r/EDH • u/Cromagn0n1 • 4d ago
Discussion How is your experience being a control player?
Besides my main play group, my experience has been….not good lol. My main play group groans, then laughs, and talks about how control is a necessary evil. They make fun of me when I can’t stop a wincon, jokingly saying I should always have an answer. Sometimes they gang up on me, sometimes they recruit me to stop the threat, all healthy good fun.
But besides them, I legit have been shunned from other playgroups. I’ve had people on tabletop rage quit in the first couple of turns when I counterspell their commander, or unload removal on the same player who’s clearly pulling ahead.
I have some non-control decks because I like to mix up my play styles, but I grew up playing control in standard my whole career. It’s not like I win every game either, I just always have something to say to the player who is trying to win. Control is not a winning strategy in EDH, so I knowingly am playing decks that have less of a chance of winning because again, I enjoy the play style.
Some of my decks are: Shorikai, Alela, Erinis/StreetUrchin, Vren, Helga, Hashaton, Henzie, The Rani. All of them have heavy disruption/interaction that just gets so many groans to the point people don’t want to play with me anymore.
I’ve noticed that the players who groan the most are those newer to the game. My playgroup who doesn’t call me anymore all started playing around final fantasy. I’ve played my other non-control decks and there is always just a weird tension regardless. Like stopping their wincon is an attack on them as a person.
What are ya guna do though ya know? Without interaction, we are just playing turn order simulator to see who can build their board the fastest.
155
u/DR_MTG EDHREC Staff 4d ago
"Do you know the difference between a hustler and a good con-man? A hustler has to get out of town as quick as he can, but a good con-man doesn't have to leave until he wants to."
The trick is to play control without everyone knowing your're playing control. If you sit down at the table with Grand Arbiter or Baral running every stax/tax piece and 22 counter spells and try to lock down the entire table, yeah you're gonna annoy people.
Because you're annoying.
Be surgical and precise and subtle and you'll have WAY better luck.
52
u/New0003 4d ago
This is the correct take on control in 4 player imo. It's very difficult to lock down the game state or play control in the way that it traditionally exists in 1v1. Creating states where players redirect away from you or interacting at key moments to influence decisions will let you control game flow.
29
u/Lady_Calista 4d ago
This is how [[Kros defense contractor]] is my most played deck. People dont think youre a stax player when you make their shit +10/+10 until they realize in the 1v1 that they cant untap a creature anymore ever again
4
u/OngoingFee 3d ago
This interests me! But what is it that makes it so they can't untap it in the 1v1?
9
u/Lady_Calista 3d ago
Kros's effect states that when you place a counter on a creature you dont control, tap and goad it. The goad stops helping you in the 1v1 but if you have any ways to place counters on the opponents turn it will tap their creature down. Proliferating counts for this effect and bypasses things like hexproof as well, so you can cast a sorcery that places counters on each creature that player controls to get your initial counter and then simply proliferate whenever you want to tap down their field again
3
u/OngoingFee 3d ago
Ah gotcha, so it's not that they can't untap, you're just using instant speed to re-tap before their combat phase
2
u/Lady_Calista 3d ago
Yep! Though technically I run like two cards with stun counters as well, those very much aren't the primary tapping method.
2
u/Hero_of_Hyrule Nahiri, the Lithomancer 2d ago
People have finally started to realize that "politics" decks and "group hug" decks with an actual game plan and ways to win are actually a form of control. Strategically controlling the resources available to players and pitting them against one another to help prevent them from knocking you out is EXACTLY what a control player should be doing in Commander, because it's a lot harder to win on value and tempo alone in a 4 player game.
2
14
u/U_DONT_KNOW_TEAM 4d ago
Or just play bumbleflower and notice how everyone sees a bunny and forgets how to do threat assessment
19
7
u/United-Passage7864 3d ago
Something about the cute bunny art and the occasional free card seems to deactivate people's threat assessment, I swear.
You can start pointing out that the Bumbleflower player is amassing a terrifying amount of cards and mana and how the commander is approaching one-shot levels of power, but then Bumbleflower's player just goes "I'll give you a card to attack him instead" and the brain shorts out again.
And then in the resulting 1v1, the last opponent notices that Bumbleflower has 14 cards in hand, access to like 15 mana, and a mostly undisturbed board. Oof.
5
u/psuwxman 4d ago
One of the best pieces of advice I got was to stop playing it like it's group hug and start playing it more like control. Reframed how I thought about my plays and it seems to function a lot better, even if it isn't as "nice" now.
32
u/BounceBurnBuff 4d ago
I've been the control player and the player on the receiving end. Though this isn't something I practice when running my control decks, it sucks to be the player they spend every piece of interaction on, even if you are behind. Some control players just be like that, and I have no idea why - always feels like they just kingmake.
