Now imagine playing for 40 minutes and losing


Imagine playing for 40 minutes and your opponent gives you an aggro gg before casting epiphany 6 times in a row


Why bother imagining that when I can just go play a couple games


You mean what happens in paper as each game at an FNM is usually 40-50mins and since you have to search for your own cards, shuffle decks, cut, etc etc 1 game can eat up most of that time.


I just don't understand why everyone is playing super aggressive deck in fucking historic brawl, like... Congrats we played for 5 turns and you gained nothing. The opposite end is mono blue, play every counter available and win Through boredom. I just don't understand how it's fun


Serious game design question: how much of aggro’s popularity is because of extrinsic rewards like currency and wildcards? They incentivize frequency over quality with their match reward systems, so aggro is better at farming currencies and cosmetics. I suspect aggro is still a more popular archetype overall, but I’m really curious what, if any, their monetization and progression systems are doing to influence archetype preferences (as opposed to players simply playing what they enjoyed the most; what they want to, not what they feel they have to).


Totally agree as Im aggro player myself and the reason why I play one. Is it the most fun? No hell no, it is RNG dependent, starting hand and first turn affect win rates a lot. But you need to climb ladder and finish daily each day that the fastest way to do it is to just play aggro. Pretty sure every new player think the same thing as standard is flooded with mono white aggro now. It is easy, not much thinking and fast. Jank brawl deck is where I actually want to enjoy magic.


Jank brawl is the shit


This one gets it. It also seems to me like theres less roping/ afk in brawl, i think brawl players are more invested and have more fun!


I'm a recent convert to Brawl. I learned to play magic back in OG Kamigawa and dropped off after Ravnica. I always liked the game but I couldn't keep up. I had never heard of Brawl before Arena, and while it took me a while to come around to it--it's now my absolute favorite game mode. I have so much more fun with it AND when I lose I'm so much less salty about it. Especially if I lose to a cool/fun commander.


Also because there’s no ladder, even if you’re playing a slow deck, people so often auto concede against a little interaction, so you’ll rack up wins quick. Also helps that it’s just the most fun to play.


I’ve had a lot of people time out against me in brawl last few days. And I play stuff like gishath or slivers


Well i guess it depends on rng there too, like everything else sadly :\ personally i think its the mobile players that time out the most, people on the move tend to be disturbed more. I have some ropers too from time to time but not nearly as bad as in standard or historic. Maybe historic brawl is the least afk, since thats where the die hard fans are? haha


IDK at least for me in historic brawl everytime I don't allow a player their 7 mana commander or just prevent their game winning combo they will rope. I mean like what do they expect me to do just allow toxrill to hit the board and basically stay around to kill me or do they expect me to allow scurry oak to hit the board.


Going to be honest, half the time I play a big commander, its as a counter check. Like OK, here, spend your removal on this that I get right back so you don't kill my 1of combo piece. I will TOTALLY blind drop the first sliver to eat a kill spell so the 2-mana manaweft sliver in my hand doesn't get exiled or whatever.


Man I wish more people played like that instead of slamming the 7 mana commander when I clearly have 4 mana open playing blue in my colors. I mean like come on I might as well reveal my hand at that point.


atleast its quicly over that way, atm im having super long Ques in both historic and brawl lol.... sigh


I can understand it just gets annoying whenever you can tell it is going to be a good game and not just be 1 sided but the person just gives up. Or if you are just trying to test a deck but you really can't cause you prevented their combo. But yeah ques for me to have started to get dreadfully long sometimes up to 2.5 minutes. Even had one that went to 10 and thought the client had crashed so I was going to restart it but then it magically connected me to a match.


>I suspect aggro is still a more popular archetype overall, but I’m really curious what, if any, their monetization and progression systems are doing to influence archetype preferences (as opposed to players simply playing what they enjoyed the most; what they want to, not what they feel they have to). Aggro is not the most fun, but it is certainly a lot of fun. When I play aggro and go up against another aggro, I know that the outcome of this match is dependent on what we drew for our initial hand. Even when I don't play aggro, I let the game play to the end because it will be over within about 5 draws (unless I can stop it). On the other hand, if I see my opponent play blue (or blue/white) and goes by turn 2 or turn 3 without playing a card, I will usually rage quit as soon as the second counterspell is played.


When I'm playing brawl, if my opponent casts more than two counterspells in the first five turns OR counterspells a turn two mana rock then...concede. I'm not about that life.


Jank historic is all for me


And here I thought having fun was the point of the game.


