Combo Detection
TappedOut forum
Posted on Dec. 20, 2013, 3:08 p.m. by yeaGO
Hey all,
You will now notice some additional features surrounding MTG combos.
1) Mentioning combos such as Channel + Fireball (that's bracket bracket channel plus fireball bracket bracket) will now aggregate discussion on the new combo pages
2) Mentioning combos and key synergies in your deck descriptions will provide YET ANOTHER place for your deck to cycle to. This uses the above syntax.
Enjoy.
You can always tell by the first card they play. For example this deck shows it with the first card. New and improved Blistercoil Weird deck
December 24, 2013 2:03 a.m.
Combo: Channel
+ Fireball
Synergy: Craterhoof Behemoth
+ Bow of Nylea
December 24, 2013 2:08 a.m.
I think those definitions don't properly segregate synergy from true combos. When we're dealing with a fuzzy area with lots of user discretion, the only thing that we can be sure of is that users will make mistakes. It stands to reason that this database should be more inclusive, rather than less inclusive. This means it will require you guys to delete less - because more will be relevant, and ultimately it will be more useful overall. I really don't think that synergy should not be allowed and combo should, when we can't even properly define a difference.
December 24, 2013 5:26 a.m.
Its really not a fuzzy area.
yeaGO! just doesn't want to leave out synergies.
December 24, 2013 7:48 a.m.
Yeah. I don't get how synergies aren't useful. We could flag them separately. but I don't know what we've accomplished by doing that.
December 24, 2013 8:26 a.m.
Dorotheus - at what point does a synergy become a combo then?
Given that no-ones given a satisfactory definition that separates the two, I would say that it IS a fuzzy area.
December 24, 2013 8:34 a.m.
Basically, a combo "goes off" and a synergy doesn't. That's the difference.
December 24, 2013 8:40 a.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #10
A combo has the potential to end the game by itself, and is a potential win condition (it doesn't need to be infinite). Children of Korlis + Hatred + Vizkopa Guildmage is a non-infinite lifegain/life loss combo.
A synergy is just stuff that works together particularly well. Pristine Talisman and Oloro, Ageless Ascetic are wonderfully efficient together.
December 24, 2013 8:50 a.m.
Let me give you some examples.
Possibility Storm and Curse of Exhaustion is a synergy. They are a synergy because there is no "going off," it's just two cards that work well together.
However, Karmic Guide and Reveillark is a combo, because it "goes infinite."
December 24, 2013 8:51 a.m.
There must be combos that don't go infinite though, that's my point. The actual definition of combo is - the product or result of combining; a combination.
Combos don't have to win the game by themselves. I just completely disagree. Karmic Guide and Reveillark doesn't end the game (depending on the sacrifice outlet - for example: Viscera Seer wouldn't).
Now we have disagreement about whether combos have to be infinite and whether they have to win the game. As I said - there's little agreement.
December 24, 2013 8:58 a.m.
Children of Korlis + Hatred + Vizkopa Guildmage doesn't 'go-off' at all. But I would class that as a combo over synergy. Although it does seem hard to pull off (but that's an unrelated issue).
December 24, 2013 9 a.m.
Can you explain that combo to me? I don't see it right now and don't feel liked figuring it out.
December 24, 2013 9:03 a.m.
I'm not too sure because I haven't encountered it yet. But here's my guess -
- Pay X life with Hatred
- Activate Vizkopa Guildmage second ability.
- Sacrifice Children of Korlis - Gain life equal to the amount you lost this turn (which is the value you paid for X), and opponent loses that much life.
You lose no life overall (by the end), opponent loses X life.
Could potentially end a game I would say.
December 24, 2013 9:06 a.m.
So what you described is the going off. This is what "going off" is with a synergy:
1) Cast Curse of Exhaustion
2) Cast Possibility Storm
3) ?????
4) Profit.
You actually have to do something with a combo, but with a synergy, you just cast both and profit.
December 24, 2013 9:12 a.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #17
Children of Korlis + Hatred + Vizkopa Guildmage is a multiplayer combo, there's a couple of variations of it sometimes used in EDH Suicide Black decks to try to kill all opponents at once. ChiefBell explained it. I just used it as an example of a non-infinite combo, not taking into account practicality. You can use a lot of other things instead, Sanguine Bond + Selenia, Dark Angel + Tainted Sigil is similar and easier to fire off, but more heavily telegraphed, only one target, and uses completely different cards.
December 24, 2013 9:17 a.m.
I thought you were using 'go-off' as a synonym for 'go infinite' or something.
I think that's actually a pretty good description.
Synergies are multiple cards that, when casted, complement each other in terms of their abilities etc. This requires nothing more than casting
A combo is a series of cards cast and actions taken, with cards that are already cast, that triggers complementary abilities to occur. This requires triggers to be caused by the player, other than simply casting.
Note: I use trigger in the literal sense, not the magic sense.
Does this seem sensible?
December 24, 2013 9:17 a.m.
That's exactly what I was trying to get to. If yeaGO! wants to use a defination for combo/synergy, he should use that.
December 24, 2013 9:20 a.m.
I feel like both should be included though, so the definition becomes slightly less important. Although if synergies were to be excluded from the list then the definition is important.
Depends on what people want.
December 24, 2013 9:24 a.m.
Well, I would class a combo as something that has potentially game ending synergy with one another (given your deck build). That is where the grey area would come in to play in my opinion. Something that would be considered a combo in one deck is only a synergy in another deck (because it is simply two cards that work together well, not part of your strategy to win, it's more of an added bonus).
Hopefully that makes sense? I know we will never define the line between synergy/combo, because it is open to opinion after all. That is just what I feel a combo/synergy is. The best thing I can come up with as an example is an Animar, Soul of Elements EDH deck. It usually contains a bunch of cards that have synergy with each other (bounce and ETB, etc.) but due to the nature of the deck, they are potential combos that will end the game if left unchecked. Even noninfinite things with "combo enablers" like Earthcraft / Aluren and Tidespout Tyrant / Cloudstone Curio if you were to choose that path, can be considered a combo in my opinion.
Hopefully my explanation makes sense to everyone, I'm not sure how else to explain how I feel.
December 24, 2013 9:25 a.m.
P.S. I also feel that both should be included, however we need to draw the line somewhere probably. You can't say things like Livewire Lash has synergy with any infect creature, any creature with lifelink has synergy with Sanguine Bond etc. Because that'd just be ridiculous. Being able to tag keywords like double strike, lifelink, etc. might be helpful to this system, idk.
December 24, 2013 9:38 a.m.
For example, allow us to use lifelink in the combo syntax, and it'd make some type of "token" lifelink card, that when you click on it goes to a list of every card that has/grants lifelink. I just feel that would prevent a superfluous amount of "combos" being listed, and would make it into a more organized and usable feature.
December 24, 2013 9:42 a.m.
I think the problem is just that magic is a MASSIVE game, with a huge card pool and there are thousands of things that synergise with things like Sanguine Bond . I've been going through my EDH deck and arranging combos by sacrifice outlet and there are about 10 combos per sacrifice outlet. For exaple - Altar of Dementia + Reveillark + Saffi Eriksdotter, Altar of Dementia + Karmic Guide + Saffi Eriksdotter. I don't mind doing that for myself because I'm slightly OCD and when I start a project I have to finish it, but my god, the combo pages are going to be so long.
December 24, 2013 9:43 a.m.
Only problem is cards that are named after such keywords, like ironically enough, my own example Lifelink . I'm not sure how you'd go about the few keywords that have card counterparts. Maybe when the card is clicked on it gives you two options, a did you mean this or this page.
December 24, 2013 9:45 a.m.
yes, I hear you ChiefBell I thought the same thing when I went through my oloro deck and updated it. I actually chose to keep out a few things from my "key combos" because I didn't consider them to be "key" in the slightest.
December 24, 2013 9:47 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #27
@ChiefBell: Your definition doesn't really do the difference justice.
These are the definitions I always use when threads about this pop up.
An interaction between two cards is merely some kind of synergy between their effects that works to create advantage that neither card inherently has.
