Having Your Voice Heard

[draken]

I tend to fall of the spectrum of un-bans rather than bans. I would truly like to know, how many games was paradox engine ruining? Do you feel it was a significant percentage of games? Among casual EDH or among cEDH? I play both types of EDH and love both of them very much. Sure, someone can take a longer turn with paradox engine, but there are players who tank even when they are deciding to counter spells....every turn. It can't possibly be large enough to think that paradox engine was "ruining games" and thus should be on the banned list.

As another point, the logic of "paradox engine requires very little build around to be broken" is VERY shaky. Yes, people put mana rocks in their decks anyway, but by that logic Yawgmoth's Will is insanely broken by virtue of the fact that it combos with playing he game. There are many cards that fall into similar categories of "high-reward, little investment" yet are not "bannable."

Finally, yes there is the philosophy document that was published. I am fully on board with what the RC has as idealized for commander. Yes, you guys (invented?) and popularized the format we all love. However, it has gone beyond the ideal of what it once was. There are so many people who play commander and make it their own--whether it be the Timmy's with 5 color dragons with the Ur dragon, to "sits in chairs tribal" to Zur Doomsday decks. Commander means a very different thing to many people. While policing the format and not allowing truly broken cards in (Moxen) is a necessity, you cannot seriously try to enforce this "ideal of commander" on everyone who plays. It seems, with all due respect, very selfish.

In my experience, tables police themselves. If one guy tries to break out the Derevi stax decks people either don't play with him if they want Vampire Tribal or Mono Red lands OR will play with their decks knowing (and looking forward to) the challenge they face. And as an aside, while it has been mentioned, the cEDH community (IMO) very much dislikes pub stompers. There is just no point. It's like putting a Game Genie on (showing my age here) and running through on god mode. That seems like it would get boring hella fast. cEDH is about the challenge of facing against highly tuned decks and utilizing deck building strategies/general gameplay savvy to win rather than bulldozing other players cards with their own.


Finally, while I am on the fence about splitting the format, it has been mentioned that someone from a competitive standpoint be more in solved in the RC or CAG (and no, not competitive like strong Edgar Markov deck, competitive like cEDH). People have mentioned Jim from the Spike Feeders. I very much endorse this as well. He is well spoken, thoughtful and I think would serve to convey the interests of the cEDH community to the RC in making rules/ban decisions.

--------
Anecdotally, I have run paradox engine in a Teferi mono blue storm list and I have had some of the most fun EVER playing magic, trying to figure out lines so I don't fizzle. My opponents, believe it or not, also very much enjoyed playing against me storming off and finding the perfect moment to use strategy and disrupt my combo letting me fizzle. In my experience, the card has been just fine FWIW

[Kajarak32]

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.

The RC is not the barrier to this. We are, as a group, big proponents of people creating other ways to play. French/Dual commander sprung directly out of a former RC member who wanted a different format. Tiny Leaders was great for the people who enjoyed it. We wish Oathbreaker the best. I think more highly invested players should check out Canlander, which looks like a great design for what it's trying to be.

We're not interested in doing this ourselves (and, honestly, you don't want us doing this; my first instinct to try to get to a balanced format would probably be to go to the Modern cardpool), but you won't see anyone on the RC denigrate someone willing to put the time and effort into making a format they want to play.

The idea that EDH and cEDH are different things and should be different things is the issue. cEDH players (in the largest percentages) don't want to ban a bunch of cards or even believe in achieving a "balanced" format. They strive for the same things the RC does. A fun, social format, they just play efficient decks. If banning one card, nearly explicitly played in cEDH (Flash), would help create better play experience for more people than it would hurt, then why not do so?

[ilovesaprolings]

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.

1) i don't see this format anywhere
2) or are you trying to create it on the spot? Please link me rules and banlist then, and maybe find a better name. this one is kinda long
3) if you were just trying to make a useless comment, congratulations! you surpassed magikarp's level and reached male combee's level.

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.

