Something I've noticed about myself and me deckbuilding is that, the more mental energy I devote to a deck, especially for decks that I think are especially clever and original, the less fun I often have actually playing it. I think I get my ego too tied up in the results, and I get anxious and take the game too seriously. Generally this ends up manifesting as me being a worse sport than I wish I was, and not actually being able to enjoy the game, and then also hating myself for being a bad sport afterwards. All around, not a great experience.
(Weirdly, playing cEDH decks that I've taken off online lists (it was one time, for a GP EDH tournament, it's not who I am inside!) tends to have a similar effect. Haven't totally figured that one out.)
Curious if anyone else has experienced this problem, and what tactics people use to combat it. I've got a few things that seem to work pretty well:
-Using a precon
-Building a deck around a theme or something silly, instead of a (complicated, political) strategy
-Building a deck I know is trash
-Borrowing someone else's deck
These strategies tend to work, but they can also leave me a bit frustrated against opponents with more competitive decks. The best remedy seems to be to just not take the game very seriously, but that can be tough to keep up for an extended game.
I could be totally wrong here, but I think you may be operating off the false premise that every deck you build will be equally fun to play. Original and clever decks, while tantalizing, aren't necessarily going to lead to better gameplay. In fact, depending on the direction you take them, they may lead to worse gameplay.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Why not swap decks with your opponents? Then if you loae your deck did well, and if you win you did well. That lets you put as much or as little effort into your deck as you like without feeling guilty or irritated by the results.
Why not swap decks with your opponents? Then if you loae your deck did well, and if you win you did well. That lets you put as much or as little effort into your deck as you like without feeling guilty or irritated by the results.
Well, most of the people I play with tend to be pretty attached to their decks (which, no offense to them, are almost all pretty default lists for their commander of choice, or are really badly built, but whatever - you know how newer players are). So I doubt they'd want to play mine.
Also, depending on the list, a lot of my decks are pretty tough to play, at least without a tutorial. If I handed my new Athreos deck to virtually anyone at my LGS I'm pretty sure they'd be confused af.
I could be totally wrong here, but I think you may be operating off the false premise that every deck you build will be equally fun to play. Original and clever decks, while tantalizing, aren't necessarily going to lead to better gameplay. In fact, depending on the direction you take them, they may lead to worse gameplay.
I do get that, but I think I can differentiate between decks that lead to unfun play patterns (i.e. arixmethes kept leading to me recurring counters and board wipes with conqueror's galleon) and decks that make me anxious regardless of what's actually happening.
I do get that, but I think I can differentiate between decks that lead to unfun play patterns (i.e. arixmethes kept leading to me recurring counters and board wipes with conqueror's galleon) and decks that make me anxious regardless of what's actually happening.
Perhaps. I personally find it really difficult to determine which decks will lead to good gameplay and which won't, at least not until I try them first hand anyway. I mean, sure, there are some strategies that I know are just going to be miserable (like an extra turns themed deck), but if I were to cobble together two different generic goodstuff decks, I'd have a hard time telling you which of the two produced better gameplay without actually testing them.
One of the decks I'm currently/was currently working on (it's kind of on the back burner now) was a Queen Marchesa deck bent on creating the most entertaining games of Magic possible. Have you ever tried to build a deck like that before? A deck whose sole purpose is to minmax the amount of fun you and the rest of your table might have?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
I don't keep any single deck together for longer than a week these days and have 900 or so singles in boxes that I build out of to keep things constantly fresh.
I do get that, but I think I can differentiate between decks that lead to unfun play patterns (i.e. arixmethes kept leading to me recurring counters and board wipes with conqueror's galleon) and decks that make me anxious regardless of what's actually happening.
Perhaps. I personally find it really difficult to determine which decks will lead to good gameplay and which won't, at least not until I try them first hand anyway. I mean, sure, there are some strategies that I know are just going to be miserable (like an extra turns themed deck), but if I were to cobble together two different generic goodstuff decks, I'd have a hard time telling you which of the two produced better gameplay without actually testing them.
One of the decks I'm currently/was currently working on (it's kind of on the back burner now) was a Queen Marchesa deck bent on creating the most entertaining games of Magic possible. Have you ever tried to build a deck like that before? A deck whose sole purpose is to minmax the amount of fun you and the rest of your table might have?
Yep. Specifically my Tymna/Kraum deck, although most of my other 4c decks have been experiments in seeing how much fun various unconventional "strategies" are - playing only cards which give opponents choices, determining targets based on objective criteria selected randomly, or determining card play order based on certain criteria selected randomly, to name a few. Most of those have been pretty fun, if only because I'm not taking it very seriously.
But I think this is a bit off-topic. Trying to minmax fun is an interesting topic too, but I didn't have any issues with being anxious or a bad sport while playing, say, Arixmethes (which created counter locks, boardwipe locks, and capsize locks) despite it creating unfun game states, because it isn't particularly clever or original compared to, say, my Athreos build. My ego doesn't get as tied up in its success.
I don't keep any single deck together for longer than a week these days and have 900 or so singles in boxes that I build out of to keep things constantly fresh.
900? Pssh, peasant. I've got 7.5K
I'd say my average deck lifespan ranges from less than a week, up to 3-4 weeks of consistent play (they might stick around longer if I'm just not playing much, but usually 3-4 sessions is about the max unless it's super super fun and I don't have any other compelling ideas).
Having a constant rotation is fun but it doesn't make me less invested when I think I've got a great idea.
I have a measure of self control and a knowledge of how I like to play to not require that many cards to build many decks from, also unsure if clear but when I say singles that is what I mean outside of basic lands, I see no need for that many more at this point.
But I think this is a bit off-topic. Trying to minmax fun is an interesting topic too, but I didn't have any issues with being anxious or a bad sport while playing, say, Arixmethes (which created counter locks, boardwipe locks, and capsize locks) despite it creating unfun game states, because it isn't particularly clever or original compared to, say, my Athreos build. My ego doesn't get as tied up in its success.
I'm afraid I have little insight to offer when it comes to taming an ego. I was simply looking at this problem from the perspective I understand best: creating good games of Magic through gameplay and deck design. It's entirely possible there's no action you need to take from a deckbuilding direction.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Budget decks and pauper decks; they both help me distance myself from expecting a win while making me more appreciative when I manage to succeed. I recently built a Tatyova budget deck that I run against normal decks worth many times its value. Surprisingly, I've actually won more than I've lost with it, but I've had to fight for those wins, which makes it feel so great when I pull it off. Pauper decks are similar - I run a rare legend as the general and then restrict all 99 other cards to commons.
Secondly, engage in legalrecreational relief and watch Alan Watts videos? Invest in a sensory deprivation tank? Practice Mahayana Buddhism? This topic feels outside the purview of this forum, but for a more Magic-related response I'm going to need to know what you mean by "results." Is that winning/losing, or having your deck do its thing? Sure, most decks will win when they get to do their thing if they're competently built, but I try to avoid binary decks that either go off and win or durdle around and lose (eg, Krenko, Mob Boss or many combo decks). I almost exclusively play control decks because I want to be directly involved in the course of the game whether I win or lose knowing that my decisions mattered. It's nice to win, but it's even nicer to enjoy the journey.
I have a measure of self control and a knowledge of how I like to play to not require that many cards to build many decks from, also unsure if clear but when I say singles that is what I mean outside of basic lands, I see no need for that many more at this point.
I do appreciate the appeal of restricting the collection to a more manageable number of cards (coming through several thousand cards to create each deck can be pretty time-consuming) but I like being able to make any deck, even the really unusual ones, which increases the pool of playable cards to a pretty enormous number. For Athreos I ended up getting seven new cards - which is really rare for me - including cards that look like absolute garbage in nearly any other context, like final strike, flesh allergy, and shifting wall. Even stuff that looked totally unplayable can find unexpected homes.
Granted, trying to buy every playable card in ADVANCE when I probably will only ever play 50% of them in my lifetime is a little stupid and I should probably just wait until I actually WANT to build that deck before buying otherwise-useless cards like mobile garrison (playable in king macar, a commander I'll likely never build, and probably nowhere else). But then I'd have to use digital tools to build decks instead of doing it by hand. That's getting more and more appealing the more unwieldy my collection gets, though.
Budget decks and pauper decks; they both help me distance myself from expecting a win while making me more appreciative when I manage to succeed. I recently built a Tatyova budget deck that I run against normal decks worth many times its value. Surprisingly, I've actually won more than I've lost with it, but I've had to fight for those wins, which makes it feel so great when I pull it off. Pauper decks are similar - I run a rare legend as the general and then restrict all 99 other cards to commons.
That's definitely a solid way to go, and it works well for most of my usual playgroup. It tends to be less appealing when I end up playing against high-powered decks, though, especially if the rest of the field isn't up to the task of containing them. Maybe not a great instinct, but I tend to get feisty when the guy who brings a gun to a knife fight gets to win because I decided to play a precon or whatever.
Secondly, engage in legalrecreational relief and watch Alan Watts videos? Invest in a sensory deprivation tank? Practice Mahayana Buddhism? This topic feels outside the purview of this forum, but for a more Magic-related response I'm going to need to know what you mean by "results." Is that winning/losing, or having your deck do its thing? Sure, most decks will win when they get to do their thing if they're competently built, but I try to avoid binary decks that either go off and win or durdle around and lose (eg, Krenko, Mob Boss or many combo decks). I almost exclusively play control decks because I want to be directly involved in the course of the game whether I win or lose knowing that my decisions mattered. It's nice to win, but it's even nicer to enjoy the journey.
I'm in Seattle, so recreation is legal but showing up to my LGS under the influence of anything except cardboard crack is probably not kosher.
Results generally equals winning, yes, if I lose to my opponent getting lucky after I made a calculated decision (i.e. if he has exactly boros charm I'm boned but that's basically it - which happened to me recently) then I don't mind so much. But if the game makes it clear that my whole plan was weak, that's when I tend to get anxious and unhappy. But even if I win perfectly according to plan, I still tend to be a bit anxious. Also can sometimes be true if I think I've drafted an amazing deck, for example, but not if I think I drafted a decent deck. Basically the common thread seems to be, the more I think I ought to be able to win, the more nervous I am about not doing so. If I think my deck is trash I don't worry at all. But then I don't get to try the cool ideas I have.
Agree about on/off decks. That's also been a realization of mine.
It happens, all creative deck builders want their unique ideas to succeed or at least do better than net-decking cliche, but it's also taxing to make sure ideas work.
And as you have suggested, I too have precons to change my gear and mood when I'm too invested. I occasionally would intentionally build a deck that I know would be subpar, and with the low expectation bar I could at least be content even if it loses, and be extra happy when it wins.
I think I get what DirkGently is saying. I personally have more fun with the deckbuilding and "what if" scenarios than the actual playing of it. It wouldn't be uncommon for myself to spend quiet a few hours on making a specific deck, playing it 1-4 games, then scrapping it and starting from anew when I am not satisfied with it. Especially true with decks that I would consider my "magnum opus". As they are consistently strong and win games, yet I have scrapped them.
As I have also done the Junk deckbuilding. Like doing beartribal with Ezuri, Claw of Progress at the helm and yet I haven't scrapped it. In a strange way, its like my pride and joy even when it loses or wins.
Don't get too strung up on a specific way to win. Find several ways to win that share common properties together (and cards that work for those several strategies at the same time). On the surface it sounds like boring goodstuff, but it's a world of difference between when you give yourself a general direction to look ahead to, which is another world of difference when compared to as if you only focus on a specific way (or unrelated specific ways to win).
I'd assume you're playing multiplayer (which I do), the actual game itself is always navigating the 75% field of interaction that effectively stops you from executing the gameplan. The narrower your plans are, the more likely the 75% field demolishes that plan. Having several plans might increase the likelihood of success, but if the cards in those plans do not help each other effectively, they end up sabotaging each other when they become dead cards when their respective plans fail, so in reality they don't really raise the success rate all that significantly. But when cards are capable of transiting from one plan to the next, you effectively become the chessmaster, adaptively moving from one plan to the next. Of course, it's still no guaranteed success (even the best transition setups can be bungled by RNG), but keeping in mind of the transition during deckbuilding is a vital component that RNG can help you when it wants to, at the very least.
Also, don't forget to provide your 25% contribution of the field of interaction - any opponent that only has to navigate 50% of the field instead already has an infinitely easier life than the other players.
Deckbuilding is always about the plan, but playing the game is also about the enemy (in fact it's actually mostly about the enemy). No plan survives contact with the enemy.
I feel like you aren't really responding to what I actually said. I don't have problems win%-wise, if anything it's too high. I know how to build good decks. I've been building edh for nearly a decade.
The problem isn't the decks, but how I feel playing them.
I do think there's room to explore trying to figure out what sorts of decks are more comfortable to play, but that's sort of a band-aid solution. I don't want my build creativity to be constrained by caring too much about the result - that's the actual crux of the issue.
I feel like you aren't really responding to what I actually said. I don't have problems win%-wise, if anything it's too high. I know how to build good decks. I've been building edh for nearly a decade.
The problem isn't the decks, but how I feel playing them.
I do think there's room to explore trying to figure out what sorts of decks are more comfortable to play, but that's sort of a band-aid solution. I don't want my build creativity to be constrained by caring too much about the result - that's the actual crux of the issue.
I probably worded my opinion very poorly, but in my defense (and my pride), this topic basically revolves around how we handle our emotions between deckbuilding and playing the game and I tried to translate the technical terms over to an emotional one (and I'm clearly better at the former than the later). Might have gone too far off the technical description on how I made myself comfortable between deckbuilding and playing.
At the same time you raised a valid point - comfort stifles creativity, but that in technical terms means the reverse is true - creativity often spawns discomfort (off tangent, but that's why society is usually so unfriendly to the new). While the card pool does seem diverse, the truth is the entire game is finite enough most "creative plans" are ridiculously uncomfortable to adopt or they're comfortable enough that it's no longer creative due to the number of people using it. To find something creative and uniquely comfortable to oneself is a task of the highest order, mostly because you have to undertake it yourself (no amount of media/social communication can help) and chances are anything you find comfortable, enough other people find it as well enough to dilute it.
It's also hard to answer your question since you do re-iterate the "answer" by yourself - don't care too much and the problem doesn't exist... and then it feels like you're looking for a "Is there a way I can care too much and yet not have this problem". If strictly based on the creativity-comfort spectrum that works inversely to each other, the answers is no. You know what, I want to be blunt - creativity itself is a band-aid from the lens of comfort, even the most creative idea will feel boring over time, because if it doesn't, it has already fallen to the comfort zone, which well, the creative side will see as a band-aid.
Creativity demands change, comfort demands stability and my idea of transition is to create a space large enough for the creative-side to roam within without feeling bored, but not unstable enough for me to feel uncomfortable. But even I can only provide an answer that is tailor-made to suit myself, for I am not you, so you need to manufacture your own space. You might be one of those "extreme-creative" types that there might be no "compromise allowed for creativity", but given this thread exists, it shows you do have a "comfort-side" that is screaming for help.
... and I only covered the deckbuilding half, once you add in interaction (and not necessarily only in-game), the metrics (and influence) for comfort varies a whole lot more, but like the deckbuilding half, is customized based on your meta.
I have what seems a well built Sigarda deck dedicated to building Brisela, and though I've played it multiple times I've yet to get her to stick long enough to even attack with her. Part of it is playing against people with answers, which I can't fault them for, but I think a huge part of it is the variability of playing with a 100 card singleton deck. How often do you see people flabbergasted at getting mana screwed when they run 38+ lands and ramp? Some strategies/deck archetypes lend themselves to consistency, and those rise to the top of the cEDH strata, but most decks are going to fail to fire a good percentage of the time when facing other real players and the randomness of the format. Frustrating, but healthy for the format I think.
Then there was that time I built a deck to solely get off the Worldgorger Dragon combo, did it the first game I played with the deck on turn four, and quickly decided that wasn't so fun and never did it again. So even when a deck I put a lot of time into fires on all cylinders it isn't necessarily fun. I've noticed some decks, particularly combo decks, are more fun to goldfish than to play against other players. Maybe that's just me.
Just my random thoughts, probably not too helpful, but there ya go.
I recognise your problem, It's a brewers curse. I have had it too and it has made me a bad sport, even against guys who actually didn't have a clue about what they we re doing.
The cause, unfulfilled expectations.
Especially with commander, decks tend to be more inconsistent so you just have to take your time to develop it. Start your games knowing you can only make it work after fine tuning. Adapt. It's a process that takes time but has worked for me amd the reward when it finally clicks is far greater than just sit down after some theorycrafting and expect things to work out.
When you feel "overinvested" just put it down to rest to break the circle. Build or play something else. Something that is proven to give you joy and revisit the project after a while. The fresh start will give you new perspectives.
Just don't forget the commander game is stricktly for fun!
Feel like you're still kinda sorta totally missing the point.
My deckbuilding process is great. I love deckbuilding. You may notice I've got 70 of them down there, not counting the PDH and brawl and all the EDH and 60-card-casual decks I built and never recorded. At no point do I ever feel uncomfortable while building a deck, and definitely not because it's "too creative". I have no problem with how much I care about deckbuilding or the decks I make.
The problem is with how much I care about the results of the games I play with them. Ultimately, the success or failure of a deck in a single game - especially its first game - is a pretty poor metric for success. And I'm not brewing cEDH here, success on its own isn't even the goal. So just because I like my decks and invest time and thought into them, that's still not much reason to get anxious while playing them. Ideally each game should be a learning experience where I develop an understanding of the nuances of the deck, find synergies I didn't notice, or maybe find faults that result in poor function or unpleasant play patterns or some other undesirable outcome, and where the actual win/loss outcome isn't of much consequence. But instead I often find myself worked up about the result while playing, and ignoring all the valuable stuff until after the game is over.
I take the games very personally, I guess, is sort of what I'm trying to say here, and I don't think there's any reason I ought to. There may well not be an easy fix for this, but I thought I'd see if anyone else had any techniques for getting into the right frame of mind, or could at least commiserate.
I take the games very personally, I guess, is sort of what I'm trying to say here, and I don't think there's any reason I ought to. There may well not be an easy fix for this, but I thought I'd see if anyone else had any techniques for getting into the right frame of mind, or could at least commiserate.
From my perspective (might have to do with how I interpret things combined with how your statements were phrased) it almost feels like the goalposts are moving every time I try to grasp it, but yeah I might be missing the point completely from your view.
Your own posts have demonstrated you are capable of playing relaxed, fun, learning games... when you are playing with decks/ideas that you are either less invested in or outright know is rubbish. The very existence of this thread pretty much deems to me at least that you do not consider that as a "permanent solution" (otherwise you'll pretty much just continue playing with these decks while leaving your more creative ones in the lab), so the only logical conclusion from my perspective is you're looking how to integrate playing your invested builds into the same type of games you demonstrated you can play with less invested builds. Short of literally medicating before a match (which sounds stupid to me), I don't see any feasible solution that relates the physical playing itself (unless there are physical factors I'm unaware of), so I can only draw solutions from the deckbuilding half and that's how I ended with "diversify the decks in a more general direction without losing focus or ending up in goodstuff".
Okay, I was just explaining the thought process on how I got to my conclusion, I probably still missed the goalpost from your perspective. But that thought process still applies when I read the most recent post.
"But instead I often find myself worked up about the result while playing, and ignoring all the valuable stuff until after the game is over."
Do you walk into a game with your creative deck with specific expectations? Here's where I can see where own initial argument was flawed - one could still walk in with a diversified creative deck and still suffer the same discomfort because of specific expectations, so perhaps my view was redundant because your decks are already diversified within each deck (and with so many decks I should have had that foresight).
I feel like this topic is very hard to approach without specific case examples, so I implore you to raise a few, because I cannot analyze and diagnose why you're so uptight with just general descriptions. I'll just raise one myself, but knowing my track record here I might miss this shot completely as well, but hey failure is in not trying:
My Alesha deck runs basically on two themes: Equipment-Combat to dispose of as much as possible, with a follow up of drain effects to finish the game because I know the former doesn't have good success rates, but will do enough damage to make life easier for the back-end. I once did a fantastic job clearing the game with the exception of one player left (whom I think was playing Trostani tokens) who could flood his board effectively. My usual fallback is to assemble the Exquisite-Sanguine combo so blockers/life doesn't matter, but I only had pretty much my Commander, Sunforger and a Jitte after spending resources to clear the board. One swing later and the opponent was down to 4 life but I pretty much exhausted my burn resources and the opponent promptly flooded his board back with blockers I can't get through during his turn, so I just unequipped Sunforger to see what I could possibly find first and well turned out I could Enlightened tutor for Sanguine Bond and let Jitte finish the game with its third mode. That made me appreciate playing cards that overlapped in functionality and themes even more.
Okay... come to think of it, game-winning examples aren't good ones, but I'll leave it there since I already typed all of that, but along the same lines there were games I tried to assemble similar outs and they failed (both spectacularly and by a margin) and let's not get to the number of times Animar fell damage short anywhere from 1 point to 1 missing beatstick I could not get out in time, but the lessons learnt were pretty much the same (and sometimes RNG just doesn't favor you).
I think the Animar example is actually better, when it fails I usually know exactly why it happened, a combination of not-drawing the beatstick and/or protection to go another round, which leads to either not enough draw, or not enough of the two factors to draw into for draws to work (trust me the deck has been on both ends on different times before). That's for a dumb, mindless battlecruiser deck. In something more concentrated like Alesha, the likelihood becomes smaller, so after pretty obvious failures I sought after diverse cards that ended up with the first example I had, and that's how diversification and melding on suitable themes/plans became the way I enhanced both my deckbuilding and playing process (which I suppose is my frame of mind on how I approach the format overall).
But reverse-engineering my own examples is just the long-version of me explaining the posts I posted earlier, which probably missed the whole point since it is your thread/problem we should be looking at, so yeah, I need examples to reverse-engineer from and disclaimer that doesn't guarantee I could come up with a solution... and that is if there's one at all.
Another piece of "wisdom" that probably misses the point. Just like no plan survives contact with the enemy, the enemy of enjoyment is expectation, so while I wouldn't say expectation would outright destroy enjoyment on contact, I've also never really seen expectation actually enhance enjoyment when things align to meet up to it. So cobbling everything I've said in the previous post, I can only conclude you should not let your creativity create expectations, for expectations by nature hinder the movement of enjoyment when it comes to application. In other matters responsibility might force expectation to be a necessity, but this is EDH.
....I probably typed the whole lot of nonsense for almost nothing again, so let's cut short. Why are you worked up when you play games when there is no need to? Is it because you think because you invested time and thought into them and want "results"? Then you basically let your investment create expectation.
I know what you mean. I feel the same way sometimes. Of course what really bothers me is one person in Play against. I like the guy usually. But I get so burned out playing against him.
I know what you mean. I feel the same way sometimes. Of course what really bothers me is one person in Play against. I like the guy usually. But I get so burned out playing against him.
I'm curious what bothers you about this person. I definitely notice that how anxious I get depends on who I'm playing against.
The last game I played with Athreos was against a guy I've run into a couple times who really bothers me. He's plenty friendly and everything, and a good sport, but every time I've bumped into him he's been playing an unabashed cEDH deck - in this case, some sort of storm Jhoira list that looks basically identical to this one: https://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/fast-mana-is-fair-and-balanced-jwc-storm-primer/. Not sure if he created it or if he's netdecking, but either way he doesn't give any kind of disclaimer about what he's playing, he just asks if we want to play a game. When I said I needed to leave soon, he said not to worry, that the game would be quick because of his deck.
Last time I bumped into him, me and my gf were trying to find additional players to bash precons (I had a box of them) and he said he had no interest in playing any decks except his own.
Basically I don't the sense he wants any challenge at all - he just wants to steamroll unsuspecting people all day, like he's totally oblivious to the idea that EDH involves a social contract and that most people aren't interested in games that end on turn 3-5. I don't mind as much for me, since I could smell what he was cooking a mile away. But for sure he's sat down next to newer players and done the same thing and doesn't seem to see anything wrong with it. I asked him why he bothers, why doesn't he find someone also interested in cEDH, and he said "well I didn't make you play the game".
Anyway, this sort of person bothers me and I get a lot more anxious about losing, and a lot more invested in taking him down a peg. Which is probably not a great reaction.
(Weirdly, playing cEDH decks that I've taken off online lists (it was one time, for a GP EDH tournament, it's not who I am inside!) tends to have a similar effect. Haven't totally figured that one out.)
Curious if anyone else has experienced this problem, and what tactics people use to combat it. I've got a few things that seem to work pretty well:
-Using a precon
-Building a deck around a theme or something silly, instead of a (complicated, political) strategy
-Building a deck I know is trash
-Borrowing someone else's deck
These strategies tend to work, but they can also leave me a bit frustrated against opponents with more competitive decks. The best remedy seems to be to just not take the game very seriously, but that can be tough to keep up for an extended game.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
GENERATION 12: The first time you see this, copy and paste it into your signature and add 1 to the generation number. It's a social experiment.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Also, depending on the list, a lot of my decks are pretty tough to play, at least without a tutorial. If I handed my new Athreos deck to virtually anyone at my LGS I'm pretty sure they'd be confused af.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
One of the decks I'm currently/was currently working on (it's kind of on the back burner now) was a Queen Marchesa deck bent on creating the most entertaining games of Magic possible. Have you ever tried to build a deck like that before? A deck whose sole purpose is to minmax the amount of fun you and the rest of your table might have?
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
But I think this is a bit off-topic. Trying to minmax fun is an interesting topic too, but I didn't have any issues with being anxious or a bad sport while playing, say, Arixmethes (which created counter locks, boardwipe locks, and capsize locks) despite it creating unfun game states, because it isn't particularly clever or original compared to, say, my Athreos build. My ego doesn't get as tied up in its success. 900? Pssh, peasant. I've got 7.5K
I'd say my average deck lifespan ranges from less than a week, up to 3-4 weeks of consistent play (they might stick around longer if I'm just not playing much, but usually 3-4 sessions is about the max unless it's super super fun and I don't have any other compelling ideas).
Having a constant rotation is fun but it doesn't make me less invested when I think I've got a great idea.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
Secondly, engage in legal recreational relief and watch Alan Watts videos? Invest in a sensory deprivation tank? Practice Mahayana Buddhism? This topic feels outside the purview of this forum, but for a more Magic-related response I'm going to need to know what you mean by "results." Is that winning/losing, or having your deck do its thing? Sure, most decks will win when they get to do their thing if they're competently built, but I try to avoid binary decks that either go off and win or durdle around and lose (eg, Krenko, Mob Boss or many combo decks). I almost exclusively play control decks because I want to be directly involved in the course of the game whether I win or lose knowing that my decisions mattered. It's nice to win, but it's even nicer to enjoy the journey.
[Primer] Erebos, God of the Dead
HONK HONK
Granted, trying to buy every playable card in ADVANCE when I probably will only ever play 50% of them in my lifetime is a little stupid and I should probably just wait until I actually WANT to build that deck before buying otherwise-useless cards like mobile garrison (playable in king macar, a commander I'll likely never build, and probably nowhere else). But then I'd have to use digital tools to build decks instead of doing it by hand. That's getting more and more appealing the more unwieldy my collection gets, though. That's definitely a solid way to go, and it works well for most of my usual playgroup. It tends to be less appealing when I end up playing against high-powered decks, though, especially if the rest of the field isn't up to the task of containing them. Maybe not a great instinct, but I tend to get feisty when the guy who brings a gun to a knife fight gets to win because I decided to play a precon or whatever. I'm in Seattle, so recreation is legal but showing up to my LGS under the influence of anything except cardboard crack is probably not kosher.
Results generally equals winning, yes, if I lose to my opponent getting lucky after I made a calculated decision (i.e. if he has exactly boros charm I'm boned but that's basically it - which happened to me recently) then I don't mind so much. But if the game makes it clear that my whole plan was weak, that's when I tend to get anxious and unhappy. But even if I win perfectly according to plan, I still tend to be a bit anxious. Also can sometimes be true if I think I've drafted an amazing deck, for example, but not if I think I drafted a decent deck. Basically the common thread seems to be, the more I think I ought to be able to win, the more nervous I am about not doing so. If I think my deck is trash I don't worry at all. But then I don't get to try the cool ideas I have.
Agree about on/off decks. That's also been a realization of mine.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
And as you have suggested, I too have precons to change my gear and mood when I'm too invested. I occasionally would intentionally build a deck that I know would be subpar, and with the low expectation bar I could at least be content even if it loses, and be extra happy when it wins.
Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest WUR Voltron Control
Temmet, Vizier of Naktamun WU Unblockable Mirror Trickery
Ra's al Ghul (Sidar Kondo) and Face-Down Ninjas
Brudiclad, Token Engineer
Vaevictis (VV2) the Dire Lantern
Rona, Disciple of Gix
Tiana the Auror
Hallar
Ulrich the Politician
Zur the Rebel
Scorpion, Locust, Scarab, Egyptian Gods
O-Kagachi, Mathas, Mairsil
"Non-Tribal" Tribal Generals, Eggs
As I have also done the Junk deckbuilding. Like doing bear tribal with Ezuri, Claw of Progress at the helm and yet I haven't scrapped it. In a strange way, its like my pride and joy even when it loses or wins.
I'd assume you're playing multiplayer (which I do), the actual game itself is always navigating the 75% field of interaction that effectively stops you from executing the gameplan. The narrower your plans are, the more likely the 75% field demolishes that plan. Having several plans might increase the likelihood of success, but if the cards in those plans do not help each other effectively, they end up sabotaging each other when they become dead cards when their respective plans fail, so in reality they don't really raise the success rate all that significantly. But when cards are capable of transiting from one plan to the next, you effectively become the chessmaster, adaptively moving from one plan to the next. Of course, it's still no guaranteed success (even the best transition setups can be bungled by RNG), but keeping in mind of the transition during deckbuilding is a vital component that RNG can help you when it wants to, at the very least.
Also, don't forget to provide your 25% contribution of the field of interaction - any opponent that only has to navigate 50% of the field instead already has an infinitely easier life than the other players.
Deckbuilding is always about the plan, but playing the game is also about the enemy (in fact it's actually mostly about the enemy).
No plan survives contact with the enemy.
The problem isn't the decks, but how I feel playing them.
I do think there's room to explore trying to figure out what sorts of decks are more comfortable to play, but that's sort of a band-aid solution. I don't want my build creativity to be constrained by caring too much about the result - that's the actual crux of the issue.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I probably worded my opinion very poorly, but in my defense (and my pride), this topic basically revolves around how we handle our emotions between deckbuilding and playing the game and I tried to translate the technical terms over to an emotional one (and I'm clearly better at the former than the later). Might have gone too far off the technical description on how I made myself comfortable between deckbuilding and playing.
At the same time you raised a valid point - comfort stifles creativity, but that in technical terms means the reverse is true - creativity often spawns discomfort (off tangent, but that's why society is usually so unfriendly to the new). While the card pool does seem diverse, the truth is the entire game is finite enough most "creative plans" are ridiculously uncomfortable to adopt or they're comfortable enough that it's no longer creative due to the number of people using it. To find something creative and uniquely comfortable to oneself is a task of the highest order, mostly because you have to undertake it yourself (no amount of media/social communication can help) and chances are anything you find comfortable, enough other people find it as well enough to dilute it.
It's also hard to answer your question since you do re-iterate the "answer" by yourself - don't care too much and the problem doesn't exist... and then it feels like you're looking for a "Is there a way I can care too much and yet not have this problem". If strictly based on the creativity-comfort spectrum that works inversely to each other, the answers is no. You know what, I want to be blunt - creativity itself is a band-aid from the lens of comfort, even the most creative idea will feel boring over time, because if it doesn't, it has already fallen to the comfort zone, which well, the creative side will see as a band-aid.
Creativity demands change, comfort demands stability and my idea of transition is to create a space large enough for the creative-side to roam within without feeling bored, but not unstable enough for me to feel uncomfortable. But even I can only provide an answer that is tailor-made to suit myself, for I am not you, so you need to manufacture your own space. You might be one of those "extreme-creative" types that there might be no "compromise allowed for creativity", but given this thread exists, it shows you do have a "comfort-side" that is screaming for help.
... and I only covered the deckbuilding half, once you add in interaction (and not necessarily only in-game), the metrics (and influence) for comfort varies a whole lot more, but like the deckbuilding half, is customized based on your meta.
Then there was that time I built a deck to solely get off the Worldgorger Dragon combo, did it the first game I played with the deck on turn four, and quickly decided that wasn't so fun and never did it again. So even when a deck I put a lot of time into fires on all cylinders it isn't necessarily fun. I've noticed some decks, particularly combo decks, are more fun to goldfish than to play against other players. Maybe that's just me.
Just my random thoughts, probably not too helpful, but there ya go.
WUBRG Some of these decks can actually win games...WUBRG
How I know I should build a deck:
The cause, unfulfilled expectations.
Especially with commander, decks tend to be more inconsistent so you just have to take your time to develop it. Start your games knowing you can only make it work after fine tuning. Adapt. It's a process that takes time but has worked for me amd the reward when it finally clicks is far greater than just sit down after some theorycrafting and expect things to work out.
When you feel "overinvested" just put it down to rest to break the circle. Build or play something else. Something that is proven to give you joy and revisit the project after a while. The fresh start will give you new perspectives.
Just don't forget the commander game is stricktly for fun!
Good luck
Modern: WUBRG Humans - GBW Traverse - GWU Knightfall - GRW Bushwhacker Zoo -
My deckbuilding process is great. I love deckbuilding. You may notice I've got 70 of them down there, not counting the PDH and brawl and all the EDH and 60-card-casual decks I built and never recorded. At no point do I ever feel uncomfortable while building a deck, and definitely not because it's "too creative". I have no problem with how much I care about deckbuilding or the decks I make.
The problem is with how much I care about the results of the games I play with them. Ultimately, the success or failure of a deck in a single game - especially its first game - is a pretty poor metric for success. And I'm not brewing cEDH here, success on its own isn't even the goal. So just because I like my decks and invest time and thought into them, that's still not much reason to get anxious while playing them. Ideally each game should be a learning experience where I develop an understanding of the nuances of the deck, find synergies I didn't notice, or maybe find faults that result in poor function or unpleasant play patterns or some other undesirable outcome, and where the actual win/loss outcome isn't of much consequence. But instead I often find myself worked up about the result while playing, and ignoring all the valuable stuff until after the game is over.
I take the games very personally, I guess, is sort of what I'm trying to say here, and I don't think there's any reason I ought to. There may well not be an easy fix for this, but I thought I'd see if anyone else had any techniques for getting into the right frame of mind, or could at least commiserate.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
From my perspective (might have to do with how I interpret things combined with how your statements were phrased) it almost feels like the goalposts are moving every time I try to grasp it, but yeah I might be missing the point completely from your view.
Your own posts have demonstrated you are capable of playing relaxed, fun, learning games... when you are playing with decks/ideas that you are either less invested in or outright know is rubbish. The very existence of this thread pretty much deems to me at least that you do not consider that as a "permanent solution" (otherwise you'll pretty much just continue playing with these decks while leaving your more creative ones in the lab), so the only logical conclusion from my perspective is you're looking how to integrate playing your invested builds into the same type of games you demonstrated you can play with less invested builds. Short of literally medicating before a match (which sounds stupid to me), I don't see any feasible solution that relates the physical playing itself (unless there are physical factors I'm unaware of), so I can only draw solutions from the deckbuilding half and that's how I ended with "diversify the decks in a more general direction without losing focus or ending up in goodstuff".
Okay, I was just explaining the thought process on how I got to my conclusion, I probably still missed the goalpost from your perspective. But that thought process still applies when I read the most recent post.
"But instead I often find myself worked up about the result while playing, and ignoring all the valuable stuff until after the game is over."
Do you walk into a game with your creative deck with specific expectations? Here's where I can see where own initial argument was flawed - one could still walk in with a diversified creative deck and still suffer the same discomfort because of specific expectations, so perhaps my view was redundant because your decks are already diversified within each deck (and with so many decks I should have had that foresight).
I feel like this topic is very hard to approach without specific case examples, so I implore you to raise a few, because I cannot analyze and diagnose why you're so uptight with just general descriptions. I'll just raise one myself, but knowing my track record here I might miss this shot completely as well, but hey failure is in not trying:
My Alesha deck runs basically on two themes: Equipment-Combat to dispose of as much as possible, with a follow up of drain effects to finish the game because I know the former doesn't have good success rates, but will do enough damage to make life easier for the back-end. I once did a fantastic job clearing the game with the exception of one player left (whom I think was playing Trostani tokens) who could flood his board effectively. My usual fallback is to assemble the Exquisite-Sanguine combo so blockers/life doesn't matter, but I only had pretty much my Commander, Sunforger and a Jitte after spending resources to clear the board. One swing later and the opponent was down to 4 life but I pretty much exhausted my burn resources and the opponent promptly flooded his board back with blockers I can't get through during his turn, so I just unequipped Sunforger to see what I could possibly find first and well turned out I could Enlightened tutor for Sanguine Bond and let Jitte finish the game with its third mode. That made me appreciate playing cards that overlapped in functionality and themes even more.
Okay... come to think of it, game-winning examples aren't good ones, but I'll leave it there since I already typed all of that, but along the same lines there were games I tried to assemble similar outs and they failed (both spectacularly and by a margin) and let's not get to the number of times Animar fell damage short anywhere from 1 point to 1 missing beatstick I could not get out in time, but the lessons learnt were pretty much the same (and sometimes RNG just doesn't favor you).
I think the Animar example is actually better, when it fails I usually know exactly why it happened, a combination of not-drawing the beatstick and/or protection to go another round, which leads to either not enough draw, or not enough of the two factors to draw into for draws to work (trust me the deck has been on both ends on different times before). That's for a dumb, mindless battlecruiser deck. In something more concentrated like Alesha, the likelihood becomes smaller, so after pretty obvious failures I sought after diverse cards that ended up with the first example I had, and that's how diversification and melding on suitable themes/plans became the way I enhanced both my deckbuilding and playing process (which I suppose is my frame of mind on how I approach the format overall).
But reverse-engineering my own examples is just the long-version of me explaining the posts I posted earlier, which probably missed the whole point since it is your thread/problem we should be looking at, so yeah, I need examples to reverse-engineer from and disclaimer that doesn't guarantee I could come up with a solution... and that is if there's one at all.
Another piece of "wisdom" that probably misses the point. Just like no plan survives contact with the enemy, the enemy of enjoyment is expectation, so while I wouldn't say expectation would outright destroy enjoyment on contact, I've also never really seen expectation actually enhance enjoyment when things align to meet up to it. So cobbling everything I've said in the previous post, I can only conclude you should not let your creativity create expectations, for expectations by nature hinder the movement of enjoyment when it comes to application. In other matters responsibility might force expectation to be a necessity, but this is EDH.
....I probably typed the whole lot of nonsense for almost nothing again, so let's cut short. Why are you worked up when you play games when there is no need to? Is it because you think because you invested time and thought into them and want "results"? Then you basically let your investment create expectation.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
The last game I played with Athreos was against a guy I've run into a couple times who really bothers me. He's plenty friendly and everything, and a good sport, but every time I've bumped into him he's been playing an unabashed cEDH deck - in this case, some sort of storm Jhoira list that looks basically identical to this one: https://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/fast-mana-is-fair-and-balanced-jwc-storm-primer/. Not sure if he created it or if he's netdecking, but either way he doesn't give any kind of disclaimer about what he's playing, he just asks if we want to play a game. When I said I needed to leave soon, he said not to worry, that the game would be quick because of his deck.
Last time I bumped into him, me and my gf were trying to find additional players to bash precons (I had a box of them) and he said he had no interest in playing any decks except his own.
Basically I don't the sense he wants any challenge at all - he just wants to steamroll unsuspecting people all day, like he's totally oblivious to the idea that EDH involves a social contract and that most people aren't interested in games that end on turn 3-5. I don't mind as much for me, since I could smell what he was cooking a mile away. But for sure he's sat down next to newer players and done the same thing and doesn't seem to see anything wrong with it. I asked him why he bothers, why doesn't he find someone also interested in cEDH, and he said "well I didn't make you play the game".
Anyway, this sort of person bothers me and I get a lot more anxious about losing, and a lot more invested in taking him down a peg. Which is probably not a great reaction.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6