You guys seemingly skip over any of my posts whenever I talk about the power level of decks involved it is really very strange actually.
Addressing the fact that if the decks are not super powerful then the Planeswalker deck will also be less powerful never seems to come up, for some reason these decks always have the removal and the mana and the cards to keep playing the game and trying to play Ultimate against 3 opponents of similar power.
Certain Walkers will be really good in that 75% zone that people like to hang out in but I still think the decks that surround them will keep them in check.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
Anyways I am gonna just stop re-posting last pages post but the discrepancies in response are very interesting and very revealing
You guys seemingly skip over any of my posts whenever I talk about the power level of decks involved it is really very strange actually.
Addressing the fact that if the decks are not super powerful then the Planeswalker deck will also be less powerful never seems to come up, for some reason these decks always have the removal and the mana and the cards to keep playing the game and trying to play Ultimate against 3 opponents of similar power.
Certain Walkers will be really good in that 75% zone that people like to hang out in but I still think the decks that surround them will keep them in check.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
Anyways I am gonna just stop re-posting last pages post but the discrepancies in response are very interesting and very revealing
The squeaky wheel gets the oil. Take it as a compliment - your points are fairly valid and you're not resorting to ad hominem personal attack.
At any rate, the argument that walkers won't survive a round does beg the question of why you'd bother making them legal commanders in the first place.
Honestly, I've only seen one person really go that far. Though a couple get close, they don't cross the line and are making relevant arguments. I don't find their arguments to be very good, but they aren't just descending into personal attacks. Saying that answers exist is a valid counter argument to someone presenting a card or strategy as a problem. It's effectivesness as an argument depends on the degree to which those answers are effective against the card/strategy, as well as whether even if the answers are effective the mere presence of the strategy is detrimental.
My comment doesn't pertain to personal attacks so much as the completely binary dismissive attitude toward counter-arguments. Complete unwillingness to acknowledge a single point, and little digs like "that's just silly" or whatever. It's not just one side for sure, but there's a lot of just unpleasant discussion where it feels like talking to a brick wall.
You guys seemingly skip over any of my posts whenever I talk about the power level of decks involved it is really very strange actually.
Addressing the fact that if the decks are not super powerful then the Planeswalker deck will also be less powerful never seems to come up, for some reason these decks always have the removal and the mana and the cards to keep playing the game and trying to play Ultimate against 3 opponents of similar power.
Certain Walkers will be really good in that 75% zone that people like to hang out in but I still think the decks that surround them will keep them in check.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
Anyways I am gonna just stop re-posting last pages post but the discrepancies in response are very interesting and very revealing
The squeaky wheel gets the oil. Take it as a compliment - your points are fairly valid and you're not resorting to ad hominem personal attack.
At any rate, the argument that walkers won't survive a round does beg the question of why you'd bother making them legal commanders in the first place.
[Oh, are we just going to start making up numbers now?
These numbers fit pretty well with my experience. YMMV, but most of my games are online and the quality of play experience is incredibly variable. And to be absolutely fair, anyone who targets the superfriends or walker general is probably assessing correctly.
So which is it? Am I allowed to play however I want because it's my deck and not have to care about anyone else, or does that seem like opening a floodgate for degeneracy and unfun games?
The difference is you were suggesting Cryo was playing the game wrong - based on my experience, I'm fairly certain he isn't, and the point is in this situation it's not for you to say one way or another. Knowingly slamming a ton of proliferate, counter spam and degeneracy into a deck to crush your casual meta with and expecting them to be cool with it is a whole different kettle of fish, and I think you know it.
At any rate, I'm done with this discussion if this is the level of rhetoric we've hit. If you want to bring it up a couple levels and speak to people like equals let us all know.
I see a lot of the same contradictions that Impossible does see.
There is a lot of Hey this thing will happen with these Walker commanders that already happens in games anyway but it is not a huge problem. There is a lot of that in this thread too. The archenemy conversation on the last couple pages has the same features.
You guys seemingly skip over any of my posts whenever I talk about the power level of decks involved it is really very strange actually.
