Having Your Voice Heard

[Sheldon]

Despite what some folks think, the RC listens to as many voices in the Commander community as we can. One of the reasons we formed the CAG was to extend our reach. Still, it appears as though some folks feel as though their voices aren't being heard. I'd like to get your opinions on how you think that we might demonstrate to you that we're listening, especially when we do the thing that's not what you, the individual, want. It's easy to feel as though you weren't heard if a decision goes a way you don't like--but every decision is going to have people who dislike it. What would make you go "Well, they didn't agree with me, but at least I felt like they considered my position?"

[ISBPathfinder]

I think the issue is that every meta is different and that is sort of the problem with communication. There isn't really a right answer because there isn't a national meta in the sense that when you look at standard, modern, legacy, vintage there is data and a national meta to back up results. The issues I have are not necessarily reflected by all because of different social norms at the games I play at. Every store has different decks and players making it up and the way they play is very different based on the people and decks they play. In a meta where combo is prevalent the concerns of those players are probably way different from a meta where people are slinging 8 mana haymakers.

I don't think we can accurately represent every level and type of group in a banned list due to the fact that this is a casual format and expectations of players vary wildly due to the nature of this format. I for example am a big advocate of lowering life totals and the commander damage to kill but in more casual playgroups I totally don't believe this should be done. This is my viewpoint as someone who plays on the higher end of no combo / no land disruption and I think it probably carries up to higher levels of play as well. That doesn't mean I am right or its right for everyone.

[Morganelefay]

In this day and age, a lot of people interpretate "Listened to me" as "They personally replied to me on twitter/facebook/reddit" and since you can't feasibly respond to everyone in that way given that you're not doing this professionally nor do you have a PR person handling that stuff, that's just something that'll always happen.

What would help, I think, is two lists. One being a list that you acknowledge that people are talking about and are topics of debate among the RC. I'd imagine Paradox Engine would've been on such a list over the past years. The second is a list of cards that may actually be on the cusp of banning/unbanning. This one's a bit more nebulous as things can change rapidly, but it would give people more of a headsup as to what might come. Paradox Engine comes as a surprise to many because it never appeared in prior announcements.

If you, during the last annoucnement, would've mentioned "We're keeping a specific eye on Paradox Engine due to reasons X and Y", two things would've happened - people would talk more about it, giving you more direct opinions, and at the same time less people would've been caught out by the ban right after the price spike.

Alternately, if on the fence about banning a card, maybe publish a poll on here and over at Reddit that asks "Do you believe card X is banworthy". Perhaps not let the actual result determine the decision, but it can serve as an extra point of data and people will know the talk is there about it.

Just my $0.02.

[Sheldon]

The problem with a Watch List is the expectation that it's a stepping stone to the Ban List, which is why we got rid of it in the first place. What a Watch List does is create an additional set of expectations regarding individual cards, which means that you get more dissatisfaction any direction a card might move. How long does it stay on the WL before getting banned or not? There's lots of extra baggage.

That said, your voice has been heard.

[sheldonshouldretire]

My biggest issue is honestly with the RC in general and their treatment of the format as an abstract concept based on what they personally find as fun. The formats hit a wall where it can no longer progress with leadership that makes decisions based on feelings rather than evidence and its begun to feel as if the RC has no interest in actually promoting a healthy format and constantly attempts to wash themselves of any criticisms by saying you can just play with your own rules if you don't like it.
Honestly I realize WOTC taking over isn't something the masses are ready for and I am okay with that, I mostly just want to know that the ones in charge are using logic and statistics to regulate the format instead of feeling like the RC is trying to obtain some abstract conception of a "social format" that they have to constantly attempt to legitimize by telling people they're playing their format wrong.


It's not that I don't feel heard it's that I don't feel included or wanted, I enjoy playing the game to win as intended and the formats clearly outgrown the idea that everyone should only play mono green stompy but the RC hasn't grown with the format and has lost touch.

[Jace]

I just don't understand why Gifts Ungiven remains banned, for example. Or what the thought process behind some of the earlier bannings even were. There doesn't seem to be anything inherently unfun about tutors, but the combos they might tutor for that could be degenerate. But when I joined Commander, I was just told that's how it is, with no avenue to debate it? That's what bothers me.

[TheTuna]

The inception of the CAG as a group of highly visible and highly active content creators/community members in and of itself offers a great opportunity here. With bans like Paradox Engine which are bound to stir the pot a bit, having an RC member or members make the rounds on the CAG's various shows after the ban might be a good way to help communicate the thought behind a ban at greater length. If there's any way to circulate Elder Dragon Statesmen more widely, that'd be great as well. I didn't know about it until very recently, but the most recent episode provided a lot of insight as to the RC's thinking.

My biggest issue is honestly with the RC in general and their treatment of the format as an abstract concept based on what they personally find as fun. The formats hit a wall where it can no longer progress with leadership that makes decisions based on feelings rather than evidence and its begun to feel as if the RC has no interest in actually promoting a healthy format and constantly attempts to wash themselves of any criticisms by saying you can just play with your own rules if you don't like it.
Honestly I realize WOTC taking over isn't something the masses are ready for and I am okay with that, I mostly just want to know that the ones in charge are using logic and statistics to regulate the format instead of feeling like the RC is trying to obtain some abstract conception of a "social format" that they have to constantly attempt to legitimize by telling people they're playing their format wrong.

From where would EDH statistics come? There's no competitive circuit, and even if there were, it couldn't serve as a guide for a casual format. EDHrec is just a collection of lists (and doesn't include Tappedout) and skews heavily towards more engaged players, so it can only take you so far.

If WOTC were ever to take over the format, I doubt that the complaints would recede one bit. People just like to complain.

[tstorm823]

My biggest issue is honestly with the RC in general and their treatment of the format as an abstract concept based on what they personally find as fun.

You're describing literally the draw of the format. They made the rules in a way that supports their abstract concept of fun. People get into the format to join in specifically that fun. part of that fun is self-expression, and it just isn't logically possible to put a hard definition on self-expression.

If you want a game with more defined rules for casual play, I recommend board games, there are many of them to find one that suits you and none of them have the baggage of having to build a deck before playing. If, however, you would prefer to stay in an expressive format like Commander, you're going to have to live with the vague caveat that you can only do what you want if it doesn't ruin the game for everyone else.

[braden]

I think you all do a fine job of helping people be heard. I think the BEST thing you could do is an AMA on reddit. Head over to /r/EDH and just answer people’s questions (with the help of some moderation from the mod team) and help people know they are being heard.

[CardboardLord]

I think some sort of voted representation would alleviate some of the feel bads from the equation. The CAG was randomly picked one day and I had no say over the people that "speak for me" and I don't feel that they do. I also have no say over who the RC is. These are unilateral decisions made with 0 input from the community.

[Jim Wolfie]

You've posted multiple times "we don't consider competitive when making bans" . If you wanted people to believe that you considered our opinions you might want to consider competitive when making bans and not just be dismissive.

[TheTuna]

I think you all do a fine job of helping people be heard. I think the BEST thing you could do is an AMA on reddit. Head over to /r/EDH and just answer people’s questions (with the help of some moderation from the mod team) and help people know they are being heard.

/r/EDH is alarmingly toxic and frequently features an almost gleeful level of RC-bashing. One of the most-upvoted threads yesterday was entitled "Spit in the Face of the Spirit of the Format!" - no joke. Engaging with the community there might do more harm than good, especially as it has an extremely Spikey skew. It represents a subset of the community adequately enough, but it's in no way a good proxy for the wider Commander playerbase.

[Neuroplasticity]

We don't think you listen because you tell us that our opinion doesn't matter if we don't play the game the same way you do.

Flash is horrible for the format. Your CAG expressed this as well and you didn't listen. The social contract is not enough from keeping people in my stores and events from playing broken things to win, and Flash/Hulk is on another level of broken.

We needed your guidance more than ever as a format leader that pretends to be about letting people play the game the way they want, but you continue to ignore anything that steps outside a very narrow power window.

EDH is powering up whether you like it or not. Please listen to your player base. Pretending to listen and choosing to ignore us over and over is the same as not listening.

[Morganelefay]

The problem with a Watch List is the expectation that it's a stepping stone to the Ban List, which is why we got rid of it in the first place. What a Watch List does is create an additional set of expectations regarding individual cards, which means that you get more dissatisfaction any direction a card might move. How long does it stay on the WL before getting banned or not? There's lots of extra baggage.

That said, your voice has been heard.

I getcha. Still, making a point of having official comments about highly contentious cards (such as Paradox Engine) might help soften blows. Wizards kinda does this in their banlist announcements like they're saying they're monitoring certain winrates, so something alike might be of use here as well.

[burntfish44]

My biggest issue is honestly with the RC in general and their treatment of the format as an abstract concept based on what they personally find as fun. The formats hit a wall where it can no longer progress with leadership that makes decisions based on feelings rather than evidence and its begun to feel as if the RC has no interest in actually promoting a healthy format and constantly attempts to wash themselves of any criticisms by saying you can just play with your own rules if you don't like it. .

This sums up my feelings pretty well. Different people have fun in different ways and I shouldn't feel anxiety over the banlist date because the people in charge seem to have little concern for anything other than 3 hour long battlecruiser games.

A quote from https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveEDH ... _cedh_and/ also sums it up pretty well:

Whenever WOTC makes an ban, no matter how affected I am by that ban, one thing I never do is DOUBT the validity of it. WOTC has data. They have playtesters. They have people who are paid to keep track of and observe the formats they oversee, and who care about the health of that format. If they came out and banned fatal push tomorrow I would be angry, but I wouldn't ever doubt their decision. I would instead take part in the next round of creating and updating decks to the next meta.

The Rules Committee has none of these things. The committee inspires no confidence that their decisions are made with any amount of logistical data or testing. The committee instead has made it clear that the rules they adhere to are made-up philosophies that any person could make dozens of cases against. The rules Committee is not a company that values it's players playing it's formats, it's instead ostensibly one dude who values playing his Pelakka Wurm as a finisher.

Edited to add:
Tl;Dr the RC does bans based on their own opinions rather than data gathering, surveys, testing, etc, and they shouldn't get to or try to decide how others have fun.

[xeroxedfool]

Hey there. Sheldon, if you read this, thanks for what you do. I would like the RC and CAG to know I appreciate what they do and I enjoy the format.

[ilovesaprolings]

My biggest issue is honestly with the RC in general and their treatment of the format as an abstract concept based on what they personally find as fun.

I mean after reading this i don't want any voice to be heard. "sheldonshouldretire". Really?


EDh was born a casual format to play elder dragons like arcades sabboth. That was the fun thing in EDH.
Everyone know that magic is and especially was about speed, speed, speed. Low cost cards, ways to cheat mana cost, super efficient curves, instant-win combos, and so on.
Cards like leviathan or the mentioned elder dragons got printed but were unusable.
Until a group of friends decided to create a format for that kind of cards.

Years later competitive players complain that the format isn't cathered enough for them. What the %$#%?
Sheldon is lucky, because he and his friends know what is "fair" without having to stricly define it. So they can enjoy a wonderful format.
It happened to me too for while. I had a group were our decks' power level were synchronized and it was so much fun...
sadly then a couple of shift happened and suddenly we got the guy who thought himself to be the best just because he could netdeck a couple of combos into his deck. Everything was fine because those cards were not banned and every argument we made talking about the spirit of the format, house bans and so on were just personal attacks because he was such a better player than us, we were jealous. And we got there, sucked into a spiraling arms war that, in the end, just sucked the fun out of our games and nothing else.
I won't even mention what happened when i tried playing in a LSG with a bunch of strangers.

Sheldon is trying to keep competitive guys into the format, to not ostracize them and they still complain? Why are you so determined to twist EDH until it fits YOUR criterias and not the ones of its creator?
Guys like me who want interesting and interactive board states, battlecruiser-style magic and a little of durdling, what should they play then?

[cryogen]

Well with the caveat that I've always felt like you listen, even the earliest days of our interactions.....

There are two main problems as I see it:

First is that people literally don't know who you four are. Anecdotal evidence, last night at my LGS we were discussing cEDH in general, Flash, and just Commander in general. A woman in our pod, whom I consider a skilled and spikier deck builder (she runs Stasis in an Estrid deck, for example) didn't know who you were. And you're the face of the format. So when invested players don't know you, they sure don't know who Toby, Scott, or Gavin are. My suggestion here is to encourage Scott, Gavin, and to a lesser extent Toby, to be more visible. Have them on EDS. Guest on Command Zone or Commanderin' (or other podcasts out there but I named those because of the CAG). I get that it becomes beating a dead horse when you get asked the same questions and discuss similar topics, but I genuinely want to know how Scott and Gavin tick. So when Gavin was on the Commander summit I was floored. And on forums - particularly your own forums, I would love to see you and Toby more present. I know there are pitfalls to being down in the trenches of the ban list threads, but even just popping into random threads that are inconsequential, like off topic, stuff, new card hype, etc., let's users see that you are visiting and presumably reading. There have been long stretches where neither of you have been active and I wondered if you were still lurking because I hoped you were seeing whatever hot topic was going on.

The second issue is trickier. It's not just cEDH but overall competitive players that are increasing in the public community. This is compounded by people like Command Zone, Dech Tech, EDHREC, etc. basically encouraging tighter builds and tuned decks. And so you've got a growing player base that loves Commander and wants to play Commander, but they feel shunned and left out. You can see it in the comments here and in the results of my poll. And i get it, you're in a precarious position because I know you genuinely WANT to include those people, but the question is HOW to do it and what effect that has on the format you're curating. So for this I don't really have a suggestion... at least not a new one. I think the format will survive banning a couple of cards that will either slow games down or appease that segment of players, but I understand that this isn't a route you necessarily want to take.

Beyond that, I can only echo what others have said. Acknowledging problematic cards without actually confirming a watch list goes a long way. I saw the Iona ban coming from a mile away because I knew it was something we have been talking about for years and that the CAG felt strongly about it, and PE wasn't entirely unexpected either. But for the people whose only insight to the RC is through your SCG articles, they were probably blindsided.

[Jim Wolfie]

Guys like me who want interesting and interactive board states, battlecruiser-style magic and a little of durdling, what should they play then?

People like you should play interesting and interactive board states, battlecruiser-style magic and a little of durdling if you like to play interesting and interactive board states, battlecruiser-style magic and a little of durdling.

[Rx-18-67]

Please stop writing comments like this one:

I'm not demonizing combos here. What's of concern is that when they're the primary win condition, the format devolves. Games need to end at some point, so having a backup plan isn't all that bad. When the nuclear option becomes the first choice, then we get into trouble.

All my Commander decks are combo decks because Commander is the only format where those infinite combos are viable. It's a facet of Magic that can only be experienced by playing Commander. I cannot take the RC seriously when someone on the RC says they're not demonizing combos and then accuses combos - and by extension, me as a combo player - of devolving the format in the very next sentence. You cannot repeatedly present a hostile attitude towards playstyles that don't match your personal preference and expect people to believe you when you say you think people should be allowed to play however they want. It's just not credible.

[SocorroTortoise]

I think you all do a fine job of helping people be heard. I think the BEST thing you could do is an AMA on reddit. Head over to /r/EDH and just answer people’s questions (with the help of some moderation from the mod team) and help people know they are being heard.

/r/EDH is alarmingly toxic and frequently features an almost gleeful level of RC-bashing. One of the most-upvoted threads yesterday was entitled "Spit in the Face of the Spirit of the Format!" - no joke. Engaging with the community there might do more harm than good, especially as it has an extremely Spikey skew. It represents a subset of the community adequately enough, but it's in no way a good proxy for the wider Commander playerbase.

There's still an argument that it's a good plan to attempt to reach out to them again. Even if I'd argue a big part of why they don't get interaction with the RC is past behavior (I think papa funk used to post there at least occasionally, not sure about anyone else. I also remember how long it took the MTGS mods to keep things civil enough that a topic like this could happen without being half mod text), there is a large and very public group of EDH players there who feel disenfranchised. I'd also guess that there's a decent sized lurker community there. They have 80k+ subscribers and most of them aren't wading in to every discussion throwing hate around. They would probably also draw in some additional readers for an RC AMA. All of that said, it would probably require a lot of buy in from the mod team to keep things civil enough to be worthwhile discussion. I don't know them well enough to say if they'd be willing to crack down more than usual for a thread if it meant greater engagement.

I also agree with cryo on a couple points. First, I've always felt like you listen. I feel that the format is in a good place, you've always come across as reasonable in my admittedly limited interactions, and I appreciate that you're making the effort here.

Second, the rest of the RC could definitely afford to be more visible. There were a lot of comments on Reddit immediately following the banlist announcement that showed that people know almost nothing about the RC. I've been playing this format and active on forums for the last decade or so. I was researching a post to try and shed some light on the RC for those people and the most recent article or similar I could find about the RC was the SCG article from 09. I'm very engaged and couldn't tell you if Alex was still on the RC or when he left. I can understand if they don't want to open themselves up to the level of internet vitriol that you seem to be more willing to deal with, but a little more from some of the the other people behind the decisions would go a long ways.

[burntfish44]

EDh was born a casual format to play elder dragons like arcades sabboth.
...
Years later competitive players complain that the format isn't cathered enough for them. What the %$#%?
Sheldon is lucky, because he and his friends know what is "fair" without having to stricly define it. So they can enjoy a wonderful format.

I think this is a common misconception. It's not that cEDH-max-power-only players think the rules should cater to them. It's that with expanding popularity and resources like edhrec, the format has evolved and decks have become more tuned and improved over time, while the RC continues to deem their way the best way and nevermind other ways.

A lot of players aren't cEDH but still like to tune their lists to be better. A lot of players like to play at the "75%" level (including your lgs it seems?), and they're ignored just as much as cEDH players because they aren't playing 2 hour battlecruiser games.

It happened to me too for while. I had a group were our decks' power level were synchronized and it was so much fun...
sadly then a couple of shift happened and suddenly we got the guy who thought himself to be the best just because he could netdeck a couple of combos into his deck.

It sounds like you had a bad experience with a toxic player. It's an unfortunate situation, but it doesn't mean others are like this. If anyone is using any power of deck to stomp weaker decks, that's a person problem not a game problem.

Why are you so determined to twist EDH until it fits YOUR criterias and not the ones of its creator?

Again, because the format has become way more popular, has evolved over time, and not everyone wants to play the same way.

And as a side note, quoting rule 0 is an invalid argument for claiming the rules are handled properly because the same rule applies to every format of every game.

[cryogen]

One onther thought I had. At the formation of the CAG you discussed how diversity was important, and it shows with the various play styles among them. But as much as it pains me to say it, if you are going to value their input as diverse players, then you need to value everyone's and it should show that you do.

[benjameenbear]

There is a fine line that you walk as the RC, even with the CAG to support you and your decision making. With the growing, and increasingly vocal, subset of Commander players that are of a cEDH mindset you will ALWAYS receive backlash, it seems, in regards to the decisions that you make and the mindset you have. I think [mention]Rx-18-67[/mention] has a great point that while you say that you want to include the cEDH audience in the format you've created you also actively try to maintain the stance that you want the spirit of the format to override any and all other concerns and make comments that are at odds with the inclusive attitude you're trying to maintain.

Rightly so! This format was initially designed and intended as a format where cards like the OG Elder Dragons would actually get play time instead of rotting in a card collection somewhere. Where sweet interactions and an immersive experience was the sole object of the game and you could walk away really feeling like you were an almighty Planeswalker fighting against a fellow Planeswalker with terrifying creatures and epic spells. There is an inherent ability for MTG to be a vicarious way to experience one's imagination, and I 5,000% support this and endorse it. It is, truly, the way I think MTG ought to be experienced for any player at least once in their life. Some people approach MTG from a strictly gaming perspective, but they are missing out on the most important quality that I think Garfield intended for his game.

But my perception, as the primary liaison between the cEDH crowd and MTGSal/MTGNexus, is that the Commander format has reached a crossroads and you need to actively embrace it and recognize it. There is a growing population of competitively minded players that love Commander for the original reasons but have a different approach to it entirely, one that I believe is at odds with the core philosophy you've explained, reiterated, and repeated.

So, and this is solely my opinion, I think it's time to recognize the growing cEDH community and create a separate cEDH type Commander format.

I think that this will solve two things for you:

• 1) By advocating and establishing cEDH as a data-driven format, you will encourage people to contribute real and effective data to make banlist decisions on. There are a significant number of cEDH content creators on the internet and they DO have real and effective data that could be used to make ban decisions and philosophy decisions. There IS an established meta-game that is quantifiable and expected if you're sitting down for a cEDH game already. This also opens up the opportunity for you to create a new type of format that could be tracked and, perhaps in the future, recognized as an official Tournament format . This potential is particularly attractive to me and the communities I'm a part of since we already play with a tournament mindset.
• It will deflect any and all complaints that you receive about the banlist and the battlecruiser type of mentality that you rightly champion. Tell them to be a cEDH player and check out the separate cEDH banlist, and I think that you can move on past the complaint or argument in a mutually beneficial way.

I get that this kind of decision is antithetical to what you created and championed for Commander. But, let's face it, the format has evolved and adapted into arguably THE most popular MTG format of all time and its scope is now beyond what you probably envisioned. And the decisions that you make, and receive flak for on the internet, are going to continue to happen by the significantly more vocal competitive subset of Commander players.

As shameless self-promotion, I personally would be 100% happy to champion, moderate, and maintain a cEDH Commander format if this idea carries merit with you, the RC, and the CAG.

[Jim Wolfie]

>format split.


No thank you I'm good