Remember when I told I’d make a video reply to the 2024 player feedback? I lied. Instead, I’ll summarize my thoughts in writing.
What questionnaire?
Around the turn of the year, I as a part of the European Council made a short questionnaire to the players of the format. As I’m new to the role, I wanted to get some kind of an understanding of the wider sentiments, not just from within Finland (which I at least think I’m somewhat familiar with).
The questions in the questionnaire were as follows:
- What is your primary region of play for European Highlander?
- Option 1: Austria
- Option 2: Czechia
- Option 3: Finland
- Option 4: Germany
- Option 5: Slovakia
- Option 6: Online
- How often do you play European Highlander?
- Option 1: Weekly
- Option 2: Monthly
- Option 3: 3-5 times per year
- Option 4: 2 or fewer times per year
- How long have you been playing European Highlander?
- Option 1: Less than 2 years
- Option 2: 2-5 years
- Option 3: Over 5 years
- Have you ever organized a European Highlander tournament?
- Option 1: Yes, regularly
- Option 2: Yes, occasionally
- Option 3: No, but interested
- Option 4: No, not interested
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how would you in general rate the state of the format right now?
- Scale selection 1-5
- In your opinion, what are the best aspects of the European Highlander format right now?
- Free text answer
- In your opinion, what are the most challenging or frustrating aspects of European Highlander right now? Feel free to mention specific cards, archetypes, or anything else that comes to mind.
- Free text answer
- What ideas, changes, or suggestions do you have that might make European Highlander a better format?
- Free text answer
- Do you have any specific feedback, requests, or questions for the Council?
- Free text answer
All questions were made optional, meaning that the amount of answers per question varies.
In total, there were 143 replies to the questionnaire. While of course I was hoping for more, I think it gives a good cross-section of players and both the numbers and sentiments can be extrapolated from there with some degree of accuracy. I think it’s also natural that such a questionnaire attracts mostly the more enfranchised EUHL players and more casual players of the format are less enticed to reply.
Going brick by brick, I’ll summarize the general replies question by question and interject my own personal thoughts.
1. What is your primary region of play for European Highlander?
The intent was to get an understanding of how players of the format are split geographically.
| Country | Count (%) |
|---|---|
| Finland | 83 (58.0%) |
| Germany | 42 (29.4%) |
| Czechia | 10 (7.0%) |
| Slovakia | 5 (3.5%) |
| Austria | 3 (2.1%) |
| Total | 143 |
The results are unsurprising. I think the numbers are less important than the percentages, as I believe when looking at the total number of potential players the percentages stay roughly the same.
2. How often do you play European Highlander?
The intent was to understand how “dedicated” the players were: playing only a few times a year would suggest players that mostly attend the larger tournaments, while monthly or weekly play suggest players that could consider EUHL as one of their primary forms of Magic play – I understand it’s not that black & white, but this is mostly a supporting statistic.
| Answer | Count (%) |
|---|---|
| Monthly | 63 (44.1%) |
| Weekly | 59 (41.3%) |
| 3-5 times per year | 14 (9.8%) |
| 2 or fewer times per year | 7 (4.9%) |
| Total | 143 |
About 85% of the repliers play at least monthly. This is one question that I don’t think extrapolates as well through the entire player base: people who play more are inclined to answer these questinnaires, while people who play just occasionally are less. I don’t think this data is meaningful on its own, but it’s useful when combining it to other replies to understand better a specific point of view. For example, all 7 people who play twice or less annually have been playing for over 5 years. This is unsurprising, as such players might only attend the larger tournaments in their area.
3. How long have you been playing European Highlander?
The intent was to especially see how many newer players we have to the format.
| Answer | Count (%) |
|---|---|
| Over 5 years | 78 (54.5%) |
| Less than 2 years | 35 (24.5%) |
| 2-5 years | 30 (21.0%) |
| Total | 143 |
I specifically chose these years as rough ballparks around COVID: less than 2 are post-pandemic, 2-5 are mid-pandemic, and over 5 are pre-pandemic. The pandemic naturally affected the play our primarily-in-paper format, so having other boundaries might have muddled the answers a bit.
I’m extremely happy to see that a quarter of the players are quite new to the format. To be honest, it’s a bit surprising to me that the long-time players are “only” about half of the replies. To me this looks like a very healthy trajectory for our format, as getting new players to any eternal format is a tall ask.
Of the new players, 41.2% report to play weekly and 38.2% to play monthly.
4. Have you ever organized a European Highlander tournament?
The intent was to understand how keen players are to organize tournaments. This is admittedly a bit vague, as “organizing a tournament” might mean different things to different people, but I think the mentality and steps are the same regardless if it’s a local pub get-together or a more structured tournament.
| Answer | Count (%) |
|---|---|
| No, not interested | 72 (50.3%) |
| No, but interested | 38 (26.6%) |
| Yes, occasionally | 20 (14.0%) |
| Yes, regularly | 13 (9.1%) |
| Total | 143 |
I was very much surprised by this. I was expecting the “no, not interested” to be closer to 75-80% than just half. That reads more or less that half of the players (who are enfranchised enough to reply) are potential TO’s at least in some capacity.
As mentioned, I understand that it’s a bit different to organize a small online thing and a large 100-player tournament. However, I think the people are the same: honestly, the most important part is to have at least some interest in facilitating play, and the rest are just varying levels of practicality. It’s kind of like for a job you don’t necessarily hire the most qualified person rather than the right person for the job.
To me, the over a quarter of repliers “no, but interested” are the most interesting. How can we get you there? What do you need to launch your own event, whatever it may be? I personally can’t necessarily help with specifics for someone far away from me, but as a sometimes-TO myself I can sure help you with understanding how I’ve done things to varying levels of success. I think enabling players to run events is hugely important for the health of any format, especially community-run like ours. If you are interested in running events and just would like some enablement, I’m always here to help!
5. On a scale from 1 to 5, how would you in general rate the state of the format right now?
The intent was to have a very general, high-level litmus test on “how are we doing”. It is very nonspecific, but I like having this kind of a “mood meter” as a central KPI. I’ll have a few different ways of measurement here based on combinations to other replies.
| Country | Average rating (count) |
|---|---|
| Finland | 4.23 (82) |
| Germany | 3.67 (42) |
| Czechia | 3.90 (10) |
| Slovakia | 2.80 (5) |
| Austria | 4.33 (3) |
| Total | 3.99 (142) |
My take-away here are 2 things:
- The average rating of about 4 is very good.
- The happiness towards the format in general looks to be more about the local play groups.
It’s important to remember that we are playing more or less the same format. The main difference between countries is how the local players handle it. There are always some cultural considerations with these “rate 1 to 5” things, but I’m inclined to believe the countries present here are close enough to be comparative. In the US, anything below 5 is a catastrophe, while in Japan, anything above 3 is excellent.
| Play frequency | Average rating (count) |
|---|---|
| Weekly | 4.15 (59) |
| Monthly | 3.97 (63) |
| 3-5 times per year | 3.85 (13) |
| 2 or fewer times per year | 3.14 (7) |
| Total | 3.99 (142) |
This makes sense as likely the players who like the format more play it more (duh).
| How long playing EUHL | Average rating (count) |
|---|---|
| Less than 2 years | 4.18 (34) |
| 2-5 years | 4.10 (30) |
| Over 5 years | 3.87 (78) |
| Total | 3.99 (142) |
I’m very happy to see new players enjoy the format the most in general – of course new players who tried EUHL and didn’t like it are not here to give out replies. It’s good to remember that this ranks years with the format, not Magic in general. Someone new to the format might have a decades-long history with the game itself. It might have been good for me to add an extra question of “how long have you been playing Magic in general”, which might’ve provided more context.
Intermission
Overall based on these simple statistics alone I would say that the state of the format itself is good. Before we go to the more abstract answers of free text, I’ll share this sheet with the community. It has all of the individual answers of the first 5 questions as I believe they are anonymous enough. You may use the information to play around as you see fit.
Now, let’s go ahead to the more open-ended questions. I have read through all of the individual answers as-is. For the purpose of this article in specific, I’ll use the help of our friend ChatGPT (4.5) to condense the central ideas of the replies – not the perfect approach, but it will hopefully keep me honest. This is the prompt I’ve used:
I have conducted a community questionnaire for the players of European Highlander, a Magic: The Gathering community format.
I will continue to first list the question, followed by all of its replies.
Please give me a short, objective summary of the central topics within the replies. Please do not include any outliers rather than focus on the general sentiment spanning across multiple replies within the given dataset.
This is the followed by simply the question, and a copy-paste of all of the answer rows.
6. In your opinion, what are the best aspects of the European Highlander format right now?
ChatGPT summary:
Players highlight the deck diversity and significant freedom for creative deckbuilding as the standout aspects of European Highlander. The singleton nature ensures high variability in gameplay, making each match unique and reducing repetitive game states compared to 60-card formats. Many players appreciate the large, powerful card pool and a short but effective banlist, enabling the use of iconic or otherwise unplayable cards from Magic’s history. Additionally, the format is praised for maintaining a good balance between competitive and casual play, with a welcoming and supportive community, especially noted in Finland, where local playgroups and tournaments actively encourage growth and engagement. The absence of Commander-style gameplay is repeatedly mentioned positively, reinforcing the format’s distinct identity as a skill-testing, varied, and strategically rewarding competitive singleton format.
My attitude is that successes are extremely important to reflect on: whatever seems to be working is the guiding light towards, because it is what people enjoy. Because the format as a whole seems to be rated fairly well, enforcing the positives to me seems more important than weeding the relatively few negatives.
The core that needs to be tightly safeguarded to me reads as:
- Keep the singleton core as-is; don’t mess with the essentials and identity.
- Diverse deckbuilding options through large card availability.
- Keep the banlist short to enable previous point.
- Understand that the format is not ultra-competitive, nor is it highly casual.
My own take on point 4 is that it’s kind of like a lot of community formats: people want to play “regular”, powerful Magic in a relaxed atmosphere. I try to enforce this with my own tournaments like Ylämaa: regular REL with a community feeling, but still tight play in a competitive meta.
I’m personally quite banlist liberal, meaning I want to keep the banlist quite short. This seems to align well with the sentiment at large.
7. In your opinion, what are the most challenging or frustrating aspects of European Highlander right now? Feel free to mention specific cards, archetypes, or anything else that comes to mind.
ChatGPT summary:
Players repeatedly highlighted frustration with specific powerful cards and mechanics dominating gameplay, notably:
- Problematic cards and mechanics:
- Initiative and Monarch mechanics significantly disrupt game flow, creating repetitive or snowballing gameplay patterns.
- Nadu (Cephalid Illusionist) was frequently mentioned due to lengthy combo turns, limited interaction points, and repetitive gameplay.
- “FIRE design” threats and cards from recent supplemental sets (Modern Horizons, Commander products, and Lord of the Rings) negatively affect diversity and push “goodstuff” decks.
- Specific cards such as Minsc & Boo, Oko, Thief of Crowns, Ragavan, The One Ring, Orcish Bowmasters, Mana Drain, Karakas, and Wasteland were cited repeatedly as too powerful, restrictive, or frustrating to face.
- Meta imbalance and reduced diversity:
- Players feel pressured into 4-5 color “goodstuff” decks due to ease of mana bases and high-power cards, reducing strategic diversity and promoting similar decklists.
- Traditional archetypes such as pure control and combo (aside from Nadu and reanimator) are viewed as underpowered due to power creep.
- Council communication and engagement:
- Many respondents perceive the rules council as inactive, secretive, or insufficiently communicative, causing frustration and disconnect within the community.
- Players called for more frequent unban trials and proactive transparency from the council.
- Community and organizational concerns:
- Shrinking player base and lack of growth in regions outside Finland were frequently mentioned.
- High entry cost due to reliance on reserved-list cards (dual lands) and insufficient proxy support was repeatedly identified as a barrier for attracting new players.
- Limited availability of regular tournaments and large events outside Finland negatively impacts engagement.
- Gameplay logistics:
- Shuffling 100-card decks is widely considered cumbersome and negatively impacts game pace, especially in tournament environments.
In summary, central frustrations revolve around problematic card designs (Initiative, Monarch, Nadu, FIRE design), imbalance caused by power creep toward multicolor goodstuff decks, perceived inactivity of the rules council, high barriers to entry (cost and proxies), declining player engagement outside Finland, and cumbersome gameplay logistics (shuffling, slow combo turns).
There’s a bit to unpack here. I’ll divide my thoughts into a few sub-sections.
Ban logic & power creep
I have been vocal about my general acceptance of current Magic design and the subsequent power creep. I can certainly understand the sentiment, but I think moving to ban “just generally good cards” is a losing strategy. It is fighting the entire current game design, and instead of getting new cool cards with every set, it would turn into a constant churn of what needs to be banned. It’s very difficult to draw a line where a card is “too good” without being fundamentally offensive. White Plume Adventurer is an example of something I supported banning (I was not in the council yet at that point in time), but that from day 0 I understood will eventually get unbanned when the general card quality catches up. Same was true for Uro, Titan of Nature’s Wrath and True-Name Nemesis. Multiplayer mechanics bleeding into eternal formats is frustrating, but I do not personally think they are enough to justify that the juice is worth the squeeze. I take this as more of a “Magic problem” and less of a “format problem”.
The “goodstuff problem” is a conversation that has existed about as long as the format itself. I remember the same discussion from already when I started with the format around 2012. The key issue is that even if the “best-stuff” is gotten rid of, there will always be the “next-best-stuff”. Sure, we are lowering the bar, but it feels very much like fighting against windmills set after set. I think a more fruitful conversation is to see which individual cards bring their own unique archetypes into the format, such as the currently legal Oath of Druids and the currently banned Tolarian Academy. These are outlier cards that by their existence battle the perceived “goodstuff” paradigm.
As for more trials, it’s a frequent theme in the replies. I think it’s easy to facilitate and I have already been living according to this wish: the recent Mystical Tutor trial vote was tied and completely due to this community feedback I switched my swing vote to support the trial. Another improvement we as the council began with the most recent announcement was summarizing which individual cards we have discussed regardless of them being ban/unban candidates.
Tournaments & proxies
My confrontational option is that if you want more tournaments, organize them. If you want to play with proxies, organize tournaments that allow proxies. I do not think these are something I or anyone from the council should combat, because they are more on the tournament organizers. I think the best take-away here is to offer visibility on what the player base at large wants: more tournaments that potentially offer proxy options. I think there’s a good synergy here with the fact that many players seem to want to organize play, so it’s just a point of encouraging and enabling those potential TO’s.
8. What ideas, changes, or suggestions do you have that might make European Highlander a better format?
ChatGPT summary:
- Increased Unban Trials and Banlist Management:
Many players advocate for more frequent and bold unban trials, especially for iconic, currently banned cards such as Survival of the Fittest, Sensei’s Divining Top, Natural Order, Mystical Tutor, Tolarian Academy, and Underworld Breach. Some players also request targeted bans, particularly for multiplayer mechanics (Initiative, Monarch) and problematic individual cards (Nadu, Oko, Minsc & Boo, Oath of Druids, Karakas).- Community Engagement and Council Transparency:
A strong sentiment exists for the council to be more active, transparent, and communicative. Players suggest clarifying the council’s goals, philosophy, and rationale behind decisions. Increased community input through surveys, votes, or clear official communication channels is widely recommended.- Reducing Financial Barriers (Proxies and Card Accessibility):
There is significant support for a more liberal or clearly defined proxy policy to lower the format’s entry barrier, especially regarding expensive Reserved List cards like dual lands. This includes encouraging tournaments to officially allow proxies, at least for costly staples.- Promotion and Growth of the Format:
Many suggest actively growing the format by increasing its visibility via streaming, video coverage, influencer collaborations, online content (YouTube, MTGTop8, decklist archives), and international cooperation. Organizing more tournaments, including large-scale or international events outside Finland, is a repeated suggestion to boost global player engagement.- Gameplay Adjustments and Format Variants:
Suggestions also include experimenting with format variants such as limited sideboards (to enable Wishes or companions), a points system (similar to Canadian Highlander), increasing starting life totals (e.g., to 25 life), or even testing smaller deck sizes (e.g., 80 cards) to mitigate issues like lengthy shuffling and game logistics.- Meta and Gameplay Balancing:
Players frequently suggest balancing archetypes by providing stronger tools for underrepresented archetypes (control, combo) or addressing excessive reliance on staples. Reducing incentives for easy access to 4-5 color goodstuff decks, potentially by limiting fetchlands or strengthening nonbasic land hate, is also mentioned.- Removing or Limiting Supplemental and Commander Product Cards:
There is notable sentiment for limiting or outright excluding cards explicitly designed for multiplayer environments (Commander products, supplemental sets), as these cards negatively impact competitive balance and gameplay quality in a 1v1 format.- Centralizing and Moderating Community Channels:
A call exists for a clear, centralized official communication channel (Discord server, regularly updated website) managed directly by the council, aiming to improve communication, reduce toxicity, and unify fragmented community interactions.In summary, suggestions revolve around increased transparency and council engagement, liberalized proxies to lower entry barriers, more aggressive experimentation with bans/unbans, proactive promotion, and practical adjustments to gameplay rules to balance the format and improve community health and global growth.
