All users will need to merge their MTGSalvation account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Sept 25th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
Magic Market Index for March 16th 2018
All Sets Are Good: Saviors of Kamigawa
Dominaria Spoiler Digest - Who's Who and What's What from the Release Notes
  • posted a message on Coalition Victory
    Quote from Impossible »
    I see your Grand Abolisher and raise you a Platinum Angel. In all honesty, I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here but the fact that CV (or anything else for that matter) is susceptible to already commonly played answers like spot creature removal is definitely something worth talking about. If everyone is already packing the proper answers, it is far less likely that thing will become problematic.

    So according to this, we should just unban Primeval Titan, Prophet of Kruphix, Braids, Cabal Minion, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary and Sylvan Primordial because they're all "suspectible to removal", right?

    The argument "Dies to removal" holds no ground in any discussion. Being harder to remove/interact with is a strike against a card, for sure, but being easy to remove does not neccesarily make a card fair to play.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on [[Official]] Unreleased and New Card Discussion

    You sure about them not being on this site yet?
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Jodah, Archmage Eternal in Commander/EDH
    It's the same case as with General Tazri who is the head of most 5cc combowombo competitive EDH decks.
    Posted in: New Card Discussion
  • posted a message on Coalition Victory
    This whole debate has been going back-and-forth over the same points constantly. I do want to point out specifically the Enter the Infinite comparison.

    If I cast EtI, under normal circumstances, the game will end for me within TWO turns. TWO. Not one. TWO. I get to draw a card for the turn, and then the turn after I'm dead. Gives two turn cycles to do something about it.

    Now, of course, you could argue "But you'd just cast Lab Man and evoke Mulldrifter and be done with it." Sure. That's possible. But at that point, I've spent 11 mana in one turn, 6 mana the next, and NOBODY DID ANYTHING about it in a full turn cycle. That's kinda like me resolving Mortal Combat and the entire turn cycle goes by and nothing happens, thus triggering my win.

    Wins like that aren't an issue. There was ample counterplay possible. A full turn to go through the motions. And nothing was done.

    Now, if you look further, you'll note cards like Enter the Infinite, Doomsday, Mortal Combat...they all require more cards than just themselves to actually win. They all require specific cards to be built in the deck, whether it's Omniscience/Lab Man (ETI), specific Doomsdayable stacks, a way to quickly get 20+ creatures in the yard...none are a one-card-i-win button. They require specific deckbuilding.

    Beyond that, each of those cards can be used just as a cool trick in a deck. A gy-using deck might just consider slotting in a Mortal Combat in order to give it another angle of attack.

    Coalition Victory, again, only requires one slot. Why does this matter, you asked, well...

    Each of the other "big wincon cards" CAN be used without going for the instant kill. They require one of two things: Constraint or Ignorance. Constraint fits within the RC mantra of "Build casually, play competitively". If the strongest combowombo I want to play with T&N is Avenger of Zendikar and Regal Force, then who are you to tell me I'm playing it wrong for not going with MikeTrike instead? I adapt my decks to the powerlevel of my meta. Many people do.

    When you add Coalition Victory however, there's no other deckbuilding decisions to be made. You run lands. You run your commander. Those are things you cannot avoid in EDH. Thus, no matter what you do, eventually you'll reach a state of "And now CV wins". This is regardless of how the game so far has panned out. You could argue things like countermagic and instant removal but THAT GOES FOR EVERY COMBO AND IS NOT AN ARGUMENT. And even then, what if I just put down something like, say, Grand Abolisher? I'm quite good at the "Mental Magic Counter Game" so don't try that game with me, it's not a valid argument in any way.

    So that's the thing. Having a card that, no matter what the game before has done reads "Now you win the game and no I don't have any other modes" is not good for the game.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on [[Official]] Unreleased and New Card Discussion
    So Squee, the Immortal is an infinite combo with Food Chain. Squee can be tutored by a whole host of tutors, such as Thalia's Lancers, Imperial Recruiter, Recruiter of the Guard, and of course the regular host of instant/sorcery creature tutors mostly found in Green.

