Care to elaborate on why it is bad? You do realise that you get 40 life in normal EDH only because it is used to account for multiplayer?
He doesn't need to, obviously he is a person of secrets. 30 life is amazing, it gives aggro decks a fighting chance. 40 life is just too much when playing one on one.
Some of their logic is really contradictory or arbitrary. Life is lowered to 30 for aggro to stand a chance. Serra Ascendant is banned when it's one of the real reasons to play agro. I play 1v1 all the time and have faced Serra Ascendant turn 1 multiple times. It's a rought start but I managed to win 35% of those games.
Some people may think that is low, but it is not. How many games do you win where your opponent goes turn 1 Sol Ring? There is tons of broken stuff in EDH, I am more than fine with creatures that do nothing but beat down.
The reasoning of "not meant for a game where you start at 30". So what? Gilded Drake wasn't intended to be played with Venser and blink effects. There are other tons of examples that are interesting. EDH does not need any bannings of french vanilla creatures.
Let me just say that banning mana crypt / sol ring is a bad decision. The reason for this is simple, every deck has access to them. While blue has a slight advantage with them (I'm thinking of trinket mage), all it does is excel. Neither of these provide any kind of degenerate combo, just make it so that it's easier to play with expensive generals.
Yes sol ring / mana crypt fit in almost any deck, but a whole host of other colorless cards do also, the solution isn't to ban them, just learn how to play in a format where there's a small ((7-8/100)*2 =>) 15% chance to start the game with some decent excelleration
Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are both banned because they provide a ridiculous tempo advantage to anybody who somehow draws either or both in their opening 7 or their early game, increasing the luck factor in the game (this is incidentally why they are similarly restricted in Vintage and Legacy). Giving someone an ability to play a 4 mana spell on Turn 2 can be seriously backbreaking and not something most decks can recover from. Banning it is the best way of ensuring that this does not become a game of "who draws their sol ring or mana crypt first wins".
Incidentally, the probability of drawing at least one of them in your opening seven is 13.7085% or 15.5844% if you account for starting second
imo serra ascendant ban is ok if life starts at 30 but if life starts 40, i vote to unban it. (even first turn serra ascendant, second turn lightning greaves).
but after i read carefully the french banlist and mtgs banlist, why kokusho is not banned? or am i missing something?
but after i read carefully the french banlist and mtgs banlist, why kokusho is not banned? or am i missing something?
Kokusho is very weak when you can only drain 5 life per trigger. Most decks in 1v1 could seriously care less about life totals because they win by forcing concessions instead of physically reducing someone's life total to 0.
Kokusho is very weak when you can only drain 5 life per trigger. Most decks in 1v1 could seriously care less about life totals because they win by forcing concessions instead of physically reducing someone's life total to 0.
partly agreed, but i dont see any deck kokusho as general, nor anybody using panoptic mirror imprinting time warp in 1vs1.
honored tht you replied noob question like this one.
partly agreed, but i dont see any deck kokusho as general, nor anybody using panoptic mirror imprinting time warp in 1vs1.
honored tht you replied noob question like this one.
To clarify on the issue of Kokusho. You don't see many decks running Kokusho as a general for the same reason that you don't see Keiga and Yosei as generals. The cool thing of the Kamigawa dragons will only happen if the general actually hits the graveyard (which they won't if you choose to apply the replacement effect that sends them back to the command zone). Otherwise, it tends to be a one-off thingy unless you have a solid reanimation engine or something that can repeatedly exile your general after it ends up in the graveyard. That and as SC mentioned, a life swing of 10 per pop is not going to win you the game in 1v1 games.
On a side note, note how the Esper Kamigawa dragons are the awesome ones while Jugan and Ryusei is comparatively underpowered
This seems like strange reasoning to me. M11 was obviously designed with 2HG in mind (Blood Tithe and Hunters' Feast, among others), and the Ascendant therefore must have been considered as a potential turn one 6/6.
I disagree. I played some two headed giant after the release of M11 using many of its cards, the format is terribly poor and feels like a joke. It doesn't seem like it's been playtested at all. I'm pretty certain those cards are meant for free for alls, which do get some support. Hunter's Feast can be very useful for diplomacy, it doesn't have to be a braindead choice to use it on a teammate, it's actually a much more interesting card when diplomacy is involved, even.
It's also why Strip Mine shouldn't be banned, because it's a card that any deck can use to answer problematic lands, no questions asked.
Is that why I still have to play with this card? I played a couple games the other day where my opponent had a turn 1 Strip Mine that rendered my hand that had seemed keepable useless. The very next game, I drew Strip Mine and Wasteland and did the same thing to him.
