I have been trying to come up with a way to enjoy my favorite expansion set's limited environment without having to buy boosterpacks all the time and was intrigued by the idea of building a cube with one copy of every unique card from a specific set (probably proxying the more expensive cards).
Obvious problems you would face would be the ratio of rares/uncommons/commons, which would't be 1/3/10 as in normal boosterpacks but more like 2/2/3.
So, I was wondering if you guys had any thoughts on this idea. Would the low number of commons disrupt the balance of the set? Are there other obstacles I have overlooked? Maybe even a completely different way of reaching the named experience? Anyone with experience with this concept or an otherwise relevant background? Help is appreciated
You should consider adding multiple copies of each common and uncommon with one of each rare. Most limited formats need multiple copies of the commons to be playable. Plus, you might consider not including the useless chaff. It looks like Lorwyn is the set you're considering, but it's not like Bog Hoodlums is ever going to make anyones deck, so you may as well not include any copies of it.
We did this with Modern Masters (as did many others) and are currently setting it up for Conspiracy. Granted it is a much smaller starting set then a full block, so you will want to tweak the numbers. For MMA we actually had two people create a cube in our group, one opting for 1:2:3 for R:U:C and the other wanting a bit heavier common environment using 1:2:4. I have drafted both several times, and both ratios work out just fine. Spairy was spot on with cutting a lot of the chaff. In MMA that meant removing cards like Dragonstorm that could not really be played in any MMA limited deck. We also combined R and M cards into one R grouping since M cards take the place of R in packs.
If I were to do this again for a whole block I would: 1.)Settle on a R:U:C ratio. I would likely pick 1:2:3 in this case due to individual commons being much rarer in a format with three different set packs. 2.)Settle on the size of the cube I wanted. It would be pretty easy to have a huge cube if you want to keep most of a block, but I would lean toward keeping it tighter so any card dependent themes you choose to support can come together. An example of what I mean recently came up in a Conspiracy draft I did. I assembled a brutal combo-mill deck by using Alter of Dementia, Deathrender, and huge late game creatures like Ignition Team. I'd guess that if I drafted Conspiracy 1,000+ more times I would not get the 5+ rares necessary to assemble that combo again - just too many other cards. But in a smaller cube based on Conspiracy it would be much much easier. 3.) Think about what decks you want to be viable. In MMA we wanted Arcane to be a playable deck, so we needed to plan ahead for that. The same is true in a normal cube when working to make aggro good enough to punish control. 4.) Start cutting out the chaff based on your desire total size and viable decks. Keep the cards that support what you want, cut the worst, then see how to fill in the gaps. 5.) Finally, go buy it. Or slap together something that is close from your collection. Assuming you want to design primarily top down.
Thanks for the replies, guys. I'm going to have a look at how exactly I'm going to approach this project.
I was wondering, flatterguy, how would you guys compose packs for drafting? Just, as normal with cube, fifteen random cards, or would you manually construct packs with a set number of rares/uncommons/commons?
We respect rarity in both of our MMA cubes. So we make sure that each pack has 1 R, 3 U, 10 C, and 1 foil in the case of MMA. The foil slot presented a strange problem for us, and the two designers went slight different ways: one just used copies of foil MMA cards that we had meaning that you can get more then one of some cards, but that cards like foil Swords or Elspeth were out do to price (let alone foil Goyf or Bob...). The other used that slot for foil versions of cards that they felt would be a lot of fun in the MMA environment, but were not included such as foil Lin Sivi. Rebels are pretty heavy in MMA so it seemed like a natural boost. Both sets are quite fun.
In our other cubes (normal, multicolored, pauper, bad) we do not respect rarity. Only in the ones were we trying to mimic a specific actual draft environment.
Some good advice above, and if you want to replicate the draft environment as faithfully as possible, the recommended scaling method is probably a good approach.
I chose a different tack, wanting to create a cube-like singleton experience. For Innistrad block, I acquired one copy of every card, including rare and mythic rare. The problem with this approach is that rares do not provide the same kinds of effects that you usually find at common and uncommon. So, while there is usually some kind of removal at rare, most of the removal in a block is actually at common and uncommon. The net effect is a paucity of removal in the kind of cube mentioned above. Compounding this is the fact that many of the things that you can do at rare are relatively powerful, so you end up with decks that can do powerful things and can rarely be disrupted by the opponent.
There is one other thing that bothered me about this approach - cost. There are usually a handful of very good rares in a set and they can be expensive. On top of that, if you think including Bog Hoodlums is a waste, try spending actual money on Elbrus, the Binding Blade. Yuck. And of course this just compounds across all of the rares.
So, I eventually decided to just scale back to "peasant" - i.e. just commons and uncommons. While this does, of course, omit some powerful cards that actually do turn up in draft/sealed/league, I find that it is more faithful to the "feel" of the limited environment than the rares-included singleton approach.
I have done this now for Innistrad and Return to Ravnica blocks, went back and did it for Scars of Mirrodin since I already had most of the cards, and am now collecting all of my Theros cards from multiple leagues to do it again. I have thought of going back through my collection to see what else I can piece together - I should be able to do Lorwyn/Shadowmoor block(s) (either separately or together) and Shards of Alara. I didn't draft much Zendikar and don't feel like dropping cash on that.
It should be noted that the singleton approach does have the effect at times of changing the value/power level of some cards. In particular, not being able to get multiples of the same card can make certain strategies less effective. For example, in Theros block, I'll only have one copy of Gray Merchant of Asphodel. In this case, the card itself isn't any worse, but strategies looking to do this kind of thing will need other reasons - they can't rely on 2-3 copies of the centrepiece card. Overall, the feel is more like the full-block draft experience since you have fewer opportunities for multiples in that environment.
And one other thing - the environment can be negatively affected when WotC doesn't continue themes all the way through the set. For example, in Innistrad block, the werewolf deck is significantly worse in my configuration when I include Avacyn Restored...oh, well.
I have been trying to come up with a way to enjoy my favorite expansion set's limited environment without having to buy boosterpacks all the time and was intrigued by the idea of building a cube with one copy of every unique card from a specific set (probably proxying the more expensive cards).
Obvious problems you would face would be the ratio of rares/uncommons/commons, which would't be 1/3/10 as in normal boosterpacks but more like 2/2/3.
So, I was wondering if you guys had any thoughts on this idea. Would the low number of commons disrupt the balance of the set? Are there other obstacles I have overlooked? Maybe even a completely different way of reaching the named experience? Anyone with experience with this concept or an otherwise relevant background? Help is appreciated
Leander
If I were to do this again for a whole block I would:
1.) Settle on a R:U:C ratio. I would likely pick 1:2:3 in this case due to individual commons being much rarer in a format with three different set packs.
2.) Settle on the size of the cube I wanted. It would be pretty easy to have a huge cube if you want to keep most of a block, but I would lean toward keeping it tighter so any card dependent themes you choose to support can come together. An example of what I mean recently came up in a Conspiracy draft I did. I assembled a brutal combo-mill deck by using Alter of Dementia, Deathrender, and huge late game creatures like Ignition Team. I'd guess that if I drafted Conspiracy 1,000+ more times I would not get the 5+ rares necessary to assemble that combo again - just too many other cards. But in a smaller cube based on Conspiracy it would be much much easier.
3.) Think about what decks you want to be viable. In MMA we wanted Arcane to be a playable deck, so we needed to plan ahead for that. The same is true in a normal cube when working to make aggro good enough to punish control.
4.) Start cutting out the chaff based on your desire total size and viable decks. Keep the cards that support what you want, cut the worst, then see how to fill in the gaps.
5.) Finally, go buy it. Or slap together something that is close from your collection. Assuming you want to design primarily top down.
Hope that was helpful!
I was wondering, flatterguy, how would you guys compose packs for drafting? Just, as normal with cube, fifteen random cards, or would you manually construct packs with a set number of rares/uncommons/commons?
In our other cubes (normal, multicolored, pauper, bad) we do not respect rarity. Only in the ones were we trying to mimic a specific actual draft environment.
I chose a different tack, wanting to create a cube-like singleton experience. For Innistrad block, I acquired one copy of every card, including rare and mythic rare. The problem with this approach is that rares do not provide the same kinds of effects that you usually find at common and uncommon. So, while there is usually some kind of removal at rare, most of the removal in a block is actually at common and uncommon. The net effect is a paucity of removal in the kind of cube mentioned above. Compounding this is the fact that many of the things that you can do at rare are relatively powerful, so you end up with decks that can do powerful things and can rarely be disrupted by the opponent.
There is one other thing that bothered me about this approach - cost. There are usually a handful of very good rares in a set and they can be expensive. On top of that, if you think including Bog Hoodlums is a waste, try spending actual money on Elbrus, the Binding Blade. Yuck. And of course this just compounds across all of the rares.
So, I eventually decided to just scale back to "peasant" - i.e. just commons and uncommons. While this does, of course, omit some powerful cards that actually do turn up in draft/sealed/league, I find that it is more faithful to the "feel" of the limited environment than the rares-included singleton approach.
I have done this now for Innistrad and Return to Ravnica blocks, went back and did it for Scars of Mirrodin since I already had most of the cards, and am now collecting all of my Theros cards from multiple leagues to do it again. I have thought of going back through my collection to see what else I can piece together - I should be able to do Lorwyn/Shadowmoor block(s) (either separately or together) and Shards of Alara. I didn't draft much Zendikar and don't feel like dropping cash on that.
It should be noted that the singleton approach does have the effect at times of changing the value/power level of some cards. In particular, not being able to get multiples of the same card can make certain strategies less effective. For example, in Theros block, I'll only have one copy of Gray Merchant of Asphodel. In this case, the card itself isn't any worse, but strategies looking to do this kind of thing will need other reasons - they can't rely on 2-3 copies of the centrepiece card. Overall, the feel is more like the full-block draft experience since you have fewer opportunities for multiples in that environment.
And one other thing - the environment can be negatively affected when WotC doesn't continue themes all the way through the set. For example, in Innistrad block, the werewolf deck is significantly worse in my configuration when I include Avacyn Restored...oh, well.
My Cube
My Blog