Re: Top 5 Current Commander Concerns or have another freak out over Sheldon's thoughts
Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:39 pm
I just posted a decklist - Mina and Denn - that I am actively trying to update, to see if it makes it easier for me.
Magic the Gathering Resources, Tools, Previews, and Community.
https://www.mtgnexus.com/
I just posted a decklist - Mina and Denn - that I am actively trying to update, to see if it makes it easier for me.
Accurate. Part of the fun of the game is finding inventive ways to make things work, not having it handed to you on a platter.Igzex wrote: ↑2 years agoI feel the decay of other formats can be argued to be a problem for Magic in general. I mean, the popularity of Commander as a format kinda was responsible for the Companion disaster and part of me wonders if all these overpowered value cards like Uro, Titan of Nature's Wrath and Omnath, Locus of Creation that wreck standard can also be pinned on WOTC trying perhaps a little too hard to appeal to commander players as our format has kind of taken over. It's ok WOTC you don't need to push value engines so hard, you can trust us to be creative. Just relax and make reasonable cards
Your first comment is what I am trying to avoid.pokken wrote: ↑2 years ago"you there, sit and don't play magic for a while" is a really problematic effect in commander.Treamayne wrote: ↑2 years ago
- An enchant player curse that makes a Blood Moon type effect just for that player (e.g. Nonbasic lands enchanted player controls lose all abilities and are Basic Wastes)
- Cheap multi-target artifact destruction that can address artifact ramp early (e.g. Destroy X (each) tapped artifact MV 2 or less)
- Ruination for a single target (e.g. If target player controls more lands than each other player, that player sacrifices nonbasic lands equal to the difference)
- "Catch up" effects that aren't just "ramp" in disguise or lead to discarding most of your hand - since the lagging player might "get" a number of lands to hand, only to discard due to hand size (e.g. For each player with more lands than you, search for a basic land and exile it. You may play those lands for as long as they are exiled)
Ask people how they feel about being knocked out if the game by a mindslaver effect it's basically the same.
I would have to sit down and try hard to imagine a worse play experience than single target ruination. Yuck.
I will grant you this for sure. When I am playing my Lands decks, any armageddon/blood moon effects favor me (because I have the easiest time getting basics and getting lands out of the bin) if not combined with graveyard hate or a sweeper or both.Treamayne wrote: ↑2 years agoFrom my perspective (no play group - all games 100% random - with no possible rule 0 conversation because its MTGO and WotC removed the ability to have a pre-game chat for no discernible reason), I have never seen Armageddon, Blood Moon, Ruination, et. al resolve and actually affect the ramp player for more than a turn or three - whereas the casual players like me are generally hurt much more severely. I almost consider them king-maker cards because if player A is ramp heavy and player B uses one of these without winning that same turn - all they have done is guarantee the victory to Player A who will inevitably recover far faster than the rest of the table.
I think it would have to either "Balance" to the average number of lands - or - reduce to the amount of lands at the start of the turn. As I recall, one of the main broken plays with balance was to ramp, ramp, ramp, tap everything, sac all lands (usually Zuran Orb) then cast Balance (and removal of rocks with floating mana, if possible) - so the Stux* player is the only one with mana (from rocks since all lands are gone).
Which is one reason why I thought a single-player version would be viable. If it only hit nonbasics, and only reduced the player to the same as the second level - then, for example:(e.g. If target player controls more lands than each other player, that player sacrifices nonbasic lands equal to the difference)
Agreed that those are steps in the right direction. However, my problem with them is they are all creatures (being a Tribal guy - these would only go in a deck of the appropriate creature type(s)). Also, the only time I've seen Thalia and Tomik in the wild were in the command zone of oppressive decks (GAAIV light) - not used as a way to "reign in" or "even the field."And Scholarship Sponsor has actually been pretty good too, much better than I expected.
The bottom line I think is that rather than giving people more ways to knock people out of the game they should be more creative in changing the texture of the game. cards like Thalia, Heretic Cathar and Tomik, Distinguished Advokist are pretty interesting moves in that direction, and Archon of Emeria is top tier sauce.
You might be able to use the Wayback Machine to find it. That's how I pulled all the old ban announcements.kirkusjones wrote: ↑2 years agoBack in the commander net days, we had proposed including a welcome letter from the RC with the inserts in the commander precons that pointed people to the philosophy document and said something like "welcome to the best format in the game, we're here for fun, interesting and challenging games" or something of that nature to help set up expectations around Rule 0 from the start. Sadly, all that work disappeared when those forums went down.
Keldon Firebombers, Natural Balance and Fall of the Thran all fill that bill. I hope WotC will print more of that effect as I also think this is the best kind of MLD. Tectonic Hellion is a nice idea but too slow.onering wrote: ↑2 years agoYou know what kind of mld actually would help against ramp? Balance style mld. Harder versions of the effect could make everyone sacrifice down to the X lands, where X is the number of lands controlled by the player with the fewest lands, or make everyone sacrifice down to a relatively low number of lands, like 4. Softer versions of the effect could make the player with the most lands sacrifice down to the number of lands controlled by the player with the second most lands. Such an effect would probably have to be part of a charm or on an etb creature to be worth it, but would really just slow down the ramp player while not effecting anyone else.
I figured Fall of the Thran would be well received since it's more limited but every time I played it people insta-scooped and whined about armageddons.
Did you try the other two? I feel like Fall of the Thran might be the harshest one of the bunch. Did you played it in an online game or a "real" one? Given what I read on these forums about your and others' past experiences online, if it was a modo game, I can't really say I'm surprised by this reaction.pokken wrote: ↑2 years agoI figured Fall of the Thran would be well received since it's more limited but every time I played it people insta-scooped and whined about armageddons.
It did break the symmetry a bit having the first land I bring back be Serra's Sanctum or Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx I guess =P
twice on modo with Yorion, Sky Nomad (which I understand is nasty but like, play a removal spell?)Dragoon wrote: ↑2 years agoDid you try the other two? I feel like Fall of the Thran might be the harshest one of the bunch. Did you played it in an online game or a "real" one? Given what I read on these forums about your and others' past experiences online, if it was a modo game, I can't really say I'm surprised by this reaction.
Well, if you blinked it repeatedly I can certainly understand their frustration. They might not have had an instant removal in their hand and the mana to cast it. (Although I guess 'anything goes' is the motto there)pokken wrote: ↑2 years agotwice on modo with Yorion, Sky Nomad (which I understand is nasty but like, play a removal spell?)
This sounds okay. The only way I can really see you taking advantage of that is with Serra's Sanctum and Cascading Cataracts. (Or more classically by having a big board advantage).pokken wrote: ↑2 years agoLIke a half-dozen times in paper with my Golos, Tireless Pilgrim mono white deck.
I guess MLD is going to be frowned upon no matter what, but those cards can at least offer players a reasonable chance of coming back (plus the mana dead player is going to thank you). They are ways to abuse them of course but this is true of any kind of card. I tend to be rather against MLD in general, mainly because I have seen them being cast at the wrong time, leading to boring turns afterwards. Yet, I feel like I don't really have a problem with those. With 3-5 mana left, your deck should still be able to operate, even if not at its maximum efficiency.pokken wrote: ↑2 years agoI've never played Natural Balance, and not played firebombers since back in the day where it was not well received
pokken wrote: ↑2 years agoI dunno man, I have played a lot at LGS' since 2016 or so and banning stuff like Prophet of Kruphix, Sylvan Primordial and Paradox Engine have greatly improved the casual play experience. I've always had decks of various power levels but any power level playing against Prophet.Dec was unpleasant.vandertroll wrote: ↑2 years agoThe fewer cards are getting the axe the better for the format. Trying to steer EDH in a perceived ''it's how supposed to be played" route was nice when it was played among Sheldon and friends but now, for better or for worse, it's way bigger than him or the RC. No one can be pleased all the time and that's why Rule 0 is paramount for a good game experience in EDH.
