Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Sep-18 4:06 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 10:55 am 

Joined: 2011-Apr-07 11:38 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I understand that it combos with any sorcery that says take an extra turn, but I don't feel that is cause enough for its banning. It seems to me the cards that it generally makes really powerful are already unplayable due to them being hated out of the format (mass land destruction and extra turns).

It's also really easy to answer. Artifact removal may not have always been a popular thing, but that's not the case anymore. Decks are typically constructed to have answers to everything now.

This card looks to me like a really fun interactive card that has been banned because it has some combo potential. Combo potential should not cause a card to be banned unless we want an extremely large banned list. Tooth and nail, kiki-jiki, triskelion, Ghave, and Sword of feast and famine would all have to be banned.

_________________
http://legendarycommander.blogspot.com/

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 11:26 am 

Joined: 2011-Sep-30 6:08 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Jelik wrote:
I understand that it combos with any sorcery that says take an extra turn, but I don't feel that is cause enough for its banning... This card looks to me like a really fun interactive card
The reason it is banned is that you think this. The hard infinite turn combos are problematic. But equally annoying are various sweepers, tutors, ramp spells, draw spells, and discard spells. It is almost never fun or interactive. You play it, then it is removed before the next upkeep or it probably makes the game miserable for everyone but you.

_________________
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
Cryocerete (sp?)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 11:37 am 

Joined: 2011-Apr-07 11:38 am
Age: Elder Dragon
But this could be said about a million other cards that aren't banned.Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite is terrible to play against if you like playing creatures. No one is happy to see a Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger on the other side of the table. Jin-Gitaxias, Core Augur certainly doesn't promote fun. And these 3 examples can be used as your commander making them quite difficult to deal with.

I'm not saying you cant be a dirtbag player with the mirror, I'm just saying you don't have to be.

_________________
http://legendarycommander.blogspot.com/

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 12:24 pm 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
My question would be, what do you want to put under your mirror?

I assume as you have started this thread that you want to be able to use the card, so I am interested to know what you imagine the game is going to be like at the time you play this?

There just aren't a lot of things I can imagine wanting to put under a mirror that are both fun and worthwhile. I mean you could just put divination under there, but you'd probably be better off playing staff of nin.

Furthermore, just because you're not being a jerk with it, doesn't mean I cant steal or copy your's and then run away with it. If we take you're comparison with the praetors, if I copy your Vorinclex or Jin Gitaxtis, then we are at parity. If i copy your panoptic mirror, one of us could be winning the game and one of us could be doing nothing.

Ultimately there's seems to be several good reasons for it to be banned, but pretty much none for it to be allowed.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 3:32 pm 

Joined: 2011-Apr-07 11:38 am
Age: Elder Dragon
What are these good reasons? Cards being part of a strong combo don't warrant a ban as I pointed out above. Take tooth and nail for example. I have never seen this card resolved and not caused the player and overwhelming advantage or strait up game win.

If you are in a competitive meta, then the combo of mirror/time warp doesn't even seem all that strong to me (it's not played in legacy to my knowledge).

I wanted to run it in a Melek deck with lots of targets honestly (it's sorcery/instant themed). It was in the deck until I realized it wasn't legal. Cool things to cast with it would have been Blast of Genius, Stolen Identity, Mystic Retrieval or Spelltwine. Rite of Replication would probably be the worst card to imprint which is really speaking to the power of rite, not the mirror (it is another card never resolves without giving the caster extreme advantage, but still not banned).

_________________
http://legendarycommander.blogspot.com/

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 3:38 pm 

Joined: 2011-Apr-07 11:38 am
Age: Elder Dragon
specter404 wrote:
Furthermore, just because you're not being a jerk with it, doesn't mean I cant steal or copy your's and then run away with it. If we take you're comparison with the praetors, if I copy your Vorinclex or Jin Gitaxtis, then we are at parity. If i copy your panoptic mirror, one of us could be winning the game and one of us could be doing nothing.


Exact same thing can be said for Kiki-Jiki yet not banned. This is my main point.

_________________
http://legendarycommander.blogspot.com/

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 6:51 pm 

Joined: 2010-Dec-03 3:54 pm
Age: Drake
First, comparing Panoptic Mirror to Tooth and Nail - a card that 1) should be banned and 2) has nearly double the effective mana cost does not help your case.

As for why Panoptic Mirror is banned, this is because of the combination of very easily being a highly warping card (easily on par with Tooth and Nail), combined with precisely your impression of it - it looks fun.

I suggest you print out a few proxies of the card and ask every player in your group to add it to their decks, and play with it for a few weeks. Then you can come back and actually discuss the card in a meaningful manner; I suspect that unless your entire playgroup focuses on Phelddagrif style group-hug decks, even the most seemingly benign uses of the Mirror will distort your games into 3v1 after the first week.

