And Grim Monolith, seriously? They playtested the format w/o Zuur and Derevi and that's the conclusion? Monolith is too strong? Wow... we should ban Basalt Monolith too now that we're at it. On what is this really based? All decks using it aren't warping the format at the moment of the ban. So it can only be based on the assumption that it would warp the format with Zuur and Derevi banned.
As a Godo, Bandit Warlord player, I'm sad to see Monolith leaving (no more T1 Gamble into T2 Monolith for me), but I understand the reasoning as to why. Ramp decks are probably going to see more play now that Zur fetching Nevermore naming the general is no longer viable. The banning of Monolith is to slow down ramp decks like Iname, Godo, Prossh, Griselbrand, and Maelstrom Wanderer.
As a Godo, Bandit Warlord player, I'm sad to see Monolith leaving (no more T1 Gamble into T2 Monolith for me), but I understand the reasoning as to why. Ramp decks are probably going to see more play now that Zur fetching Nevermore naming the general is no longer viable. The banning of Monolith is to slow down ramp decks like Iname, Godo, Prossh, Griselbrand, and Maelstrom Wanderer.
None of those decks were making many top-8s right now, so that's all presumptions. Also, if this card is good in so many different decks, I don't see the purpose of banning it. It's still no Sol Ring or Mana Crypt, you get one use out of it. I think we want all those ramp deck there, and Monolith is just a good card, control matchup doesn't care about you taking one spell (Gamble) to get Monolith (which they don't care about) and then you also discarding a card. That's basically +3 of card advantage for them...
My own rules when building a Commander deck:
1) Underrated general that I can build around but the deck must work without him/her too.
2) Every card must be legal in both banlists.
3) No infinite combo that could win (and ruin) instantly a multiplayer game.
4) Synergy at all costs; stay on theme, avoid goodstuff.
I wonder how much time they put into the format WITH Derevi and WITHOUT Zuur, because there is no actual top-8 that could help to determine what would be the meta in such case. All could be done is assumptions.
I agree. I wonder if they also tested banning Zur and unbanning Edric to see what the result would be. It would seem that Edric and Derevi would have similar weaknesses.
And Grim Monolith, seriously? They playtested the format w/o Zuur and Derevi and that's the conclusion? Monolith is too strong?
So which part of their reasoning do you disagree with? Do you disagree that ramp decks will be an important part of the new meta or that Grim Monolith won't be an important part of those ramp decks?
I'm pretty sure Sensei's Divining Top is banned because it makes for slow play in tournaments, while being very powerful, which is why it is banned in Modern and was banned in Extended when it was legal there.
So which part of their reasoning do you disagree with? Do you disagree that ramp decks will be an important part of the new meta or that Grim Monolith won't be an important part of those ramp decks?
I'm pretty sure Sensei's Divining Top is banned because it makes for slow play in tournaments, while being very powerful, which is why it is banned in Modern and was banned in Extended when it was legal there.
Ramp decks will be important and Grim Monolith will be played in those decks. Does it mean we have to ban it without actually look at how the meta develops? No.
About Sensei... yeah, I see. Not sure it's that much different from Sylvan Library assuming you don't activate Top more than once a turn. Even Mirri's Guile at that point. But I can see how activating Top's ability every turn could take 1 minute to fully resolve and be a problem (while this is also true about the 2 other cards I just mentionned).
My own rules when building a Commander deck:
1) Underrated general that I can build around but the deck must work without him/her too.
2) Every card must be legal in both banlists.
3) No infinite combo that could win (and ruin) instantly a multiplayer game.
4) Synergy at all costs; stay on theme, avoid goodstuff.
4 people are probably better than thousands of people actually trying to adapt to a new meta. Banning the 2 best generals at the same time? Wow. I wonder how much time they put into the format WITH Derevi and WITHOUT Zuur, because there is no actual top-8 that could help to determine what would be the meta in such case. All could be done is assumptions.
There was a brief time when Zur was the only deck worth playing, until Derevi's release. Honestly removing both of them is a perfectly fine option. Zur and Derevi were basically keeping each other's bad matchups in check, nevermind cutting out a lot of the possible creative decks.
