Silly combo idea for EDH: Have Swarm Intelligence out, then cast Spelljack targeting whatever spell you can. Make the copy of Spelljack target the original Spelljack, then when the original Spelljack gets exiled, recast it and repeat. If you have something thatcares about instants, or casting lots of spells in general, GG. This'll also work with any counterspell + Guile.
Opponent is at 2 life but I'm dead to Emberhorn Minotaur next turn if I can't finish things. I'm in topdeck mode and all I have out is a Shadowstorm Vizier and 7 lands. I untap and draw a useless land, so I aftermath Memory from my graveyard, leaving an Island untapped.
Shuffle, draw 7.
Play an Island.
Cast Pull from Tomorrow, X = 0.
Discard a card, Shadowstorm Vizier triggers.
Attack for 2, win.
I tried building Zur the Enchanter once. It stayed intact for one game. It turns out that even when you're not tutoring up broken combo/stax/protection pieces (my deck was themed around reanimation and Animate Dead-style enchantments, with no super-broken reanimation targets) it's still annoying to wait for a search and shuffle every single time Zur attacks. The group made it quite clear that they didn't like playing against it.
As for commanders other people play that are on my personal hit list: Animar, Soul of Elements--Only played against it once but, guess what, Animar on turn 2 and Ancestral Statue on Turn 3. Of course. Yisan, the Wanderer Bard--I wouldn't mind it if it was just "search up a value creature once per turn cycle" but nooooo, every single Yisan deck has to be ramp ramp ramp, Elves Elves Elves, untap untap untap so that he gets to basically take a turn in between all of our turns. And, of course, since he's tutoring you can expect most games to go the same unless you disrupt his game plan (and with all the ramp, and the general costing only 3, it only sets him back so far). Bruna, Light of Alabaster--This general is simply too risky to ever let attack, since a whole bunch of Auras will probably attach to her for free and make her into a one-hit kill, make her impossible to remove, or both. Sometimes it doesn't happen--the controller only drew one or two Auras--but you can't know that until it's too late to prevent the worst case from happening! And the worst part is, being a Voltron, she can kill one player quickly and just fail to kill the others for whatever reason, leaving that player stuck out of the game for quite a while.
I didn't understand what "creatures are too powerful" meant for a time, but now I think I do...
Anyway, I've got a lot to say, based on my own experiences and others' complaints, so I'll collapse it in spoiler tags.
The important part, with a nice little list of card analyses:
The problem is not "creatures slamming into each other is boring", the problem is "creatures put on too much pressure and don't give synergistic decks time to develop their gameplan". (We can see this by the fact that Mardu Vehicles is called a "midrange" deck yet can inflict up to 11 damage by the end of Turn 3.) Let's call the threats that allow them to exert such ridiculous pressure "hyperefficient creatures". They're creatures that are just so good for their cost that they basically force themselves into any deck in their color, and sometimes force decks to play their colors just to include them! In my experience, they tend to fall into two categories:
1) A way above the curve creature with a "drawback" to balance it out, but the "drawback" turns out to be too weak so the creature provides too much benefit
Prime exhibits: Smuggler's Copter, Heart of Kiran
In this case, the "drawback" is the inability to attack or block unless you pay the Crew cost, but that turns out to be too easy and their stats are too good for how early you can bring them out. Also, the "drawback" turns into a benefit against any sorcery-speed creature removal that doesn't also hit noncreature artifacts.
2) A creature with a body on curve but a powerful effect that the developers conveniently forget to charge the player for, manawise
Some prime examples from recent sets:
Body: 2/3 flash flying for is right on curve.
Effect: O-Ringing a spell that costs 4 or less Probably worth 2 mana, it's a more powerful "counter" than either Prohibit or Horribly Awry but has the downside that the opponent can get the spell back. Or, compared to Mystic Snake, you get a counter that's better and worse at the same time (exile > counter, but the spell is recoverable) and you get a better body (2/3 flyer vs 2/2).
Fair cost for Spell Queller: At least , although even that makes Ulamog's Nullifier cry at the hoop it has to jump through.
Actual cost:
Body: 4/4 flash flying for is fair.
Effect: Indestructible until end of turn for your whole team. Should be worth a little less than 2 mana (compare Heroic Intervention) However, the body combines with this effect to make it much more powerful, as she's extremely likely to eat an attacker if she comes in to block and your other creatures can eat more attackers. So the effect should be a little over 2 mana.
Oh, there's also the flip thing that makes her into a more powerful creature while simultaneously burning your opponent and wiping weenies off the board. It takes a little work to control when it triggers (emphasis on a little), so I'm not sure what it should cost, but it definitely shouldn't be free.
Fair cost for Archangel Avacyn: AT LEAST , her power level would drop off significantly at since her effects are both situational, but they shouldn't be free, that's for sure!
Actual cost:
Body: 3/2 for ! That's already above curve, especially for artifact creatures that rarely even make it to X/X for X in most cases!
Effect: Can't block is a negative, but with stats like that, it's made for attacking anyway. Being able to recur it for the low cost of and a creature in your graveyard (at instant speed!) is insane, considering how fast a clock it is.
Fair cost for Scrapheap Scrounger: At least , maybe
Actual cost:
Body: 2/3 for is pretty fair. Maybe a tiny (tiny!) bit below curve considering that Green can get 2/3s for now and multicolored cards tend to be more powerful than monocolored cards.
Effect: Hardened Scales+, which cost . This has the downside of being on a creature, meaning it's easier to remove, but it also has the upside of being on a creature, meaning you don't lack for a body to put +1/+1 counters on! I think the downside and upside are approximately equal there. In any case, a counter-increasing effect is worth something!
Fair Cost for Winding Constrictor:
Actual cost:
[*} Rishkar, Peema Renegade
Body: 3/3 for in the WORST case. It turns out to be at least 4/4 worth of stats in most cases if you can jump through the incredible hoop of controlling at least ONE other creature before you play him. So his worst case is a little below curve in terms of body (a 3/3 with a keyword for 3 is fair), but his average and best case is definitely above curve.
Effect: Counter-placement, which has some nice synergy and gives you flexiblity. Oh, and also the ability to tap creatures with counters on them for mana, in order to aid you in the efficient dumping of your hand (or ramp you into bigger stuff, or make up for missed land drops, etc.)
Fair Cost for Rishkar, Peema Renegade: It's hard to say...he clearly is worth more than but 4 mana for a 3/3 and a +1/+1 counter seems below par. Maybe if he ditched the mana ability he'd be OK at 3 mana.
Actual cost:
Yeah, I wish Wizards would realize that when you add two numbers together, you don't just take the bigger one and ignore the smaller one, they BOTH have to contribute to the mana cost. Anyway, so those are hyperefficient creatures, and as you can see they're all over Standard now and were recently.
Some additional details and thoughts:
Anyway, hyperefficient creatures are a problem. There's also the problem of "2-for-1" creatures that generate card advantage as soon as they hit the battlefield/die, but I don't think those are as big a problem. (Synergy-based decks can gain larger advantages than those simple 2-for-1 creatures do, and control decks can run better CA/inevitability to out-grind those decks (or turn the corner and kill these decks), but these plans only work if they have enough time, which hyperefficient creatures take away.)
Oh yeah, and another problem of hyperefficient creatures: It turns hitting your land drops on time and curving out perfectly from "advantage into the midgame" into "completely unbeatable unless your opponent curved out equally perfectly", and adds a lot of importance to the die roll.
So what do I think of "make answers better" or "print Counterspell in Standard"? I don't think this is quite the way to go. Think about it, when any spell can be countered for or any creature can be destroyed for , then playing hyperefficient creatures is one of the only ways to avoid falling way behind in tempo! That makes the problem worse, as it crowds out the non-hyperefficient creatures even further! No, I think it's important for removal to scale up in cost with the power of the threats it's removing, so that synergistic non-immediate-advantage creatures, as well as high-raw-power-but-low-efficiency creatures have a fighting chance in the format. Maybe creating more answers that can hit multiple different card types would help, especially against decks like Mardu Vehicles.
