Main site (German)   |    HighlanderMagic.info
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Login with username, password and session length
14016 Posts in 1016 Topics- by 444 Members - Latest Member: Dracomnis
Pages: [1]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Discuss the state of the Ban- and Watchlist at the moment    (Read 368 times)
DarkLight
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



View Profile
« on: 02-12-2017, 07:49:36 PM »

WARNING!!! WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!!!


Because on Facebook there was asked for a consideration to unban 'Skullclamp' and the council already set 'Birthing Pod' on the unban watchlist.
I think it's time for the community to deeper discuss some cards on the banlist and unban watchlist. I know many guys of the highlander community are lazy facebook junkies but I hope we can find a constructive discussion here in the forum about that subject.

Here is my opinion about some cards ...

BANNED CARDS

Birthing Pod (Banned since: 15.04.2012)
Reason:
Quote
Birthing Pod:
Spätestens ab dem Zeitpunkt als Survival of the Fittest gebannt wurde, haben wir besonderes Augenmerk auf Karten gelegt, die durch ihre Funktionsweise einen konstanten Kartenvorteil garantieren und außerdem Zugang zu den jeweils situationsbedingt besten Kreaturen der jeweiligen Toolbox gewähren. Dies wurde damals wie heute als schädlich für unser Format erachtet, insbesondere wenn die Karte sowohl wenig manaintensiv ist und gleichzeitig den Spieler mit weiterer Boardpräsenz versorgt. Birthing Pod war im Format für fast ein Jahr. Während dieser Zeit wurden viele Turnierergebnisse gesammelt und ausgewertet. Birthing Pod war in fast allen multi-color midrange decks enthalten. Das Artifakt kann sowohl dazu benutzt werden, um Kombos den Weg zu ebnen als auch um z. B. recht zügig in Titanen hineinzurampen. Mit dem Phyrexian Mana unterliegt es zudem nicht den herkömmlichen Mana-Restiktionen und kann somit noch universeller eingesetzt werden. Außerdem kristallisierte sich bei den Beobachtungen heraus, dass der Spieler, der den Pod zuerst aktiv bekam, immer einen extremen Vorteil im Spiel gewann (insbesondere dann, wenn die Kurve nach einen T1 Mana-Tier gelegt werden konnte) und nach ein paar Aktivierungen das Spiel für den Gegner kaum noch zu gewinnen war. In einem Meta, wo mehr Kreaturen als je zuvor gespielt werden, machte oftmals der Pod auf der Starthand den entscheidenden Unterschied aus. Deshalb haben wir uns für das gleiche Vorgehen wie damals bei Survival of the Fittest entschieden.
TL;DR:
Banned because the mechanic is similar to 'Survival of the Fittest' and generate card advantage and tutoring answers permanently for everything

My opinion:
I'm playing green based 3-5c midrange/aggro decks in highlander now for around 15 years (yes I already played highlander before magicplayer.org) and before the release of 'Birthing Pod', 'Survival of the Fittest' was an auto-inculde in all of my decks so was 'Birthing Pod' since it's release until it's ban.
The dominance of this card is kinda like 'Survival of the Fittest' and will not be healthy for the format at all, especially with the growing powerlevel of creatures nowadays.

My vote would be BAN



Gifts Ungiven (Banned since: 15.10.2011)
Reason:
Quote
Gifts Ungiven
Als wir diese Karte vor drei Monaten auf die Watchlist gesetzt haben, haben wir zuerst das generelle Powerlevel des Formats näher untersucht und Gifts Ungiven als stärkste Karte des Formats identifiziert. Die Karte ist außerdem leicht splashbar sowie auch in entsprechend vielen Top8-Listen zu finden. Mit der Einführung des Snapcaster Mage werden Decks mit Gifts Ungiven sicherlich auch nicht schlechter werden.
TL;DR
At the time of the ban the council had the opinion that 'Gifts Ungiven' was the best card in the format and with 'Snapcaster Mage' coming this card had too much potential

My opinion:
As far as I can remember it was banned because 'Gifts Ungiven' for example on 'Life from the Loam', "Cycle Land", 'Wasteland' and '?Maze of Ith?' was one of the biggest threats at this time in the format. My knowledge about that kinda decktypes is not that deep, but because of the better graveyard removal we have now (example: 'Deathrite Shaman', 'Scavenging Ooze', 'Rest in Peace', ...).

