|
|
Post by abstractapathist on Apr 3, 2014 22:55:43 GMT
I think his point was that a case can be made to ban tutors based on the idea that commander decks should be more random since it's 100 card singleton. That is the nature of a format being singleton, but tutoring circumvents that. I don't think flavor is a good reason to ban cards. Commander is already very random with tutors, so I feel like banning them all would just make the ban list really long, but not do much else. Combo would die out as an archetype, but I don't think it's currently broken. |
|
|
|
Post by abstractapathist on Apr 3, 2014 22:56:55 GMT
So are you of the opinion that a multiplayer format cannot have a adequate banned list, or exist without the wholesale removal of tutors? I would also say that any deck with access to so many tutors, could theoretically tutor for answers to intruder alarm. With 4 other players the meta can figure out how to stop that deck. Unless it is theoretically impossible to stop, then it should be banned. I think that any format can adjust to almost anything, especially since the main people the list is for is casual players. No draft list at all wouldn't "break" the format as people would just not run decks that are boring and not fun....we have to do that now with Zur, for example (either don't play zur or play a deck that is super weakened, or have everyone hate on you). I feel like the idea for a banned list is either A-make it so that the same cards arn't used in every deck, becaus ethat is boring (sol ring), B-make sure the field is wide open and there are not overly dominant decks (there are enough answers to everything, and as casual people will play what is fun to them....French 1v1 has its own list for more competitive people who want to combo out turn 4 every game). C- keep it fun (winter orb maybe?) A - I agree. One reason that {Painter's Servant} is significantly more powerful than {intuder alarm} is that both parts of its main combo are colorless, and would be used in every deck if allowed to be played. Sol ring is debatable, although in the end it may be worth banning. B - Yes. C - I disagree. People can make the format fun if they want to, but the job of a ban list is NOT to enforce casuality, but to keep the competitive meta from breaking. |
|
|
|
Post by Dudecore on Apr 3, 2014 23:15:49 GMT
So are you of the opinion that a multiplayer format cannot have a adequate banned list, or exist without the wholesale removal of tutors? I would also say that any deck with access to so many tutors, could theoretically tutor for answers to intruder alarm. With 4 other players the meta can figure out how to stop that deck. Unless it is theoretically impossible to stop, then it should be banned. I think that any format can adjust to almost anything, especially since the main people the list is for is casual players. No draft list at all wouldn't "break" the format as people would just not run decks that are boring and not fun....we have to do that now with Zur, for example (either don't play zur or play a deck that is super weakened, or have everyone hate on you). I feel like the idea for a banned list is either A-make it so that the same cards arn't used in every deck, becaus ethat is boring (sol ring), B-make sure the field is wide open and there are not overly dominant decks (there are enough answers to everything, and as casual people will play what is fun to them....French 1v1 has its own list for more competitive people who want to combo out turn 4 every game). C- keep it fun (winter orb maybe?) It is simply impossible to ban cards that make a format boring and unfun, unless they're proven to be boring and unfun (Jace, the Mind Sculptor in standard). Just because cards can be used in a void to combo out quickly, doesn't mean there are not answers or any counter-strategies. The idea behind a new format is so casual and competitive players alike can play one format, and then go do what they do. Competitive players break combos and try to win as soon as possible with expensive cards, casual players can build what they like and ban whatever they want. I agree with point B, but as I previously noted - we don't have data on the situation. We're in a position where we have to basically guess what is ruining the format based on other formats. Legacy and Vintage have a fairly well balanced format. Besides their reliance on {Force of Will} to keep degenerative decks honest, you also aren't dealing with 1-copy of any wincon. Armed with that bit of information, we do our best to ban cards that they have banned, and add others that hurt the multiplayer format. French 1v1 is its own format, and they ban cards accordingly. We're attempting to balance a multiplayer format that everyone can enjoy. I think throwing tutors away because they can on occasion be used in a turn 2 win against other casual players is wrong way to handle it. We should be unbanning cards that while they can be used for bad things (finding combo pieces) can be used to find answers. In a competitive meta, which some of us play in, turn 2-4 wins rarely ever happen. There are enough cards in the magic universe to provide answers to most things (save for Emrakul and others). Further compounding issues is the fact our new rules include a TON of cards that were previously unplayable to certain decks. We've also lowered the life total to 30, to make aggressive creature strategies more viable (amongst other things). We're attempting to change the format, and just don't know what is going to pop up. {Painter's Servant} was because of its color-less cost, and it's combo with {Grindstone}. It wasn't singled out because it was the best combo, or even the fastest, it's just one that every deck can run, and it's only 2 cards. Fun cannot be predicted. There will always be "the best" card to play. We can chase them down all day long, banning does the opposite of having a fun environment. There will always be an opportunity to put Zur on the banned list if it turns out 80% of the competitive decks run him. Banning tutors also puts us in a position to have the format NOT adopted by anyone. You can play tutors in regular commander, why switch over to adopt our list and revisions? Just keep playing regular Commander, odds are you don't even care about {Trade Secrets} or {Primeval Titan}. It is possible by its very definition that "multiplayer" means "casual". Any attempt were making to have a balanced format for everyone is impossible. But if you think about your FNM's, where you have super competitive netdecks vs. having fun homebrews, then you'll understand what I'm aiming for. People go to play STANDARD or DRAFT, not to play CASUAL STANDARD or CASUAL DRAFT. It attracts all types. Competitive players are, and always will be, the indicators of broken things. If {Intruder Alarm} seems to be the most consistent card in the game, and no one can even meta plan around it? Then there is something there. If players aren't building their decks around some problematic strategies that can arise, then we can't simply ban cards to make their decks easier to build. |
|
