Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Oct-19 3:42 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-16 9:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2019-Jul-16 9:21 pm
Age: Wyvern
A lot of arguments have been popping up recently about cEDH players feeling disenfranchised from the format. While I don't personally enjoy cEDH myself, I can definitely sympathize with those that feel unheard or unrepresented, and I wouldn't want anyone to feel that way. The RC has made it abundantly clear that this format is designed for casual play, and at the end of the day that is the kind of playstyle and format they are going to be focusing on. My suggestion then, is for cEDH players to make their own format, separate from casual EDH, with it's own banlist and philosophy. I think that would go far in terms of satisfying those cEDH players who disagree with the RC's vision for their format. I'm not trying to say that cEDH players don't have a place in the EDH community as it currently exists, but with all of the grievances I've seen being shared on this forum I can't help wonder if a separate format (somewhat along the lines of how 1v1 made their own version of the format) would be the best solution to these issues.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 12:12 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I agreed with you last week, now I am not so sure.

check out the messages on MTGNexus from Sheldon about the cEDH meta, and what those players say they want.

Its not quite the slam dunk that you may think.

_________________
sir squab wrote:
My... history of buying Magic cards is probably a tapestry of bad financial decisions >_>
niheloim wrote:
No, I think he's right. I'm just all butt-hurt over prophet.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 12:15 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
MRHblue wrote:
I agreed with you last week, now I am not so sure.

check out the messages on MTGNexus from Sheldon about the cEDH meta, and what those players say they want.

Its not quite the slam dunk that you may think.

Do you have a message you can point us to for where that particular discussion about cEDH starts?

_________________
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: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 12:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2018-Nov-03 1:03 pm
Age: Wyvern
spacemonaut wrote:
MRHblue wrote:
I agreed with you last week, now I am not so sure.

check out the messages on MTGNexus from Sheldon about the cEDH meta, and what those players say they want.

Its not quite the slam dunk that you may think.

Do you have a message you can point us to for where that particular discussion about cEDH starts?


Here's the thread about the cEDH metagame: https://www.mtgnexus.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=644

There's also a relevant post by Sheldon about halfway down page 9 of the thread located here: https://www.mtgnexus.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=567&start=200

_________________
Survivor of the EDH 32 Challenge.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 1:34 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2019-Jul-16 9:21 pm
Age: Wyvern
HoffOccultist wrote:
spacemonaut wrote:
MRHblue wrote:
I agreed with you last week, now I am not so sure.

check out the messages on MTGNexus from Sheldon about the cEDH meta, and what those players say they want.


Honestly all the discussion on MtgNexus has shown me is that the arguments between casual and cEDH players are more toxic than ever. I admire Sheldon’s desire to find a middle ground but in all honesty I think it’s a little too idealistic and the differences between the two playstyles will only lead to further arguments down the road. I fully believe a separate banlist, philosophy, and format is the way to go in order to make both groups happy. I also believe that cEDH players, rather than the current rules committee, should take on the responsibility of creating such a format. They’ve already got enough on their plates managing the current EDH format as it is, and a group of people who can devote themselves entirely to managing cEDH would probably do a better job making those competitive players feel more understood and represented anyway.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 3:50 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Hoff nailed the threads, good reads.

OldManJenkins wrote:
Honestly all the discussion on MtgNexus has shown me is that the arguments between casual and cEDH players are more toxic than ever.
I could see that, but I think those toxic folks are the minority in both camps.

I was quite surprised most arguments for cEDH wasn't a variation on 'get gud scrub'. They want to play 10s against other 10s, and don't think the ban list needs to change dramatically. Lets give them the benefit of the doubt, especially as the new communication clarifies points.

_________________
sir squab wrote:
My... history of buying Magic cards is probably a tapestry of bad financial decisions >_>
niheloim wrote:
No, I think he's right. I'm just all butt-hurt over prophet.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 4:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Jan-02 5:25 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Costa La Haya, capital del ducado Holanda
HoffOccultist wrote:
spacemonaut wrote:
MRHblue wrote:
I agreed with you last week, now I am not so sure.

check out the messages on MTGNexus from Sheldon about the cEDH meta, and what those players say they want.

Its not quite the slam dunk that you may think.

Do you have a message you can point us to for where that particular discussion about cEDH starts?


Here's the thread about the cEDH metagame: https://www.mtgnexus.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=644

There's also a relevant post by Sheldon about halfway down page 9 of the thread located here: https://www.mtgnexus.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=567&start=200


This doesn't have much relevance to this thread, but Sheldon's reference to the goofiest of Civic races made me recall something that was on TV when I was young: racing in reverse and racing with caravans. It's as goofy as it gets. Take a look at this when you're bored: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THSmhTLB9FI

I've played Extended (with duals) and Legacy for years, and I like that as a 1v1 format. I like min/maxing in gaming. That's not why I play multiplayer offline though: if anything can be done to keep stax and combo decks in a multiplayer format as far away from me as possible that'd be great https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFRa7Ovym8s So yes please, let someone make a competitive format. If it'd be 1v1 I might even play it (although I think there's already something called canadian highlander that is just that) if I knew anyone who plays it.

