Penguin_Gamer_1 finally someone with common sense, thank you.

I haven't read everything that's been posted because there's a lot but I understand the argument

I mean... Five color=Best color combination... so yeah, I think we all can agree about that. Yeah, I love Thras/Tymna, great enablers for Hermit Druid.

I believe you have made my agruement for me, that list is the best atraxa list, not the best Hermit Druid/Cephalid Breakfast list though, right? so the arguement you made is nulled by this one:

"The point is, there is a hierarchy; that's inarguable. The cream of the crop sits at the top. As you move down the hierarchy, you also (presumably) decrease in speed and consistency, and to some extent, archetypically. There are other factors to consider as well."

So why have Atraxa here as Tier 2, when a Child of Alara would do just as well, right? Okay, minus Bloom Tender, other than that the deck would run nearly exactly the same. Honestly Bloom Tender might like Child of Alara now that I am thinking of it.

If the arguement that the best commander for an archetype is the only one that should be shown, this is undeniably false by the showing of Atraxa in Tier 2.

I haven't read everything that's been posted because there's a lot but I understand the argument. How about if the commander is only used for colors in a competitive deck, it isn't the commander that is competitive but the deck. Ok apparently TappedOut doesn't like emojis so here's everything I meant to say lol

So why is atraxa here?

The list provided only uses it for colors, and Thrasios/Tymna are better commanders for it, and that list is also here.

So why is atraxa here?

The list provided only uses it for colors, and Thrasios/Tymna are better commanders for it, and that list is also here.

Whoops, I apologize, since the last comment was directed at Sorin841.

Thrasios/Tymna are listed a lot higher, are they not? Besides there arent mana 4c commanders and the partners already have better decks available to them, so it's to be expected that some will only use colors. But yes, this would be a case where the deck is competitive, not necessarily the commander. It's just explaining why the statement every commander can be competitive is false.

Oh they are, however with many of the other lists I went over, that are listed as tier five, and I asked about, the answer (at least by thegigibeast) was that they shouldn't be listed as tier 2.5, because the lists isn't based on the commander, and are an archetypal list. I was wrongly under the impression both of you had the same opinion. I apologize.

A possible solution would be to tier the decks, and under them list the commanders that pilot the decks, in order of strength for the commanders. That way we have the commanders tiered and the archetypes, everyone's happy.

I doubt everyone will be happy, as they never are, but it would be a start in the right direction.

Atraxa is a good example. I dont know the decklist but I'm assuming its combo of some sort. So we tier the deck/archetype let's say for arguments sake tier 2. And then under it, since she's just for colors and doesn't help the strategy, she'd be near the bottom. Obviously some people will just always he unhappy but it seems a lot more accurate and a much better compromise.

I agree it is too much work, yet I would be unopposed to to a list that looks like that, I don't think it is the solution.

I dont think you would need to make the categories that specific. Mono Blue control is enough. I'd say maybe put it around tier 2 and put every mono blue commander with a submitted control list under it in order of strength, I dont see why you need to further organize it by HOW they control, just that they do.

The problem with Mono-U Control being tier 2 is that Commander Deck Teferi is By far the best by a full tier. Probably the best solution for now so that the list can actually just get updated quickly is to update the way it always has with lists posted on their merits and a strategy breakdown with commanders that follow that strategy in the description. Ergo, Strategy_ followed by Recommended Commanders__. If people want the info they know where to get it and otherwise the list is the same decent general benchmark it has always been. Nuance is a waste of people's time beyond tier 2, tiers 2 and 1.5 being the most contentious.

Teferi isn't strictly control. I think he falls under stax or possibly a hybrid between stax and combo.

Two years ago I commented saying that Arcum Dagsson was Teir 1. I gave a list that was basically like every other list at the time. With a few different personal choices.

Well for two years I've played at different tables, competitive, casual. Testing, gold fishing, streamlining.

In that time I've arrived at this list.

https://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/arcums-infinite-puzzle-box/

This list differs from every other competitive Arcum list I've come across.

