Why is everyone in cEDH keep calling about 'ban' Flash thing?

[pokken]

I can tell ya consult pact Oracle decks win as much as flash hulk in my meta. Not having the brick count of flash (hulk, flash, and the breakfast guys are total boat anchors) decks is pretty seriously a big deal. The 4c mana base is also no walk in the park. You can miss hard and get ruined by blood moon too.

I would not be that surprised if we looked back a year from now and either CST or kess consult proved to be better decks than TNT sushi. It might just be a phase in my meta but the kess decks win rate is materially better than sushi at this moment.

Hulk is very good and presents a weird warped play pattern with the efficient instant speed combo. So it's hard to know for sure. But consultation kess feels super close and still annihilates any other decks.

[Kelzam]

cEDH doesn't have its own banlist for a very simple reason: It's not a different format. It's a different philosophy to deckbuilding, gameplay, and player interaction within a game, but that just means that when we sit down to an agreed upon "cEDH" game, we've just already established our Rule 0 discussion. Likewise, splitting off cEDH from the rest of the format would, in my estimation, cause far more problems than it would solve by removing a natural progression from players who are looking to play commander at a higher level than their playgroup might want to. Without an outlet, those players sometimes become pubstompers, sometimes revert their power level to meet the group, and sometimes leave the format entirely. With the ability to be directed to cEDH play, we provide another positive outcome to those situations.

Really, the issue is that "cEDH" is a misnomer. The vast majority of cEDH games aren't played in any sort of tournament structure or for any reason other than enjoyment--they're not really "competitive". Are the decks played at a high level of optimization and power? Yes, absolutely. But the name cEDH has stuck, despite the format not being a competitive format much at all.

This is such a rose-tinted load of horse manure that I'm so over cEDH players trying to peddle while conveniently always unwilling to concede the multitude of concerns for everyone else. Every time without fail, cEDH players invoke "We're EDH players too!", yet when it's brought to light by many how cEDH players are most often the pubstompers, they try to defend themselves and say they don't want to play with normal Commander players and that they're outliers! How convenient! Yet, everyone knows cEDH is a small minority and that when they can't find other cEDH players, they happily break out near cEDH level decks that overpower most players who play Commander on the grounds it was meant for - they have a level they like to play at that is simply not congruent with the intentions of Commander. "We're the next level and save casual players from pubstompers" is such a ridiculous attempt at trying to appear righteous. cEDH players want to say that they only want to play with other cEDH players; they don't want to bide by the format's customs or Rule 0 yet tout that they use the same framework, even though the most important features of Commander are Rule 0 and the RC banning for it's core player base and intended experience. cEDH players play with entirely different goals and intentions in mind for their decks and gameplay. For all intents and purposes, cEDH players don't want to play Commander, but a format with Commander's deck building restrictions. They could do like French Commander or MTGO's competitive tables do and have their own sub-format of Commander and banlist, but they won't, and keep saying that they're "still playing Commander." And to what end? Because without claiming they're playing the same format, they can't stake a claim as playing the highest form of Commander and stroke their egos and treat themselves as superior and look down on those who aren't playing cEDH? They might not feel the authority to enter conversations in social media groups to call cards/non-"tier" Commanders trash, or insult/attack the RC personally on every social media platform and invade conversations? Yet, cEDH is supposedly a "misnomer"? Not competitive? Despite the incessant need to find the best lines of play possible, build with the best cards possible and subscribe to a designated meta game of top Tier decks? Spare me the %$#%$#%.

[Gashnaw]

People will always whine to ban a card. It will never change.
cEDH needs its own ban list. It should not coincide with casual players.

[RxPhantom]

cEDH doesn't have its own banlist for a very simple reason: It's not a different format. It's a different philosophy to deckbuilding, gameplay, and player interaction within a game, but that just means that when we sit down to an agreed upon "cEDH" game, we've just already established our Rule 0 discussion. Likewise, splitting off cEDH from the rest of the format would, in my estimation, cause far more problems than it would solve by removing a natural progression from players who are looking to play commander at a higher level than their playgroup might want to. Without an outlet, those players sometimes become pubstompers, sometimes revert their power level to meet the group, and sometimes leave the format entirely. With the ability to be directed to cEDH play, we provide another positive outcome to those situations.

Really, the issue is that "cEDH" is a misnomer. The vast majority of cEDH games aren't played in any sort of tournament structure or for any reason other than enjoyment--they're not really "competitive". Are the decks played at a high level of optimization and power? Yes, absolutely. But the name cEDH has stuck, despite the format not being a competitive format much at all.

This is such a rose-tinted load of horse manure that I'm so over cEDH players trying to peddle while conveniently always unwilling to concede the multitude of concerns for everyone else. Every time without fail, cEDH players invoke "We're EDH players too!", yet when it's brought to light by many how cEDH players are most often the pubstompers, they try to defend themselves and say they don't want to play with normal Commander players and that they're outliers! How convenient! Yet, everyone knows cEDH is a small minority and that when they can't find other cEDH players, they happily break out near cEDH level decks that overpower most players who play Commander on the grounds it was meant for - they have a level they like to play at that is simply not congruent with the intentions of Commander. "We're the next level and save casual players from pubstompers" is such a ridiculous attempt at trying to appear righteous. cEDH players want to say that they only want to play with other cEDH players; they don't want to bide by the format's customs or Rule 0 yet tout that they use the same framework, even though the most important features of Commander are Rule 0 and the RC banning for it's core player base and intended experience. cEDH players play with entirely different goals and intentions in mind for their decks and gameplay. For all intents and purposes, cEDH players don't want to play Commander, but a format with Commander's deck building restrictions. They could do like French Commander or MTGO's competitive tables do and have their own sub-format of Commander and banlist, but they won't, and keep saying that they're "still playing Commander." And to what end? Because without claiming they're playing the same format, they can't stake a claim as playing the highest form of Commander and stroke their egos and treat themselves as superior and look down on those who aren't playing cEDH? They might not feel the authority to enter conversations in social media groups to call cards/non-"tier" Commanders trash, or insult/attack the RC personally on every social media platform and invade conversations? Yet, cEDH is supposedly a "misnomer"? Not competitive? Despite the incessant need to find the best lines of play possible, build with the best cards possible and subscribe to a designated meta game of top Tier decks? Spare me the %$#%$#%.

