"how often do actually sit around and analyze what you did during the game...?" I'd say a solid 3 hours every night after commander, when I need to sleep but I can't stop replaying every move in my head.
Alright alright let's all be very clear here. I'm not a threat, my decks are just what I had laying around. It's not like if Josh doesn't counter Selvala on turn 3 I go infinite on turn 4. C'mon. Oh look Jimmy has no blockers attack him I'm not really doing anything. -- kH
one time I was playing naya, there was one opponent left. I tapped 6 of my eight mana for a creature that got haste from my fires of yavimaya and then swung with my whole board without doing math and leaving up green and white mana. I hit them to 1 and had a red sun's zenith in my hand. major L
@@regular_ian i play a lands windgrace deck, after i get to 20+ lands i tell people i'll just tap whichever mana because if i spent time thinking every cast my turns would take eons.
"LETS SAY IT WAS A BLIGHTSTEEL COLOSSUS, IN THAT CASE I THINK I WOULD LET IT SIT _ BECAUSE ITS UNLIKELY TO SWING AT ME" - Josh Lee Kwai, before seeing the latest Game Knights :D
I love this video. My main playgroup always do a dissection of games where we comment or ask about plays/ mistakes we made during the game. So often it's tiny mistakes which lead to huge swings in play.
I played highest level competitive Pokémon for 8 years and transitioned to Commander about a month ago. These things you are talking about are very universal for all Card games. One thing that really upped my Pokémon gameplay was every turn look at your hand and go “what can I do here to put myself in the best position to win.” That’s the simplest thing I think players can do.
in the same vein as "playing to your outs", I've learned over the years the value of *"building to your outs".* for me, that means including 4-5 metagame tech cards that act as safety valves in the evergreen emergency scenarios. simple cards like Tormod's Crypt and Pithing Needle are low-cost, highly concentrated hate pieces that can save a game with very little setup cost. Rakdos Charm is another situational haymaker. these types of cards aren't necessarily exciting, and may not fit the theme of your commander, so they often go overlooked when building a deck. but man, I can't tell you how many times these unsuspecting little devils have saved me. feel free to recommend other cards that fit this role!
My favorite types of those cards are probably Price of Progress, Stormfang, and a Ruination in my mono-red Daiochan deck. Our land based are very greedy as I am the only person in the playgroup who plays decks with fewer than 3 colors. Storm fang is an old green spell to ping a player for each card in hand.
I throw scavenging ooze into every green deck for this very reason! I prefer it to a tormod's for the fact that it can be activated multiple times and has incidental lifegain
I don't particularly fault DJ for making that play. The message there is don't attack me out of nowhere especially if I'm communicating that you can hold off attacking and I'll answer the bridge. No deals? OK, I don't care if we all lose. Having the answer for the obvious threat on the board should have some political leverage, and if Vinnie can't be talked out of attacking with his hydra, maybe he should dig up an answer for the Planar Bridge.
True. Sometimes making a statement is worth possibly not winning the game. Never helping your opponents for free is a decent approach. It only works if it's properly communicated though.
@@faultier1158 Yup. There seems to be part of that interaction that was cut, and DJ did say he could remove the Bridge if the hydra doesn't attack him. The interesting tension here is Vinnie leveraged on flat out threat assessment. He stood to lose nothing by getting a free hit because DJ obviously had to use his removal on the clearer threat. Evidently, EDH is never supposed to be that easy. Maybe in the future, he'll think twice about leaning on that same assumption, and that's more valuable down the line to DJ because maybe he's not in a good position to win in either scenario. In cases like these, I always tend to favor the guy who holds the answer to the imminent threat... because he has it. He spent the deck slot on a card that will deal with that Planar Bridge, and not another combo piece or value card. I have great respect for people who can solve what threatens the game--and sympathize when they're potentially punished for it.
Howzit! Huge fan, but never comment. I just backed the Kickstarter, and figured I'd drop a comment. I've only started playing commander a few months ago, and I have learned a ton from watching your show. Thank you for always providing an interesting and entertaining learning experience!
For the Planar Bridge situation: I would have used Utter End on Mana Gorger out of spite for Vinny. Like a guy has Planar Bridge and I am the only one with an answer and you decide to hit me? Guess you’ll lose with me then! It was a lose-lose for DJ Also, a big misplay of mine was not using my Scourge of Valkas triggers off of a Utvara Hellkite attack trigger for like 6 dragons. Lost that game :/
After a hiatus of about 5+ years I think my biggest issue is threat assesment of cards I'm unfamiliar with. A lot times people play cards that seem inconsequential and then they combo or do something crazy.
That's how Marwyn wins games basically; turning empty boards into winning positions seemingly out of nowhere Turn 1 mana dork Turn 2 Marwyn Opponents-> No big deal! it's just a dork who can get him a bunch of mana if he plays more elfs! if things get out of control just board wipe! I'll play my signet and pass turn Turn 3- Phytoburst into staff of domination for GGs
I remember an episode where someone besides the caster voted "Time" for expropriate because they were confident they'd win and then lost on the person's second extra turn
I came here to comment on that . They tal talk in the video about proper throat assessment and I agree that they are correct that possibly DJshould have blown up the planar bridge but that's a hard one state to call cuz it takes discipline when you're taking 12 damage also the real question in this is what makes me upset and when I say people have poor dressed as to me as if the planner Bruce was going to win the game then Maybe Vinny should have been attacking the person with planar. bridge and not dj. This is also Why I don't like politics. Jimmy and Vinny make a deal that Vinny won't attack Jimmy and then Jenny wins that wasn't a good deal for anyone at the table even if Jimmy technically took up his side of the deal whatever they agreed to do like not attack Vinny you're not loving things or whatever I don't know but if there's no deals being made that I'm free to Simply make the correct threat assessment so for Vinny maybe he doesn't care about buying a bridge and it just needs to kill DJ that's fine but the DJ would need to have this one to make the correct call and blow up the planar bridge and not worry about the manager but maybe not maybe if any should not have attacks DJ DJ told that he had to play The Ridge it's logical to assume the answer was a Vindicator fact which can also do a better gorger so maybe they should have been like a wolf I don't want my Manticore charger to be blown up maybe I should just not attack DJ let DJ answer the planar bridge and I'm two cards up.
We didn't hear it on the Game Knights episode, but Josh and Jimmy say on this video that DJ tried to persuade Vinny not to attack because he needed to use Utter End on the Planar Bridge. In which case I think DJ was right to Utter End the Hydra. Vinny had a Rogue's passage, and the Hydra was big enough that DJ would probably have died to it the following turn. Vinny shouldn't have attacked. It's entirely on him that Jimmy got his Planar Bridge activation.
New players will proudly skip over other players ' priority to take care of threats. Remember to wait and see if others do your dirty work for you. Also in my brief edh experience many players don't politic and bargain enough. It's fun and to your advantage to work deals, but don't over do it.
For me the mistakes I mostly do are: 1. Losing track of what is left in my deck that could help me out 2. Becoming the threat before I can handle answers of 3 enemies 3. Missing out on triggers 4. Using triggers in the wrong order 5. Messing up mana for instants by tapping wrong Lands 6. Playing more into my hands rather than vs my opponents
This actually happened to me. I was playing my Heliod, the Sun God deck, and in my hand I had a Swords to Plowshares in my hand. On of my opponents had an active Sneak Attack on turn 5. He Sneaked in a Blightsteel Colossus. Attacked another player, then cast a Seize the Day to get an extra attack phase. He then attacked me on his second attack. My previous turn I cast a 4 drop and left one mana open. You could guess which one I left open. That's right, a colorless mana.
My biggest mistakes lately? 1. Landfall triggers - Playing a land before casting Angry Omnath/Tatyova, missing out on the token/card 2. I forgot I could attack with my mana dork. Bit of a story, but it was a super cool kill. Turn one, played a BoP. Turn two, Gyre Sage. Turn three, freed from the real on the sage for infinite green mana. Cast Nylea from hand, buff the bird and swing killing one player. I dunno if I was being greedy and wanting to do it all with the bird or if it's just a case of 20/20 hindsight but I should have buffed up the Gyre sage and taken out another player then. Someone played a Glacial chasm and combo'd out before I could deal with it so my infinitely large bird was pretty useless after that. That was an awesome game, but I dun goof'd for sure.