    Sticking to Naya, you have Academy Rector, Enlightened Tutor, Idyllic Tutor and a few others who can fetch Food Chain.

    So then you need a way to abuse the infinite creature-mana. X-cost creatures such as Genesis Hydra look like a slam-dunk. But you also have infinite ETB triggers so Purphoros, God of the Forge and Impact Tremors become strong possibilities. If you want to go even meaner, the combination of Mycosynth Lattice and Aura Shards will completely wipe the opponent's boards. Alternately, once you have that infinite mana you can just Goblin Bombardment your Squee away over and over again.

    Or if you want to go even more complicated, if you use Zacama, Primal Calamity as your commander you can turn that infinite creature-only-mana into Infinite-Mana-For-Whatever-You-Want. Just play him, untap your lands, tap them, sac Zacama to the Food Chain, rinse and repeat for more mana. Which Zacama can then use to nuke your opponent's fields and give you infinite life.

    Now, keep in mind that all this is only in Naya. You even have Eternal Scourge as a backup Food Chain piece but he's a wee bit harder to pull up from your deck due to his higher stats.

    And I don't even want to think just what this will do for the 5cc Tazri Food Chain deck.........
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [Dominaria] Legends discussion
    I do like that we're actually getting interesting Boros commanders this time around. It's a colour combo sorely lacking in the "Commanders That Do Stuff Aside From Going Into The Red Zome" department.

    Now, Firesong and Sunspeaker may be expensive, but I just want to live the dream of doing a "Turn 7, cast Firesong and Sunspeaker, cast Blasphemous Act" once. It's going to be glorious.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Noncreature Commanders: good or bad?
    I'd prefer to just stick to creatures, though I wouldn't be opposed to some OLDwalkers as new commanders either. With which I mean the likes of Lord Windgrace, Serra, Tevesh Szat, Feroz...the likes. They feel epic/awesome enough to be a commander.

    Of those released in C14, Freyalise, Pre-Mending Nahiri, Teferi and Ob Nixilis all (kinda) filled that bill. Daretti, cool as he is, felt underwhelming as a character in response cause he's not an oldwalker. To me, the oldwalkers are the ones with enough oomph to be leaders of decks, the neowalkers aren't.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Coalition Victory
    Quote from Impossible »
    Quote from Buffsam89 »
    The only reason you and impossible are creating cards is because you are trying to move the line in the sand, simply because you have nothing that’s legal, or in print for that matter, to compare it to. At that point, what are we discussing? If CV was a different card and said different things it wouldn’t need to be banned?

    There is value in discussing Coalition Victory. What I cannot see value in is discussing these hypotheticals. You are muddying the waters and making it near-Impossible to have a relevant discussion about the card by creating these scenarios that just have no real background to them.
    To be fair, it's more like you (plural) keep moving the goalposts. Over the course of this thread I've given numerous examples of cards that can and do function similarly to CV, enough to raise doubts about it's necessity on the ban list. Most of the responses have been "but those cards don't literally say 'win the game' on them" or some variation of "but those cards have fair uses". I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the "fair use" of Enter the Infinite is. That card ends the game with more certainty than CV ever did.

    As for the thought experiments, they are a oft used way to help re-imagine a problem or argument and come at it from a different angle. If you don't see the value in that I don't really know what to say. Perhaps this isn't the thread for you.

    Okay, so if I ramp up to 11 mana and I cast Enter the Infinite, have I won the game?

    No, I have not. I still have to play all those cards. And without Omniscience or Dream Halls or something that's gonna be hard.

    You haven't given a single card yet that comes even close to rivalling Coalition Victory in sheer "End the game now" potentional. Even T&N, which is already often counted among the "Not many would hate seeing this get banned" camp has more counterplays, requires more deck slots and more work.

    As stated before. The card IS on the banlist. YOU should make a compelling argument about why that card should be unbanned, and no, "so the kiddies know just what exactly beat them" is not a good argument.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Coalition Victory
    Quote from Impossible »
    Quote from LouCypher »
    And it's a fact - one that you cannot argue - that Coalition Victory can do anything else other than "Win the game or bust". All those other cards can. And therein lies the difference.
    Okay, I have a hypothetical for you. Imagine this card:

    Searching for Victory 3WUBRG
    Search your library for up to one creature card, put it onto the battlefield, then shuffle your library.
    You win the game if you control a land of each basic land type and a creature of each color.

    Do you think this card would need to be banned?

    That one? Yes. The 5GGG version ArrogantAxolotl posted? That one I'd be willing to try out.

    You could indeed argue your version does have fair uses, but it's still very much a card that's too linear and, well, hard NOT to break. To go back to the comparison of T&N: Let's say you're new to the game and you played a few months of standard, and now you're starting to get into EDH. You picked up some cards from friends among which T&N and Your Version Of Coalition Victory. Which of these cards do you think this new player will be able to "break" more easily? That's a comparison that does need to be looked at. Someone new playing T&N might very well just grab Worldspine Wurm and Xenagos because that's a badass play. They might even not know about the insta-win buttons at that point (Though that chance quickly diminishes the moment you start playing more).

    Whereas your version spells it out perfectly for them.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Coalition Victory
    Quote from Ryperior74 »
    As for the no other card strait up said "you win the game" on resolve sorcery spell

    Whoever said this is wrong

    I see you all forgot about approach of the second sun you just cast it twice for the win.

    As a matter of fact not to mention it's secretly has "can't be countered" because it's a cast trigger just like the eldrazis have

    Except you need to cast that one twice, which is quite a difference.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Coalition Victory
    The biggest point comes from this quote:

    Despite all of the bitching, moaning, and arbitrary lines in the sand some people seem to be drawing, you know deep down that the majority of the cards I've used as examples thus far in the thread (T&N, Enter the Infinite, Omniscience, Rise of the Dark Realms, Doomsday, Ad Nauseam, so on and so forth) directly or indirectly lead to the game ending once resolved a vast majority of the time. That's why people play them to begin with. Some are better at their job, some are worse. Some are more "competitive" and some are less. But they all serve the same purpose when you slot them into your deck.

    The biggest point is that each of those cards, whether you like it or not, do have more casual applications to various degrees. This especially goes for the first 4 cards in your example. None of them actually win the game on their own, they require a bit more than just "Play your lands and your general like you are likely to do each game you play anyway".

    You have to keep in mind the target audience for the game. Hermit Druid, another card you touched upon, isn't banned because unless you're running the very specific build that causes early KO's, it's not really a great card. Like sure there's a few archetypes that'll like having him, but you get where I'm going there.

    This also goes for Doomsday and Ad Nauseam. Neither are cards that an average mid-power EDH player is going to look at and be like "I'm going to stuff this in my deck for *****s and giggles" and then oops accidentally the game is broken. They require specific builds. Ad Nauseam is in my Edgar Markov deck where it generally reads 3BB: Draw 7 cards, lose 6 life or something in that general area. Is that broken? Strong, for sure.

    Now the other cards you're prone to point at do have casual applications that translate to other things than "Win the game on the spot". While I do think Omniscience and Enter the Infinite are hilariously poor design (they stem from an era I like to call "WOTC throwing ***** at commander and see what sticks while injecting a lot of bad stuff into the format" which stretches from roughly the release of the first commander set to Theros) both do give the potentional for fun and interesting interactions depending on the playgroup. This goes for just about every other card you've listed as well.

    And it's a fact - one that you cannot argue - that Coalition Victory can do anything else other than "Win the game or bust". All those other cards can. And therein lies the difference.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Random Card of the Day: Spring Cleaning
    Abduction is such a nasty word. I prefer the term "Surprise Adoption".
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Magus of the Wheel (Rare)
    A 3/3 for EDH...yeah no, that's really not where red wants to be. Red needs the hand refill more than anything. Vomit out hand -> Wheel -> Resume vomiting hand.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [[Primer]] [PAUPER/BUDGET] Crushing Dreams on a Budget - Child of Alara
    The wincon would probably look different. The full-powered version can much more reliably keep bringing Child back, nuke the field, reanimate, nuke again, etc etc. The whole thing that's making this deck actually FUN is the puzzle it presents that you need to win with just commons.
    Posted in: Variant Commander
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.