I’ve been reading articles on tempo today, and it turns out that I tend to have a good understanding of it based on the way I build 1v1 decks. In MP, however, it seems to me tempo is much like card advantage and drawing wherein your conglomerated opponents have a much greater net tempo than you. They are playing more spells on average than you are and generating more mana than you each turn, something quite dangerous to you if those moves are all directed against you.
So what does tempo mean to you in MP, and how do you take advantage of it to generate a win? Is it more likely to be generated by cancelling out multiple moves with a sweeper, or are there other ways to take advantage of it in an MP game?
...and how do you take advantage of it to generate a win?
By literally winning the game. The reason why I tend to laud things like Gemstone Caverns and Carpet of Flowers is because they enable you to enact broken sequences faster. Wrath of God doesn't win games of Magic. It just doesn't. You may trade favorably on cards and mana but you're not doing anything to surge ahead of the pack. All you're doing is resetting the board which doesn't accomplish much when multiple adversaries are drawing into new threats each turn. Mass removal is still plenty useful in MP but not for tempo purposes. It prevents you from losing, that's certainly important, but not losing != winning. That being said going turn 1 Waste Not, turn 2 Dark Deal -> draw your deck -> Cut // Ribbons the table for 80 ends the game and that's how you abuse tempo and offset the card disadvantage caused by things like Mox Diamond and Chrome Mox. Tempo, by definition, means converting an early advantage into a win before your adversaries can extract value from their spells and effects so that's what you need to be doing. The biggest issue with tempo in multiplayer is the stigma against combo decks because most people dislike when someone goes dork -> Pestermite -> Splinter Twin and the game ends before they cast their second spell. Still, the concept of tempo doesn't change, only the way that it's enacted. There are no "Delver of Secrets" in MP since quick beatdown isn't possible against numerous adversaries but there's nothing stopping you from going turn 1 Dark Ritual + Entomb + Animate Dead on a Jin-Gitaxias, Core Augur to seal the deal and that's what MP tempo looks like. Expending additional resources in order to do something broken faster and converting that advantage into a win.
I've always assumed that one of the reasons people dislike combo so much is that permission, discard, and cheap spot removal lack viability in multiplayer and it only gets worse if multiple players are running exceptionally fast combos. Anyone want to play flip the coin to determine the winner?
I've always assumed that one of the reasons people dislike combo so much is that permission, discard, and cheap spot removal lack viability in multiplayer and it only gets worse if multiple players are running exceptionally fast combos. Anyone want to play flip the coin to determine the winner?
Which is an argument typically made by people who don't play in those types of spheres or who are unwilling to build/modify their decks to adjust. As someone who routine plays broken formats such as cEDH I can promise you that games are anything but a coinflip. Player skill comes through on a consistent basis and you're heavily rewarded for your experience and decision-making (which includes deck building). It's no different that the people who think that Vintage is a turn 1 format or Legacy is a turn 1 format etc etc. No one who plays these formats on a frequent basis believes in these ridiculous claims because they're completed unfounded concerns. Most games are extremely interactive and a good chunk of your wins/losses are due to decisions that you made (for better or for worse).
That makes sense, and is certainly in line with deck advice you give most people. In lower-powered metas, or at least mine, that line of play is not generally preferred for any number of reasons not worth discussing here. Without going infinite or combo = win, is there a lower-powered, more meta-appropriate line of design? I get this goes against your normal tendencies, but I am interested in your opinion here. Is it something like a strong synergy that just happens to be not infinite. I realize the Gitaxias example above is not infinite, but it’s a harsh example wherein everyone is screwed immediately.
Something like building casually and then playing for the win as hard as you can. I’m fine finding that balance for myself for my group, but does this even enter anyone else’s calculus, or am I the only person who cares about the fun factor of the people I value more than the game?
I ask this not to be snarky, but because this is clearly aggravating to everyone who comments on deck designs (most often mine) only to have the person intentionally (most often me) pick a less-powerful move. Believe me, I’m not tone deaf or oblivious about that. Maybe by better understanding levels of tempo in MP (if any such notion exists), I won’t have to ask for feedback. I’ve learned a lot by posting the last two years, and I appreciate the feedback when I get it, hell I really enjoy seeing wide variety of ways people can screw their enemies instantly. I truly love the ideas but I feel constrained by my group’s inability to keep up with my appetite for design advancement for a host of reasons. I can literally build myself out of the stable play group group I co-founded a quarter century ago. I value my friends more than my deck performance, so I don’t make changes lightly. Does this make sense?
If I joined a new group I’d definitely go bonkers on broken stuff. It looks like a lot of fun.