I think you make a lot of excellent points, but I'm unwilling to paint all cEDH players with the same brush. The appeal of playing the tippiest toppiest of top tier decks is one I understand. What I don't understand is why so many cEDH proponents all of a sudden think that the casually minded RC - whose focus has always been on the casual side of things - should be obligated to moderate their format, too.

[BeneTleilax]

Because no-one else does, and a Flash ban would do more good to cEDH than it would harm to any other faction. I don't play cEDH, but I'm sick of factiousness being the defining factor in arguments. A ban would do more good than ill, there are currently more cEDH players detrimented by Flash than casuals who even play the card. If you want to hold a format hostage to feel like you got even with that one pubstomper at your LGS, I have little sympathy for your points.

[pokken]

(snipped a few important bits out here)

Yet, everyone knows cEDH is a small minority and that when they can't find other cEDH players, they happily break out near cEDH level decks that overpower most players who play Commander on the grounds it was meant for - they have a level they like to play at that is simply not congruent with the intentions of Commander. "We're the next level and save casual players from pubstompers" is such a ridiculous attempt at trying to appear righteous.

cEDH players want to say that they only want to play with other cEDH players; they don't want to bide by the format's customs or Rule 0 yet tout that they use the same framework, even though the most important features of Commander are Rule 0 and the RC banning for it's core player base and intended experience.

(1) So I do not consider myself a "cedh player" - I play maybe 20% of my games as CEDH and exclusively with other people playing competitive. In my shop there was an epidemic of pubstomping for a few months when I first went there (before I played any modern CEDH really) and then a particular player started pushing the competitive ethos pretty hard. He dragged all the pubstompers out and whomped them with better decks until they all stepped it up and became part of the CEDH community.

I've heard more than one person at my shop effusively praise this player for this. And he deserves it. The conversations about whether pods are competitive are really good and no one ever gets surprised by it. And the pubstomping has fallen to almost none.

So at least anecdotally the whole ethos of "play in pods of high powered no holds barred decks" has been pretty good for us and had the effect desired. I can't say that it always works that way but it did at my shop for the most part.

note: There is one player still who will trot out his competitive decks but he's, erm, that guy, and everyone knows him

(2) I think your second point is extremely important. The double standard that casual players should use rule 0 but competitive players can't is a dangerous attitude since the natural philosophical result of that attitude is that casual players don't need a banlist and the list should focus on competitive balance. We've already seen many CEDH players of the more aggressive bent make this claim loudly, so it's pretty obvious that's where the rhetoric leads.

[pokken]

A ban would do more good than ill, there are currently more cEDH players detrimented by Flash than casuals who even play the card.

I don't know that this has been proven, and if it is I don't know that it's for sure an appropriate assumption. Commander is not a format built on utilitarianism - it has a philosophy about whose needs take precedence.

[WizardMN]

A ban would do more good than ill, there are currently more cEDH players detrimented by Flash than casuals who even play the card.

I don't know that this has been proven, and if it is I don't know that it's for sure an appropriate assumption. Commander is not a format built on utilitarianism - it has a philosophy about whose needs take precedence.

There is also the argument that RxPhantom has made on a number of these threads, this one probably included: if one of the arguments of banning Flash for cEDH is "well casuals don't even play it that much" there is a significant problem. RxPhantom has a number of fun anecdotes (not data, but they are fun which is what matters) where Flash allowed them certain plays to make fun things happen. The suggestion of casuals not playing the card enough essentially boils down to "yes, RxPhantom is detrimented by the ban, but who cares? How many RxPhantoms are there really?". And, the obvious answer is "enough that banning it hurts someone the RC has constantly professed to catering towards".

The "casual" crowd is "hurt" by bannings because the cards are omnipresent or warp games. Prophet of Kruphix, Paradox Engine, Primeval Titan. I miss Titan, but I understand the reason for their departure. These cards were used far too often in the games RC cares about.

But, to suggest that now, in order for us to not worry about a card as benign as Flash being banned, we actually have to play it more is ridiculous. Others have stated the same question, and I will repeat it here since I have never seen a good answer to it:

"What do cEDH players feel would be the right amount a card is played in order to be "safe" from a banning?" That is, where is the cutoff to where a card is busted in cEDH but is still used enough by "casuals" to be safe from a banning based on that criterion?

[onering]

As a separate banlist seems to be a non starter with the cEDH community (even though I still believe it's the best answer and allows for targeted bannings of cards like flash and unbannings of cards that are banned for casual but make no sense being banned in a competitive environment, like PE or Prime Time or probably half the cards on the banlist), I do see a few options for handling the current conundrum.