_________________
"Our words are backed with OBLIVION STONE!"


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 7:47 pm 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I agree, but the problem I see is... They've tried. and come back. 1v1, French. My LGS once did a cEDH night, 4 people turned up, we had a regular community of 20+ commander players at the time.

I don't mean to be mean about this, but I don't think cEDH is big enough to have it's own format that way.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-17 9:21 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2019-Jul-16 9:21 pm
Age: Wyvern
specter404 wrote:
I agree, but the problem I see is... They've tried. and come back. 1v1, French. My LGS once did a cEDH night, 4 people turned up, we had a regular community of 20+ commander players at the time.

I don't mean to be mean about this, but I don't think cEDH is big enough to have it's own format that way.


I don’t mean to be mean about this, but I don’t think it’s fair to use your one individual experience with your LGS as a reflection of an entire community of players. 1v1 and French have their own formats that have been doing extremely well for the people who enjoy playing a more competitive one on one kind of EDH. I see no legitimate reason why that solution couldn’t work out for cEDH players as well.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-18 12:24 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2018-Nov-03 1:03 pm
Age: Wyvern
OldManJenkins wrote:
specter404 wrote:
I agree, but the problem I see is... They've tried. and come back. 1v1, French. My LGS once did a cEDH night, 4 people turned up, we had a regular community of 20+ commander players at the time.

I don't mean to be mean about this, but I don't think cEDH is big enough to have it's own format that way.


I don’t mean to be mean about this, but I don’t think it’s fair to use your one individual experience with your LGS as a reflection of an entire community of players. 1v1 and French have their own formats that have been doing extremely well for the people who enjoy playing a more competitive one on one kind of EDH. I see no legitimate reason why that solution couldn’t work out for cEDH players as well.


So in your first post here, you say that you don't enjoy cEDH. And that's totally fine, no one is asking you to play that way. However, you are asking those of us who do enjoy cEDH to go away, in effect, and I don't think that sentiment is really all that popular among cEDH players. I can only speak for what I've seen, but a lot of the biggest cEDH movers and shakers are against separating.

And while you don't think that one particular LGS's experience is emblematic, the issue is that what Specter404 is talking about is more common than, perhaps, you realize--which is fine, given that you already said you don't play cEDH. Many cEDH players don't have opportunities to play in person because the number of players of cEDH are few and far enough between that getting to play in paper is a challenge (and I say this having helped organize a number of in-person meet ups of cEDH players for an entire state). People get around this by playing via webcam and such, but a large amount of people who do play cEDH actually play more casually as often (if not more so) than playing cEDH.

One other issue is that while people do play different variations of 1v1 EDH, there are like...3 or 4 different ban lists for it that have splintered off further. With the already relatively sparse population of cEDH, that seems like too large a danger. Playing cEDH isn't about pubstomping, it's about playing tightly tuned lists against other tightly tuned lists. The unspoken agreement of a Rule 0 discussion in cEDH is "We're going to have fun by playing the best we can with the best deck we can, then shuffle up and do it again". Not to say people don't get salty, but the overwhelming majority of cEDH players are looking to play against other high level decks, not "Guys with Hats" tribal and not anything that would call itself "75%". There still are pubstompers, but they aren't going to go away if a separate cEDH list existed. Honestly, I think you'd actually just run into that problem more if a split did occur, since then they could be playing anything adhering to the regular EDH banlist and say "it's not competitive" even if it's still basically the same thing.

_________________
Survivor of the EDH 32 Challenge.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-18 1:17 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2019-Jul-16 9:21 pm
Age: Wyvern
HoffOccultist wrote:
OldManJenkins wrote:
specter404 wrote:
I agree, but the problem I see is... They've tried. and come back. 1v1, French. My LGS once did a cEDH night, 4 people turned up, we had a regular community of 20+ commander players at the time.

I don't mean to be mean about this, but I don't think cEDH is big enough to have it's own format that way.


I don’t mean to be mean about this, but I don’t think it’s fair to use your one individual experience with your LGS as a reflection of an entire community of players. 1v1 and French have their own formats that have been doing extremely well for the people who enjoy playing a more competitive one on one kind of EDH. I see no legitimate reason why that solution couldn’t work out for cEDH players as well.


So in your first post here, you say that you don't enjoy cEDH. And that's totally fine, no one is asking you to play that way. However, you are asking those of us who do enjoy cEDH to go away, in effect, and I don't think that sentiment is really all that popular among cEDH players. I can only speak for what I've seen, but a lot of the biggest cEDH movers and shakers are against separating.