With both gone, there is going to be a lot of breathing room to fill, and it's quite possible that we'll see ramp run to the front again, and with them all the decks that were closed down by Zur and Deveri's dominance over their respective styles.
And Grim Monolith, seriously? They playtested the format w/o Zuur and Derevi and that's the conclusion? Monolith is too strong? Wow... we should ban Basalt Monolith too now that we're at it. On what is this really based? All decks using it aren't warping the format at the moment of the ban. So it can only be based on the assumption that it would warp the format with Zuur and Derevi banned.
Monolith probably should have been banned a long time ago in any case. It's by far the most fair of the cards being banned this go around, though it enables a lot of unanswerable turn 3/4 plays. Wanderer coming down that early with a single monolith and ramp spell is already game-breaking. With this now gone it's more challenging to end the game instantly. Still doable, but harder.
It's funny, people blasted me and my theories in running my Commander events on Magic Online. They questioned me for not playing the same exact format as Duel-Commander, and they questioned my changes. While a couple of these DC changes do make sense (Zur and Nat. Order) the others just flat out don't.
Come to Magic Online and play in my events instead of this. You can play your Derevis, and Grim Monoliths freely. Monolith isn't a problem card, and, the Derevi-Prossh-Karador trifecta keeps heavy permission decks from being all over the format. If you're curious to my format, check the link in my sig (we just completed event 4.08). We run events about once a week, with number of rounds based on attendance, and I personally oversee matches when one particular deck may or may not be getting out of control.
At least a few of us decided that if Derevi was banned it was indicative that the rules committee was completely disconnected from the idea of a competitive format, and on top of that completely hypocritical. Zur gets 3 years with only pieces being banned before getting removed from the format - yet Derevi gets banned in a few months? At the very least it's hypocritical as there was no attempt to ban any cards that might have made the deck very strong in an attempt to balance it. And the reasoning itself names interactions with a few cards that, while strong certainly, already require a strong board and for you to be winning to be oppressive (Hokori). There are many decks that can create very strong board positions like this with just a card or two and their general.
There has been absolutely no communication between the french rules committee and the english-speaking players. This is the most active and largest forum, right here, and most people here were against banning Derevi in the thread in which is was discussed (and certainly, the people that actually gave any reasoning were mostly against it). Frankly, it seems to me that the french rules committee very much wants the french to continue controlling their format. And that's fine. But since they want to be insular and exert their control over others... well that's a reason we shouldn't follow them.
I want a competitive format. With competitive cards. Looking through the recent tournaments - really? The Derevi ban? Derevi did well, sure, but it was not oppressive or dominating top 8s. And people hadn't really been changing their decks to deal with it at all. Surely this format has been much more diverse than standard, for example (where you can find many lists with 7/8 decks being black or blue devotion).
The banning of Derevi, like Edric, says a few things: namely, that the only viable decks should be control and ramp. Derevi and Edric make red decks better. The good combos that can actually win have been banned (think about it... Protean Hulk, Loyal Retainers, Oath of Druids, Hermit Druid). And really... grim monolith?
Not going to get into the argument about what should/should not have been banned. I'm just glad the waiting is over.
What I do want to mention is that this is absolutely not something to get y'all's panties in a twist The RC decided to let Zur function as the dominant deck for quite a while before banning it. I figure we can extend the same courtesy and actually play the new meta for a little while to see what happens instead of everyone jumping off the wagon at the first sign of a couple changes.
Some people like it, some people don't. As is, this is what we have, and I doubt the format's going anywhere but up, so just try it out. You might even like it.
To the people saying you're going to make your own format, or you have a format already that's successful: I'm trying to be polite here, but I would like to believe that people posting on this thread are interested in growing and strengthening this format, not tearing it down. If you're of the latter you're not helping anything, and I would consider it a point of common courtesy to keep such comments to yourself. It does nothing positive here, and has no purpose other than to sow discord.
