Infinite Combos
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on April 18, 2015, 1:41 a.m. by Zyxix
The first time I lost a game to an infinite Basalt Monolith/Rings of Brighthearth combo that an Oona, Queen of the Fae pulled off in a pod match on turn 6 I was angry, hoped to find some flaw in the combo and could find none. Since then I've built my own infinite combo deck with Reaper King having 3 infinite mana combos to win through Minion Refector or Bosh, Iron Golem sacrificing Reaper King over and over, through Legacy Weapon removing everything they own, using Deadeye Navigator and any scarecrow/changeling to destroy everything they have. I also run the three different champion changelings to combo out infinite destruction. I have Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker/Deciever Exarch for infinite hasty creatures and Tooth and Nail to get to it. I run multiple tutors and I have Rite of Replication to destroy 25 permanents with Reaper King.
My question is, does this reduce the fun you have playing the game? By having cards that can do so much so early on, does it change the way the game is played? My playgroup has gotten more and more competitive and it seems like games were better when it was a fight to the death between more aggro through commanders like Jenara, Asura of War, Kresh the Bloodbraided, or even Mayael of the Anima dropping creatures left and right. I've talked to the people in my group about it and they don't seem to agree, they would rather have games that abruptly end, though for me, it always seems to ruin the fun that was happening in the interactions between players. At the same time, there has been a game we played where at least 7 different times a player attempted an infinite combo to win but failed. During that match, a Hamletback Goliath grew to becoming a +12,000,006/+12,000,006 creature through a failed Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker combo. This is not the norm when most players at the table have multiple ways to finish the game though, and in that round, the player without any infinite combos in his deck, running a mono-white deck won in the end.
I think there are too many cards to combo with to ban them, and I don't think that's the answer, but is it just a new paradigm shift in playstyles to get used to, and to abuse in any way you can?
EndStepTop says... #3
"My question is, does this reduce the fun you have playing the game?"
Hell no, combos are very common in my group. It keeps the table on a clock and makes everyone play with plenty of interactive spells, not just creatures.
April 18, 2015 6:16 a.m.
Megalomania says... #4
I play a pretty competitive Oona combo deck and my playgroup is quite ok with it. There are even times when they would rather have me win because they'd rather die all at once than die and wait an hour before the next game starts. Lol.
But seriously, as long as a deck complies with the banlist, I don't think there should be any reason for people to say a deck is unfair or it takes the fun out of the game.
What is unfair is for people to limit other people's creativity in deckbuilding.
There are people that do their best not to netdeck (no offense to those that do) and spend a good amount of time listening to suggestions and playtesting cards. Should we limit their capabilities just because some people do not have the time, the budget, the creativity or the patience to do the same?
My deck is far from being the best. If I see one that is infinitely better than mine, I work harder make my deck better. Infinitely harder.
April 18, 2015 6:25 a.m.
No. That's how competitive commander often works. An instant win through combo.
April 18, 2015 6:40 a.m.
I think combo is boring as fuck. its also not fun to play as in my opinion.
id rather play someone who was playing ruthless Stax decks over combo any day.
combo is super easy and almost never requires any skill to play. I think it is way harder to win with aggro or stax
April 18, 2015 7:04 a.m.
Gidgetimer says... #9
"combo is super easy and almost never requires any skill to play"
Have you ever played combo at all? The only time combo is easy to play is if your opponents have no way to interact with it. If your opponents are smart and include ways to interact with you it is a complex game of counter and removal baiting in order to win despite the disruption.
In my opinion the presence of combo decks makes formats interesting. It is one of the reasons I am upset that Wizards changed the "Rock-Paper-Scissors of Magic" away from Aggro/Combo/Control to Aggro/Midrange/Control. Combo forces players to interact with each other instead of sitting there playing with themselves until someone topdecks the evasive threat.
April 18, 2015 7:22 a.m.
Megalomania says... #10
Good combo decks require good deckbuilding. Just because you know some combos doesn't mean you'll be able to make a deck that wins consistently.
As for skill, what exactly is skill? If timing is a skill, playing a combo deck requires a lot of it.
Building a successful combo deck requires skill. The more skill you put into deckbuilding, the less skill you will need in-game.
