Clearly creatures centralize the game. Shown by how other decks have to change and run answers just to deal with them. Clearly creatures needs to be banned for the same reasons as Emmy!
Thanks for the template! Now I can launch crusades/jihads against stuff that I find boring...
so you know it's still sarcasm lol
Yes I thought using the word sarcasm would be sufficient:P
Also well played. I counter with...
Casting spells over centralize the game. They require other players to do something or lose the game. Ban spells for the same reasons as Emmy!
Back on topic. Could Sheldon have handled it better? Probably. I would say who cares what he has to say. But the last 7 pages show that people care. Personally I don't mind when people aren't PC and speak there mind, even if they are wrong. I don't agree with his calling the person out so openly. But I fully understand him wanting to vent. This is what the "Pet Peeves" on this forum is really for. Sometimes you just got to *****. And I can see how the person that is largely responsible for the format can become frustrated watching it degenerate into another Legacy style game with fast combos and locks. I would think people should be happy he has not got on a banning crusade to stop such things. You should give him props for that much at least.
Back on topic. Could Sheldon have handled it better? Probably. I would say who cares what he has to say. But the last 7 pages show that people care. Personally I don't mind when people aren't PC and speak there mind, even if they are wrong. I don't agree with his calling the person out so openly. But I fully understand him wanting to vent. This is what the "Pet Peeves" on this forum is really for. Sometimes you just got to *****. And I can see how the person that is largely responsible for the format can become frustrated watching it degenerate into another Legacy style game with fast combos and locks. I would think people should be happy he has not got on a banning crusade to stop such things. You should give him props for that much at least.
I think after the recent investment, if it was seen to anyone at WoTC that he would even attempt to move against combo's in general, they would push him out of "his own" format. I don't think he has the ability nor the support to do this anyway, and would like to think that as much as he may not like combo players, he realizes that EDH has moved well beyond "creature smash" deck building.
This thread isn't supposed to be about combo vs not combo. There's like a thousand locked threads for that. Can we talk about Sheldon please?
I'm on record saying Sheldon is wrong bigtime for insulting anyone from his position of massive influence. He's got to be interacting with others with higher standards than that. I want to see what more people think of his behavior.
Ok since you asked. His call out was totally unjustified.
Besides being immature, he's partially to blame. He could have politicked Dags getting focus fired, blown stuff up that is Dags, won before turn 10.
I get that he doesn't like combo, but on turn 10, it's ok to win. Some people want to megazord a few cards together and wipe a table, others like attacking. At 10 turns (assuming 5 minutes per orbit) you're at 50 minutes of MTG, what's the big deal? Don't they hard stop at 1 hour anyway? Be grateful he didn't lock you out on turn 3.
However, the bigger faux pas was NOT calling Jon a dick, whatever, he does that all the time when people stray from his narrow view of EDH, but rather when he started commenting on the girl's play. Mr. High and Mighty was just as culpable as the other 2 people for letting Dags win on turn 10. Her threat assessment sucks? Their politicking sucks even harder. Token boy wanted to "spread love"? Sheldon should have convinced him to cram the tokens down Dags' throat. Then in the other game when he said he wanted to Mind Slaver someone to "show them how to play" or whatever...seriously dude? Why don't you play 4 deck solitaire or something since nobody Embraces the Chaos better than you do.
@Tantarus - clearly the true culprit is not spells, but mana. Mana enables spells, which centralize the game. Ban all mana and I think we solved the problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I think EDH would be more fun for the majority of participants if players just showed eachother their decks rather than actually playing games out."
Just to add I don't know if you read the story in question, the combo player interacted quite a bit, even after the lands were nuked, he had his whole field bounced practically, which just made things worse for the remaining players, which resulted in the long final turn. If you give me back 20 cards then it may take a while for me to figure out how to play them, especially with Confusion in the Ranks in play.
I did read it. And I was speaking not really to that specific case but to combo players in general. Though I think we are probably using different definitions of the word. I guess I divide it up into 3 different categories:
Combo: Specific infinity combos. Auto wins. Not very interactive and the game just suddenly stops. These are the kinda of wins I support playing for 2nd place in. Perhaps I should refer to it as Comboing out?
Locks: These are your Lattice/March, Erayo/lab kinda things that lock the rest of the table out of playing the game.
Synergies: Two or more cards that work very strongly together. These I have no issue with. I think all decks should probably have them. This to me is what magic is about and the heart of edh as well. Using 2 cards together for interesting and more powerful effects. But not degenerate auto wins. Examples would be from the strong ones like Novablast wurm/sun titan/Dauntless escort to moderate Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker/Conquering Manticore to the old school, Icy Manipulator/Royal Assassin and even simple Equipment and Kemba.