Gotta grind first to get the tools to have fun




Are you saying you don’t need to grind to unlock the cards you want to use to build fun decks? Because I’ve been playing this game for a long time and swear I’ve needed to do lots of grinding to build the decks I’ve got.




Just cause you enjoyed the ride doesn’t mean you didn’t grind to build your collection.


aggro is so autopilot I tend to bring one out when I want to just zone out and bang out daily rewards. Drop my cards on curve and keep mashing spacebar until I win or lose.


Actually winrate is more important than gametime to climb ladder fast. Just because games are fast doesn't mean you climb faster. And if you face mostly aggro you aren't even playing longer games. I haven't done the mythic climb for a while, but when I did it was with control and with very small amount of games taking advantage of everyone spamming aggro with false thinking it being better option.


> you need to climb ladder Past Gold raw number of wins won't help with that; you have to have a positive win record.


Net +6 is still easier to achieve after playing more games, as it will take a lower proportion (i.e. a lower winrate) the more games you play. Winning 8 and losing 2 is very difficult, but winning 20 and losing 14 is much more reasonable.


Your deck still has to win more than it loses.


The average game of aggro takes about 5 mins, control takes about 10 mins roughly speaking. So aggro players play twice as many games. If the winrates are the same the aggro player moves up twice as much. And that's assuming the winrates are the same. Looking at untapped.gg the winrate for white aggro in standard is around 64% and the winrate for the next highest control deck is 61.4% The Arena economy rewards aggro more.


Well yes, assuming the aggro decks are actualy good, which they currently are. 64% is a very good winrate for any any deck. Maybe the way the economy is structured gives them a nudge, but if the best aggro deck had a 34% winrate I doubt that nudge would be enough to make it a popular deck, at least beyod Gold.


I know, I never disputed that.




No, once* you hit Platinum you slide back one blob for every loss and advance only one blob for a win. So you have to consistently win more than you lose, over at least 24 games, to reach Diamond. If your winrate is less than 50% you might get there but you probably won't.


I know paper players who enjoyed aggro before any f2p magic game came out.


Aggro has that visceral "I beat your face in" quality. With control, sure, you can establish a board lock or a "my grip is full of counterspells", but you're still many turns away from actually winning if they don't scoop.


It goes hand-in-hand with Fear Of Missing Out (FOMO), the predatory practice of these FTP games to incentivize players to log in each an every day... less they fall behind. If you're not playing every day, and not paying any money... you're going to fall behind. Decks like aggro that will typically provide a quick win, or a quick loss are more desirable when you might not even want to be playing the game at all. Bo1 only acerbates this issue. It's almost a necessary evil as people want to avoid sitting down to playing a (potentially) 60 minute Bo3 match only to lose. The results? One of the shittiest metas you can imagine: Mono white aggro and Izzet variants for as far as you can see. Don't be fooled into thinking Izzet is "slow". A lot of aggro players will quit when it's clear Izzet pulled the right combination of removal, and even if they don't, once you hit "critical mass" of mana, you just... win.


I think a lot of aggro players would prefer to play midrange but the overwhelming dominance of control makes that impossible


Yes. I only really enjoy limited so I just want to complete quests/weeklies quickly.


Bingo, I need to do 4 wins a day. No way i am spending half an hour a game.


Why do you "need to do 4 wins a day"?


most money per win i think right?


Yea most gold for least effort. Used to do 15. Wins a day for half a year, but lately I care less and less. I told myself that I am not paying wizard anything after all the problems last year.


As someone who has played a lot of Hearthstone as well in any came where there is a ladder system aggro or tempo decks will be disproportionately represented because their faster games give more currency and help you to climb faster along with usually being cheaper. Every streamer I know who plays games with these kinds of ladder systems always plays a fast deck right after reset just because it's faster to climb up to your intended rank and play what you actually want to play.


Midrange doesn't exist in most standards, and most midrange players don't want to play control as far as I know.


Orzhov Midrange is the most fun I’ve had in standard in years. Finally a deck that plays incrementally while engaging in all phases of the turn with many card types— creatures attacking and blocking, card draw, curving, instant speed removal, wipes, planeswalkers, learn/lesson, enchantments, sacrifice… I’m so bored of piloting aggro decks that are determined by opening hand. And even more tired of killing and bouncing shit until I can play my i-win card.


