Sheldon's state of the format and AMA

Legend
Aethernaut
Posts: 1639
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Eternity

Post by Legend » 3 years ago

Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
Legend wrote:
3 years ago
"format is healthy" = "sales are up"
What metric would you use to say the format is healthy?
It'll be healthy when Wishing functions properly. #freewishes
“Comboing in Commander is like dunking on a seven foot hoop.” – Dana Roach

“Making a deck that other people want to play against – that’s Commander.” – Gavin Duggan

"I want my brain to win games, not my cards." – Sheldon Menery

User avatar
RxPhantom
Fully Vaxxed, Baby!
Posts: 1513
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Southern Maryland

Post by RxPhantom » 3 years ago

All of the Golos decks at my LGS have been dismantled. Eventually, everyone knew how busted it was under almost every circumstance, so they became the archenemy on T0. You could actively try to make it a bad deck but it would still probably be pretty good. You could fill it with Craw Wurms and it would still do ok.

As for the greater state of the format, I haven't a clue, and I don't think anyone else does either. Their is no stats-gathering apparatus that exists to get the kind of data needed to make specific determinations about EDH. The Command Zone, for instance, did an entire episode about statistics...but they had a ludicrously small sample size that consisted of only games they could find on YouTube. From these games they made conclusions about the format that really only reflect their own experiences and biases. They still cite it in videos two years (or so) later, as if it was anything but anecdotal.

Homogenization and optimization seem to dominate a lot of content lately, but in my own anecdotal experience, it hasn't been as widespread. Again though, i don't have the data.
Legend wrote:
3 years ago
Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
Legend wrote:
3 years ago
"format is healthy" = "sales are up"
a
What metric would you use to say the format is healthy?
It'll be healthy when Wishing functions properly. #freewishes
Yo @Feyd_Ruin, where's the thumbs down button?
Last edited by RxPhantom 3 years ago, edited 1 time in total.
Can you name all of the creature types with at least 20 cards? Try my Sporcle Quiz! Last Updated: 2/18/22 (Kamigawa: Neon Dynasty)

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6278
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

Sinis wrote:
3 years ago
pokken wrote:
3 years ago
To this day I do not know why I cannot be relied on to gender a magic card at a rate better than raw chance..

I do think tergrid will die out as a commander. Just mentioned it because it's fresh in a lot of people's minds and korvold is like tergrid that can 21 you in the face so doesn't have to work for it :P

...and combos with fetchlands good lord will they stop encouraging fetches in commander Magic
Fixed that for you.

<stares in Threshold, Delve, Landfall, Delirium, Revolt, and countless individual mechanics like Jace, Vryn's Prodigy>
While I really do enjoy them in legacy and modern I can't really disagree..the shuffling mechanic to get Mana is really an awful drain.

It's a bummer for me to accept because half my favorite cards involve getting lands out of the bin

User avatar
3drinks
Kaalia's Personal Liaison
Posts: 4832
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Ruined City of Drannith, Ikoria

Post by 3drinks » 3 years ago

pokken wrote:
3 years ago
onering wrote:
3 years ago
For the other, I'd suggest Chulane.
Korvold hands down for me. There is not a more toxic problem commander out there. Any commander that combos with Wildfire is just begging for trouble.

Kinda like Tegrid fires alarm bells with his Pox combo, and Leovold with Windfall et al. There's just zero good that's going to happen with a general comboing with an already tedious effect.

I'd take Golos before any of them but Golos, then Korvold, then whatever else is a distant 3rd for me.
Hey now, you leave my white border dragon alone! Yeah he's powerful enough such that I can keep up with my chosen pool of cards, but c'mon. I know I'm not alone in being sad to lose my dragon despite actively policing it to be a showcase in nostalgia and less overt brute force.

And Wildfire is and always has been a perfectly FAIR and BALANCED card, especially given what any other colour combo can do at that stage of the curve.

