Power Level Standards
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Dec. 27, 2023, 11:24 a.m. by Icbrgr
Is there anything like an "official" or most commonly referred to source for the determination of a EDH Deck power level?
I have been getting more games of commander in lately and every time a POD of randoms gets assembled it seems to be an uncertain conversation for most players involved.
With a general google search I have found various explanations for explaining a power level of a deck ranging from how many turns it typically takes for a deck to win; if there are reliable infinite/game winning combos or just the inclusion of certain cards/interaction and even just Power level Calculators. (very curious if this is a reliable tool)
but I'm wondering what/if there is a "best reference/tool/standard" to use...
TypicalTimmy says... #3
A good method to gauge "power" is to ask
- How many LAND tutors are there, such as Evolving Wilds
- How many NONLAND tutors are there, such as Idyllic Tutor
- How many TUTORS are there (that can search for land and nonland cards alike) such as Vampiric Tutor
- How many DISTINCT "combos" are there? Which is different from synergy
There is a big disagreement on what constitutes a combo and what constitutes as synergy. Not all synergistic cards are combos and vice versa. My fundamental philosophy is that a combo RELIES on each individual card to succeed. If you remove one element, they fall flat. For example, KCI requires specific cards. You exile or destroy just one, it falls flat. Meanwhile synergy are booster cards. You don't NEED it to win, but having it will significantly improve your chances. It boosts everything you have. For example, you don't NEED a Dragon Tempest to win, but it makes it so much easier if you have it. Whole synergy cards help you win, combos MAKE you win.
So,
- How many DISTINCT COMBOS do you have?
- What is your average mana curve?
- With an ideal opening hand, how quickly can you theoretically win?
I mean there's probably a dozen more elements we can add but you get the point.
The real issue is that, you can be Top Dog #1 with your little playgroup or small LGS and believe your deck is just the bee's knees, but you take it to even a local championship and you get blown out of the water.
So really, you also have to account for skill and, yes, luck. So, shrug?
December 27, 2023 12:56 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #4
And the crazy thing is, you could have a deck that consistently wins on T5 and it means absolutely nothing, because you sit across from a player who runs Death & Taxes, or LD, or Artifact Hate
So really, while it can be objectively stated some decks are superior to others, there are so many factors that it just doesn't really matter.
You could have two identical decks, and one player just has years more experience.
You could also have one of those nights where you just can't draw the lands you need, or too many, or not the right colors.
Admit it, we've all been there.
December 27, 2023 1:09 p.m.
@Caerwyn lol thats exactly how it feels too! @TypicalTimmy I hear that hahaha
for the most part the games I've been playing most people say there decks are 7 with and occasional 8 (honestly im not even sure if anyone even tries so say anything otherwise come to think of it lol)... however the games just feel so all-over the place having games that go on for well over 10+ turns and taking 90 min+ (usually at the LGS) to games that finish under 6 turns and what maybe feels like 10 min... most of these are online but they also happen at the LGS plently.
with the exception of the occasional super drawn out long games there just always seems to be "That guy" who is just obviously the archenemy/biggest threat and its 3 people working just to contain/slow the madness or they just win swiftly despite there being 3 other players lol.
idk if this is just the nature of the format or if there are people who just wanna take advantage or both... And I know I'm newish/unseasoned in EDH but I just figured even removing myself from the equation and just observing that if all these people are saying that they are on the same level then there wouldn't be so many lopsided games as I've come across.
December 27, 2023 1:30 p.m. Edited.
There are four tiers of EDH power.
-
Not supposed to win
-
Casual jank
-
About a 7
-
80% turn 3 win rate in cEDH tournaments
Numerical descriptors are just about meaningless. I assume in cEDH, you just sit down and start playing with the idea that everyone has tuned their deck to be as fast and consistent as possible, with the goal of winning as reliably as possible. In casual games, I loosely describe my deck. Some examples:
"I made this literally yesterday out of whatever I had lying around. Don't expect too much."
"I put an instant win combo in here, but no tutors, and the mana's kind of slow. Let's see if I can get it."
"This is one of my most tuned decks. It's flexible and reliable, good production, but I wouldn't use it in cutthroat competitive Commander."