If building a deck that needs a ton of "skill" to win is your idea of fun, a mono-black Grandmother Sengir deck would be perfect for you.
April 18, 2015 7:24 a.m.
It is one of the reasons I am upset that Wizards changed the "Rock-Paper-Scissors of Magic" away from Aggro/Combo/Control to Aggro/Midrange/Control. Combo forces players to interact with each other instead of sitting there playing with themselves until someone topdecks the evasive threat.
the day they ban palinchron or deadeye Ill then agree with you. Midrange has never been viable in EDH since the battlecruiser style of EDH is all but gone.
As for skill, what exactly is skill? If timing is a skill, playing a combo deck requires a lot of it.
I would put skill into the description of just knowing how to understand board state and EDH politics. then themore skilled you are the more complex that gets. Combos are almost always non interactive which means YOU WILL succeed unless someone counters or responds in a way to stop you...and since combo is normally in a control shell this isnt usually a problem.
Building a successful combo deck requires skill. The more skill you put into deckbuilding, the less skill you will need in-game.
I disagree. I dont think it is hard to put tons of combo pieces with a control shell into a deck and win against a aggro deck.
MY OPINION...peace
April 18, 2015 7:39 a.m.
KillTheIslandUser says... #12
That's all you ever will have is an opinion.. peace.. ooh so cool much wow.
If you don't like it, then play 5 color. People need to stop assuming that Commander should be 5 color.. no tutors... hard to get out a combo because of the sheer amount of cards when you can only draw.
Even still I've seen cut-throat as fuck 5 colors, that can go out early as hell. I hate commander when it's played as a snails pace game. Knowing how to build a deck, and pilot, while also reading the board is all about skill. Commander needs all that, and then some. It's why I love toolbox/rock, so I can respond to threats, while weaving in my win.
Agro decks can win, just to many people are brain dead when making agro decks. Let's not any utility creatures/ramp/tutors/correct land bases.....ect ect... but instead throw in some creatures that can just beat face. That same shit doesn't work in standard/modern/legacy/vintage. Also let's face it.... any deck is gonna have some form of control, as we get better at playing, it's a necessity. You need to protect your shit, while keeping your opponent controlled. If you aren't, then you are just purposely dumbing yourself down.
ApocryphalSaint says,"id rather play someone who was playing ruthless Stax decks over combo any day.
combo is super easy and almost never requires any skill to play. I think it is way harder to win with aggro or stax"
Ok first off, stax is in it's own a combo based deck, and many stax decks go off with combos... cause.. wait for it..... IT'S HOW THEY WIN!!!!! OOh look I can make a creature every turn by tapping a creature and sacrificing it to smokestack... ooh look I made a combo to barely hurt my board, other than use a little bit of resources. Ooh you had to remove that land you just played.. sucks..
Jesus... you don't know what a stax deck is, yet said that? I guess stax doesn't take skill to play eh?
ALso this:
"Gspot says... #2
"My question is, does this reduce the fun you have playing the game?"
Hell no, combos are very common in my group. It keeps the table on a clock and makes everyone play with plenty of interactive spells, not just creatures."
April 18, 2015 8:07 a.m.
KillTheIslandUser the amount of the assumption in the responses to what I have said is beyond ridiculous.
Also Stax doesnt need combo.
April 18, 2015 8:12 a.m.
Just something to keep in mind, for some, instant win combos on like turn 5 aren't fun, but at least they're usually fast and you can move onto the next game. Not everyone is content to have a several hour long EDH game where no one can really seal the game.
As for what requires skill and what doesn't in that whole argument above, IMO skills is seen in two parts: the actual game, and the deckbuilding. Decisions players make in game can show how skilled they are, complex decisions require more and more skill. It doesn't matter if you could have a Demonic Tutor in hand if you're not skilled enough to recognize what would be the best play in your deck at that time, or even if you should make that play.
