Fun is an arguable point. In fact, its the only one that matters. You even said it yourself, fun is subjective. Some people love winning and will choose the best cards to help them do that. Some people simply love playing the game. Either way they are doing what they perceive as fun. Since you seem to have fun playing the most powerful cards in magic then you should continue doing so. I for one will apparently continue to sap the fun out of cubes.
I definitely agree that buffing is waaay better than nerfing/removing cards. I also know that perfect balance is just not possible in packs. When I said these things I do not mean to enforce it on others. In my innistrad cube I have not removed any cards based on power level. In fact, I have drawn from other sets to bolster weaker archetypes and add some counterbalance.
I believe you misread what I typed there. I want decks to be more than a mass of cards. We're on the same page with that, more options for synergy rewards those who can make it work.
I somehow disagree that every archetype needs a lot of support. Aggro will use the most aggressive cards in the format and control will take all the doomblades. Midrange will take from both of those. The only archetypes you really need to support imo are the ones that rely on heavy synergy or interactions to work, such as reanimator. If you do not include any reanimation spells then it simply wouldn't exist.
What i meant by the last bit was that if there is a elf lord in the first pack, and no other elves in the cube, then you let hurt the player. Either a strategy or tribe exists in teh draft, of it does not. I don't want to have anyone lose because they tried to draft a tribe with no support in the entire cube.
For a couple weeks now I have been working on my cube, whittling down the cube into something I liked a bit more. I removed the cards I believed had no place in my cube, either because they had better in-set cards or they didn't fit any particular deck strategy. Any holes in certain deck strategies have been patched a bit with out-of-set cards. A couple of small caveats to this cube though:
This is not singleton. There are many reasons for this, however the greatest must be that in order to support more varied possible decks including only 1 of many cards would not help them.
I do not care about card rarity, and so rarity does not influence the amount of cards I choose to include. I am not trying to recreate a booster pack ratio with my draft, and so the card amounts will be determined by it's appeal to multiple archtypes.
Anyway, the thing I now need some input on is choosing what cards to remove from the cube so I can add more copies of other cards. I believe having about 60-80 of each color will be about enough, though each color must have the same amount of cards.
Any help would be appreciated, I will of course be working on this by myself as I have been. http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcurve/21044
I believe that power is a relative term, and am sure many will agree. If you choose to add restoration angel into your cube filled with leveler cards it's usefulness will drop, and so will it's perceived power level. Personally I have some very different design philosophies when adding cards, and seeing how I value fun over everything else my choices here will reflect that.
First and foremost, cards that prevent interaction should never be included. Highest on my list of cards to never add is Armageddon; any card that locks a player out of playing anything has no place in my cube. Playing cards is fun, right? Why should I ever encourage a playstyle that removes fun? I wouldn't even run small land destruction, though that's more down to not wanting to annoy the newer players in my environment.
I want to create packs for people that make them think for a second about which card would fit their deck best. Adding any card that removes the element of choice from my drafters is a cancer to the draft. I know many people love or feel obligated to take the busted cards immediately, so I choose to keep those autopicks to a minimum in an effort to keep people off autopilot.
I personally love reducing the element of luck in drafts and think that by doing so you reward more skillful drafting. I think that if you include an archtype such as reanimator in your cube, you are letting those people who draft it down unless there is proper support for it.
After typing this up I realize that this thread is a month old. Seeing as it's only 1 month, and the board can move slowly sometimes I hope no one will hold it against me that I don't want to have wasted my time. I hope maybe we can rekindle this discussion, as it is good for people to talk about things like this.
Sorry for double post, but what does everyone thing about about this style of archetype balancing?
Completely forget about card rarity.
The cards you should include the most of are:
1. Auto-picks in multiple archetypes(Wrath of God, Lightning bolt).
2. 100% necessary for an archetype to function(Unburial Rites, Lingering Souls).