I do like that alchemy has more midrange type decks


That's the best part of Alchemy and why I am at currently enjoying despite all the other issues I have with it. Some of the best decks in the format are grindy midrange decks with huge decision trees and a high skill ceiling. It feels like nobody is left out right now. There's Dragons for the aggro player, Clerics for the creature/lifegain Timmys and UW for control players. Still Orzhov Midrange is probably the best deck in the format but they all feel competitive and I would call them all tier 1. It feels like forever since a midrange deck has been tier 1 in standard, let alone potentially the best deck. There are also tons of variations on it in card choice and even color including Abzan and Esper versions.


There's a few significant but less popular Midrange decks on MTGGoldfish. Temur Midrange, Naya Midrange, Rakdos Midrange, June Midrange, and Orzhov Midrange. Every one of those besides Orzhov does rely at least partially on Goldspan to do well but they still all play relatively different from each other and Midrange is in a lot better place than it has been. Ikoria and M21 metas make the current meta look like a Midrange heaven.


Well, before the Fire ban, and before Lukka/Agent, Jeskai Fires was probably the most competitive midrange deck I can remember.


Jeskai Fires with creatures was definitely Midrange and was decent but Jeskai Fires with Planeswalkers really wasn't and I believe the ladder was the more successful one if I remember correctly.


I guess that depends on how long you've been playing lol. Combo control has just been really good for a while with the ultimatums and/or epiphany being in the format, and that type of control deck absolutely shits on midrange. Control's usually pretty good against midrange to begin with, but there are generally grindy builds with recursion/disruption that can overcome that. Problem is if a control player can effectively shut the game down turn 6 or 7 either through absurd ultimatum value, comboing turns, or a combination thereof none of the traditional midrange tools against control matter.


Temur midrange was easily one of my favorite decks back when I played weekly in-person.


They've got high win rates, which shouldn't be affected by match time or external rewards.


“Play more games faster! Get more addicted more quickly in rapid succession! Give me more money please from your wallet! Play again what a short match!”


If you compare metas %s for tournaments and MTGA ladder, it's pretty clear that the grind speed/daily completion rate is heavily warping the meta. Orzhov/mono black have 10-15% higher average win rates in MTGA ladder than tournaments, which is almost entirely on the back of the insane popularity of mono white (and splashing variants) in ladder.


Those kinds of differences between paper and digital are really interesting.


Games per time is the sole reason I have adenoids the combo decks that get so much hate. There are days I just want to phone it in without losing progress, so let's hit our four wins before the pizza gets here


I’ve definitely roped people a few times while dealing with pizza-related tasks. Not sorry about it ;)


I stopped playing Arena after getting bored of playing aggro for this reason. I made some control decks which were 10x more fun, but after a long game that I really enjoyed I would just want to stop playing. Not do it 3+ more times in a row. After that it just didn't seem worthwhile to me.


I'm pretty sure it's overrepresented here exactly because of what you are saying. Also I think there is a player lifespan progression from aggro/creature decks towards more control type decks. I think you have to have a deeper understanding of the game and opponents to play control, and that comes with time and experience.


I don’t know… I was pure control back in the days of Ice Age through tempest and urzas. Like forbidian and Draw-go control w/whispers of the muse. Played against so many aggro decks for so many years that I finally decided to play some aggro after my long hiatus from Magic (masques-eldraine) and I’ve been loving it ever since.


please don't go down the "control pro, aggro noob" route




actual play-to-win, good players who don't use their limbic system for everything in their life use whatever deck and archetype they feel gives them the best chance to win. U don't see pro players shying away from aggro, combo, or whatever plat4 players on this sub call lame. also, go take a look at a deck website before saying "PpL plAy aGgrO bEcAuSe ThEy DoN't HaVe WiLdCaRdS" [https://i.imgur.com/WJtw19l.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WJtw19l.jpg)


It is overrepresented on arena for those reasons, but historically aggro decks (particularly RDW) are much more skill intensive than most other decks. If you're trying to win the game turn 4 in aggro, your sequencing has to be very precise and there's pretty much no room for error as a single misplay more often than not leads to a game loss. That sequencing can be very dependent on your opponent, so you really need to understand the game/how your opponent is likely to interact with you to play the decks effectively.


The RDW from the last set looked....pretty easy to play. Embercleave, giant w/ shock, torbrand, Ajax (or w/e). It was pretty much a NASCAR deck except you always turned right instead of left.


Particularly at a higher level, you had to think hard about where you used removal or pump spells to really make the deck effective. Especially since midrange was actually a factor in the format. A delay of even a single turn in closing out with an embercleave was often the difference between a win or a loss as it meant a higher chance for your opponent to have a removal spell to disrupt the equip trigger or creatures big enough to actually stuff it. The decks often get misconstrued as being on autopilot, but that's often a function of how punishing the they are against decks that are slow/inconsistent more than anything else.


