The sol ring argument is pretty laughable. Its literally only super good in the first 3 turns or if you fell behind early in lands.
Anyone who thinks that is not paying attention and playing literally no card draw in their decks. If you frequently feel you have not enough to do with your too much mana that 2 more (1 more the turn you cast it) doesn't help you, I don't know what you're doing. If you think you haven't lost games to opponents being 2 mana short of killing you the turn they topdeck Sol Ring, it's almost certainly that you got so used to Sol Ring that you only consider it's impact on the board the same way you consider a land drop, and are ignoring how much grosser it really is. And to top it off, the opportunity cost on playing Sol Ring in your deck is "cut a basic land."
Sol Ring is the best card in the format at almost any point for almost any deck in almost any game, and it's painful that people pretend otherwise.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
The sol ring argument is pretty laughable. Its literally only super good in the first 3 turns or if you fell behind early in lands.
Anyone who thinks that is not paying attention and playing literally no card draw in their decks. If you frequently feel you have not enough to do with your too much mana that 2 more (1 more the turn you cast it) doesn't help you, I don't know what you're doing. If you think you haven't lost games to opponents being 2 mana short of killing you the turn they topdeck Sol Ring, it's almost certainly that you got so used to Sol Ring that you only consider it's impact on the board the same way you consider a land drop, and are ignoring how much grosser it really is. And to top it off, the opportunity cost on playing Sol Ring in your deck is "cut a basic land."
Sol Ring is the best card in the format at almost any point for almost any deck in almost any game, and it's painful that people pretend otherwise.
The reason Cryogen made the comment he did about Sol Ring is because it’s a circular argument. I really don’t see the need to dig it up again, at least in this thread.
However, no, it’s not “almsot the best card at any point for almost every deck”. I mean, just to prove how ridiculous this argument is( and that’s both for and against), I’ve lost games because I top-decked Sol Ring, and even lost a game because I top-decked that instead of a land(or anything else, really). Also, it’s not that you lost because another player started with Sol Ring, it’s more along the lines of you lost because you didnt start with Sol Ring. Could be argued that it’s the same thing, but there is a difference.
If the plan here is to point to Sol Ring and say “See! See! The banlist is inconsistent garbage”, well, you’re going to have a bad time.
The reason Cryogen made the comment he did about Sol Ring is because it’s a circular argument. I really don’t see the need to dig it up again, at least in this thread.
However, no, it’s not “almsot the best card at any point for almost every deck”. I mean, just to prove how ridiculous this argument is( and that’s both for and against), I’ve lost games because I top-decked Sol Ring, and even lost a game because I top-decked that instead of a land(or anything else, really). Also, it’s not that you lost because another player started with Sol Ring, it’s more along the lines of you lost because you didnt start with Sol Ring. Could be argued that it’s the same thing, but there is a difference.
If the plan here is to point to Sol Ring and say “See! See! The banlist is inconsistent garbage”, well, you’re going to have a bad time.
"The Plan" here is to point out that Magic: the Gathering is better without Sol Ring. Always. Period. The card was a mistake when it was printed and should be rotting away in binders instead of ruining the fun format. I don't care if allowing Sol Ring is consistent with the ban list or not. If their ban philosophy allows it, then their ban philosophy is misguided.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
The reason Cryogen made the comment he did about Sol Ring is because it’s a circular argument. I really don’t see the need to dig it up again, at least in this thread.
However, no, it’s not “almsot the best card at any point for almost every deck”. I mean, just to prove how ridiculous this argument is( and that’s both for and against), I’ve lost games because I top-decked Sol Ring, and even lost a game because I top-decked that instead of a land(or anything else, really). Also, it’s not that you lost because another player started with Sol Ring, it’s more along the lines of you lost because you didnt start with Sol Ring. Could be argued that it’s the same thing, but there is a difference.
If the plan here is to point to Sol Ring and say “See! See! The banlist is inconsistent garbage”, well, you’re going to have a bad time.
"The Plan" here is to point out that Magic: the Gathering is better without Sol Ring. Always. Period. The card was a mistake when it was printed and should be rotting away in binders instead of ruining the fun format. I don't care if allowing Sol Ring is consistent with the ban list or not. If their ban philosophy allows it, then their ban philosophy is misguided.
Well, that’s just not true. Period. You’ve nothing to back that up, so, yeah.
I’ve cooled quite a bit on Sol Ring. Rarely does a player just run away with the game with a turn 1 Sol Ring. Maybe it’s better deck builders, or more relaxed metas, I’m not sure, but it’s just a non-issue of late. I’d wager it’s 1 in 10 games where a player is able to build a winning strategy off of that early acceleration, but it’s usually in combination with really good draws or a way to take advantage of it.
If we want to play this game, how about Edgar Markov? It’s not even based off of a lucky draw, it’s not uncommon to be staring down an army on turn 2 or 3. Or Vial Smasher, the Fierce and friends. I’d argue Sol Ring keeps more generals and strategies relevant than it does to ruin gameplay.
Well, that’s just not true. Period. You’ve nothing to back that up, so, yeah.
I’ve cooled quite a bit on Sol Ring. Rarely does a player just run away with the game with a turn 1 Sol Ring. Maybe it’s better deck builders, or more relaxed metas, I’m not sure, but it’s just a non-issue of late. I’d wager it’s 1 in 10 games where a player is able to build a winning strategy off of that early acceleration, but it’s usually in combination with really good draws or a way to take advantage of it.
If we want to play this game, how about Edgar Markov? It’s not even based off of a lucky draw, it’s not uncommon to be staring down an army on turn 2 or 3. Or Vial Smasher, the Fierce and friends. I’d argue Sol Ring keeps more generals and strategies relevant than it does to ruin gameplay.
I've probably personally written a 10,000 word essay on the subject of banning Sol Ring in this thread. Of course I have things to back it up.
1) It's a card with no clear replacement if you ban it. Mana Crypt is the 1 card that arguably does the same thing as well or better, but ever putting availability aside, most edh decks aren't equipped to win a game fast enough for the damage to not matter. If banned, there wouldn't be a race to play the next best card, the format would just exist without that effect. Wizards hasn't even tried to balance Sol Ring. We've gotten multiple attempts at fair takes on Black Lotus or Moxen over the years, but they haven't even attempted to balance the 1 mana rock. The only other 2 1 mana rocks are Mana Vault which stops gaining you mana after the first shot and Springleaf Drum.
2) It warps the format around it. The existence of Sol Ring in edh changes deck building in the obvious ways: people prioritize having cheap artifact removal, people play tutors that can fetch Sol Ring, etc. But even more than that, Sol Ring changes the way we evaluate every single card. Artifacts are more pushed in this format than basically anywhere but vintage, and Sol Ring is a lot to do with that because colorless mana is so cheap. 2-cost artifacts are so good because you might play them turn 1. Sad Robot is probably a lot more prevalent as a turn 2 play than as a turn 4 play. Cards without generic mana in their cost lose value by missing the curve off Sol Ring mana, and slowing people down to more reasonable mana ramp might allow more cards pushed by their color requirement to sneak into people's decks.
3) There's nothing lost by banning it. 3/4 or more of edh decks ever built have played Sol Ring, and most of the rest would undoubtedly benefit from it. When considering a ban, just as important as "who does the ban hurt" is "who does the ban help?" Well, if you banned Sol Ring, you'd be helping all the decks that can't benefit from playing Sol Ring. That's just not a thing. The percentage of decks that can't benefit from a Sol Ring in place of a land is so, so small that I'm perfectly willing to let them have their time in the sun. Frankly, I'd say an influx of decks that don't need to ramp +2 would be a welcome addition to the world of board wipes and tooth and nail.
4) The format is more fun without it. I promise you this. I'm working on getting people to voluntarily drop the card from a 3rd meta at the moment since I've done it twice already. It's not hard to talk a small group off of Sol Ring. All you have to do is cut it from your own decks and point out to people when the Sol Ring player wins. They'll agree to try without it, and suddenly you get consistent, meaningfully interactive games of magic and never go back. People have this idea that the answer to Sol Ring is playing cheap interaction, but the truth is that people play more cheap interaction without Sol Ring because players are heavily biased toward the best case scenario. The average person making cuts is going to remember the cards that worked when their deck was at its best, and their deck is always at its best with Sol Ring. Cutting Sol Ring significantly balances out the best case scenarios and encourages better deckbuilding and more interactive games of magic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
"The Plan" here is to point out that Magic: the Gathering is better without Sol Ring. Always. Period. The card was a mistake when it was printed and should be rotting away in binders instead of ruining the fun format. I don't care if allowing Sol Ring is consistent with the ban list or not. If their ban philosophy allows it, then their ban philosophy is misguided.
I'm with you that Sol Ring was a mistake. In fact, knowing what we do today, I doubt many folks would argue the game is better off with Sol Ring having seen print. Wizards certainly wouldn't print Sol Ring today. Having said all that, I don't believe the RC's ban philosophy is misguided. This is because Commander, for better or worse, is a mod of Magic, and as a result, the RC can't control which cards Wizards will print and which cards Wizards has already printed. All the RC can do is accommodate their list as a result.
