That's not really true. If, amongst the 5 cards you reveal, 4 cards have 0 value and 1 card only has a non 0 value, you'll get 0 value from Steam Augury. I'm sure that scenario is going to be relevant. I'm not saying Steam Augury is a bad card, but there are still situations where it will heavily backfire.
That's the same stuff that's been spouted since page 1.
If you are looking at this card strictly as the Top Deck finder, you are going to be very disappointed. Of course, if you have TWO of the cards you need, then it's FOF 2.0 very easy.
If you want a small boost of cards, it's awesome for that two. Maybe you get that 1 awesome card when you don't need it, but your opponent has to cringe at the fact he must get rid of that possible future wrecking ball of a card or let you have 4 more cards, even if they are straight lands.
FWIW, as I've tried hard to argue the value of this card, in the process I ended up convincing myself that the card isn't quite as good as I initially thought.
It's quite a bit worse than fact or faction.
However, in the process I've also realized fact or fiction is quite a bit better than I thought and a worse fact or faction is still sweet =P
Yeah, it doesn't have to be a sweeper. That's just a good example of where this card has an issue. If there's just one card in there which helps you more than the others, be it a fat creature, sweeper, reanimation spell or whatever, you will not get that card. Overall, that definitely needs to factor into the evaluation, and is realistically likely to happen often. But in other situations where you get multiple helpful cards or you're already ahead, this card is the business. I think it's really good and I will run it, but the potential for failing when I get denied the card out of five which is what I need cannot be ignored.
I completely understand this and yes it certainly is a factor. I maintain, however, that revealing 5 cards and only finding one relevant card that will help you will be the exception and not the rule. If there are that many blanks in a deck (outside of hitting a huge land pocket) that you can't hit useful spells to get out of a mess, I'm not sure we are examining the right problem.
Seeing the 'fair' version of Fact or Fiction should make everybody realize how busted the original one is.
That's not really true. If, amongst the 5 cards you reveal, 4 cards have 0 value and 1 card only has a non 0 value, you'll get 0 value from Steam Augury. I'm sure that scenario is going to be relevant. I'm not saying Steam Augury is a bad card, but there are still situations where it will heavily backfire.
I don't think I've ever seen a FoF reveal with 4 zero value cards in it before. And we've never had to experiment with the tables turned before now. Play with the card. I think you'll be surprised how high you can get the average pile value when you are the one in charge of building them.
And in any case, this card isn't replacing Fact or Fiction. Instances where it's worse than FoF don't really apply.
It's really not as far back as you think. You play tutors and card selection spells to find outs and smooth draws. Draw spells are used to generate card advantage and increase your resource pool. This card does exactly what I want my draw spells to do, which is to draw more cards. It has the further advantage of ensuring that the cards I draw will be useful with each other, and will be split according to how they interact with my hand. I'd much rather play this spell than Inspiration, Concentrate or Jace's Ingenuity, because ensuring that the piles are matched according to how well they work together beings up the average value of the draws by a lot. Plus, if you reveal 5 "meh" cards, this saves you from the game loss that straight draw would've cost you. Not to mention the graveyard interactions. This is seriously a fantastic Izzet spell.
Looks like a pretty good card. I would most likely not run it in a control deck, but I could see it helping if you were only splashing red for something else like pyroclasm, wildfire, spot removal or something. I don't mind having more draw spells in my cube too. I would most likely run this in a tempo deck. Having this in a deck where you don't need a certain card but more cards will always play out well. I think it is in the best guild section for such a card as well.
My biggest concern is what to take out? I run a 540 powered cube with 5 guild cards. I currently have Ral, Fire//Ice, Electrolzye, P-Bolt and Izzit Charm. The only cards I could see taking out would be Charm or P-Bolt which both don't see too much play here.
As for the "you won't get the one card you need scenario as your opponent picks," that's fine in my opinion. There are plenty of other cards in my cube that would better benefit that kind of deck (CONTROL). I think no matter what you are still getting 2-3 cards in your hand for 4 mana at instant speed. This card is for tempo, reanimation, and counter-burn.
I am curious to see how it plays out and have some high hopes for it. I also think that picking the piles yourself can be an advantage over FOF in tempo decks. Might take out izzet charm for it as I love burn and card draw (keeping p-bolt)
Conclusion: In a general sense, this draws 2.4ish cards worth of power as contrasted to 2.6 from Fact or Fiction. If you don't care about land at all and all your spells are equal in value, it draws just under 2.1 cards worth of power as contrasted with 2.9 from FoF. Much, much nerdiness follows.
I rarely post, though I tend to read (and enjoy!) these forums quite a bit during spoiler season, but this thread confuses me a lot.
On the surface, this card isn't terribly hard to evaluate: you look at 5 cards, split them as evenly as you can on power level and then are handed the weaker one. If you could always split perfectly, this is about the same as drawing 2.5 cards. For the sake of discussion, I'm going to assume you and your opponent are valuing cards the same (this is, of course, not always true, and probably slightly in your favor, but the effect should be fairly small except in that it makes the card more fun to play). So you are incented to split the piles as evenly as possible.
In general, this is exactly the same game as Fact or Fiction, except here, when you can't make an even split you get penalized and with FoF, you get rewarded. Let's assume the average power level of a card in your deck is 1. Then you should expect to get around 2.5 points of power, minus some amount for the times you can't split evenly, as opposed to FoF where you get 2.5 plus a little bit. The question of how much a little bit is is interesting, but it's generally less than .5. Under reasonable assumptions, it's about .1 (so FoF is about 2.6 cards, this is about 2.4 cards)
So this draws between 2 and 2.5 cards worth of power and FoF is between 2.5 and 3 (ish). Note that there is a mill attached to this, which is generally an upside.
There are some interesting cases to consider. If the power level of your deck is completely flat, this is exactly the same as drawing 2 cards (plus the mill). If the power level is incredibly spiky (say 1 card is worth 40 points and the rest worth 0), this is worth nothing (the wrath scenario). Lastly, if land is worthless and your spells are all pretty close to even, you should expect to draw a little better than 1 spell (about 1/3 of the time you draw 2), which works out to just over 2 cards worth of power, assuming 24 spells, 16 lands (17 or 18 lands is close to the same and the numbers are prettier for 16).
By comparison, FoF is worth 3 vs 2, more than 0 vs 0, and 2.9 vs 2.1 in those cases
Basically the point is that the theory conforms to intuition: you draw just worse than 2.5 cards with it because you can't always split well. In the case where you don't want land, it's harder to get a good split (3 spells, 2 lands is tough to split), so the value goes down to just over 2 cards.
The number above for 2.4 cards comes from assuming your deck is distributed as a continuous uniform distribution. I then just simulated it, assuming perfect information and the same valuations for both players.
@Eidolon: I'm confused as to where your numbers are coming from. If we take a continuous uniform distribution for power level in our deck, I simulated that you get just under 2.4 cards worth of power (assume average power level of a card is normalized to 1). You say that you used a discrete uniform distribution, but I'm curious as to what your range was. For example, in [1,5], there's no split at all that's worse than 2:3 (the usual worst splits are big, big, big, small, small or big, small, small, small, small, but here those are fine). From reading your post, you seemed to have a theoretical (rather than simulated) justification for your answer - my statistics training is probably not up to yours, so I'm very interested in your process since I needed to simulate for the general case (for the 40% land, 60% spell, flat power level, it's easy to get 2.08 with straight theory, but in general I don't know how to do it without simulating)
@synergy people: I'm honestly confused as to what kind of synergies people are seeing commonly in their splits. Someone mentioned always getting "a pile of cards that always work together", which seems pretty unreasonable to hope for unless we're counting "Island, Cryptic Command" as a combo. You don't have a ton of control over the split since the cards are just the top 5 of your library, so it's not a Gifts Ungiven-type thing. I think if you're using the card hoping for synergy beyond "Counterspell + Lightning Bolt is sweet synergy since one kills little things and the other stops big things" you're going to be sadly disappointed most of the time. Do your decks really have so many awesome synergies that you're going to have 2 disjoint pairs of synergistic cards among your top 5? Or is it more like with divination where your deck is full of sweet cards, so pretty much any pair of cards in your deck works well together?
That said, I definitely agree with the point that this is a reasonable card draw spell. It's somewhere a little better than inspiration in terms of card draw if you don't want lands, with milling upside and, in my opinion, it's fun to resolve. In fact, if your deck looks like a uniform distribution (basically you value lands to some extent and you have more and less powerful cards in your deck), it's actually closer to Fact or Fiction than to intuition.
@synergy people: I'm honestly confused as to what kind of synergies people are seeing commonly in their splits. Someone mentioned always getting "a pile of cards that always work together", which seems pretty unreasonable to hope for unless we're counting "Island, Cryptic Command" as a combo. You don't have a ton of control over the split since the cards are just the top 5 of your library, so it's not a Gifts Ungiven-type thing. I think if you're using the card hoping for synergy beyond "Counterspell + Lightning Bolt is sweet synergy since one kills little things and the other stops big things" you're going to be sadly disappointed most of the time. Do your decks really have so many awesome synergies that you're going to have 2 disjoint pairs of synergistic cards among your top 5? Or is it more like with divination where your deck is full of sweet cards, so pretty much any pair of cards in your deck works well together?
Great post. I'll speak to the synergy thing because I think it's relevant. A lot of decks in cubes are highly synergistic. Pox/Braids, Reanimator, Reveillark, just to name a few. These decks have a lot of redundant synergy in them, by design. Consider the theoretical group of cards [cryptic command, island, kiki jiki, pestermite, island]. With FoF, they can split the piles into [Kiki/island/island] vs [Cryptic/Pestermite]. With Steam Augury, you get to split them into [kiki/pestermite] vs [cryptic/island/island]. In this case, the piles are clearly much better in the second case. You still get the worse pile, but on average your piles will be better due to synergies. Will every case be this clear? no. Will you get synergy in every pile? No. But on average you're getting some value from choosing the piles. And that's, I think, what people are talking about when we're discussing synergy.
One example is being able to do proper land/spell splits. Cast Augury with Island, Island, Mountain, Mind Stone. Flip Cryptic Command, Island, Mountain, Thundermaw, and Card #5.
Instead of it being split Mountain/Cryptic/X and Thundermaw/Island (like your opponent would do with FoF) you pair the lands you need to cast the spells with the spells that you plan on casting with them. This guarantees you cards you can cast, and resources that will pair well with them.
That makes sense - it seems like a small but relevant upside and one that's hard to quantify. You can also do a better job of splitting up separate effects - with FoF, opponents can split removal vs counters (for example) and then actively play around whichever they you chose, whereas with this you can make put one in each pile and make it much harder to play around.
You can also do a better job of splitting up separate effects - with FoF, opponents can split removal vs counters (for example) and then actively play around whichever they you chose, whereas with this you can make put one in each pile and make it much harder to play around.
Absolutely. And that's one particular reason why I like it so much in UR. I'm usually not digging for something specific, just a refill on counters/burn/bounce and additional resources. It's been a fantastic EOT spell for counterburn decks, and I look forward to seeing continued success with the card in the cube.
Hmmm, I sort of just did trusted eidolon on the math, but when a well thought out detailed analysis by ferrett contradicted him I decided to do my own little number sketching..
Took a few different distributions of card power level ratios that added up to 5 (normalized) with equal and non-equal power spacing between them, and also arrived at 2.4 to 2.6.
2.33333 vs 2.6666
(Im probably doing something wrong here)
Then looked at some of the corner cases:
Worst case scenario is when one card is worth WAY more than the other cards combined (digging for ONE answer or dying).
When one card is worth more than the value of all the other 4 cards combined, you start losing significant value. Id say this is pretty uncommon.
and a bad average case scenario is when the value of the two card pile cannot add up to 2.4/5 of the value of the three card+ pile. Worst situation of that case is when all cards are equal and steam augur = inspiration + graveyard value.
Id also say this is pretty uncommon...
OK OK, card IS as good as I thought, I reconvinced myself. Thanks ferret =D
Now that folks have played with it a bit, is Steam Augury worth bringing in for one of the other Izzet spells: Turn//Burn, Electrolyze, or Izzet Charm?
I cut Electrolyze for it myself, but we don't love that card as much as most groups do, so I can see keeping it in if your group loves it. Why cut cards your group is in love with?
If you can really use the discard outlet mode on the Charm, I give it the edge over Fire // Ice. (Basically, the artifact deck and Grixis reanimator love Charm for that mode.) If you don't play those two decks all that often, I prefer Fire // Ice because of the dividable damage, tempo plays and easier casting costs.
I was completely underwhelmed by Izzet Charm, so that'd be my cut. Fire/Ice could also be run in red, not sure how often the Ice part is relevant for your group (we never played the card without red sources, but your mileage may vary).
