2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement next week
    Bolt was actually quite good against Cawblade. I say this as a Cawblade player at that time. It killed greedy Jaces brainstorming before fatesealing first, and hawks in combat after equipping so you couldn't re-equip. Probably the single best piece of interaction against the deck.

    The problem with that format wasn't actually even THAT deck itself, it was actually Valakut which had a 0% winrate against Cawblade but a 100% winrate against the rest of the format, including decks that were really very favored against Cawblade. Players who just wouldn't let go of their big dumb Primeval Titans choked the variety out of standard.

    Bringing us back around to the threats being too good argument lol.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Banned and restricted announcement next week
    Quote from Flamebuster »
    STP do do da do do do
    STP do do da do do do
    STP do do da do do do
    STP!

    Counterspell do do da do do do
    Counterspell do do da do do do
    Counterspell do do da do do do
    Counterspell!

    Lightning Bolt do do da do do do
    Lightning Bolt do do da do do do
    Lightning Bolt do do da do do do
    Lightning Bolt!

    This can easily be solved if reliable answers from days of yore were reprinted with earnest. Remember M11 standard? Bolt was there. Were there any out-of-control decks at the time? Not that I can recall. At least they brought Disenchant back over Naturalize...

    This is also a telling sign of the neglect WotC has put into the designing of standard-level sets and focusing too much on auxiliary products. But that's the result of having so many formats that require product support. They reap what they sow...

    'buster


    Prettymuch!

    They got a lot of feedback from bad players that they hated having their stuff interacted with, and now all of the threats are completely out of control. Answers have never, EVER ruined a format, and should be leaned upon heavily to regulate them. People like playing with powerful threats, so let them! Just make sure there are efficient answers to those threats at all times.

    Honestly, something like '1W Sorcery Exile target creature.' should probably just be evergreen. Not so efficient or flexible that it invalidates archetypes, but strong enough that you can't just jam a threat and expect it to stick around for the rest of the game. No-frills 4-cmc wraths should also be a constant, since the aggro decks nowadays are inarguably fast enough to warrant it.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    I'll concede that budget is not an absolute indicator of power level, but all things equal building-skill-wise, a bigger budget will invariably lead to stronger decks. Aside from cards that are expensive because of collectibility (read: reserved list, underprinted, rare promos), expensive cards are expensive for a reason and that reason is that they're powerful.

    Also, yeah, expensive is relative. Some people think buying physical cards at all is a racket. Some people play with Alpha duals.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    I definitely agree that there will always be a degree of subjectivity to any scale, but I still believe that its worth making the existing system better. Currently the flaws in said system are (to an extent) being smoothed over by the multiplayer nature of the format as you say, however its not doing anyone any favors by setting people up for disappointment when they think 'Tuned' is a useful description in this context. A system with clear strata would go a long way towards guiding people to the right tables, whereas now its more of a trial-and-error situation.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    I honestly think there's a lot of value in telling people that average means average, and de-stigmatizing so-called 'variant' players by making it clear that there is as much variation in power level at their tables as anyone else's. FWIW:


    0) Weak budget deck/Bad on purpose/A literal pile of cards/Chair tribal
    1) Average budget deck
    2) Strong budget deck
    3) Transition between budget/casual
    4) Weak casual deck
    5) Average casual deck/this is where your '7' goes, knock it off
    6) Strong casual deck
    7) Transition between casual/competitive
    8) Weak competitive deck
    9) Average competitive deck
    10) Strong competitive deck
    11) Thrasios/Tymna consult

    ...and precons go in the 1-3 range depending, but who cares. Ideally you'd play within 1 level of each other, but within 2 is still a game. 3+ levels of difference makes for non-games. And that's really what any such list should strive to lay out: who is going to have an actual game with who? Having distinct and parallel bands within each subsection helps with self-reporting.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    On that note: There's definitely a lot of problems being caused by the existence Command Zone's power level scale, since it inherently lumps every deck into the 7 slot with little to no room for variance and most players default to that measuring stick.

    It would definitely help if we had a more concrete and well-though-out system.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    I like the analogy, but if they really wanted to baby-proof the format the banlist would be enormous, including all land destruction, all counterspells, and most removal.

    The current list serves neither casual nor competitive players, and is mostly just a joke to point and laugh at while we enjoy the format in spite of it (because the original idea was so damn good, thank you Adam Staley!).
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    It strikes me that all of the people arguing that its difficult to find a pickup game of appropriate power level by talking to people are an extremely good argument for actually having a governing body that is interested in balancing the format Teach
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    Quote from JuiceBOX »
    No.

    My solution is: be willing to compromise. It is either be willing to compromise or deal with having fewer people to play with.

