Hello all,
Is there a place anywhere on the internet to discuss MTGO 1v1 Commander? It's not clear where (if anywhere) it's being discussed on mtgsal, and I am unable to find discussion elsewhere. Also, when is the banlist to be updated for the format, and why did the event frequency drop from one per day to twice per week?
Is there a place anywhere on the internet to discuss MTGO 1v1 Commander? It's not clear where (if anywhere) it's being discussed on mtgsal, and I am unable to find discussion elsewhere. Also, when is the banlist to be updated for the format, and why did the event frequency drop from one per day to twice per week?
Probably fits the 1v1 traditional sub best right now, but I think you're right in that there's not really a designated place for it. I'd throw a post in the helpdesk topic to make sure the mods see it. If it's not something they're already discussing, it probably should be.
Too bad Gals disappeared. I'm doing tattoo research and I'd be very surprised if there wasn't something I'm not thinking of while I do it.
Can you point me to that topic? For some reason, I am having some trouble finding it.
Is there a place anywhere on the internet to discuss MTGO 1v1 Commander? It's not clear where (if anywhere) it's being discussed on mtgsal, and I am unable to find discussion elsewhere. Also, when is the banlist to be updated for the format, and why did the event frequency drop from one per day to twice per week?
*Yawn* 25 life please. And hurry up and match the DC banlist already. WoTC is letting pride get in the way here. DC has years of experience, and a huge back catalog of data behind their bans, and while some of them are indeed dubious, the lists need to start matching by at least 90% within the next month, or both formats will tank in paper. Additionally, there is no reason not to bring back commander damage, as it will increase the diversity of the format slightly. There is too much dancing and overly defensive maneuvering on WoTC's part here.
I can't believe I missed that part of the announcement! Thank you. That said, your post led me to believe this was the sanctioned, paper format we were waiting for. There will always be resistance to this format until Wizards comes out and says that it's meant to be for paper and/or that it's sanctioned. We need 1v1 GPs, for example.
All of these generals are banworthy at any life total. The only issue is that the thing making the blue generals powerful is merely their mana costs @ 2, not their abilities. Maybe cheap polymorphs are the problem cards. Banning Emrakul is not a good primary idea, because that slippery slope leads to alot of fatties being banned. The 0 drop rocks aren't helping, either.
The only actual problem I have with 20 life is that my games are all much less interactive, and this is the style of magic I prefer. Very little back and forth, more of "do you have the exact answer needed here?" There are too many cards capable of dealing too much damage too fast, and players have 8 card hands, while defense is diluted by players having to draw one of a few cards in their decks to deal with a specific type of issue. This is further compounded by the lack of sideboard. Watching the DTC stream, I noticed almost all games were totally one sided, and I had to stop watching after about 4 of them because it was a huge yawnfest. I think it's more than a publicity statement when WoTC comes out with a new format where 30 life is the norm again.
I wouldn't even consider the results from the first few tournies. Players in this new format have no idea how to brew for it yet. Give it time, and it'll end up right where we predict it will.
I am looking to discuss Titania card choices in a private Facebook group chat with people who have been playing the deck in DC for a significant time and/or people who regularly top 8 with the deck. PM me if interested.
Oloro and derevi are similar to vial in that they give you an advantage by changing the rules of the game.
I'm glad wizards is planning on taking over 1vs 1 edh so maybe mistakes like these will not be repeated.
Does anyone else feel that while the meta is pretty diverse now it just feels boring. 90% of my games feel decided by the match up.
I agree completely. The format at 20 life is very much "do you have the answer literally right now or do you die?" 90% of the time. Extremely matchup dependent. This effect is compounded by the fact that we run one-of answers in a 99 card deck.
As long as they keep the Leviathan banlist framework so as to not ignore all the good work DC has done in the past, this is nothing but good news. Rules the majority of us want and the rest of us can easily deal with, and a format to put all the 1v1 Commander formats to bed and unite the playerbase. I would even hope any and all committees would step down provided the banlist and rules end up being sensible, and be obnoxious and belligerent if, on the contrary, WoTC shows no regard or respect for all the good the RC has done in the past by not adhering to the basic framework that's been constructed over the past years.
Is there a place anywhere on the internet to discuss MTGO 1v1 Commander? It's not clear where (if anywhere) it's being discussed on mtgsal, and I am unable to find discussion elsewhere. Also, when is the banlist to be updated for the format, and why did the event frequency drop from one per day to twice per week?
Can you point me to that topic? For some reason, I am having some trouble finding it.
Is there a place anywhere on the internet to discuss MTGO 1v1 Commander? It's not clear where (if anywhere) it's being discussed on mtgsal, and I am unable to find discussion elsewhere. Also, when is the banlist to be updated for the format, and why did the event frequency drop from one per day to twice per week?
I can't believe I missed that part of the announcement! Thank you. That said, your post led me to believe this was the sanctioned, paper format we were waiting for. There will always be resistance to this format until Wizards comes out and says that it's meant to be for paper and/or that it's sanctioned. We need 1v1 GPs, for example.
Where did you see this information?
All of these generals are banworthy at any life total. The only issue is that the thing making the blue generals powerful is merely their mana costs @ 2, not their abilities. Maybe cheap polymorphs are the problem cards. Banning Emrakul is not a good primary idea, because that slippery slope leads to alot of fatties being banned. The 0 drop rocks aren't helping, either.
Thanks for your opinion, just wanted a binary answer
http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=15353&d=293380&f=EDH
Granted, this is DC, but it's the most recent topping Baral list. In 30 life it's certainly much less good.
I agree completely. The format at 20 life is very much "do you have the answer literally right now or do you die?" 90% of the time. Extremely matchup dependent. This effect is compounded by the fact that we run one-of answers in a 99 card deck.