There are tons of absolutely abysmal legal cards in Commander. Mana denial, like Winter Orb and Armageddon, is often especially heinous to gameplay, and Commander would no doubt be better off if those sorts of cards didn't exist either. The fact of the matter is that they do exist though, and the RC must shape their ban list philosophy in such a way to account for this fact. Banning all the cards that fall under the umbrella of "creates bad games of Magic" isn't a possible prospect. That would lead to an untenable ban list. As such, the ban list must reconcile the fact that cards like Sol Ring are here to stay and choose to fight other battles instead.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
"The Plan" here is to point out that Magic: the Gathering is better without Sol Ring. Always. Period. The card was a mistake when it was printed and should be rotting away in binders instead of ruining the fun format. I don't care if allowing Sol Ring is consistent with the ban list or not. If their ban philosophy allows it, then their ban philosophy is misguided.
I'm with you that Sol Ring was a mistake. In fact, knowing what we do today, I doubt many folks would argue the game is better off with Sol Ring having seen print. Wizards certainly wouldn't print Sol Ring today. Having said all that, I don't believe the RC's ban philosophy is misguided. This is because Commander, for better or worse, is a mod of Magic, and as a result, the RC can't control which cards Wizards will print and which cards Wizards has already printed. All the RC can do is accommodate their list as a result.
There are tons of absolutely abysmal legal cards in Commander. Mana denial, like Winter Orb and Armageddon, is often especially heinous to gameplay, and Commander would no doubt be better off if those sorts of cards didn't exist either. The fact of the matter is that they do exist though, and the RC must shape their ban list philosophy in such a way to account for this fact. Banning all the cards that fall under the umbrella of "creates bad games of Magic" isn't a possible prospect. That would lead to an untenable ban list. As such, the ban list must reconcile the fact that cards like Sol Ring are here to stay and choose to fight other battles instead.
I think people just want ban list consistency. Prophet of Kruphix was banned for being centralizing, and giving way too much advantage. I agree.
But Sol Ring being unbanned when it does those exact things is the issue. I acknowledged that when I noticed the majority of blue decks at the shops I play at run Thada Adel as a value card, just to use her to steal Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, and Mana Vault from other players. To the point that G/U/x decks will tutor her in the early-to-mid game. If that isn't completely centralizing, I don't know what is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
So yeah, I lied. But this truly is it, because there'e nothing more to say. I went through this before, and always the same. I'm done.
Hats off to the gentlemen of the RC and beyond...I dunno how you guys do it.
I'm going to try to address your latest post, and then I'm out, because you seem quite set in your ways.
Why I should be "set in my way" more of the rest of people taking this discussion? I am glad to be proven wrong (I even ask people to bring me objective data to confute my arguments), but nobody still bringed datas or logical arguments that stands through all my objections, that's why I am still asking and investigating why my arguments are completely flawed while the current "status quo" of things should be the infallible and correct one.
Bringing 'objective' data into this is going to be an uphill, nearly impossible battle. Everything about this is going to be subjective, because everyone has/had/will have a different experience. Your experiences have shaped what you think/see, mine have done the same. While I don't believe the current status quo is infallible and correct(please, point out the post where I said otherwise if I'm wrong), the experience has apparently been formed due to MUCH more subjective(and perhaps a touch of objective) data than we have ever had. I agree, you don't, they(RC) have ruled. I think it's stupid that at least one American town can place you under arrest for stepping on tulips, but that doesn't mean I fight the establishment over it. Or, to put things more in parallel with this game, I think it's amazing that Paradox Engine is still legal, even though I have gone infinite with it with little effort.
Quote from »
while Sylvan Primordial, Primeval Titan and Prophet of Kruphix were legal, the general consensus was that you HAD to run those cards if you had their colors. It didn't matter what the rest of your deck's gameplan was; you wanted Prime, Sylvan and Prophix in your deck. Even if you only cast them once, your value was gained in that very instant.
The same can be said for stuff like Sol Ring, Mana Crypt and Mana Drains : cards that simply make better any decks, that are the best in what they do, and they give you a not exactly fair advantage and value over the other opponents. But I am asking you : is being a staple that just fills good in any deck any worth of a ban reason? For me, no, absolutely, I am not bothered at all that cards are that good and efficent that are ubiquituous in the format. Competitive players can run all the best goodstuff staples they want in their decks and that, as a casual player, doesn't bother me at all. For the same reason, if it's true tha RC doesn't care about spike/tournament/competitive environments when they ban cards, shouldn't be worried of those cards as well. Prime, Sylvan and Prophix doesn't stop alone people from playing and having fun and they all can be played in fair ways by the casual crowd.
Now we can make an interesting comparison of how a Prophet is actually on the same par of a Consecrated Sphinx, in terms of value. Both they don't do anything when comes to play and can be stopped easily. Both gets stronger, the more players are in the game. Both are very juicy target for Bribery/Clone/Steal/Reanimation warping. Both gives a very huge value that, if unanswered, can be strongly relevant for the final outcome of the game.
I could even make arguments of how the Sphinxs, in a vacuum, is actually even stronger than the Prophet. It goes in more decks. Cloning makes them infinitely more abusable than Prophet. And finally, while a card that is for most part a mix of Seedborn Muse and Leyline of Anticipation is very good, we have to notice tha Prophet actually, does, per-se, zero card advantage. The Sphinx, per-se, alone, does, tons of CA, and from my point of view that's something much, more valuable, especially since it goes straight without any drawbacks of sort, a real gift.
What does that mean? That Prophet wins you the game if you actually are already winning or in a very good position (got already the combo and value pieces in hand), while is basically useless as a topdeck or with a ...bad hand. The Sphinx, on other hand, if unanswered, even if just as a lonely topdeck in an empty board state, let you make tons of card advantage that could actually save you, if not winning the game later directly. The Prophet in comparison, is more like a winmore than anything.
Now I am sure nobody agree that the Sphinx is banworthy even if all the points I made with the comparison with the Cruphix are true. But if a Cruphix is actually less powerful and bring less value and card advantage than a Sphinx, that just leads to understand that actually, not even the Cruphix need it at all the banhammer. If we start to think with the logic of "But this card X with card Y or Z is unfair and so should be banned" instead of the criteria "What does this card in a vacuum alone? Can actually be fair or is always a pain in the ass in all situations"? we should ban hundreds of cards that brings degenerative board states when they work together.
While, if we actually start to use instead the criteria, of what simply does a card in a vacuum, without any other malicious support (which wouldn't be used by casual players that respect the social philosophy and the general fun of the tables anyway), the banlist would be more elegant, with less cards as possible (which is what RC hopes to do), and with solid and logic reasons which can be perfectly grasped by all the player that follows and understand the social philosophy and spirit of EDH.
1. If said staple that fills good spot creates a massive, overwhelming advantage through minimal effort(i.e., playing the game normally), then yes. I repeat, there will be inconsistencies, but I only have 8 years of EDH experience(and a handful more of MTG experience) to go off of. I contest your idea of 'fun', however; again, even a casual player can accidentally break any of those cards and splurge out before another casual(perhaps even a new player) can bring out their mid-guns. Sure, the mindset there would be, "I need to get me one of those!", but that's what the mindset will be, as opposed to, "How can I deal with that, barring getting one of my own?". Prime had a price value of $25 during it's heyday, and yes...EDH may have only had a SMALL part in that(Valakut was a degenerate combo in modern back then with it), but it had a part. After the banning, the price dropped precipitously as people sought to get rid of it. The trend points towards people WANTING the card, buying up all they could, and then flooding the market when it wasn't viable anymore.
THAT, to me, is format warping.
2. If you're going to start using comparisons like that, I would urge you to use card tags. It's REALLY hard to follow your point through the text, even worse without references. I will try to follow what you're saying in my rebuttal, however:
You mention Consecrated Sphinx and Prophet of Kruphix in one breath. Coninx does indeed get you mad card advantage(why else would I put it in my Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind deck? ), but it does not provide effectively free turns, without the proper cards. Prophix does that all on her own; as you say, she's a Seedborn Muse with the addendum of "You have 3 extra turns"(or however other many players there are in your pod). For a new player sitting down to what should be a 'casual game', I would think seeing a player cast spells during everyone's turn is a lot more disheartening than a player drawing tons of cards(again, at first...we all learn that card draw is something to fear in an opponent's hands later). That perceived barrier, along with it's format warping, leads me to accept its banning.
3. Perhaps the banlist would be better in your description, that is a distinct possibility. Perhaps also, the format would be so degenerate in the interim while said cards are playable that no one wants to bother with it anymore. While this list isn't perfect, are you willing to gamble the format on big change like that? At this point in time, I, and perhaps the vast majority, am not. The social contract is unenforceable in some instances(you only have the one group/LGS to play at, for example); trying to formulate this banlist around some degenerate cards is the best to hope for at this point.
Second: While I find it VERY difficult to believe you have never had a pod/game centralize around these three, you are likely to find yourself in the minority. I can only speak for my own honesty(for whatever that's worth), but you will likely find MANY more people talking about the terrible trio dominating a game's focus, primarily because they're just that good.
