I don't see what the problem is.
Banning kills that aren't be combat damage seems silly. Can I Fireball you for 19 and then attack you with my Dauthi Marauder? If so, what's so wrong about attacking you, but then being unable to get past your blockers and still doing the last damage with a Prodigal Sorcerer? We could ban more cards or something, but there's always going to be some loophole to what someone thinks is "in the spirit of tribal."
Really, the last game was the only one where someone successfully ended the game with an infinite combo. And he was stopped, but we didn't go after him and he got it AGAIN on the next turn without using a ton of draw spells or anything. I don't think he got really lucky to pull it off, but it's not like he plowed right through the rest of us with his broken deck.
I don't see the infinite combo decks as being more competitive here. They have to play around 1/3 of the deck being creatures, which weakens combo decks.
If anything is broken in this environment, it would be the use of powerful cards that aren't banned, like Mishra's Workshop. And no one is doing that. The most broken card we've seen has probably been Necropotence. That was in highlander and the deck got slaughtered anyway.
We can change things up if we want. But please, let's not do some silly rule that specifies how you have to kill someone or some such thing. It's awkward, and whenever I've seen it done, people have always pushed the issue. For a while, I played at a store where they'd do tournaments with a "no kills until 5th turn" rule. People would play decks that virtually locked the game on turn 2 (no cards were banned or restricted) and then waited until turn 5 to go for the kill. Or there were decks that gained infinite life and played Yawgmoth's Bargain, then simply protected the Bargain until turn 5. I myself had an Academy deck that would (on turn 2 or 3) drop a ton of artifacts and lock the opponent down every turn during his upkeep with MoMa until I was allowed to kill him. It was dumb.
