Your opinion of mill in EDH from a theoretical perspective is irrelevant to the games of EDH I actually play. In practice, mill constitutes a viable strategy for less competitive groups. (Certain forms of mill or at least exiling libraries also work in competitive combo decks - Bitter Ordeal with infinite gravestorm, for example.)
1) Milling because of a combo isn't really "mill" in the sense most people are talking about.
2) Theory is required because every playgroup is different. "less competitive" is a vague and (I'm not trying to offend here)honestly useless metric to discuss anything.
Discuss the cards assuming they're being used properly in a competent group or there is no point in having any kind of conversation.
Edit: A mill general that doesn't rely on the combat step or creatures or infinite mana would be lovely. But we only see trash like Phenax and Vosk recently so I think I'm justified in my pessimism.
You might as well play real creatures if you're going to try to win for damage. It's really nice to think of attacking players from multiple angles, but it's not realistic.
You might as well play real creatures if you're going to try to win for damage. It's really nice to think of attacking players from multiple angles, but it's not realistic.
Those aren't there for damage.
A 1-Drop 5/5 Flyer, while not going to keep you "safe", will deter smaller flyers. Heck, if I could trade a 1-drop for Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, I am a happy panda.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
You might as well play real creatures if you're going to try to win for damage. It's really nice to think of attacking players from multiple angles, but it's not realistic.
Those aren't there for damage.
A 1-Drop 5/5 Flyer, while not going to keep you "safe", will deter smaller flyers. Heck, if I could trade a 1-drop for Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, I am a happy panda.
You might as well play real creatures if you're going to try to win for damage. It's really nice to think of attacking players from multiple angles, but it's not realistic.
Those aren't there for damage.
A 1-Drop 5/5 Flyer, while not going to keep you "safe", will deter smaller flyers. Heck, if I could trade a 1-drop for Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, I am a happy panda.
Seems like some desperate reaching there.
Hopefully you can keep him off the battlefield by other means, but as a last resort, I would rather have the Phantasm than not
And even if you don't use him as a blocker, he's still a free Tome Scour every turn for Phenax. Any one of those creatures with Phenax, honestly; the more you mill, the more you get to mill.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
Theory is required because every playgroup is different. "less competitive" is a vague and (I'm not trying to offend here)honestly useless metric to discuss anything.
I'm most interested in what I see at the table. The claim that mill is garbage is laughable for folks like me who've lost to mill in practice. It's suboptimal, sure, but so's nearly everything that I play and play against. As the original post of this thread argues, you can make a playable mill deck in many groups.
Discuss the cards assuming they're being used properly in a competent group or there is no point in having any kind of conversation.
I care more about actually existing EDH than your notions of what's proper and competent.
Also, while it's emphatically true that putting cards in your opponents' yards gives them resources, you can also use their resources against them with Chancellor of the Spires and whatnot.
Theory is required because every playgroup is different. "less competitive" is a vague and (I'm not trying to offend here)honestly useless metric to discuss anything.
I'm most interested in what I see at the table. The claim that mill is garbage is laughable for folks like me who've lost to mill in practice. It's suboptimal, sure, but so's nearly everything that I play and play against. As the original post of this thread argues, you can make a playable mill deck in many groups.
Winning with Sorrow's Path doesn't make it playable. People win with mill in spite of it. Now of course, that's perfectly fine. People can play with what they want. I just don't think they should claim it's good.
Ya, some of those creatures Slarg listed aren't great creatures, even if the mill shell makes them "better". I use better very loosely here...
Consuming is a beast, and Riddle is descent.
What I mean about piggy backing off other players work is simply that a Undead Alchemist still swings for 4 damage... Sneaking that 4 damage in and contributing to the destruction of a players life total doesn't mean you suddenly aren't a mill list, it just means you're using your cards intelligently...
A strategies viability shouldn't solely be determined by it's ability to win only by 1 way. Pure mill is only unviable if you consider it a failure if it sometimes doesn't win by milling all your opponents out...
