People getting mad at conceding. You have lethal, hasty damage on the board, I have no hand, I'm tapped out, and you can swing for lethal. Two other players are waiting for the next game to start. I concede, and the winning player gets into a huff because I didn't "let him win" and he wanted to swing with all his dudes.
For me, when I'm in a totally hopeless situation there is no fun in just letting it go on, I figure might as well start the next game. If my opponent concedes, I've never felt that's less of a win, though in casual games I'll point a way out if I see one in their board state.
People getting mad at conceding. You have lethal, hasty damage on the board, I have no hand, I'm tapped out, and you can swing for lethal. Two other players are waiting for the next game to start. I concede, and the winning player gets into a huff because I didn't "let him win" and he wanted to swing with all his dudes.
For me, when I'm in a totally hopeless situation there is no fun in just letting it go on, I figure might as well start the next game. If my opponent concedes, I've never felt that's less of a win, though in casual games I'll point a way out if I see one in their board state.
yeah, this goes hand-in-hand with those people who take WAY too long playing out a dominant board. They could easily just win, but instead they do a bunch of pointless stuff for 5 minutes THEN win by more. In my experience green rampy players are the worst about this. Yes, they could just Craterhoof and kill you, but instead they want to see how much they can Genesis Wave for 1st...and see what it hits...and see what that equates to damage-wise.
People getting mad at conceding. You have lethal, hasty damage on the board, I have no hand, I'm tapped out, and you can swing for lethal. Two other players are waiting for the next game to start. I concede, and the winning player gets into a huff because I didn't "let him win" and he wanted to swing with all his dudes.
I'd like to add to this: people who explain how they were going to win against you after you've conceded.
People getting mad at conceding. You have lethal, hasty damage on the board, I have no hand, I'm tapped out, and you can swing for lethal. Two other players are waiting for the next game to start. I concede, and the winning player gets into a huff because I didn't "let him win" and he wanted to swing with all his dudes.
I'd like to add to this: people who explain how they were going to win against you after you've conceded.
This and the folks who lost, but somehow hold some belief that they should/could have won:
they show their hand and say "look at that; i COULDV'E won if i had 'a', 'b' and 'c' and/or if some other player did/didn't do 'd' and/or 'e', and creature 'f' didn't hit player 'g'", and then try to debate with everyone about how they should've won (instead of starting a new game).
for me, i'd like to think i know my playgroup pretty well; we have a pretty good grasp with what we have in each other's decks. if you happen to have a dread cacodemon but i or someone else on the table was able to nuke all their artifact mana before they reach 10 mana then win on the back of a ruination, its not us being lucky, its us playing to our knowledge/assumptions, right?
for some reason, it seems that some players just can't understand that games are won not because of what could have happened, but what actually did happen. maybe im a control player at heart, but generally, if i have some hunch that someone else has a threatening card in hand, i play around it as if they did, kinda neutering it before it hits play if i can/saving up counters for it. maybe its my playstyle that leads people to have false hope in their ability to win.
This could go either way for me. I can definitely do without the smug and entitled "still had these so I sort of won too." On the other hand, I do like seeing what other folks had planned, especially if they were secretly setting up a play to blindside the rest of the table.
Yeah, I like it when people go things like "oh man, I was one piece away from comboing out and was going to tutor for it on my very next turn.", but I hate ones that are "You only won that because I hadn't found the last piece of my combo yet."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rest in RIP My Signature, I guess. 2015-2016, we hardly knew ye.
Total side note but I like how people are discussing running this over itself.
Well, it has to be said that Kolaghan is clearly better than Kolaghan. Considering what BR decks usually want and how stiff the competition in this guild is, there is no way that I would run Kolaghan over Kolaghan! Kolaghan might make it in as the sixth guild card or so. Kolaghan on the other hand ranks several places below that.
It was so funny to me when they described this as a downgrade to the original Zurgo during the Pax East panel. I was thinking if this is a downgrade, they should really "downgrade" all legendary creatures. Haha.
My deck designing is quite concise at this point:
1. Come up with deck idea
2. Realize this idea is somehow fundamentally similar to another deck I have or that is commonly played in my group
3. Decide I don't want to disassemble one of my existing decks
4. Give up and do nothing
I don't see the point of this new shroud mechanic. It's strictly worse than Hexproof. Threshold is pretty bad too, Delirium is a much better mechanic and probably easier to activate.
