The Power Level Problem in Commander | EDH | Deck Power Level | Magic the Gathering | Commander 

heres my powerscale 1- no rats, not even in the colors that could play rats 2- no rats, but in colors that COULD play rats 3- one rat, probably a throw away/combo extender or whatever not there for being a rat 4- one rat but like you really like the rat and he tends to be more of a mascot on the field 5- 2 to 9 rats its not a big part of the deck but you got a couple of rats in there, look how cute they are! 6- 10ish rats give or take a few more like 5 but on average bit more rats 7- average 15 rats but no swarmland or the "rat orges" of the piper 8- average 15 rats but with the "human package" mentioned above 9- ONLY RATS AND LANDS HOW MANY RATS IS TO MUCH? TRICK QUESTION MORE RATS 10- 3 lands, 1 thrumming stone and 96 relentless rats

I'm not in this video, although I thought I would be. I feel betrayed. Mitch talked about putting better ramp in the precon decks, and instead of me, showed...Talisman of Progress! As of this posting, my lowest TCGPlayer market price is $2.64 for my Modern Masters 2015 printing. I definitely need to be reprinted.

when i sit down at the table i make sure to qualify my power level. "yeah this deck is an 8, but with me as the pilot? definitely a 6"

I remember one day a buddy of mine called me saying his fraternity was hosting a informal magic tournament and everybody could invite one acquaintance. When asked on what format he was like: "Whaddaya mean format? We'll all just bring our best decks and see how far each get." When I arrived, I once again asked around about format or any card restrictions, there was only one: no power-9. Back in the days I was a competitive legacy player, whose favorite deck was literally banned only weeks ago(UBG Oath of Druids), so I though well if there's no format, I suppose banned lists don't make sense. So I decided to run with it, even supplanting some wastelands for strip mines and a bunch of other very unLegacy additions which made it stronger, but certainly less legal. I completely and utterly slaughtered everyone by turn 3-5 as if i was just gold fishing, except for this one guy, who happened to run a vintage deck minus the power(and some not Vintage legal additions as well, never seen so many strip mines in play in any game in my life xD). It was however, the 3 most exciting game of the whole evening. He's had pretty much the same experience just steam rolling everyone. We played the finale of course, and everybody was just in complete awe and just watching us battling it out. I won 2 out of 3, and the last victory was a close one. Basically, they invited two competitive players to what turned out a slightly above casual(what did they call it...'focussed'?) style tournament. The two of us played cards that outpriced people's whole decks with ease, but were a pretty good match up to each other. Where I was going with my story: winning is fun but only if the other guy has a chance at winning as well, otherwise the victories feel empty and sore. Sure it's fun the first time, but by the 3rd guy I was getting what level was played in this group and i actually started feeling sorry for them(and he was playing mono green elves too...so 0 answers to an t2 Akroma, i was like, sorry dude). I ended up giving away half my prizes(they were just boosters), as it felt completely unfair and certainly not as much fun as winning everything in a real tournament.

I'm currently brewing on "love matters". Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis at the head, Pia and Kiran Nalaar, Anax and Kymede, True Love's Kiss, Kiss of the Amesha, Cathartic Reunion, Run Away Together, Lovestruck Beast, Beloved Princess, Beloved Chaplain, Squees Embrace and so on. I'd realy like to play against Chair Tribal at some point. x)

I'm currently listening, but EDHREC had a similar topic recently. One of their biggest points was: the bell curve is too steep. Basically, there basically are no decks that are 1 or 2, hardly any decks at 9 or 10, so 80% of decks are 6-8. It is impossible to accurately determine a powerlevel with so few options in such a huge sample size. Rating decks not with numbers, but with descriptors would be a step to alleviate some of that.

- Low: If you feel the need to ask if someone has a deck as weak as yours (Nissa tribal, random cards I had at home). - Mid: If you feel comfortable bringing the deck to most tables (upgraded precons, most well built decks with budget restrictions or fun non optimal inclusions). - High: If you feel the need to ask an unknown playgroup whether their decks are as powerful as yours (optimized decks with little budget restrictions or decks with a very strong wincon). - Cedh: You wouldn't play this in a non competitive table. Should work as an approach for unknown playgroups. Most important thing is to be sincere and willing to switch decks. If you trust the people you play with try switching decks with each other.