That's no different then saying a Voltron list is a failure if sometimes it doesn't win by general damage...
Winning with Sorrow's Path doesn't make it playable. People win with mill in spite of it. Now of course, that's perfectly fine. People can play with what they want. I just don't think they should claim it's good.
In my group you'd have to stretch the definition of "playable" to the point of meaninglessness to exclude mill from the category. If people regularly play a strategy, sometimes win with it, and almost always put up a fight, that strategy is playable.
Winning with Sorrow's Path doesn't make it playable. People win with mill in spite of it. Now of course, that's perfectly fine. People can play with what they want. I just don't think they should claim it's good.
In my group you'd have to stretch the definition of "playable" to the point of meaninglessness to exclude mill from the category. If people regularly play a strategy, sometimes win with it, and almost always put up a fight, that strategy is playable.
You're mistaking what happens in your playgroup for reality as a whole.
Mill is bad. It works for you guys. Those two truths can coexist.
Theory is required because every playgroup is different. "less competitive" is a vague and (I'm not trying to offend here)honestly useless metric to discuss anything.
I'm most interested in what I see at the table. The claim that mill is garbage is laughable for folks like me who've lost to mill in practice. It's suboptimal, sure, but so's nearly everything that I play and play against. As the original post of this thread argues, you can make a playable mill deck in many groups.
Discuss the cards assuming they're being used properly in a competent group or there is no point in having any kind of conversation.
I care more about actually existing EDH than your notions of what's proper and competent.
He does have a point, though;
Let's suppose you (Not you you, you in general) have a play group of decently well to do players; None of you are sporting a Black Lotus, but you have disposable income to pump into the game, follow it in general, and know how to counter things.
Mill just doesn't have "Good" Instant-I-Win-Unless-Answered-immediately buttons. Wrexial is still single target, Consuming Aberration is too slow, Mind Grind comes too late unless you get really lucky draws.
My problem is that people seem to think that it ends; that Mill has no Banefire "Equivalent", which is just false. Precognition + Tunnel Vision + any sort of Sorcery recursion is HILARIOUS. Mill also has the answers in it's primary colors to remove any sort of stopgate in it's plans, it's just that no one actually puts any thought in it.
Heck, if you get three turns (or attacks) with Rootwater Thief, you are still at a major advantage for knowing what everyone has in their deck, even if you just exile a land.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
Ya, some of those creatures Slarg listed aren't great creatures, even if the mill shell makes them "better". I use better very loosely here...
Consuming is a beast, and Riddle is descent.
What I mean about piggy backing off other players work is simply that a Undead Alchemist still swings for 4 damage... Sneaking that 4 damage in and contributing to the destruction of a players life total doesn't mean you suddenly aren't a mill list, it just means you're using your cards intelligently...
A strategies viability shouldn't solely be determined by it's ability to win only by 1 way. Pure mill is only unviable if you consider it a failure if it sometimes doesn't win by milling all your opponents out...
That's no different then saying a Voltron list is a failure if sometimes it doesn't win by general damage...
Riddle isn't that bad, as long as he's not the Umbrella you as Wily Coyote are holding up against the mudslide.
In a Mill-Pillow Fort deck, he's just another way to keep people from attacking you, and if they do, it gets you that much closer to your goal (Which is admittingly not very).
The Wight is a Zombie, so can act as a brick wall and as another Milling tool as long as Undead Alchemist is out (Assuming, of course, there were creatures put in the graveyard before Alch came out).
Not Great creatures, but not too aweful terrible. It all depends on what else your deck is trying to pull.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
IMO mill needs more hit all deck type cards, and stuff to profit off the mill. (Deathrite, ooze and such) don't get me wrong it's fun to play, my mimeo deck is a "mill" deck it's just missing something.
IMO mill needs more hit all deck type cards, and stuff to profit off the mill. (Deathrite, ooze and such) don't get me wrong it's fun to play, my mimeo deck is a "mill" deck it's just missing something.
This echos my sentiments exactly.
Also, I think defining "unplayable" is necessary here. I define it as: Not having a high probability or expectation of winning via the decks primary win-con (library depletation) in any unknown or potential meta. Maybe more simply put, there are a lot of decks that can use mill as A win-con but there aren't a lot of decks than can use mill as THE win-con. Voltron wins through commander damage right? That's what makes it Voltron. So by the same virtue a mill deck would then need to rely on mill as the primary source of victory. Consuming Aberration, Wight of Precinct Six, Nighthowler, etc can use mill as a way to fuel an alternate win-con but unless you deck out your opponent you did not win via mill at least for the sake of argument. I would say you won via deck synergy.
The only reason I bring this up is because I understand where Jivan is coming from and a lot of the arguments I see levied against him are comparing apples to fruit loops, its simply not the same definition of playable. He is arguing, forgive me if I'm wrong, that mill is the core deck strategy and your ultimate goal is for your opponent to lose upon their next draw step. It seems a lot of people are arguing that "mill cards can have a place in your deck" which is a totally different scenario.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The following link is an invitation to join Pucatrade (card trading service though similar to TCGPLayer). If you follow the link then it awards me with tokens to exchange for actual cards. Thanks! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
Mill is just weaker in every way to "normal" decks unless you hit a combo or leyline of the void/rest in peace, which are counterproductive to most creatures you would want to use in mill.(sewer nemesis etc.)
I've milled tables out with a phenax pillowfort deck quite a few times, it's just not as engaging or climactic as swinging herp-derp worth of dudes at someone, or storming someone to death.
Modern: UUUBlue Man Group
Legacy: UWBMiracles
Edh: UUUThassa Control WWWHokori Stax GGGJolrael, Empress of Land Stompy BBBGriselbrand French List RBGShattergang(Super Villians) RWGHazezon Flicker UBRMarchesa Aggro URGMaelstom Wanderer (Maelstorm)
IMO mill needs more hit all deck type cards, and stuff to profit off the mill. (Deathrite, ooze and such) don't get me wrong it's fun to play, my mimeo deck is a "mill" deck it's just missing something.
This echos my sentiments exactly.
Also, I think defining "unplayable" is necessary here. I define it as: Not having a high probability or expectation of winning via the decks primary win-con (library depletation) in any unknown or potential meta. Maybe more simply put, there are a lot of decks that can use mill as A win-con but there aren't a lot of decks than can use mill as THE win-con. Voltron wins through commander damage right? That's what makes it Voltron. So by the same virtue a mill deck would then need to rely on mill as the primary source of victory. Consuming Aberration, Wight of Precinct Six, Nighthowler, etc can use mill as a way to fuel an alternate win-con but unless you deck out your opponent you did not win via mill at least for the sake of argument. I would say you won via deck synergy.
The only reason I bring this up is because I understand where Jivan is coming from and a lot of the arguments I see levied against him are comparing apples to fruit loops, its simply not the same definition of playable. He is arguing, forgive me if I'm wrong, that mill is the core deck strategy and your ultimate goal is for your opponent to lose upon their next draw step. It seems a lot of people are arguing that "mill cards can have a place in your deck" which is a totally different scenario.
Not to nit pick, but Consuming Aberration does increase the power of all your mill spells, and turns everything into one. Not great, but when Brainstorm and Ponder (And Black Ritual) start grinding out a land for Mirko, you definitely feel the difference.
