This makes no sense. The ethos of Commander is 'build casual, play competitive'. You don't put combos in your deck and not play them. It makes the game worthless.
Assuming you're directing this at "T"'s last sentence, I think what that commenter is saying (and I could be wrong) is that they don't take issue with people playing their combo on turn 5 if they have it, but the reason they are combing off on turn 5 is because they're actively tutoring and digging for those pieces.
If by turn 5 I just happen to have my combo in hand without even trying and I go for it and no one has the answer, then cool whatever, that was a nut draw and we can shuffle up again and play a new one. But if the lead up to that turn 5 was turn 1 Vampiric Tutor turn 2 Demonic Tutor, and a sequence similar to this is happening every other game, then that's a problem.
If a deck has the ability to reliably assemble and deploy the pieces of a 2-3 card combo in the early turns of the game, that deck in my mind would cease to be "built casually". At that point the deck is just a combo deck, and the homogenization of all decks and strategies into combo decks is probably part of what Sheldon is objecting to as well.
I don't know how you fix this without a ban list the size of Texas.
I imagine the alternative is to power up the ban list a little and also include some sort of restrictions that encourage folks to fill their decks with bad nonsense that allows them to turn dudes sideways and pummel each other as God/Sheldon intended.
- Your deck must include at least 10 creatures.
- Your deck must include at least 5 cards of each CMC 1-7.
- Your deck must include at least 3 creatures with power 6 or greater.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sufferer of EDHD
Commander - Currently Playing: RCRDaretti: Superfriends Forever RCR WGBDoran: Ent-mootWBG GGGMultani: Group Bear HugGGG GB(B/G)The Gitrog Monster: Dredgefall DurdleGB(B/G) RGWGahiji, the Honored Group Hug MonsterRGW UB(U/B)Yuriko, Ninja Trinket AggroUB(U/B) WUBRGAtogatog: Assembling a OHKOWUBRG
So I've read all the opposing responses to my comment. My mind hasn't changed. I don't dis-recognize your opinions, they deserve to exist as much as my own.
I don't agree with them. You're entitled to bash me, flame my matter-of-fact stance, and make excuses for the format, but it does not, will not, nor can it think to change the stark realities of this format. You can play "casual" (what even does that mean?) but that does not entail others playing the same. Oh, you're going to ostracize others for having a different belief? Really? So we're now going to create social pariahisms because one person plays a game a different way than you believe a game should be played? Based on using the same legal set of cards you have access to?
You know what? I don't like countermagic. I think it is boring, trite, but it is a necessary evil to the game. They're not banned though, so it's within the rules. Just like I play MLD tribal, if I want to have between four and six 'Geddons in my deck, and they are not banned, then that is just as valid too. You want to ramp to twenty and windmill bombs, I want to stifle your growth and keep you on three to five. Checks and balances, give and take.
You don't like this, that's an issue to take up with the RC and their idiotic banlist. That list is what shapes the format into what it is right now. You don't get to socially shame others into playing the way you want to. No, screw you if you think that's okay. Full stop. That is practically bullying with social pressure, and you should feel terrible for even attempting to guilt or shame any other player that way, whether friend or random.
1) lower the starting life total to 30, 25, or even 20. This allows proactive decks to reign in combo decks, makes non-combo a more viable strategy, and reduces the power of stupid BS like necropotence. Maybe griselbrand could even come off the banlist, who knows.
2) ban the fast mana. Less important, but still. It creates so many nongames. Kill with fire please. Also it could be (slightly) more problematic with a lower life total, since aggro can have pretty insane starts off a ring or crypt.
Stop making me agree with you! What is this, the Twilight Zone? Once again, Dirk and I are on the same page, what sweet ninth level of hell is this?
I'm still trying to comprehend how i play "wrong" by not going after the "game winning if it isn't stopped combo in my voltron deck" all the time.
People don't understand politics at all. You go for it and you don't get it and you're likely public enemy #1. And you exhausted resources you could have used developing your board or creating engines.
Going for the combo is not always the best line, especially if it leaves you exposed.
Hell, in most groups I've played in they remember that you combo'd out the next game and it almost always carries a little aggro over So if I think I can win without comboing I'll usually try, just because it's usually safer. or if I can delay and do it when it's safer, etc.
Oh, you're going to ostracize others for having a different belief? Really? So we're now going to create social pariahisms because one person plays a game a different way than you believe a game should be played? Based on using the same legal set of cards you have access to?
