-
- PhroX
- Registered User
-
Member for 12 years, 6 months, and 1 day
Last active Wed, Jun, 17 2020 11:19:39
- 0 Followers
- 1,418 Total Posts
- 285 Thanks
-
Jun 27, 2019
12
Jivanmukta posted a message on Sheldon's Thoughts on infinite combosCombos don't ruin games, players do. Literally every single issue in EDH is fixed by communicating.Posted in: Commander (EDH) -
May 23, 20194
benjameenbear posted a message on Sisay, Weatherlight Captain Let's brewGeez guys, I can't believe no one has mentioned this yet. Pssh.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
The correct way to build Sisay is to build a deck that features the Storyline Arc for the Invasion block! I think every member of the Weatherlight crew now has physically printed copies that exist, so you should build a Weatherlight Tribal deck. They all conveniently happen to be Legendary creatures too, so that you have synergy with Sisay. You could even include the Legends from the new Weatherlight crew in Dominaria too!
Then, when they finally print Yawgmoth, you can have an awesome Duel between Sisay and Yawgmoth, a way to recreate the final battle of the Invasion block!
That is all. -
May 1, 20192
DirkGently posted a message on Orzhov spot removal choicesIt's always a bit dependent on play patterns and meta. Primarily - how important answering early threats is, how many combos need to be interacted with at instant-speed and which specific pieces need to be answered, how much mana is reasonable to leave up, how much exile matters, etc.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
Anguished Unmaking > Utter end, unmake, and morify, almost always. More flexibility at the cost, and the life loss is pretty irrelevant.
Personally I would consider vindicate to be the worst of all of them. Sorcery speed absolutely kills it imo. Instant-speed is way more effective against combo and lets you wait as long as possible for someone else to answer it, and to make sure it's really YOUR problem and not someone else's. On the other hand, it does hit lands. So some metas might want that enough to justify the other downsides. I guess it's still probably better than unmake, for the flexibility.
Despark is a little tougher since it really will depend on meta - many of the best combos totally circumvent it. But it is only 2 mana. So if you want to minimize mana kept up and aren't worried about food chain combos and like, it could be great. Maybe the best in a more casual environment since it lets you develop the most while keeping it up, and probably most stuff that really matters will cost more than 3.
But in vacuum...
I'd say anguished unmaking > despark > utter end > mortify > vindicate > unmake.
EDIT: also worth pointing out that I'd consider many mono-w and mono-b answers better than many of these, especially STP and PTE. I'm also a big proponent of oblation. -
Apr 19, 20193
GloriousGoose posted a message on The Best Draw Cards in EDHctrl+fPosted in: Commander (EDH)
"ad nau"
0/0
Oh, you guys.
Ad Nauseam is probably the most powerful draw spell in the format if your deck is set up to abuse it, and still very good even when used "fairly." If your average cmc is around 2 or less including lands and your deck contains black, it's probably worth running even if you don't draw your whole deck. -
Mar 16, 2019
2
GloriousGoose posted a message on Fun deck idea!! TRUMP themed edh deckPosted in: Multiplayer Commander Decklists -
Feb 28, 2019
4
DirkGently posted a message on “Boros sucks” is a culture problem.Man, I'm really starting to get tired of this pattern. I make an effort to find an objective metric of how strong a color combination is, criticisms get leveled at that methodology (most of which are fair, to be clear, it's really hard to find a good methodology for this sort of thing) and then the argument immediately goes right back to anecdotal evidence. It's not evidence. I don't care that your gisela deck can beat other decks, it's not relevant. At all.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
I'm not offering to build a deck (in any color combination) better than some random boros deck, of course that would be easy. I'm saying, pick any budget you want, build any boros deck you want. The best boros deck (relative to budget) you can possibly imagine. You get all the cards too. And it will still be trivial to build a better deck in almost any other color combo with that same budget, even when you get to pick all the parameters. Not "well, it'll be slightly worse for boros in most strata of budgets" but "building a better deck at any budget is trivially easy because boros is so bad." It doesn't even really matter how you're defining goodness either. The gap is going to be big enough that most reasonable people are going to agree that the boros deck is worse in any meta.