As for the first paragraph, let me give it a shot; with Mill, you can't necessarily rely ON Mill cards. With Mirko Vosk, Mind Drinker, the cards you want are less Glimpse the Unthinkable, Tome Scour, or even Thought Scour. You want cards like Fireshrieker, Strionic Resonator, and Keening Stone. With Double Strike and the Resonator, Mirko is now Grinding out 12 lands a turn, when most decks only have 40. That means that enemies can only play 4 lands before they hit the magic number where you kill them in three hits, 36. Throw Keening Stone into it and who knows, you could only mill 12 more cards (Assuming you ONLY hit lands, pretty rare) or you could mill the entire deck out (Also pretty rare....). The thing is, is that every land you hit with Keening stone, but it only 1 or a whooping 10, is less "life" they have in the library.
Only two of the cards actually said "Mill", but you are still winning by Milling out the opponent. Effective Mill relies on massive amounts of deck synergy, and luckily it's in the best Tutor colors; don't forget about Transmute!
Another thing, is you can use Black Tutors to set up a backbreaking Traumatize + Archeomancer + Traumatize as early as turn five/six. Someone just got cut down to 25% deck strength. (However, if you throw in Blink effects, don't be silly; Time Warp is STILL a better reccurable spell.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
The claim that mill is garbage is laughable for folks like me who've lost to mill in practice.
I've been milled out before and I still think it's a terrible win-condition. In my 20 years of Magic playing, I've never seen anyone win a multiplayer game, EDH or regular, via mill. NEVER. Yeah, one or two people may get milled out, but they never mill out everyone. I got hit by a size 11 Mind Grind in one game and, yeah, it took me and another guy out of the game, but there was still one guy left and he ended up winning the game. Last week, we played a three hour game and one guy was using a Lazav deck with lots of mill and Consuming Aberration and Mind Grind and crap. He milled out one guy. The problem was that there were three of us. I was using a Braids deck with Eldrazi in it, so when he milled me, he did me a favor.
Mill is great for disruption, but it's just too inefficient to be a viable win-condition in a multiplayer setting. It's simply far easier to damage everyone out than it is to mill everyone out. Someone was saying to use cards to strip Eldrazi out of a deck to help mill. Sure, you can do that to one guy, but what about all the other guys? If everyone at the table has an Eldrazi or two or is using Feldon's Cane or Elixir of Immortality, then how are you going to fight that? Use Leyline of the Void or Rest In Peace? Yeah, you can try those, but sooner or later (more likely sooner) someone is going to Disenchant them. You've got to jump through too many hoops to get mill to work that it's just not worth it. There's also the fact, which has been mentioned, that when you're trying to mill out all of your opponents, you're usually doing that by yourself. Meanwhile everyone else that's trying to win via damage is dealing damage to everyone, which is helping everyone that's trying to win via damage, but that does nothing for you. If you're at a table with three other guys and you're trying to mill all three and they're all attacking with creatures and casting damage dealing spells, how are you going to mill out three decks before one of them takes your life to zero when all three are dealing damage to everyone? You'll never be able to reliably do that. Yeah, maybe you can mill one guy out, two if you're lucky. Maybe once in a blue moon you'll actually win a game, but far more often than not, you're going to lose because it's just far more efficient to win with damage than it is to win with mill. It just is. If you want to play mill for fun, then by all means do it. No one is tell you you can't do that, but saying that mill is a viable win condition is just silly. It's not. It's not consistent enough to be considered 'viable'. It's not efficient enough.
What mill is really good for is disruption. You add mill to a deck just to knock cards out of people's libraries and disrupt their game (unless they're reanimating or dredging, in which case you are helping them). If I made a Black/Blue deck, I'd throw Mind Grind and Consuming Aberration in it just for the potential disruption. Yeah, maybe I'd mill one or two guys out with them, but I'd never count on that. I'd never build my deck around that. I'd never depend on that. The odds are just too slim. Mill is too easy to disrupt and too hard to pull of. Is it fun? Sure. Is it competitive? Nope.
The problem i see with mill is that unless your opponents are drawing half their library (meaning they should be winning by now), you will most likely be the only player contributing to your strategy, so in a way it is infact archenemy.
However, when playing Phenax, who is more reliant on boardstate than 1-off spells to win, 1 player down will quickly turn to more. The times i've won playing phenax, i often take out 1 opponent and leave the other player/players 1 turn to kill me, often while i have counterspell backup.
Or get a combo that straight out wins.
Yes mill is significally worse if your opponents play eldrazi. However in my experience mill isn't mainstream and people dont play eldrazi in most decks anyway.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH decks:
RWUNarset, jeskai burn RUB Marchesa the black rose R Daretti, reanimator goodstuff BU Vela, ninja assasin UG Ezuri, woodland critters.
1) Milling because of a combo isn't really "mill" in the sense most people are talking about.
2) Theory is required because every playgroup is different. "less competitive" is a vague and (I'm not trying to offend here)honestly useless metric to discuss anything.
Discuss the cards assuming they're being used properly in a competent group or there is no point in having any kind of conversation.
Edit: A mill general that doesn't rely on the combat step or creatures or infinite mana would be lovely. But we only see trash like Phenax and Vosk recently so I think I'm justified in my pessimism.
You might as well play real creatures if you're going to try to win for damage. It's really nice to think of attacking players from multiple angles, but it's not realistic.
Those aren't there for damage.
A 1-Drop 5/5 Flyer, while not going to keep you "safe", will deter smaller flyers. Heck, if I could trade a 1-drop for Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, I am a happy panda.
Seems like some desperate reaching there.
Hopefully you can keep him off the battlefield by other means, but as a last resort, I would rather have the Phantasm than not
And even if you don't use him as a blocker, he's still a free Tome Scour every turn for Phenax. Any one of those creatures with Phenax, honestly; the more you mill, the more you get to mill.
I'm most interested in what I see at the table. The claim that mill is garbage is laughable for folks like me who've lost to mill in practice. It's suboptimal, sure, but so's nearly everything that I play and play against. As the original post of this thread argues, you can make a playable mill deck in many groups.
I care more about actually existing EDH than your notions of what's proper and competent.
Also, while it's emphatically true that putting cards in your opponents' yards gives them resources, you can also use their resources against them with Chancellor of the Spires and whatnot.
Winning with Sorrow's Path doesn't make it playable. People win with mill in spite of it. Now of course, that's perfectly fine. People can play with what they want. I just don't think they should claim it's good.
Consuming is a beast, and Riddle is descent.
What I mean about piggy backing off other players work is simply that a Undead Alchemist still swings for 4 damage... Sneaking that 4 damage in and contributing to the destruction of a players life total doesn't mean you suddenly aren't a mill list, it just means you're using your cards intelligently...
A strategies viability shouldn't solely be determined by it's ability to win only by 1 way. Pure mill is only unviable if you consider it a failure if it sometimes doesn't win by milling all your opponents out...
That's no different then saying a Voltron list is a failure if sometimes it doesn't win by general damage...
RW Kalemne, Disciple of Iroas
In my group you'd have to stretch the definition of "playable" to the point of meaninglessness to exclude mill from the category. If people regularly play a strategy, sometimes win with it, and almost always put up a fight, that strategy is playable.
You're mistaking what happens in your playgroup for reality as a whole.
Mill is bad. It works for you guys. Those two truths can coexist.
UAzami, Locus of All KnowledgeU
BMarrow-Gnawer, Crime Lord of ComboB
WBRTariel, Hellraiser StaxWBR
Annul is really good in EDH
He does have a point, though;
Let's suppose you (Not you you, you in general) have a play group of decently well to do players; None of you are sporting a Black Lotus, but you have disposable income to pump into the game, follow it in general, and know how to counter things.
Mill just doesn't have "Good" Instant-I-Win-Unless-Answered-immediately buttons. Wrexial is still single target, Consuming Aberration is too slow, Mind Grind comes too late unless you get really lucky draws.
