Banned List - Comparison different HL formats

[Maggot]

Combo shouldn't be tier 1, because people who don't know how to play against it, think they cannot interact with it.

I thought Highlander is supposed to be a competitive format, if it´s not we can all play Commander with Gentlemen agreements, 30 life and all that bull...

[Kristian]

Combo shouldn't be tier 1, because people who don't know how to play against it, think they cannot interact with it.

I thought Highlander is supposed to be a competitive format, if it´s not we can all play Commander with Gentlemen agreements, 30 life and all that bull...

I think he's being sarcastic.

[Sturmgott]

Combo and Control can NOT coexist as tier 1 in HL!

The years and all experience have clearly shown that rock-paper-scissors a.k.a. control-combo-aggro does NOT work in HL - simply because there's a) no sideboard in HL, b) too many different combo approaches out there (Aluren, Dreamhalls, Hulk-Flash, Angry Ghoul, Dragonstorm/TPS, Painter/Servant, Heartbeat, etc...). If all these were tier 1, or even close to tier 1, control decks CANNOT cover them all. How many cards do you want to play to battle all these approaches? And if you do, either your control matchup will be horrible or you'll simply lose against any aggressive deck. This is easy to understand!

2nd reason why tier 1 combo decks ruin the format: They disallow completely for non-blue-based midrange decks like MBC, or Rock-style decks. Both of which in my opinion allow for very much interaction and fun.

[coldcrow]

I understand your point Sturmgott, but I do not see Yawgwill elevating TPS to Tier 1. I just don't see it. Please enlighten me why this once card would make TPS so good with the current banlist + cardpool.

[Nastaboi]

Combo and Control can NOT coexist as tier 1 in HL!

The years and all experience have clearly shown that rock-paper-scissors a.k.a. control-combo-aggro does NOT work in HL - simply because there's a) no sideboard in HL, b) too many different combo approaches out there (Aluren, Dreamhalls, Hulk-Flash, Angry Ghoul, Dragonstorm/TPS, Painter/Servant, Heartbeat, etc...). If all these were tier 1, or even close to tier 1, control decks CANNOT cover them all. How many cards do you want to play to battle all these approaches? And if you do, either your control matchup will be horrible or you'll simply lose against any aggressive deck. This is easy to understand!

2nd reason why tier 1 combo decks ruin the format: They disallow completely for non-blue-based midrange decks like MBC, or Rock-style decks. Both of which in my opinion allow for very much interaction and fun.

Combo will never be tier1 in the format just because of the very inconsistent nature of the format. If there are critical mass of good tutors and cheap manipulation, then maybe, but right now we're not even close.

Targeted discard and counterspells work wonders against any form of combo deck. I play 12-15 counters in all my blue-based decks, and fear no combo nor aggro (as I have about 50 spell slots left after those counters, and cheap conterspells magically work against aggro, too). Most combo decks can't handle at all combination of one counterspell + opposing creature.

About Rock decks being not viable: Rock is not viable in Extended and Legacy, not even to talk about Vintage. It has sometimes been playable in those formats, but never that strong. I really can't support banning decisions based on artifically keeping alive a dead deck. Time Sieve was once a deck in standard, but I won't claim bannings/unbannings to make that pet deck viable in highlander.

Highlander is an eternal format, where you are supposed to play the very best cards. The thing is, they just happen to be blue. You can blame Wizards if you want to, but what else are we going to do about it? Ban blue as a colour?

If you fear combo that much, why don't just ban Gifts and call it a day? Control decks have no problem replacing it with just another bomb, but there are no replacement to Gifts in combo decks.

[SirGalahad]

As the thread's name is "Comparison Highlander & Singleton", look at the Banned List in Singleton and ask yourself, why there is no combo online. And no, it's not because of price issues - many of the really good players, that play 100CS have all cards available.

I can understand everyone who claims, that there are some cards, that aren't available online but irl. But someone has to show me, how those few cards would change that much in the format.

As i'm playing a lot of 100CS at the moment, i really ask myself, why there has to be a different Banned List at all, other than the difference in sideboarding. But maybe we should really discuss this topic a lot more instead of discussing about single cards all night long...

