The worst strategy that everyone plays

[@getsinged7631]

I think you're either playing with bad players, or massively misunderstanding why ramp and draw is so commonly used in commander. It isn't used JUST because it's free value, it's used because you don't have the same consistency in commander as you do in other formats, you're playing with 100 cards and no duplicates aside from your basic lands, there's often no consistent way to make your deck do what you want it to do because your starting hand and draws are so much more random than in a 40 or 60 card format with duplicates, where your starting hand is likely to contain one of almost every card you actually have in the deck. You need ramp because the game is likely to go longer and you don't want to get stuck with your clunky expensive cards and no way to cast them, and you need card draw to see more of your deck more quickly to try to make your deck more consistent. These effects contribute to ALL decks regardless of what they are trying to achieve, because they enable the deck to achieve what it is trying to achieve more consistently, and if you already have what you need in hand you simply choose not to play those cards, and play your win instead.

[@easyyo6784]

Thats exactly how it is. These card are so expensive, because they are so good for your deck. Any Aggro deck will fail if they dont have carddraw, or ramp (i look at you boardwipe). Any Controll deck will fail, if they dont have carddraw and ramp (i need you now borardwipe! i know you are in my deck against the aggro player!). Someone on the table will use it, and it will be very hard for the others who dont.

[@thomaspetrucka9173]

My thoughts exactly! I mean, this format was built around getting to the 8-drop dragons. It's where big splashy gets to flourish. Ramp and draw is a contingency for me, not the whole strategy. And I'm MUCH more likely to keep a hand that's all draw rather than one that starts off with a wincon. I think Deck Driver might just be addicted to aggro. 😂

[@nathanlowry9421]

Truly ramp and card draw wouldn’t be as big a deal if board wipes weren’t as prevalent as they are now. But as it stands now, 1 board wipe per game is like on the low end of the average game so really ramp and draw also help you jump back from to the player that just landed the board wipe and now technically has a better card advantage. You just need both to get back in the game in a meaningful way

[@Arvensa]

The longer new cards are being produced, the more redundancy is available to decks without being forced to rely on ramp and card draw as filler to assemble their machines or reach their haymakers. That said, more of the most efficient level of ramp and card draw spells are also being produced, helping that strategy to keep up.

[@VictorianoOchoa]

okay, but decks that do this without a game plan and not going for the win is very different from decks w/o plans. I think he is referring to inefficient card draw ramp spells that go for big splashy plays that competitive decks can easily undercut.

[@blizzardcrow3051]

Everytime someone makes one of these "your deck is bad, do this instead" videos about commander, they make a ton of good points as to why your deck isn't successful. They also completely forget the casting big, do nothing spells for funsies is *the entire point* of commander

[@bobbobfr43ed]

I think the issue is that yes, you’re there to win, but if everyone’s deck is bad and mid range, then you’re still as likely to win as if everyone’s deck is high tier competitive CDH. And people just like dorky 6-10 drops

[@guyatanosavia8487]

Something to note is that I think there's a big misunderstanding here about what a midrange deck is supposed to be doing. What you've described isn't midrange so much as just a greedy deck, midrange is a specific archetype that is meant to be able to handle aggro decks until it can overwhelm them while being fast/resilient enough to punish greedy control/combo decks. If your "midrange" deck isn't playing the game until turn 6 or 7, it's not a 'midrange' deck. It's just slow

[@Evaders99]

In Commander, "how you win the game" is just as important as winning for most players. It's a creative expression. Doing crazy big plays is the goal.

[@maximillianhallett3055]

But that’s not a metric everyone agrees upon. I thinking swinging for lethal boring. I have friends that think burn is anti-climatic. “Expectations of experience” has done more harm than good. The only expectation from the get go is you’re playing magic the gathering and potentially against any card. Any expectations beyond that edges into sore loser territory.

[@WackNoir]

@@maximillianhallett3055 that is a good point. Like, land destruction is looked down upon, but there is no rule that say's "no land destruction" therefore it is acceptable, but bc of groups and what they may be comfortable with - which is fine -, their expectations become reality in a warped way for the game

[@Daniel-zs4ww]

Why does everybody trying to dictate how to play this casual format like it matters. Do what you like people. That's kinda the point.

[@darkrexkigntstone8773]

True. As long if your play group is fine with it.

[@woahismeme9330]

I would like to apologize but I love control in commander so much

[@josiahclarke3535]

Nah it’s cool. You’re playing against 3 people so, if you can successfully play control giant all of them, you’re doing something neat.

[@modtyrant1784]

Disagree completely, a hyper focused strategy leads you to lose if you go all in on it. You will run out of options very quickly when your presented with some thing your deck can't fight against, its an auto lose if your opponents have not taken that player out. Its also pretty boring if you are up against players that can't stop your deck, it becomes a wash and that's not interesting. Draw is more important in commander than standard unless you field a lot of cards with similar effects. Specialized strategies is the death of variety, its why tournaments have meta decks.

[@Belena711]

9:28 I can't follow your logic on how rhystic study/smothering tithe are typically only good when you're already doing something successfully. In fact, I'm pretty sure they're so heavily played for the opposite reason.

[@dominicdemarco871]

Yeah I’m not really sure what he meant by that either, but the rest of the video had some really solid points!

[@aquamage9788]

Exactly. The point is that they work well independent of how well you're doing. It's a value piece that you literally don't have to do anything with to benefit from.

[@testingbls]

I'm thinking that a card like Rhystic Study isn't very useful if you can't spend your cards. If you have an aggressive deck, then Rhystic Study helps you tax your opponents (leaving less mana for responses) or gives you new threats to play. But in a midrange deck you might already have a hand full of 5 drops, so drawing more cards isn't necessarily helpful. It is a bit of a tricky example though, since the card is so good. But another way to look at Rhystic Study is that for the amount of money you pay, it might not be super helpful. You could buy a whole deck for the cost of a single Rhystic Study.

[@DontCryJustJeskai]

Both of those let you get ahead when behind too

[@Belena711]

@@testingbls I 100% agree with the cost argument - people sometimes feel priced out of games when in actuality they just need a little guidance building their deck.

[@andrewpark78]

This sounds like a problem with bad decks rather than rhystic. Card draw in decks with mostly bad cards is bad because you get bad cards. Card draw in good decks wins you the game super fast because you're drawing good cards. Winmore cards are usually bad sure, but a card like rhystic study is not at all a win more card. You mentioned return of the wildspeaker, which is an overrun at its floor, but at its peak is 5 mana draw 10+ and likely win the game in the next two turns. That doesn't really feel win more to me, it feels like nail in the coffin. Sure you jammed your Ghalta but without a return, it just dies and now you're left with nothing. I appreciate that you like aggro, but refined decks with high interaction just shit on aggro. Only by having a critical mass of card draw and mana in able to do more than what your opponents (with the best removal from all of magic history!) can do to stop you can you reliably win. A deck like Zada is strong; until you reach higher powers and it just gets sniped off the table instantly and youre left with a bunch of shitty goblins and combat tricks. The "do nothing value deck" draws a fk ton of cards until they can hit their compact win conditions, usually a combo or broken creature strategy, while getting to fill their deck with the best cards in the format: ramp, draw, interaction.

[@g4e4rman54]

The first part is his entire point

[@natethetoe386]

Commander players have chosen to complain and wine, instead of making decks that can function well in a range of environments.

[@PasDeMD]

It's a good reminder that I should probably pay a little more attention to curve and consider not always running ramp in strategies that have good support from 1-3 mana cards.

[@maximillianhallett3055]

You still need enough of any effect to draw into them consistently across games. 3 ramp pieces are generally not enough to ever see them in a game, unless you run a lot of multi-card draw.

[@1PercentSSB]

I feel like this is giving midrange a bad rep. In my opinion, midrange is the strongest thing you can do in EDH. You run a solid removal suite, a fair set of effective wincons and some style of stax to slow down the aggro lines. Midrange may be a deck without a clear single goal, but it's also the deck that is able to attack at any angle. With a deck that is built to do it all, these types of card/mana advantage tools are really only boons and not putting you in a worse spot. I feel like the problem isn't that people are playing midrange, it's that they put value pieces in bad decks and expect it to do something.

[@strangemagik]

Seriously. This video observes a correlation between bad deckbuilding and the most common deck strategy, then decides that the problem is midrange itself, not that people are building vague value piles copied from EDHrec without any clear wincon. A *good* midrange deck has an appropriate curve for its goals, has sufficient interaction, and has a wincon... like any good deck of any strategy.

[@NotBer]

Midrange has a bad rep and is a strong strategy because it goes together with the "small bean mentality" and passive gameplay that plagues casual tables.

[@apony6263]

This take is kinda dumpstered by a one second reflection upon how severely underwhelming things like boros aggro were until red and white started getting consistent card draw and ramp. Like short of krenko or infect, aggro working.. like really working across the board is a pretty new thing in the grand scheme of edh. And to be honest since you still have 120 life to chip through instead of 40 saying that its somehow stronger than midrange is just. Bogus.

[@Matiassanita]

i don't completely agree with that take, i made an Adeline deck that plays almost no ramp, with the exception of sol ring, pearl medallion and some other utility mana rock, a bit more draw and recursion just to not run out of gas too quickly, and a very aggressive curve to try to win or at least start killing players ASAP. the deck also plays the "do nothing" token doublers, but when you play a doubler and get value in the same turn in the form of more damage, it just makes sense. you don't need to ramp for the first 4 turns to win (great fast mana is an exception), but you need to make a very good use of those early plays to pressure enough to force the greedy players into suboptimal play just to not die.

[@NevarKanzaki]

One of the other reasons why greed pops up so much is the presence of multiplayer in commander. If you're not playing combo, it severely narrows down the strategies that can just win a 4 player game. You could be more interactive. But whoever hits the gas first and doesn't win with it is usually the one who gets slapped down, buried under the card advantage of there being multiple opponents. A lot of the normal strategies like aggro and tempo just don't work in this context. This leaves midrange value, combo, control, and stax being the only realistic way to hold down the board state of multiple players. This of course tends to boil down to the other 3 more than stax for obvious reasons. Not to say you can't play aggressively in EDH. Just that there's an awful lot of multiplayer and that makes aggro's job exponentially harder with the increase of players.

[@testingbls]

I wanna build a Ramses-deck one day. Sounds so sweet to be able to punch one, kill all. 😂

[@kronjuwel9584]

I agree hard here. Its possible to play aggro if it means to sacrifice speed a bit in favour of protection. In my case I play my loved Moria Boros Aggro deck. It wins in all kind of environments a lot of the time and survives the aggression it gets by lifesteal. Sounds crazy but works nuts. Its the most viewed Moria deck on Moxfield if you wanne check it out.

[@NevarKanzaki]

@@kronjuwel9584 Moria? What's the full name? I don't happen to be familiar with that one. Not saying you can't play aggro in a 4 way. Just much harder and requires much more ability to have sustained aggression. It almost has to operate between aggro and midrange. Otherwise it won't have enough gas/the ability to overcome 3 opponents worth of setbacks. Point being is that a 1v1 aggro deck and a 4 way aggro deck look and behave quite differently.

[@blackdeath6085]

@@kronjuwel9584Sorry, total noob here starting a comeback in magic, after decades, and trying to get into edh but: Did you mean the goblin Moria, or the land, Mines of Moria? Because i did a search and came across a Boros Aggro deck with Cadric , soul kindler, on Moxfield. Did you mean that deck?

[@Quansen45]

Edh was literally built for midrange battlecruiser decks. OP only builds deck with commanders mana value 6 or below and lectures the rest of us who wanna enjoy a Gishath or Atarka. Respectfully pick up a Borborygmos Enraged or turn Jetmir into Ghalta and Mavren and then this critique could feel a bit more legit

[@ThatMillGuyShaf]

Loved this video! I feel like it touched on some broader points that I explored in my react video about deck building and homogenization but here to comment for the algorithm!

[@deckdriverMTG]

Hey! Thanks for reacting to my stuff! Honestly looking back I could've revised a few things and clarified a bit more, but I hope you enjoyed it! Let's Collab in the future😉😉

[@Battleguild]

You just reminded me that I should finish building my "Whenever an Opponent" deck.

[@yusheitslv100]

That's just any mono blue commander /s

[@jean-baptistedelabroise5391]

The thing I see, The deck that first presents the win early generally gets handled by the table and then is so behind it never catches back.

[@jean-baptistedelabroise5391]

Also there is a different level of doing nothing. The worst case of this is big mana mono black that ends with a exanguinate after 10 turns of stacking mana.

[@seanwechsler6783]

I think the problem is that these midrange “do nothing” decks end up with in “the sweet spot” of the game, and can win because of it. They’re slowly building a board that isn’t doing anything….yet. All while the other opponents with “stronger” consistent decks are attacking/targeting each other in competition. If you’re not the threat, then you’re less likely to be attacked or targeted. All while saving your interactive resources in your hand.

[@BrainSpew]

I don't often run Doubling Season-style effects, because they often feel awful when you're behind and require help to actually matter (hence being 'win more' cards). I'd rather just have redundancy for the thing that makes the tokens in the first place. That said, I identify myself as a primarily midrange player...but I don't know if this video identifies midrange in the same context as other constructed formats do. To me, its to play control/defensive against early aggro (and in my group, we do have a solid aggro contingent in Krenko, elf tribal, slivers, dinosaurs, and Ur Dragon reanimator...yes I know you may consider that combo, but these decks all win by attacking you out of the game very early) and pivot to more aggressive value-based strategy (2 for 1s for days) before the big mana decks can stabilize (if you can...sometimes that window is painfully narrow, especially if you don't get any acceleration and your opponent is on green ramp), while still leveraging the disruption. It's less about being greedy and needing a few turns off to set up and more about knowing when to/being able to switch gears between defender and aggressor. This is from a boomer Jund/Rock player so ymmv.

[@DrVividz]

A interesting thought is that when you make a good tempo deck, or something along the lines with a synergestic strategy against the common strategy of midrangey "do nothing" decks, is that you'll just have a good deck people will get tired of losing too. If you convince 3 or so people at your lgs to suddenly make these stronger synergestic decks at the same time, yes maybe you'll see some shifts of meta at your lgs. BUT, lets be honest most people just wanna play the cards they wanna play. So instead you'll just have a deck people get tired of losing to

[@nk8244]

I love my Sammut voice of dissent agro midrange, it's excels aggro originally it was only super aggro but I realised after playing our aggro brought me a reputation and got my things targeted frequently so I leaned into some more value pieces that still synergies with my deck, there's a recursion sub theme, a lil bit of landfall, replaced cards with similar effects but are more versatile. At first glance the deck does seem like a generic value deck but once you get into a game with it you realise it packs a punch real quick. I honestly don't regret leaning more into value tbh it's made my deck more consistent, people actually like versing it now cos I don't just kill someone out of nowhere, and there's a lot less feel bad moments cos I know I'm deck is built to handle getting reset

[@forrestl5982]

It's about finding the balance between "win more" cards and "parity" cards. I have found myself cutting some pretty expensive and powerful cards, I'm sad to say, because, they tend to be "win more" and not "stop my opponents from winning"

[@dcdids2011]

This happend to me with my newest deck and smothering tithe. Im playing a low mana curve, aristocrats deck that does really well against my usual table. The problem came when I realized that each time I could play tithe, I had better plays in hand and the few times I did cast it, I became the instant focus of the table and the card didnt even make such huge of an impact. I no longer play it on that deck and never had felt its absence rly. In short: dont just play staple cards just because they are powerful. Sometimes they simply dont justify their place on your deck enough to auto include them, even when they are such easy picks.

[@LogoMotive11]

I wouldn't lump all of "Midrange" into this discussion. You speak alot about bad deck building habits which I agree with but putting "midrange" as a label makes it seem that strategy as a whole has all these flaws when it really doesn't, it's just a flaw in deck building. It's like trying to say all Aggro decks are bad Cuz one board wipe makes the deck lose. We know that's not true for aggro at all, it's only true for decks built very greedily with no protection or way to rebuild. Otherwise solid video.

[@SoulofStorm333]

If your deck win by turn 5/6, you are factually a Cedh deck. The whole video is centered around rhystic and tithe, like they aren't just ramp piece like any other. I'm sorry "winning turn 7/8" when you are playing a format centered around games taking longer, ramping to big creature and big payoff is a valid strategy. I'm very confused ngl. You seems to confused "midrange goodstuff control" wich is a valid strategy (not everyone can centered theyre strategy around a 3/4 cost mana curve) and "goodstuff deck with just no strategy". Like yes slow deck need to have a win condition, but the problem here is not the speed of the deck, just the fact it has no wincon basically. But yes too many "winmore" piece is bad for your deck

[@ericyang8474]

Midrange is not a do nothing archetype, but it's one that slows their end game with the intent of being able to shift gears on the situation either by stopping others or preventing from getting stopped at the cost of deviating from their own play. Tempo is just a subset of aggro because it's usually set on winning by damage with minor interaction that slows moreso than stops, but the cost is that it's more fragile on their focus due to their inability to recover. Greed is not an archetype issue, it's a deckbuilding issue/a product of the bystander effect in a 4 player format (only interacting when it stops you vs helping them). The problem of stalling the game is arguably worse with Control, such as Teferi Azorious builds, since often times delaying and exhausting is the win con.

[@whatever-kc5dk]

Can we stop calling these value piles "midrange"? That is not midrange. Midrange can switch from aggro to control and back. Midrange plays a ton of removal and is flexible. These value piles are not able to play proper midrange

[@thomaspetrucka9173]

My pod is a turn 8 pod. I think that's when most pre-cons start to pop off. It's enough room for most casual strategies to compete. Therefore, this "turn 6 or 7" talk is pretty worrying. 😂

[@brokenp1ank]

You're so real for this. I straight up had to look and reflect on my gameplay. This will definitely increase my deckbuilding strategies to make more fun choices overall. Thank you

[@jolteon345]

Ok so here’s the problem with Commander. You find yourself drawn towards higher power casual. That’s completely fine. However, there’s a difference between playing to win - something you should consistently do - and having winning be *the* goal - something that takes away from the other parts of casual play. If someone’s goal is to put 100 goat tokens into play, they should still play to win while pushing towards that goal, but they might hold off winning until that goal is completed. If a deck does a cool thing and the player’s main goal is to do the thing, that’s fine and they’ll probably be happy with a loss. However, playing some form of aggro and *not* attacking is a problem. That problem is caused by casual play being partly social, as people will tend to “feel bad” for attacking the midrange valuetown player while that player is ramping, because that player didn’t do “the thing” yet. The problem is that the “thing” for the midrange or combo player usually results in winning the game. It’s why I’ll tell people to attack me if I’m playing a deck that looks like I’m doing nothing but has the potential to win out of nowhere if I do the thing.

[@flavioromano8754]

Oh you must be fun to play with...

[@dallasfavel4817]

Honestly, if your edh games are only lasting like eight turns, just commit and do cedh... Or admit you're there to pubstomp and not make friend.

[@vladtheimpaler7878]

I’ve been playing since 1993 and I remember running a deck when I was a kid that was basically comprised of disrupting scepters and dark rituals. I had a single creature, I think it was a nightmare because it was mono black. I ran that cafeteria as a kid. It was well before the limit of individual cards. Welcome to very early magic.

[@vladtheimpaler7878]

I say this to say that card draw is one of the top strategies. Every card is an idea, every card is a strategy. I was briefly professional in the early 2000s. Those lessons served me well.

[@davidsantiago7808]

i think you severely misunderstand why cards like Rhystic Study and Smothering Tithe are popular and why they are very strong on their own. You are completely wrong by saying you playing them is "waiting around", because literally no one is waiting. Either your opponents have an answer for it or you pop off and draw a ton of cards or make a ton of mana and get a severe advantage or even win the game. The only time this isn't a game winning drop is when the person who plays it doesnt know what they're doing, either because they're a new player or because they are borrowing someone elses deck higher power deck. Half of this video sounds more like you just hate it when new players run higher power cards because they dont know why they're playing them.

[@HarlowAshensky]

Thank you for bringing up Tempo! I’ve had the most fun playing decks like this, and breaking a stalemate where no one attacks is so freeing when everyone just builds castle walls for one big turn. I built my second deck ever with it in mind for the new Arna Kennerud from mh3 as a flier deck because I loved ✨skycaptain✨ It’s filled with low mana offensive creatures to be online before Arna drops :) Deck is called ‘Arna, count your blessings’ on moxfield. It’s aggressive, and aims to pick apart opponents boards with removal that can double once it’s on the field~ doubling assassin gauntlet or inner demon does work haha

[@Citinited]

Uh, no. That's not what a tempo deck is. A tempo deck first sticks a low cost threat like Delver of Secrets and then protects it, often with disruption that is card disadvantage, to win the game. It's not just playing on curve.

[@deckdriverMTG]

This is commander, tempo is not really tempo, midrange isn't really midrange. The words are used to describe an overall mindset on how you are aiming to play. You can't have something as precise as Delver and disruption in your Highlander deck. In the decks I described the goal is to make a board state and fight for that board state (like what tempo decks aim to do). The decks I make often revolve around a strategy like that as I think it's the best way to play.

[@todharter5195]

I think you do have a point here. It is very easy to fall into the trap of just going Christmas shopping and end up with a lot of big budget, as you call them, 'win more' type cards. OTOH I do think most of those cards DO have a point, it just may be considerably less common to see it than their play would indicate.

[@robmellesh1530]

100% agree. Do NOT have fun watching my opponents play solitaire.

[@9clawtiger]

Your definition of Tempo, is my definition of Midrange. "Play one threat every turn" But also you put my in a skinner box with a button that gives repeatable draw (a Guardian Project let's say), and I'll push that button until I starve.

[@seanwechsler6783]

This IS my playgroup. The biggest threat usually ends up being the person with the most value on the battlefield, rather than basing it on player actions. “The sweet spot” is always a thing in every game. Where 1 or sometimes even 2 players are just chillin playing synergy pieces and passing the turn. Meanwhile the other 2 or 3 players are duking it out back to back using all their resources. Politics is a problem too…but our problem is there are no politics. Everyone is more about revenge over actual winning.

[@TheESTRAEL]

I played in mid power games where i counter a ramp piece early or destroy solring of the midrange player so they are slowed down for a few turns before getting their high cost commander out... and i get so much salt from that... they say me countering the card ruined the game and they scoop but i think its their attitude and deckbuilding that makes it less fun...

[@deckdriverMTG]

When you stop their greedy strategies they get mad and salty, but don't look internally at the fact they relied on their greedy strategy!

[@Grimmlocked]

Yup I countered an attraxa grand unifier last week and the guy freaked the f out

[@jacesaints]

I am so hated because of my blue + color X(Y) combined decks. But I also play group hug or manipulate my mates to fight each other. Commander is really about the game itself. Not just to try to win, but to play with their minds. I love to play more flavorful decks than playing on effectiveness.

[@marc-yp9vu]

Thanks to your explanation, I have deduced that all of my decks have been midrange which checks out as I never have an impact early on. I have been struggling to find decks that feel good to play (vorthos so my decks are whack as a baseline).

[@DontCryJustJeskai]

I also like aggro decks but for me it seems like the assumption is that an aggro deck is seeking to win through combat damage primarily, with some other win conditions throughout. To me, burn and spellslinger that focuses on burn, qualify as aggro. My favorite aggro deck focuses on Gev, Scaled Scorch as commander because it wins through both burn and steadily building up a board state. The best part of playing Rakdos or Izzet aggro(as I define it) in commander is that while I dont have much in the way of dealing with board wipes, I am usually certain that someone else at the table does.

[@yesimchar]

really opened my eyes. i was iffy on these cards but ran them anyways because "its a smothering tithe, why wouldnt i run it"

[@deckdriverMTG]

It's sometimes ok to play cards like this, but often using them in decks with no intention behind WHY you run it is that problem.

[@SoftwareNeos]

Can we just stop calling Commander a casual format. Cause it doesn't say anything. its like calling CEDH a competetive format. it doesnt really tell me anything on either formats. Theres too much variance to pin anything down. Theres competitive EDH players. Theres Casual CEDH players (yeah they exist) with different reasons why they are playing the games. Its just weird that this umbrella term is here when ive just seen the opposite over time. Most people pick a theme or card to run... then optimize. Whether you use the best cards or not... that a competetive mindset. running removal? running cards that synnergize? Trying to win even though its not the best theme? What else is that but a competetive mindset? The Mill Guy will bring up players not running removal/interaction... and I JUST SEE THE OPPOSITE. Players just always getting BETTER. Someone can run edgar markof in a 1v1 against me... i have mirko. i can still win. let alone games of 4v4 commander. There are people who dont run removal. dont improve their decks at all. barely a percent of these players actually exist. Almost all people are playing to win with THEIR DECKS in edh. So evertime i hear "sometimes winning isnt the primary goal" i just get mad. cause unless you use group hug with no win condition... or staxx with no win condition. it doesnt apply. "doing something big before you lose" doesnt fit either. Cause You still wanna win. Sure you did an interesting thing with your deck and it happened... and you had fun before you lost.... BUT YOU STILL WANNA WIN. So it is the goal... you just had fun EVEN THOUGH you lost. entirely different. They arent running Thassas oracle to do it... but to say its a casual format with what players are doing is kinda crazy. especially since every other TCG would call it the opposite. If you went to a tourney with a tier 3 deck... is that not being competetive? Is it still a casual player if your not running the best deck? no. so why do we do it here? i get it. we dont have tourneys... but its the same concept. Just cause you arent running the best cards. doesnt mean you arent being competetive. Maybe you can talk about it in a future video. But i honestly just dont get it.

[@deckdriverMTG]

I totally agree with this point! Me calling it a "casual" format is mostly just a blanket term that I agree doesn't really say anything. In MTG the goal is to win the game, you can do this in so many different ways. This channel is meant to help people make better deck building choices that can help them win these games easier. On the videos where I talk about the different power levels or expectations of the game people have, it's usually pretty divided. Lots of people share your viewpoint, but lots do not. Because of the wide variance, if you play to win people will say "just play cEDH". While others like yourself think no matter that power level you should try to win. Videos like this are here to invite discussion on this very dichotomy, and I think we can all come to a middle ground from there. Thank you for your comment, a video around this will be posted soon!

[@tommieboi707]

I have a ghired deck that populates rhinos. I absolutely need cards like anointed procession and parallel lives. Turn 5-7 can be super explosive and usually knocks 1-2 people out of the game unexpectedly.

[@nickw7235]

We celebrate the fast games in my group. There’s no mercy and it gets kinda brutal, in a fun way.

[@SVcreations43]

Made me rethink one of my decks strategy. I have a Sauron, Lord of the Ring aggro deck with equipment and the Nagul. It always looses to combo decks on turn 7. Seems like I'm the only one attacking the life points but not fast enough to eliminate a person.

[@monomanamaniac]

I think my favorite deck, Galea Kindler of Hope, is a great mix of tempo, mid range, Voltron aggro, and a touch of control for protection. I do run rhystic study and mystic remora, esper sentinel and smothering tithe, but I do so to create those pain points for my opponents. Do they give up their tempo to the very fast aggro deck, or do they give up a resource to me instead. I don't rely on them though, I certainly don't tutor for them, and I don't go out of my way to play them unless I think it's going to give me a decent return or eat important removal for something I actually care about.

[@SaltyCrocodile]

Great commentary! But it wont stop me playing from greedy cards lol. I embrace the archenemy when it comes to ramp and mana doublers. My Imoti deck is called Final Exam because its very much "Can you stop me before I spiral out of control?" Also, on the case of doublers, I think a lot of people are looking at them lens of them being win more in a 1v1 scenario. In CMD, having two extra opponents often means getting double tokens can be the breaking point to push you in the win.

[@deckdriverMTG]

Greedy cards can certainly be great when fully built around and leaning into their usefulness. This video is meant to help people build with more intention for this exact purpose. Thank you for your comment!

[@MFeyBlizzard]

As a midrange do nothing hater myself, I'm seen as spike platyer when as, once the deck is the decided and its within the correct table power, I go to focus around the most important threat to make him unable to pull a win out of his hat because I'm "not letting him play his cards". The same is applied when I try to change the pace of the game (again, within the power level of my group) as im either pressuring life total or turbostaxxing not letting the midrange bad pile accumulate advantage so i can win the lategame (its a stax deck for a reason). I'm not saying there's a correct way to play the game but I would like more reasoning and politicing when playing edh

[@floppyslot]

5:05 I love it when the opponent drops rhystic study or smothering tithe in brawl on arena. It tells me right away that they haven't built their deck for one on one and my chances of winning go up drastically.

[@Exile559]

My green agro deck doesn't care what you run. It's just gonna pound the board no matter what you do.

[@jweezy15able]

It was the moment you said "I play cEDH" that I knew you were going to say something that boiled down to "I need more competition in my casual games" while ignoring the keybword: Casual. Sometimes, its OK to just let people run a commander deck with 3 non-land cards and let them do dumb stuff.

[@deckdriverMTG]

I totally agree. After a video like this and seeing the feedback given by everyone. I think finding more consistent pods or even just playing cEDH more often can help me find more enjoyment. However sometimes other commanders just can't quite get it done in cEDH but are still interesting to me so i want to play them. Its a tough subject

[@Oz__MTG]

Well, not with the recent bans damn near everyone is rerouting from fast mana. Midrange/stax is one of those said styles players are now headed to. It may be frustrating, but now players have no choice but to build with and around it. We can’t have it all. 🤷🏻

[@deckdriverMTG]

Thank you to everyone who's watched the video! Your constant support means so much to me! We are SO CLOSE to 10k SUBS!

[@ashemabahumat4173]

O, I wanna ramp too. But my ramp leads to Reality Smasher and Apex Devastator. We are not the same.

[@dallasfavel4817]

Playing is like 20% of Magic The gathering commander, and winning is 10% of playing. Why would I focus on literally 2% of the holistic commander experience? Why would I want to win more than see people's decks pop off? This isn't arena, I don't have daily win challenges I need to complete....

[@jakebjackson5143]

Hot take inbound- I agree, everyone is do focused on card draw and ramp, what if that just gets shut down via stax? (Yes I'm a stax player at heart 😂)

[@tommieboi707]

Rhystic study and smothering tithe are super powerful cards in commander! You have 3 or more opponents that will be casting/drawing cards which will give you a ton of value every turn. Is it bad card design? Yes! Is it extremely powerful in commander? Absolutely!

[@Momo_pstat4]

I do agree on certain premises of the video, and found it a really interesting take on commander deck building. Recently my decks have been kinda trending up the mana curve and moving towards to midrange games, but i used to build decks to use a highly strict mana curve. My most “winningest” casual deck is a weird agro 4 color partner pair that turns card draw and my hand size into lethal commander damage. It follows a very strict turn 1-2 mana dork, first commander on turn 2-3, second on 3-4, and start swinging from there. It is efficient, it focuses on just making the commanders unblockable, and turns any big spell into a potential win. And this deck is a blast. What i have found is i am looking to play games with a lot more variance as of late. I like games that i can ramp a bunch, sling a ton of weird spells, and use an overwhelming amount of advantage and large spells to win games. The decks in theory are more powerful in the long game than my aggro decks, but fall short of the pace of play these aggro decks can make. Its just that the variance from turn to turn is what excites me more nowadays. And i wonder if thats a sentiment others feel, that instead of prioritizing the mana curve of a list, that the first priority being bombastic gameplay turns is a result of a gradual shift from optimization to jank. I also wonder if midrange inherently is the best strategy to house these janky deoptimized decks, as its easier to tell someone to play a card to slowly draw them their weird spells than it is to get someone to find the right balance of cheap draw, cheap setup pieces and also find places to pile that jank into a list that could conflict with the aforementioned mana curve

[@zakromero7795]

WTH is this book you wrote?

[@jeroenvaneekeren]

Interesting video, and it's interesting because you take a specific stand of course. The thing is though that a lot of it is about balance. "Midrange"/value cards in a balanced deck are the fuel that in my opinion make you resilient. But that's a whole different video ;)

[@AseAPS]

Just like in cEDH, the reason you play mid-range is that it will give you a stronger win attempt if you can grind longer. This only works if you're grinding for a reason.

[@deckdriverMTG]

Agreed, the good cards should help you GET to the end, rather than just "be good"

[@xdelbarrio]

The board game thing is so true, imagine getting incredibly salty because someone put the robber in a tile you controlled in catan, or went for a longest road to win, thats what I think when people get mad over interaction in edh or combos that depend on many pieces and permanents (mote of a tangent to the video but still), sure its a casual game but the objective is still to win

[@ArthurC7]

Good times when I had an Edgar Markov aggro deck and I was the archenemy everytime haha

[@VantaCube]

This is Carolina reaper level hot take. First, you need to define “do nothing decks”. Second, mid range is the most common because it has a balance of do something and jank. Most of those do nothing ramp/draw cards exist to facilitate doing something. The entire premise of EDH is midrange. Jank low and cEDH are outliers (in fact, cEDH is an oxymoron because EDH is not meant to be competitive). It sounds like you either want strictly cEDH or play with people who don’t use their cards. I’d say the worst EDH is high range power level. When I see decks like that, I just scoop and play with people who want to have fun.

[@OG_G4m3r]

I disagree with Rhystic/Smothering to only be good when you're already doing something successfully. These two cards make ANY deck that can run them better (outside of CEDH), regardless of the strategy/theme.

[@Hell_Majesty_]

Pauper EDH midrange is a lot different, in order for it to be effective it needs to be absurdly interactive and proactive. PDH stays winning.

[@abeybaebe2514]

Time to cast thoughtseize and lightning bolt Return to the old ways

[@DeluluDan]

I'll accept the card if it accelerates your game plan and has a lot of synergy rather than being slapped in because it's a "staple"

[@hellNo116]

i have a deck that if i exclude ashnod's altar costs 20 euros and it is drawing so many cards. but the deck is trying to win as fast as possible

[@SRMC23]

TL:DR for the last time, this is supposed to be a casual format, play something silly this isn't an LGS Competitive Event, you're not getting paid for tryharding on a multiplayer game.

[@deckdriverMTG]

Totally agree, but there is a large amount of people that like to win, play in higher power pods (that aren't cEDH) and enjoy the competitive nature of the card game. This is why a pre game conversation should be had. This video is the help others build better EDH decks with INTENTION, and I think some of my ideas here can do that. I think playing a casual game like this is going to have a large range of skill, effort, builds, and expectations for what they want out of a game. Despite this, people can find pods and strategies they enjoy playing, jank or no jank.

[@dominicdemarco871]

I think there’s a pretty big gap between “playing something silly” and “try hard competitive” Like deck driver said there’s a lot of people that want to play to win, because magic is inherently a game where you compete against other players, and I think if somebody wants to win a game of commander they shouldn’t be considered a try hard or be told to go play cEDH instead.

[@ericyang8474]

If the win con is predictable (aka I'm not pulling some two card combo at instant speed), the cards are legal in the format, or I'm not outright denying the person's ability to play (stax, mld), then personally I see the deck as fair game. Not saying power levels shouldn't be taken into consideration, but you should expect that in a game people are there to win.

[@weihaigoh9734]

Well, everyone plays the game to win the prize. I respect your points, and I agree on some points. Keep it on. EDH does not have Competitive or Casual, just you want to invest more moeny to win the game or just playing what you have.

[@SilverAphelion]

every time I do my combo I have fun and thats what is all about.

[@khathecleric]

Unfortunately that's not the game the other three don't agree. I do agree that tempo feels really good to do. My dino deck is just like that.

[@jean-paulbascelli1078]

Eh, I prefer playing the long game. I prefer removal, ramp, and advantage engines. I do have a strategy, a go long, more controlling, more card draw kind of game. I do play game ending plays, like cloning hullbreaker horror/ tidespout tyrant/nyxbloom ancient with extra turns etc.

[@NotBer]

I'm also not a fan of midrange because it promotes the "small bean" mentality and passive gameplay that plagues casual tables.

[@kingmob___5224]

Dudes been getting beat by Battle Cruisers latley.

[@deckdriverMTG]

Never once🤣

[@jacquesdespadas]

Sounds more like you’re just playing the wrong format.

[@archmeridian8334]

This video is kind of a mess.

[@friesen_m]

The whole vid is just telling me to burn my Blim chaos deck and play a cedh deck instead. Please treat me to a Mana Crypt, Mana Vault, legal Moxes, Jeweled Lotus, a full set of fetches, and a Dockside if you want to keep your word.

[@BingbongRecto]

Rhystic study and Smothering tithe are totally bad for the game

[@rickerpelding7606]

Personally, I'm not playing Commander so I can win on turn 6 or 7.

[@maxspecs]

Agreed. If you win on turn 3 or 4, you can get more games of commander in!

[@cesargalvez1914]

My opinion is that all cards are good if you have a cool synergy and you will have fun playing but, if the cards were just added for the hype o just because with no reason, then the deck needs to be re-evaluated. Why tithes if you don’t have cards to play or abilities to activate? Why rhystic if you have hand size and you will discard?, i really like to have fun rather than be winning, and my friends on the table can be a bit controlled or can laugh with me when i ask them if they’re payin hehe.

[@crazydeadperson]

I believe I understand your thoughts but using the words midrange and tempo here don't make sense. For example the way you described muldrotha sounds like a good midrange deck made by someone with a good understanding of a mana curve. The traditional idea of a tempo deck doesn't really work with commander using early threats with cheap removal to kill your opponents before they can stabilize. 1 for 1ing yourself works in a 1v1 format but isn't good enough with 3 opponents. The only kind of tempo deck that can really work in commander is something akin to hate bears or death and taxes but then you are getting really close to stax and may just be hated out for existing

[@SquirrelDash]

Brother... I don't think commander is for you

[@deckdriverMTG]

You might be right, but it's so addicting

[@Magnafiend]

There's so much wrong with this take. First off you're not explaining midrange decks, you're describing just greedy decks that play solitaire. Midrange is fine, especially since it usually starts pressuring turns 4-5 with some early ramp (1-2 drops) and start outvaluing the aggro player or dealing with pressuring the combo player. My Nyelith deck is a great example of this, the deck generally curves out at 4-5 with a small handful off 6-7 drops meant push things just over the edge if need be, and I'm usually getting commander out turn 3 and then pressuring with combat if I havent already. What you're describing is decks that are just synergy piles that don't actually care about the other players at the table. And the best way to deal with them? Run the aggro or control decks, run interaction, run ways to stop their value engines and force them to factor in other players at the table. Run the things that are "looked down upon" (which honestly with experienced players no, they're not really looked down upon that much. What IS looked down upon usually is just throwing a 2 card infinite in a random deck so the consistency is all over the place, then complaining about people focusing you out of the game every time because they don't know if or when that combo is going to drop). Perfect commander for this is the meld Mishra from Brother's War. Swarm with small evasive creatures, drain the table for the number of attacking creatures, if they don't handle you they lose.

[@bobby5913]

can you point to an example tempo decklist for reference?

[@AP-wc1fn]

My thoughts are a little all over the place but hopefully I can create some discussion or help you reflect and improve for future videos. The "im going to wait for my opponents to do something so I can get advantage" point kinda falls flat when the things they are doing are normal game actions. People HAVE to cast spells to progress their own gameplan or pay the tax and they are forced to draw at least 1 card a turn or pay the tax. Getting either of these out turn 3 means that removal needs to be applied immediately or people need to start paying the tax, else you will lose to the card/mana advantage of a well built deck. Doesn't matter how aggro your deck is its simply not winning on turn 4-5 without casting more spells or having fast mana (in which case someone could have a rhystic turn 1 with mana crypt so the argument still holds). This is a big difference vs a card like doubling season or parallel lives. Those are cards which literally do nothing without another card. These are the cards you are really talking about and covering them both in the same video muddies the waters. Honestly it sounds like you are playing against people with bad decks. Any half decent deck will take the cards given with rhystic and protect themselves from aggro, or take the mana from smothering tithe and board wipe and then be in a fantastic spot coming up to turn 4-5. Xyris is also a bad example because he is his own card draw engine meaning any pump spell turns into cards so its way more efficient than rhystic study. And token making isn't his main theme either because you are more likely to win via commander damage than real damage anyways. Also that snapshot of the most common cards in decks on edhrec at 9:13 is badly placed because you have it pop up on the line "but you still see these cards in so many decks". Like no shit. 4 of the most versatile removal spells, the best protection spell in the most common color along with the best protection artifacts, 6 two mana ramp spells and 2 one mana dorks. While editing this I would have only put up smothering and rhystic on screen since they are the only two you are even making a point about. I agree with the overall point that yes players should optimize their strategy and deckbuilding before adding expensive cards that don't necessarily fit the theme or win more cards that don't work without their commander in play or 2 other cards to support it.

[@AP-wc1fn]

Rewatched the video. I hope you find a more skilled pod because control, aggro and combo are all deck types I regularly play against. Not to mention tempo deck is just a fancy way of saying midrange. A greedy deck is just a badly built deck.

[@neon4635]

This is a bizarre take to me. Like, yeah, win more cards kinda suck but why are you upset with people playing bad cards against you? You get to win every game against them and teach them to stop being so greedy!

[@dave_8600]

Not sure you understand what midrange is…sounds more like you hate battle cruisers or pillow fort

[@Ghost-Toast819]

In defense of parrallel lives in a xyris deck. It all depends on what you are doing with xyris. If you play perexian alter or even better a cryptology rite and earthcraft (the latter is pretty pricey but it’s an option) then xyris can be used to make snakes that tap for any color mana and the more you have the more you have to pump into a fireball, or a storm win or, a pseudo storm reiterate lightning chain. There a lot of reasons to want more tokens when xyris really isn’t exclusively a combat tricks deck but also a very effective engine for various strategies.

[@deckdriverMTG]

Agreed, the video mostly is about the fact you should have this intention when playing these cards. If your goal is going wide to have payoffs like that then doubling tokens works. In that example the difference of 4 mana into a trick vs doubling tokens wouldn't get me much so I don't run it. Thank you for your comment!

[@Ghost-Toast819]

@@deckdriverMTG Hey man I’m loving the content it’s both respectful and informative and since I’ve watched your stuff I’ve become a much better player and started having a lot more fun. Keep up the good work.

[@maxspecs]

Just run your deck and do combo, it’s not that hard guys.

[@NeoChromer]

I have a Shilgengar and Ur Dragon deck.. and I know what you mean the gameplay is do nothing for 5-6 turns and then win.. at least that is how my games are going. I dont think I can make those decks faster anyhow

[@RaisinBrin]

I play a lot of 5 drops in my Ur Dragon list and I found that it turns any turn 1 or 2 ramp into a potential turn 3 or 4 dragon depending on the ramp...its pretty focused on just trying to cast a dragon every turn regardless of my opponents boards and I've found that just being highly focused in like that isn't something most players are ready for speed-or-power-wise

[@Yangblaze11]

Why did you put hakbal as your example for simic when hakbal decks are aggressive?

[@abeybaebe2514]

It kills people fr

[@escadora2206]

i prefer games which go 8-12 turns. under 8 turn wins are imop not fun :(

[@MisterWebb]

You lost me at 2:04 Whatever reason is never good enough to try to win the game in earnest

[@enfe8858]

I dislike you using the words "Midrange" and "tempo" cause they are already used common terms in magic. You got a good argument there but it becomes weaker if you mix up different game concepts. Tempo is not an archetype it is part of the games core mechanics. Bounce Spells and spot removal for example are there to generate tempo by removing board presence although trading 1 for 1 which nets you card disadvantage in multiplayer. On the other hand Rampant growth lets you drop an additional land for turn = you are getting more mana faster = tempo Tempo is more like an invisible resource which is not easy to count. It correlates with each other core mechanic like mana generation, board presence, life totals, etc. Gaining 60 life does not win you the game but if your opponents can only deal 20d/turn you survive 5 rounds while you can take out two players at same speed. Midrange is an archetype and aims to drop highly efficient plays on each of its turn accumulating Value and Tempo over time until it wins the game. It generates enough tempo to outpace Control-Decks while also being able to control Aggro-Decks.