In lower-powered metas, or at least mine, that line of play is not generally preferred for any number of reasons not worth discussing here.
Let's make one thing clear. How many infinite combo/oppressively broken decks do I actually post? I have almost 10, 000 contributions on this forum and only a small fraction contain the broken synergies/strategies that I enjoy playing. I recognize that most people dislike infinite combos and have adjusted my posting/deckbuilding accordingly. That doesn't mean that I like it or agree with these reasons, I just know how the world works. So I'm willing to give people what they want but the price is that you have to listen to me cry and moan like a baby every now and then.
I've always assumed that one of the reasons people dislike combo so much is that permission, discard, and cheap spot removal lack viability in multiplayer and it only gets worse if multiple players are running exceptionally fast combos. Anyone want to play flip the coin to determine the winner?
Which is an argument typically made by people who don't play in those types of spheres or who are unwilling to build/modify their decks to adjust. As someone who routine plays broken formats such as cEDH I can promise you that games are anything but a coinflip. Player skill comes through on a consistent basis and you're heavily rewarded for your experience and decision-making (which includes deck building). It's no different that the people who think that Vintage is a turn 1 format or Legacy is a turn 1 format etc etc. No one who plays these formats on a frequent basis believes in these ridiculous claims because they're completed unfounded concerns. Most games are extremely interactive and a good chunk of your wins/losses are due to decisions that you made (for better or for worse).
It isn't comparable to either of those formats (which I play, so I do understand the correlation you are attempting to create). 1 vs. 1 with things like Thoughseize and Force of Will is different. I don't care if you agree. I have very little interest in your typical incessant need to be correct. My comment was a general one and I stand by it.
Edit: However, I admit my poor phrasing and snarky joke. "Coin-flip" is hyperbolic and dismissive and is literally used by those that do not understand eternal formats. So, word choice and tone, my bad.
It isn't comparable to either of those formats (which I play, so I do understand the correlation you are attempting to create). 1 vs. 1 with things like Thoughseize and Force of Will is different. I don't care if you agree. I have very little interest in your typical incessant need to be correct. My comment was a general one and I stand by it.
To be clear, I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that I disagree with the people who have this mindset. I also realize that it's most people and that I'm the one in the minority. I'm not under any illusions that most people think like me. It's quite the opposite, the overwhelming majority of people experience the game and derive enjoyment from entirely different things. I also want to stress that there's no right or wrong to enjoy something so I'm not trying to be "right" or make people agree with me. It's not going to happen. I'm still free to voice my opinion though :P.
I've admitted my comment was overboard so I will move on and ask one question here and one on you Gifts thread.
Question: So, say it is a highly powered multiplayer free-for-all environment with 6+ players playing 4-ofs, not EDH, Vintage banned list, and everyone is playing combo for the sake of the question and it is a known meta. What are the interaction spells? Force of Will, Swords, Standstill? I actually have never played in a meta where everyone had access and proclivity to play that way. I have had dis-balanced ones.
Question: So, say it is a highly powered multiplayer free-for-all environment with 6+ players playing 4-ofs, not EDH, Vintage banned list, and everyone is playing combo for the sake of the question and it is a known meta. What are the interaction spells? Force of Will, Swords, Standstill? I actually have never played in a meta where everyone had access and proclivity to play that way. I have had dis-balanced ones.
So, if I understand right, and amazing start might be the first player Thoughtseizes the second players combo piece, the second player FOWs the third players attempt to go off, the fourth player fizzles, but has the Pyroblast to stop the Swan Song of the fifth player who goes off and is countered by sixth players FOW and then the sixth player has Chain of vapor to stop player one? That kind of thing? I am not saying in reality they would all have their combos or all have interaction. I am just trying to wrap my head around disruption being spread around a table and not missing. It is really easy if you want to to create efficient and busted combo packages for multiplayer decks and each additional player seems (seems, I am not saying I know) to make it more likely that somebody can't stop one of the later players attempts.
What I have seen is half a table of people with deep collections and experience and half a table without. The first half, who is not even attempting to play really nastily, basically gets to ignore the other half because it is literally two different levels of magic.
In no way am I saying that the way most people seem to play is better and it is not any different in result - a win is a win is a win - but playing for 15 - 10 turns lets people feel (most likely this is illusory) that they got to play and interact. In fact, to bring this full circle, playing inefficient decks with long games are more a coin-flip because it comes down to player whims and politics and card sequencing. I just don't know anymore!
Kinda. In reality there's always some people having crappy games, someone having a GREAT game and a couple of people doing average. People tend to make their move around turn 4 when you go off with protection but it's usually only 1-2 players who have those types of draws.
