Okay so I was going back thought my old saved pages in my Magic folder and I found this article again. the Link is right here but I also copied it to here after I asked the author if I could share it along. I found it extremely useful when adjusting decks. Hope this helps.
If you clicked this link, chances are there have been times you wondered why your deck just isn't performing as well as you think it should. Or perhaps you're happy with your deck but you just wonder if there's room to improve. Maybe someone out there knows something you don't.
The vast majority of decks out there ARE underperforming. Sometimes, it's because the core strategy just isn't an efficient one. Sometimes it's because the card choices are off. But the vast majority of the time, it largely comes down to deck design.
Think of your deck as a beautiful structure. Perhaps it's a tall proud skyscraper. Perhaps it's a sprawling museum. Perhaps it's a giant statue. Whatever the case, it needs the support of a solid foundation. Most players I've played with/against online, and most decks I've seen posted here on the forums skimp on the foundation, and the deck underperforms as a result. And when I say 'most', I mean the vast majority. Like 90% of you.
Yes, even you, guy-who-thinks-he's-got-it-all-figured-out, are most likely choking your decks' efficiency by making it top-heavy.
So what is this foundation I speak of? It comes down to escaping the game's 2 core limitations:
1) the 1 land per turn limit
2) the 1 card drawn per turn limit
It really doesn't matter what your deck is trying to do. Perhaps you're trying to build up an overwhelming token swarm. Perhaps you're trying to voltron your general to epic proportions. Perhaps you're trying to assemble some sort of combo. Or perhaps you're trying to run everyone else out of gas and then clean up with the most hilarious of finishers. It doesn't matter. Regardless of its aim, your deck will accomplish its strategy more effectively with more mana available and more cards to play.
Ramp & draw is not just a 'strategy' that only applies to certain decks. EVERY strategy benefits from being supplemented by the ability transcend the 2 fundamental limitations of a turn.
Consider the following extremely simplified example:
I chose concentrate because 4 mana is a pretty standardized cost for a draw-3. Yes, there are more efficient (and more inefficient) ways to draw extra cards, but concentrate is common and cheap and accessible to everyone, and there are enough 3-for-4 analogs (eg: ambition's cost, harmonize) to consider it a standardized 'fair' price for its effect.
Given a perfectly even shuffling distribution, goldfishing would look something like this:
By 'perfectly even' I mean that since deck A is 3/5ths action and 2/5ths land, its draws would look like:
action, land, action, land, action,
action, land, action, land, action,
action, land, action, land, action,
etc - 2 lands for every 3 action cards
Deck A opening hand: 3 land, 4 action
Turn 1: draw action, play land(1 in play, 2 left in hand), 1 action mana available, 5 actions
2: draw land, play land(2,2), 3 am, 5a
3: draw action, play land(3,1), 6 am, 6a
4: draw action, play land(4,0), 10 am, 7a
5: draw land, play land(5,0), 15 am, 7a
6: draw action, miss land(5,0), 20 am, 8a
7: draw land, play land(6,0), 26 am, 8a
8: draw action, miss land(6,0), 32 am, 9a
9: draw action, miss land(6,0), 38 am, 10a
10: draw land, play land(7,0), 45 am, 10a
At the end of 10 turns, deck A has 7 lands in play, has drawn 10 action cards, and has had 45 mana over the course of those 10 turns that could have been spent playing action cards.
and deck B's perfect shuffle would leave the library stacked thusly before drawing the opener:
Action land concentrate signet land
Action action Land Action Concentrate
Land Action Signet Land Action
Concentrate Land Action Action Land
Action Signet Land Concentrate Action
land action action land signet
Concentrate, etc...
Deck B opening hand: 2 land, 3 action, concentrate, signet
1: draw land(3), play land(1,2), 1am, 3a
2: draw action, play land (2,1), play signet, 1am, 4a
3: draw concentrate, play land (3,0), play concentrate (land(1), action, signet), 1am, 5a
4: draw land(2), play land(4,1), play signet, play concentrate (action, concentrate, land(2)), 1am, 6a
5: draw action, play land(5,1), play concentrate (action, land(2), action), 4am, 8a
6: draw signet, play land(6,1), play signet, 11am, 8a
7: draw land(2), play land (7,1), 21am, 8a
8: draw concentrate, play land(8,0), play concentrate (action, land(1), action), 28am, 10a
9: draw action, play land (9,0), 40am, 11a
10: draw land(1), play land (10,0), 53am, 11
At the end of 10 turns, deck B has 10 lands in play, and 3 signets, for a total of 13 available mana. It has drawn 11 action cards, and has had 53 mana over the course of those 10 turns that could have been spent playing action cards.
To summarize:
Deck B ran fewer lands than deck A (33 vs 40), yet deck A missed its turn 6 land drop while deck B made every drop up to turn 10.