My vote would be UNBAN



Library of Alexandria (Banned since: 01.07.2010)
Reason:
Quote
Library of Alexandria

"Der Unban der Library ist als testweiser Unban zu verstehen. Wir werden den Effekt, den das auf das Format hat, sehr genau beobachten [...]"
Library of Alexandria wurde am 01.10.2008 entbannt, zusammen mit Mind Over Matter, wirksam wurde der Unban zum 15.10.2008. LoA war also ein Jahr und 9 Monate lang Bestandteil unseres Formats. Warum also erfolgt nun der Ban?
Es gibt hier keinen einzelnen, ausschlaggebenden Grund, wie auch bei Survival of the Fittest in der letzten Banning Season. Gründe haben sich hier auch nach und nach akkumuliert:

  • Das Zugänglichkeitsproblem: LoA ist eine sehr teure Karte, die aber an sich jeder Highlanderspieler, der nicht nur Aggro- und Kombodecks spielen will, braucht.
  • Das Frustrationsproblem: Der Gegner präsentiert Dir die Lucky Starhand-LoA. Wenn Du nun nicht der super Aggromann bist oder die sofortige Lösung am Start hast, fühlst Du Dich scheiße - auch wenn die LoA vielleicht garnicht unbedingt den Sieg bedeutet für Deinen Gegner.
  • Das "ich hab keine LoA, ich spiel kein Control"-Problem: Jeder will ja ein möglichst optimal konstruiertes Deck pilotieren. Daher wird jeder, der auf einem Turnier ein Control-Deck ohne LoA pilotiert, dies mit dem bitteren Beigeschmack tun, dass sein Deck nicht optimal ist. Viele Spieler greifen aus genau diesem Grund nicht zu einem Control- oder Midrange-Deck. Und Leute, die keine Lust haben, Aggro oder Kombo zu spielen, spielen u. U. deswegen garnicht mehr mit...
  • Das "Typ 1"-Problem: Die Außenwirkung des Formates auf Interessenten - mal abgesehen von den Eternal-Jungs, die keine Spielpartner mehr finden - leidet unter der Legalität von LoA, das haben wir in sehr vielen Einzelgesprächen bspws. mit Legacy-Spieler auf Turnieren immer wieder gehört.
  • Das "Randomness-im-Mirror"-Problem: Wenn auch die Randomness im Control Mirror durch LoA m.E. bei weitem nicht so groß ist wie es bei Jitte im Aggro-Mirror der Fall ist, so ist dennoch nicht von der Hand zu weisen, dass die Starthand-LoA die Siegchancen beträchtlich erhöht.

Zusammenfassend ist zu sagen, dass die Legalität von 'Library of Alexandria'...
a) nicht notwendig ist
b) das Format beschädigt, da es eine nicht kleine Anzahl von Spielern vom Highlandern abhält.
Dies konnten wir wie gesagt immer wieder aus Einzelgesprächen und auch Forenbeiträgen entnehmen. Letztlich handelt es sich hier innerhalb des Rates auch um eine Mehrheitsentscheidung, vier von fünf Ratsmitgliedern stimmten eindeutig für einen Ban.

Zuletzt ist noch darauf hinzuweisen, dass die LoA von Beginn an auf der Watch List stand.
TL;DR
- Expencive card.
- Frustration against 1st turn 'Library of Alexandria', if you don't play a very aggressive deck.
- Playing control decks without 'Library of Alexandria' feels so much weaker so players could consider not to play control because they don't have a 'Library of Alexandria'.
- In mirror control Match-Ups this card is kinda like 'Umezawas Jitte' in creature based Match-Ups, the player who has it first has a big advantage.

My opinion:
I think over the last years the decktype who can abuse this card pretty good nearly vanished from the highlander format, furthermore the meta has shifted to be much faster these days. So why is this card still banned? Sure this card has some potential to be broken in some situations, but as I said before in my opinion the decktype who can abuse this card nearly disappeared over the years.

My vote would be UNBAN



Sensei's Divining Top (Banned since: 01.04.2016)
Reason:
Quote
Sensei's Divining Top
A powerful tool for many decks, which continually smooths draws to a degree like no other card can, while also being almost indestructible.
However, the problematic part of playing this card is the time issue, which it often creates when used repeatedly over a long game. By banning this card, we would like to come to less stressful tournaments and lower the amount of unfinished games, which in turn should create a happier environment for everyone.
TL;DR
Almost indistructible. Annoying to play against in tournaments, because of the time management.

My opinion:
This is most likely an only tournament relevant decision and I think I am fine with that.

My vote would be BAN



Skullclamp (Banned since: Forever?)
Reason:
Quote
Huh

My opinion:
I think a card like 'Skullclamp' which is banned since "forever", should closely considered to be rewatched just because the powerlevel has shifted so much since the ban decision. I think we should give this card one or two seasons to show at some tournaments if a ban is still justified.

My vote would be UNBAN



Strip Mine: (Banned since: Forever?)
Reason:
Quote
Huh

My opinion:
Since 'Wasteland' is an auto-include in every highlander deck today and most decks revolving around Non-Basiclands (example: 'Karakas', 'Maze of Ith', ...) anyway, in my eyes an unban would just give us a better second 'Wasteland' option (instead of 'Tectonic Edge') which is not that big of a deal in my opinion so maybe we can discuss about that, too.

My Vote would be UNBAN



Survival of the Fittest (Banned since: 01.04.2010)
Reason:
Quote
Survival of the Fittest

Survival steht schon seit sehr langer Zeit auf der Watchlist, und die Gründe für seinen Ban haben sich im Laufe der Zeit langsam, aber sicher kumuliert. Wenn die Karte das Format auch nicht gebrochen hat, so war sie in den letzten Monaten ohne Frage formatdefinierend, was zu einem sehr festgefahrenen Metagame geführt hat, in dem man Survival durchaus als dominant bezeichnen kann. Der Rat hatte mit dem Banning von Enlightened Tutor bereits begonnen, um die Karte drumherum zu bannen. Ebenfalls in Betracht gezogen wurde das Banning von Squee, Goblin Nabob. Wir sind diesen Weg an dieser Stelle bewusst nicht weitergegangen, sondern wollen durch das Banning von Survival of the Fittest wieder Raum für Decks schaffen, welche bisher nicht in Betracht gezogen wurden seitens der Spielerschaft aufgrund deren schlechten Survival-Matchups. Die Möglichkeit, Squee einfach zu ersetzen durch qualitativ nicht einmal zwingend schwächere Karten - Krovikan Horror (der mit entsprechend viel Mana doppelt soviel Kartenvorteil generiert wie ein Squee), Gigapede - der gerade in Kombination mit Wonder auch einfach mal gern das Spiel gewinnt, nachdem man mit seiner Hilfe Crap auf der eigenen Hand in die besten Kreaturen verwandelt hat, zeigt bereits, dass das Problem hier an der Wurzel gepackt werden muss. Andere bekannte und valide Argumente sind:

  • Loyal Retainers // Iona, Shield of Emeria: Die aus Legacy bekannte Reanimator-Tech ist auch im HL sehr gut spielbar.
  • Ein-Karten-Kombo, die sich selbst beschützt, indem sie als Antwort auf Removal Eternal Witness/Venser, Spellshaper Savant/Mystic Snake sucht.
  • Combo-Enabler mit Karten wie Body Double, Reveillark etc.
  • Survival hat einen relevanten Anteil daran, dass im HL of mit 60 Minuten Rundenzeit nicht mehr ausgekommen wird.
  • Survival gibt zu jedem Spielzeitpunkt dem ausspielenden Spieler einen derart drastischen Vorteil, dass selten Spiele mit liegendem Survival verloren werden.
  • Survival-Decks mit Toolbox spulen fast immer das gleiche, monotone Schema ab:
    - Squee suchen, Wall of Roots/Birds/Sakura-Tribe Elder suchen (Phase "Ans laufen kriegen")
    - Harmonic Sliver/FTK/Bone Shredder holen, Antworten suchen (Phase "den Druck abbauen")
    - optional, falls nötig: Loxodon Hierarch, Kitchen Finks etc suchen und Life gainen (Phase "restabiliseren und außerhalb der Burn-Range gelangen")
    - Letzte Phase: Antworten des Gegners neutralisieren und eigene Finisher suchen (Mystic Snake, Venser, oder gleich Doran, Baneslayer, Rampaging Baloths etc.).
  • Survival blockiert das Format in seiner Entwicklung.
  • Survival ist zudem ein hoher Frustrationsfaktor.

Über den Ban von Enlightened Tutor sind wir dennoch weiterhin glücklich, da der Archetyp, der von Survival bislang in Schach gehalten wurde - Oath of Druids - nun sicherlich in den Fokus der Spieler rücken wird, erst Recht dank der Eldrazi-Monster.
 
Keiner der genannten Gründe rechtfertig für sich genommen ein Ban von SotF. In der Summe aber sind wir der Meinung, dass auch die Stärksten nicht ewig leben können. Wir sind uns bewusst, dass wir keine andere Karte hätten bannen können - außer vielleicht Demonic Tutor - welche das Format derart stark verändert hätte. Wir sind jedoch auch der Ansicht, dass heutige Survival-Decks auch ohne ihren Namensgeber spielbar sind, da die Tiere in der heutigen Toolbox - anders als früher - selbst auch noch eine gute Power/Toughness-Mana-Kosten-Relation mitbringen. Anders als bei Demonic Tutor, welcher nahezu ausschließlich positive Auswirkungen auf das Format und seine Diversifizität hat, führt Survival zu einer Decklandschaft von Survival-Decks und Anti-Survival-Decks (siehe die Turniere der letzten Monate in Iserlohn und Dülmen).
TL;DR
- Time management in tournaments, because of permanently tutoring.
- Because mostly always running the same pattern resulting in monotone and boring gameplay.
- 'Survival of the Fittest' is blocking the development of the format, because of it's dominance.
- High frustration factor playing against 'Survival of the Fittest', because the Survival-Player always finds the perfect answer.

My opinion: Same as on 'Birthing Pod' see above.

My vote would be BAN



Umezawa's Jitte (Banned since: Forever?)
Reason:
Quote
Huh

My opinion:
I look at this card with mixed feelings. At first I really would like to see how this card would perform in the meta nowadays but the potential to be broken in certain Match-Ups is kinda big. So probably it's better to stay on the banlist for now.

My vote would be BAN


Watchlist opinion follows ....
Logged

Formerly known as With-FuLL-Force.
DarkLight
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: 02-12-2017, 07:53:44 PM »

WATCHLISTED CARDS

Back to Basics:

My opinion:
I'm fine with it to stay in the format. I don't understand why it's on the watchlist anyway.

My Vote would be UNBAN



Blood Moon

My opinion:
Rather than 'Back to Basics' I think this card is more problematic. Against 'Back to Basics' you still can "fetch" or have a one-time usage of your Non-Basicland(s), for a potential removal or whatever, you don't have this against a 'Blood Moon'. A turn3 'Blood Moon' when you are tapped out or don't have instant removal results in a most likely complete disrupted game and often in an automatic win for the 'Blood Moon' player. Furthermore RED still has with 'Magus of the Moon' ,'Ruination' and 'Price of Progress' pretty good cards against Non-Basiclands. At the end I think this card really deserves to be banned.