Can i just laugh at you assumption? My games, even the durdliest ones, used to last 1-1,5 hours.
Kinda nice that the format has to be inclusive too everyone, but if you are a "casual", suddenly you get drowned by assumptions about how miserable your games are.
You can interact and win quickly even without 2-cards combo you know?

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.

I don't get how it's not the game problem
If mikaeus and triskelion are unbanned then why it's not the game problem? Why the person using them should retain himself if his winrate increase by 50% just by adding these two cards?
At my lsg i met a guy who comboed off with Inalla on turn 3. Was him a toxic guy too? Or was he just trying to use that general the way that general was made and left unbanned?

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

And so what about people who wants to play the same way? Where should they go?

[tstorm823]

tstorm823 has it right. I'm going to start using the term "fast combo" as opposed to combo and maybe folks will take it as intended. Flash/Hulk is fast combo. Mike/Trike might be if you're tutor/tutor/ramp/ramp/Tooth and Nail. Winning Turn 4 or earlier is fast combo. Assembling a Rube Goldberg device of some kind that five different pieces is by the strictest definition a combo, but isn't what I see as a threat to anything. Combos (tstorm's "goofy combo") are part of Magic.

Hopefully something like that would avoid offending some of the people who are innocent collateral damage, but I think the segment of people who want a hard line on what is and isn't acceptable are going to be disappointed by any articulation. It just shifts the question from "can I combo or not" to "can I combo this turn or not", and the intent of either of those questions is equally problematic. Anyone demanding to know the limit of something is asking that because they intend to hit that limit. Which is a great thing if you're asking a blood drive how much you can donate, and not a great thing if you're asking a Chinese buffet how many plates you get before they kick you out of the restaurant.

It's a noble thing for someone in a competitive setting to aim for the highest limit and offer their opponents the best possible competition, but actual competitive people aren't asking what the upper limit is, they're dedicated to discovering that for themselves. People asking for hard lines on what is socially acceptable in casual edh are never going to get a great answer because it changes with who you're playing with, but even if there was an easy answer you could give them, I can't help but feel when a person asks "Excuse me, but what is the absolute barest standard of social acceptability I'm required to meet?", they're just determined to make their own life miserable.

[IAMAfortunecookieAMA]

/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.

Hi folks, hi Sheldon (not sure if you'll see this).

I wrote that post and the primer. The title is intended as a joke. If the ban list is intended to send a message about the strategies that are "acceptable" or "appropriate" in EDH, my deck (which uses Jeskai Ascendancy as a Paradox Engine) defies the "spirit of the format."

The intended message is that there's more than one way to play. If a subset of players defines one way as "correct" (i.e. the spirit of the format), anyone who has fun in a different way is going to have to go against that. In my meta, my deck is perfectly balanced and fun. But according to the rules of the format that my friends and I have loved for almost a decade, we're not playing in an acceptable way.

I don't need Paradox Engine to be unbanned. The ban is breeding deck creativity in my meta. But, please don't take my message as anything other than a quiet protest against the idea that a banlist can serve all players equally. I don't hate the RC, and I think this past week has demonstrated the difficulty of your job. In lieu of a perfect solution to a rapidly diversifying format, I think it's best to let the players use Rule 0 to define "acceptable" decks for themselves.

[IAMAfortunecookieAMA]

To respond to Sheldon's original question:

I think Commander is now much larger than the perspectives of the original RC can properly manage. I think WOTC has demonstrated through new card development that they understand what players are seeking in EDH, and I think the format should be managed by WOTC.

[thwgrandpigeon]

Hey RC. Chaotic couple of days, eh?

First I want to apologize for anyone that sent any of you death threats or any kind of rude or mean spirited messages. I think you guys have managed to create a fantastic format that's done well for itself and for us players. I can only hope that the last few days will ultimately prove to be healthy for the format in the long-run, if only because of how much it's encouraged folks like me to reach out to you about our thoughts on the competitive scene.