[Maggot]

As the thread's name is "Comparison Highlander & Singleton", look at the Banned List in Singleton and ask yourself, why there is no combo online. And no, it's not because of price issues - many of the really good players, that play 100CS have all cards available.

I can understand everyone who claims, that there are some cards, that aren't available online but irl. But someone has to show me, how those few cards would change that much in the format.

As i'm playing a lot of 100CS at the moment, i really ask myself, why there has to be a different Banned List at all, other than the difference in sideboarding. But maybe we should really discuss this topic a lot more instead of discussing about single cards all night long...

I believe that there is no combo online because of their bannings: Regrow, Intuition, Gifts Ungiven, Demonic Tutor are banned.
Four cards that are staples in 90% of the RL-Combo-Decks, these cards are more valuable for Combo than the irl banned cards MT, ET, Buried Alive and Entomb, because they add consistency to those decks.
Imo the irl banned list is better due to consistency and speed reasons. There is a huge difference between a possible eot 1 tutor for combo part or a eot 3-4 tutor for combo part with recursion effects.
It´s a very differnt aproach on how to keep the format in balance, and I believe the counsil does a very good job.
There are competitive combo decks out there but they don´t get out of hand in terms of speed, control decks have enough tools to be playable against both combo and aggro, well aggro decks don´t get smothered by a shitload of fast combos. Seems fair to me.

Look at the list of decks I consider Tier 1:

Aggro:
Naya-Zoo
RDW (with or without Gobbos)
BR Gobbos
Elves (Mono G or Multi CC)
5C Aggro

Control:
UW Control
Esper Control
UB Control
Counter Burn
Staxx (in many variations)
Mono U Prison
UG Aggro Control

Combo:
Pattern Rector
Heartbeat
Dream Halls
Reanimator


I believe this shows how healthy and alive the irl meta is. But I also believe that there have to be some minor adjustments to be made. But that´s a different matter.

Visit my Blog!
http://highlanderplayer.blogsport.de/

Cheers

Maggot

[Tiggupiru]

Even tough I don't think this matters a whole lot, I would like to point the fact that combo is also a hell to play in MODO. I just gave my friend the Pattern-Rector decklist and we noticed it will take about 20 clicks to complete each cycle of the combo. Misclick even once and the combo falls apart.

This means that it's really taxing to play and click through it, even if you are familiar with the deck. Also this might make you want to add Kokusho or some other card you really don't want to play, just for the sake of finishing on time. Making your deck little bit weaker is something many "click-a-lot" combos in the Magic Online have opted to do, just to save time and minimize the possibility of an human error.

Gifts, Intuition and Entomb being banned surely makes things more difficult for digital Johnnys, but the atrocious process of clicking makes combo decks less attractive. The results are not 100% comparable because of this.

[God_of_War]

Another reason no one mentioned yet is the spoils mulligan:
The spoils mulligan favours combo big time and here is why:

First of all, let's take a look at Aggro, for example 3C-Naya (posted on the blog):
CC1: Elite Vanguard,Isamaru, Savannah Lions, Loam Lion, Goblin Guide,Kird Ape,Jungle Lion, Wild Nacatal,Shyshroud Elite
All these creatures are very similar (yes there are some exceptions, Mother of Runes/Grim), making the deck very redundant. Now I wont go through all the other slots, but the point should be clear: cards like tarmogoyf,Watchwolf or Anurid Brushoper are not that different (yes that Tarmo might be 4/5, but they all have one thing in common: good stats and hence they are made for attacking). 
Conclusion: Aggro decks are (and that's the obvious intention) redundant. Therefore the variance of the power level is rather low. And because of that fact, aggro decks gain a rather low advantage from the spoils mulligan.

Now let's analyse combo:
These decks need some "key" cards. For example GWB Pattern-Rector:
There are (just a rough overview):
a)sac outlets
b)utility creatures/spells
c)pieces that get Hulk into play
d)discard
e)tutors
All these cards have very different purposes and interact in a very different way with the game. Hence the variance of the power level is much greater (compared to aggro). Being able to spoil unnecessary pieces away, keeping only the best cards, favours these decks much more than aggro.

That is imo another huge factor to consider (asides from the different banned list, combo being hard to play online and having access to a Sb).