    If you are having an unfun experience in Commander, that is on you. It shouldn't be up to other players to cater to you because you don't want to play Combo. Maybe have a bit of accountability for your experiences within the format... seems you are sidestepping that little tidbit.


    Prettymuch this. Personally, the power level I enjoy building at is about an 8 or a 9, but the average player runs 4s and 5s (not 7, the obsession with lying and saying 7 people have is infuriating) so I have to build much weaker decks to ensure that the experience isn't lopsided (pubstomping is the opposite of fun).

    Taking responsibility for your own fun is a pretty fair ask for everyone involved, and arguments to the contrary are churlish at best.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    The "combo players should play somewhere else" stance is definitely foolish coming from anyone against counterspells. You can't be both an advocate for interactivity, and of the position that if you cast a spell, you are 100% entitled to its effect/ETB. Imagine the confidence of looking at your hand and never having to worry about when to cast it, because you know that doing anything about it is wrong.


    Yeah I always roll my eyes at those folks. Interaction and counterpunching are the best parts of the game! Every strategy is more-or-less viable, and every strategy has counterplay, which is what makes the game exciting. Playing large dudes and turning them sideways with no tricks, blocking, or removal is disturbingly popular and I cannot wrap my mind around it.

    Tangentially related: I've got a 9, 8, 7, and 6 deck, and I'm currently working on a 5 which should definitionally be an absolutely average deck. To make it a meme, I pulled up the single most popular general, took the aggregate average decklist, and its... umm... painful. 1 counterspell. 5 instants total. Almost no removal. 3 card advantage spells. More than half of the deck is lands and ramp. The only wincon is incidental beats from ETB creatures. I want to cry.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    Quote from Shadow345 »
    People don't want narrative in games, they just want power.

    I agree cEDH ruins everything.

    To the surprise of no one one new guy who turned up for a week or two who had the cEDH mindset ended up getting himself banned after arguing with the store manager. Not a related matter but it's reflective of the overall personality.

    I know what the c really stands for and it's not something pleasant I can say on the forums.


    That just blows my mind, I've had the exact opposite experience. I've yet to have one issue with anyone who plays cEDH, but I've got a thousand lifetimes worth of horror stories about being aggressively mistreated by casual players. In particular the more casual they claim to be, the nastier they seem to get. There's a super-budget EDH variant in this area and they're absolutely the meanest players I've ever met. You ever get yelled at by a guy who played 4 mana doublers on his last turn for countering his full-tap Stroke of Genius, because you're somehow supposed to know that he has no win-condition?
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    Quote from DirkGently »
    For someone called cranky, I am out-cranky-ing the hell out of you right now.


    You ain't kidding bud XD
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    You're really leaning hard into the victim complex stuff my dude, let's dissect this a bit.

    I don't think you can really in good faith make the claim that combo is inherently bad, or that it's wrong to include them in the average deck. Some people enjoy playing combos. Some people just want their decks to be good. It is an unfortunate side-effect of the way the format is meant to be played that aggressive strategies are just not as effective as going infinite. The game has to end at some point, and I know that I've consciously made the decision to include at least one way to immediately end the game in every deck because playing one game that drags on the for the entire night makes me want to kill myself.

    And can you really blame people for looking at a cEDH deck and saying 'wow that looks awesome!' when they're such finely tuned works of art? When the cards in them are often obscenely expensive? People like shiny things, and a solid cEDH deck is very, very shiny indeed. Its like gawking at an ancient heirloom katana when you've been playing with boffing sticks. They both have their place and they're both fun, but come on it is only natural.

    I wouldn't be too worried about the extinction of casual EDH, from my experience the ends of the format keep getting further and further apart from each other, not closer, as folks naturally separate themselves into distinct cliques based on what they want out of the game.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Best Mardu commander?
    Definitely avoid Kaalia, she gets expensive really quickly and lends herself to a lot of non-games. Edgar specifically has issues against wrath-heavy metagames, but can drop the table to the teens pretty quickly. Kaalia can too, but she's vulnerable to literally any removal spell, counterspell, most blockers, and your own manabase, while Edgar requires them to have wraths. The trick is finding the last few points of damage or protecting your board from wraths (cards like Blood Artist, Boros Charm, and the like are premium).

    You're going to have a bad time playing against top-tier decks with Thassa's Oracle regardless in these colors, so I would either not worry about it or go heavy stax/mass land destruction.

    YMMV but most people play 4-player EDH.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Rules committee narrow minded?
    Holy hell that's an incredibly toxic way of looking at things, Dirk. The scawy cEDH people are definitely not out to get you, but those are some pretty ferocious straw men you've got there.

    I sincerely hope you're just trolling and I'm just not catching the sarcasm.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.