The last few days I've been mulling over the dilemma of the edh banlist and how it affects cEDHers. Full confession: I'm a Paradox Sisay player. It's my favourite deck, bar-none, since I like playing rogue-builds, enjoy the feeling of having a deck full of efficient, powerful cards, and most importantly don't like blue. You'll be glad to know that I've made a point to only pulling it out only against other incredibly powerful decks in the year or so since it's been assembled.

So the ban hurt.

Since the announcement I've been pretty vocal about cEDHers making their own banlist, since that's what, honestly, the RC has encouraged all along; you have consistently told everyone that the banlist is *suggested*, and that playgroups can ban and unban whatever they see fit since EDH is about the social contract, not the legalese on the rulebook. But with cEDH, that doesn't exactly work.

The main problem is that cEDH's point is to treat your banlist as word-of-law and make lemonade out of the weird lemons that arise from the banlist/format-rules when it's is put in the context of ruthless play. What you've said repeatedly is that all bannings and un-bannings are optional if a playgroup doesn't agree with them, but ironically cEDH probably takes these suggested bans more seriously than any other iteration of EDH, even though cEDH is played in a style that is probably the least like the RC's initial envisioning of the format. The whole point/social-contract of the power-level is to use your banlist exactly and push it to extremes, which makes the recent ban so frustrating. To some degree, and I hate to be accusatory with this, the banning of PE has shown you guys to either be in denial or unaware of how much your choices affect the cEDH community. We really do depend on you for the health and diversity of our tables.

By now you've probably been told that PE was a very fair card at cEDH tables. And you probably also know that PE was an engine that gave the sometimes homogenous cEDH format a bit of metagame diversity. *But* PE is a rightfully oppressive card in many lower-powered metas, which is why I don't mind its banning for *most* of EDH. This is why I've been advocating for a second, competitive banlist for awhile.

The problem with splinter formats is that they tend to die. The mods at r/CompetitiveEDH have rightfully *not* endorsed creating a second banlist. And I completely understand their logic. Because of this the only solution I see long-term for these kinds of issues is for the RC to start a second suggested banlist or, if you don't want to run a second banlist, finding others who would be interested in organizing it on your behalf. Make clear that the banlist is for those who seek to play EDH at its most ruthless against opponents who do the same, and that decks built with the cEDH banlist should not be played against non-cEDH decks unless everyone has agreed to it beforehand.

There are issues with that of course. Once you split the format many players will probably start asking for bans to cards like crypt or rift. I personally wouldn't want this. Most decks that play crypt or rift aren't cEDHing, and I think the culture of EDH has really leaned against things like pubstomping and bad spirited play in the last few years. I also don't think a competitive banlist would need to be that different from the normal one, at least at first, since most of your banlist has been made with a range of power-levels in mind. Maybe someday the format could test allowing Braids or Griselbrand, but I think it would be best for any second banlist to change things slowly over time. And having two lists for different playgroup-types might actually be beneficial, since it would help players think of both banlists as suggestions, not absolutes, and think about the banning of cards as being in-service of the spirit of their playgroup(s), rather than molding the spirit of their playgroup to the banlist.

I realize this is not likely to happen. You've made clear in other posts that cEDH is not something you're interested in or particularly knowledgeable about, which has previously never bugged me in the slightest. I'm even 100% in agreement with Sheldon when he states that comboing off before turn 4 is unhealthy for EDH games 99% of the time. And I even think that, without a second banlist, it's better for PE to be banned than not. But maybe there is a way forward that would protect the format, while also helping those seeking to play EDH at its most optimized, with a little bit of ingenuity or outreach? Folks like me can always go to cEDH nights and ask to play our Paradox lists, and hopefully others will understand. This post isn't really about me not wanting to have those conversations so much as it is about hopefully helping you understand your impact on the cEDH community.

Regardless thanks for reading this. Sorry about all the angry reddit posters of the world who've been treating you unfairly over this stuff.

[Istarkano]

The RC is not the barrier to this. We are, as a group, big proponents of people creating other ways to play. French/Dual commander sprung directly out of a former RC member who wanted a different format.