If you have trouble to believe me, seems that many people really forgot to what the "build casually, play competitively" of Sheldon words really means. I don't need to make a deck just to be the tryhard that go degenerate/oppressive/infinite with a Prime Time, I remember how I've used simply to ramp for zendikar manlands and for me at the time that was the coolest thing ever to do, and players around me were perfectly ok with that. Even if we're in a situation of where the Prime Time is abused from every player or most of them, I still don't see how that's bad, since that means that everybody ramps and got the opportunity to play even more powerful, fun and splashy spells and interact with each other. This is a battlecruise scenario and that's what I think it's good and legit to do in this format, I would love to see the Prime Time warping every day than the miserable prison decks that love to prevent people to do hardly anything at all.
And that's your opinion. Some people LOVE those prison decks(I am not one of them). Some people love the decks that wrath the board every turn, while their stuff is indestructible, and they swing for Overrun damage. Some people love token decks.
Everyone loves something different...just because you have a dream of 'seeing the world burn' doesn't mean that it's ideal for everyone, rookies and vets alike. Prime/Sylvan/Prophix got banned, and people moved on to other things, not necessarily 'the next best thing'. Some people I know took decks apart completely because those cards were the lynchpins of them(poor deck planning, I say). Intended or not, banning those cards had the side effect of forcing people to re-examine options, instead of 'Gotta have this!'. Yes, I know you can point out a half-dozen other offenders(easily), but either A) they effect so few games(subjectively), that they do not warp much, or B) they need to have a deck built to take advantage of their strengths.
Have you seen a Prime Time with 3 different Mind Controls on it? I have.
And I think that's wonderfully hilarious and would never seriously bother me at all. Now I make you some questions of things that really bother me:
...have you ever see somebody casting turn 2 a Treasonous Ogre, taking 11 mana and casting the general Godo, Bandit Warlord that brings Helm of the Host and winning the game doing infinite combat phases on the spot? I did.
...have you ever see somebody casting Armageddon like cards after Kaalia cheated some ridiculous fatty like Iona/the first Avacyn/Sire of Insanity? I did, lot of times.
...have you ever see a Teferi, Temporal Archmage going infinite with the Chain Veil or simply freeze the game with Stasis? I did.
....have you ever see somebody playing Doomsday and then winning right away with the combination of cards that brings to Laboratory Maniac?
...have you ever see a Daretti or Derevi deck abusing with tons of stax cards like Winter Orb, Static Orb, Tangle Wire? I did
...Have you ever seen an Enduring Ideal deck? I did.
...Have you ever seen a Hermit Druid combo deck? I did
....Have you ever seen a Food Chain combo deck? I did
... Have you ever seen Zur, the Enchanter tutoring every game for Necropotence, Contamination and other lovely cards? I did.
...Have you ever seen a deck abusing and winning the same moment it casts Paradox Engine? I did
...Have you ever seen Arcum Dagsson ending every game with Disk+Lattice+Forge? I did
....Have you ever seen people casting Tooth and Nail just to straight win with infinite on the spot? I did
....Have you even seens people going infinite after sac their Protean Hulk? I did
..I could go on for long, but I believe you grasped the concept.
I am not exaggerating in saying I played maybe even a thousand (or even more) of EDH games in all these years. With online gaming, that's very easy and possible, and I saw all sort of stuff from players all over the world and not just my little insignificant local meta. I know what means to play nasty in this format. I saw all sort of evil, abusing, combo, and degenerate things, in competitive, mildy competitive and casual metas.
And if you think that I should be outraged of a Prime Time with 3 mind controls on it....You doesn't seem to realize what's the real evil that is possible to do in this format. There's so many things much more upsetting than a "triple mind controlled Prime Time" and are perfectly legal to do here, that you have no idea.
From what I saw remembering all my long experience...your little anecdote doesn't impress me at all, and I will gladly take that everyday.
For someone who complained about another being a jerk...well...*gestures*
Yes, to 80% of your questions(and worse). And comparing online EDH to the paper format...I think it weakens your argument, as online resources are much more readily available, so the effort to find 'a better and perhaps funsie way' isn't necessarily worth the effort. I've seen some **** too...but normally in a fun way that doesn't turn up in the same fashion every time. You may be okay with it...but I think you should also accept that not everyone is.
. Painter's Servant(nevermind its legality) and Iona, Shield of Emeria is pretty bad, but it opens up politics more often than not. And that's not even the worst engine of it...replace Iona with Grindstone.
Painter with Grindstone is actually a really "meh" combo, compared to all the others game-ending combo that this format already gives you, since this 2 card combo can kill only one opponent at time...and even still, they could survive, if they play any cards that reshuffle itself in deck (Blightsteel Colossus, etc.). No, believe me, Painter+Grindstone combo is laughable. If you want to win for real you have so much better choices.
The big thing with my third point is that none of those 'degenerate' cards that are more deserving of bans are auto-includes the way Prime/Sylvan/Prophix were.
But, how I already proved before, you have to convince me how auto-includes means banworthy. For me it's not even that bad. For me are others the problems, much more worrying than that.
This may sound lazy, but the burden of proof is actually on you to prove them UNbanworthy. The same uphill battle had been(and likely will be) fought by proponents of Coalition Victory, and honestly it's true. Your experience shows they are not that bad...expand on that. Show your experience to be the majority, maybe things will change.
Truth be told, I can't remember the last time I've seen Mike/Trike(Mikaeus, the Unhallowed and Triskelion, in case you were unfamiliar}, Deadeye or even Mycosynth.
Does personal experience mean something for the sake of the arguments of ban/unbans? Because in that case I probably made more games than you, against more decks, more players, from more places and my words could be meaningful at least. Doesn't personal experience mean anything? Good it's a bias, in that case what you are saying here isn't worth anything. That's why I am asking that somebody brings to me data that I can fact-check myself instead of being forced to have religious faith on the words of some people.
Emphasis mine on your quote...
If your words are the only ones that hold meaning, then this discussion was over before it even started, so why are you still here? And given your last quote(below), why are you demanding data from us when your 'data' is just as subjective?
The council has spoken, and we must abide.
The "council" can change idea, you know? They are not Gods with divine wisdom within. The sole fact that cards on the banlist aren't a biblical monolith but get unbanned over time proves that things changes, cards changes, RC change, and discussions like this are always worth to do.
No, I had no idea that the council can change its mind.
...Seriously, of course they can. 8 years playing the format, remember? And if they unban Prime Time or the others, I will think it a mistake, but will go along with it; you know, 'The council has spoken' and all? If I'm wrong, and Prime doesn't warp the format again, I will gladly accept "I told you so"s all over. But I don't think I am, and until that day, apparently neither does the RC.
Out of curiousity, have you and your playgroup ever TRIED playing with those cards nowadays(I noted that you said you were playing before the bans)? House rule them back in sometime, and see what happens. I will commend your playgroup's restraint if they do not steal the show, but I do not believe most people would be as self-controlled.
I have a couple of friends who are willing to do the experiment of a "non banlist format". Yeah, that's right, nothing is banned, even silver border cards are allowed. And we already playing in this mode for about...4 years kinda. That doesn't mean we are willing to use every single cards frobidden from the banlist, but for sure we are using lot of them. The results? In a format where's everything legal, Prime Time is just a good card over divine monsters, and we prefer to make more wacky/crazy plays usually. It's very fun to play if you actively avoid to play some cards only to do upsetting combos with them.
Good for you(no sarcasm here, serious). Increase the sample size and get back to us on your findings. Keep records so you have 'objective' instead of 'subjective' data, and check back with us. There may come a breaking point, there may not...but in the meantime, you're asking US for objective proof when this is just as subjective.
That would lead to an untenable ban list. As such, the ban list must reconcile the fact that cards like Sol Ring are here to stay and choose to fight other battles instead.
Except it wouldn't. First, the RC has already decided to fight the "fast mana" battle: Tolarian Academy, Channel, Fastbond, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary, Black Lotus, and the Moxen are all already banned as some of the most egregious examples of fast mana available. The RC clearly recognizes that fast mana is a problem. They just refuse to pull the trigger on Sol Ring because it has basically been grandfathered into the format thanks to WotC printing it in literally every single precon.
Second, there are no comparable cards. You can easily ban Sol Ring, Mana Vault, and Mana Crypt and call it a day. There's no slippery slope here. It's a pretty simple criteria: does your mana rock produce more mana than it cost? It should probably be banned.
First off, apologies for the double post, but I wanted to reply to you directly.
This just isn’t true. Primeval Titan and Sylvan Primordialdid see play in competetive decks, almost every deck. Actually, the meta was so G that I would routinely see 3-4 of Prime Time in every game. Hell, Prime Time sees a ton of play in 1v1 cEDH, so, you’re wrong. Same goes for Prophet of Kruphix. If you weren’t playing green, you weren’t playing EDH. Beyond that, PoK was just a nightmare for multiplayer games.
I’ll just say this, you have access to the official reasonings on why those cards were banned. Personal commentary means absolutely nothing.
You’re right, we do have the official reasonings on why these cards were banned.
“Primeval Titan
One of the concerns that we've had recently is the overrepresentation of heavy ramp strategies, to the point where it makes up a large proportion of the aggregate decks out there. While we think ramp should be good - this is battlecruiser Magic, after all - it's probably a little too prevalent and needs reining in a bit. With that in mind, we're banning the most egregious offender, Primeval Titan.
This decision won't be universally popular. Primeval Titan is dripping with awesomeness, and we ourselves are big fans of the card. But its ubiquity and effect on games couldn't be ignored and sad though we are to see it go, we think it will make for a more interesting and diverse format.”
They banned Prime Time because they thought green ramp was too good.
“That said, there is one card which has drawn an increasing amount of ire over the past year. We feel Sylvan Primordial is causing far more problems than its contributions justify, and that the format will be better off without it. It meets many of the heuristic markers for a banned card, insofar as it invalidates many other creatures as search targets and causes arguments about whether its use is degenerate or reasonable. It can be easily accelerated into on turn 4 or 5 (before players are expected to have extensive defenses or threats online), at which point it turns a reasonable ramp deck into uninteresting games.
If the card was just a big ramp, or just utility destruction, or just spot land destruction, it would likely be fine but by combining both factors it becomes ubiquitous, frequently overwhelming, and repetitive. After some debate in previous seasons, the committee members all voted in favour of removing it from the format.”
They banned Sylvan Primordial because they thought it was making “reasonable ramp” decks too strong.
You’re wrong about green being the only way to play EDH back then. There were still very competitive commanders that weren’t green.
Primeval Titan, Sylvan Primordial, and Prophet of Kruphix didn’t push all non green decks out of the format. They weren’t even the best cards in the green decks that were competitively viable.
I'm with you that Sol Ring was a mistake. In fact, knowing what we do today, I doubt many folks would argue the game is better off with Sol Ring having seen print. Wizards certainly wouldn't print Sol Ring today. Having said all that, I don't believe the RC's ban philosophy is misguided. This is because Commander, for better or worse, is a mod of Magic, and as a result, the RC can't control which cards Wizards will print and which cards Wizards has already printed. All the RC can do is accommodate their list as a result.
There are tons of absolutely abysmal legal cards in Commander. Mana denial, like Winter Orb and Armageddon, is often especially heinous to gameplay, and Commander would no doubt be better off if those sorts of cards didn't exist either. The fact of the matter is that they do exist though, and the RC must shape their ban list philosophy in such a way to account for this fact. Banning all the cards that fall under the umbrella of "creates bad games of Magic" isn't a possible prospect. That would lead to an untenable ban list. As such, the ban list must reconcile the fact that cards like Sol Ring are here to stay and choose to fight other battles instead.
I'm not suggesting that every card that creates bad games should be banned. I definitely play Knowledge Pool and Possibility Storm, I'm very guilty of making game states people don't like. But Sol Ring effects more than just the games it blows out. Sol Ring changes the way people approach every game. Nobody builds a deck planning for any unknown opponent to slam down Winter Orb. A card in 75% of decks stops being just a card and becomes more like one of the rules of deck construction. That is a rare, if not totally unique, quality.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
Your well thought out and impeccably argued argument has most surely convinced me of the error of my ways.
Oh wait...
In all seriousness though this is the problem with talking about the ban list. You cannot just hand wave away inconsistencies. Your argument against PT and SP basically boiled down to "a bunch of people complained about it so it got banned" despite the fact that Sol Ring (and friends) might be one of the most complained about cards ever, to the point you've apparently made a drinking game about it. Noticing the problem yet?
Except it wouldn't. First, the RC has already decided to fight the "fast mana" battle: Tolarian Academy, Channel, Fastbond, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary, Black Lotus, and the Moxen are all already banned as some of the most egregious examples of fast mana available. The RC clearly recognizes that fast mana is a problem. They just refuse to pull the trigger on Sol Ring because it has basically been grandfathered into the format thanks to WotC printing it in literally every single precon.
Second, there are no comparable cards. You can easily ban Sol Ring, Mana Vault, and Mana Crypt and call it a day. There's no slippery slope here. It's a pretty simple criteria: does your mana rock produce more mana than it cost? It should probably be banned.
Well half of your examples produce either lots of mana, lots of colored mana, or are also banned for PBtE. Sol Ring produces 2 colorless always and forever. Lastly, can you cite shere the RC said where printing it in (not literally) every precon is what is stopping them from pulling the trigger? Because I'm pretty sure you're just making that up.
Ok. So if we are going for that criteria, I just linked to Papa Funk at least 12 different links, from different players and different places of people complaining about the legality of Serra Ascendant. Boom. There's 12 pieces of data. Is Serra Ascendant bannable only because lots of people complain the card?
Dude, that's 12 links over *8 years*. That's nothing. You're just making it impossible to take you seriously.
I suggest you go back and read my original post and think about the actual - fairly narrow - point I made, which you've completely failed to address. At this point, I think you're just throwing around a whole bunch of random stuff in the hope that maybe something sticks.
I think people just want ban list consistency. Prophet of Kruphix was banned for being centralizing, and giving way too much advantage. I agree.
But Sol Ring being unbanned when it does those exact things is the issue. I acknowledged that when I noticed the majority of blue decks at the shops I play at run Thada Adel as a value card, just to use her to steal Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, and Mana Vault from other players. To the point that G/U/x decks will tutor her in the early-to-mid game. If that isn't completely centralizing, I don't know what is.
People definitely want ban list consistency. And so does the RC. One person's idea of consistency might not align with another person's though, and when a card in Commander is banned for more than one reason, I think it's easy for onlookers (especially uneducated ones) to cry foul.
Regarding your Thada Adel example, your metagame strikes me as being very atypical of Commander. Personally, I've never found Sol Ring to be that centralizing, and if people are actually going out of their way to tutor up a Thada Adel in hopes of connecting with it the following turn, all in the name of Ur-Golem's Eye, that doesn't strike me as a serious problem. I know I'm dicing up your example here and that there may be other reasons why you've found Sol Ring to be centralizing, but I've seldom found Sol Ring to be this egregious.
Except it wouldn't. First, the RC has already decided to fight the "fast mana" battle: Tolarian Academy, Channel, Fastbond, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary, Black Lotus, and the Moxen are all already banned as some of the most egregious examples of fast mana available. The RC clearly recognizes that fast mana is a problem. They just refuse to pull the trigger on Sol Ring because it has basically been grandfathered into the format thanks to WotC printing it in literally every single precon.
Second, there are no comparable cards. You can easily ban Sol Ring, Mana Vault, and Mana Crypt and call it a day. There's no slippery slope here. It's a pretty simple criteria: does your mana rock produce more mana than it cost? It should probably be banned.
I think we can agree that it's certainly a good thing the RC has had fast mana in their crosshairs. I believe you just draw the line differently than where the RC does regarding what kind of fast mana is problematic. Personally, I don't find Sol Ring to be a problem. I play it all the time alongside Mana Crypt and Mana Vault and those cards never eviscerate my games when I play them. If I could get my hands on some Moxen, I suspect I'd find them just as amiable.
As Cryogen already mentioned, I thought I should reiterate that some of the cards you listed aren't banned solely because they make mana too quickly. The Moxen and Lotus, for example, are also banned due to perceived barrier to entry. And Rofellos can be used as a commander. There isn't just one reason why many of these cards are problems. Most of them are banned for a culmination of things.
Also, I don't think lumping all the cards together that make more mana than they cost is as simple as a fix as you make it sound. Is Grim Monolith really a problem? What about Bloom Tender? Should that be banned? How about a hypothetical Mana Crypt that deals 10 damage to you for losing a flip instead of 3? I think each individual card deserves scrutiny and that a card shouldn't necessarily be banned just because it meets a certain criteria. This is where the slippery slope resides. When players look for consistency in their banned list (as Teysa mentioned), they're naturally going to find cards that aren't banned but believe meet the same qualifications as cards that are. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and I think you just disagree with where that line is, and that's a perfectly fine place to be.
I'm not suggesting that every card that creates bad games should be banned. I definitely play Knowledge Pool and Possibility Storm, I'm very guilty of making game states people don't like. But Sol Ring effects more than just the games it blows out. Sol Ring changes the way people approach every game. Nobody builds a deck planning for any unknown opponent to slam down Winter Orb. A card in 75% of decks stops being just a card and becomes more like one of the rules of deck construction. That is a rare, if not totally unique, quality.
Would you be willing to elaborate further on why you believe Sol Ring changes the way people approach the game? For me, I don't see how Sol Ring changes the way I play at all. It just goes into my decks because it's good at making mana, and that's about all there is to it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Would you be willing to elaborate further on why you believe Sol Ring changes the way people approach the game? For me, I don't see how Sol Ring changes the way I play at all. It just goes into my decks because it's good at making mana, and that's about all there is to it.
Sol Ring helps enable the trap of optimistic deckbuilding, playing cards for their best case scenario and not thinking about all the other cases. But then people try out what they wanted to do against strong opponents and the high ceiling they theorycrafted for their cards doesn't always appear, they see how low the floor is, and they move on to something else. That's the story of most brews in competitive formats. Everyone hopes for the best and then the play data keeps you grounded.
Edh is already a different beast. The format has high variance, and it's also perfectly acceptable here to just enjoy losing most of the time since that's the essence of multiplaer, and that lets people play whatever they want to and I wouldn't have it any other way. But all of this makes it even harder to see the floor of a cards usefulness and puts a highlight on the minority of games that are won. So when people go to make cuts from their deck, they'll be inclined to keep the cards they remember carrying them when their deck was at its best.