I've said before that a modest change can be made to the ban philosophy that takes into account cEDH concerns while still relegating them to a minor consideration (as is befitting a minority that isn't representative of most of the playerbase or the core purpose of the format). That would be to use cEDH concerns as a tie breaker that can push a card over the line into being banned. A card that doesn't quite meet the requirements for banning but is causing problems in cEDH could be banned. That gives cEDH a better seat at the table than the status quo, without letting them take over the format or even get overrepresented in ban considerations. This becomes relevant to the current situation by potentially enabling a flash ban. Given that Flash is capable of winning from nowhere and generally creating non games, even if instead of flash hulk it's getting used for more "casual" flash rector combos to fetch Ugins or Omnisciences, that is borderline gameplay as it is that goes up to the line of what's ok in edh without crossing it. Taking into account the impact of flash on cEDH could push Flash over the line, if you come from the perspective that it's already producing play lines that are only borderline acceptable and potentially only held back from being a problem in casual by being underplayed, then cEDH concerns could be both a preview of future problems as well as an example of a potentially problematic card being especially problematic to a section of the playerbase. This essentially makes banning slightly more aggressive.

Alternatively, they could ban Hulk. Hulk was already banned before, and when it was unbanned the RC's announcement was very much "let's see how this goes." Hulk in casual can be fine but is still easily abused. Ive used it for value myself, and had been using it via rule 0 while it was banned, and it can be very good but totally fine that way, however even when used for value it can get out of hand and lead to unfun grindy recursion engines that take over the game even without going full infinite combo, and can be a real %$#% with certain commanders. There was an issue when it was banned with T&N also being a "tutor a full combo" card for only a bit more Mana that was legal, both cards straddling the line of banworthiness. The RC unbanned Hulk in part because they were removing cards from the list that were banned because they were part of an infamous combo, like Worldgorger Dragon, since banning combos is a fools errand. That doesn't stop them from banning a combo piece if it becomes too dominant, especially if that piece is already problematic, and I think it's easier to ban a card that was already banned than ban a new card (you have "we made a mistake and it didn't work out" as a built in explanation).

Third would be an addendum to rule 0. This would be more sweeping than other changes, and would involve adding suggestions of cards to rule 0 out if your group wants a certain playstyle. It could say something like "For example, if you are interested in competitive balancing for the subformat colloquially known as "cEDH", you might consider house banning Flash and Demonic Consultation." If, on the other hand, your group dislikes what is referred to as "fast Mana", consider house banning Sol ring and Mana crypt." I don't like this much myself as it amounts to a soft banlist, and that could lead to particularly vocal players insisting that all named cards should be banned, or conversely that if a card isn't named then it shouldn't be rule 0 'ed.

[ilovesaprolings]

Eh, 1v1 communities always create new banlist: 20 life, leviathan, centurion, wotc official ones...
Yet for some reason cEDH players can't create their own banlist? Stop letting the RC do all the work for you and create another format.
The only reason i can think for cEDH players to not do this is that would prevent pubstomping.

[pokken]

The main problem I envision with another format that is disconnected is it splits the party into guys who want to stay playing EDH and the new crew. Then the people who stay behind revert to pubstomping for lack of anyone to play with.

[hyalopterouslemur]

The problem is more Hulk than Flash. Flash can do some crazy things, but Hulk, it's the "any number of creatures" thing for just 7 mana. Plus, if you don't have Flash, you can still use something like Sneak Attack for the same effect.

The singleton format stops a lot of the more borked things you can do with Hulk, but being such a modular card means there's always more.

As an aside, I kinda wish Flash was played like a Pact.

[HoffOccultist]

cEDH doesn't have its own banlist for a very simple reason: It's not a different format. It's a different philosophy to deckbuilding, gameplay, and player interaction within a game, but that just means that when we sit down to an agreed upon "cEDH" game, we've just already established our Rule 0 discussion. Likewise, splitting off cEDH from the rest of the format would, in my estimation, cause far more problems than it would solve by removing a natural progression from players who are looking to play commander at a higher level than their playgroup might want to. Without an outlet, those players sometimes become pubstompers, sometimes revert their power level to meet the group, and sometimes leave the format entirely. With the ability to be directed to cEDH play, we provide another positive outcome to those situations.

Really, the issue is that "cEDH" is a misnomer. The vast majority of cEDH games aren't played in any sort of tournament structure or for any reason other than enjoyment--they're not really "competitive". Are the decks played at a high level of optimization and power? Yes, absolutely. But the name cEDH has stuck, despite the format not being a competitive format much at all.

This is such a rose-tinted load of horse manure that I'm so over cEDH players trying to peddle while conveniently always unwilling to concede the multitude of concerns for everyone else. Every time without fail, cEDH players invoke "We're EDH players too!", yet when it's brought to light by many how cEDH players are most often the pubstompers, they try to defend themselves and say they don't want to play with normal Commander players and that they're outliers! How convenient! Yet, everyone knows cEDH is a small minority and that when they can't find other cEDH players, they happily break out near cEDH level decks that overpower most players who play Commander on the grounds it was meant for - they have a level they like to play at that is simply not congruent with the intentions of Commander. "We're the next level and save casual players from pubstompers" is such a ridiculous attempt at trying to appear righteous. cEDH players want to say that they only want to play with other cEDH players; they don't want to bide by the format's customs or Rule 0 yet tout that they use the same framework, even though the most important features of Commander are Rule 0 and the RC banning for it's core player base and intended experience. cEDH players play with entirely different goals and intentions in mind for their decks and gameplay. For all intents and purposes, cEDH players don't want to play Commander, but a format with Commander's deck building restrictions. They could do like French Commander or MTGO's competitive tables do and have their own sub-format of Commander and banlist, but they won't, and keep saying that they're "still playing Commander." And to what end? Because without claiming they're playing the same format, they can't stake a claim as playing the highest form of Commander and stroke their egos and treat themselves as superior and look down on those who aren't playing cEDH? They might not feel the authority to enter conversations in social media groups to call cards/non-"tier" Commanders trash, or insult/attack the RC personally on every social media platform and invade conversations? Yet, cEDH is supposedly a "misnomer"? Not competitive? Despite the incessant need to find the best lines of play possible, build with the best cards possible and subscribe to a designated meta game of top Tier decks? Spare me the %$#%$#%.

