@onering : I always adapt my deck to the power level of my meta. If I choose a powerful commander like Animar or Narset, I usually tend to build them in a less cutthroat way, to compensate for their inherent power level. That is how I have always played and Golos is no different in that regard. If we only need to take into account the ceiling of every commander, then the banlist should be aimed at cEDH and nothing else. The RC has repeatedly said that they don't want that, they don't want Commander to look like the other formats, they don't want to ban stuff just because it's powerful or popular.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
I don't want to be hated/targeted just for being me. But you know what, if opponents target me so what? I don't whine about it. I just play. Because you know what, if people hate adversity that's what GAIV is. I'm not going to sit here and say "Oh, it's not THAT kind of deck. I'm just playing GAIV for it's colors." Which is exactly what you're saying. "Oh, I got Golos, but it's only the type that wins 10% of the time."
Even if GAIV is the only cost increaser, my opponents won't give a flip. Your random opponents also have the right to not give a flip about Golos excuses as well.
So are you not okay with people hating playing against Golos? If you are okay with and can see why people hate playing against GAIV, you should be ready to have people hate your general too. Sorry, but your card isn't off limits. No one gets to sit on their Golos high horse and look down at me for GAIV.
I never said you don't have the right to hate Golos, never. If I'm facing you and you don't want to play against Golos, then I simply won't play that deck against you. It's that simple, really. And I don't look down on anyone playing anything, I even said that I don't have any problem with GAIV and yet you interpret it as me somehow looking down on you? I try my best to respect every player style, there are some cEDH decks in my meta, and some newbies playing unsleeved precons. They all have the right to exist and enjoy the game. I'm even against having a banlist at all, I think there is no point for that in a casual format that is not aimed at tournament play anyway but I know it's not realistic. The key part is just to communicate. If you don't want to face certain styles of decks, just say it beforehand, rather than hating on the player during the game.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
Truly, no one here is being dismissive of your play style.
You might not be dismissive about my playstyle but this topic sure likes to make me feel like I should be ashamed to even like Golos, given how "awful", "boring", "terrible" or "bad for the format" he is.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
It's just high time we acknowledge that overpowered resource acquisition is just as unfun to play against as dedicated resource denial.
You admitted yourself that it was fun to play against resource denial, that it makes the game more interesting in your eyes, which rightly proves that this is only a matter of taste. You have the right to like playing against resource denial but I don't have the right to like overpowered resource acquisition?
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
I don't like
limited resources (, weak pun), I like choices and decision trees. No interaction and pure ramp for the first 4-5 turns is not appealing to me.
That is totally fair. I also like that style.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
People coming here to explain why they think Golos could be banned is not "forcing" or "imposing" you to do jack.
I suggest rereading the topic and seeing the words that have been used throughout it. The first posts are totally valid, our opinion and experiences differ but the point of view is certainly valid, But it quickly degenerates after that, some people proudly stated targeting Golos players in each and every game, out of principle, and if their target dared to complain, they just see it as a "really myopic way of seeing the game and the players". I can also read "this is not what the format is about", suggesting there is only one valid way of playing? "He's just as awful and repetitive as an artifacts deck, a superfriends deck, an enchantment deck, a Gods tribal deck", completely ignoring what the player even intends to build with him. Again, this might not have been the intention, but it really comes across as, well, dismissive.
There is a difference between saying "I don't like the style of play Golos promotes", which is basically what the first post is about, and the follow-up conversation which implies hating the Golos player themselves, as if they were the one responsible for this design.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
Don't worry about stax, it's been bullied out of existence.
And I find this sad, honestly. There are still a few of those in my meta among the cEDH players (or at least it looks like it is, I definitely saw
Stasis and
Smokestack being played).
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
No one is complaining about being forced to play against Golos. They're pointing out that Golos provides resources too effectively and has an all too convenient built in outlet to pour all of those resources into.
They are pointing out how that is unfun for them.
And I don't disagree with that, it is their opinion after all, and they have the right to express it. Golos is busted and some people don't like to play against him, I never denied that.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
I mean, they're right.
And again, this is a matter of opinion. Nobody is wrong for liking resource denial just like nobody is wrong for liking Golos. And the same can be said for not liking those things.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
You couldn't find some other deck to lose 90% with? J/k
Well, no. I want all my nonland cards and my commander to be on theme. Golos was the first 5 colours option to be printed that was compatible with my theme. Now there is
Esika, God of the Tree // The Prismatic Bridge but she doesn't work as well with all the cascade stuff.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
You're only winning 10% but others are winning 100% running jank Golos. Ultimately, we don't know what actually dictates banning because it's on the RC and this is a casual format. But if anything did dictate banning it's not your games. It's the games where Golos is obviously doing much better.
I'm guessing they actually care about both kinds of games. For every banning decision, you need to take a look at the whole spectrum, not just one end of it.
umtiger wrote: ↑3 years ago
If you play the best deck in modern, you better be able to stomach bans and losing your deck. If you play EDH, you better be able to stomach all the whining there is about removal, counters, stax, you playing Golos. So whatever.
I disagree with this point. The RC makes it one of their top priority to handle Commander in a different way than Modern and the other competitive formats. When I play EDH, I'm not playing for prizes. I'm playing to have fun, so no, I don't have to stomach anything at all. We should all be enjoying the game, period. If somebody is not having fun at the table, this is a miss and we need to figure out why and see how to correct it.