Posting this (with some editing for legibility reasons) for Uriel's sake...
I would understand this ban if this was the first card banned in the list, in ancient times, as the first one that gives you an alternate and instant win-con. A symbol of what should not be played in a format like EDH, cards that end the games abruptly, with some sort of unstoppable combo or never-ending loop condition. But now, that we got so many alternate win-con cards (and Wizards now makes at least one per set in most sets) and they aren't being banned, what's the sense of leaving only this one on the ban list? What's the problem? That the moment that you cast the spell, if you satisfy all the requirements, you win istantly the game instead of waiting an upkeep and give a turn for the opponent to do anything? Yeah, but what are those requirements?
Ten cards, accounting for mana cost, assuming lack of ramp. The Coalition Victory is nothing more and nothing less than ten freaking cards that you need to have in battlefield at the same time to work out the combo.
Now, considering that most of the powerful combo cards require only another one card to work, and not ten, you spend much less time and mana to realize them, and these combo-cards are perfectly legal, as :
In what way does it make sense to ban the Coalition, if as a combo win-con it is maybe the weakest of all? Because you need to run a pentadeck, you must have eight mana (probably from 8 lands), at least one land in play, a Prismatic Omen, and a 5-color general that you have out. The worse of this card is that is that can be so easily disrupted, destroying, blinking or bounce in response any of the relevant cards to make the Coalition resolve completely uselessly without even need to counterspell it.
So, if it's legal and everybody is ok for dying in four turns to a Splinter Twin/Pestermite combo, or for a deck that has one of its combo pieces always available as a general (Niv-Mizzet), I don't see why this card should be so much worse then other, better, combo wins.
Even making a deck where you win around Primal Surge or Enter the Infinite card would be better then the Coalition, because to stop the combo of those cards really the only way is just to counter them and nothing else.
Talking about the origin of the ban, as I said, I suppose that this card was banned more because it was a "symbol" of how EDH games should not ending rather then its real brokenness. But in the meta and cards out today, I think it's pretty useless, considering that Wizards has printed a lot more win-con cards since Invasion, and if somebody wants to win in the combo way, they will build the combo deck anyways (see examples above). So, we ban any possible cards that can realize instant-combo win (the RC already banned Painter's Servant just for this), or it is obsolete that the Coalition is still in the "ultra-brokenness" cards page.
I admit that Coalition is not a fun card, but the "unfun" point alone looks like is not enough to ban a card (or any Armageddon effect, or Stasis effect, or Erayo effect, or Braids effect would be in the ban list in no time). But if we don't like instant-win combo, I don't get it why the format allows some of them (Pestermite/Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker, etc.) but not others (Painter's Servant+Iona, Shield of Emeria for example, and that is not even an instant win if we consider that there still exists so many ways to stop it depending on what is already in the battlefield).
Can other cards to "similar" or "same" effects? Yes. But it is much harder to do so usually with Coalition Victory, and requires 2 or more cards often to do just that.
What are some positive aspects of Coalition Victory? Epic Win, that's pretty what it is all about. Negative aspects? It is not fun for some, but there are so many ways to instant-win that are legal in this format and are way better and more aggressive than the Coalition.
Except it doesn't take 10 cards. It takes 5: your general, 3 lands with basic land types, and Coalition Victory itself (which you mentioned further down). Prismatic Omen isn't needed and its a bit disingenuous to suggest mana ramp cards should be included in that count since those cards are going to see play anyway. Other than needing 8 mana, you just ramp into Tropical Island, Badlands, and Scrubland (or the Shock Land equivalents/mix and match of duals), cast your general, tutor out Coalition Victory, and win. 8 mana isn't that hard to come by in EDH.
The fact that it requires such little investment (both in game and with regards to deckbuilding) is a problem. I agree that other instant win combos can be just as unfun but this one seems like it has fewer ways of stopping it. In the example of Kiki/Exarch, if you exile or kill Kiki, the combo stops and it is harder to do it again. If you Fog, nothing happens. If the setup is countered, nothing happens. Temple Bell/MoM can be interrupted (kind of) with artifact/enchantment hate, (such as Krosan Grip), counter magic, etc. It also takes a bit more to get the combo online and it still requires and additional win-con (drawing your deck isn't enough) and that win-con can be dealt with too (Laboratory Maniac can be removed for example).