Modern
R{R/W} 87guide Burn
Commander
WRKellan, the Fae-Blooded // Birthright Boon (local secret santa gift)
RTorbran, Thane of Red Fell (Red Deck Wins)
WBRAlesha, Who Smiles at Death (Slivers)
WBRKaalia HQ

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4538
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 3 years ago

ZenN wrote:
3 years ago
1) People complaining about the existence of EDHREC and/or its use seems silly to me. Leaving aside for a sec that if you just go to EDHREC, hit the "average deck" button and run with it, you're probably going to get a bad deck, how would that be any different from someone coming here, pulling up a primer, and just playing that deck? Why is it more respectable for someone to struggle to assemble their own pile and then be miserable playing something that doesn't work when they're against a player who truly understands and excels at deckbuilding?

If someone is going to have more fun by seeking out a prebuilt list that they expect to perform at a certain level, who are any of us to tell them they're having the wrong kind of fun? The worst part is that I know people who are terrible deck builders but actively avoid any sort of guidance because, "netdecking is bad," is an idea that has been drilled into them by various communities over the years. The sort of thing we're exactly seeing in this thread. It's pretty sad, really.
If I was the dictator of magic, all magic would be a biathlon of deck construction and deck playing. For me, that's what makes a deck building game like magic meaningfully different from other games. Playing magic but not liking deck building is like playing poker but not liking the betting stage. Playing against someone who "netdecked" is like playing poker against someone who uses an AI to make their bets for them.

That's a big part of why I like commander and dislike competitive constructed formats. In standard it's pretty difficult to make a deck purely on your own that can even compete on an even playing field, let alone break the meta. That pushes more people to "netdeck" which makes it even harder not to. It becomes a format that punishes you for trying to make your own decks, even if you're good at it.

That said, I know my view isn't held by many players. Luckily since commander isn't competitive, it means that there's usually not much advantage to net decking since outside cEDH people don't have much of a venue to cut the wheat from the chaff. So edhrec decklists aren't so much "the deck with the best results" and more like "the median deck of what most people think of for a given commander", which is hardly optimised. So edhrec doesn't bother or threaten me, and it's a great place for data and inspiration.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

User avatar
Cyberium
Posts: 837
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Cyberium » 3 years ago

My biggest concern with commander is not between Casual and Hardcore, but what direction WotC would attempt to take it. The scale of power and creativity isn't balanced, and they're not keen on making it happen.

WotC insisted that printing powerful cards (like Hullbreacher and Opposition Agent) is ok in EDH because "the most powerful player gets ganged up", but that reasoning is less and less convincing these days as WotC continue to push power and ramp instead of creative/political cards. Hell, even Maro himself commented that he dislikes political stuff, which is the core of EDH given its full-table tendency.

While the playgroup can decide which cards to ban, the company shouldn't encourage powercreeping, an action obviously to boost sells rather than maintaining a healthy format. Like, why is Jeweled Lotus even a thing? It only works in EDH, yes, but since EDH is the most popular format it's going to affect the biggest player base. They should be printing more Phelddagrif in a commander set, not Lotus or Moxen.

User avatar
Dunharrow
Posts: 1821
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Montreal

Post by Dunharrow » 3 years ago

RxPhantom wrote:
3 years ago
As for the greater state of the format, I haven't a clue, and I don't think anyone else does either. Their is no stats-gathering apparatus that exists to get the kind of data needed to make specific determinations about EDH. The Command Zone, for instance, did an entire episode about statistics...but they had a ludicrously small sample size that consisted of only games they could find on YouTube. From these games they made conclusions about the format that really only reflect their own experiences and biases. They still cite it in videos two years (or so) later, as if it was anything but anecdotal.

Homogenization and optimization seem to dominate a lot of content lately, but in my own anecdotal experience, it hasn't been as widespread. Again though, i don't have the data.
I think there is stats on the popularity of the format based on WOTC market research. It seems, by a large margin, that Commander is the biggest format, followed by draft.
Homogeneity of any one card is very hard to assess. You can look at MtGO stats, but that skews towards more enfranchised play.
I think this is a reason why the CAG is important - they help the RC get a broader sense. Of course, this is skewed towards the demographic of players that play in stores or at Magic Fest.