Addressing the fact that if the decks are not super powerful then the Planeswalker deck will also be less powerful never seems to come up, for some reason these decks always have the removal and the mana and the cards to keep playing the game and trying to play Ultimate against 3 opponents of similar power.
That doesn't seem right. Lower powered metas are highly creature based, usually with little real CA, which means landing an early PW or wiping the board ups the odds of allowing your walker to either go off or generate enough advantage to set you far ahead. As the power level gets higher the number of answers goes up and lowers the odds of the PWs getting out of control.
In either case, like some people have already mentioned, if the counterargument that PWs aren't going to survive long enough because that's what usually happens anyways is correct then why make them legal? If there's a planeswalker you really like and you feel like it represents you better than your commander just stuff it behind your actual commander in a clear sleeve and let people know your actual commander is the creature.
Also in reference to the argument that people naturally regulate themselves, if that was the case the banlist would contain exactly 0 cards and pubstompers wouldn't exist.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
Let's assume that most people choosing to play a planewalker as their commander would also build their deck to support it. I play five-color superfriends, and I know just how fragile planeswalkers are. The entire deck is devoted to keeping my walkers alive - Humility, Doubling Season, proliferate, board wipes, etc. It actually succeeds in keeping walkers alive... sometimes. But if I were to build around just one planeswalker (as my commander), you can bet I would do something similar to get maximum value from it. Unless that commander was Sorin Markov; then I'd beg for him to die just to recast and target someone else.
At any rate, the argument that walkers won't survive a round does beg the question of why you'd bother making them legal commanders in the first place.
A fair question for the pro-walker/commander folks. If they just die and can't be used effectively, what good are they? But once you concede the point that planeswalker commanders can be maximized, then you have to admit that it carries some risks.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
I don’t necessarily think that is what is being argued here. I think this is a result of too many people focusing on PW ultimates rather than their overall utility. Take Ashiok, nightmare weaver, 3cmc and a load of annoying utility. Being available from the jump, you aren’t going to convince me that it won’t survive a few rounds, unless specific removal is available that early, which won’t happen often. Now, will it grow large enough to Ultimate? Possibly, but it will be large enough to snag some really good value from an opposing player, while also putting a sizeable dent in their deck. That’s just off of a single investment, you’ll be doing other things after you’ve cast Ashiok, wether building more board presence or just protecting your general. That is your general, and is an important cog in your deck, so naturally you’ll want to keep it around. Good players aren’t just going to let their opponents destroy it at will. I’ll have answers to your answers(which is why this is a bad argument in almost all cases when talking generals), and if not, it’s only 2 more to recast. You going to expend all your resources just to answer a PW? While other players are building their boards? If you ask me, the only threat I’m interested in answering is the one that is threatening me, so don’t expect me to bail you out unless it’s a benefit to me.
Comparing how a card functions in the 99 and how it could function at the helm is rather foolish, like how Braids is fair in the 99, yet BaaC(when that existed). Which also brings up another point, if a PW is deemed too powerful as a commander, it will ultimately be outright banned from play in the format. That’s a different discussion entirely, but an interesting one to have.
Really, it just boils down to the fact that if you are building a deck helmed by a PW, you’re going to go out of your way to protect it. That isn’t how it works when you put them in the 99, save for the few super friends lists(which do exactly what I’m saying). While they won’t always survive, you’ll have far more opportunity to play them into favorable board positions and be able to work around their weaknesses when you’ve actually constructed a deck fit for them.
I think making more Walkers Commanders will change the paradigm of how people have to build around them in ways that don't always just mean play defensive and put up a bunch of fences.
I think making more Walkers Commanders will change the paradigm of how people have to build around them in ways that don't always just mean play defensive and put up a bunch of fences.
I would like to hope that is the case anyway.
I would too, but I strongly doubt it. All other things being equal there's not enough ways to interact with walkers at present, so there's no reason either side of the game would change. There's every chance this could change in the future with additional mechanics and printings so who can say?
I've been thinking about the other side of the coin, in the meantime - if walkers were legal generals, what do we think would happen to The Immortal Sun? Could we see a ban, or is 6 justifiable for the effect? I guess it's a similar thing to Iona in that it shuts down a whole raft of strategies, and Iona is still legal so maybe it wouldn't bite the ban.