Hey, thanks for the reply.

To the point about pubstompers: most cEDH players dislike them just as much as everyone else. I can't speak for everyone, but the folks in the cEDH groups I play with all only play cEDH decks against other cEDH decks, and have other decks for different playgroups. Most cEDH players dislike pubstompers because they suck the fun out of the game. The suck the fun out of the game for the people they're playing against, and they suck the fun out of the game for the other folks who enjoy playing optimized lists because we're instantly associated with that level of nonsense, even if the vast majority of us want nothing to do with that. If there were a magic spell to just snap someone's fingers and make pubstomping go away, I'd do it in an instant, and I'm sure most other players (of all stripes) would do so too. There may be more pubstompers that come from cEDH groups (I'm curious as to the data behind that claim, but I can't disprove it either), which is why it's important to have cEDH exist within EDH. If we were to, as you suggest, split off from EDH like the various 1v1 formats, it wouldn't solve the issue of pubstomping. It would still exist--and honestly might even be more common--as an issue, because a separate ruleset (even if it's just a banlist) would create an additional barrier to entry that those who are pubstomping jerks already don't want to work around without that barrier. Whether or not you feel that's false righteousness or whatever is up to you, but various observations of multiple different playgroups has shown, in my experience, that having cEDH as an outlet for players who want to push the envelope prevents those players from pubstomping, especially as they become more familiar with the cEDH community at large.

I agree with much of your point about Rule 0 as well. However, I think the blanket "hey, this is cEDH so our rule 0 is X" is within the idea of rule 0, especially with the amount of cEDH that's played online. You may disagree, and that's fine, which is why I would imagine you don't play cEDH--and that's totally cool! I don't want anyone who doesn't want to play a way they don't want to. But if players agree to an unspoken Rule 0 because it's tied to the power level that's agreed upon by those players, is that actually a violation of the ideas behind Rule 0? I don't think it is. Maybe you disagree, but that's fine. I don't have all the answers, nor do I think there is a clear, clean "answer" to this concept.

I also think I explicitly said I like how the RC manages the banlist in my post, so I'm not sure the point of bringing it up in your response. Do I wish Flash was banned? Sure. Would there be other changes I'd make? Yeah. But I'm not in that position, and I'm ok with the RC making the decisions they do with the specific targets in mind that they have. Will I continue to advocate for Flash being banned? Yes, but I don't expect it to have any real impact aside from continuing to tell stories about how it makes games unfun. But that comes with playing the format, and if it doesn't go the way I want, that's totally fine. I trust the RC to make decisions that create the most net fun for players, even if it's not always the best for me individually.

To the last point: every community has toxic members. I don't think there are any more or less in cEDH than any other community, and many of the community leaders are very much trying to get those who are more toxic to change their ways (to varying degrees of success). I do concede your point that many folks who identify as cEDH players will often insert their ideas and opinions into non-cEDH discussions, and I agree that is not particularly productive for anyone. Though, this particular thread is about cEDH based on the title, so I hope my response wasn't interpreted as butting in to something where it wasn't appropriate.

As to the "ego stroking", maybe some folks are in it for that, but I don't think it's many. Most cEDH players, I would guess, just enjoy the gameplay and lines that these particular decks and strategies engender (which, as an aside, is why so many cEDH players don't like Flash--the lines it creates are generally miserable. But as I said above, if it doesn't get banned then that's ok too). Maybe you define that as "competitive", and if you do then we might have different definitions. But that's fine, and honestly is part of what makes EDH such a fantastic format: it's really what you make of it with your friends and other players. I appreciate that you're not a fan of the same things that I enjoy from it, because that difference is what makes EDH so appealing to so many folks.

[Spleenface]

Eh, 1v1 communities always create new banlist: 20 life, leviathan, centurion, wotc official ones...
Yet for some reason cEDH players can't create their own banlist? Stop letting the RC do all the work for you and create another format.
The only reason i can think for cEDH players to not do this is that would prevent pubstomping.

A) It wouldn't prevent pubstomping, people who WANT to pubstomp will always be able to

B) Did you actually, genuinely claim that your list of 4 formats, 3 of which are dead and one of which is crippled since all the splits was a good argument for why splits work?

[Spleenface]

There is also the argument that RxPhantom has made on a number of these threads, this one probably included: if one of the arguments of banning Flash for cEDH is "well casuals don't even play it that much" there is a significant problem. RxPhantom has a number of fun anecdotes (not data, but they are fun which is what matters) where Flash allowed them certain plays to make fun things happen. The suggestion of casuals not playing the card enough essentially boils down to "yes, RxPhantom is detrimented by the ban, but who cares? How many RxPhantoms are there really?". And, the obvious answer is "enough that banning it hurts someone the RC has constantly professed to catering towards".

The "casual" crowd is "hurt" by bannings because the cards are omnipresent or warp games. Prophet of Kruphix, Paradox Engine, Primeval Titan. I miss Titan, but I understand the reason for their departure. These cards were used far too often in the games RC cares about.

But, to suggest that now, in order for us to not worry about a card as benign as Flash being banned, we actually have to play it more is ridiculous. Others have stated the same question, and I will repeat it here since I have never seen a good answer to it:

"What do cEDH players feel would be the right amount a card is played in order to be "safe" from a banning?" That is, where is the cutoff to where a card is busted in cEDH but is still used enough by "casuals" to be safe from a banning based on that criterion?

So I guess this fundamentally comes down to the following question: Does the fact that the RC wants to cater to a more battlecruiser type of EDH mean that a given cEDH player's opinion is actually less valuable than the average player's?

The fact is, any and all data we have (most notably the EDHRec data) shows that the number of RxPhantoms is much smaller than the number of people for whom flash is an issue.

If we look at a card like Recurring Nightmare, one could make the argument that it's only a problem in an extremely narrow band.

You have to be reanimating stuff that's actually good (so not like random vanillas) or doing something with Altars or Aristocrats (i.e. trying) for it to actually be a problem. You also have to have a lack of: counterspells, graveyard removal, wheels, discard effects and instant speed removal for it to be hard to deal with.

How many people play in this band of power? Why does everyone else lose out on a potentially fun and powerful card because some small group can't deal with it? And is this standard being applied evenly across all the bands of power?

And again, Flash isn't just a problem because it's really strong. It's also miserable. How many people have to stand up and say "Flash is ruining my fun" for it to matter at all?

And this "low popularity" argument is a catch-22. If I was in here advocating for the ban of a much more popular card, even one that was potentially contentious at lower power levels, I'd get told that banning it would be cEDH having undue influence, as we'd be overruling the majority. Since is not played, we get told that it doesn't matter.

The reason we make the low popularity argument, is that the point of the banlist is to maximize fun, and the lack of casual people using flash to do fun stuff with flash means we can VERY comfortably say it's ruining more fun than it's allowing.

Is my fun less important than RxPhantoms?

[pokken]

recurring nightmare is a pretty bad example because it's straight up goodstuff on its own in a creature deck. Think of it more like prophet of kruphix than seedborn muse in terms of effort required to abuse.

I say this as someone who thinks RN would actually be OK, just very popular

[Spleenface]

The point is that while it's good, it's only truly a problem for a pretty small portion of the community. Yet to protect the fun of those people, it's banned, even at the cost of a substantial number of other people's fun.

I was merely endeavouring to demonstrate that a card doesn't have to be a problem blanketing the entire format to be considered for a ban.

[MrMystery314]

Some assorted responses to ideas in this thread (coming from someone who mainly plays 1v1 Constructed formats and is somewhat biased in that direction, meaning that my opinions probably should be taken with a grain of salt):

Hulk is very good and presents a weird warped play pattern with the efficient instant speed combo.

As discussed many times, this is the key factor that makes Flash Hulk ban-worthy from a competitive perspective. Not necessarily its win percentage, which admittedly is a bit high too, but the idea that from turn 1 or 2 players need to always have some interaction up or run the risk that they just lose, or that they blow their resources stopping the Hulk player from winning only for someone else to swoop in. Then again, the latter is a fundamental aspect of any interactive game, at least in my opinion, but it does "feel bad"; I do think especially at higher power levels where there's this expectation of competitiveness people should accept that, make better play decisions next time, and shuffle up to play another round, but it never hurts to minimize moments where a player feels cheated out of a game. An analogous situation could be Twin in Modern where you needed interaction up by turn 3 or else every turn had the potential for the end-step Deceiver Exarch, next turn Splinter Twin, and from the competitive perspective that was judged too unfun compared to what everyone else was doing. While it's disputable if Twin was "too good," or if Flash Hulk is "too good," undoubtedly a good number of decks are forced to walk on eggshells or lose.

cEDH players trying to peddle while conveniently always unwilling to concede the multitude of concerns for everyone else

This makes it sound like cEDH players are trying to deal drugs, subvert democracy, or do something so much more insidious than trying to enjoy playing EDH in a way that's fun for them without falling into the same trap all the other attempted splinter formats fell into.

yet when it's brought to light by many how cEDH players are most often the pubstompers

I'd like to see some data for this. Who has "brought this to light"? Anecdotal evidence isn't data, nor is a consensus of players who are collectively resentful of their own boogeymen that instead of swiftly cutting them out of their playgroups and moving on, they demonize a whole host of other players simply because they seem kind of similar.

say they don't want to play with normal Commander players and that they're outliers! How convenient!

This relies on the assumption that pubstompers are primarily cEDH players, or that that fact somehow casts doubt on the entire cEDH community. Dictators are primarily from third-world countries, yet somehow I don't accuse everyone from those countries of having repressed authoritarian tendencies. Painting such broad strokes creates the appearance of desperation, and frantic flailing is no way to talk when better options are available.

"We're the next level and save casual players from pubstompers" is such a ridiculous attempt at trying to appear righteous.

I agree with you. That is a ridiculous argument, especially as I imagine most pubstompers aren't going to willingly put themselves on a more even playing field; still, characterizing whoever said that as hiding some greater moral fault (I am quite curious who you're quoting, by the way) seems purposely confrontational, and generalizing an entire group of players beyond a few people who mistakenly believe in the "cEDH player's burden" is counterproductive. Still, this is a game, not an exercise in morality; why is righteousness or feeling good about creating an elaborate sculpture of fun times and good feelings a concern? We'd all be greatly advantaged if we dispensed with those illusions, especially cEDH players who think they're stooping down to a lower level and tricking "regular EDH" players by being the good guy.

cEDH players play with entirely different goals and intentions in mind for their decks and gameplay.

