Expropriate isn't a great card on its own. It doesn't guarantee the win, it costs 9 mana, it self-exiles...there's various reasons as to why you wouldn't run it. Blatant Thievery is a great card, Time Warp is a great card, stapled together they're a great card, but...
THEY DO NOT WIN THE GAME. They can put the caster in a great position, yes, but so many times the board has just been so well filled that even taking the best permanents AND an extra turn simply left me ahead but not winning the game. You know how to play around Expropriate? Create a board state where you don't lose to Blatant Thievery. Not that hard to do.
Coalition Victory has counterplay, yes, but the counterplay is even more telegraphed than the CV itself. Now, if CV did anything else beyond "win the game", I'd be more interested in giving it a test run as it'd be a card you'd include to have fun with. As is, hell no.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
That's not a great place to be, and I'm not seeing any fun upsides to the card that might balance it out.
You, on the other hand, never managed to counter this.
So no, history will not vindicate you. Coalition Victory is not going to be unbanned. Not now, not in the nearby future, not ever unless we get a completely different RC and even then I have my doubts.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
But then, as it's the same answer as you've already been told about 50 times...I'm not surprised you'd think different.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I see your Grand Abolisher and raise you a Platinum Angel. In all honesty, I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here but the fact that CV (or anything else for that matter) is susceptible to already commonly played answers like spot creature removal is definitely something worth talking about. If everyone is already packing the proper answers, it is far less likely that thing will become problematic.
So according to this, we should just unban Primeval Titan, Prophet of Kruphix, Braids, Cabal Minion, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary and Sylvan Primordial because they're all "suspectible to removal", right?
The argument "Dies to removal" holds no ground in any discussion. Being harder to remove/interact with is a strike against a card, for sure, but being easy to remove does not neccesarily make a card fair to play.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
This whole debate has been going back-and-forth over the same points constantly. I do want to point out specifically the Enter the Infinite comparison.
If I cast EtI, under normal circumstances, the game will end for me within TWO turns. TWO. Not one. TWO. I get to draw a card for the turn, and then the turn after I'm dead. Gives two turn cycles to do something about it.
Now, of course, you could argue "But you'd just cast Lab Man and evoke Mulldrifter and be done with it." Sure. That's possible. But at that point, I've spent 11 mana in one turn, 6 mana the next, and NOBODY DID ANYTHING about it in a full turn cycle. That's kinda like me resolving Mortal Combat and the entire turn cycle goes by and nothing happens, thus triggering my win.
Wins like that aren't an issue. There was ample counterplay possible. A full turn to go through the motions. And nothing was done.
Now, if you look further, you'll note cards like Enter the Infinite, Doomsday, Mortal Combat...they all require more cards than just themselves to actually win. They all require specific cards to be built in the deck, whether it's Omniscience/Lab Man (ETI), specific Doomsdayable stacks, a way to quickly get 20+ creatures in the yard...none are a one-card-i-win button. They require specific deckbuilding.
Beyond that, each of those cards can be used just as a cool trick in a deck. A gy-using deck might just consider slotting in a Mortal Combat in order to give it another angle of attack.
Coalition Victory, again, only requires one slot. Why does this matter, you asked, well...
Each of the other "big wincon cards" CAN be used without going for the instant kill. They require one of two things: Constraint or Ignorance. Constraint fits within the RC mantra of "Build casually, play competitively". If the strongest combowombo I want to play with T&N is Avenger of Zendikar and Regal Force, then who are you to tell me I'm playing it wrong for not going with MikeTrike instead? I adapt my decks to the powerlevel of my meta. Many people do.
When you add Coalition Victory however, there's no other deckbuilding decisions to be made. You run lands. You run your commander. Those are things you cannot avoid in EDH. Thus, no matter what you do, eventually you'll reach a state of "And now CV wins". This is regardless of how the game so far has panned out. You could argue things like countermagic and instant removal but THAT GOES FOR EVERY COMBO AND IS NOT AN ARGUMENT. And even then, what if I just put down something like, say, Grand Abolisher? I'm quite good at the "Mental Magic Counter Game" so don't try that game with me, it's not a valid argument in any way.
So that's the thing. Having a card that, no matter what the game before has done reads "Now you win the game and no I don't have any other modes" is not good for the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
The only reason you and impossible are creating cards is because you are trying to move the line in the sand, simply because you have nothing that’s legal, or in print for that matter, to compare it to. At that point, what are we discussing? If CV was a different card and said different things it wouldn’t need to be banned?
There is value in discussing Coalition Victory. What I cannot see value in is discussing these hypotheticals. You are muddying the waters and making it near-Impossible to have a relevant discussion about the card by creating these scenarios that just have no real background to them.
To be fair, it's more like you (plural) keep moving the goalposts. Over the course of this thread I've given numerous examples of cards that can and do function similarly to CV, enough to raise doubts about it's necessity on the ban list. Most of the responses have been "but those cards don't literally say 'win the game' on them" or some variation of "but those cards have fair uses". I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the "fair use" of Enter the Infinite is. That card ends the game with more certainty than CV ever did.
As for the thought experiments, they are a oft used way to help re-imagine a problem or argument and come at it from a different angle. If you don't see the value in that I don't really know what to say. Perhaps this isn't the thread for you.
Okay, so if I ramp up to 11 mana and I cast Enter the Infinite, have I won the game?