And while you don't think that one particular LGS's experience is emblematic, the issue is that what Specter404 is talking about is more common than, perhaps, you realize--which is fine, given that you already said you don't play cEDH. Many cEDH players don't have opportunities to play in person because the number of players of cEDH are few and far enough between that getting to play in paper is a challenge (and I say this having helped organize a number of in-person meet ups of cEDH players for an entire state). People get around this by playing via webcam and such, but a large amount of people who do play cEDH actually play more casually as often (if not more so) than playing cEDH.

One other issue is that while people do play different variations of 1v1 EDH, there are like...3 or 4 different ban lists for it that have splintered off further. With the already relatively sparse population of cEDH, that seems like too large a danger. Playing cEDH isn't about pubstomping, it's about playing tightly tuned lists against other tightly tuned lists. The unspoken agreement of a Rule 0 discussion in cEDH is "We're going to have fun by playing the best we can with the best deck we can, then shuffle up and do it again". Not to say people don't get salty, but the overwhelming majority of cEDH players are looking to play against other high level decks, not "Guys with Hats" tribal and not anything that would call itself "75%". There still are pubstompers, but they aren't going to go away if a separate cEDH list existed. Honestly, I think you'd actually just run into that problem more if a split did occur, since then they could be playing anything adhering to the regular EDH banlist and say "it's not competitive" even if it's still basically the same thing.


I don’t want cEDH players to “go away.” I want them to be happy. Having their own format would solve a lot of the issues being addressed in this thread and others like it. Hoping for the rules committee to find a magic fix for making competitive and casual players happy in a format that is explicitly designed and regulated for casual play is not going to work out well. You say cEDH players want to consistently play against other high level decks. Wouldn’t that be a lot easier if there was a whole new format that encouraged those kind of high powered decks to be played?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-18 1:45 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2018-Nov-03 1:03 pm
Age: Wyvern
OldManJenkins wrote:
I don’t want cEDH players to “go away.” I want them to be happy. Having their own format would solve a lot of the issues being addressed in this thread and others like it. Hoping for the rules committee to find a magic fix for making competitive and casual players happy in a format that is explicitly designed and regulated for casual play is not going to work out well. You say cEDH players want to consistently play against other high level decks. Wouldn’t that be a lot easier if there was a whole new format that encouraged those kind of high powered decks to be played?


The issue is that we don't want to just play whatever competitively, there's Modern and Legacy and Standard and whatever else for that. We want to play EDH at the highest level it can be played. The beauty of EDH and cEDH is the relatively conservative approach to the banlist, and while you may be right that there will always be some tension between the philosophy document and cEDH, even just the conversations that are happening now (for example, Sheldon posted on twitter that he had a conversation with a number of cEDH content creators) are a big step in easing that tension.

Also, I think it's a bit disingenuous for you, someone who stated in your OP that you don't play cEDH, to explain what will make cEDH players happy. There's a reason that most of leaders in the community are opposed to a split--a split isn't going to be beneficial or happy for us.

_________________
Survivor of the EDH 32 Challenge.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-18 2:25 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2019-Jul-16 9:21 pm
Age: Wyvern
Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-18 3:33 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
HoffOccultist wrote:
The beauty of EDH and cEDH is the relatively conservative approach to the banlist

For me at least, this is the point of fundamental disagreement. In regards to competitive play, I see the rules of the format as the ultimate bug, not a feature. The multiplayer nature of the format destroys the numbers at the foundation of why competitive magic works, a problem which is only worsened by the increased life total, deck size, singleton nature, and constant access to a powerful card. The constant check and balance between aggro, control, and combo that makes other magic formats interesting is thrown out the window, as aggro strategies are dead on arrival and virtually every deck is either glass cannon combo or control combo.

Furthermore, I think that cEDH utterly fails at the goal of "playing EDH at the highest level". Or, to make it more clear what I mean, it utterly fails at the goal of playing Commander at the highest level. The more I play and watch cEDH games the less I think the Commander is even needed for the game. In cEDH more often than not the deck drives the commander, not the other way around. To illustrate the point I think the most clear case is the popularity of Thrasios, Triton Hero. If cEDH were truly a format about taking Commander to its highest level, he would not be so popular, as he isn't that powerful and the decks he runs have little to nothing to do with his abilities. The actual reasons why he's everywhere are all only relevant at all if you don't start with the premise that the Commander should be the most important part of the deck:
1. More colors means better cards, so the deck's commander should allow as many colors as possible.
2. Having effectively 2 bonus cards in your opening hand > having 1, so the partner commanders should be used whenever possible.
3. When you actually play the commander it will be more of "nothing better to do" than an actual goal, so it should be as cheap as possible to maximize its availability.