There’s a lot of overlap here with the previous question, and I’ve summarized a lot of this already previously.
Some feedback here (such as limiting deck size, sideboards, categorical bannings) are in direct conflict with the core tenets outlined before and this I would not support them. They also feel like generally unpopular options that I have not heard much about.
When it comes to stuff like content creation, I think there are 3 distinct roles that many people confuse: council member, tournament organizer, content creator. One person can be all, another can be just one without being the other. Likely the kind of person that’s one is the kind of person that might be the other, but I cannot see a universe where this is any kind of a requirement for any role. If you want more tournaments, organize them. If you want more content, create it. This is a community format and it takes a village. Many community members have already begun to upload tournament results to mtgtop8 and I think that’s a wonderful example of community initiative and effort that has absolutely nothing to do with the council. If there’s anything I can do to facilitate stuff, reach out and I’m happy to help.
Speaking of…
9. Do you have any specific feedback, requests, or questions for the Council?
ChatGPT summary:
- Council Activity, Transparency, and Communication:
Players repeatedly request greater transparency, regular communication, and increased visibility from council members. There’s strong sentiment urging inactive or unresponsive council members to step aside, allowing more engaged representatives to take their places. Players particularly praised “Henkka” for recent positive improvements, especially regarding community engagement and website/Discord management.- Community Building and Representation:
The community asks the Council to actively unite fragmented player groups across regions and digital platforms, foster a healthier discussion culture, and take leadership in creating centralized communication (such as an official Discord server). Some players specifically request more Finnish representation due to the significant local player base.- Tournament Scene and Format Promotion:
Many encourage the Council to support and organize larger-scale, high-profile tournaments (including a European Championship), enhancing format visibility and player recruitment. Suggestions include collaboration with influencers, online leagues, international events, and more accessible prize support.- Banlist and Format Management:
Feedback on banlist management consistently highlights a desire for more frequent and ambitious unban trials, with specific requests for trials of Survival of the Fittest, Tolarian Academy, Natural Order, Mystical Tutor, and Sensei’s Divining Top. Conversely, players frequently mention banning problematic cards or mechanics like Nadu, Oath of Druids, Initiative, Monarch, and multiplayer-designed cards.- Accessibility and Proxies:
Players advocate for clearer recommendations or policies on proxy allowance in tournaments, to reduce entry barriers caused by reserved-list card prices.- Website and Content Maintenance:
A common frustration is the poor reliability and frequent downtime of the official website. Players request a stable, regularly updated site, more quality content, decklists, articles, and perhaps budget decklists to help attract new players.- Constructive Community Culture:
Several respondents emphasize that despite negativity and vocal criticism, there’s genuine appreciation for the Council’s work and dedication. Players encourage the Council to maintain confidence in their leadership role and decision-making, while clearly communicating their rationale to the community to prevent misunderstandings.- Miscellaneous Requests:
Suggestions include experimenting with new rules (such as allowing Companions as a 101st card), possible changes to format structure (sideboards, life totals), and broader reflections on format philosophy.Overall, players are requesting stronger and more visible leadership from an engaged Council, clearer and more frequent communication, aggressive yet thoughtful banlist management, active growth initiatives, increased accessibility through proxies, improved online presence, and fostering a positive and unified community culture.
What the council has done since the questionnaire:
- New website.
- Community-facing Discord server.
- Better transparency through announcement structure revamp.
I believe that the majority of the community has already embraced and appreciated these improvements.
Many of the other points (such as proxies, tournaments) I have addressed earlier. The feedback here was mostly positive and appreciative, so I personally think we are doing well and that’s always nice to hear.
Closing thoughts
Everything can always be better, but I think the format is in a good place and the feedback supports that. I feel like the trajectory is good and we are making well-received decisions. Overall, I think we have already begun implementing a lot of improvements into how the council works as a whole.
Personally I see tournament enablement as a personal interest here. How I go about doing that, I’m not sure, but I’m always happy to help any prospective tournament organizers or content creators.
Another thing we’re looking to implement are frequent community-facing “mini-polls” to keep our finger on the pulse and to get feedback in a more structured way. An example of this is the most recent poll on Mystical Tutor.
Leave a Reply