Messages

btw: i've never said that my example represents any benchmark - that's what u've said, it was posted as random example of stupid games which piss me off - that's all

Maybe, but the way you bring it up gives the impression that you present it with an agenda.

Alternatively, an online league could be made testing free mulligan/regular mulligan.

E. The format needs diversity, both for archetypes and card selection in deck construction. I don't feel strongly for any of the options.

Snipped for simplicity.

I pretty much agree with all of it. However, one point that could be raised is that just because Wizards deem a mana cost "fair" for an effect, does not make it so. Besides, cards are balanced to other formats, not german highlander.

Furthermore, even though GWx would lose alot of tutors provided all cards listed there was banned, it's not certain that it would help. The bannings would also hurt other decks and it might be costing them more competitiveness and thus the goodstuff/aggro decks could benefit from it. I played several of the cards listed in control shells in order to acquire some of the consistency I saw in the aggro decks.

For comparison, the French Commander (EDH 1v1) is using 30 life and aggro still works there. However, you got access to a commander which could be a recurring threat even when drawing lands only which makes the comparison less valid. Furthermore, I'm don't have a great insight into that format since I haven't played it.

Sounds like a reasonable conclusion. Thank you all for the input.

It might solve some of the problems.

Where do we begin?

As of this moment I can't think of a disadvantage of allowing sideboards, however failure to imagine such is not the same as there is none. The only advantage I can think of it would allow people a greater degree of freedom in constructing a deck with a focused plan and then have a sideboard in order to react accordingly. Which problems do you think allowing sideboarding would address? And how?

The discussion in another thread got me thinking about how we might be able to improve the format. What is the current reasoning for not allowing sideboarding?

when we talk about "control" we gotta be precise what we are talking about. for me, there is something in between "aggro control" and "do nothing till turn 4"-control.

There is obviously different types of control. But given highlander's construction as a format, the third wheel of the archetype "combo" has been left out, leaving control to keep aggro in check. So far have I yet to see any tier 1 control deck. I'm not saying they can't be succesful when piloted right, but that you're behind already before the game starts due to a higher inconsistency when compared to aggro decks. This is kept more in check in other formats with the rules allowing for more consistent deck construction.

yes, a competitive deck in Hl needs creatures, creatures are the best cards and the "main" cards in magic and it should be that way. they supply answers and "ask questions". so it depends, how many you run, 20-40 is what I have seen in competitive decks. 20 being control..25-30 mostly aggro control/maybe some midrange, and then 30+ is mostly aggro.

Merely looking at the quantity of creatures isn't enough, thre's also the mana curve, card roles and gameplan which matters greatly. Furthermore, if you by aggro-control refer aggro with distruption then it's tempo, which is still an aggro deck.

the thing, in my opinion, there are about 20 creatures that really really stand out (in a vacuum, without any context given, not gonna list them), so the argument "more creatures, the better" does not apply, since then spells come close to the power level/efficieny level of those creatures (20th best creature and going up).

This doesn't respond to my arguement about the consistency of having a significant amount of multiple answers that also can double as other roles. Control can do this too with running Damnation, Day of Judgement and Wrath of God, however, there is less diversity when it comes to spells. Counterspells is one of the few exceptions, but the inherent weakness in counterspells is that they can only answer in a short time window (when the spell is on the stack).

creatures have gotten a power creep, yes, thats also true, but i'd like to argue, as berlinballz already pointed out, that some creatures that can be gamebreaking are more suited for control.

And I have not contested that. Baneslayer Angel is a good example of a creature being better in control than in aggro.

stoneforge mystic ist better in uw control than it is in 4c, that is a fact. cawblade dominated the meta, cause you never had to tap out, let your batterskull or feast and famine do the work, be proactive and reactive at the same. there are more examples.

