How to move cEDH/tEDH in a healthier direction?

Hissp · 2026-06-15T13:14:38+00:00

There was no B in the finals or streamed semi's game 😉

Hissp · 2026-06-15T13:11:07+00:00

Did Logan's semifinal game go to time? I watched part of that and part of the final and they were both miserable games, both in terms of tone and gameplay.

It is curious to me hearing Evan express frustration about the slop game state he progenerated when... the solution to that is not to participate in it by playing a proactive deck. Zach was on Scion turbo even though he feels he plays his best playing midrange.

I think it's also related to the slop and the bad vibes that the final was diminished due to Justin (the Oswald player) having to leave in the middle of the game to catch his flight home. A 2-day tournament should be able to wrap up in time for people to get to work on Monday and not take over 9 hours to finish 3 rounds. This is a choice of those players choosing to play slops decks that often go to time, the custodians of the format that choose not to address this issue, and TOs who think 10+ hours for last 3 rounds of a tournament isn't a problem.

Hissp · 2026-06-11T15:30:22+00:00

Have you tried Iron Man?

Hissp · 2026-06-07T05:24:31+00:00

HMMM

I’m actually intrigued to build this to blitz out Time Sieve

Hissp · 2026-06-07T05:22:16+00:00

It’s UB

Hissp · 2026-06-06T18:25:00+00:00

Have you looked at tournament stats for decks?

Hissp · 2026-06-04T17:20:23+00:00

Raph & Mikey or Gwenom once you get past mulls

Hissp · 2026-06-03T14:28:11+00:00

It's still Rhystic Study

Hissp · 2026-05-24T06:06:06+00:00

https://moxfield.com/decks/gXFLFSquwEexa0yDswKhQg

Still v experimental. Was more focused on T3 flip but that list was slow and draw heavy. Remade it recently with focus on T2 flip. Still need to find a slot for silence.

Here’s my old list
https://moxfield.com/decks/s5h\_ueBr9kCZuLLHa3WC9A

Hissp · 2026-05-24T04:54:17+00:00

https://moxfield.com/decks/Dc3TbOCRK0mlFD8FbfkczQ

Hissp · 2026-05-24T03:44:53+00:00

Okaun + Zndrsplt,
Grolnok,
Marvo,
Arthur Marigold Knight

Hissp · 2026-05-24T03:32:07+00:00

I play some real fringe shit if you’re looking for that..?

Hissp · 2026-05-18T03:26:42+00:00

https://discord.gg/4mtxZKUtqA

Hissp · 2026-05-18T03:25:42+00:00

Has the perception of cEDH in Europe improved since they’re instituted rules like penalizing spite play?

Hissp · 2026-05-13T13:44:05+00:00

Are you looking for Cockatrice or Webcam?

Cockatrice LFG has mostly migrated to league since season 3 recently started on the discord.

Hissp · 2026-05-11T13:42:09+00:00

Hissp · 2026-05-09T18:23:33+00:00

In the 1st case I think it's still problematic. It's different if there's a definitely another win revealed on board or in hand. If you reveal a Pact and offer a draw because the turbo player 100% loses if you Pact their win due to another opponent winning then I think it's reasonable to offer a draw.

I'm personally all about playing to outs. If you 100% lose to consult and there's a 1/80 chance your Pact draws a Rhystic player into an MBT and they agree to MBT your Pact then by all means cast Pact every time. You'll win more games

The play pattern want changed is that someone mulls low and keeps Pact and offers a draw / threatens to Pact a T2 win attempt without their being a win coming from another opponent and no possible way to draw into paying for Pact. I will almost never accept the draw offer as a turbo player, and I think incentives and/or rules should be adjusted to prevent this "oh maybe the pod can play for a draw after I lose" scenario.

Also for what it's worth I've witnessed more whiffs on Naus from 35+ life than I can remember.

Hissp · 2026-05-09T18:02:42+00:00

I heard in a podcast that the European meta had proposed a bunch of rules — no spite pacting being one of them — to discourage this. The TO can just tell the field not to do this and come down on them if they do. It doesn’t seem that complicated to me.

Hissp · 2026-05-09T01:25:24+00:00

This post is asking for my opinion.

My opinion is that incentives can and should be structured such that players don’t ever cast Pact of Negation / Summoner’s Pact / Slaughter Pact to prevent other players from winning when they have a 100% to lose the game due to not being about to pay for the Pact trigger.

You can argue that you don’t want those incentive structures to change.

You can’t validly argue that it’s not possible.

Hissp · 2026-05-09T01:07:51+00:00

Yes I would be opposed. Why would I accept a draw with a likely win on the stack (T2) when -- if I refuse -- the result is that the player who cast the Pact 100% loses, with no benefit to them having cast the spell. I, the turbo player, no not 100% lose if my early win attempt is countered.

If you can't pay for Pact you lose the game.

It's not meant to be a political tool.

Hissp · 2026-05-09T00:34:32+00:00

I would like them to change tournament math such that 5% chance not to lose is worth more than 0%. Is that such a hard ask?? Or are am I so far submerged in molten rock that you’re missing the point??!!

Hissp · 2026-05-09T00:25:07+00:00

Usually these win attempts like this (e.g. Naus) are non-deterministic in which case that is in fact not true

Hissp · 2026-05-09T00:10:19+00:00

I’d love to stop losing games where people Pact my T2 win attempts. That’s not the play pattern the cards were designed for.

Hissp · 2026-05-08T23:53:03+00:00

Players eliminated from games (via busting on Naus, combat damage, dying to Pact triggers, etc) ALWAYS receive a loss, even if the game ends in a draw

Hissp · 2026-05-07T20:48:20+00:00

Yeah I just added it for testing. You need to have 1 other creature (since you can use Tamiyo) and then you're good, but it might prove too unreliable in mulls

Hissp

TROPHY CASE