Well why the Hell can't it be a wincon???
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on May 23, 2016, 11:38 p.m. by Deckologist
As always every day in my meta there is something to complain about. Today just so happened with a new player coming to the shop and destroying some players using Phelddagrif group hug. Everyone complained that it wasn't group hug and then proceeded to make the player feel like crap. Being the guru at my shop i stood up on my soap box and explained that group hug is in fact a wincon albeit a very odd one and usually wins over less experienced players that think its just there for fun. One of our newer players...we will call him "Jimbob Mcmethteeth"...stands up and states that it should be banned from our shop the same way that infinite combo and stax are. Naturally this lead to a debate.
Do you believe that group hug, in the traditional aim to win stance, should be looked down upon?
Do you find Group Hug decks at all annoying?
DERPLINGSUPREME says... #3
I personally really love playing hug decks, when they're made correctly. Love everyone, deal with threats so others don't have to, make sure everyone is a friend until they all die to some dumbly insane combo.
there are people who play it WRONG, however. This means that they're simply STALLING the game while letting us draw. Its less political-friendship and more no-one-plays-so-no-one-can-be-enemies.
Now comes the part where I REALLY hate Hugs.
I only like hugs when I am also playing a dumb herp-derp deck. For example, I have a Shauku, Endbringer deck where shes the only creature and the rest is only removal. its fun to play when someone else is hugs. If I'm playing my Wort, Boggart Auntie deck however, I hate it. It prohibits me from killing anyone, which I guess is a strategy.
TL;DR If Its a game where i'm trying to win it pisses me off b/c it'll just slow down the game, but If I'm playing just to mess with people I'm all for it.
May 23, 2016 11:48 p.m.
If people get mad because they can't beat my Angus Mackenzie deck that wins with Helix Pinnacle without infinite mana, then I achieved what I set out to do: belittle the try-hards.
May 24, 2016 2:10 a.m.
Group hug is effectively the polite (read casual) version of group slug/stax (not saying you can't have a casual stax deck but that's another discussion).
The big issue that a lot of people have with them is that there is a decent chunk of them that lack a win condition and are typically "come in second place" decks. This I find frustrating because they effectively just choose the player they want to win for the game and then effectviely make it 2v1 for anybody who tries to do anything to change that.
But a well designed group hug deck that can actually close a game is perfectly fine. It just sounds like this Jimbob Mcmethteeth is a bit of a bad player and didn't know how to read the game and is having a whinge because of it. "Wah, the deck that I didn't think would do well did well and now I lost" kind of thing.
May 24, 2016 3:13 a.m.
Jamesfurrow says... #6
Well looking at the fact it's a deck that makes everyone's gameplan harder to achieve or in some cases faster groups hug is a very viable strategy. Cause who wants to kill the person giving us all free lands and cards? All the cutthroat players that's who because we know what's up as was stated. A group hug deck does not deserve to be shunned. I can semi understand combo since if it's assembled it's game over right there and then. But even then combo isn't a strategy that isn't viable either. I can understand it not being intresting but so can a game of commander that has reached turn 16 and their's been 6 wraths that reset the board and everyone is on topdeck mode. At that point im pretty sure we wouldn't mind an interaction that said game over there and then. I personally feel no deck isn't allowed in commander as long it follows the ban list basically. If you have combo's well to me I feel it means I have to play better or win faster. It entices me to be a better brewer. And isn't magic suppose to be a game where we all improve and enjoy the process of improving our style and expressing our creative side? I mean yes we all like big derpy creatures but how we can get them out greatly vary and the process of getting them out is where we express and show ourselves. So no don't look down at hug decks they are probally one of the most difficult decks to play properly. Keep them hugs alive. Also get some love for combo it's not evil just another aspect of the game that needs to be played around
May 24, 2016 3:37 a.m.
It's OK to be a hater of group hug. Just remember that next game you are going to be hugged a lot less than your opponents.
May 24, 2016 4:54 a.m.
Group Hug is a valid deck-type? Why ban it?
I guess the players complaining where sour because they lost to a seemingly innocent looking deck. But tell me, how fair is a really (and I mean REALLY) competitive Narset deck? With Cruel Control, denial and the works?
Stax likewise. Competitive, and seldom much fun to play against...but valid. It comes down to communication I think.
If the people in the shop play casual games : tell new players that instead of banning deck types...though I think that Group hug is one of the best examples of casual decks (they seldom win a competitive win, at least I haven't seen that happen yet). Moreover, they also have a downside: they can play their trick only once, then people know
@ DaftVader : lol
May 24, 2016 6:45 a.m.
lemmingllama says... #9
Group hug helps balance out games. If we have Timmy, Spike, and Grouphuggy playing a game, Timmy can be fed the cards and mana required to compete against Spike. It makes playgroups more balanced in a mixed setting.
However, complaining about how group hug runs is silly. Group hug decks help people and themselves at the same time, and rely on politics to not die. They obviously want to win the game (a hug deck with no wincon is either fun or degenerate) and so they will advance the game state to a point where they can win. Saying that helping other players isn't a valid way to play means that politics are meaningless in EDH since you aren't allowed to do anything that benefits another player.
Overall, group hug is valid. If they don't like it, all they have to do is attack the hug player and their whole strategy crumbles.
May 24, 2016 7:10 a.m.
Personally I don't play group hug exclusively in a deck, my jhiora deck is mainly a chaos deck with a bit of hugs and slugs just to keep everyone off balance. Although it is great when I Curse of Echoes myself (which usually makes me a non threat at that point) then later Hive Mind into a Final Fortune and wait until the stack resolves down to me and Time Stop
May 24, 2016 11:59 a.m.
This is, in my opinion, not about Group Higvat its core. This is more about, "Do People who complain about losing to a deck that they perceived as the weak link have a case?"
I would say no. I played a mono blue Vendilion Clique deck where my win con was Tunnel Vision. The rest of the deck was literally devoted to finding Tunnel Vision and duplicating it for as many players as needed.
My playgroup bitched about it a lot. After they all ran the gauntlet we had the same debate...can we allow this deck to continue? I said that they should give t another go and see if they can win knowing the game plan. That didn't work so well for them...I mean, I lost, but not often. It all came down to me finding my lockout and comboing off on my turn unhindered. They ultimately decided it was just a reverse Azami deck and said its fine as long as I keep diversity up by swapping it out every now and then. Apparently other players like taking turns as well.
That said...I think Group Hug is legit and should be left alone. Play it. It has the potential to get stale as well though so maybe dude should switch it up and "methteeth" should switch to decaf and just have fun.
May 24, 2016 12:18 p.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #12
Players have differing ideas what constitutes fun. I get it now. It was... difficult to understand the reality, initially, though I knew it intellectually. A lot of people don't take losing to a new deck real well either.
I never got that, exactly, but I understand the frustration of playing group hug decks. If you were to look at my old posts, I was vitriolic about them, for many reasons. I still don't care to play the strategy myself but have chilled out a bit about it. It can be exceedingly frustrating.
A friend of mine who played Yu-Gi-Oh (heh) pointed out that, generally speaking, one of the nice things about MTG is that most removal cards are cheap. Apparently not the case for games like Yu-Gi-Oh, where the threats are often far cheaper (both to buy and use) than the removal, or at least it was the case when he was in the game. I thought it was worth mentioning.
May 24, 2016 5:16 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #14
enpc has a similar opinion as me on this.
I'm less friendly about it and straight up hate group hug. I'm not subtle about it, either in-game or out. My original playgroup kind of fostered this attitude too; playing group hug in it was suicidal.
May 25, 2016 12:44 a.m.
It depends on how the deck is built. If it's built to stifle and restrict players from carrying out their game plan in order to keep things fair and balanced, it will garner a lot of hate. A good hug deck should enable players to do more with their deck faster than usual.
I play the only group hug deck among my playgroup. It is a Karona, False God deck and the main win-con is to put the Vow enchantments on Karona to let my opponents beat each other up with her. It plays a lot of mana acceleration and card draw, as well as giving opponents creatures to beat each other up with. It plays little removal and I don't disrupt my opponents' gameplay - I just given them more options to consider. I usually only bring the deck out if we've got 6+ players, to help speed the game along.
May 25, 2016 3:22 p.m.
MirranTitan says... #16
I, like many others in this thread, have a love hate relationship with group hug. There are days where the hug deck just gives me all of the gas, and I can take over a game. There are days where group hug decides I am a threat for some reason or another, and Time Stops me. There are days where I wish I didn't have to do so much math for Upwelling and Heartbeat of Spring. There are days where group hug goes Hunted Wumpus and the rest of us are like AW YISS! Until that one guy is like insert jerk card here Group hug has several win-conditions. (Yeah, I said it, it has win conditions.) One of which is classic "I have no more cards in my deck." The other is "ah dang, I accidentally win?"
As much as I prefer to not be a part of a group hug table, I don't think group hug is that bad in the long run. It's a archetype that does very well when it comes to politics and interacting with the board state. Even though I feel drained after getting hugged, there are situations where keeping track of all the triggers keeps me sharp. (can't miss that Howling Mine or Knowledge Pool )
tl;dr: hug is a headache, but not ban-worthy.