I would like to see you demonstrate it if it is a fact as you claim. Cawblade dominated standard (and was played to a lesser extend in legacy), a format which enjoyed all the benefits of the higher consistency for all archetypes. The lesser consistency in highlander means that you can't rely on single spells and thusly the equipment package is less useful when played in a control deck while an aggro deck has a higher rate of benefitting from drawing an equipment. On a related note, it's my experience that Stoneforge Mystic is vastly better in midrange aggro compared to weenie aggro, simply because it allows midrange to combat weenie more efficiently on creature quality while benefitting from equipments, then again Stoneforge Mystic can lead to onesides games due to it high card quality and enabling.

snapcaster mage also way better in control then in aggro. while it can be argued that it was a tempo card in standard you gotta realize this was only due to the fact that we had vapor snag. in highlander snapcaster does not gain much tempo in 4c and 5c decks, since the only way to gain tempo, is removing a creature for cheap. there is lightning bolt, path and swords, thats nothing in a 100 card format. so the flexibility and diversity of spells to flashback is what makes this card insane, and thats given in a control deck, with lots of instants and lots of options. to be honest, in some 4c, 5c decks, the ones that run like 15-18 instant/sorceries, i have seen snapcaster being stranded in there hand, its a 2 mana 2/1 flash creature, that gets them value later in the game but has nothing to do with a tempo play.

I'm not contesting that Snapcaster Mage can work in control. Snapcaster Mage still allows for tempo plays, but also for amplifying other resourcedenial tactics (discard spells such as Inquisition of Kozilek, Thoughtseize, Duress, Hymn to Tourach etc. and spot removal such as Doom Blade, Go for the Throat, Lightning Helix, Sinkhole, Vindicate etc.). It's effeciency is bare far not excluded from aggro decks.

dungeon geist is a very good creature, and the "it dies to bolt" or "it dies to searing spear" (what? what besides rdw plays that) is not a valid argument. sower of temptation dies to bolt and that is as much of as staple as a card can be. playing against aggro, they likely tap out on turn three, given you were on the play, a turn 4 dungeon geist does slows them down significantly, cause their biggest thread is locked down and if they wanna bash through your dungeon geist they gotta remove it (which might cost them the turn/half the turn). its a very good card and not even close to being "too late".

Why is it not a valid arguement? The other cards I listed still provided a benefit EVEN if being removed instantly in EOT. Furthermore, I listed a significant larger list of removals (which all see play in the meta I used to frequent), please don't short it down and only responding to some of it instead of recognizing the point. Besides, it's also relevant for late game situations where you need an answer were you're both sitting on a low card count and playing the war of attrition. Also I would still rate Sower of Temptation vastly better simply because of the opportunities it provides. It has a better risk/benefit comparison because it allows for defense (and offense!) with the stolen creature provided you can defend it, unlike Dungeon Geists. Dungeon Geists still has 1 more power and toughness which also could be relevant, but it still doesn't address it trading 1 for 1 with a spot removal and leaving you open for attacks.

besides all the cards berlinballz listed, control got lingering souls, which buys TONS of time. additionally, esper for example now has 4 sweepers and i wonder how aggro ever has a good match up against a deck with 4 maindeck sweepers (if you decide to ever play all 4).

I've not evaluated Lingering Souls myself but would if I were to return to the format. While it has potential, it also has the chance of being "just" 4 1/1's for 5 mana which at certain times, which can be a problem.

imagine this hand from esper control (not a nut draw): 3 land, counterspell, inquistion of kozilek, go for the throat, dungeon geist/sower. how does this have a bad matchup against aggro? of course you cant fill your deck with bulky, clunky spells, but there are good, efficient spells to build a control deck that is absolutely competitive.

It's a neat hand. But picking specific hand combination is far different from playing the game. We're evaluating cards based on how they would perform on average over the course of many games and thusly it should be accounted for if it's good enough in situations where you're not under optimal conditions AND if the card is bogging down your deck by being too expensive compared to the average effect.

one word on jace: i am getting tired of people saying he "does not do enough". its a fact that he is very good when you actually tested him or read about him. yes, planeswalkers are hard to evaluate, but knowing that statements like that should be hold back until you actually played with him. i did, and yes he is very good and yes he will be played in highlander.

