Moving this discussion over from the voting thread:
I'd rather see cards that play the same 99% of the time combined, so we get to see more effects on the list (and thus it will be more useful). Obviously, you have to draw the line somewhere, but I've never seen Wildfire and thought "If this was Burning of Xinye, I'd totally take it, but...".
In other words, what say we use common sense as opposed to rigid rules?
Moving this discussion over from the voting thread:
I'd rather see cards that play the same 99% of the time combined, so we get to see more effects on the list (and thus it will be more useful). Obviously, you have to draw the line somewhere, but I've never seen Wildfire and thought "If this was Burning of Xinye, I'd totally take it, but...".
In other words, what say we use common sense as opposed to rigid rules?
I don't think your idea is common sense as much as your opinion on what common sense is. Common sense to me would be to list cards with different rules text as different cards. Also, this is only going to come up like 3 or 4 times in the whole set of voting (that we already started with one set of rules...). Why not just go with what we are already doing so no one has to change their votes?
As I had said in the other thread:
I think if the card text isn't the same then they are different cards. Ravages and Armageddon look the same beyond the art and the name and do the exact same thing. Each other example brought up is not the same and plays enough differently that they deserve their own votes.
On the voting front, I'm surprised to see Wrath of God and DoJ so far apart in many lists. I believe that they are basically identical in my list. How many cards differentiate these from each other in the average cube? A good white regenerator would be awesome, by the way.
I put them pretty far apart on my list because DoJ has let me down on occasion. When you want a sweeper, you really want a sweeper. There's nothing worse than holding DoJ in your hand and staring down Lotleth Troll or Thrun. You are right that there are not many cards that cause this to come up, but when it does it's totally frustrating and can cost you the game. The benefit of having your own regenerator on the board at the time has come up approximately never.
You can revise your list, but if you do -- please make note of the edit in the post itself and also post a comment to direct me to review your revision.
(I'll be adding that into the VOTING post for the rest of the groups)
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom: The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray). The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it. The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Oh yeah, thanks for reminding me that I have Thrun as which makes a difference. For me to rate them a long way apart though, I'd need a lot more than one relevant other creature though. Actually if we had a good white regenerator or two, I'd rate DoJ more highly than ***, as I'd be able to regen off my own sweeper more easily. I did it back in the day when I ran Troll Ascetic, but the regeneration clause has actually rarely been relevant either way owing to the scarcity of good regenerators.
EDIT: Ugh, why does the Reply function even exist? I always expect that to also quote a post I'm replying to, but no...
My problem is that the line between functional reprints (Armageddon and Ravages of War) and variants that work the same most of the time (Wrath of God and Day of Judgment) is so thin that it feels arbitrary to say that one type gets separate slots on the top 20 lists while the other type does not. Wouldn't it be best to stick to the official singleton rules and treat functional reprints as unique cards? After all, you can run both Armageddon and Ravages in a singleton deck/cube. Why should we force one out of our top 20 lists?
We're not "forcing one out". If you see Ravages or Geddon in a pack, you're not skipping on one in favor of the other. I don't believe the same can be said for *** and DoJ. I think a case can be made for both O-Ring vs Banishing Light as well as Wildfire vs Burning of Xinye, but we're not trying to leave anything out. This discussion in relation to the voting is to say that "these cards are the same, vote on them as a single card" and "these cards are different, vote on them individually". The first one is a case of not putting two cards that are identical onto the list and possibly knocking a card off the Top 20 (by the second version of the card taking up an unnecessary spot). And the second case is differentiating between two cards, who by the looks of things may not end up right next to each other...only supporting the notion that they are, in fact, different.
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom: The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray). The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it. The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
You can revise your list, but if you do -- please make note of the edit in the post itself and also post a comment to direct me to review your revision.
(I'll be adding that into the VOTING post for the rest of the groups)
I edited my list to remove the one Conspiracy card and I made a note in the post itself
I don't think your idea is common sense as much as your opinion on what common sense is. Common sense to me would be to list cards with different rules text as different cards. Also, this is only going to come up like 3 or 4 times in the whole set of voting (that we already started with one set of rules...). Why not just go with what we are already doing so no one has to change their votes?
As I had said in the other thread:
I think if the card text isn't the same then they are different cards. Ravages and Armageddon look the same beyond the art and the name and do the exact same thing. Each other example brought up is not the same and plays enough differently that they deserve their own votes.
I didn't mean to make my idea sound like common sense. If you think that every card with even the tiniest bit of wording (or rarity???) change should be ranked individually, then there is nothing wrong with that.
What I was speaking to was the idea that because we started this way, we should continue. In other words, let's not let the perfect get in the way of the good here.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
We're not "forcing one out". If you see Ravages or Geddon in a pack, you're not skipping on one in favor of the other. I don't believe the same can be said for *** and DoJ. I think a case can be made for both O-Ring vs Banishing Light as well as Wildfire vs Burning of Xinye, but we're not trying to leave anything out. This discussion in relation to the voting is to say that "these cards are the same, vote on them as a single card" and "these cards are different, vote on them individually". The first one is a case of not putting two cards that are identical onto the list and possibly knocking a card off the Top 20 (by the second version of the card taking up an unnecessary spot). And the second case is differentiating between two cards, who by the looks of things may not end up right next to each other...only supporting the notion that they are, in fact, different.
Fair point, which is why I think the discussion should be had before voting, to see what kind of disagreement we have. I think of Wrath and Day of Judgey as the same exact value, but clearly some people disagree (or at least they do when voting, which is a whole other bag of problems). So the argument that they should be individual has some merit. Does ANYONE rate Wildfire and XBurn miles apart, or even view them as different effects?
I think Wildfire and Burning of Xinye are significantly different in multiplayer because I'm pretty sure only the caster and one other player sacrifice lands to Xinye because it says target opponent.
I think the easiest thing to do is say that if they have different rules texts, they need to be different cards in the votes. White's voting has already been cast this way, and I think we need to keep it consistent throughout all the voting. Maybe next year before the list submitting starts we can change it to something different. But right now, it's already started as "same text, same card; different text, different cards" and I don't think we should change that between colors.
I agree with wtwlf123, in that we've had the previous two PR's following this principle, we've (in some ways, naturally) followed it again. We'll continue this way through 2014's PR's and if we need more discussion, and God willing, another list (yay!) -- then so be it.
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom: The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray). The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it. The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Once the results are calculated for white, there will be a thread with all that information in it, and that's where we discuss the results. We should be getting one for white pretty soon, I'd guess. The voting for white closes tomorrow morning, iirc.
Once the results are calculated for white, there will be a thread with all that information in it, and that's where we discuss the results. We should be getting one for white pretty soon, I'd guess. The voting for white closes tomorrow morning, iirc.
You are correct, sir. Voting for WHITE closes tomorrow morning, and once I have it all tallied up I will post the results as well as open up the voting for BLUE.
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom: The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray). The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it. The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
I found it easy to decide the top places, but afterwards I could put them in groups of equal power. With cards in these groups it depends on what I want to draft.
I voted as discussed here for Wrath and Day of Judgement. I would always pick Wrath first, but the difference is not big enough to put a card in between those two.
Another thing I noticed that some cards might be more powerful in a vacuum, but I might pick a lower power card if that archetype is more powerful. White aggro is a good example for this. I might just pick Isamaru over a Baneslayer, even if Baneslayer on itself is the better card. White weenie though always deliver in our cube. This effect makes this vote a bit harder.
Question: what do we do with very narrow cards that can be very powerful if they are fully supported? I am mainly thinking of Time Vault here, which if it gets enough support can be a top tier card. But if it is only supported half heartedly, it becomes pretty mediocre.
I found it easy to decide the top places, but afterwards I could put them in groups of equal power. With cards in these groups it depends on what I want to draft.
I voted as discussed here for Wrath and Day of Judgement. I would always pick Wrath first, but the difference is not big enough to put a card in between those two.
Another thing I noticed that some cards might be more powerful in a vacuum, but I might pick a lower power card if that archetype is more powerful. White aggro is a good example for this. I might just pick Isamaru over a Baneslayer, even if Baneslayer on itself is the better card. White weenie though always deliver in our cube. This effect makes this vote a bit harder.
Question: what do we do with very narrow cards that can be very powerful if they are fully supported? I am mainly thinking of Time Vault here, which if it gets enough support can be a top tier card. But if it is only supported half heartedly, it becomes pretty mediocre.
As soon as the White Discussion thread is up I'm going to explain my picks and I will address how I chose to handle many of the problems you mention here. With a couple days' worth of hindsight I would actually do some things differently.
I just genuinely try to put in order what I would P1P1 - given my cube and all its idiosyncracies, like the fact it's Winston drafted. So I tend to pick splashable cards really highly, as I'm more certain about it ending up in my 40.
Of course on any given day, your mood and picks will change a lot. Trying to make an 'average' pick is really tough.
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom: The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray). The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it. The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom: The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray). The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it. The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Very interesting rankings! I'm surprised to see Stoneforge Mystic ranked so high - I didn't even vote her. I guess I would never take her P1P1 because I have a 720 cube, and there is a very legitimate chance that I would never see one of the swords, Jitte, or Skullclamp in my draft (those cards are valued very highly in my playgroup so it's not too likely that I would see one if I didn't open one).
Oh man, I don't. Lark is not only incredibly powerful, but it goes into more decks and gets vastly better if you build around it. Making it a much more reasonable P1P1 choice, IMO.
The blue voting is a bit problematic for me. In theory, I would rank Ancestral Recall and Time Walk on #1 and #2. However, I never ever played with or against those cards in cube, which is a reason not to rank them, according to the vote thread. Now, the problem is, if only the people who have actually played with/against those cards rank them, they will most likely not make it onto the top spots of the final list, even though they totally deserve to be there due to their power level. Should I (and other unpowered cubers) still not rank them despite the risk to end up with a final list that places them deceptively low?
I only ever drafted power cards in virtual drafts (like at Cubetutor). I did what I was instructed: what I would most likely pick as P1P1 among all blue cube cards.
That's why I'm probably the only one who ranked Time Walk over Ancestral Recall, I do think I'd take the extra-turn over the extra-cards as P1P1.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'd rather see cards that play the same 99% of the time combined, so we get to see more effects on the list (and thus it will be more useful). Obviously, you have to draw the line somewhere, but I've never seen Wildfire and thought "If this was Burning of Xinye, I'd totally take it, but...".
In other words, what say we use common sense as opposed to rigid rules?
I don't think your idea is common sense as much as your opinion on what common sense is. Common sense to me would be to list cards with different rules text as different cards. Also, this is only going to come up like 3 or 4 times in the whole set of voting (that we already started with one set of rules...). Why not just go with what we are already doing so no one has to change their votes?
As I had said in the other thread:
I think if the card text isn't the same then they are different cards. Ravages and Armageddon look the same beyond the art and the name and do the exact same thing. Each other example brought up is not the same and plays enough differently that they deserve their own votes.
Draft my cube!
Watch me stream!
I put them pretty far apart on my list because DoJ has let me down on occasion. When you want a sweeper, you really want a sweeper. There's nothing worse than holding DoJ in your hand and staring down Lotleth Troll or Thrun. You are right that there are not many cards that cause this to come up, but when it does it's totally frustrating and can cost you the game. The benefit of having your own regenerator on the board at the time has come up approximately never.
Cheers,
rant
My Cube
CubeCobra: https://cubecobra.com/cube/overview/5f5d0310ed602310515d4c32
Cube Tutor: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/1963
(I'll be adding that into the VOTING post for the rest of the groups)
NorCal Crew Collective Cube on Cube Tutor
My 2009 Cube Draft Article - "With The First Pick..."
2009 Official Cube Power Rankings
2010 Official Cube Power Rankings
2014 Official Cube Power Rankings
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom:
The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray).
The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it.
The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Twitter: @archplus3
EDIT: Ugh, why does the Reply function even exist? I always expect that to also quote a post I'm replying to, but no...
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
NorCal Crew Collective Cube on Cube Tutor
My 2009 Cube Draft Article - "With The First Pick..."
2009 Official Cube Power Rankings
2010 Official Cube Power Rankings
2014 Official Cube Power Rankings
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom:
The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray).
The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it.
The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Twitter: @archplus3
I edited my list to remove the one Conspiracy card and I made a note in the post itself
I didn't mean to make my idea sound like common sense. If you think that every card with even the tiniest bit of wording (or rarity???) change should be ranked individually, then there is nothing wrong with that.
What I was speaking to was the idea that because we started this way, we should continue. In other words, let's not let the perfect get in the way of the good here.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
Fair point, which is why I think the discussion should be had before voting, to see what kind of disagreement we have. I think of Wrath and Day of Judgey as the same exact value, but clearly some people disagree (or at least they do when voting, which is a whole other bag of problems). So the argument that they should be individual has some merit. Does ANYONE rate Wildfire and XBurn miles apart, or even view them as different effects?
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
NorCal Crew Collective Cube on Cube Tutor
My 2009 Cube Draft Article - "With The First Pick..."
2009 Official Cube Power Rankings
2010 Official Cube Power Rankings
2014 Official Cube Power Rankings
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom:
The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray).
The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it.
The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Twitter: @archplus3
My 540 card Powered Cube last updated March 2022
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
You are correct, sir. Voting for WHITE closes tomorrow morning, and once I have it all tallied up I will post the results as well as open up the voting for BLUE.
Currently at 30 voters!!!
NorCal Crew Collective Cube on Cube Tutor
My 2009 Cube Draft Article - "With The First Pick..."
2009 Official Cube Power Rankings
2010 Official Cube Power Rankings
2014 Official Cube Power Rankings
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom:
The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray).
The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it.
The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Twitter: @archplus3
I voted as discussed here for Wrath and Day of Judgement. I would always pick Wrath first, but the difference is not big enough to put a card in between those two.
Another thing I noticed that some cards might be more powerful in a vacuum, but I might pick a lower power card if that archetype is more powerful. White aggro is a good example for this. I might just pick Isamaru over a Baneslayer, even if Baneslayer on itself is the better card. White weenie though always deliver in our cube. This effect makes this vote a bit harder.
Question: what do we do with very narrow cards that can be very powerful if they are fully supported? I am mainly thinking of Time Vault here, which if it gets enough support can be a top tier card. But if it is only supported half heartedly, it becomes pretty mediocre.
I feel compelled to repeat everything I hear
As soon as the White Discussion thread is up I'm going to explain my picks and I will address how I chose to handle many of the problems you mention here. With a couple days' worth of hindsight I would actually do some things differently.
Of course on any given day, your mood and picks will change a lot. Trying to make an 'average' pick is really tough.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
BLUE VOTING is now OPEN. Please feel free to read up, and post away!
NorCal Crew Collective Cube on Cube Tutor
My 2009 Cube Draft Article - "With The First Pick..."
2009 Official Cube Power Rankings
2010 Official Cube Power Rankings
2014 Official Cube Power Rankings
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom:
The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray).
The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it.
The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Twitter: @archplus3
NorCal Crew Collective Cube on Cube Tutor
My 2009 Cube Draft Article - "With The First Pick..."
2009 Official Cube Power Rankings
2010 Official Cube Power Rankings
2014 Official Cube Power Rankings
Silent Edge's Tidbits of Wisdom:
The Lewis Theory - When the presence of a single card makes every other card in your deck better (see Lewis, Ray).
The Rubber Edict - You'd rather have it and not use it, than need it and not have it.
The Shotgun Wedding - Don't commit early unless you absolutely have to.
Twitter: @archplus3
Not surprised to see the other newcomers on the list, though I think that Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite is much more P1P1 worthy than Reveillark
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
That's why I'm probably the only one who ranked Time Walk over Ancestral Recall, I do think I'd take the extra-turn over the extra-cards as P1P1.