What's so bad about immediately winning the game? | Casual Compliance | Episode 15

[@Kjos_jax]

I agree with Rosewater, Gavin, and RG himself who stated that no two cards should win the game together and no card should say "you win" on them. What I don't get is if they all feel this way, then how do cards continue to get printed that don't align with that philosophy?

[@KrakenWall]

I actually agree with gramps on this one, while this is a boring win con, it could be unbanned but id either want to know its in the deck or it would make for a feels bad game (hi rule 0). That being said its also the same reason id tell people if i had a Thassa's Oracle in a deck outside of Cedh, like a merfolk deck or a blue devotion deck. @13:35 the easiest way to shortcutting the all color creature and land at the same time is if you have any creature on the field and Leyline of the Guildpact. @27:35 This is a great point, one thing i hope wotc does do with the commander panel is give an "example" pregame discussion with things like "What style of deck are you playing" "How do you plan on winning (combat, combo, or alt win con)" "If your winning with an alt win con, does it have build up or come out quickly" Honestly to fix this would be as easy as putting it on an enchantment that checks at upkeep to give even sorcery speed removal a chance to fight back. There are ways to accelerate that (Obeka, splitter of seconds/ second sunrise effects/ flash effects) but those make it feel more earned as a combo instead of a single card out of nowhere. Also, while we know what card the episode is about, I liked the wheel to see your reaction on how excited Gramps was to see whatever card it was as it was spun.

[@wong40k42]

The moment they say just need 2 cards to win, which was actually three if you count the spell itself, my mind immediately went to the Thassa's Oracle combo.

[@calsonic2272]

I need to go back through all the Episodes and build a deck of cards that Gramps dislikes

[@casualcompliance]

Jokes on you, you can’t play 99 sol rings

[@user-pr6jx5hz9m]

Great video! Where in australia are you guys based? I think Coalition Victory is an easy unban as compared to many 2 card infinites/win conditions like Thassas, Exquisite Blood, Niv-Mizzet Visionary and so many more Coaltion Victory requires AT LEAST 3 cards and is very susceptible to removal/countering at a very high mana cost. If you want to make casual commander more casual then just restrict all 1 mana instant speed tutors to CEDH as these are the ones that pull the win cons out of nowhere with no time to respond (and at least one turn earlier due to using left over mana from the previous turn).

[@Key-ny8ny]

This is one reason I didn't like the former RC. Coalition Victory was fine to ban during EDH era, but since it became Commander and power creep cards that have came out since, this should have been unbanned. One of the easiest argument to unban it is the fact that Thassa's oracle isn't banned. It's a 2 card combo that can be played earlier and win. While Coalition Victory is 1 card, it still requires all the lands and at least 1 creature + the mana cost. Even if you shortcut it with leyline of the guildpact and fist of suns, you still require a creature which makes this a turn 5, 4 card combo. Second reason is it's easy to disrupt. As you mentioned you can just removal creatures or destroy lands. There's plenty of instant speed removal like generous gift, beast within, chaos warp, and anguished unmaking. Also to note with the 1st argument. The former RC said "steering folks away from this kind of experience", whats the difference between winning on turn 5-8 with coalition victory with all the setup, vs someone doing infinite mana, turns, combat phase, draws, creatures with less or the same amount of cards?

[@leadpaintchips9461]

The problem I have with the former RC is that this banning is an example of their 'signposting' philosophy. They assume that by banning Coalition Victory that they're sending a clear message that having win conditions that come out of nowhere is not acceptable for general play. There's no 'tell' for a Coalition Victory, because what it needs is a play pattern that's natural for a 5 color deck. 'Signposting' is a stupid idea. It's them trying to shortcut doing the actual work that is needed to make and upkeep a ban list for an eternal format. There was a lot of signs that pretty much everyone on the RC didn't really wanna be there because they didn't wanna deal with the issues that came with their position.

[@Alduin-di5wb]

Ok but how is this different from a 3 card infinite combo, 2 if you aren't counting your commander as a card in the combo with those combos still being legal

[@michaelberresford4291]

I play Prismatic bridge but only with cards from Kaldheim set and pre cons.

[@casualcompliance]

Oh you’re building a Prismatic Bridge to flavour town, that I can get behind

[@michaelberresford4291]

@casualcompliance I bought the whole set of Kaldheim, and just chose to build decks exclusively using those cards, including secret lair. Prismatic bridge isn't super strong with that restriction but it's fun, good for a mid tempo game.

[@paniago82]

If you are building for Coalition Victory you have a bad 5 colour combo deck, if you are just playing it on any 5 colour deck it will be a dead card in most situations. The question is more are combos Ok or not in commander. It is just wild for me that you guys play Isochron Scepter + Dramatic Reversal, something that can go infinite turn 3 pretty easy but Coalition Victory is too much xD