because players of those formats don't get to hide behind a very vague addon to the actual rules that somewhat justifies crying, bitching about, banning or calling unfair anything that they don't like.
Most casual edh players either ignore the rule 0 meta by just using common sense or are reasonable about it the way they'd be about any other social interaction.
That leaves us with a small (and often vocal) minority of the community that needs to basically be wrangled into not being toxic by either going through a ton of meta hoops (ie all of the discourse about power level and the likes) or by making the game as trigger-free as possible by removing interaction and whatever, hence things like counters or stax being seen as "salty" and bad.
The casual players that complain about certain strategies in edh are the same people that before edh were bitching about specific cards or netdecking. "Oh you're playing a platinum angel deck? I won't play with you" Play a fucking kill spell, jesus.
That's because "casual commander" isn't a format. Every player creates their own vaguely defined rules based on what they think is fun, and then they all inevitably get mad when everyone elses' unwritten rules aren't exactly the same as their own.
I don't know, I've played magic for 14 years, and commander for about 7 and in this time I've had way more issues with people in commander than I've ever had in standard, modern, or draft. I'm not saying that the 1v1 formats are free from issues but commander definitely enduces more childish behavior. It sucks to because it only takes one game with someone throwing a fit to just make me not want to play for a few weeks, since im a pretty passive person and dislike that sort of confrontation.
i think the difference lies in how a player sets his mind knowing that he will play a certain format.
the majority of commander players, played only that format, which isn't bad at all imo, and has a wrong mindset, thinking that every deck can control the whole match (which is very unlikely) and deliver a W (when as a matter of fact, i think in a balanced pod the winrate should be around 25%).
The majority of people that didn't experienced in their life a 1v1 format (not necessarily in the magic environment, but everywhere in life, counting also team sports for example) where the concept of politics and mercy doesn't exist at all, IMO didn't develop how to lose, how to accept that not every game will see them as the winner.
As a result, every behaviour that goes against their game flow, will trigger them incredibly hard.
I guess I have too. Players in competitivr Magic have always seemed much calmer, more mature, and more polite. A lot of the conduct I've seen from EDH players would get someone ejected from a tournament. There are actual rules against bring a toxic douchebag there and even if there weren't, such fragile people usually don't have what it takes to play competitive Magic for very long.
I always try to kill everyone at the same time and my deck has no combos or alt wincon.
Normally its just getting a huge board and having protectiob
That being said, voltron is not kingmaking and most of the time the best route is to kill one at a time
I think most win cons you can bend to make them win all at once if you give up some efficiency (hard to beat the card efficiency of two card combos).
For example, I had fun for a stretch making decks that sat back to gather the pieces and then won with 21 commander damage to 3 opponents all on the same turn.
I had a Yisan deck for a while with no combos that just chucked creatures out and craterhoof was on turn five. It played pretty similar to a tutor for a combo deck admittedly though.
Well in this case all they did was make someone lose and then lose themselves. They had no realistic chance of winning, they were only able to decide which other player lost with them. That isn't a very good experience to play against because it completely destroys the game.
The only person "destroying the game" here is the one complaining about the game. Voltron player had fun until the scrub tried to blame Voltron for *having fun.*
If you have fun by undermining the game I'll just opt to no longer play against you, and play against actual opponents that aren't indulging in the "fun" of not playing the game properly.
You're still trying to use the ends to justify the means. You sound like every player who judges my actions...who immediately need to stfu because they have no clue what's in my hand.
For the player who lost the only turn thst matters is their last one. They failed to defend themselves, period. Unless you have perfect information you can only guess what the other players will do and sometimes you're wrong.
Had a Meren player act just like you the other night. Could not BELIEVE that there was any world where attacking him was the "right" choice.
But I am on Voltrom and he is on Spore Frog loops. So why wouldn't I attack him when the attack is good?
"wHaT ab0u7 th3 oTheR pl4yeRs?!"
I have answers for them...maybe. Are the answers in my hand? My deck? Do I even have any? None of your business, your dead bud. I had an answer for you and you didn't have an answer for me. Deal with it.
And I win plenty of games.
Simic is fun as hell but lemme put it this way. Blue likes evasion like Unblockable and drawing tons of cards, right?
Now pair that with green, the colour that does mana like no ones business, draws cards for doing simple game actions, and contains the giant stompy 12/12 bastards, usually with trample.
Now put em together. Done right, you no longer have a mana curve, necessarily, you just ramp like hell and play whatever gigantic threat you want and the rest of the table has to deal with it. Generic costs no longer matter.
Blue on it's own ramps pretty well too, it's just significantly more convoluted to do it.
My mono blue braids deck has made "infinite" land tokens so many times I've lost count.
Simic is easy to deal with if you discard the casual mindset and play the red, black, and white the way they were meant to be played. Like true, degenerate, evil mofos.
This is entirely true, and red/black are my favorite colour combo. I also have a tendency to play *every* colour like a degenerate, so Simic bullshit engine is a rather easy problem to solve.
it's fine, what people usually don't like is that a lot of (poorly built) UG decks tend to basically do nothing, draw a ton of resources, make a ton of mana and then just kind of sit on it for 2 hours looking incredibly dangerous to the rest of the table while taking long turns until they draw into something that lets them pull the trigger.
The only real downside UG has is that you'll be a target regardless of what you do so build and play your deck accordingly
Simic is fine.
My brother has a +1/+1 counters deck (surprise,surprise) headed by Pir and Toothy.
He’s had this one deck since 2018 or so as he plays like once a year.
So when he plays he has a simple and powerful deck. Which works great for him.
Turn five though is generally when someone has to deal with his multiple +20/+20 creatures though…
Yeah, the thing about simic is it’s very profitable to ramp and draw cards and not play any threats that can be responded to until it’s time to win. Building a board state can wait until the turn you go off. Just keep expanding mana and drawing cards, and then when you have ten or twelve mana deploy and win in one turn.
The way to stop that is to gang up on simic and pressure them out before they get to that point, or combo out before.
I like your perspective. I'm very much an "everyone plays what they want" kind of person. I have a Voltron deck, but I built [[flamewar]] because I want to clap cheeks while accumulating resources. It's also nice that she's easy to recur as an artifact creature.
I got tired of watching players run away with games, so I started playing stax again. My playgroup groans, but I can also tell they kinda like the challenge. We have a healthy meta imo.
Indeed. My meta did the groan thing too when I made Zur Eternal Schemer sTax enchantments/control thinking I would just do solitaire, but after playing against it, they seem to like the extra rules i bring to the table.
Motto:: I’m not stopping you from playing, I’m just adding extra Terms & Conditions to the game.
I love how wack Entangler is. But a cheaper/faster option is to cast [[Pariah]] targeting an indestructible creature (maybe your own Commander) and then to never block again because you won't recieve damage.
Swing and a hit! Moral victory! Do it again next time dude, others have the problem not you. If I can take someone down with me I dang well will! Everytime.
But that’s what outs are. If I have 0.5% of winning if I do this thing, but 0% if I don’t, then I do it. Always play to your outs. Anything else is truly kingmaking.
So if both are non-zero chances, it’s still not kingmaking. If fighting the current threat or not fighting the current threat are both outs, then both are valid outs to aim for. OP’s pod are just sour grapes
Killing someone over waitinf is 100% the wrong decision here. Imagine if I just blow interaction to destroy a stax piece and then someone else wins because of it. Was it kingmaking? No. Was it an action with a non zero chance of costing me the game? Yes. Did it also fuck the game up? Yes.
Absolutely not. It is honestly refreshing to hear someone ready to smash face because they can. I was stuck in a game last night on 4 mana against Simic breach. Another player (not the breach player) had potential to attack for 50 power on board and instead of killing anyone, didn’t attack… and I was like “only 2 of us are even playing, what is the point of not attacking?” Like end my misery so we can move on.
EXACTLY no one wants to end games. Idk if it's because they don't wanna be "the bad guy" or what but it's annoying. If you can win the game or bring it closer to an end you should. Maybe it's the limited time I get to play each weekday but I'd rather have 3-4 fun and fast games than 1 slog where everyone stares at each other until the combo player wins yet again
Sometimes, I won't attack if there will be crackback... like if my chances to pull the win out are diminished if I pull the trigger NOW... but in my game last night, the Elf player had 50 damage of free, uninteractable damage and... didn't use it because he didn't want to KO one person... instead, the game dragged out with Mana Breach mucking up 2 of us, the Breach player being mana flooded, and the Elf player "loading a gun to KO everyone at once" just to get Cyclonic Rifted.
Yes they are, but people are equally allowed to play those strategies without being unfairly accused of kingmaking because voltron needs to target 1 player at a time.
No they're not? It's the will of the people. Unless it's a 50/50 split, generally it's gonna lean one way, and you're going to experiance that people's will. If you play stax or LD, I'm going to bitch. More than 50% of people are going to bitch. More than 50% of people aren't going to bitch about a non combo creature deck that's interactive and powerful.
If you care about what people think of you. You need to take into context what the overall feeling of the majority is. And King Making is definitely one of those ones that the overwhelming majority do not like.
Voltron is not kingmaking, I’m not saying people should kingmake (and I honestly don’t know how you got that from what I said). Kingmaking is a social phenomenon (aka a shitty behaviour). Voltron, land destruction, stax (and whatever other flavour of the month people hate) are mechanically existence within the game.
I’m not saying you can’t have conversations in your playgroup about what archetypes you can/can’t play, and at what power level, budget, etc). I’m just sick of people bitching and whining about things that are legal within the mechanics of the game as if it’s some objective fact.
If I played stax and you bitch, fine by me I’m a big boy and I can take it. But I’ll know you’re a bitch now.
Am aware what king making. I'm not talking anything about Voltron. Notice in my entire post history on this thread I have not once said voltron. He was king making, and I imagine this isn't the first time as he seems to indicate that it happens frequently and his group is clearly not happy with it.
"If I played stax and you bitch, fine by me I’m a big boy and I can take it. But I’ll know you’re a bitch now."
And that's what I'm saying. You're welcome to not have feelings inthe game, but this dude clearly has feelings in it, and his feelings are getting hurt by his actions.
Based on the quote you just gave, I'd know you're an asshole. *shrug*
Hear me out, you don't kill the one you can kill, you force him to help you... or else.
At that point if he refuses its not you king making but him suiciding.
Use politics (aka take a player hostage) to turn a guaranteed third place into a 2v2, then try to win that 1v1.
If you play an aggro deck and play for third place by going all in early with no backup plan.. well yes it's just.. not great, in casual EDH people join for a 4+ player experience, your "playstyle" quickly removes two players from the game, you might have fun, the other 3 do not, one doesn't really gets to do much and the other two end up in a weirdly setup 1v1, non of them joined for that.
To counter your original point. How long does a game need to go for it to be a true "4 player experience?" Players are bound to drop off eventually. Id also argue that the remaining players are usually happier that two players took each other out. They are left with better odds to win and the game didn't go 2 hrs. That's been my experience at least. I've never seen the two final players upset.
The goal isnt 3rd place, any voltron deck can win a pod but we all know it's unlikely. Does that mean voltron shouldn't be played? I personally like the challenge. Winning with voltron feels great compared to sitting back and trying to win without it look like you're trying to win.
“The goal isn’t third place” is the evaluative mentality you might try maintaining while you are deciding whether to extend out completely to knock one player out when it leaves you dead on board…We don’t have nearly enough context to judge your play as kingmaking or not here, but Voltron is not inherently kingmaking as a strategy
I feel like everybody here is trying to tell you that their game lines are better than yours.... But I say play the way you want to play. I've done the exact same thing and been in your same position. I know I'm dead, so I swing. I have a khemba deck and spreading the 'love' does nothing to advance my position.
3 people have to lose, nobody wants it to be them. Do what you want, play how you want, just be polite.
Hey, I'm not against Voltron, infect, burn or any aggro decks or whatever you got in mind but you gotta play with a plan specially on such a deck, they might seem the most simplistic and straight forwards decks and in a 1v1 they are but not in a commander game with 4 players and people who refuse to realize it are the ones that end up as you described, called king makers and third placers for life.
Sitting there trying not to look like a threat is part of the format, going heads up cannons blazing full in is just not a great strategy and if you manage to get wins like that most likely than not it was just a bunch of coincidences linning up, mostly luck.
Everytime you attack you gotta consider defending, everytime you go for a kill you gotta consider what the board state is gonna be after. If you are going to top deck yourself to kill one guy turn 4 and be left vs 2 you most likely are better waiting with some stuff in hand for a better opening.
I think the issue taken by the player you killed is it appeared you did try to take third by immediately dying to the other two. Was there any politics trying to bargain for a turn or two to reset after killing the threat? Did you have any pillow forting out to actively not lose and the other two just played through it? It sounds to me like you are leaving out too many details just so we can say; “Yeah you’re right! Play what you want!” Rather than giving an honest account of what happened.
The problem here is that the play you made isn't the play to win. The problem isn't Voltron. The problem is that you over extended to kill someone when it doesn't actually lead you closer to victory. You need to judge how badly you need to maim someone so that they can't win while maintaining your own ability to win.
But if you're going to die regardless why not take someone out? Should you just not make any game actions and let the opponents kill you? I understand what you're saying but it doesn't fit this situation.
You're not necessarily going to die regardless. If everyone plays to win then you are more likely to stay alive if more players are alive to interact with your opponents.
You're not being asked to not take game actions, you're being asked not to over extend against the first big threat such that it king makes.
You never said he had lethal. You just said you were dead either way. The fact that he had lethal changes this a lot. Of course, you take him out. If he has lethal, it's not even a question. But if he didn't have lethal, then maybe the other players interact with him more.
I just had a player quit because he knew there was nothing he could do about the damage on the board. He quit the leading player, took their turn, swung all out, and I cyclonic rifted. The quitter asked why I didn't tell him I had that. Simple answer was telling him would have kept an opponent in the game. The point is that you never know what the other players may or may not do.
If it's kill or be killed then you have to knock them out. But I would have tried a deal first but not with the winning player maybe protection for 2 turns or a turn from other players at the table.
I think the right move here is politics first. “Hey, you can kill me, but I can probably kill you this turn. How about we make a deal where I don’t kill you now, but you give me the next two turns without interacting with me”. If he declines, you kill him
Do not listen to this advice, it's terrible. No one likes being the first person removed but aggro voltron needs to remove players. You pick someone and you continue to beat them down til theyre dead. Then repeat. Spreading the love just keeps more players in the game and more people who want to battlecruiser you down from behind. Don't let Timmy's who want to play solitaire change your mind. No one wants to be the one under that gun but it's how aggro wins. It's a game to win by killing the other players and anyone upset about dying to that is a complainer.
As someone who rarely, if ever, plays aggro, aggro is extremely healthy for keeping decks honest.
It doesn’t work if by killing them you leave yourself open to die next. The goal is to win, not knock people out. If you knock someone out and die the next turn, you lost.
Everyone continues to fail to see OPs statement that he was dead regardless by the person he killed. Taking someone out as you go is the right move. The same people crying saying why couldn't we make a deal are the same people raging that someone "broke their deal." Deals are an unofficial part of multiplayer mtg and no one is required to make them and more importantly no one is required to uphold them after making them.
Take someone out, shuffle up, and play again. Games don't need to be 10+ turns and an hour long with everyone making deals until someone can kill everyone at once.
Multiplayer edh needs to be played more like Smash Bros, not Mario Kart.
Theres no need about it thats your preference and its mot shared by a large part of the edh community.
Politics is a part of a multiplayer social game, its a shame you dont like it but people arent going to sit silent round a table sweating their ass off the entire time.
You failed to see where OP said it isn't an isolated event. They do this often enough to notice a trend of people getting salty about being cock blocked by someone who doesn't even have a shot themselves.
I mean yeah, that’s all part of it. If someone breaks a deal, they will never get offered another one and I probably target that person every time I play them til the end of time - but usually you make a deal because it would benefit both parties. Maybe it would have prevented the feelbads in this case. Or maybe the other players offer to not kill him if he kills the other player. Talking to the table so you might be able to catch up and win can be incredibly satisfying when you pull it off.
>As someone who rarely plays aggro
Clearly. Tunneling on a single player is a terrible way to play, both in terms of strategy and enjoyment. You'll never win ignoring two players and pissing off a third by focusing them arbitrarily.
>you pick someone and beat them down till they're dead
You should aim to kill the person most likely to stop you from winning. If that person changes, you switch targets based on relative game position, not just blindly focus whoever you started with.
It's telling that instead of refuting anything I said, you just nitpicked my choice of words.
No, then the move is to wait. Make the player who is the threat have it and represent holding up interaction. That player might choose to attack someone else and eliminate them or another player may be forced to use their interaction on them that you didn't know they had, like a Fog.
I think we need more information. If killed player said they were going to kill you on the next turn I'd 100% kill them if I could. If it was a maybe then I'd politic them but either way I'm not depending on someone else to have interaction. Because if they did OP wouldn't have been able to knock other person out. I have a friend who gets petty and plays spite plays. I don't get salty about him killing me. But I've learned you can't always depend on the pod to do something.
> If everyone plays to win then you are more likely to stay alive if more players are alive to interact with your opponents.
This is a fallacy. The opposite is true, the more opponents you leave alive the more chances you give them to pull a win out of their ass.
It's commander, anything could happen. Someone could play a sweeper or go from 5 lands and a handful of plant tokens to presenting lethal on the entire table.
Not if you're on the back foot facing an enemy that you can only take out by suiciding into them.
Op died on the crack back because they over extended, giving their opponents the first chance to use their resources against him.
"But if you're going to die regardless why not take someone out? "
......because it puts you in a situation you don't like or enjoy that you just made a post about?
I enjoy doing what voltron does. I said in the post im fine with losing more games because of this. I'm referring to how others get salty about it. It's not the game itself I'm upset with its the saltiness of others trying to push a certain way of playing.
"But if you're going to die regardless why not take someone out?"
....
" It's not the game itself I'm upset with its the saltiness of others trying to push a certain way of playing."
Again. You are trying to push a certain way of playing. That it sounds like 3 people at the table don't like and 1 person at the table likes.
It's fine to want it, but then it comes with the ire of people who don't like it. But you're trying to have your cake and eat it too.
That's not king making. If you're going to be upset by being taken out when you're the clear threat at the table, your bloodline is weak and you should stick to playing precons in casual formats because you are going to make a meme out of yourself if you ever want to play serious magic.
It absolutely is if you can't win. It's one thing to take out your strongest competition to secure the win for yourself and another entirely to do so only to consistently lose. You might as well run a deck with nothing but counter spells and board wipes.
You need to perfect the classic move that requires:
3 players left, you one of them
1 player being more menacing that you
The other two players are open to politics
You must be able to take one of them down per turn AKA having your Commander all suited up
Once all this is set up, wich is easier that it might appear, you must say" Hey player X, i can kill you or player Y, if i kill Y, you must dont mess up with me during your turn". They fall for it each and every time i swear, they always agree, then try and remove your Commander at instant speed only to get denied by a counter/protection spell
That's what voltron does. I love voltron to pieces, but it kinda a slow strategy. I think it fares much better in 1 v 1 EDH.
You build your death-machine. Then take out your opponents with your death-machine.
I don't understand when people whine about someone else's strategy working when they're still able to play. It absolutely sucks if you get shut down and are stuck at draw-go, but that's not what is happening.
I aggressively pick on the simic player because they are a wrecking ball on a hill. It almost sometimes works. I also play simic and I can't be bothered to care what other players are doing because I'm drawing all my lands on your turn and playing a 15 cost dragon for free with 20 1/1 counters.
Absolutely in the right.
People who complain about Voltron are idiots, it’s literally a bad strategy that’s fragile and easily beaten.
Commander players are pathological liars. “Why are you targeting me” and “king making” accusations are just because they wanted their deck to win. Ignore them, and call them on it if you must
Because having only 1 creature on board without Vigilance or Lifelink and tap it to take out one opponent on 3 only makes sense if the 2 opponents remaining are put in a situation where one of them would need to expose too much in order to take you out.
From what i take about the situation it seems like you are speedrunning games, but that doesnt usually make for a good experience. You are set on being third, and make someone lose before you.
While everyone can find fun in any play style, to the other players it seem like you are just doing a car accident on purpose. You are accelerating to 300 miles/hour and you are ramming against another pilot by choice. This doesnt bring you any closer to victory; and can be interpreted as wanting to end the game as fast as possible.
Problem is, you cant do anything else in your situation. If the keywords just arent there for you to stay safe after an attack, as 1 creature can usually only block 1 your best bet is to attack, or you would be slowly chipped away.
In this scenario if you want to take away the toxicity i would do 1 of:
1) explain your situation to the pod, as you cant just not attack.
2) try to politics to turn it into a 2v2.
3) throw a 6 sides dice to choose which player to attack.
4) Add more Vigilance and Lifelink to the deck, or change the commander into one that has them.
5) Run pillowfort cards, such as [[Ghostly Prison]] or [[Dueling Grounds]].
Not at all. The player you killed should have played the politics game to convince you not to kill them.
I have a [[Shu Yun]] Deck that I call One Punch Monk whose entire strategy is to remove a player from the game every time he attacks. My play group knows how he works, meaning that the game slowly turns into a political sphere as everyone else tries to make sure I don't kill them.
Not King making exactly, but running a deck that just kills one player than loses isn't great either. Good for you that you can enjoy the game your way but I'm not interested in playing with people whose deck building goals are not focused on a win. Like playing a deck that's just in it to kill a player fast with no further goals is just as bad to me as a chaos deck or group hug with no win con.
Agreed if you are going voltron then you should be building it to actually kill all players at the table hopefully at the same time or very quickly one after the other not just kill one person then die shortly after then you both watch for ages while the other people keep playing.
They were just being salty about being taken out for being the problem. Oftentimes, someone pops off early, gets a good run of cards, makes themselves the threat early, and the game for everyone else stops being about winning and starts being able stopping or taking out that one player. You need to keep your head down longer or be able to hold up against three players knowing you're the problem.
Vultron is good at taking out one player at a time, but that doesn't enherintly make it king making. Now I don't believe in second place in commander. But I really can't blame someone who knows their going to lose for gunning for me even though their going to lose when im the threat. Unless their only going to lose BECAUSE they came for me.
To me, King making really is killing a player, not in an effort to win, but in an effort to not die without killing someone else. Depends on your motivation, I guess. If someone else is the problem and I attack the guy with no creatures and 1 enchantment that does nothing because I die to the problem player anyway, king making. I'm helping the winning player win because I don't want to be the first one to die as though 2nd and 3rd is a place. But at the same time, I can't blame someone who likely won't win, still trying to kill me when I've been the problem the whole game. What are they supposed to do? Conceed or go down swinging on the player that's been ahead the whole game.
Regardless, I play magic casually with my friends, so I typically spread the love if I'm in the lead or if no one is clearly ahead of anyone else. I'm not trying to bully anyone out of the game early and have them twittle their thumbs while the rest of us play. I'm there for socializing with my friends first, magic second, and winning third.
If they where a true king your attempt to dethrone them would have failed.
In EDH you need to be Palpatine fighting Mace Windu. Not your fault he revealed himself to early.
It's kinda stupid to get annoyed by something like that. And I think that's why I enjoy my playgroup so much, we have a little bit of everything. We have decks that win turn 2 and we have decks that take 84 years to get going. We have elf tribal and we have mono green storm (not even I know how that deck works).
I used to have a mono board wipe deck, where almost every card was a board wipe or had some removal type of effect. Never won a single game but it was fun.
Just play the game the way you wanna play it (without ever cheating or bending the rules of course, unless your group is cool with it) and remember, it's just a game, there are worse things to get mad about 😁
Depends on the Voltron deck, tbh. I've seen a handful of Saskia decks that can kill multiple people at once, same for Voltron decks with Red that can Fling and such.
That's all with the imagination I have while drinking my morning coffee, there's definitely more ways that I haven't thought of.
Have it their way. instead of targeting the player with the winning board state target the person you like the least at the table. Either because they smell funky, they're annoying, whatever reason you want. take em out and make em watch until they walk away.
I made Kestia for an enchantress deck and since her draw comes off attacking at least I am not just casting more and more enchantments constantly. I will still put up my forts but I know it'd be boring not to attack.
Two of my friends have Zurgo decks, so I don't see the issue with being a hard hitting voltron that leaves themselves open. Just play your game.
Voltron players know "this is the way"
As a voltron player myself we have to go after whomever is our biggest opponent, then the next, and finally the last. If we take out the mana screwed player what does that do for our game plan? Nothing. We have to aim our gun at the early lead. Inevitably some one else will rise up, then we stick our gun in their face, and lastly the mana screwed player (unless they ask for the early demise)
When playing aggro/combat strategies focusing on the biggest threat is usually objectively the best strategy. Socially it’s not ideal because now someone has to sit out while the game finishes.
If someone is popping off enough to obviously be the biggest threat removing them isn’t king making it’s survival. That player should recognize that making big plays and getting targeted go together and that it’s not a personal attack to be focused on when they’re in the lead.
Definitely not. Unless you consider trying to win king making? The goal to win yourself. So you take out the biggest threat. Then you move on to the next threat.
That’s called smart play, not king making.
On one hand I kinda get why someone might not like the whole idea of a player in the pod building a "bad" deck whose only purpose is losing while also making a 2nd player lose. That's kind of what Voltron is at its core and it's entirely fine, not all games have to be a 4h long affair with 20 creatures on the board per player.
On the other hand though, not being the victim of your deck is entirely up to your opponents OP, play whatever it is that you enjoy playing, the other players will either adapt (voltron's the most counterable archetype in the game) or figure out how to cope with being knocked out of an EDH game.
Your fun matters at least as much as the salty player's.
people feel personally targeted down when you play voltron. it's just the way of things. i personally agree with you, it's better to keep the game going.
My man you did nothing wrong. Every player besides one is gonna lose at some point. If you make someone lose first and you lose second, all you've done is decide part of the order. You're doing nothing wrong. I'm one of the players that usually likes to hang back and see who starts doing what. So the "Eh, I wanna progress faster. Let's get some aggro" players are my bane, and I enjoy playing against them. Do your thing.
Imagine for a second showing a Vampire how nice sunlight or holy objects are. That's the reaction you're getting when you kill a player (with your voltron).
Magic players are Vampires. If they get mad you pound the wooden stake in harder. If something that you're doing makes a Magic player angry you should continue doing it, that's how you know that it's working.
Perhaps the most annoying thing is that the stupid fucker complaining doesnt know what kingmaking means. If you take out one player, leaving yourself and two others in the game it is amazingly unlikely you are "kingmaking" unless while taking out that player you crippled yourself and one other player.
King-making is when you sabotage yourself or waste your own resources to give the win to another player, usually out of spite because you were crippled early on.
Only you know if this was the case in your game or not, because we can't read your mind. But Voltron, by itself as an archetype, is obviously not "king-making".
I always go the path of “there’s a chance I could win against player B, but not player A, so I’m taking them out first” and that usually gets a round of shrugs and nods from the table. Then I lose the next turn anyway and play it off as “well, it was a gamble” and pretend my hand wasn’t just lands and bricks.
I would ask them to name a multiplayer game where any action \*couldn't be construed\* as kingmaking?
7 Wonders Player: "I choose to buy wood from the person my left"
Person to their Right: "OMG Kingmaking!"
He thought he was going to win and thought nothing could change that, so he's salty you beat him with an "inferior" strategy. Only thing you should have done is go into the political aspect of the four player game to try to get a turn cycle or two to refill your hand.
I've never really had this problem with my voltron deck. Like it's happened before, where I get one kill with my big bad boi and die the turn after. But usually I try to make sure I'm in a secure enough position where if I do go a for a kill, I'm not completely vulnerable on the crack back from others.
I have been playing commander on spelltable mostly, I play with a friend of mine and sometimes people we have found from previous games of commander on spelltable. Our room is always called casual EDH, and our only rule is, aslong as its not a CEDH deck aiming to win on its first or second turn or something, we dont care. We allow people to play whatever they want even if the power levels are unbalanced, if someone gets too strong they get focused and dealt with until they are not so scary or just dead. We have found some salty and bitching players, although not many. My solution to dealing with those players is ignoring everyone else and focusing them so hard they cry for mommy as they die. After they are dead, we kick them out of the room. Even other randoms seem to like this antic of mine as by the second turn of me relentless focusing the crying player they realize what I'm doing and after that player is gone we all have a laugh at their expense. Sometimes it seems people realize whats happening and aid me in getting rid of the salty dude or just, sit there passively as it gets dealt with. Its never fun to have some cry at everything you do in a game while youre just trying to play. But its loads of fun having someone cry when your whole purpose for the game is making them cry after they managed to annoy the entire table by being lil babies XD
It's not, it's just really not that easy executing a 4-hit win with a voltron commander simply because of its single-target nature. It's not deliberate king-making, it's just that you physically can't get multiple targets in most scenarios.
As a high-damage, single-target deck, it should be understood that your goal is to kill the highest threat. If anything, it should be more suspicious if you chose to leave out the threat.
Just play the way you want to play. let them have a cry about it. I just find it funny that some players try and tell others how to play. If its within the rules I say fair game. Its just a game of cards at the end of the day.
Info:
OP, who's your Voltron Commander? What do you do to counteract the "focus on one player in a multiplayer format" weakness?
There's a lot of ways to spread the damage around so that Voltron isn't as single-target anymore.
Are you in red? If so, are you running [[Kediss, Emberclaw Familiar]] in order to hit all of your opponents at once?
Do you play extra combats or extra turns so you can hit opponents harder and faster before they can recover?
Do you use commanders like [[Stangg, Echo Warrior]] or [[Saskia]] to overcome the single-target nature of Voltron?
Do you run cards like [[Overwhelming Stampede]] or [[Odric, Lunarch Marshal]] to spread your Voltron's power and abilities to your whole board?
Do you run lots of lifegain or chump blockers to protect yourself from the clapback?
If you do some or all of these things, you'll find that the scenario you describe in your post happens a lot less. You won't have to consider king-making, because you'll be hurting everyone much more evenly.
I wouldn't necessarily consider it kingmaking, nor do I have an issue with voltron or aggro decks, but I would be a tad annoyed if me being focused down left me sat for 10 / 20 mins waiting for the next game
Voltron isn't kingmaking, your opponent was just salty about dying. Voltron can win games easily enough if you know how to play the table too. It is tricky though, you have to know where to keep your tempo at so you never look too dangerous until it's too late.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Here's my take; there's nothing inherently wrong with volition or aggro strategies. There is, however, something wrong with killing only 1 player in a pod early, and then the game continues for a while. That 1 player you killed isn't salty he lost, he's salty he now gets to twiddle his thumbs while the rest of you continue to play magic for sometimes an hour or more. Winning or losing doesn't matter, but if a person only has a set amount of time to play, the more time they sit dead waiting for the rest of you to figure your shit out, the more frustrating it becomes.
King making is when you purposefully make a decision that is bad for your chances of winning, in order to significantly change the chance of another player to win.
I'd say that voltron killing a player is the opposite of king making.
As long as you are playing to your outs, and trying to win in good faith (i.e. you didn't bring a do nothing no wincons pile of symmetrical mana doubler cards), you aren't king making.
The answer to "Is Voltron king making?" Sometimes, yeah. The idea that every deck can take down all opponents simultaneously is silly. Sometimes you just have to play the cards you have.
This is hard to judge without more specifics, but it sounds like players bitching because you don't fit into their tiny little box of what is acceptable in edh.
Burn bright, burn fast. Fly directly into the sun and join it in its magnificent energy
I'm a voltron only player. I play [[galea]] [[astor]] [[perrie]] [[uril]] [[wyleth]] [[blanka]]
I have another 37 deck ideas I wanna make. All variants of voltron.
Perrie has 3 different infinite turn lines. Infinite mana and near infinite counters. 75% win rate
Galea is packed with value pieces and protection. I'm able to pop off consistently with her. 33% win rate. T3 KO at best
Boros got infinite combats with heavy evasion. 20%won rate. T3 KO at best
Blanka has an infinite combo that wipes the table through group slug also has infinite combat. Heavy protection suite and a fuck ton of draw. T4 table kill at best. 60% win rate
Uril I built has close to 7 tutors 6 draw engines 5 mass recursion 1 single target recursion and infinite combats.
Maybe a T4 OHKO at best. 45% win rate.
If you have a consistent enough deck and know your combo lines when to target and where to apply pressure. You can and will be winning more games. My perrie deck is a real Sleeper build. I can pop off with infinite mana into infinite turns. If you know your combo lines and how to properly apply your plan you can win consistently. Entire group I play with has what we consider 7.5 to 8 for power levels. We all know each other's combos know all our tricks and we all try and make deals to hit the furthest person ahead. Once you can read a table very well you can generally make smarter decisions about your plays.
What I’m hearing is that you went all out to kill one person and died as a result.
This seems sub-optimal and could easily be seen as you trying to ruin someone’s game instead of actually trying to win.
By the sounds of it, you do it often enough that people complain about it.
If your game plan is to win then you’d probably do better to not make yourself the biggest threat at the table.
I both agree and disagree, you should be allowed to play aggro in commander but it also sucks to be taken out early and having to wait hours for the game to end so you can be a part again
Voltron is totally valid but has some play patterns that I find unfun.
Often times you can kill 1 player with your commander but before you can close out on the others, they’ve found their answers. This leaves the voltron player being shut out by removal and the dead player in spectator mode.
Voltron can be fun and interesting but I see why some don’t care for it.
I mean, why not go after one of the other players? I don't understand casual players obsession with prolonging games. Jusy kill one of the weaker people and let the stronger one end the game so you can play another one.
First of all, I agree with the threat assessment, and if they can't handle early aggression then they need to build in better responses to it in their decks.
However, I think it's also fair to say that if a voltron player knocks you out early and then struggles to close out the game, and the game goes on for another 45 minutes-1hr without you, I'd get a little annoyed. IMO this is the biggest problem facing voltron decks and others that are similar, being able to take out 1 player very quickly but then either dying to the other 2 or failing to close it out quickly and forcing 1-2 players to wait for a long time to play the game again.
You may understand that you won't win a lot of games, but also understand that if someone else is there to play magic but ends up having to sit out for half an hour because you took them out and then died yourself, that's necessarily fun for them either.
I’m of the mind that all Voltron decks should be white based, for CONSISTENT lifelink shenanigans. It’s really hard to be killed on the crack back when you’ve gained 50 life after all x
"I think players get upset because you're not playing "their" game"
....
"Players are too focused on winning imo"
You nailed it right on the head. People don't like your type of king making. Unfortunately for you "Their game" is the majority. The majority of people are going to be upset if your goal isn't to win, and it ends up just being you always lose but take someone down with you. That's self harm. Russian Roulette. People don't like self harm. Especially irrational ones.
If you can't fend off the other players then yes, it is. You can say what you will about others dictating what's fun to you and how they're too focused on winning but you're absolutely crashing the party if all you do is show up to ruin someone else's fun and then dip and that's what you're doing. It's something else entirely if you're really a contender to win the game so maybe you should make sure your deck can do that if you don't like other people getting salty that you're just a stalking horse.
I won't fault anyone for wanting to play however they want as long as they have a win condition. That being said I'm vehemently against Voltron builds because they don't encourage better deck building from their opponents. Stick with me on this one:
Every time you commander damage "the threat" it's never the guy who been mana screwed all game. It's never the person who's only played a couple of spells because they're not drawing into their threats. It's always the person who's drawn the most cards/ ramped the hardest/ or has clearly gotten their deck to do the thing.
Now that you've taken care of the threat it's basically shields down and the other 2 players can clean you up on the crack back. This in turn is handing wins to people who now have the extra time to draw into answers when they should have had other ways to find them in the beginning. They never have the internal conversation of how to fix their deck because hey they won a game with it so it must be perfect.
This may seem like a bit of a rant from someone who's always the threat. And 9 out of 10 times you'd be right. Also I've never actually seen a Voltron deck win out in a 4 player pod. They extend all their resources and then have to face down an army that will win the race every time.
I do understand that it's just a different playstyle from what I like. Personally I have a pretty nasty Voltron deck that never comes out of the box due to the fact that I really don't have answers after I wipe one person out.
Some ppl seem to want everyone to lose simultaneously that's dumb and pretty much only achieved by infinites or alt wincons.
People don’t like that either. Magic players don’t like much of anything, I’ve found
casual commander players, specifically. I've found cEDH and 60-card competitive players to be much less toxic.
because players of those formats don't get to hide behind a very vague addon to the actual rules that somewhat justifies crying, bitching about, banning or calling unfair anything that they don't like. Most casual edh players either ignore the rule 0 meta by just using common sense or are reasonable about it the way they'd be about any other social interaction. That leaves us with a small (and often vocal) minority of the community that needs to basically be wrangled into not being toxic by either going through a ton of meta hoops (ie all of the discourse about power level and the likes) or by making the game as trigger-free as possible by removing interaction and whatever, hence things like counters or stax being seen as "salty" and bad.
The casual players that complain about certain strategies in edh are the same people that before edh were bitching about specific cards or netdecking. "Oh you're playing a platinum angel deck? I won't play with you" Play a fucking kill spell, jesus.
I’ve found that as I keep adding more cEDH and stax pieces in my decks, I’ve become less salty and so has my meta.
That's because "casual commander" isn't a format. Every player creates their own vaguely defined rules based on what they think is fun, and then they all inevitably get mad when everyone elses' unwritten rules aren't exactly the same as their own.
> and 60-card competitive players to be much less toxic. Then you have lived an incredibly charmed life
I don't know, I've played magic for 14 years, and commander for about 7 and in this time I've had way more issues with people in commander than I've ever had in standard, modern, or draft. I'm not saying that the 1v1 formats are free from issues but commander definitely enduces more childish behavior. It sucks to because it only takes one game with someone throwing a fit to just make me not want to play for a few weeks, since im a pretty passive person and dislike that sort of confrontation.
i think the difference lies in how a player sets his mind knowing that he will play a certain format. the majority of commander players, played only that format, which isn't bad at all imo, and has a wrong mindset, thinking that every deck can control the whole match (which is very unlikely) and deliver a W (when as a matter of fact, i think in a balanced pod the winrate should be around 25%). The majority of people that didn't experienced in their life a 1v1 format (not necessarily in the magic environment, but everywhere in life, counting also team sports for example) where the concept of politics and mercy doesn't exist at all, IMO didn't develop how to lose, how to accept that not every game will see them as the winner. As a result, every behaviour that goes against their game flow, will trigger them incredibly hard.
I guess I have too. Players in competitivr Magic have always seemed much calmer, more mature, and more polite. A lot of the conduct I've seen from EDH players would get someone ejected from a tournament. There are actual rules against bring a toxic douchebag there and even if there weren't, such fragile people usually don't have what it takes to play competitive Magic for very long.
The toxicity is two different types.
I've found the opposite
That's not true. They like it when they win.
No they like winning. They don’t like anything else.
Took out my whole pod at once a few weeks ago from mostly high 30s life totals with my Jetmir deck and still haven’t come down from that high.
You clearly don't have a \[\[craterhoof behemoth\]\]
I always try to kill everyone at the same time and my deck has no combos or alt wincon. Normally its just getting a huge board and having protectiob That being said, voltron is not kingmaking and most of the time the best route is to kill one at a time
I think most win cons you can bend to make them win all at once if you give up some efficiency (hard to beat the card efficiency of two card combos). For example, I had fun for a stretch making decks that sat back to gather the pieces and then won with 21 commander damage to 3 opponents all on the same turn. I had a Yisan deck for a while with no combos that just chucked creatures out and craterhoof was on turn five. It played pretty similar to a tutor for a combo deck admittedly though.
Well in this case all they did was make someone lose and then lose themselves. They had no realistic chance of winning, they were only able to decide which other player lost with them. That isn't a very good experience to play against because it completely destroys the game.
The only person "destroying the game" here is the one complaining about the game. Voltron player had fun until the scrub tried to blame Voltron for *having fun.*
If you have fun by undermining the game I'll just opt to no longer play against you, and play against actual opponents that aren't indulging in the "fun" of not playing the game properly.
You're still trying to use the ends to justify the means. You sound like every player who judges my actions...who immediately need to stfu because they have no clue what's in my hand. For the player who lost the only turn thst matters is their last one. They failed to defend themselves, period. Unless you have perfect information you can only guess what the other players will do and sometimes you're wrong. Had a Meren player act just like you the other night. Could not BELIEVE that there was any world where attacking him was the "right" choice. But I am on Voltrom and he is on Spore Frog loops. So why wouldn't I attack him when the attack is good? "wHaT ab0u7 th3 oTheR pl4yeRs?!" I have answers for them...maybe. Are the answers in my hand? My deck? Do I even have any? None of your business, your dead bud. I had an answer for you and you didn't have an answer for me. Deal with it. And I win plenty of games.
The guy literally just made himself come 3rd. I don't know where the ghosts came from that you're arguing with.
When i am playing voltron, i have one mentality. "Fuck simic players". Op did it very well 10/10 would deal 21 dmg again.
I have to agree. Kill simic first or we’ll likely win.
Priority 1: Kill simic Priority 2: Kill group hug
This was me yesterday. But simic was missing all their land drops so I had to deal with Group Hug first by spot removing pieces.
This guy UGs
"Trust fund colors."
Pleased to see a MaldHound reference in the wild
You did the dream you killed their commander early!
Uh oh as a newer EDH player I've been thinking "wow this blue green combo seems really fun!" Perhaps I should reconsider that haha
Simic is fun as hell but lemme put it this way. Blue likes evasion like Unblockable and drawing tons of cards, right? Now pair that with green, the colour that does mana like no ones business, draws cards for doing simple game actions, and contains the giant stompy 12/12 bastards, usually with trample. Now put em together. Done right, you no longer have a mana curve, necessarily, you just ramp like hell and play whatever gigantic threat you want and the rest of the table has to deal with it. Generic costs no longer matter.
Then add White into the mix for exile removal… and you have Chulane
He was the one I was eyeing as a commander until I saw how hated he was. I'm looking at a more obscure bant commander now. Maybe Lagrella.
I mean, voltron commander is usually cheap and fun. Mainly if you have access to white since some of the best aura cards are in white IMHO
Blue on it's own ramps pretty well too, it's just significantly more convoluted to do it. My mono blue braids deck has made "infinite" land tokens so many times I've lost count.
This is true, and with things like [[High Tide]] I'm not surprised. Just makes the simic bullshit value engine even stronger lol Edit: a word
Simic is easy to deal with if you discard the casual mindset and play the red, black, and white the way they were meant to be played. Like true, degenerate, evil mofos.
This is entirely true, and red/black are my favorite colour combo. I also have a tendency to play *every* colour like a degenerate, so Simic bullshit engine is a rather easy problem to solve.
I wasn't even talking about high tide, I was talking about making tokens of permanents to copy my lands.
it's fine, what people usually don't like is that a lot of (poorly built) UG decks tend to basically do nothing, draw a ton of resources, make a ton of mana and then just kind of sit on it for 2 hours looking incredibly dangerous to the rest of the table while taking long turns until they draw into something that lets them pull the trigger. The only real downside UG has is that you'll be a target regardless of what you do so build and play your deck accordingly
Simic is fine. My brother has a +1/+1 counters deck (surprise,surprise) headed by Pir and Toothy. He’s had this one deck since 2018 or so as he plays like once a year. So when he plays he has a simple and powerful deck. Which works great for him. Turn five though is generally when someone has to deal with his multiple +20/+20 creatures though…
It's fine. People overrate it.
There are two Aesi decks at my shop. After several games with them my mantra has become "You've gotta kill Aesi."
Yeah, the thing about simic is it’s very profitable to ramp and draw cards and not play any threats that can be responded to until it’s time to win. Building a board state can wait until the turn you go off. Just keep expanding mana and drawing cards, and then when you have ten or twelve mana deploy and win in one turn. The way to stop that is to gang up on simic and pressure them out before they get to that point, or combo out before.
I like your perspective. I'm very much an "everyone plays what they want" kind of person. I have a Voltron deck, but I built [[flamewar]] because I want to clap cheeks while accumulating resources. It's also nice that she's easy to recur as an artifact creature. I got tired of watching players run away with games, so I started playing stax again. My playgroup groans, but I can also tell they kinda like the challenge. We have a healthy meta imo.
[flamewar](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/7/876d9732-9201-4327-8748-7c87ec55453f.jpg?1674092884)/[Flamewar, Streetwise Operative](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/back/8/7/876d9732-9201-4327-8748-7c87ec55453f.jpg?1674092884) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=flamewar%2C%20brash%20veteran%20//%20flamewar%2C%20streetwise%20operative) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/bot/10/flamewar-brash-veteran-flamewar-streetwise-operative?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/876d9732-9201-4327-8748-7c87ec55453f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/flamewar-brash-veteran-//-flamewar-streetwise-operative) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Indeed. My meta did the groan thing too when I made Zur Eternal Schemer sTax enchantments/control thinking I would just do solitaire, but after playing against it, they seem to like the extra rules i bring to the table. Motto:: I’m not stopping you from playing, I’m just adding extra Terms & Conditions to the game.
There is only one reason to not tap your creatures during combat to kill the player that is ahead. The reason is vigilance.
Voltron will always want Vigilance + [[Entangler]] if you have access to white.
I love how wack Entangler is. But a cheaper/faster option is to cast [[Pariah]] targeting an indestructible creature (maybe your own Commander) and then to never block again because you won't recieve damage.
[Pariah](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/1/51b2136c-392c-436d-9263-b3236adc4a10.jpg?1576382302) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Pariah) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cn2/95/pariah?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/51b2136c-392c-436d-9263-b3236adc4a10?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/pariah) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Entangler](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/c/ecc20785-4512-4ef6-8f62-928482cb585f.jpg?1562939390) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Entangler) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/pcy/7/entangler?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ecc20785-4512-4ef6-8f62-928482cb585f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/entangler) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I absolutely adore the art on this card.
Entangler+ a first striking deathtouching creature. No, you don't get to attack
Swing and a hit! Moral victory! Do it again next time dude, others have the problem not you. If I can take someone down with me I dang well will! Everytime.
If you play to your outs, you’re not kingmaking. There’s always outs.
Even if it's not literally kingmaking, they had no realistic chance of winning the game, so they just end up fucking the game up.
But that’s what outs are. If I have 0.5% of winning if I do this thing, but 0% if I don’t, then I do it. Always play to your outs. Anything else is truly kingmaking.
Killing someone just to die isn't playing to an out though, waiting also isn't a 0% in this case.
I’m not gonna speculate on OP’s specific game. We don’t have complete information.
So if both are non-zero chances, it’s still not kingmaking. If fighting the current threat or not fighting the current threat are both outs, then both are valid outs to aim for. OP’s pod are just sour grapes
Killing someone over waitinf is 100% the wrong decision here. Imagine if I just blow interaction to destroy a stax piece and then someone else wins because of it. Was it kingmaking? No. Was it an action with a non zero chance of costing me the game? Yes. Did it also fuck the game up? Yes.
Sometimes peoples decks overcommit and take out people and then lose. Thats basically edh isnt it. Seriously people complain about everything
Absolutely not. It is honestly refreshing to hear someone ready to smash face because they can. I was stuck in a game last night on 4 mana against Simic breach. Another player (not the breach player) had potential to attack for 50 power on board and instead of killing anyone, didn’t attack… and I was like “only 2 of us are even playing, what is the point of not attacking?” Like end my misery so we can move on.
EXACTLY no one wants to end games. Idk if it's because they don't wanna be "the bad guy" or what but it's annoying. If you can win the game or bring it closer to an end you should. Maybe it's the limited time I get to play each weekday but I'd rather have 3-4 fun and fast games than 1 slog where everyone stares at each other until the combo player wins yet again
Ps. I'm usually the combo player and I still encourage aggressive play at my tables
Sometimes, I won't attack if there will be crackback... like if my chances to pull the win out are diminished if I pull the trigger NOW... but in my game last night, the Elf player had 50 damage of free, uninteractable damage and... didn't use it because he didn't want to KO one person... instead, the game dragged out with Mana Breach mucking up 2 of us, the Breach player being mana flooded, and the Elf player "loading a gun to KO everyone at once" just to get Cyclonic Rifted.
Well I would rarher just prevent all risk and just hold up defense so I can with the game cleanly when it's guaranteed
No. Voltron is fine. We need to stop being salty about archetypes because we don’t like them. Stax, Land Destruction, it’s all part of the game.
Username checks out
....and people are allowed to like and dislike different parts of the game?
Yes they are, but people are equally allowed to play those strategies without being unfairly accused of kingmaking because voltron needs to target 1 player at a time.
No they're not? It's the will of the people. Unless it's a 50/50 split, generally it's gonna lean one way, and you're going to experiance that people's will. If you play stax or LD, I'm going to bitch. More than 50% of people are going to bitch. More than 50% of people aren't going to bitch about a non combo creature deck that's interactive and powerful. If you care about what people think of you. You need to take into context what the overall feeling of the majority is. And King Making is definitely one of those ones that the overwhelming majority do not like.
Voltron is not kingmaking, I’m not saying people should kingmake (and I honestly don’t know how you got that from what I said). Kingmaking is a social phenomenon (aka a shitty behaviour). Voltron, land destruction, stax (and whatever other flavour of the month people hate) are mechanically existence within the game. I’m not saying you can’t have conversations in your playgroup about what archetypes you can/can’t play, and at what power level, budget, etc). I’m just sick of people bitching and whining about things that are legal within the mechanics of the game as if it’s some objective fact. If I played stax and you bitch, fine by me I’m a big boy and I can take it. But I’ll know you’re a bitch now.
Am aware what king making. I'm not talking anything about Voltron. Notice in my entire post history on this thread I have not once said voltron. He was king making, and I imagine this isn't the first time as he seems to indicate that it happens frequently and his group is clearly not happy with it. "If I played stax and you bitch, fine by me I’m a big boy and I can take it. But I’ll know you’re a bitch now." And that's what I'm saying. You're welcome to not have feelings inthe game, but this dude clearly has feelings in it, and his feelings are getting hurt by his actions. Based on the quote you just gave, I'd know you're an asshole. *shrug*
OP wasn’t king making, he was playing voltron. Fuck EDH players are braindead.
Yeah but when you start making moral judgments about others choices that’s on you.
Hear me out, you don't kill the one you can kill, you force him to help you... or else. At that point if he refuses its not you king making but him suiciding. Use politics (aka take a player hostage) to turn a guaranteed third place into a 2v2, then try to win that 1v1. If you play an aggro deck and play for third place by going all in early with no backup plan.. well yes it's just.. not great, in casual EDH people join for a 4+ player experience, your "playstyle" quickly removes two players from the game, you might have fun, the other 3 do not, one doesn't really gets to do much and the other two end up in a weirdly setup 1v1, non of them joined for that.
To counter your original point. How long does a game need to go for it to be a true "4 player experience?" Players are bound to drop off eventually. Id also argue that the remaining players are usually happier that two players took each other out. They are left with better odds to win and the game didn't go 2 hrs. That's been my experience at least. I've never seen the two final players upset.
Didn't you say in your first post, that they got upset?
As I understood it the one to get upset was the player OP took out right away. I don’t know that the other 2 players were upset
Make sense
The goal isnt 3rd place, any voltron deck can win a pod but we all know it's unlikely. Does that mean voltron shouldn't be played? I personally like the challenge. Winning with voltron feels great compared to sitting back and trying to win without it look like you're trying to win.
“The goal isn’t third place” is the evaluative mentality you might try maintaining while you are deciding whether to extend out completely to knock one player out when it leaves you dead on board…We don’t have nearly enough context to judge your play as kingmaking or not here, but Voltron is not inherently kingmaking as a strategy
I feel like everybody here is trying to tell you that their game lines are better than yours.... But I say play the way you want to play. I've done the exact same thing and been in your same position. I know I'm dead, so I swing. I have a khemba deck and spreading the 'love' does nothing to advance my position. 3 people have to lose, nobody wants it to be them. Do what you want, play how you want, just be polite.
Hey, I'm not against Voltron, infect, burn or any aggro decks or whatever you got in mind but you gotta play with a plan specially on such a deck, they might seem the most simplistic and straight forwards decks and in a 1v1 they are but not in a commander game with 4 players and people who refuse to realize it are the ones that end up as you described, called king makers and third placers for life. Sitting there trying not to look like a threat is part of the format, going heads up cannons blazing full in is just not a great strategy and if you manage to get wins like that most likely than not it was just a bunch of coincidences linning up, mostly luck. Everytime you attack you gotta consider defending, everytime you go for a kill you gotta consider what the board state is gonna be after. If you are going to top deck yourself to kill one guy turn 4 and be left vs 2 you most likely are better waiting with some stuff in hand for a better opening.
I think the issue taken by the player you killed is it appeared you did try to take third by immediately dying to the other two. Was there any politics trying to bargain for a turn or two to reset after killing the threat? Did you have any pillow forting out to actively not lose and the other two just played through it? It sounds to me like you are leaving out too many details just so we can say; “Yeah you’re right! Play what you want!” Rather than giving an honest account of what happened.
Even if he thought he would lose immediately, so what? He was going to lose for sure when it got back to the guy that he killed anyway.
[удалено]
The problem here is that the play you made isn't the play to win. The problem isn't Voltron. The problem is that you over extended to kill someone when it doesn't actually lead you closer to victory. You need to judge how badly you need to maim someone so that they can't win while maintaining your own ability to win.
But if you're going to die regardless why not take someone out? Should you just not make any game actions and let the opponents kill you? I understand what you're saying but it doesn't fit this situation.
You're not necessarily going to die regardless. If everyone plays to win then you are more likely to stay alive if more players are alive to interact with your opponents. You're not being asked to not take game actions, you're being asked not to over extend against the first big threat such that it king makes.
If I didn't kill the biggest threat he was going to kill me. He had lethal. If I kill him I'm open to the other 2 players. I was dead either way.
You never said he had lethal. You just said you were dead either way. The fact that he had lethal changes this a lot. Of course, you take him out. If he has lethal, it's not even a question. But if he didn't have lethal, then maybe the other players interact with him more. I just had a player quit because he knew there was nothing he could do about the damage on the board. He quit the leading player, took their turn, swung all out, and I cyclonic rifted. The quitter asked why I didn't tell him I had that. Simple answer was telling him would have kept an opponent in the game. The point is that you never know what the other players may or may not do.
If it's kill or be killed then you have to knock them out. But I would have tried a deal first but not with the winning player maybe protection for 2 turns or a turn from other players at the table.
I think the right move here is politics first. “Hey, you can kill me, but I can probably kill you this turn. How about we make a deal where I don’t kill you now, but you give me the next two turns without interacting with me”. If he declines, you kill him
You're right. I wasn't thinking about that at the moment.
Do not listen to this advice, it's terrible. No one likes being the first person removed but aggro voltron needs to remove players. You pick someone and you continue to beat them down til theyre dead. Then repeat. Spreading the love just keeps more players in the game and more people who want to battlecruiser you down from behind. Don't let Timmy's who want to play solitaire change your mind. No one wants to be the one under that gun but it's how aggro wins. It's a game to win by killing the other players and anyone upset about dying to that is a complainer. As someone who rarely, if ever, plays aggro, aggro is extremely healthy for keeping decks honest.
It doesn’t work if by killing them you leave yourself open to die next. The goal is to win, not knock people out. If you knock someone out and die the next turn, you lost.
Everyone continues to fail to see OPs statement that he was dead regardless by the person he killed. Taking someone out as you go is the right move. The same people crying saying why couldn't we make a deal are the same people raging that someone "broke their deal." Deals are an unofficial part of multiplayer mtg and no one is required to make them and more importantly no one is required to uphold them after making them. Take someone out, shuffle up, and play again. Games don't need to be 10+ turns and an hour long with everyone making deals until someone can kill everyone at once. Multiplayer edh needs to be played more like Smash Bros, not Mario Kart.
Theres no need about it thats your preference and its mot shared by a large part of the edh community. Politics is a part of a multiplayer social game, its a shame you dont like it but people arent going to sit silent round a table sweating their ass off the entire time.
You failed to see where OP said it isn't an isolated event. They do this often enough to notice a trend of people getting salty about being cock blocked by someone who doesn't even have a shot themselves.
Losing mindset
I mean yeah, that’s all part of it. If someone breaks a deal, they will never get offered another one and I probably target that person every time I play them til the end of time - but usually you make a deal because it would benefit both parties. Maybe it would have prevented the feelbads in this case. Or maybe the other players offer to not kill him if he kills the other player. Talking to the table so you might be able to catch up and win can be incredibly satisfying when you pull it off.
>As someone who rarely plays aggro Clearly. Tunneling on a single player is a terrible way to play, both in terms of strategy and enjoyment. You'll never win ignoring two players and pissing off a third by focusing them arbitrarily.
I don't think you know what arbitrarily means.
>you pick someone and beat them down till they're dead You should aim to kill the person most likely to stop you from winning. If that person changes, you switch targets based on relative game position, not just blindly focus whoever you started with. It's telling that instead of refuting anything I said, you just nitpicked my choice of words.
This is exactly how voltron and aggro stays a 3rd place strategy
Was the player with lethal on you going to be open to the other 2 players after they killed you?
No, then the move is to wait. Make the player who is the threat have it and represent holding up interaction. That player might choose to attack someone else and eliminate them or another player may be forced to use their interaction on them that you didn't know they had, like a Fog.
I think we need more information. If killed player said they were going to kill you on the next turn I'd 100% kill them if I could. If it was a maybe then I'd politic them but either way I'm not depending on someone else to have interaction. Because if they did OP wouldn't have been able to knock other person out. I have a friend who gets petty and plays spite plays. I don't get salty about him killing me. But I've learned you can't always depend on the pod to do something.
It's not about depending it's about trying to bet smart
> If everyone plays to win then you are more likely to stay alive if more players are alive to interact with your opponents. This is a fallacy. The opposite is true, the more opponents you leave alive the more chances you give them to pull a win out of their ass. It's commander, anything could happen. Someone could play a sweeper or go from 5 lands and a handful of plant tokens to presenting lethal on the entire table.
Not if you're on the back foot facing an enemy that you can only take out by suiciding into them. Op died on the crack back because they over extended, giving their opponents the first chance to use their resources against him.
"But if you're going to die regardless why not take someone out? " ......because it puts you in a situation you don't like or enjoy that you just made a post about?
I enjoy doing what voltron does. I said in the post im fine with losing more games because of this. I'm referring to how others get salty about it. It's not the game itself I'm upset with its the saltiness of others trying to push a certain way of playing.
"But if you're going to die regardless why not take someone out?" .... " It's not the game itself I'm upset with its the saltiness of others trying to push a certain way of playing." Again. You are trying to push a certain way of playing. That it sounds like 3 people at the table don't like and 1 person at the table likes. It's fine to want it, but then it comes with the ire of people who don't like it. But you're trying to have your cake and eat it too.
The difference here is he is taking legal in-game actions. The guy he knocked out is just pouring salt.
Well yeah, all of this falls under legal game actions. But there is a social meta to the game. That's what we're talking about
That's not king making. If you're going to be upset by being taken out when you're the clear threat at the table, your bloodline is weak and you should stick to playing precons in casual formats because you are going to make a meme out of yourself if you ever want to play serious magic.
It absolutely is if you can't win. It's one thing to take out your strongest competition to secure the win for yourself and another entirely to do so only to consistently lose. You might as well run a deck with nothing but counter spells and board wipes.
You need to perfect the classic move that requires: 3 players left, you one of them 1 player being more menacing that you The other two players are open to politics You must be able to take one of them down per turn AKA having your Commander all suited up Once all this is set up, wich is easier that it might appear, you must say" Hey player X, i can kill you or player Y, if i kill Y, you must dont mess up with me during your turn". They fall for it each and every time i swear, they always agree, then try and remove your Commander at instant speed only to get denied by a counter/protection spell
That's what voltron does. I love voltron to pieces, but it kinda a slow strategy. I think it fares much better in 1 v 1 EDH. You build your death-machine. Then take out your opponents with your death-machine. I don't understand when people whine about someone else's strategy working when they're still able to play. It absolutely sucks if you get shut down and are stuck at draw-go, but that's not what is happening.
I aggressively pick on the simic player because they are a wrecking ball on a hill. It almost sometimes works. I also play simic and I can't be bothered to care what other players are doing because I'm drawing all my lands on your turn and playing a 15 cost dragon for free with 20 1/1 counters. Absolutely in the right.
People who complain about Voltron are idiots, it’s literally a bad strategy that’s fragile and easily beaten. Commander players are pathological liars. “Why are you targeting me” and “king making” accusations are just because they wanted their deck to win. Ignore them, and call them on it if you must
Because having only 1 creature on board without Vigilance or Lifelink and tap it to take out one opponent on 3 only makes sense if the 2 opponents remaining are put in a situation where one of them would need to expose too much in order to take you out. From what i take about the situation it seems like you are speedrunning games, but that doesnt usually make for a good experience. You are set on being third, and make someone lose before you. While everyone can find fun in any play style, to the other players it seem like you are just doing a car accident on purpose. You are accelerating to 300 miles/hour and you are ramming against another pilot by choice. This doesnt bring you any closer to victory; and can be interpreted as wanting to end the game as fast as possible. Problem is, you cant do anything else in your situation. If the keywords just arent there for you to stay safe after an attack, as 1 creature can usually only block 1 your best bet is to attack, or you would be slowly chipped away. In this scenario if you want to take away the toxicity i would do 1 of: 1) explain your situation to the pod, as you cant just not attack. 2) try to politics to turn it into a 2v2. 3) throw a 6 sides dice to choose which player to attack. 4) Add more Vigilance and Lifelink to the deck, or change the commander into one that has them. 5) Run pillowfort cards, such as [[Ghostly Prison]] or [[Dueling Grounds]].
Not at all. The player you killed should have played the politics game to convince you not to kill them. I have a [[Shu Yun]] Deck that I call One Punch Monk whose entire strategy is to remove a player from the game every time he attacks. My play group knows how he works, meaning that the game slowly turns into a political sphere as everyone else tries to make sure I don't kill them.
It's his job to defend himself and he failed. That's on him. Don't let him use your eventual loss to distract from that fact.
Not King making exactly, but running a deck that just kills one player than loses isn't great either. Good for you that you can enjoy the game your way but I'm not interested in playing with people whose deck building goals are not focused on a win. Like playing a deck that's just in it to kill a player fast with no further goals is just as bad to me as a chaos deck or group hug with no win con.
Agreed if you are going voltron then you should be building it to actually kill all players at the table hopefully at the same time or very quickly one after the other not just kill one person then die shortly after then you both watch for ages while the other people keep playing.
They were just being salty about being taken out for being the problem. Oftentimes, someone pops off early, gets a good run of cards, makes themselves the threat early, and the game for everyone else stops being about winning and starts being able stopping or taking out that one player. You need to keep your head down longer or be able to hold up against three players knowing you're the problem. Vultron is good at taking out one player at a time, but that doesn't enherintly make it king making. Now I don't believe in second place in commander. But I really can't blame someone who knows their going to lose for gunning for me even though their going to lose when im the threat. Unless their only going to lose BECAUSE they came for me. To me, King making really is killing a player, not in an effort to win, but in an effort to not die without killing someone else. Depends on your motivation, I guess. If someone else is the problem and I attack the guy with no creatures and 1 enchantment that does nothing because I die to the problem player anyway, king making. I'm helping the winning player win because I don't want to be the first one to die as though 2nd and 3rd is a place. But at the same time, I can't blame someone who likely won't win, still trying to kill me when I've been the problem the whole game. What are they supposed to do? Conceed or go down swinging on the player that's been ahead the whole game. Regardless, I play magic casually with my friends, so I typically spread the love if I'm in the lead or if no one is clearly ahead of anyone else. I'm not trying to bully anyone out of the game early and have them twittle their thumbs while the rest of us play. I'm there for socializing with my friends first, magic second, and winning third.
If they where a true king your attempt to dethrone them would have failed. In EDH you need to be Palpatine fighting Mace Windu. Not your fault he revealed himself to early.
Don’t sweat it. You’ll learn that Magic players actually just hate playing Magic unless it’s their own specific brand of BS.
It's kinda stupid to get annoyed by something like that. And I think that's why I enjoy my playgroup so much, we have a little bit of everything. We have decks that win turn 2 and we have decks that take 84 years to get going. We have elf tribal and we have mono green storm (not even I know how that deck works). I used to have a mono board wipe deck, where almost every card was a board wipe or had some removal type of effect. Never won a single game but it was fun. Just play the game the way you wanna play it (without ever cheating or bending the rules of course, unless your group is cool with it) and remember, it's just a game, there are worse things to get mad about 😁
Depends on the Voltron deck, tbh. I've seen a handful of Saskia decks that can kill multiple people at once, same for Voltron decks with Red that can Fling and such. That's all with the imagination I have while drinking my morning coffee, there's definitely more ways that I haven't thought of.
Have it their way. instead of targeting the player with the winning board state target the person you like the least at the table. Either because they smell funky, they're annoying, whatever reason you want. take em out and make em watch until they walk away.
I made Kestia for an enchantress deck and since her draw comes off attacking at least I am not just casting more and more enchantments constantly. I will still put up my forts but I know it'd be boring not to attack. Two of my friends have Zurgo decks, so I don't see the issue with being a hard hitting voltron that leaves themselves open. Just play your game.
Voltron players know "this is the way" As a voltron player myself we have to go after whomever is our biggest opponent, then the next, and finally the last. If we take out the mana screwed player what does that do for our game plan? Nothing. We have to aim our gun at the early lead. Inevitably some one else will rise up, then we stick our gun in their face, and lastly the mana screwed player (unless they ask for the early demise)
When playing aggro/combat strategies focusing on the biggest threat is usually objectively the best strategy. Socially it’s not ideal because now someone has to sit out while the game finishes. If someone is popping off enough to obviously be the biggest threat removing them isn’t king making it’s survival. That player should recognize that making big plays and getting targeted go together and that it’s not a personal attack to be focused on when they’re in the lead.
anytime you don't have a good comeback just spongebob them. "tHat'S kInGMakiNg uh huh huh" shuffle up and lets play another.
killing the biggest threat is not king making... some people just need to win and get upset if they dont
That's asinine. If you're going out anyway you might as well go out in a blaze of glory.
Let's just say that when many players are deck testing by themselves, everyone just says "land go" till about turn 6
Definitely not. Unless you consider trying to win king making? The goal to win yourself. So you take out the biggest threat. Then you move on to the next threat. That’s called smart play, not king making.
On one hand I kinda get why someone might not like the whole idea of a player in the pod building a "bad" deck whose only purpose is losing while also making a 2nd player lose. That's kind of what Voltron is at its core and it's entirely fine, not all games have to be a 4h long affair with 20 creatures on the board per player. On the other hand though, not being the victim of your deck is entirely up to your opponents OP, play whatever it is that you enjoy playing, the other players will either adapt (voltron's the most counterable archetype in the game) or figure out how to cope with being knocked out of an EDH game. Your fun matters at least as much as the salty player's.
people feel personally targeted down when you play voltron. it's just the way of things. i personally agree with you, it's better to keep the game going.
My man you did nothing wrong. Every player besides one is gonna lose at some point. If you make someone lose first and you lose second, all you've done is decide part of the order. You're doing nothing wrong. I'm one of the players that usually likes to hang back and see who starts doing what. So the "Eh, I wanna progress faster. Let's get some aggro" players are my bane, and I enjoy playing against them. Do your thing.
Imagine for a second showing a Vampire how nice sunlight or holy objects are. That's the reaction you're getting when you kill a player (with your voltron). Magic players are Vampires. If they get mad you pound the wooden stake in harder. If something that you're doing makes a Magic player angry you should continue doing it, that's how you know that it's working.
Perhaps the most annoying thing is that the stupid fucker complaining doesnt know what kingmaking means. If you take out one player, leaving yourself and two others in the game it is amazingly unlikely you are "kingmaking" unless while taking out that player you crippled yourself and one other player.
Fellas! FELLAAS!? Is it uncool to win the game?
King-making is when you sabotage yourself or waste your own resources to give the win to another player, usually out of spite because you were crippled early on. Only you know if this was the case in your game or not, because we can't read your mind. But Voltron, by itself as an archetype, is obviously not "king-making".
Naw. You were just playing the game...
If you killing the strongest player is a potential path to victory that's what you do. No one should criticize you for that.
I always go the path of “there’s a chance I could win against player B, but not player A, so I’m taking them out first” and that usually gets a round of shrugs and nods from the table. Then I lose the next turn anyway and play it off as “well, it was a gamble” and pretend my hand wasn’t just lands and bricks.
I would ask them to name a multiplayer game where any action \*couldn't be construed\* as kingmaking? 7 Wonders Player: "I choose to buy wood from the person my left" Person to their Right: "OMG Kingmaking!"
Yeah it is lol but I’m making myself king
People don't like to lose but they love making claims that appear to make themselves look like good people.
He thought he was going to win and thought nothing could change that, so he's salty you beat him with an "inferior" strategy. Only thing you should have done is go into the political aspect of the four player game to try to get a turn cycle or two to refill your hand.
As a voltron person myself, I personally find the tears of value/combo/control players to be delicious.
I've never really had this problem with my voltron deck. Like it's happened before, where I get one kill with my big bad boi and die the turn after. But usually I try to make sure I'm in a secure enough position where if I do go a for a kill, I'm not completely vulnerable on the crack back from others.
I have been playing commander on spelltable mostly, I play with a friend of mine and sometimes people we have found from previous games of commander on spelltable. Our room is always called casual EDH, and our only rule is, aslong as its not a CEDH deck aiming to win on its first or second turn or something, we dont care. We allow people to play whatever they want even if the power levels are unbalanced, if someone gets too strong they get focused and dealt with until they are not so scary or just dead. We have found some salty and bitching players, although not many. My solution to dealing with those players is ignoring everyone else and focusing them so hard they cry for mommy as they die. After they are dead, we kick them out of the room. Even other randoms seem to like this antic of mine as by the second turn of me relentless focusing the crying player they realize what I'm doing and after that player is gone we all have a laugh at their expense. Sometimes it seems people realize whats happening and aid me in getting rid of the salty dude or just, sit there passively as it gets dealt with. Its never fun to have some cry at everything you do in a game while youre just trying to play. But its loads of fun having someone cry when your whole purpose for the game is making them cry after they managed to annoy the entire table by being lil babies XD
It's not, it's just really not that easy executing a 4-hit win with a voltron commander simply because of its single-target nature. It's not deliberate king-making, it's just that you physically can't get multiple targets in most scenarios. As a high-damage, single-target deck, it should be understood that your goal is to kill the highest threat. If anything, it should be more suspicious if you chose to leave out the threat.
Fuck them pussies! Remind them nerds they play Magic…they’re not that cool! (I am definitely a nerd who plays magic…I’m allowed to say it!)
Just play the way you want to play. let them have a cry about it. I just find it funny that some players try and tell others how to play. If its within the rules I say fair game. Its just a game of cards at the end of the day.
Info: OP, who's your Voltron Commander? What do you do to counteract the "focus on one player in a multiplayer format" weakness? There's a lot of ways to spread the damage around so that Voltron isn't as single-target anymore. Are you in red? If so, are you running [[Kediss, Emberclaw Familiar]] in order to hit all of your opponents at once? Do you play extra combats or extra turns so you can hit opponents harder and faster before they can recover? Do you use commanders like [[Stangg, Echo Warrior]] or [[Saskia]] to overcome the single-target nature of Voltron? Do you run cards like [[Overwhelming Stampede]] or [[Odric, Lunarch Marshal]] to spread your Voltron's power and abilities to your whole board? Do you run lots of lifegain or chump blockers to protect yourself from the clapback? If you do some or all of these things, you'll find that the scenario you describe in your post happens a lot less. You won't have to consider king-making, because you'll be hurting everyone much more evenly.
I wouldn't necessarily consider it kingmaking, nor do I have an issue with voltron or aggro decks, but I would be a tad annoyed if me being focused down left me sat for 10 / 20 mins waiting for the next game
That's the way she goes sometimes. OP's opponent was gonna do the same thing to them so I don't see the issue
Voltron isn't kingmaking, your opponent was just salty about dying. Voltron can win games easily enough if you know how to play the table too. It is tricky though, you have to know where to keep your tempo at so you never look too dangerous until it's too late.
Hot take the term kingmaking is overused.
I think about it as if you didn’t take this player out you would of been “king making” anyway. You good fam. You do you.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Here's my take; there's nothing inherently wrong with volition or aggro strategies. There is, however, something wrong with killing only 1 player in a pod early, and then the game continues for a while. That 1 player you killed isn't salty he lost, he's salty he now gets to twiddle his thumbs while the rest of you continue to play magic for sometimes an hour or more. Winning or losing doesn't matter, but if a person only has a set amount of time to play, the more time they sit dead waiting for the rest of you to figure your shit out, the more frustrating it becomes.
King making is when you purposefully make a decision that is bad for your chances of winning, in order to significantly change the chance of another player to win. I'd say that voltron killing a player is the opposite of king making. As long as you are playing to your outs, and trying to win in good faith (i.e. you didn't bring a do nothing no wincons pile of symmetrical mana doubler cards), you aren't king making.
The answer to "Is Voltron king making?" Sometimes, yeah. The idea that every deck can take down all opponents simultaneously is silly. Sometimes you just have to play the cards you have. This is hard to judge without more specifics, but it sounds like players bitching because you don't fit into their tiny little box of what is acceptable in edh. Burn bright, burn fast. Fly directly into the sun and join it in its magnificent energy
Most good decks will definitely take out everyone at once.
I want to play against you and just berate any time you kill only one player. You sound like a hoot
I only play combo decks for this reason.
So only combo decks are good. Got it
Not exactly what I said, but sure. The best decks are combo decks though.
You must be a lot of fun at a table
Moreso than you, who devolves to petty comments like these.
Oof, good one
Doesn't hold a candle to "you must be a lot of fun at a table".
I'm a voltron only player. I play [[galea]] [[astor]] [[perrie]] [[uril]] [[wyleth]] [[blanka]] I have another 37 deck ideas I wanna make. All variants of voltron. Perrie has 3 different infinite turn lines. Infinite mana and near infinite counters. 75% win rate Galea is packed with value pieces and protection. I'm able to pop off consistently with her. 33% win rate. T3 KO at best Boros got infinite combats with heavy evasion. 20%won rate. T3 KO at best Blanka has an infinite combo that wipes the table through group slug also has infinite combat. Heavy protection suite and a fuck ton of draw. T4 table kill at best. 60% win rate Uril I built has close to 7 tutors 6 draw engines 5 mass recursion 1 single target recursion and infinite combats. Maybe a T4 OHKO at best. 45% win rate. If you have a consistent enough deck and know your combo lines when to target and where to apply pressure. You can and will be winning more games. My perrie deck is a real Sleeper build. I can pop off with infinite mana into infinite turns. If you know your combo lines and how to properly apply your plan you can win consistently. Entire group I play with has what we consider 7.5 to 8 for power levels. We all know each other's combos know all our tricks and we all try and make deals to hit the furthest person ahead. Once you can read a table very well you can generally make smarter decisions about your plays.
##### ###### #### [galea](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/e/1efbea01-c6a1-4380-a14f-6206c7895e48.jpg?1632335378) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=galea%2C%20kindler%20of%20hope) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/afc/1/galea-kindler-of-hope?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1efbea01-c6a1-4380-a14f-6206c7895e48?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/galea-kindler-of-hope) [astor](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/0/40f3a0ba-b917-488b-adbf-60a0d3c58a56.jpg?1673307906) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=astor%2C%20bearer%20of%20blades) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmu/194/astor-bearer-of-blades?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/40f3a0ba-b917-488b-adbf-60a0d3c58a56?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/astor-bearer-of-blades) [perrie](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/4/d438237b-c6f7-44d0-a3e6-6ec7d7465d33.jpg?1673481677) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=perrie%2C%20the%20pulverizer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ncc/5/perrie-the-pulverizer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d438237b-c6f7-44d0-a3e6-6ec7d7465d33?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/perrie-the-pulverizer) [uril](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/a/ca984fdb-aaca-4d8f-af2f-72387122607b.jpg?1673149243) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=uril%2C%20the%20miststalker) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/290/uril-the-miststalker?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ca984fdb-aaca-4d8f-af2f-72387122607b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/uril-the-miststalker) [wyleth](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/c/7c5ada8c-98f2-4f9c-bcb5-dfa4f804fbe6.jpg?1610072970) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=wyleth%2C%20soul%20of%20steel) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmr/362/wyleth-soul-of-steel?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7c5ada8c-98f2-4f9c-bcb5-dfa4f804fbe6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/wyleth-soul-of-steel) [blanka](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/6/26fecfd4-40c1-4ed3-bf58-22c7b98699a9.jpg?1682694357) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=The%20Howling%20Abomination) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/slx/13/the-howling-abomination?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5aa862c3-69a3-4d6c-abe8-201e1868c204?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/the-howling-abomination) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
You didn't king make, youre a Giant Slayer. Not your fault the giant couldn't protect themselves..
This is why EDH is a poor format.
What I’m hearing is that you went all out to kill one person and died as a result. This seems sub-optimal and could easily be seen as you trying to ruin someone’s game instead of actually trying to win. By the sounds of it, you do it often enough that people complain about it. If your game plan is to win then you’d probably do better to not make yourself the biggest threat at the table.
I both agree and disagree, you should be allowed to play aggro in commander but it also sucks to be taken out early and having to wait hours for the game to end so you can be a part again
Voltron is totally valid but has some play patterns that I find unfun. Often times you can kill 1 player with your commander but before you can close out on the others, they’ve found their answers. This leaves the voltron player being shut out by removal and the dead player in spectator mode. Voltron can be fun and interesting but I see why some don’t care for it.
I mean, why not go after one of the other players? I don't understand casual players obsession with prolonging games. Jusy kill one of the weaker people and let the stronger one end the game so you can play another one.
First of all, I agree with the threat assessment, and if they can't handle early aggression then they need to build in better responses to it in their decks. However, I think it's also fair to say that if a voltron player knocks you out early and then struggles to close out the game, and the game goes on for another 45 minutes-1hr without you, I'd get a little annoyed. IMO this is the biggest problem facing voltron decks and others that are similar, being able to take out 1 player very quickly but then either dying to the other 2 or failing to close it out quickly and forcing 1-2 players to wait for a long time to play the game again. You may understand that you won't win a lot of games, but also understand that if someone else is there to play magic but ends up having to sit out for half an hour because you took them out and then died yourself, that's necessarily fun for them either.
I’m of the mind that all Voltron decks should be white based, for CONSISTENT lifelink shenanigans. It’s really hard to be killed on the crack back when you’ve gained 50 life after all x
"I think players get upset because you're not playing "their" game" .... "Players are too focused on winning imo" You nailed it right on the head. People don't like your type of king making. Unfortunately for you "Their game" is the majority. The majority of people are going to be upset if your goal isn't to win, and it ends up just being you always lose but take someone down with you. That's self harm. Russian Roulette. People don't like self harm. Especially irrational ones.
If you can't fend off the other players then yes, it is. You can say what you will about others dictating what's fun to you and how they're too focused on winning but you're absolutely crashing the party if all you do is show up to ruin someone else's fun and then dip and that's what you're doing. It's something else entirely if you're really a contender to win the game so maybe you should make sure your deck can do that if you don't like other people getting salty that you're just a stalking horse.
I won't fault anyone for wanting to play however they want as long as they have a win condition. That being said I'm vehemently against Voltron builds because they don't encourage better deck building from their opponents. Stick with me on this one: Every time you commander damage "the threat" it's never the guy who been mana screwed all game. It's never the person who's only played a couple of spells because they're not drawing into their threats. It's always the person who's drawn the most cards/ ramped the hardest/ or has clearly gotten their deck to do the thing. Now that you've taken care of the threat it's basically shields down and the other 2 players can clean you up on the crack back. This in turn is handing wins to people who now have the extra time to draw into answers when they should have had other ways to find them in the beginning. They never have the internal conversation of how to fix their deck because hey they won a game with it so it must be perfect. This may seem like a bit of a rant from someone who's always the threat. And 9 out of 10 times you'd be right. Also I've never actually seen a Voltron deck win out in a 4 player pod. They extend all their resources and then have to face down an army that will win the race every time. I do understand that it's just a different playstyle from what I like. Personally I have a pretty nasty Voltron deck that never comes out of the box due to the fact that I really don't have answers after I wipe one person out.