Niv-Mizzet is a good example though as it is the one that is the closest to Coalition Victory since it revolves around 1 card and the general so it is harder to stop. It does take a little setup but it also requires you to run Niv-Mizzet as your general and you are running colors that make it tougher to tutor up an enchantment. I think those are enough restrictions that it ends up being fine.
So, I think you misunderstand the difficulty in winning with Coalition Victory. It is much easier than Primal Surge (requires somewhat severe deckbuilding restrictions) or Enter the Infinite (requires 12 mana, 4 of which is U and an actual win-con once you draw your deck). Coalition Victory just goes into every 5 color deck because it takes up a total of 1 card slot. As long as the deck is running Duals/Shocks/Battle Lands, the entire suite of cards necessary for winning off of Coalition Victory is already there. There is no thought in the decision and it becomes an almost auto-include for nearly every 5 color deck. The decks also have access to everything to make the win work and none of the cards need to be added specifically for CV. Tutors are already good. Eternal Witness and Regrowth are already good and they get back Coalition Victory. Counterspells are good and they protect the "combo".
Are the other combos you listed unfun? Absolutely (though not all will necessarily share that sentiment). I just don't think the existence of other infinite combos (which can never be entirely removed from the game) is enough to justify the unbanning of Coalition Victory.
The fact that it requires such little investment (both in game and with regards to deckbuilding) is a problem. I agree that other instant win combos can be just as unfun but this one seems like it has fewer ways of stopping it.
Putting in my own input instead of Uriel's...
Isn't there plenty of removal/countermagic out there that can stop it? Heck, a comparable amount to any other combo? I mean, you're talking three lands of specific types, your general, and a specific card from your deck. That seems not too hard to stop...
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
It's not that hard actually, with Transguild Courier being a thing. However, as people stated, enough alternate win conditions have been printed and I don't see this as being problematic in any way. It's so easy to disrupt: counter the spell or ghost quarter a land / kill a creature in response and the spell does nothing. Not to mention the fact that you can only play one copy so you need it in your hand when you fullfill all the condition.
I think Maze's End + Gates is actually far more easy to pull off as a 5 color alternate win condition deck since you don't need to dedicate tons of cards to your deck to get it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
Not that they connect well, but with PoK being banned, the hard ramp strategies I've seen are not as easy to execute. And honestly, if a casual person ramped hard into this spell and used it to win, that's more cute than format breaking now.
TLDR: I'd be content with this being taken off the list simply because it is limited and very easy to disrupt. #make5colorgoodagain
Victory really has no place on the ban list. It's incomparably weak to many of the combos present in the format, requiring a minimum of nine mana and five cards to pull off. Its continuing presence on the banlist along with several cards is one of the primary reasons I feel the current rules committee is inadequate.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Instead of building a fast car to win the race, you fill the race track with manure and drive your tractor to victory.
That is stax."
~cmv_lawyer, 2016
Victory really has no place on the ban list. It's incomparably weak to many of the combos present in the format, requiring a minimum of nine mana and five cards to pull off. Its continuing presence on the banlist along with several cards is one of the primary reasons I feel the current rules committee is inadequate.
It's shocking to see someone feel this way. I believe Coalition Victory is the posterchild for what a banned card should look like.
Coalition Victory ends the game instantly when it resolves. That's probably the least satisfying way to end a game of Commander. Why would someone want this card running around in the format? It just completely invalidates every decision made before it was cast. Plus, it's trivially easy to assemble the conditions needed to cast it. Between fetches, shocks, and a slew of Cultivate effects, all a player needs is eight mana and their Commander. Lands can hardly be considered combo pieces. Not to mention there's almost no way to interact with it. Players can counter it or try to destroy creatures/lands in response to it, but that's it. It isn't like other alternate win condition cards such as Helix Pinnacle that trigger only during the upkeep, allowing other players a chance to use sorcery speed cards in an attempt to stop it. Coalition Victory literally just ends the game.
Coalition Victory ends the game instantly when it resolves. That's probably the least satisfying way to end a game of Commander. Why would someone want this card running around in the format? It just completely invalidates every decision made before it was cast. Plus, it's trivially easy to assemble the conditions needed to cast it. Between fetches, shocks, and a slew of Cultivate effects, all a player needs is eight mana and their Commander. Lands can hardly be considered combo pieces. Not to mention there's almost no way to interact with it. Players can counter it or try to destroy creatures/lands in response to it, but that's it. It isn't like other alternate win condition cards such as Helix Pinnacle that trigger only during the upkeep, allowing other players a chance to use sorcery speed cards in an attempt to stop it. Coalition Victory literally just ends the game.
All of these things apply to all combo. Plenty are much easier to assemble, and can be interacted with instantly, or the game ends. I am not saying its desirable to have, but to compare it with combo, and come to a conclusion that its a lot easier to assemble and harder to interact with seems off. It is just another combo piece that should be played in the metas that like that sort of game.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
It's not a card I'd play or would likely see played much but yeah, it's just another combo like all the other combos and if it were first printed now it wouldn't be banned any more than Biorhythm. It was a different time back when it was banned, way before the hardcore crowd and commander precons.
All of these things apply to all combo. Plenty are much easier to assemble, and can be interacted with instantly, or the game ends. I am not saying its desirable to have, but to compare it with combo, and come to a conclusion that its a lot easier to assemble and harder to interact with seems off. It is just another combo piece that should be played in the metas that like that sort of game.
To play devil's advocate, I'm not sure Coalition Victory is like most combo. It's about the only combo card I can think of that says "you win the game" right there on the text box. Sure, even if some combos are easier to assemble or are just as difficult to interact with, aren't they different in that they only effectively win the game rather than explicitly winning the game like Coalition Victory does? Surely that accounts for something?
Regarding Coalition Victory's status as a banned card, what do you believe should happen to it?
EDIT: I suppose I probably should have also talked about how Coalition Victory has no applications outside of combo whereas most combo pieces do.
Victory really has no place on the ban list. It's incomparably weak to many of the combos present in the format, requiring a minimum of nine mana and five cards to pull off. Its continuing presence on the banlist along with several cards is one of the primary reasons I feel the current rules committee is inadequate.
It's shocking to see someone feel this way. I believe Coalition Victory is the posterchild for what a banned card should look like.
Coalition Victory ends the game instantly when it resolves. That's probably the least satisfying way to end a game of Commander. Why would someone want this card running around in the format? It just completely invalidates every decision made before it was cast. Plus, it's trivially easy to assemble the conditions needed to cast it. Between fetches, shocks, and a slew of Cultivate effects, all a player needs is eight mana and their Commander. Lands can hardly be considered combo pieces. Not to mention there's almost no way to interact with it. Players can counter it or try to destroy creatures/lands in response to it, but that's it. It isn't like other alternate win condition cards such as Helix Pinnacle that trigger only during the upkeep, allowing other players a chance to use sorcery speed cards in an attempt to stop it. Coalition Victory literally just ends the game.
EDIT: A word
If you're able to assemble Coalition Victory, you deserve to invalidate every decision made before it (which also isn't true. You need to both get three highyl specific lands into play, cast an extremely high color investment creature, AND somehow put an 8-CMC card which in turn has an insane color cost, all without anyone playing a single answer against you. It in no way invalidates previous decisions, as the combo is weak to nearly every form of removal or stax under the sun. You can delay hard-casting it indefinitely just by keeping a Gaddock Teeg around. It's a win condition, and just like every other win condition in all of EDH, it's entirely dependent on decisions made by you and your opponents). Meanwhile you can just cast Ad Nauseam on someone else's turn and storm out on your next mainphase with protection and multiple lines of victory. It's the same thing, only with most combos, you get to watch your opponent play with himself for several minutes while he goes off. Coalition Victory is at least a clean win, which is more than most combos can say. And it's certainly not unique in being a win the game on the spot card. laboratory maniac is one of the most ubiquitous win conditions in EDH. He's only put into play when his controller's victory is guaranteed. He's far, far better than Coalition Victory, yet there's hardly a peep about him being banworthy. Any way you slice it, Victory's card's place on the banlist just doesn't make sense.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Instead of building a fast car to win the race, you fill the race track with manure and drive your tractor to victory.
That is stax."
~cmv_lawyer, 2016
To play devil's advocate, I'm not sure Coalition Victory is like most combo. It's about the only combo card I can think of that says "you win the game" right there on the text box. Sure, even if some combos are easier to assemble or are just as difficult to interact with, aren't they different in that they only effectively win the game rather than explicitly winning the game like Coalition Victory does? Surely that accounts for something?