...Yes? I won't play with someone who wants something completely different from the game.
I won't expect you to change, and I won't change myself. I just won't play with you.
I'm still trying to comprehend how i play "wrong" by not going after the "game winning if it isn't stopped combo in my voltron deck" all the time.
People don't understand politics at all. You go for it and you don't get it and you're likely public enemy #1. And you exhausted resources you could have used developing your board or creating engines.
Going for the combo is not always the best line, especially if it leaves you exposed.
Hell, in most groups I've played in they remember that you combo'd out the next game and it almost always carries a little aggro over So if I think I can win without comboing I'll usually try, just because it's usually safer. or if I can delay and do it when it's safer, etc.
I honestly just don't really think about doing the combo unless I think about it,instead of thinking "how can I kill player S quickly". In fact if T hadn't said anything the first time I played both the helm and gordo, more than likely I wouldn't had realized if was an infinite combo till much later. I just don't operate that way,unless you count my rat combo of relentless rats + Thrumming stone in which case that janky combo is the whole point of the deck and so yeah I'm gonna go for it as quick as I can because it's a janky combo that everyone in my play group is aware of and knows how to stop. So the fun with that deck is can I vomit out the rats before stone is gone or am i going to blow the initial stone trigger?
In response to the lab man deck that's in our group along with other infinite combos, I honestly considered going full stax (stasis,smock stack etc) but that doesn't appeal to me and I don't think the others in the group would enjoy it very much.
I don't know how you fix this without a ban list the size of Texas.
So what Alaska is bigger than Texas and Quebec is bigger than Alaska.
A list the size of Quebec would worry me
And what really counts as infinite. I ran a combo that had about 7 pieces, I would obtain more tokens then there are particles in the known universe, but it was still a finite number.
If you go for Godo and you miss, you have just spent 11 mana and ended with a piece of equipment that has Equip 5 and doesn't do very much outside of winning with Godo. That can be a tempo disaster if somoene swords's Godo when you equip. I would be very hesitant to go for that unless everyone was tapped out personally. And 11 mana is no joke to get to either.
Some decks play combos and that's fine, some games end in a combo and that's fine, and some games end when someone disrupts a combo and that person doesn't have another win con, and that's fine too. But if everyone's doing it and everyone's teching against it, it makes the ability to express through your own deck meaningless because you have to play the same strategy to keep up. Different people play for different reasons, and formats are nicest when you've got a balance between aggro/control/combo and this format doesn't reflect that a whole lot. I think you can ostracize players more easily by outpowering them and refusing to power down to their level because it costs a lot of money to power up to your level. I think "infinite combo" usually just means "This person is kitted to fight against this same stuff."
I hope they finally decide to just lower the starting life total from 40 to something reasonable like 25-30. Lower CDMR damage to 20 instead of 21. That 1 extra point is very crucial. It makes games turnover faster and give tables a better shot at archenemy'ing a dirty-combo player.
Give attacking and chip damage more meaning by lowering life totals. Force players to do something the first 3 turns of the game besides mindlessly ramping. If anything, having it be at 20 life would get rid of the stupid argument people have for poison being something other than 10. I've had to tell people, "Poison is still 10 because Lightning Bolt still deals 3." CMDR damage is still a good alt-win con even with starting life lowered.
Could also ban all CMDR set generals as commanders...but that's just me.
The cards they print now are just over the top (especially the threats and CMDR-set legendaries). You can have all the fast mana and build an EDH deck using only pre-modern sets. And I don't think it'd beat EDH decks without fast mana constructed from Modern-legal sets. Fast mana actually makes games fun, that's why people like group-hug. But fast mana isn't Shivan Dragon anymore, it's Enter the Infinite.
People don't understand politics at all. You go for it and you don't get it and you're likely public enemy #1. And you exhausted resources you could have used developing your board or creating engines.
Going for the combo is not always the best line, especially if it leaves you exposed.
Hell, in most groups I've played in they remember that you combo'd out the next game and it almost always carries a little aggro over So if I think I can win without comboing I'll usually try, just because it's usually safer. or if I can delay and do it when it's safer, etc.
I'm certainly not arguing that someone should go for their combo if they think doing so will make them less likely to win the game. You should make the play that will result in the highest possible chance for you to win. Usually that'll be the combo, but not necessarily.
My feelings on playing differently for the benefit of subsequent games is a little more complicated. I'm in favor of keeping your word in terms of dealmaking, but I wouldn't intentionally hold back good plays otherwise. I'd say, if you think a play is going to annoy the other people to the point that they'll target you in subsequent games, I wouldn't run that play in the deck. And if it's just some lucky coincidence that it comes together quickly, then I'd make it clear to the other players that I got lucky.
i have no problems with infinite combos personally. as long as you don't drag the game out and end it quickly its perfectly fine. just don't take half an hour tinkering. explain how your gonna kill everybody, check for responses, if no responses go to the next game.
My feelings on playing differently for the benefit of subsequent games is a little more complicated. I'm in favor of keeping your word in terms of dealmaking, but I wouldn't intentionally hold back good plays otherwise. I'd say, if you think a play is going to annoy the other people to the point that they'll target you in subsequent games, I wouldn't run that play in the deck. And if it's just some lucky coincidence that it comes together quickly, then I'd make it clear to the other players that I got lucky.
I generally agree with this but I think there are negative consequences to running out a combo early that sometimes follow from game to game, especially with some players and some playgroup. Especially if I am gambling that no one has removal, this factors into my personal decisions to run out a combo or not.
Say I have Godo in hand and 11 mana on turn 5 or 6, and there are two people with mana up but I think there's a decent possibility they don't have removal, do I go for it or not? If I am safe to hold off, or I think I can win without going for helm, it definitely enters into my decision-making process that getting branded as "that combo rush guy" is a potential consequence.
My preference for those kinds of plays are on turn 10 when everyone is shields down. That's generally how I play combos. And I think it's definitely defensible on multiple grounds not to just run things out there.
But I will say it stops entering into my thinking if everyone is shields down. If people are tapping out into me with 11 mana they get what they get
I disagree with some of the posts that I was reading. The way that some people want to play shouldn't be the way that everyone plays. While I agree that there are certain cards that need to be banned to create some diversity in the format, cards like fast mana I feel are fine because yes they do alot in the early game but if you aren't able to establish a win, everyone will catch up or blow up your board state. Additionally if you are far enough into the game, drawing a sol ring turn 7-10 is almost always a dead draw outside of specific circumstances. You are playing risk and reward. People have a stigma of playing hate cards. If fast mana is plaguing your play group, then stony silence, null rode, collector ouphe,and treasure nabber are among some cards that you should consider that help reduce this kind of an issue. For most decks in the format, there is almost always an answer to dealing with that issue that isn't a counter spell. Most people need to recognize that hate cards shouldn't be frowned upon because it helps deal with problematic issues that most playgroups face.
If you want to play craw worm beats while the rest of your table is openly playing around level 7-8 decks then it shouldn't be a surprise when you are losing without playing anything. Having a deck for different levels is what I feel most players need to learn to do. You can have your pet deck which is tuned and dressed to the 9. However you should also have a deck where it doesn't need to be optimally played and doesn't try to gun for the finish line right out of the gates. While some players may argue that they do not have the budget to make several decks, you would be surprised to see how strong some $25.00 USD budget decks can become and conversely how jank they can get when you aren't building with winning in mind.
I feel that this the main issue is that people don't like to lose. Its ingrained in us that losing is bad and that you have to be a winner and is the reason that Sheldon sees more people that try to assemble an inf combo faster and faster. This attitude is an issue with many players that I play against. I feel that for any play group that isn't playing cEDH, there needs to be a points system which rewards players for winning, while also rewarding players for doing interaction and doing interesting plays and penalizes players for doing the same repetitive combo in every game. That way even if the game ends in an infinite combo, they still get points, but they get less and hopefully are less incentivised to do so again. A example of a points scoring would be the VS live commander videos that the SCG youtube channel does. While i personally would change/add/remove certain ways for scoring or removing points, i feel that it lays out a general ground work that most playgroups could use.
Of course these are all just thoughts that i have from playing with a variety of play groups, some which i love playing with to some that i actively try to avoid when they try to get a game night together.
If you like the idea of making "bladder matters" a theme, Sheldon, then just ban any tutor other than for a subset of lands costing less than three mana. This would still ban Crop Rotation and Sylvan Scrying, by the way.
And people will still piss and moan about combo's natural enemy, control, no matter how much they profess to hate infinite combos.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
People seem to be purposely missing his point. He didn't say 'don't play combo' or anything that approached that. His issue was with going straight for combo every time as option #1, perhaps your only win-con. And again, only in an unknown group, where such a thing should have social consequences.