I agree. Still, games evolve, and most games with a competitive scene were not originally formulated to such a high degree. Taking video game speedrunning as an example, the amount of games crafted by the developers under the assumption their assembly code would be sifted through by hand and players would spend hours routing in different ways is quite small; many presently popular video games for speedrunning were originally aimed at the under-10 demographic. They're clearly having fun, even if arbitrary code execution is at odds with "yay, I caught a Mewtwo!," so why is their fun so unimportant as to define them as some faceless other of unrefined enemies of the common man?

they can't stake a claim as playing the highest form of Commander and stroke their egos and treat themselves as superior and look down on those who aren't playing cEDH?

And many people here could be said as stroking their egos by saying that they are playing the "highest form of Commander," and those who are playing something else like cEDH are sub-human or unrefined. Would you consider yourself as "treating yourself as superior" right now, or are you merely arguing what you believe is unfailingly correct, like many cEDH advocates?

Yet, cEDH is supposedly a "misnomer"? Not competitive?

cEDH is competitive by definition. Arguing otherwise is incorrect. I agree with you here.

cEDH needs its own ban list. It should not coincide with casual players.

This would lead us toward the ideal banlist in my opinion, just banning the clearly broken Power 9 and ante/dexterity cards, giving individual playgroups the authority to see what works best for them instead of one central group having to represent everyone and be guaranteed to irritate somebody with every word written. If cEDH players want something more regulated at the tournament setting, they can either try to abuse things as much within the given constraints as they can (which I personally consider the epitome of any format) or play something else a bit more heavily modulated. My answer to the "Ban Flash" conundrum is to "unban everything and let people figure out individually what they want to do".

What I don't understand is why so many cEDH proponents all of a sudden think that the casually minded RC - whose focus has always been on the casual side of things - should be obligated to moderate their format, too.

I think the ideal is a RC that encompasses all ends of the format, from the "ladies looking left" end to the "what do you mean, you don't play Force of Will?" end. EDH is everyone's format, and the RC should include everyone.

A ban would do more good than ill, there are currently more cEDH players detrimented by Flash than casuals who even play the card. If you want to hold a format hostage to feel like you got even with that one pubstomper at your LGS, I have little sympathy for your points.

While utilitarianism understandably rubs a lot of members here the wrong way, especially if the cost-benefit analysis doesn't agree with their personal opinion, from my personal perspective it is the right call. That's how society works: there are always winners and losers, and nobody is forcing you to stay if you happen to be part of the minority.

He dragged all the pubstompers out and whomped them with better decks until they all stepped it up and became part of the CEDH community.

Once again, this is a great heart-warming story, and of course I'd love this to happen always, but one "happily ever after" story does not mean the cEDH community has some magic power to solve all that is wrong with EDH. The schoolyard bully approach of "have the biggest guy beat up the smaller guys" is a personal favorite, but I can't see this as a widely-endorsed policy, nor should the cEDH community be stuck with the responsibility of draining the cesspool.

"What do cEDH players feel would be the right amount a card is played in order to be "safe" from a banning?" That is, where is the cutoff to where a card is busted in cEDH but is still used enough by "casuals" to be safe from a banning based on that criterion?

In my opinion, perhaps a bit too weighted toward utilitarianism and competitive balance not to be at odds with the EDH community's approach, for any card it's simple: if more players are hurt by its presence in the format than actively benefit from it, regardless how they're split between casual and competitive, that's a fair criterion for a ban, that is, if we aren't taking my favorite approach of "pretty much everything is unbanned, if you don't like a card, suck it up." A card like Cyclonic Rift is in somewhat of a reverse position to Flash where it's seen in cEDH but quite infrequently, yet often brings the same feel-bad moments that Flash does. And of course, if there were a proposed ban, of course the minority of players that uses it in a "fun way" would crawl out of the woodwork and complain that their jank is more important than competitive balance.

I think your second point is extremely important. The double standard that casual players should use rule 0 but competitive players can't is a dangerous attitude since the natural philosophical result of that attitude is that casual players don't need a banlist and the list should focus on competitive balance.

While this is obviously not the widely-held opinion, I don't believe in rule 0. Players playing weaker decks should be willing to accept that while they can still have fun (and in most healthy formats people playing weaker decks should still be having fun, otherwise something is clearly quite wrong), it's an inevitability that they will lose to better decks. Likewise, players should accept that playing to the utmost highest standard means playing what is best, not playing decks which one wishes to be best and complaining they aren't on the top of the food chain anymore. If it wasn't obvious by now, I am somewhat of a masochist.

I don't like this much myself as it amounts to a soft banlist, and that could lead to particularly vocal players insisting that all named cards should be banned

I have enough faith that players can figure out which cards are causing problems in their playgroup and resolve those issues, either by playing better decks or through other means.

The main problem I envision with another format that is disconnected is it splits the party into guys who want to stay playing EDH and the new crew. Then the people who stay behind revert to pubstomping for lack of anyone to play with.

Certainly. Under the assumption (which is most likely true) that pubstompers want to maximize their personal win-rate, the optimal means of doing this is avoiding players who play similarly-powered decks. Creating a new format won't stop them unless the regular EDH banlist is somehow adjusted to force power levels to be uniform, and that is a bad idea for countless reasons.

Whether or not you feel that's false righteousness or whatever is up to you

I agree. Righteousness can't be used as code for "I fundamentally disagree with my opinion, so I will create a straw man and attack all of you so inwardly I know that the opinion I've always held is right."

But that's fine, and honestly is part of what makes EDH such a fantastic format: it's really what you make of it with your friends and other players.

This is certainly an argument for the most lax official policies as possible, and to quote Federalist 10, that serves quite well to quell the "mischiefs of faction".