Example: Craterhoof Behemoth + Bow of Nylea allows you to swing for massive damage because of the synergy between trample and deathtouch.
A combo is an interaction between two cards that leads to game-ending advantage through a self-sustaining repeatable loop, an infinite loop, or a lock.
Example: Palinchron + Deadeye Navigator is a self-sustaining repeatable loop that allows you to end the game by capitalizing on the infinite mana generated by the interaction.
The problem I have with allowing interactions into the system is that there are basically an uncountable number of synergies, and the definition for interaction is so open that we can easily get thousands of useless entries, like Prodigal Pyromancer + Needle Drop .
The site should instead focus on listing the relevant and useful combos between cards, especially the ones that aren't general knowledge. Once you allow interactions in, you have a flood of far less useful information, and you have to have a way to control that all.
We already have a demonstrated need for control because users have, under the old and existing syntaxes and privileges, inputted such gems as Swamp + Forest and Corrupt + Sign in Blood .
If we continue to allow all users to submit combos, we should implement a system not unlike the card approval/disapproval system, which requires users to fill out a form with the relevant information and a moderator to read and either approve or disapprove the submission. We should also post our definitions/guidelines at the top of the admin interface so they're always available to the people who need to make the final decision.
December 24, 2013 10:23 a.m.
Well you guys posted a lot... but it seems Epochalyptik has taken care of it. lol
Curse of Exhaustion
+ Possibility Storm
is a combo, and a very mean lock >:
December 24, 2013 4:46 p.m.
I think you've missed the point. We decided that storm + exhaustion is synergy, not a combo
December 24, 2013 4:57 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #30
Curse of Exhaustion + Possibility Storm is a combo. It is a lock.
December 24, 2013 5:27 p.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #32
Would have to agree with Epochalyptik by my definition of combo, Curse of Exhaustion + Possibility Storm would count, it leads directly to a concluded game. I'd have to scramble I don't know what to get out from under it.
Out of curiousity, what would you call something like Strionic Resonator and a given card with a triggered ability? Because the card explicitly interacts only with triggered abilities, does that mean all cards with triggered abilities are synergistic with it by default? I hadn't thought of it that way myself, as it seems overly inclusive, but I am curious how others would see it.
December 24, 2013 5:47 p.m.
I think a lock is a synergy. But, I wanted a definite answer, so I searched it and came to here. Here's my favorite answer (and the one that seems to be the best) out of these.
"In my mind, the distinction between synergy and combo is that a combo requires both cards for either one to be good (e.g., Phyrexian Dreadnought is useless without Stifle ), whereas synergistic cards are effective on their own, but even better in conjunction with others. "
So, the question is, which defination do we use? Do we use mine or Epochalyptik's or this one?
December 24, 2013 5:47 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #34
@Matsi883: That is a uselessly inaccurate definition. And Phyrexian Dreadnought + Stifle is an interaction, not a combo.
@nobu_the_bard: Strionic Resonator synergizes. It doesn't combo. See my definition a few posts ago.
December 24, 2013 5:54 p.m.
It isn't mine, but I like it...until I see it again.
MTGS thinks that a combo is something that lets you win or lose.
I think that the main question now is that we have completely different definitions. So which do we use?
December 24, 2013 6:01 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #36
I'm inclined to say mine. None of the other definitions I've read thus far in this thread are accurate. They try to differentiate combos and synergies using meaningless terms or insignificant qualities. For example, "going off" means nothing. It doesn't accurately describe any difference between combos and synergies, and it doesn't account for the dozens of combos that don't actually "go off."
December 24, 2013 6:12 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #38
Locks. Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir + Knowledge Pool doesn't "go off." Curse of Exhaustion + Possibility Storm doesn't "go off."
December 24, 2013 6:28 p.m.
smash10101 says... #40
I think a problem we're running into is that some people want a combo to be infinite/self sustaining like Exquisite Blood + Sanguine Bond and others want locks like Curse of Exhaustion + Possibility Storm to be included as well. What about something like Elder Mastery + Nekusar, the Mindrazer? Every time an opponent draws a card they discard 2. Is that a combo, or just synergy? What kind of locks do we want to as include? I can think of some that prevent players from casting spells, some that prevent players from attacking, prevent players from being attacked, from having a hand for longer than a round of priority, even from producing colored mana (in EDH).
And what about Channel + Fireball? That doesn't win the game on it's own. You have to have more life than them or enough mana to make up the difference.
December 24, 2013 6:34 p.m.
My opinion:
Exquisite Blood + Sanguine Bond is definately a combo and should be in.
Curse of Exhaustion + Possibility Storm is a lock, which Epochalyptik and I are disagreeing about whether it's combo or synergy.
Elder Mastery + Nekusar, the Mindrazer is synergy.
Channel + Fireball will win you the game if you have untapped lands/mana rocks. So, combo.
December 24, 2013 6:39 p.m.
Please can we just have all of them :( yeaGO! agrees with me.
December 24, 2013 6:50 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #43
I put locks in the combo category because they do what we traditionally think of combos as doing. They generate advantage from an interaction between cards, and they use that advantage to end the game.
"Going off" is a meaningless term in this context because it doesn't actually characterize why combos are different from synergies. It doesn't say anything about the properties of either group. You need to start at the definitions and work from there.
December 24, 2013 7:24 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #44
@ChiefBell: The reason I oppose synergies is that it's very hard to draw a line in regards to what is and isn't acceptable. Do we really want 300 listings with Invisible Stalker and every buff ever printed? No.
I like the idea of combo-only listings because the list itself would be much shorter, and because the elements of that list all have definite importance.
December 24, 2013 7:43 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #46
I don't make the final call. I'm just here to help implement and maintain the system. But I do think, both for usability and my own sanity, that combo-only listings are the simpler and better way.
December 24, 2013 7:54 p.m.
Locks are combos because they immediately prevent a player from winning the game, prevention from winning concludes in the other player winning. Its a meta idea. You can no longer win, defaulting in me winning.
After arguing the ideas of combos and synergy, it comes down to placement then. Anything that effects life lose and damage would be higher tier than say infinite mana, although infinite mana (which is where I believe people get hung up) is a combo it does not lead to the game ending just from it, but an additional piece that uses that resource to then end the game. (eg - Misthollow Griffin
+ Food Chain
+ Fireball
)
The other thing I believe people get hung up one are assuming combos are always infinite, which is untrue, but in many cases simply due to the state of the game, most are and that's just how things are.
December 24, 2013 7:54 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #48
I agree with Dorotheus's definition. Per my definition in post 7:6, I argue that a combo "leads to game-ending advantage." Combos don't necessarily end the game automatically (e.g. infinite mana), but they produce the advantage necessary to make victory more of an inevitability rather than just a possibility.
December 24, 2013 8:02 p.m.
Well perhaps the necessary arrangements should therefore be agreed upon and a strict definition of combo be put in place so that people can follow this system. Other users need to be made specifically aware of 1) what a combo is (by definition) and 2) the syntax to include one.
By the way - I have noticed that 4 card combos don't appear to be working. I know they're convoluted but they are possible and can highlight nice little game ending things, so I would like to see them. Altar of Dementia + Blood Artist + Reveillark + Karmic Guide , as an example. Rare - but possible.
I'm perfectly happy to not have synergy included because it's a massive area and this is an early stage for all of this. Obviously combos are a massive areas as well, but it seems better to start with one first and add another later.
December 24, 2013 8:07 p.m.
I agree with putting HARD LOCKS in the combase, even if I maintain that they aren't combos. Soft locks are a different story.
smash10101 says... #1
I believe that the limit is currently 4, but I have seen combos that are larger than that. Example: Crackleburr + Ley Druid + Thoughtlace + Chromatic Lantern + Extraplanar Lens + Swamp + Dawn's Reflection + Deep-Slumber Titan + Deep-Slumber Titan + Izzet Staticaster + Boros Charm + Memnite = infinite targeted 3 damage. Oh hey, I used a basic land too.
December 24, 2013 12:44 a.m.