No, I have not. I still have to play all those cards. And without Omniscience or Dream Halls or something that's gonna be hard.
You haven't given a single card yet that comes even close to rivalling Coalition Victory in sheer "End the game now" potentional. Even T&N, which is already often counted among the "Not many would hate seeing this get banned" camp has more counterplays, requires more deck slots and more work.
As stated before. The card IS on the banlist. YOU should make a compelling argument about why that card should be unbanned, and no, "so the kiddies know just what exactly beat them" is not a good argument.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
And it's a fact - one that you cannot argue - that Coalition Victory can do anything else other than "Win the game or bust". All those other cards can. And therein lies the difference.
Okay, I have a hypothetical for you. Imagine this card:
Searching for Victory3WUBRG
Sorcery
Search your library for up to one creature card, put it onto the battlefield, then shuffle your library.
You win the game if you control a land of each basic land type and a creature of each color.
Do you think this card would need to be banned?
That one? Yes. The 5GGG version ArrogantAxolotl posted? That one I'd be willing to try out.
You could indeed argue your version does have fair uses, but it's still very much a card that's too linear and, well, hard NOT to break. To go back to the comparison of T&N: Let's say you're new to the game and you played a few months of standard, and now you're starting to get into EDH. You picked up some cards from friends among which T&N and Your Version Of Coalition Victory. Which of these cards do you think this new player will be able to "break" more easily? That's a comparison that does need to be looked at. Someone new playing T&N might very well just grab Worldspine Wurm and Xenagos because that's a badass play. They might even not know about the insta-win buttons at that point (Though that chance quickly diminishes the moment you start playing more).
Whereas your version spells it out perfectly for them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
As a matter of fact not to mention it's secretly has "can't be countered" because it's a cast trigger just like the eldrazis have
Except you need to cast that one twice, which is quite a difference.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Despite all of the *****ing, moaning, and arbitrary lines in the sand some people seem to be drawing, you know deep down that the majority of the cards I've used as examples thus far in the thread (T&N, Enter the Infinite, Omniscience, Rise of the Dark Realms, Doomsday, Ad Nauseam, so on and so forth) directly or indirectly lead to the game ending once resolved a vast majority of the time. That's why people play them to begin with. Some are better at their job, some are worse. Some are more "competitive" and some are less. But they all serve the same purpose when you slot them into your deck.
The biggest point is that each of those cards, whether you like it or not, do have more casual applications to various degrees. This especially goes for the first 4 cards in your example. None of them actually win the game on their own, they require a bit more than just "Play your lands and your general like you are likely to do each game you play anyway".
You have to keep in mind the target audience for the game. Hermit Druid, another card you touched upon, isn't banned because unless you're running the very specific build that causes early KO's, it's not really a great card. Like sure there's a few archetypes that'll like having him, but you get where I'm going there.
This also goes for Doomsday and Ad Nauseam. Neither are cards that an average mid-power EDH player is going to look at and be like "I'm going to stuff this in my deck for *****s and giggles" and then oops accidentally the game is broken. They require specific builds. Ad Nauseam is in my Edgar Markov deck where it generally reads 3BB: Draw 7 cards, lose 6 life or something in that general area. Is that broken? Strong, for sure.
Now the other cards you're prone to point at do have casual applications that translate to other things than "Win the game on the spot". While I do think Omniscience and Enter the Infinite are hilariously poor design (they stem from an era I like to call "WOTC throwing ***** at commander and see what sticks while injecting a lot of bad stuff into the format" which stretches from roughly the release of the first commander set to Theros) both do give the potentional for fun and interesting interactions depending on the playgroup. This goes for just about every other card you've listed as well.
And it's a fact - one that you cannot argue - that Coalition Victory can do anything else other than "Win the game or bust". All those other cards can. And therein lies the difference.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I think at this point the burden of proof lays upon those who want it unbanned.
I don't see why. It seems to me that it should be the other way; those in favor of keeping it on the ban list should have strong, compelling arguments for it to stay there. You don't just ban cards willy-nilly. Coalition Victorywas banned, therefore the RC should have had a good reason for it. And according to papa_funk from earlier in the thread, that good reason was mostly "interacts poorly with the format." But papa_funk also said T&N is weaker in EDH than in other formats, so it's tough to take anything he/she says too seriously. Regardless, interacting poorly with the format is a nebulous and poorly defined criteria that, according to papa_funk's earlier definition of 'does it do the same thing in EDH as normal Magic?', can realistically be applied to basically any card. For example, Syphon Mind becomes significantly better in multiplayer. I don't see anyone clamoring for that ban, however.
For your first post: No. The card is currently banned. Thus, if you want change, you have to provide reasons for the change, preferrably reasons that cannot be easily shot down. The unban-Protean Hulk-camp had to do the exact same thing. The ban-Prophet of Kruphix-camp had to provide reasons as to why it should be banned. That's just how it works.
Personally, I'd define "interact poorly with the format" as anything that, thanks to quirks in commander's rules, just becomes crazy. Like Worldfire has the "Float mana, cast worldfire, cast your commander" thing going. Not a lot of cards that interact poorly with the format that actually are broken though.
So how does CV interact poorly with the format, exactly? Stop me if I'm wrong, but isn't the entire point of the format to ensure you always have access to your general? Why, I do believe the RC even changed the tuck rule to ensure you literally could not possibly lose your general. And using that always available general to just do literally anything is a time honored tradition. I don't think Child of Alara was intended to be cast every turn to wipe the board, but here we are in this brave new format. So saying CV interacts poorly with the format because it makes use of your general is just utter nonsense. That's kind of the point of the format.
