|
4 years ago ::
Nov 18, 2009 - 8:49AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Mar 15, 2009
|
1. soft games != interesting games
2. stagnation is the #1 killer, in any format.
3. regarding "seriousness": if you say you're "not serious" - and i'm not talking to anyone in particular here - i believe you generally do because you don't want to feel as bad for making mistakes or playing bad decks.
why not instead trying serious next time? who knows, might be fun.
i keep hearing players saying they chose to play loose and casual, as if they could all of a sudden play good if they just decided to do so... well, guess what? it's not that easy.
but it sure is fun trying.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 22, 2009 - 11:04AM
#52
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2008
|
...
anyway, serious decks are super-important for the game in so many ways. they provide the technology push to keep the game moving forward. where would we be if not for them? stuck in 1993.
...
Why are serious decks important? There aren't any prizes attached to winning. Serious decks are very important to limited formats because prizes are the reward for winning tournaments, and tournaments are what drive booster sales. Serious decks are important to sanctioned constructed formats because they help retain residual card value.
Serious decks aren't important to casual formats because casual formats are more about social interaction then winning. In fact, I'd argue that serious decks have the opposite effect; serious decks drive out casual players and without casual players the format dies.
Don't believe me? Prismatic was a fun casual format until it got sanctioned. Once that happened the best decks became very well defined and those serious decks drove casual players out of the format. And without the casual base there weren't enough 'Spikes' to sustain Prismatic, so it died.
Don't believe me? Tribal Standard was another WotC's attempt at a competitive format that would appeal to casual players. Want to know what happened?
Exactly. Also look at Tribal Classic, dead format - it wasn't even sanctioned, but casual players left because every FFA became Goblins, kithkith, elves and whatever casual deck your brought to the table. Really, the main flaw i see in "serious" (I would say competitive) decks in casual formats is that it breeds stagnation. E.g.: Emp games. Even before V3 destroyed running Emp games in the multiroom (semi-functional now) the format had degenerated to where every deck was nearly identical. You knew before joining that the Emp was going to be playing Vision Skeins, Platinum Angel, Jace, etc. You knew his flanks would have Fertile ground, Yavimay Dryad, etc. It was no longer a game of innovation, it was who's team had the better shuffle and got to their cards first.
Tribal Standard, and some classic became more of the same. Every elf deck, if not a NetDec kanyway, is going to be identical within 1-15 cards of any other elf deck. The format gets boring and people stop playing when it is boring. The format dies when people stop playing.
1. soft games != interesting games
2. stagnation is the #1 killer, in any format.
3. regarding "seriousness": if you say you're "not serious" - and i'm not talking to anyone in particular here - i believe you generally do because you don't want to feel as bad for making mistakes or playing bad decks.
why not instead trying serious next time? who knows, might be fun.
i keep hearing players saying they chose to play loose and casual, as if they could all of a sudden play good if they just decided to do so... well, guess what? it's not that easy.
but it sure is fun trying.
1. Concur, but equally true: Serious != interesting. I would say uniqueness and innovation are the only true formula for interesting. It can be serious or casual, but it needs to be unique. NetDecks = Boring.
2. Very True - but over serious / all competitive play in a Casual format breeds stagnation, see above.
3. I think you are misunderstanding casual and serious. I don't think people set out to build bad decks, and people aren't going to purposefully make mistakes (not to be confused with personal restraint - which is not a mistake, btu a play style and attitude putting the game over the outcome). Casual can be playing Horde of Notions in a Tribal Commander deck instead of a 5C good stuff. Doesn't mean the deck is bad (fairly strong actually) it's just different, unique, innovative. Also, as we try to expand the format and draw in new players (appeals to alot of newer folks since they can play a classic format without needing a 4 card playest of anything super strong) not every Green player is going to own or play Genises + Eternal Witness. Hell, I don't even own an Eternal Witness. Can you build a 5th turn win every game deck...sure. Should you play it every game? No (unless your ego needs that much stroking, then please label your game "competitive only and let the casual players enjoy a 2 hour epic battle, thats....fun ).
/me hops off the soap box
V/R
HK
V/R
HK
"Treamayne"
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 28, 2010 - 12:25AM
#53
|
|
|
I'm a bit annoyed these days by sorin markov. In competetive commander he might be a strong but not overpowered card, but in casual games he is often an "I win" button.
The problems with him are imho:
- 6 mana ain't a lot
- the effect is really powerful. If you play early some lifegain card, someone slaps down sorin by turn 6, you might lose 40 life all on a sudden
- it's hard to guess who plays sorin, since he can be played in most decks
- defending is very hard, since you don't even get priority between him enter play and his ability. you can give yourself shroud, play "counter activated ability" cards or counter him. The first two ways are limited already by the number of cards with that effect. Countering him is guesswork, since leaving mana open at all times if you have a counterspell on hand, just in case someone might play sorin, is a bit paranoid and also hampers your development a lot
- early game sorin is strong, because him making you lose 30 life, while everyone is at 40, is pretty surely a "goodbye". late game sorin is strong, because him + any sort of evasion, burn or drain life spell or whatever also means you lost
I don't mind strong cards. Either you can anticipate them (like when someone is about 10 mana and plays blue, you might expect a time stretch) or deal with them before they kill you. But the combination of beeing playable in many decks, costing only 6 mana, and having no time to remove sorin is really annoying.
You need more lands!
You need more card draw!
You need more removal!
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 10, 2011 - 5:23PM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Aug 18, 2008
|
New here on the boards, but certainly not Magic and just started getting into Commander. I have no tolerance for degenerate combo decks in any multiplayer format and certainly not Commander. There's a format built for that... solitaire, because let's not try kidding ourselves here, that's what all these combo decks are. I wouldn't consider any deck that presents a "Counter/destroy this spell/permanent or lose" an interactive deck no matter how many times someone tries to convince me that it is.
There's only one person having fun when someone decides to play these types of decks. That's not what I feel Commander was designed for. There's already plenty of other avenues for you to play those types of decks in.
|
|
|