I think they're doing a pretty solid job overall but I think a few more bans are probably warranted. The format's growing so fast both in players and card pool that I think they've gotten a bit behind on their Meta Shaping bans which have always been really effective for improving my experience anyway.
I guess, but there's a big difference between "No one can play artifact abilities because of Stony Silence but you're the most effected" vs. "I blew up all your lands but no one else's, have fun digging out!"vandertroll wrote: ↑2 years agoEdit: I saw @pokken 's post above mine. Sometimes not being able to play magic in the corner because of a spell or an ability is part of MtG! Trying to recover from a bad boardstate and sometimes get a win can be even more rewarding. If there is saltiness on the group about this, having a discussion should resolve the situation
Ruination in some decks will function as a win condition where you mosty bork the entire table. I'm not 100% against that though I tend to not want it in lower powered decks where I'm not running as much countermagic.
But ruinationing one person? You seriously think that's a good card design?
Well, I would not lump hullb and narset together, Hullbreacher is problematic because it's goodstuff that combos with wheels. Narset is much less problematic because she's not universal.vandertroll wrote: ↑2 years agoBut banning Hullbreacher or Narset because they create soft locks with wheels can lead to very niche-y bans in my book. Why not ban Entomb and Reanimate as well? They can lead to very oppressive plays as well. The list could go on forever
To my mind, it was close to balanced, they just got the wording wrong. Take out that 'instead you' and put in 'you also', and we've got a much more balanced card. The fact that it monopolises mana resource and denies draw makes it disgusting.pokken wrote: ↑2 years agoHullbreacher creates extremely problematic patterns just by its text though - even without wheels it's really awful to play against, shutting down a massive part of the format in a one-sided way that also provides ramp at the cost of 3 mana, with flash so it can provide a counterspell effect for draw spells too. The card is too strong period. Its interaction with wheels is grotesque but far from its only problematic aspect.
Or limit it to once a turn or make it symmetrical but you choose an opponent to get the treasure or whatever. Literally anything but a big dumb one sided flash draw disabler for 3 mana in mono blue.toctheyounger wrote: ↑2 years agoTo my mind, it was close to balanced, they just got the wording wrong. Take out that 'instead you' and put in 'you also', and we've got a much more balanced card. The fact that it monopolises mana resource and denies draw makes it disgusting.
For sure. I find it difficult to think that R&D didn't think they'd made a mistake with the wording on that one.pokken wrote: ↑2 years agoOr limit it to once a turn or make it symmetrical but you choose an opponent to get the treasure or whatever. Literally anything but a big dumb one sided flash draw disabler for 3 mana in mono blue.toctheyounger wrote: ↑2 years agoTo my mind, it was close to balanced, they just got the wording wrong. Take out that 'instead you' and put in 'you also', and we've got a much more balanced card. The fact that it monopolises mana resource and denies draw makes it disgusting.
They absolutely do, but so do sites like this (and, previously, MTG Salvation) that include primers and deck lists, and so do all sorts of content creators. I have seen people on Spelltable playing lists copied 100% from lists posted here, and from Sheldon and Bennie Smith's lists, and from decks played on Game Knights, and from Commander's Quarters and from various other resources.
Oh my gosh you're naming all the cards I basically felt I had to play 8 years ago or just not matter. Thankfully the meta around me changed, but god I got some mileage out of boil vs. counterspell full infinite turn combo blue decks.3drinks wrote: ↑2 years agoPopular commanders have targets. People that despise those commanders - for whatever reason - are going to find ways to stop them from ruining their card night. In my young days I used to get used and abused by an Azami deck, I'd get out-tempo'd by efficient Rafiq Bantvalue decks and I grew tired of losing to the same stuff. The moment they saw my Boil come from nowhere, in the middle of a counter-war with no means to stop it, they looked at me like I wasn't serious. "It resolves, yes?" For the same reasons, I run Perish in Alesha, and Meltdown vs mox decks.
If their weakness is "playing the basic land type some rando chooses to hate on" that's not really the same as "playing all creatures with no defense."