Anyhow back to Sheldon I don't recall who put confusion in the ranks into play, but honestly what happened is probably as much there fault as anyone elses. Those kinda cards can drag out turns nearly as bad as land sweeping.
@Orgefoot, yeah I see what you are saying about mana. But Islands at the end of the day creature the worst spells. Therefore they are the root of the issue! (coming full circle to blame blue!)
Kind of offtopic, but does anyone know what point system this league uses? My local playgroup was going to start a league and the point system had me interested, it turned more into a tournament however. I don't know if someone may have a link, if so please pass it a long, thanks.
Kind of offtopic, but does anyone know what point system this league uses? My local playgroup was going to start a league and the point system had me interested, it turned more into a tournament however. I don't know if someone may have a link, if so please pass it a long, thanks.
Kind of offtopic, but does anyone know what point system this league uses? My local playgroup was going to start a league and the point system had me interested, it turned more into a tournament however. I don't know if someone may have a link, if so please pass it a long, thanks.
However, the bigger faux pas was NOT calling Jon a dick, whatever, he does that all the time when people stray from his narrow view of EDH, but rather when he started commenting on the girl's play. Mr. High and Mighty was just as culpable as the other 2 people for letting Dags win on turn 10. Her threat assessment sucks? Their politicking sucks even harder. Token boy wanted to "spread love"? Sheldon should have convinced him to cram the tokens down Dags' throat. Then in the other game when he said he wanted to Mind Slaver someone to "show them how to play" or whatever...seriously dude? Why don't you play 4 deck solitaire or something since nobody Embraces the Chaos better than you do.
Yeah this bothered me a bit too. He is basically *****ing at people for being too casual while at the same time *****ing at someone for not being casual enough. If anything he should encourage people to be more like them and less like mr Blue. The real issue is that table was a total mismatch of player types from the sound of it. Which can be frustrating in it's own right. I have played with people that *****ed at me for going balls out against an azami player in a game marked "casual" on cockatrice. And after 2 of us ran the azami player off the table they said we should have waited till he did something threatening to go after him. Some poeple are just not experienced enough or too nice maybe to have politicking work on them.
@Orgefoot, yeah I see what you are saying about mana. But Islands at the end of the day creature the worst spells. Therefore they are the root of the issue! (coming full circle to blame blue!)
I see you, over there, trying to judge me and make me feel bad for liking blue and black, but I won't go quietly into the night!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I think EDH would be more fun for the majority of participants if players just showed eachother their decks rather than actually playing games out."
And I can see how the person that is largely responsible for the format can become frustrated watching it degenerate into another Legacy style game with fast combos and locks. I would think people should be happy he has not got on a banning crusade to stop such things. You should give him props for that much at least.
I guess that's his problem after all. He likes green, he likes big creatures, he likes smashing face. It's easy to see how EDH is creature oriented as a result. However, combos are still quite dominant, and that bothers him to no end.
As a fellow "combo-hater" I understand his frustration. But the way he's trying to change this reality is just unacceptable and childish. If he's trying to "make EDH right" that's really not the way to do it.
The Cheese Stands Alone – Win the game with two or more opponents still in the game.
Maybe I am misunderstanding this rule. But it kinda seems to reward comboing out?
Yeah, but with things like Helix Pinnacle instead of milling everyone's deck, killing everyone or anything that takes players out of the game at the end of the combo.
Yeah, but with things like Helix Pinnacle instead of milling everyone's deck, killing everyone or anything that takes players out of the game at the end of the combo.
yea most of that article doesnt bother me too much. what irks me most is when he is sneaking in insults about how bad the other players are especially when he says something to the effect of "Beth probably is too bad of a player to run answers to anything"
yea most of that article doesnt bother me too much. what irks me most is when he is sneaking in insults about how bad the other players are especially when he says something to the effect of "Beth probably is too bad of a player to run answers to anything"
Yeah, and I mean...Smash = Answer....it just got smacked with rewind.
I feel criticism is the only way you can really grow in anything, but much of the article isn't criticism so much as being on tilt, ranting, or venting about how the other players aren't killing Arcum (I mean, they should, but you still need to play table politics...if they don't get it, just explain the combo)
Also - re: "Points" - nothing upsets me more than slow-rolling or seeing someone toys with players when they should have already won or should have won on the spot. The way points are set up in Sheldon's league greatly encourages such play as demonstrated by this post on the SCG forums (by David that closed the gap on Sheldon in the article).