As part of this experiment, make sure that everyone understands exactly how the card works - you choose which imprinted card you wish to copy when the triggered ability resolves, not when it is put in the stack. This means you can respond to the upkeep trigger by imprinting a card, then copying that card when the ability resolves that upkeep.

_________________
Karador, Ghost Chieftain
Alesha, Who Smiles at Death


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-18 11:59 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Aug-20 7:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Hampshire
Muspellsheimr wrote:
As for why Panoptic Mirror is banned, this is because of the combination of very easily being a highly warping card (easily on par with Tooth and Nail), combined with precisely your impression of it - it looks fun.

QFT.

I can't think of anything that would be both worth the investment of the mana and cards to do every turn that would also be fun for the table.

_________________
"The President's job - and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this - is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it." -- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide tot he Galaxy Radio Transcripts predicting the future.


Last edited by Sid the Chicken on 2014-Sep-19 1:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-19 12:57 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
specter404 wrote:
There just aren't a lot of things I can imagine wanting to put under a mirror that are both fun and worthwhile. I mean you could just put divination under there, but you'd probably be better off playing staff of nin.

Thinking of putting divination under there has me salivating. The investment of 5 then 3 to set up drawing 3 cards every turn...Conan was wrong about what is best in life.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-19 6:20 am 

Joined: 2010-Dec-03 3:54 pm
Age: Drake
JJackson wrote:
Thinking of putting divination under there has me salivating. The investment of 5 then 3 to set up drawing 3 cards every turn...Conan was wrong about what is best in life.

Divination is probably the single most unoffensive card you can imprint on a Mirror that is actually worth imprinting.

The problem though is that after doing so for a week, you will want to replace Divination in your deck with Concentrate or Foresee, or maybe Tidings. Another thing to note is that unlike Isochron Scepter, you are not locked into a single card choice with this - you can imprint two or three utility or removal cards and choose which one you want each upkeep.

A more common occurrence I think would be imprinting Demonic Tutor - something that seems benign at a glance, but I assure you is not. And this is still on the 'tame' end of the spectrum with Panoptic Mirror.

_________________
Karador, Ghost Chieftain
Alesha, Who Smiles at Death


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-19 7:20 am 

Joined: 2011-Apr-07 11:38 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Muspellsheimr wrote:
As for why Panoptic Mirror is banned, this is because of the combination of very easily being a highly warping card (easily on par with Tooth and Nail), combined with precisely your impression of it - it looks fun.


This is my whole point. The powerlevel of the card is compared to tooth and nail (kiki-jiki is better comparison imo). Cards that are not banned.


Sid the Chicken wrote:
I can't think of anything that would be both worth the investment of the mana and cards to do every turn that would also be fun for the table.


This is something I don't understand. Doom Blade isn't fun for the whole table, there is always someone it is hampered by it. Almost every card can be classified this way. It's powerful, I'm not denying that. But it is easily interacted with.

Quote:
First, comparing Panoptic Mirror to Tooth and Nail - a card that 1) should be banned and 2) has nearly double the effective mana cost does not help your case.


1) should probably be, but it isn't. T&N is a 1 card combo and can only be interacted with by counterspells vs Mirror other which is at least a 2 card combo and can be removed after it's in play and takes a full turn before it has any effect.

2) Tooth and Nail costs 9 mana. Mirror costs 5 another card and however much that other card costs. I would say Mirror costs more. If we take the most offencive spell Timewarp. It costs 5 to play mirror and another 5 to imprint it. 5+5=10. 10 > 9.

Quote:
I suggest you print out a few proxies of the card and ask every player in your group to add it to their decks, and play with it for a few weeks. Then you can come back and actually discuss the card in a meaningful manner; I suspect that unless your entire playgroup focuses on Phelddagrif style group-hug decks, even the most seemingly benign uses of the Mirror will distort your games into 3v1 after the first week.


1st off, how am I not discussing it in a meaningful manner? I actually thought that's what we were doing here . . .

2nd, If a card distorting a game to 3vs1 means it needs to be banned, the list of cards needing to be banned just got a whole lot larger. Any card that needs to be answered does this. Then the card gets answered and it goes back into a free for all. That's how politics at a multiplayer table are supposed to work.

_________________
http://legendarycommander.blogspot.com/

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-19 7:24 am 

Joined: 2011-Apr-07 11:38 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Sheldon via Official Banned List and Format Philosophy Document wrote:
We’d like the Banned List to be as small as possible to make it easily understandable for the players and manageable for us, meaning we’re not going to ban every card that someone finds unpleasant to play against. It is not a problem that some cards are strong.


So the card can be strong. It's a strong versatile card, and that's ok.