If you want some further evidence, how often do people complain about how weak other color combinations are? Surely there's some second-worst color combination. Orzhov, maybe? Or maybe rakdos? Could be selesnya. Or perhaps gruul. I don't even really have a guess, tbh. They're all close enough that it's hard to tell. But it's REAL easy to tell who the worst is. Easy enough that they're basically the only color combination that has threads like this frequently. Does that maybe seem indicative of something to you?
I mean, I get why people on side "boros = fine" don't try to offer any data-driven evidence. For one thing, it's really hard to find and really easy to tear down. For a second thing, you know it wouldn't support your position. So keep telling us about how boros is fine but just "requires more care when building". Which is literally the problem, but you don't seem to realize it. -
Feb 24, 2019
1
Muspellsheimr posted a message on Print this Wizards (so I can play it in EDH)Talisman of Corruption 2Posted in: Commander (EDH)
Artifact
t: Add C.
t: Add W or B. Talisman of Corruption deals 1 damage to you.
Talisman of Ingenuity 2
Artifact
t: Add C.
t: Add U or R. Talisman of Ingenuity deals 1 damage to you.
Talisman of Decay 2
Artifact
t: Add C.
t: Add B or G. Talisman of Decay deals 1 damage to you.
Talisman of ? 2
Artifact
t: Add C.
t: Add R or W. Talisman of ? deals 1 damage to you.
Talisman of ? 2
Artifact
t: Add C.
t: Add G or U. Talisman of ? deals 1 damage to you.
Side note: Ravnica would have been an excellent place to put these (and reprints of the other five), instead of those awful Lockets -
Feb 1, 2019
3
benjameenbear posted a message on cEDH Forum: Philosophy & EtiquettePosted in: Competitive Commander (cEDH)cEDH Philosophy & cEDH Forum Etiquette
What is Competitive Commander, or cEDH?
First, I want to warmly welcome you to the Competitive Commander Forum! There are many ways to play our most beloved format and this forum is for you cEDH’ers out there who are wanting to have a dedicated space to discuss strategy, card choices, decklists, and other ideas in a safe environment.
But, I feel like it’s important for you, dear reader, to determine if this is the type of forum that best suits your playstyle and the type of Commander experience you’re looking for. When the format of Elder Dragon Highlander was initially created, it was meant to convey an enjoyable and social game where you could play the best singleton deck from the best cards possible (barring the cards on the banlist, of course) in all of Magic’s history. With the missionary efforts of the Rules Committee, particularly by Bennie Smith and Sheldon Menery from StarCityGames.com, this format has grown to be quite possibly the largest group of Magic: The Gathering players in the world. And what people define as an enjoyable game differs GREATLY from person to person. Many players prefer the battlecruiser type of mentality, where swingy plays, massive board states, and subtle politicking are the name of the game. Others prefer a more competitive experience, looking to actively refine their decklists, gameplay, strategy development, and card interactions to win as many games as possible.
But this cEDH forum caters to Commander players who generally subscribe to the competitive philosophy I mentioned: competitive, efficient, and, ultimately, winning strategies and decklists.
Both ideologies are FAIR AND VALID. I really want to emphasize this. Commander as a format hinges on the social contract that you make with your playgroup. If your playgroup is ok with cards like Stasis and Ad Nasueam, and looks to infinitely loop Timetwister while making a bajillion Swans in the most efficient manner possible, that’s ok. If your playgroup loves to instead Tooth and Nail for value instead of a game-winning combo, that’s ok too.
So, in an effort to help guide you to the proper forum and ensure that you have the highest quality experience possible on MTGSalvation.com, I’d like to take a few moments and explain what Competitive Commander, or cEDH, entails as a philosophy and mindset. These are simply general principles/guidelines that form the backbone of how a Competitive Commander player views the Commander experience and gameplay and NOT a mold that every cEDH player fits into.
