Losing to Precons and annoying stuff
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on March 28, 2019, 11:34 a.m. by ShutUpMokuba
In a multiplayer match not always the best deck and the best player wins because the other players could ally against him in order to take out the n.1 threat.. However i find it really annyoing when you lose against pre-cons, expecially the 2018 ones. I know they are supposed to be optimized with a basic but effective strategy but still.. Losing to them is the thing i find more annoying. Do you care about losing to precons? And what pisses you off the most in this format?
CrimsonKing says... #3
Try to be a better sport when losing. No one likes a sore loser.
March 28, 2019 12:32 p.m.
ninjaclevs13 says... #6
"What pisses you off the most in this format?"
A superiority complex. If you're losing to precons constantly, are you really the better player?
March 28, 2019 1:47 p.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #7
Personal favorite EDH memory: my opponent playing his $1500 Kozilek, Butcher of Truth deck against my at-the-time ~$50 Toshiro Umezawa deck and getting salty because he didn't understand why my cheap deck was thrashing his expensive one. Turns out, when your opponent has Akroma's Memorial , but then repeatedly kills your Spine of Ish Sah , you get a free answer.
TL;DR, this is a game of skill, not a game of who-has-the-best-deck.
March 28, 2019 3:37 p.m.
So I dont like losing... But who does? But not be able to win every time is just something one have to learn accept. Anyways I dont mind losing to a precon any more then losing to a really expensive or well crafted deck. What gets me is when ppl team up against me without any tactical reason. There are many examples where I am behind cuz I missed my second land drop and such and my playgroup is like A:"Hey let's kill saluma" B:"why?" A:"Why not? He's ahead" Me:"... I just missed my land drop... For the second turn in a row..." A:"See? He's far ahead". And they target me and only me til Im dead. Losses like that really makes me tilted and salty.
March 28, 2019 5:33 p.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic I think people get lost in that skill=best deck. I also think that deck building and piloting differs when you have 3 decks to worry about. Politics and patience pays off more often than not in commander. Also love Toshiro Umezawa as a commander.
March 28, 2019 5:34 p.m.
Alternative stance on this: EDH is often a 3 or 4 man free for all. If you're "the best player with the best deck", other players tend to pick up on that. They team up on you because they know they can't beat you in a 1v1. It happens to me all the time in my meta.
My solution has been that I instead like to play kingmaker. I take the 2nd best deck or (on the occasions that a "better" deck than mine shows up) the best deck, and do what I can to make that deck lose. Sometimes I die first, sometimes the other guy dies first, but most of the time the result is that the "worst" deck/player ends up winning. It's something that doesn't really happen outside of games that I participate in. Sure I lose to garbage decks all the time, and yes I, more than anyone else at my LGS, constantly have a target painted on my back. But nobody hates playing against me. The more competitive players see me as a challenge. The more casual players see me as a way to help beat better decks.
If you're really certain that you're the top dog at your LGS/venue/whatever, why concern yourself with winning every game? Why not just play to enjoy the game and have some laughs? There's a line between "best deck" and "unbeatable deck"... and crossing it usually takes the fun out of the game for everyone.
March 28, 2019 7:53 p.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #11
Alternative take part 2: Play Neheb, the Eternal and Earthquake everyone including yourself for lethal.
March 28, 2019 8:43 p.m.
Suns_Champion says... #12
As a Neheb, the Eternal player, I have done that quite a few times hahaha
March 28, 2019 10:48 p.m.
majorappliance says... #13
its good to lose, otherwise why even play. losing to players who have just entered the format is good. curbstomping them is bad. all that does is scare away new players and kills our format.
March 28, 2019 11:26 p.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #14
Being serious for a moment, i've been surely misunderstoon. What i meant is that in commander, like DuTogira said, if someone is particularly skilled and/or has the best deck becomes a common threat and the games becomes a 3v1. SO i was implying that even if you are the best in terms of skills and/or you've the best deck you can easily lose the game because of the fact that you are playing a multyplayer game. BUT, nonetheless, if i'm facing people using pre-cons i find it annoying losing.
I've never said that i am unpolite or i get mad towards other players when i lose against pre-cons deck. And i've never said that using pre-cons is for lame players because experienced players as well use them. I've just said that this thing pisses me off. Because we are not perfect and i'm pretty sure almost anyone has something that he finds annyoing while playing this game. In my playgroup a friend of mine, for example, gets mad when people loses focus on the game for a couple of minutes because someone has brought up something to discuss not involving in any way the game. Others gets mad when they lose by a combo that is basically impossible to pull off. I thank the ones that at least brought up something relevant.