What I have seen is half a table of people with deep collections and experience and half a table without. The first half, who is not even attempting to play really nastily, basically gets to ignore the other half because it is literally two different levels of magic.
This is the main reason why I Cube. If nothing else it puts everyone on the same level card-pool wise. Skill is skill, experience is experience, those aren't supposed to be fair, but I do agree that games are significantly more interesting when everyone is working with the same card pool depth.
In fact, to bring this full circle, playing inefficient decks with long games are more a coin-flip because it comes down to player whims and politics and card sequencing. I just don't know anymore!
Oh for sure. You can LSZ or Owen Turtenwald and it doesn't make a lick of difference if someone jams an Insurrection and swings at you for 50.
Tempo in multiplayer is more egocentric... so it's much easier to focus on upping your own tempo than slowing everybody else down.
And just to make sure I understand here, you are referring to stuff like blowing everyone else’s board up with a card that chain-synergizes with numerous cards of yours on the way out, to deal massive damage, gains lots of life, and spit out huge numbers of tokens at one time? Something like that?
Agreed with FGC. Tempo is essentially a deck archetype that tries to keep opponents off balance while you play faster. In 1v1 tempo decks use the most efficient threats and free or very cheap spells to try to keep the enemy from interacting before they win.
Depending on the groups ban list you could make a tempo deck of mana rocks, four balances and some powerful threats to keep the enemy from ever getting going.
It can be casual vs. competitive as well. Chaining Massacre, Wight of Precinct Six, and Dark Deal for an early colossal threat is a good tempo plan, but replace Wight of Precinct Six with Waste Not and the deck becomes much more competitive.
When I think tempo, I think from a control aspect, than simply racing your opponents.
I.E. Forcing a tempo on the board, think Planar Collapse, Impending Disaster, Manabarbs etc.
I may be wrong here, but it's just the way I kinda see it.
I find in multiplayer, tempo is often pointless as not all decks share the same archetype, let alone similar weaknesses.
Creating problems for some decks, can give massive advantages to others.
For this reason, I find racing is far and away the better option than trying to set a tempo.
In multiplayer, using card choices that effect the whole board are good, as are cards that steal or copy the biggest threat.
There is one multiplayer tempo strategy I think everyone is forgetting, time warp et al. The main tempo deck I think of is the Edric one drop/time warp deck.
The other thing I think of is stuff like winter orb especially if you can make it one sided or prophet of kruphix. You get such an advantage off of them (or punish your opponents way more than yourself) that you are able to push through a win. I may be wrong but I think basically any mana disruption that is less than a hard lock and hurts your opponents more than you could be included here such as tangle wire, static orb with a tap outlet, thorn of amethyst in a creature deck, or as Xyx already mentioned rhystic study.
So what does tempo mean to you in MP, and how do you take advantage of it to generate a win? Is it more likely to be generated by cancelling out multiple moves with a sweeper, or are there other ways to take advantage of it in an MP game?
By literally winning the game. The reason why I tend to laud things like Gemstone Caverns and Carpet of Flowers is because they enable you to enact broken sequences faster. Wrath of God doesn't win games of Magic. It just doesn't. You may trade favorably on cards and mana but you're not doing anything to surge ahead of the pack. All you're doing is resetting the board which doesn't accomplish much when multiple adversaries are drawing into new threats each turn. Mass removal is still plenty useful in MP but not for tempo purposes. It prevents you from losing, that's certainly important, but not losing != winning. That being said going turn 1 Waste Not, turn 2 Dark Deal -> draw your deck -> Cut // Ribbons the table for 80 ends the game and that's how you abuse tempo and offset the card disadvantage caused by things like Mox Diamond and Chrome Mox. Tempo, by definition, means converting an early advantage into a win before your adversaries can extract value from their spells and effects so that's what you need to be doing. The biggest issue with tempo in multiplayer is the stigma against combo decks because most people dislike when someone goes dork -> Pestermite -> Splinter Twin and the game ends before they cast their second spell. Still, the concept of tempo doesn't change, only the way that it's enacted. There are no "Delver of Secrets" in MP since quick beatdown isn't possible against numerous adversaries but there's nothing stopping you from going turn 1 Dark Ritual + Entomb + Animate Dead on a Jin-Gitaxias, Core Augur to seal the deal and that's what MP tempo looks like. Expending additional resources in order to do something broken faster and converting that advantage into a win.