People can debate whether or not Sol Ring is as grossly overpowered as I treat it, but I don't think many would argue that a deck starting the game with Sol Ring in hand is going to function far smoother than the same deck without a sol ring. Win or lose, that game will go almost certainly go in the books as a time that the deck functioned well. And unless the player actively acknowledges to themself that Sol Ring was allowing their deck to function that game, they'll be biased by the result into preferring the cards that work when they have Sol Ring; that is to say cards that most efficiently use the 2 extra colorless mana and effects that benefit most from a 2 mana advantage, and then more mana efficient cards and cards that play better from behind get left on the chopping block. People accidentally optimizing for Sol Ring can give you metas full of decks that play archenemy with a Sol Ring and then offer no meaningful contribution to the next game. And thats especially frustrating to someone like me who tries to regulate most of my decks to suit my opponents' power level, it just isn't possible to make a consistently fair match against the Dr Jeckyll and Mr Hyde act that most casual decks with Sol Ring do, and choosing to crush people when they don't have Sol Ring or accept defeat when they do only helps contribute to the bias if I'm not pointing out what's happening.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
Admittedly I haven't read the whole thread yet, but from what I've seen so far none of these posts address the current topic of why Sol Ring was brought up in the first place. The point isn't "Sol Ring should be banned" (although, in my opinion, it clearly should be). The point is "SP and PT were complained about. SP and PT were format warping and centralizing. Therefore they were banned. But don't worry about Sol Ring despite it doing the exact same thing." You're using different criteria for arguing your bans, seemingly at random.
Well half of your examples produce either lots of mana, lots of colored mana, or are also banned for PBtE. Sol Ring produces 2 colorless always and forever. Lastly, can you cite shere the RC said where printing it in (not literally) every precon is what is stopping them from pulling the trigger? Because I'm pretty sure you're just making that up.
Let us not pretend that the Power would ever be unbanned, even if they each cost cents. They're called Power for a reason. As for the other point, obviously the RC has never said that; that was my personal interpretation of events. What you might even call my opinion, if you will.
Also, I don't think lumping all the cards together that make more mana than they cost is as simple as a fix as you make it sound. Is Grim Monolith really a problem? What about Bloom Tender? Should that be banned? How about a hypothetical Mana Crypt that deals 10 damage to you for losing a flip instead of 3? I think each individual card deserves scrutiny and that a card shouldn't necessarily be banned just because it meets a certain criteria. This is where the slippery slope resides. When players look for consistency in their banned list (as Teysa mentioned), they're naturally going to find cards that aren't banned but believe meet the same qualifications as cards that are. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and I think you just disagree with where that line is, and that's a perfectly fine place to be.
First, I specified mana rock. Nobody cares about Bloom Tender. The problem is having a bunch of colorless mana rocks, specifically ones that cost less mana than they produce, that you can chain into each other. For example, I've hardcast Omniscience on T3. That's not acceptable. Granted, that's a particularly extreme example but still, would it really be better if it was Consecrated Sphinx? Or Sire of Insanity? We simply should not have access to that much mana that quickly as it leads to runaway games that are over before most players even have a chance to do anything meaningful.
As for your other point, I'm sure it would be possible to design a Mana Crypt variant with a severe enough drawback that it wouldn't see play... right up until people found out how to win before the drawback becomes an issue. Just look at Lion's Eye Diamond. It was supposed to be a fixed Black Lotus with a drawback so extreme it would balance out the fast mana. It's still broken in half and leads to degenerate gameplay. Fast mana rocks are simply too powerful. So while Grim Monolith might not be as oppressive as Sol Ring it still deserves to go because the format would be better off without it.
Would you be willing to elaborate further on why you believe Sol Ring changes the way people approach the game? For me, I don't see how Sol Ring changes the way I play at all. It just goes into my decks because it's good at making mana, and that's about all there is to it.
I know this wasn't directed at me but I would like to address it anyways. Sol Ring warps the entire format, from deck building to gameplay, simply by being legal. First and foremost, EDH is secretly a 98 card format. The last two cards should always be Sol Ring and Command Tower. Full stop. Your deck is objectively wrong if you think otherwise. And putting a Sol Ring in your deck incentivizes you to also put in 4-mana cards with generic mana requirements as things to do when you draw Sol Ring (and also just being generically good cards on their own): Sad Robot, Thran Dynamo, Explosive Vegetation, etc. Sol Ring encourages you to chain-ramp your way up the curve way faster than you would otherwise be able to, enabling Turn 10 plays by T4-5, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is basically the opposite of one of Sheldon's guiding philosophies of the format: "what's acceptable on Turn 10 isn't acceptable on Turn 4" (paraphrased because I couldn't find the actual quote).
On the flip side, building your deck against Sol Rings forces you to play a bunch of narrow, mediocre answers like Nature's Claim or Mental Misstep because waiting even one extra turn to answer a Sol Ring could potentially be too slow. I don't want to play cards like that, but I have to jam them into every deck that can support them because Return to Dust is hilariously ill-equipped to stop a Sol Ring start. Look, I managed to get your Sol Ring on turn 4 after you cast 12 mana worth of spells with it. Neat. Fun game.
And then from a gameplay perspective, Sol Ring is simply one of the grossest cards in existence. The company line regarding Sol Ring is something like "it's okay because you can team up to beat an early Sol Ring". But just think about that for a minute. When the answer to a 1 card is to Archenemy that player out of the game, there's a God damn problem. Games should not be turning into Archenemy before some players have even taken their first turn. There is an absurd cost:effect ratio happening here that the RC just refuses to acknowledge, especially when compared to cards that are theoretically banned for "centralizing the game" like PT and SP. If those cards could centralize the game at 6/7 mana and it was problematic, how is turning the game into Archenemy for 1 mana somehow more acceptable? I don't know about you, but around here a T1 Sol Ring is met with audible groans from everyone else at the table.
I simply don't understand how the RC could consider PT and SP centralizing enough to ban but not Sol Ring, the card that is in every deck and immediately changes the game into Archenemy when cast early. People complain about Sol Ring. People copy and steal Sol Ring. Sol Ring demands the attention of every player when cast, except it does it faster and more often than PT/SP ever did. I just don't see the difference. But I guess that's a recurring theme here.
The point is "SP and PT were complained about. SP and PT were format warping and centralizing. Therefore they were banned. But don't worry about Sol Ring despite it doing the exact same thing."
That's a rather massive distortion of the point I made, which I suppose you have to do to get to Sol Ring. I pointed out that post-PT, there was much greater diversity of choice for creature copying/controlling, etc, and when asked for proof pointed out that no single creature received all the complaints afterwards.
If you want to argue that Sol Ring is always the card that everyone is trying to copy & control, then it might be a parallel.
That's a rather massive distortion of the point I made, which I suppose you have to do to get to Sol Ring. I pointed out that post-PT, there was much greater diversity of choice for creature copying/controlling, etc, and when asked for proof pointed out that no single creature received all the complaints afterwards.
If you want to argue that Sol Ring is always the card that everyone is trying to copy & control, then it might be a parallel.
What exactly is the difference? If PT and SP were banned because they restricted diversity, that would imply that they elbowed out comparable cards and were generally too prevalent, correct? Or, to put it another way, PT and SP were always the best choice for your deck while they were legal. That sounds a lot like Sol Ring.
If you believe that decks should be objectively correct, then you're not going to like the philosophy of Commander.
Sol Ring is a fine card in casual, multiplayer play. If you remove any of the qualifiers, then it's awful. But that's what we're building for.
First, I don't even know what this means. What exactly is "casual, multiplayer play"? This feels like a huge cop-out that can be used to justify any card: "oh you think Channel is too powerful? You're just playing it wrong, if you play it this way it's fine."
Second, there is a pretty significant difference between building an entire cutthroat deck with a single unified game plan, and taking any random 99, removing a basic land for a Sol Ring and then randomly crushing games when you draw it early. It doesn't matter what you're doing, your deck will disproportionately benefit from a Sol Ring compared to any other card. How is that not as diversity-killing as SP and PT were?
If PT and SP were banned because they restricted diversity, that would imply that they elbowed out comparable cards and were generally too prevalent, correct?
Second, there is a pretty significant difference between building an entire cutthroat deck with a single unified game plan, and taking any random 99, removing a basic land for a Sol Ring and then randomly crushing games when you draw it early.
If you're seeing games crushed by an early Sol Ring in a random 99 regularly, I don't know what to say. It's broken in decks that are pushing the envelope, but those decks are already past what we're targeting. In the games we're trying to foster, it's powerful, but not game-breaking.
If you're seeing games crushed by an early Sol Ring in a random 99 regularly, I don't know what to say. It's broken in decks that are pushing the envelope, but those decks are already past what we're targeting. In the games we're trying to foster, it's powerful, but not game-breaking.
Ok, but have you tried playing without it? Ever cut it from a meta to see if the games might be closer to what you're trying to foster?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
If you're seeing games crushed by an early Sol Ring in a random 99 regularly, I don't know what to say. It's broken in decks that are pushing the envelope, but those decks are already past what we're targeting. In the games we're trying to foster, it's powerful, but not game-breaking.
