Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Jul-23 1:27 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-29 11:10 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
MMLgamer wrote:
2. I'm of the school of thought that banning a card merely because it fits a certain strategy is particularly childish, especially if it's a strategy that was deliberately designed and introduced into MtG. I don't care if you don't think it's fun. I don't care if it doesn't fit your special and highly specific definition of "playing Magic". If that's your only basis for saying it's a "net negative", then you're biased, period.


You say that like there's something inherently wrong with bias. It can be unhealthy or fine — I can have a bias against awful unfun experiences and that's not a problem. This is a casual for-fun format. It's already biased by its design philosophy that is a departure from regular MTG. But I don't think anything here is banned *merely* because it fits a strategy: Channel merely fits a strategy, but that's not the problem with it. Same goes for Braids.

_________________
Decks: Chaos colored dragons, Mathas, the Instigator (politics and mayhem).
Beloved precons: Atraxa, Praetors' Voice; Saskia the Unyielding; Freyalise, Llanowar's Fury.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-29 3:42 pm 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Baron Cappuccino wrote:
Fortunately, Braids is just one of several cards that do similar things, and is in the best color for tutors and second best color for draw, so whether Braids is in or out will have a minimal effect on people who want to play stax strategies. Personally, I think it's good to have stax in your meta, or at least to keep the strategy in mind when deck building. If you need a boatload of resources to operate, and you didn't pack a single thing to get you there through resistance, other players shouldn't have to accommodate that. I would hope by now that folks are packing removal for enchantments, artifacts, and things that aren't 8-drop fatties. My friends aren't so competitive where I plan to lose on turn 3, but they're competitive enough where serious business will be going on by turn three, and I can't sit around like a schmuck. Low cmc answers spread around a multiplayer table will put any oppressive strategy in its place. No need to ban around it.

I agree with you, stax is a perfectly acceptable strategy and I'm not against someone having a deck that is designed to make it harder for me to operate. Play sphere of resistance, defence grid, stony silence, rule of law. Limiting my capacity is frustrating, but is at least an interesting challenge to fight through. Putting braids into that is where I draw the line though. Nothing mentioned above actively makes me go backward in the game. I know that eventually I will be able to dig out of it, find my answers and play them.

Braids is a special level of stax. Braids says "you have this many turns to stop me, every turn you dont stop me, I'm going to take some more from you" It is a painful and punishing way to lose because just as you draw the 6 mana wrath, you lose your 6th land, You get the doomblade off the top after you sac your black source hoping to draw path. Right when you are about to deploy the answer, you lose the resources to do so.

Play stax if you want, just dont play braids.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-30 1:44 am 

Joined: 2015-Sep-02 2:49 am
Age: Drake
Location: Connecticut
The thing about Braids is, she's not a morph card. I'm sure I'm not the only one who looks at what other commanders are being played when deciding whether or not to keep an opening hand. I can't see Braids sitting down with 2-3 other players and none of them making sure Braids racks up some commander tax. A whole table where nobody has a counter spell, or nobody has a Swords to Plowshares, Go for the Throat, even a bolt or a shock -- nothing? I realize the removal argument sometimes feels tired, but if a whole table sees a four drop and feels forced to just shrug and scoop with nothing they can do, that's just lousy deck building across the board. Even if we're judging Braids as an effective two drop because your Braids player always starts the game with nut draws with just the ramp and stax-mitigation tools s/he needs, every color can insure that Braids has 2-4 in taxes tacked on before she causes her first sacrifice. We got rid of Partial Paris, so I imagine these sculpted god hands are a thing of the past.


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-30 5:09 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
MMLgamer wrote:
2. I'm of the school of thought that banning a card merely because it fits a certain strategy is particularly childish, especially if it's a strategy that was deliberately designed and introduced into MtG.

Except, there are certain strategies that even WotC doesn't print as much (or as effective as it used to be) now simply because it is unfun to play against. So they don't print aggressively costed cards in that category so as to not cause people to turn away due to frustrating experiences.

Now compare that to Commander -- where the point is to have interesting & fun experiences? Don't you think that cutting out excessively unfun cards to be a good thing?

WotC has cut back on how effective these strategies are (overall -- there may still be one or two really good cards of that style that do get printed, but not often): Land-destruction, Hand-denial, prison.

There may be some more...

So overall -- since WotC has come to the conclusion that these styles of decks don't promote growth in their game ... don't you think that there may be one or two of those cards that don't fit within this format as well?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-30 6:45 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Yes, but the RC in their infinite wisdom have recognized that there is more than one way to have fun, and that it is a fool's errand to try and define fun with the ban list. Hence stressing that it is a social format and that you should talk with your group to find games you will all enjoy.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-30 7:06 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Yes, but just because different people sometimes have different ideas of fun doesn’t mean that you throw objectivity out the window when evaluating cards. Some people like the kind of games that Coalition Victory or Limited Reaources create. That doesn’t change the fact that the vast majority of players do not, nor does it make those cards’ presence in the format a good thing. And most importantly, cards like them go directly contrary to the founding vision of the format. Braids is not as egregious as the others, but it’s still in the same category.

_________________


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-30 12:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
Yes, but the RC in their infinite wisdom have recognized that there is more than one way to have fun, and that it is a fool's errand to try and define fun with the ban list. Hence stressing that it is a social format and that you should talk with your group to find games you will all enjoy.

Right, they don't define it - but they do try to use it to guide people away from some things. Some people take the ban list as a guidance, others take it as a "I can play anything else I want." Not much they can do about it -- but that doesn't mean they shouldn't forcefully guide things using the ban list when they get too oppressive/un-fun for most players.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-30 7:25 pm 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Carthain wrote:
cryogen wrote:
Yes, but the RC in their infinite wisdom have recognized that there is more than one way to have fun, and that it is a fool's errand to try and define fun with the ban list. Hence stressing that it is a social format and that you should talk with your group to find games you will all enjoy.