One of my personal points of confusion in all of this has been cEDH vs French. Isn't French the epitome of cEDH? Didn't/don't they curate the banned list and rules specifically to service EDH players that wish to play in tournaments (i.e. a "competitive" environment)? Is the issue the multiplayer vs 1v1?

Another thing that I would like to say, is that I answered very lowly on the survey's question about voices being heard. However, if I was asked the same question but in regards to Standard, Modern, Legacy, Constructed, etc., I would answer at the same low level. I don't feel that WotC listens to me, nor should they. I feel the same way about the RC. Do they hear my voice? I don't know. At the same time, I don't feel as though they need to take my opinions into account. They did well enough to pull my friends and I back into MtG after a 10+ year absence. We still enjoy the format now. So I don't personally have an issue with how things are done. I like the bans/unban. I think it is good that you created the CAG. Looking forward to my groups game night tomorrow night!

[thwgrandpigeon]

One of my personal points of confusion in all of this has been cEDH vs French. Isn't French the epitome of cEDH? Didn't/don't they curate the banned list and rules specifically to service EDH players that wish to play in tournaments (i.e. a "competitive" environment)? Is the issue the multiplayer vs 1v1?

Not the RC but French commander is a 1v1 format. Check out their website for more details and explanation about the format!

[bobthefunny]

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?"

I want you to know that I appreciate what you do, and the level of outreach and participation that you take on the forums here, Salvation, the official forums, Twitter, Facebook, and your articles shows how much time and dedication you put into the format, and how many ways you put forth to interact with and meet the fans of this format.


I mean.... What I meant to say was... Clearly you should go on a road trip and PERSONALLY visit each and every LGS in the country to get a feel for how they all play! (You can start with mine)

[ElectricTuba]

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.

1) i don't see this format anywhere
2) or are you trying to create it on the spot? Please link me rules and banlist then, and maybe find a better name. this one is kinda long
3) if you were just trying to make a useless comment, congratulations! you surpassed magikarp's level and reached male combee's level.

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.

Can i just laugh at you assumption? My games, even the durdliest ones, used to last 1-1,5 hours.
Kinda nice that the format has to be inclusive too everyone, but if you are a "casual", suddenly you get drowned by assumptions about how miserable your games are.
You can interact and win quickly even without 2-cards combo you know?

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.

I don't get how it's not the game problem
If mikaeus and triskelion are unbanned then why it's not the game problem? Why the person using them should retain himself if his winrate increase by 50% just by adding these two cards?
At my lsg i met a guy who comboed off with Inalla on turn 3. Was him a toxic guy too? Or was he just trying to use that general the way that general was made and left unbanned?

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

And so what about people who wants to play the same way? Where should they go?

It seems as if you have an expectation that you should be able to play a single Commander deck against any other pod of Commander decks and have a good game.

This is impossible, and not worth trying to accomplish.

If you want a good experience, you should preface any pick up game of Commander (be it at a store, GP side event, online, or anywhere else you have not played with the other players before) with a quick chat about the power level of your decks.

The sheer variety of strategies and decks in Commander means that there is a huge discrepancy in power level between the best and worst decks. If you love playing a certain kind of deck that is at power level X/10, then you need to find other people with decks at that same power level and cultivate a playgroup made up of people that love playing those kinds of games, no matter what power level that is.

Again, I'd like to point out that a pod of one max power deck and three "casual" decks is not a fun game for the max power player either; and that choosing your playgroup is not something a ban list can solve. There will always be more and less effective decks/strategies.

[Styrofoam]

tstorm823 has it right. I'm going to start using the term "fast combo" as opposed to combo and maybe folks will take it as intended. Flash/Hulk is fast combo. Mike/Trike might be if you're tutor/tutor/ramp/ramp/Tooth and Nail. Winning Turn 4 or earlier is fast combo. Assembling a Rube Goldberg device of some kind that five different pieces is by the strictest definition a combo, but isn't what I see as a threat to anything. Combos (tstorm's "goofy combo") are part of Magic. There are combos in my decks (although probably very few infinite ones).

