Even players who would describe themselves as being in this category may criticise a late-game board wipe that isn’t immediately followed up with a win, or refuse to play with someone that broke an informal promise for the sake of an advantage. Hurricane and Squall line along with life gain and/or glacial chasm are probably my go to win cons besides craterhoof beatdown In green (at least competitively, casually I believe kamahl, fist of krosa to be one of the most powerful green commanders) 2. However, it’s hard to fully get on-board with the idea that 'playing to win' means 'taking the actions that are most likely going to get you a victory', as it goes against much of the etiquette Commander players have pretty concretely set out. Nobody likes it when a player kingmakes or makes plays out of spite, because then they’re not playing to win: they’re playing to punish. Rite of Replication or Myojin of Cryptic Dreams can get you there unconditionally in one card, while Echoing Equation and Mirrorweave are more battlefield-dependent. After all, nobody sits down at a game of Magic and hopes they lose. The man with a plan to clone himself has a win condition surprisingly easy to accomplish in Commander, despite it being a singleton format. On the surface, this is probably the definition most people agree with. It doesn’t matter what deck you’re playing, or how strong the overall table is, as long as everyone is doing their utmost to win. Jace is for self-milling decks and is also formidable against your opponent’s milling deck.
The second group think 'playing to win' refers solely to the actions you take in the game. This is a legendary rare planeswalker that has, if you would draw a card when your library is empty, you win the game.
0 kommentar(er)
