Power Level of an Opponent
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on April 14, 2020, 6:03 p.m. by RNR_Gaming
So, it has me baffled that I see so many conversations discussing power levels of certain commanders or cards but never any discussion about the people piloting them beyond negativity. No one likes admitting they're less experienced or bad at a game but here's a few questions; yes I know commander for the most part is a casual format and people enjoy it in different ways ect. But here are a few questions I thought would be interesting.
1) has someone ever inspired you to build better or get better at the game? Not out of spite. I'm not asking if you if you built something to meta against them. Did they inspire a spark of creativity and drive to do better?
2) what were they playing?
3) what play stuck with you?
4) do you think you can beat them now?
5) on a scale of 1-10 how strong of an opponent were they?
RNR_Gaming says... #3
hejtmane that annihilator mechanic is my top 5 most broken mechanics to exist in magic. I'm glad it's only on big stuff.
April 14, 2020 6:48 p.m.
-
Luckily I have 2 brothers that got me into MTG and I can play against.
-
They play a variety of decks with one focused on playing combinations of the best creatures e.g. Kaalia of the Vast and Sheoldred, Whispering One. Whilst the other one plays only value and combo decks such as Lord Windgrace
and Sharuum the Hegemon. -
The play that got me with Lord Windgrace
was when my tribal Dragon deck actually had no way of damaging him through a Glacial Chasm. So I now always include either ways to negate damage prevention, land destruction or graveyard hate to stop the infinite looping through the graveyard. -
It is now a 50% chance instead of a 5% chance.
-
An 8.
April 14, 2020 9:37 p.m.
SynergyBuild says... #5
1) Not really xD
Kinda falls the rest of the questions off the list. To be fair I've never felt negatively against an opponent either, so neither camp really fits me.
April 14, 2020 9:44 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #6
Lordeh having a rivalry built into the family unit sounds awesome. I'm an only child so I'll never experience that :( glad they're encouraging you to do better though
SynergyBuild we gotta find you some more interesting skilled opponents. Though I do admire the good sportsmanship.
April 14, 2020 10 p.m.
SynergyBuild says... #7
RNR_Gaming Maybe xD, I've gotten bored, I know all of the decks, I've memorized too much, know all of the combos...
I've seen too much, nothing is interesting anymore.
Jkjk, but only a little joking xD
April 14, 2020 10:37 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #8
I'm in the same boat dude. Nothing really surprises me now. Well, except suboptimal builds of urza...I swear some people just had an old arcum deck laying around and made urza thr commander of it.
April 14, 2020 10:57 p.m.
Suns_Champion says... #9
Are you two cEDH players? I’m trying to wrap my head around y’alls shared experience here.
April 14, 2020 11:23 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #10
Lol Suns_Champion I wasn't always a cedh player or at the very least i didnt realize i was. I didn't really make the distinction until maybe 3 years ago. The environment i played in was very cut throat and prizes were always on the line. Typically you could net 40 dollars in store credit off a 10 dollar buy in. I developed a reputation at the store I played at but didn't really understand what everyone was so mad about. If its pay to play why wouldn't I be in try hard mode? It was only after so many arguments, stagnation in building and a break from the game that I was able to see the other side of the coin and realize that I'm a cedh player but it was mainly due to an environment that demanded it.
April 14, 2020 11:31 p.m.
SynergyBuild says... #11
For a quick explanation, Suns_Champion, I play all EDH, from casual, precons, a 10 dollar budget series I do, to medium/optimized to 70% or competitive, paper EDH, oathbreaker, brawl, tiny leaders, and many more variants. I know the 1v1 edh metagame, I know the rogue lists, I know the different banlists for each of them by heart, mtgo versions and paper, and I try to keep up to date with every variation and combo with each commander for each budget range. That's why I get bored xD
April 15, 2020 12:56 a.m.