When I say that we're not demonizing combo, what I'm talking about we don't have any problem with combos as a normal part of mid- to late-game progression. What creates an unhealthy format is the devolution into everyone racing to it because some people are doing it and they just want to keep up. I'm struggling to find a better way to articulate the fact that we find it within reasonable bounds of health for the format that combos, even infinite ones, are in decks. Games have to end. What's troubling on a format level--without this being a judgment on anyone who is playing it--is the trend toward choosing the nuclear option as the default. The reason fast combo is troubling on a format level is that it pushes out everything else, because no one has the time to do anything. If that's the way you and your group play, great. If that way of playing were privileged over all others, the format would not be where it is today in terms of global popularity. It would have died long ago.

We can't ignore, however, that there is a contingent of players who do like to play that way. The question is how do we best serve them (or at the very least not alienate them) while not undercutting the kind of player who has carried the format to where it is.

And I suppose I should add at the end there "without also creating a 100-card banned list"

I feel like, you're not listening to the solutions we are offering. We want to play as efficiently and optimally as possible within the confines of the rules you have put forth, but we also want a diverse format.

We don't want a 100 card ban list. We aren't even (for the most part) angry about the most recent banning. We just want a 2 mana win the game on the spot spell to be axed, which doesn't affect your core demographic in any way AND we want to feel like we belong to the commander format rather than the degenerates who don't know how to have fun.

It's really simple. There are plenty of people in the cEDH community that would be good additions to either the RC or the CAG. Add them. Let them speak for us. Commander has grown beyond what your original ideas were. The social contract is still in place - people aren't being degenerates with people who don't expect or want that style of game (also, for the most part, there will always be jerks). The spirit of commander and the social contract isn't dead because a small group of people want to play 100 card singleton with average cmc of 2.5 instead of 4.5.

[Styrofoam]

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.

1) i don't see this format anywhere
2) or are you trying to create it on the spot? Please link me rules and banlist then, and maybe find a better name. this one is kinda long
3) if you were just trying to make a useless comment, congratulations! you surpassed magikarp's level and reached male combee's level.

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.

Can i just laugh at you assumption? My games, even the durdliest ones, used to last 1-1,5 hours.
Kinda nice that the format has to be inclusive too everyone, but if you are a "casual", suddenly you get drowned by assumptions about how miserable your games are.
You can interact and win quickly even without 2-cards combo you know?

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.

I don't get how it's not the game problem
If mikaeus and triskelion are unbanned then why it's not the game problem? Why the person using them should retain himself if his winrate increase by 50% just by adding these two cards?
At my lsg i met a guy who comboed off with Inalla on turn 3. Was him a toxic guy too? Or was he just trying to use that general the way that general was made and left unbanned?

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

And so what about people who wants to play the same way? Where should they go?

The people who want to play the same way should play with like minded players. NO ONE should be forced to play with people who don't want the same out of a game. I don't want to sit down with a fully tuned Thrasios/Tymna flash hulk deck against a bunch of people who will not play a spell until turn 3.

I want my games, at any level of power, to be competitive (relative to the other decks at the table, not "competitive as in fully tuned) whether that be my Soraya the Falconer bird tribal deck, or my cEDH blood pod deck. If I played my bird deck at a cEDH table, i'd be miserable. If i played my Bloodpod deck at a table of 5s adn 6s i would be miserable as well. It's give a take. Its about communication. cEDH players aren't trying to take over commander. They just want to feel like their fun matters too.

[Jim Wolfie]

I mean I wouldn't say banning flash wouldn't affect general play. It would probably be a net gain overall because the card is actually really dumb with sylvan primordial, prime time and sundering titan. Or really anythng similar.

[pokken]

I voted a 4 on the "voice is heard" question - I have had a few bits of interaction with several RC folks and generally feel like my comments are thoughtfully received when I voice good ones. I have some dumb opinions so I don't expect everything to be heard.

I feel like if I feel really passionately about something I can get in contact with the RC somehow - by posting a thought-out thread or PM'ing them somewhere or whatever.