This leads to the second part, deck construction. If you don't know what's in your deck or what's good at certain times, tutors become significantly worse. Can't tell you how many people I've played who just use tutors as soon as they draw them to get whatever they want at that time, then immediately get 2 for 1'd when they lose it because they didn't address the boardstate first. If your deck is just full of goodstuff, it won't be nearly as consistent as a finely tuned deck full of general and specific answers. Sure I can just build a control deck and throw in a ton of counterspells, but what happens if they play something like Grand Abolisher or Dosan the Falling Leaf or some other blue-hate card. Most decks will have far more cards to play than you do counterspells, so eventually you'll just run out of control cards and still have little to no boardstate if don't understand threat and resource management. Just my two cents
Also, ApocryphalSaint, I think you are using combo and infinite combo interchangeably in your last comment. Stax is inherently combo oriented due to the nature of most stax cards. Almost all stax pieces like Smokestack and The Abyss affect all players, so you need to create a combo in which you come out ahead of the other players even though you are being subjected to the same resource restrictions. I mean, without a token generator forming a combo with Smokestack, you're essentially just slowing the whole game down until you're forced to eventually sac smokestack to itself.
April 18, 2015 8:35 a.m.
KillTheIslandUser says... #16
Just because you throw in IMO every post, doesn't mean you can get away with shit.
You said combo takes no skill, and I addressed that. Stax doesn't need combo, you are right. It sure as hell 9/10 times runs one though. You also don't need combo to win, just good synergy. Again, I'm addressing points you are making. Please come back with more baseless attacks against your responses.
You said you don't find combos fun, in which I respond, "Go play 5 color." That is a valid point to your opinion. If you don't find EDH fun because you find combos lacking in skill, and skill means playing only agro/stax/anything else you assume takes skill based off your own personal beliefs of fun. You in turn ruins others terms of fun cause you are downgrading them for playing said style, and the cycle of circle-jerking rotates faster than meatspin.com
Agro decks in turn are actually less strategy based, and take less skill to play, which is a known fact. Agro decks work by slamming down points of dmg turn by turn, till you top deck. OOH BUT WAIT YOU CAN'T HURT ME WITH MY INVISIBLE SHIELD OF THAT'S MY OPINION BRO!!! I TRIED STATING SOMETHING AS A FACT BUT SAID IN MY OPINION... IT TOTALLY NEGATES WHAT I SAID YO! This entire thread is about opinions, why bother stating it's your opinion? It's when you want to attack people/ideas and not get attacked in return. That's all it is, and it doesn't work. SO stop it.
I assumed nothing, you assumed I am at fault for basing things on assumption, but in contrary, it is you who is actually tossing around baseless assumptions of others. Omg see what I did?
April 18, 2015 8:40 a.m.
KillTheIslandUser says... #17
Oh I forgot this as well
ooh upon reading the above post... nevermind
Necrotize I thank you for not having to write more <3
April 18, 2015 8:42 a.m.
KalvinHobbez says... #18
To me, combos are like Exodia in yugioh. Get the right pieces and you win the game. I do admit that infinite combos are not the worst kind of deck out there, being you can easily stop the combo once you're seeing it come up. In multiplayer, it's odd to have no artifact removal at all. I just find it a cheap way to win if you just got infinite mana or dealt infinite damage. I'm a purely casual commander player so this is just how I view it. I like games that go on for a while and are very close, the victor feeling like the work was worth it as they finally win the game.
Also Stax decks are what I consider to be the most unfun. AS one guy said one time, "If you won't let other people play, then play alone, no?" If I understand Stax right, it's just pure player hate and winning off of this. So something like that Derevi brutal control top tier deck I assume is in theme with this. I just like to be able to actually PLAY the game by turn three...
Also about the two forms of skill gauging in this game, I can agree with that. I've noticed that I don't make the very best decisions as a player at times, but can make a pretty nice deck other times. Deck construction skill is what you need for infinite combo decks, as you need an answer for every last possible combo breaking. I do admit aggro doesn't take much skill to play, even though I enjoy playing it, but I feel like you can't just throw in ANY creatures in the deck construction to utilize.
Tl;dr: Infinite combos are alright as a win con if you don't do it every game on, like, turn 3. Stax decks are unfun as hell but I'm a casual player, so yeah.
April 18, 2015 9:07 a.m.
Megalomania says... #19
ApocryphalSaint - you obviously haven't tried building and using a combo deck against a competitive playgroup. A bunch of combo pieces in a control shell will not guarantee a deck will be able to win consistently.
Combo is all about making calculated risks. Remember that you are playing against several players. In a 4-man pod, that means 75% will most likely be used against you. Those are odds that even dedicated control decks will have difficulty against.
