Companion Mechanic Video: Is it really that bad?

[Reeplcheep]

https://www.mtggoldfish.com/articles/is-companion-the-worst-mechanic-in-the-history-of-magic

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

https://www.mtggoldfish.com/articles/is-companion-the-worst-mechanic-in-the-history-of-magic

Yes, next question.

[Fox]

The first mull a non-companion deck takes vs companion is effectively a mull to 5, and a second mull is basically unwinnable. The mulligan insta-rip, nongame generation is pretty high b/c they forgot to update rules to say all non-companion mulls are at -1 card penalty vs companion users.

The mechanic is fatally flawed without this, and we won't get a fair look at whether or not companion is okay for the format. Any statistical analysis of companion winrates are contaminated by a substantial mulligan advantage (free win % currently overrides lost win % via deck restrictions).

[FTW]

b/c they forgot to update rules to say all non-companion mulls are at -1 card penalty vs companion users.

That would balance it a lot. Sadly companion still has a slight edge. There's an advantage to have an extra specific card you know about (and is discard-proof) vs an extra random card. Knowing you always have a creature, a spell-heavy blue deck has fewer concerns about running out of threats. You can also build around the card's mechanic (Lurrus recursion, Zirda combo).

Mishra's Bauble and MD Karakas are unplayable in Delver normally, but knowing you have Lurrus 100% of games makes them engines.

[Mr. Safety]

I watched the video, and I have to agree with the statement that this is the worst mechanic in Magic's history. One interesting point that I didn't consider before was that companions aren't +1 card in every game: in some games they are +2 or even +3 (depending on ETB effects.) On the draw you are effectively up 2 cards against your opponent in exchange for the small favor of playing first. I think we all agree that playing first is worth the extra draw your opponent gets, as a general rule. So you have the inherent card advantage of always having your companion available in every game along with the additional card advantage that the companions themselves bring to your strategy.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: leave Commander in Commander, don't force the mechanic into other constructed formats. There are so many avenues of design space that haven't been explored. Forcing 'commander' into constructed was 1) lazy design and 2) uninformed design. If they had done even an internet poll of players asking if they would be interested in using 'commanders' in constructed magic, I think it would have been clearly cut down the lines between constructed players and commander players. I'm going out on a limb and making the premise that Commander players enjoy their format already and don't want to switch over to constructed while constructed players want to continue with their competitive formats unchanged (fundamentally.) Sure there will be crossover where some players play both formats, but that just reinforces the premise: individuals are invested in those formats because they enjoy the differences they provide in play experience.

[Lava Snacks]

The list has gotten way too long or me to justify continuing support

Planeswalkers
Power creep
Middle finger to eternal
Companions
One-sided effects, not symmetrical
Cheapness, e.g. card stock
Mythics
Creatures creatures creatures
The art
"I win" buttons
Reserve List, reprints, and prices
Prison and land destruction gone
Incompetence, e.g. MTGO and design
Hasbro, woke corporate attitude
Uninteractive design, e.g. TNN, Teferi

[FTW]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: leave Commander in Commander, don't force the mechanic into other constructed formats. There are so many avenues of design space that haven't been explored. Forcing 'commander' into constructed was 1) lazy design and 2) uninformed design.

Anyone wants to take bets that the Companion idea was motivated by an Analyst who ran some numbers and saw that:
-the Commander player base is huge
-Commander is an eternal format that doesn't make much money outside the Commander releases
-rotating formats like Standard and Pioneer make lots of money
-putting a Commander into Standard/Pioneer might draw some Commander players, increasing sales

It's an idea that makes more sense in graphs of revenue projections than to a regular player's real understanding of the game. The mechanic is completely unbalanced in every Constructed format and even Limited.

[Barook]

Anyone wants to take bets that the Companion idea was motivated by an Analyst who ran some numbers and saw that:
-the Commander player base is huge
-Commander is an eternal format that doesn't make much money outside the Commander releases
-rotating formats like Standard and Pioneer make lots of money
-putting a Commander into Standard/Pioneer might draw some Commander players, increasing sales

It's an idea that makes more sense in graphs of revenue projections than to a regular player's real understanding of the game. The mechanic is completely unbalanced in every Constructed format and even Limited.
It absolutely feels like a "Commander is popular, bring it to Standard for $$$" mechanic.