The cards you should include the least of are:
1. Only useful in a single archetype(Rooftop Storm)(yes that pains me personally).
On these principles, you can weed out which cards are worth including over others.
I'm a bit unsure about certain other cards though. Lets take Armored Skaab for example. It's a decent blocker. It puts cards in the grave. It's a zombie. Since it's effect is pretty good in mill, indirectly helps zombies, gets buffed by zombie anthems and can block for midrange it may be worth including 4 of these. However, it's not an auto-pick by any means and hurts you if you use it in the wrong deck, so you may feel like cutting 1 or 2 of these for all-around useful cards.
I am not sure that you should do this though. Doing so hurts the archetypes it's meant for. And we all know the saying "build it and they will come" right? Players will decide what the best aggro strategies are, and chose from any archetype as long as it gets the job done. Since the aggro archetype is dependent on the fastest and most dangerous threats, you don't need to directly support it. It is exactly like midrange. The only cards you may need to include are wrath effects and stalls, they will choose what threats to play from aggro and control.
So, using the principles from before and the potential design philosophy we have here, we could keep it at 4. Midrange players that will use it will choose more cards that are okay being in the grave or simply accept it's risk factor.
Lastly, as another example, we have Rooftop Storm. It is an amazing near-win condition that is very flavorful and has immense use in a zombie deck that doesn't mind waiting until turn 6. Since is is only useful in zombies and isn't even necessary we could probably cut 2-3 copies of it. However, I personally do not believe singletons are ever worth including in this format(especially with this method of balancing). If it is so fringe that it is never useful outside of a single archetype then you should not include it. Since this is a great zombie card in my eyes I believe that leaving it at two will be quite enough. Mono black zombies can splash for it, and Zombies as a whole will enjoy its use. A single player can luck out and get both copies if no one else is playing zombies and it isn't in the excess draft cards, while having two will allow multiple zombie drafters to get a single copy each. Not too bad in my opinion.
Nice cube, but could you tell me why he only has 1 cogwork grinder and just 3 lurking automaton? Aren't they really bad with so few copies? I do like this style of balancing the cube.
Sunburst: I have tried that cube and it is indeed fun, shame I wasn't playing back then. It also seems like a very easy set to balance from what people have been saying. You simply cut the jank and auto-wins and you're good to go.
Scourge: Would those fliers count as aggro? Not entirely sure as their cost to damage ratio seems too low for what aggro wants. Or would aggro be happy to use some threats that have evasion at the cost of power? And what do you mean by them outclassing Voiceless spirit and the token generators? Sure the tokens are weak without buffing, but I would think that the first strike could redeem the first one a bit.
Scourge: Your friend with only 1 uncommon to 3 rare ratio? That seems backwards to me, any idea why they did that? Also, while tribal is a big thing in innistrad, it doesn't have to be the focus like lorwyn makes it. I would be perfectly happy with zombies being as big and usable as reanimator or bounce. I simply want to be able to draft a human deck as easily as a control deck. On that note, if they ever decide which tribe is the best I think the best solution would be to swap a couple cards around and let there be ripples.
Bolas: I agree, though I am still worried that color equity may be a thing. I would want to keep it relatively equal, but 1 more green card over red wont kill the draft. Anyway, I can respect your opinion on tribal, though I would have to try it myself and learn from it to understand it. Also, in the Krenko example, all tribal cards must be able to function by themselves for sure. The card by itself gets you tokens, but if you pick cards that care that they are goblins or red then they do something a bit extra. I think Faith's Fetters is a good example of this. For this, time will tell.
Ausschliessi: I will eb doing ravnica at some point, at least peasant cube. Ravnica is probably my favorite set for color diverity, so I will definitely use duals, maybe fetches and enough mono support too. But that will be later as I have a tribal itch right now :/
I currently am working on the Innistrad cube, and the first step is dissecting each color and trimming the excess and unplayable cards. In this case, unplayable means not only really bad, but also the cards that are too slow or fast. I don't want to bog down packs with dead picks or auto includes/denies. There must be multiple solid picks to create a meaningful choice for teh drafters. To this end, I will name off some cards that I am having trouble figuring out if they have a home in any archetype worth supporting, i.e. aggro, control-aggro, reanimator, bounce.