People straight up straw-manning his stance is a sad thing on MTGS.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
People seem to be purposely missing his point. He didn't say 'don't play combo' or anything that approached that. His issue was with going straight for combo every time as option #1, perhaps your only win-con. And again, only in an unknown group, where such a thing should have social consequences.
People straight up straw-manning his stance is a sad thing on MTGS.
That still doesn't make sense because combo is one of the pillar archetypes of the format and of magic the gathering and magic cards are deigned to interact together in combos.
That still doesn't make sense because combo is one of the pillar archetypes of the format and of magic the gathering and magic cards are deigned to interact together in combos.
Combo isn't one of the pillars of EDH. There was a time when strong combo pieces were outright banned. People can make a lot of arguments in favor of combo, but that surely isn't one of them.
Again, the point of the post was about unknown groups (LGS, MagicFest, etc) and how those have deteriorated to such a degree. It has not always been like this. I had the absolute worst game of EDH I have ever played this last weekend at MagicFest Seattle.
And cards obviously are not designed to combo together, they banned it out of Standard recently. Yes many cards within the decades do so, and I honestly get why people play them: Some games need to end.
I think its socially lacking to pub stomp people because you know they are playing '75%' and likely wont be able to stop a combo with counter back-up.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
That still doesn't make sense because combo is one of the pillar archetypes of the format and of magic the gathering and magic cards are deigned to interact together in combos.
Some combo just make crucial commander things, like the number of players, completely irrelevant, so yeah, i'd like to see combo player discussing about this kind of "interactions" instead of always screaming how much legit combo is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
That still doesn't make sense because combo is one of the pillar archetypes of the format and of magic the gathering and magic cards are deigned to interact together in combos.
Combo isn't one of the pillars of EDH. There was a time when strong combo pieces were outright banned. People can make a lot of arguments in favor of combo, but that surely isn't one of them.
Again, the point of the post was about unknown groups (LGS, MagicFest, etc) and how those have deteriorated to such a degree. It has not always been like this. I had the absolute worst game of EDH I have ever played this last weekend at MagicFest Seattle.
And cards obviously are not designed to combo together, they banned it out of Standard recently. Yes many cards within the decades do so, and I honestly get why people play them: Some games need to end.
I think its socially lacking to pub stomp people because you know they are playing '75%' and likely wont be able to stop a combo with counter back-up.
I am unsure what game you are playing because MTG surely is not it.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
I am unsure what game you are playing because MTG surely is not it.
So dispute what I said with facts instead of making snarky comments without point.
Taleran has, by highlighting some absurd claims. Cards interacting with one another in synergistic ways, which is the core notion of a combo, is a central element of this game and its design, and always has been. Regardless of finite or infinite, claiming that MTG does not have the ideas of combo in its core design seems willfully misguided.
Taleran has, by highlighting some absurd claims. Cards interacting with one another in synergistic ways, which is the core notion of a combo, is a central element of this game and its design, and always has been. Regardless of finite or infinite, claiming that MTG does not have the ideas of combo in its core design seems willfully misguided.
I didnt say that, which is part of my issue with implying something not easily deciphered.I said infinite combos are not a pillar of EDH. I think that is backed up by both the creators saying it should not be option one all the time, and some used to actually be banned out of the format.
Trying to smash synergy and infinite combo into the same idea is "willfully misguided", as someone once said.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Assuming you're directing this at "T"'s last sentence, I think what that commenter is saying (and I could be wrong) is that they don't take issue with people playing their combo on turn 5 if they have it, but the reason they are combing off on turn 5 is because they're actively tutoring and digging for those pieces.
If by turn 5 I just happen to have my combo in hand without even trying and I go for it and no one has the answer, then cool whatever, that was a nut draw and we can shuffle up again and play a new one. But if the lead up to that turn 5 was turn 1 Vampiric Tutor turn 2 Demonic Tutor, and a sequence similar to this is happening every other game, then that's a problem.
If a deck has the ability to reliably assemble and deploy the pieces of a 2-3 card combo in the early turns of the game, that deck in my mind would cease to be "built casually". At that point the deck is just a combo deck, and the homogenization of all decks and strategies into combo decks is probably part of what Sheldon is objecting to as well.
I imagine the alternative is to power up the ban list a little and also include some sort of restrictions that encourage folks to fill their decks with bad nonsense that allows them to turn dudes sideways and pummel each other as God/Sheldon intended.
- Your deck must include at least 10 creatures.
- Your deck must include at least 5 cards of each CMC 1-7.