Guilds of Ravnica - Commander 2018 - Core 2019 - Battlebond - Dominaria - Rivals of Ixalan - Ixalan - Commander 2017 - Hour of Devastation - Amonket - Aether Revolt - Commander 2016 - Kaladesh - Conspiracy 2 - Eldritch Moon - Shadows Over Innistrad - Oath of the Gatewatch - Commander 2015 - Battle for Zendikar - Magic Origins - Dragons of Tarkir
Green - Blue - Red - White - Gold
Which is an argument typically made by people who don't play in those types of spheres or who are unwilling to build/modify their decks to adjust. As someone who routine plays broken formats such as cEDH I can promise you that games are anything but a coinflip. Player skill comes through on a consistent basis and you're heavily rewarded for your experience and decision-making (which includes deck building). It's no different that the people who think that Vintage is a turn 1 format or Legacy is a turn 1 format etc etc. No one who plays these formats on a frequent basis believes in these ridiculous claims because they're completed unfounded concerns. Most games are extremely interactive and a good chunk of your wins/losses are due to decisions that you made (for better or for worse).
Guilds of Ravnica - Commander 2018 - Core 2019 - Battlebond - Dominaria - Rivals of Ixalan - Ixalan - Commander 2017 - Hour of Devastation - Amonket - Aether Revolt - Commander 2016 - Kaladesh - Conspiracy 2 - Eldritch Moon - Shadows Over Innistrad - Oath of the Gatewatch - Commander 2015 - Battle for Zendikar - Magic Origins - Dragons of Tarkir
Green - Blue - Red - White - Gold
Something like building casually and then playing for the win as hard as you can. I’m fine finding that balance for myself for my group, but does this even enter anyone else’s calculus, or am I the only person who cares about the fun factor of the people I value more than the game?
I ask this not to be snarky, but because this is clearly aggravating to everyone who comments on deck designs (most often mine) only to have the person intentionally (most often me) pick a less-powerful move. Believe me, I’m not tone deaf or oblivious about that. Maybe by better understanding levels of tempo in MP (if any such notion exists), I won’t have to ask for feedback. I’ve learned a lot by posting the last two years, and I appreciate the feedback when I get it, hell I really enjoy seeing wide variety of ways people can screw their enemies instantly. I truly love the ideas but I feel constrained by my group’s inability to keep up with my appetite for design advancement for a host of reasons. I can literally build myself out of the stable play group group I co-founded a quarter century ago. I value my friends more than my deck performance, so I don’t make changes lightly. Does this make sense?
If I joined a new group I’d definitely go bonkers on broken stuff. It looks like a lot of fun.
Let's make one thing clear. How many infinite combo/oppressively broken decks do I actually post? I have almost 10, 000 contributions on this forum and only a small fraction contain the broken synergies/strategies that I enjoy playing. I recognize that most people dislike infinite combos and have adjusted my posting/deckbuilding accordingly. That doesn't mean that I like it or agree with these reasons, I just know how the world works. So I'm willing to give people what they want but the price is that you have to listen to me cry and moan like a baby every now and then.
Open the search bar, click on Original Author and type "Prid3." That's basically every deck I've ever posted on here.
Guilds of Ravnica - Commander 2018 - Core 2019 - Battlebond - Dominaria - Rivals of Ixalan - Ixalan - Commander 2017 - Hour of Devastation - Amonket - Aether Revolt - Commander 2016 - Kaladesh - Conspiracy 2 - Eldritch Moon - Shadows Over Innistrad - Oath of the Gatewatch - Commander 2015 - Battle for Zendikar - Magic Origins - Dragons of Tarkir
Green - Blue - Red - White - Gold
It isn't comparable to either of those formats (which I play, so I do understand the correlation you are attempting to create). 1 vs. 1 with things like Thoughseize and Force of Will is different. I don't care if you agree. I have very little interest in your typical incessant need to be correct. My comment was a general one and I stand by it.
Edit: However, I admit my poor phrasing and snarky joke. "Coin-flip" is hyperbolic and dismissive and is literally used by those that do not understand eternal formats. So, word choice and tone, my bad.
To be clear, I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that I disagree with the people who have this mindset. I also realize that it's most people and that I'm the one in the minority. I'm not under any illusions that most people think like me. It's quite the opposite, the overwhelming majority of people experience the game and derive enjoyment from entirely different things. I also want to stress that there's no right or wrong to enjoy something so I'm not trying to be "right" or make people agree with me. It's not going to happen. I'm still free to voice my opinion though :P.