Does the fact that the RC wants to cater to a more battlecruiser type of EDH mean that a given cEDH player's opinion is actually less valuable than the average player's?

Great question. It certainly does appear to be the case, and while the other argument is often that cEDH players matter more because they spend more money on their decks, spend more time analyzing things, are smarter, or whatever else, fundamentally their relative worth should be equivalent. If a policy benefits more players than it hurts, it should be implemented. And I assume there are far more cEDH players who are affected by Flash and non-cEDH sympathizers who've never seen Flash played, but support competitive balance and not tossing out a group of players to the curb because they hold different opinions, than those who say "I play Flash to drain life with Kokusho, I'm special and creative! Those cEDH players could never figure out such fun interactions because they're too busy gouging each other's eyes with rusty spoons or drinking moonshine, I'm sure".

Is my fun less important than RxPhantoms?

Yes, because you don't have the common decency to go to your mildewy basement and play masturbatory solitaire with similar societal misfits while everyone else drinks beer, eats chips, and judiciously avoids stax, infinites, MLD, or winning. Similarly, RxPhantom's opinion is less important than yours because they don't have the common decency to roll up to FNM smelling of moldy Doritos with their anime girl playmat in hand playing their "only artists who are Sagittariuses who have lived in New Jersey and dislike opera" deck, primed to body slam the first player who plays Kiki combo because prizes are on the line.

[Spleenface]

This is only kind of relevant, but it annoyed me immensely: recently on TCC the prof had a cEDH proponent come on and talk about the format while subtly insulting other commander players. But what really made me laugh, and made me suspect that a lot of cEDH players have no idea what they're talking about, is how he argued for banning flash.

One of his first arguments out of the gate (around 29:30 if you find the video) is "let me paint you a scenario...I'm about to take my first turn, and another player says 'hang on, I've got a gemstone caverns. Then before your draw step, exile elvish spirit guide, cast flash, sac hulk, win. That's a turn 0 victory."

Let's add it all together...drum roll please...it's a 0.0042% chance!

Yeah if you want to make a compelling case, maybe present something that's actually ever happened to someone, eh?

To be clear, I'm ok with flash or hulk getting banned. I just find this line of arguing to be stupid, and to make the arguer look like he has no clue what he's talking about.

You are right that this is exceedingly rare (though it has happened). Slightly more common are turn 1s, which can happen on the play for a similar effect and turn 2s aren't common enough to be an expectation, but aren't rare enough to be worthy of a story.

It's not a good argument, the problem with Flash hulk isn't just that you can turn 0, it's the instant speed, 2 mana nature that essentially gives a Flash Hulk player a free stax piece by just holding up mana (which they could easily use on a counterspell or something) and forcing everyone to respect an instant speed win.

The two problematic aspects are low cost and instant speed. The "turn 0" story is just the simplest way of demonstrating how obscenely easy the "requirements" are to meet if you found the pieces. It's much harder to explain the frustration of being completely unable to play the game because you have to respect a threat that may not even materialize. As a personal anecdote, I've lost count of the times I've begged another player not to force me to interact because the Flash Hulk player would win over top. The most extreme single story was the time I had to let a ~30 life Ad Nauseam resolve because we were more likely to survive that than the flash hulk player.

As a side note, I did some different math and came up with slightly higher numbers, but it was still only 1 in many thousand games that would have a turn 0, so your general sentiment is correct.

[Sinis]

I agree. Still, games evolve, and most games with a competitive scene were not originally formulated to such a high degree. Taking video game speedrunning as an example, the amount of games crafted by the developers under the assumption their assembly code would be sifted through by hand and players would spend hours routing in different ways is quite small; many presently popular video games for speedrunning were originally aimed at the under-10 demographic. They're clearly having fun, even if arbitrary code execution is at odds with "yay, I caught a Mewtwo!," so why is their fun so unimportant as to define them as some faceless other of unrefined enemies of the common man?

Out of curiosity, would you ever try to engage with a developer and ask them to remove a certain exploit because it was commonly used in speed running so more speed running options in those relevant sections could be explored?

[DirkGently]

Yet, cEDH is supposedly a "misnomer"? Not competitive?

cEDH is competitive by definition. Arguing otherwise is incorrect. I agree with you here.

I'd like to disagree with your agreement about his disagreeing with the other guy who disagreed with cEDH being called competitive.

But seriously, what does "competitive" mean in this context? EDH is competitive in the sense that people are playing to win - not with the most powerful decks, and maybe not with the best plays, but very few commander players are acting totally randomly. They're still making some effort to win, it is still a competition. Most players I play against try pretty hard to make the best plays they can, tbh.

To me, I agree with @HoffOccultist's view that, to really be "competitive" in magic, there needs to be an actual tournament structure of some kind in place. This, to me, squares with how people would generally discuss playing standard: if you say you play "competitive standard" nobody is going to think that means "I play tiered decks with my buddies." They're going to, reasonably, think you mean that you play at GPs, PTQs, or at an absolute minimum FNMs.

Personally I really dislike the term "cEDH" because it implies that EDH isn't competitive at all, that we're all picking our noses and handing out participation ribbons. But at this point the name has stuck, regardless of how accurate it might be.

@Spleenface

I'm not saying there aren't meta-warping reasons that flash/hulk (but seriously ban hulk, not flash, I hate hulk so much) are problematic. I'm just saying that the way he argued it made it sound like he'd never actually played against it and was getting his arguments off the internet.

and yeah, I know my math was way oversimplified but I was on a treadmill and didn't really feel like trying to calculate n choose k on my phone calculator lol.

[MrMystery314]

I agree. Still, games evolve, and most games with a competitive scene were not originally formulated to such a high degree. Taking video game speedrunning as an example, the amount of games crafted by the developers under the assumption their assembly code would be sifted through by hand and players would spend hours routing in different ways is quite small; many presently popular video games for speedrunning were originally aimed at the under-10 demographic. They're clearly having fun, even if arbitrary code execution is at odds with "yay, I caught a Mewtwo!," so why is their fun so unimportant as to define them as some faceless other of unrefined enemies of the common man?

Out of curiosity, would you ever try to engage with a developer and ask them to remove a certain exploit because it was commonly used in speed running so more speed running options in those relevant sections could be explored?

No. If people don't wish to play optimally, they can create more "categories" to speedrun games in. There are pretty much always distinctions between runs where glitches are allowed, only certain glitches, or none at all. The existence of an optimal strategy shouldn't prevent people from exploring others as long as they're content that their explorations most likely will be suboptimal. Still, the analogy isn't particularly pertinent to our debate, as these different "categories" aren't mutually exclusive, and often innovations discovered under one paradigm are adapted by others.

[Sinis]

No. If people don't wish to play optimally, they can create more "categories" to speedrun games in. There are pretty much always distinctions between runs where glitches are allowed, only certain glitches, or none at all. The existence of an optimal strategy shouldn't prevent people from exploring others as long as they're content that their explorations most likely will be suboptimal. Still, the analogy isn't particularly pertinent to our debate.

I think the analogy is very pertinent to the debate.

In speedrunning, players take games 'as is', and then 'rule 0' which glitches are allowed and which ones aren't (including the 'no glitches allowed' option). The salient part of this is that speedrunning takes the game as is and it would be laughable to ask the developer to make it easier or harder to speedrun.

cEDH according to the mission statement on the subreddit, takes the game as is; anything not officially banned is permitted to use. As much is directly implied by one of the rules: "We are not interested in how "nice" a deck's strategy is. Expect discussion of combos, MLD, stax, etc. when appropriate. A post with "My meta doesn't allow X" may be removed."

IMO, it is exactly the same, except that cEDH players no longer want to engage with EDH 'as is' because they've solved the format.

[Hermes_]

cEDH according to the mission statement on the subreddit, takes the game as is; anything not officially banned is permitted to use. As much is directly implied by one of the rules: "We are not interested in how "nice" a deck's strategy is. Expect discussion of combos, MLD, stax, etc. when appropriate. A post with "My meta doesn't allow X" may be removed."

IMO, it is exactly the same, except that cEDH players no longer want to engage with EDH 'as is' because they've solved the format.

i'd love to see a topic there,along the lines or just asking if a solved format is okay when it is applied to EDH. I imagine it would be downvoted into dissappearing.

[MrMystery314]

IMO, it is exactly the same, except that cEDH players no longer want to engage with EDH 'as is' because they've solved the format.

This is somewhat of a double standard. In the days of Hogaak in Modern, when the format was effectively solved, yet at the FNM level the homogenization of Hogaak everywhere wasn't seen because people were brewing and sticking with pet decks, one can't complain that Modern players' disenfranchisement with the format is angsty teenage rebellion. Additionally, your statement implies that EDH and cEDH are two different formats, which is not true. One is simply a group of players playing better decks than the rest at a competitive level under some expectation of competitive balance. Still, your statement is factually correct; that doesn't mean that like any other competitive realm of play, measures to balance gameplay should be encouraged.

In speedrunning, players take games 'as is', and then 'rule 0' which glitches are allowed and which ones aren't (including the 'no glitches allowed' option).

I agree.

The salient part of this is that speedrunning takes the game as is and it would be laughable to ask the developer to make it easier or harder to speedrun.

I agree. However, EDH isn't speedrunning, in that there isn't implied to be a mutual enmity between different groups, or that one isn't truly "speedrunning," nor that groups aren't still looking for optimization. Regardless what restrictions in a category there are, the goal is still optimization, and within each category there is still competition. That is not the same for EDH, as that only really applies for cEDH, not EDH as a whole. Even if there are some speedrunners out there who would complain to developers about exploits, that isn't a majority of the community, and ultimately the major similarity between the two communities (speedrunning and cEDH, as paralleled by casual playthroughs of games and casual EDH) is that both try to optimize something under constraints. Whether that is a ban list or the game engine, it's still optimization. In the speedrunning sense, there's pretty much always an "Any%" no holds barred category, perhaps banning external tools; cEDH should be seen as something like this. If specific exploits allowed in this category are deemed unfun, the solution is to create a new group below that in the brokenness hierarchy, start optimizing that, and continue differentiating as needed. The focus is still optimization, and even through bans this remains. If certain strategies are purposely avoided, then that isn't speedrunning. Based on my previous arguments, I still believe the optimal solution is effectively setting the free-for-all banlist as the "Any%" assumed as default, and let those who want to optimize that play perfectly happy and let those who believe certain strategies unfair to create their own restrictions and compete under those own assumptions. In this debate, however, it appears a quite clear binary between "ban Flash" and "don't," and I assume my third option is unpopular. All sorts of EDH players can simply deal with what happens in a way that preserves their fun regardless of how they fall on the spectrum.

i'd love to see a topic there,along the lines or just asking if a solved format is okay when it is applied to EDH.

Personally I'm fine with that, although I doubt it would happen in practice with an extremely loose banlist. And when one variant of EDH is solved, nothing prevents people from moving onto a fresh format and solving it; that's what happens with every Standard rotation. Besides, most sets add at least something fringe viable at the highest levels of EDH, and obviously far more beneath that. Then again, as mentioned previously, I am somewhat of a masochist when it comes to MTG.