Sideboarding

[Kristian]

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?

[Tabris]

Actually a friend of mine suggested also a sideboard and it made me thinking about. iirc the reason against that was the time-issue and the unique experience
of the format but sideboarding would indeed solve some problems people have with the format right now.

[Kristian]

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?

[Maqi]

Hmmm...

I feel this would be a very dangerous move. Sideboards will allow players to use hatecards that hose certain strategies.

To me this means "decks with a plan" will suffer relatively more from sideboards than decks that just "do good stuff".

Combodecks and graveyard based decks will be confronted with cards a la Leyline of the Void, Planar Void, Ethersworn Canonist, Gaddock Teeg, Pyrostatic Pillar etc.

What exactly are you supposed to board against the omnipresent and potent Bant deck?

One more thing: Sure, multicolored decks can be hosed via sideboard B2B or Blood Moon type effects. But so can be mono-colored decks. Think about Karma vs. Black or Chill vs. Red. Also: Losing to super-powerful but super-narrow hate cards is not very funny. Sideboarded games might end up being a coin flip decided by the fact which player gets their hoser first...

[Nastaboi]

Figuring up whichever cards to side out each time and physically finding those cards in one's deck would be such a pain, and not really doable in three-minute time given between games.

[peeler]

I also see no good in sideboarding to highlander...
The decks that get pushed most will be UGxxxxxxx midrangedecks, which are dominating the format already.
Perhaps Control will get pushed too, change in anti aggro to anti midrange/control builds by sideing.
But the question is: What size should the sideboard be? 15 cards look like adding more randomnes to the format, who hits his 5 of 100 boarded cards?

Conclusion: Sideboarding isn´t good for Highlander...

[Vazdru]

Hmmm...

I feel this would be a very dangerous move. Sideboards will allow players to use hatecards that hose certain strategies.

To me this means "decks with a plan" will suffer relatively more from sideboards than decks that just "do good stuff".

Combodecks and graveyard based decks will be confronted with cards a la Leyline of the Void, Planar Void, Ethersworn Canonist, Gaddock Teeg, Pyrostatic Pillar etc.

What exactly are you supposed to board against the omnipresent and potent Bant deck?

One more thing: Sure, multicolored decks can be hosed via sideboard B2B or Blood Moon type effects. But so can be mono-colored decks. Think about Karma vs. Black or Chill vs. Red. Also: Losing to super-powerful but super-narrow hate cards is not very funny. Sideboarded games might end up being a coin flip decided by the fact which player gets their hoser first...

+1

I've played Singleton for quite a while and g2 after sb was often unfun - the guy who got his "silver bullet sb card" from the top first usually won the game in the end. Mono-color-decks would become even more unpopular - or who do u think would like to play Mono-Red anymore if goodstuff support CoP: Red + Enlightened Tutor? Imo sideboarding would lift HL to another level of randomness and would push multi-colordecks esp. Bant further more because they have a wider range of hate cards available and aren't that muss attackable by single cards.

Conclusion: Sideboarding isn't good for Highlander...

[Kristian]

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

[Crusader]

I don´t know if it was already discussed: What about altering some of the other possible basics? Maybe the starting life like in EDH (or 30 etc. that must be discussed and tested).
Higher Life would give Control and Combo more time to execute a game plan vs. pure Aggro and Aggro-Control. On the other hand it maybe kills aggro-strategies (if the life is too high, so maybe 30 is a good starting point). Creatures are a lot more effective then in days where a 5/5 for four was unmatched and life is the most valuable ressource for a control player (trading life for cards, mana, board position etc.).
The only other option i see to shake up the format are bannings/unbannings or maybe some form of season system, allowing only cards from specific blocks or defining a core block of sets and switching expansions. But that will be confusing imho.

[Kristian]

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.

[Sturmgott]

http://www.highlandermagic.info/index.php?id=faq#3

[ChristophO]

I agree that sideboarding in Highlander would be pretty stupid. It will be absolutely impossible to board and shuffle in 3 minutes. Most players even fail to shuffle and present in 3 minutes... In addition it will introduce additional stupid swingy hosers (I personally already dislike some of the allowed cards because of this) like CoP:Red, Choke, Gravehate etc. to the Highlander game when I would rather see less hosers in my highlander games.

[Mir]

Hmmm...

I feel this would be a very dangerous move. Sideboards will allow players to use hatecards that hose certain strategies.

To me this means "decks with a plan" will suffer relatively more from sideboards than decks that just "do good stuff".

Combodecks and graveyard based decks will be confronted with cards a la Leyline of the Void, Planar Void, Ethersworn Canonist, Gaddock Teeg, Pyrostatic Pillar etc.

What exactly are you supposed to board against the omnipresent and potent Bant deck?

One more thing: Sure, multicolored decks can be hosed via sideboard B2B or Blood Moon type effects. But so can be mono-colored decks. Think about Karma vs. Black or Chill vs. Red. Also: Losing to super-powerful but super-narrow hate cards is not very funny. Sideboarded games might end up being a coin flip decided by the fact which player gets their hoser first...

+1

Besides the mentioned time reasons the absence of sideboard is exactly what I like about Highlander is that players dont use hate cards - or have a very good reason to use one.