The card feels a heck of a lot like Sol Ring to me, a Strip Mine in your opening hand means that you have a chance to wreck your opponent and potentially win the game, straight up. It powers up black (eh, but what doesn't) since the 1-2 mana tutors can get a Wasteland to go along with it for an opportunistic victory. It's not fun at all and feels really swingy.
There's so many other ways to deal with troublesome lands, and it really doesn't have to be a card that also deals with oh-so-gamebreaking snow-covered mountains. All colors have:
Wasteland Tectonic Edge Dust Bowl Expedition Map into Wasteland Rishadan port deals with several lands Ghost Quarter - admittedly I don't feel it's playable, but other people seem to Icy Manipulator
Blue has: Spreading Seas, Annex
Green has: Acidic Slime, Reap and Sow, Sylvan Scrying into Wasteland
White has: Ok, little, Armageddon is an archetype-defining thing. But Weathered Wayfarer is very effective if you can make him go active. Monowhite is going to be stax or aggro anyway afaik, neither strategy seems particularly threatened by nonbasic lands.
Black has: all sorts of tutors for the colorless options, and Sinkhole and other LD
Red has: all sorts of LD, Magus of the Moon, and Blood Moon.
As whole there's a very healthy amount of playable answers to powerful lands. I think pre-Tectonic Edge and Expedition Map this may have been a format that needed swing Strip Mine, but I don't think that's still the case. I'd really like to see the card go. It'd be another one of those ways to help out aggro, since aggro decks are more likely to rely on basic lands and making Wasteland the go-to LD land would reward that.
I always wanted to ask but never bothered to: Who actually determines the MTGS Ban List?
It's basically the old French 1v1 list, But the community decided to remove top from the list. Now its just outdated.
On the library of alexandria note you win the game if it's in the opening 7 and I do not understand why its not banned yet in the current crackdown in cards that ask removal or die in the first turn of the game
If you have Library of Alexandria in your opening hand, and you're on the draw, neither Strip Mine nor Wasteland counter it, you've already gained card advantage. You've gained one card advantage over your opponent, 2 mana below market value, the same 2 mana that makes Sol Ring an unfair version of Worn Powerstone (okay, not quite, but you see what I'm saying right?).
Strip Mine doesn't answer that card. I think it should be banned, some don't I guess. Either way, the interaction between these two cards is that the guy with Library of Alexandria wins. If you intend to have seven cards in hand at some point, you'll make sure to drop it at a time where you can activate it immediately. Strip Mine stops the bleeding but it can't be what makes LoA behave healthily. If anything answers Library of Alexandria, it's probably fast, aggressive decks that make card advantage matter a lot less that game and force the opponent to dump cards to counter the threats. Or, what I think more likely, nothing.
To put it in easier terms, Lets just say its the third turn and you went first. They have two untapped blue lands. You drop strip mine and pop their Island. They then tap it for mana. You proceed to enter the second main phase and are now able to cast a spell with less chances of it being countered.
Now you have two mana. What key spells are going to cast for two mana that blue would have wanted to counter? If you tutor, they'll just counter whatever you tutored for. If you play a creature it's not going to get take down 30 life anytime soon even if they leave it be. You're probably going to play Three Visits, maybe Jitte, cards that blue might have let you resolve anyway because 2 mana spells aren't going to win the game on their own, they need help.
Your argument that the existence of Strip Mine powers down blue seems flimsy to me. You came up with one situation. What about blue's ability to Stifle strip mine when no other color can, or stifle fetches and then use their strip mine to screw someone over, or use their countermagic to target your ramp because they have a strip mine opener so they know they can land screw you?
Mindslaver on the otherhand. EDH has sped up dramatically. I'm not sure theirs many decks outside Sharrum and potentially Arcum that would actually run Mindslaver. Sure the effect is powerful but the manacost is tremondous. it also gives Green decks another (slow) way to fight combo. What are your guys thoughts?
Surely this alone cannot be the motivation for using 30 as the starting life total for this format because it is absolutly incorrect.
Im thinking there has to be some other reason that the creator's of the 1v1 ruleset had in mind, and I wonder if those reasons are worth re-considering.
Im thinking there has to be some other reason that the creator's of the 1v1 ruleset had in mind, and I wonder if those reasons are worth re-considering.
I think that the reason is due to general damage being set at 21. However, I don't really see a reason why the format should be slowed for otherwise no other particular reason. The issue of infinite life in 1v1 is almost completely negligible; as there are so many other (better) ways to win with infinite combos. It would be interesting if the 30 life rule were to reconsidered. Aggro would certainly become much more viable and may even be able to compete with top control decks at 20 life.