The fact is, super casual players know the format Commander and it makes more sense for them than 60 card piles of anything. I am certain it has become the dominant format for kitchen table magic. Even people I know who barely own any cards have built 1 - 2 commander decks.
Of course - this is based on anecdotes and hunches, but seems to be backed by what WOTC tells us from their market research.

That's why I wish ban criteria was based more on philosophy than amount of play. Iona ban made more sense to me than Paradox Engine, for example. I was the only person in my group who ever ran Paradox Engine, and using it to untap creatures in Phenax, God of Deception is not banworthy... so that ban really frustrated me!
I do get that PE was super overplayed in other metas... but that is why ubiquity of play of any card seems like an arbitrary way to justify a ban.

To me, it would make more sense to ban Winter Orb than Golos given the current rules philosophy.
Which is why I would like them to add to the philosophy - and argue that cards that make for repetitive games can be banned, and cards that circumvent the downside of commander tax should be banned. Ubiquitous plays is just so hard to understand. If they think certain cards may need to be banned, like Paradox Engine or Prophet of Kruphix, ubiquitous play should be a reason to look at the card, but the ban criteria should be based on philosophical reasons (like how these two cards centralize games and make for slow play).

Rather than use the existing ban criteria to argue for banning Golos, I wish they would expand the philosophy to indicate that it is a clear violation.
Because I am guessing that even at the most casual of tables Golos is a powerhouse that wouldn't be missed.
The New World fell not to a sword but to a meme

onering
Posts: 1226
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 3 years ago

Ubiquitous play, on its own, has never been a justification for banning a card. It is, as you suggest it should be, a reason to look at the card, because an ubiquitous card that is harmful will cause more harm than a widely played card that is harmful, and thus needs more immediate attention. It does, I think, play a factor when cards are borderline. The RC seems to lean towards not banning a card as the baseline, and is slow to act because they want to see if the format can handle a card, whether by finding a counter to make the card less effective or oppressive, or for the card to simply fall out of favor and end up seeing niche play in groups that are ok with it. I base this on their statements. I'd say that's why Winter Orb isn't banned. Sheldon hates the card, but some players like it, and doesn't see much play, and when it does see play its in decks that are already doing the things that make Winter Orb problematic. Banning Winter Orb won't do anything, it won't stop it from randomly ruining casual games because people aren't randomly adding it to decks, while the decks that do run it would still be doing the same thing without it AND aren't common enough to be a negative impact on the format (and are most often played in metas where they are acceptable). Iona, which was played a bit more than Winter Orb but wasn't exactly common, differs in that she was a big flashy legend that was attractive to Timmy, rather than a Johnny/Spike artifact that only supports a relatively unpopular archetype. Unlike Winter Orb, she wasn't relegated to decks that would still be doing the same problematic thing without her, and she was slotted into decks that weren't otherwise trying to be stax or prison, and immediately lock someone out, because she needs no support to do so. PE, on the other hand, was doing something borderline that would have probably been fine if it was only showing up every once in awhile, or could only be used by a handful of decks, but was so omnipresent and so easy to add to a variety of decks that it was pushed over the line and banned. The RC took awhile to ban it, and the messaging they put out touched on waiting to see if the format could handle it and counteract it, and only banned it because it didn't.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6278
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

The existing banning criteria already handle Golos handily

* cause severe resource imbalances (huge mana ramp on both parts of the card)
* allow players to win out of nowhere (infinite mana / huge bombs for cheap)
* Are very difficult for other players to interact with (by virtue of paying for most of his commander cost every cast, killing is largely pointless)
* Leads to repetitive gameplay

He's got more than a hat trick :P

Also, 'ubiquity' is still one of the additional criteria for a problematic card, which is similar to the old 'problematic casual omnipresence."
The primary focus of the list is on cards which are problematic because of their extreme consistency, ubiquity, and/or ability to restrict others' opportunities.
There is nothing at all in the rules criteria to think that having Primeval Titan in the command zone is not a bannable offense. And Golos is about as close to that as we've ever seen.

Golos actually hits two out of three of the big three, and then 4/7 (at least) of the other criteria.

User avatar
Dragoon
Posts: 417
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Dragoon » 3 years ago

On my selfish side, I don't want Golos to be banned, as it allows my deck to perform reasonably well given its theme and associated restrictions. Even though I still lose 90% of those games, I can at least compete. It is true that Golos goodstuff is a bit overbearing but I've only ever faced such a deck once, and 5-colors goodstuff will still exist no matter what, with or without Golos. The other times, people were looking to try weird stuff with him at the helm. And he is not more frequent than any other particular commander at our tables (Meren, for example, was way more popular but who could dislike a zombie dragon tamer?). As a Timmy/Johnny player at heart, I would feel sad seeing him go just because Spike players can't restrain their deckbuilding.

User avatar
BeneTleilax
Posts: 1330
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by BeneTleilax » 3 years ago

It's not a Spike problem. I feel like people elide a lot of the problems in the format by just blaming a stereotype of Spikes, when the bad Chulane, Tatyova and Golos decks I played against were very Timmy. If you just run threats and ramp, like a standard Timmy deck, you no longer need to suffer for want of draw and removal, because your threats are *also* draw and removal. At least traditional Spikes had to make tradeoffs and pay for them.

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4538
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 3 years ago

pokken wrote:
3 years ago
The existing banning criteria already handle Golos handily

* cause severe resource imbalances (huge mana ramp on both parts of the card)
* allow players to win out of nowhere (infinite mana / huge bombs for cheap)
* Are very difficult for other players to interact with (by virtue of paying for most of his commander cost every cast, killing is largely pointless)
* Leads to repetitive gameplay

He's got more than a hat trick :P

Also, 'ubiquity' is still one of the additional criteria for a problematic card, which is similar to the old 'problematic casual omnipresence."
The primary focus of the list is on cards which are problematic because of their extreme consistency, ubiquity, and/or ability to restrict others' opportunities.
There is nothing at all in the rules criteria to think that having Primeval Titan in the command zone is not a bannable offense. And Golos is about as close to that as we've ever seen.

Golos actually hits two out of three of the big three, and then 4/7 (at least) of the other criteria.
I think you're being a bit uncharitable to Mr Golos on those points:

Allows players to win out of nowhere - I'm not sure what you mean by "infinite mana", but assuming you mean "he wins if you have infinite mana" that's true of many commanders that aren't at all problematic - I wouldn't call that "out of nowhere". The infinite mana is the win, Golos is just the delivery method. Huge bombs for cheap can certainly win the game, but usually not instantly. And in any case, Golos needs to stick on the board to be activated. I think what the RC wants to avoid is a situation where you untap into an immediate win with no tells - something like biorhythm that can just end the game "out of nowhere". Golos's normal play pattern is very splashy - arguably excessively splashy - but it's not "out of nowhere" and it's usually not an immediate win either.

Very difficult for players to interact with - I think it's odd that you say he pays for "most" of his commander tax...surely you mean "half?" Ofc some decks will run Ancient Tomb (or god forbid Mishra's Workshop) but 99% of the time I've seen someone play Golos, he's getting a land that taps for 1 mana. He can also be Pithing Needled, Nevermored, repeatedly killed via Visara the Dreadful or Viashino Heretic or anything else that repeatedly kills creatures or artifacts. He can be turned into a land or ability-less creature via enchantment. He can also simply be priced off the board - yes it's harder than most commanders, but it's certainly not impossible. MLD, if your playgroup enjoys it, is also effective at stopping him. Blood Moon is likely to shut him down, as are other nonbasic hate cards, or just targeting the weak links of the manabase so he doesn't get to 5C.

From the perspective of pricing him off the field, it's less effective than vs most commanders, but that's true of really any commander with a good ETB. I don't suspect that your interpretation of the criteria is what the RC had in mind - I think they were looking more towards Recurring Nightmare, which is basically uninteractible except by countermagic and discard (and tbh probably mostly a legacy inclusion at this point). I mean, there are so many commanders who are much harder to interact with, top of the list being Inalla, Archmage Ritualist, the stupid cow, and all the other eminence commanders.

Leads to repetitive gameplay - Golos is generally kind of the opposite of repetitive? I mean, his game plan is usually consistent - ramp, play him, activate ability - but how the game will play out from there is wholly dependent on which cards get pulled. I really don't see how he's any more repetitive than any other commander-centric deck.

Ubiquity - he's the most popular commander, yes, but to compare him to prime time is apples to oranges - much smaller oranges. He's only in 9000 decks total on EDHrec, compared to the most popular cards which are more than 10x that (35x for sol ring). If prime time was still with us, he'd likely be in 100K+ decks. So they're really not comparable.

Causes severe resource imbalances - ok this one is at least a maybe. I don't think 5 to ramp a single nonbasic is anything close to strong, but the activated in a deck built to capitalize on it can be pretty overwhelming. That said, it does require a deck built to capitalize on it, which borders on cEDH (though ofc it has the problem that it's a lot more "fun and casual looking" than a deck built to capitalize on Arcum Dagsson or whatever), and it's still a bit of a crapshoot - most Golos decks don't have a 5+ average cmc, so a huge hit is nowhere near guaranteed. But if I wanted to make an argument that Golos should be banned based on the criteria, this is probably the strongest point.

Of course the problem with a lot of these criteria is that they're pretty vague and, tbh, if I was trying to match them to cards, they don't match up that well, and there are plenty of unbanned cards that are poster children for some of these criteria. At the end of the day, the criteria feel very much like a post-hoc justification, so idk that it's worth focusing on them too much when talking about potential bans.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6278
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

His activated ability is by far the strongest selling point on his banning for severe resource imbalances. Plus three cards for functionally 0 Mana.

Ubiquity - eh. He's the most popular commander in the game. That's ubiquitous for a 5c card. Remember that ubiquity is based on decks it can be in.

Golos as a card is in mammoth 10% of all five color decks and is over 1% of possible decks on edhrec. That's absurd ubiquity for a two or so year old card.

Surely not as ubiquitous as prime time but definitely has parallels. And also in terms of centralizing effects within games
DirkGently wrote:
3 years ago
Leads to repetitive gameplay - Golos is generally kind of the opposite of repetitive? I mean, his game plan is usually consistent - ramp, play him, activate ability - but how the game will play out from there is wholly dependent on which cards get pulled. I really don't see how he's any more repetitive than any other commander-centric deck.
I guess we can just agree to disagree on this one, if you think Golos isn't repetitive I don't think we're making any headway :)

Also, we should probably stop with pure golos chatter anyway. Not really on topic. My apologies for the derail.

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4538
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 3 years ago

I mean obviously some commander will be most popular. His popularity isn't wildly high compared to other popular commanders. I'm sorry but 1% doesn't exactly sound like ubiquity.

When prime time was banned, a big part of the reason that the RC talked about was how frequently it would be cloned, stolen, tutored, etc. If it was in a deck, it'd usually show up and a lot of the game would be fighting to take the most advantage from it. That's not really true for Golos since he's not an overly effective clone or theft target usually (except as a means to disable him ofc - add that to the interaction options).

Edit to respond to the edit:

I'm not sure how you're defining repetitive? Ofc most commander decks are repetitive insofar as they seek to cast and use their commander. But which cards they draw to synergies are where game experiences diverge. For a very repetitive deck, I'd point to my child of alara deck with 30 tutors getting corpse dance every game.

As always, I'm not necessarily against banning golos - I also don't like playing against him. If that's an agreeable enough point of consensus I'm happy to leave it there.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

onering
Posts: 1226
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 3 years ago

I think I'm between Pokken and Dirk on the analysis of how Golos hits the criteria, but much closer to Pokken.

Wins out of nowhere: Golos hits this the least. He doesn't just win out of nowhere in the same way that cards that get banned on this criteria alone do. He doesn't show up with no warning an immediately win. What he does do, in the absence of infinite Mana combos which are their own thing, is threaten to randomly win when you spin the wheel. When Golos is on the board, even if you can handle him getting the CA and Mana discounts from his ability you can never be sure if he's about to start dropping extra turn spells and Mana doublers. When you untap with home, his ability might just chain into extra turns and other effects that just win the game. This is materially different from cards that will just consistently win, but the experience for the opponent is similar. When it DOES happen, there's no difference, and when the opponents respond to the possibility by just hating Golos off the field as much as possible it's an extra degree of feel bad for the pilot, as they don't see it as something that's just going to win immediately and perceive it as an undue amount of hate for the amount of threat they are actually posing. I'd say 5/10 for this, not worth a ban on its own but could help a ban argument if other categories are pushing it to be banned, while arguing against it if no other category goes beyond borderline.

Very difficult to deal with: 8/10 here. The solutions you mentioned just really aren't enough for a commander that must be kept off the field and yet brings value just for being played. Visara the Dreadful is a joke of a suggestion. It sucks, it's too expensive to deal with Golos before it's first activation and is itself extremely vulnerable to removal. MLD and nonbasic hate, otoh, are actually effective, but are exactly the sort of answers the RC had repeatedly said shouldnt be needed to deal with problem cards. They are very unpopular strategies, and though I disagree with that the answer to handling a problem commander shouldn't be something that people hate even more (but I do feel less bad about running it with b's like Golos running around). Pithing needle, nevermore, and overwrite effects (as well as faiths fetters effects) are better answers, but all have their own issues. Faiths fetters effects are terribly inefficient and fall under the "feels forced to run specific narrow cards" disqualifier for answers. Golos shouldn't be forcing people to run removal that is significantly worse in all other applications just to deal with him. Dark steel mutation and other overwrite effects are better, and are actually reasonable removal in a vacuum that have merit without considering Golos as a factor. They, along with Faiths Fetters effects, are still way too easy to play around, as bounce, sac outlets, etc get around them, as does enchantment kill. Some answers to answers are always needed, but when you are already limited in what answers are effective having it be too easy to get around them is a problem. Obuilette I've found to be the fold standard for screwing Golos, as phasing his punk ass out means only enchantment removal can bring him back. Other phasing cards work as well. Still, that's a narrow set of answers. Pithing needle and nevermore effects are also very good. But these are insufficient to handle the problem, as there are just too few good answers to Golos. Him fetching a land on etb does a lot to get around commander tax. It pays at least half, and you discount the importance of ancient tomb and friends. Golos will grab colored Mana producers (or action like field of the dead) as long the pilot has another land they can play the next turn. The pilot only needs to fetch a 2 Mana plus land if they aren't garaunteed to have another land to drop the next turn. When you have to remove a commander 4 turns in a row, starting consistently on turn 4, to get to a point where the pilot might have to take a turn off from casting it, and in the process he/she has accumulated at least 4 extra lands from casting said commander repeatedly to use for other spells, that's a major violation of very hard to interact with. In practical terms, you either have one of a narrow set of answers, some of which are problematic themselves, or Golos draws an inordinate amount of the tables conventional answers (warping everything that comes after), or Golos does it's thing.

Repetitive gameplay: 9/10. I ramp into my commander and activate his ability repeatedly, this is all I do and how I win. That's almost as repetitive as it gets, with the only saving grace being that the massive resource imbalance varies in it's paint job. Yes, I'm arguing that for most Golos decks, the differences in construction are really cosmetic, not functional. There's Golos with extra turns, Golos without extra turns, Golos a land is my commander, and Golos I'm actively building this with the worst trash I can fit in the deck and still have a decent shot at winning now eat some Torsten Van Ursus to the face. Those are the different Golos decks. Most fit into the second category, which plays extremely close to the first just without the chance at closing out the game with extra turns out of nowhere. The third is usually field of the dead and extremely repetitive. The last only exists because of how obviously busted Golos is. From an opponents perspective, playing against Golos is simply the same game of keep the Golos player from playing or drown under the extreme resource imbalance. Sure, it's exciting for the pilot, but so is a broken slot machine that pays out most plays, and that's exactly what Golos is.

Ubiquity: 8/10. The main problem with your argument, Dirk, is that you neglect the importance of being a commander in ubiquity. I'll use your argument against giving BaaC against you here. You said that banning use as a commander is 100x more important than banning in the 99. By that logic, representation on EDHrec should be multiplied by 100 for commanders. Of course that's a bit silly, but only because that 100x argument was silly in the first place. Being a commander does mean that the card shows up every game, while this is not true for cards in the 99. Sol Ring shows up in 35x more decks than Golos, and I'd say that translates into Golos and Sol Ring actually showing up in about as many games (given that you will see about 15 cards by turn 7). Sol Ring is the poster child for ubiquity, so a 5 color card (which is the most restrictive limitation on how many decks a card can appear in) showing up in as many games as a card that can go in any deck AND is one of the most widely run cards of all time is a serious problem and proof of ubiquity.

Extreme resource imbalance: 8/10. This is what the card does. It's all about creating an extreme resource imbalance. Ramps lands on etb AND gives you 3 cards cast for 7 Mana. Ramp+CA+Mana savings+tutor for answer lands is just an absurd amount of advantage, and consistently comes down turn 4 and starts activating turn 5. Turn 3 drop and 4 activation is completely reasonable (that's the Sol Ring signet start). It could be worse, but not by much.

That's hitting 4/5 categories seriously while one it doesn't really hit.

User avatar
Dragoon
Posts: 417
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Dragoon » 3 years ago

I really, really disagree with Golos being repetitive. The main reason I play him is for its spinning wheel effect. Yes, you "exile the top three cards and cast them for free" every time you activate its ability, but the nature of those cards IS important. If you get three lands, that sucks. If you get three spells, that's great. Unless you deck is loaded with top deck manipulation, it has built-in variance, the antithesis of repetition. If we follow your standards, then everything is repetitive :
- What's the point of tabletop RPGs? You just say stuff then roll dice all the time.
- What's the point of videogames? You're just always smashing buttons all the time.
- What's the point of Magic? You just keep untapping, drawing, casting, attacking, casting again, then say next. And repeat this sequence each turn.
Obviously, this is highly exaggerated. My point is that Golos just creates a system inside a system. He is a tool that allows for a change of pace from normal MTG, just like cascade, flip-a-coin cards, polymorph effects, etc. The activation might always be the same, but the result will vary each time and that is what makes Golos exciting.

Also, the simple fact that there is so many different builds for Golos such as the ones you mentioned (combos, extra turns, field of the dead, mono-colour, weird stuff, etc) just shows how interesting he is from a deckbuilding perspective, at least for players who don't want to just play goodstuff.dec every time. Golos enables so many different builds that don't really have a commander otherwise. That does promote diversity, even if that means seeing Golos himself more often. Again, Commander is not just about the commander, the 99 cards also matter.

He is busted, for sure, but I think it is unfair to call him ubiquitous and repetitive, when every deck is different and variance is built in its activated ability.

User avatar
TheAmericanSpirit
Supreme Dumb Guy
Posts: 2194
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him
Location: IGMCULSL Papal Palace

Post by TheAmericanSpirit » 3 years ago

Ok, maybe we need a golos thread in B&R discussion...
There's no biscuits and gravy in New Zealand.
(Except when DirkGently makes them!)

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6278
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

TheAmericanSpirit wrote:
3 years ago
Ok, maybe we need a golos thread in B&R discussion...
There is and I have moved my discussion there

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Commander”