That said - I think my original suggestion when they started the CAG was the right approach. These surveys are magnificent. They answer all kinds of questions. They're far better than the CAG at getting diverse opinions and a real pulse on the format. My overall impression of the CAG was that they have interesting opinions but did not feel very representative. This is not to throw stones at them, they are who they are and were selected the way they were.

My best suggestion is to do this quarterly, or at least biannually, in some meaningful way. Cry's questions were great. I feel like this survey is a huge step in the right direction for getting communication going.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

re: The CEDH community

I am sick and tired of seeing CEDH decks interact with non-CEDH decks. I don't really care for the "we're just socially exploring bro" narrative. These decks are tedious. No one really likes them. Half the people I see play them don't even like them. They just feel compelled to have one. Almost everyone I run into has a CEDH deck that they only play sometimes, and they usually sigh most of the time they play it and look sheepish - unless they're playing other CEDH folks, and then one of them usually has a clear budget advantage and wins.

I think the community needs to split. And when there is a format for that, you can be sure the people still hanging around in ours don't like competition as much as they claim to.

If you play kitchen table magic and try to influence the vintage banlist based on that, you're doing it wrong. If you play CEDH and try to influence the Commander banlist based on those experiences, you're likewise doing it wrong.

[FireStorm4056]

Hi Sheldon, as an EDH player of 10+ years (and one who has maintained decks at all power levels including CEDH) I'll offer a few suggestions:

- Ignore the toxic CEDH voices. They misrepresent a community that is in reality incredibly supportive, welcoming, and fun to be a part of. Unfortunately the toxic individuals are also by far the most outspoken, leading many to believe they are the "norm" (they are not). On behalf of many in the CEDH community, I'd like to apologize for the (largely unfair) backlash directed at you over the past few days.

- Discuss cards that came up in RC meetings but did not get banned. This offers greater transparency as to which cards are being discussed and the merits behind the arguments for/against. The operative word here is "transparency." Note, this is not the same as a "Watch List." Discussing a card does not imply that it's an ongoing concern.

- At least consider CEDH, even if it's not a priority. All EDH players play the game for the same reasons, regardless of power (even CEDH!) - for a fun social experience, insane plays, and amazing memories. The mindset is the same; the goals are the same; the premise is the same! Power level is a sliding scale, but it's all one format - and we ALL just love us some EDH! We just don't all share the same exact tastes in gameplay. I fully understand that CEDH is very low on the priority list and that's just fine. That said, EDH at a high-power level is the most beloved MTG format for tens of thousands of players. They would greatly appreciate being valued by the RC, even if the outcome isn't perfectly agreeable on all sides. For more casual-focused bans, at least consider the effect on competitive gameplay, even if the decision doesn't change (also, in the announcement, explain that you considered this!) Bans that would affect only more competitive games (with negligible casual impact) should at least be entertained - they ultimately stand to improve the experience of a massive number of players (even if they are still a niche relative to the whole).

- Adjust your messaging/communications: The RC's communication causes many players to feel they are being actively shunned and/or told their interpretation of the format is not accepted/valid. For example, many players' interpretation of the recent ban-update explanation was: "We considered Flash. It's not even played in casual, so not a problem there. It IS played in more competitive groups, where a ban would likely vastly improve player enjoyment. However, we decided not to ban it anyway." This was a slap-to-the-face for many, who saw it as an intentional undermining of their beloved slice of the format (all without any tangible benefit to the rest of the playerbase). Again, it's fine that CEDH is not a priority. However, many feel the RC is actively avoiding great opportunities to improve the game for players who prefer a higher power level, and then going out of its way to let everyone know it did so.

- Gather feedback, in private, from some of the trusted CEDH community figures. Again, CEDH doesn't need to be a priority, but many players would be greatly relieved to know that the RC invested effort to gather information/feedback from all corners of the community. It would mean a great deal to higher-power groups to know that the RC cares about the entire playerbase, and is committed to gathering accurate and honest feedback from players representing all power levels. Even if they don't agree with the final decision, knowing their position was valued and fairly considered will be enough to satisfy most. (Again, CEDH players know they're not the priority, but deserve to at least be fairly considered.)

[Jim Wolfie]

I mean for the record if you don't want to play cedh, it's a very opt in activity, most magic on a casual level is. I would also ask you take a step back and examine your own actions, if you can observe a game irl you're within proximity enough to convey a body language, and that sheepish behavior could easily be them tensing up to a hostile entity who might not like cedh.

[TheWayBySwanns]

Dear Sheldon,




How does your banlist aim to shape tournament play and the metagame which arises from it?

We all know (thanks to your helpful recent communication) that your banlist does not aim to regulate tournament/competitive play.

However many hundreds of people (myself included) play EDH in competitive tournaments with prize support.




Why then is the banlist used in these tournaments the one upheld by yourself and the RC?

[FireStorm4056]

@[mention]pokken[/mention]:

Please keep in mind that CEDH is NOT the same as pubstomping. The purpose of Formula 1 isn't to race F1 cars against Honda Civics. F1 cars race other F1 cars, where the competition is fair, balanced, and fun for everyone. Likewise, everyone has fun when Civics race against other Civics. The key here is balance.

The foundation of Commander rests in the social contract - that players will agree on a fair power level amongst themselves, build decks to meet that power level, and then enjoy a fun and balanced game together. When someone breaks that contract and brings a deck to the table that is absurdly stronger than the rest, the issue is not the deck itself, the issue is the player who is breaking the social contract. The people who approach the game this way (beat up on much weaker decks/players) will do so regardless of the banlist/rules. CEDH has nothing to do with it.

Everyone can have fun when F1 cars race F1 cars and Civics race Civics. When someone brings their F1 car to the Civic race, the car's owner is the issue, not the car itself.

[FireStorm4056]

When I say that we're not demonizing combo, what I'm talking about we don't have any problem with combos as a normal part of mid- to late-game progression. What creates an unhealthy format is the devolution into everyone racing to it because some people are doing it and they just want to keep up.

This is already well-regulated via social contract and has been for some 10 years now. There is no need for you to ban away "fast combo" - it's well-balanced for those that desire it (exception: Flash/Hulk), and for those that don't, is easily solved via social contract (as implied in the Commander Philosophy document).

Playgroups that find themselves in an undesirable arms race can mutually disarm on their own. For others, the arms race offers a spectacular, highly-interactive, dynamic, and exciting playing opportunity that simply isn't available anywhere else.

[ilovesaprolings]

cEDH players aren't trying to take over commander. They just want to feel like their fun matters too.

Really? Some messages are really... interesting, however. Like this one:

I think Commander is now much larger than the perspectives of the original RC can properly manage. I think WOTC has demonstrated through new card development that they understand what players are seeking in EDH, and I think the format should be managed by WOTC.

I don't get why cEDH players' fun isn't mattering. Wotc prints a lot of broken cards. The banlist is extremely thin. The format is fast and powerful.
What do you want more?

[Taleran]

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.

This is why I stay out of most of these discussions at this point, the people I play with tune decks for the most part (we play weird jank but it is typically also pretty tuned jank) so a lot of the discussions here basically come to.

Left Side of the Mouth: The Rules Committee does not ban for more tuned metas / cEDH

Right Side of Mouth: These cards still have to go because everyone plays the format.

I realize there is no easy way to put this square peg into the round hole.

---

The other thing is that all the cards that making this format more powerful are being reprinted and printed by Wizards, what is the oldest card that is problematic in Commander that hasn't had a reprint outside of the reserved list, Ad Nauseam?

The precons are getting more powerful, standard is getting more powerful, modern is getting more powerful it only bears to reason that Commander gets more powerful due to the influx of all those cards.

Everything is speeding up and trying to put your arms up to stop this flood is not going to work.

[pokken]

@@pokken:

Please keep in mind that CEDH is NOT the same as pubstomping. The purpose of Formula 1 isn't to race F1 cars against Honda Civics. F1 cars race other F1 cars, where the competition is fair, balanced, and fun for everyone. Likewise, everyone has fun when Civics race against other Civics. The key here is balance.

The foundation of Commander rests in the social contract - that players will agree on a fair power level amongst themselves, build decks to meet that power level, and then enjoy a fun and balanced game together. When someone breaks that contract and brings a deck to the table that is absurdly stronger than the rest, the issue is not the deck itself, the issue is the player who is breaking the social contract. The people who approach the game this way (beat up on much weaker decks/players) will do so regardless of the banlist/rules. CEDH has nothing to do with it.

Everyone can have fun when F1 cars race F1 cars and Civics race Civics. When someone brings their F1 car to the Civic race, the car's owner is the issue, not the car itself.

This is pretty much the cedh party line. I've heard it said so many times and it has never rung true based on what I see.

What I see is (and this was the same on the other side of the country):
A very few guys with super tricked out cedh level decks
A few other guys dragged into being their practice dummies with underpowered decks due to budget or ignorance
People end up trotting their cedh decks out for "practice"
The same couple people win everything because they tune better or play better or both
Things are generally not really competitive if analyzed objectively because decks are always unbalanced


In the online community for cedh on cockatrice and so on the decks are all close to the same power level but in real life it doesn't play out like that..

But I suspect even in the online communities there is less of an actual competitive balance than people think because the banlist creates a hilariously skewed meta.

I follow it because I'm into finance and cedh has major downstream effects on what is popular in stronger casual decks.

[Taleran]

@@pokken:

Please keep in mind that CEDH is NOT the same as pubstomping. The purpose of Formula 1 isn't to race F1 cars against Honda Civics. F1 cars race other F1 cars, where the competition is fair, balanced, and fun for everyone. Likewise, everyone has fun when Civics race against other Civics. The key here is balance.

The foundation of Commander rests in the social contract - that players will agree on a fair power level amongst themselves, build decks to meet that power level, and then enjoy a fun and balanced game together. When someone breaks that contract and brings a deck to the table that is absurdly stronger than the rest, the issue is not the deck itself, the issue is the player who is breaking the social contract. The people who approach the game this way (beat up on much weaker decks/players) will do so regardless of the banlist/rules. CEDH has nothing to do with it.

Everyone can have fun when F1 cars race F1 cars and Civics race Civics. When someone brings their F1 car to the Civic race, the car's owner is the issue, not the car itself.

This is pretty much the cedh party line. I've heard it said so many times and it has never rung true based on what I see.

What I see is (and this was the same on the other side of the country):
A very few guys with super tricked out cedh level decks
A few other guys dragged into being their practice dummies with underpowered decks due to budget or ignorance
People end up trotting their cedh decks out for "practice"
The same couple people win everything because they tune better or play better or both
Things are generally not really competitive if analyzed objectively because decks are always unbalanced


In the online community for cedh on cockatrice and so on the decks are all close to the same power level but in real life it doesn't play out like that..

But I suspect even in the online communities there is less of an actual competitive balance than people think because the banlist creates a hilariously skewed meta.

I follow it because I'm into finance and cedh has major downstream effects on what is popular in stronger casual decks.

The behavior you are discussing happens at all levels of the game of magic because it is an issue with the people involved and not the decks they choose to play. Variations of power exist for all kinds of Commander and often times those bleed into each other.

But straight saying that people are lying when they say hey when I play my good deck against other people who have good decks and the games are good is people lying to you to fill a party line is some horseshit on your part.

[pokken]

I don't mean to say people are lying but that the rosy view they present is exceptional and more rare in paper than the generic claim of "cedh players just want to race t1 cars." Suggests.

I believe some people really want that.

But I also believe most of them are practicing a degree of self deception if they think they are playing truly competitive games with an wildly unbalanced banlist.

I think the attitude of "let's just play competitive with this ridiculous noncompetitive banlist" also had negative impacts for the format as a whole. The practices of the cedh community do migrate to lower powered metas.