MTG Salvation

Ashes to Ashes is already in there. How was Kagemaro? It seems like a bad topdeck, kinda the opposite of Mutilate.

Do you have Reckless Spite? I see you think it's the worst, do you think it's still worthy of inclusion?

If you want to kill a creature, many times you will be forced to chump block+burn it. With Puncture Blast you can shrink the creature, then kill it with the blocker, so you don't suffer card disadvantage. And it kills regenerators.
But I think it's still weak.

I like this update. All the changes except two sound good to me, and I tend to criticize a lot.

Akroma's Vengeance is better IMO than Austere Command. Austere Command can be a blowout, but it doesn't have cycling and that's useful on a 6cc spell.

Brion Stoutarm seems better than Balefire Liege, but I'm not sure about it.

Yeah, it's better than a 4-mana Infest. The question is, do you think it's better from any of the following list?

• Damnation
  
• Barter in Blood
  
• Ashes to Ashes
  
• Bane of the Living
  
• Decree of Pain
  
• Reckless Spite

In my unexpirienced eyes, Mutilate seems underpowered. Mono-black decks are very rare in my cube, and two-colored decks will probably have two-swamps by the time it's cast, with all their nonbasics and lands from their second color.

@wtwlf123 - You play a lot of instant mass removals which most cubes don't play. Rude Awakening is a first pick for us, but I know you would prefer Mox Diamond over it.

@Breyfunk - Yeah, your cube is fleshed out very well now. Which format do you usually play (1vs.1, 2HG, winston, something else)? Which archetypes do you want to promote?
Ideas for a better thread - include cards that cost 2W before cards that cost 1WW. Their CMC is the same, but the 1WW cards are harder to cast, so aren't really in the same category. Spells should have a curve, maybe some separation for instant/sorceries and other card types, so you can view the number of burn spells and counters quickly, as well as the number of pacifisms.

It was great so far, A control deck's dream. Playing it on the third turn to destroy their whole tempo is hot. RFG and only nonartifact makes it relevant in most situations. One game it removed a bribed Hellkite Overlord and Rakka Mar.

The problem is that all black's mass removals are good. I play:

• Damnation
  
• Innocent Blood
  
• Barter in Blood
  
• Bane of the Living
  
• Ashes to Ashes

You may say that's not too much, but black is also the color of targeted removal and CIP destroy effects.
I see many more playable black mass removals, like Reckless Spite and Decree of Pain.

Testing reminded me that most pro. black creatures have one or two toughness, making Bane of the Living much more appealing. I'm still concerned about the lack of aggro in black, but Bane fixes this problem so well it will stay.

If time is an issue in your group, you also have deckbuilding time problems.

Building the best deck against the field that still loses just decreases the amount of skill needed. Losing to single cards is both:
a) Not fun for both sides
b) Not an indicator for the strongest deck between the two
c) Not an indicator of a deck's strength compared to the other eight

And if you think it decreases powerlevel, why to bother forbidding it. It's like disallowing misplays (not that I agree with this).

You should be rewarded with your decisions to draft narrower cards, not cutting other players, adding them in certain matchups and taking out the bad/irelevant cards. Following your logic, players should lose based on their luck, so it might as well be based on their coin flip. Whoever loses it, loses the game. Afterall, players don't deserve winning if they have lost their coin flip. It's their fault. If they had better coinflipping skills it wouldn't have happened.

Wow, we never play cube NOT in teams of some sort (unless it is 1v1 Winston). Team drafts, 2HG (which is VERY fun to draft), whatever. I don't think I would enjoy cubing as much if it were an individual game. You should definitely try it. What does the italicized part mean?

I said we do draft 2HG. The question I asked is why do you prefer teams over 2HG. It seems less skill-intensive because you can get a random great combo of decks or be paired horribly regardless of your draft decisions.

That's why I don't include gray ogres. Also the same reason I don't include cards like Shatter. Grey Ogre + Shatter, however, is awesome. My point was that cards like Orangutan and Hedge-Mage are never stone blanks like cards like Krosan Grip or Orim's Thunder. What can you do when you have a Disenchant and they don't have any targets in play? What can you do when you have a 'Tang in hand and they don't have any targets, and you need a creature? Which one is a blank? Nullification...nullified?

Most of the time it's a gray ogre, and you have said yourself they suck. Why would it ever see play? I'd prefer something more solid any time. It's not hard to find green creatures with better P/T ratio than a gray ogre.
Note - in 2HG I'd play it main, because it isn't narrow anymore.

Then draft more broken cards. Don't try to be the fair deck; be the deck that the other decks can't handle. Instead of drafting (or putting in) marginal cards that are only useful part-time, have better cards and a better deck. Maybe that means you have to tighten up your deck, or focus your strategy more, or play cards maindeck that you realize might be suboptimal but can shore up your deck's weakness. Talk to your teammates, find out what they passed the other team and plan accordingly.

There are plenty of ways to accomodate the situation without a sideboard; one of which that should not be overlooked is realizing your opponent's deck is better and sucking it up as you lose

Also, why not just omit cards that are borderline? I guess if your cube is enormous, you are forced to include marginal cards that can only see good play if you use sideboards.

Cause we want interactions in our games. You don't just try to draft broken cards, and play them ignoring your opponent, trying to win before he does, because neither of you have any answers.
Yes, I'm forced to play them, but that's not why I think this way. If my cube was smaller I'd still play with sideboards and wouldn't think doing otherwise.
btw enormous is a bit of an exaggeration IMO. There are much larger cubes in this forum.

@#2: Less dead cards? That's part of the risk of playing them in your deck! If you're using a card with the intent of cuting it for game 2 and 3, replace it with another card in the cube entirely. Masticore is a dead card? When? Against control when it's a 4/4 regenerate... for :4mana:? Against aggro when it kills all their creatures? You're awesome dude.

Yeah, I'm awesome. And rest assured: I'm not trying to convince you I'm trying to convince mainly the cube newbies who read your opinions before building their cubes. 4/4 for four with attached card disadvantage that increases each turn in the control mirror is as good as dead. Probably even worse, because you have the temptation of biting it.
Taking risks and no strategy at all is not fun for us. It's like gambling. You have no control about the opponents you will be facing, so you have a chance to be screwed even if you drafted the best deck and built it properly, just because your hoser is (rightfully) in your sideboard.

@#3: No it doesn't. It reduces the amount of skill required to win an event when the card selections in your deck can be swapped out completely. You end up with 45 drafted cards. You play 22-24 of them. That means you could change your ENTIRE deck in between games 2 and 3... some real deckbuilding skill needed there... It makes it so there is no drawback to running certain cards. "Oh well... if the deck sucks, I'll just change the entire thing..."

That's actually a far more difficult thing to do than you give it credit for. You're just shooting.

@#5: Haha. This completely proves my point! It allows for deckbuilding mistakes to not really be mistakes at all!

It gives the players a way to improve themselves in real time. They are more attentive during the draft, they learn their mistakes and improve. And again, more narrow cards are run, less cards are hated, more decisions made - they all raise the skill level needed.

About changing your whole deck: Your arguments are circular. You CANNOT change your whole deck. It isn't possible. That's from years of experience in drafts from many players. It really doesn't take more than three minutes.

Now, for Antkknee.

1) Security. Less loose cards the better, especially when your cube is pimp and replacing cards can be difficult sometimes.

It sucks you have to sacrifice gameplay for financial reasons, but it's for the better.

2) Time. Some people take FOREVER to SB, especially when not under a time constraint.

Why r u playing with no time constraint (or, actually, a pressure from their opponents to finish in a reasonable time)? I can imagine deckbuilding going very long without any interference as well.
In my cube we do have time constraints. I have to keep it functional for 16 people though, so maybe I'm alone here.

A note on the hatedrafting comments I have seen: Select teams randomly after you draft! This eliminates a lot of hatedrafting, since you might be hating from your teammate!

We're never playing teams (the closest we do is 2HG). It seems more shallow than 2HG though, because your decks can have no interaction whatsoever in times and sick unbeatable fitting at others at the merit of dice. I haven't tried it though, so It's just a first impression.

My cube doesn't play sideboard cards, btw. Cards like Disenchant and their ilk just take up space that can be used for better/more flexible cards. I don't EVER want a dead card in my hand in a format like the Cube.

That also reduces the strategical depth.

Quote from Darkmindtone »

Masticore has been nominated many times in the local area for cuts, but I keep it in simply because of it's history and occasionaly being solid against aggressive decks. For the most part though, the card has been a pretty big letdown. Just not as many X/1's or Cradle-fueled shenanigans as it's previous runs in constructed I guess...

I'll play it in a control deck, because it deals so efficiently with their biggest problems in the aggro matchup. Anything else, and I'll side it in a hurry.

In most green decks, a creature almost always advances the game plan since your plan is to attack their face. Question is, do you play it on-curve or do you wait for a target? Do you play it at all, and know that your deck is without a way to deal with something juicy IF they have it?

THAT, my friends, is what it's all about.

In most decks, a gray ogre won't ever see play to begin with, nullifying your assumption. If it was good enough to see play (Indrik Stomphowler) it wouldn't be a troublesome decision to begin with. The borderline cards are the hardest to use (anyone disagrees?), and playing with sides lets them shine and see the playlights.
Even if the card isn't good enough for the main, you should be always asking yourself if it's worth siding in.

I vote for what kenny said, but would like to add that with each creature being a threat you wouldn't need transferring it often.

I like Lightning Dragon more than RPD.
Thunderblust was more than solid. Ball Lightning is cubeworthy only if you enable mono-red, it will rarely see any other play. Ghitu Slinger is a bit underpowered, but it's still red card advantage if you need it.
Countryside Crusher is solid, just remember that while Armageddon will lock you, you will have a 7/7 creature turn 4 that keeps growing.
Taurean Mauler is great. Splashable and fitting into every red deck.
Flameblast Dragon - players scoop at his mighty gaze.

Cards other ppl noted:
Rakka Mar provides a source of card advantage for a color that needs it.
Stigma Lasher is a under the average powerlevel, but red aggro decks do play it in my cube.