Is Ramp Too Good?

[Aetherium Slinky]

It's not an argument against anything. It's supposed to be a discussion. I'm just saying "hey, do we think that maybe the best ramp cards in EDH are actually better than they need to be?". It's really that simple.

Highlights by me. I've been lacking this piece of information. Why do you say it only now, after three pages of novels?

Knowing this: no, ramp is not too good. They're just spells. This is the same as asking "is Thoracle too good?" which isn't really a question anyone else but the cEDH community can answer. Now, the format isn't ruled by the cEDH community -- in fact the RC very reluctantly banned Flash as a result of an outcry from the community. This to me proves that all cards can be used responsibly (including ramp) so that's a non-problem.

If you're asking on behalf of the cEDH community please say so! Is ramp too good in the context of cEDH? No, the meta is in a very healthy place right now. If it isn't broken don't try to fix it. I've never heard the cEDH community complain about ramp. Other cards, yes, but not ramp at large. I don't think ramp is a problem at any power level. When it comes to cEDH nothing in the current conversation implies ramp is a problem.

At lower power level the community is self-regulating and responsibility to play appropriate cards is on the player. So that, by definition, cannot be a problem. This is universal to all spells and does not apply to ramp specifically so that's not an argument either.

Q.E.D. - I rest my case. Is that what you were looking for? Does this prove ramp not being a problem well enough?

[anjinsan]

In essence having not enough mana to do something is said more compared to having to much mana and nothing to do. So the answer for me would be no there is no such thing as ramp being to good.

So, does it follow, then, that you think we should have, say, the old moxen back?

Highlights by me. I've been lacking this piece of information. Why do you say it only now, after three pages of novels?

Apologies. I guess I assumed people would understand what I was talking about in my first post, rather than making up weird things to argue about.

Is ramp too good in the context of cEDH? No, the meta is in a very healthy place right now. If it isn't broken don't try to fix it. I've never heard the cEDH community complain about ramp.

What do we mean by "the cEDH community"? cEDH players, typically, seem to concern themselves with creating the most powerful decks according to the rules. If anything, cEDH players are less likely to have a problem with something like ramp than the rest of us because they are choosing to play in the games where it's prevalent; people who dislike it are a lot less likely to play cEDH in the first place.

I'm talking about the format as a whole... which admittedly is difficult, because it gets into this weird philosophical thing about whether EDH that isn't cEDH is even EDH or whether the rules even really matter if people aren't playing optimally. Indeed, you seem to have hit upon that yourself:

At lower power level the community is self-regulating and responsibility to play appropriate cards is on the player. So that, by definition, cannot be a problem.

This sounds a lot like the "well EDH has this problem but we don't play EDH so we're happy so therefore EDH is great!" argument which... well, you can spot the flaw.

Indeed, if a self-regulating community is choosing not to play the best ramp spells (though I'm not sure that they are, if we discount "fast mana") then that rather implies that they are "too good" (for some definition of "too good", at least).

So far, what I've gotten is "some players [the cEDH ones] don't complain about ramp, and the ones who don't like it don't play it, therefore it must be fine" which, well, it's not exactly QED, is it? Oh, and "this is a question you could ask of any card, therefore you cannot ask it of ramp specifically" (which also doesn't make sense).

[Valmias]

Indeed, you seem to have hit upon that yourself:

At lower power level the community is self-regulating and responsibility to play appropriate cards is on the player. So that, by definition, cannot be a problem.

This sounds a lot like the "well EDH has this problem but we don't play EDH so we're happy so therefore EDH is great!" argument which... well, you can spot the flaw.

Saying the community self-regulates is not the same as saying it has a problem. Self-regulation is the means by which it is not a problem. Some people just like playing with slower mana. Some people just like playing faster mana. By and large, players with similar likes choose to play together, and everyone can have fun. If you are playing fast games and wish your games were slower, the problem is not the mana rocks.

Your responses have just become restatements of people's positions as non-sequitur straw men, and then addressing those. I won't accuse you of arguing in bad faith, but I am finished responding to this line of "discussion".

[anjinsan]

Saying the community self-regulates is not the same as saying it has a problem. Self-regulation is the means by which it is not a problem.

It's not really about whether it's a problem; I'm asking a question here about the mechanics of the game. If you're discussing the qualities of certain cards, to say "well yeah but we just don't play with those cards" completely dodges the question and is, essentially, irrelevant. It's a completely nonsensical line of reasoning.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm not trying to restate any arguments as straw men, I guess I'm just struggling to understand certain other people's confusion), but you seem to be saying that if I have a problem with faster ramp, I should play games with other people not using faster ramp, and under the impression that I'm simply advocating for that ramp to be banned? If so... fine? But that's kind of missing the point again. For the purposes of this discussion, at least, "ban all ramp in EDH" and "I will play a version of EDH with my mates where ramp is banned/soft-banned" are the same; in either case, I'm playing a game with less ramp. My question is more about the relative merits of playing without that ramp in the first place.

It's also kind of a slightly philosophical one about game design, and whether these cards are tuned correctly, and what it actually means to be correct. I'm not sure that everyone here agrees but I still believe it to be the case (and in fact the common consensus) that the better ramp we have, including the regular non-fast-mana is really good, and more powerful than it needs to be (again, compare/contrast Standard) but there are reasons why that might still be desirable. I was hoping people might be interested in discussing those reasons and perhaps helping me decide whether any of them are particularly strong or not.

Please give me one more opportunity to restate this in a way that may be more comprehensible. Forget all that rubbish about what you play in your playgroup or whatever; imagine you're a game designer at Wizards and someone's just invented mana rocks (or, heck, the whole notion of ramp) for the first time. You're trying to decide what the final mana rocks should look like (or they could be Rampant Growths, whatever, but let's just stick with rocks without loss of generality) and, for the sake of this thought experiment, let's assume there aren't already mana dorks or whatever to compare too. What CMC do you put these rocks at? Zero is a valid answer - that was what they did first, after all! But they decided that that was too low. Why? How about 1? 2? 3? 4? And why?

This is really the question I was trying to ask: would people put rocks in the same place they are now (which is about 2, ish, setting aside Sol Rings and other fast mana) if we didn't already have the guilty knowledge that we do? And what are the factors that would affect that decision? To me, the whole point of ramp is to provide a trade-off between playing it and not, so I'd want to try and balance them around the point that the pros and cons to using them are roughly on some kind of a par (that's what I was trying to say in my first post; and, again, compare/contrast with Standard), but what I was trying to ask is, do people think there are other factors that should be taken into account?

That seems like a pretty simple question to me, albeit not necessarily one with a simple answer.

[Morganator 2.0]

That seems like a pretty simple question to me, albeit not necessarily one with a simple answer.

We're 4 pages in and still don't know what kind of answer you want.

In no more than two sentences, can you state your question?

[Aetherium Slinky]

You're trying to decide what the final mana rocks should look like (or they could be Rampant Growths, whatever, but let's just stick with rocks without loss of generality) and, for the sake of this thought experiment, let's assume there aren't already mana dorks or whatever to compare too. What CMC do you put these rocks at? Zero is a valid answer - that was what they did first, after all! But they decided that that was too low. Why? How about 1? 2? 3? 4? And why?

That's a whole different question...again.

I think WotC has done a fine job balancing formats: at first you could get cards and mana for free, basically. But to offset that creatures and damage was hard to come by. Nowadays the balance has shifted to the opposite and I think that is a natural consequence of balancing the different metas. If you look at what is printed to Modern and Standard these days you see what is being considered fair. So the answer is 2 (creature with summoning sickness), 2 (tapped rock) or 3 (untapped).

That being said it doesn't make previous ramp cards too powerful. They simply are? They don't break anything on their own. If you run all fast mana you have fast starts and EDH starts to look like Legacy lite and if you don't it's just as valid of a format.

You're asking to ignore a lot of context here. I don't understand why. It's very confusing. Sol Ring of Mana Crypt are not bonkers good if everyone is running them and everyone is prepared to answer them. Dockside Extortionist is bonkers good and probably the best ramp card out there in terms of cEDH. Not that good in lower power metas but that's not something you're concerned with.

I repeat my point: cEDH isn't crying for banning any ramp cards other than Dockside Extortionist but even it is not a problem at large because it doesn't warp the meta to the point R is a must have colour. In fact its inclusion rate is 53% and it's not even the most popular combo card even though there are a lot of cards that combo with it.

[WWolfe]

I’ve read four pages of this and don’t understand what the OP is really asking. Did I miss something?

[anjinsan]

In no more than two sentences, can you state your question?

Yes, in my experience fewer sentences always make things clearer. Let's have a go...

"In EDH, how powerful do you think ramp cards should be, and why?"

If you look at what is printed to Modern and Standard these days you see what is being considered fair. So the answer is 2 (creature with summoning sickness), 2 (tapped rock) or 3 (untapped).

Standard is, however, not EDH, and in fact even there I don't think you get any 2-mana rocks even tapped. Tablet of Compleation just showed up, and it is effectively double-tapped (you need to tap it an extra time, or proliferate) before it gives you mana (though it does also have a potential card-draw mode, eventually). In EDH, aggro decks aren't overrunning durdly ramping decks early before they can get set up (not that this is any bad thing, IMO) so I suspect the balance is a bit different.

That being said it doesn't make previous ramp cards too powerful. They simply are?

Well... if a card is about right, and then another card is more powerful than it, it kind of suggests that the other card is too powerful, or at least pushing it (likewise if a card is notably worse, it's probably not very good). That's pretty much tautological; more powerful cards are, well, more powerful.

[Landale]

"In EDH, how powerful do you think ramp cards should be, and why?"

As powerful as they are now.
Because the power they currently have is quite varied.

[Bonethousand]

"In EDH, how powerful do you think ramp cards should be, and why?"

I honestly don't have a problem with any ramp. I've had a few games where someone drops a Sol Ring T1 and then has 4-5 mana on T2, and I've scoffed; however, my dissatisfaction level is the same as when someone plays a stax piece. I knew it was a potential, and I've got one in my deck, so it just comes down to the natural variance of the game that my opponent stuck the landing and not me.

We've discussed fast ramp in my pod before and the discussion always comes down to the same factor, late game catching up. No matter how good your card draw, sometimes you miss you 4th, 5th, and/or 6th land drop, and everyone else boosts ahead. Going mana positive on a later turn is sometimes essential to even have a horse in the race. I think we all remember that time we tutored for a sol ring when we would have loved to get a combo piece or a board wipe. If the only two options were to 1) never have explosive first turns, or 2) have the ability to catch up, I'm picking 2 every time and dealing with any drawbacks of accelerated games.

Additionally, I think it's hard to decide that a certain mana cost for a certain mana output ratio is inherently too powerful. An everflowing chalice or a black market can very quickly generate absurd amounts of mana in the right decks. Sure it takes setup, but not much. And I've definitely experienced mana crypt into sol ring into a signet plenty of times where the player was just dead in the water without good spells to play while hoping no one has a nature's claim.

So, to answer the question succinctly, I'd say current ramp is fine. If we had to draw a line on cost/output, I would say Black Lotus is a pretty good barometer. 

[Morganator 2.0]

"In EDH, how powerful do you think ramp cards should be, and why?"

Where they are right now is a good spot. They're strong but not overpowering. I wouldn't mind seeing a cycle like the diamonds except where they don't enter tapped. They'd be good options for mono-coloured decks while being inferior in multicoloured.

[AlltheTokens]

I was going to say it depends on what you want out of EDH, but, the more I think about it, I realize that is wrong.  If you want to play big splashy creatures, ramp.  If you want to flood the field with weenies, ramp. If you are like me and want to make big splashy plays that then flood the field with weenies, ramp!  Ramp speeds up the game, and the more they print the harder it is for the guy who can afford the best cards to buy games.  I love ramp, because it helps people do all the things I love in EDH just that little bit faster.  That means more games and more interesting boardstates.

[anjinsan]

So, to answer the question succinctly, I'd say current ramp is fine.

It may be a little subtle, but this isn't the question you quoted. I asked "how powerful do you think ramp cards should be, and why?", not "is what we have at the moment OK?". It's possible that what we have now is fine but something else would be better, so not having any problems with the game as it is now simply doesn't rule out the option of existing ramp (but also doesn't rule out anything else).

We've discussed fast ramp in my pod before and the discussion always comes down to the same factor, late game catching up. No matter how good your card draw, sometimes you miss you 4th, 5th, and/or 6th land drop, and everyone else boosts ahead. Going mana positive on a later turn is sometimes essential to even have a horse in the race. I think we all remember that time we tutored for a sol ring when we would have loved to get a combo piece or a board wipe. If the only two options were to 1) never have explosive first turns, or 2) have the ability to catch up, I'm picking 2 every time and dealing with any drawbacks of accelerated games.

Interesting take, but I think that, if you think about it, it doesn't quite work out like that; for every opportunity for someone to catch up, there's a time when someone else gets ahead faster, creating the very problem you're trying to fix in the first place (and being in that position on turn 2 sucks even worse). Essentially, you've increased the variance, because yes sometimes I will miss land drops but be able to tutor for some fast mana, but other times I will do neither whilst someone else is doing both.

And, of course, the effect is limited by how many tutors you have and how many pieces of fast mana. Plus, you could just replace some of those with lands and the difference between worst cases and best would already be smaller. I actually think that MDFC lands or cards like Abundant Harvest, Dig Up, etc are a much better fix to this problem than Sol Rings and Mana Crypts.

[Bonethousand]

So, to answer the question succinctly, I'd say current ramp is fine.

It may be a little subtle, but this isn't the question you quoted. I asked "how powerful do you think ramp cards should be, and why?", not "is what we have at the moment OK?". It's possible that what we have now is fine but something else would be better, so not having any problems with the game as it is now simply doesn't rule out the option of existing ramp (but also doesn't rule out anything else).

Bro, it's literally the title of the thread. Is it too good? No. How powerful should it be? The current level of variable power. In the context of my whole post, this answer makes complete sense with your question. I mean, I'm trying to be on your side in this, but your discourse is making it really hard. I know someone mentioned before that they didn't want to say you were arguing in bad faith here, but I'm starting to think their instincts were right. I can't tell if you can't read the room or if you're intentionally being argumentative for the sake of argument. I think at this point the waters are so muddied that it's a good idea to just start a new thread that is intentional, clear, and directed at the level of pedantry you're looking for in this discussion.

Interesting take, but I think that, if you think about it, it doesn't quite work out like that; for every opportunity for someone to catch up, there's a time when someone else gets ahead faster, creating the very problem you're trying to fix in the first place (and being in that position on turn 2 sucks even worse). Essentially, you've increased the variance, because yes sometimes I will miss land drops but be able to tutor for some fast mana, but other times I will do neither whilst someone else is doing both.

And, of course, the effect is limited by how many tutors you have and how many pieces of fast mana. Plus, you could just replace some of those with lands and the difference between worst cases and best would already be smaller. I actually think that MDFC lands or cards like Abundant Harvest, Dig Up, etc are a much better fix to this problem than Sol Rings and Mana Crypts.

I agree with your point about MDFC's here. However, when it comes to the two types of situations we've been discussing, I can only go by experience alone. I don't keep any data on this in my pod. All I know is that the enduring feeling is one of relief when I can catch up, and not of frustration of getting smoked by fast mana.

[WWolfe]

This is going to sound like a generic answer, but it's really up to the individual metas to decide. There are two shops (well were two, one closed) where I live. One of them was a much more competitive meta where you wanted your deck as fast as possible with quick mana while the other was slower but everyone did play ramp, just not the quick mana. There were those of us that went to both stores and adjusted accordingly to where we were. All of this while having a somewhere in between speed when playing with my regular playgroup while having a few drinks.

So I guess my answer is, where it's at is fine. You just have to make sure your meta is all on the same page.