Except it's broken in every deck, even the most casual ones. For example, T1>Sol Ring into T2>Thran Dynamo gives you potentially 8 mana on turn 3. Ring into Explosive Vegetation gives you potentially 7 mana on turn 3. Even the lowly Ring into Sad Robot gives you potentially 6 mana turn 3. Or the dreaded T1>Sol Ring>Signet untap with 5 mana on turn 2.
Those are literally all cards that were printed in the EDH Precons. They aren't exactly "pushing the envelope" in terms of power level here. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the precons are more powerful than what the banlist is made for? Or are you trying to tell me that 6+ mana on turn 3 is an acceptable place to be?
I think I'm starting to see why Prime Time was a problem. Of course he's a problem when you cast him on turn 3.
Ancestral Recall is a nice effect but not game breaking, the 5 Mox are hardly a problem on their own (allowing all 5 might be a different story), and even Black Lotus as a ritual effect isn't liable to swing games (although again, when taken into the cumulative effect of many pieces of free mana it's a different story). And even though it's not Power, Library pales in comparison to the drawing power of Necropotence.
Ancestral Recall is a nice effect but not game breaking, the 5 Mox are hardly a problem on their own (allowing all 5 might be a different story), and even Black Lotus as a ritual effect isn't liable to swing games (although again, when taken into the cumulative effect of many pieces of free mana it's a different story). And even though it's not Power, Library pales in comparison to the drawing power of Necropotence.
I don't know how Impossible feels about Ancestral and Library, but they probably think there is too much fast mana in the format already.
I'm fine with Library of Alexandria coming off the list right now. If the best fast mana and fast tutors were banned, I would be fine with Ancestral Recall coming off as well. I hope the Moxes and Black Lotus are never legal.
Ancestral Recall is a nice effect but not game breaking, the 5 Mox are hardly a problem on their own (allowing all 5 might be a different story), and even Black Lotus as a ritual effect isn't liable to swing games (although again, when taken into the cumulative effect of many pieces of free mana it's a different story). And even though it's not Power, Library pales in comparison to the drawing power of Necropotence.
While we might disagree on what should be banned, I appreciate this statement. I think the format is better off without a card like black lotus, but it wouldn't turn casual decks into mythical turn 1 machines. For decks not focused on fast mana, I think Sol Ring is actually more desirable than a mox or lotus.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
Except it's broken in every deck, even the most casual ones. For example, T1>Sol Ring into T2>Thran Dynamo gives you potentially 8 mana on turn 3. Ring into Explosive Vegetation gives you potentially 7 mana on turn 3.
To reiterate papafunk's point. If you're getting crushed by a T2 Thran Dynamo in casual, multiplayer games you/your group is doing something wrong.
Anyone who thinks that is not paying attention and playing literally no card draw in their decks. If you frequently feel you have not enough to do with your too much mana that 2 more (1 more the turn you cast it) doesn't help you, I don't know what you're doing. If you think you haven't lost games to opponents being 2 mana short of killing you the turn they topdeck Sol Ring, it's almost certainly that you got so used to Sol Ring that you only consider it's impact on the board the same way you consider a land drop, and are ignoring how much grosser it really is. And to top it off, the opportunity cost on playing Sol Ring in your deck is "cut a basic land."
Sol Ring is the best card in the format at almost any point for almost any deck in almost any game, and it's painful that people pretend otherwise.
The reason Cryogen made the comment he did about Sol Ring is because it’s a circular argument. I really don’t see the need to dig it up again, at least in this thread.
However, no, it’s not “almsot the best card at any point for almost every deck”. I mean, just to prove how ridiculous this argument is( and that’s both for and against), I’ve lost games because I top-decked Sol Ring, and even lost a game because I top-decked that instead of a land(or anything else, really). Also, it’s not that you lost because another player started with Sol Ring, it’s more along the lines of you lost because you didnt start with Sol Ring. Could be argued that it’s the same thing, but there is a difference.
If the plan here is to point to Sol Ring and say “See! See! The banlist is inconsistent garbage”, well, you’re going to have a bad time.
"The Plan" here is to point out that Magic: the Gathering is better without Sol Ring. Always. Period. The card was a mistake when it was printed and should be rotting away in binders instead of ruining the fun format. I don't care if allowing Sol Ring is consistent with the ban list or not. If their ban philosophy allows it, then their ban philosophy is misguided.
Well, that’s just not true. Period. You’ve nothing to back that up, so, yeah.
I’ve cooled quite a bit on Sol Ring. Rarely does a player just run away with the game with a turn 1 Sol Ring. Maybe it’s better deck builders, or more relaxed metas, I’m not sure, but it’s just a non-issue of late. I’d wager it’s 1 in 10 games where a player is able to build a winning strategy off of that early acceleration, but it’s usually in combination with really good draws or a way to take advantage of it.
If we want to play this game, how about Edgar Markov? It’s not even based off of a lucky draw, it’s not uncommon to be staring down an army on turn 2 or 3. Or Vial Smasher, the Fierce and friends. I’d argue Sol Ring keeps more generals and strategies relevant than it does to ruin gameplay.
I've probably personally written a 10,000 word essay on the subject of banning Sol Ring in this thread. Of course I have things to back it up.
1) It's a card with no clear replacement if you ban it. Mana Crypt is the 1 card that arguably does the same thing as well or better, but ever putting availability aside, most edh decks aren't equipped to win a game fast enough for the damage to not matter. If banned, there wouldn't be a race to play the next best card, the format would just exist without that effect. Wizards hasn't even tried to balance Sol Ring. We've gotten multiple attempts at fair takes on Black Lotus or Moxen over the years, but they haven't even attempted to balance the 1 mana rock. The only other 2 1 mana rocks are Mana Vault which stops gaining you mana after the first shot and Springleaf Drum.
2) It warps the format around it. The existence of Sol Ring in edh changes deck building in the obvious ways: people prioritize having cheap artifact removal, people play tutors that can fetch Sol Ring, etc. But even more than that, Sol Ring changes the way we evaluate every single card. Artifacts are more pushed in this format than basically anywhere but vintage, and Sol Ring is a lot to do with that because colorless mana is so cheap. 2-cost artifacts are so good because you might play them turn 1. Sad Robot is probably a lot more prevalent as a turn 2 play than as a turn 4 play. Cards without generic mana in their cost lose value by missing the curve off Sol Ring mana, and slowing people down to more reasonable mana ramp might allow more cards pushed by their color requirement to sneak into people's decks.
3) There's nothing lost by banning it. 3/4 or more of edh decks ever built have played Sol Ring, and most of the rest would undoubtedly benefit from it. When considering a ban, just as important as "who does the ban hurt" is "who does the ban help?" Well, if you banned Sol Ring, you'd be helping all the decks that can't benefit from playing Sol Ring. That's just not a thing. The percentage of decks that can't benefit from a Sol Ring in place of a land is so, so small that I'm perfectly willing to let them have their time in the sun. Frankly, I'd say an influx of decks that don't need to ramp +2 would be a welcome addition to the world of board wipes and tooth and nail.
4) The format is more fun without it. I promise you this. I'm working on getting people to voluntarily drop the card from a 3rd meta at the moment since I've done it twice already. It's not hard to talk a small group off of Sol Ring. All you have to do is cut it from your own decks and point out to people when the Sol Ring player wins. They'll agree to try without it, and suddenly you get consistent, meaningfully interactive games of magic and never go back. People have this idea that the answer to Sol Ring is playing cheap interaction, but the truth is that people play more cheap interaction without Sol Ring because players are heavily biased toward the best case scenario. The average person making cuts is going to remember the cards that worked when their deck was at its best, and their deck is always at its best with Sol Ring. Cutting Sol Ring significantly balances out the best case scenarios and encourages better deckbuilding and more interactive games of magic.
There are tons of absolutely abysmal legal cards in Commander. Mana denial, like Winter Orb and Armageddon, is often especially heinous to gameplay, and Commander would no doubt be better off if those sorts of cards didn't exist either. The fact of the matter is that they do exist though, and the RC must shape their ban list philosophy in such a way to account for this fact. Banning all the cards that fall under the umbrella of "creates bad games of Magic" isn't a possible prospect. That would lead to an untenable ban list. As such, the ban list must reconcile the fact that cards like Sol Ring are here to stay and choose to fight other battles instead.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
I think people just want ban list consistency. Prophet of Kruphix was banned for being centralizing, and giving way too much advantage. I agree.
But Sol Ring being unbanned when it does those exact things is the issue. I acknowledged that when I noticed the majority of blue decks at the shops I play at run Thada Adel as a value card, just to use her to steal Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, and Mana Vault from other players. To the point that G/U/x decks will tutor her in the early-to-mid game. If that isn't completely centralizing, I don't know what is.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Hats off to the gentlemen of the RC and beyond...I dunno how you guys do it.