April 18, 2015 9:10 a.m.
Viral_Assassin says... #20
Everyone needs less butthurt and more democracy in their playgroups. There is nothing wrong about bringing up house rules before a game of edh or before the planned date of a game or two. It's actually encouraged as this way everyone can vote and put forth ideas on what they would like/expect from this game of edh. This is mostly adheres to the social and casual playing of edh. Competitive edh is a whole other story that I don't play in.
This being said, if I run any combos at all they are there as blankets for if the game goes too long and everyone is getting bored. I'll Tutor the combo when a I can then go off if no one is having a good time. I don't ever strive to achieve it. I don't even expect to win by it. It's merely a means to end an ongoing game that might not be fun for everyone.
April 18, 2015 9:40 a.m.
thegigibeast says... #21
Combos are nice, depending on your playgroup. I like to introduce new players to the game, but when I do so, I prefer simple decks, aggro decks (playing EDH). But when I am playing competitive (tournaments at LGS or the like) I always pull out my strongest deck that consists of combos. I think that combos require skills, because when you are playing with other skilled players, they will mostly know the combo and try to stop you (counterspells, removal, etc...). Infinite combos are even more fun, Mikaeus, the Unhallowed + Triskelion being a dick combo I like to pull out.
Sometimes in my playgroup, as I said before with newer players, we decide to ban infinite combos (so basically my competitive deck) and we prefer playing with budget commander decks (under 100$) without infinite combos. It makes the game really different and the interactions between the players are not the same. It is not less fun, it is only different.
April 18, 2015 10:07 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #22
Guess I better link this to address the "fun" bit. Fun is subjective. Nothing is inherently fun or unfun. If you're in a playgroup that wants to play stompy battlecruiser Magic, then they're obviously unlikely to find a turn-three combo deck unideal. If you're in a competitive playgroup, on the other hand, you may well find that combos help to create the high-tension environment that those players love.
To address the other debate about combos in general:
A disclaimer that something is your opinion does not relieve you of the responsibility of presenting evidence and making valid arguments if you want to be taken seriously. If all you do is assert something based on your opinion, then say, rather superfluously, that it's your opinion, then you've merely introduced an idea for discussion; you've demonstrated no nuance and presented no compelling argument for why you should be taken seriously. I'll consider any statement at least once, but I'll also discard the ones that offer nothing to the conversation.
With that out of the way, we can get to the actual substance of the debate.
@ApocryphalSaint:
Building a combo deck does take skill. If you think you can throw a bunch of random combo cards together and have a strong deck, I encourage you to try it and witness how wrong you are. I, perhaps more than any other user on this site, am known for playing combo-control in EDH. I can assure you that the process of constructing a strong combo deck that utilizes a network of win conditions and has sufficient utility to support it in its most likely environments is not a simple task. It's certainly not, at any rate, something that anyone can do regardless of experience or knowledge.
To assert that skill is involved in understanding board state and politics while asserting that combo takes no skill is to demonstrate quite clearly that you aren't qualified to assess the skill involved in combo. Combo decks are dependent on the pilot's understanding of board state and politics. You need to discern the safest and most productive combo, the best order in which to assemble it, and the most flexible ways to protect it. You need to be sly enough to deceive others about your progress or fast enough to outpace their responses. A single mistake -- one combo piece played out of order or too soon, the wrong tutor for the situation, or a failure to play the mindgame -- can mean that you lose the game, regardless of the quality of your deck.
I'll also point out that Wizards does not make decisions for EDH. Their trend toward a more midrange-oriented game has no direct impact on the state of EDH.
April 18, 2015 11:50 a.m.
I think combo is a needed aspect of commander. It puts a clock on the game and keeps things interesting. It also stops lifegain like Oloro from just stalling out till everyone needs to leave or just scoops.
April 18, 2015 12:36 p.m.
I personally never run "combos" in the sense that "this spell resolves, I win the game." I find effects which go infinite to be immersion breaking. Being an incurable Vorthos who rarely puts more than one walker or legendary creature of a type in any given deck, immersion is very important to me.
It is true, however, that building good combo decks is harder than most people think. You have consistency issues, you have timing issues...in all formats of Magic, combo decks are the hardest to put together, and EDH is harder still because of the singleton format.
