Sheldon From The RC is doing an AMA
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Feb. 27, 2020, 2:38 a.m. by ToffMcSoft
Everyone, Sheldon is doing an AMA. I've already posted asking about the flash ban. Would help if others do the same. If we made it the most common question asked it's got to have some clout.
Feel free to ask him anything though. I have a personal vendetta against Flash and wouldn't miss the card one bit.
https://twitter.com/SheldonMenery/status/1232438980332810242?s=20
Megalomania says... #2
You guys are discounting the fact that there are a lot of casual players (me included) that have competitive decks. I like my decks to be fast and efficient but i’d rather play against guys that I can share drinks with during or after games. I don’t care much about the competition but I will continue to make my decks better from a design point because that is part of the fun for me.
I’m not sure if that makes me a pubstomper but my group has a good mix of tuned and competitive decks and will gladly play against any deck brought to the table as long as it subscribes to the RC banlist. We don’t see ourselves as part of the competitive community though. We play purely for fun and mostly among ourselves. We never resorted to creating a “personalized” banlist because the RC list is impersonal and avoids creating a scenario where a player feels he is being singled out.
This is why I don’t think banning Flash is easily a good thing. The lines between casual and competitive play isn’t as clear as some of you present it to be.
March 2, 2020 6:06 p.m.
Dark_Danda says... #3
Man, that took some time to read through the entire post here. I find the discussion very fascinating and would like to point out an underlying issue.
How do you people think competitive players in EDH came into existence? Who are these people? How do you define them? Just once, think of it on an abstract level. The so called "cEDH players" (I personally think there are only EDH players and the c only applies to the decks, the result/product of the work an EDH player) are the EDH players that are interested in how much a deck can be optimized and strictly adhere to the rules as written in order to be clear on how to be most efficient. What I am trying to say is, that whatever format you have in magic, there will always be that group of players that are interested in optimizing their decks within the boundaries of that given format. The reason for that lies in the human nature. There are 16 different types of personalities according to Carl Jung & Myers Briggs. Just as you encounter various types of people in your everyday life, the same is true to every format in magic. What you people call the "cEDH players" are in fact just ordinary people that value performance/efficiency in life. People that are more interested in results. In that sense I think the original mindset of EDH (playing for fun) should not be interpreted as "not playing the strongest combos" because what is fun is not determined by the RC - it is determined by your preferences, which in turn are coming from your personality, which differ so much between people that there will never be an universal agreement. Let's be honest. The reason why there is a cEDH group is human nature. And just the same as the % of personality type of people who valor competence/results/efficiency is small in the real world, the same is true in magic. Though I would argue that magic itself by nature is a home to such type of people. So, I would very much appreciate that the EDH community as a whole acknowledges that reality and would as such at the very least be honest to say that we do not want the analytical type of personality in our meta and would rather much more welcome all the others. That would be a statement I could live with and more importantly - work with.
March 3, 2020 6:27 p.m.
Dark_Danda says... #4
to finalize my previous post: I am a cEDH player and after having read the forum, it appears to me that, at least the casual players who spoke up, are just denying our definition of fun. I really don't want the format to split but at the same time I would see it as a logical next step in case the EDH community makes it clear to not support a competitive mindset. Because for people like us we cannot change. That is who we are. And if we split - the new format will cannibalize the original one. This is bad for everyone and unnecessary.
March 3, 2020 6:41 p.m.
dingusdingo says... #5
"Long post there."
I'm having to rehash the same points over and over because you keep ignoring them. Please engage the points that are being repeatedly made or see yourself out of the thread.
"As I said earlier, for every subgroup affected positively by a ban there is another subgroup affected negatively"
Once again, WHAT DECKS ARE LOSING FROM THE FLASH BAN? Cite a decklist or a commander outside of Flash Hulk. Griffstick graciously posted the % of decks that run the card. Do you see how marginally low that number is?
Banning a card that ~0.01% (1 in 10,000) of decks run for the betterment of 99.9% of players is exactly what the ban list is supposed to do. Specifically address these two numbers if you decide to post a reply.
"Its not spite that makes players dislike bannings & more regulation."
Come on dog, this is just getting tiring
Direct quote: "Your Albino Troll has nothing on me :)"
Look at other users in this thread too. The spite is evident.
"I guess if you want events & competitions to specifically ban the card that's cool. Just leave the RC out of it. The less they have to do the better."
Please explain how EDH can have a uniform banlist for events and tournaments without the RC taking the step of banning the card. Why does the RC exist if they are supposed to take no action?
Megalomania I remember you as the flash hulk player shilling for players to play decks that suck against flash hulk as the "answer" to Sushi Hulk. Just wanted to bring this context back before we dive in, as you are once again trying not to get the key card of your tier 0 deck banned.
"I don’t care much about the competition but I will continue to make my decks better from a design point because that is part of the fun for me."
Then accept the flash ban and find the next best card from design and efficiency perspective. If you enjoy designing decks, having the range of top tier decks open up is a positive.
"I’m not sure if that makes me a pubstomper"
If you're playing Flash Hulk against your casual buddies deck the answer is yes.
"will gladly play against any deck brought to the table as long as it subscribes to the RC banlist."
This isn't an argument against banning. If anything, this supports the argument that people play it because its legal and hyper efficient. The solution to this problem from this mentality is the obvious choice: Ban Flash.
"We never resorted to creating a “personalized” banlist because the RC list is impersonal and avoids creating a scenario where a player feels he is being singled out."
Prove that they take an impersonal approach to banning cards. The criteria for banning or unbanning a card by the RC is "fun", quite possibly the most personal and subjective measurement you could make.
"This is why I don’t think banning Flash is easily a good thing. The lines between casual and competitive play isn’t as clear as some of you present it to be."
Your entire argument boils down to
- I can't tell whether my tier 0 deck is a competitive deck or not
- I can't tell whether this $3000 deck is casual or competitive
- I run Flash because it isn't banned
These are not strong arguments against the banning of Flash or to refute points made for the banning of Flash.
As far as the "blurry line between competitive and casual", you're literally playing a TnT Sushi Hulk deck with a 95% match to the tier 0 competitive list. You didn't independently brew your way to that list. You netdecked it. Nothing wrong with netdecking lists, but to claim ignorance of the power level after researching it is being deceptive. It astonishes me beyond reasonable belief you would consider spending that amount of money to acquire the deck if you had done no research on the game or the format or the deck.
Dark_Danda I believe you're on the right track. This is more a discussion of the community ostracizing its own members for having fun differently. It is mind boggling to me that casual players are repeatedly arguing for the strongest competitive deck to stay, while competitive players are repeatedly begging for a ban on the linchpin card of this deck that causes ~0 splash damage to anywhere else in the format.
People can dress it up however they want but its all the same. Moderation is okay if insert whatever criteria casual players use but isn't okay if an entire subset of players agree a card played by 0.01% of casual players is a problem. We can ban PEngine because casual players hate it and we can destroy competitive decks that hinge on it, but when competitive players want a ban that does absolutely NOTHING to casual players except help them the community is in an uproar. If the community really needs to split its better for everyone to be on the same page than for us to extend the eventual split by a year or two years or whatever.
This ban is the litmus test. Do competitive players have a voice in the format? The answer to this question determines whether the format splits.
March 3, 2020 7:39 p.m.
Megalomania says... #6
Dark_Danda There is a difference between players with a competitive mindset and the cEDH community. Like I said in my previous post, I am a player who would fall under the category of competitive in the sense that I like to optimize my deck to a really high level. However, I would not consider myself as part of the cEDH community since I don't have the time to participate in tourneys and play mostly against a group of guys who aren't exactly up to cEDH standards. Sure there are several guys in my group that have top tier decks but as a whole, our group is pretty casual. This is why the cEDH proposition puts me and players like me in a disadvantageous position. The assumption that Flash is not being used by casuals and the banning of Flash won't have any effect on the casual community isn't really accurate.