A normal Mill deck with stuff like Glimpse the Unthinkable and Tome Scour is like playing a EDH deck of stuff like Bump in the Night and Lightning Bolt, and Eldrazi Titans are kind of like the Oloro to that sort of Burn Deck.
My problem is that people seem to think that it ends; that Mill has no Banefire "Equivalent", which is just false. Precognition + Tunnel Vision + any sort of Sorcery recursion is HILARIOUS. Mill also has the answers in it's primary colors to remove any sort of stopgate in it's plans, it's just that no one actually puts any thought in it.
Heck, if you get three turns (or attacks) with Rootwater Thief, you are still at a major advantage for knowing what everyone has in their deck, even if you just exile a land.
Riddle isn't that bad, as long as he's not the Umbrella you as Wily Coyote are holding up against the mudslide.
In a Mill-Pillow Fort deck, he's just another way to keep people from attacking you, and if they do, it gets you that much closer to your goal (Which is admittingly not very).
The Wight is a Zombie, so can act as a brick wall and as another Milling tool as long as Undead Alchemist is out (Assuming, of course, there were creatures put in the graveyard before Alch came out).
Not Great creatures, but not too aweful terrible. It all depends on what else your deck is trying to pull.
Technical everything in EDH is good and bad. It's context that matters.
The people who think Mill is bad will also think those creatures are bad.
RW Kalemne, Disciple of Iroas
Nin's theft
Mill all decks
bruna blink
This echos my sentiments exactly.
Also, I think defining "unplayable" is necessary here. I define it as: Not having a high probability or expectation of winning via the decks primary win-con (library depletation) in any unknown or potential meta. Maybe more simply put, there are a lot of decks that can use mill as A win-con but there aren't a lot of decks than can use mill as THE win-con. Voltron wins through commander damage right? That's what makes it Voltron. So by the same virtue a mill deck would then need to rely on mill as the primary source of victory. Consuming Aberration, Wight of Precinct Six, Nighthowler, etc can use mill as a way to fuel an alternate win-con but unless you deck out your opponent you did not win via mill at least for the sake of argument. I would say you won via deck synergy.
The only reason I bring this up is because I understand where Jivan is coming from and a lot of the arguments I see levied against him are comparing apples to fruit loops, its simply not the same definition of playable. He is arguing, forgive me if I'm wrong, that mill is the core deck strategy and your ultimate goal is for your opponent to lose upon their next draw step. It seems a lot of people are arguing that "mill cards can have a place in your deck" which is a totally different scenario.
https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
I've milled tables out with a phenax pillowfort deck quite a few times, it's just not as engaging or climactic as swinging herp-derp worth of dudes at someone, or storming someone to death.
Draft it Here!
UUUBlue Man Group
Legacy:
UWBMiracles
Edh:
UUUThassa Control
WWWHokori Stax
GGGJolrael, Empress of Land Stompy
BBBGriselbrand French List
RBGShattergang(Super Villians)
RWGHazezon Flicker
UBRMarchesa Aggro
URGMaelstom Wanderer (Maelstorm)
The biggest issue is that it's just not dependable in either one-on-one or a multiplayer setting.
Not to nit pick, but Consuming Aberration does increase the power of all your mill spells, and turns everything into one. Not great, but when Brainstorm and Ponder (And Black Ritual) start grinding out a land for Mirko, you definitely feel the difference.
As for the first paragraph, let me give it a shot; with Mill, you can't necessarily rely ON Mill cards. With Mirko Vosk, Mind Drinker, the cards you want are less Glimpse the Unthinkable, Tome Scour, or even Thought Scour. You want cards like Fireshrieker, Strionic Resonator, and Keening Stone. With Double Strike and the Resonator, Mirko is now Grinding out 12 lands a turn, when most decks only have 40. That means that enemies can only play 4 lands before they hit the magic number where you kill them in three hits, 36. Throw Keening Stone into it and who knows, you could only mill 12 more cards (Assuming you ONLY hit lands, pretty rare) or you could mill the entire deck out (Also pretty rare....). The thing is, is that every land you hit with Keening stone, but it only 1 or a whooping 10, is less "life" they have in the library.
