You play land, Zurgo. I play Tabernacle. You just got Strip Mine'd and Strip Mine'd again every time you play a creature. You lose.
EDIT: The problem with DC20 for me right now isn't even the banlist anymore. It's just the nature of the format - it seems to be always a classic 2-deck-format, so the threshold of "normal" dominance now is 18-22% while in DC30 we had a 9-12% range. So yeah, I really don't care what you guys say because the numbers are very clear that DC20 is less diverse.
Given I was the one that mentioned the cards that I think should be unbanned, I do of course disagree with some of the things that Ashiok have said.
1. Like Mikel123 said, I don't think price should ever be considered as a reason for banning a card.
2. I don't see a problem in forcing people to run land destruction and enchantment hate. And this here is a one of the things I like the least about the players that play DC. The fact that they want to "ban that and that and that" so that they dont have to adapt to any meta at all. If you meta consist of 15 players and 14 of them runs Tabernacle, then adapt to that.
3. Marath is oppressive if you play creature decks. Partners (Bruse) is oppressive if you play control. Cant follow this argument.
Maybe Chrome Mox and Mox Diamond are too good. I just really felt like they were banned because of two specific commander rather then anything else (Baral and Jace).
Oh and fsecco, I don't think that we should keep Tabernacle banned just because its good turn 1 against Zurgo. And the analogy with strip mine isnt correct since a strip mine every turn would mean that he would be stuck on 0 lands. Thats not the case with Tabernacle at all.
I actually think the banlist for DC is in a pretty good place. Maybe Yisan is OK in 20 life, maybe #FoodChainProssh is more acceptable in 20 life, Marath might be reasonable at 20 life since aggressive decks have a better win chance (and thus Marath is more acceptable to expect as opposed to feeling hopeless vs a walking Jitte with 30 life). NOoze is fine @ 20, it at least gives mono-B an option although maybe cull Buried Alive for good measure?
IDK. If these didn't happen, I'd be OK. I'm earnestly quite happy with DC's current positioning.
P.S.: I agree and have advocated for sideboards for a long time. However, you need to be aware that the banlist would probably grow if sideboards were introduced, since some sideboard cards are a total beating (chill against monored? hibernation or nature's ruin against monogreen? Even karma seems bonker against monoblack, heh.) Not saying these would be the exact cards in the new banlist, but I'm sure the list would grow.
You don't need SBs. I've been playing maindeck Perish and Boil for years. Never once been a hindrance. You just have to know your meta, and plan accordingly. I've played Flashfreeze/Gainsay in xU. No issues. And if B were more represented, I'd justify Compost. But it's not. "They're not dead cards if your deck has a bad match-up against the cards the hate cards are efficient towards."
Point is, accurate metagame predicting is as much a part of deckbuilding as brewing the list in the first place. #KnowYourMeta
DC20 is good right now. We have a good weekly turnout at Westboro Magic League and a combo deck has won the league finals twice in a row. Last time it was Breya and this time not sure, as I was in a Grand Melee and not watching, but the lists will be at MTG Top 8 sometime today or tomorrow, just look up "Westboro Magic League". Decks there are pretty tuned too, as people have access to everything.
Looking forward to the announcement in a few hours.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The "Crazy One", playing casual magic and occasionally dipping his toes into regular play since 1994.
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
I see there are still many disagreements in the management of both DC and and mtgo among the players, which may be part of the reason why the format doesn't reach a place that favors all: either that is impossible, due to difference in preferences, or the players have a hard time reaching a compromise.
I will only add two things:
- I didn't say tabernacle should be banned ONLY due to its price, if that is what it looked like, I didn't express myself correctly. I think tabernacle is too much of a swingy card and a hindrance for creature decks, and shouldn't ever be allowed in our format, the high price is just an additional reason as to why I wouldn't allow it. Every single control deck can run expedition map, and every blue deck can run trinket mage to fetch said map, so there you have at least 2~3 copies of tabernacle in a control deck at least. And simply 'putting land hate' is not a good argument against that swingy card. If it sounds like a good argument then just allow Sol Ring into the format and 'just add artifact hate' into your deck. Humility is less oppressive than tabernacle but also incredibly destructive.
- Maybe it will be productive (probably in a different thread) to ask what cards players would like to see banned and unbanned to see if a compromise can be reached, and maybe express said compromise to the DC committee (and maybe to wizards mtgo list too, why not?). In the case of DC, I do think necrotic ooze, food chain and cradle could be reintroduced. I still disagree about Marath, but I would be willing to see what its unban would do. I would never agree to humility or tabernacle. If you want to have viable lock down strategies I would first unban strip mine before unbanning those two cards (a thing that I actually advocated for).
P.S.: I also think the DC20 format is in a fairly good place right now, and I'm only discussing these unbannings because I think they wouldn't harm the format, but rather increase its diversity.
Would you like to read Commander stories? Check my latest stories, coming from Lorwyn and Innistrad: Ghoulcaller Gisa and Doran, The Siege Tower! If you like my writing, ask me to write something for your commander as well!
Well it has been quite healthy DC30 here in my LGS. As long none of the blue/control decks play it has been quite balanced the games here. Since the implementation of Wizards 1v1 commander the winner only has repeated once and almsot every week a diferent deck won. But its a diferent case because the decks aren't exactly fully tuned or opressive(most of the time).
Well i'm happy that my Daretti is doing well and managed to be the deck to win more then once XD.
I think tabernacle is too much of a swingy card and a hindrance for creature decks, and shouldn't ever be allowed in our format, the high price is just an additional reason as to why I wouldn't allow it. Every single control deck can run expedition map, and every blue deck can run trinket mage to fetch said map, so there you have at least 2~3 copies of tabernacle in a control deck at least.
Best case, turn 1 Map, turn 2 activate it, turn 3 skip a land drop. You are pretty far behind at that point I think, having a whole 2 mana to spend to that point. And even that is miles better than spending your entire turn 3 and 4 worth of mana to get it on the board with Trinket Mage --> Map. If you're going to spend 3 mana and a land drop (or 6 mana and a land drop), why not just play Pendrell Mists?! Because 1/13 games you can just drop Tabernacle turn 1 and live the dream against Zurgo?
It's utterly baffling to me that this card hasn't ever seen the light of day in this format, as though it's a Mox or something. It's allowed 4x in Legacy and aggro dominates the format.
- I didn't say tabernacle should be banned ONLY due to its price, if that is what it looked like, I didn't express myself correctly. I think tabernacle is too much of a swingy card and a hindrance for creature decks, and shouldn't ever be allowed in our format, the high price is just an additional reason as to why I wouldn't allow it. Every single control deck can run expedition map, and every blue deck can run trinket mage to fetch said map, so there you have at least 2~3 copies of tabernacle in a control deck at least. And simply 'putting land hate' is not a good argument against that swingy card. If it sounds like a good argument then just allow Sol Ring into the format and 'just add artifact hate' into your deck. Humility is less oppressive than tabernacle but also incredibly destructive.
Two things. I dont think Tabernacle is that OP since it can be dealt with pretty easily for all decks. About it being swingy, I do think that it is far less swingy than Cavern of Souls. When I played Teferi, Temporal Archmage (High Tide Combo Deck) I felt that if a Jenara, Asura of War player (and the likes) went turn 1 green mana source -> Mana Dork into turn 2 CoS -> Jenara I would almost always just lose. I cant imagine Tabernacle being that powerful turn 1 or 2. Mostly because it doesnt provide mana, which means the control player is a land behind.
Secondly, please tell me you didn't just compare the impact of Tabernacle to Sol Ring You can remove a turn 1 Tabernacle two or three turns later and still make a comeback. That wouldnt be the case with a turn 1 Sol Ring that isnt removed on the spot.
Anyway, we dont have to agree. I just dont feel like Tabernacle would be that much of a problem, afterall you can easily run 3 land cards that can remove it. And the Expedition Map thing. If Trinket Mage into Exp. Map into Tabernacle is that good, then a Trinket Mage into Exp. Map into Wasteland must be just as good. I actually ran that tutor "combo" in Teferi just to get rid of CoS.
Oh and fsecco, I don't think that we should keep Tabernacle banned just because its good turn 1 against Zurgo. And the analogy with strip mine isnt correct since a strip mine every turn would mean that he would be stuck on 0 lands. Thats not the case with Tabernacle at all.
Why do you think that's valid for Zurgo only? It's an example on how you're able to recover a LOT of tempo by committing a single land drop. Tabernacle is very, very, very powerful and can be coupled with Winter Orb or whatever to make creatureless or creaturefew decks very powerful. It IS like Strip Mine in a way against aggro because you're "missing" a land drop and taking out a land drop of theirs. The obvious difference is that it gets better for each creature he puts into play - and god knows aggro decks need creatures to be able to get into reach. It can work as a one sided Winter Orb or Tangle Wire to give you the time to recover.
It's utterly baffling to me that this card hasn't ever seen the light of day in this format, as though it's a Mox or something. It's allowed 4x in Legacy and aggro dominates the format.
Most of which win with a single Delver of Secrets and maybe a True-Name Nemesis on the battlefield. Not the small army of mana elves or semi-vanilla beaters that Abzan, RDW, Animar, etc. absolutely need to win.
Marath and Tabernacle benefit blue by destroying non-blue strategies, but at least Marath can be killed or controlled by resources every color has a plenty, not just Wasteland, Dust Bowl and Tec. Edge.
Anyway, Geist, Jace and Bruse are banned as commanders in DC along with Polymorph and Emrakul. Ancient Tomb, Mind Twist and Fastbon were unbanned.
Our small group here in Ottawa is likely switching over to MTGO 1 v 1 banlist in a few weeks. There was just a lot of upheaval and a general concern that Gitrog/Titania are going to be pants-on-head crazy with Fastbond unbanned and so on. Looking at the MTGO results though, yeesh, so much Baral and Breya.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The "Crazy One", playing casual magic and occasionally dipping his toes into regular play since 1994.