March 29, 2019 5:46 a.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #15
TypicalTimmy I'm calm. I've just said what pisses me off in this format and i've been misunderstood so now the topic is not: "what pisses you off in this format" but "ehy, you are a sore loser, you should change game!". If i had started the discussion with "i hate losing by mill" probably the folling post would have been about what people don't like.
If it's not clear i'll repeat it again: i don't get mad, i don't start making excuses or being unpolite. This is just a thing that pisses me off. The reason why i've said that "the best player can lose because Others can ally" was not a complain but to remember that anyone can lose. And most importantly, i've never said: "guys i'm a pro ok? i can't lose to pre-cons because would be shamefull". The reason i don't like losing to pre-cons is not because i think of myself as the best guy around that may accept a loss just by super competitive decks. But because i tend to like more the idea that you've beaten me by a deck you build on your own. BUT i've not said that it's a shame using/losing to a pre-cons. I've used pre-cons. Now i still buy them but i like to change them.
I hope that now my point of view is more clear. And if you guys still think i'm just a sore loser i've just one think to say: "Screw the rules, I've my own builded (not pre-cons) decks"
March 29, 2019 7:23 a.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #16
PhotogenicParasympathetic reading your comment has come to my mind the idea for another topic that can be both intresting and misunderstood as me being a sore looser which is: Like you've said this game is about skill, not expensive/better cards. Which we can all agree it's true. But of course cards do matter. I mean some cards are similar but better than Others. So, how much being skilled counts? how much having good cards? How much luck count? I don't know like 80%-10%-10%? That would be intresting to know what you guys think..
March 29, 2019 7:49 a.m.
Everyone hating on OP and I completely understand where you're coming from. It sort of sucks when you lose to something as simple as a precon. Its not the worst, and I completely understand when I lose to something like one of the C16 decks or meren, but it hurts your pride just a bit when you spent 1000+ on a deck
March 29, 2019 8:47 a.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #18
IMMG54 thanks for trying to at least understand my view. For example, some guys in my playgroup hate combo players, especially when they base their deck on some odd and very unlikely to happen combo because they say that it's just a matter of luck at that point if they've won or lost. Instead, i give those people props for trying to win thanks to an elaborated strategy so when i lose from them it's totally fine for me. And i'll say one thing more just to be clear for Others: if a guy beats me with a 25$ deck i'm not pissed. Because it's VERY hard to make a consistent deck with such budget. Not talking about money but effort.
Basically, if you asked me:"Would you rather win 8 games out of 10 with this deck i made for you or win 3 out of 10 with the deck you put your efforts in it to make it as good as you could" i would pick the latter. Winning with a deck i didn't make doesn't satisfy me as much as winning with a deck i made myself.
March 29, 2019 9:12 a.m.
Idk if it came off this way and I sincerely apologize if it did. I wasn’t hating on OP. Just vocalizing how I deal with being targeted and losing to bad decks.
March 29, 2019 11:06 a.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #20
Don't worry DuTogira i wasn't talking with anyone in particular. The Whole idea of this post have been misunderstood because i've not been clear from the start.
March 29, 2019 11:30 a.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #21
ShutUpMokuba: Reading your later comments, I 100% agree with you; I'd absolutely rather lose with my own deck than win with something handed to me. So that makes sense - I definitely did assume you were upset about losing to precons based on money, but looking at it being about effort is a different and more sensical story. So. Sorry for making unfounded assumptions about your character.
That said, let's talk a bit more about what you brought up in the comment where you tag me - the division between skill/card selection/luck. Honestly, I don't know where that line rests, but I'm going to argue that luck and skill both play a greater role than card selection. I think the clearest example of this comes from netdecking in competitive formats. I can easily go online, find Ried Duke or Shoto Yasooka or Emma Handy's decklists, buy them, and play them. But I will absolutely not be on the same skill level as them, and I'd get crushed going head to head with them. Similarly, I'd be willing to bet that Reid Duke playing Jeskai Control loses every time to Reid Duke playing Jund, just because he's got loads of experience playing Jund, and has put in the practice necessary to get the skill to play that deck, but hasn't got the same depth of experience piloting Jeskai control. Also, I own a number of EDH decks; if I were to let any random person off the street pick one, they might pick my strongest deck, and pick my weakest one for me to play, but 9 times out of ten I'd wager I still win that match, just because I know the decks better, and know the game better. So that seems like a fairly strong argument that the most important aspect is skill. I'm gonna go ahead an agree with your 80% figure - a dominating percent, but not, of course the whole story.