However, I do think that the argument "answers make the game unfun for newbies" is unfortunate and flawed. If you play against a newbie and they get sad when you destroy their big creature that they wanted to use to win the game, that makes for a good learning experience. Instruct them that if they wish to avoid that in the future, there are cards they can use to protect their favorite creature. Negate, Dispel, Blossoming Defense, Heroic Intervention, Selfless Spirit, and Supernatural Stamina were made for a reason. Use them!
But back to hyperefficient creatures...I think the planeswalker card type has made creatures more powerful in general, because creatures are the best way to fight them. Think about it...they give off a recurring advantage, and usually win the game if left unchecked, but only a few spells can remove them directly, otherwise you need burn (which often doesn't do enough damage) or creature attacks. Oh, and guess what? If you're ahead on board, they tend to stick around for longer, and get you further ahead on board in the process. And the best way to get ahead on board? HYPEREFFICIENT CREATURES. So because of planeswalkers it's even MORE necessary to play only the most efficient creatures and ignore others. I think this could be addressed by powering down planeswalkers a notch. Increasing the number of removal spells that can hit planeswalkers could also help, but only in a limited fashion (due to priority, any planeswalker-destruction spell, even an instant, allows the planeswalker to generate a small advantage with one of its loyalty abilities before it dies).
Oh yeah, and what happens to hyperefficient creatures in terms of price? They become expensive, especially at Mythic. Trying to make the game "newbie-friendly", while also making it unwinnable for newbies who didn't afford/weren't lucky enough to pull the format's keystone cards, is counterproductive.
I'd really like to see Wizards, just for 4 consecutive Standard sets, develop creatures according to the following rules:
1) No creatures with stats better than X/X for , except that 2/1s and 1/2s for 1 are allowed and the creature can get 1 extra stat point if it's multicolored or has a double-monocolored requirement. No cheating with creatures that have printed stats <X/X for but put +1/+1 counters on themselves to become >X/X for .
2) Any creature with a beneficial effect other than 1-2 on-color evergreen keywords must have its cost increased by AT LEAST 1, and careful consideration as to whether it should cost more (possibly much more).
3) NO ABOVE-THE CURVE-WITH-DRAWBACK CREATURES BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE TERRIBLE AT BALANCING THEM. (I wouldn't be surprised if the BG "-1/-1 counters as drawback" creatures form a very powerful deck.)
Just do it for 4 blocks starting with a fall set, and see how people enjoy Standard at the end. It might be surprisingly fun, with people having to think about more of the cardpool rather than focusing on the hyperefficient creatures.
Of course, anytime a set comes out and the cards aren't all busted, people complain about how they're throwing their money away and the set's terrible. But what happens when a powerful set like Khans comes out? People ooh and aah over all the great multicolored cards, then start to play and complain about Siege Rhino and Mantis Rider. Aether Revolt? Wow these cards are great, I can't wait to buy 4 boxes...and then...ugh, I'm so tired of Winding Constrictor and Heart of Kiran. Like, don't forget that powerful cards aren't all yours, you have to play against them too. And if your Modern/Legacy deck doesn't get new cards, remember that those formats are already chock-full of hyperefficient creatures that are a chore to play against in Standard.
Oh yeah, and Turn-4 two-card win combos aren't good either. Having to always consider it in any deck you build, knowing that any advantage you try to build up can be immediately lost if you let the combo go off even once, makes playing against it extremely demanding (and of course there will be games where you don't draw your interaction and you lose with nothing you could do about it). This format is especially bad with Mardu Vehicles being an extremely aggressive midrange deck (so it goes under the decks that try to go over the top of Copycat Combo, and goes OVER the top of the decks that try to go UNDER Copycat Combo).
And one last note: I thought Green was the color of ramp and big creatures, so why does it get to have 2/1s for 1 like Red and White, which are the colors of small creatures? It's like Green is the color of "most efficient creature no matter where on the curve you are".
Summarized version for the "TL:DR" people:
1) Certain creatures are too mana-efficient, either because their drawbacks don't offset their power or because their mana cost only charges you for their body and not for their (often very powerful) effect. These creatures provide an incredible amount of pressure, taking away the time that more interesting strategies need to develop their gameplan and forcing their way into decks as auto-includes.
2) Planeswalkers exacerbate the problem.
3) More efficient removal/counterspells may not solve the problem as well as people think.