- Your deck must include at least 3 creatures with power 6 or greater.
RCRDaretti: Superfriends Forever RCR
WGBDoran: Ent-mootWBG
GGGMultani: Group Bear HugGGG
GB(B/G)The Gitrog Monster: Dredgefall DurdleGB(B/G)
RGWGahiji, the Honored Group Hug MonsterRGW
UB(U/B)Yuriko, Ninja Trinket AggroUB(U/B)
WUBRGAtogatog: Assembling a OHKOWUBRG
I don't agree with them. You're entitled to bash me, flame my matter-of-fact stance, and make excuses for the format, but it does not, will not, nor can it think to change the stark realities of this format. You can play "casual" (what even does that mean?) but that does not entail others playing the same. Oh, you're going to ostracize others for having a different belief? Really? So we're now going to create social pariahisms because one person plays a game a different way than you believe a game should be played? Based on using the same legal set of cards you have access to?
You know what? I don't like countermagic. I think it is boring, trite, but it is a necessary evil to the game. They're not banned though, so it's within the rules. Just like I play MLD tribal, if I want to have between four and six 'Geddons in my deck, and they are not banned, then that is just as valid too. You want to ramp to twenty and windmill bombs, I want to stifle your growth and keep you on three to five. Checks and balances, give and take.
You don't like this, that's an issue to take up with the RC and their idiotic banlist. That list is what shapes the format into what it is right now. You don't get to socially shame others into playing the way you want to. No, screw you if you think that's okay. Full stop. That is practically bullying with social pressure, and you should feel terrible for even attempting to guilt or shame any other player that way, whether friend or random.
Stop making me agree with you! What is this, the Twilight Zone? Once again, Dirk and I are on the same page, what sweet ninth level of hell is this?
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
People don't understand politics at all. You go for it and you don't get it and you're likely public enemy #1. And you exhausted resources you could have used developing your board or creating engines.
Going for the combo is not always the best line, especially if it leaves you exposed.
Hell, in most groups I've played in they remember that you combo'd out the next game and it almost always carries a little aggro over So if I think I can win without comboing I'll usually try, just because it's usually safer. or if I can delay and do it when it's safer, etc.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
...Yes? I won't play with someone who wants something completely different from the game.
I won't expect you to change, and I won't change myself. I just won't play with you.
I honestly just don't really think about doing the combo unless I think about it,instead of thinking "how can I kill player S quickly". In fact if T hadn't said anything the first time I played both the helm and gordo, more than likely I wouldn't had realized if was an infinite combo till much later. I just don't operate that way,unless you count my rat combo of relentless rats + Thrumming stone in which case that janky combo is the whole point of the deck and so yeah I'm gonna go for it as quick as I can because it's a janky combo that everyone in my play group is aware of and knows how to stop. So the fun with that deck is can I vomit out the rats before stone is gone or am i going to blow the initial stone trigger?
In response to the lab man deck that's in our group along with other infinite combos, I honestly considered going full stax (stasis,smock stack etc) but that doesn't appeal to me and I don't think the others in the group would enjoy it very much.
So what Alaska is bigger than Texas and Quebec is bigger than Alaska.
A list the size of Quebec would worry me
And what really counts as infinite. I ran a combo that had about 7 pieces, I would obtain more tokens then there are particles in the known universe, but it was still a finite number.
I'd rather Godo for sword of feast and famine (or fire and ice) or umezawa's jitte basically 90% of the time unless it was clearly shields down.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Give attacking and chip damage more meaning by lowering life totals. Force players to do something the first 3 turns of the game besides mindlessly ramping. If anything, having it be at 20 life would get rid of the stupid argument people have for poison being something other than 10. I've had to tell people, "Poison is still 10 because Lightning Bolt still deals 3." CMDR damage is still a good alt-win con even with starting life lowered.
Could also ban all CMDR set generals as commanders...but that's just me.
The cards they print now are just over the top (especially the threats and CMDR-set legendaries). You can have all the fast mana and build an EDH deck using only pre-modern sets. And I don't think it'd beat EDH decks without fast mana constructed from Modern-legal sets. Fast mana actually makes games fun, that's why people like group-hug. But fast mana isn't Shivan Dragon anymore, it's Enter the Infinite.
My feelings on playing differently for the benefit of subsequent games is a little more complicated. I'm in favor of keeping your word in terms of dealmaking, but I wouldn't intentionally hold back good plays otherwise. I'd say, if you think a play is going to annoy the other people to the point that they'll target you in subsequent games, I wouldn't run that play in the deck. And if it's just some lucky coincidence that it comes together quickly, then I'd make it clear to the other players that I got lucky.
