't really like to pilot/make cEDH styled decks, most if not all of them run combos based off their efficiency instead of being inline with the commander. Taigam, Ojutai Master runs Isochron combo, Tasigur runs Isochron combo, Kess runs Isochron combo. Don't get me wrong, cEDH decks are great decks and players who made them are awesome players who can build decks with such consistency. It just feels so "uncreative" (at least to me) to have the deck runs and ends the same just like another deck with a totally different commander.
WUBRG Reaper King - Elf Tribal WUBRG | Tribal Fun
WRG Gishath, Sun's Avatar - Dinosaur Tribal WRG | Rawr!!!
WUG Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - Enchantress Tactics WUG | Enchantments Focused
GBG The Gitrog Monster - Land Shenanigans GBG | Lands/Mill Focused
WBW Kambal, Consul of Life Allocation Matters WBW | Life Gain/Loss focused
UBR Kess, Dissident Mage of the Lotus UBR | Spellslinger
BGB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - Counters & Tokens BGB | -1/-1 counters focused
You're playing MTG, the sole purpose of the game is about winning
Also claiming that playing combo isn't caring about "having a good time" is incorrect. People have a good time playing combo.
Honestly at this point the combo deck discussion is about as fruitful as the "Men should put the toilet seat up"/"Women should put the toilet seat down" debate. Both sides think they're "right". The reality is neither is right or wrong. As long as you don't complain at a sanctioned event about being "robbed" of a win because of a combo, cause that would just be plain silly. Degenerate cards are banned on the banlist, if they're not considered too degenerate, they're not banned.
Modern:R 8Whack R|W White Knights W
What? No, the goal is not to win.
People play recreational games as a form of recreation, to enjoy themselves.
And good for them. It's the rest of the table I am talking about.
When people act all "git gud" then there is a wrong side
And no, that's not really how the banlist for EDH works.
Maybe is just me but I find that players who don't mind combos & infinites are generally more accepting on all types of strategies, playstyles and opinions of other players as compared to players who advocate restrictions placed on what to play and what not to in playgroups?
WUBRG Reaper King - Elf Tribal WUBRG | Tribal Fun
WRG Gishath, Sun's Avatar - Dinosaur Tribal WRG | Rawr!!!
WUG Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - Enchantress Tactics WUG | Enchantments Focused
GBG The Gitrog Monster - Land Shenanigans GBG | Lands/Mill Focused
WBW Kambal, Consul of Life Allocation Matters WBW | Life Gain/Loss focused
UBR Kess, Dissident Mage of the Lotus UBR | Spellslinger
BGB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - Counters & Tokens BGB | -1/-1 counters focused
Well I only play EDH and not other formats, I don't really have other formats which I can play the awesome card synergies I'm so fond of. Furthermore, even those synergies which I like aren't even viable in all other formats besides commander.
Like the 0-1-2-3-4 module combo which I love to call it
Walking Ballista + Animation Module + Decoction Module + Fabrication Module + Krark-clan Ironworks
Where else can I play such a combo besides commander? So awesome yet so fragile.
WUBRG Reaper King - Elf Tribal WUBRG | Tribal Fun
WRG Gishath, Sun's Avatar - Dinosaur Tribal WRG | Rawr!!!
WUG Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - Enchantress Tactics WUG | Enchantments Focused
GBG The Gitrog Monster - Land Shenanigans GBG | Lands/Mill Focused
WBW Kambal, Consul of Life Allocation Matters WBW | Life Gain/Loss focused
UBR Kess, Dissident Mage of the Lotus UBR | Spellslinger
BGB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - Counters & Tokens BGB | -1/-1 counters focused
Personally I actually don't mind the fast tuned combo decks as much as the decks that are mostly innocuous but have 1-2 infinites that they "only use if 'necessary'" or whatever. The fast combo decks at least usually let you know immediately what's going on, and then you either disrupt it or lose, and then next game you can either gang up on them, switch decks, request that they switch decks, or don't play with them. They don't bait you into what looks like a low-powered game only to abruptly end it, and they don't condescendingly hold back on their combo in the name of "letting you have your fun".