In a few ways, no draw spells. Drawing into memnite feels bad when you need torpor orb or something. Brainstorm, ponder just don't dig deep when's there's 92 singleton cards.

No clunky win more instant speed win cards, that are added to the base combo. Resulting in a lower average mana cost, increasing its consistency for turns 3-5, and possible turn 2 wins that are hilarious when they happen.

I've found that this is probably the most consistent T3-5 deck, even through disruption. ( personal opinion mind you, but by all means go try it yourself. Just keep in mind it might take some time to get use to/figure out all the tutor patterns/lines.

No "alternate win conditions". That require big clunky artifacts. Just 1 win condition with 4 ways to do it and dozens of ways to assemble the combo and some silver bullets when needed.

Sorry been awhile since I've tagged anything.

Arcum's Infinite Puzzle Box

No, the archetype is redless/witchmaw Hermit Druid combo.

Also, Sidisi/Prossh/Tazri are Sultai, Jund, and 5 color, so they would be separate Food Chain lists on color basis, Thrasios/Tymna and Atraxa are witch/redless, and so aren't in the same boat.

I understand, but you called it 4 color combo, and then claimed jund, sultai, and five color are in the same boat, you brought up color identity having to do with the names of archetypes first...

Oh yeah, and we totally agree that way of tiers is ridiculous. Like I honestly wouldn't mind seeing a list like that, but it would be absurdly complicated to make. I didn't ask for that, I only said I wouldn't mind it.

Also, Combo, Stax, and Control are the three main types I would argue are the main archytypes (ugh differeniating umbrellas and subcategories is annoying), as Stax is different than permissions, though both lead to long games.

What cEDH aggro deck do you know of, not rhetorical, like actually, I mean Tana/Tymna blood pod is beatdown, but hardly aggro.

SynergyBuild: Edric, Spymaster of Trest would be aggro.

enpc: Yeah... wow I didn't think of that.

n0bunga: I was just saying they were hermit druid lists, I apologize that I gave the wrong impression. I know aggro exists, but then we should talk about midrange, as that is another normal archetype in MTG.

Oh yeah, also vintage? How many aggro decks are in vintage? I guess you could claim dredge is, but come on, like really? that is a combo deck. Ravager shops is more midrangy, Lodestone Golem isn't the epitome of aggro, and Wurmcoil Engine definently isn't.

Really, every format is different, and archetypes change for them.

Oh yeah, and I really like Yuriko! Decent card advantage for 2 mana, it is like a bad Dark Confidant, though confidant is so good it doesn't matter!

n0bunga combined with Arcane Adaptation she could be a beast

I don't think they change constantly, but they do change on the format. Combo in modern, legacy, vintage, and commander is a fast-paced instant win kind of deal, in pauper, it is a slow, instant win, thing, like Inside Out combo. Toolbox I feel is like tribal, there are toolbox midrange lists, like legacy maverick (the banning of Deathrite Shaman hurt it, but still), and toolbox control lists like sultai gifts loops. Yes, I have seen a toolbox aggro list using Green Sun's Zenith, it looked pretty janky and was a fun bant build, but apparently was competitive.

So yes, I know toolbox is something in every archetype, but I never talked about toolbox until now, why bring it up?

It's like saying: "Did you know there are tribal decks in all of the main umbrella archetypes, there are tribal lists that are aggro, control, stax, and combo!"

It is irrelevant to the conversation.

Onto dredge, there are many varients that win through Laboratory Maniac (milling themselves with Hermit Druid because bazaar is too good to pass up), so those aren;t winning through aggro, not to say the best don't only that the win condition is not the archetype, dredge is fast-paced combo, plain and simple.

Also, in 25 years, the archetypes have changed, not a lot, but the ideas behind them totally have, originally lifegain was much more dominant, and most players lacked the understanding of card advantage that is known commonly today, control was very different, and so was aggro.

n0bunga just put Atraxa under both then. 4c Boonweaver and 4c Hermit Druid.