Deck B ran fewer action cards in total than deck A (41 vs 59), yet drew more of them over the course of 10 turns (11 vs 10). Actually - it's 12 vs 11 if you count your general as an action card (which it usually is), and by having more mana, deck B would be able to replay its general more times, increasing the action count further.
Deck B continuously dumped mana into ramp spells and card draw spells, yet had more leftover mana to put towards action cards than deck A had mana the entire course of those 10 turns (53 vs 45)
So basically, deck B outperformed deck A in every way.
Let's talk about that.
It's pretty easy to see that card draw played a huge role. How else does the deck with fewer lands in it draw more lands, and the deck with fewer action spells draw more action? It's easy to see the value provided by playing card draw effects. If you aren't playing cards that draw extra cards, you're choking your deck's performance by obeying the 1-card-per-turn limit.
What most newer players underestimate is the value of the ramp. Drawing extra cards costs mana. If you're spending mana to cheat on the 1-card-per-turn limit, but are still obeying the 1-land-per-turn limit, you're choking yourself in a different way: you now have more cards to play, but even less mana to play it with!
These 2 effects feed off each other. Ramp helps you play your cards faster. Draw gives you more cards to play. The more ramp your deck has, the more powerful card-draw effects become. And the more card-drawing-power your deck has, the more powerful ramp effects become.
Again, remember that this is just structural integrity we're discussing. I'm not telling you to change your decks' gameplan. I'm telling you to tighten it up a little and make room for the draw+ramp turbo-charge it needs to really fly.
A great read and something I always felt was pretty true without the numbers to back it up.
Necropotence is one of those cards that I love (and have an original and a Deckmasters foil) but also feel is "too good" for EDH and refuse to play it unless I know my meta is hard core cut throat.
The sad robot (Solemn Simulacrum) is really nice but is also 4 mana, not quite the "signet" talked about in the article. I don't know if I should go Mind Stone and/or any of the Diamonds (Charcoal Diamond, Marble Diamond, Sky Diamond) or not. Non-Green doesn't have a lot of "signets" and the artifacts from the previous paragraph are far more powerful in the long run.
As far as card draw go, I am so torn on Ancestral Vision. It can be amazing early, but later on it is a dead draw, I can't flash it back with Snapcaster Mage or Dralnu, Lich Lord, and returining it from my graveyard with Archaeomancer? Yeah, no. Instead I find myself stuffing my deck with cards like Opportunity, Tidings (10th edition please!), Jace's Ingenuity, Promise of Power, and so forth. I agree with the article writer, and even he (I am assuming he's a he) acknowledges that there aren't a lot of "Draw 3 for 4 mana" card in print. Deep Analysis is really a kind of delayed Tidings.
I always play Phyrexian Arena, and seeing how in the linked thread they mention Honden of Seeing Winds, I was wondering what others thought about it... and potentially playing all 3 Hondens in my colors to increase the shrine count? The black one is the opposite of the blue one (targeted discard for each shrine) and the white one is gain 2 life for each shrine. The white one isn't very good, but in my experience, the life loss from fetch lands, Ravnica shocks, City of Brass, Pain Lands, Mana Crypt, Phyrexian Arena and Bitterblossom combined with the damage I may likely taking from my opponents, it is easy to find myself blowing through that 40 life really quickly.
I am really interested in getting feedback from others and am really glad you posted this thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Whatever style you wish to play, be it fast and frenzied or slow and tactical, the surest way to defeat your opponent consistently is by dominating him or her in the war of card advantage." - Brian Wiseman, April 1996
I like the articles rough outline. I think that establishing the 2 rules you want to break; 1 land per turn and 1 card drawn per turn, are good baselines to consider when building an EDH deck. I have somewhat a problem with the approach outlined in "play 14 concentrates and fewer action cards" action cards is kind strange, because decks, especially those not jamming 30 creatures, are often very action light because they need to assign card slots for answers. Every EDH deck should be able to deal with every kind of permanent and you'll want to run at least one piece of graveyard hate too. Obviously, there are also cards that aren't the best on their own, but seek to compliment the decks plan, stuff like equipment in voltron decks. Obviously, there are far fewer action cards then a barebones decklist illustrates. Playing more card draw will find you your business spells sooner, but 14 concentrates is a strange number. I doubt there are even 14 blue and color-shifted versions of concentrate. Draw is important and not to be underestimated, but often card selection plays a more important role then pure CA does.
On Hondens: I've been working on a Hanna, Ship's Navigator deck with my brother and we've been coming to the conclusion that it should play more Hondens. If you play them, absolutely play Copy Enchantment. Drawing 4 or gaining 8 life per upkeep is huge and the cards tend to fly under the radar, so people may not instantly recognize it as a threat until you've gotten one set of triggers from them.
The article writer mentions somewhere in the comments that he means "cards that affect the board" when he says "action cards". Answers affect the board. Equipment affect the board. Etc... So, these are still "action cards". It's a poor choice of words, but it works well enough.
And he also mentions that concentrate is used as a baseline. Someone asks about mono-colored decks later (specifically mono-red), and Mind's Eye is the usual response.
I'm going to point out to anyone who is looking at that situation that Mask of Memory is the best thing since sliced bread when it comes to artifact card draw. It draws. It fills up the graveyard for all your reanimation needs. It plays card selection. It gives you more land in the early game, and less land in the later game. It is even tutorable with Godo and all the white equipment tutors.
If you clicked this link, chances are there have been times you wondered why your deck just isn't performing as well as you think it should. Or perhaps you're happy with your deck but you just wonder if there's room to improve. Maybe someone out there knows something you don't.
The vast majority of decks out there ARE underperforming. Sometimes, it's because the core strategy just isn't an efficient one. Sometimes it's because the card choices are off. But the vast majority of the time, it largely comes down to deck design.
Think of your deck as a beautiful structure. Perhaps it's a tall proud skyscraper. Perhaps it's a sprawling museum. Perhaps it's a giant statue. Whatever the case, it needs the support of a solid foundation. Most players I've played with/against online, and most decks I've seen posted here on the forums skimp on the foundation, and the deck underperforms as a result. And when I say 'most', I mean the vast majority. Like 90% of you.
Yes, even you, guy-who-thinks-he's-got-it-all-figured-out, are most likely choking your decks' efficiency by making it top-heavy.
So what is this foundation I speak of? It comes down to escaping the game's 2 core limitations:
1) the 1 land per turn limit
2) the 1 card drawn per turn limit
It really doesn't matter what your deck is trying to do. Perhaps you're trying to build up an overwhelming token swarm. Perhaps you're trying to voltron your general to epic proportions. Perhaps you're trying to assemble some sort of combo. Or perhaps you're trying to run everyone else out of gas and then clean up with the most hilarious of finishers. It doesn't matter. Regardless of its aim, your deck will accomplish its strategy more effectively with more mana available and more cards to play.
Ramp & draw is not just a 'strategy' that only applies to certain decks. EVERY strategy benefits from being supplemented by the ability transcend the 2 fundamental limitations of a turn.
Consider the following extremely simplified example:
Deck A: 40 lands, 59 action cards
Deck B: 33 lands, 41 action cards, 14 concentrates, 11 signets
I chose signets because 2 mana for +1 ramp is very standard. Nearly all 'fair' ramp effects fit that metric, be it on a creature (sakura-tribe elder), an aura (fertile ground), a spell (rampant growth), or an artifact (coldsteel heart).
I chose concentrate because 4 mana is a pretty standardized cost for a draw-3. Yes, there are more efficient (and more inefficient) ways to draw extra cards, but concentrate is common and cheap and accessible to everyone, and there are enough 3-for-4 analogs (eg: ambition's cost, harmonize) to consider it a standardized 'fair' price for its effect.
Given a perfectly even shuffling distribution, goldfishing would look something like this:
action, land, action, land, action,
action, land, action, land, action,
action, land, action, land, action,
etc - 2 lands for every 3 action cards
Deck A opening hand: 3 land, 4 action
Turn 1: draw action, play land(1 in play, 2 left in hand), 1 action mana available, 5 actions
2: draw land, play land(2,2), 3 am, 5a
3: draw action, play land(3,1), 6 am, 6a
4: draw action, play land(4,0), 10 am, 7a
5: draw land, play land(5,0), 15 am, 7a
6: draw action, miss land(5,0), 20 am, 8a
7: draw land, play land(6,0), 26 am, 8a
8: draw action, miss land(6,0), 32 am, 9a
9: draw action, miss land(6,0), 38 am, 10a
10: draw land, play land(7,0), 45 am, 10a
Action land concentrate signet land
Action action Land Action Concentrate
Land Action Signet Land Action
Concentrate Land Action Action Land
Action Signet Land Concentrate Action
land action action land signet
Concentrate, etc...
Deck B opening hand: 2 land, 3 action, concentrate, signet
1: draw land(3), play land(1,2), 1am, 3a
2: draw action, play land (2,1), play signet, 1am, 4a
3: draw concentrate, play land (3,0), play concentrate (land(1), action, signet), 1am, 5a
4: draw land(2), play land(4,1), play signet, play concentrate (action, concentrate, land(2)), 1am, 6a
5: draw action, play land(5,1), play concentrate (action, land(2), action), 4am, 8a
6: draw signet, play land(6,1), play signet, 11am, 8a
7: draw land(2), play land (7,1), 21am, 8a
8: draw concentrate, play land(8,0), play concentrate (action, land(1), action), 28am, 10a
9: draw action, play land (9,0), 40am, 11a
10: draw land(1), play land (10,0), 53am, 11
To summarize:
Deck B ran fewer lands than deck A (33 vs 40), yet deck A missed its turn 6 land drop while deck B made every drop up to turn 10.