I would serve as an interesting change of pace at least. Multiplayer EDH is meant to be long and drawn out. Duels are just as fast (if not sometimes faster) than just about any other dueling format, and in those, players usually start with 20 life.
Emmara is like the worst parts of Legends and Homelands got pregnant, aborted the fetus, tossed it in the trashcan, set it on fire and wrapped the corpse in a Dragon's Maze pack wrapper.
So a thought occurred to me today. Why isn't EDH 1v1 played with 20 life?
Well The obvious has been stated already, but their are some reasons that I would think are way more important to keep the life total at 30.
1. Tendrils of Agony.
This would go into every single Black deck, because the differance between 10 storm and usually its 8-9 with all the painful land in the format and 14 is huge. you don't even need to try. Tendrils is already borderline in some lists, Dropping the lifetotal down to 20 would mean run combo or go home.
2. Control Decks utilize life total for card advantage. It's harder to understand this point. But anyone who's played control knows that you will always win with >10 Life. It's because a number of factors, But it's hard for control decks to exist, because of the highlander part of the format. Aggro would rampage, because most decks need the extra turn to even stand a chance.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
He doesn't need to, obviously he is a person of secrets. 30 life is amazing, it gives aggro decks a fighting chance. 40 life is just too much when playing one on one.
MTGSalvation 1v1 EDH Community Members List
Some people may think that is low, but it is not. How many games do you win where your opponent goes turn 1 Sol Ring? There is tons of broken stuff in EDH, I am more than fine with creatures that do nothing but beat down.
The reasoning of "not meant for a game where you start at 30". So what? Gilded Drake wasn't intended to be played with Venser and blink effects. There are other tons of examples that are interesting. EDH does not need any bannings of french vanilla creatures.
Edric | Skithiryx | Merieke | Talrand
--------------------------
Well except for pauper EDH
Garruk's Packleader | Inkfathom Witch | Gelectrode | Sigil Captain | Glider Barin | Sludge Strider | Paragon of the Ameshsa
Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are both banned because they provide a ridiculous tempo advantage to anybody who somehow draws either or both in their opening 7 or their early game, increasing the luck factor in the game (this is incidentally why they are similarly restricted in Vintage and Legacy). Giving someone an ability to play a 4 mana spell on Turn 2 can be seriously backbreaking and not something most decks can recover from. Banning it is the best way of ensuring that this does not become a game of "who draws their sol ring or mana crypt first wins".
Incidentally, the probability of drawing at least one of them in your opening seven is 13.7085% or 15.5844% if you account for starting second
but after i read carefully the french banlist and mtgs banlist, why kokusho is not banned? or am i missing something?
Kokusho is very weak when you can only drain 5 life per trigger. Most decks in 1v1 could seriously care less about life totals because they win by forcing concessions instead of physically reducing someone's life total to 0.
partly agreed, but i dont see any deck kokusho as general, nor anybody using panoptic mirror imprinting time warp in 1vs1.
honored tht you replied noob question like this one.
To clarify on the issue of Kokusho. You don't see many decks running Kokusho as a general for the same reason that you don't see Keiga and Yosei as generals. The cool thing of the Kamigawa dragons will only happen if the general actually hits the graveyard (which they won't if you choose to apply the replacement effect that sends them back to the command zone). Otherwise, it tends to be a one-off thingy unless you have a solid reanimation engine or something that can repeatedly exile your general after it ends up in the graveyard. That and as SC mentioned, a life swing of 10 per pop is not going to win you the game in 1v1 games.
On a side note, note how the Esper Kamigawa dragons are the awesome ones while Jugan and Ryusei is comparatively underpowered
I am pretty sure the answer is yes.
I disagree. I played some two headed giant after the release of M11 using many of its cards, the format is terribly poor and feels like a joke. It doesn't seem like it's been playtested at all. I'm pretty certain those cards are meant for free for alls, which do get some support. Hunter's Feast can be very useful for diplomacy, it doesn't have to be a braindead choice to use it on a teammate, it's actually a much more interesting card when diplomacy is involved, even.
Is that why I still have to play with this card? I played a couple games the other day where my opponent had a turn 1 Strip Mine that rendered my hand that had seemed keepable useless. The very next game, I drew Strip Mine and Wasteland and did the same thing to him.
The card feels a heck of a lot like Sol Ring to me, a Strip Mine in your opening hand means that you have a chance to wreck your opponent and potentially win the game, straight up. It powers up black (eh, but what doesn't) since the 1-2 mana tutors can get a Wasteland to go along with it for an opportunistic victory. It's not fun at all and feels really swingy.