Threat assessment is definitely an art and my biggest struggle. I’m still trying to find a good ratio of removal to include in my decks and knowing when to counterspell or terminate what often hurts my brain.
It's so nice to see that you guys are making the same mistakes that I do. I always kick myself for some of these mistakes and it's nice to know that experienced players like you guys can still make the same mistakes. I was actually re-watching the Cash and Mel amonkhet game Knights before this and wondered why Josh didn't just swing out at Cash before he got O stone untapped, thus taking out that board wipe and the eventual emrakul he played, and would have left you with all your swole 8/8 snakes. Now I appreciate that in the game, and on camera, it's easy to miss that thought and make the played you did and attack Jimmy too.
I'm terrible at making myself a threat early. It's just so fun to play out all my big scary stuff that I get targeted! I've been thinking about that in general, and this is a good reminder to try to focus on playing more conservatively (at least in the early-mid game) in the future.
In my opinion, removal or control usage is best used in restraint. Wait for the thing to look at you or if you know you can't deal with it at a later point. Otherwise let it happen. Keeps you in good grace and saves your answers.
I'm in the opposite camp, since I deckbuild with plenty of removal I'd rather not allow an "engine" to come online since it "doesn't directly effect you". And I'm sure its partially due to deckbuilding (minimal answers) but I've found that eliminating the engine to a deck, while (Cont'd) helping everyone also allows me to 1. Gain favor at the table. 2. Lets me do a little setting up as well 3. Gives me ammo to politic the rest of the table to use their removal later in the game.
@Speetlebeetle: That's why you talk to them and ask their intentions. If they lie and blow up your stuff, you punish them for it. If it's a big enough threat or an all target, then fine. @Maximillian: Any "engine" that is going to end the game inherently targets you. Same logic as getting hit by C-Rift from someone with a large board presence or Expropriate. Just be smart, wait for turn order reactions, and respond accordingly. Running plenty of removal is fine, I do that myself, but, as they talk about frequently on here, if you're shutting everyone down and making the game miserable, why should people play with you? Alternatively, I'll phrase it like this. I don't play to win, I play to survive. By saving everything til I'm at the skin of my teeth I've (personally) found people enjoy their games more with less disappointment when shut down since their deck got to do the thing... then you win. Not sure how much sense that made, and I'm not saying this is the only way to play; I'm just trying to explain what I've found in the quest of playing control without tilting whole playgroups.
@@dantebeleren I'm not shutting everyone down per say. Just the engines themselves. For example if someone cast a paradox engine, ill try to destroy it asap. Or ashnods altar in Teysa. Or primordial sage in Animar. Or Skullclamp in tokens. I'm not preventing them from playing, just recognize what gives them advantage. It takes a little bit of research in general but I think we know the cards that make certain decks "click". I'm just eliminating it before it gets out of hand, while also trying to advance my own board.
One mistake I used to make all the time was playing a land first thing. It feels bad when you play an island and then draw a Gaea's Cradle at some point during your turn and can't play it. 😔
I always try to hard to theme my deck, not realising some cards are always useful. Such as my smart deck I synergise everything around her but forget the other personalities of my deck xD. Also you are literally the best, for some reason when I get a reply on patreon I get a little “tee here” moment. I love you guys and you’ve inspired me to make my the rivals mtg channel. So just wanted to say thanks so much
Using a random method to decide who to attack, a lot of newer and some more experienced players think this makes the attack blame free. Not wanting to attack anyone in fear of retaliation. Being so scared of a counter/ kill spell that they won’t play anything.
There was this quote from BDM on the Sideboard website (that could be applied in EDH) that said: "Zvi once explained to me that the problem with perfect play is that, especially with an overpowered-yet-decision-heavy deck like Napster or Turbo-Land, you will have ten possible plays, nine of which are wrong, but seven of which win the game. Making a play like mine would have in all likelihood won the game at some point, but would not have promoted correct play..."
Jimmy taking about observing the board instead of being on your phone is gold. I hate when people are on thier phones and wonder what certain cards are later or other things over social media
Being newish, assessing threat level is always my down fall! I liked that you guys pointed out that game play analysis isnt talked about a lot. Maybe an episode about how to better assess for the threats? Maybe?
I often have a problem with re-assessing threats after I've appropriately dealt with something currently threatening me. An example would be when I was playing my Emmara deck, and had a bunch of tokens on the field. One of my opponents dropped a Goblin Sharpshooter, which represented a threat specifically to my board state since I would be the only one that the sharpshooter could just rip through. So in response I dropped a Gavony Township and buffed all my tokens to 2/2 putting them out of sharpshooter range. After doing this, I should have assessed that the sharpshooter was no longer a threat to me, and focused my attention on the Tai Gam player in the group who I know has a habit of just exploding out of nowhere with all the rebound spells, but instead I swung at the player who dropped the sharpshooter because I took it as direct indicator that he was targeting me with his stuff.
This is why my playgroup has the shame dice and the "List of Stupid Actions" for Commander games. They only really are needed for extreme situations, but it makes it clear when we drop the ball on optimal or even reasonable play. Personal favorite has to be my own addition to the list, where I attacked the person not in the lead on the board, but clearly assembling a combo. He proceeds to wreck me for attacking him with a creature with a Sword of Feast and Famine, and it costs me most of my board presence and the Sword. Officially dubbed "destroying your own Sword" it means focusing on something other than the immediate battlefield threats. Others include: "Yahenni the Immortal," "Gin-Gitaxis vs Reliquary Tower," "Cathar's Crusade and Awakening Zone," "Why is Krosan Grip Split-Second?"
I think my biggest mistake has been an over-fondness for 6 drop "game-winning" enchantments. e.g. Mana Reflection, Sunbird's invocation, Thousand-year Storm etc. They all do nothing on their own and you really need the extra mana to actually win with them! (Or a whole untap step)
DJ really messed up when he didn't target that planar bridge, but that can be discussed, but the real problem in that game was his attempts of being political. I mean, what the hell dude?
I have doven into commander head first over the last 14~ months. Started out with a precon(Edgar) and now have 6 or 7 decks, with varying play styles. My latest is Niv Mizzet, Parun. I have only got to play one game with it so far so with that said, missing triggers is real relatable right now.
8:05 I think what we're looking at here is to play more mana than our opponents, relatively speaking. Playing a higher CMC spell is good advice in a vacuum but I think we can generalize the rule a bit further by saying that as long as they're losing out on more mana than we are we're good. Case in point: my friend plays an Eldrazi deck with lots of mana rocks. Let's say we're at T4 and I have the option to either a) play a CMC (4) 4/4 flier with a useful ability on it vs b) disrupt my friend for CMC (2) and not play anything else. More often than not I think it's beneficial to play the smaller spell first, because it can put my opponents next turn at even more disadvantage than it will do for my turn. I'm losing out on 2 mana and 1 turn of utility but they might lose two entire turns because their mana rocks entered tapped or got countered and they couldn't ramp more. A particular game I played I Mana Leaked their Thran Dynamo and really should have doubled up on that and Oblivion Ringed their Mana Crypt too. (Instead I removed an another opponent's only white mana source.) Result? My friend ramped and was sitting at healthy 50 mana a turn later. Not life, mana. My expensive flier thingamajing was completely useless against Annihilator 8 coming my way. Another time where I find small spells useful is when you're certain that your opponents are trigger happy and take advantage of that by playing a decoy threat. I'm not sure why they don't really learn but it's always the same thing: I play a medium thing and it's gone. After that it's safe to play the big thing. This obviously assumes that you know your opponents' decks, playstyle, their hand or are really good at guessing! In a no-information situation (i.e. vacuum) playing the biggest thing is almost always the best play but what I'm saying is that if you translate that to "use more effective mana than your opponents" gets us exactly the same results in vacuum and yields a better board position in cases where you have some information about their game.
Something I notice a lot is confusing 'card threat assessment' with 'player threat assessment'. What I mean by this is, knowing that a particular player is the better at the table doesn't always make them the best target for every answer you many have. This happens VERY often with my group of friends that play. They know I'm usually one of the higher 'player threats' due to experience and good card knowledge, so they'll waste responses very early simply because they are scared, when they should hold them, either for another player that's doing more at the moment, OR for me when I play something that's ACTUALLY a threat.
One thing that I notice (at least in my group) is players casting instant speed spells during their main phase when it is of no advantage to play that spell at that moment. Like casting Swords to Plowshares on my Blightsteel colossus during their turn vs waiting to see who I attack and casting it then if necessary
I saw the utter end as a spite play, plain and simple. Like there was the discussion of "dont swing at me, I have an answer to planar bridge" wherein Vinny decided "ok, im still gonna swing at you." I agree the politics of "dont swing at me and I can deal with his planar bridge" couldve been more explicit, but I see that kind of play being forced out of people all the time, namely control players. "I have a way to deal with X if you just dont swing at me" and people going "whatever" where the control player then has to use their way of ensuring someone cant win the game just to make sure they still have a good shot at themselves winning the game. Honestly its why I started opting for mass removal in my control decks. If people are gonna put me in the position to have to stop THEM I might as well stop the person in need of stopping as well. Plus, theres the added politics of "so long as its not at me I wont have to mess with the entire board." An evacuation can go from putting a target on your back to someone elses if you can say "I tried to warn of the mass removal spell and didnt want to use it, but he went and called the bluff..."
Anon Ymous yeah I would’ve punished vinny for that as well, even if just to send the message that in future games, I WILL sink the game if you don’t give me one measly turn in exchange for saving your ass as well as mine.
My most common misstake is "know your decklist" . Most of the times I just sit there with one of my like 10 Red decks and I just tutor to a blasphemic act and then I sit there and panic because I didn´t include it in this one deck xD
threat assessment is by far my weakest link. Not just knowing what's the threat but also what the best answer is. I've recently included more powerful answers in my deck colors and that has helped a ton. As a newer player I've learned to hold back and that has helped my game a fair amount.
I have a history of getting to teach new players how to play Magic, always having an easy to learn deck or two on me to start. The first lesson I teach after basics is to read the entire card. I've seen people who have played longer than me miss out on really powerful interactions because they skip the middle/ bottom text of a card. My worst mistakes come from card sequencing. I tend to get careless with how I tap my lands and end up drawing a great card for the turn that I can't play because I tapped mana the wrong way. Just part of me not taking the game too seriously and my playgroup is pretty lax anyways, but its something I need to improve on.
My mistake is tapping out for a sorcery and not then being able to protect myself with the instant in hand. My deck was a Sigada, Host of Herons deck and I post-combat equipped as many blood forged battle axes made in combat as I could. My opponent was playing with Prosh and was able to make Prosh big enough to finish me off. Had I not equipped then Teferi's Protection would have saved me.
In regards to threat assessment, I've found that there are two types: the threats that advance others' game plans, and ones that inhibit my game plans. The issue I've been noticing is going after one when the problem is the other. For example, I played a game where I had tutored up a Dramatic Reversal with a Spellseeker for the Dramatic Scepter combo. Though it is a scary play, I only had one rock on the field, 2 lands, and 2 cards in hand (one of which being the Dramatic Reversal). I was still hated out despite another player doing degenerate things with Etali, Helm of the Host, and other copy abilities, and another player utilizing an unblockable Thada Adel. This demonstrates focusing more on the advancement of another player instead of working on the blatantly obvious plays that inhibit one's own game.
I think narrowing this topic would've done a lot of good. This topic is so general that it's easy to argue that there are way more exceptions than there are meaningful rules to playing correctly.
22:30 I agree that the better threat assessment in context of that game would be to target the Planar Bridge. However because I usually play with the same group of people, following through on your words or threats carry to following games. In this case Vinny bullies DJ, where DJ wants to be the savior of the board and remove a potential game ender. Vinny says he cannot do anything about it and leaves it up for the rest to deal with the threat. DJ clearly states to Vinny that he has a solution to the Planar Bridge but he will use it against Vinny if he attacks him. Vinny calls it a bluff and attacks DJ regardless, so DJ is in a conundrum. Either he stays true to be the savior of the board and remove the Planar Bridge OR he carries out his threat and use his removal for Vinny's attacker. If DJ falls short of his threats, it means his threats are more likely bluffs, thus reducing the effectiveness of his threats. If a player always carries out their threats in case people wants to test them, then his opponents are more likely to weigh the threats more heavily, which is a useful political tool. If the player is not shy of potentially losing a game because someone decides to be a bully, then people are more likely to stop being a bully toward that player. It's a matter of reputation. For the record in this case Vinny is an ass. You may call it the right play for Vinny, but nothing feels worse in DJ's situation than having a solution to a problem on the board that threatens all players and someone else decides to take advantage of it because they are helpless themselves. If you show no goodwill and not attack me, then I wont deal with the problem on the board. I would have done the same as DJ. And I would have bargained with the controller of the Planar Bridge instead. If that player doesn't want to bargain then the game has already politically put you on the sidelines and you are less likely to win regardless, unless you get to brute force a winning play.
16:30 While i do agree with you for the most part josh, you might be forgetting to consider how the next players turn, or instants that could have been played (or flash if available) Nikya might not have survived that full turn rotation. Can you look back at the tape and know what each person had in their full hand dispossal? Yes that is a better sequencing, but maybe Vinny knew something that the rest of the board didnt know that he knew.
A common mistake I make is something I call "ability vision" I get so wrapped up in using my creatures abilities or my spells in hand that I tap out and die to their threats on board. Or I am so concerned with removing threats that I miss lethal sometimes
33:10 I've definitely missed triggers, I've usually been able to remember them later, however the rule we have is that once you end your turn, any triggers you've forgotten aren't valid anymore.
What loses me games is usually handling the present board states threats all myself. For example; holding up rakdos charm for the end step before my turn to destroy someone’s vedalken orrery, or using my resources to kill a player or reset the board and being open when I pass the turn. Giving players the “just one more turn” usually results in a loss. I like games to play out until turn 10 or so but it’s usually a mistake to not defeat an opponent when the opportunity arises.
Tbh, I think I lose most often to my opponents just making awesome lines of play. Sure I could be hard on myself to improve, but for the most part I generally lose when my mana doesn't make the cut or when my opponents just outplay me. My best friend and I go back and forth all the time, and even though our meta is a smaller pool, we both have around 6 decks each and when we get the opportunity to play with other people at a table usually one of us will win. We also scale our decks to match the power level at the table and it is a lot of fun. Don't get me wrong, I make mistakes and usually I work on fixing them if I can, but I have to admit that my friend is awesome at the game and we have more fun perfecting how we play decks than we do tuning them to be top tier.
I play a Phenax, God of destruction mill deck and have made myself a target for friends to watch my deck box and if they see it they pick their stronger deck. Along with that they would tend to politic around my responsive play style so much so that they aim to keep me from having creature reach their first upkeep after play whilst Phenax is on the field. I now have to change my play style with it to be somewhat more aggressive with it.
My mistake is definitely getting so focused either on their boards that I forget the triggers and effects I have added to my board or the reverse where I don't focus at all on theirs because mine gets convoluted
Things that I notice that happen a lot at least in my play group is people don't want to do anything to anyone because they don't want to draw hate so sometimes the first 4-5 turns nobody plays or does anything impactful when they have the mana or abilities to do so. They just try to ramp as fast as possible to play their bigger spells that have a but more impact
A big mistake I've made multiple times is assuming my opponents resolve the triggers I tell them about properly. I've had games where everyone is tired and after resolving the stack of 5 spells I put 5 more triggers on the stack and the board state is crazy. People miss stuff, and I've absolutely lost and then realized later that the key piece that killed me should have been sacrificed, so taking the time to check everyone's board after lots of things happen can save you.
My question is how do you estimate how much removal your opponents have? Because in the Nikya case you mentioned, I would agree with Vinny’s sequencing because if someone decided to remove Nikya (she’s a threat as a mana doubler and as a creature she’s more vulnerable to removal than Mirrari’s wake), Vinny would have gotten no value from his commander whereas with primordial sage out he already got value from playing Nikya
In general I've noticed greed to be a primary motivator to a lot of mistakes and I'm no exception to that. Take for example the sequencing they mentioned before of playing Primordial Sage and then Nikya the next so casting her draws you a card whereas Vinny could have played it in the reverse order and played 2 creatures in a turn rather than one and drawn a card in both cases. For a new example: I have a Hallar deck, as such I prioritize casting them before kicking spells since the win condition is burning people out with the kicker trigger. This mindset, however, can easily lead to greedy situations where I could potentially profit more from casting a kickable/kicked spell before Hallar (by, say, ramping sooner or answering someone else's threat) rather than after so they get that +1/+1 counter.
There's one error I've seen almost every person who plays against one of my decks make. That being underestimating a deck just because its strategy is unorthodox. The deck in question is my rebel deck that uses Zur the Enchanter as the commander. People tend to be very concerned at the start of the game because of Zur, but then as soon as I play a rebel, everybody tends to completely ignore the deck. It's almost like they feel a little bad about focusing down on me at the start of the game when I'm just running a rebel deck. This has lead to one of my favourite Magic stories. I was using my rebels against Najeela, Kruphix, and Sai. The Najeela player was the only one who had seen my rebel deck before. The deck works by using Zur to tutor for Arcane Adaptation so that my rebels can tutor for anything. I then use the ETB effects of my other creatures to piece together an engine that effectively lets me lock down the game. In this game, the Najeela player (who had around 15 warriors out at the time), started trying to convince the other players that my board of 2 rebels and a few seemingly useless enchantments and artifacts was a very serious threat. One of the other players took him somewhat seriously, and started looking at my board. He could tell that the cards I had in play had to be part of some form of combo, but he couldn't seem to figure out what the engine would do once I got the last piece out. The other player just laughed it off, thinking that the Najeela player was just trying to direct fire away from himself. They didn't even consider that a rebel deck could be threatening.
One time playing Melek I had Ionize faceup on top and my opponent cast a gamechanging creature. It took me until my draw when I saw the Ionize again to realize I had forgotten it there
My mistake is when chaining Extra Turns in a wrong time. For example: My Locust God deck have 5 cards that have extra turns effect. If chain it correctly with correct cards, I win. If chain it wrongly, I take extra turns for nothing (no card draws/cycle effect), end up losing. This is because 3 of my extra turn cards required to exile after using, except Nexus of Fate and Timestream Navigator.
My group is super casual so this won't apply to most people, but we allow one 'rewind' per game for each player in case a trigger or play gets missed in the confusion
A common mistake I make but thankfully don't make as much anymore is countering a card that helps everyone else but then an even bigger card comes out that I can't counter now.
I’ve done the “forget my counterspell” one a lot too Josh... I always realize like the next turn, I look at my hand and I’m like noooooo! I could’ve countered that thing! 😅
So you’re really supposed to play the removal spell just because you can and you’re next few turns are planned out? I feel like you should hold it for an actual threat.
Well these videos are geared towards newer players, and most new players lean towards red or green because they're so blatant in their effects. A newer players would look at most color combos and say "Do I want to be able to counter one card? Or play a bunch of cards with alot of damage output?" And usually they lean towards the damage output not understanding the value and necessity of negation and control. So this aggressive mentality is definitely veered towards its intended audience but may not be useful in more advanced and intricate gameplay.
My biggest mistake was a few days ago. I was playing my Meren deck. Opening hand included a swamp, a Phyrexian Tower, an Entomb, and a Reanimate. That's a turn two win in my deck and I didn't see it. Instead of using Entomb to bin Protean Hulk, I used it to get Razaketh. That cost me the game.
That example at 12:30 is interesting and not very clear cut: If I don't have another land in hand, I'm almost certainly going to drop the Arena first, hoping to keep my land drops going for a few more turns - especially since Arena provides a recurring advantage, just as the Lantern does (Jimmy mentioned this after I already wrote my comment). But even then, it might be worth to gamble by dropping the Lantern regardless if you have any immediate card draw at the ready (like a Read the Bones) which you could use to find your land on your next turn.
I was playing with a newer commander player, I was playing daretti, he was playing some simic deck, then there was an Oona or something and a guy playing jodah. The jodah guy played a zendikar resurgent and a miraris wake, and he was set up to win on the next turn, so I cast all is dust to slow him down, but the newer simic guy felt the need to counter to save his 2 creatures..... Me and the Oona player were so salty because when it came time for the jodah player to take his turn he played omniscience and won on the spot. Sometimes your mistakes don't just cost you a win. Listen to the other people at the table before playing something that will affect everyone.
@berry Try explaining it better next time. Maybe you didnt explain kindly or maybe the guy was just foolish or stubborn. Many factors could have led to that.
@@vengray8055 we both told him that the jodah guy would win the game if he didn't let the all is dust resolve but the guy wasn't as familiar with the format so he didn't believe us. Threat assessment is just something you have to learn, prioritizing your stuff over someone else potentially winning isn't the right choice.
It's a really interesting topic. I find the difficulty to be between balancing turns length and good plays. A multiplayer game of commander can get pretty long, so trying to maximise everything can end up in your disfavor.
More episodes like this, revolving around strategies in game and anything related, we need more off. Mainly cause I'm still under a year into playing this game and its always good to hear advice like this!
I've only just started watching this episode, but I wanted to bring up something from the last time you did an episode on this subject. Specifically, it has to do with the advice you gave to only tutor a land through Tempt with Discovery if you can get everyone to grab a strip mine. Depending on who you're playing against, they may turn that back on you by tutoring for their Strip Mine, Wasteland, Dust Bowl, etc. Then they just have to threaten that the first person to try and destroy one of their lands will lose all of their land.
My biggest mistake is missing my triggers (upkeep, end step, begining of combat, etc...). I am trying to help that by putting the die on my deck for reminders but I still forget them which HAS gotten me killed more then once.
I tend to become a threat way too quickly without being able to properly prepare for the hate from the other three players. Another big mistake I make is missing my triggers and remembering them two or three turns ahead. It sucks but something that I can work on for the future :)
I've only started the video, but I'm pretty sure that for me, talking and missing Rhystic Study triggers is what loses me games.
Same problem, but with Smothering tithe. A dice of shame does the job though
The die of shame will be with you always
exactly xD
Generic Goblin Noise :o
My buddies call it dipstick study when multiple triggers are missed, and especially if a game-changing draw would have been made.
"how often do actually sit around and analyze what you did during the game...?"
I'd say a solid 3 hours every night after commander, when I need to sleep but I can't stop replaying every move in my head.
Alright alright let's all be very clear here. I'm not a threat, my decks are just what I had laying around. It's not like if Josh doesn't counter Selvala on turn 3 I go infinite on turn 4. C'mon. Oh look Jimmy has no blockers attack him I'm not really doing anything. -- kH
Ooh, Kyle responses.
...sounds like threat. :P
Yeah right Kyle
Don’t support this channel, Kyle has his own channel now and this group only reposted old video clips and now just doesn’t post at all
Tapping the wrong mana, so you can’t play what else is in your hand. Mana sequencing is such a key thing...and I biff it far too often. 😥🐼
one time I was playing naya, there was one opponent left. I tapped 6 of my eight mana for a creature that got haste from my fires of yavimaya and then swung with my whole board without doing math and leaving up green and white mana. I hit them to 1 and had a red sun's zenith in my hand. major L
Mad Ambassador : DOH!
I do this all the time! Haha
I definitely need to double check every play 😂
@@regular_ian i play a lands windgrace deck, after i get to 20+ lands i tell people i'll just tap whichever mana because if i spent time thinking every cast my turns would take eons.
Most people I've played with don't really give a shit. It slows down games and increases cognitive load for almost no benefit.
my biggest mistake is, sometimes, when the board is very interesting, i just forget i have answers in my hand :D
Ya'll need an Eldrazi spawn token for Ashlen after that last episode.
more like a desolation twin token xD
That deck was epic.
Agreed!
"LETS SAY IT WAS A BLIGHTSTEEL COLOSSUS, IN THAT CASE I THINK I WOULD LET IT SIT _ BECAUSE ITS UNLIKELY TO SWING AT ME" - Josh Lee Kwai, before seeing the latest Game Knights :D
PowerChordJack lmao 😂
🤣
I love this video. My main playgroup always do a dissection of games where we comment or ask about plays/ mistakes we made during the game. So often it's tiny mistakes which lead to huge swings in play.
I played highest level competitive Pokémon for 8 years and transitioned to Commander about a month ago. These things you are talking about are very universal for all Card games. One thing that really upped my Pokémon gameplay was every turn look at your hand and go “what can I do here to put myself in the best position to win.” That’s the simplest thing I think players can do.
Excellent advice
in the same vein as "playing to your outs", I've learned over the years the value of *"building to your outs".*
for me, that means including 4-5 metagame tech cards that act as safety valves in the evergreen emergency scenarios. simple cards like Tormod's Crypt and Pithing Needle are low-cost, highly concentrated hate pieces that can save a game with very little setup cost. Rakdos Charm is another situational haymaker.
these types of cards aren't necessarily exciting, and may not fit the theme of your commander, so they often go overlooked when building a deck. but man, I can't tell you how many times these unsuspecting little devils have saved me. feel free to recommend other cards that fit this role!
My favorite types of those cards are probably Price of Progress, Stormfang, and a Ruination in my mono-red Daiochan deck. Our land based are very greedy as I am the only person in the playgroup who plays decks with fewer than 3 colors. Storm fang is an old green spell to ping a player for each card in hand.
I love playing Aven Mindcensor in most decks that run white.
I throw scavenging ooze into every green deck for this very reason! I prefer it to a tormod's for the fact that it can be activated multiple times and has incidental lifegain
N.
Hey can y’all do a game knights w/ mtg muddstah and commanders quarters
That would be awesome
Yes! I'd love to see that!
I agree!
Or one with some of the commander vs guys
@@nathanielkeller5366 #TeamParnell btw
I don't particularly fault DJ for making that play. The message there is don't attack me out of nowhere especially if I'm communicating that you can hold off attacking and I'll answer the bridge. No deals? OK, I don't care if we all lose. Having the answer for the obvious threat on the board should have some political leverage, and if Vinnie can't be talked out of attacking with his hydra, maybe he should dig up an answer for the Planar Bridge.
True. Sometimes making a statement is worth possibly not winning the game. Never helping your opponents for free is a decent approach. It only works if it's properly communicated though.
@@faultier1158 Yup. There seems to be part of that interaction that was cut, and DJ did say he could remove the Bridge if the hydra doesn't attack him.
The interesting tension here is Vinnie leveraged on flat out threat assessment. He stood to lose nothing by getting a free hit because DJ obviously had to use his removal on the clearer threat. Evidently, EDH is never supposed to be that easy.
Maybe in the future, he'll think twice about leaning on that same assumption, and that's more valuable down the line to DJ because maybe he's not in a good position to win in either scenario.
In cases like these, I always tend to favor the guy who holds the answer to the imminent threat... because he has it. He spent the deck slot on a card that will deal with that Planar Bridge, and not another combo piece or value card. I have great respect for people who can solve what threatens the game--and sympathize when they're potentially punished for it.
Howzit! Huge fan, but never comment. I just backed the Kickstarter, and figured I'd drop a comment.
I've only started playing commander a few months ago, and I have learned a ton from watching your show. Thank you for always providing an interesting and entertaining learning experience!
My mistakes usually always come down to RTFC (Read the f* card) lol
For the Planar Bridge situation: I would have used Utter End on Mana Gorger out of spite for Vinny. Like a guy has Planar Bridge and I am the only one with an answer and you decide to hit me? Guess you’ll lose with me then! It was a lose-lose for DJ
Also, a big misplay of mine was not using my Scourge of Valkas triggers off of a Utvara Hellkite attack trigger for like 6 dragons. Lost that game :/
After a hiatus of about 5+ years I think my biggest issue is threat assesment of cards I'm unfamiliar with. A lot times people play cards that seem inconsequential and then they combo or do something crazy.
That's why you must KILL EVERYTHING
That's how Marwyn wins games basically; turning empty boards into winning positions seemingly out of nowhere
Turn 1 mana dork
Turn 2 Marwyn
Opponents-> No big deal! it's just a dork who can get him a bunch of mana if he plays more elfs! if things get out of control just board wipe! I'll play my signet and pass turn
Turn 3- Phytoburst into staff of domination for GGs
I remember an episode where someone besides the caster voted "Time" for expropriate because they were confident they'd win and then lost on the person's second extra turn
6:16
not all heroes wear a cape.
Bless you.
Thank you
So many of these videos have time stamps in the comments, TH-cam gonna think they're CP
Thank you
"We've got all of your favorite knights"
But where is Jacob?
Yeah actually Jacob was a ton of fun, clearly had a lot of experience in magic, and really felt natural in front of the camera.
Wish we could see a deck tech of the deck he used. Looks like a good deck to play.
@@dotteduelist07 Look at the description of the Game Knights episode, has all four decklists.
Maybe in series 2 when It's made. I would love DJ to be part of series 2!
Mtg muddstah needs to be on game knights, it would be awesome to see my two favourite edh outlets play together
My play group is very friendly to backstepping and redoing things correctly if someone messes up, really helps with learning correct lines
It also speeds up the game by not having to be extra cautious before every single move, especially for really obvious plays
My group used to be like that. We haven't taught any new players for a year so now we try to play as though we're at a GP
Mistake #1. Not using Utter End on a Planar Bridge
yikes
I came here to comment on that . They tal talk in the video about proper throat assessment and I agree that they are correct that possibly DJshould have blown up the planar bridge but that's a hard one state to call cuz it takes discipline when you're taking 12 damage also the real question in this is what makes me upset and when I say people have poor dressed as to me as if the planner Bruce was going to win the game then Maybe Vinny should have been attacking the person with planar. bridge and not dj. This is also Why I don't like politics. Jimmy and Vinny make a deal that Vinny won't attack Jimmy and then Jenny wins that wasn't a good deal for anyone at the table even if Jimmy technically took up his side of the deal whatever they agreed to do like not attack Vinny you're not loving things or whatever I don't know but if there's no deals being made that I'm free to Simply make the correct threat assessment so for Vinny maybe he doesn't care about buying a bridge and it just needs to kill DJ that's fine but the DJ would need to have this one to make the correct call and blow up the planar bridge and not worry about the manager but maybe not maybe if any should not have attacks DJ DJ told that he had to play The Ridge it's logical to assume the answer was a Vindicator fact which can also do a better gorger so maybe they should have been like a wolf I don't want my Manticore charger to be blown up maybe I should just not attack DJ let DJ answer the planar bridge and I'm two cards up.
@@sethstephens4777 ... um ... pardon?
We didn't hear it on the Game Knights episode, but Josh and Jimmy say on this video that DJ tried to persuade Vinny not to attack because he needed to use Utter End on the Planar Bridge.
In which case I think DJ was right to Utter End the Hydra. Vinny had a Rogue's passage, and the Hydra was big enough that DJ would probably have died to it the following turn.
Vinny shouldn't have attacked. It's entirely on him that Jimmy got his Planar Bridge activation.
@@knarlyknucks sorry my
New players will proudly skip over other players ' priority to take care of threats. Remember to wait and see if others do your dirty work for you. Also in my brief edh experience many players don't politic and bargain enough. It's fun and to your advantage to work deals, but don't over do it.
For me the mistakes I mostly do are:
1. Losing track of what is left in my deck that could help me out
2. Becoming the threat before I can handle answers of 3 enemies
3. Missing out on triggers
4. Using triggers in the wrong order
5. Messing up mana for instants by tapping wrong Lands
6. Playing more into my hands rather than vs my opponents
This actually happened to me. I was playing my Heliod, the Sun God deck, and in my hand I had a Swords to Plowshares in my hand. On of my opponents had an active Sneak Attack on turn 5. He Sneaked in a Blightsteel Colossus. Attacked another player, then cast a Seize the Day to get an extra attack phase. He then attacked me on his second attack. My previous turn I cast a 4 drop and left one mana open. You could guess which one I left open. That's right, a colorless mana.
priority of players when it comes to resolution of spells
My biggest mistakes lately?
1. Landfall triggers - Playing a land before casting Angry Omnath/Tatyova, missing out on the token/card
2. I forgot I could attack with my mana dork. Bit of a story, but it was a super cool kill. Turn one, played a BoP. Turn two, Gyre Sage. Turn three, freed from the real on the sage for infinite green mana. Cast Nylea from hand, buff the bird and swing killing one player. I dunno if I was being greedy and wanting to do it all with the bird or if it's just a case of 20/20 hindsight but I should have buffed up the Gyre sage and taken out another player then. Someone played a Glacial chasm and combo'd out before I could deal with it so my infinitely large bird was pretty useless after that. That was an awesome game, but I dun goof'd for sure.
Threat assessment is definitely an art and my biggest struggle. I’m still trying to find a good ratio of removal to include in my decks and knowing when to counterspell or terminate what often hurts my brain.
It's so nice to see that you guys are making the same mistakes that I do. I always kick myself for some of these mistakes and it's nice to know that experienced players like you guys can still make the same mistakes.
I was actually re-watching the Cash and Mel amonkhet game Knights before this and wondered why Josh didn't just swing out at Cash before he got O stone untapped, thus taking out that board wipe and the eventual emrakul he played, and would have left you with all your swole 8/8 snakes. Now I appreciate that in the game, and on camera, it's easy to miss that thought and make the played you did and attack Jimmy too.
1. Win the game now.
or
2. Durdle into oblivion for fun and whiff.
I generally go for #2 most of the time...
same here, jank jank jank all day :D
Jonathan Ross OH MY GOD ANOTHER KRUPHIX PLAYER!!!!!!! granted I play a competitive level kruphix deck BUT STILL
Yes
Not specifically in Commander, but one of my biggest mistakes is missing Monarch triggers
I'm terrible at making myself a threat early. It's just so fun to play out all my big scary stuff that I get targeted! I've been thinking about that in general, and this is a good reminder to try to focus on playing more conservatively (at least in the early-mid game) in the future.
I thought the card sleeves you had at the beginning had the Game Knights logo on it, you guys should contact UltraPro and release something like that
When you come across a fork in the road, take it
But what if it's a Spoon or a Knife? Or even worse, a Spork/Foon?
When you come across a fork on the top of your deck... Cast it to counter someone's Mana Drain.
In my opinion, removal or control usage is best used in restraint. Wait for the thing to look at you or if you know you can't deal with it at a later point. Otherwise let it happen. Keeps you in good grace and saves your answers.
Dante Beleren some target on Etb, so you can’t already wait. Plus what’s cast is cast.
I'm in the opposite camp, since I deckbuild with plenty of removal I'd rather not allow an "engine" to come online since it "doesn't directly effect you". And I'm sure its partially due to deckbuilding (minimal answers) but I've found that eliminating the engine to a deck, while (Cont'd) helping everyone also allows me to 1. Gain favor at the table. 2. Lets me do a little setting up as well 3. Gives me ammo to politic the rest of the table to use their removal later in the game.
@Speetlebeetle: That's why you talk to them and ask their intentions. If they lie and blow up your stuff, you punish them for it. If it's a big enough threat or an all target, then fine.
@Maximillian: Any "engine" that is going to end the game inherently targets you. Same logic as getting hit by C-Rift from someone with a large board presence or Expropriate. Just be smart, wait for turn order reactions, and respond accordingly.
Running plenty of removal is fine, I do that myself, but, as they talk about frequently on here, if you're shutting everyone down and making the game miserable, why should people play with you?
Alternatively, I'll phrase it like this. I don't play to win, I play to survive. By saving everything til I'm at the skin of my teeth I've (personally) found people enjoy their games more with less disappointment when shut down since their deck got to do the thing... then you win.
Not sure how much sense that made, and I'm not saying this is the only way to play; I'm just trying to explain what I've found in the quest of playing control without tilting whole playgroups.
@@dantebeleren I'm not shutting everyone down per say. Just the engines themselves. For example if someone cast a paradox engine, ill try to destroy it asap. Or ashnods altar in Teysa. Or primordial sage in Animar. Or Skullclamp in tokens. I'm not preventing them from playing, just recognize what gives them advantage. It takes a little bit of research in general but I think we know the cards that make certain decks "click". I'm just eliminating it before it gets out of hand, while also trying to advance my own board.
A play mistake I often make is keeping a hand with not enough lands because of some other card. (usually Sol Ring)
One mistake I used to make all the time was playing a land first thing. It feels bad when you play an island and then draw a Gaea's Cradle at some point during your turn and can't play it. 😔
how would you play a land before drawing? 🤔🤔
@@cristianprado8559 I'm a big fan of brainstorm and the like...
@@cristianprado8559 The comment means to say "untap, draw, play land for turn, cast draw spell, find Gaea's Cradle, proceed to be sad"
@@cristianprado8559 there's other ways to draw cards besides the draw step
@@keanulinkers4487 Draw spells? Draw triggers?
I always try to hard to theme my deck, not realising some cards are always useful. Such as my smart deck I synergise everything around her but forget the other personalities of my deck xD. Also you are literally the best, for some reason when I get a reply on patreon I get a little “tee here” moment. I love you guys and you’ve inspired me to make my the rivals mtg channel. So just wanted to say thanks so much
I'm only at eight minutes but let's take a drink every time Josh says "logic would dictate..."
If you draw a two drop you could also play lantern and the 2 drop on four lands.
It would be cool to see you guys do a pauper style commander game
Wait, why do we not have a Craig Blanchett (sp) infect token? Especially with you getting 10 of them. Come on guys
It would be fun to see an episode where you guys look at fan submitted game play tips and talk about them
40:08 jimmies face represents me at one life forgetting to pay to untap mana vault...
Using a random method to decide who to attack, a lot of newer and some more experienced players think this makes the attack blame free.
Not wanting to attack anyone in fear of retaliation.
Being so scared of a counter/ kill spell that they won’t play anything.
There was this quote from BDM on the Sideboard website (that could be applied in EDH) that said: "Zvi once explained to me that the problem with perfect play is that, especially with an overpowered-yet-decision-heavy deck like Napster or Turbo-Land, you will have ten possible plays, nine of which are wrong, but seven of which win the game. Making a play like mine would have in all likelihood won the game at some point, but would not have promoted correct play..."
How did you not get Craig to be the art work for a poison counter!
Bring muddstah to command zone
this would be so amazing!
Immediately went over and pledged the amount for the foil set! You guys are awesome and best of luck in your pledges!
Jimmy taking about observing the board instead of being on your phone is gold. I hate when people are on thier phones and wonder what certain cards are later or other things over social media
Being newish, assessing threat level is always my down fall! I liked that you guys pointed out that game play analysis isnt talked about a lot. Maybe an episode about how to better assess for the threats? Maybe?
4 views means I don’t know when they actually start ;-;
xenos hive 3:48
I often have a problem with re-assessing threats after I've appropriately dealt with something currently threatening me.
An example would be when I was playing my Emmara deck, and had a bunch of tokens on the field.
One of my opponents dropped a Goblin Sharpshooter, which represented a threat specifically to my board state since I would be the only one that the sharpshooter could just rip through.
So in response I dropped a Gavony Township and buffed all my tokens to 2/2 putting them out of sharpshooter range.
After doing this, I should have assessed that the sharpshooter was no longer a threat to me, and focused my attention on the Tai Gam player in the group who I know has a habit of just exploding out of nowhere with all the rebound spells, but instead I swung at the player who dropped the sharpshooter because I took it as direct indicator that he was targeting me with his stuff.
This is why my playgroup has the shame dice and the "List of Stupid Actions" for Commander games. They only really are needed for extreme situations, but it makes it clear when we drop the ball on optimal or even reasonable play.
Personal favorite has to be my own addition to the list, where I attacked the person not in the lead on the board, but clearly assembling a combo. He proceeds to wreck me for attacking him with a creature with a Sword of Feast and Famine, and it costs me most of my board presence and the Sword. Officially dubbed "destroying your own Sword" it means focusing on something other than the immediate battlefield threats.
Others include: "Yahenni the Immortal," "Gin-Gitaxis vs Reliquary Tower," "Cathar's Crusade and Awakening Zone," "Why is Krosan Grip Split-Second?"
I think my biggest mistake has been an over-fondness for 6 drop "game-winning" enchantments. e.g. Mana Reflection, Sunbird's invocation, Thousand-year Storm etc. They all do nothing on their own and you really need the extra mana to actually win with them! (Or a whole untap step)
DJ really messed up when he didn't target that planar bridge, but that can be discussed, but the real problem in that game was his attempts of being political. I mean, what the hell dude?
I have doven into commander head first over the last 14~ months. Started out with a precon(Edgar) and now have 6 or 7 decks, with varying play styles. My latest is Niv Mizzet, Parun. I have only got to play one game with it so far so with that said, missing triggers is real relatable right now.
8:05 I think what we're looking at here is to play more mana than our opponents, relatively speaking. Playing a higher CMC spell is good advice in a vacuum but I think we can generalize the rule a bit further by saying that as long as they're losing out on more mana than we are we're good.
Case in point: my friend plays an Eldrazi deck with lots of mana rocks. Let's say we're at T4 and I have the option to either a) play a CMC (4) 4/4 flier with a useful ability on it vs b) disrupt my friend for CMC (2) and not play anything else. More often than not I think it's beneficial to play the smaller spell first, because it can put my opponents next turn at even more disadvantage than it will do for my turn. I'm losing out on 2 mana and 1 turn of utility but they might lose two entire turns because their mana rocks entered tapped or got countered and they couldn't ramp more. A particular game I played I Mana Leaked their Thran Dynamo and really should have doubled up on that and Oblivion Ringed their Mana Crypt too. (Instead I removed an another opponent's only white mana source.) Result? My friend ramped and was sitting at healthy 50 mana a turn later. Not life, mana. My expensive flier thingamajing was completely useless against Annihilator 8 coming my way.
Another time where I find small spells useful is when you're certain that your opponents are trigger happy and take advantage of that by playing a decoy threat. I'm not sure why they don't really learn but it's always the same thing: I play a medium thing and it's gone. After that it's safe to play the big thing.
This obviously assumes that you know your opponents' decks, playstyle, their hand or are really good at guessing! In a no-information situation (i.e. vacuum) playing the biggest thing is almost always the best play but what I'm saying is that if you translate that to "use more effective mana than your opponents" gets us exactly the same results in vacuum and yields a better board position in cases where you have some information about their game.
Something I notice a lot is confusing 'card threat assessment' with 'player threat assessment'. What I mean by this is, knowing that a particular player is the better at the table doesn't always make them the best target for every answer you many have. This happens VERY often with my group of friends that play. They know I'm usually one of the higher 'player threats' due to experience and good card knowledge, so they'll waste responses very early simply because they are scared, when they should hold them, either for another player that's doing more at the moment, OR for me when I play something that's ACTUALLY a threat.
One thing that I notice (at least in my group) is players casting instant speed spells during their main phase when it is of no advantage to play that spell at that moment. Like casting Swords to Plowshares on my Blightsteel colossus during their turn vs waiting to see who I attack and casting it then if necessary
I saw the utter end as a spite play, plain and simple. Like there was the discussion of "dont swing at me, I have an answer to planar bridge" wherein Vinny decided "ok, im still gonna swing at you." I agree the politics of "dont swing at me and I can deal with his planar bridge" couldve been more explicit, but I see that kind of play being forced out of people all the time, namely control players. "I have a way to deal with X if you just dont swing at me" and people going "whatever" where the control player then has to use their way of ensuring someone cant win the game just to make sure they still have a good shot at themselves winning the game.
Honestly its why I started opting for mass removal in my control decks. If people are gonna put me in the position to have to stop THEM I might as well stop the person in need of stopping as well. Plus, theres the added politics of "so long as its not at me I wont have to mess with the entire board." An evacuation can go from putting a target on your back to someone elses if you can say "I tried to warn of the mass removal spell and didnt want to use it, but he went and called the bluff..."
Anon Ymous yeah I would’ve punished vinny for that as well, even if just to send the message that in future games, I WILL sink the game if you don’t give me one measly turn in exchange for saving your ass as well as mine.
I haven’t watched the full video and this is a really specific example, but always play into Nev’s Disk
My most common misstake is "know your decklist" .
Most of the times I just sit there with one of my like 10 Red decks and I just tutor to a blasphemic act and then I sit there and panic because I didn´t include it in this one deck xD
I find it funny that Josh brought up removal on a Blightsteel 😏
threat assessment is by far my weakest link. Not just knowing what's the threat but also what the best answer is. I've recently included more powerful answers in my deck colors and that has helped a ton. As a newer player I've learned to hold back and that has helped my game a fair amount.
After last game knights you guys should review threat assessment topic man. Never let eldrazi stick
I have a history of getting to teach new players how to play Magic, always having an easy to learn deck or two on me to start. The first lesson I teach after basics is to read the entire card. I've seen people who have played longer than me miss out on really powerful interactions because they skip the middle/ bottom text of a card.
My worst mistakes come from card sequencing. I tend to get careless with how I tap my lands and end up drawing a great card for the turn that I can't play because I tapped mana the wrong way. Just part of me not taking the game too seriously and my playgroup is pretty lax anyways, but its something I need to improve on.
My mistake is tapping out for a sorcery and not then being able to protect myself with the instant in hand. My deck was a Sigada, Host of Herons deck and I post-combat equipped as many blood forged battle axes made in combat as I could. My opponent was playing with Prosh and was able to make Prosh big enough to finish me off. Had I not equipped then Teferi's Protection would have saved me.
In regards to threat assessment, I've found that there are two types: the threats that advance others' game plans, and ones that inhibit my game plans. The issue I've been noticing is going after one when the problem is the other. For example, I played a game where I had tutored up a Dramatic Reversal with a Spellseeker for the Dramatic Scepter combo. Though it is a scary play, I only had one rock on the field, 2 lands, and 2 cards in hand (one of which being the Dramatic Reversal). I was still hated out despite another player doing degenerate things with Etali, Helm of the Host, and other copy abilities, and another player utilizing an unblockable Thada Adel. This demonstrates focusing more on the advancement of another player instead of working on the blatantly obvious plays that inhibit one's own game.
I think narrowing this topic would've done a lot of good. This topic is so general that it's easy to argue that there are way more exceptions than there are meaningful rules to playing correctly.
22:30 I agree that the better threat assessment in context of that game would be to target the Planar Bridge.
However because I usually play with the same group of people, following through on your words or threats carry to following games.
In this case Vinny bullies DJ, where DJ wants to be the savior of the board and remove a potential game ender. Vinny says he cannot do anything about it and leaves it up for the rest to deal with the threat. DJ clearly states to Vinny that he has a solution to the Planar Bridge but he will use it against Vinny if he attacks him. Vinny calls it a bluff and attacks DJ regardless, so DJ is in a conundrum. Either he stays true to be the savior of the board and remove the Planar Bridge OR he carries out his threat and use his removal for Vinny's attacker.
If DJ falls short of his threats, it means his threats are more likely bluffs, thus reducing the effectiveness of his threats. If a player always carries out their threats in case people wants to test them, then his opponents are more likely to weigh the threats more heavily, which is a useful political tool. If the player is not shy of potentially losing a game because someone decides to be a bully, then people are more likely to stop being a bully toward that player.
It's a matter of reputation. For the record in this case Vinny is an ass.
You may call it the right play for Vinny, but nothing feels worse in DJ's situation than having a solution to a problem on the board that threatens all players and someone else decides to take advantage of it because they are helpless themselves.
If you show no goodwill and not attack me, then I wont deal with the problem on the board. I would have done the same as DJ. And I would have bargained with the controller of the Planar Bridge instead. If that player doesn't want to bargain then the game has already politically put you on the sidelines and you are less likely to win regardless, unless you get to brute force a winning play.
16:30 While i do agree with you for the most part josh, you might be forgetting to consider how the next players turn, or instants that could have been played (or flash if available) Nikya might not have survived that full turn rotation. Can you look back at the tape and know what each person had in their full hand dispossal? Yes that is a better sequencing, but maybe Vinny knew something that the rest of the board didnt know that he knew.
A common mistake I make is something I call "ability vision" I get so wrapped up in using my creatures abilities or my spells in hand that I tap out and die to their threats on board. Or I am so concerned with removing threats that I miss lethal sometimes
33:10 I've definitely missed triggers, I've usually been able to remember them later, however the rule we have is that once you end your turn, any triggers you've forgotten aren't valid anymore.
What loses me games is usually handling the present board states threats all myself. For example; holding up rakdos charm for the end step before my turn to destroy someone’s vedalken orrery, or using my resources to kill a player or reset the board and being open when I pass the turn. Giving players the “just one more turn” usually results in a loss. I like games to play out until turn 10 or so but it’s usually a mistake to not defeat an opponent when the opportunity arises.
Tbh, I think I lose most often to my opponents just making awesome lines of play. Sure I could be hard on myself to improve, but for the most part I generally lose when my mana doesn't make the cut or when my opponents just outplay me. My best friend and I go back and forth all the time, and even though our meta is a smaller pool, we both have around 6 decks each and when we get the opportunity to play with other people at a table usually one of us will win. We also scale our decks to match the power level at the table and it is a lot of fun. Don't get me wrong, I make mistakes and usually I work on fixing them if I can, but I have to admit that my friend is awesome at the game and we have more fun perfecting how we play decks than we do tuning them to be top tier.
I play a Phenax, God of destruction mill deck and have made myself a target for friends to watch my deck box and if they see it they pick their stronger deck. Along with that they would tend to politic around my responsive play style so much so that they aim to keep me from having creature reach their first upkeep after play whilst Phenax is on the field. I now have to change my play style with it to be somewhat more aggressive with it.
My mistake is definitely getting so focused either on their boards that I forget the triggers and effects I have added to my board or the reverse where I don't focus at all on theirs because mine gets convoluted
Things that I notice that happen a lot at least in my play group is people don't want to do anything to anyone because they don't want to draw hate so sometimes the first 4-5 turns nobody plays or does anything impactful when they have the mana or abilities to do so. They just try to ramp as fast as possible to play their bigger spells that have a but more impact
A big mistake I've made multiple times is assuming my opponents resolve the triggers I tell them about properly. I've had games where everyone is tired and after resolving the stack of 5 spells I put 5 more triggers on the stack and the board state is crazy. People miss stuff, and I've absolutely lost and then realized later that the key piece that killed me should have been sacrificed, so taking the time to check everyone's board after lots of things happen can save you.
My question is how do you estimate how much removal your opponents have? Because in the Nikya case you mentioned, I would agree with Vinny’s sequencing because if someone decided to remove Nikya (she’s a threat as a mana doubler and as a creature she’s more vulnerable to removal than Mirrari’s wake), Vinny would have gotten no value from his commander whereas with primordial sage out he already got value from playing Nikya
In general I've noticed greed to be a primary motivator to a lot of mistakes and I'm no exception to that. Take for example the sequencing they mentioned before of playing Primordial Sage and then Nikya the next so casting her draws you a card whereas Vinny could have played it in the reverse order and played 2 creatures in a turn rather than one and drawn a card in both cases. For a new example: I have a Hallar deck, as such I prioritize casting them before kicking spells since the win condition is burning people out with the kicker trigger. This mindset, however, can easily lead to greedy situations where I could potentially profit more from casting a kickable/kicked spell before Hallar (by, say, ramping sooner or answering someone else's threat) rather than after so they get that +1/+1 counter.
There's one error I've seen almost every person who plays against one of my decks make. That being underestimating a deck just because its strategy is unorthodox. The deck in question is my rebel deck that uses Zur the Enchanter as the commander. People tend to be very concerned at the start of the game because of Zur, but then as soon as I play a rebel, everybody tends to completely ignore the deck. It's almost like they feel a little bad about focusing down on me at the start of the game when I'm just running a rebel deck. This has lead to one of my favourite Magic stories. I was using my rebels against Najeela, Kruphix, and Sai. The Najeela player was the only one who had seen my rebel deck before. The deck works by using Zur to tutor for Arcane Adaptation so that my rebels can tutor for anything. I then use the ETB effects of my other creatures to piece together an engine that effectively lets me lock down the game. In this game, the Najeela player (who had around 15 warriors out at the time), started trying to convince the other players that my board of 2 rebels and a few seemingly useless enchantments and artifacts was a very serious threat. One of the other players took him somewhat seriously, and started looking at my board. He could tell that the cards I had in play had to be part of some form of combo, but he couldn't seem to figure out what the engine would do once I got the last piece out. The other player just laughed it off, thinking that the Najeela player was just trying to direct fire away from himself. They didn't even consider that a rebel deck could be threatening.
One time playing Melek I had Ionize faceup on top and my opponent cast a gamechanging creature. It took me until my draw when I saw the Ionize again to realize I had forgotten it there
My mistake is when chaining Extra Turns in a wrong time.
For example: My Locust God deck have 5 cards that have extra turns effect. If chain it correctly with correct cards, I win.
If chain it wrongly, I take extra turns for nothing (no card draws/cycle effect), end up losing.
This is because 3 of my extra turn cards required to exile after using, except Nexus of Fate and Timestream Navigator.
Forgetting you have Necropotence.
Forgetting how necropotence works
Forgetting to add necropotence to your deck.
Forgetting necropotence exists.
Forgetting your Necropotence is like forgetting you were killed 4 turns ago.
Forgetting Magic the Gathering
My group is super casual so this won't apply to most people, but we allow one 'rewind' per game for each player in case a trigger or play gets missed in the confusion
A common mistake I make but thankfully don't make as much anymore is countering a card that helps everyone else but then an even bigger card comes out that I can't counter now.
I’ve done the “forget my counterspell” one a lot too Josh... I always realize like the next turn, I look at my hand and I’m like noooooo! I could’ve countered that thing! 😅
So you’re really supposed to play the removal spell just because you can and you’re next few turns are planned out? I feel like you should hold it for an actual threat.
I agree with you, it's better to not waste a spell if you don't have to. Kill spells are better used on actual threats.
Well these videos are geared towards newer players, and most new players lean towards red or green because they're so blatant in their effects. A newer players would look at most color combos and say "Do I want to be able to counter one card? Or play a bunch of cards with alot of damage output?" And usually they lean towards the damage output not understanding the value and necessity of negation and control. So this aggressive mentality is definitely veered towards its intended audience but may not be useful in more advanced and intricate gameplay.
My biggest mistake was a few days ago. I was playing my Meren deck. Opening hand included a swamp, a Phyrexian Tower, an Entomb, and a Reanimate. That's a turn two win in my deck and I didn't see it. Instead of using Entomb to bin Protean Hulk, I used it to get Razaketh. That cost me the game.
That example at 12:30 is interesting and not very clear cut: If I don't have another land in hand, I'm almost certainly going to drop the Arena first, hoping to keep my land drops going for a few more turns - especially since Arena provides a recurring advantage, just as the Lantern does (Jimmy mentioned this after I already wrote my comment). But even then, it might be worth to gamble by dropping the Lantern regardless if you have any immediate card draw at the ready (like a Read the Bones) which you could use to find your land on your next turn.
I was playing with a newer commander player, I was playing daretti, he was playing some simic deck, then there was an Oona or something and a guy playing jodah. The jodah guy played a zendikar resurgent and a miraris wake, and he was set up to win on the next turn, so I cast all is dust to slow him down, but the newer simic guy felt the need to counter to save his 2 creatures..... Me and the Oona player were so salty because when it came time for the jodah player to take his turn he played omniscience and won on the spot. Sometimes your mistakes don't just cost you a win. Listen to the other people at the table before playing something that will affect everyone.
@berry Try explaining it better next time. Maybe you didnt explain kindly or maybe the guy was just foolish or stubborn. Many factors could have led to that.
@@vengray8055 we both told him that the jodah guy would win the game if he didn't let the all is dust resolve but the guy wasn't as familiar with the format so he didn't believe us. Threat assessment is just something you have to learn, prioritizing your stuff over someone else potentially winning isn't the right choice.
@@LegoMyachi I mean once you explained the line to him it should be obvious regardless of format.
@@silverdeathgamer2907 I don't know man, I think he realized his mistake after but he just didn't get it at the time.
berry once I countered a really bad spell and then my opponent played a overrunning stampede and I died.
It's a really interesting topic. I find the difficulty to be between balancing turns length and good plays. A multiplayer game of commander can get pretty long, so trying to maximise everything can end up in your disfavor.
More episodes like this, revolving around strategies in game and anything related, we need more off. Mainly cause I'm still under a year into playing this game and its always good to hear advice like this!
I've only just started watching this episode, but I wanted to bring up something from the last time you did an episode on this subject. Specifically, it has to do with the advice you gave to only tutor a land through Tempt with Discovery if you can get everyone to grab a strip mine. Depending on who you're playing against, they may turn that back on you by tutoring for their Strip Mine, Wasteland, Dust Bowl, etc. Then they just have to threaten that the first person to try and destroy one of their lands will lose all of their land.
My biggest mistake is missing my triggers (upkeep, end step, begining of combat, etc...). I am trying to help that by putting the die on my deck for reminders but I still forget them which HAS gotten me killed more then once.
Forgetting about sequence of my combo pieces in the middle of the game. That is my biggest flaw.
41:41 in my playgroup, that's called the "declare intentions" phase. I also like to put my public tutors face up on my deck to remind everyone
I tend to become a threat way too quickly without being able to properly prepare for the hate from the other three players. Another big mistake I make is missing my triggers and remembering them two or three turns ahead. It sucks but something that I can work on for the future :)