What good does Armegeddon add? There are just so many terrible cards it isn't feasible to ban them all. A card shouldn't need to prove it's worth, it should be legal until proven explicitly problematic.
but the problems are there, some of which have been discussed ad nauseam in this very thread about a year ago. Most notably:
- Sit down with a 5cc deck at a meta you don't really know: Have fun getting stomped on because people fear Coalition Victory come out.
This is a risk you take playing against literally any deck. I could play the most innocuous legendary I can find as my general (Jasmine Boreal, anyone?) and jam it full of tutors and combos. Or I can take a notoriously powerful general and build it extremely casually (Captain Sisay tribal Weatherlight crew?). It is irrational to assume one way or the other. Either ask beforehand to gauge the table's power level, or just get-got once and learn for the future. Blindly turning all of your focus to a 5-color deck just because it's a 5-color deck is a player problem, not a problem with CV.
The fact that you have access to your general at all times is EXACTLY why it interacts poorly in the format. In "normal" magic, you don't always have a 5cc creature in your hand. You have to pull it from your deck and get it out, and then get your Coalition Victory, only then have you won. Meanwhile in EDH you can drop some lands, drop your commander, then play this and voila.
Cards like Armageddon do add to the game. There are specific strategies that make the most of MLD and quite frankly I find it insulting to shelve MLD under the same umbrella as a "lol I win" card. MLD requires strategy to be put behind it, not just "play your deck as it's intended and here's an i win now button". I know there's a stigma against MLD but that's due to poor players who pull the 'geddon whenever they can, not due to players who know what they're doing.
There is a difference between "terrible cards for the format" and "cards some people find unfun". Armageddon is a strategic card. Coalition Victory is not. An "i win" button doesn't add anything interesting to the format.
As for the 5-color-hate thing; you might be right except there's often still player bias. Hard to get that out.
- Doing literally nothing in a game EXCEPT win on the spot, which NO OTHER SINGLE CARD IN THE GAME DOES.
You are correct. There are no other sorceries that say "win the game" on them. I mean, there are a bunch of sorceries that win the game without saying "win the game" on them so differentiating CV seems ludicrous, but if this is one of the biggest problems you have with the card I guess I can't argue it as it is factually true. I will, however, ask why you think this is a bad thing? As I've mentioned earlier in the thread, I think this is a plus (spoiler tags for large requote):
CV creates exactly the same undesirable game states as any other combo/haymaker finish... except CV is actually better because nobody does it on accident. It's literally impossible to put CV into your deck thinking it does anything other than win the game. Which is a far cry from the actually problematic cards that look flashy and cool, but secretly exist only to prevent a single player from actually playing the game, like Iona, Shield of Emeria or Sorin Markov. Now those create undesirable game states.
That's a plus in my book, not a negative. The fact that [Coalition Victory] either wins or does nothing means it's much less likely to be unknowingly abused by a casual/new player. I think a lot of people are forgetting how newer players see the game; Channel isn't the problem, it was the Fireball that killed them. CV, on the other hand, does exactly what it says on the tin, and that makes it easy to identify if these kinds of cards are a problem when talking with players about what kind of games you want to play. They'll lose to it and go "man that was super unfun" or "oh nice one lets go again" but either way everyone will know.
The thing is; any of those other cards you mentioned have other uses beyond just saying "I win the game". There are sorceries that are mostly used to win the game, yes. None do so for nearly as little mana as Coalition Victory, and they all have "fair" uses too. Genesis Wave for x=17 isn't an "i win" button but it will put one in a strong position. Same with something like Exsanguinate. But they won't win you the game.
Honestly, to me the "accidentaly finding out a winning combination" is a draw to the format, not a downside. It's how I developed my first deck (Lyzolda) from a hilariously *****ty sac-and-recur thing to a combo-wombo machine. I later dismantled it for becoming too powerful, but yea.
Basically, a key thing to keep in mind is this; the RC generally bans based on what "the general public" plays. Thus, having fair uses is a big plus for a card. CV does literally nothing else, thus it's banned.
- The fact that it ignores everything that happened before in the game. Most cards that single-handedly do so are banned, you'll note. (Worldfire, Sway of the Stars being the main culprints) Before anyone points to Obliterate - that one still means whoever's ahead in life/cards in hand has a good chance.
What? It ends the game. How is that ignoring everything that happened before? Does a T&N combo kill ignore everything that happened before it? If I Debt to the Deathless the table for lethal, did I ignore everything that happened before? And lets not look past the fact that these cards are far from universally banned: Warp World and The Great Aurora both have the same effect of basically making the game's outcome a coin toss. I don't understand this argument. What is the deciding factor here that dictates some of these are okay but some aren't? Is there an honorable mention for Karn Liberated, who literally invalidates your previous game and starts a new one?
The comparison with Warp World, Great Aurora and Karn is hilarious. Warp World and Great Aurora both benefit the player who'll have most permanents out on the field, who built their deck to take advantage of it. Without auto-winning the game for them. They require a setup, a deck to take advantage of the casting, and thus their effect depends heavily on what has been played before.
Karn, in the meantime, needs several turns of buildup before it can reset the field. (Doubling Season notwithstanding) Things that are telegraphed I have no issue with (Which is why I also don't see an issue with Mortal Combat and friends).