So where's the line between card selection and luck? There is, of course, an argument to be made that card selection is a part of skill, especially for those who like to brew their own decks. To continue the example I used above, Reid Duke playing Jund with a limitless budget probably beats Reid Duke playing Jund with 100$ budget, just because one has access to better cards and can afford to tailor his deck better. Sure, mana screw/flood can happen, and sometimes we get lucky or unlucky topdecks, but I think there's an argument to be made that luck is less important than card choice. So I think in the end I'm going with 80% skill, 15% card/deck choice (which can also be a subset of skill) and 5% luck.
What do you think?
March 29, 2019 3:05 p.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #22
PhotogenicParasympathetic First of all, thanks for your honesty.
About the skill/cards/luck issue: my opinion is that the first thing that a skilled player wants to make less important is the aleatory component of the game. That's because of course you can't control that aspect of the game. I mean let's say i play a combo deck whose win condition is based on three cards. Of course i will run tutor cards in order to get them as fast as i can (stupid example but to get the idea). If i just hope to find them in a 99 cards deck then i'm a naive player. Basically Skill can make luck less important. Skill can overcome better cards too. But i would say that only if with "cards" we mean the deck as Whole. Because, surely, the same plan with some cards is better than with Others but overall the idea is the same. If i am a skilled player my deck will have something to deal with most of the main tactics and if i make the right choices i can still win with "worse" cards. But if with cards we mean the single, eventually situational, cards my opinion is that your skill can't do very much sometimes (unless you've been expecting that card in the first place). I mean one thing is to know how to handle the main strategies, board situations and so on. Another is to deal with a card you've not been expecting. Because in your deck there isn't room both for the cards to set up your win condition and cards to handle very specific situations. In my opinion skill is the base but without preparation if your opponent casts some very good unexpected card you either happen to have the solution in your hand or you're done. Luckily that doesn't happen very often. I say this because sometimes it happens that someone wins by pulling that one card no one expected that in the current game, for many reasons, the others can not counter.
So yes, we all agree that skills can overcome better cards, minimize the impact of luck.. but it can't overcome everything in a game at the point that the most skilled wins almost every match.
March 29, 2019 4:18 p.m.
I love this website so f***ing much you'll never find a better comments section in a forum anywhere else
March 29, 2019 6:32 p.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #24
IMMG54 this is my first threat and i've already fallen in love with this forum.
March 29, 2019 7:41 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #25
ShutUpMokuba, you said,
"... if someone is particularly skilled and/or has the best deck becomes a common threat and the games becomes a 3v1. SO i was implying that even if you are the best in terms of skills and/or you've the best deck you can easily lose the game because of the fact that you are playing a multyplayer game. BUT, nonetheless, if i'm facing people using pre-cons i find it annoying losing."
What I meant with my earlier comment is this:
We all walk into each game knowing that the measurement of success is the deck doing its thing until it wins. Something else we know is that being scary early on leads more often to losing than it does to winning. When you combine these two ideas, you get the result of the following idea: "The most successful decks in multiplayer commander appear to be doing nothing until they win."
Unfortunately, when most players think about this, they tend to either say that trying to win by not being scary is not their "play style" or that it's just incorrect.
If we want to improve as players, I think a lot of that comes with optimizing our decks to be less explosive when it's not time to win AND more explosive when it is time to win. This took me WAY TOO LONG to understand lol
March 30, 2019 12:56 a.m.
ShutUpMokuba says... #26
MagicalHacker i agree with you. But with "to be better" i meant that a deck in 1vs1 would easily beat every single other. The fact is that, even if what you say is 100% correct, in a playgroup everyone knows each other. I mean if everyone knows that your deck has more resources, better stronger strategies, the other players will take that info into account. It's not like the others will say:"he is not doing anything, so he's not a threat for now". They will surely think "better kill him now before he manages to do something". I'm not saying that in my playgroup everyone is an idiot that just wants to win no matter what. I'm saying that you can't pretend you don't know who is the most skilled player or the one with the best deck around. Knowing that changes in a way the decisions you take in a game, even if you don't want to. So this is not about complaining because i've never stated that "I am the one that being the best ends up alone against 3 every single time". As i said, you're right. But only if you sit down and play with people that you don't know.
March 30, 2019 4:12 a.m.
MagicalHacker says... #27
ShutUpMokuba, my point was just that people tend to not consider how what is strong in 1v1 might be a poor choice for multiplayer, and vice versa, when it comes to building their deck. They tend to not think, "This deck will perform better if it would not be so good for a 1v1 game."
MagicalHacker says... #2
If something loses more, why call it "best"?
March 28, 2019 12:30 p.m.