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
Oh and fsecco, I don't think that we should keep Tabernacle banned just because its good turn 1 against Zurgo. And the analogy with strip mine isnt correct since a strip mine every turn would mean that he would be stuck on 0 lands. Thats not the case with Tabernacle at all.
Why do you think that's valid for Zurgo only? It's an example on how you're able to recover a LOT of tempo by committing a single land drop. Tabernacle is very, very, very powerful and can be coupled with Winter Orb or whatever to make creatureless or creaturefew decks very powerful. It IS like Strip Mine in a way against aggro because you're "missing" a land drop and taking out a land drop of theirs. The obvious difference is that it gets better for each creature he puts into play - and god knows aggro decks need creatures to be able to get into reach. It can work as a one sided Winter Orb or Tangle Wire to give you the time to recover.
If you don't believe it, just test it out.
But thats not what you said. You said it was like being Strip Mined again and again and again, which is simply not true, as that would mean you didnt have acces to any lands at all. You do have acces to lands vs. Tabernacle. Against Jenara og Doran it would most of all mean that your Mana Dorks are close to useless, and I for one would love to have an answer to that strategy. Furthermore, as Mikel123 stated, its not like STAX decks with winter orb effects are extremely popular right now.
Anyway, as stated it is just my opinion. But arguing that Tabernacle is hard to deal with is just wrong. Actually its one of the things even each mono-colored deck would be able to destroy. It may be a very good card, but again, adapting to a meta should be considered important. Else we should all just go and play solitaire.
I dont understand. You are switching to MTGO 1v1 one day after the banlist change because of concern that something might happen? Why dont you rather adjust to the new meta?
It's utterly baffling to me that this card hasn't ever seen the light of day in this format, as though it's a Mox or something. It's allowed 4x in Legacy and aggro dominates the format.
- Death and Taxes has been a tier 1 deck in the format for over a decade, and more than half its spells are creatures.
- Delver decks play "only" 14 creatures or so, and between 2-4 copies of Young Pyromancer. That card isn't in there because it's a 2/1 for 2 mana...
- Eldrazi Aggro plays ~24 creatures.
- And of course, Elves is a mainstay in the format and something you can count on seeing at most mid-sized tournaments.
Zurgo wins plenty of games being the only creature left on the battlefield too. So does Anafenza or Doran. That's the nature of aggro; you don't just get to play all your guys and let them swing every turn without obstacle.
The fact that a deck needs a lot of guys on the board to win is not something to be catered to, in my opinion. That just means the format is slow or lacking removal/answers. Needing lots of guys on the board is an obstacle that a combo deck like Elves or Animar must work around. Carving out special bans so that they can exist is favoritism for what is likely otherwise a subpar deck.
It's utterly baffling to me that this card hasn't ever seen the light of day in this format, as though it's a Mox or something. It's allowed 4x in Legacy and aggro dominates the format.
- Death and Taxes has been a tier 1 deck in the format for over a decade, and more than half its spells are creatures.
- Delver decks play "only" 14 creatures or so, and between 2-4 copies of Young Pyromancer. That card isn't in there because it's a 2/1 for 2 mana...
- Eldrazi Aggro plays ~24 creatures.
- And of course, Elves is a mainstay in the format and something you can count on seeing at most mid-sized tournaments.
Zurgo wins plenty of games being the only creature left on the battlefield too. So does Anafenza or Doran. That's the nature of aggro; you don't just get to play all your guys and let them swing every turn without obstacle.
The fact that a deck needs a lot of guys on the board to win is not something to be catered to, in my opinion. That just means the format is slow or lacking removal/answers. Needing lots of guys on the board is an obstacle that a combo deck like Elves or Animar must work around. Carving out special bans so that they can exist is favoritism for what is likely otherwise a subpar deck.
D&T runs and can mulligan agressively to Wasteland, Elves ignore Tabernacle by making mana off themselves/Priest of Titania and still getting a payload with Gaea's Cradle, and Eldrazi doesn't beat Lands.
The only time an aggro deck beats the ONE competitive deck that runs Tabernacle in Legacy, it's either Delver variants with 1-2 Delver of Secrets/TNN or Burn with 1-2 Goblin Guide.
You people make the stupidest arguments. Put Tabernacle in Baral, Breya or Tasigur and watch this stupid waste of a format become even less proactive and closed than it already is.
Elves ignore Tabernacle by making mana off themselves
That's not "ignoring" :/
It's all well and good to try to claim Tabernacle is amazing in Legacy, but the indisputable facts are:
- it's a 1-of...
- in a single deck...
- that makes up 4% of the metagame.
- And all of the decks that get "dominated" by it are the top decks in the format - both in results as well as just plain number of people playing them.
Maelstrom: No, I replied to wrong post. Ment the one by Crazy Pierre
That winning UR parthner is interesting take IMO but some of the card choices are weird (frostling, no cryptic command or mystic confluence and lack of true name nemesis)
Mystic Confluence is a 60 dollars card in mtgo. People not playing it is not that out of the ordinary. People tend to not play Daze and Impulse because of their price as well.
