Messages

[honestly will make more people quit highlander altogether rather than get new people in.]

I think the biggest difference is that over here people don't seem to put in effort to keep the format going, while over in Canada they do.

What we see over here: an inactive council with super questionable watchlistings that don't even get their own forum topic.
What we see over there: a streamlined website and an impressive vodcast backed by LRR.

For the longevity of the format I think it's important to polish up how the format appears to potential new players.
I think the two formats can co-exist. I also think suddenly switching to some other format is a hard sell over here and honestly will make more people quit highlander altogether rather than get new people in. I don't see how switching to Canlander suddenly makes the format more appealing over here. I think it's just the larger trend of eternal formats getting played less and less.
Rather than arguing bans, we'd be arguing points. And I suspect we'd have very little influence on those.

Gameplay wise I personally prefer our version. It seems like a North/South Korea situation: having One True Highlander format would be nice, but we both want it on our own terms.
I still see fixing our current problems is very possible (and not even that hard) and the preferred path.

edit: typo

AFAIK votes from 2 council members can put a card on the watchlist. I think this is problematic because it is obvious there are impatient people in the council.
First, 4C was The Best Deck that needed to be punished. NO was re-banned as a part of this, even if it had more impact in the lists it was designed to support (T2 green decks).
Then the meta evolved to support UR control and Scapeshift. These are decks that prey on midrange. Blood Moon, Back to Basics, and Bring to Light were watchlisted because of this.
This is just the natural cycle of the metagame in whole and rapid responses are disruptive to the integrity of the format.
The Canlander community already thought our banlist is too strict. Then the council goes ahead and watchlists landhate that's integral to the format, and Bring to Light. It's just insane.
Legacy just now got to trying a DRS ban. DRS has been a defining player in the format since its initial printing in 2012.

This is a format with good cards that have strong effects. These strong effects may shape the metagame, at least for a few months. Then the gears of the meta tick to the next step. There will always be the soup du jour and it's not good format design to sharpen the pitchforks right away.

I think the council should be more liberal with unbans rather than bans. The Canlander council is rather conservative with their pointing practices and they have a rather healthy and varied metagame that I envy.

I could be nice here and try not to be a dick but that is one of the worst posts I ve ever read (and I saw some amount of 4chan posts). I am not sure if that is some kind of trolling or not. But the part about "Wasteland is like Oath-a random win" is highly indicating that you cant be serious and therefore I dont try to explain to you on how many level you are wrong.

Thank you for your courteous and well-argued response. It makes me feel very welcome to try and discuss the format in the appropriate place.

My point is, against a known Oath opponent you know you should mulligan for an answer against a T2/3/4 Oath if you're planning on playing creatures. That's not unreasonable and while Oath is a top-tier combo archetype I've never felt it's too oppressive to keep tossed around on the watchlist. Against Wasteland, you can fetch basics (not a reasonable option most of the time) or just hope your opponent doesn't have it or you don't have to indicate by missing a land drop. Every single deck in the format plays Wasteland so you can always expect the possibility if you absolutely have to play around it. I understand fixing is one of the problems you agree to when you decide to run a greedy manabase, but the fact that uneven mana is one of the major complaints against Magic as a game isn't remedied well with resource denial literally every deck runs. It never feels good or rewarding to either win with or to lose to a Wasteland on T2/3/4 because a lot of the time it happens because you're setting up the game in a way that you can actually play the game.

Wasteland.

It has been discussed earlier and said that winning with Wasteland recursion is slow and disruptable.
Thing is, not all "Random Wasteland Wins" are wins by recursion. In fact, only a vast minority of them are. LftL/Crucible combos are only a small part of the format, at least over here.
Wasteland is just an oppressive "oops I won" card that I don't think is good for the format. It's an auto-include in literally every deck. It's a good toolbox component, but even then we have good and fair stand-ins in Tectonic Edge, Ghostly Quarter and even Enroaching Wastes.

Wasteland is similar to Oath of Druids in that it can just outright win the game out of the blue. It makes the luck component of the game even more conspicuous. Blood Moon and other such NBL hate is in my opinion good and necessary for the format, but they are easier to play around and more importantly can be answered to. I think Wasteland overall makes the format significantly more un-fun.

B. There are several decks that can't interact with him at all or have to add sub-par answers just for that specific card. I don't think that's healthy.

The better question would be: "Why would we keep this card in the format?" I mean, I don't see any reasons.

qft

[Name/Nick:]

Name/Nick: Henri Särkkä / Demppa

How do you rate the banned-list on a scale from 1 to 10 (1=poor, 10=great)?
7

Which mulligan-rule do you prefer?
Free Mulligan

How do you rate the free mulligan on a scale from 1 to 10?
9

How often do you play Highlander (mp.org-rules)
several times weekly / once per week

Which cards are missing on the banned-list and why? (max. the 5 most important ones)
Dark Depths - I don't completely agree with people saying this is way too hard to disrupt, but I do agree it's a one-card combo with Primeval Titan or Knight of the Reliquary and leads to too many "oops, I win" situations.

Demonic Tutor - Many decks splash black just for Deathrite Shaman and Demonic Tutor. Furthermore, Vampiric Tutor is banned. As someone else said, either ban or unban both. I feel that having both banned is the better option.

True-Name Nemesis - Very (too) difficult to have an answer to. Makes a lot of matchups a simple game of who can get one into play.

Which cards should be deleted from the banned-list and why? (max. the 5 most important ones)
Entomb - Heavy graveyard synergy decks haven't been resulting high in tournaments as of late. Giving them a new powerful tool might give room for both existing and new decks.

Mystical Tutor - With the ban of Demonic Tutor the unban of Mystical would be acceptable.

Natural Order - I think the biggest problem with Natural Order was Depths. Would love to see this unbanned again.