pokken wrote: ↑3 years ago
There's this particular nuance that I think sliver queen in particular will run up against, which is that it will be at the power level to play in, say, 4-5/10 games, but when it is in 4-5/10 games it will %$#% them up with its play patterns of "I can 100% of the time do this fairly powerful thing and you had better have removal."
The only thing it can do 100% of the time is make 1/1s for 1. Anything beyond that - skullclamp, cathar's crusade (wait that doesn't work), coat of arms (wait that doesn't work), mana echoes (wait that doesn't work), craterhoof (wait that doesn't work)....ok I guess overwhelming stampede? - is still going to be a matter of chance. And if all someone's deck does is make 1/1s for 1, that's really not very powerful imo. Plus at a really low power level (1) sliver queen doesn't exist because she's expensive and (2) her manabase is jank so she's not reliable anyway.
I mean sure, in theoretical universe where all variance is removed from commander because all decks are 50 companions and nothing but fixing lands in the 99, it could become the sort of game where the better deck/player wins 100%. But that's like...so, so far away from what this is, and you're really reaching to imply that it's anything close.
My opinion is that yes it is a problem. With such luminaries as Rofellos, Braids, Griselbrand, Leovold, Erayo there's reason to think that some things are off limits from a general perspective.
Personally I doubt any of the 4-5 players were ever looking at braids, leovold, or erayo. Rofellos is probably the commander that's most desirable + overpowered in a 4-5 meta, and probably a big part of why he's on there, since he's essentially a 2-mana mana doubler.
Colossal dreadmaw turn 3, everybody freak out!
All of those commanders do something really powerful really quickly, though. Rofellos powers out things way ahead of curve (plus goes infinite fairly easily but that may not matter to the RC at this point). Braids can start locking down the game on turn 2-3. Gbrand...well, I think he's banned more from the 99 than the CZ tbh, but to compare his draw efficiency to anything Kenny can do, without or without Zirda, is a joke. Leovold also locks people out of their hands very early, turn 3-4 generally. Erayo locks down the game turn 2-4.
I really don't see how any of these are remotely comparable to Kenny. They aren't banned for "consistency", all of them need to draw other cards to do much of anything. They're banned because they create degenerate game states very quickly. Zirda may do that in the future, but right now I'm not seeing it.
Zacama has a billion easy ways to recur protect zirda, I'll get my lolwhut in first I guess -- do you need a list of green and/or white cards zacama can play to recur zirda or protect it? The list is like..20 cards long of playable stuff.
But you have to draw those. So it's not reliable, by your own standards.
Also, like, half the commonly-played removal is exile removal anyway.
If you want to dedicate a million slots to protect a card so you can get a 30% discount on golos, be my guest, I guess. Hardly seems like the thing that broke Golos to me.
It may come as a surprise to you, but 1 is less than 3 by a significant amount in commander.
How...how are you still arguing this point? Honestly... Do you honestly think this is a good argument? Sliver overlord being able to pay 1 to tutor up random garbage changelings, or a couple one-shot commander-dependent theft effects? You think that's scarier than being able to pay 3 to tutor up any sliver in the game?
Oh, but yeah, 3>1. That's the OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNLLLLLYYYYY thing that matters. I'm so bad at math, how could I forget.
100 lands, zirda and kenrith would beat probably half the decks on EDHrec more often than not.
If that's what you genuinely believe then I can see why you feel how you do.
That said I think you're comically wrong. I doubt there's even a precon that would struggle against that deck.
But like I said, we're talking consistency. The tutors are all legal in Zirda, excepting
spellseeker and maybe recruiters. You get all the tutors AND a synergy piece ready to hand. And then your response to that will be to say "Well but then you're talking CEDH and so your argument is irrelevant." It's like we're going in circles here
No, I think tutors can be played outside of cEDH, obviously. I've said I'm very pro tutors. It's just a matter of what you're searching for.
The more consistent a deck is, the less flexible it is in terms of where it's appropriate (generally). A Zirda + Kenny deck that's too powerful for a meta is probably going to be less fun in that meta than a deck with more variance in its play patterns - especially if they're running a lot of tutors, since those also reduce variance. So it's true that, for someone playing Kenny + Zirda, they may want to be more vigilant than most about abiding by the power level of their meta.
...But the same is true for the tutor commanders except much, much moreso.
And honestly, while it's true, I don't think it's a huge factor. It would be in 1v1, but in multiplayer there's always that balancing element if someone is consistently overpowering their group, so long as they aren't wildly above them in power level.
I think politically the companions will actually be kind of a disaster. People tend to worry a lot more about the threat they can see coming, and don't take into account that which they don't see - which for most companions will be a much weaker deck.
What I'm telling you is the Zirda-Kenrith deck is abominably consistent and sure, other commanders have consistent builds. But these builds are almost invariably at the upper end of the power level spectrum.
And....that won't be true in this case because....?
Zirda-Kenrith will be stupidly consistent at any level of its power and you almost can't make it bad.
I'd say that's true of Kenrith without Zirda too. I set out trying to make a pretty limited Kenny deck and it still overpowered the games I played it in. That was mostly using triggered abilities though.
Some commanders just have high floors.
And I think that is a problem. I struggle to illustrate the way it just feels different to me than Zurcropotence -- but I guess it's that I don't think people will react to it the same way as Zur because the power level is not absurd in the same ways. It's deceptive. People are going to be playing this crap for years before they wear it out if they ever do.
I think it's far more likely it becomes acceptable but tedious -- more like Golos than Animar.
Possibly, but I still see that as fundamentally more of a problem with Kenny than Zirda. Kenny is plenty strong without him.
Mostly it seems like the line is "broken but not TOO broken". The line of what level of power is acceptable has been slowly creeping forward since the format began, with WotC doing the pushing.
I'd still rather see Kenny + Zirda on the other side of the table than Golos + nothing though. If companions push the power level of the game further than normal commanders then I can see that being a problem, but I don't see any reason why they'd be treated differently than anything else, nor evidence that they're more powerful than what's already easily available.
As and I said, politically I think they're kind of a disaster. If someone sits down with Kenny + Zirda everybody already knows what he's planning to do, more or less. Playing with your hand open is a huge political disadvantage - take it from a Phelddagrif player.
Both Sisays, Zur, Arcum, Golos, even Momir Vig, are mostly horrible. Why do we want more of that?
Sure, but while they're similar in certain ways I think the difference of degrees is crucial. Tutoring up any card, even with restrictions, leaves open incredible potential for brokenness. What Zirda does to Kenny...well, it's good, no doubt, but broken? Imo that's a firm no.
I do think there're a lot of differences in the two synergistic cards vs. one that can tutor for others, but it's a decent comparison regardless. Ways it's different:
* You have to do something or pay something to tutor with almost every tutor commander. Golos' etb tapped clause is very meaningful.
* They tend to have even more narrow deckbuilding constraints than zirda (e.g. arcum requiring an artifact creature means a lot of things you have to do)
* #1 is only kind of true. Sisay 1.0 costs tapping, once. Zirilan costs 3 and a tap but puts it into play with haste (and ofc a downside). Golos costs...entering tapped? How are you figuring that as a cost? It's ramping you, you probably already played a land that turn so you couldn't put it into play if it tutored to hand, plus no companions are lands anyway...this is a stupid comparison. Lin Sivvi costs essentially nothing beyond tapping. Vannifar costs extra-nothing. Momir requires casting a creature but you were doing that anyway, and then it keeps doing it on its own. Arcum you have setup but it puts it into PLAY, which is so much more powerful than having the extra card in hand. Same for Zur, minus the setup. Sisay 2.0 is expensive initially but can be a huge discount later. This is apples to oranges at best.
* #2 is only true for some of them - sisay 1,0 doesn't, Zirilan doesn't, Lin Sivvi doesn't, Golos doesn't, Zur doesn't, Overlord doesn't, Vannifar I would argue doesn't, Momir I would argue doesn't, Sidisi sure as %$#% doesn't...Ok so you've got arcum and maybe Sisay 2.0, kind of. Excellent point
* all of the tutor commanders are repeatable, either by blinking/replaying them or with their own repeatable activated ability.
* all of the tutor commanders give you a wide range of targets while Zirda is just...Zirda.
So we've got 2 ways where *some* tutor commanders as weaker, and two HUGE ways in which they're much, much stronger.
I bring up the tutor commanders because they're soooo far beyond the consistency that Zirda grants. Are they annoying? Most of them, yeah, but we put up with them and they haven't destroyed the game to my knowledge. Can't see Zirda doing it if Sisay used to be one of the most popular commanders in the game.