RNR_Gaming that is why the RC should spend more time making a process-driven standardized optional points system, and less time looking at what they should be banning.... Sortof like Star City Games does with various event-based points. So that events-holders can have a few standardized (casual or competitive) conditions and you are not simply playing for just the win to gain your prize. It would be nice to go to an event with prizes on the line but still have the regular tabletop wizard-poker experience because the incentive is different. Change the incentive & change the Event Experience of EDH.
April 15, 2020 8:59 a.m.
-
It wasn't one person, but was the group of people I played EDH with back in college, who were the same people that got me into EDH. My only deck was the Grixis Precon from 2013. The more games I played and either won or performed well, it drove me to want to learn how to deck build and improve my general game play. And over the course of a year or two that deck (and others, but Nekusar was my first deck that I figured out and made well) developed into what it is, and become a force to be reckoned with.
-
Huge range of decks over 1-2 years with these friends. Initially it was Derevi, Omnath, Jarad, Mogis, Marath, Oloro, and Daretti. Some we just the Precon or slightly modified. Others like Oloro and Omnath were oppressive, and Marath was combo-central.
-
I can't really pin it down to one play. It was just evaluating each game at the time to see why this did or did not happen, and wanting to improve the deck.
-
Nekusar in particular has beaten all of them with ease. It has lost to some of them as well, but that is just how the game goes.
-
If I think about the 1-10 scale as when you can threaten a win or how easily you can stax an opponent into nothing, most were in the 3-5 range with two or three from 6-7.
April 15, 2020 9 a.m.
Suns_Champion says... #14
SynergyBuild interesting. The desire to know everything about every metagame has killed the fun for you, then? Ignorance is bliss haha! I find it was more fun to see a new commander and just... not know what it does, or how it plays or wins. Sounds like that might be too late for you though. :(
RNR_Gaming if I played for money I'd probably do the same thing. I'm sorry nothing surprises you now... that seems like not as much fun :(
April 15, 2020 9:46 a.m.
Suns_Champion says... #15
I think judging the power level of an opponent is impossible. It all depends on what deck they're playing and quite simply how they feel or how tired they are.
When I play Neheb, or Winota, I'm giving it my all, playing as cutthroat as I can. When I'm playing Elenda or Brion Stoutarm, I'm way more relaxed and play way looser. If I'm tired while playing, I play way worse. That's how it goes. I think you have to judge the deck and opponent power level together.
April 15, 2020 9:49 a.m.
I built a superfriends deck after having lost to one at my LGS that played every boardwipe imaginable that didn't affect planeswalkers. I really liked the planeswalker aspect and enjoyed playing against it, but I found it frustrating and so opted to build mine with zero boardwipes (sans Elspeth and Ugin by virtue of being planeswalkers that do other things).
April 15, 2020 12:20 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #17
Gleeock I've played with point systems and superlatives. Both have their advantages and faults. With point systems especially if they're standardized people will build decks to farm points and drag out the games. Trust me I had a friend that basically dominated a league by a large margin and boy oh boy did people complain. Superlatives took all the fun out of tournments and became a popularity contest and just a bunch of dudes jerking their friends off. Non-regulars had zero chance of netting any prizes. I actually enjoyed the cedh tournment at command fest. I do think it could of been run better; they didn't announce each round over the intercom so I missed out on playing a round :( but the over all experience was challenging and rewarding. Everyone was on the same page and aiming for the same goal. I think their efforts would be better spent figuring out a way to sanction events and figure out a prize structure and having wizards come up with cool exclusive fnm promos for commander.
April 15, 2020 1:35 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #18
Suns_Champion it's why I love when new sets come out. I love seeing people brew and get excited and determine power levels and synergies but the new novelty wears off too quick :( I think between edhrec/youtube/discord/tappedout most commanders get figured out in less than a week and optimized in under a month. Also, you just need a scooter! I definitely think there are a lot of determining factors to figure out power level of players. Power level of deck, number of hours they've played, big events attended, and the type of opponents they play.
April 15, 2020 1:39 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #19
kanokarob - I never really enjoyed that archetype but its definitely cool that your lgs got you brewing and trying to figure out a new angle
April 15, 2020 1:41 p.m.
dingusdingo says... #20
The sum of your opponent's decks will do more to determine the power level of the game than the power of your own deck. You have control of 100 of the 400 cards that can be seen at the table.
1) My LGS has an extremely competitive and diverse competitive EDH meta. In this regard, I am rather fortunate, as I can play against competitive 95% power lists in real games and see how they perform, what their weaknesses are, and how my own cards interact with them. We have a couple older OG players who run Timetwister and Bazaar of Baghdad and it is quite a treat to be able to play against 100% optimized no budget decks. I was already very experienced and had been playing for 15 years when I joined this meta, so I didn't have any real stand out opponents specifically. Winning games and getting absolutely hammered in other games has made me better informed about the specifics of EDH, why some cards work well in the format, and why some styles of decks perform faster and more reliably.
2) Gitrog Dakmor combo, DD Breya, Neru Meha combo, CVT, TnT Flash Hulk, Helm Godo, Ur-Dragon combo, Yisan combo, Xantcha combo control, Alela Stax, and tons of other less competitive but still high powered stuff.
3) Always include Red Elemental Blast and Pyroblast in any deck with red to stop all the fuckhead blue players, especially Flash
4) Yes, I switch off my tier 2.5 Alesha stax deck and play my tier 0.5 Consultation Kess whenever I want to run up some winnings for free boosters.
5) The bottom end of the shop is around a 5, the top end is a hard 10, and the average deck is about an 8. Even being full of sweaty neckbeards its a fantastic place to play and a healthy competitive meta.
April 15, 2020 4:19 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #21
@dimgusdingo I'm so jealous of that environment. My environment was hyper competetive but once another shop sniped some of the players the community kinda flopped to this mesh of casuals/remnants of its prior greatness. The other shop closed down but the majority of older players never returned and the influx of newer players are military and have relatively weaker decks than I'm use too. Mostly 5-6 versions of popular commanders
April 15, 2020 5:31 p.m.
RNR_Gaming well sure. That is why an incentive system would have to be process-driven though. Typically with any standardized system in a game players will take advantage, it requires a systematic process with player feedback. I could say that current incentives have been "figured" as well, hence the current cEDH concern with people sushi-hulking into their win-based incentive. Now offering a couple of standard options can modify expectations & would be a nice exploration, particularly for events. It would be particularly nice for the new player crowd or casuals that want a more guaranteed way of going to an event without entering the no-so-Wild-West that is cEDH prizegrab gameplay. Of course, true Wild-West near anything goes EDH should always still be an event option as well.
April 15, 2020 7:32 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #24
Eh you'll never be able to please everyone. My lgs tried some of these approaches and took into account what everyone was saying and it did A LOT more harm than good we went from 21-30 people participating in edh tournments to between 4-12. I feel that an experienced player would sneak into a casual pod if the incentive was high enough...just saying people love an easy prize pull. The ban list at the end of it was pretty funny.
April 15, 2020 8 p.m.
I don't think we are on the same wavelength. My experience of meta incentives has been radically different. Maybe the framework was better? Maybe the rules were easier to warp and farm as they were set for your LGS? Arguing from experience will probably make an impasse here. It just feels like other options like that would be nice to have.... And certainly at the kitchen table no one is stopping anyone from some pretty good variants at least. But boy I have seen some pretty sour events that only reflect web-based incentives of EDH and it feels like progressive problem solving could be attempted
April 15, 2020 11:50 p.m.
To be fair though RNR_Gaming you are correct in several ways. The word "Superlative" does boil it down pretty well. There are inherent problems with superlatives -- as one could argue that there are problems with playing a true casual format with incentives as it is now. I do believe (usually) that cognitive load should be kept low & players will always break the system, & if a system is placed does it really emulate EDH?. Also, the realistic part of me says this would not happen on a large scale. I do think there are progressive ways to make a "difficult to break" for-fun tournament that still has incentives though... you'd just have to know what you are signing up for & understand the fact that: winning may not be winning. A 14 entry EDH "casual" tournament with Iconic Masters prizes that I held went off without a hitch after the playgroup had refined a system. It involved a simplified point system with random-weighted points.. If I remember right, only Turn 0-4 wins had set negative points. Conditions were set, but the point weights were randomized per game, so you couldn't really build a farm-specialty deck, this DID favor more low synnergy decks though. The conditions list was kept pretty small but pertinent... That worked pretty darn well to incentivize casual win conditions.
April 16, 2020 8:31 a.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #28
Gleeock we probably are on different wave lengths. Myself and a few others did try and help to store owner/tournment organizer but...the more restrictions put in place the more people felt shafted and a lot of people were already cemented or attached to their decks or couldn't afford to edit or tone em down due to the massive pocket investment. This one group stopped playing in tournments compeley after a store banning of all positive mana rocks and notorious one-two card combos. While the more competitive players just played the next best thing. Granted, we had a lot or variants with age and maturity so that probably played a role in it too. A lot of people didnt like the change or ban list even if it didn't directly impact their deck. Honestly, I don't feel any tournment in which you can go positive in prizes can not be considered casual; no one wants to pay to lose and at the end of the day stronger players and deck builders will just brew around the rules the best deck possible and still come out on top. Those are the 10s ;)
April 16, 2020 1:36 p.m.
Sure, it is difficult to brew specialty style however when you use randomized weighting that generates per game... If the incentives are divergent. But it is a pretty good point you make that players make their invested specialty decks. Pay to lose is different way to look at it. I feel that plenty of people would pay for the social experience like my 14 did. And I don't believe in special subset card banning in any way, that type of regulation always makes for unnecessary issues. It sounds like some very different experiences, metas, and maybe approaches
April 16, 2020 10:22 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #30
The way it is now is basically 5 dollars and get entered into a raffle. You're basically paying for space to play at an lgs; this only applies on fridays and only extends to commander players =_= while dnd players/board gamers that don't even but materials at the store get charged nothing and take up 80% of the space but that's a whole other topic. I feel the 8s,9s and 10s can adjust to any meta and still win and make good decks for any situation.
April 16, 2020 11:38 p.m.
The 3x 8-10s by the subset we played a couple of times had difficulty "adjusting" decks due to the random weighting (you found out which conditions were weighted when points were tabulated end of round). The biggest issues this ran into (of those you listed) were probably the "investment" aspect (2 of those players griped quite a bit) while the majority had fun... non-tuned elfball did well for a round! :) Also, primarily those high-end players complained about "arbitrary" feeling which can be a concern with that rules subset. Another issue that popped up (not impossible to address) was I believe a Kaalia deck that had about a turn 4 lockdown... but purposefully held off winning to avoid that (-) condition & then 1 or 2 rounds (-) conditions were not weighted enough to discourage that. In practice this subformat DID reinforce casual play & low synnergy deck styles for prizes. With an outlier player that did have a 50% win rate by the circumnavigation of the system... Though, again, that was difficult since "win" conditions were in fact randomized after the fact. I don't think a majority of the players looked at it as "playing to lose" & more like "playing a social gamble" -- sortof like draft is in some ways.
April 17, 2020 8:42 a.m.
I need Dell to replace my desktop parts so I can just post the rules specifics & results... They tell me my replacement parts are delayed because.... COVID??....... not a very great explanation, so I use this wretched tablet for now :(
April 17, 2020 8:45 a.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #33
I'm actually interested in seeing the break down. Its really weird commander is the only format where efficiency can make people complain to such a degree. I mean I guess in standard/modern people scream for bans after every set drop but I couldn't imagine a modern/standard player going up to the T/O and being like "hey tell these guys to tone it down I'm here for the social experience not to just lose turn 3"
April 17, 2020 12:58 p.m.
See that the issue if you look at the RC mission statement the goal is about not being a turn 3 format unless that is what your groups wants. Yes the tone down is a valid statement in commander this is a non competitive format. Why it is very popular
April 17, 2020 6:30 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #35
hejtmane it's just amusing that in any other format winning takes priority. Sure, people clamour for bannings and insist things are broken but the focus is always on winning, efficiency discovery, improvement and innovation. Edh is the only format in magic where that mentality is largely frowned upon.
April 17, 2020 6:53 p.m. Edited.
RNR_Gaming Alot of it has to do with the eternal nature of the format & also the multiplayer aspect. There is a portion of the player base that is more about the means than they are about the ends. It is no surprise if these individuals want to see something new and are therefore disappointed when they see all these been-done, maximum potential wincons and this leads to things like the statements above; of not being surprised anymore. Rotation-based formats & formats less predicated on social contract; unsurprisingly, have different focuses. An eternal format is going to have mostly long-established wincons (& a few quickly figured new ones) to the point where the pinnacle of win-focus will in fact achieve the opposite of: discovery, improvement, innovation. Rotating formats run into this challenge, but they also at least have a short-term memory (does not span the entire game's history) this allows for new wincons having a fresh priority & win-based focus can breathe a little
As to the original question,
- I'm an old-timer hard to say when I would have learned any "betterment". You could say I've done my time winning with optimum, gotten my fill, now I've learned how to win with sub-optimal strategies.
- Originally Captain Sisay, foodchain tazri, Karametra enchantress, Narset, Enlightened Master...many more
- Hard to think of one play. Most enchantment & artifact combos have made me run a lot of hate for those...These old-hat/recognizable tricks are guaranteed to end you or lock down games, vs. creatures which you usually have a few turns to address.
- I have been able to beat the opposition for a long time, just depends on the luck of the draw.
- I agree with Suns_Champion People are not static, the power level of my opposition can vary wildly based on fatigue, investment, mood.
April 18, 2020 1:06 a.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #37
Gleeock that's a very interesting prospective. Though it could also be argued that some players strive for excellence and if everything is figured out than the only thing left is to master playing a deck which is fun for a bit but definitely much easier to stagnant. There was lots of Evolution when I got into the format. Sure, there were things like Tooth and Nail into a win with Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker+Zealous Conscripts or Avenger of Zendikar+purphrose god of the forge but things have evolved to the point where it feels maxed out. C13 provided extremely diverse and powerful commanders that scaled with the game even if you weren't combing out. Then in 2014 we get Teferi, 2015 meren and mizix. Granted, mizix isn't all that great anymore...commander 2016 we get partners and god damn was that format warping. Urza and the first sliver are great but in reality they're just upgrades to existing strategies. There's no rotation but there are definitely shifts but there hasn't been a massive shift since 2016 imo and how could you get tired of winning XD
April 18, 2020 3:08 p.m.
You don't get tired of winning really but some people get tired of winning the same ways. Striving for excellence is fine, but hopefully, it is excellence with your own twist on it. There also have been massive shifts if you know where to look, just not necessarily in competitive circles. There have been massive shifts if you like to play a lot of midgame content, political, or previously neglected strategies... Particularly because the game designers have explored the multiplayer aspect of the game more.
April 18, 2020 3:21 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #39
I'm always looking for innovation. I've got a kong maker deck that's perfect for introducing new players to your game:]
hejtmane says... #2
I got a guy that I play with he made me better player all around and deck builder.
The one that got me was his eldrazi and annihilator.
I was playing and early version of my Samut, Voice of Dissent deck. I promptly found and added two creatures that protect me from sacrificing and always will lol. What I did not know at the time was how helpful that would be when I started running up against decks using black later on.
I have
I say an 8
April 14, 2020 6:31 p.m.