EDIT: I suppose I probably should have also talked about how Coalition Victory has no applications outside of combo whereas most combo pieces do.
That is says you win the game does not matter, it is semantics. No one plops down Palinchron as a 'free' flying beater. Plenty of other cards like Epic struggle say "you win the game", and they are not being played on a turn and letting everyone get a crack at them. They are played as combo, flashed in.
Regarding Coalition Victory's status as a banned card, what do you believe should happen to it?
I think it should be like all other combo: Played in metas that go for that sort of thing, and hopefully I never see it. Same as the decks setup to win via Primal Surge or Ad Nauseaum.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
That is says you win the game does not matter, it is semantics. No one plops down Palinchron as a 'free' flying beater. Plenty of other cards like Epic struggle say "you win the game", and they are not being played on a turn and letting everyone get a crack at them. They are played as combo, flashed in.
Except, no. Those cards aren't always flashed in. Most times people play them on their main phase, sometimes with protection in place, others with only faith in The Heart Of The Cards. And what's more, those are still permanents. Permanents can be removed, even those that are flashed in. Palinchron? You can still respond to the triggered ability with instant-speed creature removal, which each colour has an abundance of.
I think it should be like all other combo: Played in metas that go for that sort of thing, and hopefully I never see it. Same as the decks setup to win via Primal Surge or Ad Nauseaum.
Winning with Primal Surge takes a huge hit towards reliability due to lack of Sorceries/Instants - I would definitely not compare it to A.N. or C.V.
Maybe I missed it, but has anyone addressed the fact that unlike "other combo cards", CV doesn't require any additional support? You could quite literally take any random card out of a 5C deck, replace it with CV, and you have a game winning "combo". This is the problem with the card. It's getting looked at as comparison to worse "I win" combo cards, but the real problem is that it interacts poorly with the format.
Maybe I missed it, but has anyone addressed the fact that unlike "other combo cards", CV doesn't require any additional support? You could quite literally take any random card out of a 5C deck, replace it with CV, and you have a game winning "combo". This is the problem with the card. It's getting looked at as comparison to worse "I win" combo cards, but the real problem is that it interacts poorly with the format.
While I agree that it is potentially an auto-include into any 5 color deck, I don't agree that it interacts poorly with the format because it isn't that easy to pull off. At a minimum, this card requires 3 cards to be in play (a Land, a 5-c Creature, and Prismatic Omen) and you need to generate 8 mana to resolve the spell, which is more cards but let's not count those... Otherwise, it takes 4 cards, 3 of which need to be a specific grouping of dual lands and the creature to enable the spell.
Maybe I missed it, but has anyone addressed the fact that unlike "other combo cards", CV doesn't require any additional support? You could quite literally take any random card out of a 5C deck, replace it with CV, and you have a game winning "combo". This is the problem with the card. It's getting looked at as comparison to worse "I win" combo cards, but the real problem is that it interacts poorly with the format.
But it wont win very often. Not all mana bases have all 5 basic land types a lot of the time. And people are not going to just throw it in outside someone who would play combo or "I win" stuff anyway.
How does any of what you posted means it interacts badly? Having a 5C creature that may cost upwards of 10 mana in the command zone?
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
I don't really see how it interacts any differently in commander than any other format. That's really only Limited Resources. It interacts differently with multiplayer games. Life/deck size cards interact differently too.
While that's true, it doesn't allow you as good of access to basic typed duals and you have to cast said creature which costs a minimum of 5 mana in all 5 colors in addition to casting Coalition Victory which costs 8 mana including all 5 colors. There are seriously better 1 card + commander combos that you can play with much stronger commanders than any of the 5 color ones. I mean I've seen it argued that it can go in any 5 color commander deck, but you only get one commander outside of the partners so I don't really see why that matters. You could totally be playing better combos and if you're playing Sliver Queen, it isn't exactly hard to combo with anyway.
So it's a worse Tooth and Nail that people can see coming because you have to play an unwieldy 5-color general first? Coalition Victory being banned is a bad joke. Might as well ban Door to Nothingness because you can make someone lose the game instantly if you do a bunch of things first, like play Mind over Matter to untap it, then casually generate WWUUBBRRGG. But it can invalidate everything one player did beforehand, so clearly it should be banned.