I am not a vintage/legacy player, so it is very difficult for me to play with older cards. I have very high standards when it comes to art and clarity on cards, which imo many old cards lack. However, I have tried out Arky's Odyssey draft and I have to admit I very much like the card interactions in the set. Some of the art was even rather acceptable to me. I'm not sure about how my other friends would feel about using the older cards but I am confident it wouldn't be too big of a problem. Also, easier to understand cards would be best since at least 2 of them are really new to the more complex interactions in magic. While Innistrad could absolutely be paired with Odyssey, I am not sure that it would offer any tribal support for zombies or humans etc. There aren't any unique support creatures, much less any lord or anthem effects from what I could tell in regards to human/vampire/zombie/spirit. Innistrad is one giant horror film with a lot of graveyard interaction through things dying rather than being discarded, so I'm not sure odyssey is what would work best. Good suggestion though. c:
I definitely want to heavily support any themes or playstyles that a player would want in their deck, so if they see a diregraf captain there damn well will be at least 2 others floating around.
What do you think of adding non-Innistrad cards to supplement the cube such as Long-forgotten Gohei and Bloodlord of Vaasgoth? I think the benefit is too good to not pass up.
Hey all, I am new to cube and have been doing some reading. I swear, you learn more in an hour of reading than you do in days of playing. Anyway, I have a goal to make a cube for my friends and I. It must be on theme within reason, so regardless there wont be any power 9 or anything like that. At first it may not include some of the most expensive cards in it but that's a goal for me to achieve later.
I am on the fence about what cube to make. I like the freedom of a completely unique cube drawing from all across magic, however my need for theme and history trumps that. I will either go Ravnica, Lorwyn, Zendikar or Innistrad.
+Block specific questions+
In ravnica's case I would need to use plenty of gold cards while paying special attention to prevent players from being forced into 3 colors, probably by including enough monocolor or hybrid cards. Although ravnica is huge, would I have enough support for most archetypes? Beyond including enough support for the major ones like aggro and control, is there enough to support alternate playstyles?
In Lorwyn, I would love tribal however wouldn't want to force people into going tribal if they didn't want to. Are there enough unique non tribal cards in loryn? I didn't play back then.
With Zendikar, I'm not too familiar with tribes, playstyles or support for them contained in the block.
Innistrad has probably one of the best chances to be the most flavorful for me, and while I had a good amount of experience playing it, I am not quite sure I could do a Innistrad cube without adding in some support for demons, zombies, spirits, or anything to shift it into higher gear. The temptation might be too great to add some of the more unique playstles available only through tribal support and unique cards from previous sets. Do you think adding more type support would enhance the fun enough to make the theme being watered down worth it?
+Cube Philosophy questions+
What is your opinion on cube size? I expect anywhere from 3-6 people playing at any given time. 360 sounds reasonable to me.
What is your opinion on using multiple of some cards? Since I may not be able to add redundant or functional reprints I would like to use extra of certain cards where appropriate, possibly to support more synergistic decks and make playing against decks more risky. Instead of knowing that someone else used wrath in another game, and being able to play more reckless do you think a second copy of said effect would be useful?
+Other Ideas+
Would any of these blocks benefit in greatw ays by being paired with another block I hadn't considered?
Hearing back from anyone with knowledge and opinions to contribute would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!
I definitely agree that buffing is waaay better than nerfing/removing cards. I also know that perfect balance is just not possible in packs. When I said these things I do not mean to enforce it on others. In my innistrad cube I have not removed any cards based on power level. In fact, I have drawn from other sets to bolster weaker archetypes and add some counterbalance.
I believe you misread what I typed there. I want decks to be more than a mass of cards. We're on the same page with that, more options for synergy rewards those who can make it work.
I somehow disagree that every archetype needs a lot of support. Aggro will use the most aggressive cards in the format and control will take all the doomblades. Midrange will take from both of those. The only archetypes you really need to support imo are the ones that rely on heavy synergy or interactions to work, such as reanimator. If you do not include any reanimation spells then it simply wouldn't exist.
What i meant by the last bit was that if there is a elf lord in the first pack, and no other elves in the cube, then you let hurt the player. Either a strategy or tribe exists in teh draft, of it does not. I don't want to have anyone lose because they tried to draft a tribe with no support in the entire cube.
Anyway, the thing I now need some input on is choosing what cards to remove from the cube so I can add more copies of other cards. I believe having about 60-80 of each color will be about enough, though each color must have the same amount of cards.
Any help would be appreciated, I will of course be working on this by myself as I have been.
http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcurve/21044
After typing this up I realize that this thread is a month old. Seeing as it's only 1 month, and the board can move slowly sometimes I hope no one will hold it against me that I don't want to have wasted my time. I hope maybe we can rekindle this discussion, as it is good for people to talk about things like this.
Completely forget about card rarity.
The cards you should include the most of are:
1. Auto-picks in multiple archetypes(Wrath of God, Lightning bolt).
2. 100% necessary for an archetype to function(Unburial Rites, Lingering Souls).
The cards you should include the least of are:
1. Only useful in a single archetype(Rooftop Storm)(yes that pains me personally).
On these principles, you can weed out which cards are worth including over others.
I'm a bit unsure about certain other cards though. Lets take Armored Skaab for example. It's a decent blocker. It puts cards in the grave. It's a zombie. Since it's effect is pretty good in mill, indirectly helps zombies, gets buffed by zombie anthems and can block for midrange it may be worth including 4 of these. However, it's not an auto-pick by any means and hurts you if you use it in the wrong deck, so you may feel like cutting 1 or 2 of these for all-around useful cards.
I am not sure that you should do this though. Doing so hurts the archetypes it's meant for. And we all know the saying "build it and they will come" right? Players will decide what the best aggro strategies are, and chose from any archetype as long as it gets the job done. Since the aggro archetype is dependent on the fastest and most dangerous threats, you don't need to directly support it. It is exactly like midrange. The only cards you may need to include are wrath effects and stalls, they will choose what threats to play from aggro and control.
So, using the principles from before and the potential design philosophy we have here, we could keep it at 4. Midrange players that will use it will choose more cards that are okay being in the grave or simply accept it's risk factor.
Lastly, as another example, we have Rooftop Storm. It is an amazing near-win condition that is very flavorful and has immense use in a zombie deck that doesn't mind waiting until turn 6. Since is is only useful in zombies and isn't even necessary we could probably cut 2-3 copies of it. However, I personally do not believe singletons are ever worth including in this format(especially with this method of balancing). If it is so fringe that it is never useful outside of a single archetype then you should not include it. Since this is a great zombie card in my eyes I believe that leaving it at two will be quite enough. Mono black zombies can splash for it, and Zombies as a whole will enjoy its use. A single player can luck out and get both copies if no one else is playing zombies and it isn't in the excess draft cards, while having two will allow multiple zombie drafters to get a single copy each. Not too bad in my opinion.
But what is your opinion?
Scourge: Would those fliers count as aggro? Not entirely sure as their cost to damage ratio seems too low for what aggro wants. Or would aggro be happy to use some threats that have evasion at the cost of power? And what do you mean by them outclassing Voiceless spirit and the token generators? Sure the tokens are weak without buffing, but I would think that the first strike could redeem the first one a bit.
Bolas: I agree, though I am still worried that color equity may be a thing. I would want to keep it relatively equal, but 1 more green card over red wont kill the draft. Anyway, I can respect your opinion on tribal, though I would have to try it myself and learn from it to understand it. Also, in the Krenko example, all tribal cards must be able to function by themselves for sure. The card by itself gets you tokens, but if you pick cards that care that they are goblins or red then they do something a bit extra. I think Faith's Fetters is a good example of this. For this, time will tell.
Ausschliessi: I will eb doing ravnica at some point, at least peasant cube. Ravnica is probably my favorite set for color diverity, so I will definitely use duals, maybe fetches and enough mono support too. But that will be later as I have a tribal itch right now :/
I currently am working on the Innistrad cube, and the first step is dissecting each color and trimming the excess and unplayable cards. In this case, unplayable means not only really bad, but also the cards that are too slow or fast. I don't want to bog down packs with dead picks or auto includes/denies. There must be multiple solid picks to create a meaningful choice for teh drafters. To this end, I will name off some cards that I am having trouble figuring out if they have a home in any archetype worth supporting, i.e. aggro, control-aggro, reanimator, bounce.
Thanks for the feedback everyone! This would be glacial fast without you're help!
I am not a vintage/legacy player, so it is very difficult for me to play with older cards. I have very high standards when it comes to art and clarity on cards, which imo many old cards lack. However, I have tried out Arky's Odyssey draft and I have to admit I very much like the card interactions in the set. Some of the art was even rather acceptable to me. I'm not sure about how my other friends would feel about using the older cards but I am confident it wouldn't be too big of a problem. Also, easier to understand cards would be best since at least 2 of them are really new to the more complex interactions in magic. While Innistrad could absolutely be paired with Odyssey, I am not sure that it would offer any tribal support for zombies or humans etc. There aren't any unique support creatures, much less any lord or anthem effects from what I could tell in regards to human/vampire/zombie/spirit. Innistrad is one giant horror film with a lot of graveyard interaction through things dying rather than being discarded, so I'm not sure odyssey is what would work best. Good suggestion though. c:
I definitely want to heavily support any themes or playstyles that a player would want in their deck, so if they see a diregraf captain there damn well will be at least 2 others floating around.
What do you think of adding non-Innistrad cards to supplement the cube such as Long-forgotten Gohei and Bloodlord of Vaasgoth? I think the benefit is too good to not pass up.
I am on the fence about what cube to make. I like the freedom of a completely unique cube drawing from all across magic, however my need for theme and history trumps that. I will either go Ravnica, Lorwyn, Zendikar or Innistrad.
+Block specific questions+
In ravnica's case I would need to use plenty of gold cards while paying special attention to prevent players from being forced into 3 colors, probably by including enough monocolor or hybrid cards. Although ravnica is huge, would I have enough support for most archetypes? Beyond including enough support for the major ones like aggro and control, is there enough to support alternate playstyles?
In Lorwyn, I would love tribal however wouldn't want to force people into going tribal if they didn't want to. Are there enough unique non tribal cards in loryn? I didn't play back then.
With Zendikar, I'm not too familiar with tribes, playstyles or support for them contained in the block.
Innistrad has probably one of the best chances to be the most flavorful for me, and while I had a good amount of experience playing it, I am not quite sure I could do a Innistrad cube without adding in some support for demons, zombies, spirits, or anything to shift it into higher gear. The temptation might be too great to add some of the more unique playstles available only through tribal support and unique cards from previous sets. Do you think adding more type support would enhance the fun enough to make the theme being watered down worth it?
+Cube Philosophy questions+
What is your opinion on cube size? I expect anywhere from 3-6 people playing at any given time. 360 sounds reasonable to me.
What is your opinion on using multiple of some cards? Since I may not be able to add redundant or functional reprints I would like to use extra of certain cards where appropriate, possibly to support more synergistic decks and make playing against decks more risky. Instead of knowing that someone else used wrath in another game, and being able to play more reckless do you think a second copy of said effect would be useful?
+Other Ideas+
Would any of these blocks benefit in greatw ays by being paired with another block I hadn't considered?
Hearing back from anyone with knowledge and opinions to contribute would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!