May 25, 2016 6:14 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #17
I think group-hug is the only archetype I'd want to ban from a playgroup, but that's personal preference.
May 26, 2016 11:19 a.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #18
Group Hug decks tend to have radically different results depending on what sort of benefits they are attempting to provide (like, if they are even trying to win). They tend to alter how other decks operate and interact with other. For example, Mayael the Anima manages to be setup by turn 2 instead of 4-5, thanks to the free ramp. This causes weird things to happen; some decks benefit more than others (exactly which decks benefit and how much depends on the Group Hug deck).
It makes them frustrating to face for players who try to optimize decks to behave in a particular way, making specific assumptions about the pace and nature of the game.
Made-up imperfect example: A Control deck may have been designed with the idea it'll start to lock down anything it considers threatening by turn 6; because of how it does this (getting card draw into play, defenses, etc) it can't really do this much earlier, even if it's got 3 more mana than expected (because it's not, say, drawing cards any faster yet). However that extra mana means Mayael the Anima is running at full steam on turn 3. Now the Control player is frustrated because his draw engine isn't online and he can't afford to counter/bounce/etc nearly as fast as the threats are coming.
For some players this is great; Mayael's clearly happy about the situation. Suddenly everything is screwy and the Mayael deck with hardly any ramp is operational. If the example control player is actually effective at stopping the group hug player from disrupting his plans, he'll actually make enemies of the rest of the table often, causing him to end up playing a 3-vs-1.
I know that example has a lot of issues I'm just trying to illustrate with the simplest thing I could think of.
There's also some issues I have with regards to how players read the game state and identify threats, and how Group Hug messes with how people tend to do these things in my observations, but I've rambled enough for one post, and those things aren't necessarily specific to Group Hug.
May 26, 2016 12:03 p.m.
Meh. As someone who too often sits on the right of somebody with counterspells (they feel they have to use them or it wasn't worth leaving up mana) the hypothetical player probably deserves it for playing control. Saying that, lots of different strategies impact each other in a way that is either beneficial or plan-ruining. If someone is playing slivers, the hate flying in their direction can be enough of a distraction for a voltron deck to hit critical mass. If somebody is playing boardwipe tribal, it sucks for the voltron guy. If somebody is playing a flicker deck, the boardwipe guy doesn't stand a chance. The circle goes on.
My point is that hating a specific strategy for its impact on the game is illogical, as all other strategies do the same thing. Honestly, the more the deck shakes things up, the better, as ultimately commander is meant to be a 'fun' format anyway.
May 26, 2016 12:11 p.m.
zandl I guess if group hug ramps into Heartbeat of Spring and the mayael deck went Birds of Paradise into Mayael the Anima?
May 26, 2016 12:13 p.m.
Deckologist says... #22
Turn one Collective Voyage into a turn two Tempt with Discovery could do the trick.
May 26, 2016 12:19 p.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #23
@DaftVader, thanks that's a good expansion on the concept.
And, I was giving a somewhat absurd example - I didn't work out the exact mechanics involved. I'm sure you could figure it out if you wanted to badly enough.
My focus is on what goes through the heads of the people playing against the deck though. Things get turned around crazy against group hug. People running Elves or Goblins or whatever expect to see Wrath of God probably; people running artifacts/enchantments probably expect Vandalblast or Tranquility or something. Everyone expects Counterspell. Sometimes you run into a deck that perfectly shuts yours out without even meaning to.
But, people tend not to think like "what happens if everyone's turn 2 is more like turn 5" until it happens. Group Hug decks seem to speed games up quite a lot, which affects many decks' tempos. Some people love it and I find it highly frustrating, but I understand why I do much better now. It can be frustrating if you've got a more concrete plan in mind.
Anyway just my two cents. I didn't even really get into the politics hugely.
May 26, 2016 1:06 p.m.
Deckologist says... #24
I feel like it's just secret control. You're controlling the tempo of the game but where a lot it group hug decks fall short is that they have nothing to tone things back down
May 26, 2016 1:16 p.m.
I dunno. I guess your definition of "set up" means "have some lands out".
May 26, 2016 1:48 p.m.
JohnnyBaggins says... #27
I think the problem here might not be group-hug, but rather that you ban certain decks. Why do you ban Stax and Infinite Combo? Once you ban one thing for one reason, it becomes very hard to draw the line for anything else. Where does Stax begin? Am I Stax because I run a Strip Mine? And when I add a Wasteland? And then a Winter Orb? Am I stax now? I guess I am. But am I, not running a single lands sweeper. Is Silence over Ravnica: The Command of Augustin IV a stax deck? Can you tell?
And once you can't draw that line, you can't tell Group Hug from Stax as they share many approaches. What you should do is not banning, but actually just let the people play with what the want. At Face to Face Games, we have better and weaker decks. Let's call the best EDH player there Tim. Whoever doesn't like to play with Tim's absurdly good decks can either just decide to play different pods or ask Tim to switch to a different deck. If you let the people play what they want and have them make decisions, instead of forcing them into what they're allowed to do, everyone will have more fun.
Summing up: I think group hug can and should we a win condition. Just as Stax and Infinite Combos should be.
May 27, 2016 5:57 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #28
I agree wholeheartedly with JohnnyBaggins. This has worked very well at my LGS as well. I don't think they even could ban an archetype. Torches and pitchforks would be involved in the customers' reaction.
It works fine. People find playgroups that work for them, and adapt if they enter a new one.
That said, I have a seething hatred for group hug and tend to suspect these decks are effectively trolling the entire table, because that's been my experience with them. Most games I've played with them present have ended with everyone being miserable and not wanting to play anymore, or with the group hug player getting hated off the table fairly early.
If that happens, I think there is some argument for banning them, but it's better handled as JohnnyBaggins suggests. It's really a problem with player behavior more than decks.
May 28, 2016 3:14 a.m. Edited.
Postmortal_Pop says... #29
I feel very strongly about the idea of banning a deck archetype in any format, but commander is where I feel the strongest. With somewhere around 15,000 cards in existence and a deck of 100 single cards, there is no excuse to not be able to stand a chance against anything. Opponent has mad card draw? There's a card for that. Opponent ramps life to 4386 life in 3 turns? There's a card for that? Savage Beating imprinted on Spellbinder equpped to Ferropede? There are 153 artifact only removal and some, Abolish namely, are free.
Banning a style is the reaction of a weak player and sore loser. Even if group hug is a horror in the meta, you can't say there isn't a few cards you can trade off to beat it a without destroying your deck.
May 29, 2016 10:49 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #30
I think you may be missing the point, Postmortal_Pop. The reason I'm cool with Stax, infinite combos, hard locks and counterspell tribal but not with group hug is that none of them have its propensity to screw up the game and make it a miserable clusterfuck, just for shits and giggles.
Group hug frequently does do that in my experience. It's a social issue, not a gameplay one.
May 30, 2016 3:37 a.m.
readerrw07 says... #31
Here's how you play Group Hug. You benefit everyone, keep anyone from going nuts, then end the game with Divine Intervention before anyone even realizes whats going on
June 1, 2016 9:15 p.m.
Deckologist says... #32
That's cute and all but, its not a win. Its you going hardee har har look whats I did hayuck hayuck...outta here with that crap
June 1, 2016 9:46 p.m.
readerrw07 says... #33
Thats what I consider Group Hug. If it's an EDH league, find a way to farm points then draw the game so you get the most points. By the logic of EDh leagues that use points, you win
June 1, 2016 10:22 p.m.
Deckologist says... #34
In most leagues they have rules about slow rolling for points. The people who employ that kind of strategy is one of the main reasons people dont like leagues
June 1, 2016 10:32 p.m.
MonoGreenKing says... #35
At my shop their is someone who plays Phelddagrif group hug and people still call it hug but everyone their has mixed feelings about it because it "wins". Now he does not call it winning, even though everyone else calls it that, what he does is he combos off and draws everyone out in one turn. I do not mind this because this takes a very long time to happen and my commander is Maelstrom Wanderer so the hug is really welcome. So, yes I agree that group hug is a wincon for either the person hugging or the hugged.
June 2, 2016 9:34 a.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #36
In my first playgroup it was a losecon. Group hug players always got focused and were generally the first to die.
I think that is an excellent philosophy.
June 2, 2016 2:01 p.m.
Deckologist says... #37
ComradeJim270 you should swing by my profile and see a real Phelddagrif deck lol
June 2, 2016 2:02 p.m.
Deckologist says... #39
Surprisingly well ComradeJim270. The first game people play against it I fool them with the "lol i play Hippo" facade and then rip them apart. The second game they will all focus me but strong plays always overcome. I wouldn;t bring it to a hyper competitive tournament but for casual to semi-competitive its a power house.
UpperDeckerTaco says... #2
I find them annoying, yet helpful to play with, but in my playgroup, the group hug guy usually gets taken out of the game either first or 2nd, because the group hug deck can just lock out players without those players realizing it, but we know what's up.
May 23, 2016 11:46 p.m.