"Interacts poorly with the format" means that a card behaves differently due to the special rules of Commander. We have already seen this with Worldfire, a nine mana spell that requires no additional effort beyond having mana and access to your general - which is the exact same prerequisite as Coalition Victory. Do you have a bunch of mana? Do you have your general? Did the spell resolve? Congratulations, you just won the game.
There are currently 15 dual lands and 5 fast fetches that are relatively cheap. There are another 7 slow fetches that all tutor basic lands types into play. So the argument of requiring work to build a mana base which isn't very difficult or expensive. Nor is casting a creature which costs 5 mana.
And for the "not just going to throw it in" and "bad Tooth and Nail" comments, I ask why. It takes up exactly one slot in your deck and wins the game instantly. Tooth and Nail requires more mana and at a minimum two additional deck slots. So why would you choose to not run CV, or why.why would you choose to run TaN over CV?
People who are thinking Coalition Victory is fine are approaching the game from a competitive POV, and from that POV, they're pretty much correct that CV really isn't worse than other combo wins. However, what those players are missing - as usual - is that the format was not designed and is not intended as a competitive format full of "I win" combos, but rather as a social one. Social games have different concerns, and the intent - as Sheldon and others in the RC have said repeatedly - is to make for memorable games in which interesting things happen. Combo wins don't make for memorable wins, because the wins obtained are essentially the same from game to game. Once you've seen the trick, most combos are in fact really boring. The greatest drama in a combo win is whether or not someone can get their "I win this turn" combo past removal or countermagic. Similarly, something like Coalition Victory, which in a non-competitive game is just going to come out of left field and instantly win the game, makes for something anti-climactic, as opposed to memorable or interesting. As such, it has no place in the format at the format was designed and intended to be played.
"Interacts poorly with the format" means that a card behaves differently due to the special rules of Commander. We have already seen this with Worldfire, a nine mana spell that requires no additional effort beyond having mana and access to your general - which is the exact same prerequisite as Coalition Victory. Do you have a bunch of mana? Do you have your general? Did the spell resolve? Congratulations, you just won the game.
This. The effort part is what differentiates Coalition Victory from the other "win" cards. All the requirements of Coalition Victory can be (and rightfully) seen as regular game actions rather than a specific-combo assembly. Gathering five basic land types for color fixing seems pretty on-par for any 5-color deck, be it via Prismatic Omen or ramping with duals. Casting your Commander is regular play in the format. Victory turns all these basic actions into a combo-win instead of a conscious effort of assembling it.
On top of all that it works with any 5-color commander. Technically Mortal Combat works the same way if Iname, Death Aspect was my Commander (and I gave them Flash), but Mortal Combat only works that way with Iname, Death Aspect as the Commander and not any other B Commander. Felidar Sovereign does work with any W Commander, but consciously maintaining your life at 40 isn't exactly easy in multiplayer and if you play a boatload of lifegain, people would eventually catch on (since Commander Damage exists), you can attempt to cover up with Karlov of the Ghost Council as the Commander, but at that point of time even if it covers up as "regular gameplay actions" because of your Commander, people would be actively stopping those actions, something with doesn't (usually) happen with the actions of assembling Coalition Victory.
Basically, Coalition Victory would create a knee-jerk reaction that ramping/mana-fixing (and casting one's Commander) is now an attempt to assemble the combo and the measures taken to prevent that will result in hurting many, many 5-color decks more than it would help them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The fact that it requires such little investment (both in game and with regards to deckbuilding) is a problem. I agree that other instant win combos can be just as unfun but this one seems like it has fewer ways of stopping it. In the example of Kiki/Exarch, if you exile or kill Kiki, the combo stops and it is harder to do it again. If you Fog, nothing happens. If the setup is countered, nothing happens. Temple Bell/MoM can be interrupted (kind of) with artifact/enchantment hate, (such as Krosan Grip), counter magic, etc. It also takes a bit more to get the combo online and it still requires and additional win-con (drawing your deck isn't enough) and that win-con can be dealt with too (Laboratory Maniac can be removed for example).
Niv-Mizzet is a good example though as it is the one that is the closest to Coalition Victory since it revolves around 1 card and the general so it is harder to stop. It does take a little setup but it also requires you to run Niv-Mizzet as your general and you are running colors that make it tougher to tutor up an enchantment. I think those are enough restrictions that it ends up being fine.