How they did think that the free CA is balanced is beyond me, though.

[Wrath of Pie]

Anyone wants to take bets that the Companion idea was motivated by an Analyst who ran some numbers and saw that:
-the Commander player base is huge
-Commander is an eternal format that doesn't make much money outside the Commander releases

This is where you lose, Commander makes them tons of money because they literally make legendary creatures/new staple cards in every Standard-legal set, and there is actual demand for them to do so.


-rotating formats like Standard and Pioneer make lots of money
-putting a Commander into Standard/Pioneer might draw some Commander players, increasing sales

Close, but not right. The conclusion is that mimicking the feel of Commander in competitive will draw players into playing more than Commander, increasing sales. Unfortunately, this falls apart when it is realized that the competitive side of Commander is extremely small to the point there were internal debates among their committee about banning Flash because of how it breaks competitive Commander but matters little elsewhere because of the precedent it might create.

Companion is nowhere close to the worst mechanic anyways, the correct answer is always ante.

[Wrath of Pie]

It absolutely feels like a "Commander is popular, bring it to Standard for $$$" mechanic.

How they did think that the free CA is balanced is beyond me, though.
Their testing is probably more of a casual free-for-all rather than trying to break the hypothetical Standard.

[Barook]

Their testing is probably more of a casual free-for-all rather than trying to break the hypothetical Standard.
The irony here is that they hired a bunch of "pros" as playtest team to exactly prevent post mistakes. Seems like their effect didn't last long.

[Sella]

It absolutely feels like a "Commander is popular, bring it to Standard for $$$" mechanic.

How they did think that the free CA is balanced is beyond me, though.

The mechanic is degenerate by itself, how they decided printing Lurrus was a good idea on top of that is beyond me

[Wrath of Pie]

The irony here is that they hired a bunch of "pros" as playtest team to exactly prevent post mistakes. Seems like their effect didn't last long.
If at all, honestly.

[Lord Seth]

The irony here is that they hired a bunch of "pros" as playtest team to exactly prevent post mistakes. Seems like their effect didn't last long.
To be fair, that testing is for Standard. From my understanding (I could be totally wrong, I don't pay that much attention to Standard), Standard hasn't been as problematically affected by Companions. Sure, they see a lot of play, but there's a bit more of a dispersion amongst them.

Granted, Fires of Invention's dominance seems potentially problematic, so that's a criticism that could be aimed at them in regards to Standard, but I don't think Fires of Invention is the fault of the Companion mechanic.

[Sella]

To be fair, that testing is for Standard. From my understanding (I could be totally wrong, I don't pay that much attention to Standard), Standard hasn't been as problematically affected by Companions. Sure, they see a lot of play, but there's a bit more of a dispersion amongst them.

Granted, Fires of Invention's dominance seems potentially problematic, so that's a criticism that could be aimed at them in regards to Standard, but I don't think Fires of Invention is the fault of the Companion mechanic.

Makes me wonder if it might be better to restrict standard sets to standard and stick to eternal masters and other such product for modern/legacy/etc support. I'd rather not do this same old song and dance every other set where we all sit on our hands waiting for shit to get banned or desperately grind Lurrus before it inevitably gets nuked.

Like why did they even make Pioneer?

[ahg113]

Makes me wonder if it might be better to restrict standard sets to standard and stick to eternal masters and other such product for modern/legacy/etc support. I'd rather not do this same old song and dance every other set where we all sit on our hands waiting for shit to get banned or desperately grind Lurrus before it inevitably gets nuked.

Like why did they even make Pioneer?

That would become boring, excluding eternal sets to specials. It belies the intent of eternal (you can use all of the cards), and robs the fun that is spoiler season for the majority of product.

Pioneer is an admission that they screwed up with Modern, so they're attempting a reboot, without the shame of mucking up the B&R list yet again for what has typically been a clown show.

Procrastination has finally paid off, did not buy Lurrus at $7/per and refused at $22+. Not having a dead card = winning. BRING BACK DRS! (& G. Probe?!)

[Sella]

That would become boring, excluding eternal sets to specials. It belies the intent of eternal (you can use all of the cards), and robs the fun that is spoiler season for the majority of product.

Pioneer is an admission that they screwed up with Modern, so they're attempting a reboot, without the shame of mucking up the B&R list yet again for what has typically been a clown show.

Procrastination has finally paid off, did not buy Lurrus at $7/per and refused at $22+. Not having a dead card = winning. BRING BACK DRS! (& G. Probe?!)

I mean yeah it wouldn't be optimal, but Wizards designing exclusively for standard combined with this weird new whatever the acronym is design philosophy they have is just going to keep creating this cycle of broke --> ban every couple of months.

[Barook]

If at all, honestly.
Things looked reasonable around Dominaria - just to nuke everything with WAR walkers afterwards.


To be fair, that testing is for Standard. From my understanding (I could be totally wrong, I don't pay that much attention to Standard), Standard hasn't been as problematically affected by Companions. Sure, they see a lot of play, but there's a bit more of a dispersion amongst them.

Granted, Fires of Invention's dominance seems potentially problematic, so that's a criticism that could be aimed at them in regards to Standard, but I don't think Fires of Invention is the fault of the Companion mechanic.
Standard seems to be pretty fucked by Companions as well and I wouldn't be surprised to see bannings down the line there as well. They'll just wait longer due to $$$.

Ironically, they can act more freely in Legacy and Vintage since it doesn't affect their bottom line as much as Modern and Standard.

[Mr. Safety]

Anyone wants to take bets that the Companion idea was motivated by an Analyst who ran some numbers and saw that:
-the Commander player base is huge
-Commander is an eternal format that doesn't make much money outside the Commander releases
-rotating formats like Standard and Pioneer make lots of money
-putting a Commander into Standard/Pioneer might draw some Commander players, increasing sales

It's an idea that makes more sense in graphs of revenue projections than to a regular player's real understanding of the game. The mechanic is completely unbalanced in every Constructed format and even Limited.

I don't take sucker bets...

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Anyone wants to take bets that the Companion idea was motivated by an Analyst who ran some numbers and saw that:
-the Commander player base is huge
-Commander is an eternal format that doesn't make much money outside the Commander releases
-rotating formats like Standard and Pioneer make lots of money
-putting a Commander into Standard/Pioneer might draw some Commander players, increasing sales

It's an idea that makes more sense in graphs of revenue projections than to a regular player's real understanding of the game. The mechanic is completely unbalanced in every Constructed format and even Limited.

Don't we already know what happened because of that article where Maro mentioned all those mechanics that never made it out of playtesting?
Maro had a "cool" idea and was told no.
Everyone who told him no was now either gone or below him.
Maro got to have final say over if his cool idea from years ago was cool or dumb. He choose cool and now we're dealing with legacy deciding it was actually dumb.

[jaytothen]

The irony here is that they hired a bunch of "pros" as playtest team to exactly prevent post mistakes. Seems like their effect didn't last long.

Sam Black is on record stating he told the design team companions was busted to hell and couldn't be printed as is. They didn't listen and did so anyway.

And I'm sure he isn't the first one to point out a mistake and they went ahead and printed it anyway.

[Lord Seth]

Things looked reasonable around Dominaria - just to nuke everything with WAR walkers afterwards.


Standard seems to be pretty fucked by Companions as well and I wouldn't be surprised to see bannings down the line there as well. They'll just wait longer due to $$$.
Standard getting overrun by cards isn't as big of a deal as they eventually leave the format. Then again, they've been banning stuff much more regularly in Standard over the last several years. I've been wondering how much of the increased ban frequency is because the cards are actually more problematic than unbanned cards in the past and how much is them just being faster to pull the trigger on it, irrespective of past cards not being banned.


Sam Black is on record stating he told the design team companions was busted to hell and couldn't be printed as is. They didn't listen and did so anyway.

And I'm sure he isn't the first one to point out a mistake and they went ahead and printed it anyway.
That's interesting. Where did he say that?

[jaytothen]

.
That's interesting. Where did he say that?

Not going to lie I looked for it and couldn't find anything other than articles he wrote about it being the worse mechanic designed yet. I think a YouTuber I heard it on misspoke or I misunderstood because I'm the dumb.

[Izor]

Well, that SCG article of his was posted before most of the companions were spoiled I think. So he kind of did say they were broken before we actually knew the final list of companions, though Lurrus was already part of the discussion and he obviously wrote it at a time when the set was already finalized, so no time to react on WotC's part in that case.