That lifespan theory is interesting. When I started playing, my preferences gravitated straight to control. I enjoyed feeling like I had many options/cards in hand but my opponent did not. But after playing for a long-time now, I’ve gravitated more towards playing midrange. I still rarely play aggro though; fuck aggro! Lol So doesn’t match your aggro -> control theory, but not everyone has the same preferences. It’s interesting learning about what is satisfying to different player types. I’ve learned a lot about what’s satisfying about playing aggro, because I didn’t know what people saw in it for the longest time.


I followed the same path. I was all in on blue control decks when I started MTGA, but over the last couple of years I’ve moved to Aggro and Midrange decks. The only control deck I like to play these days is Mill or Discard which lets be honest, are just glorified control jank. I can’t stand just playing lands and then staring at my cards waiting to ruin another player’s time anymore. It’s no longer fun for me.


Started control back in Mirrodin, progressed to midrange and aggro over the years because I find control to be painfully easy and boring (I hate empty board states. I can stare at blank tables without frustrating my friends with counter counter field wipes counter win con gg)


A lot of PT winners play aggro. Short lines are easier than long lines to understand as a beginner but picking the best lines is incredibly hard in any deck.


It's also best to farm rank, as that is a function of the number of games played in the current system.


I play aggro a lot. I play it so that I can play multiple matches in a short amount of time. I either die quickly, or kill quickly. This also means I am less like to have to concede a match early because I ran out of time to play.


That's why I play aggro mill in historic, turn 4-6 wins.


It may be because Control decks play longer matches, so the amount of matches an Aggro deck has in an hour is much higher than Control. Therefore when you get into a match it is more likely that you are facing Aggro


It's a symptom of any game with a ladder tho. Fast games lead to faster results. I think even without currency/wildcards, aggro would still be more popular just because for those trying to climb, you can get many more games in. For casuals, this will skew things like what they see is good when netdecking since aggro will tend to make up more of the meta if it's decent.


Yes and no. Control tends to make up less of a metagame percentage in paper as well and there is no "gotta go fast" incentive. Like if we look at an "average" meta it tends to be some percentage of aggro and midrange decks and then a minority of control decks. This doesn't hold true for all metas, because sometimes the cards are just so strong--But having played competitively since Tenth Edition, Control is *usually* the minority of the meta anyway. Arena likely *increases* the aggro percentage by some amount, but it was almost always going to be higher than control's % of the meta anyway.


Its like the old joke in tournaments that every smoker is an aggro player so they can get their smoke breaks ASAP.


It's not only a matter of popularity. Even if aggro and control shared the same portion of players, aggro players will on average play more games (as they last less), so you are more likely to face one.


Hell, that's what some of my aggro matchups look like. It took me nearly an hour to do the "cast 30 red or blue spells" with a crappy goblin deck I threw together on a whim because of all the slow play in the ladder.


My least favourite are the attack with creatures quests. Anytime I assemble a sizable board my opponent concedes before I can attack and I get nothing.


I just make specific and dumb decks to quest. Like, all 1-3 drops with haste. Or mostly all destroy spells. Heck, destroy my own creatures to speed things up.


for destroy creatures, i think aristocrats sacrificing counts towards the total doesn't it?


I can't stop those quests from completing in draft!


Agree. I never even look at the quests, the all just autocomplete in draft


I've learnt to just spam the hell out of the change phase button to counteract this, it works sometimes.


Spacebar smashing is my method


I use hasty red deck. Lots of 1/1 haste guys get in and don't scare the opponent.


Completely honest, the two best ways to do that quest are red haste decks and control with some token generation to annoy.


Really? I usually just spam one mana creatures with haste and bolt everything that my opponent throws at me early on. By the time they get something on the field can't be bolted so easily, I usually have a flavor of Krenko and/or a Battlecry Goblin and a bunch of tokens out. Usually takes me three or four quick games to hit 30.


Problem was that every single time I took an action or had to pass priority I'd get roped. Every game.


„Patience is my wincon.“ - CGB 2021


“Lethal Omen of the sea” also CGB. Missing his Yorion piles, after rotation he made much less control decks


Not a fan of either, but I do enjoy long games that let both sides fully realize their deck.


The last time I seriously put effort into playing a control deck and trying to grind the ladder with it, the matchmaking would only pair me with other control players (often mirror matches), and after playing a few BO3's that would last the better part of an hour, I decided to only play aggro in the Arena client.