[Tiggupiru]

Actually, I think it's the other way around. Aggro will benefit immensely from the spoils, as it allows them to run higher threat count (less lands), find those critical Winter Orbs and most importantly, they can manipulate their curve. For example, one, two and a three-drops, with the appropriate lands as opposed to something like two two-drops, a three-drop and sketchy lands). This gives combo something like two turns less to work with, while it usually fixes only rather marginally with the spoils (greatly depending the deck, ofc). Combo has huge amount of library manipulation in form of Ponders, Prordains and such, but that really isn't giving them as much edge as it does in other formats, because the mulligan ensures you both have better starting grip than you otherwise "should".

[MarcMagic]

Another reason no one mentioned yet is the spoils mulligan:
The spoils mulligan favours combo big time and here is why:

First of all, let's take a look at Aggro, for example 3C-Naya (posted on the blog):
CC1: Elite Vanguard,Isamaru, Savannah Lions, Loam Lion, Goblin Guide,Kird Ape,Jungle Lion, Wild Nacatal,Shyshroud Elite
All these creatures are very similar (yes there are some exceptions, Mother of Runes/Grim), making the deck very redundant. Now I wont go through all the other slots, but the point should be clear: cards like tarmogoyf,Watchwolf or Anurid Brushoper are not that different (yes that Tarmo might be 4/5, but they all have one thing in common: good stats and hence they are made for attacking). 
Conclusion: Aggro decks are (and that's the obvious intention) redundant. Therefore the variance of the power level is rather low. And because of that fact, aggro decks gain a rather low advantage from the spoils mulligan.

Now let's analyse combo:
These decks need some "key" cards. For example GWB Pattern-Rector:
There are (just a rough overview):
a)sac outlets
b)utility creatures/spells
c)pieces that get Hulk into play
d)discard
e)tutors
All these cards have very different purposes and interact in a very different way with the game. Hence the variance of the power level is much greater (compared to aggro). Being able to spoil unnecessary pieces away, keeping only the best cards, favours these decks much more than aggro.

That is imo another huge factor to consider (asides from the different banned list, combo being hard to play online and having access to a Sb).

I don't really get this "redundance" of which you are talking about by trying not be a smartass. Either it is me who does not know the true meaning of "redundant" (=needless) or you want to say sth different. First of all it is not redundant whether aggro got a spoils mulligan or not in respect of the one-drops they play. Just like Tiggupiru said, they can build their curves way more risky with access to spoiling bad cards away. The second thing is - people often forget about - heavy/straight aggro like RDW, mono Green, Goblins and even Naya can kill as fast as combo at goldfishing (turn 3-5). Now the aggro mage got just 1 card which is able to interrupt the combo player or just delays him for one or two more turns; the result: aggro won. There is not much combo can do against aggro the same way aggro can do against combo. Lets pick Dreamhalls as an example: you need a good tutor which finds you Dreamhalls within the first 3/4 turns, you need enough Mana to cast Dreamhalls asap and you need at least one GOOD business spell and a card of same color. Now every card you play which should stop/delay aggro will give you the same delay. If you cast Molten Rain turn 3 on one of the combo players good lands, he takes 2 dmg and got slowed down at least by one turn. So finding options to slow down combo is way more easy for aggro than for combo. If you already got a good tutor + enough mana you can spoil away "useless" cards but you won't find the right cards as easy as your opponent.

I know this is not true for all combo decks and yes, you can play removal and stuff but I want to say that aggro benefits from the spoils mulligan maybe even more than combo. You can imagine the same for a MU vs Staxx: aggro just needs to find the good removal (r/rg/rgw -> artifact/chantment/any removal) and got the odds (maybe because of what you said and called redundant (because it does not matter which 2 drop you find?!)). Staxx however needs more than just 1 out to get the same advantage (you won't win with Propaganda alone neither with Armageddon).

Maybe those aren't the best examples but I am quite angry that people always think combo is overpowered and does not need a boost. When aggro kills control in turn 4 its nothing wrong bc control just did not find the right answers fast enough. But if combo kills control turn 4 people will think "WTF IM DEAD WITHOUT INTERACTION". Ofc not all people think so but I bet most of them cry only because it is "combo" they lost against.