Now, Debt and TNN are different cases. But again, they have OTHER options beyond "end the game". TNN doesn't need to be in a deck with infinite combos - there's a reason the mantra "play competitively, build casually" exists. What's stopping me from pulling out, say, Avenger of Zendikar + Regal Force with it? Or why wouldn't Timmy McBigDudes get out a Worldspine Wurm and a Xenagos? Likewise, Debt to the Deathless has, in my experience, been cast for X=6 or so just to stabilize or to put one far ahead.
The card that comes closest to winning on it's own is Tooth and Nail. But unlike Coalition Victory, Tooth and Nail (no matter how much I loathe that card) at least has a few requirements before it wins you the game. Notably, unless you play with reanimation on a stick, the creatures you're tutoring cannot be in the graveyard. Then, beyond spot removal or counterspells, things like fogs can also manage to upset the T&N player.
So the only condition for T&N is you can't be a bad player? If your goal is the combo off, you're not going to play out half of your combo early on in the game and just hope against hope it doesn't end up in your graveyard after a few turn cycles.
Regarding the second point, Fog doesn't stop Mike&Trike or the dozens of other combo targets you can get off of T&N. I assume your point was to show that T&N has more ways to be stopped than CV does, which, I guess is technically true depending on the combo. But you're also glossing over the fact that CV can be stopped with land destruction, which is something I'd expect more decks to be packing than Fogs. Honestly every deck should have at least one Strip Mine variant in the 99 just because of how many problematic lands there are knocking around. Seeing how every color has at least one instant-speed way to remove a creature from play, and lands are colorless, ultimately this means that every deck, regardless of color, has multiple potential avenues of attack to interact while a CV is on the stack. Meanwhile, if you're not careful, Mike&Trike can go off in response to a Swords.
Yeah, T&N is a stupid card. I've conceded that point before. I wouldn't mind it getting banned. But it deserving to eat a ban does not equal Coalition Victory needing to share it's fate.
Also, cards do end up in graveyards through ways other than being played and killed. Wheels, hand disruption, stuff like that is all possible.
I do concede the point that CV can be stopped with targeted land destruction - but honestly, I do file that under "remove the appropriate permanents that provide all 5 colours" pointed below. However, if you're up against someone with 3 duals and 5 basics (1 of each), you're still not in the clear there. It also requires you to have a strip mine open from the very moment the 5cc player is getting close to the requirements for CV, thus needing to ignore Cradles, Coffers and what have you. A weak point from my side admittedly, but still something to keep in mind.
Mike/Trike going off in response to a StP just points to hilariously bad play and would at least be a learning moment to the player who timed the StP wrong. But yea, that's one combo that can go through Fog...but I can't think of many others that are actually played in TnN lists. Might be missing something.
Coalition Victory has exactly two counterplays. Counter the CV, or remove the appropriate permanents that provide all 5 colours. Now that's all fine and dandy, but what if the CV player was smart enough to ensure there's at least 2 creatures of each colour around? The options go down VERY quickly and a single Path to Exile may not be enough, whilst that same PtE will deal with just about any T&N victory if you get your timing right. (Surprisingly a lot of people don't realize at what point you should Path a Mikaeus)
As I mentioned above, you seem to be glossing over the first part of Coalition Victory. You also must control all 5 basic land types, which isn't exactly difficult, but it's not entirely trivial either, especially if you're not running a full 10 ABUR/10 Shocks/10 Fetchs manabase. It is another way to stop a CV that every deck has access to via Strip Mine.
On to your actual point, what would I do if the CV player somehow has multiple creatures of each color, or more realistically just two 2-color creatures then casts CV? I would say that player paid 18 mana (2xWUBRG creatures plus 3WUBRG for the CV itself) and won the game which seems like something that should happen when someone pays 18 mana. It seems like they deserve to win. The game has to end at some point, and I believe one of the guiding principles of Sheldon's philosophy is something along the lines of "it's not okay on T4 but fine on T10+". I don't see the problem. Would it be better if they spent 7UUU on an Omniscience then proceeded to vomit their entire deck into play to win? If you're spending that much mana it should probably be winning you the game. That's not something to be upset about, that's just how the game goes.
I have already addressed the strip mine point above, so let's move beyond that:
The land types bit is hilariously easy. I play Pauper Child of Alara and even there getting all 5 basics is a trivial matter - and that deck plays exactly 1 Plains. While I would argue that for a reasonably regular win with Coalition Victory you'd need at least Shocks, I do think you're overestimating the task at hand. Again all you'd need to do to get the requirements for a CV is to play the game. A budget mana base based in green for the ramp will be able to push it out by turn 6 with relative ease.
Thing about Omniscience; this is dependant on them actually having a drawpower card behind it. Thus turning it into more than a one-card-now-i-win thing.
So yeah, it's an anticlimactic way to end the game, it barely has counterplay especially in lower-power metas, it completely invalidates anything that happened before, it paints a target on any 5cc player, and it's unique in that it's the sole card that wins the game ON THE SPOT and does nothing else.
So please, do tell what it adds to the format that counterbalances all those strikes against it.
I don't disagree that it's an anticlimactic way to end the game, but so is any combo ever (with one exception). It has roughly as much counterplay as a large number of commonly played combos, mainly involving instant speed creature removal. It ends the game, I don't really understand how that is invalidation anymore than any other kill that ends the game immediately. Painting a target is a player problem that results from poor communication, not from the cards themselves. And as I've said, being extremely clear about what it does is a positive for me. I'd rather the RC focus on the insidious cards that look like they're fun to play with but they secretly terrible for the game.