Oh and fsecco, I don't think that we should keep Tabernacle banned just because its good turn 1 against Zurgo. And the analogy with strip mine isnt correct since a strip mine every turn would mean that he would be stuck on 0 lands. Thats not the case with Tabernacle at all.
Why do you think that's valid for Zurgo only? It's an example on how you're able to recover a LOT of tempo by committing a single land drop. Tabernacle is very, very, very powerful and can be coupled with Winter Orb or whatever to make creatureless or creaturefew decks very powerful. It IS like Strip Mine in a way against aggro because you're "missing" a land drop and taking out a land drop of theirs. The obvious difference is that it gets better for each creature he puts into play - and god knows aggro decks need creatures to be able to get into reach. It can work as a one sided Winter Orb or Tangle Wire to give you the time to recover.
If you don't believe it, just test it out.
But thats not what you said. You said it was like being Strip Mined again and again and again, which is simply not true, as that would mean you didnt have acces to any lands at all. You do have acces to lands vs. Tabernacle. Against Jenara og Doran it would most of all mean that your Mana Dorks are close to useless, and I for one would love to have an answer to that strategy. Furthermore, as Mikel123 stated, its not like STAX decks with winter orb effects are extremely popular right now.
Anyway, as stated it is just my opinion. But arguing that Tabernacle is hard to deal with is just wrong. Actually its one of the things even each mono-colored deck would be able to destroy. It may be a very good card, but again, adapting to a meta should be considered important. Else we should all just go and play solitaire.
It's an analogy and yes, it is just ANALOG to being Strip Mine'd because if you want to keep your tempo/CA engine going (creatures, in aggro decks) you need to spend that mana every turn keep your guys on the table. All that cost me is a single land drop. It you let it die then it's pretty good for the Tabernacle player too. The only thing that makes this not that awesome against Zurgo are the hasty creatures, but well, they're just burn spells now.
I really don't think you get how Tabernacle works at all. It's not a Wrath of God, that's not why it's there. It's a TEMPO card that buys you a lot of time against aggro and doesn't let the aggro player curve out.
Saying "every deck can deal with it" is just like saying a creature is not oppressive because it dies to Bolt - it's a non-argument.
Also, there is an answer to elfball. It's called Cursed Totem, nice to meet you.
You people make the stupidest arguments. Put Tabernacle in Baral, Breya or Tasigur and watch this stupid waste of a format become even less proactive and closed than it already is.
I can't believe this but... I... agree... with you...
Crazy Pierre: I dont understand. You are switching to MTGO 1v1 one day after the banlist change because of concern that something might happen? Why dont you rather adjust to the new meta?
edit: comment targeted to Crazy Pierre
I think some of the concern is that there really isn't an understanding of the bans. For example, banning Emrakul alone might have been fine, but banning Polymorph with Emrakul gone seemed like overkill. Fastbond was a big red flag as well for some of our players, and Geist wasn't particularly threatening at all, so that was overkill.
There has been a lot of debate over the past few weeks on which banlist to adapt. The cantrips and selection cards being cut from MTGO 1 v 1 should have made blue a little more clunky, but it hasn't been so, apparently. I believe that with 30 life, there might be a bit more of a cushion in fighting aggro as well, which might lead to a few slower strategies. You can just join the Facebook group to see the discussion thread, it's Westboro Magic League basically.
I believe there might have been some "ban fatigue" as well, with people building decks and then having their stuff banned (JVP in one case, Geist in another) and so on. The league had been going for some time though, and still draws a good amount of people. I'm building something weird and grindy for the next iteration (HoD Season starts on the 31st, due to DC at Toronto this weekend, people need rest after coming back), and the 30 life will be a boon for my Azorious deck.
Just FYI, our meta these days has been:
1 Dragonlord Ojutai
2 Zurgo
1 Atraxa/Rhonas
1 Kytheon
1 Brimaz
2 BR Grenzo (One combo, one token overwhelm)
1 Narset
1 Pope
2 Bruse Tarl
1 JvP (at times)
1 Geist
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The "Crazy One", playing casual magic and occasionally dipping his toes into regular play since 1994.
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
I really don't get how Commander players react to bans... people thought Marath was oppressive when he had 4% of the Top 8s and now think Geist is OK when he has 11-20%. Go figure...
Oh and fsecco, I don't think that we should keep Tabernacle banned just because its good turn 1 against Zurgo. And the analogy with strip mine isnt correct since a strip mine every turn would mean that he would be stuck on 0 lands. Thats not the case with Tabernacle at all.
Why do you think that's valid for Zurgo only? It's an example on how you're able to recover a LOT of tempo by committing a single land drop. Tabernacle is very, very, very powerful and can be coupled with Winter Orb or whatever to make creatureless or creaturefew decks very powerful. It IS like Strip Mine in a way against aggro because you're "missing" a land drop and taking out a land drop of theirs. The obvious difference is that it gets better for each creature he puts into play - and god knows aggro decks need creatures to be able to get into reach. It can work as a one sided Winter Orb or Tangle Wire to give you the time to recover.
If you don't believe it, just test it out.
But thats not what you said. You said it was like being Strip Mined again and again and again, which is simply not true, as that would mean you didnt have acces to any lands at all. You do have acces to lands vs. Tabernacle. Against Jenara og Doran it would most of all mean that your Mana Dorks are close to useless, and I for one would love to have an answer to that strategy. Furthermore, as Mikel123 stated, its not like STAX decks with winter orb effects are extremely popular right now.
Anyway, as stated it is just my opinion. But arguing that Tabernacle is hard to deal with is just wrong. Actually its one of the things even each mono-colored deck would be able to destroy. It may be a very good card, but again, adapting to a meta should be considered important. Else we should all just go and play solitaire.
It's an analogy and yes, it is just ANALOG to being Strip Mine'd because if you want to keep your tempo/CA engine going (creatures, in aggro decks) you need to spend that mana every turn keep your guys on the table. All that cost me is a single land drop. It you let it die then it's pretty good for the Tabernacle player too. The only thing that makes this not that awesome against Zurgo are the hasty creatures, but well, they're just burn spells now.
I really don't think you get how Tabernacle works at all. It's not a Wrath of God, that's not why it's there. It's a TEMPO card that buys you a lot of time against aggro and doesn't let the aggro player curve out.
Saying "every deck can deal with it" is just like saying a creature is not oppressive because it dies to Bolt - it's a non-argument.
Also, there is an answer to elfball. It's called Cursed Totem, nice to meet you.
You people make the stupidest arguments. Put Tabernacle in Baral, Breya or Tasigur and watch this stupid waste of a format become even less proactive and closed than it already is.
I can't believe this but... I... agree... with you...
You are still wrong. I fully understand how tabernacle works, I play it in my legacy lands deck. And its not the same as being strip mined every turn. The lands deck is built around strip mining the opponent every turn (either through wasteland og ghost quearter) and there is a BIG difference between being hit by a wasteland coming again and again from the grave with Life from the Loam than paying one land every turn to keep Tarmogoyf on the battlefield. The opponent can easily have acces to 3 or 4 lands even though tabernacle is on the battlefield. He aint getting strip mined down to zero lands every turn, like he is when I keep recurring ghost quarter. Furthermore, sometimes its best not to pay for the creature to survive, in case you need the mana for something else, so you land is still there. If you cant see that being hit by a strip mine again and again and again (like you said) turn after turn losing x lands is something totally different than tabernacle being on the battlefield, then I really believe you are the one that doesnt get how tabernacle works.
Back to the topic
I said that I stopped playing DC some months ago ( back in April I think), and wasn't able to play 1v1 WotC since my LGS didnt switch away from DC20 in may. So I went on and started playing legacy, something I never thought I would do, and it turns out to be quite fun and well balanced. 2-3 weeks ago my LGS announced that they would switch to MTGO 1v1, but I dont think I want to play that format anymore, since I found a better and way more balanced format.
What is happening here (in my last couple of posts) is that I stated that, the sad thing is, that both MTGO 1v1 and DC20 are quite broken. DC20 has a very weird banlist. Someone then asked me which cards I would remove from the banlist and I wrote 6-8 cards that I thought should be unbanned. Thats all, unbanning tabernacle is something I believe could be good for the format.
But as I said earlier, I dont think either DC20 or MTGO 1v1 will ever work and the main reason is the acces to a commander. For instance, BURN/RDW is maybe tier 1,5 in legacy, it can be very hard to beat but they require a good starting hand, and often mulligans to 5 or 6. In DC20 having acces to a turn 1 drop every game just makes it so much easier. Futhermore the partner mechanic is just broken. I said a long time ago, that it wasnt enough just to ban Vial Smasher the Fierce. Having acces to 9 cards is just ridicolous. Take Bruse/Reyhan, even if they mana flood they can always just Reyhan turn 3, Bruse turn 4, then Reyhan turn 5, then Bruse turn 6 and so on. Not that, thats what the deck wants to do, but it is a possibility whereas commander decks with one commander wont be able to do that when mana flooding.
I really liked the idea of commander but I dont see it ever being a competitive format, as I have stated before too.
Oh and Cainson, you do know that Breya and Tasigur is banned in your precious format right? I am talking about what cards I would unban in DC20. I just realised that they banned Polymorph in DC20, I think that says all there is to say about that format.
Man, come on, of course I understand the difference between Tabernacle and Strip Mine, I'm not dumb. As I said a few times, it's an ANALOGY. As simple as that. And for creature-heavy strategies, Tabernacle hurts mana development just like an Strip Mine every turn does. Is it the same thing? Nope. Is it analog and comparable, yes. I don't think Tabernacle is safe AT ALL in this format and I really believe whoever defends that doesn't understand the card properly (just like everyone who defended Balance's unban back then just didn't know what it did properly).
I also believe Commander is bound to be an unbalanced format. I see no problem with that, as long as we don't have decks dominating 20% of the meta. Legacy is in a good place right now and I'm playing it too.