There's so many other ways to deal with troublesome lands, and it really doesn't have to be a card that also deals with oh-so-gamebreaking snow-covered mountains. All colors have:
Wasteland
Tectonic Edge
Dust Bowl
Expedition Map into Wasteland
Rishadan port deals with several lands
Ghost Quarter - admittedly I don't feel it's playable, but other people seem to
Icy Manipulator
Blue has: Spreading Seas, Annex
Green has: Acidic Slime, Reap and Sow, Sylvan Scrying into Wasteland
White has: Ok, little, Armageddon is an archetype-defining thing. But Weathered Wayfarer is very effective if you can make him go active. Monowhite is going to be stax or aggro anyway afaik, neither strategy seems particularly threatened by nonbasic lands.
Black has: all sorts of tutors for the colorless options, and Sinkhole and other LD
Red has: all sorts of LD, Magus of the Moon, and Blood Moon.
As whole there's a very healthy amount of playable answers to powerful lands. I think pre-Tectonic Edge and Expedition Map this may have been a format that needed
swingStrip Mine, but I don't think that's still the case. I'd really like to see the card go. It'd be another one of those ways to help out aggro, since aggro decks are more likely to rely on basic lands and making Wasteland the go-to LD land would reward that.It's basically the old French 1v1 list, But the community decided to remove top from the list. Now its just outdated.
On the library of alexandria note you win the game if it's in the opening 7 and I do not understand why its not banned yet in the current crackdown in cards that ask removal or die in the first turn of the game
If you have Library of Alexandria in your opening hand, and you're on the draw, neither Strip Mine nor Wasteland counter it, you've already gained card advantage. You've gained one card advantage over your opponent, 2 mana below market value, the same 2 mana that makes Sol Ring an unfair version of Worn Powerstone (okay, not quite, but you see what I'm saying right?).
Strip Mine doesn't answer that card. I think it should be banned, some don't I guess. Either way, the interaction between these two cards is that the guy with Library of Alexandria wins. If you intend to have seven cards in hand at some point, you'll make sure to drop it at a time where you can activate it immediately. Strip Mine stops the bleeding but it can't be what makes LoA behave healthily. If anything answers Library of Alexandria, it's probably fast, aggressive decks that make card advantage matter a lot less that game and force the opponent to dump cards to counter the threats. Or, what I think more likely, nothing.
How does Strip Mine counter blue? The blue deck gets Strip Mine too. I don't see it.
Your argument that the existence of Strip Mine powers down blue seems flimsy to me. You came up with one situation. What about blue's ability to Stifle strip mine when no other color can, or stifle fetches and then use their strip mine to screw someone over, or use their countermagic to target your ramp because they have a strip mine opener so they know they can land screw you?
You can see a argument against braids in http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=301172
Mindslaver on the otherhand. EDH has sped up dramatically. I'm not sure theirs many decks outside Sharrum and potentially Arcum that would actually run Mindslaver. Sure the effect is powerful but the manacost is tremondous. it also gives Green decks another (slow) way to fight combo. What are your guys thoughts?
Er.. because nobody likes aggro.
Surely this alone cannot be the motivation for using 30 as the starting life total for this format because it is absolutly incorrect.
Im thinking there has to be some other reason that the creator's of the 1v1 ruleset had in mind, and I wonder if those reasons are worth re-considering.
I think that the reason is due to general damage being set at 21. However, I don't really see a reason why the format should be slowed for otherwise no other particular reason. The issue of infinite life in 1v1 is almost completely negligible; as there are so many other (better) ways to win with infinite combos. It would be interesting if the 30 life rule were to reconsidered. Aggro would certainly become much more viable and may even be able to compete with top control decks at 20 life.
I would serve as an interesting change of pace at least. Multiplayer EDH is meant to be long and drawn out. Duels are just as fast (if not sometimes faster) than just about any other dueling format, and in those, players usually start with 20 life.
Well The obvious has been stated already, but their are some reasons that I would think are way more important to keep the life total at 30.
1. Tendrils of Agony.
This would go into every single Black deck, because the differance between 10 storm and usually its 8-9 with all the painful land in the format and 14 is huge. you don't even need to try. Tendrils is already borderline in some lists, Dropping the lifetotal down to 20 would mean run combo or go home.
2. Control Decks utilize life total for card advantage. It's harder to understand this point. But anyone who's played control knows that you will always win with >10 Life. It's because a number of factors, But it's hard for control decks to exist, because of the highlander part of the format. Aggro would rampage, because most decks need the extra turn to even stand a chance.