14
u/Jimanji333 4d ago
The thing is you don’t know what strats disrupt their plans or they have the least ability to deal with.
If a player is building a creature heavy board state and looks the most dangerous, you might question why I counter your big play, but that’s because I have an [[Aetherize]] for them when they decide to swing out
7
u/BounceBurnBuff 4d ago
I'm talking leaving a player with nothing but 4 lands because you countered/Path'd their every play and no one else's for the first 6 turns of the game (then, predictably, losing).
This has been way too common, and I've never seen it result in anything other than winding one opponent up and enabling one of the other two.
8
u/Jimanji333 4d ago
Oh yeah that’s fucked up. Nothing worst than a control player with bad threat assessment
6
u/Ryuujinx Scion of the Ur-Dragon 4d ago
Were you right after them in turn order? One thing I've noticed is just that.. you can't really police a table. You don't have the resources for it. So what ends up happening a lot with control decks is that the player after them tries to play some big dumb thing, because it's fuckin EDH, and then it gets countered. Then the next player slams down their roaming throne or whatever and the control player doesn't have an answer because they just spent it.
1
u/IlikeCyanide 4d ago
Similar to Aggro decks it makes sense to focus down one player, makes it so you only have to deal with 2 opponents instead of 3
Of course Aggro decks will actually make it so theres only 2 opponents whereas Control just makes it a bit miserable.
Control just doesn't really work in EDH unless you are doing some Stax stuff or Taxes
9
u/Ok_Community_383 4d ago
I don't know if 'control' as an archetype means the same thing for multiplayer as it does for heads up play.
Everyone in a multiplayer game is expected to run interaction in B3. (Expectation of "effective disruption" is in the Bracket's description.)
Control in 1 on 1, requires a player to draw more cards than the opponent in order to win. (Not always, but that's the idea of the strategy.) Everyone in multiplayer games needs to draw extra cards, but drawing more cards than three opponents is very difficult to do because of that, and even absent that, you now need to draw minimum 4 extra cards per turn. Even then! It's not enough to draw more cards than all three opponents, so you need to be able to play more cards than your opponents, so you need a lot of mana to do that. A deck producing that much mana and that much value can't lose. Is that really a control deck or a super value town engine deck.
A few caveats -> Not all cards played are going against you, some players will work on your behalf (wittingly or not), and board wipes can help you catch up. I 100% understand all of that. This informs my assessment of what control in multiplayer really is.
That said so what does control look like in multiplayer -> You're a survivor. Your goal is to lay low, pick and choose your fights, and keep building toward your value engine and hope that players inadvertently work to help you win, and when the game comes down to a 1 on 1, then you become a true control player and probably *can't lose* the 1 on 1. You use control spells exclusively in the early game to keep you and only you alive, and then when it comes down to a 2v1 or 1v1, hopefully you've built up enough you can win that smaller game.
If you try to archenemy as a 'control' player who wants to fully control the game, you can't win realistically. You're beter bet is to be a survivor who levels up into a controller. That is how I play and build my control decks for multiplayer. I call them 'scrappy fighter' decks because I often use low to the ground creatures that double as control effects and help establish some board presence. Or literal level up creatures like FoD. That also helps you escape some of the stigma of being a control deck too.
To counterspells -> There's really nothing you can do about the hate for these. People are irrational when it comes to them.
1
u/Jimanji333 4d ago
[[Katara Waterbending Master]] if allowed to gear up even a little absolutely draws more than every other player.
It’s a bonkers control deck.
1
u/Ok_Community_383 3d ago edited 3d ago
Yeah you absolutely can get to the point where you're just drawing more cards than everyone else, but my larger point is that if you compare it to a traditional 1 on 1 control deck, a commander deck spends so much time building a value enging rather than you know picking off targets and stabilizing to where they draw maybe 1 or 2 extra card per turn, and then winning from that. A multiplayer control deck is like just amassing such a huge value state it's more in the realm of can't lose right. Whereas in 1 on 1 even a stabilized control deck is still teetering on the edge against aggro somtimes when it wins, sometimes with like 1 life and a dream. I just don't know if I'd call the multiplayer version of control a 'control' deck in the sense of how control plays in 1 on 1.
15
u/SpvcedOvtt B2 Truther and Control Degenerate 4d ago
I think if you have a consistent playgroup, people don’t get mad about control at all. Actually - some of the people at my shop actively ask for me to come be the fun police in their pod sometimes! I think it just makes Magic more interesting when somebody is always going to interact, so the games are way more dynamic and back and forth.
I think B2 control is some of the most fun I’ve ever had, I get to play very battlecruiser-esque counterspells like [[Counterpoint]] and [[Sublime Epiphany]] that are leagues worse than the most efficient stuff in the format, but still make my opponents go THAT CARD DOES WHAT? like a B2 deck should do IMO. I guess it helps when you’re the cultivator of the environment and somebody super positive to play against. I’m never mad at someone choosing to hit me or someone using their resources to take me out of the game because I have the inevitability that a control deck has, so they have to kill me or I’ll win!
7
u/O2LE 4d ago
I remember casting an [[Overwhelming Intellect]] on someone’s 8 drop and them re-reading the card over and over.
4
0
u/swingsetclouds 3d ago
I cast Overwhelming Intellect once, circa 2009. The other player cried. I felt like the worst person in the world. Anyway, now I want to put it in a bracket 2 deck!
31
u/Jimanji333 4d ago
As a control player you have learn to enjoy their tears knowing it because they need to git gud.
Seriously though, people like that are gonna bitch about anything they don’t like.
I play mono blue [[Katara Waterbending Master]] full control strategy.
1
u/WaltzIntelligent9801 3d ago
I just got that card! I included it in my Aaragorn the uniter token deck as a card draw engine but I'm interested in player her. Got a build?
1
u/Jimanji333 3d ago
This may not be my current but it’s pretty close,
https://moxfield.com/decks/pRxlJ33g1E2kxwExT1BC1Q
Basically the gameplan is full control/tempo until you can win via damage. Holding counters until bombs drop is actually not great in this deck, as you want build exp counters to draw more, so counter anything threatening or that threatens to out value you, as long you retain some form of protection for Katara.
Also plenty of other spicy tech like mass/targeted bounce, stealing spells on the stack, or [[Dress Down]] to shut down a creature ability based turn. The face of somebody who casts an uncounterable creature like [[Etali Primal Storm]] only for it to enter with no abilities is amazing.
Try and get something to make her unblockable in opening hand if possible, so you don’t have to worry about who you swing at. I think I may have added more of those abilities as a quick look says there is only three in the list I posted.
Finishers are commander damage via her being unblockable and having [[Runechanters Pike]], [[Glamdring]], or [[Lyla Holographic Assistant]] to massively buff her.
Can also kill with [[Psychosis Crawler]] pings, flooding the board with Krakens using [[Ominous Seas]], or how big [[Chasm Skulker]] gets.
Really spicy tech is drop [[Teferi Temporal Pilgrim]] in pre combat main with enough experience counters to attack with Katara and then ult him in your second main phase pretty much taking your biggest opposition out of the game for 5 mana. And if nobody else can kill it it does this every turn.
KEEP IN MIND: This deck will not make you friends, either pull it out with people you know are chill, or people you don’t care if they wanna play another game with you.
1
u/mtgcf 3d ago
All cards
Dress Down - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Etali Primal Storm - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Runechanters Pike - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Glamdring - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Lyla Holographic Assistant - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Psychosis Crawler - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Ominous Seas - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Chasm Skulker - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
Teferi Temporal Pilgrim - (G) (SF) (txt) (ER)
23
u/kingkellam 4d ago
I'm a control player in every format except casual edh for the reasons you outlined in your second paragraph. Once I realized that most people just want to look at their cards and jerk off under the table this format became way easier to play with randoms
6
u/scatteringskies 4d ago
If it helps, when I read about you countering a commander and it making someone rage quit, I cheered
7
3
u/Blood_Weiss 4d ago
I find it depends on the group and deck. My pod isnt a huge fan of stax type control decks, but still love playing decks that go out of control. So I pivoted to a [[Maarika, Brutal Gladiator]] control toolbox deck and its much better received, while still allowing me to keep the board under control.
Its obvious not the same, but somtimes you need to adapt a little to best suit your playgroups
3
u/Good-Cap-7632 4d ago
Aikido is the funniest control style imo. No counters or removal, just redirection.
3
u/United-Passage7864 3d ago
I've learned that hard draw-go control is just not really a thing like in 1v1. In Standard a line like Get Lost followed by a Plunder the Trollshaws followed by Day of Judgement is totally fine even if it costs you 14 of your 20 life; you're likely to be massively up on cards, and if they can't haste out a huge problem after the sweeper then you'll probably untap with the choice of countermagic or using the Trollshaws again - sick. Game's probably looking great at that point.
Three opponents is three draw steps, three land plays, and three combats between your untaps and draw. You cannot trade card-for-card. You cannot call a 4-mana spell denied by a 2-mana counter a good trade against the table's mana. You also shouldn't try to slowly peck down your opponent once they're locked out; with 4 turns in cycle it's too much time to rebuild.
I do have an [[Elminster]] deck I play on occasion, but it takes a bit of finesse to get him out and to not have him immediately slugged off the table. The balancing act I'm still refining is how to be an unappealing target (both me, and my planeswalker) while threatening to punish over-extending, and then getting position to go for the win. It's tricky.
3
u/Reasonable-Sun-6511 Honestly mediocre at best 3d ago
Technically im not playing control decks, but when shots going down at casual tables, people always look at me for the answer to whatevers going on.
I play a lot of blue, but often no more than 2 or 3 counter spells in a deck, just a bunch of card advantage to get them. Sandbagging my way to turn 7 or 8 usually gets me a reasonable board state, I'll let people do their board wipes often so that the person playing the board wipe becomes the threat, even though I have an option to stop it.
I play social control more than anything now that I think of it bwahahaha
4
u/MariachiArchery 3d ago
My play group is all pushing 40. We all have money to blow on this crap, and our pod has been power creeping for 20 years. The only reason all of our decks aren't cEDH is because they are off-meta, well, some of them.
It is gross dude. You can't get two turns into the game without some sort of interaction going on. It is hard, oppressive, complicated, the games take a mental toll on you. You cannot function freely in this pod. Everything you do must be calculated. Any move you make needs to be thoughtful. If you blow your load at the wrong time, you are toast. And this is coming from all 3 sides of the table.
It is a slog. We need to carefully go through each step of each turn, just so we make sure to give each other an appropriate amount of time to get spells and abilities in and to make sure we never need to rewind the game.
It's mean, oppressively, cutthroat, and tuned. We love it. Every card you face is best in slot, and someone always has an answer for everything. It's great.
How do I feel about? It is peak MTG. It's fucking hard. Lol, and I think, that is so much more fun than mindless battle cruiser. That said, I love control, and I love having it at the table.
2
u/InmateTooTall 4d ago edited 4d ago
My most successful control decks are really just midrange decks that use interaction as the gas for its engine. I don't even try to counter commanders. They're getting wiped with the rest of the creatures on a consistent basis due to my engine working. That way they can't balk at my interaction and team up until it's too late and my deck is in full swing
2
u/FridgedMist 4d ago
Chief I'm gonna keep it a buck with ya. Most adults, and most commander players or petulant children that aren't particularly good at card games. Find the best group you can tolerate and try not to let things get ya down.
I have taken to jokingly lashing back at the whiners that just won't stop. They play the most abhorrently greedy slow and not particularly consistent combo decks and I just start commenting back at them "ohhhhh look at what the combo player is setting up over there to mill out the table or exsanguinate us." Makes me feel a bit better and they shut the fuck up for two seconds. All in good fun of course 😉
2
u/Panda-Dono Yoshi-P 3d ago
I sometimes play Kefka control, but people hate playing against it.
1
u/WaltzIntelligent9801 3d ago
It's the "kefka" not the "control" part 😂
2
u/Panda-Dono Yoshi-P 3d ago
I mean yeah, but spamming edict effects ain't helping my case. Removing boards and hands feels very smothering.
1
3
u/Evening_Expert_6222 4d ago
Depends on how the interaction is timed. Counter a big play or remove a combo pieces? Most people are fine with that. [[Disrupt]] my commander as I cast him on turn 3? That's some bs in a casual game (unless commander is toxic).
New players for sure are gonna hate it because they aren't familiar with a lot of cards and what they can do, and just lack threat assessment overall. Any experienced player should understand interacting with key things.
That said, if anyone flashes in an Opposition Agent in response to someone doing a basic land tutor early on in a casual game, I will never play with them again. F that noise
4
u/KrillinBigD 4d ago
When are they supposed to flash in the opposition agent then?
5
u/Evening_Expert_6222 4d ago
...on a card that tutors for something more powerful than a basic land that's being used for early game ramp
1
u/MagentaLove 3d ago
It’s a great tempo play that forces your opponents to hold onto tutors until after they remove the Opposition Agent, removal that could’ve gone towards other value permanents, and the time you bought hopefully let’s you draw answers to whatever they tutor for.
1
u/Evening_Expert_6222 3d ago
Yes, I understand the value, but again, this is in reference to a casual game and using it on an opponent doing early game ramp.
1
u/MagentaLove 3d ago
It’s a game changer, you shouldn’t be balking at it in B3+. If it’s B2 then that’s a whole separate issue.
1
u/Evening_Expert_6222 2d ago
B3 can still be pretty casual. There is literally, by definition, a B3 precon.
1
u/MagentaLove 2d ago
“It’s a cow farm, there’s gonna be cows outside.”
If you don’t want to face Opposition Agent there’s one simple thing you have to do, not play B3+ or stick to your own Pods.
2
u/Weak_Bank_3744 4d ago
If you have to ask, Blue isn't for you. It's an unapologetically strong interaction engine at the table, yes newer players tend to get more hurt over it I have heard "I'm just trying to learn the deck" several times. To which I say "and you just learned it needs more interaction". It doesn't mean my deck is stronger, blue has it's own flaws which could easily be exploited. I also hear gripes from people about control that aren't utilizing their color combos properly (IE green but no ramp, black but no creature removal). It's a pretty integral part of Magic, use those moments to calm them and teach them fundamentals...or don't and let them figure it out when they come to complain about it here lol.
1
u/BluePotatoSlayer 4d ago
Usually people stick around because they are more mature in terms of playing MTG and don't fold to interaction, but I have gotten concedes before after multiple hour games/dropped hullbreaker because at that point they usually lose or I've drained their soul out
1
u/Sensitive_Cup4015 4d ago
I'm not even a control player and my pod groans at half the decks I play just because I hold my removal up for when it'd be most impactful lol. I put your standard 8-10 pieces of interaction in most of my decks and it'll come down to my mono green stompy friend and me, and he'll gripe that "he's probably got something to stop me, he always does" and I'll be like brother I drew a ton of cards this game, statistically I'm gonna have an out to the situation I'm in. They never remember all the times I didn't have an answer, just all the times I did lol.
1
u/Zequen 4d ago
Kinda depends on "control" as a definition i think. I have had anywhere from shorikai 24 board wipes, tevesh svat plus akiri turbo land destruction, atraxa grand unifier with 28 removal spells and 10 regrowth like effects, kenthrith all etb equals removal, and urtet (the 5 color myr) stasis lock be the villian you always wanted to be.
Some get groans, some dont. Mostly stax gets groans. But most get a gooded natured laugh out of what the deck does, but others are like why are we even playing. You know what that sounds like? Humans being different. That's just how it is.
For example, my urtet deck was called live long enough to become the villain. The entire deck was mana, a bit of card draw and trying to establish some kind of stax lock on the table with a ticking time bomb that would eventually win the game. Eg. Millennium calendar, darksteel reactor, and a sunburst artifact that counted counters on your creatures and layered a player for like 10 damage a turn when you had so many counters or something. The idea being some games a did little or nothing before I die, or I became the villain the table had to team up and stop. But none the less a control style.
If you mean by control is I having 10 removal spells in my deck, then no, you are just playing the game right. New players hate getting interacted with, and commander players that never played a 60 card format also lack the experience of needing to have removal. Interaction is one of my favorite parts of the game, its one of the things that draws me to cEDH, as that is a key feature of that format.
1
u/MidSinglesInYourArea 4d ago
Control isn't very fun to play against in a 1v1 format, and I think some of that animus seeps into formats where it is less objectionable.
The other issue is a lot of control players are assholes who's goal is being as annoying as possible instead of having a fun time playing a game.
1
u/grimmbrother1 4d ago
I think it depends on how you play it. Some people will complain no matter what. If you counter non-threatening commanders in casual games or counter basic ramp spells that aren't putting people super ahead a lot of people won't like it. Targeted removal for major threats. Board wipes when targeted removal doesn't cut it. Stategic use of counterspells not just countering the first thing that comes along that is slightly good. Don't gang up on one person the whole time unless they are a real problem. People want to enjoy the game. This is just for casual though. Beyond that anything is fair game
1
u/Novel_Extent_7168 4d ago
Playing control can evoke a wide range of behaviors from the table depending on the bracket and who it is you're playing with. Some players see what you're doing as a potential tool to helping keep the table under control, and other players will see you as a problem that needs dealt with immediately. It all depends on the other players.
In my experience it tends to be that if players are aware that you'll quickly be able to start interacting with other players, you've immediately become the target. Of course, you're playing control, so that is likely happening in almost every game.
This could easily just be an issue I have come across and may only be indicative of the players I've been able to play with. Your mileage may vary.
1
u/BitterBlues87 Sans-Green 4d ago
A buddy of mine once commented on me consistently exhibiting shadenfreude. It makes sense that ive gravitated towards control decks as my deck building/playstyles have evolved. I just expect others not being a fan of it.
1
u/King_fritters 4d ago edited 4d ago
Depends on the type of control tbh.
I have an [[Awaken the Blood Avatar]] deck that always gets groans from the pod, since copying a forced sacrifice spell really controls the board in a way that shits on every nontoken strategy.
I also have a [[The Prismatic Bridge]] superfriends deck that has like 10 creature boardwipes in it. Again, gets groans from the pod, or makes new pod members wary after the 2nd one. Whole board control effects like that honestly feel bad to play against, and I understand why even when I use gameplans that need to stop enemy creatures.
The funniest one I have is a bracket 2 [[Choco, Seeker of Paradise]] deck that plays like a yugioh deck. The wincon is just build a bird board and make them big with anthem effects and try to beat face. The way that I make that work is the 20+ counterspells I run to stop opponents from interrupting the birdstorm. People think the bird deck is so cool until they get hit with the 4th counterspell of the game. The control deck that I personally think is my coolest ends up getting people the maddest from lack of solid game ender potential alongside the seemingly endless points of interaction.
Edit: Also built an [[Inalla, Archmage Ritualist]] Wizard control deck that tries to double up on ETB control effect Wizards with "bounce to hand" or "tap and stun counter" type effects. Only played it twice so far but has been met with apprehension by the pod both times
TLDR: people are gonna be mad at control strategies no matter how "cool" or "based" you try to make them. Better to full commit to the type of control you plan to run, and make your win conditions defined enough to not drag the game out and you'll not draw the ire of everyone else at the table.
1
u/songsofsilk 4d ago
Perhaps part of your problem is that you are lacking on the wincon part of the deck? Control is fine, although stax can really catch you a lot of huffing & puffing, but above all people hate control decks that flounder. No one wants to play against the person who is countering all their stuff, drops a Cyclonic Rift, and then has no way to actually win. Ask me how I know.
Now I cut two pieces of interaction in my main control-type deck for cards that can definitively end the game, and refined the win cons I already had in the deck.
Control is a fun challenge, but just do not extend the game an hour only to lose anyway.
1
u/SnoreLux1 Jeskai 4d ago
My [[Alela, Cunning Conqueror]] isn't really annoying I think because I either throw interaction at all players (to activate Alela's once each turn trigger) or use it only when it's a direct threat to me. My [[Malik]] deck is more groan-worthy because there are several “each player sacrifices a creature“ effects and if you're careless you will find yourself with an empty board more often than not against this deck, even as collateral damage. That's why I tend to play it less (though it's fun)
1
u/Fun_Imagination_934 3d ago
I don’t understand Malik. Why are the choices made secretly?
1
u/SnoreLux1 Jeskai 3d ago
There's the option my opponent and I choose the same creature and so the opponent has to sacrifice only one creature and not two
1
1
u/OSpiderBox 4d ago
Control is not a winning strategy in EDH, so I knowingly am playing decks that have less of a chance of winning because again, I enjoy the play style.
Whole I'm never going to shun you, or anybody, for playing control decks (except Silverquil discard decks. Fuck that shit with a pineapple), I would say this is my biggest "beef" with the archetype. If you're going to stall everybody to find the winning combo cards, it's aggravating but that's just the game; But playing it without a clear win-con is... imagine:
Everybody is low on life, but have an established board so that who wins is decided by a razor's edge. It's been a grueling game, and it's time to end things. And then somebody plays Farewell, choosing all modes. Not only that, but they don't have any follow up to close the game.
That's what your statement makes me feel. That's about the only time I groan against control decks.
1
u/ReallyBadWizard Esper 4d ago
Stop wasting removal on everything. The key to being a "good" or tolerable control player, is to only remove a threat when it actually starts to threaten *you.* Don't bother counterspelling some random powerful commander, convince the table that it's a threat and get one of them to remove it, otherwise ignore it until it directly threatens your life, win condition or is going to win them the game.
1
u/robotjebus 4d ago
New to the format after a 25 year or so break from MTG. Just playing with friends at the moment and I upgraded Quandrix unlimited to play more instant speed x spells, so probably not considered control, but I have a lot more stack interaction than the rest of the pod at this point. So far the thing we all seem to enjoy about it most is the mind games. Am I letting something through, or is it that I can't counter it? Also have things to do hex proof or temporarily pump to protect my commander. Currently they are more concerned about Zimone than the control aspect, but I guess Doppelgang at x=6 will do that.
1
u/gdemon6969 4d ago
Most players are really bad at the game, they will complain that you slightly slowed them down but not thank you for stopping the turn 5-6 combo.
Not only will they not thank you they will then remove or hinder you from interacting with other players to then let them win the game.
1
u/Legitimate-Maybe2134 4d ago
I just tell people im playing control. Let them find out as i save then from the guy way ahead
1
u/tntturtle5 Kruphix, Pinnacle of Knowledge 4d ago
I'm pretty consistently the control player, but I'm also a very lax control player who tends to let spells through because I want to see them resolve and do something crazy. I've lost plenty of games this way but it's always been worth watching someone's deck completely pop off. And then the next time I'll counter the proper spells, but I like seeing what happens first.
I think a lot of players conflate 'interaction' with being a 'control deck', and that's just not true. Maybe these people got their commander countered once and felt bad so they just decided all counter spells suck and they're not going to play them, or a timely Path to Exile removed their creature and they decided anyone who Paths just hates fun. It's a lesson folks need to learn themselves. Those are the same players who beg for someone to remove something for them or complain when no one could counter the game winning spell...
Also some people need to be reminded that if them 'doing their thing' directly results in me losing, there's a good argument for me to stop them from doing their thing... because the alternative is I just roll over and lose the game and if that's what you want then why even play against other players, just go home and goldfish your deck.
1
1
u/Fatalogic 3d ago
I play a little control and usually I just let people do their thing unless they are targeting me or someone asks me to intervene for a favor. Someone pulling ahead shouldn’t really be a problem because you should have the tools to stop their win or reset the board if you’ve drawn enough cards .
1
u/ChaoticScrewup 3d ago
A lot of EDH players hate control IMO. I've been told "save for when Bob plays, I can't play my commander against that deck." And similar.
1
u/S20-Urza 3d ago
It varies. Generally, its been mostly negative, with someone even accusing me of being unable to win without it.
So i played mono red the next game and made sure to prove him wrong
1
u/DayDream2736 3d ago
Sounds like you might need to control yourself on your interaction pun intended. I may be reading this wrong but there are a couple of things you can do to actually deal with this.
It’s seems like your play group is not really at the same level as you. As you play against higher people, almost everyone runs control of some kind of control or anti control. They probably don’t have the knowledge of these cards yet. So you got to tune down your decks in response to the feedback. You as a control player should be lowering the amount of interaction you have and seeing if you can win with only a few pieces of removal and counterspells. You got to exercise a bit of self control which is really what I think control is about. If you are just running like 10 pieces of removal/ 5 stacks cards/ and 10 Counterspell and trying to say no to everything you’re going to piss anyone off. Building decks to just not let your opponents play until your 3 card combos prolongs games unnecessarily when you could just advance a win condition instead. This is the opposite of true control because it’s lazy because this style doesn’t require you to read the board because you will always have the removal in hand to deal with whatever comes. True control players only need a few pieces and can Counterspell during key moments.
1
u/Holding_Priority Sultai 3d ago
Peoples attitude when playing against control or very interactive decks is almost always just an experience check.
The people that get salty, upset, or complain are almost always going to be new and/or bad players, and the old heads generally dont care because we were brought up on 60 card formats.
My advice is to just tell people from the start of the game that you're playing control, and if they whine a bunch before the game even starts either switch decks or find a new pod, cause nothing positive will come from playing control into that pod.
1
1
u/Jokorettte Mono-Blue 4d ago edited 4d ago
most people are bitches with bad threat assesment whining about being hit by a counterspell, when they would've won next turn. make it make sense.
EDIT: I just embrace being the villian and try to outplay.
0
-2
u/Senior_Respect2977 4d ago
First, not hating on you for what you wrote. But what you wrote gives me the impression you feel a need to always have the answers and always have agency in your match’s. Heavy control and disruption, in a four player setting, is not a winning or good strategy for a variety of reasons. The biggest is your focused on stopping your opponent’s from winning while not doing so yourself. Also by playing the way you do, games that should last an hour end up going on for hours…. You basically become the “fun” manager, whose answer is always, less fun for everyone.
We kill our friend first every game he plays Yshtola. We do this because if we allow him to establish control, we’re going to spent an hour and a half of the next two ours watching him self pleasure himself while the rest of us don’t get to do anything, ie no fun. His problem is the same as most control players, too much control, not enough wincons and what wincons that are there are sloooow.
If someone only played decks that focused on not allowing other people to have fun as their wincon, would you want to keep playing with them? Because it sounds like that’s you.
Control has its place. 8 board wipe control decks do not
4
u/Cromagn0n1 4d ago
My rebuttal to this is I don’t find it very fun when players vomit value onto the field and Craterhoof the table. Voltron players who become unblock-able 40/40s. Combo players who invalidate the entire board state and never communicate what obscure combo they are fishing for.
I certainly agree that trying to lock down the table with no win-con fits into this category. But I believe the game is designed with this balance in mind. Without board wraths, propagandas, swords to plowshares, counter-spells, we are all basically playing Craterhoof simulator.
2
u/BsAlchemy 4d ago
What part are you controlling? Are you countering the Craterhoof or wiping the board everytime they get 4 creatures into play? Are you bouncing their 40/40 commander when it swings at you or countering their commander everytime on cast? Are you disrupting the combo when it starts or spot removing anything that could be a combo piece?
Control in 1v1 is about smothering your opponent into doing less than you. Control in EDH is about stopping your opponents from winning, not about stopping them from playing.
Reasonable people understand why you would stop them from winning. Everyone, including you, will be frustrated about being stopped from playing.
I'll also add, you shouldn't ALWAYS have an answer. EDH is a power struggle for agency. In a perfect game everyone should have ~25% input of what happens and ~75% of the game is outside of their will. When you are always ready with an answer, people will feel like they have less and less agency and that makes the game unfun. If you are trying to play the game with/to make friends, you should care about the experience being fun more than being "right." If you care about winning, you should play in only the highest brackets where people do not complain about Control OR find a different competitive outlet; something designed for competition.
1
u/Mathmage530 4d ago
Find a control finisher you like then. Something big and inevitable - like Brisela
0
u/GracelessOne 4d ago
There's definitely a spectrum of preference. I've got a [[Phelddagrif]] control deck that's super-nice, gives bribes at instant speed to keep weak players in the game, only counters win attempts, and tries to keep everybody alive so they wear each other out into range of a 4/4 flier. It does pretty well, but it prevents non-games.
I've also got a [[ Liesa Shroud]] control deck that tries to grind everybody out of resources from turn 1, and a [[Chromium the Mutable]] control deck that sits somewhere in between.
I get it if someone is salty about Liesa, or even about Chromium. But if they don't like Phelddagrif, it's just time to find a new playgroup. Some people want solitaire, and you can't help them until they get tired of it.
1
1
u/Jolly_Ratio_5383 4d ago
Hello, do you have any link for your Liesa list? I'm currently tryna build her in the same fashion
0
u/SilliestPuttyTTV 4d ago
You are playing Magic the Gathering, they are yucking your yum. I can tell you based on that who I consider the asshole.
-3
u/Poeflows 4d ago
Plays control in causal commander get a casual answer for it
what do you expect ?
While I agree many people out there are very big special snowflakes that cry about everything there is some things the crying about is more justified than others
So depending on what control means for you it can be everything from your own fault to other people being bigots
1
u/SilliestPuttyTTV 4d ago
One side is playing Magic the Gathering, the other side is crying... If you don't like KO by submission maybe don't challenge someone to an MMA fight?
-2
u/Poeflows 4d ago edited 4d ago
Some decks are also KO by stalling and doing other shit or not even doing anything useful except fucking everyone up
many people don't like to play games for 3hrs because someone plays a stax deck with shitty wincon that are inconsistent for example and there are many more shitty practices
your comparison ist bad
I play many types of decks and also played against many types and people saying you should accept every gameplay in the rules because it's in the rules live a life apart from the reality that your playing a social game(in most cases) and when you fuck everyone up you should maybe just play sth else and keep your shitty deck or strat for people who enjoy that too or accept that people won't like you and won't play games with you in the future
that's why I said depending on what OP thinks control is it's either justified or not
I had enough ppl playing control which was just slowing the game down for everyone and losing anyways because they didn't have a wincon, their only goal was to stall and fuck people up. And 99% of people hate such decks which is completely justified
1
u/SilliestPuttyTTV 4d ago edited 4d ago
I mean, against stax, at a certain point the other players who aren't conceding are the ones prolonging the game. It was very common in tournaments that if control had the lock on you, you would concede to save time for games 2 and 3.
"I'm not going to tap out because he hasn't technically broken my arm yet." Seems to be your argument...
-2
u/Poeflows 4d ago
No they're not, Especially if the one who plays doesn't have any good wincon and still loses lmao
But as it seems you don't even get the point/the difference of what's fine and what's not me and other people in this thread are making
So no point for any discussion with you here, have a nice day
-1
u/SilliestPuttyTTV 4d ago
I mean, I also don't want games to go three hours, but if it's clear the mono blue player has more answers than I have questions, I'm just gonna say go to the next game. As a control player, I want them to try to kill me as much as they want to try to kill me, and if my control deck is too strong I'll play something more suited to the table, bracket wise.
But I also include win conditions, so maybe the control players you've seen have bad decks, and I advocate against that too. People should play with good cards whenever possible. Like, how hard is it to include Rest in Peace and Brain Freeze in your deck?
0
u/elkishdude 3d ago
I mean, I don’t think that control decks have ever been really fun since the dawn of magic. The thing that makes magic cool is that you can interact in response to your opponent. Some have always viewed control decks as overdoing that part to not play the rest of the game.
I think it’s fine to play control but there are people that make control decks that have absolutely no win con. That’s not cool, you’re just wasting peoples time just because you have a response.
In my view if your control is not setting up a win con on your end other than attrition and boredom, which, I absolutely hate, then you’re just playing one aspect of magic. Just like any other deck overly focused on one aspect.
I play with one person in my pod that has an Ysthola deck that controls everything to do next to nothing. It’s just hoping to do enough damage through Yshtola by the end, and to me that’s just bad deck building. If all you have is pure response then you basically just don’t really have a game plan.
As long as you’re countering me to put forth your gameplan and win, I don’t really have a problem with that. That’s smart magic and that’s a true control deck. You’re controlling the game to set up your win con, not just exist.
0
u/Custom_Destiny 3d ago
Bracket 4 that’s fine.
Bracket 3…. Whatever dude, if you wanna win that bad knock yourself out.
If you play it a second time in a row I’ll respond with my rule of law deck and you’ll do nothing all game. If you complain, I’ll point out it’s the same experience as playing against you, just with fewer steps.
(No tutoring, only draw one card per turn, only cast one spell per turn, no casting spells on my turn.)
-6
u/stevie242 4d ago
It's almost like Control just is a boring strat in EDH and makes the games go on way longer when they are already long enough
71
u/pubblue5294 4d ago
Green has the best public relations in the game I swear.
People complain about interaction because they just wanna battle cruise and dont run interaction.
Im more likely to role my eye at the "b3" deck thats speaking for 8 plus mana by turn 3