Deck B ran fewer action cards in total than deck A (41 vs 59), yet drew more of them over the course of 10 turns (11 vs 10). Actually - it's 12 vs 11 if you count your general as an action card (which it usually is), and by having more mana, deck B would be able to replay its general more times, increasing the action count further.
Deck B continuously dumped mana into ramp spells and card draw spells, yet had more leftover mana to put towards action cards than deck A had mana the entire course of those 10 turns (53 vs 45)
So basically, deck B outperformed deck A in every way.
Let's talk about that.
It's pretty easy to see that card draw played a huge role. How else does the deck with fewer lands in it draw more lands, and the deck with fewer action spells draw more action? It's easy to see the value provided by playing card draw effects. If you aren't playing cards that draw extra cards, you're choking your deck's performance by obeying the 1-card-per-turn limit.
What most newer players underestimate is the value of the ramp. Drawing extra cards costs mana. If you're spending mana to cheat on the 1-card-per-turn limit, but are still obeying the 1-land-per-turn limit, you're choking yourself in a different way: you now have more cards to play, but even less mana to play it with!
These 2 effects feed off each other. Ramp helps you play your cards faster. Draw gives you more cards to play. The more ramp your deck has, the more powerful card-draw effects become. And the more card-drawing-power your deck has, the more powerful ramp effects become.
Again, remember that this is just structural integrity we're discussing. I'm not telling you to change your decks' gameplan. I'm telling you to tighten it up a little and make room for the draw+ramp turbo-charge it needs to really fly.
Who is the author and could we fie tune these numbers further?
His name is Tremor88 and I honestly think we could if we did some more work on it.
Necropotence is one of those cards that I love (and have an original and a Deckmasters foil) but also feel is "too good" for EDH and refuse to play it unless I know my meta is hard core cut throat.
I like to play around 34-36 lands and in my Esper colored deck I run all 3 signets and both Talismán of Progress and Talismán of Dominance. That makes five, and Sol Ring makes six. For power levels I always go back and forth on running Mana Crypt. Mana Vault, Grim Monolith and Basalt Monolith aren't really ramp until you can untap them with Voltaic Key or Tezzeret the Seeker.
The sad robot (Solemn Simulacrum) is really nice but is also 4 mana, not quite the "signet" talked about in the article. I don't know if I should go Mind Stone and/or any of the Diamonds (Charcoal Diamond, Marble Diamond, Sky Diamond) or not. Non-Green doesn't have a lot of "signets" and the artifacts from the previous paragraph are far more powerful in the long run.
As far as card draw go, I am so torn on Ancestral Vision. It can be amazing early, but later on it is a dead draw, I can't flash it back with Snapcaster Mage or Dralnu, Lich Lord, and returining it from my graveyard with Archaeomancer? Yeah, no. Instead I find myself stuffing my deck with cards like Opportunity, Tidings (10th edition please!), Jace's Ingenuity, Promise of Power, and so forth. I agree with the article writer, and even he (I am assuming he's a he) acknowledges that there aren't a lot of "Draw 3 for 4 mana" card in print. Deep Analysis is really a kind of delayed Tidings.
I always play Phyrexian Arena, and seeing how in the linked thread they mention Honden of Seeing Winds, I was wondering what others thought about it... and potentially playing all 3 Hondens in my colors to increase the shrine count? The black one is the opposite of the blue one (targeted discard for each shrine) and the white one is gain 2 life for each shrine. The white one isn't very good, but in my experience, the life loss from fetch lands, Ravnica shocks, City of Brass, Pain Lands, Mana Crypt, Phyrexian Arena and Bitterblossom combined with the damage I may likely taking from my opponents, it is easy to find myself blowing through that 40 life really quickly.
I am really interested in getting feedback from others and am really glad you posted this thread.
On Hondens: I've been working on a Hanna, Ship's Navigator deck with my brother and we've been coming to the conclusion that it should play more Hondens. If you play them, absolutely play Copy Enchantment. Drawing 4 or gaining 8 life per upkeep is huge and the cards tend to fly under the radar, so people may not instantly recognize it as a threat until you've gotten one set of triggers from them.
And he also mentions that concentrate is used as a baseline. Someone asks about mono-colored decks later (specifically mono-red), and Mind's Eye is the usual response.
I'm going to point out to anyone who is looking at that situation that Mask of Memory is the best thing since sliced bread when it comes to artifact card draw. It draws. It fills up the graveyard for all your reanimation needs. It plays card selection. It gives you more land in the early game, and less land in the later game. It is even tutorable with Godo and all the white equipment tutors.