I see a lot of the same contradictions that Impossible does see.
There is a lot of Hey this thing will happen with these Walker commanders that already happens in games anyway but it is not a huge problem. There is a lot of that in this thread too. The archenemy conversation on the last couple pages has the same features.
Very few people have said "this thing will happen" as opposed to "this thing could happen and that is a risk." Most of the certainty comes from Impossible
You guys seemingly skip over any of my posts whenever I talk about the power level of decks involved it is really very strange actually.
Addressing the fact that if the decks are not super powerful then the Planeswalker deck will also be less powerful never seems to come up, for some reason these decks always have the removal and the mana and the cards to keep playing the game and trying to play Ultimate against 3 opponents of similar power.
Certain Walkers will be really good in that 75% zone that people like to hang out in but I still think the decks that surround them will keep them in check.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
Anyways I am gonna just stop re-posting last pages post but the discrepancies in response are very interesting and very revealing
It's not intentional. I also feel like some of the more important points I've been making have been glossed over as well.
Regarding power level, I think that's a two way street. On the one hand, I agree that lower power decks won't be as equipped to protect their PW general and crank up their loyalty counters, but on the other, the opponents won't have as many ways to directly attack the planeswalker outside of combat damage. And I'm not dismissing the seeming ease of recasting your general that we might make it sound like, because there is a definite opportunity cost. But the opportunity is there nonetheless, which brings me to the last thing you said. As I said previously, a card in the 99 does not play the same as it does in the Command Zone. A card in the CZ is most likely getting built around because it is always at your disposal. A card like Curiosity is a great card when Niv-MIzzet is your general, but if N-M was only in the 99 you probably wouldn't run it unless you were trying to build around that combo. Same with walkers, unless you're building a superfriends deck or a counters matter deck, you probably aren't including something like Deepglow Skate or Fuel for the Cause.
I think making more Walkers Commanders will change the paradigm of how people have to build around them in ways that don't always just mean play defensive and put up a bunch of fences.
I would like to hope that is the case anyway.
I'd like to think that players would evolve over time as well and start adapting to certain strategies. I'd really like to think that graveyard hate is enough of a thing to consider legalizing Recurring Nightmare. But my impression from the RC is that there is a very finite amount of "git gud scrub" that influences their decisions. That's why I was being generous in my initial list. If you'll recall, it was only a very small number that I actually thought should be banned, but a much larger number which I felt could be problematic. And I do think that a number of players would adapt to the new meta, but I think a greater number would not adequately change their decks and would become discouraged.
Total side note, though it touches on a few points I've seen floating around about power level:
My anecdotal experience playing with precons was that the PW precons always felt significantly stronger than the other precons to me.
Am I the only one who had this experience? Obviously it doesn't necessarily mean anything if so but the Nahiri precon for example tended to just crap on the others when we played with them. That could just be that Nahiri and Daretti had some powerful mechanics in them I guess (tokens and artifacts).
The difference is you were suggesting Cryo was playing the game wrong - based on my experience, I'm fairly certain he isn't, and the point is in this situation it's not for you to say one way or another. Knowingly slamming a ton of proliferate, counter spam and degeneracy into a deck to crush your casual meta with and expecting them to be cool with it is a whole different kettle of fish, and I think you know it.
At any rate, I'm done with this discussion if this is the level of rhetoric we've hit. If you want to bring it up a couple levels and speak to people like equals let us all know.
So let me just break this down real quick to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. Cryo, before the game has even started, decides he doesn't like Player A's general and is going to spend the whole game targeting Player A even if it is detrimental to his own chances of winning. Acceptable behavior! On the other hand, Player Z sits down with his full combo Animar deck against 3 opponents playing out-of-the box precons and beats them all handedly. Problematic behavior! Well gosh, I sure am glad you told me the proper way to ruin a game. It would have been mighty embarrassing if I did it the wrong way. I guess the secret is to only ruin it for one person at a time. You know, the gentlemanly way! It gives it that personal touch.
If you don't want me to respond to you like you're a child, don't say stupid *****. Apparently that's difficult for some people, though...