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
This has generally been my experience in playing with the variety of people you find on Cockatrice/xMage. When you join a game titled "No inf/mld/extra turns", it's almost inevitable that SOMETHING you do is going to get the creator salty - they're super picky about what they want to play against. Then when you join a cEDH game or a game with no restrictions, you get way more "good play dude" even when you're crushing people/getting crushed.
Padeem, Consul of Innovation - Artifact value/combo.
Sidisi, Brood Tyrant - Sultai zombie reanimator.
I get what you mean, usually those decks will give off the "what the hell" kind of feeling. Like seeing a vampire tribal deck running MikeTrisk, or a zombie deck with no apparent life gain elements suddenly pop up a Sanguine Bond + Exquisite Blood.
Nope it isn't, but sad case is combo players often get the same treatment/scorn even if they win via a 5+ card combo (at least in my case, but now not that bad since the playgroup has changed). It just gives off the vibe that as long as the win isn't via combat phase it wouldn't be approved, be it infinite or not. Like what I experienced when I play Gitrog.
Basalt Monolith + Mesmeric Orb + Gitrog on field. Self mill with Eldrazi bros reshuffling back until get 80+ draw triggers. Draw deck, drop a Glacial Chasm and cast Sickening Dreams discarding 70+ cards. Gets called out for ruining fun due to infinite combo.
Then ok, no infinites then. Played Gitrog deck again, did a Scapeshiftx2 (with Regrowth) + Splendid Reclamation with Zuran Orb, Amulet of Vigor and Retreat to Hagra in play. Generates 40+ Retreat to Hagra triggers in total. Again get called out for ruining fun.
WUBRG Reaper King - Elf Tribal WUBRG | Tribal Fun
WRG Gishath, Sun's Avatar - Dinosaur Tribal WRG | Rawr!!!
WUG Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - Enchantress Tactics WUG | Enchantments Focused
GBG The Gitrog Monster - Land Shenanigans GBG | Lands/Mill Focused
WBW Kambal, Consul of Life Allocation Matters WBW | Life Gain/Loss focused
UBR Kess, Dissident Mage of the Lotus UBR | Spellslinger
BGB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - Counters & Tokens BGB | -1/-1 counters focused
To be fair, Mesmeric Orb + Basalt Monolith is ridiculously easy to do to mill your own deck, and especially easy when you have Gitrog as your commander that forever can be played in the game. It is a fun ruiner since it can't really be interacted with very easily and ends the game out of nowhere.
WUBRG Reaper King - Elf Tribal WUBRG | Tribal Fun
WRG Gishath, Sun's Avatar - Dinosaur Tribal WRG | Rawr!!!
WUG Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - Enchantress Tactics WUG | Enchantments Focused
GBG The Gitrog Monster - Land Shenanigans GBG | Lands/Mill Focused
WBW Kambal, Consul of Life Allocation Matters WBW | Life Gain/Loss focused
UBR Kess, Dissident Mage of the Lotus UBR | Spellslinger
BGB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons - Counters & Tokens BGB | -1/-1 counters focused
That is a good example of how everyone has different feelings on what is a acceptable for how they lose, infinite or non infinite. Personally I think your win with Retreat to Hagra is fine, because it is on theme with your commander and it gives your opponent(s) many chances to interact with to stop it before they lose all the life from Retreat to Hagra. That is totally fair, and if they have problems with that they might want to consider playing a different game.
Lark and saffi immediately set off alarms of "there's probably an infinite going on here". Saffi in particular I never see anyone include other than for an infinite combo.
If you are running lark and free ways to kill lark, I assume you are trying to go infinite, even if the combo pieces are themselves often good enough to include as value goodstuffs.
There doesn't need to be any reasoning for the way people feel about things.
