Look, there is a good reason why there is no combo in Standard (maybe not "good," but clear and logical):
Wizards wants new players to get into Magic. Wizards has long since stopped marketing beginner sets like Portal. Standard, which is compromised of all current product, needs to be able to be readily accessible and stable enough for new players to learn the game. New players would be turned off by a barrage of Standard combo decks, it would be hard for new players to safely learn the game well enough. Combo is allowed in formats like Modern because Modern is arguably a more advanced format, drawing from a larger card pool and not being as directly influenced by specific interconnected mechanics of Standard.
In short: Combo doesn't exist in current Standard because Standard needs to be accessible to players at all ages and experience.
Ok, new question. Why did Wizards remove combo from Standard when it was fine before?
I got into competitive Magic around May of last year. I would have liked to play Standard (after it rotated because it was too close to rotation then), but as someone who likes to play combo, I noticed that since Zendikar/Scars (Valakut and Splinter Twin), combo decks in Standard have been a lot less playable. Why is this?
As a player who's been in the game since Tempest block, I'd like to point out that the nerfing of combo decks in Standard is a trend that extends far beyond Zendikar and Scars.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Due to real-life obligations, I am taking a long break from Magic which may include missing the local Legacy GP. Apologies for not being able to keep my threads updated.
I want to allay some of the misconceptions about combo:
Combo is not intrinsically very slow and boring to play against. Second sunrise combo was, and Wizards banned it from modern for that reason. More common combos like Kikki-Jikki + Pestermite often have very little time required to activate. The only real offender right now is storm combos, which aren't very strong in modern and don't even take too long in legacy.
1. I am fine with there not being combos in single sets. But the idea that there aren't competitive combo decks at all in Standard is just ridiculous. They existed in Standard right up until Innistrad. Why can't we see more of them?
2. How does limited affect whether a card that combos with a card from another set/block is printed?
Smaller sets means less room for both combo cards and hate for said combo. Wotc cant print a combo for Standard that has no hate.
Ok, new question. Why did Wizards remove combo from Standard when it was fine before?
I could think of a few reasons.
1. They have seen what those tame Standard combos do to older formats.
2. They have seen the mess they have created in the past and the numerous cards they needed to print to combat said combos in older formats.
3. Change in the thinking behind design and certain formats.
4. Set sizes dont allow for a truly fleshed out meta.
Remember Wotc has data to what is good for formats and attendance and what is not. Magic is a business more then a game, so keeping the largest group happy and playing is in their best interest.
Combo tends to require a threshhold of cards good enough so that its actually a legitimate option.
Pyromancers Ascension got more attention in ZEN/SOM once more sets were released, so the card quality for the deck was good enough. The same can be said for Valakut. It didn't really take off til Primeval Titan was printed.
With 2 blocks and 1 core set (plus the 2nd core set for 3 months) being all we have access to makes it hard for combo decks to be competitive enough to be played. Combos always exist, but most often lack the synergistic cards to glue it together, or the combo is not assembled quickly enough (lack of card quality).
Exarch-Twin was such an amazing combo in standard, that Caw Blade decks just jammed it in their SB, to "instawin" essentially.
Most combo's aren't exactly printed for the sake of being combos either. They tend to be compromised of two cards that just so happen to go infinite together, which is likely something that got missed by the FFL (They can't see EVERYTHING) during playtesting. There are a few small exceptions, of course, but generally spoken, Wizards doesn't print insta-win-combo's just for the sake of printing insta-win-combos, they print stuff that flew under the radar and happens to go infinite. Or there's a perfect storm of cards that just so happen to work together. Those combinations take a bit longer to be found out, generally.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Most combo's aren't exactly printed for the sake of being combos either. They tend to be compromised of two cards that just so happen to go infinite together, which is likely something that got missed by the FFL (They can't see EVERYTHING) during playtesting. There are a few small exceptions, of course, but generally spoken, Wizards doesn't print insta-win-combo's just for the sake of printing insta-win-combos, they print stuff that flew under the radar and happens to go infinite. Or there's a perfect storm of cards that just so happen to work together. Those combinations take a bit longer to be found out, generally.
Actual WotC prints a fair deal of combos, just not 2 card combos (or even 1 card combos, cards that tutor for all you need).
Most combos that are printed with knowing they combo require like 3+ cards at least, with that i mean infinited mana is archived with 2 cards, but you still need something to dump it on, which makes it a 3 card combo (and they are potentially playable, but if the format has no form of actual tutor, you have a problem with no redundancy, especially as WotC is greatly reducing the filter spells at low manacost to further make redundancy a problem).
If we get a working 2 card combo its very very likely that they simply didnt figure it out in testing, but any 3 card combo, chances are high that they know about the combo (especially if its in the same set, and not with very old cards).
I do recall an article on dailymtg saying that their idea of combo in Standard is something like Bant Hexproof.
Yeah, I read that article, honestly WOTC interpretation on combo is terrible. Bant hexproof is a more annoying deck than most combo decks I can think of.
So, players don't like counters, removal, discard, combo, and mana denial. All we have left is... creatures bashing at each other.
You should try looking at top 8 standings before spouting nonsense. Almost creature less control is doing very well in standard right now and they tend to run several counterspells. True, there is no force of will or counter spell itself but saying there is no playable counter magic is just ignorant. And yeah there is no good discard in standard, I mean thoughtseize? Pfffft! Card is jank and its all zac hills fault right?
The creatureless control deck runs like 5 counters then about 20 ways to deal with creatures. It also runs mutavaults and often aetherling somewhere in the 75. Thoughtseize is discard but it wouldn't have been reprinted if it wasn't already a card. It is way over the top or what wotc considers a fair discard card these days. Overall discard has been nerfed though not nearly as much as countermagic or LD.
That wasn't a combo deck. It was not dedicated to finding a card or a specific combination of cards to win or gain an immense advantage. The deck played Nytkthos, but if I remember correctly, it wasn't dedicated to finding Nykthos and playing it.
Yes it was. It was dedicated to landing Polukranos, making him stupid huge, shooting all of your guys and making you immediately dead. Having a combo strapped to the back of a few creatures doesn't make it not a combo.
That isn't combo, its an interaction and no the Gx devotion decks aren't dedicated to polukranos, they just run him because he's the obvious stupid fat 4 drop to include. If you are going to ramp into stupid fat then you might as well go big and polukranos is both efficient and due to his monstrous potentially the largest creature in standard as well. But this is still just ramp and people who consider ramp combo are imo a sorry lot.
It puzzles me that so many people are TRULY convinced that WOTC listens to the cries of a vocal minority hating combos, prison and LD and shapes the game to cater to that minority. Do you really think that such a big company must resort to listen to (a minority of) players' whinings in order to choose the game's future development? Wouldn't be more rational to think that they do a lot of market research, surveys, tournament attendance' analysis? That they actually pay people to analyze those datas?
As a player who will play against combo if he must, but doesn't enjoy it in the least, here's my two cents: combo has been removed because for most players playing against it takes away, if not the "fun" as a whole, an important piece of the fun: to be able to play your strategy.
Unlike aggro, midrange, control, ramp, tempo who all work on the same axis, traditional combo shifts that axis from the actual game (in its "match" acception) to external considerations: the side, the possible hosers etc. Furthermore, the typical match against combo focuses around a single play: if it goes off, gg; if the opponent is able to prevent the combo... still gg.
This pisses off, to various degrees, players who would like to play the game and enjoy a match in which both players have the time and possibility to execute their gameplan.
I understand that this definition of "unfun" should then include the fastest aggro decks, but that's not the case: aggro tries to go off before the opponent can react, but it doesn't require specifical answers: the suite of removal that 99.9% of the decks sport is enough for all creature-based decks, so one can never be completely unprepared to fight aggro.
And that brings to my final point: these periodic wars between summoners and warlocks, who oppose "turning dudes sideways" and "unfun, unfair combos" all boil down to two different ways to enjoy this game: some players derive their fun from solving the puzzle of the metagame; others (and I count myself among them; I never felt satisfied if my opponent didn't stand a chance) from playing the actual match, turn by turn. Sadly for the first group, they are in the minority, and that's not surprising: most players - and especially the new ones - gather to play Magic for the experience of challenging an opponent, not simply to draw satisfaction from their plays; and the experience apparently requires... let's say, at least 4 turns.
They have strait said "Players find counters, ld, discard, and strong combo decks unfun so we restrict their influence in standard," They have said this in literally probably a hundred articles or so by now on the mothership. Literally click anything on development of modern magic by rosewater and you would find a statement akin to this. Also combo isn't simply about killing player interaction, its a means to winning not by traditional combat means. Combo players want to win other than simply play dude, bash. Its a misinterpretation to assume that means they don't want their opponents to have a fighting chance.
Look, there is a good reason why there is no combo in Standard (maybe not "good," but clear and logical):
Wizards wants new players to get into Magic. Wizards has long since stopped marketing beginner sets like Portal. Standard, which is compromised of all current product, needs to be able to be readily accessible and stable enough for new players to learn the game. New players would be turned off by a barrage of Standard combo decks, it would be hard for new players to safely learn the game well enough. Combo is allowed in formats like Modern because Modern is arguably a more advanced format, drawing from a larger card pool and not being as directly influenced by specific interconnected mechanics of Standard.
In short: Combo doesn't exist in current Standard because Standard needs to be accessible to players at all ages and experience.
Ok, new question. Why did Wizards remove combo from Standard when it was fine before?
Same reason basically, balance=/= beginner friendly. Although combo can be fair the nature of most combo decks require you to know of their existance to fight them. No one who players legacy seriously thinks storm, belcher, elves, or high tide are broken right now but that doesn't stop the fact if you don't know what they decks are and play against one you are going to be in for a bad time. I'm not advocating the return of fast combo decks but it would be nice to see something that can kill the opponent without relying on a creature on planeswalker in standard.
real talk yugioh at it's peak was more fun, interactive, and skill intensive than current Standard. IMO standard is the same two decks with different reskins. You can play creatures midrange, or anti-creatures control.
Combo deck is a Magic: The Gathering term for a deck of (usually sixty) Magic: The Gathering cards that aims to win the game using a relatively small number of cards that instantly or very quickly win the game when combined (hence the name "combo").
This definition is not wrong, but I think it does not give the full story. In practice there have actually been three major kinds of combo decks, all of whom fulfill the above definition but otherwise share very little in common.
1. Traditional decks that use a combo as a win condition.
2. Combo decks that aim to combine specific cards in a specific way that leads to a big payoff.
3. Combo decks that aim to assemble a critical mass of redundant combo pieces that leads to a big payoff.
For number 1, I think the best examples are the decks that use Thopter Foundry and Sword of the Meek as a finisher. Those decks are usually built on an aggro/midrange/control axis but they have access to a combo win condition. Other examples are Aristocrats (Boros Reckoner + Blasphemous Act) and Lucky Charms (Boros Reckoner + Azorius Charm + Boros Charm). This fulfills the definition above, but most players here would not accept these as combo decks. They are "just decks with combos" and "the focus is not on assembling the combo". These kinds of decks are not Standard mainstays but they pop up often enough.
For number 2, we have things like Painter's Servant + Grindstone or Angel of Glory’s Rise + Fiend Hunter + Burning-Tree Emissary + Undercity Informer. Of the three kinds of combo decks I listed these are the ones that I would think are universally accepted as "true" combo decks, because they strictly adhere to the definition and they also are completely focused on assembling the combo. These are rarely found in Standard, though they do make an appearance every now and then.
The third kind is quite well-known to competitive players, but for some reason or another they reject a lot of archetypes that really should be considered.
Let's start with something uncontroversial (Storm):
* You play spells that generate mana (enablers), you play Past in Flames or Ad Nauseum (lynchpin), then you go crazy with Tendrils or Empty the Warrens (payoff)
I think most people on this forum would agree that Storm is a combo deck, but in casual circles you would be surprised at how many people do not think of it as such. They ask things like "If Storm is a combo, then what is the combination? Yawgmoth's Will and the rest of your deck?". In their minds this is not a "true" combo deck because these is no specific "combination" that the deck strives to assemble.
Now let's go with something a little less uncontroversial (Elves):
* You play elves (enablers), you play Glimpse of Nature or Natural Order (lynchpin), then you go crazy with a Craterhood Behemoth.
Most people here would also agree that Elves is a combo deck, but again there are some who do not think so. They point out that Elves is more of a "ramp" deck that has an almost superfluous Glimpse of Nature combo shoehorned into it. There are also people who say that it is not a "pure" combo deck because of various reasons (ie. it does not tutor for Natural Order or Glimpse of Nature, it has a grindy aggro back-up plan). I have also heard the "Natural Order" half of the combo dismissed in the past as not really a "true" combo so much as just playing one broken card. IIRC it was something like "If a deck focused on green creature + Natural Order is a combo deck then a deck focused on Stone-Forge Mystic + equipment is also a combo deck. Since StoneBlade is not a combo deck Elves is also not a combo deck." Needless to say, the same person also did not accept Sneak & Show or Reanimator as "true" combo decks.
Now let's get squarely into controversial territory:
* You play any combination of burn spells that adds up to twenty points of damage.
At this point let's look at something in the current standard environment:
* You play a couple of cards with green mana symbols (enablers), you play Nykthos (lynchpin), then you go crazy with Polukranos or Garruk (payoff).
Multiple people in this thread have dismissed Nykthos decks (and all ramp decks, really) as not true combo decks. However, what is the defining characteristic possessed by Storm decks that is not present in ramp decks? From a logical standpoint I am having trouble coming up with a definition for "combo deck" that includes Storm but excludes Ramp. Both archetypes are basically doing the same thing, using different tools.
Personally I think that Burn, Ramp and Storm are all combo decks. Structurally similar combo decks to boot. It's just that some specific combo strategies have dominated eternal formats so fully that players who use them have come to think of themselves as "the one true combo".
Saying that combo is dead in standard because no one is chaining card draw spells and rituals or tutoring for specific combo pieces is like saying that aggro is dead in standard because no one is playing tribal. If you want to play "combo" in standard all you need to do is pick up Brad Nelson's burn deck or Mihara's Devotion deck. If you want to play "chain rituals and draw spells" or "assemble 3 cards and win" combo you are out of luck for now. It is fine if you are upset by this, and you may create threads that say "Why has Wizards removed ritual/draw spell combo from standard?". On the other hand saying that "combo is not in standard" is a mistake borne of arrogance.
A way of winning that isn't attacking with hardcasted creatures/the occasional 2 mana wannabe Lightning Bolt. I'd even be happy with something like what they did with Maze's End, just less terrible. I wish Balustrade Spy and Undercity Informer were in the same Standard as Laboratory Maniac. I think that could have led to some fun decks.
I think.. what they want is a non creature based combo... they want to cast spells to combo off something that can only be stopped by counterspells. That is not ok for standard. But the creature based ones are nice. The important thing about combo is that it forces opponents to interact even if it itself does not interact. With thoughtsieze everywhere right now I don't think combo would be that dangerous or overbearing even if a good one appeared.
Personally I want wizards to print some good rituals so I can play Beck + young pyromancer because that deck is just a lot of fun, even if I had a lot of people say "your deck is stupid" and quit when I played it before.
They were in the same standard, until Innistrad rotated out and Theros rotated in. You can do something similar in RTR block constructed just be replacing Lab Maniac with Psychic Spiral.
If you're looking for simple combos like that, there are plenty in Standard. The issue, for a lot of people, seems to be that there are no top-tier competitive combo decks.
They were in the same standard, until Innistrad rotated out and Theros rotated in. You can do something similar in RTR block constructed just be replacing Lab Maniac with Psychic Spiral.
If you're looking for simple combos like that, there are plenty in Standard. The issue, for a lot of people, seems to be that there are no top-tier competitive combo decks.
You're right, I had a derp moment and got my blocks mixed up.
I think.. what they want is a non creature based combo... they want to cast spells to combo off something that can only be stopped by counterspells. That is not ok for standard. But the creature based ones are nice. The important thing about combo is that it forces opponents to interact even if it itself does not interact. With thoughtsieze everywhere right now I don't think combo would be that dangerous or overbearing even if a good one appeared.
I think that's it right there: people want combo that doesn't require creatures. They want to feel like real spellcasters using magic directly on their enemies. But wizards insists on including creatures in combos so that any deck can have a chance to interact with it, since every deck has some sort of creature removal. As things stand now, spell based combo decks are pretty much immune to anything that isn't running counter spells and possibly discard or a handful of white spells. Although combo wouldn't take over the meta, it would be tremendously unpopular if wizards allowed decks that effectively win or lose on turn zero. This is why a lot of people hate Restore Balance - it's obvious how the game will end the moment you know what the other guy is playing. And that's not fun.
The solution is to not rely on blue to keep combo in check - have main-deckable solutions to combo in every color. I'm certain it can be done somehow, without destroying the color pie. I think Spirit of the Labyrinth is a good start.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Things WotC cares about:
-making certain Standard cards can be played in Modern, therefore increasing their value and increasing WotC's profit margin
Things WotC does not care about:
-keeping the ban list as short as possible
-taking chances with an entire format for the benefit of a single card
-catering to play styles that newer players generally don't like and will lose them more players than it will gain
-keeping the meta balanced between archetypes/colors/whatever
-keeping cards on the secondary market cheap (available yes, but not cheap)
-keeping the meta diverse (as long as a single deck doesn't threaten the popularity of the format)
1. I am fine with there not being combos in single sets. But the idea that there aren't competitive combo decks at all in Standard is just ridiculous. They existed in Standard right up until Innistrad. Why can't we see more of them?
2. How does limited affect whether a card that combos with a card from another set/block is printed?
Smaller sets means less room for both combo cards and hate for said combo. Wotc cant print a combo for Standard that has no hate.
I meant combos that are spread out over the whole block. Like right now. In this Standard, there are the 3 best pieces of graveyard hate ever printed, an uncounterable Cranial Extraction, and the second-best discard spell ever printed. There is plenty of combo hate. Now would be a good time for a combo deck.
Ok, new question. Why did Wizards remove combo from Standard when it was fine before?
I could think of a few reasons.
1. They have seen what those tame Standard combos do to older formats.
2. They have seen the mess they have created in the past and the numerous cards they needed to print to combat said combos in older formats.
3. Change in the thinking behind design and certain formats.
4. Set sizes dont allow for a truly fleshed out meta.
Remember Wotc has data to what is good for formats and attendance and what is not. Magic is a business more then a game, so keeping the largest group happy and playing is in their best interest.
1. What is that mess again? Decks like Splinter Twin and Scapeshift are perfectly fine in Modern.
2. The thing is, why would they need to create new hate in Modern for another combo deck that doesn't break the turn 4 rule? There is already an enormous amount of hate.
3. What do you mean by this?
4. As I said, there are many cards in a full Standard or even most of one. Combo would be fine.
5. I'm pretty sure that that evidence is circumstantial. More players have played Standard in the past few years when there wasn't combo because there are more people playing the game.
Combo deck is a Magic: The Gathering term for a deck of (usually sixty) Magic: The Gathering cards that aims to win the game using a relatively small number of cards that instantly or very quickly win the game when combined (hence the name "combo").
This definition is not wrong, but I think it does not give the full story. In practice there have actually been three major kinds of combo decks, all of whom fulfill the above definition but otherwise share very little in common.
1. Traditional decks that use a combo as a win condition.
2. Combo decks that aim to combine specific cards in a specific way that leads to a big payoff.
3. Combo decks that aim to assemble a critical mass of redundant combo pieces that leads to a big payoff.
For number 1, I think the best examples are the decks that use Thopter Foundry and Sword of the Meek as a finisher. Those decks are usually built on an aggro/midrange/control axis but they have access to a combo win condition. Other examples are Aristocrats (Boros Reckoner + Blasphemous Act) and Lucky Charms (Boros Reckoner + Azorius Charm + Boros Charm). This fulfills the definition above, but most players here would not accept these as combo decks. They are "just decks with combos" and "the focus is not on assembling the combo". These kinds of decks are not Standard mainstays but they pop up often enough.
For number 2, we have things like Painter's Servant + Grindstone or Angel of Glory’s Rise + Fiend Hunter + Burning-Tree Emissary + Undercity Informer. Of the three kinds of combo decks I listed these are the ones that I would think are universally accepted as "true" combo decks, because they strictly adhere to the definition and they also are completely focused on assembling the combo. These are rarely found in Standard, though they do make an appearance every now and then.
The third kind is quite well-known to competitive players, but for some reason or another they reject a lot of archetypes that really should be considered.
Let's start with something uncontroversial (Storm):
* You play spells that generate mana (enablers), you play Past in Flames or Ad Nauseum (lynchpin), then you go crazy with Tendrils or Empty the Warrens (payoff)
I think most people on this forum would agree that Storm is a combo deck, but in casual circles you would be surprised at how many people do not think of it as such. They ask things like "If Storm is a combo, then what is the combination? Yawgmoth's Will and the rest of your deck?". In their minds this is not a "true" combo deck because these is no specific "combination" that the deck strives to assemble.
Now let's go with something a little less uncontroversial (Elves):
* You play elves (enablers), you play Glimpse of Nature or Natural Order (lynchpin), then you go crazy with a Craterhood Behemoth.
Most people here would also agree that Elves is a combo deck, but again there are some who do not think so. They point out that Elves is more of a "ramp" deck that has an almost superfluous Glimpse of Nature combo shoehorned into it. There are also people who say that it is not a "pure" combo deck because of various reasons (ie. it does not tutor for Natural Order or Glimpse of Nature, it has a grindy aggro back-up plan). I have also heard the "Natural Order" half of the combo dismissed in the past as not really a "true" combo so much as just playing one broken card. IIRC it was something like "If a deck focused on green creature + Natural Order is a combo deck then a deck focused on Stone-Forge Mystic + equipment is also a combo deck. Since StoneBlade is not a combo deck Elves is also not a combo deck." Needless to say, the same person also did not accept Sneak & Show or Reanimator as "true" combo decks.
Now let's get squarely into controversial territory:
* You play any combination of burn spells that adds up to twenty points of damage.
At this point let's look at something in the current standard environment:
* You play a couple of cards with green mana symbols (enablers), you play Nykthos (lynchpin), then you go crazy with Polukranos or Garruk (payoff).
Multiple people in this thread have dismissed Nykthos decks (and all ramp decks, really) as not true combo decks. However, what is the defining characteristic possessed by Storm decks that is not present in ramp decks? From a logical standpoint I am having trouble coming up with a definition for "combo deck" that includes Storm but excludes Ramp. Both archetypes are basically doing the same thing, using different tools.
Personally I think that Burn, Ramp and Storm are all combo decks. Structurally similar combo decks to boot. It's just that some specific combo strategies have dominated eternal formats so fully that players who use them have come to think of themselves as "the one true combo".
Saying that combo is dead in standard because no one is chaining card draw spells and rituals or tutoring for specific combo pieces is like saying that aggro is dead in standard because no one is playing tribal. If you want to play "combo" in standard all you need to do is pick up Brad Nelson's burn deck or Mihara's Devotion deck. If you want to play "chain rituals and draw spells" or "assemble 3 cards and win" combo you are out of luck for now. It is fine if you are upset by this, and you may create threads that say "Why has Wizards removed ritual/draw spell combo from standard?". On the other hand saying that "combo is not in standard" is a mistake borne of arrogance.
I would define a combo decks as "A deck that finds (by tutoring, card draw, or topdeck manipulation) and uses a combination of specific cards or a single specific card (or multiple win conditions) in one turn to either gain an immense advantage or win the game." A deck like Storm would count for this because it is dedicated to finding and abusing a single card to instantly win the game in a single turn. However, saying that Burn is combo is ridiculous. Yes, it uses a combination of burn spells to kill an opponent. Guess what? Zoo uses a combination of creatures to kill its opponent. Jund uses a combination of disruption and creatures to drag out the game and kill its opponent. By your definition of combo, everything is combo.
I want a combo deck (using my definition of combo, not anything that plays a combination of anything to win the game) that is tier or tier 1.5. right now, there are no successful Standard combo decks. That should change.
I think.. what they want is a non creature based combo... they want to cast spells to combo off something that can only be stopped by counterspells. That is not ok for standard. But the creature based ones are nice. The important thing about combo is that it forces opponents to interact even if it itself does not interact. With thoughtsieze everywhere right now I don't think combo would be that dangerous or overbearing even if a good one appeared.
Personally I want wizards to print some good rituals so I can play Beck + young pyromancer because that deck is just a lot of fun, even if I had a lot of people say "your deck is stupid" and quit when I played it before.
I'm fine with creature-based combo (though right now there is enough hate that noncreature-based combo would be safe in Standard).
Did Wizards of the Coast ever want combo in Standard in the first place? I was under the impression any combo decks that did develop were interactions they either missed or underestimated, and they've just gotten better at spotting them over the years, hence there being less combo.
1. What is that mess again? Decks like Splinter Twin and Scapeshift are perfectly fine in Modern.
2. The thing is, why would they need to create new hate in Modern for another combo deck that doesn't break the turn 4 rule? There is already an enormous amount of hate.
3. What do you mean by this?
4. As I said, there are many cards in a full Standard or even most of one. Combo would be fine.
5. I'm pretty sure that that evidence is circumstantial. More players have played Standard in the past few years when there wasn't combo because there are more people playing the game.
1. Scapeshift was never a deck in Standard, and the Twin you see played in modern is not the same Twin that was in Standard. The mess I speak of is the combos that just keep getting stronger the more sets that are printed. Think Dredge, reanimator, twin, and pod decks that get better and need more hate every set to keep them in check so they dont dominate, or flat out bans.
2. Why do you think the graveyard hate gets printed in almost every set? To stop the reanimator/dredge decks in older formats that keep getting stronger and more resilient to graveyard hate.
3. Up until recently Wotc designed cards for formats not really taking Limited into consideration. Then they stopped thinking of the older formats and started concentrating on Standard and Limited. They streamlined the sets to be more efficient for Standard and Limited with certain stronger cards being a by product for older sets. Theros is suppose to be the first set designed with Modern in mind.
4. Set size is the big one here. Plus Block constructed. Wotc cant have a combo deck dominate the Block constructed scene. This is what happened with Valakut and they learned their lesson.
5. Wotc has said time and again that players dont like playing with certain strategies in certain formats. They know this because they have the numbers to show the effects of certain decks on formats. Ever think the reason more players are playing is because Wotc has weeded out the hated strategies?
1. The mess I speak of is the combos that just keep getting stronger the more sets that are printed. Think , reanimator, twin, and pod decks that get better and need more hate every set to keep them in check so they dont dominate, or flat out bans.
2. Why do you think the graveyard hate gets printed in almost every set? To stop the reanimator/dredge decks in older formats that keep getting stronger and more resilient to graveyard hate.
I've got to say I really disagree with this. has been barely holding on in Legacy by the skin of its teeth thanks to an overwhelming amount of graveyard hate being printed, it's only saving grace is the fact that since it's only a T 1.5 deck at best most people don't even bother boarding in hate. In Modern, they never even game the mechanic a chance, and banned Grave troll and Dread Return right off the bat, so it's just impossible to say whether or not it would be to powerful for Modern. Can you tell me exactly how dredge or really ANY reanimator decks have gotten "stronger and more resilient"? They've gotten good targets lately thanks to creature power creep, but while they'll pop up occasionally (Reanimaor getting 3rd at GP Paris this week), they're just too easy to hate out, and if they start becoming even remotely common players put gravehate back in their sideboards and the whole strategy becomes unplayable another few months.
5. Wotc has said time and again that players dont like playing with certain strategies in certain formats. They know this because they have the numbers to show the effects of certain decks on formats. Ever think the reason more players are playing is because Wotc has weeded out the hated strategies?
Numbers are also showing that all those players are leaving the game after about 2 years of playing. That fits right in with my timeframe giving Standard a shot, sort of having fun at first, but after a few rotations realizing that while the cards may all change, the strategy and games just don't, then getting bored and moving on.
1. The mess I speak of is the combos that just keep getting stronger the more sets that are printed. Think Dredge, reanimator, twin, and pod decks that get better and need more hate every set to keep them in check so they dont dominate, or flat out bans.
2. Why do you think the graveyard hate gets printed in almost every set? To stop the reanimator/dredge decks in older formats that keep getting stronger and more resilient to graveyard hate.
I've got to say I really disagree with this. Dredge has been barely holding on in Legacy by the skin of its teeth thanks to an overwhelming amount of graveyard hate being printed, it's only saving grace is the fact that since it's only a T 1.5 deck at best most people don't even bother boarding in hate. In Modern, they never even game the mechanic a chance, and banned Grave troll and Dread Return right off the bat, so it's just impossible to say whether or not it would be to powerful for Modern. Can you tell me exactly how dredge or really ANY reanimator decks have gotten "stronger and more resilient"? They've gotten good targets lately thanks to creature power creep, but while they'll pop up occasionally (Reanimaor getting 3rd at GP Paris this week), theyre just too easy to hate out, and if they start becoming even remotely common players put gravehate back in their sideboards and the whole strategy becomes unplayable another few months.
..and how long did it take with Wotc printing hate for graveyard strategies every set for blocks? Dredge was played in Standard, Dredge was played in Old Extended, Dredge is played in Legacy. Wotc doesnt want Dredge in Modern. So effectively it took them how many years to fix their mistake called dredge? 5? 10? Now think if they have to do that with ever combo deck that keeps getting more powerful as sets are released. Terrible can of worms to open, or I should say relive.
To be fair I believe Dredge won a Legacy event in the past 2 years. The real final nail in the coffin was Rest in Peace. Think how many tried they had to go through to finally hit the right card to stop the deck they hate so much.
..and how long did it take with Wotc printing hate for graveyard strategies every set for blocks? Dredge was played in Standard, Dredge was played in Old Extended, Dredge is played in Legacy. Wotc doesnt want Dredge in Modern. So effectively it took them how many years to fix their mistake called dredge? 5? 10? Now think if they have to do that with ever combo deck that keeps getting more powerful as sets are released. Terrible can of worms to open, or I should say relive.
I was't playing Standard during original Ravnica so I don't have first hand info, but I've never heard any horror stories about dredge dominating the format. Same with extended. Legacy dredge is barely playable, and as much as I enjoy playing it in tournaments, I can't honestly expect to do better than break even. Your arguments seem to be that people played the mechanic, so it needs to go away forever, despite the fact that it never really warped any format it was played in, besides Vintage. You're calling it a mistake, I just don't see it. I see a deck that's a refreshing break from the norm.
1. What is that mess again? Decks like Splinter Twin and Scapeshift are perfectly fine in Modern.
2. The thing is, why would they need to create new hate in Modern for another combo deck that doesn't break the turn 4 rule? There is already an enormous amount of hate.
3. What do you mean by this?
4. As I said, there are many cards in a full Standard or even most of one. Combo would be fine.
5. I'm pretty sure that that evidence is circumstantial. More players have played Standard in the past few years when there wasn't combo because there are more people playing the game.
1. Scapeshift was never a deck in Standard, and the Twin you see played in modern is not the same Twin that was in Standard. The mess I speak of is the combos that just keep getting stronger the more sets that are printed. Think Dredge, reanimator, twin, and pod decks that get better and need more hate every set to keep them in check so they dont dominate, or flat out bans.
2. Why do you think the graveyard hate gets printed in almost every set? To stop the reanimator/dredge decks in older formats that keep getting stronger and more resilient to graveyard hate.
3. Up until recently Wotc designed cards for formats not really taking Limited into consideration. Then they stopped thinking of the older formats and started concentrating on Standard and Limited. They streamlined the sets to be more efficient for Standard and Limited with certain stronger cards being a by product for older sets. Theros is suppose to be the first set designed with Modern in mind.
4. Set size is the big one here. Plus Block constructed. Wotc cant have a combo deck dominate the Block constructed scene. This is what happened with Valakut and they learned their lesson.
5. Wotc has said time and again that players dont like playing with certain strategies in certain formats. They know this because they have the numbers to show the effects of certain decks on formats. Ever think the reason more players are playing is because Wotc has weeded out the hated strategies?
1. By Scapeshift, I meant Primeval Titan versions of Scapeshift in Modern, which are very similar to Valakut decks. Also, how is Splinter Twin different?
2. Most of the graveyard hate isn't strong enough to see Legacy play anyways and Modern graveyard-strategies are possibly effected too much by the hate.
3. They can have cards that are good in Limited and Standard that are used in Standard combo decks.
4. Fine then. Don't make it in a block. If a card in Born of the Gods made a combo deck with a card from Return to Ravnica, how would that have been a problem?
5. How are the numbers not circumstantial? Ravnica/Time Spiral Standard is generally viewed as the best Standard of all time. Because the game grew, more people were playing in the Caw-Blade era than in Ravnica/Time Spiral. Does that mean that Wizards should make more cards like Jace and SFM? It doesn't. It means that the game is growing regardless. Do you have any proof that less people would play Standard if there was a tier 1 combo deck, even if it was creature-based?
..and how long did it take with Wotc printing hate for graveyard strategies every set for blocks? Dredge was played in Standard, Dredge was played in Old Extended, Dredge is played in Legacy. Wotc doesnt want Dredge in Modern. So effectively it took them how many years to fix their mistake called dredge? 5? 10? Now think if they have to do that with ever combo deck that keeps getting more powerful as sets are released. Terrible can of worms to open, or I should say relive.
I was't playing Standard during original Ravnica so I don't have first hand info, but I've never heard any horror stories about dredge dominating the format. Same with extended. Legacy dredge is barely playable, and as much as I enjoy playing it in tournaments, I can't honestly expect to do better than break even. Your arguments seem to be that people played the mechanic, so it needs to go away forever, despite the fact that it never really warped any format it was played in, besides Vintage. You're calling it a mistake, I just don't see it. I see a deck that's a refreshing break from the norm.
Dredge played in RAV/TSP Standard was tame compared to what it became. But a lot like Storm Wotc saw the monster they created and they kept trying to design that card that could keep dredge in check. It started with Leyline of the void, moved on to bog and relic, a reprinting of leyline of the void, then cage and finally Rest in peace. Dredge absolutely wraped formats. Decks were needing 6 to 8 spots in their sides to combat Dredge. For quite a while Dredge was a pillar of Legacy. You had to be prepared for it.
Quote from Valanarch »
1. By Scapeshift, I meant Primeval Titan versions of Scapeshift in Modern, which are very similar to Valakut decks. Also, how is Splinter Twin different?
2. Most of the graveyard hate isn't strong enough to see Legacy play anyways and Modern graveyard-strategies are possibly effected too much by the hate.
3. They can have cards that are good in Limited and Standard that are used in Standard combo decks.
4. Fine then. Don't make it in a block. If a card in Born of the Gods made a combo deck with a card from Return to Ravnica, how would that have been a problem?
5. How are the numbers not circumstantial? Ravnica/Time Spiral Standard is generally viewed as the best Standard of all time. Because the game grew, more people were playing in the Caw-Blade era than in Ravnica/Time Spiral. Does that mean that Wizards should make more cards like Jace and SFM? It doesn't. It means that the game is growing regardless. Do you have any proof that less people would play Standard if there was a tier 1 combo deck, even if it was creature-based?
1. Here is where you confuse me, you want combo in Standard like Scapeshift, which was never in Standard. Twin didnt have some of the tools it has now to be more consistent and explosive.
2. You are looking at it today. Every bit of graveyard hate has been played in Legacy at one time or another. It has to be to keep graveyard decks in check. Where a few years back decks like Dredge and reanimator could play around a leyline or relic, they cant do then now with rest in peace. It has taken years of hate to get to this point.
3. Apparently they cant.
4. Not sure about this. Would you be willing to wait a year to get all the pieces to play a deck 3 months? Seems like wasted spots in sets to me.
5. Do you have any proof more would play? It works both ways. Wotc has the numbers and has said numerous times in design articles on the mother ship that they took out the unfun aspects of the game from what they saw. Of those was LD, draw go control, and combo. If you were running a business and the majority of your customers were complaining about a portion of your product, would you keep trying to appease the minority or the majority? Like I have said, Wotc has the numbers and information of what sells and what doesnt.
Ok, new question. Why did Wizards remove combo from Standard when it was fine before?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
May as well just playing ****ing Yugioh at that point.
UBBreya's Toybox (Competitive, Combo)WR
RGodzilla, King of the MonstersG
-Retired Decks-
UBLazav, Dimir Mastermind (Competitive, UB Voltron/Control)UB
"Knowledge is such a burden. Release it. Release all your fears to me."
—Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver
As a player who's been in the game since Tempest block, I'd like to point out that the nerfing of combo decks in Standard is a trend that extends far beyond Zendikar and Scars.
Legacy
UWR Miracles UWR
GWB Maverick GWB
GB Elves GB
UBR ANT UBR
RG Combo Lands RG
Vintage
BUG BUG Fish BUG
Modern
GBW
Junk PodMagic: the BuylistingCombo is not intrinsically very slow and boring to play against. Second sunrise combo was, and Wizards banned it from modern for that reason. More common combos like Kikki-Jikki + Pestermite often have very little time required to activate. The only real offender right now is storm combos, which aren't very strong in modern and don't even take too long in legacy.
Smaller sets means less room for both combo cards and hate for said combo. Wotc cant print a combo for Standard that has no hate.
I could think of a few reasons.
1. They have seen what those tame Standard combos do to older formats.
2. They have seen the mess they have created in the past and the numerous cards they needed to print to combat said combos in older formats.
3. Change in the thinking behind design and certain formats.
4. Set sizes dont allow for a truly fleshed out meta.
Remember Wotc has data to what is good for formats and attendance and what is not. Magic is a business more then a game, so keeping the largest group happy and playing is in their best interest.
Pyromancers Ascension got more attention in ZEN/SOM once more sets were released, so the card quality for the deck was good enough. The same can be said for Valakut. It didn't really take off til Primeval Titan was printed.
With 2 blocks and 1 core set (plus the 2nd core set for 3 months) being all we have access to makes it hard for combo decks to be competitive enough to be played. Combos always exist, but most often lack the synergistic cards to glue it together, or the combo is not assembled quickly enough (lack of card quality).
Exarch-Twin was such an amazing combo in standard, that Caw Blade decks just jammed it in their SB, to "instawin" essentially.
WBG Karador GBW
R Daretti R
RG Omnath GR
WRG Modern Burn GRW
WB Modern Tokens BW
DCI Rules Advisor as of 5/18/2015
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Actual WotC prints a fair deal of combos, just not 2 card combos (or even 1 card combos, cards that tutor for all you need).
Most combos that are printed with knowing they combo require like 3+ cards at least, with that i mean infinited mana is archived with 2 cards, but you still need something to dump it on, which makes it a 3 card combo (and they are potentially playable, but if the format has no form of actual tutor, you have a problem with no redundancy, especially as WotC is greatly reducing the filter spells at low manacost to further make redundancy a problem).
If we get a working 2 card combo its very very likely that they simply didnt figure it out in testing, but any 3 card combo, chances are high that they know about the combo (especially if its in the same set, and not with very old cards).
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Some do some don't, I think tod classified midranged ramp as combo once which made me die a little inside.
Yeah, I read that article, honestly WOTC interpretation on combo is terrible. Bant hexproof is a more annoying deck than most combo decks I can think of.
Pretty much, but don't worry some decks run a couple big creatures and some run alot of small creatures so the meta is quite diverse.
The creatureless control deck runs like 5 counters then about 20 ways to deal with creatures. It also runs mutavaults and often aetherling somewhere in the 75. Thoughtseize is discard but it wouldn't have been reprinted if it wasn't already a card. It is way over the top or what wotc considers a fair discard card these days. Overall discard has been nerfed though not nearly as much as countermagic or LD.
That isn't combo, its an interaction and no the Gx devotion decks aren't dedicated to polukranos, they just run him because he's the obvious stupid fat 4 drop to include. If you are going to ramp into stupid fat then you might as well go big and polukranos is both efficient and due to his monstrous potentially the largest creature in standard as well. But this is still just ramp and people who consider ramp combo are imo a sorry lot.
They have strait said "Players find counters, ld, discard, and strong combo decks unfun so we restrict their influence in standard," They have said this in literally probably a hundred articles or so by now on the mothership. Literally click anything on development of modern magic by rosewater and you would find a statement akin to this. Also combo isn't simply about killing player interaction, its a means to winning not by traditional combat means. Combo players want to win other than simply play dude, bash. Its a misinterpretation to assume that means they don't want their opponents to have a fighting chance.
Same reason basically, balance=/= beginner friendly. Although combo can be fair the nature of most combo decks require you to know of their existance to fight them. No one who players legacy seriously thinks storm, belcher, elves, or high tide are broken right now but that doesn't stop the fact if you don't know what they decks are and play against one you are going to be in for a bad time. I'm not advocating the return of fast combo decks but it would be nice to see something that can kill the opponent without relying on a creature on planeswalker in standard.
http://wiki.mtgsalvation.com/article/Combo_deck
This definition is not wrong, but I think it does not give the full story. In practice there have actually been three major kinds of combo decks, all of whom fulfill the above definition but otherwise share very little in common.
1. Traditional decks that use a combo as a win condition.
2. Combo decks that aim to combine specific cards in a specific way that leads to a big payoff.
3. Combo decks that aim to assemble a critical mass of redundant combo pieces that leads to a big payoff.
For number 1, I think the best examples are the decks that use Thopter Foundry and Sword of the Meek as a finisher. Those decks are usually built on an aggro/midrange/control axis but they have access to a combo win condition. Other examples are Aristocrats (Boros Reckoner + Blasphemous Act) and Lucky Charms (Boros Reckoner + Azorius Charm + Boros Charm). This fulfills the definition above, but most players here would not accept these as combo decks. They are "just decks with combos" and "the focus is not on assembling the combo". These kinds of decks are not Standard mainstays but they pop up often enough.
For number 2, we have things like Painter's Servant + Grindstone or Angel of Glory’s Rise + Fiend Hunter + Burning-Tree Emissary + Undercity Informer. Of the three kinds of combo decks I listed these are the ones that I would think are universally accepted as "true" combo decks, because they strictly adhere to the definition and they also are completely focused on assembling the combo. These are rarely found in Standard, though they do make an appearance every now and then.
The third kind is quite well-known to competitive players, but for some reason or another they reject a lot of archetypes that really should be considered.
Let's start with something uncontroversial (Storm):
* You play spells that generate mana (enablers), you play Past in Flames or Ad Nauseum (lynchpin), then you go crazy with Tendrils or Empty the Warrens (payoff)
I think most people on this forum would agree that Storm is a combo deck, but in casual circles you would be surprised at how many people do not think of it as such. They ask things like "If Storm is a combo, then what is the combination? Yawgmoth's Will and the rest of your deck?". In their minds this is not a "true" combo deck because these is no specific "combination" that the deck strives to assemble.
Now let's go with something a little less uncontroversial (Elves):
* You play elves (enablers), you play Glimpse of Nature or Natural Order (lynchpin), then you go crazy with a Craterhood Behemoth.
Most people here would also agree that Elves is a combo deck, but again there are some who do not think so. They point out that Elves is more of a "ramp" deck that has an almost superfluous Glimpse of Nature combo shoehorned into it. There are also people who say that it is not a "pure" combo deck because of various reasons (ie. it does not tutor for Natural Order or Glimpse of Nature, it has a grindy aggro back-up plan). I have also heard the "Natural Order" half of the combo dismissed in the past as not really a "true" combo so much as just playing one broken card. IIRC it was something like "If a deck focused on green creature + Natural Order is a combo deck then a deck focused on Stone-Forge Mystic + equipment is also a combo deck. Since StoneBlade is not a combo deck Elves is also not a combo deck." Needless to say, the same person also did not accept Sneak & Show or Reanimator as "true" combo decks.
Now let's get squarely into controversial territory:
* You play any combination of burn spells that adds up to twenty points of damage.
Is burn a combo deck? There is no specific "combination" of cards here, and there is also no tutoring. However, it does seek to assemble a critical mass of pieces that add up to a quick win. Certainly there are people who fall on both sides of this debate:
http://www.reddit.com/r/ModernMagic/comments/1x3huq/why_is_burn_considered_a_combo_deck/
At this point let's look at something in the current standard environment:
* You play a couple of cards with green mana symbols (enablers), you play Nykthos (lynchpin), then you go crazy with Polukranos or Garruk (payoff).
Multiple people in this thread have dismissed Nykthos decks (and all ramp decks, really) as not true combo decks. However, what is the defining characteristic possessed by Storm decks that is not present in ramp decks? From a logical standpoint I am having trouble coming up with a definition for "combo deck" that includes Storm but excludes Ramp. Both archetypes are basically doing the same thing, using different tools.
Personally I think that Burn, Ramp and Storm are all combo decks. Structurally similar combo decks to boot. It's just that some specific combo strategies have dominated eternal formats so fully that players who use them have come to think of themselves as "the one true combo".
Saying that combo is dead in standard because no one is chaining card draw spells and rituals or tutoring for specific combo pieces is like saying that aggro is dead in standard because no one is playing tribal. If you want to play "combo" in standard all you need to do is pick up Brad Nelson's burn deck or Mihara's Devotion deck. If you want to play "chain rituals and draw spells" or "assemble 3 cards and win" combo you are out of luck for now. It is fine if you are upset by this, and you may create threads that say "Why has Wizards removed ritual/draw spell combo from standard?". On the other hand saying that "combo is not in standard" is a mistake borne of arrogance.
What do you want out of a combo deck in standard?
A way of winning that isn't attacking with hardcasted creatures/the occasional 2 mana wannabe Lightning Bolt. I'd even be happy with something like what they did with Maze's End, just less terrible. I wish Balustrade Spy and Undercity Informer were in the same Standard as Laboratory Maniac. I think that could have led to some fun decks.
Personally I want wizards to print some good rituals so I can play Beck + young pyromancer because that deck is just a lot of fun, even if I had a lot of people say "your deck is stupid" and quit when I played it before.
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own
If you're looking for simple combos like that, there are plenty in Standard. The issue, for a lot of people, seems to be that there are no top-tier competitive combo decks.
You're right, I had a derp moment and got my blocks mixed up.
I think that's it right there: people want combo that doesn't require creatures. They want to feel like real spellcasters using magic directly on their enemies. But wizards insists on including creatures in combos so that any deck can have a chance to interact with it, since every deck has some sort of creature removal. As things stand now, spell based combo decks are pretty much immune to anything that isn't running counter spells and possibly discard or a handful of white spells. Although combo wouldn't take over the meta, it would be tremendously unpopular if wizards allowed decks that effectively win or lose on turn zero. This is why a lot of people hate Restore Balance - it's obvious how the game will end the moment you know what the other guy is playing. And that's not fun.
The solution is to not rely on blue to keep combo in check - have main-deckable solutions to combo in every color. I'm certain it can be done somehow, without destroying the color pie. I think Spirit of the Labyrinth is a good start.
-making certain Standard cards can be played in Modern, therefore increasing their value and increasing WotC's profit margin
Things WotC does not care about:
-keeping the ban list as short as possible
-taking chances with an entire format for the benefit of a single card
-catering to play styles that newer players generally don't like and will lose them more players than it will gain
-keeping the meta balanced between archetypes/colors/whatever
-keeping cards on the secondary market cheap (available yes, but not cheap)
-keeping the meta diverse (as long as a single deck doesn't threaten the popularity of the format)
I meant combos that are spread out over the whole block. Like right now. In this Standard, there are the 3 best pieces of graveyard hate ever printed, an uncounterable Cranial Extraction, and the second-best discard spell ever printed. There is plenty of combo hate. Now would be a good time for a combo deck.
1. What is that mess again? Decks like Splinter Twin and Scapeshift are perfectly fine in Modern.
2. The thing is, why would they need to create new hate in Modern for another combo deck that doesn't break the turn 4 rule? There is already an enormous amount of hate.
3. What do you mean by this?
4. As I said, there are many cards in a full Standard or even most of one. Combo would be fine.
5. I'm pretty sure that that evidence is circumstantial. More players have played Standard in the past few years when there wasn't combo because there are more people playing the game.
I would define a combo decks as "A deck that finds (by tutoring, card draw, or topdeck manipulation) and uses a combination of specific cards or a single specific card (or multiple win conditions) in one turn to either gain an immense advantage or win the game." A deck like Storm would count for this because it is dedicated to finding and abusing a single card to instantly win the game in a single turn. However, saying that Burn is combo is ridiculous. Yes, it uses a combination of burn spells to kill an opponent. Guess what? Zoo uses a combination of creatures to kill its opponent. Jund uses a combination of disruption and creatures to drag out the game and kill its opponent. By your definition of combo, everything is combo.
I want a combo deck (using my definition of combo, not anything that plays a combination of anything to win the game) that is tier or tier 1.5. right now, there are no successful Standard combo decks. That should change.
I'm fine with creature-based combo (though right now there is enough hate that noncreature-based combo would be safe in Standard).
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
1. Scapeshift was never a deck in Standard, and the Twin you see played in modern is not the same Twin that was in Standard. The mess I speak of is the combos that just keep getting stronger the more sets that are printed. Think Dredge, reanimator, twin, and pod decks that get better and need more hate every set to keep them in check so they dont dominate, or flat out bans.
2. Why do you think the graveyard hate gets printed in almost every set? To stop the reanimator/dredge decks in older formats that keep getting stronger and more resilient to graveyard hate.
3. Up until recently Wotc designed cards for formats not really taking Limited into consideration. Then they stopped thinking of the older formats and started concentrating on Standard and Limited. They streamlined the sets to be more efficient for Standard and Limited with certain stronger cards being a by product for older sets. Theros is suppose to be the first set designed with Modern in mind.
4. Set size is the big one here. Plus Block constructed. Wotc cant have a combo deck dominate the Block constructed scene. This is what happened with Valakut and they learned their lesson.
5. Wotc has said time and again that players dont like playing with certain strategies in certain formats. They know this because they have the numbers to show the effects of certain decks on formats. Ever think the reason more players are playing is because Wotc has weeded out the hated strategies?
I've got to say I really disagree with this. has been barely holding on in Legacy by the skin of its teeth thanks to an overwhelming amount of graveyard hate being printed, it's only saving grace is the fact that since it's only a T 1.5 deck at best most people don't even bother boarding in hate. In Modern, they never even game the mechanic a chance, and banned Grave troll and Dread Return right off the bat, so it's just impossible to say whether or not it would be to powerful for Modern. Can you tell me exactly how dredge or really ANY reanimator decks have gotten "stronger and more resilient"? They've gotten good targets lately thanks to creature power creep, but while they'll pop up occasionally (Reanimaor getting 3rd at GP Paris this week), they're just too easy to hate out, and if they start becoming even remotely common players put gravehate back in their sideboards and the whole strategy becomes unplayable another few months.
*EDIT*
Numbers are also showing that all those players are leaving the game after about 2 years of playing. That fits right in with my timeframe giving Standard a shot, sort of having fun at first, but after a few rotations realizing that while the cards may all change, the strategy and games just don't, then getting bored and moving on.
..and how long did it take with Wotc printing hate for graveyard strategies every set for blocks? Dredge was played in Standard, Dredge was played in Old Extended, Dredge is played in Legacy. Wotc doesnt want Dredge in Modern. So effectively it took them how many years to fix their mistake called dredge? 5? 10? Now think if they have to do that with ever combo deck that keeps getting more powerful as sets are released. Terrible can of worms to open, or I should say relive.
To be fair I believe Dredge won a Legacy event in the past 2 years. The real final nail in the coffin was Rest in Peace. Think how many tried they had to go through to finally hit the right card to stop the deck they hate so much.
I was't playing Standard during original Ravnica so I don't have first hand info, but I've never heard any horror stories about dredge dominating the format. Same with extended. Legacy dredge is barely playable, and as much as I enjoy playing it in tournaments, I can't honestly expect to do better than break even. Your arguments seem to be that people played the mechanic, so it needs to go away forever, despite the fact that it never really warped any format it was played in, besides Vintage. You're calling it a mistake, I just don't see it. I see a deck that's a refreshing break from the norm.
1. By Scapeshift, I meant Primeval Titan versions of Scapeshift in Modern, which are very similar to Valakut decks. Also, how is Splinter Twin different?
2. Most of the graveyard hate isn't strong enough to see Legacy play anyways and Modern graveyard-strategies are possibly effected too much by the hate.
3. They can have cards that are good in Limited and Standard that are used in Standard combo decks.
4. Fine then. Don't make it in a block. If a card in Born of the Gods made a combo deck with a card from Return to Ravnica, how would that have been a problem?
5. How are the numbers not circumstantial? Ravnica/Time Spiral Standard is generally viewed as the best Standard of all time. Because the game grew, more people were playing in the Caw-Blade era than in Ravnica/Time Spiral. Does that mean that Wizards should make more cards like Jace and SFM? It doesn't. It means that the game is growing regardless. Do you have any proof that less people would play Standard if there was a tier 1 combo deck, even if it was creature-based?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Dredge played in RAV/TSP Standard was tame compared to what it became. But a lot like Storm Wotc saw the monster they created and they kept trying to design that card that could keep dredge in check. It started with Leyline of the void, moved on to bog and relic, a reprinting of leyline of the void, then cage and finally Rest in peace. Dredge absolutely wraped formats. Decks were needing 6 to 8 spots in their sides to combat Dredge. For quite a while Dredge was a pillar of Legacy. You had to be prepared for it.
1. Here is where you confuse me, you want combo in Standard like Scapeshift, which was never in Standard. Twin didnt have some of the tools it has now to be more consistent and explosive.
2. You are looking at it today. Every bit of graveyard hate has been played in Legacy at one time or another. It has to be to keep graveyard decks in check. Where a few years back decks like Dredge and reanimator could play around a leyline or relic, they cant do then now with rest in peace. It has taken years of hate to get to this point.
3. Apparently they cant.
4. Not sure about this. Would you be willing to wait a year to get all the pieces to play a deck 3 months? Seems like wasted spots in sets to me.
5. Do you have any proof more would play? It works both ways. Wotc has the numbers and has said numerous times in design articles on the mother ship that they took out the unfun aspects of the game from what they saw. Of those was LD, draw go control, and combo. If you were running a business and the majority of your customers were complaining about a portion of your product, would you keep trying to appease the minority or the majority? Like I have said, Wotc has the numbers and information of what sells and what doesnt.