4) The current Standard (one really fast but resilient deck chock-full of noncreature creatures, and one deck with a turn-4 instant win combo) only exacerbates the problem with hyperefficient creatures.
Anyway, that's what I think. A little question for all of you: do you tend to like Standard more when the average CMC of your favorite (reasonably competitive) deck is higher, or lower?
I'm getting this mental image of Gideon +1ing and charging at the opponent for 5, after which this manticore just picks him up from behind and tosses him screaming into the opponent for another 5...not a bad finish, eh?
If you embalm this with Anointed Procession out, you get two of these which can each sacrifice the other, dealing 8 damage. Apparently the two of them grab onto each other, curl into a ball, and just hurl themselves at the enemy...
Edit: Spellskite would be able to change the targets to itself right? So actually there's no way I'd run this over vandalblast
I believe Spellskite can only legally be targeted once by the spell, so if you want to make sure you blow up everything you need to, target Spellskite as one of the X artifacts.
I like Invigorating Boon, especially if other players play a few cycling cards as well.
I've seen a few builds around enchantments, so I think Replenish is card that could used/abused, depending on what comes out of Amonkhet. At the moment there is only Cast Out as an enchantment that cycles.
The older enchantment cards that cycle are very underwhelming like :
Cut to Ribbons is a nice little early-game-value/late-game-reach package. Killing an X/4 for 2 mana isn't a bad deal at all. Rags to Riches is probably much better in Commander than Standard.
As of today's Amonkhet spoilers...I'd be surprised if I'm the only user here who thought of two-color cycling lands?
Though I bet none of us expected basic land types.
(Also, in my version, the cycling cost matched the mana the land produced, so e.g. the land that produced W or U would cost WU to cycle instead of just 2, to make them a non-strict upgrade over the Slippery Karst cycle.)
Archfiend of Ifnir shows that they aren't shying away from "cycling matters" abilities. Fingers crossed for a "cycling matters" commander, preferably in WBG. Even Astral Slide on a legendary body would be great.
It's odd...I think Astral Slide and "cycling matters" cards in general are well-liked, but Wizards doesn't really say anything about their players asking for a "cycling matters" commander so I don't know where one would be on their priority list.
Opponent B, playing Olivia Voldaren, casts Twilight's Call to get some of his Vampires back, but it also gives me 3 creatures from my graveyard, and one of them is Ponyback Brigade. Opponent B immediately takes 72 damage and dies.
I like it in my Alesha as she has a lot of ETB token makers, along with permanentsthattrigger whenever a creature ETBs under my control. The Panharmonicon essentially multiplies the triggers from tokens by 4, as I get twice as many tokens and twice as many triggers from each token. Siege-Gang Commander for 14 +1/+1 counters on my whole team or 28 damage to each opponent is a pretty nice deal.
Thalia laughs at all the cute little Felidar Guardian tokens which enter the battlefield tapped.
2x Felidar Guardian + Panharmonicon = blink all your lands back onto the bf untapped for infinite mana. Now all we need is a way to draw a card when a creature enters the battlefield to draw the entire deck and present the win condition on that turn. I am still cataloging the new cards; will look for that in a little bit.
Whoopsie noodle, we accidentally printed splintertwin in standard again.
I wonder if R&D legitimately missed this one...They didn't even preview Felidar Guardian during preview week, as they typically do with powerful cards; they just snuck it in at the end with the full set review.
Shuffle, draw 7.
Play an Island.
Cast Pull from Tomorrow, X = 0.
Discard a card, Shadowstorm Vizier triggers.
Attack for 2, win.
As for commanders other people play that are on my personal hit list:
Animar, Soul of Elements--Only played against it once but, guess what, Animar on turn 2 and Ancestral Statue on Turn 3. Of course.
Yisan, the Wanderer Bard--I wouldn't mind it if it was just "search up a value creature once per turn cycle" but nooooo, every single Yisan deck has to be ramp ramp ramp, Elves Elves Elves, untap untap untap so that he gets to basically take a turn in between all of our turns. And, of course, since he's tutoring you can expect most games to go the same unless you disrupt his game plan (and with all the ramp, and the general costing only 3, it only sets him back so far).