Spoiler contains the only combo I think is acceptable:
Step 1: Demonic Tutor 5 times.
Step 2: Reveal that you've assembled all 5 pieces of Exodia.
It's unstoppable, but thankfully nobody has tried it against me yet.
P.S. Sorry for how long this took to post. Life has this weird habit of getting in the way some times.
Look, you're right in that it might have as much counterplay as most combos. But...beyond Tooth and Nail there are NO combos in the format which require just the 1 card. They all have multiple moving pieces, and those pieces can be played with completely other uses as well. I wouldn't want to ban Curiosity for it's stupid interaction with Niv-Mizzet simply because it can be played in a saboteur-themed deck. Likewise, Mikaeus makes for an amazing zombie lord even without all his degeneracy.
Coalition Victory just...wins.
And frankly, your only argument there is that YOU specifically think having an obviously signalled "THIS CARD WON THE GAME" is a good thing in the format - and I'm sure many people will not agree with you on that.
See, had Commander not have this odd little quirk of "Your prerequired creature is always available to you" in the format, it would've been a fine card. But it does. It's what the format is based on. It's what makes Coalition Victory interact poorly with the format. It's why it should stay banned.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Oh wow, why didn't I look at it that way. You sure convinced me.
In all seriousness, Sam, what exactly is your argument? As clearly as possible, please explain why you think CV deserves a spot on the ban list. What is your most fundamental problem with the card?
I think at this point the burden of proof lays upon those who want it unbanned.
What good would CV do to the format. Give 5cc decks an extra wincon? I suppose. But why would 5cc, which is best suited to goodstuff anyway, need another wincon? See, I do get the desire to build Alt-Wincons.dec. but the problems are there, some of which have been discussed ad nauseam in this very thread about a year ago. Most notably:
- Sit down with a 5cc deck at a meta you don't really know: Have fun getting stomped on because people fear Coalition Victory come out.
- Doing literally nothing in a game EXCEPT win on the spot, which NO OTHER SINGLE CARD IN THE GAME DOES.
- The fact that it ignores everything that happened before in the game. Most cards that single-handedly do so are banned, you'll note. (Worldfire, Sway of the Stars being the main culprints) Before anyone points to Obliterate - that one still means whoever's ahead in life/cards in hand has a good chance.
The card that comes closest to winning on it's own is Tooth and Nail. But unlike Coalition Victory, Tooth and Nail (no matter how much I loathe that card) at least has a few requirements before it wins you the game. Notably, unless you play with reanimation on a stick, the creatures you're tutoring cannot be in the graveyard. Then, beyond spot removal or counterspells, things like fogs can also manage to upset the T&N player.
Coalition Victory has exactly two counterplays. Counter the CV, or remove the appropriate permanents that provide all 5 colours. Now that's all fine and dandy, but what if the CV player was smart enough to ensure there's at least 2 creatures of each colour around? The options go down VERY quickly and a single Path to Exile may not be enough, whilst that same PtE will deal with just about any T&N victory if you get your timing right. (Surprisingly a lot of people don't realize at what point you should Path a Mikaeus)
So yeah, it's an anticlimactic way to end the game, it barely has counterplay especially in lower-power metas, it completely invalidates anything that happened before, it paints a target on any 5cc player, and it's unique in that it's the sole card that wins the game ON THE SPOT and does nothing else.
So please, do tell what it adds to the format that counterbalances all those strikes against it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
People still want the literally only card that'd say "Counter this or lose the game" unbanned?
Really?
There is no other SINGLE card that, NO MATTER WHAT, either does absolutely nothing OR wins the game on the spot. CV has no in-between, unlike something like Tooth & Nail which can be used for an Avenger of Zendikar + Regal Force. Coalition Victory has no interesting interactions or anything.
I don't know how I feel about CV as a card in the format and it probably means nothing to me personally or the people I play with but exaggeration for the sake of it doesn't help your case in the slightest
CV has to resolve with all of its conditions on the field to be a victory condition, so saying it needs a Counter Spell or the person has victory is some of the most hyperbolic bull***** I have seen on this forum.
Wait, are you disagreeing with the fact that Coalition Victory is either "Win the game" or "Do nothing at all" with LITERALLY NO IN-BETWEENS? Because if you are, you're wrong. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Coalition Victory literally does nothing EXCEPT win the game on the spot, barring an answer.
Now you might try to point at Mortal Combat or Epic Struggle and other cards in those veins. Thing is, those cards need to survive a turn. If you say "but flash" then I say "It's not one card anymore".
SO. If you can point me to any single card that literally does nothing EXCEPT either win the game on the spot or nothing at all, AND it's legal in Commander? Then sure. But you can't. I know you can't.
And what would the point of adding such a card to the format be?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
People still want the literally only card that'd say "Counter this or lose the game" unbanned?
Really?