- Generally speaking, cEDH decks and game play are looking to streamline their interactions so that they can do as many things possible during a turn cycle. Consequently, the average curve for a cEDH decklist is around 1.5-2.5, often lower than 2. cEDH therefore tends to prioritize CMC considerations higher than a regular Commander player would. This also leads to lower land counts for cEDH decklists as a byproduct, since drawing a land in the Mid/Late-Game is basically a wasted turn from a competitive mindset. A 34 land count is considered to be an extremely high land count, with most lists sitting around 29-32 lands, generally speaking.
- cEDH decklists are designed at optimizing win percentage and reducing variance between games. That's why many cEDH decks usually include 6+ tutor effects within their decklist, whereas a regular Commander player might enjoy the variance their less tutor-heavy lists provide.
- To build on this previous point, there is a common misconception that cEDH decks “win on T2 or T3 EVERY GAME”. This is not accurate. cEDH decks look to be relevant on T2 or T3. This means that the overall deck strategy of any particular decklist should be in the stages of developing their Mid/Late Game strategy on T2 or T3. This means combo decks are/have tutored a few times to assemble their combos. Stax decks are looking to deploy their disruption with protection. Mid-Range decks are trying to establish card advantage engines while holding up interaction. All of these things normally occur relatively early in a game, which influences deck design and strategy.
- cEDH designs decklists and evaluates card choices with NO budget constraints. For example, pretty much every blue deck that's qualified as cEDH plays Timetwister and will continue to play 'Twister for as long as it is legal even though it's a piece of Power 9 and costs upwards of $1,000.00. cEDH players don't care. It's arguably the best draw 7 in the format and their cEDH playgroup will NOT mind a player proxying up a copy/copies of the expensive cards so that every deck at the table is playing optimally.
- cEDH decks and playgroups, generally speaking, don't follow house rules or any other subjective constraints. Implementing house rules is all and well for a regular Commander playgroup, but cEDH decklists are aiming to win as frequently and as quickly as possible. For example, I know of some groups who actively discourage taking infinite turns or executing a combo, with protection, on Turn 4. Nope, not in a cEDH game. It's a no holds barred mentality that could be perceived as ruthless or antagonistic to a normal Commander player/playgroup.
- Finally, cEDH decks are playing the most broken combos available and are constantly looking to streamline them even further in minimizing mana costs and deckspace costs. My Tasigur Flash Hulk deck, while labeled Competitive, has an admittedly clunky combo with the particular Flash Hulk chain with cards that may not be optimal for the deck's strategy as a whole. My list is therefore optimized in such a way as to make those pieces less useless or more appealing if naturally drawn.
cEDH Forum Etiquette
Great, now that you’ve determined that you want to be in the cEDH forum, it’s important to know what type of communications we expect you to have while in this forum. A lot of work and persuasion has gone into creating this cEDH forum and we DO NOT want this forum to have a negative reputation in any way, shape, or form. As such, these guidelines should influence how you interact within the forum and threads posted here. I would hope that these are obvious principles that most human beings can appreciate, but there are some corner cases where belligerent posters can make for an unpleasant experience for users as a whole.
- First and foremost, please treat everyone with respect and kindness. Sarcasm is fine when used sparingly. Comments like “ur deck sucks lol play Flash Hulk instead” are not welcome here. Any perceived condescension or baseless criticism of a user/commentator is intolerable and will be dealt with summarily and efficiently as per the MTGSalvation forum rules.
- Criticism is in fact welcome on these threads! But, before you criticize a card choice or deck construction, be sure that you have reasoning behind your criticism. Baseless criticism is useless and harmful. Thoughtful criticism is not. Please remember this principle as you interact with each other on this forum and comment on one another’s posts!
- As some MTGSalvation users are more active on the site than others, they can accrue levels of prestige within the site, such as “Archmage” or “Archmage Overlord” under their tag. Regardless of how active or established an MTGSal user is or isn’t, it is expected that you will maintain the same level of civility and consideration that you would give to an entrenched MTGSalvation user as to someone who has just started their MTGSalvation experience.
