How are we getting here? You said he’d untap with 6 on turn 3? 4 on turn 2, 6 on t3 = 9 on 4? Don’t get me wrong, turn 5 doesn’t make those totals any better, but 4+ times around the table and nobody could interact??
Forest (+1), Mana Crypt (+2), Farseek (+1). Land (+1), Explosive Vegetation (+2). Land (+1). 8 on turn 3. 9 on turn 4 for the Rite. Sometimes ***** happens, and no one has an answer, which is fine. You seem to be the only one upset.
Good thing I referenced Duel then, huh. Point is, fast mana does not make combo possible. Combo exists regardless. You’ll have games like that with or without sol ring.
And the life totals and number of players in Duel are... what's the word... it starts with a "d"...
I have no problem with combo. I have a problem with fast mana, even when I'm abusing it, because it leads to boring games.
You can’t interact with other human beings for 5 minutes? FFS it takes me over an hour to find out what my wife wants to eat, and then she inevitably changes her mind. This is such a reach man. “What can we expect here mates?” “We can end the game on T5 pretty consistently”. “Oh, ok”. I mean, how did you even come into contact with these people to begin with? Scotty beam you down into an empty chair at their table and you just start playing?
Math may not be the only thing you have trouble with, sheesh. Didn’t say removal density was an issue. Re-read what I said.
Anyways. MW does come down turn 3 without fast mana. Yisan does combo on T4 without fast mana.
Keep the same customized BBCode so I can more easily maintain a decklist on two sites. Being able to copy and paste from one to the other would save me a lot on headache medication.
No reading comprehension? MW snowballs. It’s a cast ability that can’t be interacted with. I said it myself. But, what did he cascade into? Otherwise, all players are at 40 life and there’s still plenty of time to do something. The game just doesn’t end there. If you’re claiming Mw didn’t combo kill, then he had to hit 2 other players a total of 6 times!
This whole paragraph is logically inconsistent with itself. Maelstrom Wanderer snowballs, but had to combo out to win? Is Rite of Replication from his hand kicked on a big dumb beater he flipped with Wanderer a combo? My turn 3 consisted of land, Erebos, go. His turn 4 consisted of the Rite and wiping the other player out, and I couldn't dig to find an answer in time on my turn, so it was game over.
Modern decks win on T3 or T4. What fast mana is there? Duel Commander decks achieve similar results, no fast mana. Combo players combo, fast mana or not. Getting rid of fast mana won’t result in games not ending by turn 3, I hate to say it.
60 card formats aren't really comparable with EDH. The deckbuilding limitations, life totals, number of players, and the presence of commanders means they're fundamentally different. This is a very poor argument.
I was more or less being sarcastic, but if somebody is pissed at their games ending on turn 3, that sounds like a problem that’s quickly resolved by having that quick chat ahead of time as to what everyone’s expectations are. Lots of games involving fast mana go the distance.
It is completely absurd that I need to have a five minute conversation with a group of strangers setting up a social contract that could easily be solved by a more comprehensive and logically consistent banlist. I'm not upset that I lost those two games, I'm mildly irritated that none of the three games were particularly fun.
I’m not here advocating for Fast Mana to remain legal. I’m just here to point out that games lol the above are going to happen regardless. It doesn’t even matter what types of answers are available to be used on specific turns or whatever, it’s just a matter of whether or not their available to be used at all. I’ve had more games where I’ve felt “Wow, I should have mulliganed/kept a hand with better removal”, instead of “Wow, I got wiped out by Sol Ring”.
No. No they're not. Maelstrom Wanderer isn't coming down on turn 3 without fast mana. Yisan isn't comboing on turn 4 without fast mana. I'll see more cards and have more mana with which to respond. I can't believe I have to explain this to someone.
If you think I'm not packing enough removal you really need to look at my list.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think 2 turns is the fastest sol ring/crypt can speed up anything (ignoring interactions that let them generate extra mana like voltaic key or combos where they're part of the combo, etc, and assuming players always make land drops). Just wait 2 turns for them to play 2 extra lands, and then do exactly the same thing that they would have done with fast mana. They'll have the exact same play pattern, except ignoring those two turns waiting to play lands.
I'm pretty sure fast mana will generally accelerate plays between 1-2 turns. Which is still fairly absurd in a lot of cases - the MW player, for example, without crypt, would presumably have had T2 farseek, t3 explosive, giving 7 mana on turn 4, and a 5 mana MW. Compared to turn 3. That's a huge difference in terms of the sorts of answers that can reasonably be in place by that point in the game (oh and also screw MW that guy sucks).
Okay, fair enough, math isn't my strong suit. I was thinking the ramp into ramp hastened the process without doing the calculations, thinking solely based on using mana efficiently.
Also I loathe this "well, you should just play against more morally upstanding people!" argument. Many of us play in LGSs or open groups where we can't just exclude people without being incredibly rude, and possibly not even being able to get a game - and that's assuming we already know that person and we aren't just going in blind. If the format only works for close friends, then that's a pretty stupid way to run a format. If you're so good at regulating fast mana yourself, then why not house UNBAN them???
Oh right, because everyone talks a big game about how other people should house rule stuff, but no one actually wants to do it. Because it sucks.
Pretty much this. I'm new in town and don't want to make waves by telling people what they should do. There's no way I'm going to tell people I don't want to play with them based on knowing them for an hour.
So it was combos that ended the game, not fast mana?
I get it, fast mana sucks. But, if your table is combo’ing out ASAP, what the hell does fast mana have anything to do with that? Speeds it up a turn, that’s about it.
I’ve just played tons of games where fast mana has been overcome, and that’s because people aren’t racing to combo.
Guess I just play with different people. Most of whom sound like they are better overall people judging by your commentary.
I guess just casting Maelstrom Wanderer is a combo, now.
Speeds it up a turn? Are you kidding me? Do you realistically see Wanderer coming out on turn 4 without Ring or Crypt? Does Yisan combo out on turn 3 (maybe 4, I can't remember) without the assistance of fast mana? No, fast mana speeds up the game by at least two turns, more if they use their fast mana to ramp even more. By comboing out earlier, they decrease the chance of interaction. Please, tell me you get the correlation between fast mana and comboing out early.
Besides, what's your solution to combo? I'm all ears.
Banning fast mana not only slows combo down, but stops starts like the one I had, which was almost equally as ridiculous.
Nobody had lost life, nothing of significance had been played. Th MW deck, sure, that snowballs fast, but everything else is prime for an answer that shifts the focus away from fast mana being the problem here. This is essentially judging a book by its cover, in the most extreme way.
Haha, what? Are we even playing the same game at this point? Life totals are irrelevant when a deck combos out and I'm pretty sure ramping into Wanderer on turn 3 is significant. Answers obviously exist but what's your point, here? I'm going out on good faith here and assuming that you're not making the argument that because something dies to removal it's fine, but I really don't see the argument you're trying to make.
As much as I agree, I wonder if it's even possible from a political standpoint. I think there are enough "EDH is about sweet cards like sol ring! If I can't play sol ring I QUIT!" kind of people that banning sol ring could put a serious dent in the number of players. Although maybe we're better off without them.
This is a good point. The format is entrenched in its current philosophy and any fundamental change to it is likely to make some people angry, and I can honestly understand why. No one likes having their toys taken away. That said, playing nongames because someone happened to draw into their fast mana is a big drawback to the format for me. I just want to play moderately long games with a healthy amount of back and forth and players jockeying for the lead, not get blown out because someone ramped and ramped into vomiting out their hand.
The only thing memorable about these games is that fast mana was the deciding factor in who won the game. Well, I guess the Maelstrom Wanderer player giving me ***** for not doing much in games 1 and 2 being utterly dominated by me in game 3 was satisfying, but that's neither here nor there.
This deck definitely needs Yawgmoth, Thran Physician in its life. A free sac outlet that draws cards and takes out random dorks? That card was a godsend to Chainer decks.
Dang, only 32 mana producing lands? That seems incredibly low. Do you find yourself consistently missing land drops in the early game? You do run the larger rocks that I don't, so maybe that mitigates missing the drops in the mid and late game a bit.
"Rocks"
How have the bigger rocks like Dynamo and Lotus been working for you? I mean, obviously at least pretty decently since you still run them, but I've never tried them in Erebos. Outside of specific decks like Daretti and Paradox Engine combo. I'm a little skeptical about running expensive ramp since when I have 4-5 mana available is when I'm ready to start dropping permanents that affect the game state. All that said, the deck is very mana hungry and having big boosters that don't rely on lands could be very good.
"Independent" means I can usually just play that and have extra mana, while "Dependent" means other things have to be going on for them to help with mana (usually synergy or a loop). YawgWin and Crucible can help make sure I hit at least one land drop each, but they're slightly dependent even though it's often easy enough to have a land or two in the graveyard — especially a fetch, and I've burned one of my few tutors before going for Crucible if I have a fetch or vice versa.
36 lands is where I landed in my head, so it's nice to see others there, as well. It's not necessarily accurate or relevant for me since I run so many X spells and a commander with an activated ability that costs mana, but what's your curve at? Currently, excluding lands, I'm sitting at 3.21. Obviously Chainer is mana-intensive as well, so I think it's best to lean towards too much mana rather than not enough. I'm sure you recognize the power of a mana sink in the command zone.
I think about my mana a bit differently because of the use of combos like token-producers with Phyrexian Altar. Last game I played with Chainer (it's a little while between games these days), I sat on a swamp and a C land for a few turns and got lucky with Abhorrent Overlord, Deathgreeter, and Phyrexian Altar. Even though I struggled a bit at first and missed a few drops, I ended the game with 6 lands that could have only produced 3BBB, and that seemed like a normal game to me. It does make it more vulnerable to somebody exiling the Altar and/or Pitiless Plunderer and cutting me off from that ability, but I'm okay with that.
Interesting. Your deck is uniquely suited towards insane mana production when you're looping, so I think it very well could be that our differing mana demands mean our mana bases should be somewhat different.
As for games being few and far between, I hear you. I've played more Magic in a week than I have in months since I moved to a proper city. It's glorious.
Are you (and my other mono-black friends) satisfied with the number of lands you're running? I'm currently sitting at 35 mana producing lands plus 8 rocks and I'm not sure those numbers are right. Most MBC lists from 60 card formats typically ran 25 lands due to how mana hungry they are. 25/60 is roughly 42%, which is much higher than the roughly 35% that I'm currently running. I am running a decent number of rocks, though, and if you factor them in as being equal to half of a land, that comes to roughly 39%, which is still low. However, I'm not sure I agree with that conventional wisdom with regards to mana rocks. Two cost rocks are very important in my deck, but so is hitting land drops every turn until the late game. I would guess that even though you're not running the big dumb X spells our decks are similarly mana hungry due to Chainer's ability in the mid and late game.
For posterity, here is my current mana configuration:
If we consider Sol Ring to be on par with a land by itself and cut the weakest mana rock (Star Compass) for a land, the percentage comes to roughly 40%. That seems closer to being correct due to Erebos drawing all the cards and enabling those precious land drops. On the other hand, more rocks means a higher chance to land Erebos on turn 3 and as we all know, consistency is important. Maybe the difference is marginal but I'm really split on which way to take.
I feel like the only one genuinely disappointed by the new Abzan commander. I mean, I guess he isn't a counters/tokens commander which is a relief, but his narrow focus is something I find underwhelming. It's card advantage which is something I was looking for in an Abzan general considering it's in the absolute best colors for removal, and yet, it's so specific as to lend itself to a very obvious and very boring deck. I kind of feel the same way about all the new wedge commanders that aren't Kykar, actually.
I like Deliver Unto Evil a lot more... it does more things than the Elderspell.
Big fan of the deck! I'm building my own Bolas/Deliver Unto Evil deck; I'm definitely taking your inclusions into consideration.
You'll have to let me know how it goes. I just moved and unfortunately had to leave the bulk of my collection behind so it looks like I won't be able to build this any time soon.
Forest (+1), Mana Crypt (+2), Farseek (+1). Land (+1), Explosive Vegetation (+2). Land (+1). 8 on turn 3. 9 on turn 4 for the Rite. Sometimes ***** happens, and no one has an answer, which is fine. You seem to be the only one upset.
And the life totals and number of players in Duel are... what's the word... it starts with a "d"...
I have no problem with combo. I have a problem with fast mana, even when I'm abusing it, because it leads to boring games.
Math, please.
This whole paragraph is logically inconsistent with itself. Maelstrom Wanderer snowballs, but had to combo out to win? Is Rite of Replication from his hand kicked on a big dumb beater he flipped with Wanderer a combo? My turn 3 consisted of land, Erebos, go. His turn 4 consisted of the Rite and wiping the other player out, and I couldn't dig to find an answer in time on my turn, so it was game over.
60 card formats aren't really comparable with EDH. The deckbuilding limitations, life totals, number of players, and the presence of commanders means they're fundamentally different. This is a very poor argument.
It is completely absurd that I need to have a five minute conversation with a group of strangers setting up a social contract that could easily be solved by a more comprehensive and logically consistent banlist. I'm not upset that I lost those two games, I'm mildly irritated that none of the three games were particularly fun.
No. No they're not. Maelstrom Wanderer isn't coming down on turn 3 without fast mana. Yisan isn't comboing on turn 4 without fast mana. I'll see more cards and have more mana with which to respond. I can't believe I have to explain this to someone.
If you think I'm not packing enough removal you really need to look at my list.
Pretty much this. I'm new in town and don't want to make waves by telling people what they should do. There's no way I'm going to tell people I don't want to play with them based on knowing them for an hour.
Speeds it up a turn? Are you kidding me? Do you realistically see Wanderer coming out on turn 4 without Ring or Crypt? Does Yisan combo out on turn 3 (maybe 4, I can't remember) without the assistance of fast mana? No, fast mana speeds up the game by at least two turns, more if they use their fast mana to ramp even more. By comboing out earlier, they decrease the chance of interaction. Please, tell me you get the correlation between fast mana and comboing out early.
Besides, what's your solution to combo? I'm all ears.
Banning fast mana not only slows combo down, but stops starts like the one I had, which was almost equally as ridiculous.
EDIT: I'm at 500 posts!
Played three games at my new store last night with Erebos against Maelstrom Wanderer and Yisan.
Game 1: Maelstrom Wanderer opened with Forest, Mana Crypt, Farseek on turn 1 followed by Explosive Vegetation on turn 2. He won that game.
Game 2: Yisan opened with Forest, Mana Crypt, Yisan on turn 1. He won that game.
Game 3: I opened with Swamp, Sol Ring, Coldsteel Heart on turn 1 followed by a turn 2 Swamp, Thought Vessel, and Erebos. I won that game.
The only thing memorable about these games is that fast mana was the deciding factor in who won the game. Well, I guess the Maelstrom Wanderer player giving me ***** for not doing much in games 1 and 2 being utterly dominated by me in game 3 was satisfying, but that's neither here nor there.
How have the bigger rocks like Dynamo and Lotus been working for you? I mean, obviously at least pretty decently since you still run them, but I've never tried them in Erebos. Outside of specific decks like Daretti and Paradox Engine combo. I'm a little skeptical about running expensive ramp since when I have 4-5 mana available is when I'm ready to start dropping permanents that affect the game state. All that said, the deck is very mana hungry and having big boosters that don't rely on lands could be very good.
36 lands is where I landed in my head, so it's nice to see others there, as well. It's not necessarily accurate or relevant for me since I run so many X spells and a commander with an activated ability that costs mana, but what's your curve at? Currently, excluding lands, I'm sitting at 3.21. Obviously Chainer is mana-intensive as well, so I think it's best to lean towards too much mana rather than not enough. I'm sure you recognize the power of a mana sink in the command zone.
Interesting. Your deck is uniquely suited towards insane mana production when you're looping, so I think it very well could be that our differing mana demands mean our mana bases should be somewhat different.
As for games being few and far between, I hear you. I've played more Magic in a week than I have in months since I moved to a proper city. It's glorious.
For posterity, here is my current mana configuration:
1 Ancient Tomb
1 Blast Zone
1 Bojuka Bog
1 Cabal Coffers
1 Cabal Stronghold
1 Deserted Temple
1 Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx
1 Strip Mine
25 Swamp
1 Thespian's Stage
1 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
1 Charcoal Diamond
1 Coldsteel Heart
1 Everflowing Chalice
1 Fellwar Stone
1 Mind Stone
1 Sol Ring
1 Star Compass
1 Thought Vessel
If we consider Sol Ring to be on par with a land by itself and cut the weakest mana rock (Star Compass) for a land, the percentage comes to roughly 40%. That seems closer to being correct due to Erebos drawing all the cards and enabling those precious land drops. On the other hand, more rocks means a higher chance to land Erebos on turn 3 and as we all know, consistency is important. Maybe the difference is marginal but I'm really split on which way to take.
EDIT: Happy second birthday, thread!