So, I think you misunderstand the difficulty in winning with Coalition Victory. It is much easier than Primal Surge (requires somewhat severe deckbuilding restrictions) or Enter the Infinite (requires 12 mana, 4 of which is U and an actual win-con once you draw your deck). Coalition Victory just goes into every 5 color deck because it takes up a total of 1 card slot. As long as the deck is running Duals/Shocks/Battle Lands, the entire suite of cards necessary for winning off of Coalition Victory is already there. There is no thought in the decision and it becomes an almost auto-include for nearly every 5 color deck. The decks also have access to everything to make the win work and none of the cards need to be added specifically for CV. Tutors are already good. Eternal Witness and Regrowth are already good and they get back Coalition Victory. Counterspells are good and they protect the "combo".
Are the other combos you listed unfun? Absolutely (though not all will necessarily share that sentiment). I just don't think the existence of other infinite combos (which can never be entirely removed from the game) is enough to justify the unbanning of Coalition Victory.
Putting in my own input instead of Uriel's...
Isn't there plenty of removal/countermagic out there that can stop it? Heck, a comparable amount to any other combo? I mean, you're talking three lands of specific types, your general, and a specific card from your deck. That seems not too hard to stop...
Not to mention that Darksteel Reactor is almost just as easy to get a win off of, if not easier.
Lab Man and Mortal Combat, too.
Door to Nothingness isn't hard to pull off, either.
Hell, you can even win with Biovisionary in Commander.
I don't think Coalition Victory should be banned.
If it were unbanned, I would dedicate an entire deck to alternate win cons. Wouldn't that be fun? Of course it would.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I think Maze's End + Gates is actually far more easy to pull off as a 5 color alternate win condition deck since you don't need to dedicate tons of cards to your deck to get it.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
TLDR: I'd be content with this being taken off the list simply because it is limited and very easy to disrupt. #make5colorgoodagain
Banner by Traproot Graphics
[RETIRED Primers]:
RW Aurelia, The Warleader --- R Daretti, Scrap Savant --- RUB Thraximundar
That is stax."
~cmv_lawyer, 2016
WUI Don't Mean to Brago, But... RWBI'll Kaalia Back Later GBWKaradora the Graveyard Explorer BRGLive Long and Prosshper
BGUMuscle Plasm URGImperial Animarch BGLemon Meren Pie GWStop Being Such a Sisay UTefearsome RGWMarath of the Titans
UBRNow Watch me Trai Trai RWBAleshstax GWUPrison Can Roon Your Life BRGrenzo: Your Doom UArcum's Asylum of Stax
BGFeel the Ground Croak GThe All New 2016 Yisan Wanderer URFo Rizzle Mah Mizzle UBRA Game of Marchess
It's shocking to see someone feel this way. I believe Coalition Victory is the posterchild for what a banned card should look like.
Coalition Victory ends the game instantly when it resolves. That's probably the least satisfying way to end a game of Commander. Why would someone want this card running around in the format? It just completely invalidates every decision made before it was cast. Plus, it's trivially easy to assemble the conditions needed to cast it. Between fetches, shocks, and a slew of Cultivate effects, all a player needs is eight mana and their Commander. Lands can hardly be considered combo pieces. Not to mention there's almost no way to interact with it. Players can counter it or try to destroy creatures/lands in response to it, but that's it. It isn't like other alternate win condition cards such as Helix Pinnacle that trigger only during the upkeep, allowing other players a chance to use sorcery speed cards in an attempt to stop it. Coalition Victory literally just ends the game.
EDIT: A word
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
To play devil's advocate, I'm not sure Coalition Victory is like most combo. It's about the only combo card I can think of that says "you win the game" right there on the text box. Sure, even if some combos are easier to assemble or are just as difficult to interact with, aren't they different in that they only effectively win the game rather than explicitly winning the game like Coalition Victory does? Surely that accounts for something?
Regarding Coalition Victory's status as a banned card, what do you believe should happen to it?