4 people are probably better than thousands of people actually trying to adapt to a new meta. Banning the 2 best generals at the same time? Wow. I wonder how much time they put into the format WITH Derevi and WITHOUT Zuur, because there is no actual top-8 that could help to determine what would be the meta in such case. All could be done is assumptions.
And Grim Monolith, seriously? They playtested the format w/o Zuur and Derevi and that's the conclusion? Monolith is too strong? Wow... we should ban Basalt Monolith too now that we're at it. On what is this really based? All decks using it aren't warping the format at the moment of the ban. So it can only be based on the assumption that it would warp the format with Zuur and Derevi banned.
4 people versus the whole duel EDH world. How could 4 people be better at playtesting the meta than the whole rest of us? That's impossible. Even 10 or 20 people. You need more datas.
And why is Zuur so good anyway? There were still key cards to ban in the first place. There are a lot of them. I can't stand playing this format when you ban Edric, Zuur, Derevi and cards like Sensei and Natural Order but not Sylvan Library or Survival of the Fittest.
I guess you really want 2 cards combo to win in the format, like Helm-RIP or even Mikaeus-Triskellion. We will start playing Oloro packed with tutors and those combos and just try to win from there, also winning life every turn.
Just for answer at some of your points:
The 4 people didn't obviously take all the testing between them. Their "assumptions" are taken from MtgTop8, tournaments, forums and from testing on a big scale, so they basically change what the players believe is right to change for making the format better. If you look at Metagame, you can see that Derevi, with 335 played games, is the top tier, and from french forums I know that A LOT of players tested it intensively and came out with the result that she's bannable.
About the Monolith, I agree with Virtus that allowing a turn 3 Iname/Primeval titan/Prossh isn't in the purpose of the format, in the same way that Natural order wasn't. For this reason, Basalt Monolith is legal. Because it cost 3 and it doesn't read CMC0 add 1 in certain cases. It was just one of the rocks that escaped the "first mana accel ban".
I don't know how many members of the WotC are charged for the banlists in tournament legal formats, but following your reasoning, people would have the choice to decide to ban or play what they like. And still, someone in the "minority" would complain in that case.
About Zur: He was being "so good" since 2012, when the format was born. Do you think that Vanishing, Necropotence and Back to Basics were banned for other reasons? From the beginning the comitee is trying to keep contained the power of ZUr, but he still keep to steal top8.
About Sensei... yeah, I see. Not sure it's that much different from Sylvan Library assuming you don't activate Top more than once a turn. Even Mirri's Guile at that point. But I can see how activating Top's ability every turn could take 1 minute to fully resolve and be a problem (while this is also true about the 2 other cards I just mentionned).
Well, it is important that Top is also an artifact and can go into every deck and given the nature of the format would likely go in every deck while only decks capable of using green can play Sylvan Library and most green decks don't bother to run Mirri's Guile. Probably because they are running the library instead
If you ban/nerf Zur and leave Derevi untouched, she'll wreck the format for sure.
If you ban/nerf Zur AND Derevi AND leave the other decks untouched, it'll wreck the format for sure.
The bannings seem a lot to take in at first, but it's logical and reasonable.
It's funny, people blasted me and my theories in running my Commander events on Magic Online. They questioned me for not playing the same exact format as Duel-Commander, and they questioned my changes. While a couple of these DC changes do make sense (Zur and Nat. Order) the others just flat out don't.
Come to Magic Online and play in my events instead of this. You can play your Derevis, and Grim Monoliths freely. Monolith isn't a problem card, and, the Derevi-Prossh-Karador trifecta keeps heavy permission decks from being all over the format. If you're curious to my format, check the link in my sig (we just completed event 4.08). We run events about once a week, with number of rounds based on attendance, and I personally oversee matches when one particular deck may or may not be getting out of control.
To be fair, you did ban Kiki Jiki.... These bannings were expected and whether or not justified, they are much more justified over Kiki Jiki...
What should be the maximum number of cards should be on the list? 20? 15 overall? 10?