There is no other SINGLE card that, NO MATTER WHAT, either does absolutely nothing OR wins the game on the spot. CV has no in-between, unlike something like Tooth & Nail which can be used for an Avenger of Zendikar + Regal Force. Coalition Victory has no interesting interactions or anything.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Quick question Impossible. You say you'd love to play a Weatherlight theme deck with CVictory as it's wincon. Do you have a playgroup? If yes, why not ask them if they'd be okay with that specific deck? Perhaps with the addendum that you cannot use your commander as the creature fulfillment?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Aside from the fact that it needs 101 mana, is a telegraphed play and needs to see your upkeep before it wins? See, that's the thing with a lot of the other instant wincons. They require a lot more work to be put into them. Someone slapping down a Helix Pinnacle will be kept in check throughout the game and likely kicked out of it before he can hit his 100 mana. If someone can pump in that 100 mana in one go, then wow, you sure you couldn't have won in an easier way? So yeah, it's vastly different.
So the fact that Helix Pinnacle either wins or does nothing doesn't bother you?
It doesn't "Win or do nothing" right on the spot. It's a thing you can pump mana in and is telegraphed. It can be cast and then sit on the battlefield for a while before eventually winning (thus doing something; that is mana getting pumped into it) which Coalition Victory cannot say.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
THEY DO NOT WIN THE GAME. They can put the caster in a great position, yes, but so many times the board has just been so well filled that even taking the best permanents AND an extra turn simply left me ahead but not winning the game. You know how to play around Expropriate? Create a board state where you don't lose to Blatant Thievery. Not that hard to do.
Coalition Victory has counterplay, yes, but the counterplay is even more telegraphed than the CV itself. Now, if CV did anything else beyond "win the game", I'd be more interested in giving it a test run as it'd be a card you'd include to have fun with. As is, hell no.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
You, on the other hand, never managed to counter this.
So no, history will not vindicate you. Coalition Victory is not going to be unbanned. Not now, not in the nearby future, not ever unless we get a completely different RC and even then I have my doubts.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
FTFY.
But then, as it's the same answer as you've already been told about 50 times...I'm not surprised you'd think different.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
So according to this, we should just unban Primeval Titan, Prophet of Kruphix, Braids, Cabal Minion, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary and Sylvan Primordial because they're all "suspectible to removal", right?
The argument "Dies to removal" holds no ground in any discussion. Being harder to remove/interact with is a strike against a card, for sure, but being easy to remove does not neccesarily make a card fair to play.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
If I cast EtI, under normal circumstances, the game will end for me within TWO turns. TWO. Not one. TWO. I get to draw a card for the turn, and then the turn after I'm dead. Gives two turn cycles to do something about it.
Now, of course, you could argue "But you'd just cast Lab Man and evoke Mulldrifter and be done with it." Sure. That's possible. But at that point, I've spent 11 mana in one turn, 6 mana the next, and NOBODY DID ANYTHING about it in a full turn cycle. That's kinda like me resolving Mortal Combat and the entire turn cycle goes by and nothing happens, thus triggering my win.
Wins like that aren't an issue. There was ample counterplay possible. A full turn to go through the motions. And nothing was done.
Now, if you look further, you'll note cards like Enter the Infinite, Doomsday, Mortal Combat...they all require more cards than just themselves to actually win. They all require specific cards to be built in the deck, whether it's Omniscience/Lab Man (ETI), specific Doomsdayable stacks, a way to quickly get 20+ creatures in the yard...none are a one-card-i-win button. They require specific deckbuilding.
Beyond that, each of those cards can be used just as a cool trick in a deck. A gy-using deck might just consider slotting in a Mortal Combat in order to give it another angle of attack.
Coalition Victory, again, only requires one slot. Why does this matter, you asked, well...
Each of the other "big wincon cards" CAN be used without going for the instant kill. They require one of two things: Constraint or Ignorance. Constraint fits within the RC mantra of "Build casually, play competitively". If the strongest combowombo I want to play with T&N is Avenger of Zendikar and Regal Force, then who are you to tell me I'm playing it wrong for not going with MikeTrike instead? I adapt my decks to the powerlevel of my meta. Many people do.
When you add Coalition Victory however, there's no other deckbuilding decisions to be made. You run lands. You run your commander. Those are things you cannot avoid in EDH. Thus, no matter what you do, eventually you'll reach a state of "And now CV wins". This is regardless of how the game so far has panned out. You could argue things like countermagic and instant removal but THAT GOES FOR EVERY COMBO AND IS NOT AN ARGUMENT. And even then, what if I just put down something like, say, Grand Abolisher? I'm quite good at the "Mental Magic Counter Game" so don't try that game with me, it's not a valid argument in any way.
So that's the thing. Having a card that, no matter what the game before has done reads "Now you win the game and no I don't have any other modes" is not good for the game.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Okay, so if I ramp up to 11 mana and I cast Enter the Infinite, have I won the game?
No, I have not. I still have to play all those cards. And without Omniscience or Dream Halls or something that's gonna be hard.
You haven't given a single card yet that comes even close to rivalling Coalition Victory in sheer "End the game now" potentional. Even T&N, which is already often counted among the "Not many would hate seeing this get banned" camp has more counterplays, requires more deck slots and more work.
As stated before. The card IS on the banlist. YOU should make a compelling argument about why that card should be unbanned, and no, "so the kiddies know just what exactly beat them" is not a good argument.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
That one? Yes. The 5GGG version ArrogantAxolotl posted? That one I'd be willing to try out.
