@dirkgently: so I said 20 years and it was actually 18... and that means my argument is invalid?. Silly.
When you choose the least important part of my argument and only reply to that bit while ignoring the much more important parts, do you actually feel like you're making a good counter? Genuinely curious.
Your statement implied that the mulligan rule never changed, and only changed once into the London mulligan. Maybe that's not what you meant, but that's how someone who's unfamiliar with the history of the mulligan rule would have read what you wrote. That's the actual problem. 18 years vs 20 years is only relevant because you also weren't factually correct either - but the much more important element is what you incorrectly implied, not what it literally meant in the strictest possible reading.
But all of that is just a backdrop to explain why the changes to the mulligan rule can't be compared to changing deck construction rules - especially for a format like commander where people get very attached to their decks. Changing the deck size would be incredibly disruptive to every player. Changing mulligan rules has very little impact and isn't remotely comparable.
Uhm, I doubt you can say its easy to shuffle. Heck, I bet most of you here separate your decks in two and shuffle them like that.
Thats a problem, don't deny its there.
The percentage of players I see splitting their deck is maybe...5%? It's not many. Idk where you'd get "most" from.
I find it quite easy, but I do have big ol' hands.
How many of you ever thought Wizards would change how Mulligan is done after more than 20 years of Magic?. But they did and now we have London Mulligan.
This is one of the funniest things you've said.
The mulligan rule has changed TWICE since I started playing - first to the vancouver mulligan and then to the london mulligan. And there was an earlier change to the mulligan rule as well, though that was a few years before I started playing. Commander also changed their mulligan rule from being different (partial paris) to conforming to other formats (iirc this was when the vancouver mulligan was introduced). The mulligan rule has changed quite a lot, not just once (and the longest gap was 18 years so don't pretend you're right on a technicality).
You know why the mulligan rules have changed while the deck construction rules have been consistent since the early days of magic?
Because changing the mulligan rule doesn't force EVERY PLAYER to drastically modify EVERY DECK - not to mention rendering every precon unplayable out of the box, all deck boxes to be the wrong size, etc etc etc...it would be a massive upheaval that would absolutely lose a ton of players and piss of nearly everyone.
I mean, if tons of people were calling for deck sizes to be reduced I guess it's conceivable...but you're among the only people I've heard who want it changed, and it would force every player to change every commander deck they have, make sleeve manufacturers change their sleeve counts, everyone would need to get new deck boxes or deal with their cards moving around a lot more, and ofc many people just prefer 100 cards, it's a nice round easy-to-remember number while 85 is...yuck. If the RC wanted to kill the format stone dead ASAP, it would probably be a pretty good way to do it.
I've been playing the same sol ring and command tower in almost every commander deck (or multicolor deck, for the tower) I've played since 2013 (2011 for the tower). Without removing them from the sleeve and holding them up to the light, they look mint fresh. Even in the light, if I don't hold them at exactly the right angle, they look mint fresh. When you get them at that exact right angle, there's a few tiny scratches. And these are cards I've played over and over and over, in decks packed with fetches and tutors. Week in, week out, for years and years.
Cards are meant to be played. I'm sure my collection has lost a little value from me not double sleeving (luckily my most valuable cards - tabernacle, timetwister, workshop, etc all are too niche to be regularly played. My duals see plenty of use, but they were never in mint condition so a few tiny scratches makes little difference).
But you know what I've gotten in return for that tiny degradation of value (besides saving hundreds of dollars on perfect fits)? A decade of playing a game I love without hating shuffling. I call that an easy win.
Plus it means I don’t make silly threads hoping for an unlikely fix to a problem I created myself - just saying.
1) Obviously that's never going to happen, idk why you'd bother posting this.
2) Double sleeving is a waste of time and money and makes the experience of playing the game worse YEAH I SAID IT. I'll single-sleeve my timetwister until the day I die.
3) Fetching can be annoying but (1) nobody is making you play fetchlands and (2) you can just say "I'm getting X, then playing this card" and pass turn while you search/shuffle and (3) it's not like searching through 85 cards is that much better than 100. Unless you're complaining about the shuffling, in which case stop double sleeving your cards, duh. All my cards look great and I've been single-sleeving them since 2009.