It's becoming increasingly challenging to even defend 1v1 Commander as a concept—I've been trying to pitch Duel Commander to NYC players for literally years and they laugh in my face every time and say some really *****ty things and I.. understand where they're coming from. More and more, as we get mechanics that enable 9-card starting hands and no shared Commander tax and no meaningful attempt whatsoever to make playing non-partner decks worthwhile, there are some major foundational issues that only get worse and worse over time.
I sympathize with everyone who has to make difficult rules decisions that further make the sub-format more difficult to understand for newcomers, be it bans or mechanical differences, but some things seem so obviously effed up and imbalanced that are never addressed that my empathy quickly transforms into animosity and some degree of shame, frankly, that I've been otherwise so insistent on singing the praises of everyone involved.
EDIT: The problem with DC20 for me right now isn't even the banlist anymore. It's just the nature of the format - it seems to be always a classic 2-deck-format, so the threshold of "normal" dominance now is 18-22% while in DC30 we had a 9-12% range. So yeah, I really don't care what you guys say because the numbers are very clear that DC20 is less diverse.
1. Like Mikel123 said, I don't think price should ever be considered as a reason for banning a card.
2. I don't see a problem in forcing people to run land destruction and enchantment hate. And this here is a one of the things I like the least about the players that play DC. The fact that they want to "ban that and that and that" so that they dont have to adapt to any meta at all. If you meta consist of 15 players and 14 of them runs Tabernacle, then adapt to that.
3. Marath is oppressive if you play creature decks. Partners (Bruse) is oppressive if you play control. Cant follow this argument.
Maybe Chrome Mox and Mox Diamond are too good. I just really felt like they were banned because of two specific commander rather then anything else (Baral and Jace).
Oh and fsecco, I don't think that we should keep Tabernacle banned just because its good turn 1 against Zurgo. And the analogy with strip mine isnt correct since a strip mine every turn would mean that he would be stuck on 0 lands. Thats not the case with Tabernacle at all.
IDK. If these didn't happen, I'd be OK. I'm earnestly quite happy with DC's current positioning.
You don't need SBs. I've been playing maindeck Perish and Boil for years. Never once been a hindrance. You just have to know your meta, and plan accordingly. I've played Flashfreeze/Gainsay in xU. No issues. And if B were more represented, I'd justify Compost. But it's not. "They're not dead cards if your deck has a bad match-up against the cards the hate cards are efficient towards."
Point is, accurate metagame predicting is as much a part of deckbuilding as brewing the list in the first place. #KnowYourMeta
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
Looking forward to the announcement in a few hours.
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
I will only add two things:
- I didn't say tabernacle should be banned ONLY due to its price, if that is what it looked like, I didn't express myself correctly. I think tabernacle is too much of a swingy card and a hindrance for creature decks, and shouldn't ever be allowed in our format, the high price is just an additional reason as to why I wouldn't allow it. Every single control deck can run expedition map, and every blue deck can run trinket mage to fetch said map, so there you have at least 2~3 copies of tabernacle in a control deck at least. And simply 'putting land hate' is not a good argument against that swingy card. If it sounds like a good argument then just allow Sol Ring into the format and 'just add artifact hate' into your deck. Humility is less oppressive than tabernacle but also incredibly destructive.
- Maybe it will be productive (probably in a different thread) to ask what cards players would like to see banned and unbanned to see if a compromise can be reached, and maybe express said compromise to the DC committee (and maybe to wizards mtgo list too, why not?). In the case of DC, I do think necrotic ooze, food chain and cradle could be reintroduced. I still disagree about Marath, but I would be willing to see what its unban would do. I would never agree to humility or tabernacle. If you want to have viable lock down strategies I would first unban strip mine before unbanning those two cards (a thing that I actually advocated for).
P.S.: I also think the DC20 format is in a fairly good place right now, and I'm only discussing these unbannings because I think they wouldn't harm the format, but rather increase its diversity.
Read my other stories as well (some ongoing):
Reaper King (a horror story), Kaalia of the Vast (an origin story), Sequels for Innistrad (Alternative sequels for Inn), Grey Areas (Odric's fanfic), Royal Succession (goblins),The Tracker's Message (eldrazi on Innistrad) and Ugin and his Eye (the end of OGW).
Well i'm happy that my Daretti is doing well and managed to be the deck to win more then once XD.
It's utterly baffling to me that this card hasn't ever seen the light of day in this format, as though it's a Mox or something. It's allowed 4x in Legacy and aggro dominates the format.
Two things. I dont think Tabernacle is that OP since it can be dealt with pretty easily for all decks. About it being swingy, I do think that it is far less swingy than Cavern of Souls. When I played Teferi, Temporal Archmage (High Tide Combo Deck) I felt that if a Jenara, Asura of War player (and the likes) went turn 1 green mana source -> Mana Dork into turn 2 CoS -> Jenara I would almost always just lose. I cant imagine Tabernacle being that powerful turn 1 or 2. Mostly because it doesnt provide mana, which means the control player is a land behind.