And how long do control deck 1v1s last in paper magic? Considering you have to move cards and tokens around yourself I'd bet it takes even longer in paper than in Arena to play any match. The problem is Arena not having a Turbo mode like Dota 2.


Sort of. The real reason is the gold and xp that will flash on your screen shortly after this.


Yep. Absolutely it is the rewards system that is tied to the wins. Not everyone has the time to play 10+ (sometimes 10+++) minutes average games, when you can get the same percentage at 5 min average where winning is the only was for free resources...


"The reason aggro is more popular than control" is time, meta knowledge, inventory and Alrund's Epiphany/Galvanic Interation. If Opp is going to eventually take 2 or more turns in a row, then the meta is going to either kill the Opp before they get there or lock them down. To lock them down, you have to know what is in the deck and how it will likely play out, not something everyone has time for. You can build an aggro deck on curve and it will get under most decks who have any type of early game issues or are built for the long game and whiff on their removal. Cheap, efficient and effective, like the crossbow in the hands of the masses versus an Archer is why aggro is popular, correlated to why crossbow where effective, easy to make and they were powerful versus having to train for years or hundreds of hours to become a master archer ( I am sure there is a name for that, maybe Marcher?). You can pick up an aggro deck and win while if you pick up a control deck and don't know the meta or the game mechanics that well, you will miss key opportunities which will lead to a lot of losses. Some control decks are performing sieges and draining resources, like the hand, battlefield, library and graveyard until they can turn the corner. Sieges are not quick and if you want to blitzkrieg your way to victory, cool, but when you overextend, be prepared for that cold Russian winter where all the resources are burned, doomskarred, and the siege begins, Lier/Hullbreaker.


What an elaborate metaphor, thanks for the journey!


Imagine if the system wasn't base around winning, but having fun.


Jokes on you, I love when I play Control and a single game can last 8 hours for a 1v1.


“Boring your opponent into a concession” is definitely a legitimate wincon, albeit a slightly controversial one.


It's not even boring, I just have other shit I want to do!


Like, yes, I can *eventually* hit the one copy of [[Stomp]] to get over your Nine Lives lock, but there's no way I'm sitting here for 20 min drawing and passing to do that.


[Stomp](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/9/09fd2d9c-1793-4beb-a3fb-7a869f660cd4.jpg?1616182066)/[Stomp](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/9/09fd2d9c-1793-4beb-a3fb-7a869f660cd4.jpg?1616182066) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=bonecrusher%20giant%20//%20stomp) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/eld/115/bonecrusher-giant-stomp?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/09fd2d9c-1793-4beb-a3fb-7a869f660cd4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call


To be fair, in that specific match (which yes was actually over 8 hours long), I was playing online (not MTGA or MTGO) as Lifegain Control and I just so happened to meet another Lifegain Control player by accident. We both reached the millions of lifepoints constantly recycling our decks. It was only after he decided to start bleeding my lifepoints through life drain that I reversed his life drain and basically won. It was a mutual long-game lmao, even if we didn’t intend it to be.


When you literally play magic like it's your job


The fuck is wrong with you? Do you not have anything else to do in your life?!


Who said I didn't have fun? A game this long is more likely to need some skill aside from luck, so the win feels more satisfying!


Oh of course. Never said it’s not fun. Just assumed by the post title that you meant its boring lmao.


People would be so much happier if they learned to concede when they have no path to victory directly available to them against a control deck and it's past like turn 8


I think the issue right now is how strong Fading Hope and Divide by Zero are. Tack on Jwari Distribution and you can stall for days. This forces the opponent to continue to attempt to setup the board until you show them either a win con or Lier that can't be dealt with. Hence, it might be 10 turns in before one can confidently concede to blue control right now.


I'll do you one better, I concede as soon as I learn I'm playing a control deck because I play to have fun and they're boring as hell.


I always play it out. It's rarely a done deal—topdecking is a thing.


If you know what you are trying to top deck you have a path to victory.


Land #5 😭


felt that in my soul


I don't usually concede when I've got like half a percent chance, but flipped azcanta with Teferi Hero of dominaria on an empty board and I'm out


Anyone who didn't have a win onboard who played after a Teferi ulted was wasting their time. Gameplay would have been improved by making that ult just say win the game.


it's a done deal when I untap with both hullbreaker and lier, topdeck your way out of that lmao


I've managed to boardwipe that when my opponent plays spells too liberally thinking that I couldn't possibly topdeck a boardwipe so


It would be nice if control decks with no path to victory conceded as well. The number of times I resolved [[Necromentia]] on control decks to remove the only win con and for them to keep playing for hours anyway or find literally zero win cons in the deck to begin with is frustratingly high.