My vote would be BAN


Demonic Tutor:

My opinion:
I always have to laugh if someone trying to explain why 'Demonic Tutor' needs to be banned. This card in my opinion is one of the most balanced cards in the format. It is played by all deck archetypes from AGGRO over CONTROL to COMBO ... so why should you ban a card which is played by almost everyone so everyone has the same chance to "abuse" this card. This card is not like a 'Black Lotus' you have it and your advantage is skyrocketing, this card makes it possible to adjust on certain game situations or search you the missing piece for a probably winning strike. A ban would hurt the weaker part of the meta (Combo) much harder, than those who are most likely the reason for the ban (Midrange/Goodstuff).

My Vote would be UNBAN



Dig Through Time:

My opinion:
The Delve mechanic has proven to be imbalanced at some points, so cards with this mechanic who are banned/restricted in all other eternal formats should be under a strict observation. At the moment I'm on the edge if I would like to see this card banned or not, maybe the next few expansions will show how decks with this card will develop.

My Vote would be UNBAN



Mana Drain:

My opinion:
Prime example: 2nd-3rd turn counter 2-3 mana spell 3rd-4th turn casting 'Wurmcoil Engine'/'Batterskull' ... disrupting an enemies early game plus ramping into a threat, nothing more to say about this card. There are enough other counterspells out there to fill the spot.

My vote would be BAN



Oath of Druids:

My opinion:
I don't like this card in the format since ages. It's a two mana hard to disrupt combo enabler which can mill your complete library so you can win via Storm-Combo possibly at turn3 or bringing a threat like 'Grisselbrand', 'Primeval Titan' or 'Sun Titan' for sure these kind of decks are not threatening the format at the moment but I don't like the possibility at all.

My vote would be BAN



Tainted Pact:

My opinion:
A card kinda like Demonic Tutor with the upside of being Instant and downside of removing possible winning options, so the card is not that much playable in combo decks and most control decks don't like to remove possible winning options, too. This restricting the card to be playable only in a special kind of decks, which is fine for me at the moment but should be observed strictly if things change.

My Vote would be UNBAN



Tolarian Academy:

My opinion:
The most common deck which plays this card at the moment is "Eggs" which is not even close to be a normal highlander deck it's more like Solitair ... one player is playing an endless turn and finishs with a rediculous combo. This card should be banned just to remove those kind of decks from the format where only one player is playing and the other is just watching.

My vote would be BAN



Treasure Cruise:

My opinion:
Not as problematic as 'Dig Through Time', because first of all it's a sorcery and in addition "just" drawing three cards is by far not as good as choosing between seven cards and take those two you need. But same objection as on 'Dig Through Time' the Delve mechanic is proven to be broken at some points so good cards with this mechanic always should be under a strict observation.

My Vote would be UNBAN



By the way this is how a community vote could look like which I suggested HERE -> http://www.magicplayer.org/forum/index.php?topic=1192.msg13914#msg13914
Logged

Formerly known as With-FuLL-Force.
Tabris
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 860



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: 06-12-2017, 01:15:49 PM »

It looks like the forum participation isnt what you hoped for.

Never lucky.
Logged
r4nd0m1
HL Online Champion 2012
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: 06-12-2017, 04:48:26 PM »

Hi all!

First off, let me just briefly say thank you to the Council and all the good people who made the format what it is today.

I do not post very often, but Im an avid player.

I would like to repond to the neverending bannedlist discussion.
Really, its only some half-baked thoughts, but I would like to see everybody think about a new system, and maybe build on these suggestions.

Lets...
  • start with the current bannedlist.
  • periodically have players vote for how much cards should be taxed with, pointwise (simple mailing list).
  • also vote for a threshhold of points for each card to be legal.
  • very gradually adjust for any discrepancies between the current bannedlist and voting results.



Personally, my main fun police is the relative high frequency of changes to the bannedlist, and in all honesty, althought I think the Council's statements with every un/ban are obviously a good thing,...
... I would very much like to see more tournament- and playtestdata to back it up. Otherwise it just feels like it could have been argued either way and its tough to comprehend.

That being said, thanks again for everybodys efforts and Ill talk to you later! : )













Logged
DarkLight
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: 06-12-2017, 07:17:38 PM »

It looks like the forum participation isnt what you hoped for.

Never lucky.

I think this post had +50 views after 1 day, which is not that bad I think, so poeple are reading the forum but don't post.
People are not willing to put some effort in research or posting their detailed opinions. It's much easier to post 1-2 sentenses on the run on Facebook and cry after bannings/unbannings for example the 'Mystical Tutor' BAN discussion on Facebook.

  • start with the current bannedlist.
  • periodically have players vote for how much cards should be taxed with, pointwise (simple mailing list).
  • also vote for a threshhold of points for each card to be legal.
  • very gradually adjust for any discrepancies between the current bannedlist and voting results.

Nice input. I kinda like the pointsystem so you have to think more about what you want to vote for.
But I see two problems with this system, too.
  • It needs more time to evaluate all votes for the council (of course depends on how many people would participate)
  • What happens with wrong votes (spent too many points or other mistakes)

Logged

Formerly known as With-FuLL-Force.
r4nd0m1
HL Online Champion 2012
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: 06-12-2017, 08:17:58 PM »

It looks like the forum participation isnt what you hoped for.

Never lucky.

I dont see how this is anything but a savage trolling. I love you Tabris, but are you out of your mind?

  • It needs more time to evaluate all votes for the council (of course depends on how many people would participate)
  • What happens with wrong votes (spent too many points or other mistakes)
Thanks for your reply DarkLight : )
I dont think it would be difficult at all to register a thousand players and let them vote once per year.
In fact, I can easily imagine a mailing list with automated evaluation of the returns.

Im sure similar ideas have been suggested a million times in the past. Isnt that the logical thing to do?

  
« Last Edit: 06-12-2017, 11:17:32 PM by r4nd0m1 » Logged
Tabris
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 860



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: 07-12-2017, 01:23:18 AM »

I dont want to hijack that thread with my nonsense more than necessary but I was kind of referring to OPs weird hate for facebook (where we have a lot of discussions nowadays because it is easy to reach and convinient for a lot of people) I do understand when people have reservations in regards to facebook in general but I think the HL groups there helped us way more in terms of visibility than the forum ever did. We have vivid discussions and people do come in contact with most of the council members which, I find is an important step to make the whole ban/unban/development of the format/ more transparent and comprehensible.

To give you some input to the actual topic as I said trillion times already any thoughts about bannings/unbannings etc. are fruitless unless you have clear criteria where those decisions should lead to. As in what are your parameters for cards to be seen as problematic or what do you want to achieve by doing xyz. Without any guidlines all the decisions/reasons seem arbitrary to people no matter how well reasoned it is. If the council has a goal/standards and the decisions lead to that, its way easier to defend those and prevent those tilting discussions every time.
Logged
ChristophO
HL Council Member
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 307


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: 07-12-2017, 01:41:43 PM »


To give you some input to the actual topic as I said trillion times already any thoughts about bannings/unbannings etc. are fruitless unless you have clear criteria where those decisions should lead to. As in what are your parameters for cards to be seen as problematic or what do you want to achieve by doing xyz. Without any guidlines all the decisions/reasons seem arbitrary to people no matter how well reasoned it is. If the council has a goal/standards and the decisions lead to that, its way easier to defend those and prevent those tilting discussions every time.


The goal and standard is pretty obvious isnt it? Make the format the best it can be. Setting up clear criteria (with arbitrary reasoning and decisions to find them btw) will just shift the blame from ban choices to rule choices and will make changes even more cumbersome. In the end some people claim only they themselves know it best and just ridicule everyone posting differing opinions. That being said it makes sense to talk about similiar cards as a group (e.g. tutors, cheat into play cards) and explain by which criteria ban/unban decisions have been made because magic cards have many different criteria on which they can evaluated (e.g. cmc, Instant/sorcery, color, targets, role in meta etc.).

To make you a bit happier here are my personal opinions as stated before:
I am voting/working/arguing for a format with a wieder mix of all all basic archetypes around (aggro, midrange, control, combo). That being said due to the nature of combo decks I prefer a meta where combo archetypes are competitive but not the most common decks (losing or winning once a tournament to Artifact combo is fine, playing 4 out of 7 against it is not). To better understand my ban/unban votes it is important to understand that I follow a stricter decision-making for non-combo cards than for combo cards because I believe that the singleton rule strongly pushes goodstuff decks and makes deckbuilding quite tough for combo decks. This is why I am fine with combo only powerhouses such as Oath of druids, Tolarian Academy, Yawgmoth's Will.
I am somewhat unhappy with Aggro being a bit underrepresented (non RDW Aggro that is) I think the only way to change that would be by banning the fretchland7dual mana base. Such a change woukld have too big of an impact on the format and is out of the sciope of what normal ban list changes should force on our players.

WithFullForce:
Regarding your wishes for Skullclamp/Library/Jitte. Those 3 cards in my opinion are the worst offenders if you are looking at cards that break mirrormatches.
In Control mirrors Library on Turn 1 is simply not beatable. It is extremely disheartening and unfun for most players. Skullclamp and Jitte are two cards that make attacking and blocking basically impossible. Keep in mind that creature tokens are plentiful nowadays due to planeswalkers, CitP effects and so on. While I believe Jitte to be the smaller problem of the two, Jitte really shines vs aggro. Aggro has a tough stand in our meta (except RDW) and Jitte would make matters a lot worse.     
Logged
DarkLight
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: 07-12-2017, 08:49:16 PM »

I dont want to hijack that thread with my nonsense more than necessary but I was kind of referring to OPs weird hate for facebook (where we have a lot of discussions nowadays because it is easy to reach and convinient for a lot of people)

... I know many guys of the highlander community are lazy facebook junkies ...

My facebook related quote was not meant to be against the facebook-group at all, but more against some of the people posting there or even insulting other players with other opinions.
For sure facebook is easier to reach but easier to troll, too. In my opinion if you are not willing to visit the forum and discuss certain subjects in more than 2 sentenses, you shouldn't expect to change something what you wanna change and you shouldn't cry if your opinion is not considered at all.
How could I take someones opinion serious if he/she wrote it down in two sentenses without any research or details or insults players with different opinions on a subject (f.e. 'Mystical Tutor' BAN)


Regarding your wishes for Skullclamp/Library/Jitte. Those 3 cards in my opinion are the worst offenders if you are looking at cards that break mirrormatches.
In Control mirrors Library on Turn 1 is simply not beatable. It is extremely disheartening and unfun for most players. Skullclamp and Jitte are two cards that make attacking and blocking basically impossible. Keep in mind that creature tokens are plentiful nowadays due to planeswalkers, CitP effects and so on. While I believe Jitte to be the smaller problem of the two, Jitte really shines vs aggro. Aggro has a tough stand in our meta (except RDW) and Jitte would make matters a lot worse.     

This is why I wanted to start a discussion around the cards I mentioned (there are few more cards on the banlist), I wanted to see other opinions and perspectives.
Logged

Formerly known as With-FuLL-Force.
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

 

Wizards of the Coast® and Magic: the Gathering® are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. (WotC).
Magic: the Gathering®, the five mana-symbols, the tap-symbol and most cards and artworks are © WotC.

© 2004-2007 by connexo websolutions   |   Imprint