Just because you think there's a hole in the argumentation doesn't mean people cannot feel that way about it.
An infinite combo is: getting value for free....infinitely. That value is card draw, mana, damage, taps/untaps,...basically in one way or another: board state.
I think it's worth drawing a line in the sand: How much "value for free" is too much value? Too warping of the game? I think there are different degrees that should be considered here.
For example, a really efficient spell, say Athreos, God of Passage. Wow, a 5/4 indestructible with sweet recursion for only 3 mana. What if your deck consisted of this kind of 'free value' throughout - major upside when going against decks that don't have the same efficient mana costing spells for the same boad state impact.
Another example, Edric, Spymaster of Trest - huge free value if your deck is tuned for it. Cards is the generally the key to success in the game I understand - it's where board state emerges from. When up against decks that don't have that same kind of impact, Edric will stomp.
Another example, a combo like Rings of Brighthearth + Basalt Monolith gives infinite mana, but does nothing for the player if there is no cards to cast with that mana. The board state still needs to be present.
Finally, a combo like Zealous Conscripts + Kiki-Jiki Mirror Breaker which slams down a win pretty quick still requires the necessary board state in order to achieve that win.
So I guess what I'm trying to get across here is that infinite combos are aimed to win outright. For each example, the 'line in the sand' that represents how much free value the player is getting is notched up. Groups that say 'no infinite combos' are just drawing that line in the sand....but I would suggest that there are non-infinite plays that can be more oppressive as infinite plays.
Ultimately I think it comes down to the power level of the meta that you are playing in. The general 'available access' to board state. The easily it becomes to access the cards and mana a meta needs to win, the more like they are willing to allow infinite combos. Likewise, the metas that tend to have less access to cards and mana tend towards not permitting the 'free value' plays. I think this is becase, ultimately, the more cards and mana access a meta has, the less impact 'free value' has on the meta itself - it's able to cushion the impact better.
Anyways, these are my views on the matter. There is nothing wrong with either way you choose to play - no infinite comobos or infinite combos, private banlists, proxies, or whatever else so long as the meta/group follows by the same rules. My meta doesn't play with Commander damage for example, we general enjoy not having voltron generals swing with toolbox decks - the private rule helps dissuade that particular style of build. Again, nothing wrong with that build, only out of preference that we don't care for it.
Food for thought.
| B Erebos, God of VampiresB | GYeva SmashG | RBosh ArtifactsR | GURAnimar +1 BeatsGUR | RBVial's Secret Hot SauceRB | UBRNekusar, Draw if you DareUBR | RGBDarigaaz'z DragonsRGB | GBSlimeFEETGB | UBOn-Hit LazavUB | URBrudiclad's Artificer InventionsUR | GUBMuldrotha's ElementalsGUB | WUGKestia's EnchantmentsWUG | GUTatyova - Draw, Land, Go!GU | WGArahbo's EquipmentWG | BUWVarina's ZOMBIE HORDESBUW | WLyra's Angelic SalvationW | WBChurch of TeysaWB | UAzami...WizardsU
I dont play full combo in my decks, I'm more of a timmy player, but I can enjoy some, if I win with or loose against combos.
If you ask me, if you do play in a combo heavy meta, you might want to play with the concept of custom banned lists or possibly moving the starting life totals down to see if it allows more aggro strategies. The current commander banned list is just not designed for a competitive meta where combo is the focus so I guess if you are ok with things being broken its fine but I would suggest an alternative rule set for that kind of environment.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
When people lose to aggro, control, or stax strategies, they tend to see it coming and, at some point along the way, have resigned to probable defeat.
Combos can end the game out of nowhere, and people are cheated of the opportunity to accept their likely defeat.
This is all just a guess, though. Threat assessment is a skill that takes practice, but threat assessment can be hard in a game full of combo decks, and this can lead to frustration for some.
I enjoy playing combo at competitive tables and I have a blast without it at the casual ones.