I would have to agree with Inkmoth_, if your showing a list you can't expect the results right away. Especially since putting together the deck list itself as well as comparing and testing it out against other decks against the same level or higher. In addition they would have to be tested throughout a duration and show results consistently.

I agree with Diver Down & Hissp. It's incredibly unfortunate that cEDH is so popular on so many other platforms that it means that TappedOut (honestly likely the poorest one for communication - just in comparison to the IM discord & reddit which are interaction giants) is given the least love.

Tl;dr: You want to be known for having the spiciest brew? Brew spicy stuff & do the legwork to be noticed. Posting it in one place & blaming others for your lack of notoriety is unfair. Hard work earns fame.

My issue was being blatantly ignored twice by the same mod, while he openly responded to basically everyone else who posted a deck for consideration at that time. And he uses the excuse of having too little time (even though typing several words to explain why a list isn't going to be considered takes almost no time at all, even if it was just one sentence explaining why, so that excuse is literally a cop out). I don't honestly care about notoriety, it's just the principle of the matter. Openly responding to others, while blatantly ignoring a list that I posted, that I know for a fact is on par with the other list on this thread, is pretty sketchy. This list clearly tells people that if they want to make recommendations, to post a deck list, but what's the point of taking time out of your day to offer suggestions, when some of the people running this page don't even have enough respect for people's time, to even take 30 seconds to respond to people who were trying to help, ESPECIALLY when they're already responding to other suggestions that were made in the first place? If you're responding to everyone else, how hard is it to type a few more words to explain why a list isn't being considered? It's a slap in the face is what it is. Complete lack of respect (I can't wait to hear the response of: respect is earned, not given... I'm waiting for it). Again, idgaf about notoriety, it's just the principle of the matter. Yeah, I get it, we all have lives outside of MTG, and the internet, but that doesn't make anyone special, and using it as an excuse literally doesn't mean anything, if it applies to virtually everyone.

Some of the mods seem like great people, and I truly respect them, and the time they've taken to educate players on the format, but the people running this list are human, just like everyone else, and what they think isn't always the be all, end all of the format.

Even if you're not getting many responses here in the comments, we do take everyone's input into account when we discuss potential placement changes. One example to mention here would be Anafenza. While many of you feel that she should be moved up, we've talked about her multiple times already and did not come to a unanimous conclusion. And this highlights the part that most of you might be missing. Many of the users here seem to expect that placement changes are made shortly after someone leaves a comment about a Commander they think is misplaced on the list. However, it's not that simple. We discuss every potential change, often more than once, until we reach a conclusion that everyone of us feels comfortable with. Coming to those conclusions includes reading and assessing every argument that was brought forth in the comment section that's relevant to a particular placement on top of bringing up and discussing our own arguments. We want to do a proper job here, and doing a proper job doesn't constitute looking at the comments and doing what every single commenter wants. Doing this properly takes time. Some of that time is made at the cost of responding to comments because as unfortunate as that may be, it's as tw0handt0uch said - our primary job is to maintain the list, not to debate in the comment section. So while our engagement in the context of this list may not be directly with all you commenters, we still engage with the arguments you make in your comments. Those of you who give constructive feedback and make thoughtful arguments in your comments are being heard, and your input does matter a lot to us and our continuous work to improve this list.

One change we are going to make right now is posting scheduled monthly updates where we present the changes we're making and why we're making them. If there are no changes in an update, we're going to mention why we ultimately decided against some of the suggestions brought forth in the comment section or why we haven't come to a conclusion yet if we're still undecided about a particular placement.

IMHO people would be happy if you implement the idea of monthly updates.

We all have lives outside of Magic. Even in Magic, it’s understandable that not everyone can get what they want. But it would be awesome if we would be reminded on the monthly basis that the project is still alive.

IMO it’s ok even if you’re “late” with some changes. I believe that the sole fact that we can expect a monthly confirmation you are still on the job would make many people around here happy.

Just my 2 cents though.

LabManiac_Sigi that sounds like an awesome idea; plus only having to do it once a month is a real simple commitment; but one I'm sure the community on this page will appreciate.