While most of you think the EDH community can be neatly divided into low powered pods, high powered pods and pods where there are pubstompers that ruin the game for everyone, there are also pods with varying power levels but still genuinely enjoy playing against each other (which i think embodies EDH as a social format).
Lastly, nobody is denying the cEDH's idea of fun. You guys want efficiency. Some of us do too. The weird thing is Flash Hulk decks have become so optimized and efficient (things all cEDH players are trying to accomplish) and it gets crucified for it. Isn't cEDH all about optimizing something to a point that it becomes OP? There you go. Now you think it's unfun and you want to take it away. Worse part is, you want to take my fun away with it.
March 3, 2020 7:45 p.m.
GhostChieftain says... #7
Megalomania you don't have to be playing in a tournament for the deck you are playing to be a cEDH deck. Your deck is a cEDH deck whether or not the rest of your pod is. Saying that your opponents aren't playing things up to cEDH standards says 1 of 2 things to me, either you see yourself as superior to them because you are playing a tier 0 net deck or that you are pubstomping. Unfortunately I fear it is the latter.
March 3, 2020 8 p.m.
Megalomania says... #8
dingusdingo instead of trying to pick parts of my post, why don’t you address the meat of it? I’m a casual player with a competitive deck. My group is pretty much the same. We play for fun and part of the fun involves bringing OP decks to the table. I want Flash to stay and my group is okay with it.
On the other hand, the cEDH community, the guys who are supposedly gunning to create the most efficient and OP decks possible, wants to break apart a deck for being too efficient and OP. You want Flash banned because it’s a key piece to a combo that embodies everything that cEDH is supposed to be.
March 3, 2020 8:23 p.m.
Megalomania says... #9
GhostChieftain my deck falls under cEDH. I get that. But how am I a pubstomper when my pod has some cEDH decks in it as well? My point is the cEDH COMMUNITY’s concerns regarding Flash does not apply to my (casual-minded) meta. Nobody minds how good a deck it. Bring it to the table and we’ll play to beat it or dog-pile against it.
There are players who play casually using cEDH level decks. Does anyone refute this? Likewise, there are competitive-minded players who play using casual decks. Am I wrong?
March 3, 2020 8:46 p.m.
Dark_Danda says... #10
Megalomania I don't define a cEDH player by whether he participates in tournaments or cEDH discords. These are just places where cEDH players meet. I actually would much rather use the hours spent into deck building and the frequency of it, as a criteria point. If there is one thing that really struck me after years of disagreement among my friends, regarding power level, is the huge difference in effort put into deck building. So, I really would like to welcome every casual player to connect to the cEDH player and share their approaches and experiences in deck building. What I mean to say with this is, that it really helped me to get a good context of the situation I am in, personally, with my friends. Because to me it turns out that the difference in hours between me and my friends is enormous. That helped me to understand that for some play groups, I would be required to only build a deck and then to leave it as is. Because otherwise I would gain advantage in form of a more optimized deck.
Long story short - I invite the whole EDH community to understand that cEDH player are a type of person that were always present in the community. Please support us in the cause of banning Flash to help out our meta. I realize that our decks are on a different power level. But does that really mean that there is no room for us in EDH? If so, what is the argument? There will always be people that strive for optimization as long as you can measure results in magic.
March 3, 2020 9:06 p.m.
Megalomania don't ask that user to address the meat of your argument you'll get a post that starts with: "thousands of years ago" and spans over a page. Like Turkatron from Aqua Teen Hunger Force.
A deck that uses flash would be Ephara. Regardless, do you see any irony in a small affected sample of affected players whining about flash & then continuing to say how .01% decks would be affected, thus marginalizing those affected? Then lumping everyone into your betterment of 99.9% of players, don't lump everyone into your "betterment argument".
Private events & competitions can adhere to whatever rules they want. There can be competition-specific rule sets. There can be OTHER answers than banning. The RC should be arbiters for necessary issues relevant to the format, nowhere does it say that if they aren't banning cards left and right they aren't doing anything.
From what I'm gathering, a subset of players is griping about more regulation to what should be a self-regulating format. The same players that often recommend working these things out with a playgroup, yet they cannot be beholden to this same ideology. Sounds like a division needs to occur.
You assume Megalomania is a pubstomper based on the fact that he says he uses a card in his meta? That's a leap... Maybe his table actually can self-regulate? Maybe he practices self-control & enjoys having the option?
March 3, 2020 10:04 p.m.
Supposedly it is faulty reasoning for all those who say "not my problem" because this marginalized those affected by the available option to play the card. Then, later it is ok to apply the same type of reasoning: that only a marginal group would be affected if the same card was banned... Usually with a regulatory agency if there is a minimal effect in choosing restriction & minimal effect in staying with free choice, then the rule is less-is-more.
March 3, 2020 11:25 p.m.
dingusdingo says... #13
Megalomania Alright, I'll continue in good faith assuming you are doing the same.
"I’m a casual player with a competitive deck. My group is pretty much the same. We play for fun and part of the fun involves bringing OP decks to the table. I want Flash to stay and my group is okay with it."
The reason I haven't handled "the meat of your argument" is that I already answered it in this thread. Look at post #23
"On the other hand, the cEDH community, the guys who are supposedly gunning to create the most efficient and OP decks possible, wants to break apart a deck for being too efficient and OP. You want Flash banned because it’s a key piece to a combo that embodies everything that cEDH is supposed to be."
Refer to post #20, or post #13, or post #7, or post #31, or post #15. The threat that Flash poses to the format has been very clearly defined, and the meta becoming healthier via its banning has also been clearly explained, multiple times.
"There are players who play casually using cEDH level decks. Does anyone refute this? Likewise, there are competitive-minded players who play using casual decks. Am I wrong?"
The deck is casual or competitive. The play is non-optimal or optimal. Choosing to play non-optimal while running a competitive deck doesn't make your deck a casual deck. It means your play has been non-optimal.
If you're trying to say you aren't playing in sanctioned events, then once again refer to post #23.
"my deck falls under cEDH. I get that. But how am I a pubstomper when my pod has some cEDH decks in it as well? My point is the cEDH COMMUNITY’s concerns regarding Flash does not apply to my (casual-minded) meta. Nobody minds how good a deck it. Bring it to the table and we’ll play to beat it or dog-pile against it."
Context is key. Budget is a very good indicator of power level in most circumstances. If your $4000 deck is rubbing against someone else's $250 deck, you're likely stomping. Stomping also implies the player is unaware though. If everyone is full disclosure about deck power, no worries.
Now onto the other one
"don't ask that user to address the meat of your argument you'll get a post that starts with: "thousands of years ago" and spans over a page. Like Turkatron from Aqua Teen Hunger Force."
This isn't helpful, and it doesn't address the topic at hand. I could say the exact same with you for being a misogynistic troll who can't understand some very simple points that have been made repeatedly by multiple users. Does that help me to change your mind? Not really.
"A deck that uses flash would be Ephara. Regardless, do you see any irony in a small affected sample of affected players whining about flash & then continuing to say how .01% decks would be affected, thus marginalizing those affected? Then lumping everyone into your betterment of 99.9% of players, don't lump everyone into your "betterment argument"."
This is for the betterment of all players though. Do you want your casual deck losing to turn 0 sushi hulk? This is the outcome you are fighting for.
"Private events & competitions can adhere to whatever rules they want. There can be competition-specific rule sets. There can be OTHER answers than banning. The RC should be arbiters for necessary issues relevant to the format, nowhere does it say that if they aren't banning cards left and right they aren't doing anything."
Refer to post #41. If you truly wish to go down this path the fate of casual EDH will suffer much worse than simply a Flash ban.
"From what I'm gathering, a subset of players is griping about more regulation to what should be a self-regulating format. The same players that often recommend working these things out with a playgroup, yet they cannot be beholden to this same ideology. Sounds like a division needs to occur."
Refer to post #23. Playgroup mediation works for casual but doesn't work at any sanctioned event. Once again, can you please actually read the replies in this thread before posting?
"You assume Megalomania is a pubstomper based on the fact that he says he uses a card in his meta? That's a leap... Maybe his table actually can self-regulate? Maybe he practices self-control & enjoys having the option?"
Maybe I looked at his list and had a long conversation with him on a previous thread. Playing that list against casualstompy.dec is a pubstomp, 100%.
"Supposedly it is faulty reasoning for all those who say "not my problem" because this marginalized those affected by the available option to play the card. Then, later it is ok to apply the same type of reasoning: that only a marginal group would be affected if the same card was banned... Usually with a regulatory agency if there is a minimal effect in choosing restriction & minimal effect in staying with free choice, then the rule is less-is-more."
Lol, you're so close but still so far. Please refer to post #15
To quote: "Keeping Flash in EDH means we are imposing a high burden on a significant minority of players, to prevent imposing a low burden on an even smaller number of players. "
It isn't the same because the same burden isn't being imposed on the players. It is a huge gain for one side of the community while being a mosquito sized loss for the other.
I'm really going to need Gleeock and Megalomania to read this thread, top to bottom
Look how many answers I was able to link from previous posts, this is getting embarrassing.
March 4, 2020 1:27 a.m.
Megalomania says... #14
dingusdingo First of all, I think you should define and qualify what the cEDH community actually is and inform us what tool are you using to determine the health of its meta before implicating Flash-Hulk as the culprit.
Then do the same thing with the casual community.
March 4, 2020 2:23 a.m.
And the fog rolls in on another dingusdingo post. Yep, what I see, in a nutshell; Is that you and a subset are requesting a banning based on a qualitative (subjective) negative experience, that you feel the opposite side cannot possibly be so negatively affected by a banning (subjective again). Then blanket statement that the overall health of the format is made better with a banning. Then denying the drive to look for other options... Jump to banning.
Honestly, I don't care if I lose to Sushi Hulk, or any other number of lame "competitive" wincons. If it is not that one it will be another, or self-control & the desire for less hackneyed gameplay kicks in with the playgroup.
The format is as healthier than ever & would continue to be so with less bans & all options open, because Laissez Faire (not fascism) is the heart of EDH.
March 4, 2020 8:09 a.m.
Gleeock: What's your goal here? Do you want a discussion or not? If you do, what possible purpose could there be in mentioning the size of dingusdingo's post? Wouldn't a more detailed post be useful in explaining reasoning? If your goal isn't to have a discussion then why do you keep posting? Is it to troll? I genuinely want an answer to these questions, because if you're only commenting to troll another user and the cEDH community here on TO, I don't want to waste my time writing a response.
March 4, 2020 10:18 a.m.
ToffMcSoft, i'm still super duper salty over the Paradox Engine ban. I'm of the mind that there absolutely should not be a ban list for a "casual" (a term that is relative) format. Instead, there should be one rule - the turn 0 talk.
- I am running a "blank" (elf tribal) etc, deck that threatens to win between turns x and y.
- I run some cards that can make players salty - i.e. Gaea's Cradle, Paradox Engine, Winter Orb.
- Do you want to play this deck with me? Y/N.
That's it. You sit down, and communicate with your play group and set the expectation. This is a game where there can only be one winner, by forcing everyone to abide the "social contract" just elicits the sentiment where the losers get issued a Participation trophy after playing. I don't play games like that, and I don't like that mentality.
I firmly push the Turn 0 talk. This "social contract" is the antithesis of self expression in the format - forcing people to play within some preconceived notion of being "friendly and all inclusive" but in reality is simply limiting choice because a subset of players caught some "bad feels" from a game once and blame a card as opposed to acknowledging the truth - no one set the right expectations.
March 4, 2020 11:20 a.m. Edited.
Oh, and to clarify when I said "there should be one rule - the turn 0 talk." I meant that there should be only one rule in regards to banning cards. Everything else is awesome about the format though.
March 4, 2020 11:26 a.m.
ToffMcSoft says... #20
Mortlocke What's really unfortunate is the RC can drastically change the style of game play, card prices & commander choices at their whim. For example, the Paradox Engine ban wiped out a TON of great EDH decks that are no longer viable.
The other thing, with such drastic bans what about the insider trading? Perfect example is the $ that was made over Painter's Servant becoming legal. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lot of behind the scenes agendas for profits.
March 4, 2020 2:58 p.m.
dingusdingo says... #21
Megalomania People have already explained how this banning makes the competitive meta healthier. Currently, there are two absolute top decks, one of them is TnT Flash Hulk. The other is Najeela layered with Flash Hulk. The combo is unlike other combos in that you can basically only fight it at one point, while it is on the stack. The meta becomes healthier with this ban because there is a larger and more diverse field of top tier competitive decks and players are not burdened with devoting 10 card slots to specifically stopping Flash Hulk.
This point has been made so many times already within this thread. The tool being used to evaluate this outcome is the standard Wizards has used for creating a healthy environment in literally every other format, deck diversity at the competitive level. As far as focusing on casual play, the existence of Rule 0 means you can simply not play with decks that upset you. Once again, anyone who plays in anything even close to a competitive event (LGS, Commandfest, Tournies) does not have that option.
Gleeock Its real neat you found a single point you can sink your teeth into, but you are truly misguided and your analysis is wrong. People have explained repeatedly how this effects the overall community very little, and effects the competitive community a great deal. You've managed to produce a single commander that might possibly run Flash to its own detriment. We have yet to see anyone besides a Flash Hulk player post ITT about being impacted.
As far as us asking for a ban over a subjective experience, there have been plenty of objective points made about the strength of the combo by discussing what separates it power-wise from other combos available. We have also made objective points about the density of Flash in decks, which is extremely low. While the fun factor was also discussed, it was not the only factor for suggesting the ban. You have this incredible ability to ignore every worthwhile point that has been made and then focus in on minutia.
One last pro tip for the obvious high schooler: A truly Laissez Faire format would have 0 bans on the list. Don't toss around terms you don't understand.
ToffMcSoft I wouldn't be as worried about insider trading from the RC. I'd be more worried about insider trading from Wizards itself. A great example is how the prices for Hermit Druid spiked a week before Thassa's Oracle was announced. I agree with the overall sentiment that the RC holds a significant amount of power for a group that is not affiliated with Wizards in any way whatsoever.
I'm going to aggregate all the points that have been made that people are ignoring. Please address these specific points in any reply Megalomania or Gleeock.
1. The combo is extremely good, and can come from 0 board state at instant speed
This is covered in post #13 and post #31 on the first page
2. The burden imposed from Flash being legal is much higher on one group than the burden imposed from Flash being banned
This is covered in post #15 on the first page
3. Flash is run in a minuscule amount of decks
This is covered in post #17 on the first page.
4. Flash is a problem even if it is the most efficient play
This is covered in post #20 and post #31 on the first page
5. Casual players may ignore the banlist, competitive players may not
This is covered in post #23 and post #31 on the first page.
March 4, 2020 3:24 p.m. Edited.
Dark_Danda says... #22
I think maybe we should do a vote on this. I am a strong believer in democracy (Switzerland) and if the majority says no - so be it. If they majority says yes - so be it. At the very least it would be a community decision and not a couple of people from the RC.
The question is just how to pull that off and if it would be possible, it kinda replaces the RC.
Cheers
March 4, 2020 3:27 p.m.
Dark_Danda says... #23
Also note that in this forum, I only see a few different people arguing back and forth. It doesn't seem to be in proportion to the actual opinions of the community. The arguments against and for the ban keep repeating and while doing so, the relevant posts that provide solid facts are being buried and the discussion becomes less objective and informative. Maybe it would be better to really do things properly and promote the reasons for a ban on a website where you can always see the hard facts at the top. This way you would have a base line you can refer to that remains visible at all times during the discussion.
March 4, 2020 3:33 p.m.
Megalomania says... #24
dingusdingo a combo that can go off from 0 board state at instant speed is absolutely beautiful if you ask me. what you and most people are explaining is why Flash Hulk (decks) are exceedingly powerful. That part is very clear and I agree with 100%. What is missing is proof that it actually translates to a lack of diversity in the competitive level. Your logic might be sound but does it reflect the current cEDH meta? Do we even have a way to determine (using actual data as proof) what the cEDH meta looks like today? If yes, then I suggest they be posted here or sent to the RC to help them decide on this matter. If no then I don’t see a reason to ban a card because it can potentially ruin a subset of EDH.
Also, people still haven’t answered my question about who the cEDH community comprises of and how exactly do we determine it’s meta.
March 4, 2020 5:31 p.m.
The facts are pretty easy EDH is consider a multiplayer casual format by the RC and says it banlist reflects this concept. Their mission statement not mine.
EDH is an inherently broken format and there are many ways to break the format.
There is a social contract of sorts based on fun which can cause philosophical differences. Shocking I know.
With a new turn zero deck in the format we have a solved casual meta at least in theory and probably in practice.
Now everything after that is where do you fit in on the argument to ban or not to ban; at the end of the day it is a technically a philosophical argument because this is a direct quote from the RC's website I am quoting below about ban list.
Now you can apply flash on both sides of the isle so where do you fit in that argument. All we can do is express our views on the ban flash argument. At least people are talking even if we disagree it has been fairly civil which is all you can ask.
"The goal of the ban list is similar; it does not seek to regulate competitive play or power level, which are decisions best left to individual play groups. The ban list seeks to demonstrate which cards threaten the positive player experience at the core of the format or prevent players from reasonable self-expression. The primary focus of the list is on cards which are problematic because of their extreme consistency, ubiquity, and/or ability to restrict others’ opportunities."
March 4, 2020 10:39 p.m. Edited.
Nemesis yes, a discussion would be more productive in a discussion format. Direct responses without being headered by rehashed post-bits for each response.
Overall, as much as I disagree with banning Flash specifically, I have more issue with the effect of banning ANY card in the format. Banning has negative connotations for good reasons. Banning is a LAST resort when options are exhausted. Where is the willingness to explore other options? Why not push for 1-2 standardized cardlist:restriction:point system options that vendors or events can implement? I would love a process-driven point system made standardized & available to promote "casual" games at events as well. Canadian Highlander is another example of progressive thinking. dingusdingo When offered with a keystone rule for the format "Turn 0", this is just not good enough for you....just because, cEDH just lacks the ability? & if it is specifically an events & competition issue then push for regulation for those. It's only good enough to suggest Turn 0 for everyone else playing the same format.
dingusdingo laissez-faire not accurate? Take potshots at my assumed level of education? What other policy or attitude best encompasses my standpoint here? Self-regulation, no interference, components central to laissez-faire... Yes? What a statement of absolutism you make, which explains the resistance to exploring different options. Keep applying fascist reasoning to call for banning cards
Dark_Danda Implementing a voting system would be amazing.
Gleeock says... #1
Long post there. As I said earlier, for every subgroup affected positively by a ban there is another subgroup affected negatively. Its not spite that makes players dislike bannings & more regulation.
I guess if you want events & competitions to specifically ban the card that's cool. Just leave the RC out of it. The less they have to do the better.
March 2, 2020 8:16 a.m.