Guilds of Ravnica - Commander 2018 - Core 2019 - Battlebond - Dominaria - Rivals of Ixalan - Ixalan - Commander 2017 - Hour of Devastation - Amonket - Aether Revolt - Commander 2016 - Kaladesh - Conspiracy 2 - Eldritch Moon - Shadows Over Innistrad - Oath of the Gatewatch - Commander 2015 - Battle for Zendikar - Magic Origins - Dragons of Tarkir
Green - Blue - Red - White - Gold
Question: So, say it is a highly powered multiplayer free-for-all environment with 6+ players playing 4-ofs, not EDH, Vintage banned list, and everyone is playing combo for the sake of the question and it is a known meta. What are the interaction spells? Force of Will, Swords, Standstill? I actually have never played in a meta where everyone had access and proclivity to play that way. I have had dis-balanced ones.
Swords, Duress, Thoughtseize, FoW, Swan Song, Pact of Negation, Nature's Claim, Pyroblast, Red Elemental Blast, Silence, Chain of Vapor, Cyclonic Rift, Pongify, Rapid Hybridization, Beast Within, Chaos Warp, Spell Pierce, Flusterstorm, Negate, Counterspell, Mana Drain, Snuff Out, Slaughter Pact, Dismember, Deathmark
These are the ones that immediately spring to mind.
Guilds of Ravnica - Commander 2018 - Core 2019 - Battlebond - Dominaria - Rivals of Ixalan - Ixalan - Commander 2017 - Hour of Devastation - Amonket - Aether Revolt - Commander 2016 - Kaladesh - Conspiracy 2 - Eldritch Moon - Shadows Over Innistrad - Oath of the Gatewatch - Commander 2015 - Battle for Zendikar - Magic Origins - Dragons of Tarkir
Green - Blue - Red - White - Gold
What I have seen is half a table of people with deep collections and experience and half a table without. The first half, who is not even attempting to play really nastily, basically gets to ignore the other half because it is literally two different levels of magic.
In no way am I saying that the way most people seem to play is better and it is not any different in result - a win is a win is a win - but playing for 15 - 10 turns lets people feel (most likely this is illusory) that they got to play and interact. In fact, to bring this full circle, playing inefficient decks with long games are more a coin-flip because it comes down to player whims and politics and card sequencing. I just don't know anymore!
Kinda. In reality there's always some people having crappy games, someone having a GREAT game and a couple of people doing average. People tend to make their move around turn 4 when you go off with protection but it's usually only 1-2 players who have those types of draws.
This is the main reason why I Cube. If nothing else it puts everyone on the same level card-pool wise. Skill is skill, experience is experience, those aren't supposed to be fair, but I do agree that games are significantly more interesting when everyone is working with the same card pool depth.
Oh for sure. You can LSZ or Owen Turtenwald and it doesn't make a lick of difference if someone jams an Insurrection and swings at you for 50.
Guilds of Ravnica - Commander 2018 - Core 2019 - Battlebond - Dominaria - Rivals of Ixalan - Ixalan - Commander 2017 - Hour of Devastation - Amonket - Aether Revolt - Commander 2016 - Kaladesh - Conspiracy 2 - Eldritch Moon - Shadows Over Innistrad - Oath of the Gatewatch - Commander 2015 - Battle for Zendikar - Magic Origins - Dragons of Tarkir
Green - Blue - Red - White - Gold
With multiple opponents stuff like Foil and force of will are worse, but cards like massacre, balance, Mizzix's Mastery, etc. are better.
Depending on the groups ban list you could make a tempo deck of mana rocks, four balances and some powerful threats to keep the enemy from ever getting going.
It can be casual vs. competitive as well. Chaining Massacre, Wight of Precinct Six, and Dark Deal for an early colossal threat is a good tempo plan, but replace Wight of Precinct Six with Waste Not and the deck becomes much more competitive.
UB Wight Phantasm
RB Burn
UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy:
R Burn
CG-Post
However, if I’d define it in a MP setting I’d say:
A bigger/better board position attained at an earlier turn than average in the meta.
My meta: 3 or 4 player free for all, anything goes but boring games or broken decks cause a vote to end that game.
I.E. Forcing a tempo on the board, think Planar Collapse, Impending Disaster, Manabarbs etc.
I may be wrong here, but it's just the way I kinda see it.
I find in multiplayer, tempo is often pointless as not all decks share the same archetype, let alone similar weaknesses.
Creating problems for some decks, can give massive advantages to others.
For this reason, I find racing is far and away the better option than trying to set a tempo.
In multiplayer, using card choices that effect the whole board are good, as are cards that steal or copy the biggest threat.
The other thing I think of is stuff like winter orb especially if you can make it one sided or prophet of kruphix. You get such an advantage off of them (or punish your opponents way more than yourself) that you are able to push through a win. I may be wrong but I think basically any mana disruption that is less than a hard lock and hurts your opponents more than you could be included here such as tangle wire, static orb with a tap outlet, thorn of amethyst in a creature deck, or as Xyx already mentioned rhystic study.