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 generally agree with this but I think there are negative consequences to running out a combo early that sometimes follow from game to game, especially with some players and some playgroup. Especially if I am gambling that no one has removal, this factors into my personal decisions to run out a combo or not.
Say I have Godo in hand and 11 mana on turn 5 or 6, and there are two people with mana up but I think there's a decent possibility they don't have removal, do I go for it or not? If I am safe to hold off, or I think I can win without going for helm, it definitely enters into my decision-making process that getting branded as "that combo rush guy" is a potential consequence.
My preference for those kinds of plays are on turn 10 when everyone is shields down. That's generally how I play combos. And I think it's definitely defensible on multiple grounds not to just run things out there.
But I will say it stops entering into my thinking if everyone is shields down. If people are tapping out into me with 11 mana they get what they get
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
If you want to play craw worm beats while the rest of your table is openly playing around level 7-8 decks then it shouldn't be a surprise when you are losing without playing anything. Having a deck for different levels is what I feel most players need to learn to do. You can have your pet deck which is tuned and dressed to the 9. However you should also have a deck where it doesn't need to be optimally played and doesn't try to gun for the finish line right out of the gates. While some players may argue that they do not have the budget to make several decks, you would be surprised to see how strong some $25.00 USD budget decks can become and conversely how jank they can get when you aren't building with winning in mind.
I feel that this the main issue is that people don't like to lose. Its ingrained in us that losing is bad and that you have to be a winner and is the reason that Sheldon sees more people that try to assemble an inf combo faster and faster. This attitude is an issue with many players that I play against. I feel that for any play group that isn't playing cEDH, there needs to be a points system which rewards players for winning, while also rewarding players for doing interaction and doing interesting plays and penalizes players for doing the same repetitive combo in every game. That way even if the game ends in an infinite combo, they still get points, but they get less and hopefully are less incentivised to do so again. A example of a points scoring would be the VS live commander videos that the SCG youtube channel does. While i personally would change/add/remove certain ways for scoring or removing points, i feel that it lays out a general ground work that most playgroups could use.
Of course these are all just thoughts that i have from playing with a variety of play groups, some which i love playing with to some that i actively try to avoid when they try to get a game night together.
And people will still piss and moan about combo's natural enemy, control, no matter how much they profess to hate infinite combos.
On phasing:
People straight up straw-manning his stance is a sad thing on MTGS.
That still doesn't make sense because combo is one of the pillar archetypes of the format and of magic the gathering and magic cards are deigned to interact together in combos.
Combo isn't one of the pillars of EDH. There was a time when strong combo pieces were outright banned. People can make a lot of arguments in favor of combo, but that surely isn't one of them.
Again, the point of the post was about unknown groups (LGS, MagicFest, etc) and how those have deteriorated to such a degree. It has not always been like this. I had the absolute worst game of EDH I have ever played this last weekend at MagicFest Seattle.
And cards obviously are not designed to combo together, they banned it out of Standard recently. Yes many cards within the decades do so, and I honestly get why people play them: Some games need to end.
I think its socially lacking to pub stomp people because you know they are playing '75%' and likely wont be able to stop a combo with counter back-up.
Some combo just make crucial commander things, like the number of players, completely irrelevant, so yeah, i'd like to see combo player discussing about this kind of "interactions" instead of always screaming how much legit combo is.
I am unsure what game you are playing because MTG surely is not it.
Taleran has, by highlighting some absurd claims. Cards interacting with one another in synergistic ways, which is the core notion of a combo, is a central element of this game and its design, and always has been. Regardless of finite or infinite, claiming that MTG does not have the ideas of combo in its core design seems willfully misguided.
Most Used (of many dozens) EDH Decks:
Brago, King Eternal - Stax
Grenzo, Dungeon Warden - Aggro Combo
Wort, the Raidmother - Spellslinger Swarm Control
Animar, Soul of Elements - Tempo Combo
Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder - Spellslinger
Exodia the Forbidden One:
Oona, Queen of the Fae - Combowins.dec
I didnt say that, which is part of my issue with implying something not easily deciphered.I said infinite combos are not a pillar of EDH. I think that is backed up by both the creators saying it should not be option one all the time, and some used to actually be banned out of the format.
Trying to smash synergy and infinite combo into the same idea is "willfully misguided", as someone once said.