Bruna, Light of Alabaster--This general is simply too risky to ever let attack, since a whole bunch of Auras will probably attach to her for free and make her into a one-hit kill, make her impossible to remove, or both. Sometimes it doesn't happen--the controller only drew one or two Auras--but you can't know that until it's too late to prevent the worst case from happening! And the worst part is, being a Voltron, she can kill one player quickly and just fail to kill the others for whatever reason, leaving that player stuck out of the game for quite a while.
Anyway, I've got a lot to say, based on my own experiences and others' complaints, so I'll collapse it in spoiler tags.
The important part, with a nice little list of card analyses:
The problem is not "creatures slamming into each other is boring", the problem is "creatures put on too much pressure and don't give synergistic decks time to develop their gameplan". (We can see this by the fact that Mardu Vehicles is called a "midrange" deck yet can inflict up to 11 damage by the end of Turn 3.) Let's call the threats that allow them to exert such ridiculous pressure "hyperefficient creatures". They're creatures that are just so good for their cost that they basically force themselves into any deck in their color, and sometimes force decks to play their colors just to include them! In my experience, they tend to fall into two categories:
1) A way above the curve creature with a "drawback" to balance it out, but the "drawback" turns out to be too weak so the creature provides too much benefit
Prime exhibits: Smuggler's Copter, Heart of Kiran
In this case, the "drawback" is the inability to attack or block unless you pay the Crew cost, but that turns out to be too easy and their stats are too good for how early you can bring them out. Also, the "drawback" turns into a benefit against any sorcery-speed creature removal that doesn't also hit noncreature artifacts.
2) A creature with a body on curve but a powerful effect that the developers conveniently forget to charge the player for, manawise
Some prime examples from recent sets:
Effect: O-Ringing a spell that costs 4 or less Probably worth 2 mana, it's a more powerful "counter" than either Prohibit or Horribly Awry but has the downside that the opponent can get the spell back. Or, compared to Mystic Snake, you get a counter that's better and worse at the same time (exile > counter, but the spell is recoverable) and you get a better body (2/3 flyer vs 2/2).
Fair cost for Spell Queller: At least , although even that makes Ulamog's Nullifier cry at the hoop it has to jump through.
Actual cost:
Effect: Indestructible until end of turn for your whole team. Should be worth a little less than 2 mana (compare Heroic Intervention) However, the body combines with this effect to make it much more powerful, as she's extremely likely to eat an attacker if she comes in to block and your other creatures can eat more attackers. So the effect should be a little over 2 mana.
Oh, there's also the flip thing that makes her into a more powerful creature while simultaneously burning your opponent and wiping weenies off the board. It takes a little work to control when it triggers (emphasis on a little), so I'm not sure what it should cost, but it definitely shouldn't be free.
Fair cost for Archangel Avacyn: AT LEAST , her power level would drop off significantly at since her effects are both situational, but they shouldn't be free, that's for sure!
Actual cost:
Effect: Can't block is a negative, but with stats like that, it's made for attacking anyway. Being able to recur it for the low cost of and a creature in your graveyard (at instant speed!) is insane, considering how fast a clock it is.
Fair cost for Scrapheap Scrounger: At least , maybe
Actual cost:
Effect: Hardened Scales+, which cost . This has the downside of being on a creature, meaning it's easier to remove, but it also has the upside of being on a creature, meaning you don't lack for a body to put +1/+1 counters on! I think the downside and upside are approximately equal there. In any case, a counter-increasing effect is worth something!
Fair Cost for Winding Constrictor:
Actual cost:
[*} Rishkar, Peema Renegade
Body: 3/3 for in the WORST case. It turns out to be at least 4/4 worth of stats in most cases if you can jump through the incredible hoop of controlling at least ONE other creature before you play him. So his worst case is a little below curve in terms of body (a 3/3 with a keyword for 3 is fair), but his average and best case is definitely above curve.
Effect: Counter-placement, which has some nice synergy and gives you flexiblity. Oh, and also the ability to tap creatures with counters on them for mana, in order to aid you in the efficient dumping of your hand (or ramp you into bigger stuff, or make up for missed land drops, etc.)
Fair Cost for Rishkar, Peema Renegade: It's hard to say...he clearly is worth more than but 4 mana for a 3/3 and a +1/+1 counter seems below par. Maybe if he ditched the mana ability he'd be OK at 3 mana.
Actual cost:
Yeah, I wish Wizards would realize that when you add two numbers together, you don't just take the bigger one and ignore the smaller one, they BOTH have to contribute to the mana cost. Anyway, so those are hyperefficient creatures, and as you can see they're all over Standard now and were recently.
Some additional details and thoughts:
Anyway, hyperefficient creatures are a problem. There's also the problem of "2-for-1" creatures that generate card advantage as soon as they hit the battlefield/die, but I don't think those are as big a problem. (Synergy-based decks can gain larger advantages than those simple 2-for-1 creatures do, and control decks can run better CA/inevitability to out-grind those decks (or turn the corner and kill these decks), but these plans only work if they have enough time, which hyperefficient creatures take away.)
Oh yeah, and another problem of hyperefficient creatures: It turns hitting your land drops on time and curving out perfectly from "advantage into the midgame" into "completely unbeatable unless your opponent curved out equally perfectly", and adds a lot of importance to the die roll.
So what do I think of "make answers better" or "print Counterspell in Standard"? I don't think this is quite the way to go. Think about it, when any spell can be countered for or any creature can be destroyed for , then playing hyperefficient creatures is one of the only ways to avoid falling way behind in tempo! That makes the problem worse, as it crowds out the non-hyperefficient creatures even further! No, I think it's important for removal to scale up in cost with the power of the threats it's removing, so that synergistic non-immediate-advantage creatures, as well as high-raw-power-but-low-efficiency creatures have a fighting chance in the format. Maybe creating more answers that can hit multiple different card types would help, especially against decks like Mardu Vehicles.
However, I do think that the argument "answers make the game unfun for newbies" is unfortunate and flawed. If you play against a newbie and they get sad when you destroy their big creature that they wanted to use to win the game, that makes for a good learning experience. Instruct them that if they wish to avoid that in the future, there are cards they can use to protect their favorite creature. Negate, Dispel, Blossoming Defense, Heroic Intervention, Selfless Spirit, and Supernatural Stamina were made for a reason. Use them!
But back to hyperefficient creatures...I think the planeswalker card type has made creatures more powerful in general, because creatures are the best way to fight them. Think about it...they give off a recurring advantage, and usually win the game if left unchecked, but only a few spells can remove them directly, otherwise you need burn (which often doesn't do enough damage) or creature attacks. Oh, and guess what? If you're ahead on board, they tend to stick around for longer, and get you further ahead on board in the process. And the best way to get ahead on board? HYPEREFFICIENT CREATURES. So because of planeswalkers it's even MORE necessary to play only the most efficient creatures and ignore others. I think this could be addressed by powering down planeswalkers a notch. Increasing the number of removal spells that can hit planeswalkers could also help, but only in a limited fashion (due to priority, any planeswalker-destruction spell, even an instant, allows the planeswalker to generate a small advantage with one of its loyalty abilities before it dies).
Oh yeah, and what happens to hyperefficient creatures in terms of price? They become expensive, especially at Mythic. Trying to make the game "newbie-friendly", while also making it unwinnable for newbies who didn't afford/weren't lucky enough to pull the format's keystone cards, is counterproductive.
I'd really like to see Wizards, just for 4 consecutive Standard sets, develop creatures according to the following rules:
1) No creatures with stats better than X/X for , except that 2/1s and 1/2s for 1 are allowed and the creature can get 1 extra stat point if it's multicolored or has a double-monocolored requirement. No cheating with creatures that have printed stats <X/X for but put +1/+1 counters on themselves to become >X/X for .
2) Any creature with a beneficial effect other than 1-2 on-color evergreen keywords must have its cost increased by AT LEAST 1, and careful consideration as to whether it should cost more (possibly much more).
3) NO ABOVE-THE CURVE-WITH-DRAWBACK CREATURES BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE TERRIBLE AT BALANCING THEM. (I wouldn't be surprised if the BG "-1/-1 counters as drawback" creatures form a very powerful deck.)
Just do it for 4 blocks starting with a fall set, and see how people enjoy Standard at the end. It might be surprisingly fun, with people having to think about more of the cardpool rather than focusing on the hyperefficient creatures.
Of course, anytime a set comes out and the cards aren't all busted, people complain about how they're throwing their money away and the set's terrible. But what happens when a powerful set like Khans comes out? People ooh and aah over all the great multicolored cards, then start to play and complain about Siege Rhino and Mantis Rider. Aether Revolt? Wow these cards are great, I can't wait to buy 4 boxes...and then...ugh, I'm so tired of Winding Constrictor and Heart of Kiran. Like, don't forget that powerful cards aren't all yours, you have to play against them too. And if your Modern/Legacy deck doesn't get new cards, remember that those formats are already chock-full of hyperefficient creatures that are a chore to play against in Standard.
Oh yeah, and Turn-4 two-card win combos aren't good either. Having to always consider it in any deck you build, knowing that any advantage you try to build up can be immediately lost if you let the combo go off even once, makes playing against it extremely demanding (and of course there will be games where you don't draw your interaction and you lose with nothing you could do about it). This format is especially bad with Mardu Vehicles being an extremely aggressive midrange deck (so it goes under the decks that try to go over the top of Copycat Combo, and goes OVER the top of the decks that try to go UNDER Copycat Combo).
And one last note: I thought Green was the color of ramp and big creatures, so why does it get to have 2/1s for 1 like Red and White, which are the colors of small creatures? It's like Green is the color of "most efficient creature no matter where on the curve you are".
Summarized version for the "TL:DR" people:
1) Certain creatures are too mana-efficient, either because their drawbacks don't offset their power or because their mana cost only charges you for their body and not for their (often very powerful) effect. These creatures provide an incredible amount of pressure, taking away the time that more interesting strategies need to develop their gameplan and forcing their way into decks as auto-includes.
2) Planeswalkers exacerbate the problem.
3) More efficient removal/counterspells may not solve the problem as well as people think.
4) The current Standard (one really fast but resilient deck chock-full of noncreature creatures, and one deck with a turn-4 instant win combo) only exacerbates the problem with hyperefficient creatures.
Anyway, that's what I think. A little question for all of you: do you tend to like Standard more when the average CMC of your favorite (reasonably competitive) deck is higher, or lower?
If you embalm this with Anointed Procession out, you get two of these which can each sacrifice the other, dealing 8 damage. Apparently the two of them grab onto each other, curl into a ball, and just hurl themselves at the enemy...
I believe Spellskite can only legally be targeted once by the spell, so if you want to make sure you blow up everything you need to, target Spellskite as one of the X artifacts.
Let's not forget Decree of Silence! Expensive, but potentially very powerful if you can reanimate it.
First we have the double-a-creature's-power-into-Aftermath-double-strike card,
then we have the extra-combat-phase guy,
and now straight-up double-all-damage-you-deal-for-a-turn? With an added-value back half just because? Yikes, that could get out of hand real fast.
Cut to Ribbons is a nice little early-game-value/late-game-reach package. Killing an X/4 for 2 mana isn't a bad deal at all. Rags to Riches is probably much better in Commander than Standard.
Though I bet none of us expected basic land types.
(Also, in my version, the cycling cost matched the mana the land produced, so e.g. the land that produced W or U would cost WU to cycle instead of just 2, to make them a non-strict upgrade over the Slippery Karst cycle.)
It's odd...I think Astral Slide and "cycling matters" cards in general are well-liked, but Wizards doesn't really say anything about their players asking for a "cycling matters" commander so I don't know where one would be on their priority list.
Opponent A, playing Mayael the Anima, has Gisela, Blade of Goldnight on board.
Opponent B, playing Olivia Voldaren, casts Twilight's Call to get some of his Vampires back, but it also gives me 3 creatures from my graveyard, and one of them is Ponyback Brigade. Opponent B immediately takes 72 damage and dies.
Do-do-do-do-doot Inspector Thraben!
I wonder if R&D legitimately missed this one...They didn't even preview Felidar Guardian during preview week, as they typically do with powerful cards; they just snuck it in at the end with the full set review.
It's like, I thought Modern was supposed to be the "turn 4 format". First Aetherworks Marvel into Emrakul, the Promised End, now this...