Should Infinite Combos Need to be Shown?
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Dec. 17, 2020, 9:51 a.m. by Reznorboy
So, this could be generalized to other formats, though this occurrence happened in a game of Commander.
The way I enjoy playing EDH is very beginner-unfriendly; I generally play as few creatures as possible and lots of heavy stax, land destruction, pillowfort, and infinite combo lines.
That was not the issue with this case.
Basically, I played a game against a purely aggro Gishath, Sun's Avatar deck (the game started with 4 people, and the others all quickly lost).
I was playing Golos, Tireless Pilgrim. (Note: I was playing on Untap.in and the game was labeled as 'Optimized').
I could post the deck here, it is a very budget ($300) deck that comes close to cEDH.
Point is, I had Glacial Chasm on field, and they had no land destruction. I also literally told them this: "I have a way to put Glacial Chasm back in my library from grave as well as a way to replay Golos, Tireless Pilgrim a few times per turn" (with Drownyard Temple in grave, so Chasm saccing lands wouldn't matter much, and tons of mana).
At this point, they should have understood that I could potentially just sit there until they decked out, not to mention buy me enough time to do my combo that produces infinite 1/1s.
An important note about my deck is that it is designed so that even if I drew nothing but basic lands the whole game, Golos can search out every single card in my deck given enough mana and time to set it up.
The person then demanded that I demonstrate the entire combo.
It took about 10 minutes to even set up about half of the combo.
By then, I had to leave, because I have a life.
When I told them this, they said, "I guess I win then".
It extremely angers me that in this game, one that supposedly rewards players for their intelligence, that the player won the game because they refused to understand basic card interactions.
Though it does not make sense to say that players should not have to explain anything, it also does not make sense in my opinion that a player should have to explain everything they do every single time.
I could go on a long rant on why exactly players should not have to demonstrate every detail of every combo they do, but I feel like I'm not going to change anyone's opinion in that regard anyway.
I just want people to realize that MTG is not perfectly designed, especially as far as cEDH goes, and that there should be some attempt to remediate it.
Sorry to tell you if you are running a combo it is on you to prove the combo
December 17, 2020 10:07 a.m.
My point is not what the current ruling is. I'm saying the current ruling should be different.
December 17, 2020 10:10 a.m.
The opponent should have to put in as much effort to understand as you are. If the opponent is actively attempting to not understand what is right in front of them because they want to delay the game just in case their opponent might mess up, they should not win under any circumstance. They are intentionally putting less thought into the game just to try to win, while also collaterally making the game take much, much longer. It is pretty obvious when a person can and cannot do an infinite combo, especially if they give some of the details.
Their argument is basically that I should be able to win because I don't want to actively try to do anything.
If the opponent can obviously disprove that the player cannot go infinite, then that actually requires some skill and knowledge and is a good thing.
December 17, 2020 10:19 a.m.
So there are two distinct things going on here and I think that they can be addressed separately.
In answer to your overarching question, "Should infinite combos need to be shown?" the answer is a yes, but with the caveat of "if a player requests it". This is for two reasons:
-
Can your deck actually do what you're describing? Do you still have access to the cards the form your combo? Do you even have the cards you're describing in your deck? These are questions which should be asked, depending on the trustworthiness of a player. This is not targetting you specifically, however there are a lot of really crappy people who play MtG and will do just about anything to "get the win" (which at times may include outright cheating). Hell, the player you were up against was literally trying to pull that kind of crap with you, hoping that you'd either get sick of having to explain or would leave prematurely so they could steal the victory. I once watched a pro game where a player was trying to get someone DQ'd becuase they didn't explicityly announce mana being added to their pool from unmorphing a Rattleclaw Mystic.
-
Does the combo actually work? Do you know how it works? I have seen poeple play a combo in their deck and not know how it works. I believe it was Mikaeus, the Unhallowed + Triskelion and the attitude was "I get these two cards and win, right?" Now most of the time, people would scoop becuase it was a well known combo. But in this case, the plyer didn't know how the loop worked and so techincally couldn't demonstrate it. I have also similarly seen people form infinite mana combos with no way to actually spend the mana. Again, that's nice that you can generate infinite mana but if you can't do anything with it then it's the next person's turn I guess.
Now, for very straight forward infinite combos that are well known, I don't think that many people would bother forcing you to play the combo out or even explaining it. But you should be able to if somebody asks, especially if it's not a simple combo.
Onto your point of frustration - the person you're playing against was most likely being a dick and I can empathise with you. I'm sure most MtG players have had a game with "that" person and for the average Joe, they aspire to not be "that" person. And it's even more frustrating when you deal with people who do in fact employ the "win by any means" strategy, as it can leave a really bad taste in your mouth from having to deal with them. And then for those people, the anonymity of online play just magnifies said personalities. (that was a lot of ands)
I do think that there is also a not insignificant portion of the MtG community as a whole who don't grasp a lot of the interactions of the game. And I'm not even talking about stuff like APNAP or layering, I'm just talking about having a combo that has like 5-6 cards working together.
However, it is important for players who are better educated in the game help these people in their understanding and not to belittle them. But there is also a responsibility for less educated player to bury their heads' in the sand and demand that everything is spelled out for them. I'm pretty sure that "Explain it like I'm five" and "the interactions of Magic cards and all the surrounding rules" don't mesh well together.
TL;DR: the person you were playing aginst is probably a crappy perons, but it's important that we still explain combos when asked (assuming that people aren't just doing it to be crappy people).
December 17, 2020 10:20 a.m.
fadelightningmm says... #7
If it is the first time running that combo out against someone it is your responsibility to explain how the combo works. An opponent shouldn’t have to take it at face value that you have a combo. In fact they could have ways to stop a combo from occurring if you were to play it out.
If you have played out this combo with that player I think it’s more okay to short cut the combo.
This also comes down to a matter of knowing your play group. In a play group I know I can make short cuts with combos and if they explain a combo I can tell them what I could potentially do and we would talk out the different lines of interaction. By doing this we speed up combos and prevent feel bads if we were to attempt playing it out.
December 17, 2020 10:23 a.m.
You're probably right about everything you said.
I still think that opponents should be trying to understand rather than the other way around, but it would be difficult to implement rules to make it so.
Anyway, I was especially frustrated because this is not the first time this has happened.
I once played a different deck that had an even more convoluted infinite combo against a person, and they made me spend 20 minutes playing it out (it worked and I won). That person even had the gaul to say "You just wasted our time" and the end of it.
I guess it's more of a "the person is rude" than "the game is rude".
It's difficult to find people that you know you enjoy playing with, especially consistently, which is an issue.
December 17, 2020 10:30 a.m.
plakjekaas says... #9
What I'm taking away from your story is that if you'd be playing these decks on an online MtG client, you'd probably time out setting up the exact workings of your convoluted combo. I think that's the online equivalent to "I have to leave because I have a life".
Which means, as your opponent points out, you'd not be winning the game. If your opponent's boredom is your wincon, be prepared for players who don't get bored and make you play it out. If you end up giving up before you can play it out, that's like a real life counterspell for your strategy. You even say that's the way you enjoy playing magic, and that you know it's not friendly to your opponents. Don't expect your opponents to be friendly back.
When Teferi, Hero of Dominaria was played in Standard as the only wincon of the deck, tucking itself back to not mill yourself out while you disabled your opponent with the emblem, I used to make them play it out on Arena too, and more than once, they weren't up to play it out and scooped, probably to get more games in against opponents who did get bored. They were entirely in control, yet the record says I won those games. Now I didn't enjoy those games, they didn't enjoy those games (or they wouldn't have scooped), but they were the ones submitting that deck to play with, knowing that's their only way to win. If that's not the way you actually want to win a game, build a different deck.
December 17, 2020 11:20 a.m.
officially
Yes, but it shouldn't take 10 mins
just play the loop once so that its is shown you have the loop
then just flip threw the deck and reveal combo. GG
unofficially
it depends
between friends we just ask can you stop x,y,z if answer is no its gg
but if your just some rando in a lgs im going to make you play it out
also if your just some rando in a lgs and your loop is non-deterministic
not only will i tell you to pound sand,
ill also call you on slow play if you try to make it infinite
you may agree or disagree but this is a common practice among magic players
basically it comes down to if i don't know you and you want bragging rights that you beat one of my decks YOU NEED TO EARN IT
December 17, 2020 11:22 a.m.
also for the record:
i would never concede to
Glacial Chasm
because theirs to many ways to work around it even with out land destruction
for example it prevents damage it doesn't stop life loss
another is theirs a major gap between sacrificing it at your up keep
and replaying it in your main phase that leaves you open for instant direct damage
also im a red player and always keep
Skullcrack
or another card with the same effect in my decks to keep the happy foggers in check.
edit: P.S. i have also gotten around it by nailing my opponent with
Glorious End
when they moved to draw phase
December 17, 2020 11:35 a.m. Edited.
TheRealSpecialK says... #12
I 100% think it was on you to demonstrate the combo. If you knew your opponent and they had seen this deck and that specific combo before, it might not have been necessary. But why would any player just take their opponents' word that they have a game-wining combo when they haven't seen it looped even once? Especially if it takes 10 minutes just to set up half the combo? You say you played against a purely aggro Gishath, Sun's Avatar deck, but did you know the full decklist? Is it conceivable they had a response, however much of a sliver bullet it might have been, that could have enabled them to break your combo? If I was the Gishath player, I 100% would have held on to that silver bullet chance of winning if the combo had not been fully demonstrated. If I hear you say "I have a way to put Glacial Chasm back in my library from grave as well as a way to replay Golos, Tireless Pilgrim a few times per turn," I would have sat back and said, "cool - show me and we can end this."
Now, it is totally true that the opponent might have been being kind of a dick, in which case that sucks, but to be honest a deck that wins through a combo as complicated as yours feels kind of sucky to play against sometimes - one might even say dickish. At the end of the day, Magic is a multiplayer game. We all play it to have fun - however different that looks for each person. If you were the only one having fun playing your deck, your opponent might have felt justified making it unfun for your too so that everyone at the table was having the same multiplayer experience.
December 17, 2020 12:14 p.m.
sorry for the spam its busy at work today and i couldnt fit everything in one post
last thing i was trying to fit in my post
@Reznorboy as a fellow tapped out member by default i want to have your back
i respect your passion for stax and pillow fort
i also respect you having a life outside of magic
but if your short on time pillowfort deck was probably the wrong choice
next time i would suggest picking a combo deck and sending them off to the counter to buy more cards before turn 5 hits.
December 17, 2020 1:19 p.m.
True, good point.
Only issue is I've never actually built a combo deck that doesn't take forever to execute the combo, I should build at least one that doesn't.
December 17, 2020 2:32 p.m.
Maybe its not your play style
Theirs lots of edh players that do not enjoy fast paced combo decks
Plan B. Just avoid games with randos
Once in a great while you make a new friend
But most the time it just ends in frustration
December 17, 2020 2:48 p.m.
I should have clarified;
Not that the combo takes many turns to complete, usually that the combo literally takes many, many minutes to demonstrate.
December 17, 2020 2:51 p.m.
TriusMalarky says... #17
I gotta say, if it takes that long to demonstrate the combo, then you shouldn't run it, at least IMO.
But I also must say that untap.in has some of the most degenerate players I've ever met. I mean, I had someone throw a fit when we played a budget game -- and my list was $100. In Modern. And the reason it was that high was because of a handful of dual lands.
He screamed in chat for a good 5 minutes.
December 17, 2020 4:18 p.m.
PhotogenicParasympathetic says... #18
This reminds me of a game I played in a modern tournament. I'm a fairly causal player, almost never play modern, but I was bored too I borrowed a deck and gave it a go. Ran into someone playing an infinite turns deck, and they went off and ult'ed a Jace, the Mind Sculptor on me, then proceeded to pick up their cards. I said, "Where are you going? I didn't concede." and won the game because by picking up their cards, they had effectively conceded after making the assumption that I was going to concede when I had not.
The point is, your opponent is never obliged to concede the game. If you assume they are going to and pick up your cards, that's your loss. If your opponent in this case had understood the combo immediately, they still would have been within their rights to play the game to its conclusion. If your deck can't win fast enough, that's a you problem, not a them problem.
December 17, 2020 4:42 p.m.
Yes, infinite combos should have to prove their line to victory if requested.
Otherwise you could just declare at any point in the game that you have an infinite combo and declare yourself the winner...
If you wouldn't want to play against a deck, then I don't think you should play it. I built two decks that I barely play because I wouldn't want to play against them. One of them is an infinite turns deck, which I only bring out against people like the original poster. It's my, "you're being a jerk and playing against you isn't fun. I can do that too except better" deck. The other is a stax deck, and I make sure I tell everyone I'm playing stax and make sure everyone is cool with it before I shuffle up.
December 17, 2020 5:35 p.m.
Ok, so apparently I'm just a jerk now.
Because I enjoy playing what I enjoy.
December 17, 2020 5:53 p.m.
TheRealSpecialK says... #22
I debated writing this, but I'm going to go for it.
You aren't a jerk because you enjoy what you enjoy, you come across as a jerk because you get so butthurt that other people don't act the exact way you want them to. Almost everyone in the thread has said that you should have expected to demonstrate the combo. Yet you literally wrote:
"It extremely angers me that in this game, one that supposedly rewards players for their intelligence, that the player won the game because they refused to understand basic card interactions."
How in any way is that not supposed to come across as condescending or dickish - especially when by your own admission, your combo is so complicated it takes over 10 minutes to just get off half of the combo - let alone the whole thing! You choose to play that way, but then you aren't patient in explaining the intricacies of the deck. Magic can be a crazy complicated and confusing game even for veteran players - and like you so pointedly said, people have lives. Some people only have time to play magic occasionally. If you are playing a complicated, long, game wining combo - you should expect to play the whole thing out and explain how it wins - not condescend player for not understanding it. Play what you play, but understand that you aren't playing in a vacuum - magic requires you play with other people. Learning how to interact with them is just as important as learning how to interact with your cards.
It just seems kind of jerkish that you demand players to interact with you certain way to be "fun" for you, but when those players ask you to play your deck to completion because that would be more validating/fulfilling/fun for them, you are upset. Your deck sounds kind of toxic - you literally are mad that your deck takes too long to play. You built it - be prepared to play it!
December 17, 2020 6:10 p.m. Edited.
Yes you need to demonstrate a combo and explain it. Also your link to the deck doesn't work
December 17, 2020 6:22 p.m.
Reznorboy "Ok, so apparently I'm just a jerk now."
"Because I enjoy playing what I enjoy."
Welcome to the club!
December 17, 2020 6:38 p.m.
plakjekaas says... #25
If you enjoy convoluted combo's that win slowly, that's fine, that doesn't make you a jerk.
What feels jerky about it, from an outside perspective, is that you claim to enjoy the deck, but given the chance to play it, showcase the strategy, you're unwilling to actually finish your plan because suddenly, you enjoy your life better than the game of magic you're playing.
Like someone asks you to pick up milk at the supermarket, you turn around halfway, and say "c'mon, you know they have milk at the supermarket, is it really worth my time?"
By not bringing it home, you didn't satisfy the conditions of ending the game of magic, even though you knew you could have. Your opponent didn't build your deck, he probably saw a lot of fidgeting around making little progress and wanted you to actually show a win before conceding.
You relied on your opponent's unwillingness to see it all played out instead of actually winning the game with a deck you claim to enjoy. Then you yourself were unwilling to finish and conceded. By doing so, you lost, as your opponent correctly stated.
Rallying the rest of the internet to side with your victory when you didn't actually care to win the game is what rubs me the wrong way, personally.
December 17, 2020 7:37 p.m.
Honestly, you did not win the game.
The cards in your OP don't stop your opponent from drawing or taking turns or untapping their mana.
With no lock in play, why would any normal player not make you play it out?
What you had in play does not win a game.
If you have an infinite combo, until you use it to win the game, you don't actually win the game. It does not matter how anybody feels about it. You cannot make your opponent concede and therefore you have to use your deck to win the game.
I am baffled why you would think anyone would concede to what you had in play.
The only way I would ever concede to just Glacial Chasm in play would be if I was 100% positive there was absolutely no card in my library that would kill that card. And I was 100% sure you wouldnt mess up your plays or turns. And I was 100% sure I would deck out before you decked out.
That is a lot of ifs to just concede on your sayso.
December 17, 2020 8:25 p.m.
FormOverFunction says... #27
This is why they need to finally un-ban Amulet of Quoz. Always have your out!
December 17, 2020 8:33 p.m.
plakjekaas says... #28
I had to look up how ante works exactly, but that sounds like the slowest mill deck ever '^^
December 17, 2020 11:48 p.m.
There is a long-established doctrine we have in law called the “least cost avoider principle” that holds that the individual who can most easily avoid a problem is the one who should have the burden of avoiding said problem.
The same basic idea applies here. There are thousands of cards in the game, which countless interactions. When a player executes a combo, the problem we seek to avoid is slow gameplay and misunderstandings over how the combo operates.
Consider our two players. The first is the player who is playing the combo, and thus presumably knows the combo inside and out. They can easily identify how everything works since they are intimately familiar with its workings.
The other player might be familiar with the cards and the rules, but it is unlikely they will have an intuitive recognition of how the combo works unless they have seen it before or are otherwise familiar with the combo.
Basic common sense dictates the person executing the combo, as the person best poised to swiftly and accurately explain said combo, should hold the burden of explanation. Any other rule would result in a greater number of suboptimal results.
December 18, 2020 1:08 a.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #30
I mean if the combo is set up how is it going to take 10 minutes to explain?
December 18, 2020 4:17 a.m.
Combos should be understood by all at the table. If it's self explanatory and fairly well known, then you can check in and make sure everyone gets it before glossing over. If not, just take the time to explain the combo.
December 18, 2020 9:41 a.m.
The replies in this thread have renewed some of my faith in humanity.
December 18, 2020 10:27 a.m.
fatalzintomyum says... #33
This sounds like an annoying as heck deck, I love it. Glacial Chasm, even in formats like legacy, is not the end all of most decks. In commander, I cannot think of a deck that wouldn't have a way around this card, even like its looking like a maniac. I'm not sure if you are playing this sort of deck, a loop deck that runs your opponent out of cards, that you ever have an excuse to just be like, "C'est mon loop, now I must leave because I have a life." The thing about commander versus everyn other format is that each game is a time investment, and people will feel resentment if you try and rush anything to a close. They will feel cheated, and I can see this person not wanting to concede to a loop that, even with only 1 out, might be beatable. Seriously, if you feel like the person handled it badly, just feel free to block them on Untap, and click don't record on the game if that matters to you. If your deck takes hours to win, just be sure to have hours to win with. looks like a fun deck, though miserable for your opponent.
December 18, 2020 10:39 a.m.
Gidgetimer says... #34
As a degenerate combo player I am very much in the "follow the rules" camp. Which is demonstrate a loop once and then propose a shortcut to the loop resolving that many times. You should be expected to show and explain your combo. If it is deterministic you can then loop it. If it is not deterministic (as is the case with this one) you should be required to play it out until the win happens. There are any number of outs to what you have explained. For one example that took me 5 seconds to think of, how do you know that they didn't have Rest in Peace?
Your opponent should not play their turn slowly, but neither should you. If you build a deck that takes 10 minutes to assemble half the combo you should be prepared to spend 20 minutes executing the combo. If it takes that long to perform, it takes at least that long to understand, and even longer to understand without an explanation.
December 18, 2020 11:01 a.m.
Gabe_The_Controller says... #35
If I was in gishaths position I'd play to my outs. Of there is no combo or lock assembled and on field, I won't scoop. I will not scoop unless I'm 100% certain I have loss the game.
If you aren't ready to play against players like that, you probably shouldn't be running a deck with the combo/lock so convoluted that you don't even have the time to play it out yourself.
December 18, 2020 7:25 p.m.
golgarigirl says... #36
I, personally, often have people go through their combos so I can suss out if there is an out for me. Do I have time to interact between part A and B of the combo? Is that an activated or triggered ability? Can I activate something between? Does exiling part A matter? What is the most important/vulnerable part of the combo?
I'm here to learn more about the game, and considering I do not enjoy finding and constructing intricate combos, I have my opponents explain them to me to see if I have an out at all. And most of my opponents welcome that...to see if there is some creative chink in their armor they never considered.
December 20, 2020 12:56 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #37
Also, as someone who piloted Lantern Control, establishing a soft lock won't guarantee the win; that's how I'm interpreting the "combo". I've had people slow play me despite having a bridge and 3 active shredder effects with lantern and perfect information. Just because they cannot deal damage to you doesn't mean they won't win by deck out, a misplay or time running out - which is often the case for lantern.
Reznorboy says... #2
The Golos deck
December 17, 2020 10:03 a.m.