I think we should aim to get as much cards as possible out of the Banlist by KEEPING Highlander a good/fair format, with no 100% domination of a single archtype. Combo should be viable as much as aggro and control and if some people don't want to play against combo they can stay at their casual group and play with their own rules. If you look at legacy you will see that there are ofc decks which are more played than others. But you have lots of different decks you CAN play (without just hunting for the deck to beat) even if they are worse than other decks (yy I forgot about Sideboard..). And I can't remember who said that decktypes like MBC are fun and should not disappear out of the metagame.. MBC is quite good against combo but nobody can expect that MBC is as strong as UW control for example (just picking random decktypes just now.. hard to compare those two decks.). Every deck has it strenghts and weaknesses and some deck got more of them than other decks.. that does not mean, that those decks are not played. People will always play their Petdecks - but should not expect to win competative tournaments like NP.. I'm quite tired maybe this post took a hit by the hammer of inconsistence =)

[cedzoh]

i think that he had the german meaning of "redundant" in mind. which is, as he explained with his examples, that something occurs over and over again. that something of the same kind(here: the beaters with cc1 and cc2 )is there very often.

[GoblinPiledriver]

 english  redundance =  german   Redunanz

I think the Word was used correctly.

[God_of_War]

First of all, I think you should look up the word "redundant":
redundant {adj}
    unnötig
    arbeitslos
    freiwerdend
    überzählig
    überflüssig
    überreichlich
    nicht benötigt
    nicht gebraucht
    beschäftigungslos
    zusätzlich vorhanden
    im Überfluss vorhanden
    redundant [zusätzlich vorhanden]
Or see Wikipedia: "Redundanz (lat. redundare ,,überlaufen", ,,im Überfluss vorhanden sein") bezeichnet allgemein einen Zustand von Überschneidung oder Überfluss."
That is all german, but you can look up the meaning in your language too (Wikipedia or any online dictionary are your friends), that shouldnt be to difficult, honestly. You know, some words have more than one meaning....

First of all it is not redundant whether aggro got a spoils mulligan or not in respect of the one-drops they play.

Sorry, but not the spoils mulligan is redundant, the deck (Naya) is.
The next thing is, their curve is not risky at all. These decks tend to run a lot of CC1-3 creatures, usually curving out at 4 mana, there's not much risk at all involved.
You mention Dreamhalls as an example, that is hardly a deck. I wont go into details any more but I think you didnt understand my point:

Maybe those aren't the best examples but I am quite angry that people always think combo is overpowered and does not need a boost.

Actually, I dont think combo is overpowered by any means. I just tried to answer the question why there is a lot less combo in 100 card Singelton. And one reason (among others) is imo the spoils mulligan.

I think we should aim to get as much cards as possible out of the Banlist by KEEPING Highlander a good/fair format, with no 100% domination of a single archtype. Combo should be viable as much as aggro and control and if some people don't want to play against combo they can stay at their casual group and play with their own rules.

100% agreed.

Now I have one last (serious) question: Did any one test the impact of the spoils mulligan? For example 50 games Naya vs High Tide with spoils mulligan and 50 without? How do the winning percentages change? I would be really interested.

[MarcMagic]

First of all, I think you should look up the word "redundant":
redundant {adj}
    unnötig
    arbeitslos
    freiwerdend
    überzählig
    überflüssig
    überreichlich
    nicht benötigt
    nicht gebraucht
    beschäftigungslos
    zusätzlich vorhanden
    im Überfluss vorhanden

Okay thanks, I think I know what you mean. But I still don't get why Naya or those low-cost-creatures are redundant? Is it because they are played so often or because creatures/decktypes are easy to replace?

And I just said things in general not specific to you and had no intention of blaming you. I am just tired of this neverending discussion because _some_ people think the way I wrote.

But more important is the thing you mentioned about spoils mulligan benefits combo more than aggro to which I do not agree. It would be interesting to know whether there are actual examples of this thesis. And maybe I am wrong and Combo benefits more from spoils mulligan than the way around. Although it is not always easy to get an answer though empiric testing because not all people know how to spoil right etc.