EDIT: I suppose I probably should have also talked about how Coalition Victory has no applications outside of combo whereas most combo pieces do.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
If you're able to assemble Coalition Victory, you deserve to invalidate every decision made before it (which also isn't true. You need to both get three highyl specific lands into play, cast an extremely high color investment creature, AND somehow put an 8-CMC card which in turn has an insane color cost, all without anyone playing a single answer against you. It in no way invalidates previous decisions, as the combo is weak to nearly every form of removal or stax under the sun. You can delay hard-casting it indefinitely just by keeping a Gaddock Teeg around. It's a win condition, and just like every other win condition in all of EDH, it's entirely dependent on decisions made by you and your opponents). Meanwhile you can just cast Ad Nauseam on someone else's turn and storm out on your next mainphase with protection and multiple lines of victory. It's the same thing, only with most combos, you get to watch your opponent play with himself for several minutes while he goes off. Coalition Victory is at least a clean win, which is more than most combos can say. And it's certainly not unique in being a win the game on the spot card. laboratory maniac is one of the most ubiquitous win conditions in EDH. He's only put into play when his controller's victory is guaranteed. He's far, far better than Coalition Victory, yet there's hardly a peep about him being banworthy. Any way you slice it, Victory's card's place on the banlist just doesn't make sense.
That is stax."
~cmv_lawyer, 2016
WUI Don't Mean to Brago, But... RWBI'll Kaalia Back Later GBWKaradora the Graveyard Explorer BRGLive Long and Prosshper
BGUMuscle Plasm URGImperial Animarch BGLemon Meren Pie GWStop Being Such a Sisay UTefearsome RGWMarath of the Titans
UBRNow Watch me Trai Trai RWBAleshstax GWUPrison Can Roon Your Life BRGrenzo: Your Doom UArcum's Asylum of Stax
BGFeel the Ground Croak GThe All New 2016 Yisan Wanderer URFo Rizzle Mah Mizzle UBRA Game of Marchess
I think it should be like all other combo: Played in metas that go for that sort of thing, and hopefully I never see it. Same as the decks setup to win via Primal Surge or Ad Nauseaum.
Except, no. Those cards aren't always flashed in. Most times people play them on their main phase, sometimes with protection in place, others with only faith in The Heart Of The Cards. And what's more, those are still permanents. Permanents can be removed, even those that are flashed in. Palinchron? You can still respond to the triggered ability with instant-speed creature removal, which each colour has an abundance of.
Banner by Traproot Graphics
[RETIRED Primers]:
RW Aurelia, The Warleader --- R Daretti, Scrap Savant --- RUB Thraximundar
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Banner by Traproot Graphics
[RETIRED Primers]:
RW Aurelia, The Warleader --- R Daretti, Scrap Savant --- RUB Thraximundar
How does any of what you posted means it interacts badly? Having a 5C creature that may cost upwards of 10 mana in the command zone?
Commander always grants players using Colaition Victory access to a five color creature in the form of their commander.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
There are currently 15 dual lands and 5 fast fetches that are relatively cheap. There are another 7 slow fetches that all tutor basic lands types into play. So the argument of requiring work to build a mana base which isn't very difficult or expensive. Nor is casting a creature which costs 5 mana.
And for the "not just going to throw it in" and "bad Tooth and Nail" comments, I ask why. It takes up exactly one slot in your deck and wins the game instantly. Tooth and Nail requires more mana and at a minimum two additional deck slots. So why would you choose to not run CV, or why.why would you choose to run TaN over CV?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
This. The effort part is what differentiates Coalition Victory from the other "win" cards. All the requirements of Coalition Victory can be (and rightfully) seen as regular game actions rather than a specific-combo assembly. Gathering five basic land types for color fixing seems pretty on-par for any 5-color deck, be it via Prismatic Omen or ramping with duals. Casting your Commander is regular play in the format. Victory turns all these basic actions into a combo-win instead of a conscious effort of assembling it.
On top of all that it works with any 5-color commander. Technically Mortal Combat works the same way if Iname, Death Aspect was my Commander (and I gave them Flash), but Mortal Combat only works that way with Iname, Death Aspect as the Commander and not any other B Commander. Felidar Sovereign does work with any W Commander, but consciously maintaining your life at 40 isn't exactly easy in multiplayer and if you play a boatload of lifegain, people would eventually catch on (since Commander Damage exists), you can attempt to cover up with Karlov of the Ghost Council as the Commander, but at that point of time even if it covers up as "regular gameplay actions" because of your Commander, people would be actively stopping those actions, something with doesn't (usually) happen with the actions of assembling Coalition Victory.
Basically, Coalition Victory would create a knee-jerk reaction that ramping/mana-fixing (and casting one's Commander) is now an attempt to assemble the combo and the measures taken to prevent that will result in hurting many, many 5-color decks more than it would help them.