Bringing 'objective' data into this is going to be an uphill, nearly impossible battle. Everything about this is going to be subjective, because everyone has/had/will have a different experience. Your experiences have shaped what you think/see, mine have done the same. While I don't believe the current status quo is infallible and correct(please, point out the post where I said otherwise if I'm wrong), the experience has apparently been formed due to MUCH more subjective(and perhaps a touch of objective) data than we have ever had. I agree, you don't, they(RC) have ruled. I think it's stupid that at least one American town can place you under arrest for stepping on tulips, but that doesn't mean I fight the establishment over it. Or, to put things more in parallel with this game, I think it's amazing that Paradox Engine is still legal, even though I have gone infinite with it with little effort.
1. If said staple that fills good spot creates a massive, overwhelming advantage through minimal effort(i.e., playing the game normally), then yes. I repeat, there will be inconsistencies, but I only have 8 years of EDH experience(and a handful more of MTG experience) to go off of. I contest your idea of 'fun', however; again, even a casual player can accidentally break any of those cards and splurge out before another casual(perhaps even a new player) can bring out their mid-guns. Sure, the mindset there would be, "I need to get me one of those!", but that's what the mindset will be, as opposed to, "How can I deal with that, barring getting one of my own?". Prime had a price value of $25 during it's heyday, and yes...EDH may have only had a SMALL part in that(Valakut was a degenerate combo in modern back then with it), but it had a part. After the banning, the price dropped precipitously as people sought to get rid of it. The trend points towards people WANTING the card, buying up all they could, and then flooding the market when it wasn't viable anymore.
THAT, to me, is format warping.
2. If you're going to start using comparisons like that, I would urge you to use card tags. It's REALLY hard to follow your point through the text, even worse without references. I will try to follow what you're saying in my rebuttal, however:
You mention Consecrated Sphinx and Prophet of Kruphix in one breath. Coninx does indeed get you mad card advantage(why else would I put it in my Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind deck?
3. Perhaps the banlist would be better in your description, that is a distinct possibility. Perhaps also, the format would be so degenerate in the interim while said cards are playable that no one wants to bother with it anymore. While this list isn't perfect, are you willing to gamble the format on big change like that? At this point in time, I, and perhaps the vast majority, am not. The social contract is unenforceable in some instances(you only have the one group/LGS to play at, for example); trying to formulate this banlist around some degenerate cards is the best to hope for at this point.
And that's your opinion. Some people LOVE those prison decks(I am not one of them). Some people love the decks that wrath the board every turn, while their stuff is indestructible, and they swing for Overrun damage. Some people love token decks.
Everyone loves something different...just because you have a dream of 'seeing the world burn' doesn't mean that it's ideal for everyone, rookies and vets alike. Prime/Sylvan/Prophix got banned, and people moved on to other things, not necessarily 'the next best thing'. Some people I know took decks apart completely because those cards were the lynchpins of them(poor deck planning, I say). Intended or not, banning those cards had the side effect of forcing people to re-examine options, instead of 'Gotta have this!'. Yes, I know you can point out a half-dozen other offenders(easily), but either A) they effect so few games(subjectively), that they do not warp much, or B) they need to have a deck built to take advantage of their strengths.
For someone who complained about another being a jerk...well...*gestures*
Yes, to 80% of your questions(and worse). And comparing online EDH to the paper format...I think it weakens your argument, as online resources are much more readily available, so the effort to find 'a better and perhaps funsie way' isn't necessarily worth the effort. I've seen some **** too...but normally in a fun way that doesn't turn up in the same fashion every time. You may be okay with it...but I think you should also accept that not everyone is.
This may sound lazy, but the burden of proof is actually on you to prove them UNbanworthy. The same uphill battle had been(and likely will be) fought by proponents of Coalition Victory, and honestly it's true. Your experience shows they are not that bad...expand on that. Show your experience to be the majority, maybe things will change.
Emphasis mine on your quote...
If your words are the only ones that hold meaning, then this discussion was over before it even started, so why are you still here? And given your last quote(below), why are you demanding data from us when your 'data' is just as subjective?
No, I had no idea that the council can change its mind.
...Seriously, of course they can. 8 years playing the format, remember? And if they unban Prime Time or the others, I will think it a mistake, but will go along with it; you know, 'The council has spoken' and all? If I'm wrong, and Prime doesn't warp the format again, I will gladly accept "I told you so"s all over. But I don't think I am, and until that day, apparently neither does the RC.
Good for you(no sarcasm here, serious). Increase the sample size and get back to us on your findings. Keep records so you have 'objective' instead of 'subjective' data, and check back with us. There may come a breaking point, there may not...but in the meantime, you're asking US for objective proof when this is just as subjective.
EDH decks: 1. RGWMayael's Big BeatsRETIRED!
2. BUWMerieke Ri Berit and the 40 Thieves
3. URNiv's Wheeling and Dealing!
4. BURThe Walking Dead
5. GWSisay's Legends of Tomorrow
6. RWBRise of Markov
7. GElvez and stuffz(W)
8. RCrush your enemies(W)
9. BSign right here...(W)
Second, there are no comparable cards. You can easily ban Sol Ring, Mana Vault, and Mana Crypt and call it a day. There's no slippery slope here. It's a pretty simple criteria: does your mana rock produce more mana than it cost? It should probably be banned.
You’re right, we do have the official reasonings on why these cards were banned.
“Primeval Titan
One of the concerns that we've had recently is the overrepresentation of heavy ramp strategies, to the point where it makes up a large proportion of the aggregate decks out there. While we think ramp should be good - this is battlecruiser Magic, after all - it's probably a little too prevalent and needs reining in a bit. With that in mind, we're banning the most egregious offender, Primeval Titan.
This decision won't be universally popular. Primeval Titan is dripping with awesomeness, and we ourselves are big fans of the card. But its ubiquity and effect on games couldn't be ignored and sad though we are to see it go, we think it will make for a more interesting and diverse format.”
They banned Prime Time because they thought green ramp was too good.
“That said, there is one card which has drawn an increasing amount of ire over the past year. We feel Sylvan Primordial is causing far more problems than its contributions justify, and that the format will be better off without it. It meets many of the heuristic markers for a banned card, insofar as it invalidates many other creatures as search targets and causes arguments about whether its use is degenerate or reasonable. It can be easily accelerated into on turn 4 or 5 (before players are expected to have extensive defenses or threats online), at which point it turns a reasonable ramp deck into uninteresting games.
If the card was just a big ramp, or just utility destruction, or just spot land destruction, it would likely be fine but by combining both factors it becomes ubiquitous, frequently overwhelming, and repetitive. After some debate in previous seasons, the committee members all voted in favour of removing it from the format.”
They banned Sylvan Primordial because they thought it was making “reasonable ramp” decks too strong.
You’re wrong about green being the only way to play EDH back then. There were still very competitive commanders that weren’t green.
Zur the Enchanter
Kaalia of the Vast
Grand Arbiter Augustin IV
Arcum Dagsson
Azami, Lady of Scrolls
Oona, Queen of the Fae
Sharuum the Hegemon
Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir
Primeval Titan, Sylvan Primordial, and Prophet of Kruphix didn’t push all non green decks out of the format. They weren’t even the best cards in the green decks that were competitively viable.
I'm not suggesting that every card that creates bad games should be banned. I definitely play Knowledge Pool and Possibility Storm, I'm very guilty of making game states people don't like. But Sol Ring effects more than just the games it blows out. Sol Ring changes the way people approach every game. Nobody builds a deck planning for any unknown opponent to slam down Winter Orb. A card in 75% of decks stops being just a card and becomes more like one of the rules of deck construction. That is a rare, if not totally unique, quality.
Well if you'd like a well thought out argument, there's a whole thread full of it.
Well half of your examples produce either lots of mana, lots of colored mana, or are also banned for PBtE. Sol Ring produces 2 colorless always and forever. Lastly, can you cite shere the RC said where printing it in (not literally) every precon is what is stopping them from pulling the trigger? Because I'm pretty sure you're just making that up.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Dude, that's 12 links over *8 years*. That's nothing. You're just making it impossible to take you seriously.
I suggest you go back and read my original post and think about the actual - fairly narrow - point I made, which you've completely failed to address. At this point, I think you're just throwing around a whole bunch of random stuff in the hope that maybe something sticks.
Regarding your Thada Adel example, your metagame strikes me as being very atypical of Commander. Personally, I've never found Sol Ring to be that centralizing, and if people are actually going out of their way to tutor up a Thada Adel in hopes of connecting with it the following turn, all in the name of Ur-Golem's Eye, that doesn't strike me as a serious problem. I know I'm dicing up your example here and that there may be other reasons why you've found Sol Ring to be centralizing, but I've seldom found Sol Ring to be this egregious.
I think we can agree that it's certainly a good thing the RC has had fast mana in their crosshairs. I believe you just draw the line differently than where the RC does regarding what kind of fast mana is problematic. Personally, I don't find Sol Ring to be a problem. I play it all the time alongside Mana Crypt and Mana Vault and those cards never eviscerate my games when I play them. If I could get my hands on some Moxen, I suspect I'd find them just as amiable.
As Cryogen already mentioned, I thought I should reiterate that some of the cards you listed aren't banned solely because they make mana too quickly. The Moxen and Lotus, for example, are also banned due to perceived barrier to entry. And Rofellos can be used as a commander. There isn't just one reason why many of these cards are problems. Most of them are banned for a culmination of things.