I might have misjudged the new Jace. He certainly is more effective when combatting the weenie aggro. Along with that he actually amplifies the effect of spot removal to the biggest threats. I'll have to see this one in action.

Which types of control do you think is more viable? UW? BUW? 4c? 5c? A fifth option? I could assemble one and see how it fare in my meta, this would take time though. The only cards I don't have for this is The Abyss and Moat. I do have stuff such as Mana Drain and all duals, shocks and fetches for the mana base.

Edited for typos.

I don't agree with you on quite a few things, so I will argue a little for the good of HL.

It's the inherent consistency of aggro that's the issue compared to control.

If by "inherent consistency" you mean aggro drops creatures and acts during there turn constantly...while control doesn't... then you have just described the difference between the two concepts. Aggro constantly does stuff, control doesn't, waits, then wins.

That isn't the point I'm trying to convey. By inherent consistency I mean that they have many parts that can replace eachother, a plethora of threats that can act as other roles too. Everything from acid slime, quasali pride mage and harmonic sliver (enchantment/artifact removal), to Dark Confidant and Stoneforge Mystic which both provide card advantage and beat face in.

Let me repeat again: I think control can win now, it has the tools. You mentioned that Highlander has no quick rotation of card pool, but I actually think that is the beauty of it. You really have to look into the metagame and the impact of changes and cards and then it might take a while before you realize potentials. I think people are stuck on the perception of Aggro being dominant, but it's outdated.

And I believe that assertion (control having the tools to compete) is wrong. I've played and followed the format since I discovered it in march 2007. While we are gradually seeing more control cards, it can't compete with the spells on legs and general optimization of the creatures Wizards have been printing. Turn 4 answer is often too late in our meta. Also, with regards to the stagnant format and fixed card pool, it allows for exhausting card options and thus leads to a somewhat stale format. This also applies to legacy in a lesser degree, however, with their 60 card size decks and "up to 4 of" option, they can let new cards have a bigger impact than highlanders 100 card deck size and "1 of" rule.

ADDENDUM:
*Snipped for simplicity*

I don't wanna get into every detail about the single cards, cuz I think it's a bit off-topic. You are right, control does need some creatures, but that doesn't stop it from being draw-and-go and controlling and sweeping.

Induvidual card evaluation is relevant to this discussion when being brought up as examples and arguements. Furthermore control doesn't need some creatures. They need alot of creatures in highlander.

Lastly, I will just comment on two cards you just rated:

@Dungeon Geists: Play it.
@Snapcaster Mage: Nobody said this card was bad in aggro. But it has written control all over it. Just the amount of instants and sorceries in those decks makes it infinitely better than in aggro-strategies. EOT if you want.
@Jace, Architect of Thought: How do I put this nicely? Saying this Jace isn't worth 4 Mana is just completely wrong.

I really enjoy looking into the potential of cards, which is why I love Highlander's slow meta and endless diversity of play-situations. Jace, Architect of Thought is the perfect metaphor for people saying Control is weak right now. It's wrong. It's just something that's easy to say. Card is sold out at 39$ on starcity by the way. For good reason.

Please do return to playing Highlander.

Dungeon Geists dies to Lightning bolt, Incinerate, Searing Spear, Lightning Helix, Go for the Throat, Swords to Plowshares and Patch to Exile and can thus be too easily negated unlike creatures as Loxodon Hierarch, Obstinate Baloth and Flametongue Kavu or planeswalkers like Sorin, Lord of Inistrad, Elspeth, Knight-Errant, Ajani Vengeant. All of these yield instant reward in the form of card or tempo advantage, however some of these can also be used effeciently against control. Snapcaster Mage is more tempo/aggro than control. The new Jace might buy you a turn but I sincerely doubt that it'll be good enough for competetive highlander. It's high cost is due to it being a mythic rare, hype and possible viability in standard. Those are the good reasons, not it's possible semi-viability in highlander.

On a related note, other tactics that I've found somewhat worthwhile are land denial (Wasteland-Dust Bowl/Crucible of Worlds-Life from the Loam, Vindicate, Avalanche Riders and Goblin Ruinblaster) and discard used to protect your own answers to his threats in form of the same discard package as aggro employ.

Edited for additional point about stagnant format and typo.

Berlinballz,
It's the inherent consistency of aggro that's the issue compared to control. Around here (Denmark) people play 3-4 colour aggro for most success packaged with distruption (discard/land destruction - Hymn to Tourach, Gerard's Verdict, Duress, Thoughtseize, Inqusition of Kozilek, Vindicate, Sinkhole, Wasteland and more), that coupled with plenty of good tempo and card advantage (quality and/or quantity) creatures/planeswalkers (Bloodbraid Elf, Stoneforge Mystic, Elspeth Knight-Errant, Ajani Vengeant etc.), makes it hard for control to contend. I'm not syaing you can't win as control, but it's unfun when you consistenly lose to quicker decks.

I've transitioned into EDH/Commander, simply because I enjoy the control archetype (for Commander) more and I have the cards for building mostly any deck I want.

What I think kills the format (along with it being aggro-centric), is the lack of innovation. We simply have no rapid influx (and possibly outflux) of new cards. Unlike standard, we don't have a rotation of sets.

ADDENDUM:
Also, of the cards you list, Geist of Saint Traft and Snapcaster mage are great to devastating in aggro. Dungeon Geists and Tamiyo, the Moon Sage I haven't tested, but I suspect they might be too slow. Bonfire of the Damned and Entreat of the Angels could obviously be good in control and works well with tutors to top, however, they're also more of topdeck cards (miracle) than purposefully playing well, add to that, nigh useless if you draw them out of situation (starting hand or turn 1 to 3). Baleful Strix is good for any control deck that can run him.

Of RTR, Detention Sphere and Supreme Verdict are great. Azorius Charm needs to be tested, it can be problematic with etb creatures and cascade. The new Jace isn't worth it, for 4 mana, he doesn't do enough.

One thing that haven't been addressed. You NEED to play creatures, even when you play control. In order to be somewhat succesful against aggro (weenie, tempo and midrange), you have to run creatures like Flametongue Kavu, Shriekmaw, Lone Missionary, Eternal Witness etc. simply because of the effectiveness of having blockers and etb effects (the spells on legs issue). I often couple this with an Recurring Nightmare engine simply because of the power of the cards. I consider this an issue because it locks in a larger part of your deck when you construct a control deck. It's not an option, it's a necessity.

Why would you make control decks worse when they're not viable from a competetive point of view?

Nitpicking, Sacred ground >> Sacred Foundry?

Otherwise well written.

Regarding the seperate pile. I don't mind the idea, but it's my experience that it's the player that's slowing it down often, not the amount of fetches. Besides, I only play casually (with full fetches/duals) and I think it's more down to experience and how used you've gotten to making those kind of decisions. Some people seem to sac the fetch land and then proceed to think about which land to find while other have already figured out turns ago.

EDIT: Typo

@ Kirstian: Have you moved to multiplayer and therefore casual EDH or 1on1 EDH? In case you still play 1on1 but on Commander rules I would like to understand what is your motivation. To my understanding Highlander is clearly the most balanced, diversified and competitive 1on1 100/1 format. Official Commander rules allow a lot of unbalanced cards which makes it nearly impossible to play 1on1 (e.g. Sol Ring & Mana Crypt but also cards like Necropotence or Sylvan Library). Even if you play on modified Commander rules like French EDH you do not gain any advantages to Highlander as the Tier 1 decks are IMHO limited to a handful of Generals and the Commander centered strategy make the game state situations recurring and boring (e.g. 4th turn eot Wydwen...).

The casual mp EDH. I simply got tired of everybody playing aggro/goodstuff. I loved the format before the invasion of spells on legs. By the way Sol Ring and friends are banned in 1v1 french as far as I know.