onering wrote: ↑2 years ago
Dirk, when your method is insulting, expect to be insulted. It's astonishing to me that you feel like your the victim here. Getting aggressive like you do pisses people off, and I'm not afraid to hurt your feelings by calling you out on it. I'm clearly not the only person who feels that way, so assess your behavior or keep earning the insult. We shouldn't be falling to this low level of discourse, but that's what happens when your argument style is, at best, insufferably smug. You want people to engage with your arguments like gentlemen, right after accusing them of fear mongering, telling them their experiences are irrelevant, and belittling them (hurr durr have you played this format, this totally isn't an insult I'm both super smart and super polite durr). "Oh, I just said your ideas were stupid, not you, how dare you get mad I'm the victim!" %$#%$#% dude, nobody buys that %$#%. And you do it all the time. I usually let it go, but this time it stuck in my craw.
I'd respond to the points you made in your most recent post, some of which are good and some of which aren't, but as you clearly want to continue to assert your behavior is totally acceptable while playing the victim, I have no interest in treating your mind ideas with respect while you can't muster the same for myself or others. You want to be taken seriously and treated with respect, don't belittle people's ideas or experiences because they don't align with your own, and don't complain about being attacked when you throw the first punch.
In criticizing someone's arguments, it's not possible to avoid some degree of criticism of that person - that argument is a thought that came out of their head. If I say "this argument is bad", the most banal opposition imaginable, if taken personally it translates to "you had a bad thought". That's a necessary consequence of talking through opposing viewpoints.
Calling someone a dick isn't. I don't expect anyone to be perfectly polite - lord knows I'm not - but I do expect them not to make personal attacks. And before you go equating my "are you sure you've played this format" quip - in context that was obviously not literal. No one reading that thinks "he actually believes onering has never played commander before". It's obviously a criticism that I think the particular concern you voiced doesn't match with the reality of playing the format.
Someone reading your post would very reasonable conclude that you actually think I'm a dick, because evidently you do.
The feeling isn't mutual. I'm still happy to talk with you so long as we stick to critiquing ideas. If you can't do that, though, then I'm done. I enjoy a spirited debate, and I encourage you to attack my bad ideas as harshly as you like, but I don't have any interest in trading insults. It stresses me out and it's not fun.
BeneTleilax wrote: ↑2 years ago
Comp rules aren't super clear, and specify a 15 card sideboard and 4-of card limit. Those would need to be remade for EDH. They're also very tournament-based, so most of the other relevant ones (like deck restriction interactions) are phrased in terms of the order in which you set things aside before shuffling, which isn't particularly new or casual player friendly. Also, the companion vs. general thing is counterintuitive, as both are card-contingent deckbuilding restrictions. That could be remedied by setting companions to also effect the wishboard, but again, would require another ruling/clarification. That is absolutely the sort of confusion that leads to casual players accusing each other of lying and cheating.
I meant piggybacking insofar as is possible to keep them conceptually similar. Limiting to 3 (or whatever number) would require clarification etc. Although thinking about it more, the different use cases and particulars does make them different enough that it probably requires more clarification than I initially thought.
I'm not so sure about lying and cheating though. Which action do you think casual players are going to do that would be considered as such? Situations that might be counterintuitive like the companion example I think would be really rare, and probably more of a "hmm, maybe we should look up the rules to be sure" sorta thing than a "I shall stab you with a pencil for your crimes" sorta thing. I've generally seen people be pretty chill about accidental rules violations in commander.
I thought you didn't want wishboards to be limited to tech answers? That might be their strongest use-case, but once they're a thing, people will use them for whatever. Combo pieces, finishers, needlessly convoluted engines, a card they want to share between decks, etc.
I think many people will use wishboards for a wide variety of things, but the specific concern I was addressing was that someone would make multiple sideboards for different configurations of opponents. That only really applies to using narrow answers, at least I would think. I.e. in my previous Wort example, idk why you'd change your proactive wishboard based on which decks your opponents were playing.
And if someone is going to that much trouble (which would be kind of a lot of trouble - you'd need to figure out the counters to their decks which need to be hittable with your wish, and then put them into combinations based on covering the most different permutations of players, and that's all assuming everyone only has one deck which isn't that common in my experience) I think it's pretty unlikely that they don't know they're cheating, or at least abusing the spirit of the rules.
I've seen people pretty embedded in a local EDH meta who don't know how anything beyond EDH and limited works.
Limited also has sideboards, and wishes (and learn) can only hit cards in those sideboards.
I know this because I had whole conversation with one of them about why Flusterstorm was worth money.
I think that's way more arcane knowledge than how a sideboard works. I don't know hardly anything about the best decks in modern, standard, legacy, vintage, pioneer, or whatever else and have been surprised by the price of cards that are popular in those formats.
Very online EDH players know how other formats work, but we're also disproportionately players who bailed out of older formats. A fair number of folks came over from 60-card casual when the format was small, and all all the knowledge they've since acquired is pretty localized to EDH. Those are, often as not, the ones setting meta norms from "above" or a place of social authority/experience, I've found. The newer folks, after EDH blew up, have increasingly only *ever* played EDH, or only EDH and draft/sealed.
A lot of those formats are legitimately dying, and with them their bases of expertise. I don't think my local store has had any 60-card Constructed events in years. That, or they're becoming increasingly siloed, where Standard/Modern players just aren't interacting with EDH players that often, and so aren't exchanging "common" knowledge about their respective formats.
There will probably be a small percentage of players who do need the whole concept of a sideboard explained, and a significantly larger number who need information about the specifics (i.e. in how they differ from sideboards in other formats), but that seems like a temporary growing pain to me. Every other format uses boards already, outside of kitchen table, and they're probably breaking half the rules anyway (which is fine, y'know, let them enjoy their ignorance, I know I did when I played like that).
Even if somehow there's someone who is plugged in enough to figure out all the hard counters, and smart enough do the permutation math, and enfranchised enough to buy multiple copies of all the cards they need to put the permutations together, but ignorant enough to not know how sideboards are supposed to work on a fairly basic level...I mean, they'll figure it out pretty quickly when people notice them picking through a deck box of pre-configured sideboards and call them out. Unless they're doing it secretly to avoid detection, in which case they know they're cheating, and I don't think fretting about cheaters is something worth worrying about in a casual format.
@duducrash you can just run the immortal sun and aura shards in your mainboard, they're pretty damn good cards. Then you can just hit them with your tutors, of which much more exist. RIP is a bit more niche, but I think mostly because most decks themselves have a degree of gy interaction that they'd rather not screw up.
Scavenger Grounds on the other hand is imminently mainboardable even in decks that do use the gy from time to time.
If any combination of 3 cards are strong answers to most decks in the format, those cards are probably just good cards that probably don't need to be wished.
I agree about the MM smear through. That card is pretty sick in commander too.