You could indeed argue your version does have fair uses, but it's still very much a card that's too linear and, well, hard NOT to break. To go back to the comparison of T&N: Let's say you're new to the game and you played a few months of standard, and now you're starting to get into EDH. You picked up some cards from friends among which T&N and Your Version Of Coalition Victory. Which of these cards do you think this new player will be able to "break" more easily? That's a comparison that does need to be looked at. Someone new playing T&N might very well just grab Worldspine Wurm and Xenagos because that's a badass play. They might even not know about the insta-win buttons at that point (Though that chance quickly diminishes the moment you start playing more).
Whereas your version spells it out perfectly for them.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Except you need to cast that one twice, which is quite a difference.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
The biggest point is that each of those cards, whether you like it or not, do have more casual applications to various degrees. This especially goes for the first 4 cards in your example. None of them actually win the game on their own, they require a bit more than just "Play your lands and your general like you are likely to do each game you play anyway".
You have to keep in mind the target audience for the game. Hermit Druid, another card you touched upon, isn't banned because unless you're running the very specific build that causes early KO's, it's not really a great card. Like sure there's a few archetypes that'll like having him, but you get where I'm going there.
This also goes for Doomsday and Ad Nauseam. Neither are cards that an average mid-power EDH player is going to look at and be like "I'm going to stuff this in my deck for *****s and giggles" and then oops accidentally the game is broken. They require specific builds. Ad Nauseam is in my Edgar Markov deck where it generally reads 3BB: Draw 7 cards, lose 6 life or something in that general area. Is that broken? Strong, for sure.
Now the other cards you're prone to point at do have casual applications that translate to other things than "Win the game on the spot". While I do think Omniscience and Enter the Infinite are hilariously poor design (they stem from an era I like to call "WOTC throwing ***** at commander and see what sticks while injecting a lot of bad stuff into the format" which stretches from roughly the release of the first commander set to Theros) both do give the potentional for fun and interesting interactions depending on the playgroup. This goes for just about every other card you've listed as well.
And it's a fact - one that you cannot argue - that Coalition Victory can do anything else other than "Win the game or bust". All those other cards can. And therein lies the difference.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
For your first post: No. The card is currently banned. Thus, if you want change, you have to provide reasons for the change, preferrably reasons that cannot be easily shot down. The unban-Protean Hulk-camp had to do the exact same thing. The ban-Prophet of Kruphix-camp had to provide reasons as to why it should be banned. That's just how it works.
Personally, I'd define "interact poorly with the format" as anything that, thanks to quirks in commander's rules, just becomes crazy. Like Worldfire has the "Float mana, cast worldfire, cast your commander" thing going. Not a lot of cards that interact poorly with the format that actually are broken though.
The fact that you have access to your general at all times is EXACTLY why it interacts poorly in the format. In "normal" magic, you don't always have a 5cc creature in your hand. You have to pull it from your deck and get it out, and then get your Coalition Victory, only then have you won. Meanwhile in EDH you can drop some lands, drop your commander, then play this and voila.
Cards like Armageddon do add to the game. There are specific strategies that make the most of MLD and quite frankly I find it insulting to shelve MLD under the same umbrella as a "lol I win" card. MLD requires strategy to be put behind it, not just "play your deck as it's intended and here's an i win now button". I know there's a stigma against MLD but that's due to poor players who pull the 'geddon whenever they can, not due to players who know what they're doing.
There is a difference between "terrible cards for the format" and "cards some people find unfun". Armageddon is a strategic card. Coalition Victory is not. An "i win" button doesn't add anything interesting to the format.
As for the 5-color-hate thing; you might be right except there's often still player bias. Hard to get that out.
The thing is; any of those other cards you mentioned have other uses beyond just saying "I win the game". There are sorceries that are mostly used to win the game, yes. None do so for nearly as little mana as Coalition Victory, and they all have "fair" uses too. Genesis Wave for x=17 isn't an "i win" button but it will put one in a strong position. Same with something like Exsanguinate. But they won't win you the game.
Honestly, to me the "accidentaly finding out a winning combination" is a draw to the format, not a downside. It's how I developed my first deck (Lyzolda) from a hilariously *****ty sac-and-recur thing to a combo-wombo machine. I later dismantled it for becoming too powerful, but yea.
Basically, a key thing to keep in mind is this; the RC generally bans based on what "the general public" plays. Thus, having fair uses is a big plus for a card. CV does literally nothing else, thus it's banned.
The comparison with Warp World, Great Aurora and Karn is hilarious. Warp World and Great Aurora both benefit the player who'll have most permanents out on the field, who built their deck to take advantage of it. Without auto-winning the game for them. They require a setup, a deck to take advantage of the casting, and thus their effect depends heavily on what has been played before.
Karn, in the meantime, needs several turns of buildup before it can reset the field. (Doubling Season notwithstanding) Things that are telegraphed I have no issue with (Which is why I also don't see an issue with Mortal Combat and friends).
Now, Debt and TNN are different cases. But again, they have OTHER options beyond "end the game". TNN doesn't need to be in a deck with infinite combos - there's a reason the mantra "play competitively, build casually" exists. What's stopping me from pulling out, say, Avenger of Zendikar + Regal Force with it? Or why wouldn't Timmy McBigDudes get out a Worldspine Wurm and a Xenagos? Likewise, Debt to the Deathless has, in my experience, been cast for X=6 or so just to stabilize or to put one far ahead.
Yeah, T&N is a stupid card. I've conceded that point before. I wouldn't mind it getting banned. But it deserving to eat a ban does not equal Coalition Victory needing to share it's fate.
Also, cards do end up in graveyards through ways other than being played and killed. Wheels, hand disruption, stuff like that is all possible.
I do concede the point that CV can be stopped with targeted land destruction - but honestly, I do file that under "remove the appropriate permanents that provide all 5 colours" pointed below. However, if you're up against someone with 3 duals and 5 basics (1 of each), you're still not in the clear there. It also requires you to have a strip mine open from the very moment the 5cc player is getting close to the requirements for CV, thus needing to ignore Cradles, Coffers and what have you. A weak point from my side admittedly, but still something to keep in mind.
Mike/Trike going off in response to a StP just points to hilariously bad play and would at least be a learning moment to the player who timed the StP wrong. But yea, that's one combo that can go through Fog...but I can't think of many others that are actually played in TnN lists. Might be missing something.
I have already addressed the strip mine point above, so let's move beyond that:
The land types bit is hilariously easy. I play Pauper Child of Alara and even there getting all 5 basics is a trivial matter - and that deck plays exactly 1 Plains. While I would argue that for a reasonably regular win with Coalition Victory you'd need at least Shocks, I do think you're overestimating the task at hand. Again all you'd need to do to get the requirements for a CV is to play the game. A budget mana base based in green for the ramp will be able to push it out by turn 6 with relative ease.
Thing about Omniscience; this is dependant on them actually having a drawpower card behind it. Thus turning it into more than a one-card-now-i-win thing.
Look, you're right in that it might have as much counterplay as most combos. But...beyond Tooth and Nail there are NO combos in the format which require just the 1 card. They all have multiple moving pieces, and those pieces can be played with completely other uses as well. I wouldn't want to ban Curiosity for it's stupid interaction with Niv-Mizzet simply because it can be played in a saboteur-themed deck. Likewise, Mikaeus makes for an amazing zombie lord even without all his degeneracy.
Coalition Victory just...wins.
And frankly, your only argument there is that YOU specifically think having an obviously signalled "THIS CARD WON THE GAME" is a good thing in the format - and I'm sure many people will not agree with you on that.
See, had Commander not have this odd little quirk of "Your prerequired creature is always available to you" in the format, it would've been a fine card. But it does. It's what the format is based on. It's what makes Coalition Victory interact poorly with the format. It's why it should stay banned.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I think at this point the burden of proof lays upon those who want it unbanned.
What good would CV do to the format. Give 5cc decks an extra wincon? I suppose. But why would 5cc, which is best suited to goodstuff anyway, need another wincon? See, I do get the desire to build Alt-Wincons.dec. but the problems are there, some of which have been discussed ad nauseam in this very thread about a year ago. Most notably:
- Sit down with a 5cc deck at a meta you don't really know: Have fun getting stomped on because people fear Coalition Victory come out.
- Doing literally nothing in a game EXCEPT win on the spot, which NO OTHER SINGLE CARD IN THE GAME DOES.
- The fact that it ignores everything that happened before in the game. Most cards that single-handedly do so are banned, you'll note. (Worldfire, Sway of the Stars being the main culprints) Before anyone points to Obliterate - that one still means whoever's ahead in life/cards in hand has a good chance.
The card that comes closest to winning on it's own is Tooth and Nail. But unlike Coalition Victory, Tooth and Nail (no matter how much I loathe that card) at least has a few requirements before it wins you the game. Notably, unless you play with reanimation on a stick, the creatures you're tutoring cannot be in the graveyard. Then, beyond spot removal or counterspells, things like fogs can also manage to upset the T&N player.
Coalition Victory has exactly two counterplays. Counter the CV, or remove the appropriate permanents that provide all 5 colours. Now that's all fine and dandy, but what if the CV player was smart enough to ensure there's at least 2 creatures of each colour around? The options go down VERY quickly and a single Path to Exile may not be enough, whilst that same PtE will deal with just about any T&N victory if you get your timing right. (Surprisingly a lot of people don't realize at what point you should Path a Mikaeus)
So yeah, it's an anticlimactic way to end the game, it barely has counterplay especially in lower-power metas, it completely invalidates anything that happened before, it paints a target on any 5cc player, and it's unique in that it's the sole card that wins the game ON THE SPOT and does nothing else.
So please, do tell what it adds to the format that counterbalances all those strikes against it.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Wait, are you disagreeing with the fact that Coalition Victory is either "Win the game" or "Do nothing at all" with LITERALLY NO IN-BETWEENS? Because if you are, you're wrong. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. Coalition Victory literally does nothing EXCEPT win the game on the spot, barring an answer.
Now you might try to point at Mortal Combat or Epic Struggle and other cards in those veins. Thing is, those cards need to survive a turn. If you say "but flash" then I say "It's not one card anymore".
SO. If you can point me to any single card that literally does nothing EXCEPT either win the game on the spot or nothing at all, AND it's legal in Commander? Then sure. But you can't. I know you can't.
And what would the point of adding such a card to the format be?
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Really?
There is no other SINGLE card that, NO MATTER WHAT, either does absolutely nothing OR wins the game on the spot. CV has no in-between, unlike something like Tooth & Nail which can be used for an Avenger of Zendikar + Regal Force. Coalition Victory has no interesting interactions or anything.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
It doesn't "Win or do nothing" right on the spot. It's a thing you can pump mana in and is telegraphed. It can be cast and then sit on the battlefield for a while before eventually winning (thus doing something; that is mana getting pumped into it) which Coalition Victory cannot say.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.