Also, I don't think lumping all the cards together that make more mana than they cost is as simple as a fix as you make it sound. Is Grim Monolith really a problem? What about Bloom Tender? Should that be banned? How about a hypothetical Mana Crypt that deals 10 damage to you for losing a flip instead of 3? I think each individual card deserves scrutiny and that a card shouldn't necessarily be banned just because it meets a certain criteria. This is where the slippery slope resides. When players look for consistency in their banned list (as Teysa mentioned), they're naturally going to find cards that aren't banned but believe meet the same qualifications as cards that are. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and I think you just disagree with where that line is, and that's a perfectly fine place to be.
Would you be willing to elaborate further on why you believe Sol Ring changes the way people approach the game? For me, I don't see how Sol Ring changes the way I play at all. It just goes into my decks because it's good at making mana, and that's about all there is to it.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Sol Ring helps enable the trap of optimistic deckbuilding, playing cards for their best case scenario and not thinking about all the other cases. But then people try out what they wanted to do against strong opponents and the high ceiling they theorycrafted for their cards doesn't always appear, they see how low the floor is, and they move on to something else. That's the story of most brews in competitive formats. Everyone hopes for the best and then the play data keeps you grounded.
Edh is already a different beast. The format has high variance, and it's also perfectly acceptable here to just enjoy losing most of the time since that's the essence of multiplaer, and that lets people play whatever they want to and I wouldn't have it any other way. But all of this makes it even harder to see the floor of a cards usefulness and puts a highlight on the minority of games that are won. So when people go to make cuts from their deck, they'll be inclined to keep the cards they remember carrying them when their deck was at its best.
People can debate whether or not Sol Ring is as grossly overpowered as I treat it, but I don't think many would argue that a deck starting the game with Sol Ring in hand is going to function far smoother than the same deck without a sol ring. Win or lose, that game will go almost certainly go in the books as a time that the deck functioned well. And unless the player actively acknowledges to themself that Sol Ring was allowing their deck to function that game, they'll be biased by the result into preferring the cards that work when they have Sol Ring; that is to say cards that most efficiently use the 2 extra colorless mana and effects that benefit most from a 2 mana advantage, and then more mana efficient cards and cards that play better from behind get left on the chopping block. People accidentally optimizing for Sol Ring can give you metas full of decks that play archenemy with a Sol Ring and then offer no meaningful contribution to the next game. And thats especially frustrating to someone like me who tries to regulate most of my decks to suit my opponents' power level, it just isn't possible to make a consistently fair match against the Dr Jeckyll and Mr Hyde act that most casual decks with Sol Ring do, and choosing to crush people when they don't have Sol Ring or accept defeat when they do only helps contribute to the bias if I'm not pointing out what's happening.
Let us not pretend that the Power would ever be unbanned, even if they each cost cents. They're called Power for a reason. As for the other point, obviously the RC has never said that; that was my personal interpretation of events. What you might even call my opinion, if you will.
First, I specified mana rock. Nobody cares about Bloom Tender. The problem is having a bunch of colorless mana rocks, specifically ones that cost less mana than they produce, that you can chain into each other. For example, I've hardcast Omniscience on T3. That's not acceptable. Granted, that's a particularly extreme example but still, would it really be better if it was Consecrated Sphinx? Or Sire of Insanity? We simply should not have access to that much mana that quickly as it leads to runaway games that are over before most players even have a chance to do anything meaningful.
As for your other point, I'm sure it would be possible to design a Mana Crypt variant with a severe enough drawback that it wouldn't see play... right up until people found out how to win before the drawback becomes an issue. Just look at Lion's Eye Diamond. It was supposed to be a fixed Black Lotus with a drawback so extreme it would balance out the fast mana. It's still broken in half and leads to degenerate gameplay. Fast mana rocks are simply too powerful. So while Grim Monolith might not be as oppressive as Sol Ring it still deserves to go because the format would be better off without it.
I know this wasn't directed at me but I would like to address it anyways. Sol Ring warps the entire format, from deck building to gameplay, simply by being legal. First and foremost, EDH is secretly a 98 card format. The last two cards should always be Sol Ring and Command Tower. Full stop. Your deck is objectively wrong if you think otherwise. And putting a Sol Ring in your deck incentivizes you to also put in 4-mana cards with generic mana requirements as things to do when you draw Sol Ring (and also just being generically good cards on their own): Sad Robot, Thran Dynamo, Explosive Vegetation, etc. Sol Ring encourages you to chain-ramp your way up the curve way faster than you would otherwise be able to, enabling Turn 10 plays by T4-5, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is basically the opposite of one of Sheldon's guiding philosophies of the format: "what's acceptable on Turn 10 isn't acceptable on Turn 4" (paraphrased because I couldn't find the actual quote).
On the flip side, building your deck against Sol Rings forces you to play a bunch of narrow, mediocre answers like Nature's Claim or Mental Misstep because waiting even one extra turn to answer a Sol Ring could potentially be too slow. I don't want to play cards like that, but I have to jam them into every deck that can support them because Return to Dust is hilariously ill-equipped to stop a Sol Ring start. Look, I managed to get your Sol Ring on turn 4 after you cast 12 mana worth of spells with it. Neat. Fun game.
And then from a gameplay perspective, Sol Ring is simply one of the grossest cards in existence. The company line regarding Sol Ring is something like "it's okay because you can team up to beat an early Sol Ring". But just think about that for a minute. When the answer to a 1 card is to Archenemy that player out of the game, there's a God damn problem. Games should not be turning into Archenemy before some players have even taken their first turn. There is an absurd cost:effect ratio happening here that the RC just refuses to acknowledge, especially when compared to cards that are theoretically banned for "centralizing the game" like PT and SP. If those cards could centralize the game at 6/7 mana and it was problematic, how is turning the game into Archenemy for 1 mana somehow more acceptable? I don't know about you, but around here a T1 Sol Ring is met with audible groans from everyone else at the table.
I simply don't understand how the RC could consider PT and SP centralizing enough to ban but not Sol Ring, the card that is in every deck and immediately changes the game into Archenemy when cast early. People complain about Sol Ring. People copy and steal Sol Ring. Sol Ring demands the attention of every player when cast, except it does it faster and more often than PT/SP ever did. I just don't see the difference. But I guess that's a recurring theme here.
That's a rather massive distortion of the point I made, which I suppose you have to do to get to Sol Ring. I pointed out that post-PT, there was much greater diversity of choice for creature copying/controlling, etc, and when asked for proof pointed out that no single creature received all the complaints afterwards.
If you want to argue that Sol Ring is always the card that everyone is trying to copy & control, then it might be a parallel.
You would probably be incorrect.
If you believe that decks should be objectively correct, then you're not going to like the philosophy of Commander.
Sol Ring is a fine card in casual, multiplayer play. If you remove any of the qualifiers, then it's awful. But that's what we're building for.
I pray you're joking.
First, I don't even know what this means. What exactly is "casual, multiplayer play"? This feels like a huge cop-out that can be used to justify any card: "oh you think Channel is too powerful? You're just playing it wrong, if you play it this way it's fine."
Second, there is a pretty significant difference between building an entire cutthroat deck with a single unified game plan, and taking any random 99, removing a basic land for a Sol Ring and then randomly crushing games when you draw it early. It doesn't matter what you're doing, your deck will disproportionately benefit from a Sol Ring compared to any other card. How is that not as diversity-killing as SP and PT were?
Play diversity, not deckbuilding diversity.
If you're seeing games crushed by an early Sol Ring in a random 99 regularly, I don't know what to say. It's broken in decks that are pushing the envelope, but those decks are already past what we're targeting. In the games we're trying to foster, it's powerful, but not game-breaking.
Ok, but have you tried playing without it? Ever cut it from a meta to see if the games might be closer to what you're trying to foster?
Those are literally all cards that were printed in the EDH Precons. They aren't exactly "pushing the envelope" in terms of power level here. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the precons are more powerful than what the banlist is made for? Or are you trying to tell me that 6+ mana on turn 3 is an acceptable place to be?
I think I'm starting to see why Prime Time was a problem. Of course he's a problem when you cast him on turn 3.
Ancestral Recall is a nice effect but not game breaking, the 5 Mox are hardly a problem on their own (allowing all 5 might be a different story), and even Black Lotus as a ritual effect isn't liable to swing games (although again, when taken into the cumulative effect of many pieces of free mana it's a different story). And even though it's not Power, Library pales in comparison to the drawing power of Necropotence.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I don't know how Impossible feels about Ancestral and Library, but they probably think there is too much fast mana in the format already.
I'm fine with Library of Alexandria coming off the list right now. If the best fast mana and fast tutors were banned, I would be fine with Ancestral Recall coming off as well. I hope the Moxes and Black Lotus are never legal.
While we might disagree on what should be banned, I appreciate this statement. I think the format is better off without a card like black lotus, but it wouldn't turn casual decks into mythical turn 1 machines. For decks not focused on fast mana, I think Sol Ring is actually more desirable than a mox or lotus.
To reiterate papafunk's point. If you're getting crushed by a T2 Thran Dynamo in casual, multiplayer games you/your group is doing something wrong.