- Finally, remember that if you do receive criticism, and you’re feeling hurt about it or think that the criticism was presented poorly, I highly recommend that you reach out to the user directly via PM and clarify the situation. This is the internet. 75% of a human being’s communication method (body language and voice tone) are NOT present in this medium. So while you may take a comment as being too harsh or too critical, do recognize that the commentator is probably coming from a good place. We’re human beings interacting with each other virtually, where the chances of miscommunication are massively increased, so remember to be good to each other and assume the best. It will build your reputation as a poster on MTGSalvation and allow you to influence people more effectively, despite the trolls that DO exist on the internet.
Now that you understand what it is exactly we expect of you, please go forth and participate in this forum!
Sincerely,
Benjameenbear, the Primer Committee, and the MTGSalvation Admins
-
Feb 12, 2019
2
DirkGently posted a message on Best Black Politics general?Of course, you never can trust people these daysPosted in: Commander (EDH)
Naturally being aware of what might happen down the line is important threat assessment - that stony silence looks fine up until they play a mycosynth lattice. A savvy player might hold up removal or a counter as insurance, while benefiting from the situation until it becomes necessary to intervene. No reason to go trading cards 1:1 until it becomes YOUR problem. And in the land equilibrium case, you can probably bet the wort player is a lot more interested in dealing with it than you are. Let them exhaust their resources solving it, at least until it becomes a significant problem for you and it's clear the wort player doesn't have the right cards. You get the idea. -
Feb 12, 2019
2
DirkGently posted a message on Best Black Politics general?If you had a land equilibrium and I knew one or more of the other decks was a ramp deck (say wort, the raidmother) and my deck wasn't particularly high-mana or had a lot of artifact ramp, then I could certainly see being in favor of it. After all, it's going to push the wort player to fight the stax player, and I'm not particularly hampered, this seems like a pretty good tradeoff.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
And then there are other things that might not affect me at all, but might affect certain players a lot. Like, say, stony silence if I'm playing a deck with very few artifacts. No skin off my back. Stax away.
Politics is kind of nebulously defined in commander, but personally I would apply it to any situation where you're considering the reaction of the table when making decisions. In 1v1 you're motivated simply to make the best play, which will give you as much advantage and your opponent as little as possible. But in commander things aren't so simple, sometimes it's worth letting someone else have an advantage because it hampers someone else, or even because it can take the heat off what you're doing or planning to do. Being able to read the table like this is, imo, core strategy to the format and not optional for anyone trying to be good at the game, regardless of what type of deck they're playing. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1
Combos without the support of a dedicated deck on the other hand, well, I can't really see a problem. Yes, sure, they win the game, but so do all sorts of things in this format. What's the difference in losing to a combo on turn 15 and losing to some fatties punching you on turn 15? Despite the claims, combos rarely "come from nowhere" - there's usually plenty of development and play before someone will be in a position to combo, plus there's all sorts of non-infinite things that can go from nonthreatening to lethal very quickly, even more so if you're simply looking at lethal for one player. I've got a Titania, Protector of Argoth deck that regularly goes from untapping with nothing but the general and lands on the board to killing the table that turn. Nothing infinite there (there is technically a way to go infinite in the deck, but I have to draw my deck first, so...), but is there any real difference in the impact?
And for the record, my decks range from Karador Spirit Tribal to Tasigur Sceptre combo, so you can see I love the janky highly "casual" side of the format as well as the competitive one.
1
As for grave hate, yeah, I wouldn't really rely on Bojuka Bog to stop real graveyard shenanigans thanks to it being a one shot sorcery speed effect. Having a creature that you can abuse with Chainer is much more reliable - Agent of Erebos, Crypt Creeper, Withered Wretch etc.
1
If you're gonna list Char, at least include the original too: Psionic Blast. No-one expects blue burn.
But yeah, I agree with these. Bolt in particular is a great EDH card. And Bolt the Bird is still good advice.
1
I'll start with the ridiculous: Chains of Mephistopheles is pretty damn sweet when everyone's graveyards are basically a second (and third, fourth and fifth) hand for you. Plus, well Chains, Chainer, it just fits. But unless you've got one lying around spare, you're probably not going to be adding it to the deck....