I have both a zur and derevi deck and play against excellent players. There are multiple answers for each, but that isn't the point. I think banning whatever wins is a great way to ensure sub-par decks for the next cycle, if something rises to them top do they just ban that too?
I gotta say, this RC is not impressing me at all. Granted, they don't owe me anything, but this format is getting really ridiculous.
It is very very clear that the RC and a large chunk of players want this to be multiplayer EDH, but with only two people.
EVEN IF I accept the Derevi ban as justified (which it most definitely is not. Their reasons given for banning her are completely off base, and revolve around clunky interactions with clunky cards, and some other interaction with other cards that are ALWAYS going to be good in ANY deck), and EVEN if I accept the Zur ban as justified (which, okay, it's more justifiable than Derevi, but it's still not necessary), Grim Monolith and Oath!?!? Seriously!?!?!
They even specifically say in their post that Oath doesn't get played all that often. But they claim they HAVE to ban it because it beats creature decks. What the hell is this, Yu-Gi-Oh?! If tapping out every turn to play creatures and then turning them sideways is the only way the RC wants people to win, then I wholeheartedly agree with Rhythmguy's suggestion of abandoning the DC RC and developing a better, more competitive banlist.
And in any case, banning Zur and Derevi at the same time is incredibly dumb. Just when the format was stabilizing and had several viable top tier decks, with Marath and Prossh keeping Derevi in check and Derevi keeping Zur in check, they go ahead and basically torch the whole format just because players keep whining and complaining that Zur and Derevi are too good.
As long as this RC is wielding the banlist like a friggin' sledgehammer, this just does not feel like a competitive format to me.
I will also go ahead and re-echo calls for sideboards. They work.
We all knew the deluge or spike tears that would come when Zur finally got banned. And it seems like even the RC threw a temper tantrum about it; "If I can't have Zur, then you can't have Darevi!!! Buaaah!!".
Now everyone can play some anti-Marath/Geist tech (easy for all colors) and we got a healthy 10-12 decks metagame instead of Zur vs Zur and anti-Zur.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes sir, I take fantasy art and character design commissions, PM me for rates.
That's not the way any constructed format works if people are trying to win. The top tier is never going to be larger than 3 or 4 decks.
Legacy has 4 definitive Tier 1 decks, doesn't mean the 5 Tier 1.5 decks and the 13 Tier 2 decks have no chance in hell of placing like what happened with Zur's ridiculously opressing dominance before Darevi appeared. Partly because the Rock-Scissors-Paper nature of the archetypes is more pronounced, partly because WotC hasn't done all they can to keep a poisonous, format-warping deck around.
The format is better off without Zur.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes sir, I take fantasy art and character design commissions, PM me for rates.
Well, this update is going to be controversial. I can't imagine the thought process behind banning TWO generals at the same time... even if they both need banning & there's good reasoning behind it, people are going to see that and lose interest. (like we've seen in this thread)
As a Godo, Bandit Warlord player, I'm sad to see Monolith leaving (no more T1 Gamble into T2 Monolith for me), but I understand the reasoning as to why. Ramp decks are probably going to see more play now that Zur fetching Nevermore naming the general is no longer viable. The banning of Monolith is to slow down ramp decks like Iname, Godo, Prossh, Griselbrand, and Maelstrom Wanderer.
Ban list's should be short. French is out of control. It's really a multiplayer format they are trying to force in a 1v1 box anyway
None of those decks were making many top-8s right now, so that's all presumptions. Also, if this card is good in so many different decks, I don't see the purpose of banning it. It's still no Sol Ring or Mana Crypt, you get one use out of it. I think we want all those ramp deck there, and Monolith is just a good card, control matchup doesn't care about you taking one spell (Gamble) to get Monolith (which they don't care about) and then you also discarding a card. That's basically +3 of card advantage for them...
Rules Advisor
Pauper decks: Weenie Tokens — Zombies
My own rules when building a Commander deck:
1) Underrated general that I can build around but the deck must work without him/her too.
2) Every card must be legal in both banlists.
3) No infinite combo that could win (and ruin) instantly a multiplayer game.
4) Synergy at all costs; stay on theme, avoid goodstuff.
I hope it is not.
I agree. I wonder if they also tested banning Zur and unbanning Edric to see what the result would be. It would seem that Edric and Derevi would have similar weaknesses.
So which part of their reasoning do you disagree with? Do you disagree that ramp decks will be an important part of the new meta or that Grim Monolith won't be an important part of those ramp decks?
I'm pretty sure Sensei's Divining Top is banned because it makes for slow play in tournaments, while being very powerful, which is why it is banned in Modern and was banned in Extended when it was legal there.
What should be the maximum number of cards should be on the list? 20? 15 overall? 10?
Duel Commander
URG [Primer] Maelstrom Wanderer [Primer] URG
Duel Commander Current Projects:
RGWMarath, Will of the WildRGW
BRXMogis, God of SlaughterBRX
RWxIoras, God of VictoryRWx
WBxAthreos, God of PassageWBx
Created By: DarkNightCavalier
Ramp decks will be important and Grim Monolith will be played in those decks. Does it mean we have to ban it without actually look at how the meta develops? No.
About Sensei... yeah, I see. Not sure it's that much different from Sylvan Library assuming you don't activate Top more than once a turn. Even Mirri's Guile at that point. But I can see how activating Top's ability every turn could take 1 minute to fully resolve and be a problem (while this is also true about the 2 other cards I just mentionned).
Rules Advisor
Pauper decks: Weenie Tokens — Zombies
My own rules when building a Commander deck:
1) Underrated general that I can build around but the deck must work without him/her too.
2) Every card must be legal in both banlists.
3) No infinite combo that could win (and ruin) instantly a multiplayer game.
4) Synergy at all costs; stay on theme, avoid goodstuff.
There are around 13000 unique cards in this game... it's not like we don't have more to choose from.
Also, I would like to point out the Duel Commander banlist is shorter than the legacy ban list... and they are both eternal formats.
Hm.. DC is basically singleton legacy.
I think the length of the banlist is fine.
(R/W)WRAnax and Cymede: RW AggroRW(R/W)
WWWThalia, Guardian of Thraben: White Weenie AggroWWW
BUGThe Mimeoplasm: Graveyard ComboGUB
(W/B)BWAthreos, God of Passage: Orzhov ShinnanigansBW(W/B)
a card border extended by me, commissions are open.
There was a brief time when Zur was the only deck worth playing, until Derevi's release. Honestly removing both of them is a perfectly fine option. Zur and Derevi were basically keeping each other's bad matchups in check, nevermind cutting out a lot of the possible creative decks.
With both gone, there is going to be a lot of breathing room to fill, and it's quite possible that we'll see ramp run to the front again, and with them all the decks that were closed down by Zur and Deveri's dominance over their respective styles.
Monolith probably should have been banned a long time ago in any case. It's by far the most fair of the cards being banned this go around, though it enables a lot of unanswerable turn 3/4 plays. Wanderer coming down that early with a single monolith and ramp spell is already game-breaking. With this now gone it's more challenging to end the game instantly. Still doable, but harder.
A ban list should be as long or as short as it needs to make a format fair and balanced (as much as possible, at the least.)
We've got well over ten thousand unique playable cards to consider, and as a newer format keeping things hale and hearty will take some effort.
EDH:
RNorin the WaryR <-Link! (Primer - Mono Red Control)
GUEdric, Spymaster of TrestUG <- Link! (Mini-Primer - Dredge)
Duel Commander:
WUGeist of Saint TraftUW <- Link! (Aggro-Control)
BGSkullbriar, the Walking GraveGB <- Link! (Aggro)
BUGDamia, Sage of StoneGUB <- Link! (Extinction Control)
Church of the Wary
Come to Magic Online and play in my events instead of this. You can play your Derevis, and Grim Monoliths freely. Monolith isn't a problem card, and, the Derevi-Prossh-Karador trifecta keeps heavy permission decks from being all over the format. If you're curious to my format, check the link in my sig (we just completed event 4.08). We run events about once a week, with number of rounds based on attendance, and I personally oversee matches when one particular deck may or may not be getting out of control.
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
At least a few of us decided that if Derevi was banned it was indicative that the rules committee was completely disconnected from the idea of a competitive format, and on top of that completely hypocritical. Zur gets 3 years with only pieces being banned before getting removed from the format - yet Derevi gets banned in a few months? At the very least it's hypocritical as there was no attempt to ban any cards that might have made the deck very strong in an attempt to balance it. And the reasoning itself names interactions with a few cards that, while strong certainly, already require a strong board and for you to be winning to be oppressive (Hokori). There are many decks that can create very strong board positions like this with just a card or two and their general.
There has been absolutely no communication between the french rules committee and the english-speaking players. This is the most active and largest forum, right here, and most people here were against banning Derevi in the thread in which is was discussed (and certainly, the people that actually gave any reasoning were mostly against it). Frankly, it seems to me that the french rules committee very much wants the french to continue controlling their format. And that's fine. But since they want to be insular and exert their control over others... well that's a reason we shouldn't follow them.
I want a competitive format. With competitive cards. Looking through the recent tournaments - really? The Derevi ban? Derevi did well, sure, but it was not oppressive or dominating top 8s. And people hadn't really been changing their decks to deal with it at all. Surely this format has been much more diverse than standard, for example (where you can find many lists with 7/8 decks being black or blue devotion).
The banning of Derevi, like Edric, says a few things: namely, that the only viable decks should be control and ramp. Derevi and Edric make red decks better. The good combos that can actually win have been banned (think about it... Protean Hulk, Loyal Retainers, Oath of Druids, Hermit Druid). And really... grim monolith?
(Multiplayer)
BRGKarrthus, Tyrant of Jund
WUBSharuum the Hegemon
(American 1v1)
BGSkullbriar, the Walking Grave
WUGDerevi
Not going to get into the argument about what should/should not have been banned. I'm just glad the waiting is over.
What I do want to mention is that this is absolutely not something to get y'all's panties in a twist The RC decided to let Zur function as the dominant deck for quite a while before banning it. I figure we can extend the same courtesy and actually play the new meta for a little while to see what happens instead of everyone jumping off the wagon at the first sign of a couple changes.
Some people like it, some people don't. As is, this is what we have, and I doubt the format's going anywhere but up, so just try it out. You might even like it.
To the people saying you're going to make your own format, or you have a format already that's successful: I'm trying to be polite here, but I would like to believe that people posting on this thread are interested in growing and strengthening this format, not tearing it down. If you're of the latter you're not helping anything, and I would consider it a point of common courtesy to keep such comments to yourself. It does nothing positive here, and has no purpose other than to sow discord.
Let's get to testing!
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics
[Primer]WIsamaru, the Howling BladeW[Primer]
[Primer]BGSkullbriar: From Life, Death Eternal (1v1)GB[Primer]
BGRbighaben and Feverous' Prossh, Skyraider of KherRGB
BGRProssh-Gro (1V1)RGB
Just for answer at some of your points:
The 4 people didn't obviously take all the testing between them. Their "assumptions" are taken from MtgTop8, tournaments, forums and from testing on a big scale, so they basically change what the players believe is right to change for making the format better. If you look at Metagame, you can see that Derevi, with 335 played games, is the top tier, and from french forums I know that A LOT of players tested it intensively and came out with the result that she's bannable.
About the Monolith, I agree with Virtus that allowing a turn 3 Iname/Primeval titan/Prossh isn't in the purpose of the format, in the same way that Natural order wasn't. For this reason, Basalt Monolith is legal. Because it cost 3 and it doesn't read CMC0 add 1 in certain cases. It was just one of the rocks that escaped the "first mana accel ban".
I don't know how many members of the WotC are charged for the banlists in tournament legal formats, but following your reasoning, people would have the choice to decide to ban or play what they like. And still, someone in the "minority" would complain in that case.
About Zur: He was being "so good" since 2012, when the format was born. Do you think that Vanishing, Necropotence and Back to Basics were banned for other reasons? From the beginning the comitee is trying to keep contained the power of ZUr, but he still keep to steal top8.
Well, it is important that Top is also an artifact and can go into every deck and given the nature of the format would likely go in every deck while only decks capable of using green can play Sylvan Library and most green decks don't bother to run Mirri's Guile. Probably because they are running the library instead
If you ban/nerf Zur AND Derevi AND leave the other decks untouched, it'll wreck the format for sure.
The bannings seem a lot to take in at first, but it's logical and reasonable.
To be fair, you did ban Kiki Jiki.... These bannings were expected and whether or not justified, they are much more justified over Kiki Jiki...
Sexy Sig by mchief111 @ Rising Studios
EDH
G Isao
I have both a zur and derevi deck and play against excellent players. There are multiple answers for each, but that isn't the point. I think banning whatever wins is a great way to ensure sub-par decks for the next cycle, if something rises to them top do they just ban that too?
Back to legacy, vintage, and standard EDH for me.
Duel Commander
URG [Primer] Maelstrom Wanderer [Primer] URG
Duel Commander Current Projects:
RGWMarath, Will of the WildRGW
BRXMogis, God of SlaughterBRX
RWxIoras, God of VictoryRWx
WBxAthreos, God of PassageWBx
Created By: DarkNightCavalier
It is very very clear that the RC and a large chunk of players want this to be multiplayer EDH, but with only two people.
EVEN IF I accept the Derevi ban as justified (which it most definitely is not. Their reasons given for banning her are completely off base, and revolve around clunky interactions with clunky cards, and some other interaction with other cards that are ALWAYS going to be good in ANY deck), and EVEN if I accept the Zur ban as justified (which, okay, it's more justifiable than Derevi, but it's still not necessary), Grim Monolith and Oath!?!? Seriously!?!?!
They even specifically say in their post that Oath doesn't get played all that often. But they claim they HAVE to ban it because it beats creature decks. What the hell is this, Yu-Gi-Oh?! If tapping out every turn to play creatures and then turning them sideways is the only way the RC wants people to win, then I wholeheartedly agree with Rhythmguy's suggestion of abandoning the DC RC and developing a better, more competitive banlist.
And in any case, banning Zur and Derevi at the same time is incredibly dumb. Just when the format was stabilizing and had several viable top tier decks, with Marath and Prossh keeping Derevi in check and Derevi keeping Zur in check, they go ahead and basically torch the whole format just because players keep whining and complaining that Zur and Derevi are too good.
As long as this RC is wielding the banlist like a friggin' sledgehammer, this just does not feel like a competitive format to me.
I will also go ahead and re-echo calls for sideboards. They work.
Derevi, Empyrial TacticianWUGMultiplayer
Now everyone can play some anti-Marath/Geist tech (easy for all colors) and we got a healthy 10-12 decks metagame instead of Zur vs Zur and anti-Zur.
And don't you also only allow 8 counterspells per deck or something? I mean, no offense, but ... lol.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics
[Primer]WIsamaru, the Howling BladeW[Primer]
[Primer]BGSkullbriar: From Life, Death Eternal (1v1)GB[Primer]
BGRbighaben and Feverous' Prossh, Skyraider of KherRGB
BGRProssh-Gro (1V1)RGB
That's not the way any constructed format works if people are trying to win. The top tier is never going to be larger than 3 or 4 decks.
Derevi, Empyrial TacticianWUGMultiplayer
Legacy has 4 definitive Tier 1 decks, doesn't mean the 5 Tier 1.5 decks and the 13 Tier 2 decks have no chance in hell of placing like what happened with Zur's ridiculously opressing dominance before Darevi appeared. Partly because the Rock-Scissors-Paper nature of the archetypes is more pronounced, partly because WotC hasn't done all they can to keep a poisonous, format-warping deck around.
The format is better off without Zur.
I'm excited to see how the metagame evolves.
(maybe in a few months I can afford a Natural Order, naw prolly not)
..
Azusa - Derevi - Glissa - Mizzix - Sharuum - Wanderer - Wort