LabManiac_Sigi Monthly updates will go a long way. Im sure it will spark a fair bit of controversy but ultimately its going to make posters here feel heard and not ignored. Even if you don't address posters directly, talking about issues that have been raised would give me (I can't speak for others) a sense of closure. I personally would have liked to hear your thoughts on Ana while I was defending keeping her in mid-power but ultimately I ended up caving as I seemed to be the only one defending the list against multiple other posters and my points didn't seem to be very persuasive.

I'd echo tw0 and Sigi: we want everyone to know that we read everything that comes through this thread and we take all of your opinions into account and thoroughly discuss specific changes anyone suggests. That being said, our process is not to make immediate judgements and changes to the list on the things that are brought up -- our process is to reach consensus on each commander we discuss and update the list at regular intervals.

I will say that the expectations of some of the posters here seem to be unclear and in excess of reasonability. We've taken charge of this list a very short while ago; in that time we have moved several commanders around based on feedback, done error correction from our first iteration, updated for RNA, and are in the process of discussing the latest round of feedback on Anafenza and Vannifar. Barring the impossible task of individually responding to the incredibly large amounts of posts that move through here, we've (in my estimation) put significant effort into making this list the best it can be.

Hopefully regular updates explicating some of our philosophy on specific topics can bring the commenters seeking more direct feedback what they are looking for. I'd encourage anyone to that wants to engage in more real-time discussion of their concerns to contact me via Discord; I'm on the TappedOut Discord.

crstisalie I'm sorry your post asking for direct feedback got overlooked. I highly doubt it was intentional and (imo) highlights why it's difficult to attempt to respond to every individual poster. tw0handt0uch has put more effort into attempting to respond to posts than the rest of us and I think he really doesn't deserve to be accused of intentional disrespect -- he's actually a wonderful and kind person that spends a lot of time doing his best to help people improve at EDH.

That being said, I will break down your list a little bit and give you some feedback in his stead. I've played Oona a good bit before moving my infinite manas to Tasigur and subsequently Thrasios.

Here is a deck differential between your list and the one by AlwaysSleepy, which we have listed as an example list.

Marsh Flats -> Island
Bloodstained Mire -> Underground River
Verdant Catacombs -> Drowned Catacomb
Darkslick Shores -> Swamp
Voltaic Key -> Morphic Pool
Delay -> Negate
Dispel -> Personal Tutor
High Tide -> Laboratory Maniac
Mind's Desire -> Doomsday
Copy Artifact -> Demonic Consultation
Candelabra of Tawnos -> Gush
Cabal Ritual -> Mind Stone
Sleight of Hand -> Opt
Snap -> Cyclonic Rift

Overall, largely similar. Notably the main differences I see is your omission of the High Tide package and the addition of Laboratory Maniac layers via Doomsday and Consultation. In my opinion, I don't think the High Tide package should be cut in a two-color stormy deck, especially if you're attempting Doomsday, which can be very mana-intensive.

Notably you have manabase and interaction suboptimalities vs. Sleepy's list. The fetches should definitely be included. I think Delay is better than Negate in a general field. Personal Tutor seems weak and I would not overlook Dispel, which is one of the better counterspells against hard-hitters like Flash and Ad Nauseam, as well as being one of the best protective counters. I think Sleight of Hand is better in the general case than Opt (it provides a bit more selection at the cost of instant speed) but it's close. Snap is preferable to Cyclonic Rift with the High Tide package. The one change of yours I do think is preferable is cutting Voltaic Key, which I don't think does enough by itself, and you have Morphic Pool, which should be in his list.

Overall, I think it's justifiable but ultimately unnecessary to add the LabMan layers. Doomsday adds clunky draws like Gush. You don't get to run Tainted Pact in Oona with an Island manabase, which is one of the biggest upsides of LabMan layerings. Consultation is risky outside the combo. LabMan + Consult gives you some nice outs to Null Rod, so I can see some solid justification there.

Hopefully that answers some of your concerns. We apologize again for overlooking your post. I would like to note that this analysis took me about 40 minutes; multiplying that by the number of posters that move through the thread and you can see why it becomes impossible to expect us to respond to each post. I take care to try to make my posts high quality and often will opt not to give a response over giving one that's not thought out.