Still not cheap money wise, but Xiahou Dun, the One-Eyed is very solid addition to the recursion package, letting you get back any black card for BBB and 3 life.
If you want some more removal, Shriekmaw and Bone Shredder fit pretty well, being both cheap and self sacrificing. They do have conditions on what they can kill, so you do want other unconditional options, but as part of a larger removal package, they're worth considering (I currently only run the Shredder out of these). Faceless Butcher is another one to consider - you really need a sac outlet to be able to fully take advantage of it, but it's a fair bit cheaper than things like Duplicant, plus using in on your own stuff can sometimes be useful (e.g. in the face of board wipes)
Life's Finale is on the expensive side for a symmetrical wrath, but Buried Aliveing an opponent as an extra can be pretty good (even if all you do is target the green player for his Reclamation Sage...), and mono-B can make plenty of mana.
I've found Dark Deal to be solid for similar reasons to Chains - it disrupts your opponents plays while filling yards. Normally, I think it's a pretty bad card as it leaves you one down on your opponents (itself), but in Chainer, that's not really the case. Also silly with Sangromancer. And Chains....
2
Booo....
It was far more interesting with the old title.
2
In all honesty, my suggestion would be to have both. There's not that much in the way of overlap between what the two commanders want - a few good black ETB creatures and sacrifice outlets and that's it really - and they play very differently. If I had to keep one, it would probably be Chainer - the ability to abuse other people's graveyards means there's always some new things for me to do in a game - although Marchesa is the stronger commander.
2
This sort of ties in with a mistake that many people make with stax - you should not be trying to completely lock everyone else out of the game. Why? Because it's really hard to do against 3-4 opponents. There's too many angles of attack that you need to interact with, and too much removal. Instead, stax should be considered to be a tool for keeping the game in check long enough for you to win (much like a good countermagic/removal suite). A good stax deck wants to slow things down, allowing them to develop their board and hand in relative safety, then see things out with reliable wincons (for example,the popular "BloodPod" competitive list runs a KikiJiki combo with several tutors for it).
The problem with Grand Arbiter as I see it from a political perspective, at least regarding the general, is that it's often harder to come up with reasons why others will want him around. Unless there's a known storm deck around, he's going to be effecting the players in a roughly similar way - decks with lower curves will typically be built to have less mana sources - and he gives a significant benefit to his controller. He also suffers from the classic Azorious problem of not having good wincons. As I said before, having some way to see the game out in the end is important, and UW isn't that good at doing it, especially at a competitive level. So GAAIV tends to fall into the kind of deck that people really don't like playing - asymmetrical stax which takes ages to actually get to the end of the game.
Diaochan is a really fun card, and lets you do all sorts of shenanigans (hint: give her protection from red) but she's not going to get to the competitive level. That said, if you like her, go for it. Not every EDH deck needs to be (or indeed should be) competitive.
1
1
In general, I view politics as less about specific cards, and more about your interactions with the players. And at a competitive level, while you do get some games where someone just rushes into a combo before anyone else can react, often, due to the high amount of interaction the decks run as a reaction to said fast combo, there is a lot of interplay between the players. Threat assessment is often pretty difficult when the biggest dangers aren't sitting obviously on the board, so there's a good amount of advantage to be gained through playing politically, talking to the other players.
2
As a more general attitude though, don't be afraid to interact with their ramp. Nature's Claiming a Sol Ring is not a bad play. Counterspelling a Harrow is a good play. Flashing in Aven Mindcensor in response to a Skyshroud Claim is well worth doing. Cracking a Strip Mine on a land that taps for more than 1 mana is generally a solid move. And note that all these cards are just generally good and should usually be run anyway if you're in the colour.
I'll also second the vote for Meltdown. Such an underplayed little card - if you're not reliant on artifacts for ramp (e.g. a GR deck), it can do so much damage to other players' acceleration when fired off at something like X=2 early in a game.