The other thing is all the planeswalkers I see talked about in this thread I imagine them any of them but they cost 4 more. I get why people are antsy about Jace, Unraveler of Secrets but if it cost 9 you are still scared of it?
I picked 4 because in a deck that I want to cast my commander I can easily see it dying a couple times in that game.
Personally, I'm not 'scared' of any walker. Nonetheless, it's a valid point; commander taxes tend to add up quick for something that's a target. At CMC 9 you really have to hope you get value out of Jacerayo and that's doubtful.
Commander tax is a valid concern, and in decks like my Edgar and Thrax decks, I have ways to get the general from the graveyard if at all possible, thereby circumventing the tax(at least for another cast). With that point in the wings, how easy is it to get noncreature permanents from the graveyard, and in which colors? That could play a factor as well...obviously they're not as easy to bring back as creatures, but being able to use them multiple times more often than originally thought...*shrug* Maybe I'm spitting in the wind, but it's my wooden nickel thought.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
I don’t necessarily think that is what is being argued here. I think this is a result of too many people focusing on PW ultimates rather than their overall utility. Take Ashiok, nightmare weaver, 3cmc and a load of annoying utility. Being available from the jump, you aren’t going to convince me that it won’t survive a few rounds, unless specific removal is available that early, which won’t happen often. Now, will it grow large enough to Ultimate? Possibly, but it will be large enough to snag some really good value from an opposing player, while also putting a sizeable dent in their deck. That’s just off of a single investment, you’ll be doing other things after you’ve cast Ashiok, wether building more board presence or just protecting your general. That is your general, and is an important cog in your deck, so naturally you’ll want to keep it around. Good players aren’t just going to let their opponents destroy it at will. I’ll have answers to your answers(which is why this is a bad argument in almost all cases when talking generals), and if not, it’s only 2 more to recast. You going to expend all your resources just to answer a PW? While other players are building their boards? If you ask me, the only threat I’m interested in answering is the one that is threatening me, so don’t expect me to bail you out unless it’s a benefit to me.
Playtested Ashiok in our group.
Was he strong? Actually no.
Exile 3 cards from ONE deck ONCE per turn is not OP.
Enemies see what you exiled and unless you got some inherently broken creature (which rises the question whether the enemy should play it, if it is so broken) then most of times he got ignored, sometimes reanimated something.
Not even once I got to using the ultimate.
Also once he dies and is re-casted, you can't cast previously exiled creatures with him. So unless you playtested him, I think you chose very bad PW to write about. TBH I would fear Liliana of the Veil stax more than Ashiok.
Out of these 4, only one opressive (mind, not broken, only little annoying) was Tezzeret, due to his card draw on +1 ability. Ajani was totally fine, Arlinn was totally fine and to our surprise, Ugin was not game breaking. Yes, he exiled the board twice.. and that was it. Not broken than any deck who can return spells from GY and cast All is Dust several times in a game. Colorless is bad and unless you play Kozilek for the card draw, you either ramp into Ugin and then you don't have cards in hand or you have cards but don't ramp so much.
I would MAYBE fear Tamiyo, Field Researcher due to access to Deepglow Skytep/c] and Doubling Season but without her having full hand, her ultimate does nothing. And let's be honest, how is casting Doubling Season and then her different than casting Omniscience? You can cast it one round faster.
EDIT: in our group we are allowing PW to be generals. Because we came to a conclusion they are not broken and are more fun to play with.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Addressing the fact that if the decks are not super powerful then the Planeswalker deck will also be less powerful never seems to come up, for some reason these decks always have the removal and the mana and the cards to keep playing the game and trying to play Ultimate against 3 opponents of similar power.
Certain Walkers will be really good in that 75% zone that people like to hang out in but I still think the decks that surround them will keep them in check.
People think this PW will survive around the board multiple times in an equal playing field when that rarely happens in the 99 is a strange thing.
Anyways I am gonna just stop re-posting last pages post but the discrepancies in response are very interesting and very revealing
The squeaky wheel gets the oil. Take it as a compliment - your points are fairly valid and you're not resorting to ad hominem personal attack.
At any rate, the argument that walkers won't survive a round does beg the question of why you'd bother making them legal commanders in the first place.
My comment doesn't pertain to personal attacks so much as the completely binary dismissive attitude toward counter-arguments. Complete unwillingness to acknowledge a single point, and little digs like "that's just silly" or whatever. It's not just one side for sure, but there's a lot of just unpleasant discussion where it feels like talking to a brick wall.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
These numbers fit pretty well with my experience. YMMV, but most of my games are online and the quality of play experience is incredibly variable. And to be absolutely fair, anyone who targets the superfriends or walker general is probably assessing correctly.
The difference is you were suggesting Cryo was playing the game wrong - based on my experience, I'm fairly certain he isn't, and the point is in this situation it's not for you to say one way or another. Knowingly slamming a ton of proliferate, counter spam and degeneracy into a deck to crush your casual meta with and expecting them to be cool with it is a whole different kettle of fish, and I think you know it.
At any rate, I'm done with this discussion if this is the level of rhetoric we've hit. If you want to bring it up a couple levels and speak to people like equals let us all know.
There is a lot of Hey this thing will happen with these Walker commanders that already happens in games anyway but it is not a huge problem. There is a lot of that in this thread too. The archenemy conversation on the last couple pages has the same features.
That doesn't seem right. Lower powered metas are highly creature based, usually with little real CA, which means landing an early PW or wiping the board ups the odds of allowing your walker to either go off or generate enough advantage to set you far ahead. As the power level gets higher the number of answers goes up and lowers the odds of the PWs getting out of control.
In either case, like some people have already mentioned, if the counterargument that PWs aren't going to survive long enough because that's what usually happens anyways is correct then why make them legal? If there's a planeswalker you really like and you feel like it represents you better than your commander just stuff it behind your actual commander in a clear sleeve and let people know your actual commander is the creature.
Also in reference to the argument that people naturally regulate themselves, if that was the case the banlist would contain exactly 0 cards and pubstompers wouldn't exist.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
I don’t necessarily think that is what is being argued here. I think this is a result of too many people focusing on PW ultimates rather than their overall utility. Take Ashiok, nightmare weaver, 3cmc and a load of annoying utility. Being available from the jump, you aren’t going to convince me that it won’t survive a few rounds, unless specific removal is available that early, which won’t happen often. Now, will it grow large enough to Ultimate? Possibly, but it will be large enough to snag some really good value from an opposing player, while also putting a sizeable dent in their deck. That’s just off of a single investment, you’ll be doing other things after you’ve cast Ashiok, wether building more board presence or just protecting your general. That is your general, and is an important cog in your deck, so naturally you’ll want to keep it around. Good players aren’t just going to let their opponents destroy it at will. I’ll have answers to your answers(which is why this is a bad argument in almost all cases when talking generals), and if not, it’s only 2 more to recast. You going to expend all your resources just to answer a PW? While other players are building their boards? If you ask me, the only threat I’m interested in answering is the one that is threatening me, so don’t expect me to bail you out unless it’s a benefit to me.
Comparing how a card functions in the 99 and how it could function at the helm is rather foolish, like how Braids is fair in the 99, yet BaaC(when that existed). Which also brings up another point, if a PW is deemed too powerful as a commander, it will ultimately be outright banned from play in the format. That’s a different discussion entirely, but an interesting one to have.
Really, it just boils down to the fact that if you are building a deck helmed by a PW, you’re going to go out of your way to protect it. That isn’t how it works when you put them in the 99, save for the few super friends lists(which do exactly what I’m saying). While they won’t always survive, you’ll have far more opportunity to play them into favorable board positions and be able to work around their weaknesses when you’ve actually constructed a deck fit for them.
I would like to hope that is the case anyway.
I would too, but I strongly doubt it. All other things being equal there's not enough ways to interact with walkers at present, so there's no reason either side of the game would change. There's every chance this could change in the future with additional mechanics and printings so who can say?
I've been thinking about the other side of the coin, in the meantime - if walkers were legal generals, what do we think would happen to The Immortal Sun? Could we see a ban, or is 6 justifiable for the effect? I guess it's a similar thing to Iona in that it shuts down a whole raft of strategies, and Iona is still legal so maybe it wouldn't bite the ban.
Very few people have said "this thing will happen" as opposed to "this thing could happen and that is a risk." Most of the certainty comes from Impossible
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I daresay it'd rise in price if walkers were legal commanders.
It's not intentional. I also feel like some of the more important points I've been making have been glossed over as well.
Regarding power level, I think that's a two way street. On the one hand, I agree that lower power decks won't be as equipped to protect their PW general and crank up their loyalty counters, but on the other, the opponents won't have as many ways to directly attack the planeswalker outside of combat damage. And I'm not dismissing the seeming ease of recasting your general that we might make it sound like, because there is a definite opportunity cost. But the opportunity is there nonetheless, which brings me to the last thing you said. As I said previously, a card in the 99 does not play the same as it does in the Command Zone. A card in the CZ is most likely getting built around because it is always at your disposal. A card like Curiosity is a great card when Niv-MIzzet is your general, but if N-M was only in the 99 you probably wouldn't run it unless you were trying to build around that combo. Same with walkers, unless you're building a superfriends deck or a counters matter deck, you probably aren't including something like Deepglow Skate or Fuel for the Cause.
I'd like to think that players would evolve over time as well and start adapting to certain strategies. I'd really like to think that graveyard hate is enough of a thing to consider legalizing Recurring Nightmare. But my impression from the RC is that there is a very finite amount of "git gud scrub" that influences their decisions. That's why I was being generous in my initial list. If you'll recall, it was only a very small number that I actually thought should be banned, but a much larger number which I felt could be problematic. And I do think that a number of players would adapt to the new meta, but I think a greater number would not adequately change their decks and would become discouraged.
Among other cards that play well with planeswalkers.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
My anecdotal experience playing with precons was that the PW precons always felt significantly stronger than the other precons to me.
Am I the only one who had this experience? Obviously it doesn't necessarily mean anything if so but the Nahiri precon for example tended to just crap on the others when we played with them. That could just be that Nahiri and Daretti had some powerful mechanics in them I guess (tokens and artifacts).
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
If you don't want me to respond to you like you're a child, don't say stupid *****. Apparently that's difficult for some people, though... ...Oh for ****'s sake.
Okay, hit me with the warning.
Glad to see we agree on something.
I picked 4 because in a deck that I want to cast my commander I can easily see it dying a couple times in that game.
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)
Green probably has it easiest because it is permanent return
and Black has Yawgmoth's Will as a way to do it or Ill-Gotten Gains, Xiahou Dun, the One-Eyed
Blue has Recall
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Playtested Ashiok in our group.
Was he strong? Actually no.
Exile 3 cards from ONE deck ONCE per turn is not OP.
Enemies see what you exiled and unless you got some inherently broken creature (which rises the question whether the enemy should play it, if it is so broken) then most of times he got ignored, sometimes reanimated something.
Not even once I got to using the ultimate.
Also once he dies and is re-casted, you can't cast previously exiled creatures with him. So unless you playtested him, I think you chose very bad PW to write about. TBH I would fear Liliana of the Veil stax more than Ashiok.
We also tested few others, like Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas, Ajani, Mentor of Heroes, Ugin, the Spirit Dragon and Arlinn Kord.
Out of these 4, only one opressive (mind, not broken, only little annoying) was Tezzeret, due to his card draw on +1 ability. Ajani was totally fine, Arlinn was totally fine and to our surprise, Ugin was not game breaking. Yes, he exiled the board twice.. and that was it. Not broken than any deck who can return spells from GY and cast All is Dust several times in a game. Colorless is bad and unless you play Kozilek for the card draw, you either ramp into Ugin and then you don't have cards in hand or you have cards but don't ramp so much.
I would MAYBE fear Tamiyo, Field Researcher due to access to Deepglow Skytep/c] and Doubling Season but without her having full hand, her ultimate does nothing. And let's be honest, how is casting Doubling Season and then her different than casting Omniscience? You can cast it one round faster.
EDIT: in our group we are allowing PW to be generals. Because we came to a conclusion they are not broken and are more fun to play with.