Most control decks don't have a single wincon. Just as an example Historic Jeskai has three wincons mainboard: five mana Teferi, Gearhulk, and Shark Typhoon. Plus some lists have Hullbreaker Horror in the sideboard. So just resolving one Necromentia against a control deck doesn't mean they have no path to victory in most cases.


Sure. But that isn't what I was talking about. With Necromentia you can see the entire deck (other than sideboard) so you can see if there are wish effects to pull wincons from the side board, if there are multiple win cons in the deck, or see if pulling the shark typhoon or approach of the second sun actually does remove all wincons. If there are win cons left then yeah let's keep playing. ~~Though does actually contain an example of the problem. Teferi by himself isn't a wincon if there is nothing else in the deck to win with. Even if he does get to ult, yeah he can exile everything the opponent controls but if there is nothing in the deck to attack with or ways to recycle cards then there is no actual win and the game just goes to turn 50 when the control player finally decks themselves.~~ this part was mistaken, teferi does need an answer as well. For example playing against Azorius Nine Lives. Using Necromentia to remove all Shark Typhoon (edit, and handle teferi) from the deck and maybe needing to use Field of Ruin to take out the couple manlands there is no way for the deck to win once it has less cards in the library than you. It will deck out to lose, but just take forever to get there. Edit: Forgot about teferi tucking himself. But that just changes it to having to remove the sets of 2 cards rather than 1.


> Though does actually contain an example of the problem. Teferi by himself isn't a wincon if there is nothing else in the deck to win with. Yeah he can exile everything the opponent controls but if there is nothing in the deck to attack with or ways to recycle cards then there is no actual win and the game just goes to turn 50 when the control player finally decks themselves. What? That's 100% not true, Teferi himself is a wincon. If it ever actually actually gets to the point where you'd deck yourself you just -3 Teferi on himself every turn, and draw him every turn. Exile everything on your opponents board, you can't deck yourself because you're drawing the same Teferi every turn and your opponent inevitably will deck themselves and you win. That's why people scoop to a Teferi emblem unless they've got lethal on board or think they can get there, it's an inevitable but very slow win.


Ahh alright forgot about that. I MB 8 creatire or planewalker kill/exiles so I rarely get there but yeah I forgot about that aspect. I'm just saying I have absolutely had that turn 30+, just waiting for the no remaining win con control decks to deck themselves out scenarios play out quite a few times.


[Necromentia](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/3/2/32c5252e-ff15-4f86-ad63-d8286427e70f.jpg?1594736316) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Necromentia) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m21/116/necromentia?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/32c5252e-ff15-4f86-ad63-d8286427e70f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call


I would absolutely prefer it if Wotcs intended control finishers were more [[Torrential gearhulk]] than a lot of what they've tried.


[Torrential gearhulk](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/d/5/d52868cb-087e-4f91-91bc-455f2e2e7cd7.jpg?1576381464) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Torrential%20gearhulk) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/kld/67/torrential-gearhulk?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d52868cb-087e-4f91-91bc-455f2e2e7cd7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call




I've seen loads of people concede after the first counterspell. The truth, I think, is that many players know control means long games, so they quit out as soon as it becomes clear that's what they are in for.


I am offended at the accuracy. 😅


Here's the sad part, people on MTGA do not play mtg for fun, they play it for efficiency. That's why aggro is popular. 40 min actually means nothing to me as a player. Hell, I'd normally say that must be one epic game. Yet, on arena it's some cardinal sin, and means that you "wasted time" playing the game.


40 minutes for best of three is about what I’m used to in paper. If it was best of 1 that’s long


It is really not any fun to play against a guy whose deck is 20 islands, 2 manland, 38 draw, removal and counterspells. Takes forever to play and isn't really any fun. If you removed people scooping out of boredom those decks dont even have a very good win rate.


It's not really fun waiting for you to rope and think about every decision with 3 lands


Haha, idk why you are being downvoted, i mean counter decks are just more notoriously long.


Players are narcissistic and think they're entitled to their playstyles and think we have to suffer through it for their sake


And that's not even exclusive to MTGA - I never got into (traditional) Commander (though Brawl is great) and likely never will simply based on one guy I know who takes immense pleasure in elaborate, half-hour moves. Yes, I've seen people get coffee while he announces every step of a winding combo to an audience of exactly zero captivated listeners.