Right, they don't define it - but they do try to use it to guide people away from some things. Some people take the ban list as a guidance, others take it as a "I can play anything else I want." Not much they can do about it -- but that doesn't mean they shouldn't forcefully guide things using the ban list when they get too oppressive/un-fun for most players.

So you are saying that Braids was oppressive in the 99, or that other Stax pieces are too oppressive?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-31 1:59 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
So you are saying that Braids was oppressive in the 99, or that other Stax pieces are too oppressive?

She *can* be oppressive in the 99. Between black's ability to tutor & recur creatures -- yes.

And it's the ability to (fairly easily) recur her that makes her oppressive. Something like Tanglewire or Smokestacks isn't as bad, as black has a much harder time recurring those.

As well, the type of person who is likely to add her in (along with other stax pieces) is likely the type to try to make allowances to recur her -- so as to keep up the pressure of that kind of deck.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-31 2:32 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Carthain wrote:
cryogen wrote:
So you are saying that Braids was oppressive in the 99, or that other Stax pieces are too oppressive?

She *can* be oppressive in the 99. Between black's ability to tutor & recur creatures -- yes.

And it's the ability to (fairly easily) recur her that makes her oppressive. Something like Tanglewire or Smokestacks isn't as bad, as black has a much harder time recurring those.

As well, the type of person who is likely to add her in (along with other stax pieces) is likely the type to try to make allowances to recur her -- so as to keep up the pressure of that kind of deck.

Tanglewire and Smokestack are both colorless and can fit into any deck (red has become quite adept as a Stax color in recent years). The fact of the matter is that Stax, whether it is scorch earth or simply locking down the field, is a fringe deck. Legalizing Braids in the 99 won't cause a sudden rush of Stax players any more than it did when we had a BaaC list years ago. Any pretense otherwise is just misguided. This is all a moot point since there is no BaaC anymore, but I still posit that there is no evidence that she would remain fully banned if the RC were to reinstate the BaaC list.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-31 4:59 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
Legalizing Braids in the 99 won't cause a sudden rush of Stax players any more than it did when we had a BaaC list years ago. Any pretense otherwise is just misguided.

I don't think anyone is claiming that.

cryogen wrote:
but I still posit that there is no evidence that she would remain fully banned if the RC were to reinstate the BaaC list.

And what good does that stance do?

I mean, we agree that if BaaC came back, Braids would be on either the regular ban list OR the BaaC list. Until BaaC seems like a reasonable thing that they would do ... does it matter if someone things Braids would be on one list vs the other?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-31 5:48 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
This is all a moot point since there is no BaaC anymore, but I still posit that there is no evidence that she would remain fully banned if the RC were to reinstate the BaaC list.

I think the point is that part of the reason that the BaaC list was done away with is because the RC feels that the format is better with cards like Braids gone entirely.

I mean, if they were to reinstate the BaaC list today, look at the potential cards that theoretically couldbecome legal in the 99 as a result. A format-warping Annihilator 6 monster, Yawgmoth's Bargain on a stick, two of the most oppressive and fun-sucking creatures ever printed, a Stax piece, and an overpowered fast ramp spell. While I can't guarantee that all of them are necessarily banworthy on their own merits, I don't think there's an argument that reintroducing any of them into the format will do any good.

_________________


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-31 6:25 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Carthain wrote:
And what good does that stance do?

I mean, we agree that if BaaC came back, Braids would be on either the regular ban list OR the BaaC list. Until BaaC seems like a reasonable thing that they would do ... does it matter if someone things Braids would be on one list vs the other?

Well the thread is essentially about bringing back the BaaC list, so.....
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
cryogen wrote:
This is all a moot point since there is no BaaC anymore, but I still posit that there is no evidence that she would remain fully banned if the RC were to reinstate the BaaC list.

I think the point is that part of the reason that the BaaC list was done away with is because the RC feels that the format is better with cards like Braids gone entirely.

I mean, if they were to reinstate the BaaC list today, look at the potential cards that theoretically couldbecome legal in the 99 as a result. A format-warping Annihilator 6 monster, Yawgmoth's Bargain on a stick, two of the most oppressive and fun-sucking creatures ever printed, a Stax piece, and an overpowered fast ramp spell. While I can't guarantee that all of them are necessarily banworthy on their own merits, I don't think there's an argument that reintroducing any of them into the format will do any good.

I could be wrong, but I don't recall that ever being a reason for doing away with the BaaC list, I always thought it was solely to streamline the ban list.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-31 7:17 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
Carthain wrote:
And what good does that stance do?

I mean, we agree that if BaaC came back, Braids would be on either the regular ban list OR the BaaC list. Until BaaC seems like a reasonable thing that they would do ... does it matter if someone things Braids would be on one list vs the other?

Well the thread is essentially about bringing back the BaaC list, so.....

Sure. But you jumped on my comments that were about something else (but related) -- about banning things because of the archetype they fit in or promoted. Which is different than bringing back the BaaC list.

Just because the original topic is about something, doesn't mean that every sub-thread in this needs to tie directly back to the original topic.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Banning cards only as commander.
AgePosted: 2018-Jul-31 9:41 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
I could be wrong, but I don't recall that ever being a reason for doing away with the BaaC list, I always thought it was solely to streamline the ban list.

You would be correct. That was then.

Now, there is no banned as a commander list, and I am talking about the reasoning behind whether or not it is a good idea to bring it back. Even assuming that streamlining the banned list is a bad reason to have done away with it in the first place, there are other reasons why reinstating it would be bad for the format.

_________________


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baron Cappuccino and 40 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: