What did you find offputting about it? We sought input from the community, received overwhelming amounts of it very quickly, and came to a decision. We thought it would be best to not drag our feet on this decision as we didn't want to confuse the issue, so we made the announcement once everyone on the RC and CAG was in agreement.
Yes but remember, WE don't have the benefit of knowing how quickly and to what extent you received feedback. I'm sure that for many people they saw a tweet from Sheldon saying you guys were undecided and a tweet from the official account announcing the change at the same time.
The way it reads after the fact is "we are open to feedback (but we've pretty much reached a decision already). Now like I said, this decision was about as unexpected as a "no changes" ban list announcement, and I also realize that you've been listening to the community since Wizards announced they were floating the idea of going to the London mulligan. So this isn't critical rawr I'm upset feedback, merely commentary on the way the message was put out since it truly didn't feel like we had a true voice in feedback.
Commander will be adopting the London Mulligan (bit.ly/314vgT7) at the same time as other formats, with the standard first-mulligan-is-free for games with more than two players (CR103.4c).
I found it off-putting that yesterday there was a noncommittal announcement that the RC was still taking feedback and hadn't made a decision yet, and today we got an official announcement. Not that it wasn't an unexpected decision.
According to Shivam on a recent CommanderCast, they've been testing it. Shivam is under the impression that it's not a good thing for EDH, but he was just speaking for himself and not the rest of the CAG/RC. Maybe Charlotte can weigh in here as well?
I'm in the same boat but I do think that is a good thing. I think it is tough in this format to go to 5 when everyone else is still at 7 so I have, and I have seen others, keep somewhat poor 6 card hands and then just get blown out because we didn't draw lands and we were stuck on 2 lands for an extended period of time.
The new rule, if implemented, is certainly going to change things but I think the positives outweigh the negatives. I am hoping their experiment is successful though I do feel that 1v1 formats would have a bigger concern over this change than EDH.
See, I disagree and I think that because the mulligan rule is ripe for some degree of abuse, it isn't something I am hoping to see. I think that to a certain extent, the "git gud scrub" argument is a valid one when it doesn't justify something that warps games (e.g. just run removal to deal with Prophet). In this case, when the answer to not getting screwed by mulligans is to build a better deck and not skimp on land, I would rather see a world where everyone gets a decent opening hand over one where most people do but a small portion are abusing the rule by digging for a combo piece or Sol Ring.
I expect it will encourage people to build decks poorly (not enough lands) and make it take longer to start games. Though not having to shuffle is an advantage in the second case, I suppose.
Well you still shuffle between mulligans like always. This new way will just make it more likely that your final opening hand has a couple of lands in it.
This sounds like a terrible option for Commander, on every level.
I think the target audience for Commander, the ones who don't play tuned decks and focus more on the experience of the game over winning it, will like this mulligan better because it makes it more likely that they get an opening hand they can keep and not necessarily because they are trying to sculpt a nut draw.
Yes but remember, WE don't have the benefit of knowing how quickly and to what extent you received feedback. I'm sure that for many people they saw a tweet from Sheldon saying you guys were undecided and a tweet from the official account announcing the change at the same time.
The way it reads after the fact is "we are open to feedback (but we've pretty much reached a decision already). Now like I said, this decision was about as unexpected as a "no changes" ban list announcement, and I also realize that you've been listening to the community since Wizards announced they were floating the idea of going to the London mulligan. So this isn't critical rawr I'm upset feedback, merely commentary on the way the message was put out since it truly didn't feel like we had a true voice in feedback.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I found it off-putting that yesterday there was a noncommittal announcement that the RC was still taking feedback and hadn't made a decision yet, and today we got an official announcement. Not that it wasn't an unexpected decision.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
See, I disagree and I think that because the mulligan rule is ripe for some degree of abuse, it isn't something I am hoping to see. I think that to a certain extent, the "git gud scrub" argument is a valid one when it doesn't justify something that warps games (e.g. just run removal to deal with Prophet). In this case, when the answer to not getting screwed by mulligans is to build a better deck and not skimp on land, I would rather see a world where everyone gets a decent opening hand over one where most people do but a small portion are abusing the rule by digging for a combo piece or Sol Ring.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Oh I didn't mean that as an upside.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Well you still shuffle between mulligans like always. This new way will just make it more likely that your final opening hand has a couple of lands in it.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I think the target audience for Commander, the ones who don't play tuned decks and focus more on the experience of the game over winning it, will like this mulligan better because it makes it more likely that they get an opening hand they can keep and not necessarily because they are trying to sculpt a nut draw.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg