I think a good guideline is ROUGHLY 10% of your cube should be fixing of some sort, whether it is land or artifacts or what have you. I include 7 fixers in the colorless section (3 land, 4 artifacts) of my 90 card cube. That's roughly 8% of my cube devoted to fixing. I think because you see the cards more often than in a regular draft, I don't think you quite need as many as a standard cube. I could be wrong, but that's what I've noticed.
I think it would be better to come up with a general guideline for building a micro cube rather than hashing out the percentages for every aspect of the design, because realistically that's a ton of work, people probably won't adhere to it anyway, and because cube design is extremely fluid at this size--I don't think there really is an exact way to build a micro cube, especially considering they're often themed, built to have very specific archetypes, etc. A standard understanding of cube design should port over to building a micro cube, but there are special considerations for building one and I think we should focus on those points over regular cube design.
cube design is extremely fluid at this size--I don't think there really is an exact way to build a micro cube, especially considering they're often themed, built to have very specific archetypes, etc
Agreed here. Just for the hell of it, I'm working on a theros block one, and it's a whole different animal than my innistrad cube.
I think the only real consistent feature in the design process has been attention paid to a smooth 2, 3, and 4 cmc curve.
There are some many weird things that can be done with this format, I bet we haven't even scratched the surface on interesting designs and approaches to archetype and card support distributions.
Hey guys, i've got a simple question, do you think making a single set 90 card microcube would be interesting? Block cubes are a common thing, and they are 360 cards with 3 sets. It seems like something reasonable to make a 90 card cube from a single set.
I have a spare set of commons and uncommons from my RTR and INN set cubes, and it seems like something fun to do with them instead of let them collect dust
I know this is a *****ty answer, but maybe just throw it together and see how it plays? It'll probably be awesome as both of those formats were pretty fun, though I imagine it would be tougher at that size to support some of the archetypes that you look for in an archetype-centric format like 3xISD. That being said, if that's the case you could always slightly increase the cube size or figure out what you can or can't support with a few drafts.
EDIT: @ Urgox. I bet it would work well, based on what Dolono's already seen. Wizards have designed sets to have similar power level, theme, and critical turn. As long as the bombs/rarity is balanced, I bet you'll get close. Dolono could probably provide the best answer based on the work he/she is doing in his microcubes currently
Can I just say btw how much I'm enjoying this thread, and your great input and posts? I guess I did .
RE: Lands/artifact fixin'...
Well said both of you, and I agree. I've put "Roughly 10% of your cube land/artifact section should be dedicated to mana fixing" in the second post, and created a spot for the Micro Cube Design Commandments.
We've beaten the land/mana thing up for a bit, and have talked around card flexibility...shall we see if we can get some meat on this topic, as it seems to be one of the more relevant micro topics.
Simply put, selecting cards which are flexible and versatile is important for any cube. However, this flexibility and versatility should be an even higher priority for micro cube card selections.
To me, flexibility & versatility could mean some different things:
Cards which could have different uses (ie Waterfront Bouncer for tempo decks, or for reusing CIP abilities)
This last one is worth exploring as it related to theaters vs. archetypes...but I'll save that for another post.
I've liked using hybrid cards in my aggro section (Rakdos Cackler and Dryad Militant), as it gives my aggro colors more options for 1-drops, and have actually included them in mono-card selections. It gives my aggro colors more 1-drop density, while saving a couple card slots. I just wish there were more worthy hybrid cards.
Here are some of my favorite, most versatile innistrad cube cards:
tireless tracker - just has a ton of interesting applications, and supports a plethora of archetypes ~ humans, card draw, +1 counters, landfall, artifacts, saccing permanents, beat down, etc. Just a fantastic all around card!
geist-honored monk - probably relevant just to my cube; army in a can, supports humans and spirits tribal synergies. Also works reasonably well with blink, unsummon, and reanimator shenanigans. Tokens are fine beaters, and can be sacced for other profitable effects.
sanitarium skeleton - a worse version of gravecrawler for sure, but the not needing a zombie in play factor makes this dude a helpful addition to madness and discard-based archetypes.
unburial rites - just an all around awesome card again. It's color versatility is an enormous plus, and in a cube already rocking great etb effects, you can profit off of a particularly strong card as many as 3 times.
lightning axe - kills most creatures you're likely to see on the battlefield, facilitates a madness effect, and chucks something you want in the graveyard straight there.
duskwatch recruiter - inexpensive casting cost, relevant creature types, card filtering capabilities, mana sink, great ability while flipped.
travel prep - was a terror back in the innistrad draft days. Converts many a meek creature into a must answer threat. Multiple opportunities to fire it.
Sanitarium Skeleton is an absolute beast in SOI with Call the Bloodline, another card which could/should def be in consideration. I don't think I've passed Call the Bloodline more than 2-3 times before I realized how silly the card is.
@Dolono: how do you balance rarities? do you even bother at your cube size?
The approach I took with rarity balancing in the innistrad cube was basically:
1. Try to keep an even number of rares across the colors
2. Exclude mythics, for power level reasons
3. Try to include at least 1 rare, relevant to each tribe, in each color (ex. thalia's lieutenant = humans and angel of flight alabaster = spirits, in white)
4. Try to include 1 wild card rare in each color (bloodgift demon, avacyn's judgement, etc)
5. I tried to minimize the number of cards, especially rares, which would outright hose other tribes or colors
6. There were really no underlying considerations for common vs uncommon distributions, other than playability, versatility, and synergy with other cards ~ such as the aforementioned sanitarium skeleton + call the bloodline coolness
My first draft of the cube, I just chucked in any and all rares I wanted to try out. But green quickly proved too good, not carefully managing its numbers vs the other colors.
Optimally, a cube card will be easy to cast, be scalable, have useful or flexible effects.
On the last page, you guys said choose cards that are less good stuff, and more engine-based...what did you mean by that?
Part of being flexible is applying to as many theaters and archetypes as possible...is that your meaning? Are are you trying to force combos since you're more likely to see the cards?
Specifically, this description of theater vs. archetype:
In this article I will use the term “archetype” to refer to a set of cards that share a certain synergy, or to a deck based around that particular synergy. I think this use is fairly commonplace in Cube discussions, but it’s important to note that it’s slightly different from the use of “archetype” in non-Cube Magic talk, where it has the meaning of “deck sharing similarities (and usually a number of cards) with other known decks, regardless of the deck in question being power-based or synergy-based”. In non-Cube Magic, one may refer to “the Blue-White Control archetype”, or the “Sligh/Red Aggro archetype”. For the purposes of this article, however, those are not descriptions of archetypes, but indicate that decks belong to a certain “theatre”. Decks in the same theatre can differ wildly from one another, but share a similar fundamental strategy, meaning they look to win the game in a similar way and in a similar amount of time (i.e. turns).
There are four theatres: aggro, control, midrange and combo.
An aggro deck uses creatures costing one to three mana backed up by some form of disruption and/or reach to reduce the opponent’s life total to zero in the early game (around turn five, ideally). A midrange deck relies mainly on creatures and planeswalkers costing from three to five mana, often played ahead of schedule due to mana acceleration and backed up by some card or board advantage engine to grind opponents out in the mid to late game. A control deck’s strengths are cheap interaction (blockers or spot removal spells), counterspells, mass removal and card drawing. It wants to win in the late game after answering all the opponent’s threats and dedicates only a few deck slots to actual victory conditions. A combo deck foregoes all or most interaction with the opponent in order to assemble a combination of cards that will win the game more or less on the spot, relatively early in the game.
Note that I consider combo to be a separate theatre, but an optional one. While decks using each of the three main strategies will come together almost automatically in each draft (although not necessarily an equal amount of each), the question of whether a combo deck is possible depends entirely on the particular Cube list in use and requires special attention of the Cube designer. It’s entirely possible to run a successful list without any combo support, but it’s also possible to support archetypes that play very similarly to combo decks in Constructed Magic and that cannot be usefully classified as aggro, control or midrange.
Archetypes and theatres exist side by side. Each deck belongs to a certain theatre (note that hybrids are possible) and may or may not belong to one or more archetypes. Some archetypes always play in the same theatre (Storm is always a combo deck), while others can be flexible (Tokens can be an aggro deck, a midrange deck, or even a combo deck in extreme circumstances).
Archetypes are also not to be confused with themes. A “theme” is a design choice with an overarching impact on the entire Cube, where many or even all of the individual cards are somehow related to the central theme. Themes can be gameplay-related (e.g. Tribal Cubes, Artifact Cubes, Multicolor Cubes, Creatureless Cubes (!)) or be based on flavor, storyline or even something like a particular artist. Archetypes differ from themes because they’re much narrower in scope: in a small (360-450) list, supporting an archetype can often be done by adding 5-10 archetype-specific cards, while introducing a particular theme will most likely entail a full Cube re-design.
I post this, because we want to choose cards which will first a more theaters and archetypes as possible.
Hornet Queen
Theaters: Mid-range, Control, Combo
Archetypes: Reanimator Combo, Cheat/Natural Order Combo, Ramp
Pros: Can stabilize a board like a champ.
Both creatures are clearly very good, amongst the better fatties out there. But their inclusion/exclusion is affected by which archetypes you're trying to support, and what your cube needs. You support Ramp, and reanimator, and need a speed bump against aggro/midrange decks, you'd select hornet queen. You need a good control finisher, and support artifacts/tinker, take Sphinx. But if you don't support one/either of those archetypes, the value of the card goes down (but might still be worth including if the ability is good enough). In a vacuum, Sphinx is probably a better control finisher. We don't support tinker, though, so we decided to keep Hornet Queen instead as it supported more theaters and archetypes that we supported in our microi.
Based on this, I'd like to propose a commandment and I want your opinion:
"choose cards which will support as many multiple theaters and archetypes as possible"
So lemme ask you guys a question. We want to support reanimator in our cube, but don't want to include cards that are ONLY good for reqnimator. because of this, we run victimize, which can aid in both reanimation strategies as well midrange, reusing value creatures in a Rock-ish kinda way. However, as a dedicated reanimator spell, victimize is tougher to use with its stipulations. However, victimize is better for mid-range decks than Recurring Nightmare, which is a MUCH better reanimator card.
Is it worth running cards that have a lower power level if they're more flexible?
Is victimize really better than recurring nightmare, in a midrange or any deck that would want either? I have a hard time believing that. Maybe the initial switch is better, but midrange decks can certainly be grindy enough to abuse the multiple switches. I think Recurring Nightmare kind of excels in those decks where your creatures are often full of value and you don't mind abusing their ETB triggers.
Well, our thought has been "if I'm spending 2B and sacing a creature at sorcery speed, two creatures is better than one". Recurring nightmare is the (much) better card in a vacuum, and much better in a reanimator deck, and eventually is card advantage and better in the long term. I'm not dissing recurring nightmare, it's an amazing card. We've not had a hard time (at all) using victimize, it has better immediate impact for the midrange decks looking to stabilize in our experience.
But Take victimize (itself) out of the conversation...I'm curious if fundamentally it's worth running a lower power level to gain flexibility? Perhaps consider any of the charms for a different example...or trading post (which supports a ton of archetypes)
I'm getting started on another micro-cube project. This time around is for a multiplayer, 195 - 285 card, conspiracy-themed list. I am taking pains to differentiate this one from my other multiplayer commander cube, prioritizing cards unique to the conspiracy and commander 201X releases, and especially those that were high quality, but just didn't make the cut for my edh list.
I've decided to go the micro-cube route because I want to keep a tighter focus on the conspiracy mechanics, increase portability, and because I don't expect to draft this with a group larger than 6. Working on this cube will also allow me to better grapple with some of the issues we have discussed in this thread, such fixing ratios in a small cube, CMC curves, # of bomb cards, archetypes and theaters, etc. I won't be able to put the finishing touches on it till take the crown is released this summer, but I am very excited to start collecting for what I think will make for a fun, small cube.
Here's the cubetutor entry, for anyone interested:
Sounds like an interesting project dolono, I'm excited to see the final product and results. I appreciate your posting it here :). A couple questions, if you don't mind
Do you feel better equipped to build this next micro cube with your experience in your first?
You have a great start...have you play tested much? What have you learned thus far?
I think the biggest lesson/reminder I got from the innistrad cube was to diligently solicit the opinions of seasoned limited players about good draft cards, over just selecting stuff based on higher prices or use in the constructed formats. This is pretty elementary cube wisdom, but when I'm building a highly thematic or gimmicky cube, I find that I can easily regress back into pure Timmy-mode. I think after pulling a couple hundred INN-SOI cards from my collection for the first draft, I only landed up using 20-30 before having to head to the LGS to pick up stuff I didn't (and never thought I'd have to) own. Stuff like ulvenwald mysteries, watcher in the web, ulrich's kindred, graf mole, briar pack alpha, etc... Plenty of cards in the finished innistrad cube were not on my radar at all, and it took my cube partners reporting actual, in-store experiences to identify the cards that were tough to evaluate at a glance, but are really great in practice (tireless tracker, breakneck rider, bloodmad vampire, reckless scholar, and on and on).
Be that as it may, I am not sure how much the innistrad cube will influence this conspiracy project. My edh cube, and folks like Prid3s' multiplayer list will probably be more instructive on how to build this one. I will once again have the benefit of a relatively restricted pool of cards to draw from, which I think will help keep a lid on decision paralysis and the temptation to encroach on my edh cube's territory. As I mentioned above, I'm not really going to be able to proceed in earnest until the next set's mechanics and unique cards are revealed.
I guess the one thing I am currently debating now is how high quality a fixing base to spend $ on here. I have 8/10 extra shocks sitting around, and a bunch of gold bordered ONS/KTK fetches. It'll probably cost me about 40 in $ and puca points to fill the gap, but now that I'm building another rare cube, I'm still frustrated at how magic's mana base for cube is still fetches/duals/shocks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practically everything else. I will probably fill in the absence of zen fetches with city of brass, paliano, mana confluence, and maybe the mirage fetches.
Hey guys, all I own is an Origins set cube (waiting on the rotation so I can pick up Jace, Liliana, Nissa), and now I have an eye on a microcube, that would be easy enough to carry around. Definitely want it to be Pauper or Peasant (do not want it to be such a bomby cube).
I have a few questions regarding microcubes:-
1. How many basic lands would you carry with you for 90, 180, 270 cubes?
2. How many archetypes is it possible to support in 90, 180, 270 cubes?
3. How tight would a 90 card Pauper microcube be, since its archetypes are quite limited?
I think you can fit in a surprising number of archetypes, even with a 90 card cube. In my innistrad cube, for instance, I think there's at least 1 viable archetype for each bi-color combination, and probably some additional, if the player manages to get a working 3+ color scheme going.
As was stated earlier in this thread, the trick with these micro-cubes seems to be paying a lot more attention to card synergies than good-stuff power level. At 90 cards, for instance, any 15-25 cards that work well together, and have some interlocking functions, would probably be good enough to call a salient archetype. The fact that I've pulled cards exclusively from the two innistrad blocks also ensures that a lot of cards were either explicitly intended to function together in a draft environment, or shared some thematic/mechanical elements that would allow for some set cross-pollination. The various innistrad sets seemed particularly well suited for building robust archetypes (flashback + madness + delirium; tribes; DFCs, etc..)
At 180 cards+ cards, I think the principles governing normal cube archetype seeding probably apply; each color can probably house 2-3 robust mono-colored archetypes. You would just need to assign some "glue" cards across the colors (generic removal, generic good creatures, etc), to assist players with drafting multi-colored decks, or hybrid strategies.
Just as an intellectual exercise, I decided to see if I could put together a passable Zendikar super-block micro cube. I aggregated a bunch of data from draft bestiare, and am working with a buddy to prune the list down to 90 cards. Should be super cheap when it's finished too!
I'm aiming for 15-16 cards in each of WUBRG + 10-15 in colorless. Three rares in each of WUBRG should be good, with a likely schema of "1-2 rares per color in support of allies; 0-2 rares per color in support of eldrazi; 0-1 wild card rares."
Any feedback is very welcome, as I'm having a hard time distinguishing archetypes. As it is, the cube is incredibly aggro/creature focused, which I'd like to move away from. Here are my current established archetypes:
UW - ????
UB - Reanimator
BR - Aristocrats
RG - Zoo
GW - ????
BW - Deadguy Ale
BG - Rock
UG - Tempo Control
UR - Counterburn
RW - ????
Some suggestions for items that might warrant some discussion for the ten commandments.
-cutting a color. Should we consider it? If/when/how do we decide.
-archetype support. How many can we comfortably support with a 90/120/180 or more card pool?
-should specific archetypes be a focus to extend the diversity/playability of a smaller cube? For example, a token archetype could potentially make a small cube 'play' much larger.
Anyway, just some thoughts I've been having. Suggestions and comments are appreciated.
So I figured I'd join in here! I've been doing the "Travel Cube" thing a long time - it is a challenge to put one together, but they are really fun to play.
I'ts a "traditional" 180 card cube. 29 of each color, 25 colorless, one multi-color cycle, one land cycle, two utility lands.
In addition, I have been writing a series of cube articles you may find useful. They are written for beginners, but the entire series is intended to teach them how to set up a small 180 card cube or "cube skeleton" if they want to go bigger.
Hello all! Been away for a while, but I'm hoping to post a bit more in here. I've just updated my microcube list on cubetutor to include some power-level adjustments. I haven't evaluated conspiracy 2 for my microcube yet, so stay tuned for that, too.
I think it would be better to come up with a general guideline for building a micro cube rather than hashing out the percentages for every aspect of the design, because realistically that's a ton of work, people probably won't adhere to it anyway, and because cube design is extremely fluid at this size--I don't think there really is an exact way to build a micro cube, especially considering they're often themed, built to have very specific archetypes, etc. A standard understanding of cube design should port over to building a micro cube, but there are special considerations for building one and I think we should focus on those points over regular cube design.
Agreed here. Just for the hell of it, I'm working on a theros block one, and it's a whole different animal than my innistrad cube.
I think the only real consistent feature in the design process has been attention paid to a smooth 2, 3, and 4 cmc curve.
There are some many weird things that can be done with this format, I bet we haven't even scratched the surface on interesting designs and approaches to archetype and card support distributions.
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
I have a spare set of commons and uncommons from my RTR and INN set cubes, and it seems like something fun to do with them instead of let them collect dust
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
Can I just say btw how much I'm enjoying this thread, and your great input and posts? I guess I did .
RE: Lands/artifact fixin'...
Well said both of you, and I agree. I've put "Roughly 10% of your cube land/artifact section should be dedicated to mana fixing" in the second post, and created a spot for the Micro Cube Design Commandments.
We've beaten the land/mana thing up for a bit, and have talked around card flexibility...shall we see if we can get some meat on this topic, as it seems to be one of the more relevant micro topics.
Simply put, selecting cards which are flexible and versatile is important for any cube. However, this flexibility and versatility should be an even higher priority for micro cube card selections.
To me, flexibility & versatility could mean some different things:
This last one is worth exploring as it related to theaters vs. archetypes...but I'll save that for another post.
I've liked using hybrid cards in my aggro section (Rakdos Cackler and Dryad Militant), as it gives my aggro colors more options for 1-drops, and have actually included them in mono-card selections. It gives my aggro colors more 1-drop density, while saving a couple card slots. I just wish there were more worthy hybrid cards.
What are you top most versatile cards in your cube (I'm always looking for more options)? A few of ours are: Thoughtsieze, Survival of the Fittest, Thragtusk, Wickerbough Elder, Oblivion Ring, Hero of Bladehold, Tutors (of course!), Pack Rat, Qasali Pridemage, Skyshroud Elf.
Old school group, sometimes more beer than cards. Revised thru Tempest block (and a little of Urza), sorry if I don't know all the new cards
Ye' Olde Schoole Casual Decks: BUReanimate -- GRAggro -- BWPestilence -- G10-land Stompy -- GRElfball -- GWEnchantress -- RAnkh Sligh -- BDiscard -- MUC "Draw-go" -- BRSuicide -- UWSkies -- UHigh Tide Mill -- WWeenie -- UMutated Bombers -- URThe great land-toss -- UB Molasass
tireless tracker - just has a ton of interesting applications, and supports a plethora of archetypes ~ humans, card draw, +1 counters, landfall, artifacts, saccing permanents, beat down, etc. Just a fantastic all around card!
geist-honored monk - probably relevant just to my cube; army in a can, supports humans and spirits tribal synergies. Also works reasonably well with blink, unsummon, and reanimator shenanigans. Tokens are fine beaters, and can be sacced for other profitable effects.
sanitarium skeleton - a worse version of gravecrawler for sure, but the not needing a zombie in play factor makes this dude a helpful addition to madness and discard-based archetypes.
unburial rites - just an all around awesome card again. It's color versatility is an enormous plus, and in a cube already rocking great etb effects, you can profit off of a particularly strong card as many as 3 times.
lightning axe - kills most creatures you're likely to see on the battlefield, facilitates a madness effect, and chucks something you want in the graveyard straight there.
duskwatch recruiter - inexpensive casting cost, relevant creature types, card filtering capabilities, mana sink, great ability while flipped.
travel prep - was a terror back in the innistrad draft days. Converts many a meek creature into a must answer threat. Multiple opportunities to fire it.
thalia's lieutenant - humans, counters, blink, etc
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
@Dolono: how do you balance rarities? do you even bother at your cube size?
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
1. Try to keep an even number of rares across the colors
2. Exclude mythics, for power level reasons
3. Try to include at least 1 rare, relevant to each tribe, in each color (ex. thalia's lieutenant = humans and angel of flight alabaster = spirits, in white)
4. Try to include 1 wild card rare in each color (bloodgift demon, avacyn's judgement, etc)
5. I tried to minimize the number of cards, especially rares, which would outright hose other tribes or colors
6. There were really no underlying considerations for common vs uncommon distributions, other than playability, versatility, and synergy with other cards ~ such as the aforementioned sanitarium skeleton + call the bloodline coolness
My first draft of the cube, I just chucked in any and all rares I wanted to try out. But green quickly proved too good, not carefully managing its numbers vs the other colors.
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
On the last page, you guys said choose cards that are less good stuff, and more engine-based...what did you mean by that?
Part of being flexible is applying to as many theaters and archetypes as possible...is that your meaning? Are are you trying to force combos since you're more likely to see the cards?
I've linked the Comprehensive List of Cube Archetypes thread in the links post on page 1, and if you've not read it, is an EXCELLENT article.
Specifically, this description of theater vs. archetype:
There are four theatres: aggro, control, midrange and combo.
An aggro deck uses creatures costing one to three mana backed up by some form of disruption and/or reach to reduce the opponent’s life total to zero in the early game (around turn five, ideally). A midrange deck relies mainly on creatures and planeswalkers costing from three to five mana, often played ahead of schedule due to mana acceleration and backed up by some card or board advantage engine to grind opponents out in the mid to late game. A control deck’s strengths are cheap interaction (blockers or spot removal spells), counterspells, mass removal and card drawing. It wants to win in the late game after answering all the opponent’s threats and dedicates only a few deck slots to actual victory conditions. A combo deck foregoes all or most interaction with the opponent in order to assemble a combination of cards that will win the game more or less on the spot, relatively early in the game.
Note that I consider combo to be a separate theatre, but an optional one. While decks using each of the three main strategies will come together almost automatically in each draft (although not necessarily an equal amount of each), the question of whether a combo deck is possible depends entirely on the particular Cube list in use and requires special attention of the Cube designer. It’s entirely possible to run a successful list without any combo support, but it’s also possible to support archetypes that play very similarly to combo decks in Constructed Magic and that cannot be usefully classified as aggro, control or midrange.
Archetypes and theatres exist side by side. Each deck belongs to a certain theatre (note that hybrids are possible) and may or may not belong to one or more archetypes. Some archetypes always play in the same theatre (Storm is always a combo deck), while others can be flexible (Tokens can be an aggro deck, a midrange deck, or even a combo deck in extreme circumstances).
Archetypes are also not to be confused with themes. A “theme” is a design choice with an overarching impact on the entire Cube, where many or even all of the individual cards are somehow related to the central theme. Themes can be gameplay-related (e.g. Tribal Cubes, Artifact Cubes, Multicolor Cubes, Creatureless Cubes (!)) or be based on flavor, storyline or even something like a particular artist. Archetypes differ from themes because they’re much narrower in scope: in a small (360-450) list, supporting an archetype can often be done by adding 5-10 archetype-specific cards, while introducing a particular theme will most likely entail a full Cube re-design.
I post this, because we want to choose cards which will first a more theaters and archetypes as possible.
Lets take a fatty for example:
Sphinx of the Steel Wind vs. Hornet Queen
Sphinx of the Steel Wind
Theaters: Control, Combo
Archetypes: Tinker, Reanimator, Artifact Matters
Pros: Good control finisher
Hornet Queen
Theaters: Mid-range, Control, Combo
Archetypes: Reanimator Combo, Cheat/Natural Order Combo, Ramp
Pros: Can stabilize a board like a champ.
Both creatures are clearly very good, amongst the better fatties out there. But their inclusion/exclusion is affected by which archetypes you're trying to support, and what your cube needs. You support Ramp, and reanimator, and need a speed bump against aggro/midrange decks, you'd select hornet queen. You need a good control finisher, and support artifacts/tinker, take Sphinx. But if you don't support one/either of those archetypes, the value of the card goes down (but might still be worth including if the ability is good enough). In a vacuum, Sphinx is probably a better control finisher. We don't support tinker, though, so we decided to keep Hornet Queen instead as it supported more theaters and archetypes that we supported in our microi.
Based on this, I'd like to propose a commandment and I want your opinion:
"choose cards which will support as many multiple theaters and archetypes as possible"
Old school group, sometimes more beer than cards. Revised thru Tempest block (and a little of Urza), sorry if I don't know all the new cards
Ye' Olde Schoole Casual Decks: BUReanimate -- GRAggro -- BWPestilence -- G10-land Stompy -- GRElfball -- GWEnchantress -- RAnkh Sligh -- BDiscard -- MUC "Draw-go" -- BRSuicide -- UWSkies -- UHigh Tide Mill -- WWeenie -- UMutated Bombers -- URThe great land-toss -- UB Molasass
Is it worth running cards that have a lower power level if they're more flexible?
Old school group, sometimes more beer than cards. Revised thru Tempest block (and a little of Urza), sorry if I don't know all the new cards
Ye' Olde Schoole Casual Decks: BUReanimate -- GRAggro -- BWPestilence -- G10-land Stompy -- GRElfball -- GWEnchantress -- RAnkh Sligh -- BDiscard -- MUC "Draw-go" -- BRSuicide -- UWSkies -- UHigh Tide Mill -- WWeenie -- UMutated Bombers -- URThe great land-toss -- UB Molasass
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
But Take victimize (itself) out of the conversation...I'm curious if fundamentally it's worth running a lower power level to gain flexibility? Perhaps consider any of the charms for a different example...or trading post (which supports a ton of archetypes)
Old school group, sometimes more beer than cards. Revised thru Tempest block (and a little of Urza), sorry if I don't know all the new cards
Ye' Olde Schoole Casual Decks: BUReanimate -- GRAggro -- BWPestilence -- G10-land Stompy -- GRElfball -- GWEnchantress -- RAnkh Sligh -- BDiscard -- MUC "Draw-go" -- BRSuicide -- UWSkies -- UHigh Tide Mill -- WWeenie -- UMutated Bombers -- URThe great land-toss -- UB Molasass
I've decided to go the micro-cube route because I want to keep a tighter focus on the conspiracy mechanics, increase portability, and because I don't expect to draft this with a group larger than 6. Working on this cube will also allow me to better grapple with some of the issues we have discussed in this thread, such fixing ratios in a small cube, CMC curves, # of bomb cards, archetypes and theaters, etc. I won't be able to put the finishing touches on it till take the crown is released this summer, but I am very excited to start collecting for what I think will make for a fun, small cube.
Here's the cubetutor entry, for anyone interested:
http://www.cubetutor.com/cubeblog/54423
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
Do you feel better equipped to build this next micro cube with your experience in your first?
You have a great start...have you play tested much? What have you learned thus far?
Old school group, sometimes more beer than cards. Revised thru Tempest block (and a little of Urza), sorry if I don't know all the new cards
Ye' Olde Schoole Casual Decks: BUReanimate -- GRAggro -- BWPestilence -- G10-land Stompy -- GRElfball -- GWEnchantress -- RAnkh Sligh -- BDiscard -- MUC "Draw-go" -- BRSuicide -- UWSkies -- UHigh Tide Mill -- WWeenie -- UMutated Bombers -- URThe great land-toss -- UB Molasass
I think the biggest lesson/reminder I got from the innistrad cube was to diligently solicit the opinions of seasoned limited players about good draft cards, over just selecting stuff based on higher prices or use in the constructed formats. This is pretty elementary cube wisdom, but when I'm building a highly thematic or gimmicky cube, I find that I can easily regress back into pure Timmy-mode. I think after pulling a couple hundred INN-SOI cards from my collection for the first draft, I only landed up using 20-30 before having to head to the LGS to pick up stuff I didn't (and never thought I'd have to) own. Stuff like ulvenwald mysteries, watcher in the web, ulrich's kindred, graf mole, briar pack alpha, etc... Plenty of cards in the finished innistrad cube were not on my radar at all, and it took my cube partners reporting actual, in-store experiences to identify the cards that were tough to evaluate at a glance, but are really great in practice (tireless tracker, breakneck rider, bloodmad vampire, reckless scholar, and on and on).
Be that as it may, I am not sure how much the innistrad cube will influence this conspiracy project. My edh cube, and folks like Prid3s' multiplayer list will probably be more instructive on how to build this one. I will once again have the benefit of a relatively restricted pool of cards to draw from, which I think will help keep a lid on decision paralysis and the temptation to encroach on my edh cube's territory. As I mentioned above, I'm not really going to be able to proceed in earnest until the next set's mechanics and unique cards are revealed.
I guess the one thing I am currently debating now is how high quality a fixing base to spend $ on here. I have 8/10 extra shocks sitting around, and a bunch of gold bordered ONS/KTK fetches. It'll probably cost me about 40 in $ and puca points to fill the gap, but now that I'm building another rare cube, I'm still frustrated at how magic's mana base for cube is still fetches/duals/shocks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practically everything else. I will probably fill in the absence of zen fetches with city of brass, paliano, mana confluence, and maybe the mirage fetches.
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
I have a few questions regarding microcubes:-
1. How many basic lands would you carry with you for 90, 180, 270 cubes?
2. How many archetypes is it possible to support in 90, 180, 270 cubes?
3. How tight would a 90 card Pauper microcube be, since its archetypes are quite limited?
Affinity
Legacy:
GBCombo Elves
EDH:
GEzuri, Renegade Leader's Elf Ball
Cube:
180 Peasant Micro Cube
As was stated earlier in this thread, the trick with these micro-cubes seems to be paying a lot more attention to card synergies than good-stuff power level. At 90 cards, for instance, any 15-25 cards that work well together, and have some interlocking functions, would probably be good enough to call a salient archetype. The fact that I've pulled cards exclusively from the two innistrad blocks also ensures that a lot of cards were either explicitly intended to function together in a draft environment, or shared some thematic/mechanical elements that would allow for some set cross-pollination. The various innistrad sets seemed particularly well suited for building robust archetypes (flashback + madness + delirium; tribes; DFCs, etc..)
At 180 cards+ cards, I think the principles governing normal cube archetype seeding probably apply; each color can probably house 2-3 robust mono-colored archetypes. You would just need to assign some "glue" cards across the colors (generic removal, generic good creatures, etc), to assist players with drafting multi-colored decks, or hybrid strategies.
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
I'm aiming for 15-16 cards in each of WUBRG + 10-15 in colorless. Three rares in each of WUBRG should be good, with a likely schema of "1-2 rares per color in support of allies; 0-2 rares per color in support of eldrazi; 0-1 wild card rares."
http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/58666
Thanks!
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/25056
Any feedback is very welcome, as I'm having a hard time distinguishing archetypes. As it is, the cube is incredibly aggro/creature focused, which I'd like to move away from. Here are my current established archetypes:
UW - ????
UB - Reanimator
BR - Aristocrats
RG - Zoo
GW - ????
BW - Deadguy Ale
BG - Rock
UG - Tempo Control
UR - Counterburn
RW - ????
-cutting a color. Should we consider it? If/when/how do we decide.
-archetype support. How many can we comfortably support with a 90/120/180 or more card pool?
-should specific archetypes be a focus to extend the diversity/playability of a smaller cube? For example, a token archetype could potentially make a small cube 'play' much larger.
Anyway, just some thoughts I've been having. Suggestions and comments are appreciated.
So I figured I'd join in here! I've been doing the "Travel Cube" thing a long time - it is a challenge to put one together, but they are really fun to play.
My updated list is here: http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/1244
I'ts a "traditional" 180 card cube. 29 of each color, 25 colorless, one multi-color cycle, one land cycle, two utility lands.
In addition, I have been writing a series of cube articles you may find useful. They are written for beginners, but the entire series is intended to teach them how to set up a small 180 card cube or "cube skeleton" if they want to go bigger.
The first article can be found here: http://www.nomadgamer.com/2016/7/18/travel-cubed
I don't pretend to be an expert, but I do have a lot of trial and error experience, so if anyone has a question let me know
-- Geena --
"Personally I love high-riak, low-reqars gambles. Life's best with a decent amount of riak. And f*** reqars."
How many games have you played with your stack?
Can you say anything about how a general build as opposed to a synergy build affects replayability and consistency of fun?