That said, I have never seen combo decks win more than three games in a row in EDH. Not unless you're playing French, which is completely different. After the second time you deploy your combo, everyone on the table will swing early at the combo player to remove the early threat, "and then the game starts." There are combo decks which can win quite early, but the roundtable almost always wins because someone has an aggro deck which can do early damage and someone has a control deck which blocks the combo from going off.
That's just what's happened around me, anyway.
April 18, 2015 12:55 p.m.
Egann That's typically more player error than anything. Either in deckbuilding or diplomacy, something could've been done better. As Epoch said, your deck can't just be combo pieces and goodstuff. You need to be able to protect your combo, hide your combo from others, or go off faster than anyone else can respond. Once that's down, you need diplomacy. You can have a finely tuned deck that can handle a lot, but few will be able to handle several people ganging up on you. Playing smart doesn't necessarily mean winning as quickly and as often as possible. Lose a game or two, hold back for a turn, play your opponents against each other. You want to look like the person who wins to stop the main target from winning, not the aggressor whom everyone wants to stop from winning.
In large multiplayer games when you're control, its all bluffing honestly. You don't want to look like you're the closest to winning while simultaneously being the closest to winning.
April 18, 2015 1:04 p.m.
Necrotize In a sense that's the problem. Combo players tend to rely much more on playing their decks than on playing the table. This is something I've seen a lot of intermediate players--or players new to EDH--struggle with.
April 18, 2015 1:41 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #27
Saying something does not take skill to play is just straw-manning the issue.
I play combos in my budget decks, and no combos in my semi competitive decks. It takes more resources to build non combo. Both are fun to play, and I have enough skill to with with both types. I know truly competitive decks are also combo. Just how I have built the decks.
I would never insult someone for their deck lacking if they won. That is just a sign that your deck was not up to snuff, or you did not properly communicate before the game. Learning to build versatility into decks is something that newer/less-competitive players normally avoid in order to further their plan.
Also, if a whole group does not like combos, just say so. Communicate with each other, and find what gives everyone an enjoyable experience. If you have a very strong deck, build a deck that depends more on a theme, or budget closer to those you play. Have options, be open minded, and learn to communicate expectations prior to your match.
April 18, 2015 3:01 p.m.
Again, for simplicity in this conversation, please specify between "combo" and "infinite combo". "Combo" could be classified as any notably useful or powerful interaction between 2 or more cards that help increase the synergy of the deck. Any two cards that work well together could be called a "combo".
Infinite combos are typically what playgroups tend to have a problem with. These are combos that, given proper setup and without interruption, can be repeated endlessly, usually generating an infinite amount of something, be it damage, mana, life, card draw or simply a game ending combo like Academy Ruins + Mindslaver in a 1v1 game. Even so, not all infinite combos are equally game ending. Infinite combos that generate mana obviously don't win games on their own unless you concede, they need something to funnel that mana into in order to win.
If you don't clarify and just say "combos", it could be anything really. Saying your playgroup is against combos is like saying your playgroup is against decks that aren't just random goodstuff cards that don't interact at all with each other.
April 18, 2015 3:09 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #29
@Necrotize: Forgive me the semantic nitpicking, but "combos" are almost always infinite.
A synergy is any interaction between two or more cards that results in greater advantage than any one of those cards could produce on its own.
A combo is a synergy that can (1) be repeated ad nauseam to generate game-winning advantage or (2) create a lock that prevents players from taking certain actions.
Nobody usually complains about synergies. They're inherent in many, many archetypes and greatly influence the construction of many, many individual decks. Combos represent an archetype that tries to win through alternate conditions or through infinite creature alpha strikes.
April 18, 2015 3:17 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #30
I say synergy, and combo. Combo means infinite to me.
April 18, 2015 3:18 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #31
I just got Ninja'd there. Makes it look like I am beating the dead horse which was not my intention. Ephoc defined the line I put though.
April 18, 2015 3:20 p.m.
Epochalyptik Then what are the "combo" and "infinite combo" hubs for if they're the same? I always saw combo as decks with high synergy in order to maximize efficiency with as few cards as possible, while infinite combo was simply interactions that could be repeated endlessly, usually to instantly end a game or provide unlimited resources.
I honestly don't know because we're getting very much into just the arbitrary meaning of words and how people classify things. Some could say that something like Captain Sisay + Thousand-Year Elixir is a combo. It certainly isn't infinite on its own, but is it just synergy, or is it considered a combo? I say combo because those two cards while useful alone, exceed their original usefulness when together. They don't just work well together, they are better combined than they are separately, which is what makes it a combo in my eyes.
April 18, 2015 3:47 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #33
You can have noninfinite combos (again, see lock-based decks). As for why there are two hubs, I don't know. I do my best to clean up the hub listings, but people always ask for new shit.
Captain Sisay + Thousand-Year Elixir is not a combo. At all. It's a synergy I guess, but it doesn't create a lock and it doesn't go infinite.
To say that a synergy is a combo is to misrepresent what a combo is. Think about it. When you talk about the combo archetype, are you talking about Captain Sisay + Thousand-Year Elixir or are you talking about Voltaic Key + Time Vault? When people complain about combos in EDH, are they complaining about Captain Sisay + Thousand-Year Elixir or Palinchron + Deadeye Navigator?
Many decks have synergies, but only a fraction of them have combos.
April 18, 2015 3:56 p.m.
Ok, so just to be clear, the sole issue at hand is disagreeing on what constitutes a synergy, a combo and an infinite combo.
I guess its just me being pedantic about the meaning of the word "combo" then. But since there is "combo" and "infinite combo", clearly there is some differentiation and not all combos are infinite. Deadeye Navigator + Palinchron is infinite as you can repeat it nonstop as many times as you'd like to generate an infinite amount of something, in this case, mana. Wouldn't Time Vault + Voltaic Key also be considered infinite then since it is producing an infinite amount of something(albeit over the course of multiple turns)?
Couldn't "combo" just essentially mean two or more cards that have good synergy? I mean, there isn't a "synergy" hub. What is the line between "Synergy" and "Combo". Is Awakening Zone + Braids, Cabal Minion a combo because one facilitates the other, or is that just synergy, or is it both?
Sorry if this is too pedantic or seems argumentative, I'm just really interested by this kind of thing :)
April 18, 2015 4:14 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #35
"Combo" could mean synergy, but then you're just creating unnecessary confusion without any reason at all to do so. And I've already addressed noninfinite combos twice. I don't mean to be abrasive, but I don't expect you to mention it again unless you're addressing some nuance or otherwise making a distinction about the subject.
Awakening Zone + Braids, Cabal Minion is not a combo. It doesn't create a lock, and it doesn't go infinite.
April 18, 2015 4:18 p.m.
Apologies. I guess I just see the phrase "combo" as a very broad term, which I admit, probably does cause confusion.
By lock, would that be something like Linvala, Keeper of Silence + Living Plane or something else that prevents things from coming into or staying in play? Sorry, I just seem to be having trouble grasping this. I only ask because if this really is just me getting stuck on something simple, then there's a good chance I've been using the term/tag "combo" wrong for quite a while, which honestly wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened.
In any case, thanks for clearing this up for me, and apologies again for taking this thread off the original topic.
April 18, 2015 4:31 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #37
Linvala, Keeper of Silence + Living Plane is a lock because it prevents your opponents from generating mana from their lands and (other) creatures.
April 18, 2015 4:33 p.m.
Some degree of synergy is required just for a constructed deck to be functional; even draft and sealed decks sometimes synergize cards for greater effects. Remember when the Travel Preparations draft deck was a thing?
April 18, 2015 5:01 p.m.
Megalomania says... #39
Egann - that's a pretty accurate description of how things are in my playgroup.
Combo players tend to get ganged up on and will almost always be the first to die (unless they win). I personally find this the most exciting part about playing a combo deck in a tuned/semi-competitive environment. I love playing against time.
I would have to disagree with Epoch and Necrotize about being able to "hide" a combo. Diplomacy only works if you aren't constantly winning games. After winning enough of them, it won't be long before everyone realizes that they need to take you out ASAP regardless of the (apparent) board state.
