I don't quite understand the appeal of these half-measures. If you want to eliminate mana screw, but still obey the normal deckbuilding constraints of the mana curve and using a reasonable number of colors, the answer is obvious:
Your library is to be 40 nonland cards. Your territory is to be 20 land cards. Each time you have an opportunity to draw, you choose to draw from either the library or the territory. Cards that say "search your library" become "search both your library and territory"; cards that say "look at the top" or "reveal cards from" such that you look at one card at a time allow you to choose for each new look/reveal either the library or the territory. For example, a Scry 3 could mean looking at 2 from the library and 1 from the territory. I'm sure there are other styles of card that would require a more complicated interpretation, but...
It's important to stress that this change would require a HUGE shift in the metagame. How much better will burn decks be if they never flood? How much better will control decks be if they never get screwed? How many cards like Belcher will need to be banned? I don't know. Actually instituting this change in a competitive metagame would require far more extensive testing than I have done. It very nearly creates an entirely new game.
But, here's the thing: all these other changes that have been proposed will ALSO cause huge shifts in a competitive metagame. The only difference is the degree to which we fix the problem. I'd be astonished if forcing a 3-for-1 on yourself to fix your mana screw actually lets you win the game more than a bare fraction of the time. I actually quite like the idea of the "draw 10, return 3", since it also smooths randomness from non-land sources, but it's still a half measure that doesn't solve the land problem as completely as the "territory" deck does.
TL;DR: The way to fix mana screw that still punishes people trying to play all 5 colors is to have a separate deck for your lands; you choose from which deck to draw each time you draw.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Your library is to be 40 nonland cards. Your territory is to be 20 land cards. Each time you have an opportunity to draw, you choose to draw from either the library or the territory. Cards that say "search your library" become "search both your library and territory"; cards that say "look at the top" or "reveal cards from" such that you look at one card at a time allow you to choose for each new look/reveal either the library or the territory. For example, a Scry 3 could mean looking at 2 from the library and 1 from the territory. I'm sure there are other styles of card that would require a more complicated interpretation, but...
It's important to stress that this change would require a HUGE shift in the metagame. How much better will burn decks be if they never flood? How much better will control decks be if they never get screwed? How many cards like Belcher will need to be banned? I don't know. Actually instituting this change in a competitive metagame would require far more extensive testing than I have done. It very nearly creates an entirely new game.
But, here's the thing: all these other changes that have been proposed will ALSO cause huge shifts in a competitive metagame. The only difference is the degree to which we fix the problem. I'd be astonished if forcing a 3-for-1 on yourself to fix your mana screw actually lets you win the game more than a bare fraction of the time. I actually quite like the idea of the "draw 10, return 3", since it also smooths randomness from non-land sources, but it's still a half measure that doesn't solve the land problem as completely as the "territory" deck does.
TL;DR: The way to fix mana screw that still punishes people trying to play all 5 colors is to have a separate deck for your lands; you choose from which deck to draw each time you draw.