Secondly, please tell me you didn't just compare the impact of Tabernacle to Sol Ring
Anyway, we dont have to agree. I just dont feel like Tabernacle would be that much of a problem, afterall you can easily run 3 land cards that can remove it. And the Expedition Map thing. If Trinket Mage into Exp. Map into Tabernacle is that good, then a Trinket Mage into Exp. Map into Wasteland must be just as good. I actually ran that tutor "combo" in Teferi just to get rid of CoS.
Why do you think that's valid for Zurgo only? It's an example on how you're able to recover a LOT of tempo by committing a single land drop. Tabernacle is very, very, very powerful and can be coupled with Winter Orb or whatever to make creatureless or creaturefew decks very powerful. It IS like Strip Mine in a way against aggro because you're "missing" a land drop and taking out a land drop of theirs. The obvious difference is that it gets better for each creature he puts into play - and god knows aggro decks need creatures to be able to get into reach. It can work as a one sided Winter Orb or Tangle Wire to give you the time to recover.
If you don't believe it, just test it out.
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mtgo-standings/commander-1-v-1-challenge-2017-07-16
1st 6 Breya
2nd Jace VP
3rd 4 Baral
5th Ludevic, Necro-Alchemist Kraum, Ludevic's Opus
7th Marath, Will of the Wild
8th Undead Vizier
Most of which win with a single Delver of Secrets and maybe a True-Name Nemesis on the battlefield. Not the small army of mana elves or semi-vanilla beaters that Abzan, RDW, Animar, etc. absolutely need to win.
Marath and Tabernacle benefit blue by destroying non-blue strategies, but at least Marath can be killed or controlled by resources every color has a plenty, not just Wasteland, Dust Bowl and Tec. Edge.
Anyway, Geist, Jace and Bruse are banned as commanders in DC along with Polymorph and Emrakul. Ancient Tomb, Mind Twist and Fastbon were unbanned.
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
But thats not what you said. You said it was like being Strip Mined again and again and again, which is simply not true, as that would mean you didnt have acces to any lands at all. You do have acces to lands vs. Tabernacle. Against Jenara og Doran it would most of all mean that your Mana Dorks are close to useless, and I for one would love to have an answer to that strategy. Furthermore, as Mikel123 stated, its not like STAX decks with winter orb effects are extremely popular right now.
Anyway, as stated it is just my opinion. But arguing that Tabernacle is hard to deal with is just wrong. Actually its one of the things even each mono-colored deck would be able to destroy. It may be a very good card, but again, adapting to a meta should be considered important. Else we should all just go and play solitaire.
Me?
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/tournament/commander-1-v-1-challenge-10757687#paper
- Death and Taxes has been a tier 1 deck in the format for over a decade, and more than half its spells are creatures.
- Delver decks play "only" 14 creatures or so, and between 2-4 copies of Young Pyromancer. That card isn't in there because it's a 2/1 for 2 mana...
- Eldrazi Aggro plays ~24 creatures.
- And of course, Elves is a mainstay in the format and something you can count on seeing at most mid-sized tournaments.
Zurgo wins plenty of games being the only creature left on the battlefield too. So does Anafenza or Doran. That's the nature of aggro; you don't just get to play all your guys and let them swing every turn without obstacle.
The fact that a deck needs a lot of guys on the board to win is not something to be catered to, in my opinion. That just means the format is slow or lacking removal/answers. Needing lots of guys on the board is an obstacle that a combo deck like Elves or Animar must work around. Carving out special bans so that they can exist is favoritism for what is likely otherwise a subpar deck.
The only time an aggro deck beats the ONE competitive deck that runs Tabernacle in Legacy, it's either Delver variants with 1-2 Delver of Secrets/TNN or Burn with 1-2 Goblin Guide.
You people make the stupidest arguments. Put Tabernacle in Baral, Breya or Tasigur and watch this stupid waste of a format become even less proactive and closed than it already is.
It's all well and good to try to claim Tabernacle is amazing in Legacy, but the indisputable facts are:
- it's a 1-of...
- in a single deck...
- that makes up 4% of the metagame.
- And all of the decks that get "dominated" by it are the top decks in the format - both in results as well as just plain number of people playing them.
This doesn't add up.
Mystic Confluence is a 60 dollars card in mtgo. People not playing it is not that out of the ordinary. People tend to not play Daze and Impulse because of their price as well.
It's an analogy and yes, it is just ANALOG to being Strip Mine'd because if you want to keep your tempo/CA engine going (creatures, in aggro decks) you need to spend that mana every turn keep your guys on the table. All that cost me is a single land drop. It you let it die then it's pretty good for the Tabernacle player too. The only thing that makes this not that awesome against Zurgo are the hasty creatures, but well, they're just burn spells now.
I really don't think you get how Tabernacle works at all. It's not a Wrath of God, that's not why it's there. It's a TEMPO card that buys you a lot of time against aggro and doesn't let the aggro player curve out.
Saying "every deck can deal with it" is just like saying a creature is not oppressive because it dies to Bolt - it's a non-argument.
Also, there is an answer to elfball. It's called Cursed Totem, nice to meet you.
I can't believe this but... I... agree... with you...
I think some of the concern is that there really isn't an understanding of the bans. For example, banning Emrakul alone might have been fine, but banning Polymorph with Emrakul gone seemed like overkill. Fastbond was a big red flag as well for some of our players, and Geist wasn't particularly threatening at all, so that was overkill.
There has been a lot of debate over the past few weeks on which banlist to adapt. The cantrips and selection cards being cut from MTGO 1 v 1 should have made blue a little more clunky, but it hasn't been so, apparently. I believe that with 30 life, there might be a bit more of a cushion in fighting aggro as well, which might lead to a few slower strategies. You can just join the Facebook group to see the discussion thread, it's Westboro Magic League basically.
I believe there might have been some "ban fatigue" as well, with people building decks and then having their stuff banned (JVP in one case, Geist in another) and so on. The league had been going for some time though, and still draws a good amount of people. I'm building something weird and grindy for the next iteration (HoD Season starts on the 31st, due to DC at Toronto this weekend, people need rest after coming back), and the 30 life will be a boon for my Azorious deck.
Just FYI, our meta these days has been:
1 Dragonlord Ojutai
2 Zurgo
1 Atraxa/Rhonas
1 Kytheon
1 Brimaz
2 BR Grenzo (One combo, one token overwhelm)
1 Narset
1 Pope
2 Bruse Tarl
1 JvP (at times)
1 Geist
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
You are still wrong. I fully understand how tabernacle works, I play it in my legacy lands deck. And its not the same as being strip mined every turn. The lands deck is built around strip mining the opponent every turn (either through wasteland og ghost quearter) and there is a BIG difference between being hit by a wasteland coming again and again from the grave with Life from the Loam than paying one land every turn to keep Tarmogoyf on the battlefield. The opponent can easily have acces to 3 or 4 lands even though tabernacle is on the battlefield. He aint getting strip mined down to zero lands every turn, like he is when I keep recurring ghost quarter. Furthermore, sometimes its best not to pay for the creature to survive, in case you need the mana for something else, so you land is still there. If you cant see that being hit by a strip mine again and again and again (like you said) turn after turn losing x lands is something totally different than tabernacle being on the battlefield, then I really believe you are the one that doesnt get how tabernacle works.
Back to the topic
I said that I stopped playing DC some months ago ( back in April I think), and wasn't able to play 1v1 WotC since my LGS didnt switch away from DC20 in may. So I went on and started playing legacy, something I never thought I would do, and it turns out to be quite fun and well balanced. 2-3 weeks ago my LGS announced that they would switch to MTGO 1v1, but I dont think I want to play that format anymore, since I found a better and way more balanced format.
What is happening here (in my last couple of posts) is that I stated that, the sad thing is, that both MTGO 1v1 and DC20 are quite broken. DC20 has a very weird banlist. Someone then asked me which cards I would remove from the banlist and I wrote 6-8 cards that I thought should be unbanned. Thats all, unbanning tabernacle is something I believe could be good for the format.
But as I said earlier, I dont think either DC20 or MTGO 1v1 will ever work and the main reason is the acces to a commander. For instance, BURN/RDW is maybe tier 1,5 in legacy, it can be very hard to beat but they require a good starting hand, and often mulligans to 5 or 6. In DC20 having acces to a turn 1 drop every game just makes it so much easier. Futhermore the partner mechanic is just broken. I said a long time ago, that it wasnt enough just to ban Vial Smasher the Fierce. Having acces to 9 cards is just ridicolous. Take Bruse/Reyhan, even if they mana flood they can always just Reyhan turn 3, Bruse turn 4, then Reyhan turn 5, then Bruse turn 6 and so on. Not that, thats what the deck wants to do, but it is a possibility whereas commander decks with one commander wont be able to do that when mana flooding.
I really liked the idea of commander but I dont see it ever being a competitive format, as I have stated before too.
Oh and Cainson, you do know that Breya and Tasigur is banned in your precious format right? I am talking about what cards I would unban in DC20. I just realised that they banned Polymorph in DC20, I think that says all there is to say about that format.
I also believe Commander is bound to be an unbalanced format. I see no problem with that, as long as we don't have decks dominating 20% of the meta. Legacy is in a good place right now and I'm playing it too.
Quoting to emphatically say "this."
It's becoming increasingly challenging to even defend 1v1 Commander as a concept—I've been trying to pitch Duel Commander to NYC players for literally years and they laugh in my face every time and say some really *****ty things and I.. understand where they're coming from. More and more, as we get mechanics that enable 9-card starting hands and no shared Commander tax and no meaningful attempt whatsoever to make playing non-partner decks worthwhile, there are some major foundational issues that only get worse and worse over time.
I sympathize with everyone who has to make difficult rules decisions that further make the sub-format more difficult to understand for newcomers, be it bans or mechanical differences, but some things seem so obviously effed up and imbalanced that are never addressed that my empathy quickly transforms into animosity and some degree of shame, frankly, that I've been otherwise so insistent on singing the praises of everyone involved.
Duel Commander Mega-Thread