MTGO Commander changes

Commander (EDH) forum

Posted on May 4, 2017, 4:30 a.m. by Dorotheus

There is a new banned list for EDH on magic online, it is intended to hit 1v1 commander, but IS extended to 4-player free for all as well.... which is, sloppy, to say the least.

I don't believe too many people will use this list at all, but now Wotc officially dipping their toes into the rules, I can see some adopting this now.

AlexoBn says... #2

This banlist is absolute bullshit. It just feels random to ban braids and arcum. If you play 1vs1 spot removal gets a much higher importance. If you can not deal with arcum (super easy in 1vs1) you will have a bad time anyway. I do not even get why they banned Doomsday and natural order. Better play leviathan (former duel commander) and stay away from wizards messing up commander banlist (they can not even handle modern)

May 4, 2017 5:15 a.m.

Gidgetimer says... #3

I more find it funny that Leovold isn't banned and that Sensei's Divining Top is now banned in every format has a say in besides vintage. Also, Gaea's Cradle too stronk.

May 4, 2017 6:45 a.m.

Dorotheus says... #4

Braids was already banned.

If I had my way as an insightful person with knowledge into game balance, and mechanics, and mtg;Sol Ring, Mana Vault, Mana Crypt, and Necropotence, would already be banned.

Under the same umbrella, I'd say that Wotc is using the idea of 1v1 being a central balance point and the offset of these are for 4 player commander bans as well, just because, as a justification to ban things that don't really make sense, like Arcum Dagsson, Edric, Spymaster of Trest, Yisan, the Wanderer Bard, and Zur the Enchanter make people think "oh man, maybe I missed something." when in reality they want to create a fluster until people talk about it, some adopt it, and then it begins to drive a wedge between players until Wotc can completely take it over and sell cards for it in a more controllable fashion, to their standards. Which seems a bit assumptive, even to me, but Wotc has been showing a lot of signs of weakness as a company in the past year and a half.

May 4, 2017 6:48 a.m.

MagicalHacker says... #5

On the whole, I really like this banlist. Sure there are cards that are on it that I wish weren't on it (Back to Basics to punish multicolored decks, Humility to punish goodstuff decks), but there are lots of cards that are on it that I am glad are on it (literally all of the fast mana, Necropotence, Doomsday, Sensei's Divining Top, etc.) that will help the format. In addition, I wish the list also had Panoptic Mirror which goes infinite with any of the many Time Warp effects, Upheaval which easily turns a game one-sided, Captain Sisay to match all the other commanders that tutor, among others, but I'm glad they removed some of the tamer cards from the list, like Coalition Victory and Worldfire.

If you are curious on what the changes are from the paper commander banlist, I've examined the lists and here are the differences the MTGO banlist made to the official paper banlist:

Added (25):

Removed (9):

May 4, 2017 9:13 a.m.

Gidgetimer says... #6

The funny thing is that what you call the tamer cards I think deserve to be banned and that the cards you are happy got added I am mostly outraged about. To each their own I guess, and it doesn't affect me since I don't play on MTGO but I really hope the rules committee doe not ever make these changes for paper.

May 4, 2017 9:43 a.m.

AlexoBn says... #7

Banning back to basics is dumb. This card should punish greedy manabases and is essential part of stax decks

May 4, 2017 9:45 a.m.

MagicalHacker says... #8

Gidgetimer, that's pretty funny actually xD I guess it just goes to show that there are maybe more differences in perspectives in the community than people know.

AlexoBn, I think the important part of that card is helping mono-colored decks, but then again, does mono-blue need any more help? Glad to see that they didn't ban Blood Moon or Magus of the Moon.

May 4, 2017 9:51 a.m.

Rzepkanut says... #9

There should have been a separate ban list for multiplayer. There are different starting life totals. That's a significant indicator to me that it should obviously be different ban lists too. I'm extremely disappointed they didn't just adopt the official commander multiplayer banlist at the same time. This game is already infinitely complex and having 2 banlists, one multi one 1v1, would be a drop in the bucket. Having conflicting banlists is more problematic than anything.

All i know for sure is my whole MTGO collection was just an Edric deck so I'm super bummed. I bought it a few months ago...I only spent like $10 on it but now I won't have a deck to play online. Its not a deck i have ever built in paper (i have 17 real decks built) but i still enjoyed playing it.

I did know it was a powerful commander but after i built a cutthroat version i changed it to a non-cutthroat version so i could have more fun with folks. I like winning most games the old fashioned way, by turning creatures sideways, not with infinite combos or extra turns. Where's the fun in that nonsense? So i guess I'm done playing online until i buy another deck. Here's a link to my now retired Edric deck too...if you are interested in suggesting things i could turn it into, I'd love to hear it!

Edric Makes Your Opponents Wanna Fight Each Other

Commander / EDH Rzepkanut


May 4, 2017 10:38 a.m.

NecroPony says... #10

I always found it silly people harkering for Sol ring to be banned, but now that people are arguing in my meta about which list to use, I am suddenly very pro ban. It's better than green ramp and it is an autoinclude, which is bad deckbuilding. There are a few cards missing, prophet, Sylvan Primordial ect, but as the list updates I'm sure it'll get better. I am eager to see what happens, as I lost all faith in the rules committee long ago.

I'm kinda surprised Yawgmoth's Will survived. For now.

May 4, 2017 11:16 a.m.

kanokarob says... #11

The fact this list applies to both 1v1 and multiplayer is the real problem. Sol ring is banworthy in 1v1 but reasonable in multiplayer. Similar deal for Edric and a few others.

May 4, 2017 12:14 p.m.

Dredge4life says... #12

I can't play Yisan anymore, and I'm a little upset about it. :(

May 4, 2017 11:58 p.m.

kanokarob says... #13

May 5, 2017 6:12 p.m.

PookandPie says... #14

lol, they amended it because it was the right call. Enforcing one myopic ban list for both 1v1 and multiplayer would have been atrocious.

May 6, 2017 9:41 p.m.

kanokarob says... #15

I agree, it was the right call.

I'm saying it's ridiculous because it should have been that way from the get-go, like the Felidar ban.

At this point we should stop paying attention to major announcements because something will probably change two days later.

May 6, 2017 10:32 p.m.

PookandPie says... #16

You're not wrong; the last week or two has been pretty impacting on player consumer confidence with Wizards.

May 7, 2017 12:12 a.m.

Wildsong says... #17

PH.UCK MTGO and their commander banlist.

I spent a lot of money with tickets to build and test my decks...sigh. And now I can't even enjoy multiplayer on their platform anymore. I tend to run a deck online many times before buying it on paper.

Stepping their foot on a community format that have it's own ruling body is ridiculous.

Monetizing a fun format created by others . That's all i can see with their intervention. Nothing good can come out of it.

Btw I really abhore Duel Commander. I always played 1v1 on EDH rules.

Unfortunately, It seems there is no place else to play 1v1 competitively without being restrained by banlists and squish Health Pools.

Wizards of the Money and Moneys of the Coast... all they can think about is Ka ching.

May 13, 2017 11:41 p.m.

Please login to comment