Here is a quote from that post "David that closed the gap"
Also, lastly I didn't switch decks for the second round but I do have a 10 card "sideboard' for my Niv-Mizzet deck that turns it from casual-friendly into combo-rific for people that want to play that way and cause of Jon, for the first time at Armada, I stuck those cards in the deck and shortly after us taking him out of the game I was able to get Curiosity on Niv and draw lotsa cards and do whatever I want for the rest of the game which gave me lots of stuff to do and get a bunch of points before I finished off the game.
I also found it to be BS that every subsequent land drop = chasm penalty. Yes the combo "clicking together" was an armageddon but subsequent lands are "suicide" and stupid, not necessarily the Lattice + March player's fault.
Suppose I cast Genesis Wave for 4 with Hive Mind in play. I turn up nothing, the player on my left turns up Living Lands, and the player on my right turns up Night of Souls' Betrayal. So all lands die. Who gets penalized for it? Me for casting Genesis Wave or one of my opponents for making the lands die? It's a two card combo that made it happen-- no one card on its own is responsible.
Furthermore, if someone plays a land on their turn which causes it to die, who gets penalized? Is it the Living lands player or the Night of Souls' Betrayal player?
TL;DR: This point system is stupid and inconsistent.
The problem with defining [EDH] by what is "fun" is that everyone seems to define fun as what they don't lose to. If you keep losing to easily answered cards, that means you should improve your deck. If you don't want to improve your deck, then you should come to peace with the idea that you are going to lose because you chose to not interact with better strategies.
Also, some of you guys have been saying that if someone combos, they "win" and then you play for second place. This is incredibly lame.
I see no problem with it. It gives the player who has been "playing to win" his sense of victory that is considered oh so important, and lets the rest of the players do what they enjoy. If playing to win is what is most important, that person should be thrilled.
I see no problem with it. It gives the player who has been "playing to win" his sense of victory that is considered oh so important, and lets the rest of the players do what they enjoy. If playing to win is what is most important, that person should be thrilled.
It's not winning if everyone else keeps playing as if you scooped. That's loosing. Specially if that player sits down and waits for the game to end so he can play again.
I don't like combo players neither their win at all costs attitude, but it's not like they deserve a huge kick in the face.
I see no problem with it. It gives the player who has been "playing to win" his sense of victory that is considered oh so important, and lets the rest of the players do what they enjoy. If playing to win is what is most important, that person should be thrilled.
But he's not playing to win. Or at least I'm not when I'm in that situation. I'm playing to PLAY, and I have fun playing. Sometimes there's just a game where I played a whole lot better than other people (both at the deck construction step and actual game) and I win really fast. It's not too often but it does happen. I'm happy that I played well, but what I most want to do is play AGAIN. And this rule would punish me by saying I can't play, because I have to wait for everyone else to finish playing.
That's why I'd tackle this problem by making sure to kill people one at a time, without giving up control of the game state. It feels kind of lame but I'd rather win a game a bit slower and still play it than win a game quickly and then have my peers put me in a penalty box because they got their panties in a bunch.
The problem with defining [EDH] by what is "fun" is that everyone seems to define fun as what they don't lose to. If you keep losing to easily answered cards, that means you should improve your deck. If you don't want to improve your deck, then you should come to peace with the idea that you are going to lose because you chose to not interact with better strategies.
It's not winning if everyone else keeps playing as if you scooped. That's loosing. Specially if that player sits down and waits for the game to end so he can play again.
I don't like combo players neither their win at all costs attitude, but it's not like they deserve a huge kick in the face.
Yeah, they kinda do. Assuming the rest of the play group is not into that style of play. I know this is a solid way to get the message to the person that their play style is not fun for the others and they need to make compromises and adjustments to there deck to bring it more in line with the play groups so that they can all have fun.
Also - re: "Points" - nothing upsets me more than slow-rolling or seeing someone toys with players when they should have already won or should have won on the spot. The way points are set up in Sheldon's league greatly encourages such play as demonstrated by this post on the SCG forums (by David that closed the gap on Sheldon in the article).
Here is a quote from that post "David that closed the gap"
Yeah, they kinda do. Assuming the rest of the play group is not into that style of play. I know this is a solid way to get the message to the person that their play style is not fun for the others and they need to make compromises and adjustments to there deck to bring it more in like with the play groups so that they can all have fun.
Fair enough, as a last resort. You most likely can get the message across without doing such a thing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I would like to think they would not lock a thread over what was clearly a joke replying to the joke above it.
Yes I thought using the word sarcasm would be sufficient:P
Also well played. I counter with...
Casting spells over centralize the game. They require other players to do something or lose the game. Ban spells for the same reasons as Emmy!
Back on topic. Could Sheldon have handled it better? Probably. I would say who cares what he has to say. But the last 7 pages show that people care. Personally I don't mind when people aren't PC and speak there mind, even if they are wrong. I don't agree with his calling the person out so openly. But I fully understand him wanting to vent. This is what the "Pet Peeves" on this forum is really for. Sometimes you just got to *****. And I can see how the person that is largely responsible for the format can become frustrated watching it degenerate into another Legacy style game with fast combos and locks. I would think people should be happy he has not got on a banning crusade to stop such things. You should give him props for that much at least.
I think after the recent investment, if it was seen to anyone at WoTC that he would even attempt to move against combo's in general, they would push him out of "his own" format. I don't think he has the ability nor the support to do this anyway, and would like to think that as much as he may not like combo players, he realizes that EDH has moved well beyond "creature smash" deck building.
EDH Decks:
B Toshiro Umezawa B
W Mikaeus, the Lunarch W
G Azusa, Lost but Seeking G
UB Grimgrin, Corpse-Born BU
BGU The Mimeoplasm UGB
GUW Rubinia Soulsinger WUG
GRB Sek'Kuar, Deathkeeper BRG
Ok since you asked. His call out was totally unjustified.
Besides being immature, he's partially to blame. He could have politicked Dags getting focus fired, blown stuff up that is Dags, won before turn 10.
I get that he doesn't like combo, but on turn 10, it's ok to win. Some people want to megazord a few cards together and wipe a table, others like attacking. At 10 turns (assuming 5 minutes per orbit) you're at 50 minutes of MTG, what's the big deal? Don't they hard stop at 1 hour anyway? Be grateful he didn't lock you out on turn 3.
However, the bigger faux pas was NOT calling Jon a dick, whatever, he does that all the time when people stray from his narrow view of EDH, but rather when he started commenting on the girl's play. Mr. High and Mighty was just as culpable as the other 2 people for letting Dags win on turn 10. Her threat assessment sucks? Their politicking sucks even harder. Token boy wanted to "spread love"? Sheldon should have convinced him to cram the tokens down Dags' throat. Then in the other game when he said he wanted to Mind Slaver someone to "show them how to play" or whatever...seriously dude? Why don't you play 4 deck solitaire or something since nobody Embraces the Chaos better than you do.
@Tantarus - clearly the true culprit is not spells, but mana. Mana enables spells, which centralize the game. Ban all mana and I think we solved the problem.
I did read it. And I was speaking not really to that specific case but to combo players in general. Though I think we are probably using different definitions of the word. I guess I divide it up into 3 different categories:
Combo: Specific infinity combos. Auto wins. Not very interactive and the game just suddenly stops. These are the kinda of wins I support playing for 2nd place in. Perhaps I should refer to it as Comboing out?
Locks: These are your Lattice/March, Erayo/lab kinda things that lock the rest of the table out of playing the game.
Synergies: Two or more cards that work very strongly together. These I have no issue with. I think all decks should probably have them. This to me is what magic is about and the heart of edh as well. Using 2 cards together for interesting and more powerful effects. But not degenerate auto wins. Examples would be from the strong ones like Novablast wurm/sun titan/Dauntless escort to moderate Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker/Conquering Manticore to the old school, Icy Manipulator/Royal Assassin and even simple Equipment and Kemba.
Anyhow back to Sheldon I don't recall who put confusion in the ranks into play, but honestly what happened is probably as much there fault as anyone elses. Those kinda cards can drag out turns nearly as bad as land sweeping.
@Orgefoot, yeah I see what you are saying about mana. But Islands at the end of the day creature the worst spells. Therefore they are the root of the issue! (coming full circle to blame blue!)
EDH Decks:
B Toshiro Umezawa B
W Mikaeus, the Lunarch W
G Azusa, Lost but Seeking G
UB Grimgrin, Corpse-Born BU
BGU The Mimeoplasm UGB
GUW Rubinia Soulsinger WUG
GRB Sek'Kuar, Deathkeeper BRG
http://www.armadagames.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=0&func=view&catid=5&id=1439
I think that is it.
For a more recent version:
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/multiplayer/21008_Embracing_The_Chaos_AggroPhelddagrif.html
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Yeah this bothered me a bit too. He is basically *****ing at people for being too casual while at the same time *****ing at someone for not being casual enough. If anything he should encourage people to be more like them and less like mr Blue. The real issue is that table was a total mismatch of player types from the sound of it. Which can be frustrating in it's own right. I have played with people that *****ed at me for going balls out against an azami player in a game marked "casual" on cockatrice. And after 2 of us ran the azami player off the table they said we should have waited till he did something threatening to go after him. Some poeple are just not experienced enough or too nice maybe to have politicking work on them.
I see you, over there, trying to judge me and make me feel bad for liking blue and black, but I won't go quietly into the night!
I had not seen the updated list.
+4 Points
The Cheese Stands Alone – Win the game with two or more opponents still in the game.
Maybe I am misunderstanding this rule. But it kinda seems to reward comboing out?
I guess that's his problem after all. He likes green, he likes big creatures, he likes smashing face. It's easy to see how EDH is creature oriented as a result. However, combos are still quite dominant, and that bothers him to no end.
As a fellow "combo-hater" I understand his frustration. But the way he's trying to change this reality is just unacceptable and childish. If he's trying to "make EDH right" that's really not the way to do it.
Possibly. I think it's more geared toward stuff like Chance Encounter and Epic Struggle, but it is interesting to note that:
1. You can most easily meet these conditions through combo, like you said.
2. Coalition Victory, the flagship "I WIN" card, is banned in EDH. Better do cool things, but not too cool. lol
I guess consistency is something I cannot really expect here, and I need to get over it.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Yeah, but with things like Helix Pinnacle instead of milling everyone's deck, killing everyone or anything that takes players out of the game at the end of the combo.
Or Feldinar sovereign / test of endurance would be another way to do this.
EDIT: Ironic - I usually set up this type of win with a chasm effect (cataclysm) and then everyone has 1 turn and minimal resources to stop me.
Net result: I am a bad person....but I still net at least +2 points....hrm.
Trade/Sell me your Demonic Attorney!
Pro tip: don't expect to win a game of edh against Sheldon and not read about it in some tempertantrum rant on the Internet the next day.
The EDH stax primer
When you absolutely, positively got to kill every permanent in the room, accept no substitutes.
Yeah, and I mean...Smash = Answer....it just got smacked with rewind.
I feel criticism is the only way you can really grow in anything, but much of the article isn't criticism so much as being on tilt, ranting, or venting about how the other players aren't killing Arcum (I mean, they should, but you still need to play table politics...if they don't get it, just explain the combo)
Also - re: "Points" - nothing upsets me more than slow-rolling or seeing someone toys with players when they should have already won or should have won on the spot. The way points are set up in Sheldon's league greatly encourages such play as demonstrated by this post on the SCG forums (by David that closed the gap on Sheldon in the article).
Here is a quote from that post "David that closed the gap"
If you get Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind with Curiosity please end the game now. Thanks. If you don't, I'm not inclined to return (I won't smash your face in, but someone will).
Trade/Sell me your Demonic Attorney!
Suppose I cast Genesis Wave for 4 with Hive Mind in play. I turn up nothing, the player on my left turns up Living Lands, and the player on my right turns up Night of Souls' Betrayal. So all lands die. Who gets penalized for it? Me for casting Genesis Wave or one of my opponents for making the lands die? It's a two card combo that made it happen-- no one card on its own is responsible.
Furthermore, if someone plays a land on their turn which causes it to die, who gets penalized? Is it the Living lands player or the Night of Souls' Betrayal player?
TL;DR: This point system is stupid and inconsistent.
It's not winning if everyone else keeps playing as if you scooped. That's loosing. Specially if that player sits down and waits for the game to end so he can play again.
I don't like combo players neither their win at all costs attitude, but it's not like they deserve a huge kick in the face.
But he's not playing to win. Or at least I'm not when I'm in that situation. I'm playing to PLAY, and I have fun playing. Sometimes there's just a game where I played a whole lot better than other people (both at the deck construction step and actual game) and I win really fast. It's not too often but it does happen. I'm happy that I played well, but what I most want to do is play AGAIN. And this rule would punish me by saying I can't play, because I have to wait for everyone else to finish playing.
That's why I'd tackle this problem by making sure to kill people one at a time, without giving up control of the game state. It feels kind of lame but I'd rather win a game a bit slower and still play it than win a game quickly and then have my peers put me in a penalty box because they got their panties in a bunch.
Yeah, they kinda do. Assuming the rest of the play group is not into that style of play. I know this is a solid way to get the message to the person that their play style is not fun for the others and they need to make compromises and adjustments to there deck to bring it more in line with the play groups so that they can all have fun.
That guy sure could use a kick in the face. It's goes to show how tournaments, prizes and points take casual out of the equation.
I'd scoop right away. Not sure why people let him play around like that.
Fair enough, as a last resort. You most likely can get the message across without doing such a thing.