How about being narcissistic that I have to play the way you want?


I think its perfectly necessary for any game to have assymetry like aggro and control. What's annoying about players like you is that you have no empathy for what the other player is going through, you only care about your choices, how it affects you, and how much fun it is to work through your decisions when its boring as fuck for the other player. That's narcissism


You are assuming all this stuff. Some strategies are slower than others. That's why there's a timer and not infinite time. I'm under no ethical obligation to play some blazing fast deck, merely to play to the best of my ability and not use time as a wincon. Imagine getting mad at a football team for using 30 seconds of the play clock instead of going no huddle just because your team does. Now imagine pathologizing it with a B-cluster diagnosis. Yikes, man. Yikes.


> That's why there's a timer and not infinite time. The timer is WAAAAY too generous. Like, they could come out and say it's accessibility for quadraplegics and it wouldn't be that implausible...


I very much don't need all 4 timers or whatever. But sometimes I need one of them and I get LOTS of concessions at the slightest pause on my part.


I play control decks relatively fast because I know what my deck does and I rarely have to think about what to play because of that. I wish I could say the same for people I face though, aggro or control. Like watching what they highlight for 30 seconds on a board with no creatures and 6 lands that are clearly black, white, blue and watching my lands light up because they can't tell colors apart is amazing. An ingame report button would work magic for this game.


I love how a ton of people here assume every control player ropes and does dumb shit like this. If they’re roping, just leave, I do. Hell, I played an *aggro* opponent today who took longer to think than I did (and did so every turn) when I was playing Grixis control, so I ended up just conceding. I might have been able to win, but my side of the board wasn’t looking all too great for how many creatures he had.


Hey let's do some statistical analysis on the next 100 games and see who takes longer and slows the game down on 2 land decisions


It would be epic if it was the kind of game where both players get to play cards and make tough decisions. It wouldn't be epic if one player has decided to play flash lobster solitaire or 'drown the enemy in board wipes and planeswalkers until their side of the table snaps from the sheer weight of all the money I've invested' and the game just dragged on that long because they couldn't stand the 0.00001% chance that playing card X before card Y might cause the opponent to have a shot at playing the game too.


Ya I don't have Time to play control. I'll concede if I see more then one rope. Enjoy your win big brain


Not a full truth, I would not mind playing hour long game if one hour of raw gameplay awarded me more wins than a 3 minute win with aggro deck.


U came up with this conclusion all on ur own,? Damn boy now go to bed it's late kids should not be up this late.


I hope they make midrange and tempo decks more viable. Aggro is fun to play. Control is very boring - super long matches where very little happens most turns. I would love it if they had a game mode with shorter time limits to discourage decks that only have a win on if making others concede from boredom.


Aggro wins quick and punishes decks that get mana screwed. Most aggro decks are too linear, though...so the gameplay can be less fun. But different strokes for different folks. In standard I play a really grindy BW deck that takes forever to slowly but surely win. Often go into topdeck mode and cards like \[\[Ondu Inversion\]\] make things more interesting.


[Ondu Inversion](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/back/b/6/b6e6be8c-41c3-4348-a8dd-b40ceb24e9b4.jpg?1604243286)/[Ondu Inversion](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/b/6/b6e6be8c-41c3-4348-a8dd-b40ceb24e9b4.jpg?1604243286) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=ondu%20inversion%20//%20ondu%20skyruins) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/znr/30/ondu-inversion-ondu-skyruins?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b6e6be8c-41c3-4348-a8dd-b40ceb24e9b4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call


For quests, I literally make a mono color deck with pure cycle and cheap cards so I can play as many cards as possible before I concede. For attack, I spam tokens and attack every chance and then concede and repeat. If the opponent plays slow, I concede and repeat. I am done with quests in about 15 min. After this I play standard brawl to get my wins. If my colors line up with the quests, I'll just brawl instead but I don't have good brawl decks in every color, or it's not mono color so it would take forever to meet the daily versus knocking it out in 1 game.


Yep I don't have time for this, gotta enjoy family time too. Plus some of these control decks irl wouldn't last in most playgroups. You'd be the guy that doesn't get the call to come out and play.


Yeah it would be nice to have a "don't match me against this person again" button. Alternatively in paper magic where you don't have control over who you are matched against, like tournaments, there are match time limits to stop this.