Taking all those factors into account, and you get to a situation where the optimal decision is to pair Thrasios with Tymna or Vial Smasher. Not because you actually care about what any of the cards do, but because they provide a bunch of peripheral advantages and are the least useless way of doing so. And if you really don't believe me, imagine what would happen if Thrasios were banned. The answer to me at least seems obvious: every deck would replace him with Kydele or potentially swap out the commander pair for a different pair in the same colors and nothing else about the deck would change. To me, no format that calls itself a variation of Commander should be one where the best commanders are interchangeable.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: cEDH should be it's own format
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-18 5:49 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2018-Nov-03 1:03 pm
Age: Wyvern
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
HoffOccultist wrote:
The beauty of EDH and cEDH is the relatively conservative approach to the banlist

For me at least, this is the point of fundamental disagreement. In regards to competitive play, I see the rules of the format as the ultimate bug, not a feature. The multiplayer nature of the format destroys the numbers at the foundation of why competitive magic works, a problem which is only worsened by the increased life total, deck size, singleton nature, and constant access to a powerful card. The constant check and balance between aggro, control, and combo that makes other magic formats interesting is thrown out the window, as aggro strategies are dead on arrival and virtually every deck is either glass cannon combo or control combo.

Furthermore, I think that cEDH utterly fails at the goal of "playing EDH at the highest level". Or, to make it more clear what I mean, it utterly fails at the goal of playing Commander at the highest level. The more I play and watch cEDH games the less I think the Commander is even needed for the game. In cEDH more often than not the deck drives the commander, not the other way around. To illustrate the point I think the most clear case is the popularity of Thrasios, Triton Hero. If cEDH were truly a format about taking Commander to its highest level, he would not be so popular, as he isn't that powerful and the decks he runs have little to nothing to do with his abilities. The actual reasons why he's everywhere are all only relevant at all if you don't start with the premise that the Commander should be the most important part of the deck:
1. More colors means better cards, so the deck's commander should allow as many colors as possible.
2. Having effectively 2 bonus cards in your opening hand > having 1, so the partner commanders should be used whenever possible.
3. When you actually play the commander it will be more of "nothing better to do" than an actual goal, so it should be as cheap as possible to maximize its availability.

Taking all those factors into account, and you get to a situation where the optimal decision is to pair Thrasios with Tymna or Vial Smasher. Not because you actually care about what any of the cards do, but because they provide a bunch of peripheral advantages and are the least useless way of doing so. And if you really don't believe me, imagine what would happen if Thrasios were banned. The answer to me at least seems obvious: every deck would replace him with Kydele or potentially swap out the commander pair for a different pair in the same colors and nothing else about the deck would change. To me, no format that calls itself a variation of Commander should be one where the best commanders are interchangeable.




I think your assessment of Thrasios makes a couple of really good points, particularly about the power of partners. Having access to a virtual 9 card opener is incredibly strong, and the ability to bump decks that could function as 3 color to 4 color without a hard cost in the command zone is a huge boon. But that's a partner thing in general, rather than just a Thrasios thing--it just happens that Thrasios+Tymna, Thrasios+Vial Smasher, and Tymna+Kraum represent the best combinations of efficient commanders and color combinations.

That said, I think it's a mistake to say that partners are played only because of those benefits. For example, Thrasios' popularity is about more than just being a partner. Three major things matter as well:

1) Being blue/green means that it automatically opens up FlashHulk piles no matter what its partnered with (although if it's Thrasios+Kydele the simic piles are pretty lackluster).
2) The 1/3 body for 2 mana is highly relevant when one of the other primary partner commanders is Tymna--blocking an early creature ends up being important in not
3) The "coiling oracle" activated ability is an outlet for infinite mana in the command zone, which is incredibly relevant in a meta where Dramatic Reversal + Isochron Scepter exist. In fact, prior to the banning of Paradox Engine, one of the premier decks was Paradox-Scepter Thrasios, which utilized Thrasios's activated ability to draw the deck and win (usually with Lab Maniac--and the deck still functions post Engine ban, mostly replacing Engine with Demonic Consultation).

If Thrasios were banned, undoubtedly some decks would swap him to Kydele, but I think it'd be far less than decks that would explore other commanders and partners entirely, because Thrasios being what it is as a complete package is important to many decks. And many strong cEDH decks very much rely on their commander--GodoHelm, Rashmi Control, Chain Veil Teferi, the major Food Chain variants (First Sliver, Niv-Mizzet Reborn, and General Tazri), Gitrog Monster, and so on (and we just lost a couple others in Captain Sisay and Arcum with the Engine ban). It just happens that one of the most efficient and consistent win cons, Flash Hulk, fits into a Thrasios/X deck very easily, and that Thrasios has relevance as a creature and with its activated ability in the meta as it currently exists.

_________________
Survivor of the EDH 32 Challenge.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 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: