Hello,
do you know if exists any utility to calculate the optimal number of lands?
I mean NOT something where I say "I've got 36 lands" and it makes a stupid proportion.
I mean somthing where I say "This is the list of cards" (or the mana costs) and it says: you need at least 123 lands of these colors to play this deck.
And so I can add/cut cards until I get that my list and the lands makes 60 (or 100).
Thank you!
Not really what you're looking for but I use tools similar to what you find at Deckstats.net. Specifically the charts page and the probabilities page. It helps visualize your ratios and helps you decide just what lands (for multi-color decks) you really want and how often you want to draw into them.
The whole thing is really subjective and prone to variance. It's way too easy to jump the gun when you get mana screwed or hosed and and futz with the lands when that's not what you need. For example, Autumn Birchett's Mono-Blue Tempo deck runs a nearly absurd 19 Islands. The average spell CMC for that deck is 1.76. A 5 color Gate deck might run as many as 27 lands. The average CMC might be something like 3.5. But selecting the correct lands (gates) blend isn't always easy to ascertain. Then you have the Legacy Lands deck which runs well... nearly all lands!
Basically what I'm trying to say is that the whole counting/weighting/averaging bit works just fine for say... Draft where decks aren't likely to be very well tuned anyways. But Constructed requires a small amount of understanding how cards interact with each other, not just land count.
Frank Karsten wrote an article and a second on how many lands a deck should run given a few different circumstances
Hopefully these help you
It usually depends on number of colours, average cmc and the demands of different cards in your deck. For example, some decks may need to hit UU or BB early in the game, so they'd wanna include more sources able to produce both. I believe it also depends how much fixing you have, as in how much you can get lands from your decks
also some decks that are one colour, with cheaper spells, so they won't need as many lands as decks that are two or more colours.
On the one hand, burn decks get by with 20 lands. Other decks can have even fewer, like Señor Stompy (18) or Landless Dredge (a nice round figure).
On the other, control and midrange decks need a lot more, and it's human nature to underestimate one's need for lands. lands.dec needs over half the cards to be lands. Commander decks where the commander is a mana sink will also typically have more (and more mana accel as well).
One other thing I must mention: If you play a lot of accel, there's a reason you're playing it, so, no, accel is not a replacement for lands.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
do you know if exists any utility to calculate the optimal number of lands?
I mean NOT something where I say "I've got 36 lands" and it makes a stupid proportion.
I mean somthing where I say "This is the list of cards" (or the mana costs) and it says: you need at least 123 lands of these colors to play this deck.
And so I can add/cut cards until I get that my list and the lands makes 60 (or 100).
Thank you!
The whole thing is really subjective and prone to variance. It's way too easy to jump the gun when you get mana screwed or hosed and and futz with the lands when that's not what you need. For example, Autumn Birchett's Mono-Blue Tempo deck runs a nearly absurd 19 Islands. The average spell CMC for that deck is 1.76. A 5 color Gate deck might run as many as 27 lands. The average CMC might be something like 3.5. But selecting the correct lands (gates) blend isn't always easy to ascertain. Then you have the Legacy Lands deck which runs well... nearly all lands!
Basically what I'm trying to say is that the whole counting/weighting/averaging bit works just fine for say... Draft where decks aren't likely to be very well tuned anyways. But Constructed requires a small amount of understanding how cards interact with each other, not just land count.
Hopefully these help you
It usually depends on number of colours, average cmc and the demands of different cards in your deck. For example, some decks may need to hit UU or BB early in the game, so they'd wanna include more sources able to produce both. I believe it also depends how much fixing you have, as in how much you can get lands from your decks
also some decks that are one colour, with cheaper spells, so they won't need as many lands as decks that are two or more colours.
On the other, control and midrange decks need a lot more, and it's human nature to underestimate one's need for lands. lands.dec needs over half the cards to be lands. Commander decks where the commander is a mana sink will also typically have more (and more mana accel as well).
One other thing I must mention: If you play a lot of accel, there's a reason you're playing it, so, no, accel is not a replacement for lands.
On phasing: