Yeah, me too, I mean, I guess with flash cards like Cast Out, Stasis Snare, and Seal Away that could make up a fun casual deck, but it wouldn't be competitive.

SynergyBuild

You are saying the same thing as me... I mean, the commander is the 8th card in your hand, so you must take the most important one to get the best 8th card possible. The 8th card in your hand must actively help your strategy...

Take your Zirilan deck again, and simply swap the commander for a Daretti. Instantly, you will get better results. Why? Daretti is better than Zirilan to play mono-red stax. I am not saying that Zirilan cannot lead a stax deck, just that Daretti, with the exact same 99, will be a better commander for a stax deck. Even if the deck does not rely on the commander that much, if the commander can add even a 1% more win rate, well, that is what competitive is all about, small improvements and optimization.

On the Jelava and Kess case, the thing is, they are both as good to lead a storm deck, but have some different use depending on your playstyle or the meta you play them in. Jeleva is better in a known meta that will have other spellslinger/storm decks, because even if you only cast her once in twenty games, you know that when you will cast her to restart your chain, you have a lot more chances to hit some good spells from your opponents. Kess would be better in an unknown meta, that you do not know if opponents will play spellslinger/storm decks with spells you can rely on. She lets you reuse your own cards, because you know you can use yours, to storm.

Then, if we compare, let's say, Nekusar to Jelava/Kess… Sure, Nekusar is Grixis, so he could be at the helm of the exact same storm deck. The thing is, even if that would be a competitive deck, the deck would be even better if it had Jelava or Kess in the command zone, since they contribute to your gameplan really better than Nekusar.

Same thing for Daretti vs Zirilan: I am not saying do not play Zirilan, I am not saying Zirilan is really bad, I am just saying that Daretti contributes better to the gameplan, and will make your deck overall better at what it tries to do.

So, I reiterate my point: every commander can lead a COMPETITIVE ARCHETYPE, but NOT ALL COMMANDERS ARE EQUAL. Some are better than others to lead said archetypes, such as Daretti being better than Zirilan for mono-red stax or Kess/Jelava being better than Nekusar at the head of a grixis storm deck.

Okay, then I am happy, can we agree then that Tier 3-5 isn't a thing?

"Tier 3

This is the middle tier. They can't usually compete against tier 1 decks, but might do fine with tier 2 decks. They usually have "the Aggro Problem," or they are wildly inconsistent. Most of the "pubstomp" decks that dominate casual meta go in here. They may have a bad reputation, but that doesn't make them tier 1.

Tier 4

These decks are somewhat weak. They have trouble winning in competitive metas, but may do well in casual games. They need a very favorable meta and a very lucky hand to win against decks like Zur. Tier 5

Janky generals that can't win often in competitive metas. Vanilla generals fit in here, as well as stuff like Gallowbraid. They usually can't do much. Those commanders mainly are used as placeholders or simply to fly under the radar with a strategy that doesn't requires your commander."

So, are any of my decks having these describe them, the "Aggro problem"? Wildly Inconsistent? Can't compete at all with Tier 1 decks like Zur? or are they decks that can be made better, yet are still consistent.

If you are honestly saying "every commander can lead a COMPETITIVE ARCHETYPE", then how is it this list claims they can't.

@ Winterblast I mean if you have some recorded games and what not or just goldfish data it could be enough... but I just see so much spam about getting X-commander higher because of super biased reasons and it is really plain dumb to go over it like that for the 1000th time put some time in it and add research to your posts...

@ SynergyBuild I talked about your mindset and we had a good laugh in our CEDH playgroup with your decks... I'm not saying a commander in tier 4 or 5 is where it belongs (maybe that 1% could be wrong-placed back then) as some things may have been overlooked at some point but most of it is accurate and not all of them belong in 2.5 or w/e tier... In Many games "cookiecutter" stuff exists... Abuse it and don't be delusional... This applies to the commander as well not being redundant like yours... in the long run with for example 1000+ games on the same deck, you'll start to see why a certain commander is chosen for a specific strategy... VS any same color thingamajig commander at its helm... It will show a lot of inconsistency in wins and it would never be equal or push everything to 2.5 all of a sudden because that just sounds plain mad...

SynergyBuild

That is why we are working on this list again. It can lead to some confusion and misinterpretsation.

Archetypes can be competitve or not, and the commander is a huge part of the archetype. If you play mono-red stax, you have many options available to you, but Daretti stands as the best commander for that specific archetype, being av=ble to contribute a lot more.

And of course, many commanders are wrongly positionned on the list, and that is why I started working on it again with some serious people (labmans, SS, tw0 and many others) in order to reformat the list, make it in a appropriate format to see what commanders are competitive, which are string, which are middle power and which would be better being replaced by any commander of the above categories.

On a side note merrowMania, I really like the living Kraken. Huge butt and interesting design for a creature that we did not see before (the closest thing in my mind is Dryad Arbor).

I think I will try to brew a Xerox Arixmethes decklist. I will look at some Taigam Xerox decks (like this one Xerox Taigam). General idea: lots of cantrips, less lands, and the win condition will be Paradox Engine + Commander or Isochron Scepter/Dramatic Reversal.

I know this wont be the most competitive deck ever, but I think that it could work. T3 worthy IMO.

Kiyomei yeah, I have a note in my wallet on which I write the turns and how I won in goldfished games I sometimes make when I'm on my phone. So far there have been several t2 hulks, which has also happened in real games, and every other possible kill including necromancy hulk, birthing pod, buried alive or razaketh as a setup hasn't been slower than t4 with the majority being on t3, considering actual mulligan rules. Even using the commander for a kill has been no slower than t4 in the goldfished games - in practice this would be a backup plan against gy hate or torpor orb for example, but in the goldfishing I tried going straight for the commander kill when it felt like the fastest way.

Winterblast seems Gucci!! is it all in speed or can it protect itself well during the combo turn? and is its late-game comparably as good as its early-game?

anyways I'm glad your build works wonders for you, just don't stress it too much about some random tier that doesn't mean anything at the moment. I mean this list has .5 tiers which are so extremely vague and wrong anyway... just sad the Ramos is still there which might confuse people...

thegigibeast About the discussion with SynergyBuild, I mostly agree with you but just wanted to bring up one commander/deck that kind of breaks from the idea of a better commander in certain colors = higher tier placement. The one commander who kind of breaks from this on the tier list is Atraxa, and while I understand she contains one if not the best color combination in the game, the deck list that is used for her doesn't use her at all, only her color identity. Just wanted to ask about this cause it seems to break from the mold a bit.

Penguin_Gamer_1 finally someone with common sense, thank you.

I haven't read everything that's been posted because there's a lot but I understand the argument

I mean... Five color=Best color combination... so yeah, I think we all can agree about that. Yeah, I love Thras/Tymna, great enablers for Hermit Druid.

I believe you have made my agruement for me, that list is the best atraxa list, not the best Hermit Druid/Cephalid Breakfast list though, right? so the arguement you made is nulled by this one:

"The point is, there is a hierarchy; that's inarguable. The cream of the crop sits at the top. As you move down the hierarchy, you also (presumably) decrease in speed and consistency, and to some extent, archetypically. There are other factors to consider as well."

So why have Atraxa here as Tier 2, when a Child of Alara would do just as well, right? Okay, minus Bloom Tender, other than that the deck would run nearly exactly the same. Honestly Bloom Tender might like Child of Alara now that I am thinking of it.

If the arguement that the best commander for an archetype is the only one that should be shown, this is undeniably false by the showing of Atraxa in Tier 2.

I haven't read everything that's been posted because there's a lot but I understand the argument. How about if the commander is only used for colors in a competitive deck, it isn't the commander that is competitive but the deck. Ok apparently TappedOut doesn't like emojis so here's everything I meant to say lol

So why is atraxa here?

The list provided only uses it for colors, and Thrasios/Tymna are better commanders for it, and that list is also here.

So why is atraxa here?

The list provided only uses it for colors, and Thrasios/Tymna are better commanders for it, and that list is also here.

Whoops, I apologize, since the last comment was directed at Sorin841.

Thrasios/Tymna are listed a lot higher, are they not? Besides there arent mana 4c commanders and the partners already have better decks available to them, so it's to be expected that some will only use colors. But yes, this would be a case where the deck is competitive, not necessarily the commander. It's just explaining why the statement every commander can be competitive is false.

Oh they are, however with many of the other lists I went over, that are listed as tier five, and I asked about, the answer (at least by thegigibeast) was that they shouldn't be listed as tier 2.5, because the lists isn't based on the commander, and are an archetypal list. I was wrongly under the impression both of you had the same opinion. I apologize.

A possible solution would be to tier the decks, and under them list the commanders that pilot the decks, in order of strength for the commanders. That way we have the commanders tiered and the archetypes, everyone's happy.

I doubt everyone will be happy, as they never are, but it would be a start in the right direction.

Atraxa is a good example. I dont know the decklist but I'm assuming its combo of some sort. So we tier the deck/archetype let's say for arguments sake tier 2. And then under it, since she's just for colors and doesn't help the strategy, she'd be near the bottom. Obviously some people will just always he unhappy but it seems a lot more accurate and a much better compromise.

I agree it is too much work, yet I would be unopposed to to a list that looks like that, I don't think it is the solution.

I dont think you would need to make the categories that specific. Mono Blue control is enough. I'd say maybe put it around tier 2 and put every mono blue commander with a submitted control list under it in order of strength, I dont see why you need to further organize it by HOW they control, just that they do.

The problem with Mono-U Control being tier 2 is that Commander Deck Teferi is By far the best by a full tier. Probably the best solution for now so that the list can actually just get updated quickly is to update the way it always has with lists posted on their merits and a strategy breakdown with commanders that follow that strategy in the description. Ergo, Strategy_ followed by Recommended Commanders__. If people want the info they know where to get it and otherwise the list is the same decent general benchmark it has always been. Nuance is a waste of people's time beyond tier 2, tiers 2 and 1.5 being the most contentious.

Teferi isn't strictly control. I think he falls under stax or possibly a hybrid between stax and combo.