Otherwise this card is a pretty neat guy. Dodges removal and grows into a Primal Huntbeast. 3/5
I'm not sure how much of a pet peeve it is to me, cuz it happens from a friend who is genuinely a good dude, but i just wished that he would say "ok" after our spells when he's playing his counterspell decks. in the past when I've waited politely for like 8 seconds or so, then asking him "resolves?" he's done the whole "what? yah, it's good" like he didn't know he was being waited for.
i figured that maybe it's for bluffing purposes, or maybe he does genuinely forget or whatever, but saying "ok" after everything would eliminate all the confusion.
in the end, it's not the biggest of deals, so I don't see myself aggressively trying to confront him about it or anything
side note: yes, I say "ok" after everything and the rest of the table is pretty good about it
People who think a "casual" deck is any deck that wins by combat damage. The same people usually think that infinite combos and mld are not casual. If you can consistently win before turn five in edh because you are playing a re animation deck, your deck is not casual. On the other hand if your deck has a three card infinite combo that does not involve the commander and your deck has no tutors, it is a casual deck.
Proxies are perfectly fine. The general rule is nothing that you wouldn't really buy or realistically afford. I would much rather spend money on my competitive decks than my casual decks. My maelstrom wanderer deck is about 75% proxies. *shrug*
And looking at the Wanderer deck you are exemplifying the kind of player I hate playing against wrt to proxies. UGx deck that just proxies up all the goodstuff with nothing remotely interesting going on.
*shrug* My play group is a pretty cutt throat play group. And if you want to win in a group where everyone is playing cut and dry decklists to win. You really don't care about "interesting"
People getting mad at conceding. You have lethal, hasty damage on the board, I have no hand, I'm tapped out, and you can swing for lethal. Two other players are waiting for the next game to start. I concede, and the winning player gets into a huff because I didn't "let him win" and he wanted to swing with all his dudes.
For me, when I'm in a totally hopeless situation there is no fun in just letting it go on, I figure might as well start the next game. If my opponent concedes, I've never felt that's less of a win, though in casual games I'll point a way out if I see one in their board state.
UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU's prison: blue is the new orange is the new black.
BSidisi, Undead VizierB: Bis zum Erbrechen
GTitiania, Protector Of ArgothG: Protecting Argoth, by blowing it up!
GYisan, The Wanderer BardG: Gradus Ad Elfball.
Duel EDH: Yisan & Titania.
In Progress: Grand Arbiter Augustin IV duel; Grenzo, Dungeon Warden Doomsday.
yeah, this goes hand-in-hand with those people who take WAY too long playing out a dominant board. They could easily just win, but instead they do a bunch of pointless stuff for 5 minutes THEN win by more. In my experience green rampy players are the worst about this. Yes, they could just Craterhoof and kill you, but instead they want to see how much they can Genesis Wave for 1st...and see what it hits...and see what that equates to damage-wise.
I'd like to add to this: people who explain how they were going to win against you after you've conceded.
This and the folks who lost, but somehow hold some belief that they should/could have won:
they show their hand and say "look at that; i COULDV'E won if i had 'a', 'b' and 'c' and/or if some other player did/didn't do 'd' and/or 'e', and creature 'f' didn't hit player 'g'", and then try to debate with everyone about how they should've won (instead of starting a new game).
for me, i'd like to think i know my playgroup pretty well; we have a pretty good grasp with what we have in each other's decks. if you happen to have a dread cacodemon but i or someone else on the table was able to nuke all their artifact mana before they reach 10 mana then win on the back of a ruination, its not us being lucky, its us playing to our knowledge/assumptions, right?
for some reason, it seems that some players just can't understand that games are won not because of what could have happened, but what actually did happen. maybe im a control player at heart, but generally, if i have some hunch that someone else has a threatening card in hand, i play around it as if they did, kinda neutering it before it hits play if i can/saving up counters for it. maybe its my playstyle that leads people to have false hope in their ability to win.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
i figured that maybe it's for bluffing purposes, or maybe he does genuinely forget or whatever, but saying "ok" after everything would eliminate all the confusion.
in the end, it's not the biggest of deals, so I don't see myself aggressively trying to confront him about it or anything
side note: yes, I say "ok" after everything and the rest of the table is pretty good about it
I mean the game has to end sometime.
*shrug* My play group is a pretty cutt throat play group. And if you want to win in a group where everyone is playing cut and dry decklists to win. You really don't care about "interesting"