I think LabManiac_Sigi's solution is the best thing the thread could possibly ask for considering the influx of notifications I get from this post. Sucks that most won't get the individual attention they want, but at least we're getting something at the end of each and every month.

No worries, thanks for the response. I really do appreciate the explanation (at least I have one now, lol).

I tried High Tide for a while, but ultimately found that I didn't always have enough islands in play to warrant its inclusion.

I do run fetches, but only the blue ones, since I only have 5 fetchable swamps in the list, and islands being the most important for Doomsday piles obviously, and more shuffle effects matter in niche situations. Leaving out the off color black fetches just made sense to me. There's a method to my madness.

I have Delay in the maybebaord (though it's not listed on the list), and I go back and forth with it, I definitely understand how good the counter is.

Sleight of Hand is out, precisely because this list runs Doomsday. The actual draw can matter.

Anyway, thanks again, Shaper!

Does anyone know if there is a way I could argue for a deck to be placed on a higher tier then where it's listed? I have an Ezuri, Renegade Leader deck that can consistently win on turn 2/3 and I feel placing it in High Power is lower and should be up their with the Competitive tier. I only say this because I play against very competitive decks every Sunday and Ezuri can not only stand up to them, but wipe the floor with most of them.

Can you describe a typical turn 2 win?

I have a new petition for all of us to be friends.

New tier list. Only card on it is Chandler . The only friend you ever need.

I agree with n0bunga, definitely liking the new interface as well! Thanks to whoever edited it, looks super streamlined and easy to read!

At first I thought the new structure of the list was a step in the right direction, but I get the feeling that - and I mean before the long time of no updates that took place before the restructuring process - the list and how it was managed was more in touch with the community and less discussed and decided in an ivory tower. I mean yes, the comment section is public and there's a lot of stuff here that doesn't have anything to do with helping to improve the list and is rightfully ignored, but I think it's pretty much impossible anyway to contribute anything to the actual discussion, where changes to the list and the example builds are eventually made...because this doesn't take place here. If more of the real discussions happened here (for example as it happened a few comments above), the community could contribute more to how the list looks in the end.

This is also a shoutout to people suggesting changes here, to check what example is currently listed for a commander in the category it is placed and considering that information before suggesting a change. Maybe if fewer decks that are far away from competitive were posted, it would be easier to publicly discuss suggestions to the point where a change in the tier placement or example deck is made (or not). As it is now, people throw everything in here, from quality suggestions to absolute crap, and then 4 or 5 people forage through the comments and discuss how relevant everything is in the closet. That feels more elitist than it could be, but it's also in the responsibility of everyone posting here to not flood the comments with stuff that is irrelevant for cEDH. The people managing the list can't realistically spend hours to analyse decklists that are not maybe 10 or 15 cards off, but more like 50%...and then it's clear they rather discuss changes privately.

I like it; very similar to the microsoft dark theme. Try adding this to the text-area (this box)

<div class="md-header btn-toolbar" style="background-color:#232325">

<textarea name="comment" rows="10" title="" required="" cols="40" id="id_comment" class="form-control md-input" style="resize: both; background-color:#232325;">

Shouldn't Saffi Eriksdotter be tier 3 given there are so many combos in the command zone? Here is a link to a list of several easily tutorable combos in GW: https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/commander-edh/multiplayer-commander-decklists/214701-saffi-eriksdotter-combo-oh-the-humanity

I just stopped by to see if Anafenza was moved yet, guess I will ignore the list for another 6 months. Seriously, tier 4? Lol!

I don't see an "Unlimited Power!" tier. Much disappoint. Upvoted anyway.

So i was looking at EDH rec since i recently obtained a nim deathmantle and a trostani discordant... NOT A SINGLE ONE of the lists ive seen online have the Nim Deathmantle + Ashnod's Altar + Trostani Discordant combo

I'm noticing Kazarov, Sengir Pureblood is missing. Add please? (Dominarian Rare vampire)

Kazarov, Sengir Pureblood

Many highly experienced edh players at my lgs consider Karador ghost chieftain cEDH but it’s tier 3 on here. Any reason it’s so low tiered on here but mine I built is considered cEDH by veteran edh players at my lgs? Just curious

Whisper, Blood Liturgist seems to be missing?