"This deck is just for fun. It's not a threat, I promise."
This gives everyone an idea of what to expect, without assuming that everyone's definition of a 5 or whatever is the same, or even similar. That listing at the top of this post is tongue in cheek, but I don't think it's inaccurate. I've seen "about a 7" used to describe decks that try to luck into a three card combo, and decks that win 3-on-1s on turn 5.
December 27, 2023 3:48 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #7
Power level scales are pointless and contain too much quantitative analysis without enough qualitative analysis. The best option in my opinion is a turn 0 conversation and everyone being open and honest about what they are trying to do and their expectations for the game. I like to describe general archetype, speed, consistency, and resilience. Then ask if there is any other metric that people are concerned about. If everyone does a 10-15 second description of their deck incorporating all the metrics that everyone at the table care about, you have spent about a minute and are ensuring that expectations for the game are shared.
December 28, 2023 7:23 a.m.
golgarigirl says... #8
I just find that as soon as I commit to any kind of rating about my decks...IE my spirit deck is a midrange aggro deck that is very resilient and generally quick...it will spend the next 7 games playing nothing but mana rocks and my commander exclusively until turn 14. So I feel like rankings are wishful thinking and everything is a crapshoot anyways?
I play with the same playgroup and whatnot, so I mostly just ask my opponents what they want me to play, or just inform them that I want to play X, Y, or Z and be prepared. I don't build many new decks nowadays, or they tell me that they're testing something new, so I cater to them and bring a budget deck or a precon along just in case.
December 31, 2023 3:18 p.m.
Happy new year everyone!
I agree with the other posters here that, using power levels (either numbers or categories) in an attempt to standardize levels of play is not a good idea for EDH. Even if these systems did not have any reliability or validity issues, and even if everyone would use them adequately an honestly, only conveying such a category is not sufficient for achieving the goal of a pregame talk: aligning on the preferred gameplay experience and having everyone commit to that experience upfront. Despite this, the standardization scenario seems to have been the predominant expected use of power level guides so far.
Lately the community seems to be catching up on the fact that this does not work for a "social first" format. It’s like only using restaurant review scores to get on the same page about where we want to go for dinner tonight. It’s not an appropriate means for getting on the same page about the preferred table experience. It works better to prioritize aligning the subjective expectations of the players about the game over matching the power levels of decks. Those categories and rankings might still be useful for your own personal understanding of the EDH landscape and to assess where your different decks fall, but they’re not suitable as the go-to language for aligning on the game itself.
With my own EDH guide efforts here on Tappedout as wel as my website, I argue for a different use for power level guides. Instead of standardizing anything or regulating levels of play, power level guides can help the user get on the same page with their fellow players without having to refer to any chart, number or category. Instead, such guides can help them understand what they can talk about during a pregame talk. Instead of using numbers (or labels like “low", "mid" or "high”), they can focus on assessing the preferred gameplay experience of the group by using universally observable expressions of the gameplay experience: the things you can actually see happening during the game. Examples include: "What is the critical turn range we’re aiming for?" (at what turn range do we expect players to go for a winning play) and "how much can we tolerate other players preventing us from playing our game?" (what level of interaction and/or denial are we ok with). That is using language anyone can understand and doesn’t require the table to all master any chart or the meaning of a set of unit-less numbers.
January 1, 2024 6:19 a.m.
Beebles I was trying to remember the name of your guide so I could credit it as a good example of how to compare decks and start the match discussion. Thanks for providing that!
Caerwyn says... #2
No, there is no consistent standard. Because power levels are so subjective, every group has its own idea of what the scales might look like.
While there have been attempts at objectively measures, such as “how many combos” or “how quickly can it win gold fishing” those mechanisms are often incomplete to the point of futility. It doesn’t matter how many combos you run if you have tapped lands; it doesn’t matter how quickly you can win gold fishing if you don’t have a way to protect the combo.
Without forming a consensus on what power means and how to measure it, we just have a system where, rather than a single standard, we have basically every article author/YouTube personality saying “here is what power means to me, here is something that measures what it means to me, can you please adopt the standard that works for me?”
I think the below xkcd comic pretty much sums up the situation with power level standards perfectly:
December 27, 2023 11:49 a.m.