April 19, 2015 11:57 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #40
That depends on the environment. Obviously, people will eventually learn your deck. And if you're the only combo player at the table, then you might get focused solely for that reason. But if the table is playing combo, then that's a non-issue. You need to present a less threatening appearance. Act as though you don't have that combo piece in hand. Act as though you're not able to win the game at the moment.
April 19, 2015 12:03 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #41
Comes down to communication. If you are the only combo guy playing, and your group does not like that, maybe it is time for a new deck.
April 19, 2015 12:10 p.m.
Can always lose a game on purpose so people don't focus you right out of the gate. Depending on the type of control, you can also use it to help other players out instead of just trying to further your own game-plan. It also helps to have multiple win-cons besides one combo or even just a non-combo win-con. Obviously if you just destroyed everyone with a combo not 10 minutes ago, they're probably gonna expect it the next time and you'll become public enemy number 1 as soon as you play part of that combo.
April 19, 2015 12:38 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #43
As someone who plays non-blue combo-control, I can definitely testify the amount of skill required to play them. The biggest thing with combo control is the tutors, with them you have to really plan ahead. With any given hand I have to plan 5 turns ahead of time while trying to predict my opponent's hand/plays to compensate. Do I spend my tutor early game to get ramp out to combo out sooner to beat that aggro player? Do I tutor for inconspicuous things like draw spells to get underneath control players? Do I prep myself against control players immediately early on or drop them later on when they aren't expecting it?
I once had a 4 player game where it took us an hour to get through 8 turns before I combo-d off. I was facing against two blue decks, one which was a Bribery deck. I had to do a lot of planning there, and I spent like, 10 minutes or so on some of my turns.
April 19, 2015 3:22 p.m.
Megalomania says... #44
In most of the games i've played, people tend to leave mana open whenever there is a combo player around. Same goes when it's an all-combo table.
In an all combo table, and this is in my experience, one guy will roll the dice and see if he has enough counterspells to make his combo resolve. It's either that guy wins or everyone runs out of mana/disruption and the next guy who already holds his combo pieces wins the game.
As for intentionally losing the game, I doubt that i'll ever do that. Oh, and most of the effective combo decks i've seen never play a combo piece unless a win is possible that very turn or unless it offers some use to everyone (e.g. Temple Bell, Helm of Awakening) that they will take their chances and leave it on the table for at least another turn.
April 19, 2015 7:52 p.m.
I think in competitive play they are a good thing, but in just casual play with friend I don't enjoy playing them. having op decks is only fun when the other players have them as well. When I have the only op deck it is no fun for either side.
April 22, 2015 11:08 a.m.
griffstick says... #46
i don't like infinite combos, i refuse to use them. i feel that's a "cheap" way to win. one i particularly refuse to use and hate to play against are "i win shit" like: Exquisite Blood + Sanguine Bond , or Bloodchief Ascension + Mindcrank . a friend of mind play a combo where he gets infinite turns, and before he begins to finish his first turn everyone starts to quit. im not totally against these combos as long as i dont see them come out on the first 10 turns. i like to play the game of magic before you go infinite. the game should be fun and games should be won without having to win by going infinite, but unfortunately sometimes this is exactly what it will take to win once some one puts the board on lock down.
April 23, 2015 2:08 a.m.
Didgeridooda says... #47
They are a cheap way to keep up with all those good stuffs decks around, and not have to break the bank.
April 23, 2015 10:22 a.m.
Megalomania says... #48
"... games should be won without having to win by going infinite."
Should? Not sure where you got that idea griffstick.
Everyone has their own idea of fun. To me, there is more to EDH than playing fatties to break face. And in my experience, the more diverse the table is, the more fun the games are.
April 23, 2015 5:06 p.m.
EndStepTop says... #49
But combos make me salty because reasons, the table should warp it's playstyles around my whims of fun.
VictorSilvertome says... #2
To me, infinite combos are perfectly fine and don't ruin my fun as long as they...
Any more, combos seem to be automatically included in almost every commander deck, it's kind of like your ultimate weapon.
If you're not having any fun when you play these games, you can let people know that it isn't anymore fun and ask them if they'd be willing to remove their combos, or if they're running a lot of tutors, to remove some tutors so that those combos don't happen every game. Some decks even depend on combos to win them the game.
By the way, that game with Hamletback Goliath sounds epic!
April 18, 2015 3:36 a.m.