[Penalty Guidelines] Loops CHANGES

[thefringthing]

Section 4.3 of the IPG now contains the following language:


It is also slow play if a player continues to execute a loop without being able to provide an exact number of iterations and the expected resulting game state.

As I understand it, players will now face penalties for performing the 4 Horsemen loop. (And perhaps also Dragon loops in Vintage.)

[UnderwaterGuy]

Doesn't the 4 Horseman loop have an expected game state though? Both players know exactly what will end up happening but they just don't know how many tries it will take for it to happen.

Unless I'm remembering wrong. It's impossible for that combo to fizzle, right? It just takes a random amount of time to actually win.

[thefringthing]

Right. Although you can state exactly what will happen eventually, you can't state how many iterations it will take, so the loop is now Slow Play.

[Julian23]

Whenever I came across people playing Four Horsemen, I made them play it out and won by them timing out in game1 on MODO. I will scoop to actual endless combos, but this one has the potential to never achieve the game state it tries to create so it's just fair it sometimes doesn't work out for them.

With this new rule, the combo becomes almost impossible, I guess.

[thefringthing]

With this new rule, the combo becomes almost impossible, I guess.It's perfectly *possible*, it's just not allowed anymore. Which seems ridiculous to me.

[Julian23]

I was referring to practically impossible, not the theoretical chance of pulling it off without accumulating too many slow play warnings :eyebrow:.

[Phoenix Ignition]

What's a 4 horseman loop? Something that mills infinite but the opponent has 4 Emrakuls or something?

[thefringthing]

What's a 4 horseman loop? Something that mills infinite but the opponent has 4 Emrakuls or something?From the 4 Horsemen thread:


Once you have the set up complete you can tap Basalt Monolith to untap itself as often as you like. Each time you do, Mesmeric Orb will put a single card from your library into your grave yard. Whenever you get to Emrakul its reshuffle trigger goes on the stack. If your opponent has any unknown resources (cards in hand, an active Top, etc.), you should just let it resolve immediately. Other than that, you are looking to reveal a Narcomoeba and a Cabal Thetapy. If you reveal Cabal Therapy first, keep going. If a Narcomoeba comes first, its ability goes on the stack. Do not let it resolve yet. Keep activating the Monolith with the Narcomoeba on the stack until you see a Cabal Therapy. When that happens allow the Narcomoeba to enter the Battlefield and, without passing priority, cast Cabal Therapy. The Narcomoeba will be safely back in your graveyard before your opponent can respond. Note that if Emrakul comes up with the Narcomoeba ability on the stack, you can let Emrakul shuffle it back in your library to essentially cancel the trigger. You are probably naming Swords to Plowshares with the first Therapy. If any of your Narcomoebas are exiled you have to go back to the search stage and get the Blasting Station in your hand and hardcast it. Now that you have seen your opponent's hand you can use the second Cabal Therapy in this same way to nab Stifle or Path to Exile. There really aren't any other cards to be concerned with (they should have countered one of your enablers if they had a counter). If the opponent has nothing pertinent from the first Therapy, you can use the others to discard combo pieces from your own hand if you are holding any.

Once these details are in order it is safe to let the three Narcomoebas enter the battlefield. Then you are looking to get Sharuum, Dread Return, and Blasting Station in your grave yard before revealing Emrakul. This may take several times through the deck but it must be exactly this way. Once you get this, Dread Return Sharuum who brings in the the Blasting Station. When Blasting Station enters the battlefield you are in business. Just continue to bring the Narcomoebas onto the battlefield one at a time and sacrifice them to the Station as you do. You will do infinite amounts of artifact damage to any legal target including your opponent.

[cdr]

I don't see a change; I see codification of existing policy. You were never seriously allowed to consider something with an indeterminate number of iterations or an indeterminate end point a loop.

"Four Horsemen" was always on shaky ground at best rules-wise.

[thefringthing]

I don't see a change; I see codification of existing policy. You were never seriously allowed to consider something with an indeterminate number of iterations or an indeterminate end point a loop.You certainly could never shortcut it, but now (if I understand this change correctly) you can't even play it out.

[cdr]

You certainly could never shortcut it, but now (if I understand this change correctly) you can't even play it out.

Nothing says you can't play it out (a little anyway, playing it out more than 20 secs or so is going to be Slow Play), you just can't treat it like a loop. Which is nothing different, you never could.

[thefringthing]

Has it always been the case that the Dragon combo in Vintage is Slow Play? (Generate arbitrary mana and then mill yourself with Bazaar until there's an Oona in your graveyard.)

(There was a Dragon deck in the Top 8 of Vintage Champs this year.)

[cdr]

Has it always been the case that the Dragon combo in Vintage is Slow Play? (Generate arbitrary mana and then mill yourself with Bazaar until there's an Oona in your graveyard.)

No, and neither is it now. You can either mill yourself one at a time until you hit Oona (you ought to be able to do that very quickly), or say you're milling yourself [decksize/2] times - both legal.

It's possible I'm misunderstanding the intent of the rule, but I don't think so.

[Parcher]

To the best of my understanding in both the Four Horseman, and Dragon cases, you cannot do what you intend to due to both the wording of the new loop rule, and the old "advancing the game state rule".

If you do not announce your number initially, as the new rule requires, and you individually resolve your effects for whatever reason,(in both Dragon, and Four Horseman, there are reasons not to flip your library as a whole) and a judge is watching/called, you can be called for slow play by burning time, and doing nothing visible to advance the game state.

[Anusien]

This stops any sort of "Try to mill you repeatedly so Blessing is in your last few cards" sort of shenanigans, but otherwise does not affect WGD.

It completely nerfs Four Horseman, which is acceptable. If you can't win in 50 minutes, play a different deck.

[KevinTrudeau]

How is Four Horsemen dead? Can't you just state the expected resulting game state and go from there (similar to the 'take 20' rule from D&D, where you're allowed to auto-roll a 20 if you're using a skill and aren't pressed for time in-game, e.g. breaking down a door in an empty cavern)? You won't be able to draw out the game anymore, but I don't see how this rules change affects the normal win con.

I don't mind this change at all.

[cdr]

How is Four Horsemen dead? Can't you just state the expected resulting game state and go from there (similar to the 'take 20' rule from D&D, where you're allowed to auto-roll a 20 if you're using a skill and aren't pressed for time in-game, e.g. breaking down a door in an empty cavern)? You won't be able to draw out the game anymore, but I don't see how it affects the normal win con.

I don't mind this change at all.

No; you have to have a defined end state AND a set number of repetitions.

Like I said, Four Horsemen has always been questionable at best - this puts overindulgent judges on notice that it's not ok.

[UnderwaterGuy]

Needing an exact number of repetitions seems completely useless. If both players understand what is happening then the outcome should be allowed to just happen. It's bullshit that people are going to step in now and destroy a fairly weak and unique combo.

Who cares exactly how many times something happens? Everyone knows what it does at the end. This feels like such a lame move.

[cdr]

Needing an exact number of repetitions seems completely useless. If both players understand what is happening then the outcome should be allowed to just happen. It's bullshit that people are going to step in now and destroy a fairly weak and unique combo.

Who cares exactly how many times something happens? Everyone knows what it does at the end. This feels like such a lame move.

You are always free to propose a reasonable shortcut and your opponent is always free to accept. The likelihood of your opponent accepting when there's prizes on the line does not seem very good, though.

You can't, though, imply that it works by the rules (it doesn't) or that he's required to accept (he isn't).

[UnderwaterGuy]

Obviously no one would concede when the rules allow them to win by doing nothing at all.

I understand that this makes it not work by the rules. What I'm saying is that it should work by the rules. Anyone playing with or against that deck can understand what is happening once the combo starts and the only reason the combo is unplayable now is because it takes longer to execute than other combos.

It's silly.

[Julian23]

I'm sorry to take away the illusion, that people used to scoop to the combo before the rules change. Actually, anyone who scooped to Four Horsemen before the rules changes is a real moron, game-wise. Even before, the combo could very likely end up in what could be considered Slow Play, so why scoop to it.

Everytime I encountered the deck, they weren't able to pull off the entire combo in a reasonable amount of time.

[Koby]

Does this impact shortcuts setup for multiple triggers occurring off singular events (i.e., Glimpse Elves combo with Heritage Druid + Nettle Sentinel)?

[cdr]

Does this impact shortcuts setup for multiple triggers occurring off singular events (i.e., Glimpse Elves combo with Heritage Druid + Nettle Sentinel)?

It shouldn't but it might depend exactly what you mean.

Unless I hear differently pretty much anything that was legal before is still legal, and anything that was not legal before is even less legal.

[KevinTrudeau]

No; you have to have a defined end state AND a set number of repetitions.

I see; thank you for the clarification.

My stance has shifted from not minding this rules change to minding it as it is written. I like the fact that 'drawing out' interactions are pretty much killed off by this, but I don't like the concrete number requirement. However, since this rules change only affects a very small percent of interactions, I'm overall pretty apathetic towards it.

[alderon666]

I already know the answer to this, but I have to ask it. Can't I skip the Emrakul's shuffle trigger according to the other new rule?

[cdr]

I already know the answer to this, but I have to ask it. Can't I skip the Emrakul's shuffle trigger according to the other new rule?

Nope. "Puts cards from your library, graveyard, or exile zones into your hand or onto the battlefield. This includes drawing cards."

You can let your opponent miss his Emrakul trigger if he forgets though, thanks to the other other new rule.

[troopatroop]

Nope. "Puts cards from your library, graveyard, or exile zones into your hand or onto the battlefield. This includes drawing cards."

You can let your opponent miss his Emrakul trigger if he forgets though, thanks to the other other new rule.

Wait... so you CANT miss it yourself... but your opponent CAN?!?! I'm very confused... seriously, not trolling...

[cdr]

Wait... so you CANT miss it yourself... but your opponent CAN?!?! I'm very confused... seriously, not trolling...

Two separate changes.

The "beneficial triggers as optional" is new, but narrowly defined. The eldrazi shuffle trigger doesn't fall under the definition.

Separately, for missed triggers, now only the person who controls the trigger is responsible for it. If your opponent misses a trigger, you no longer have an obligation under any circumstance to remind him.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Wait... so you CANT miss it yourself... but your opponent CAN?!?! I'm very confused... seriously, not trolling...


It's very simple. (http://grooveshark.com/s/New+Math/1YtgEi?src=5)

[Meekrab]

Two separate changes.

The "beneficial triggers as optional" is new, but narrowly defined. The eldrazi shuffle trigger doesn't fall under the definition.

Separately, for missed triggers, now only the person who controls the trigger is responsible for it. If your opponent misses a trigger, you no longer have an obligation under any circumstance to remind him.
So if he misses the trigger because he's playing with a pimped out foreign deck and goes on playing his turn, and then I call a judge and complain about him having his annoying unreadable Emrakul in his graveyard, what happens?

[cdr]

So if he misses the trigger because he's playing with a pimped out foreign deck and goes on playing his turn, and then I call a judge and complain about him having his annoying unreadable Emrakul in his graveyard, what happens?

Not been clarified yet; my guess for now is that if it's within a turn cycle the trigger gets resolved, and if it's not it doesn't. Warning for him either way. They didn't touch the Missed Trigger section other than adding the new part about not being responsible for other people's triggers.

Being able to basically decide whether your opponent gets a warning or not is a first and quite odd. We'll see what they say about it.

[Offler]

Loop like

Lotus Vale + Fatestitcher + Freed from the real are easy even with this rule.

I am creating large amount of mana 100 000. Casting Sphinx of Magosi which means I can draw 50 cards and cast all of them, lets say Stroke of genius.

But if I have Stroke, Braingeyser, Blue suns zenith, and Lotus Vale with Mind over Matter is this considered to be a loop?

Actions taken in such combos require a lot of time. Discard X cards, gain (X*3) mana, Cast Stroke, draw [(X*3) - 3] cards. Then use Braingeyser in same way effectively having more mana, more cards. Reroll the grave to library and so on until you can let your oponnent draw more cards as he has in his library.

amount of cards and mana can be determined, but i doubt to be able to count all cards and mana in 20 seconds... Also its bit hard to determine how many times I will need to repeat this kind of "loop" until the result will be clear even to the oponnent...

[Parcher]

Not been clarified yet; my guess for now is that if it's within a turn cycle the trigger gets resolved, and if it's not it doesn't. Warning for him either way. They didn't touch the Missed Trigger section other than adding the new part about not being responsible for other people's triggers.

Being able to basically decide whether your opponent gets a warning or not is a first and quite odd. We'll see what they say about it.

Fuck yeah! Cheatyface Ichorid is back bitches! Dread Returning Emrakul and Progenitus all over your faces! Better watch my dredges real close!

[MattH]

This stops any sort of "Try to mill you repeatedly so Blessing is in your last few cards" sort of shenanigans, but otherwise does not affect WGD.

It completely nerfs Four Horseman, which is acceptable. If you can't win in 50 minutes, play a different deck.
Jesus, what an uninformed comment.

I can do it in about five minutes, but now I'm not even allowed to try.

[sclabman]

I don't understand why some people on this thread are hating on the Four Horseman combo. It's a unique combo that I'm glad exists in the game and this rule is explicitly killing it. It's not like it takes any longer to kill you than any average High Tide player.

These rules decisions combined with the other genius decisions coming out of the MtG bureaucracy is making the game less fun with each announcement. I'm probably not going to be willing to play in any sactioned events pretty soon, and I'm sure I'm not alone.