There is also an issue with pilot skill level and pilot attitude. A new player will usually lose to an experienced player-assuming even luck. There are some gamers I absolutely hate playing against because of personal interactions. Sometimes power level is not the main factor in having a fun, fair game.

Commander is a ridiculous format. I’m so glad to be a part of it!

Scale I generally use: 0 - Literal pile of cards 1 - Pure jank, theme is more important than winning 2 - Jank with a plan, has some synergy but theme still more important than doing anything 3 - Weak unmodified precon 4 - Typical unmodified precon 5 - Strong unmodified precon OR precon with fixed mana base 6 - Precon with fixed mana base AND extraneous cards swapped out. Also focused home brew decks. Below average win rate, can’t reliably hit their victory plan. 7 - Optimized home brew deck. Average win rate. Has a defined victory plan and can reliably hit it. May use a suboptimal Commander for the deck’s strategy. 8 - Highly optimized home brew deck. Above average win rate. Has one or more combo finishers and can reliably hit them. Uses the best, optimal Commander for their deck’s strategy. 9 - Tier 2 cEDH 10 - Tier 1 cEDH

I agree with the Jank, Casual, Focused, Optimised, cEDH categories and that’s it. The numbers confuse things because as you say most decks are 5-8. It’s easier to have precons as casual. And Focused as the lower end of being better than precons and Optimised the higher end. Trying to pin it down more specific than that is a big old mess.

Cool! Boros is too good, right? That would make more sense. Simic is underpowered!

The fact that we put pre-cons at 5 is...problematic. If we put pre-cons at 5 and cEDH at 9-10, then that makes the actual range of decks in the 6-8 range. There is too much range in between pre-con and cEDH for this range to be useful. Realistically, we should look for the "average" deck to be a 5. That means pre-cons should be in the 2-4 range depending on upgrades & power level of the pre-con, with "worse than pre-con" being 1-2. This would make the scale actually useful. Then again, most people would still misevaluate soooo...

I describe almost all my decks as 'Casual/Focused'. There's normally core mechanics, synergies and goals like a focused deck, but also features lots of fun easter eggs/showcases/stories that people often point out either hinder or are inefficient in the deck. I personally think these are the best kind of decks. For example, my budget Karametra Enchantments deck (£50 budget) plays the Gods and their associated cards: Karametra; Dictate of Karametra; Karametra's Blessing; Karametra's Acolyte; Karametra's Favour Heliod God of the Sun; Dictate of Heliod; Spear of Heliod Nylea God of the Hunt; Nylea Keen Eyed; Bow of Nylea; Nylea's Forerunner; Nylea's Presence I also run Font of Fertility as a budget version of Wayfarer's Bauble...

I would list Pre-con decks at about a 2-3 on average. So saying that my deck is better than a pre-con but not c-edh provides a huge gap that it falls in.

I've found the command fest scheme was a nice jumping on point. Everyone just took a few minutes to describe what their decks did in broad strokes and how consistent they were. "6. Daxos the returned. Constellation/enchantress nonsense. 1 tutor." A small description after the number seemed to smooth out confusion.

For me, I tend to look at a couple of different things when it comes to power level. Tutors are one, especially if it's every tutor you could possibly get in your colors. The other is land base. A deck that has stuff like original duel lands, shock lands, the good fetch lands, and things like gaia's cradle and so forth are just going to play faster and get to Thier win con easier then a deck running basics, tap lands and bounce lands

I like the idea Mitch said about starting off with a lower power deck to gauge the table and adjust accordingly.

I’m going to echo several others and say this debate about power level is why I love cEDH. It has a defined meta like Modern and Pioneer, everyone is on a mostly even playing field, and there are few surprises. This constant debate, the tension surrounding new cards, and all of the hurt feelings are why cEDH is going to continue to increase in popularity. I’m all for it.

Btw Mitch, isocron septor just got a reprint, you could run the septor dramatic reversal combo in your jhoira deck for 3.75 now.

Ohh man, I've got some 1's and 2's that I'm proud of. You ever see someone pull out crab tribal? Well you'd think it'd be bant because of all the simic crab abominations, but no, I built it in Azorius because I wanted Hannah as the captain with that one art that makes her look like she's getting attacked by crabs. My worst deck, which I'm pretty proud of, is Masako the humorless, and every single white creature that can tap to prevent damage. I sit there and look super impenetrable, taunting the other players who can't touch me, but I can't interact, and one board wipe completely shuts down my board. It's legendary.