Banning Criteria by Sheldon wrote:
* Creates Undesirable Games/Game Situations.


This card does not create any more undesired game situations than most cards I see played.

Quote:
* Warps The Format Strategically.


I don't this so. This was my initial question.

Quote:
* Produces Too Much Mana Too Quickly.


Nope

Quote:
* Interacts Badly With the Structure of Commander.


If anything it's less potent in commander as a multiplayer format opposed to a 1v1.

Quote:
* Creates a Perceived High Barrier to Entry.


Nope, this card is far from playable in every deck and has a pretty low monetary cost ($10 foil)

_________________
http://legendarycommander.blogspot.com/

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-19 8:05 am 

Joined: 2010-Dec-03 3:54 pm
Age: Drake
Jelik wrote:
Tooth and Nail costs 9 mana. Mirror costs 5 another card and however much that other card costs. I would say Mirror costs more. If we take the most offencive spell Timewarp. It costs 5 to play mirror and another 5 to imprint it. 5+5=10. 10 > 9.

While Time Warp may be one of the most effective options, it certainly is not the most offensive. Restore Balance probably takes that place among format legal cards, with Armageddon a close second - both of which are nearly as effective at winning the game as infinite turns when used correctly (with a single casting).

Aside from that, {5} on turn four, followed by {5} on the upkeep of turn five is considerably less costly than {7}{G}{G}. It doesn't matter that it is a two-card combo - it is one card plus nearly any other card in your deck, many of which set up the game-ending combo (such as the aforementioned Demonic Tutor).

Jelik wrote:
1st off, how am I not discussing it in a meaningful manner? I actually thought that's what we were doing here . . .

2nd, If a card distorting a game to 3vs1 means it needs to be banned, the list of cards needing to be banned just got a whole lot larger. Any card that needs to be answered does this.

Because you very clearly have no idea what the impact of Panoptic Mirror would be, should it be legal. You have made it abundantly clear that you have little to no experience playing with or against the card. Until you actually understand what this card does when played, you cannot meaningfully contribute to a discussion about it's 'banworthyness'.

It is not the fact that the games will be 3v1 that makes it banable - most games I play turn into 3v1 because I play a highly tuned attrition-control deck. The problem with Panoptic Mirror is that its effect is so warping that after a few months, every deck in your playgroup will be built to ramp and tutor into Panoptic Mirror, and every game will consist of 'Kill the player who resolved Mirror first or loose.'

Jelik wrote:
If anything it's less potent in commander as a multiplayer format opposed to a 1v1.

Opposite, actually. Mirror was not played in Standard because that format was dominated by Ravager decks - a deck far faster than any Mirror deck could hope to be.
It is not played in Legacy because the format is defined by the first two or three turns, and there are any number of more reliable win conditions at that point.
I am rather surprised the card is not played in Modern, actually. The only reason I can see for it not being competitive there is similar to that of Legacy.

Commander on the other hand is a slow format, often defined by 'big plays'. It is precisely the kind of format that Panoptic Mirror is the strongest in.

Panoptic Mirror is as strong or stronger than the single most ban-worthy card currently legal (T&N), is considerably easier to setup (due to lower mana requirements), and is highly deceptive regarding the impact it has on metagame deck construction and gameplay choices. That is why it is banned.

_________________
Karador, Ghost Chieftain
Alesha, Who Smiles at Death


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-19 10:30 am 

Joined: 2009-Apr-21 3:38 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Palm Springs Area, CA
Try it out. Weve had fun with it before. If it doesn't cause problems for you guys i don't see why you shouldn't play with it.

_________________
3DH4L1F3


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is panoptic mirror really format warping?
AgePosted: 2014-Sep-19 1:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-03 3:16 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I so agree with Niheloim, everybody thinks just because this is banned here (or any other banlist on any other website) that it cannot be used, assuming that your play group agrees. I have had fun games with just about every banned card on the list. I have had crappy games that did not include any banned cards.

If you want to play with the mirror, do so. If you abuse it just know that your friends will likely not want to play against that deck again.

It is kind of a big waste of time to build a deck for one game. I was putting together a Zurgo deck that was going to be a voltron/wrath.dec but as I was putting it together I was reminded of a Avacyn wrath.dec I built that ended up as Avacyn carrying Worldslayer. After a game nobody wanted to play against it...

Just my two cents.

_________________
Shabbaman wrote:
The usual answer is "the social contract", but I guess that is not what you are looking for. Try house rules.


With perfect mana, reasonable removal, disruption, and card advantage, we're back to pitchforks and torches. And it's about to get worse for those who do not enjoy the game as Richard Garfield intended, playing as few win conditions as possible and prompting concession after all hopes (and spells) are lost. - Shaheen Soorani


Top
 Online Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Sinis and 59 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: