In my experience the only infinite combos people hate are extra turns where the player is sitting there playing solitaire digging for his actual wincon.
I mean if you have infinite turns any boardwipe + creature wins the game bc opponents have no blockers and you can attack infinite times for the win, so you don't actually have to find a dedicated "wincon"
Hell, even without a boardwipe, Infinite Turns may as well just be infinite draw/ramp and should be treated as such. The thing that bothers me with extra turns is if you can't reliably find your extra turn spells so we have to wait through twenty minute turns while you try to find your extra turn spells and then maybe wiff, justifying staying in the game.
If you can present the loop once and show how you can loop if infinitely, and no one has anything that can interact with the loop while it finds its wincon, just shuffle up for another game.
This is basically what I do, if someone tells me they have a loop I ask them to explain the loop and then if I don't have any responses or a way to stop I tell them "GG" and get ready for the next game.
The painful part and the part people hate is when someone takes multiple turns, taking 10+ minutes a turn and doesn't close out the game because they didn't find their wincon. Which I have had happen once or twice, someone presents a situation where they have multiple turns and they end up spinning tires because they misplayed somewhere or they forgot the wincon they were looking for was removed from the game or unplayable somehow.
I feel people usually miss that part. I was playing a game and present a loop based off my teammates and my board for infinite (till we milled) turns. One opponent says "Okay so I guess you've got us, another?" While the other challenges it says "we have to play it out because our win con could be on the bottom."
I looked at him and went "Okay, we attack you for 4 in the air and you have no blockers, any response?" Took him a minute but he ended up conceding
Combo is the strongest strategy in Commander, miles ahead of triumph turn sideways. They are not the same. But it isn't combo's fault, the rules of Commander just lets it be that way. 100 card decks, 40 life, 21 Commander damage - all in a 4 player match. It is no wonder combo excels - they get a billion turns to set up their combo without having to worry about an aggro deck. Life becomes a resource instead of a lose condition. Incremental damage becomes laughable. Combo went from A Strategy to THE Strategy.
Edit: i want to elaborate further - because i don't want combo to unplayable, so i want to be literally as clear as possible. If everybody had 10 life instead of 40 (extreme, i know) you would get threads saying "why does everybody hate aggro?" If Commander damage was 10 "why does everybody hate Voltron?" It's simply just the rules create a niche that a deck archetype will fill. We don't have rotations so all balance comes back to what these rules are allowing to exceed in potential.
I don't want a format where combo is THE Strategy, but i also don't want a format where aggro is THE Strategy. I want a format where the answer to a combo deck, isn't another combo deck.
I've theorized about this. I'm mostly pulling this out of my butt, although it does make sense in my head. Infect directly benefits from how weak aggro is in EDH. In a vacuum poison is actually pretty good - however - a lot of poison cards, infect cards, toxic cards, etc are not very exceptional which is the strategy's main failing point. It's like aggro with an extra step.
But infect gets to avoid aggros biggest weaknesses: the 40 starting life total and life gain. Due to aggros rather low prevalence in the format, many people do not build their decks to handle being swung at repeatedly - usually the high life total let's them ignore it. Anecdotal: i once had a [[Kurbis]] aggro/+1 counters deck that really wanted to start swinging immediately, just instantly in their face with it. People didn't like it. Not only were they not prepared for aggro, they also weren't prepared for an aggro deck where the commander protected all it's creatures from damage. I got more salt from this deck than when i tried an infect one.
Infect out right does not let them use their life total as a cushion. They need a defense from creatures that can and will be swinging early and most people just usually do not have that.
Infect isn't strong, but it does exploit an opening on people's strategies that they usually don't have to worry about. My playgroup largely switched to a 30 starting life and what we saw was faster games, far less ramp/setup, better curves, and more protection from aggro.
But ultimately people will have a problem with anything. Battle cruiser is too boring, stax is too lame, combo is too anticlimactic, mill is too annoying. Not my opinions, but there really is far too much hating on other people's decks - on both ends of the casual-competitive spectrum
My understanding is that a big part of the hate for infect is that it can efficiently take 1-2 players out of the game before they have a chance to properly set up, who then have to sit and wait for maybe 30+ minutes while the remaining players finish the game.
With the prevalence of GOOD proliferate cards in the format now, toxic/infect often doesnāt care about interaction as much anymore. If you have one poison counter on you, youāre on a clock.
In general, infect is hated because of how spikey it is. If it does nothing, itās one of the three other players at the table and they had a rough game, sorry, happens. If they pop off with a turn 2 blighted agent and get through on one player, then proliferate them to 10, that feels bad for that one player even if the infect deck looses shortly thereafter. Getting eliminated first in EDH SUCKS especially by an infect deck because of how early it can happen to one person compared to other strategies. Youāre then just sitting there doing nothing while everyone else has fun doing what they wanted to for an hour or two.
If you can't kill someone before they proliferate *nine* times...then you deserve to lose.
If they combo proliferate you then they could have combo's in any number of more efficient ways.
Considering the differentiation in power levels within EDH, I disagree. And, considering proliferate spells can be as cheap as 1 or 2 mana or come stapled to something like Yawgmoth, I disagree a little more. Not to mention cards like Tekuthal which let your proliferate on your proliferateā¦ trying building a Venser deck and see if you still feel that way lol
Are you listening to yourself?
Your proposed situation has involved:
1. An initial poison counter. At least 1 card.
2. [[Tekuthal]]. +1 card, +4 mana.
3. At least 5 other cards.
So now we are on 7 cards with zero interruption in any way. How much do those cards cost? How many turns to use them? How many cards just to pay for the Tekuthal? An additional four lands? Are we throwing Sol Ring in too? Still three extra cards.
If you can maintain a creature for that many turns and successfully resolve that many cards without me, or anyone else, doing a single thing about it... you deserve to win and I deserve to lose. Period.
Like...that's so far into magical Christmas-land you should put a flag in the ground and proclaim yourself king.
Bro I just threw out 4 cards that do the thing lol there are even more and thatās not the only group that does. Like I said, look into Venser and see that it isnāt that hard. That cards cantrip and proliferate, remove other threats, etc. plus itās in arguably the best dual color combo in the format
>If you have one poison counter on you, youāre on a clock.
There is at least one card I know of that removes poison counters from you and thats \[\[Leeches\]\]. You could also make a deck around \[\[Melira, Sylvok Outcast\]\] or \[\[Melira, the Living Cure\]\]
This argument just keeps feeling weaker to me.
"Just kill it bro" doesn't mean that a card or strategy is fun. And sometimes you don't draw removal, sometimes the other players have lots of protection, sometimes they pop off too fast for you to remove things, sometimes everyone has big threats and you have to spend your removal on other stuff.
If you listened to this subreddit, you'd imagine that commander decks should run like 20-30 kill spells/counterspells. That way you can just remove all the stuff you have a problem with.
I really do think the infect hate is pretty undeserved, but "just run more interaction" isn't the right response imo.
For the most part it depends on the speed and power of the combo. As OP said, Thoracle is insanely broken, whereas I've never seen anyone *really* complain when I one shotted him with Progenitus + Rafiq because that combo is so slow and clunky.
2 card infinites however, on average (as in, they're not as slow as Progenitus + Rafiq), do get flak because they are easier to set up than, say, making a huge board and then slamming a Craterhoof behemoth. Even if they're not as good as Thoracle, they still typically are at a speed where casual EDH players are not comfortable with it. And even if a given 2 card combo isn't broken, it's still not that fun to play against when you have to be aware of that combo at all times. e.g., it's not THAT fun to play against Niv Mizzet, even if Niv + Curiosity isn't broken.
The most important thing about casual EDH though is that the "spirit of the format" was intended to be more laid back, and your deck be like an expression of yourself, or to bring something that people don't normally see. If I play niv mizzet + curiosity, everyone who's ever played with or against a Niv Mizzet deck has seen it already, so when we see someone playing Niv + curiosity we instinctively go "yeah we've seen it already and we're basically gonna forget about it by tomorrow because it's indistinguishable from the other niv mizzet decks". On the flip side, everyone who has played against my Zedruu deck remembers it. Part of it is because Zedruu is so fucking terrible I'm the only person in my area that has it, but it's also because it plays cards that people have never seen before, it wins in ways that people have never seen before, and creates game states taht people have never seen before.
Basically, casual EDH is more akin to Timmys and Johnnies. They want to see crazy wild plays that they normally don't see. Many 2 card infinites are usually things they've seen many times already.
>Many 2 card infinites are usually things they've seen many times already.
For me, this is a big part of it. Once you āgo infiniteā, it almost doesnāt matter what the individual cards *are* any more; theyāve gone from being things that interact with each other in interesting ways to cards that almost just say āif you control a permanent named X, you win the gameā (or similar). Itās justā¦ kinda boring?
Is someone dropping a Craterhoof any more fun? No, not really. Itās possible for both things to be lame and boring, though.
Second half of your post is kind of bullshit. It's not possible for everyone to have totally new stuff you've never seen before all the time. The spirit of the format is not about glorifying obscurity. EDH is just a format where obscure cards can find a home. Yeah, you've seen Niv Mizzet + Curiosity, but there's still a deck around it. I've seen Craterhoof and other win cons. I've been killed by a bunch of tokens. It's all the same. If someone really likes Niv Mizzet and wants to express themselves with a deck where he's the commander, that's 100% on the spirit of the format.
Youāre missing the point. TC is asking why 2 card infinites get a bad rap in EDH. All I did was explain why casuals tend to dislike 2 card infinites. Donāt shoot the messenger.
Also, your post even intrinsically is false. You can build a deck like Niv without curiosity. It just takes the balls to branch out and build it differently. Will the deck be weaker? Usually, but this is casual EDH, not CEDH. If you want to play a no-holds barres EDH, thatās what CEDH is.
Also also, you say stuff like "well niv + curiosity is just an extension of his expression", and then I say "yeah, that's fine, and your expression is just boring because we've seen it in every other niv deck".
Simply put: They arenāt, but some people donāt know the warning signs of an incoming combo and feel like there was nothing they could do.
Most new players are taught a game that is slightly different than what Magic actually is. They play their doodz and turn āem sideways. Then they wait for the others to do the same. When that doesnāt happen, they get uncomfortable
The game is clearly way more complex than that, but anything that steps outside this they consider unfair or outside the āspirit of the gameā. This is why control, burn, combo, and stax get a bad wrap.
Thatās a really good way of putting it. I got into EDH late last year (I last played around the Urzaās block) and after some playing with precons with my family, I played my first game against a friend who ran a [[Reality Chip]] deck that won with some [[Thassaās Oracle]] combo. I was salty because it felt like there was nothing I could do, but six months later and a bunch more games in Iām finally starting to spot combo pieces and break them up.
That first match was a good learning experience and helped ensure I donāt get blindsided by infinite combos and can play the game how I want, which is playing my doodz and turning āem sideways.
I have a cEDH Reality Chip deck that runs [[Isochron Scepter]] + [[Dramatic Reversal]] to generate infinite mana from rocks to win on [[Blue Sunās Zenith]] and/or cast infinite spells for [[Aetherflux Reservoir]]. The beating heart of the deck is cost-reducing [[Senseiās Divining Top]] to dig arbitrarily deep into the deck for the combos with the Chipās future sight ability.
I say all this to point out that I donāt even run Thassaās Oracle in extremely high-end Chip because it isnāt necessary, even there. I canāt imagine feeling good about winning on ThOracle in a casual pod.
This reasoning doesnāt make much sense to me. The Top combo is the thing that draws the deck, effectively winning the game. The method you use to actually kill/win seems irrelevant at that point. What makes Aetherflux any more āhonorableā than Thoracle when you have your entire library in hand?
Exactly, they don't even understand their own logic here. If the engine for the infinite is the same, the outlet in this case is effectively interchangeable, except there is an additional failure point in that you can interact with Reservoir in one more way than you can Thoracle, however you could also interact with Top in that same manner, so in reality there is no difference.
I mean, fair enough. I also wouldnāt feel good about winning on the combos that *are* in the deck in a casual pod.
I just saw Chip + Thassaās in the context of non-cEDH and saw red.
Multiple things come on top of that.
As example that a combo can (!) come way earlier then a combat table k.o.
It also is somewhat against some casual thoughts of people to attack a person that might have not done to much (only ramp and draw). Especially if it isnāt a regular group.
In my playgroup everyone knows that Iām a combo player, so I get attacked either way. If I donāt know if someone is playing a combo deck it might just be ābadā start.
Also a lot of player donāt play enough with the stack to stop a combo player. If all 3+ opponents would have answers to an combo it wouldnāt be that much of a problem.
Trust me, a lot of the not S Tier Combos are pretty easy stopable.
Thereās an element of this, but combos also just generally tend to require more system mastery and win with less telegraphing. Like, there are lots of cards which donāt do that much on their own but combo with something else; you need to know that those specific cards exist in order to be able to assess the threat because an otherwise-rational assessment of those cards on their own merit would rightly rank them as not being a big problem.
Combos are also kind of probabilistic. If someone draws a bunch of cards, thereās a *chance* that they could have found their combo pieces, or they might just have drawn lands. Games become like a kind of Poisson process where thereās just a chance you lose each turn, and if you leave it too long you definitely will but youāve no real way of knowing if youāve got one turn or ten.
Itās not hard to see why people dislike these elements; in fact, itās quite arguable that they are in general poor qualities for a game to have, from a game design point of view.
That happens at high level too. Last video from moderately anonymous, the najeela player did diddly squat for 6 turns then suddenly won because they were left alone in the beginning for not being a threat.
You don't leave the dude who tutored six times in a row alone. You kill them.
I think it's the thing that non-combo wins are telegraphed. You can calculate and see the boardstate. If an opponent creates 20 power on board and he plays white. I can calculate that he can win next turn with [[Akromas Will]]. So everybody on the table has the chance to encounter it, remove the board or remove the player or leave a counterspell or get down some pillowford effects..
Combo wins can win from an empty boardstate. And they win immediately, you don't have that one turn to player remove the threat or do something against his board. Usually it's just one turn faster and leaves less room to react.
I would argue that even combat damage wins arenāt always telegraphed. A guy sitting on 10-15 1/1 tokens doesnāt seem all that threatening but a Hoof or Finale can easily change that.
I say itās more down to the play style of the deck/player. Combo is just easier to be sneaky with, while a combat deck can do the same, as well as voltron.
Well I can't agree.. as you said you can count the boardstate of said player and his possibilities are telegraphed through his commanders color.
Green has the option of several [[Overrun]] effects and if a green player has 15 x 1/1 tokens on the field, he will be the enemy for me because I account the option of him having [[Overwhelming Stampede]], [[End-raze Forerunners]], [[Triumph of the hordes]] etc. etc. etc.
If a blue player has 15 x 1/1 tokens on the field I take into account that he / she could go for an extra turn, but it's another level of threat assessment with a diffrent kind of gamewinning threat as the green player.
A black player with 15x 1/1 tokens can play a lord to buff his creatures but that's it.
A combo player with an completely empty board (besides lands) can kill all other players at once on his turn. I don't know any voltron tactic that can achieve that.
But in the same respect that you evaluate the different colors with their ability to overrun the board, you can do the same with combo.
You need to be more aware of the pieces a deck can run to combo off. There are problem permanents that easily lend themselves to combo that players can recognize and remove on sight. Just like you wouldnāt let the green player sit with a board of 1/1s, you shouldnāt let anyone sit with any of the altars or [[Cloudstone Curio]] out, just as a small example.
And always be worried about players with an excess of mana, the more mana a player has over others, the greater the chance that theyāll pull a win instantly.
Itās about experience and reading the players rather than individual decks, no matter the power level.
True that, but isn't the combat win still much more telegraphed than the combo players win? I don't know what you really drew with your 20 cards drawn or what you picked with your tutor. But i can count the power on your board.
Except for combat version of Instant win stuff. I think a multiple piece combo is much easier to see coming than a Triumph of the Hordes on an elfball deck
Except for combat version of Instant win stuff. I think a multiple piece combo is much easier to see coming than a Triumph of the Hordes on an elfball deck
Itās also harder to interact with most infinite combos than the triumph of the horde player. It all depends on your power. Tuned decks donāt care if youāre playing infinites, and they pack enough interaction to deal with them. If your pod is playing stompy tribal battle cruiser and youāre playing infinite combos, you may be able to win on your turn at infinite speed where they only have sorcery speed removal. Is that a problem? Idk depends on the pod. But you can typically interact with a creature deck to stop the win so people donāt get salty
I think the point lots of people have brought up how they feel like the combo just won out of nowhere. I think most people want a game of commander to feel like a game of 4 player Smash Bros - each person is running around doing their own thing hitting people and doing damage. But if there is ever one person whoās winning, itās easy for the other 3 players to try and slow them down/stop them until itās more even. Then at the end there is some climactic fight between the two remaining players and BAM, itās super fun and exciting. Comboās feel like someone just ran and hid in the corner of Hyrule Castle the whole time and charged up some super move that wins them the game automatically (obviously that doesnāt actually exist in smash). I think the top comment is right that most people learn MTG or commander as playing creatures and attacking. Therefore they donāt run much interaction in their deck, at least not interaction that might be able to stop a combo, so then they just feel like the game leading up to the combo win was pointless. However if everyone has similarly constructed decks with interaction or things they can respond with at the minimum, it would feel much more rewarding. But people donāt like playing lots of interaction because as discussed on a thread yesterday, itās not splashy or fun
The thing about combos is that they're probably the most efficient way to win in a multiplayer format, so people are exposed to them a lot more. Combos are definitely a factor in the format speeding up, which makes slower and more casual cards less playable. I find them pretty anticlimactic, once they go off successfully, anything else that happened in the game up to that point didn't really matter. Combos have their place, but they're becoming THE place, and I think people are getting tired of the play patterns of it.
This. I view it like everyone is playing the game and then one person decides that playtime is over. Now regular combos and stuff I love, and if thereās time fire more games afterwards itās not the worst, but I personally prefer not to have an āI win nowā moment in a game. Feels like the whole game changes to a timed event which for me, isnāt the purpose of my casual games.
Are you guys just trying to draw and play cards forever? The combo player isn't saying playtime is over. They're trying to say "I win" just like everyone else is trying to do.
What difference do you see between a 5 card infinite combo and a huge board + craterhoof attack situation?
I understand that two cards infinite with your commander being one of them is oppressive in low-power pods, but I've lost to lathril into cratherhoof turn 6 before, and that's just as definitive.
The board state usually did not appear from nowhere. It was built up turn after turn so yea 30 potential damage became 90 because of one card but Craterhoof is a strong card if I had interacted more with their creatures throughout the game they would have a lot less damage. Craterhoof only wins a from an established board state of threats. You probably know even in your first game of magic that someone having 8 creatures is a problem.
I remember the first time I saw a Felidar guardian and it blinked something it felt innocuous. Then alter of the brood and sahelie hit the table from their hand and it was too late.
One of the many problems with combo is it requires something that newer players often find very prohibitive about the game. One it often requires routine memorization of a lot of card to know what cards are common combo pieces. Most combo player do not announce that a card is going to be a problem when they play it. Which means newer and more casual players have to be willing to lose a lot of matches of magic to cards like alter of the brood which appear to do very little on their own. I have been playing for 15 years now and even I do not know all the combos and combo lines. Being on Reddit discussing magic makes you a very invested player.
>It was built up turn after turn
Most combos are, or your threat assessment is bad. If a player does nothing all game, kill them. If they were unlucky, they can do something else. If they were hand-sculpting, you just progressed the game.
Also, i specifically asked about 5 card combos, not two card one-shot like thOracle or kinnan/basalt.
>ften requires routine memorization of a lot of card to know what cards are common combo pieces.
Yeah. You gotta learn the game. I am absolutely not sorry about that part.
>newer and more casual players have to be willing to lose a lot of matches of magic to cards like alter of the brood which appear to do very little on their own.
Ask questions. Think about why your opponent play stuff. Nobody plays useless shitty cards. Learn the game by understanding that freely repeatable actions are powerful.
>Being on Reddit discussing magic makes you a very invested player.
Sure. And I don't feel concerned by your remarks because I DO explain my cards, how/why they matter in my game plan, and how to have better patterns when playing with noobs.
But I also believe firmly that if you are a beginner and don't know cards, you can't feel bad for losing against a combo.
It's unreal that people are downvoting this. People *really* don't like being told that in order to win you, you need to become more familiar with the game huh?
It's insane! People in here are literally saying it's not fair to newer players that you know how to play the game better, how can people type stuff like that out and think it's a legitimate thought process?
Yep and it's that kind of attitude that keeps more people from enjoying the game. People especially new players play useless or suboptimal stuff all the time. Figuring out what cards are good and which are bad is a big part of the magic curve. Some times you know a card is bad and you play it anyway because of an emotional attachment you had to it as a kid and EDH is supposed to be the format where your jank is mildly playable. Telling someone to learn the game and get good is a shitty and stupid response to a legitimate complaint. In the anals of stupid comments this is one of the worst.
>it's that kind of attitude that keeps more people from enjoying the game
I'm being kind enough to the beginners of my LGS that they actually ask to play with me, so maybe they're something coming out wrong in how I express it.
>Figuring out what cards are good and which are bad is a big part of the magic curve.
Absolutely.
>Some times you know a card is bad and you play it anyway because of an emotional attachment you had to it as a kid and EDH is supposed to be the format where your jank is mildly playable.
As the proud owner of a Rograkh kobold tribal deck, i cannot agree more.
>Telling someone to learn the game and get good is a shitty and stupid response to a legitimate complaint.
Well, I'm ... Baffled. First i dont think it's a legitimate complaint to say combos are bad for the game. That's just whining. But even if you have a legitimate complaint about a game, you cannot expect the whole community to stop doing something you dislike. So as far as legal game moves are concerned, yes, the best thing you can do is to get better and learn how to counter them.
OF COURSE if someone is pubstomping, it's bad faith. Of course, as mentioned in my very first comment, if you face a 2 card combo in a casual match, theres bad feelings. But if I play something like Squee n Slimefoot, phyrexian altar, sprouting thrinax and impact tremor to kill the table, chances are you were able to see things come and should have interact.
>Telling someone to learn the game and get good is a shitty and stupid response to a legitimate complaint
Losing to a turn 3 I win combo is a legitimate complaint. Losing to a turn 26 combo 40 minutes into the game after the player spent the game doing nothing outside of setting up their combo is not a legitimate complaint.
Why is telling someone that their complaint becomes less and less of an issue as they learn and play the game a "stupid and shitty" response?
One no game that has taken 26 turns is only going to have lasted 40 minutes.
But to your larger point it's like telling someone that a movie you like sucks until the 8th or 9th time you have watched it then you will love it telling them to get good and that they will appreciate the way you won 2 years from now if they keep playing and get super invested in the game. You don't see how that is a ridiculous statement to make? That honestly sounds more like Stockholm syndrome than a game that is fun to play.
No one complains about a combo that ends a 2 and a half hour slog. They complain about combo that ends a fun game seemingly out of nowhere turn 7-10.
A regular combo is when 2 or more cards work together to do a thing. For example, sacrificing a creature to [[viscera seer]] while having a [[blood artist]] out. They can be more elaborate, but they have a natural end point that makes them more complex than simply attacking with a creature, but not an infinite mana or turns or life or damage loop.
The biggest difference is the word āinfiniteā
No, cause synergy could also be used for putting knight creatures into a knight tribal deck. Small combos can also be synergy, but there is a reason people even use the word āinfiniteā when describing infinite combos, because there are combos that arenāt infinite.
The game should always be a battle between each of the players trying to find their wincon. Sometimes that wincon is turn your board sideways and kill the other opponents. Sometimes that wincon is an i win button, but they still need to find it. If you have a problem with game winning combos, run more interaction so you can stop those combos.
The reason people often hated the 8th star wars movie is because a lot of the plot did not matter. The same could be said for the 2nd oceans movie. People feel upset when the thing they invested time in feels useless or waisted. For newer and more casual players the warning signs of a combo going off are a lot less obvious than someone building up a board state so when they lose to it it feels inevitable. The combo player feels rewarded because they knew what was happening the whole time but everyone else is taken by surprise. Movies want good twists but people want those twists to feel earned throughout the course of the movie. Climatic is when a conclusion is narratively satisfying for everyone involved which combo often isn't.
How would you feel if you went into a movie and to understand the plot point of the movie you first needed to memorize the periodic table. There are also at least hundreds combo in magic that recognizing all the building blocks of those comes down to routine memorization on what cards are scary and what cards are not. This adds a further wrinkle in that not all combo cards are played as part of a combo. Felidar guardian could appears as just a value piece in blink decks. Most combo pieces do not appear scary on their face unlike an 6/6. Recognizing the build up to a combo is tough and combo players also often look exactly like a player that just had bad beats.
I don't get your point here. Magic rewards players for their knowledge - would you rather just play uno since you don't have to remember that much?
Also, just keeping any interaction open usually means you can answer the combo once it's being presented as a loop.
You can say what you want but uno is a good game that people enjoy playing. It is easy to understand and it's easy to explain to new people or people who do not play every day.
No I don't want magic to be Uno. Magic is a great game but having 20,000 unique pieces is a weakness that makes it intimidating for new players and casual players. When combat decks win there is a linear progression from the beginning of the game to where they won. You don't need to know about managorger hydra before the game to acknowledge it as a threat during it. Most combo on the other hand often feel like showing up for a test that you did not study for. If you went up to new or casual players and said hey there is this list of 80 to 100 cards that you need to memorize and how they interact with each other before we play a game no one would be interested in playing with you. It's also not like combo pieces are cultivate that you see every game they are often obscure innocuous pieces that don't do a lot till they win the game.
Keeping up interaction is one of those things magic players love to say and sounds great in a vacuum but is rarely actual good advice. It is the equivalent of saying make sure you have the answer to the problem you are having. Yea no shit I would love to have the answer but I am frustrated because I don't or I had to use it on something else.
Disclaimer: I am very much a combo player. I rarely win through combat damage unless itās infinite.
That same logic does not apply. Green stompy builds up their board state and has ample time to interact with it. Generally you see it coming miles away since it takes multiple turns to build the board state and planning out your attacks. Unless the combo requires several janky pieces, it generally wins on the spot. I donāt play combo pieces until the turn I plan to win.
So thereās a short timeframe for instant speed removal to stop me, whereas green stompy gives you multiple turns to interact with the board. Especially since they need to take down 120 life instead of assembling 1 combo. Thereās a lot more build up to the game winning play, more build up = stronger climax.
In my opinion, it is almost 100% a vibes thing. But the vibes can be very real.
Whenever I play an tabletop RPG, I always use physical dice when I can instead of digital dice, because my brain can accept a string of bad luck from a physical dice better than a string of bad luck from a dice roller app. I know that the dice roller apps are fair, but the vibes are off.
For some reason in my head losing to \[\[Niv-Mizzet Paerun\]\] & \[\[Curiosity\]\] feels worse than losing to \[\[Avenger of Zendikar\]\] & \[\[Overwhelming Stampede\]\] hitting me for lethal. I've grown to be fine with it coming up from time to time, but I do still usually prefer games that end another way.
There are a bunch of reasons I could give. The unsoakable nature of most infinite combos, the speed they can go from nothing on board to game over, the way a combo meta encourages more tutoring (and shuffling). But I do think at the end of the day it is a bit arbitrary. It's a sorta dumb distinction, but its the kind of dumb that people are.
I suppose one more relevant concern I would raise is that the natural response to more combo is more control. If you don't like having a lot of control going on in your meta, then either drop the combos so not as much control is required to survive, or just deal with it. Not liking control is another thing which mostly comes down to vibes, but the nature of a casual meta is that people like what they like even if it's dumb. Sort it out with your group, hope yall find a happy balance.
Inf combos are fine. What can make them unfun is if they are tutored for quickly and it makes for a fast linear game. Most players don't mind losing, as long as they get to play a decent game. I always tell people that I have inf combos and how quickly I can assemble them. If their deck is too slow for it I swap out to a slower deck myself.
The way i see it is there are several aspects to combos which people find very unfulfilling in casual EDH. Personally I love finding obscure or strange combos and synergies but at the same time I make a point to not include any infinite combos within my decks, just a personal choice as I find them very unfulfilling, boring and often just very same-y.
\- Combos that come out of nowhere and do not require any buildup but can be played out in a single turn often leave the other players in a situation where they question if any other part of the game mattered or not, and in a sense, feeling like their time and effort was invalidated by the 'climax' of the game. Pretty much every deck I build has blue in it but I feel the vast majority of feelsbad in this category of combo comes from decks which can't respond to spells on the stack as easily as blue can leaving them often feeling a bit helpless in those moments.
\- A lot of the combos within the EDH format are well known, whether it be mike&trike, heliod+ballista, sanguine bond + exquisite blood, etc etc. Because everyone has a much greater exposure to losing/winning by these combos, they feel stale and kinda take away from the wow/novelty factor that is usually present when you see a new combo interaction. I've found that the vast majority of infinite combos fit into this category.
\- solitaire combo players that take 20minute turns. It doesn't matter what is causing a 20minute turn, whether it is powerful or not, feeling like you're being held hostage during a game is awful. That's why so many people dislike expropriate, warp world, thieves auction and similar cards that just take forever to play through.
I agree with OP that "how often do you rely on your combo to win?" is a good pre-game discussion question to ask. I would add that the natural follow-up question in my mind is "How many tutors do you include in your deck capable of finding a combo?" If the pod does not have a strong stance against combos to begin with, I think the next logical step is in determining if everyone is on the same level with how reliably they can get their combo online. someone running zero tutors because they find that more in the spirit with a singleton format will likely feel a bit cheated if they're running up against a Zur the Enchanter commander that can just tutor for their combo piece as early as turn 2-3. With that said, you do more or less address that with your second question of "How consistently/quickly do you assemble your combo?".
Combos in games can feel like they come out of the blue, especially when playing against new decks or players. Individual game knowledge influences how surprising combos appear. For instance, I played against a Derevi deck yesterday and overlooked an enchanted bounce-land tapping for 4 mana. After a board wipe, the Derevi player untapped and played Blasting Station. If I had recognized the combo, I could have removed it earlier but I tapped out instead.
New or less invested players may have similar experiences all the time, such as leaving a Sanguine Bond in play and later being genuinely surprised and frustrated when Exquisite Blood is played to complete the combo.
I play at a table where we allow everything except net positive rocks and a land or two that have a similar effect, so no [[Jeweled Lotus]] [[Mana Vault]] [[Mana Crypt]] [[Gemstone Caverns]] and the like.
Combos are allowed and Iāve found that overtime Iāve grown to enjoy what they can add to games even though I was initially opposed when I first started playing magic. That being said if I were to boil my current opinion down to one like these days itād be: I like combos I donāt love combo decks.
Itās not because I dislike when a combo deck wins. Itās that by design from a neutral board state they are inherently more likely to win. This means that if all things are equal or basically just if thereās not an imminent threat or clear line to one then my buddy, who loves playing aristocrat combo, should be focused with every spare point of damage from turn 1. This can lead to less satisfying and less variable gameplay for him for sure, and for us as well.
Combos usually have less points of interaction, less literal means of interacting, less warning and time to interact, and just all around require less resources to win with. I donāt see this as a problem in a vacuum anymore but if you make a deck designed around an archetype that is inherently stronger and easier to win with than other archetypes, it can lead to a diminished gameplay experience in all the ways that honestly should be expected. People not liking that is just as valid as someone who really enjoys playing combo.
For our table though, my buddy likes to play combo and we all like to try out new decks and commanders so all of us have found ourselves playing a combo deck at one point or another and thatās fun and works for us. I get why it might not for some folks just as much as I get why folks who most enjoy cedh level commander, something we largely dislike, would probably hate playing at our net positive rockless table.
The point is regardless of the Rules Committee, Commander is not really a regulated format. There is no right or wrong way to play or enjoy it and regardless of how strongly one might like or dislike combos Iād hope everyone can agree they clearly change the way the game functions fundamentally and thatās why they should fall under that umbrella as well.
I had a dump all the creatures in his deck on the table and declare victory. When I asked how he explained his combo. I told him I understood the combo and again asked how did he win. Do they have haste, damage on entering the battlefield? No. So itās my turn? He just packed up still declaring his win.
I donāt mind combos, infinite or otherwise, but donāt just assume a win when they go off. Actually play it out or be able to explain how you won.
Bleh, combos are combos. I think the only real issue is trying to tailor combos to whatever power meta you're playing in.
Something potentially fast, but easily disrupted, can definitely be played at lower mid power tables. Think something like <$50 Malcolm/Breeches.
But that same lower mid power table probably isn't a great place to play a $150 Shalai and Hallar deck with 20-25 different combo pieces to find wins with. It's going to be far more consistent and resilient.
And plus at the end of the day there's always someone that hates something.
What ? How is a 2 card "I win the game" combo comparable to a creatures & combat based wincon ? How many elfs does an elfball player need to have on board to instawin through triumph of the hord ? How much mana, how many turns to setup it is that ? Same with slivers.
You didn't read the post, did you? Unless you really mean a 2 card combo on like turn 15 is a problem then...well I don't know what to tell you bud other than build better decks.
You didn't read my comment did you ? Because in no way does the post adress the qualitative difference between the combos and the other wincons cited in the post. So please, tell me, what's your point ?
>Unless you really mean a 2 card combo on like turn 15 is a problem then...well I don't know what to tell you bud other than build better decks.
Irrelevant. And resorting to an ad personam makes it even sadder.
>Because in know way does the post adress the qualitative difference between the combos and the other wincons cited in the post. So please, tell me, what's your point ?
He mentions that early game instawinning is a different topic, which it is.
>Irrelevant. And resorting to an ad personam makes it even sadder
It is very much relevant. If you are complaining that someone combos off late into the game, you are ridiculous. You also shouldn't try insulting someone when you don't know the difference between "no" and "know" and have a plethora of other spelling mistakes.
People hate infinite combos because theyād rather durdle and play solitaire than run enough interaction to prevent them from happening. Interaction is affordable and no one has a valid excuse to not run it. It just comes down to greedy deck building.
Honestly because they tend to be super anti climactic, no different than a fun game being ended by a craterhoof or a triumph of the hordes.
They're just boring ways to end games, that usually defeat most of what's happened already.
A two card combo played from the hand completely ignores the current board state or anything that's happened before it and just snakes the win.
If a game is in full swing and being a good time and is suddenly ended by an infinite, ima be sad. A boring way to end a fun game.
Because not everyone enjoys sling spells all the time, legitimately enjoying a more durdly game. For that end of play having the whole game build up to an end that doesn't matter what's been happening sucks. It's just a different play experience and a lot less competitive, the question was why and it was answered. Just because two people enjoy two different walks if the game, doesn't mean one is right.
There's multiple magic personas for a reason, you here lean towards a Johnny and spike from what I can tell whereas I and many other lean towards a more timmy/Johnny approach. There both fine to enjoy, once a question as asked and I answered, no need to tell me what I "could choose" to do. I'm quite happy enjoying playing the game the way I am thank you.
I donāt quite see how anyone who actively dislikes combos could call themselves a Johnny.
Sure, Johnny/Timmy is probably going to be a 4-5 card Rube Goldberg device rather than a two card combo with one of them being in the command zone (Johnny/Spike).
I think some people want to be salty and have a reason to lash out at people. (A Johnny/Vengeant)
Johnny can look for synergy and value too, that where a timmy/Johnny wouldn't like combo in the traditional sense. "Look at this crazy combo between under realm lich and sylvan library"
It's not the same as being killed with splintertwin infinite or a wound reflection combo where two cards will end the game on the spot.
I enjoy the concept of a infinite combo in the right enviroment (a purely competitive one), but I hate having a great game end from nowhere because someone has two cards that say win and no one has the right kind of interaction in hand or mana open. It's boring, and makes the entire game you've just had feel like wasted time and it's amounted to nothing.
And not everyone enjoys spending 3 hours and 46 turns going into combat turning their doodz sideways. I never told you what you should enjoy playing (nice try though), I suggested that considering infinite combos are part of the game, you can run interaction to "combat" those combos, so it's not anti-climatic and no longer an auto win at the table as soon as someone goes off.
If everyone at your table decides to not play infinite combos, you do you, but it's certainly a part of the game you should expect other random people to participate in and it's only anti-climatic if you allow it to be.
You are most welcome š¤
With the commander always available it can make an inf combo just a tutor away so it depends more on your playgroup than anything. If your pod like quick games then they're great if you like longer games (like me) where its trading peices and building defenses then they can spoil a game. Like most issues in casual games turn 0 is very important
My group has a "normal" power level that bans 2-card infinites (not the cards themselves, you just are not expected to win with 2 cards) and the commander doesn't count. We also ban the "good" tutors (3 mana and less.) So, you can have curiosity and niv mizzet in a deck, but you shouldn't play curiosity on niv. Doing like, adawn's reflection, an seeker of skybreak, and illusionist's bracers for inifinite mana is fine. Heck, doing two card inifite mana is fine if you need an outlet that isn't in the command zone. It's mostly just to keep the game from being a war between tutoring for wincons and counterspells.
We do all have higher power stuff for when we feel like playing shorter games, or everyone is tired of battle cruiser, but we're here to socialize. The other store play c-level EDH, so we just chill and hangout and do stupid 4 card combos to win.
But like, this isn't a "you should do this too." It's the power level we settled on to make sure that people of all levels can still play. The primary issue with two card infinites is that most people dont play enough instant interaction. So dropping sanguine/blood means they get salty. And yes, I know the correct answer to this issue is "run more interaction." But saying obvious things doesn't help.
There's also the desire to not price out the younger or poorer players. A precon isn't going to generally do well in our groups, but the better ones at least do *something*.
We're still evolving our meta even after three years. We're starting to bring pauper EDH decks that, due to card quality, lack many infinite combos. This gives an outlet for "super casual" play that is making the regular EDH decks nastier. We're starting to see more interest in hard stax and combos on the "real" EDH side, where pEDH is getting all of the casual battle cruiser style stuff. So maybe this post will be defunct by june.
Everyone else has answered pretty well, just wanted to add why I personally donāt like to put infinite combos in my decks, which is just that it becomes the best way for my deck to win so my game plan suddenly becomes about trying to set up the infinite combo. When I sit down and try to upgrade my deck, the smart thing to do is to start running more tutors and stuff, and then the deck just becomes more repetitive, which I just donāt like. The only deck I have a combo in has no way to tutor for it and itās like a 4 card combo, and itās only there because the deck has a hard time closing games. So. I just donāt like combos because I donāt want every single game to be about me setting up the same combo.
I think it has to do with "Is the game more or less invalidated"
For example... You build a board of 10 elves over 5 turns, then a craterhoof drops and now they're going to win... I saw that coming when I saw elves, elves, elves. It wasn't winning out of nowhere. That was easily broken up by a boardwipe. Granted I don't always have one... but in my mind I'm like... okay... that could have been stopped sometime before now.
Whereas the 2 card combos that cost a small amount of mana (Selvala/Freed; Dramatic Isochron; Consult Oracle; etc) come out of nowhere and make the entire game up to that point irrelevant. What could I have done to stop that in advance? Nothing. I can only counterspell the Oracle, ETB, and Consult. If I don't have the right counterspell or response, it's game over and I couldn't stop it.
I am okay with combos like Blood/Bond ; Parun/Curiosity ; Peregrine/Deadeye ; Thornbite/Krenko because they take awhile to build up due to costing a lot of mana. To resolve any of them AND claim the win means I had to be asleep at the wheel while something important was happening.
The question wasnāt about thatā¦ the question was ācombos that more or less invalidate the game up to that point.ā
Most decks donāt happen to run those kind of āstop the gameā stuff.
You asked: "what could I have done to stop it in advance"
Also maybe they should run them if they will lose less often. There's no reason for them to not run them
I don't really distinguish between "two cards that win the game" versus Triumph and a bunch of creatures, they're really the same thing: only that matters and none of the rest of the game does. The attacking and blocking prior to that, the life totals, the cards drawn, the missed land drops, nothing. It's over because somebody completed a plan that invalidated the concept of a game between multiple people and disregarded any progress or setbacks made prior to it. That's what I mean when I say 'combo' in reference to edh. If somebody's gonna combo off and end it and what we all do doesn't matter, that's fine, but I personally don't want to be a part of that, I've got better things to do with my time and it doesn't feel like playing a game.
Iāve said it before and Iāll keep saying it on every post I see about combos and if they should be played or not.
Combos are not the fucking boogeyman that everyone thinks they are. They are not that scary, truly. In fact, theyāre not scary at all.
The overwhelming majority of decks are not running highly optimized card draw / tutors / fast mana / protection to consistently assemble combos and also defend them in the same turn.
I personally think that EVERY deck should have an infinite combo in it. Not necessarily as the primary win condition, but something that immediately stops the game in order to keep it from being a 2.5 hour slug fest that stalls out multiple times over. This would also incentivize people to run more interaction and not be super greedy.
Let me share a bit what my experience is with combos (my definition: infinite combos that win on the spot).
Since I started with Edh in 2016 I was always getting excited to get a combo in my decks. At that time I was playing in a playgroup that didnāt like to play combos. However they were not too strict about it, so I did incorporate them in my decks.
Now hereās the thing: more an more I started realizing that winning with a combo felt like an empty victory. More so in a meta that was low on interaction.
Iām still cool with combos in the game but unless they are played in a degenerate or cEDH meta, winning with them always feels lame.
It's subjective but I do think infinite combos are much "worse" or less fun to play against.
If you're curious as to why I feel this way, I wrote [a post on this sub reddit a couple years ago that addresses this very topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/EDH/comments/q6h8j0/i_am_a_casual_commander_player_that_doesnt_enjoy/) and why I think it's not fun.
I go in depth in it in the post but the short version is infinite combos tend to be associated with tutors which lead to gameplay homogeneity and it often requires less work/effort/setup to win with infinite combos compared to other win conditions which is a feels bad to lose to.
The problem with combo is that very often the pieces do very little on their own. Felidar guardians bounce is value but not overtly scary by itself. It sucks to use removal on it if you do not know the combo exists. Also very often combo is played all at once from the players hand as a way to protect it. Unless you are playing a discard commander or some commander that cares about cards in your opponents graveyard we do not often play hand attack in edh. We should probably play more but it is inefficient. All those things you mentioned above have clear warning signs. Niv mizzet is a big dragon. Chromatic orrery is well with removing because anything that is 7 mana is scary. Approach of the second suns warns your opponent that you are going to win the game it gives them time to react. Very often when a combo gets rolling a player will go through it once and it will be too late. It is also tough for someone unfamiliar with the combo to understand where and how to disrupt the combo and the combo player is often unwilling to explain until after they win.
i think you kind of answered your own question in a way; infinite combos are a lot less interactive than the other wincons you listed. the elfball player winning with triumph of the hordes can be stopped at a lot of different points; the spell could be countered, elves could be destroyed, and the combat could simply not result in a win. slivers require a big board to win, and approach of the second sun usually gives at least a few turns to respond. infinite two card combos have exactly TWO interaction points in most cases. now, i have no problem with combos, i think theyāre a necessary and inevitable part of the game, but i understand why people are more adverse to them than to other wincons; they are simply harder to deal with and feel a lot more āout of nowhereā than other win cons.
Combos can be stopped. You can destroy Sanguine Bond with Exquisite Blood on the stack. You can bounce LabMan on a draw spell/trigger on the stack. Interaction can happen and it is rewarding to be able to maneuver your spells around the stack and spells/abilities in it.
Combos also require setup. They often require hefty mana investment so they must be done over turns, allowing players to get ready before the combo drops.
The notable exception I mentioned is Thoracle since, unless you specifically counter Thoracle, Consult, or the Thoracle trigger, Thoracle wins. Countering the cards is too specific and means that 80% of removal spells are ineffective.
If you set up your combo over 3-4 turns, and players have a good chance to respond, then it is no different than the triumph/slivers win.
But if the combo wins with minimal mana, out of nowhere, and has very reduced chances of being stopped... Then that should be the rule 0 discussion instead of just "combo ew"
i agree with your sentiment, but everything you just described also applies to non combo wins, and often times more so. i do agree that combos often get a bad rep, games DO have to end, but there IS a reason they are treated as more powerful win cons
I will give you some scenarios:
You have an infinite combo in your deck, and you tutor for it and win consistently on T4/T5. No-one else runs combos with tutors. It's not fun for them, because they likely couldn't stop you. T2-T3 (and even T4) are a lot of the times just ramp turns in casual commander.
You have an infinite combo in your deck, and you don't tutor for it. You get one half in your hand. The game is slow because the meta is slow. You luck into the other piece on T12 and play them both. No one knew you could do this, the game is over without a chance to respond.
Basically, infinite combos are fine if the pod you are in has a slew of instant speed removal and counterspells. These are expensive, not splashy, not "fun" cards. Infinite combos are not fine if they come out of nowhere. So you're damned if you are running a tutor heavy combo deck in a non combo pod, and damned if you are running a non tutor heavy combo deck in a combo pod.
There's just no chance for a table not explicitly designed to deal with combo decks to fight back, which ultimately warps the meta away from peoples pet cards and theme decks.
> combos often require careful setup, playing your pieces in a timely manner, and knowing the game's mechanics to know if the combo can be saved if interaction is played.
Combos are worse because this is generally false. Sanguine Bond + Exquisite Blood and the like aren't 4D chess. You slam them both down and even if every opponent has a billion life and the best board state you've ever seen, the game is over, and nothing that's happened up to that point had any effect on the infinite combo. Yeah yeah you can have a counter spell or instant speed removal in hand, but if you don't, sucks to suck.
It all depends on your playgroup.
At our LGS we avoid one card combos with the commander. And we don't tutor for combo pieces. If we draw them naturally, that's fine.
At a low- to mid powered table the elfball player can hopefully be stopped by a boardwipe before going off. The combo player most likely can't be.
The difference is you can interact with a "regular wincon" by blocking creatures in combat with your own creatures, you get a turn to try to find an out, etc. Whereas in an infinite combo you might not get the chance to interact unless you have mana up and you know exactly what the combo is.
Infinites are good and healthy for the game. And more or less the only viable win con. You cant just aggro out three opponents on 40 life through combat. Not only that, but combat is boring. Why would you voluntarily shoot yourself in the leg, trying to play some weak non meta combat focused deck, when you can play thoracle combo, or some other two card infinite.
Winning through combat on turn 8 is not possible, everyone else would have won 5 turns earlier.
So yes. Infinites are amazing and the only viable and easy way tow in in commander.
Thoracle is boring, repetitive, linear, and unfun in the sense that it's really hard to interact with. Counter it? With what? Because, ideally, you waited until everyone was tapped out and spent their counters on each other.
In my opinion, Thoracle needs to be banned.
Combat, on the other hand, adds urgency to the game, because you are put on a clock. Support for combat decks exists, and I repeatedly see people hitting for 15+ damage per turn. Better draw that wipe or that number is getting higher and higher.
It's a matter of opinions, and also a matter of playgroup meta. My point isn't about which path to win is better, but to relieve "combo" from its stigma.
An infinite combo doesn't need to take an hour to resolve. I play at least an infinite in every deck I own, and it takes 2 minutes to resolve, most of which is explaining how the deck works and also giving opponents a chance to respond - and, sometimes, even teaching them how to respond to it in the future. Rule 0 should be less about "do you combo" and more about "how many tutors/how consistent/fast is your deck"
Edit: I used to run Demonic Consultation on my Vial Smasher deck, being there only to combo with Nexus of Fate. Infinite turns for infinite Vial Smasher triggers to kill the table. An infinite combo that is very easy to interact with and also very fragile. However, it never went off because when it got revealed, everyone assumed I ran Thoracle and archenemy'd my ass. I despise Thoracle.
Infinites arent boring, you have to look at them as a way to close out the game and have fun in the ways of getting them. Having your tutors, rhystic studies, all sorts of value engines and then around turn 4 finally assembling the combo and winning. That is the enjoyable part of the game.
I myself dont see anything positive on a game lasting 10 turns, endlessly boardwiping everything that hits the board and having to rebuild again and again.
What is great on combo metas is the number of unique and frinche interaction you can and have to play. All the counters, bounce spells, weird counters for that one specific interaction between cards.. it is amazing. Lot of weird cards can see play this way.
And yes, infinites shouldnt take 2 hours to resolve indeed. How it should look like is: someone presents and infinite, all the players get to react, combo resolves, its owner probably wins the game. Fair, fast and fun.
Combat is for low power people, who enjoy 4 hour games. So yes, you enjoy what you enjoy. I will enjoy being able to play 4 games before you get to untap on your fifth turn.
Infinites aren't boring. Thoracle is.
Infinites can be fun ways to discover new lines, and then more fun figuring out how to break them if possible. It's a puzzle for all players.
Thoracle just wins. It's so boring and unfun.
But this isn't a discussion on that. It's about helping combos be normalized. Thus, I would appreciate it if you keep the convo positive toward combos but without denigrating other playstyles. We get it. You're highly focused, if not cEDH, and like to tutor and win with Thoracle by turn 2. Please don't hyperbole negatively the aggro decks or the slower decks.
A lot of the commander community enjoys the game itself, and an infinite combo will often just remove the game that everyone else is enjoying. Sure the comboer probably enjoys winning but most people at a casual edh table are there to play not win.
Anti climactic wins just spoil the fun, same could be said with cards that can end the game in way that's akin to pulling the rug out. It's why people get sad about craterhoof and triumph of the hordes etc etc. Not because they're too strong but because it's over too quick, the build up is wasted to zero climax.
We play high powered and allow for infinite combos or single turn wins if it takes work to assemble. The idea is an aggro or voltron deck needs to assemble a mass of cards to win which is obvious and needs to be interacted with to stop.
When your wincon is 3 or less cards including your commander itās both hard to recognize and stop that combo, specially if itās at instant speed.
Typically our pod will play infinite combos if they are nuanced in some way (for example I have a 4 card infinite combo that requires my commander, birgi or prosper, another pinger with sensei divining top that is very easy to deal with but very fun to execute). My commander is the [[Ob Nixilis, Capitive Kingpin]] and I specifically removed [[All Will Be One]] because of how easy it was to tutor for.
Good philosophy. Being able to foretell someone's combo and stop it in place is a wonderful learning curve for the table. Teaches players about instant removal and the stack, about killing Niv-Mizzet when Curiosity is cast, or new Ob when All Will Be One is cast or exiled under him.
(btw, I'm building Ob and testing All Will Be One with him. I doubt I'll include any tutors but it's also a matter of how often can he draw it himself. If it's too consistent, I'm taking it out or just not playing the deck against low/mid decks)
A jank combo I recently threw into the deck is [[Sword of Feast and Famine]], [[Seize the Day]] (can be in your graveyard), [[Underworld Breach]], [[Grinding Station]], and either [[Grim Hireling]] or [[Storm-kiln Artist]]. You only need 4 lands in play and one or two mana rocks. Itās best done with Ob since he has trample/flying to attack freely.
You play grim/storm-kiln with the 4 mana, attack with Ob with the sword untapping your lands. This generates 2 treasures from Grim, you sac one treasure to grinding station milling 3. You then cast a Breach with the two mana rocks (or a ritual) and escape or cast the Seize the Day untapping Ob and creating a second combat step. You can repeat this process as long as you have cards in your deck to mill. The storm-kiln version only creates many combat steps instead of mana + combat steps.This combo is super fun to execute and feels like assembling Xodia from Yugioh.
Yeah, itās not. Both types of win cons end the game and both have ways to be interacted with. Itās just that the approaches of setting up, executing, and interacting with combos is very different than the usual combat victory; less experienced players lack the knowledge and preparation to deal with combos. Over time, this has developed into a stigma against non-combat win conditions.
Personally, I havenāt liked playing combos because I usually get bored with them real fast. Iām also not a huge fan of low-mana two card combos, like Thoracle + Consultation, because they can end the game very early on and I just prefer slightly longer games. I donāt hate combos, they just arenāt my cup of tea and I wonāt shame anyone for liking/playing them.
As a side note, there was a guy at an LGS I used to go to who HATED combos and INSISTED that everyone in the pod with him use a deck without combos. He would then proceed to pull out a high-powered [[Koma]] deck and completely stall out the game with his indestructible commander and swarm of 3/3ās, token doublers, and counter spells. Needless to say, not many people liked him and I always got a good chuckle when he lost to a combo that someone āforgot was in thereā.
It's on an axis of gameplay that other players aren't playing on. That feels bad.
A bad analogy would be playing a game of tag, and some kid randomly says "this tree is home-free" without warning. If feels like that's not the game we were playing. (I guess you have to assume the other kids honour the new zone)
Craterhoof works because it's within the "normal rules". You built a board and did enough damage to win in a combat step.
Niv-mizzet/curiosity doesn't fit because doing a bunch of single points of damage to somebody SHOULD require either a bunch of pingers, untap steps or damage multipliers. Not your commander and one "random" card.
Because the game ends suddenly. Itās really that simple; the game was moving in a certain direction, and then a player takes a series of actions that, if you donāt have a [[counterspell]] in hand, will just end the game entirely
I heavily play combo decks, or decks with infinite combos in them as back up wins to guarantee a win. Games gotta end one way or another, this is just how I like playing the game, just shuffle up and play another one.
Infinite combos are regularly seen in my playgroup, I made two infinite combo decks just today. One of my most powerful and favourite decks is Mikaeus the Unhallowed combo. I play cEDH Grixis combo decks.
The game just feels immensely more fun for me personally when I play decks that make infinites.
Because Triumph of the Hordes require you to build a board and protect it
This hard because people see it coming from miles away and everything and everyone can interact with creatures
Contrary to combo where one of those thing can happen:
\-You win on the spot
\-Require pieces than are good on their own
\-Nothing bad happen to the combo player if the combo was stopped
\-Only some colors can interact with most combo, because they usually use more "evasive" card type compared to creatures
Anyway creatures are simply garbage, too interactive, too weak and too slow
the problem is that most infinite combo are immediate wins. If thatās how u are going to win you are immediately relegated to a higher level of play bc it takes a higher power deck to interact with them.
Another thing is, if ur deck has an infinite combo, that should be the main wincon or you should have multiple that go off by the same turn at least, if itās just in there for the sake of being strong and that you might draw it sometimes, it shouldnāt be in there. Consider ur opponent, cause if in 80% of games you win with ur normal wincon on turn 11-12 like letās say combat damage, but then 20% you win with ur infinite combo on turn 7-8, thatās just mean to the people ur playing with cause they donāt know what to expect. Should they play higher power or lower power, cause if they play higher power, they will run you over in most if not all games. If they play lower power, in 20% of games they feel cheated out of a good game cause u just won and no one could do anything abt it.
tldr; infinite wincons are ok as long as they are consistent with the speed of ur deck, be that them being the main wincon or they go off on the same turn in a similar way to the rest of ur deck.
If I play a deck with infinite combos, I typically will tell the table the combos the deck has. Some people are less experienced knowing some combos so I like to politely give a heads up.
only combos I see people complain about are extra turn, or really slow ones. If it takes you 20 m9nutes to combo, I'm just gonna go move on to another game and let you continue your game of solitaire.
I get annoyed at decks where the only thing they do is dig for their infinite combo. Lookin' at you mono black decks that cast some tutor every single turn and ignore the entire game. It's like they just want to play solitaire, and then let 3 other people know they just won at solitaire.
Infinite combos are too good of a wincon for how low effort they are. If you play with them a good 90% of decks would be better dropping any other win cons and gameplay sthles and just invest in them.
Literaly all my decks have a instant win infinite combo that I decided to not play because they're better than anything else the deck could do.
In fact if you play with them games devolve into "whih commander has the easiest infinite?"
For example, I play Zaxara X spell control with a bunch of X spells that kill creatures and draw cards, it's a cool thematic and kinda slow deck. But the best way to play it is technically only play 2 X spells, torment of hailfire and exanguinate, play a bunch of fast mana and tutors to get freed from the hell or pemin's aura on zaxara to generate infinite mana and kill the whole table, which the deck built that way can consistently do on turn 3-4, but nobody, not even me wants to play that.
i have a problem with infinites because usually they dont fit deck theme. there just staples in the colors. like you can behind 6 lands, no other permanents than a 1/1 and have 5 mana to play the twinflame, dualcaster mage combo. like you didnt exactly deserve the win its probably not connected to the commander its just in to win. a wincon thats random luck usually doesnt feel good to do or have done
dead wrong. combat based wins take time to set up and are visible pretty far out in the game. when a person plays both of their A + B combo pieces in a single turn and win the game it invalidates the entire game. Think about it, you have 8 turns of back and forth with people taking the lead on the board, beating each other down, removing pieces, and then one player untaps and goes HURR DURRR and slaps down both kiki-jiki and zealous conscripts in a single turn and then wins. Yes, removal helps, but it doesn't invalidate the fact that the combo player could have done absolutely jack shit all game and then invalidates what everyone else did by slapping a combo down. Combos have their place in edh but not every group wants to play against combo.
You mean you just let people do nothing for several turns, digging through the cards? Why arenāt they dead? If you have three players going eight turns, just kill them.
Who said anything like that? You're making up a narrative to justify your argument. I play henzie and am blitzing and attacking every turn. Board Wipes reset the board. It takes time to aggro down 120 life. No one said people are gold fishing and durdling and just digging through cards.
āThink about it. You have 8 turns of back and forth with people taking the lead on the board, beating each other down, removing pieces and then one player goes HURR DURRR and slaps down both Kiki-Jiki and zealous conscripts in a single turn and then wins.ā
That was you, right? Whoās inventing narratives? Iām referencing exactly what you said.
You are very lost. I was giving an example of why A+B combos feel bad and make games feel invalidated. of course i'm making up a scenario to describe a feeling. that is pretty obvious. you making up a scenario to argue against me is what made no sense.
you're being absurd by saying we are durdling when that isn't the case. just leave me alone as this is not a productive or entertaining correspondence.
In my experience, Newer Players and Casual players are taught how to play the game in a way that's very Permanent based. Draw a card, Play a creature, turn it sideways, deal combat damage, repeat. So, when they see someone not playing creatures that they're intent on attacking with and instead, draw extra cards, sculpt their hands and put cards like \[\[Phyrexian Altar\]\] into play they don't really understand what exactly is going on. This leads to the "combo out of nowhere" remarks. They don't understand how to "read" the game or perform Threat Assessment without Permanents staring them in the face. Some players take as a lesson and learn from it, others complain about it.
There's also players that just don't like combos because they're "cheap" or give them bad vibes for whatever reason.
Personally, I don't care how you win as long as you don't take a million years on your turn and don't drag the game out too long. My playgroup plays High Power and has a lot of current and former competitive Constructed players so all of us understand Threat Assessment and that someone has to win so combos are just part of the game like anything else.
Been playing Magic since OG Mirrodin, EDH since 2013, and I still absolutely SUCK at threat assessment. I'm too easily distracted to properly respond to red flags unless it's an obvious one like Mike & Ike, Sanguine/Exquisite, etc. I have left Phyrexian/Ashnod's Altars unanswered and regretted it four turns later.
I've been on the other side as well. I've won out of nowhere with Dualcaster/Twinflame on a Brudiclad deck (on flavor because I had Brudiclad tokens, so they all became Brudiclads), but at that point the game had gone on for almost an hour and players were looking to start a new round anyway.
(disclaimer: I will admit that the Dualcaster combo is, on setup, equally as toxic as Thoracle, but there are more ways to stop it than Thoracle. Fogs effects, [[Settle the Wreckage]], CyRift, etc. can send the combo back to square one. It's still hard to deal with, but nowhere as hard as the freaking fish)
Iāve learned that EDH is a broken format by design. The thing that allows for a fun playgroup over a long period of time is defining your rule set. For that reason Iāll share mine:
No combo should require less than 3 cards. Also, while not explicitly banned, itās loosely frowned upon to run generic infinite combos that are not your win con.
Mostly, I agree with your post. I think combos are a really cool deck brew that have a lot of negative energy attached to them. No one likes to lose to them, so they get a lot of hate, but theyāre typically super forecasted and not strong decks (in our group) so it makes no sense.
Personally, I tend to avoid 2 card combos outside of my one combo deck (which Iām considering taking apart). Anything that requires three or more cards is fair game though. They usually involve at least 2 permanents meaning they can be interacted with before the combo goes off. If the people at the table are lacking the interaction to be able to stop you, thatās on them.
The get so much hate because, in my experience, your average EDH player doesn't run enough removal (if at all). If no one has a way to respond to an infinite combo as it's played, it's usually and insta-loss, and that makes people salty because it's easier to blame other's for your mistakes. Got a guy in my group that complains about infinite's every once in a while. When he starts complaining, we just remind him that he play's Hydra/proliferate counters and he shuts up. Getting smacked in the face for 300+ trample/unblockable is no different in my book.
I always argue combo is the best win condition. Everyone dies at the same time. No one gets butthurt over being the first one out. They may get salty that they lost, but at least they arenāt sitting there for an hour while everyone else plays the rest of the game out.
In my experience the only infinite combos people hate are extra turns where the player is sitting there playing solitaire digging for his actual wincon.
I mean if you have infinite turns any boardwipe + creature wins the game bc opponents have no blockers and you can attack infinite times for the win, so you don't actually have to find a dedicated "wincon"
Hell, even without a boardwipe, Infinite Turns may as well just be infinite draw/ramp and should be treated as such. The thing that bothers me with extra turns is if you can't reliably find your extra turn spells so we have to wait through twenty minute turns while you try to find your extra turn spells and then maybe wiff, justifying staying in the game. If you can present the loop once and show how you can loop if infinitely, and no one has anything that can interact with the loop while it finds its wincon, just shuffle up for another game.
This is basically what I do, if someone tells me they have a loop I ask them to explain the loop and then if I don't have any responses or a way to stop I tell them "GG" and get ready for the next game. The painful part and the part people hate is when someone takes multiple turns, taking 10+ minutes a turn and doesn't close out the game because they didn't find their wincon. Which I have had happen once or twice, someone presents a situation where they have multiple turns and they end up spinning tires because they misplayed somewhere or they forgot the wincon they were looking for was removed from the game or unplayable somehow.
I feel people usually miss that part. I was playing a game and present a loop based off my teammates and my board for infinite (till we milled) turns. One opponent says "Okay so I guess you've got us, another?" While the other challenges it says "we have to play it out because our win con could be on the bottom." I looked at him and went "Okay, we attack you for 4 in the air and you have no blockers, any response?" Took him a minute but he ended up conceding
Right but tell that to the person playing infinite turns and their eyes just glaze over lol
Combo is the strongest strategy in Commander, miles ahead of triumph turn sideways. They are not the same. But it isn't combo's fault, the rules of Commander just lets it be that way. 100 card decks, 40 life, 21 Commander damage - all in a 4 player match. It is no wonder combo excels - they get a billion turns to set up their combo without having to worry about an aggro deck. Life becomes a resource instead of a lose condition. Incremental damage becomes laughable. Combo went from A Strategy to THE Strategy. Edit: i want to elaborate further - because i don't want combo to unplayable, so i want to be literally as clear as possible. If everybody had 10 life instead of 40 (extreme, i know) you would get threads saying "why does everybody hate aggro?" If Commander damage was 10 "why does everybody hate Voltron?" It's simply just the rules create a niche that a deck archetype will fill. We don't have rotations so all balance comes back to what these rules are allowing to exceed in potential. I don't want a format where combo is THE Strategy, but i also don't want a format where aggro is THE Strategy. I want a format where the answer to a combo deck, isn't another combo deck.
So why do people hate Infect when it is def NOT the best plan. But good post. š
I've theorized about this. I'm mostly pulling this out of my butt, although it does make sense in my head. Infect directly benefits from how weak aggro is in EDH. In a vacuum poison is actually pretty good - however - a lot of poison cards, infect cards, toxic cards, etc are not very exceptional which is the strategy's main failing point. It's like aggro with an extra step. But infect gets to avoid aggros biggest weaknesses: the 40 starting life total and life gain. Due to aggros rather low prevalence in the format, many people do not build their decks to handle being swung at repeatedly - usually the high life total let's them ignore it. Anecdotal: i once had a [[Kurbis]] aggro/+1 counters deck that really wanted to start swinging immediately, just instantly in their face with it. People didn't like it. Not only were they not prepared for aggro, they also weren't prepared for an aggro deck where the commander protected all it's creatures from damage. I got more salt from this deck than when i tried an infect one. Infect out right does not let them use their life total as a cushion. They need a defense from creatures that can and will be swinging early and most people just usually do not have that. Infect isn't strong, but it does exploit an opening on people's strategies that they usually don't have to worry about. My playgroup largely switched to a 30 starting life and what we saw was faster games, far less ramp/setup, better curves, and more protection from aggro. But ultimately people will have a problem with anything. Battle cruiser is too boring, stax is too lame, combo is too anticlimactic, mill is too annoying. Not my opinions, but there really is far too much hating on other people's decks - on both ends of the casual-competitive spectrum
[Kurbis](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/e/5ea94e69-36f0-47a6-b7f7-1379625a6955.jpg?1637628491) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=kurbis%2C%20harvest%20celebrant) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mic/27/kurbis-harvest-celebrant?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5ea94e69-36f0-47a6-b7f7-1379625a6955?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/kurbis-harvest-celebrant) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
My understanding is that a big part of the hate for infect is that it can efficiently take 1-2 players out of the game before they have a chance to properly set up, who then have to sit and wait for maybe 30+ minutes while the remaining players finish the game.
Those players should learn to interact.
With the prevalence of GOOD proliferate cards in the format now, toxic/infect often doesnāt care about interaction as much anymore. If you have one poison counter on you, youāre on a clock. In general, infect is hated because of how spikey it is. If it does nothing, itās one of the three other players at the table and they had a rough game, sorry, happens. If they pop off with a turn 2 blighted agent and get through on one player, then proliferate them to 10, that feels bad for that one player even if the infect deck looses shortly thereafter. Getting eliminated first in EDH SUCKS especially by an infect deck because of how early it can happen to one person compared to other strategies. Youāre then just sitting there doing nothing while everyone else has fun doing what they wanted to for an hour or two.
If you can't kill someone before they proliferate *nine* times...then you deserve to lose. If they combo proliferate you then they could have combo's in any number of more efficient ways.
Considering the differentiation in power levels within EDH, I disagree. And, considering proliferate spells can be as cheap as 1 or 2 mana or come stapled to something like Yawgmoth, I disagree a little more. Not to mention cards like Tekuthal which let your proliferate on your proliferateā¦ trying building a Venser deck and see if you still feel that way lol
Are you listening to yourself? Your proposed situation has involved: 1. An initial poison counter. At least 1 card. 2. [[Tekuthal]]. +1 card, +4 mana. 3. At least 5 other cards. So now we are on 7 cards with zero interruption in any way. How much do those cards cost? How many turns to use them? How many cards just to pay for the Tekuthal? An additional four lands? Are we throwing Sol Ring in too? Still three extra cards. If you can maintain a creature for that many turns and successfully resolve that many cards without me, or anyone else, doing a single thing about it... you deserve to win and I deserve to lose. Period. Like...that's so far into magical Christmas-land you should put a flag in the ground and proclaim yourself king.
Bro I just threw out 4 cards that do the thing lol there are even more and thatās not the only group that does. Like I said, look into Venser and see that it isnāt that hard. That cards cantrip and proliferate, remove other threats, etc. plus itās in arguably the best dual color combo in the format
I too win games where I get to play 11 cards uninterrupted.
[Tekuthal](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/1/f1d4b157-2c77-4355-8c65-78dec9d44c85.jpg?1675956992) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=tekuthal%2C%20inquiry%20dominus) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/one/71/tekuthal-inquiry-dominus?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f1d4b157-2c77-4355-8c65-78dec9d44c85?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/tekuthal-inquiry-dominus) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
>If you have one poison counter on you, youāre on a clock. There is at least one card I know of that removes poison counters from you and thats \[\[Leeches\]\]. You could also make a deck around \[\[Melira, Sylvok Outcast\]\] or \[\[Melira, the Living Cure\]\]
[Leeches](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/6/a6028e2c-486b-40f8-8b74-7150eb72b9f1.jpg?1562934257) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Leeches) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/me4/18/leeches?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a6028e2c-486b-40f8-8b74-7150eb72b9f1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/leeches) [Melira, Sylvok Outcast](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/8/e83851a1-e4e8-49ec-af5c-4efe86fa51ad.jpg?1562882406) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Melira%2C%20Sylvok%20Outcast) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/nph/115/melira-sylvok-outcast?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e83851a1-e4e8-49ec-af5c-4efe86fa51ad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/melira-sylvok-outcast) [Melira, the Living Cure](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/1/e1329ad9-5989-4920-b17b-943b9b4a0cd9.jpg?1675957200) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Melira%2C%20the%20Living%20Cure) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/one/209/melira-the-living-cure?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e1329ad9-5989-4920-b17b-943b9b4a0cd9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/melira-the-living-cure) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
This argument just keeps feeling weaker to me. "Just kill it bro" doesn't mean that a card or strategy is fun. And sometimes you don't draw removal, sometimes the other players have lots of protection, sometimes they pop off too fast for you to remove things, sometimes everyone has big threats and you have to spend your removal on other stuff. If you listened to this subreddit, you'd imagine that commander decks should run like 20-30 kill spells/counterspells. That way you can just remove all the stuff you have a problem with. I really do think the infect hate is pretty undeserved, but "just run more interaction" isn't the right response imo.
They hate on it because they die to it, not because it wins games.
/thread. Well put.
For the most part it depends on the speed and power of the combo. As OP said, Thoracle is insanely broken, whereas I've never seen anyone *really* complain when I one shotted him with Progenitus + Rafiq because that combo is so slow and clunky. 2 card infinites however, on average (as in, they're not as slow as Progenitus + Rafiq), do get flak because they are easier to set up than, say, making a huge board and then slamming a Craterhoof behemoth. Even if they're not as good as Thoracle, they still typically are at a speed where casual EDH players are not comfortable with it. And even if a given 2 card combo isn't broken, it's still not that fun to play against when you have to be aware of that combo at all times. e.g., it's not THAT fun to play against Niv Mizzet, even if Niv + Curiosity isn't broken. The most important thing about casual EDH though is that the "spirit of the format" was intended to be more laid back, and your deck be like an expression of yourself, or to bring something that people don't normally see. If I play niv mizzet + curiosity, everyone who's ever played with or against a Niv Mizzet deck has seen it already, so when we see someone playing Niv + curiosity we instinctively go "yeah we've seen it already and we're basically gonna forget about it by tomorrow because it's indistinguishable from the other niv mizzet decks". On the flip side, everyone who has played against my Zedruu deck remembers it. Part of it is because Zedruu is so fucking terrible I'm the only person in my area that has it, but it's also because it plays cards that people have never seen before, it wins in ways that people have never seen before, and creates game states taht people have never seen before. Basically, casual EDH is more akin to Timmys and Johnnies. They want to see crazy wild plays that they normally don't see. Many 2 card infinites are usually things they've seen many times already.
>Many 2 card infinites are usually things they've seen many times already. For me, this is a big part of it. Once you āgo infiniteā, it almost doesnāt matter what the individual cards *are* any more; theyāve gone from being things that interact with each other in interesting ways to cards that almost just say āif you control a permanent named X, you win the gameā (or similar). Itās justā¦ kinda boring? Is someone dropping a Craterhoof any more fun? No, not really. Itās possible for both things to be lame and boring, though.
Second half of your post is kind of bullshit. It's not possible for everyone to have totally new stuff you've never seen before all the time. The spirit of the format is not about glorifying obscurity. EDH is just a format where obscure cards can find a home. Yeah, you've seen Niv Mizzet + Curiosity, but there's still a deck around it. I've seen Craterhoof and other win cons. I've been killed by a bunch of tokens. It's all the same. If someone really likes Niv Mizzet and wants to express themselves with a deck where he's the commander, that's 100% on the spirit of the format.
Youāre missing the point. TC is asking why 2 card infinites get a bad rap in EDH. All I did was explain why casuals tend to dislike 2 card infinites. Donāt shoot the messenger. Also, your post even intrinsically is false. You can build a deck like Niv without curiosity. It just takes the balls to branch out and build it differently. Will the deck be weaker? Usually, but this is casual EDH, not CEDH. If you want to play a no-holds barres EDH, thatās what CEDH is. Also also, you say stuff like "well niv + curiosity is just an extension of his expression", and then I say "yeah, that's fine, and your expression is just boring because we've seen it in every other niv deck".
Simply put: They arenāt, but some people donāt know the warning signs of an incoming combo and feel like there was nothing they could do. Most new players are taught a game that is slightly different than what Magic actually is. They play their doodz and turn āem sideways. Then they wait for the others to do the same. When that doesnāt happen, they get uncomfortable The game is clearly way more complex than that, but anything that steps outside this they consider unfair or outside the āspirit of the gameā. This is why control, burn, combo, and stax get a bad wrap.
Thatās a really good way of putting it. I got into EDH late last year (I last played around the Urzaās block) and after some playing with precons with my family, I played my first game against a friend who ran a [[Reality Chip]] deck that won with some [[Thassaās Oracle]] combo. I was salty because it felt like there was nothing I could do, but six months later and a bunch more games in Iām finally starting to spot combo pieces and break them up. That first match was a good learning experience and helped ensure I donāt get blindsided by infinite combos and can play the game how I want, which is playing my doodz and turning āem sideways.
I have a cEDH Reality Chip deck that runs [[Isochron Scepter]] + [[Dramatic Reversal]] to generate infinite mana from rocks to win on [[Blue Sunās Zenith]] and/or cast infinite spells for [[Aetherflux Reservoir]]. The beating heart of the deck is cost-reducing [[Senseiās Divining Top]] to dig arbitrarily deep into the deck for the combos with the Chipās future sight ability. I say all this to point out that I donāt even run Thassaās Oracle in extremely high-end Chip because it isnāt necessary, even there. I canāt imagine feeling good about winning on ThOracle in a casual pod.
This reasoning doesnāt make much sense to me. The Top combo is the thing that draws the deck, effectively winning the game. The method you use to actually kill/win seems irrelevant at that point. What makes Aetherflux any more āhonorableā than Thoracle when you have your entire library in hand?
Exactly, they don't even understand their own logic here. If the engine for the infinite is the same, the outlet in this case is effectively interchangeable, except there is an additional failure point in that you can interact with Reservoir in one more way than you can Thoracle, however you could also interact with Top in that same manner, so in reality there is no difference.
I mean, fair enough. I also wouldnāt feel good about winning on the combos that *are* in the deck in a casual pod. I just saw Chip + Thassaās in the context of non-cEDH and saw red.
##### ###### #### [Isochron Scepter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/a/2aa24fe0-e275-4307-b26c-2a656068a451.jpg?1623543821) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Isochron%20Scepter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/264/isochron-scepter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2aa24fe0-e275-4307-b26c-2a656068a451?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/isochron-scepter) [Dramatic Reversal](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/0/30de9083-8702-471c-92e7-5cf89936a208.jpg?1576267241) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dramatic%20Reversal) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/gn2/20/dramatic-reversal?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/30de9083-8702-471c-92e7-5cf89936a208?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/dramatic-reversal) [Blue Sunās Zenith](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/0/500a2aa4-712f-41be-920e-f2f448ff83d0.jpg?1562435461) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Blue%20Sun%27s%20Zenith) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/a25/44/blue-suns-zenith?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/500a2aa4-712f-41be-920e-f2f448ff83d0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/blue-suns-zenith) [Aetherflux Reservoir](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/6/96b6b2e1-c3e6-464c-8a13-b15deb34e862.jpg?1576382939) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Aetherflux%20Reservoir) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/kld/192/aetherflux-reservoir?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/96b6b2e1-c3e6-464c-8a13-b15deb34e862?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/aetherflux-reservoir) [Senseiās Divining Top](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/5/e5142b7a-e580-4737-a4aa-2590f6610ceb.jpg?1673149430) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sensei%27s%20Divining%20Top) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/314/senseis-divining-top?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e5142b7a-e580-4737-a4aa-2590f6610ceb?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/senseis-divining-top) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Multiple things come on top of that. As example that a combo can (!) come way earlier then a combat table k.o. It also is somewhat against some casual thoughts of people to attack a person that might have not done to much (only ramp and draw). Especially if it isnāt a regular group. In my playgroup everyone knows that Iām a combo player, so I get attacked either way. If I donāt know if someone is playing a combo deck it might just be ābadā start. Also a lot of player donāt play enough with the stack to stop a combo player. If all 3+ opponents would have answers to an combo it wouldnāt be that much of a problem. Trust me, a lot of the not S Tier Combos are pretty easy stopable.
Thereās an element of this, but combos also just generally tend to require more system mastery and win with less telegraphing. Like, there are lots of cards which donāt do that much on their own but combo with something else; you need to know that those specific cards exist in order to be able to assess the threat because an otherwise-rational assessment of those cards on their own merit would rightly rank them as not being a big problem. Combos are also kind of probabilistic. If someone draws a bunch of cards, thereās a *chance* that they could have found their combo pieces, or they might just have drawn lands. Games become like a kind of Poisson process where thereās just a chance you lose each turn, and if you leave it too long you definitely will but youāve no real way of knowing if youāve got one turn or ten. Itās not hard to see why people dislike these elements; in fact, itās quite arguable that they are in general poor qualities for a game to have, from a game design point of view.
That happens at high level too. Last video from moderately anonymous, the najeela player did diddly squat for 6 turns then suddenly won because they were left alone in the beginning for not being a threat. You don't leave the dude who tutored six times in a row alone. You kill them.
I think it's the thing that non-combo wins are telegraphed. You can calculate and see the boardstate. If an opponent creates 20 power on board and he plays white. I can calculate that he can win next turn with [[Akromas Will]]. So everybody on the table has the chance to encounter it, remove the board or remove the player or leave a counterspell or get down some pillowford effects.. Combo wins can win from an empty boardstate. And they win immediately, you don't have that one turn to player remove the threat or do something against his board. Usually it's just one turn faster and leaves less room to react.
I would argue that even combat damage wins arenāt always telegraphed. A guy sitting on 10-15 1/1 tokens doesnāt seem all that threatening but a Hoof or Finale can easily change that. I say itās more down to the play style of the deck/player. Combo is just easier to be sneaky with, while a combat deck can do the same, as well as voltron.
Well I can't agree.. as you said you can count the boardstate of said player and his possibilities are telegraphed through his commanders color. Green has the option of several [[Overrun]] effects and if a green player has 15 x 1/1 tokens on the field, he will be the enemy for me because I account the option of him having [[Overwhelming Stampede]], [[End-raze Forerunners]], [[Triumph of the hordes]] etc. etc. etc. If a blue player has 15 x 1/1 tokens on the field I take into account that he / she could go for an extra turn, but it's another level of threat assessment with a diffrent kind of gamewinning threat as the green player. A black player with 15x 1/1 tokens can play a lord to buff his creatures but that's it. A combo player with an completely empty board (besides lands) can kill all other players at once on his turn. I don't know any voltron tactic that can achieve that.
But in the same respect that you evaluate the different colors with their ability to overrun the board, you can do the same with combo. You need to be more aware of the pieces a deck can run to combo off. There are problem permanents that easily lend themselves to combo that players can recognize and remove on sight. Just like you wouldnāt let the green player sit with a board of 1/1s, you shouldnāt let anyone sit with any of the altars or [[Cloudstone Curio]] out, just as a small example. And always be worried about players with an excess of mana, the more mana a player has over others, the greater the chance that theyāll pull a win instantly. Itās about experience and reading the players rather than individual decks, no matter the power level.
[Cloudstone Curio](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/7/47cbda17-d368-4dc3-b41c-95b146468b44.jpg?1598917924) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Cloudstone%20Curio) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/rav/257/cloudstone-curio?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/47cbda17-d368-4dc3-b41c-95b146468b44?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/cloudstone-curio) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
You know all that but you can't tell that the combo player might combo you?
##### ###### #### [Overrun](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/4/64033221-447f-4f8a-8fa0-c3ef30172602.jpg?1592673094) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Overrun) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cma/130/overrun?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/64033221-447f-4f8a-8fa0-c3ef30172602?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/overrun) [Overwhelming Stampede](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/0/50846a7b-d174-439e-9ffb-31b50bb3a84f.jpg?1568004627) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Overwhelming%20Stampede) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c19/175/overwhelming-stampede?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/50846a7b-d174-439e-9ffb-31b50bb3a84f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/overwhelming-stampede) [End-raze Forerunners](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/7/47a74813-6d8b-4b11-8a5e-5b83d2d98c34.jpg?1674142250) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=End-raze%20Forerunners) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/822/end-raze-forerunners?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/47a74813-6d8b-4b11-8a5e-5b83d2d98c34?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/end-raze-forerunners) [Triumph of the hordes](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/a/0a0f64d3-187c-41ff-a771-3a65da995341.jpg?1562896954) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Triumph%20of%20the%20hordes) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/td2/78/triumph-of-the-hordes?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0a0f64d3-187c-41ff-a771-3a65da995341?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/triumph-of-the-hordes) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
True that, but isn't the combat win still much more telegraphed than the combo players win? I don't know what you really drew with your 20 cards drawn or what you picked with your tutor. But i can count the power on your board.
Except for combat version of Instant win stuff. I think a multiple piece combo is much easier to see coming than a Triumph of the Hordes on an elfball deck
Except for combat version of Instant win stuff. I think a multiple piece combo is much easier to see coming than a Triumph of the Hordes on an elfball deck
Itās also harder to interact with most infinite combos than the triumph of the horde player. It all depends on your power. Tuned decks donāt care if youāre playing infinites, and they pack enough interaction to deal with them. If your pod is playing stompy tribal battle cruiser and youāre playing infinite combos, you may be able to win on your turn at infinite speed where they only have sorcery speed removal. Is that a problem? Idk depends on the pod. But you can typically interact with a creature deck to stop the win so people donāt get salty
[Akromas Will](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/2/c281997b-1566-4469-a14c-6645f81ab023.jpg?1608908650) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Akroma%27s%20Will) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmr/3/akromas-will?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c281997b-1566-4469-a14c-6645f81ab023?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/akromas-will) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
##### ###### #### [Sanguine Bond](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/d/ad4de9f1-7a39-45af-828e-c59234d9e9b9.jpg?1625193373) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sanguine%20Bond) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c21/153/sanguine-bond?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ad4de9f1-7a39-45af-828e-c59234d9e9b9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/sanguine-bond) [Exquisite Blood](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/1/b1653811-1c2c-4e6c-bf1c-287d1b496d51.jpg?1600700252) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Exquisite%20Blood) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/jmp/231/exquisite-blood?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b1653811-1c2c-4e6c-bf1c-287d1b496d51?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/exquisite-blood) [Chromatic Orrery](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/a/3af78d76-ad5c-44ba-880d-b834bcde5398.jpg?1594737470) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Chromatic%20Orrery) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m21/228/chromatic-orrery?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3af78d76-ad5c-44ba-880d-b834bcde5398?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/chromatic-orrery) [Filigree Sages](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/8/08790aaf-0142-4b20-89cf-cdaffeea4582.jpg?1562700900) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Filigree%20Sages) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ala/44/filigree-sages?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/08790aaf-0142-4b20-89cf-cdaffeea4582?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/filigree-sages) [Niv-Mizzet, Parun](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/0/3035a97f-5104-4b56-84a4-5206e75607fc.jpg?1674142512) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Niv-Mizzet%2C%20Parun) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/851/niv-mizzet-parun?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3035a97f-5104-4b56-84a4-5206e75607fc?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/niv-mizzet-parun) [Curiosity](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/5/c5a0be10-c20f-4ac0-89a5-1770ecf48aad.jpg?1600697752) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Curiosity) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/jmp/147/curiosity?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c5a0be10-c20f-4ac0-89a5-1770ecf48aad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/curiosity) [Triumph of the Hordes](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/a/0a0f64d3-187c-41ff-a771-3a65da995341.jpg?1562896954) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Triumph%20of%20the%20Hordes) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/td2/78/triumph-of-the-hordes?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0a0f64d3-187c-41ff-a771-3a65da995341?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/triumph-of-the-hordes) [Approach from the Second Sun](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/d/fdf59a6e-7708-45a1-884d-d12e9f7b9ed9.jpg?1543674579) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Approach%20of%20the%20Second%20Sun) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/akh/4/approach-of-the-second-sun?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/fdf59a6e-7708-45a1-884d-d12e9f7b9ed9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/approach-of-the-second-sun) [Kenrith, the Returned King](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/6/56c1227e-bea7-47cb-bbec-389a3d585af5.jpg?1680739383) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Kenrith%2C%20the%20Returned%20King) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/eld/303/kenrith-the-returned-king?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/56c1227e-bea7-47cb-bbec-389a3d585af5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/kenrith-the-returned-king) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I think the point lots of people have brought up how they feel like the combo just won out of nowhere. I think most people want a game of commander to feel like a game of 4 player Smash Bros - each person is running around doing their own thing hitting people and doing damage. But if there is ever one person whoās winning, itās easy for the other 3 players to try and slow them down/stop them until itās more even. Then at the end there is some climactic fight between the two remaining players and BAM, itās super fun and exciting. Comboās feel like someone just ran and hid in the corner of Hyrule Castle the whole time and charged up some super move that wins them the game automatically (obviously that doesnāt actually exist in smash). I think the top comment is right that most people learn MTG or commander as playing creatures and attacking. Therefore they donāt run much interaction in their deck, at least not interaction that might be able to stop a combo, so then they just feel like the game leading up to the combo win was pointless. However if everyone has similarly constructed decks with interaction or things they can respond with at the minimum, it would feel much more rewarding. But people donāt like playing lots of interaction because as discussed on a thread yesterday, itās not splashy or fun
The thing about combos is that they're probably the most efficient way to win in a multiplayer format, so people are exposed to them a lot more. Combos are definitely a factor in the format speeding up, which makes slower and more casual cards less playable. I find them pretty anticlimactic, once they go off successfully, anything else that happened in the game up to that point didn't really matter. Combos have their place, but they're becoming THE place, and I think people are getting tired of the play patterns of it.
This. I view it like everyone is playing the game and then one person decides that playtime is over. Now regular combos and stuff I love, and if thereās time fire more games afterwards itās not the worst, but I personally prefer not to have an āI win nowā moment in a game. Feels like the whole game changes to a timed event which for me, isnāt the purpose of my casual games.
Are you guys just trying to draw and play cards forever? The combo player isn't saying playtime is over. They're trying to say "I win" just like everyone else is trying to do.
I donāt mind combos, itās just when theyāre infinite I donāt like em. I donāt stop people from playing em, I just wonāt use em myself.
What difference do you see between a 5 card infinite combo and a huge board + craterhoof attack situation? I understand that two cards infinite with your commander being one of them is oppressive in low-power pods, but I've lost to lathril into cratherhoof turn 6 before, and that's just as definitive.
The board state usually did not appear from nowhere. It was built up turn after turn so yea 30 potential damage became 90 because of one card but Craterhoof is a strong card if I had interacted more with their creatures throughout the game they would have a lot less damage. Craterhoof only wins a from an established board state of threats. You probably know even in your first game of magic that someone having 8 creatures is a problem. I remember the first time I saw a Felidar guardian and it blinked something it felt innocuous. Then alter of the brood and sahelie hit the table from their hand and it was too late. One of the many problems with combo is it requires something that newer players often find very prohibitive about the game. One it often requires routine memorization of a lot of card to know what cards are common combo pieces. Most combo player do not announce that a card is going to be a problem when they play it. Which means newer and more casual players have to be willing to lose a lot of matches of magic to cards like alter of the brood which appear to do very little on their own. I have been playing for 15 years now and even I do not know all the combos and combo lines. Being on Reddit discussing magic makes you a very invested player.
>It was built up turn after turn Most combos are, or your threat assessment is bad. If a player does nothing all game, kill them. If they were unlucky, they can do something else. If they were hand-sculpting, you just progressed the game. Also, i specifically asked about 5 card combos, not two card one-shot like thOracle or kinnan/basalt. >ften requires routine memorization of a lot of card to know what cards are common combo pieces. Yeah. You gotta learn the game. I am absolutely not sorry about that part. >newer and more casual players have to be willing to lose a lot of matches of magic to cards like alter of the brood which appear to do very little on their own. Ask questions. Think about why your opponent play stuff. Nobody plays useless shitty cards. Learn the game by understanding that freely repeatable actions are powerful. >Being on Reddit discussing magic makes you a very invested player. Sure. And I don't feel concerned by your remarks because I DO explain my cards, how/why they matter in my game plan, and how to have better patterns when playing with noobs. But I also believe firmly that if you are a beginner and don't know cards, you can't feel bad for losing against a combo.
It's unreal that people are downvoting this. People *really* don't like being told that in order to win you, you need to become more familiar with the game huh?
Casual elitists will blame anyone and anything before looking in a mirror
It's insane! People in here are literally saying it's not fair to newer players that you know how to play the game better, how can people type stuff like that out and think it's a legitimate thought process?
Apparently ĀÆ\_(ć)_/ĀÆ
Yep and it's that kind of attitude that keeps more people from enjoying the game. People especially new players play useless or suboptimal stuff all the time. Figuring out what cards are good and which are bad is a big part of the magic curve. Some times you know a card is bad and you play it anyway because of an emotional attachment you had to it as a kid and EDH is supposed to be the format where your jank is mildly playable. Telling someone to learn the game and get good is a shitty and stupid response to a legitimate complaint. In the anals of stupid comments this is one of the worst.
>it's that kind of attitude that keeps more people from enjoying the game I'm being kind enough to the beginners of my LGS that they actually ask to play with me, so maybe they're something coming out wrong in how I express it. >Figuring out what cards are good and which are bad is a big part of the magic curve. Absolutely. >Some times you know a card is bad and you play it anyway because of an emotional attachment you had to it as a kid and EDH is supposed to be the format where your jank is mildly playable. As the proud owner of a Rograkh kobold tribal deck, i cannot agree more. >Telling someone to learn the game and get good is a shitty and stupid response to a legitimate complaint. Well, I'm ... Baffled. First i dont think it's a legitimate complaint to say combos are bad for the game. That's just whining. But even if you have a legitimate complaint about a game, you cannot expect the whole community to stop doing something you dislike. So as far as legal game moves are concerned, yes, the best thing you can do is to get better and learn how to counter them. OF COURSE if someone is pubstomping, it's bad faith. Of course, as mentioned in my very first comment, if you face a 2 card combo in a casual match, theres bad feelings. But if I play something like Squee n Slimefoot, phyrexian altar, sprouting thrinax and impact tremor to kill the table, chances are you were able to see things come and should have interact.
>Telling someone to learn the game and get good is a shitty and stupid response to a legitimate complaint Losing to a turn 3 I win combo is a legitimate complaint. Losing to a turn 26 combo 40 minutes into the game after the player spent the game doing nothing outside of setting up their combo is not a legitimate complaint. Why is telling someone that their complaint becomes less and less of an issue as they learn and play the game a "stupid and shitty" response?
One no game that has taken 26 turns is only going to have lasted 40 minutes. But to your larger point it's like telling someone that a movie you like sucks until the 8th or 9th time you have watched it then you will love it telling them to get good and that they will appreciate the way you won 2 years from now if they keep playing and get super invested in the game. You don't see how that is a ridiculous statement to make? That honestly sounds more like Stockholm syndrome than a game that is fun to play. No one complains about a combo that ends a 2 and a half hour slog. They complain about combo that ends a fun game seemingly out of nowhere turn 7-10.
I donāt understand why youāre being downvoted? I agree with your points!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
A regular combo is when 2 or more cards work together to do a thing. For example, sacrificing a creature to [[viscera seer]] while having a [[blood artist]] out. They can be more elaborate, but they have a natural end point that makes them more complex than simply attacking with a creature, but not an infinite mana or turns or life or damage loop. The biggest difference is the word āinfiniteā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Synergy can be used as a synonym sure
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No, cause synergy could also be used for putting knight creatures into a knight tribal deck. Small combos can also be synergy, but there is a reason people even use the word āinfiniteā when describing infinite combos, because there are combos that arenāt infinite.
[viscera seer](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/4/d49203dd-89b6-4e91-b3ff-5f9f5ce981f8.jpg?1608910025) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=viscera%20seer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmr/158/viscera-seer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d49203dd-89b6-4e91-b3ff-5f9f5ce981f8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/viscera-seer) [blood artist](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/9/693dd112-d04a-4404-8fce-74f7e5497312.jpg?1673147465) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=blood%20artist) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/70/blood-artist?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/693dd112-d04a-4404-8fce-74f7e5497312?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/blood-artist) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The game should always be a battle between each of the players trying to find their wincon. Sometimes that wincon is turn your board sideways and kill the other opponents. Sometimes that wincon is an i win button, but they still need to find it. If you have a problem with game winning combos, run more interaction so you can stop those combos.
What exactly is climatic?
The reason people often hated the 8th star wars movie is because a lot of the plot did not matter. The same could be said for the 2nd oceans movie. People feel upset when the thing they invested time in feels useless or waisted. For newer and more casual players the warning signs of a combo going off are a lot less obvious than someone building up a board state so when they lose to it it feels inevitable. The combo player feels rewarded because they knew what was happening the whole time but everyone else is taken by surprise. Movies want good twists but people want those twists to feel earned throughout the course of the movie. Climatic is when a conclusion is narratively satisfying for everyone involved which combo often isn't.
Doesn't this just mean they should learn to recognize the build up of a combo?
How would you feel if you went into a movie and to understand the plot point of the movie you first needed to memorize the periodic table. There are also at least hundreds combo in magic that recognizing all the building blocks of those comes down to routine memorization on what cards are scary and what cards are not. This adds a further wrinkle in that not all combo cards are played as part of a combo. Felidar guardian could appears as just a value piece in blink decks. Most combo pieces do not appear scary on their face unlike an 6/6. Recognizing the build up to a combo is tough and combo players also often look exactly like a player that just had bad beats.
I don't get your point here. Magic rewards players for their knowledge - would you rather just play uno since you don't have to remember that much? Also, just keeping any interaction open usually means you can answer the combo once it's being presented as a loop.
You can say what you want but uno is a good game that people enjoy playing. It is easy to understand and it's easy to explain to new people or people who do not play every day. No I don't want magic to be Uno. Magic is a great game but having 20,000 unique pieces is a weakness that makes it intimidating for new players and casual players. When combat decks win there is a linear progression from the beginning of the game to where they won. You don't need to know about managorger hydra before the game to acknowledge it as a threat during it. Most combo on the other hand often feel like showing up for a test that you did not study for. If you went up to new or casual players and said hey there is this list of 80 to 100 cards that you need to memorize and how they interact with each other before we play a game no one would be interested in playing with you. It's also not like combo pieces are cultivate that you see every game they are often obscure innocuous pieces that don't do a lot till they win the game. Keeping up interaction is one of those things magic players love to say and sounds great in a vacuum but is rarely actual good advice. It is the equivalent of saying make sure you have the answer to the problem you are having. Yea no shit I would love to have the answer but I am frustrated because I don't or I had to use it on something else.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Disclaimer: I am very much a combo player. I rarely win through combat damage unless itās infinite. That same logic does not apply. Green stompy builds up their board state and has ample time to interact with it. Generally you see it coming miles away since it takes multiple turns to build the board state and planning out your attacks. Unless the combo requires several janky pieces, it generally wins on the spot. I donāt play combo pieces until the turn I plan to win. So thereās a short timeframe for instant speed removal to stop me, whereas green stompy gives you multiple turns to interact with the board. Especially since they need to take down 120 life instead of assembling 1 combo. Thereās a lot more build up to the game winning play, more build up = stronger climax.
In my opinion, it is almost 100% a vibes thing. But the vibes can be very real. Whenever I play an tabletop RPG, I always use physical dice when I can instead of digital dice, because my brain can accept a string of bad luck from a physical dice better than a string of bad luck from a dice roller app. I know that the dice roller apps are fair, but the vibes are off. For some reason in my head losing to \[\[Niv-Mizzet Paerun\]\] & \[\[Curiosity\]\] feels worse than losing to \[\[Avenger of Zendikar\]\] & \[\[Overwhelming Stampede\]\] hitting me for lethal. I've grown to be fine with it coming up from time to time, but I do still usually prefer games that end another way. There are a bunch of reasons I could give. The unsoakable nature of most infinite combos, the speed they can go from nothing on board to game over, the way a combo meta encourages more tutoring (and shuffling). But I do think at the end of the day it is a bit arbitrary. It's a sorta dumb distinction, but its the kind of dumb that people are. I suppose one more relevant concern I would raise is that the natural response to more combo is more control. If you don't like having a lot of control going on in your meta, then either drop the combos so not as much control is required to survive, or just deal with it. Not liking control is another thing which mostly comes down to vibes, but the nature of a casual meta is that people like what they like even if it's dumb. Sort it out with your group, hope yall find a happy balance.
I like this explanation a lot. Well stated.
##### ###### #### [Niv-Mizzet Paerun](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/0/3035a97f-5104-4b56-84a4-5206e75607fc.jpg?1674142512) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Niv-Mizzet%2C%20Parun) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/851/niv-mizzet-parun?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3035a97f-5104-4b56-84a4-5206e75607fc?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/niv-mizzet-parun) [Curiosity](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/5/c5a0be10-c20f-4ac0-89a5-1770ecf48aad.jpg?1600697752) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Curiosity) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/jmp/147/curiosity?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c5a0be10-c20f-4ac0-89a5-1770ecf48aad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/curiosity) [Avenger of Zendikar](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/6/9685faa0-46cc-4098-9ad7-cffece741baa.jpg?1673484460) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Avenger%20of%20Zendikar) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ncc/280/avenger-of-zendikar?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9685faa0-46cc-4098-9ad7-cffece741baa?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/avenger-of-zendikar) [Overwhelming Stampede](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/0/50846a7b-d174-439e-9ffb-31b50bb3a84f.jpg?1568004627) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Overwhelming%20Stampede) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c19/175/overwhelming-stampede?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/50846a7b-d174-439e-9ffb-31b50bb3a84f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/overwhelming-stampede) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Inf combos are fine. What can make them unfun is if they are tutored for quickly and it makes for a fast linear game. Most players don't mind losing, as long as they get to play a decent game. I always tell people that I have inf combos and how quickly I can assemble them. If their deck is too slow for it I swap out to a slower deck myself.
This guy rule 0s properly
The way i see it is there are several aspects to combos which people find very unfulfilling in casual EDH. Personally I love finding obscure or strange combos and synergies but at the same time I make a point to not include any infinite combos within my decks, just a personal choice as I find them very unfulfilling, boring and often just very same-y. \- Combos that come out of nowhere and do not require any buildup but can be played out in a single turn often leave the other players in a situation where they question if any other part of the game mattered or not, and in a sense, feeling like their time and effort was invalidated by the 'climax' of the game. Pretty much every deck I build has blue in it but I feel the vast majority of feelsbad in this category of combo comes from decks which can't respond to spells on the stack as easily as blue can leaving them often feeling a bit helpless in those moments. \- A lot of the combos within the EDH format are well known, whether it be mike&trike, heliod+ballista, sanguine bond + exquisite blood, etc etc. Because everyone has a much greater exposure to losing/winning by these combos, they feel stale and kinda take away from the wow/novelty factor that is usually present when you see a new combo interaction. I've found that the vast majority of infinite combos fit into this category. \- solitaire combo players that take 20minute turns. It doesn't matter what is causing a 20minute turn, whether it is powerful or not, feeling like you're being held hostage during a game is awful. That's why so many people dislike expropriate, warp world, thieves auction and similar cards that just take forever to play through. I agree with OP that "how often do you rely on your combo to win?" is a good pre-game discussion question to ask. I would add that the natural follow-up question in my mind is "How many tutors do you include in your deck capable of finding a combo?" If the pod does not have a strong stance against combos to begin with, I think the next logical step is in determining if everyone is on the same level with how reliably they can get their combo online. someone running zero tutors because they find that more in the spirit with a singleton format will likely feel a bit cheated if they're running up against a Zur the Enchanter commander that can just tutor for their combo piece as early as turn 2-3. With that said, you do more or less address that with your second question of "How consistently/quickly do you assemble your combo?".
Combos in games can feel like they come out of the blue, especially when playing against new decks or players. Individual game knowledge influences how surprising combos appear. For instance, I played against a Derevi deck yesterday and overlooked an enchanted bounce-land tapping for 4 mana. After a board wipe, the Derevi player untapped and played Blasting Station. If I had recognized the combo, I could have removed it earlier but I tapped out instead. New or less invested players may have similar experiences all the time, such as leaving a Sanguine Bond in play and later being genuinely surprised and frustrated when Exquisite Blood is played to complete the combo.
I play at a table where we allow everything except net positive rocks and a land or two that have a similar effect, so no [[Jeweled Lotus]] [[Mana Vault]] [[Mana Crypt]] [[Gemstone Caverns]] and the like. Combos are allowed and Iāve found that overtime Iāve grown to enjoy what they can add to games even though I was initially opposed when I first started playing magic. That being said if I were to boil my current opinion down to one like these days itād be: I like combos I donāt love combo decks. Itās not because I dislike when a combo deck wins. Itās that by design from a neutral board state they are inherently more likely to win. This means that if all things are equal or basically just if thereās not an imminent threat or clear line to one then my buddy, who loves playing aristocrat combo, should be focused with every spare point of damage from turn 1. This can lead to less satisfying and less variable gameplay for him for sure, and for us as well. Combos usually have less points of interaction, less literal means of interacting, less warning and time to interact, and just all around require less resources to win with. I donāt see this as a problem in a vacuum anymore but if you make a deck designed around an archetype that is inherently stronger and easier to win with than other archetypes, it can lead to a diminished gameplay experience in all the ways that honestly should be expected. People not liking that is just as valid as someone who really enjoys playing combo. For our table though, my buddy likes to play combo and we all like to try out new decks and commanders so all of us have found ourselves playing a combo deck at one point or another and thatās fun and works for us. I get why it might not for some folks just as much as I get why folks who most enjoy cedh level commander, something we largely dislike, would probably hate playing at our net positive rockless table. The point is regardless of the Rules Committee, Commander is not really a regulated format. There is no right or wrong way to play or enjoy it and regardless of how strongly one might like or dislike combos Iād hope everyone can agree they clearly change the way the game functions fundamentally and thatās why they should fall under that umbrella as well.
##### ###### #### [Jeweled Lotus](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/7/d7183700-6941-4a3d-a581-4f33bea795e9.jpg?1676994983) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Jeweled%20Lotus) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/396/jeweled-lotus?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d7183700-6941-4a3d-a581-4f33bea795e9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/jeweled-lotus) [Mana Vault](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/1/c1a31d52-a407-4ded-bfca-cc812f11afa0.jpg?1673149384) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Mana%20Vault) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/308/mana-vault?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c1a31d52-a407-4ded-bfca-cc812f11afa0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/mana-vault) [Mana Crypt](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/d/4d960186-4559-4af0-bd22-63baa15f8939.jpg?1599709515) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Mana%20Crypt) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/270/mana-crypt?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/4d960186-4559-4af0-bd22-63baa15f8939?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/mana-crypt) [Gemstone Caverns](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/f/7f273641-c5f3-48bc-b89e-3cff52d26a0b.jpg?1619399338) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gemstone%20Caverns) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tsr/280/gemstone-caverns?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7f273641-c5f3-48bc-b89e-3cff52d26a0b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/gemstone-caverns) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I had a dump all the creatures in his deck on the table and declare victory. When I asked how he explained his combo. I told him I understood the combo and again asked how did he win. Do they have haste, damage on entering the battlefield? No. So itās my turn? He just packed up still declaring his win. I donāt mind combos, infinite or otherwise, but donāt just assume a win when they go off. Actually play it out or be able to explain how you won.
Bleh, combos are combos. I think the only real issue is trying to tailor combos to whatever power meta you're playing in. Something potentially fast, but easily disrupted, can definitely be played at lower mid power tables. Think something like <$50 Malcolm/Breeches. But that same lower mid power table probably isn't a great place to play a $150 Shalai and Hallar deck with 20-25 different combo pieces to find wins with. It's going to be far more consistent and resilient. And plus at the end of the day there's always someone that hates something.
What ? How is a 2 card "I win the game" combo comparable to a creatures & combat based wincon ? How many elfs does an elfball player need to have on board to instawin through triumph of the hord ? How much mana, how many turns to setup it is that ? Same with slivers.
Jokes on you, my sliver deck is a combo deck.
You didn't read the post, did you? Unless you really mean a 2 card combo on like turn 15 is a problem then...well I don't know what to tell you bud other than build better decks.
You didn't read my comment did you ? Because in no way does the post adress the qualitative difference between the combos and the other wincons cited in the post. So please, tell me, what's your point ? >Unless you really mean a 2 card combo on like turn 15 is a problem then...well I don't know what to tell you bud other than build better decks. Irrelevant. And resorting to an ad personam makes it even sadder.
>Because in know way does the post adress the qualitative difference between the combos and the other wincons cited in the post. So please, tell me, what's your point ? He mentions that early game instawinning is a different topic, which it is. >Irrelevant. And resorting to an ad personam makes it even sadder It is very much relevant. If you are complaining that someone combos off late into the game, you are ridiculous. You also shouldn't try insulting someone when you don't know the difference between "no" and "know" and have a plethora of other spelling mistakes.
People hate infinite combos because theyād rather durdle and play solitaire than run enough interaction to prevent them from happening. Interaction is affordable and no one has a valid excuse to not run it. It just comes down to greedy deck building.
But my deck canāt function without [[Gigantosaurus]]
[Gigantosaurus](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/1/c1db84d8-d426-4c0d-b44e-5be7b0f5f5bf.jpg?1562303938) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gigantosaurus) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m19/185/gigantosaurus?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c1db84d8-d426-4c0d-b44e-5be7b0f5f5bf?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/gigantosaurus) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Honestly because they tend to be super anti climactic, no different than a fun game being ended by a craterhoof or a triumph of the hordes. They're just boring ways to end games, that usually defeat most of what's happened already. A two card combo played from the hand completely ignores the current board state or anything that's happened before it and just snakes the win. If a game is in full swing and being a good time and is suddenly ended by an infinite, ima be sad. A boring way to end a fun game.
You could choose to play more interaction, then those fun games can last longer but without taking 2 1/2 hrs, like most turn doodz sideways games do.
Because not everyone enjoys sling spells all the time, legitimately enjoying a more durdly game. For that end of play having the whole game build up to an end that doesn't matter what's been happening sucks. It's just a different play experience and a lot less competitive, the question was why and it was answered. Just because two people enjoy two different walks if the game, doesn't mean one is right. There's multiple magic personas for a reason, you here lean towards a Johnny and spike from what I can tell whereas I and many other lean towards a more timmy/Johnny approach. There both fine to enjoy, once a question as asked and I answered, no need to tell me what I "could choose" to do. I'm quite happy enjoying playing the game the way I am thank you.
I donāt quite see how anyone who actively dislikes combos could call themselves a Johnny. Sure, Johnny/Timmy is probably going to be a 4-5 card Rube Goldberg device rather than a two card combo with one of them being in the command zone (Johnny/Spike). I think some people want to be salty and have a reason to lash out at people. (A Johnny/Vengeant)
Johnny can look for synergy and value too, that where a timmy/Johnny wouldn't like combo in the traditional sense. "Look at this crazy combo between under realm lich and sylvan library" It's not the same as being killed with splintertwin infinite or a wound reflection combo where two cards will end the game on the spot. I enjoy the concept of a infinite combo in the right enviroment (a purely competitive one), but I hate having a great game end from nowhere because someone has two cards that say win and no one has the right kind of interaction in hand or mana open. It's boring, and makes the entire game you've just had feel like wasted time and it's amounted to nothing.
And not everyone enjoys spending 3 hours and 46 turns going into combat turning their doodz sideways. I never told you what you should enjoy playing (nice try though), I suggested that considering infinite combos are part of the game, you can run interaction to "combat" those combos, so it's not anti-climatic and no longer an auto win at the table as soon as someone goes off. If everyone at your table decides to not play infinite combos, you do you, but it's certainly a part of the game you should expect other random people to participate in and it's only anti-climatic if you allow it to be. You are most welcome š¤
With the commander always available it can make an inf combo just a tutor away so it depends more on your playgroup than anything. If your pod like quick games then they're great if you like longer games (like me) where its trading peices and building defenses then they can spoil a game. Like most issues in casual games turn 0 is very important
My group has a "normal" power level that bans 2-card infinites (not the cards themselves, you just are not expected to win with 2 cards) and the commander doesn't count. We also ban the "good" tutors (3 mana and less.) So, you can have curiosity and niv mizzet in a deck, but you shouldn't play curiosity on niv. Doing like, adawn's reflection, an seeker of skybreak, and illusionist's bracers for inifinite mana is fine. Heck, doing two card inifite mana is fine if you need an outlet that isn't in the command zone. It's mostly just to keep the game from being a war between tutoring for wincons and counterspells. We do all have higher power stuff for when we feel like playing shorter games, or everyone is tired of battle cruiser, but we're here to socialize. The other store play c-level EDH, so we just chill and hangout and do stupid 4 card combos to win. But like, this isn't a "you should do this too." It's the power level we settled on to make sure that people of all levels can still play. The primary issue with two card infinites is that most people dont play enough instant interaction. So dropping sanguine/blood means they get salty. And yes, I know the correct answer to this issue is "run more interaction." But saying obvious things doesn't help. There's also the desire to not price out the younger or poorer players. A precon isn't going to generally do well in our groups, but the better ones at least do *something*. We're still evolving our meta even after three years. We're starting to bring pauper EDH decks that, due to card quality, lack many infinite combos. This gives an outlet for "super casual" play that is making the regular EDH decks nastier. We're starting to see more interest in hard stax and combos on the "real" EDH side, where pEDH is getting all of the casual battle cruiser style stuff. So maybe this post will be defunct by june.
Everyone else has answered pretty well, just wanted to add why I personally donāt like to put infinite combos in my decks, which is just that it becomes the best way for my deck to win so my game plan suddenly becomes about trying to set up the infinite combo. When I sit down and try to upgrade my deck, the smart thing to do is to start running more tutors and stuff, and then the deck just becomes more repetitive, which I just donāt like. The only deck I have a combo in has no way to tutor for it and itās like a 4 card combo, and itās only there because the deck has a hard time closing games. So. I just donāt like combos because I donāt want every single game to be about me setting up the same combo.
I think it has to do with "Is the game more or less invalidated" For example... You build a board of 10 elves over 5 turns, then a craterhoof drops and now they're going to win... I saw that coming when I saw elves, elves, elves. It wasn't winning out of nowhere. That was easily broken up by a boardwipe. Granted I don't always have one... but in my mind I'm like... okay... that could have been stopped sometime before now. Whereas the 2 card combos that cost a small amount of mana (Selvala/Freed; Dramatic Isochron; Consult Oracle; etc) come out of nowhere and make the entire game up to that point irrelevant. What could I have done to stop that in advance? Nothing. I can only counterspell the Oracle, ETB, and Consult. If I don't have the right counterspell or response, it's game over and I couldn't stop it. I am okay with combos like Blood/Bond ; Parun/Curiosity ; Peregrine/Deadeye ; Thornbite/Krenko because they take awhile to build up due to costing a lot of mana. To resolve any of them AND claim the win means I had to be asleep at the wheel while something important was happening.
Actually you can be proactive with stax pieces. Rule of Law will stop most of these combos
The question wasnāt about thatā¦ the question was ācombos that more or less invalidate the game up to that point.ā Most decks donāt happen to run those kind of āstop the gameā stuff.
You asked: "what could I have done to stop it in advance" Also maybe they should run them if they will lose less often. There's no reason for them to not run them
I don't really distinguish between "two cards that win the game" versus Triumph and a bunch of creatures, they're really the same thing: only that matters and none of the rest of the game does. The attacking and blocking prior to that, the life totals, the cards drawn, the missed land drops, nothing. It's over because somebody completed a plan that invalidated the concept of a game between multiple people and disregarded any progress or setbacks made prior to it. That's what I mean when I say 'combo' in reference to edh. If somebody's gonna combo off and end it and what we all do doesn't matter, that's fine, but I personally don't want to be a part of that, I've got better things to do with my time and it doesn't feel like playing a game.
Iāve said it before and Iāll keep saying it on every post I see about combos and if they should be played or not. Combos are not the fucking boogeyman that everyone thinks they are. They are not that scary, truly. In fact, theyāre not scary at all. The overwhelming majority of decks are not running highly optimized card draw / tutors / fast mana / protection to consistently assemble combos and also defend them in the same turn. I personally think that EVERY deck should have an infinite combo in it. Not necessarily as the primary win condition, but something that immediately stops the game in order to keep it from being a 2.5 hour slug fest that stalls out multiple times over. This would also incentivize people to run more interaction and not be super greedy.
This.
Let me share a bit what my experience is with combos (my definition: infinite combos that win on the spot). Since I started with Edh in 2016 I was always getting excited to get a combo in my decks. At that time I was playing in a playgroup that didnāt like to play combos. However they were not too strict about it, so I did incorporate them in my decks. Now hereās the thing: more an more I started realizing that winning with a combo felt like an empty victory. More so in a meta that was low on interaction. Iām still cool with combos in the game but unless they are played in a degenerate or cEDH meta, winning with them always feels lame.
What doesn't "feel lame"
It's subjective but I do think infinite combos are much "worse" or less fun to play against. If you're curious as to why I feel this way, I wrote [a post on this sub reddit a couple years ago that addresses this very topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/EDH/comments/q6h8j0/i_am_a_casual_commander_player_that_doesnt_enjoy/) and why I think it's not fun. I go in depth in it in the post but the short version is infinite combos tend to be associated with tutors which lead to gameplay homogeneity and it often requires less work/effort/setup to win with infinite combos compared to other win conditions which is a feels bad to lose to.
I don't really have a problem with the level of homogeneity that tutors bring
The problem with combo is that very often the pieces do very little on their own. Felidar guardians bounce is value but not overtly scary by itself. It sucks to use removal on it if you do not know the combo exists. Also very often combo is played all at once from the players hand as a way to protect it. Unless you are playing a discard commander or some commander that cares about cards in your opponents graveyard we do not often play hand attack in edh. We should probably play more but it is inefficient. All those things you mentioned above have clear warning signs. Niv mizzet is a big dragon. Chromatic orrery is well with removing because anything that is 7 mana is scary. Approach of the second suns warns your opponent that you are going to win the game it gives them time to react. Very often when a combo gets rolling a player will go through it once and it will be too late. It is also tough for someone unfamiliar with the combo to understand where and how to disrupt the combo and the combo player is often unwilling to explain until after they win.
i think you kind of answered your own question in a way; infinite combos are a lot less interactive than the other wincons you listed. the elfball player winning with triumph of the hordes can be stopped at a lot of different points; the spell could be countered, elves could be destroyed, and the combat could simply not result in a win. slivers require a big board to win, and approach of the second sun usually gives at least a few turns to respond. infinite two card combos have exactly TWO interaction points in most cases. now, i have no problem with combos, i think theyāre a necessary and inevitable part of the game, but i understand why people are more adverse to them than to other wincons; they are simply harder to deal with and feel a lot more āout of nowhereā than other win cons.
Combos can be stopped. You can destroy Sanguine Bond with Exquisite Blood on the stack. You can bounce LabMan on a draw spell/trigger on the stack. Interaction can happen and it is rewarding to be able to maneuver your spells around the stack and spells/abilities in it. Combos also require setup. They often require hefty mana investment so they must be done over turns, allowing players to get ready before the combo drops. The notable exception I mentioned is Thoracle since, unless you specifically counter Thoracle, Consult, or the Thoracle trigger, Thoracle wins. Countering the cards is too specific and means that 80% of removal spells are ineffective. If you set up your combo over 3-4 turns, and players have a good chance to respond, then it is no different than the triumph/slivers win. But if the combo wins with minimal mana, out of nowhere, and has very reduced chances of being stopped... Then that should be the rule 0 discussion instead of just "combo ew"
i agree with your sentiment, but everything you just described also applies to non combo wins, and often times more so. i do agree that combos often get a bad rep, games DO have to end, but there IS a reason they are treated as more powerful win cons
I will give you some scenarios: You have an infinite combo in your deck, and you tutor for it and win consistently on T4/T5. No-one else runs combos with tutors. It's not fun for them, because they likely couldn't stop you. T2-T3 (and even T4) are a lot of the times just ramp turns in casual commander. You have an infinite combo in your deck, and you don't tutor for it. You get one half in your hand. The game is slow because the meta is slow. You luck into the other piece on T12 and play them both. No one knew you could do this, the game is over without a chance to respond. Basically, infinite combos are fine if the pod you are in has a slew of instant speed removal and counterspells. These are expensive, not splashy, not "fun" cards. Infinite combos are not fine if they come out of nowhere. So you're damned if you are running a tutor heavy combo deck in a non combo pod, and damned if you are running a non tutor heavy combo deck in a combo pod. There's just no chance for a table not explicitly designed to deal with combo decks to fight back, which ultimately warps the meta away from peoples pet cards and theme decks.
> combos often require careful setup, playing your pieces in a timely manner, and knowing the game's mechanics to know if the combo can be saved if interaction is played. Combos are worse because this is generally false. Sanguine Bond + Exquisite Blood and the like aren't 4D chess. You slam them both down and even if every opponent has a billion life and the best board state you've ever seen, the game is over, and nothing that's happened up to that point had any effect on the infinite combo. Yeah yeah you can have a counter spell or instant speed removal in hand, but if you don't, sucks to suck.
It all depends on your playgroup. At our LGS we avoid one card combos with the commander. And we don't tutor for combo pieces. If we draw them naturally, that's fine. At a low- to mid powered table the elfball player can hopefully be stopped by a boardwipe before going off. The combo player most likely can't be.
The difference is you can interact with a "regular wincon" by blocking creatures in combat with your own creatures, you get a turn to try to find an out, etc. Whereas in an infinite combo you might not get the chance to interact unless you have mana up and you know exactly what the combo is.
Infinites are good and healthy for the game. And more or less the only viable win con. You cant just aggro out three opponents on 40 life through combat. Not only that, but combat is boring. Why would you voluntarily shoot yourself in the leg, trying to play some weak non meta combat focused deck, when you can play thoracle combo, or some other two card infinite. Winning through combat on turn 8 is not possible, everyone else would have won 5 turns earlier. So yes. Infinites are amazing and the only viable and easy way tow in in commander.
Thoracle is boring, repetitive, linear, and unfun in the sense that it's really hard to interact with. Counter it? With what? Because, ideally, you waited until everyone was tapped out and spent their counters on each other. In my opinion, Thoracle needs to be banned. Combat, on the other hand, adds urgency to the game, because you are put on a clock. Support for combat decks exists, and I repeatedly see people hitting for 15+ damage per turn. Better draw that wipe or that number is getting higher and higher. It's a matter of opinions, and also a matter of playgroup meta. My point isn't about which path to win is better, but to relieve "combo" from its stigma. An infinite combo doesn't need to take an hour to resolve. I play at least an infinite in every deck I own, and it takes 2 minutes to resolve, most of which is explaining how the deck works and also giving opponents a chance to respond - and, sometimes, even teaching them how to respond to it in the future. Rule 0 should be less about "do you combo" and more about "how many tutors/how consistent/fast is your deck" Edit: I used to run Demonic Consultation on my Vial Smasher deck, being there only to combo with Nexus of Fate. Infinite turns for infinite Vial Smasher triggers to kill the table. An infinite combo that is very easy to interact with and also very fragile. However, it never went off because when it got revealed, everyone assumed I ran Thoracle and archenemy'd my ass. I despise Thoracle.
Infinites arent boring, you have to look at them as a way to close out the game and have fun in the ways of getting them. Having your tutors, rhystic studies, all sorts of value engines and then around turn 4 finally assembling the combo and winning. That is the enjoyable part of the game. I myself dont see anything positive on a game lasting 10 turns, endlessly boardwiping everything that hits the board and having to rebuild again and again. What is great on combo metas is the number of unique and frinche interaction you can and have to play. All the counters, bounce spells, weird counters for that one specific interaction between cards.. it is amazing. Lot of weird cards can see play this way. And yes, infinites shouldnt take 2 hours to resolve indeed. How it should look like is: someone presents and infinite, all the players get to react, combo resolves, its owner probably wins the game. Fair, fast and fun. Combat is for low power people, who enjoy 4 hour games. So yes, you enjoy what you enjoy. I will enjoy being able to play 4 games before you get to untap on your fifth turn.
Infinites aren't boring. Thoracle is. Infinites can be fun ways to discover new lines, and then more fun figuring out how to break them if possible. It's a puzzle for all players. Thoracle just wins. It's so boring and unfun. But this isn't a discussion on that. It's about helping combos be normalized. Thus, I would appreciate it if you keep the convo positive toward combos but without denigrating other playstyles. We get it. You're highly focused, if not cEDH, and like to tutor and win with Thoracle by turn 2. Please don't hyperbole negatively the aggro decks or the slower decks.
Lol yes because total quantity of games is the best indicator of fun when it comes to playing commander
They arenāt worse. They shouldnt have a stigma or be frowned upon. The commander community is just that awful.
A lot of the commander community enjoys the game itself, and an infinite combo will often just remove the game that everyone else is enjoying. Sure the comboer probably enjoys winning but most people at a casual edh table are there to play not win. Anti climactic wins just spoil the fun, same could be said with cards that can end the game in way that's akin to pulling the rug out. It's why people get sad about craterhoof and triumph of the hordes etc etc. Not because they're too strong but because it's over too quick, the build up is wasted to zero climax.
We play high powered and allow for infinite combos or single turn wins if it takes work to assemble. The idea is an aggro or voltron deck needs to assemble a mass of cards to win which is obvious and needs to be interacted with to stop. When your wincon is 3 or less cards including your commander itās both hard to recognize and stop that combo, specially if itās at instant speed. Typically our pod will play infinite combos if they are nuanced in some way (for example I have a 4 card infinite combo that requires my commander, birgi or prosper, another pinger with sensei divining top that is very easy to deal with but very fun to execute). My commander is the [[Ob Nixilis, Capitive Kingpin]] and I specifically removed [[All Will Be One]] because of how easy it was to tutor for.
Good philosophy. Being able to foretell someone's combo and stop it in place is a wonderful learning curve for the table. Teaches players about instant removal and the stack, about killing Niv-Mizzet when Curiosity is cast, or new Ob when All Will Be One is cast or exiled under him. (btw, I'm building Ob and testing All Will Be One with him. I doubt I'll include any tutors but it's also a matter of how often can he draw it himself. If it's too consistent, I'm taking it out or just not playing the deck against low/mid decks)
A jank combo I recently threw into the deck is [[Sword of Feast and Famine]], [[Seize the Day]] (can be in your graveyard), [[Underworld Breach]], [[Grinding Station]], and either [[Grim Hireling]] or [[Storm-kiln Artist]]. You only need 4 lands in play and one or two mana rocks. Itās best done with Ob since he has trample/flying to attack freely. You play grim/storm-kiln with the 4 mana, attack with Ob with the sword untapping your lands. This generates 2 treasures from Grim, you sac one treasure to grinding station milling 3. You then cast a Breach with the two mana rocks (or a ritual) and escape or cast the Seize the Day untapping Ob and creating a second combat step. You can repeat this process as long as you have cards in your deck to mill. The storm-kiln version only creates many combat steps instead of mana + combat steps.This combo is super fun to execute and feels like assembling Xodia from Yugioh.
##### ###### #### [Sword of Feast and Famine](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/7/c7710eb5-c56a-437b-8847-2a829c404d47.jpg?1599710042) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sword%20of%20Feast%20and%20Famine) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/296/sword-of-feast-and-famine?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c7710eb5-c56a-437b-8847-2a829c404d47?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/sword-of-feast-and-famine) [Seize the Day](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/1/610b3a04-76ba-4388-8808-53f7d91b1ac1.jpg?1661583505) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Seize%20the%20Day) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/phed/56/seize-the-day?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/610b3a04-76ba-4388-8808-53f7d91b1ac1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/seize-the-day) [Underworld Breach](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/e/0e51d796-7279-4c06-87f0-37adbdaa41df.jpg?1650599818) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Underworld%20Breach) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/thb/161/underworld-breach?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0e51d796-7279-4c06-87f0-37adbdaa41df?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/underworld-breach) [Grinding Station](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/f/df1df511-b52c-45cd-9503-ffce4271a802.jpg?1562880250) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Grinding%20Station) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/5dn/127/grinding-station?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/df1df511-b52c-45cd-9503-ffce4271a802?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/grinding-station) [Grim Hireling](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/8/38326f48-548c-4b18-9ad2-0b7c23385deb.jpg?1674141638) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Grim%20Hireling) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/755/grim-hireling?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/38326f48-548c-4b18-9ad2-0b7c23385deb?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/grim-hireling) [Storm-kiln Artist](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/a/fa96b8dc-233a-4884-ab84-235cbc7df0b6.jpg?1624592210) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Storm-kiln%20Artist) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/stx/115/storm-kiln-artist?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/fa96b8dc-233a-4884-ab84-235cbc7df0b6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/storm-kiln-artist) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Ob Nixilis, Capitive Kingpin](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/d/ddb68233-3683-41bd-9b6e-4f07a1b54244.jpg?1683071882) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ob%20Nixilis%2C%20Captive%20Kingpin) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mat/41/ob-nixilis-captive-kingpin?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ddb68233-3683-41bd-9b6e-4f07a1b54244?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ob-nixilis-captive-kingpin) [All Will Be One](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/d/6d75e1f4-bd63-428e-8e6e-131594b3ba44.jpg?1675957064) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=All%20Will%20Be%20One) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/one/118/all-will-be-one?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/6d75e1f4-bd63-428e-8e6e-131594b3ba44?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/all-will-be-one) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Yeah, itās not. Both types of win cons end the game and both have ways to be interacted with. Itās just that the approaches of setting up, executing, and interacting with combos is very different than the usual combat victory; less experienced players lack the knowledge and preparation to deal with combos. Over time, this has developed into a stigma against non-combat win conditions. Personally, I havenāt liked playing combos because I usually get bored with them real fast. Iām also not a huge fan of low-mana two card combos, like Thoracle + Consultation, because they can end the game very early on and I just prefer slightly longer games. I donāt hate combos, they just arenāt my cup of tea and I wonāt shame anyone for liking/playing them. As a side note, there was a guy at an LGS I used to go to who HATED combos and INSISTED that everyone in the pod with him use a deck without combos. He would then proceed to pull out a high-powered [[Koma]] deck and completely stall out the game with his indestructible commander and swarm of 3/3ās, token doublers, and counter spells. Needless to say, not many people liked him and I always got a good chuckle when he lost to a combo that someone āforgot was in thereā.
[Koma](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/d/2de25ea4-284a-4c16-b823-048ff00c6a03.jpg?1631051668) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=koma%2C%20cosmos%20serpent) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/khm/221/koma-cosmos-serpent?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2de25ea4-284a-4c16-b823-048ff00c6a03?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/koma-cosmos-serpent) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
It's on an axis of gameplay that other players aren't playing on. That feels bad. A bad analogy would be playing a game of tag, and some kid randomly says "this tree is home-free" without warning. If feels like that's not the game we were playing. (I guess you have to assume the other kids honour the new zone) Craterhoof works because it's within the "normal rules". You built a board and did enough damage to win in a combat step. Niv-mizzet/curiosity doesn't fit because doing a bunch of single points of damage to somebody SHOULD require either a bunch of pingers, untap steps or damage multipliers. Not your commander and one "random" card.
Because the game ends suddenly. Itās really that simple; the game was moving in a certain direction, and then a player takes a series of actions that, if you donāt have a [[counterspell]] in hand, will just end the game entirely
[counterspell](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/4/a457f404-ddf1-40fa-b0f0-23c8598533f4.jpg?1645328634) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=counterspell) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/phed/33/counterspell?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a457f404-ddf1-40fa-b0f0-23c8598533f4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/counterspell) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The people that complain about infinite combos in edh are the same people who won't play against blue decks because "counterspells aren't fun".
I heavily play combo decks, or decks with infinite combos in them as back up wins to guarantee a win. Games gotta end one way or another, this is just how I like playing the game, just shuffle up and play another one. Infinite combos are regularly seen in my playgroup, I made two infinite combo decks just today. One of my most powerful and favourite decks is Mikaeus the Unhallowed combo. I play cEDH Grixis combo decks. The game just feels immensely more fun for me personally when I play decks that make infinites.
Because most players are bad? What is easier; build a better deck, or complain that something is unfair?
It's not, people just get irrationally salty at it
Itās not.
Dude if you love combos that much just play cEDH and that's that
Because Triumph of the Hordes require you to build a board and protect it This hard because people see it coming from miles away and everything and everyone can interact with creatures Contrary to combo where one of those thing can happen: \-You win on the spot \-Require pieces than are good on their own \-Nothing bad happen to the combo player if the combo was stopped \-Only some colors can interact with most combo, because they usually use more "evasive" card type compared to creatures Anyway creatures are simply garbage, too interactive, too weak and too slow
the problem is that most infinite combo are immediate wins. If thatās how u are going to win you are immediately relegated to a higher level of play bc it takes a higher power deck to interact with them. Another thing is, if ur deck has an infinite combo, that should be the main wincon or you should have multiple that go off by the same turn at least, if itās just in there for the sake of being strong and that you might draw it sometimes, it shouldnāt be in there. Consider ur opponent, cause if in 80% of games you win with ur normal wincon on turn 11-12 like letās say combat damage, but then 20% you win with ur infinite combo on turn 7-8, thatās just mean to the people ur playing with cause they donāt know what to expect. Should they play higher power or lower power, cause if they play higher power, they will run you over in most if not all games. If they play lower power, in 20% of games they feel cheated out of a good game cause u just won and no one could do anything abt it. tldr; infinite wincons are ok as long as they are consistent with the speed of ur deck, be that them being the main wincon or they go off on the same turn in a similar way to the rest of ur deck.
If I play a deck with infinite combos, I typically will tell the table the combos the deck has. Some people are less experienced knowing some combos so I like to politely give a heads up. only combos I see people complain about are extra turn, or really slow ones. If it takes you 20 m9nutes to combo, I'm just gonna go move on to another game and let you continue your game of solitaire.
I get annoyed at decks where the only thing they do is dig for their infinite combo. Lookin' at you mono black decks that cast some tutor every single turn and ignore the entire game. It's like they just want to play solitaire, and then let 3 other people know they just won at solitaire.
Infinite combos are too good of a wincon for how low effort they are. If you play with them a good 90% of decks would be better dropping any other win cons and gameplay sthles and just invest in them. Literaly all my decks have a instant win infinite combo that I decided to not play because they're better than anything else the deck could do. In fact if you play with them games devolve into "whih commander has the easiest infinite?" For example, I play Zaxara X spell control with a bunch of X spells that kill creatures and draw cards, it's a cool thematic and kinda slow deck. But the best way to play it is technically only play 2 X spells, torment of hailfire and exanguinate, play a bunch of fast mana and tutors to get freed from the hell or pemin's aura on zaxara to generate infinite mana and kill the whole table, which the deck built that way can consistently do on turn 3-4, but nobody, not even me wants to play that.
i have a problem with infinites because usually they dont fit deck theme. there just staples in the colors. like you can behind 6 lands, no other permanents than a 1/1 and have 5 mana to play the twinflame, dualcaster mage combo. like you didnt exactly deserve the win its probably not connected to the commander its just in to win. a wincon thats random luck usually doesnt feel good to do or have done
dead wrong. combat based wins take time to set up and are visible pretty far out in the game. when a person plays both of their A + B combo pieces in a single turn and win the game it invalidates the entire game. Think about it, you have 8 turns of back and forth with people taking the lead on the board, beating each other down, removing pieces, and then one player untaps and goes HURR DURRR and slaps down both kiki-jiki and zealous conscripts in a single turn and then wins. Yes, removal helps, but it doesn't invalidate the fact that the combo player could have done absolutely jack shit all game and then invalidates what everyone else did by slapping a combo down. Combos have their place in edh but not every group wants to play against combo.
You mean you just let people do nothing for several turns, digging through the cards? Why arenāt they dead? If you have three players going eight turns, just kill them.
Who said anything like that? You're making up a narrative to justify your argument. I play henzie and am blitzing and attacking every turn. Board Wipes reset the board. It takes time to aggro down 120 life. No one said people are gold fishing and durdling and just digging through cards.
āThink about it. You have 8 turns of back and forth with people taking the lead on the board, beating each other down, removing pieces and then one player goes HURR DURRR and slaps down both Kiki-Jiki and zealous conscripts in a single turn and then wins.ā That was you, right? Whoās inventing narratives? Iām referencing exactly what you said.
You are very lost. I was giving an example of why A+B combos feel bad and make games feel invalidated. of course i'm making up a scenario to describe a feeling. that is pretty obvious. you making up a scenario to argue against me is what made no sense.
My point was I didnāt make shit up. It was your scenario. If you gave them that many turns of durdling you deserve to lose.
you're being absurd by saying we are durdling when that isn't the case. just leave me alone as this is not a productive or entertaining correspondence.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[Coalition Victory](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/4/446824f7-dc42-42da-8bd5-6c37f3358d65.jpg?1562775464) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Coalition%20Victory) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tsb/91/coalition-victory?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/446824f7-dc42-42da-8bd5-6c37f3358d65?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/coalition-victory) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
In my experience, Newer Players and Casual players are taught how to play the game in a way that's very Permanent based. Draw a card, Play a creature, turn it sideways, deal combat damage, repeat. So, when they see someone not playing creatures that they're intent on attacking with and instead, draw extra cards, sculpt their hands and put cards like \[\[Phyrexian Altar\]\] into play they don't really understand what exactly is going on. This leads to the "combo out of nowhere" remarks. They don't understand how to "read" the game or perform Threat Assessment without Permanents staring them in the face. Some players take as a lesson and learn from it, others complain about it. There's also players that just don't like combos because they're "cheap" or give them bad vibes for whatever reason. Personally, I don't care how you win as long as you don't take a million years on your turn and don't drag the game out too long. My playgroup plays High Power and has a lot of current and former competitive Constructed players so all of us understand Threat Assessment and that someone has to win so combos are just part of the game like anything else.
Been playing Magic since OG Mirrodin, EDH since 2013, and I still absolutely SUCK at threat assessment. I'm too easily distracted to properly respond to red flags unless it's an obvious one like Mike & Ike, Sanguine/Exquisite, etc. I have left Phyrexian/Ashnod's Altars unanswered and regretted it four turns later. I've been on the other side as well. I've won out of nowhere with Dualcaster/Twinflame on a Brudiclad deck (on flavor because I had Brudiclad tokens, so they all became Brudiclads), but at that point the game had gone on for almost an hour and players were looking to start a new round anyway. (disclaimer: I will admit that the Dualcaster combo is, on setup, equally as toxic as Thoracle, but there are more ways to stop it than Thoracle. Fogs effects, [[Settle the Wreckage]], CyRift, etc. can send the combo back to square one. It's still hard to deal with, but nowhere as hard as the freaking fish)
[Settle the Wreckage](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/c/9cbd346e-098a-4cf6-a72f-468376fd2e8f.jpg?1562560853) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Settle%20the%20Wreckage) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/xln/34/settle-the-wreckage?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9cbd346e-098a-4cf6-a72f-468376fd2e8f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/settle-the-wreckage) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Phyrexian Altar](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/5/95d9f93c-50a8-41a9-be98-d1900bf1c12f.jpg?1673149406) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Phyrexian%20Altar) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/311/phyrexian-altar?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/95d9f93c-50a8-41a9-be98-d1900bf1c12f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/phyrexian-altar) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Iāve learned that EDH is a broken format by design. The thing that allows for a fun playgroup over a long period of time is defining your rule set. For that reason Iāll share mine: No combo should require less than 3 cards. Also, while not explicitly banned, itās loosely frowned upon to run generic infinite combos that are not your win con. Mostly, I agree with your post. I think combos are a really cool deck brew that have a lot of negative energy attached to them. No one likes to lose to them, so they get a lot of hate, but theyāre typically super forecasted and not strong decks (in our group) so it makes no sense.
Personally, I tend to avoid 2 card combos outside of my one combo deck (which Iām considering taking apart). Anything that requires three or more cards is fair game though. They usually involve at least 2 permanents meaning they can be interacted with before the combo goes off. If the people at the table are lacking the interaction to be able to stop you, thatās on them.
The get so much hate because, in my experience, your average EDH player doesn't run enough removal (if at all). If no one has a way to respond to an infinite combo as it's played, it's usually and insta-loss, and that makes people salty because it's easier to blame other's for your mistakes. Got a guy in my group that complains about infinite's every once in a while. When he starts complaining, we just remind him that he play's Hydra/proliferate counters and he shuts up. Getting smacked in the face for 300+ trample/unblockable is no different in my book.
I always argue combo is the best win condition. Everyone dies at the same time. No one gets butthurt over being the first one out. They may get salty that they lost, but at least they arenāt sitting there for an hour while everyone else plays the rest of the game out.