Thank you Mitch and Ed for using the Rarity pony art :) in your background.

When y'all said "what turn" I immediately thought of my Phenax, God of Deception deck. It can't win in just a few turns, but it has the resources to keep other decks from winning that early either.

That exact problem could be said about the latest "Extra Turn" episode from the Command Zone channel. Where Jesper had a way higher competitive level than the rest of the table's decks.... >.

The solution is for someone to create a EDH scouter that automatically gages the power level of a deck. But not from just 1-10. It needs to go from 1 to 10,000 so if you come across a really strong deck you can say when someone asks you what its power level is, "Its over 9000!"

Hey Mitch! I'm really glad that content creators like you are striving to discuss and further create a healthier Commander community. You do a lot for this community, sir. I want to suggest you to open discussion on another topic which is threat assessment since i've seen a lot of people have doubts or problems with that. Thank you again, and keep it going. Greetings from Mexico City!

In my group of friends we use some house rules, that help a lot: 1) Tutor effects are limited, when you search for any card, you look in the first 10 cards. When you search for a type of card (artefact, creature, land), you search in the first 15. When you look for a basic land or a specific card (like the cat that searches for his hammer), then you look into the whole library. 2) Artefact ramp has to be used in the turn next to the amount of mana they produce. That means, Sol Ring cannot be played turns 1 and 2, for example. 3) Mass land destruction is forbidden. Targeted is OK, but no armageddons and similars. It really works in our environment, since makes the format less combo-oriented, and still enjoyable for Timmy/Johnny/Spike, we have the 3 archetypes in our group.

Such a treat for a lazy Sunday morning. Been loving the podcast-like episodes Mitch! I hope you keep em coming!

i'd like to be able to tell how "focused" are my decks ... i really can't tell if they are 6 or 7 or

Here is the system I like. Ask the group if everyone's deck is between a 6-8. Unless there is a precon or a cEDH player at the table everyone says yes. Then you ask "okay so on a scale from 1-10 where 1 is barely a 6 and 10 is possibly a 9 what would your deck be?" I know it looks/sounds little clunky and confusing but most people understand the question and it allows people to say their deck is a 2 without feeling bad about their deck but more importantly the guy who is playing an almost 9 will love to call his deck a 10 and out himself. It works, try it. (disclaimer: it works better then anything else I've tried)

Listening to this reminded me of something several players at my LGS that was super fun. Everyone picked 2 commanders, had to be less than 200 decks showing for each commander on EDHRec, they shuffled them up, and each person in a 4 man pod picked 2 of the commanders randomly, and they partnered together even IF they weren't actual partner pairs. Everyone had to throw a deck together under $50 and play it. Talk about some fun jank... and really interesting way to play commander cause some of the decks (taking out the whole non partner partner commander bit) was probably in the 6-7 and/or focused ranged of power, was a pretty fun little experiment! You guys should try something like that Mitch

What happened to the old music? It was iconic lol

Good episode guys. I also feel that an open and honest discussion about what kind of deck each person is running. In my old playgroup before I sold my physical cards, we had a general rule that we wouldn't allow more than two of each style unless it is agreed by the table. We generally categorized it something like this: aggro, beats, combo, disruption, heavy control, stall/stax, voltron, and sacrifice. So we wouldn't end up with three aggro decks against one control.

I agree that #'s are useful in that 5 is precon, below that is theme > power (and jank at the very end) while the top end (9-10) is cEDH, which 6-8 being where most players have their deck. I feel like this is similar to jank < casual < focused < optimized < competitive. However, I believe that the level system (in which turn will you win if not disrupted) because that evaluation is dependent on having opponents that will not interact with you and that's unrealistic most of the time. I feel like this system is a logical fallacy because it's built on something that isn't reliable. I feel like with #'s, 6-8 should be able to work together because you are playing multiplayer and if someone gets ahead too quickly, the rest of the table will gang up on them for becoming the archenemy. So it is still very possible for a 6 to win at a table with at least one 8. That being said, it's still not ideal. I agree with your system in which most commander players are between precon and cEDH level. However, that's still quite a range to cover. Playing with strangers it's quite difficult to reduce the differences of opinion between 6,7,8 but at least with a playgroup then everyone knows who's deck is at which level. But at least with one game against strangers, you can understand what everyone's idea of what level is what and then play the next games accordingly.

one thing to keep in mind when determining power level is how well your deck runs without interaction, how much interaction you have, how many win cons it has, and how many ways it has to tutor the win cons.

In our group we have some rules. 1: commander band list is active 2: NO endless combinations. So no cdhrec. 3: proxy allowed till 10-20 cards. To test new commander. Exchange them to real cards within 6 months. 4: turns max 4-5 min. 5: play is for fun so keep it so. I have one rules for my decks. Have at least 10 removal (creature, artifact, enchanment, land, planeswalker) and with blue in the commander also 5-10 counterspells

Great Episode as always. I feel like this discussion is ever ongoing and just needs to happen before you play. Always worth doing a 5 minutes of quick deck tech talk in order to give you the best shot at 45+ minutes of fun game play.

Great video gents. I'd love to hear you guys talk about how to resolve these differences between power levels a little more. Like suggestions on budget ramp/card draw/removal spells in each color to help boost your power level on a budget. Me and my SO play with another couple that are relatively new to commander and I'd love to link them a video that could help them boost their decks up, on a budget. I really liked the studio btw. I can tell you put a lot of hard work into it.

I really like the discussion. Only thing I'd say is for combo decks is you should not be relying on your opponents not knowing what your combos are and should be up front about your win conditions. You don't have to get into the gory details, but I think you should divulge a few key cards such as isochron scepter. This is knowledge that anyone who has played against your deck a few times would have, which is the entire point of describing what your deck does.

love these discussion theme episodes with the two of you- more please

My play group often goes by two numbers when comparing decks. 1) Fastest number of turns to win and average number of turns to win. The average is great for balancing, but the fastest is helpful for threats.

That is a great experiment! Probably a great conversation starter for a playgroup. Not useful for out in the wild, but still very cool.

I don't know about that statement about Solemn Simulacrum being a 0 in all decks. I'm usually pretty happy to see it in my Feldon of the Third Path opening hand.

Your comment about a single game not being a good way to judge a decks overall performance is on point and something I wish my group would understand. I have a Kami of the Crescent Moon deck which is realistically a 5 at best, but I ended up getting some really good draws and winning fairly handily in my first game with it. I don't think it has won a single game since then because of that first impression the deck made; the rest of my group treats it as a 7 or 8 power level threat when most of the time it doesn't really do anything before I'm eliminated.

I would love to see Eddie's Rashmi deck list, if you could put that into the description that would be awesome :)

Weird that EDHRec just did a podcast where they rated precons as 1 on the 1-10 scale. So this just proves how wildly different expectations can be even when you do try to establish a universal grading scale.

9:12 power levels are subjective, commander's quarters. You, this table that knows so much, you decide what's fair and balanced the same way you decide what's budget and what's not.

In the video you asked about building cedh on a budget. Just as with most of the commanders you highlight on your channel, there are many ways to go budget depending on what compromises you want to make. I think the cheapest "meta" deck right now is Momir Vig Hackball which bottoms out at 75$ for a deck that can play with 10s but could be labeled an 8 because of the lack of tutors and the fragility of its combo. There are a surprising number of cheap cards that are common in cedh.

Most important words from the opening statement “when playing with someone for the first time”. Sometimes you need that game where you get annihilated to read the room so to say.

I've pulled some silly things, but mostly through luck. Turn 1: badlands, sol ring, boros signet. Turn 2: drop a plains, increasing devotion. Turn 3, cast my commander, jirina kudro and swing for 15. Then drop windbrisk heights for my land. Turn 4, swing with everything, activate windbrisk, play fiery emancipation for 1, deal 63 damage

The worst mismatch of power levels I've experienced was at my LGS. There was this young guy, about 13 or so years old, who just bought a precon so I pulled out my lower deck and the third player knew to play suboptimally with his deck, but the fourth guy played his high power Zacama combo deck and pubstomped all of us. I thought the kid was never going to play again. Thankfully, he kept coming back and the pubstomper more or less stopped coming to our casual games.

I don't avidly play commander but casual kitchen table magic, sometimes commander, planeschase, or house rules. I enjoy the discussion, and I often learn things about the game and or format. I look forward to more close quarters. Keep it up!

That's one reason that I think why cEDH is getting more and more players, in a very slow fashion. We don't have problems with Power Level in a cEDH pod because everyone know what to expect. Ofc there will always be a boogeyman (hello Blue Farm), but no one gets salty.

My friends and I found a great way to figure out how strong a commander deck is and how to adjust its power level: 1. How consistent is your deck in fullfilling its game plan? 2. How fast is your deck in fullfilling its game plan? 3. How quickly does your deck win when fullfilling its gameplan? 4. How easy is it to disrupt your deck's game plan? By using this method, and trying to get everybody on a similiar level, games are usually fairly balanced.

I would do it based off of combo pieces. What I mean is certian interactions make decks powerful, and every deck has a way to combo. How often can you get those combo pieces out, how many do you, and how well do they synergize.

I usually just try to find out what turn your deck can do its thing, usually the power of a deck is directly related to how fast it is

The pre cons this year had great ramp packages. All the signets being included made it super easy to get them upgraded and playing

I have a very limited playgroup, because we understand that the one aspect of Magic hardly anyone plays, we do: Land destruction. And not just spot removal, either: Me and my brother have cast Armageddon, and one of our friends plays a Jokulhaups in his R/U Superfriends deck.

Power level exists in a vacuum. What style (archetype) of decks are at the table (matchups) and who is piloting them also makes a difference in how the game goes and that is something that cannot be quantified. Even CEDH decks can have problems against casual decks instead of stomping them into the ground. You sit down to play carpet of flowers / mystic remora, and no one is playing islands and their ramp is elves / birds... Some decks also change power level based on what's at the table. Lazav DM can punch up against some reanimator decks or Muldrotha style decks, but seems really low powered against decks with weaker creatures or few creatures at all such as the archetypes of enchantress, spellslingers, or artifact combo. I'm sure if you think about it you can come up with many examples both theoretical and anecdotal. Great episode! Keep up the good work.

Honestly I feel like the best way to let people know how powerful a deck you have is to find out how fast you can win without interference with a God hand? Then on what turn can you consistently get to a win state without interference. For example my K'rrik deck with a God hand I can win on turn 1 and I can constantly win by turn 5.

I played one time with a group of people who used to play on the more competitive side of things and had got so sick of it that they made up their own ban list to try to "slow down" their games. When I went to play I brought my 6-7 power decks thinking they would be alright. Everyone else at the table had decks that were so strong that they blew me out of the water every time. I stood no chance even when I brought out my Gitrog deck, which is arguably my most powerful deck. When I brought up the problem of power level, they just kept saying "well we aren't playing competitive decks" which was true, but I tried to point out to them that this was supposed to be casual and they were still threatening to win by turns 3-5. When I asked them if they would switch to lower power decks, they all said they only had one deck to play with. The power problem isn't something to be solved easily, but talking and discussing expectations before a game is a step in the right direction. If I had talked with these people before sitting own to play a game with them, I would have not even begun the game because I would have known that I was out of my league.

I always have to say "semi-competitive " not good enough for cedh and too good for casual

This is the comment I posted on the EDHREC video about power level, describing my view on the topic: I do like the idea of explaining what the goal of your deck is (or isn't) before playing when your on the Focus/Optimized group; especially when playing against new players. Here is my take on some of those categories: * Casual * Pre-game discussion tend to matter less as casual deck tends to have less interaction with other decks. I think a bare description of the deck is enough: it's a precon, a design-theme deck (lady's looking left, avenger theme)... That information + the commander should be plenty enough to enjoy a good game. * Focus * Focus deck are deck with a general idea / play-theme (tribal, +1c, superfriend...). They are designed to play a 8-12 turn games; with board-wipes, and way to bounce back from one. Between focus and optimized, this is probably the category which requires the most pre-game talk. If one deck is graveyard base, and it's facing a (mill+graveyard hate) the game is not going to be fun for the graveyard base deck. A good brief description of the deck strategy is very welcome here. Kind of what they do at the beginning of each episode of CommanderVS. If your deck has expensive cards like: Mana Crypt, Mana Drain etc... let you group know about it. I would divide the focus category into the following sub-categories: - First time(s) playing the deck -- Can't really tell how good/bad it's gonna be; you may need time to think about your move... trying a new deck idea... etc... - General focus deck: Not too many cards out of the spectrum of what the deck wants to do; a bit tuned up, but you're not really focusing your effort to make it better... But the deck was play-tested a few times and the strategy is known to work. (This category also includes decks which haven't been updated for the past 2+ years... I.e: not really tuned to the new power-level) - Refined focus deck: Deck you really love, and keep improving, re-tuning it after every game. * Optimized * I except somewhat less talk that in the focus category, rather: what the average power level of your cards? Even an "average cost ( one-mana-land cost excluded )". Optimized decks are refined-focus decks with consistent way to "pop": it could be through infinite loop... self-decking, ... But can also be through fast damage burst style often after a infinite mana-loop. They tend to have fewer board-wipes and more spot-removal, spot interaction to prevent other decks from combo-ing off. This category is for decks with "one-turn win" out of nowhere if not stopped. Two sub-categories: - Fairly optimized: Mostly limited by the cost of cards... built to win. - Highly optimized: The only thing which prevent this deck from being competitive is that commander/theme is not good enough yet to be consider competitive level. * Competitive * Obviously you don't want to mention the goal of your deck granted it's often gonna be quite obvious :D The commander(s) itself(themselves) will define the power level of your deck in that category.

People: What's your deck's power level? Me: IT'S OVER 9000!!!

I love the little tail wiggle on the piggy bank

I'm early like a bird and got the quarter worm

For one I'd suggest a question of if someone's land base is precon level or optimized. Another thing to ask is how many ways can ur deck win. A deck that wins only through combat or one other win condition is a casual deck. A deck that has 3 plus ways to win, including attacking is on the more powerful side. That being said, there are exceptions like combos in the command zone. Another way to go about it is to put precons at a level of 3. This way u can give that 6-8 more room

Simplify the grading structure; high power, mid, low or cedh as its own powerlevel. Thats been super easy to work around for any random group i found myself in over 4 years

The other problem with power level, is even within each power level, some decks will have advantage over others (rock, paper, scissors style), or it could be a skill level, a complete novice running a cEDH deck will still probably lose, and then the variance in each game - bad draws, etc. It all comes down to communication, and remembering that it is a game.

I think a huge part of what leads to the disparity between people while judging decks is setting precons as the middle of the pack. As said towards the end, the vast vast majority of decks are going to be better than precons to some extent, but not cedh. It doesnt make sense to try and force the majority of decks into being a 6-8 when if you evaluate precons as being a range of 3-5, then stuff better than precons would be in the 4-8 range which gives you much more room to reasonably compare decks. Whats happening when you do put precons at 5 is you're turning your linear 1-10 scale into an exponential one, since the gap into cedh and precons is absolutely massive and gets jammed into a more narrow range than it should.

I liked the way you rated Marchesa. I tend to build 7-8 power decks (based on your criteria), but really play them more at a 4-6 power level, depending on the deck and/or the playgroup.

1-10 is way too subjective and means different things to different people. What's important is: -Does your deck run combo wins? -Do you run alternate win conditions? -What mana ramp do you run? -Do you run aether reservoir? -At what turn do you realistically win? -How many counterspells do you run, if any? If everyone answers these questions truthfully, it gives a much better power lvl understanding than just saying a number that means different things to different people.

Well I just ask my opponent- "how soon does your deck go off?"

Big fan here. Which is why I recommend the purchase of a quality audio compressor for your mics. The dynamic range is all over the place when y’all speak (which is normal) but it makes it more difficult to hear every word especially when you’re driving and listening to the podcast. Just a suggestion on taking the audio quality to the next level.

Asking about the consistency in the deck is also a huge part of it. decks that can reliably get their wincons without fail vs decks that dont run tutors and play out more naturally can tell you a lot about the problem. Our playgroup rarely uses tutors beyond land grabbing helps keep the shenanigans in line

Why are the precons a 5? I would place them at 3, anything under precon power is mostly jank.

We play with 3 house rulesets to remedy this. A budget level where there are limitations on lands, cost per card and total deck cost. a "precon or precon equivalent" and an unlimited budget. We typically don't play land destruction at any level except a few targetted exceptions.

I have a tymna ludevic legendary draw creature tribal with only two support cards deck that I always pull out when I dont know the power level since if I am losing at least I will have fun looking at all the cool legends

At the LGS if I don't know the decks I sit down with my tree tribal budget deck. I would get stomped normally but you also see the psychology of people "pitty-ing" you. Then I can adjust and pull out my casual uro or cEDH deck to fit the table. The issue is one you need time to play multiple games. Two you need multiple decks.

I really need to recalculate my Riku of Two Reflections deck. It was a slow but fun 7, Optimized and getting Tuned card draw aggro/combo deck. Then I added a full suite of Kiki-Pod and blew out a playgroup out of nowhere on turn 5 with a Splinter Twin on a Corridor Monitor. Just remember to recheck your decks so you're not making the game unfun for everyone else. Fun for everyone should be the goal below cEDH levels.

I was playing a 2x2 commander game with those premade RGB commander deck. It ended up being me against a elf infinite mana deck left, the difference was obvious. I asked him if he was gonna do his infinite combo so we can play a new match, or just let me play my turn, he said he wasn't and to go ahead. I started my turn and in the middle of it he pulled off the infinite combo with the biggest shit eating grin. I just packed up my deck and left, not wanting to play with someone like that anymore

my go to for power level is, in a solo game, what turn do you usually win on? turn 4 or below? cEDH 9/10 turn 5-8? 7/8 turn 9-11? 4/6 after that it's below a 4. But that's average hand not best hand so you need to have played the deck a bit or solo tested it

When playing with others for the first time, I invite them to look through my deck and ask if I can do the same. I ask how many tutors people run (and which ones), what their typical tutor targets are, what kind of hate/interaction they play (if any) and what kind of strategies aren’t fun for them to play against. It takes longer than a 1-10 power scale, but I’ve never had anyone come out of the game after that conversation with any feel bads based purely on deck strength.

I think a good way to gauge a deck is to ask if uninterrupted what turn do you think you'd win.

You took all stapples and rate them from 1-3 as 3 as the BEST, then you calculate the number of your stapples and the result and compare with others Also are ment to be stapples not only refered with colors but also the specifics ones of your strategy ( aristócrats= skullsacmp 3) Then you can say i have a power 65 deck Oh i have a 36 points deck lets not waste time :D

10/10 agree that Precon decks need better ramp. I love my precons, but especially when you're just starting out, you're at 5 or 6 mana when everyone else at the table is casting 8 to 10 drops. And then later on, you try to get the mana to cast the flashier spells that come with the deck, and your deck can just never seem to get the extra land drop necessary to use them.

I have a Sram that caused a bit of “hurt feelings” I’m on mono white so I run into the typical mono white issues. But I also have the swords and a few other must have equipment that makes the deck work. I usually say my deck is somewhere in the 5-6, because he gets removed quite often and the mass artifact removal and such. Well apparently I lied about the level. I have played well tuned decks before and I know my deck isn’t above a 6.

I wonder if it would be possible to create an Algorithm that recognizes the inherent synergy of a deck, number of combos present, and the power/synergy the commander has with the deck, to provide someone with a numerical or one of four descriptions (and we could somehow add it as a feature in decklist sites like edhrec)

Everyone should read a blog post on Commander Manifesto called "The Six-to-Eight Problem and the Zero-to-Eleven Scale." In a nutshell, it provides a much clearer set of criteria for rating a deck, based on how you answer specific yes-or-no questions about what the deck's properties and abilities are: Is your mana base strong? Can your deck ramp effectively and reliably? Can your deck reliably generate a lot of card advantage? Is your commander known to be strong? Does your deck have a lot of interaction? There are eleven questions in total, and if you answer "yes" to a question, you give your deck a point, resulting in a rating from zero to eleven points. It's not perfect, but I feel that forcing a player to answer these sorts of questions at least gets around the vague descriptors people usually use ("focused," "optimized") and gives you some clear, consistent criteria that you can use to compare different decks.

I often ask for their win cons, if they say thassa, food chain, worldgorger etc. Then u can gauge the powerlevel. Casuals often play tribal synergy deck that often win by just swinging with creatures.

I generally don't like to put numbers on my decks. When I'm playing with a new group of people I will generally with Niv-Mizzet Parun. He's powerful enough to hold his own against 8s, but he's versatile enough that he can be played at lower power levels without pup stomping. It's mostly choosing different targets with Niv's ability, but also holding back powerful spells like Teferi's Ageless Insight.

CommandFest Online uses a 1-10 scale for the power level of decks in order to help players match up against like-minded opponents. This scale was developed by Jimmy Wong and Josh Lee Kwai of the Command Zone podcast and modified for CommandFest Online. 1-2: Just for Fun Decks that are more interested in staying on theme than efficiency or winning. The lower power level and lack of synergy is usually an intentional choice in service of a specific theme. 3-4: Casual Decks that are trying to win but have limited synergy and less powerful cards. This power level is similar to that of recent Commander preconstructed decks. 5-6: Focused Decks that have synergy and a focused game plan but aren’t optimized. Infinite and game-ending combos are entirely absent or extremely difficult to pull off, and few to no tutors are included to improve consistency. 7-8: Optimized Decks with powerful synergy, carefully constructed mana curves, and many format staple cards. Infinite combos and tutors are more common. 9-10: Competitive Only top-tier Commanders and cards are played. Games take only a few turn cycles, and decks are consistently able to execute their strategies the same way each game.

I have been working on a 2 sided card that helps you evaluate and summarize your deck so that you can have someone else take a look and judge your deck at a glance. I would love to have you take a look and see what you think.

A question I thought of while watching is " how consitent your deck can " pop off"." Like my niv does have the infitinite loop, but i rarely get it, and i usually tend to goof around with drawing which in numerical term would be a 7 to me. An 8 would be that you can consitantly do your combo to win almost every game, and a 6 would be better than a pre con, but with the ability to go off, but it happens less than 7. I like having a game where everyone gets time in the spotlight, if they can, and so knowing how well the deck can go off or get their sweet spot like a big enough field can help with the speed of the player. I even put in a few token spawners so that players wont get bored of me just winning with pinging if we all use the same deck again to mix things up.

Here's an example from CQ - I built the Inalla Wizards Deck. At first I was kind of bad at piloting it, and I added some useful cards (Cyclonic Rift, Demonic Tutor, Rhystic Study, etc). Added some extra combo cards (Curiosity, Ashnods Altar). Does that make it an 8 now or still a 7, it still doesn't have fetches, shocks or non-taped dual-lands but can win out of nowhere? Would an optimized mana base turn it into a solid 8 or really a 9? I used to rate decks kind of by the win "speed" but the concept of control brings up a good point, is a deck that slows the game to a snails pace like Stax rated higher the better the lock, AKA the slower the game? And then there's meta related ranking, meaning you have a deck that wins a lot in your meta, but then someone new comes in and stomps your deck you thought was an 8, and maybe it's been a 6.5 all along. It's tough ranking cards, sometimes you end up just ranking players. Like I know certain guys in my groups are much tougher opponents no matter what the deck, and they build decks to win. One way NOT to rank decks is the terrible way that Discord and Cam-EDH was being done, "Jank, Battlecruiser or cEDH" - but Jank/Battlecruiser was no infinite combo and CEDH was way overpowered for any of my combo decks.

So I have a ur dragon deck that started as a daragaaz deck so all my dragons are jund and I feel like I either have too many creatures in total in the deck how many would you consider too many for a deck in general that could limit the amount of removal and board wipes

I would have loved to hear comments on the impact of how tuned a mana base someone has effects the power level, if at all. I find the more tuned a mana base a player has, the more the more tuned the rest of their deck is.

Time can be also an indicator for what powerlvl you are but also can synergie, commander, removals, protection, ramp, carddraw and so on. At best you ask yourself did the match feel fair? on that you also ask did someone screw up by holding greedy hands? did you/ the group had enough answers for whats happening on the field? Did everyone enjoy the game? But at all i think the 1-10 powerlvl is a good indicator to tell what you want to do. Its only difficult to tell if decks dont want to play around the normal system. Like decks that fokused about being explosive but have no removals for other decks or decks that only boardwipes as much they can. Those decks test the limit of a normal ranking.

I think the best way, in general, to evaluate your opponents decks and your own is how much the deck is worth (not counting special alters or promo arts) like if I'm playing against a deck where the owner is running OG dual lands and several high dollar cards, that deck will inherently be more powerful then a giant tribal deck. Additionally you can ask, like you guys said, how the deck wins. If its a fast combo deck, its inherently going to be more powerful then a voltron build. Ruhan is a great voltron commander. However its not going to win versus, say a t2 or t3 k'rrick combo deck. Anyways, great episode. Many in my LGS have shifted to pauper commanders for casual play. Its been a great challenge to build a deck using only commons thats still competitive in that sense.

So i basically have a precon kadena deck with upgraded lands and some better morph creatures. I happened to pull mana crypt and force of will from double masters and so im playing those as well. Do you all think those 2 cards drastically affect the power level?