Only two of the cards actually said "Mill", but you are still winning by Milling out the opponent. Effective Mill relies on massive amounts of deck synergy, and luckily it's in the best Tutor colors; don't forget about Transmute!
Another thing, is you can use Black Tutors to set up a backbreaking Traumatize + Archeomancer + Traumatize as early as turn five/six. Someone just got cut down to 25% deck strength. (However, if you throw in Blink effects, don't be silly; Time Warp is STILL a better reccurable spell.)
I've been milled out before and I still think it's a terrible win-condition. In my 20 years of Magic playing, I've never seen anyone win a multiplayer game, EDH or regular, via mill. NEVER. Yeah, one or two people may get milled out, but they never mill out everyone. I got hit by a size 11 Mind Grind in one game and, yeah, it took me and another guy out of the game, but there was still one guy left and he ended up winning the game. Last week, we played a three hour game and one guy was using a Lazav deck with lots of mill and Consuming Aberration and Mind Grind and crap. He milled out one guy. The problem was that there were three of us. I was using a Braids deck with Eldrazi in it, so when he milled me, he did me a favor.
Mill is great for disruption, but it's just too inefficient to be a viable win-condition in a multiplayer setting. It's simply far easier to damage everyone out than it is to mill everyone out. Someone was saying to use cards to strip Eldrazi out of a deck to help mill. Sure, you can do that to one guy, but what about all the other guys? If everyone at the table has an Eldrazi or two or is using Feldon's Cane or Elixir of Immortality, then how are you going to fight that? Use Leyline of the Void or Rest In Peace? Yeah, you can try those, but sooner or later (more likely sooner) someone is going to Disenchant them. You've got to jump through too many hoops to get mill to work that it's just not worth it. There's also the fact, which has been mentioned, that when you're trying to mill out all of your opponents, you're usually doing that by yourself. Meanwhile everyone else that's trying to win via damage is dealing damage to everyone, which is helping everyone that's trying to win via damage, but that does nothing for you. If you're at a table with three other guys and you're trying to mill all three and they're all attacking with creatures and casting damage dealing spells, how are you going to mill out three decks before one of them takes your life to zero when all three are dealing damage to everyone? You'll never be able to reliably do that. Yeah, maybe you can mill one guy out, two if you're lucky. Maybe once in a blue moon you'll actually win a game, but far more often than not, you're going to lose because it's just far more efficient to win with damage than it is to win with mill. It just is. If you want to play mill for fun, then by all means do it. No one is tell you you can't do that, but saying that mill is a viable win condition is just silly. It's not. It's not consistent enough to be considered 'viable'. It's not efficient enough.
What mill is really good for is disruption. You add mill to a deck just to knock cards out of people's libraries and disrupt their game (unless they're reanimating or dredging, in which case you are helping them). If I made a Black/Blue deck, I'd throw Mind Grind and Consuming Aberration in it just for the potential disruption. Yeah, maybe I'd mill one or two guys out with them, but I'd never count on that. I'd never build my deck around that. I'd never depend on that. The odds are just too slim. Mill is too easy to disrupt and too hard to pull of. Is it fun? Sure. Is it competitive? Nope.
However, when playing Phenax, who is more reliant on boardstate than 1-off spells to win, 1 player down will quickly turn to more. The times i've won playing phenax, i often take out 1 opponent and leave the other player/players 1 turn to kill me, often while i have counterspell backup.
Or get a combo that straight out wins.
Yes mill is significally worse if your opponents play eldrazi. However in my experience mill isn't mainstream and people dont play eldrazi in most decks anyway.
RWU Narset, jeskai burn
RUB Marchesa the black rose
R Daretti, reanimator goodstuff
BU Vela, ninja assasin
UG Ezuri, woodland critters.