Yup, and during FNM they're the guy going to turns on the 2nd round constantly


It definitely depends on the group. An LGS I used to go to had a clique of 5 UW players who would force the archetype regardless of format. Modern was their core but they would sometimes show up to standard and pioneer with the exact same type of deck. The regulars loved playing against them because they were such an easy target; the decks have "bad guy" written all over it and everyone wanted to be the one to bring down the beast. We would even stack the sideboard, sometimes maindeck too, with anti control cards because you were almost guaranteed to run into UW at least once each night. It was all in good fun though, and there was never any slow play or malicious BM.


Paper magic, I love longer games. Digital, not so much.


Its because of the lack of chat feature imo. When you're playing against a player in paper, you're often making small talk if not actually having fun together. On the other hand, arena just has you sit in silence listening to sound effects and elevator music.


Yep that’s part of it. Also, for some more complicated interactions you can just say something like “I’m going off” and start showing what you’re doing rather than waiting for the game or worrying about misclicking


I love long interactive games. then I'm not salty if I loose :)


"Control", I have 2 sets of board clears and 3 sets of direct removal without a win condition other than making the game as unfun as possible!


My matches are a lot faster than that. Though I play speed magic at the diamond level and I'm a control player lol If you can't make decisions in a timely manner, how do you expect to do well at tournament where you're playing for actual prize money?


This. I have only recently got back into BO3 and I have lost 2 games from timing out in the third match. I wasted a lot of time looking through the deck and other wasteful stuff, like not a fast enough wincon. In at least one match, I was sure I was going to win, but my slow play caused the loss. Just to clarify, I don't rope, but I am truly trying to think ahead. Anyways, it made me play faster and trust my 1st instinct and deck.


I really wish there were more ways to just absolutely ream a control player after they have spent this much time confidently countering all your stuff. I would feel a lot better playing control players if there were some good outs if they can’t secure the win after 10 minutes.


Flip the table (6) Sorcery - Lesson If target player has eight or more instants, sorceries, or enchantments with 'target spell' in their text within their graveyard or in exile, that player loses the game. *Today's lesson is about how it feels to have your time wasted.* --- edit Thought about including 'each creature' but that would catch too much fun jank.


Tasha’s Hideous Laughter would like a word


~~Is that word 'ha'?~~ At least that would end the game quick! And it'd make the flavor text ironic!


Aggro is popular because it only requires two brain cells to pilot correctly. Most aggro players would be dumbfounded trying to operate a typical control deck.


Aggro is cheaper by far. Complex, high mana wincon cards are usually expensive, while aggro set pieces can typically be much cheaper for Standard play. Even with Arena economy, you typically need fewer premium colour wildcards.


Yep quick game is a good game but it get worse with competitive as win count is what moves ranks not win %.


Plus, playing BUG Ultimatum with omniscience makes games go a lot faster. I play Omniscience. I cast peer into the abyss targeting myself. I cast half of my deck. I proceed to collect the salty tears of my opponent in a glass vial for further study.


I really hope its bo1


With the game oriented for quick wins doing quests in efficient way) it is not a surprise that many people prefer to play aggro deck with 50% win rate that either wins or loses in 2 minutes, so if they don't have a lot of time or are not feeling like playing Magic this specific day, it is possible to still farm gold from these few first wins in like 15-20 minutes.


Not me, I played some cool control mirrors during the arena open last weekend and winning with clock was so much fun!


Damm clerics and there’s white decks! Sometimes I give up I’m just to bored to keep fighting them.


As a beginner magic player I struggle against the white lifegain deck I seem to be constantly facing in the lower ranks I'm in. Do you maybe have a tip for what type of deck works against them at least okayish?


For me goblins deck works fine since is a fast deck and they don’t have time to build up


Thanks for the tip! I'll try it, and if it works I might try to upgrade the Goblin deck a bit, too.


Switch to Mill. Games are as fast as aggro but it feels like playing control. Best of both worlds.


Saying that I had an aggro / midrange deck against clerics yesterday. Lasted 25m because we kept exiling each others things with blockers held up etc


It's only more popular in BO1, in BO3 it's the opposite.


Arena is a time killer game for me. I want to do a pick up game in about 10 minutes. So yeah, Aggro is good for me.


I had a match that lasted 2hrs. All cards used. My opponent ran out of cards first. I had 1 left.


This is why I finally built an aggro deck


You took almost 40 minutes as aggro????


I think you’re missing the point


I just ramp to Approach of the Second Sun. Usually it's faster than aggro, and pretty much free wins.


I just played a game where the blue/black deck countered everything and never played a creature. I felt obliged to rope the goon to obtain his win. It's worse than just playing the black decks that are 90% of games in Diamond Tier 1