I personally really like Turn / Burn. Feels a little more impactful than Fire / Ice and Turn can deal with some particularly pesky threats. I'm trying to move Izzet towards the bigger more impactful spells rather than cheaper stuff like Charm and Electrolyze. I currently run: Ral, Steam, Dracogenius and Turn / Burn.
I personally really like Turn / Burn. Feels a little more impactful than Fire / Ice and Turn can deal with some particularly pesky threats. I'm trying to move Izzet towards the bigger more impactful spells rather than cheaper stuff like Charm and Electrolyze. I currently run: Ral, Steam, Dracogenius and Turn / Burn.
I can't agree with cutting electrolyze but with that philosophy I like prophetic bolt over dracogenius.
I've actually swapped Prophetic Bolt in and out with Dracogenius a number of times. I don't disagree that most (or all) times PBolt is a better card, the group and myself just like playing with Niv-Mizzet.
Steam Augury seems like a sweet one. But in 5 drafts so far, it has only been main decked once. This might speak to a bigger problem of Izzet not having a real identity in my cube. Izzet has CounterBurn and value cards and kind of shows up in Grixis congrol. Is Steam Augury splashable? Is it even enough value to splash?
That's the same stuff that's been spouted since page 1.
If you are looking at this card strictly as the Top Deck finder, you are going to be very disappointed. Of course, if you have TWO of the cards you need, then it's FOF 2.0 very easy.
If you want a small boost of cards, it's awesome for that two. Maybe you get that 1 awesome card when you don't need it, but your opponent has to cringe at the fact he must get rid of that possible future wrecking ball of a card or let you have 4 more cards, even if they are straight lands.
What I am excited about are the amount of graveyard cards in this color combination.
It's quite a bit worse than fact or faction.
However, in the process I've also realized fact or fiction is quite a bit better than I thought and a worse fact or faction is still sweet =P
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
I completely understand this and yes it certainly is a factor. I maintain, however, that revealing 5 cards and only finding one relevant card that will help you will be the exception and not the rule. If there are that many blanks in a deck (outside of hitting a huge land pocket) that you can't hit useful spells to get out of a mess, I'm not sure we are examining the right problem.
Seeing the 'fair' version of Fact or Fiction should make everybody realize how busted the original one is.
-AA
I use descriptive language. Assume that I'm being nice and respectful. (I'll tell you when I'm not.)
My Cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9029
I don't think I've ever seen a FoF reveal with 4 zero value cards in it before. And we've never had to experiment with the tables turned before now. Play with the card. I think you'll be surprised how high you can get the average pile value when you are the one in charge of building them.
And in any case, this card isn't replacing Fact or Fiction. Instances where it's worse than FoF don't really apply.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
My biggest concern is what to take out? I run a 540 powered cube with 5 guild cards. I currently have Ral, Fire//Ice, Electrolzye, P-Bolt and Izzit Charm. The only cards I could see taking out would be Charm or P-Bolt which both don't see too much play here.
As for the "you won't get the one card you need scenario as your opponent picks," that's fine in my opinion. There are plenty of other cards in my cube that would better benefit that kind of deck (CONTROL). I think no matter what you are still getting 2-3 cards in your hand for 4 mana at instant speed. This card is for tempo, reanimation, and counter-burn.
I am curious to see how it plays out and have some high hopes for it. I also think that picking the piles yourself can be an advantage over FOF in tempo decks. Might take out izzet charm for it as I love burn and card draw (keeping p-bolt)
I rarely post, though I tend to read (and enjoy!) these forums quite a bit during spoiler season, but this thread confuses me a lot.
On the surface, this card isn't terribly hard to evaluate: you look at 5 cards, split them as evenly as you can on power level and then are handed the weaker one. If you could always split perfectly, this is about the same as drawing 2.5 cards. For the sake of discussion, I'm going to assume you and your opponent are valuing cards the same (this is, of course, not always true, and probably slightly in your favor, but the effect should be fairly small except in that it makes the card more fun to play). So you are incented to split the piles as evenly as possible.
In general, this is exactly the same game as Fact or Fiction, except here, when you can't make an even split you get penalized and with FoF, you get rewarded. Let's assume the average power level of a card in your deck is 1. Then you should expect to get around 2.5 points of power, minus some amount for the times you can't split evenly, as opposed to FoF where you get 2.5 plus a little bit. The question of how much a little bit is is interesting, but it's generally less than .5. Under reasonable assumptions, it's about .1 (so FoF is about 2.6 cards, this is about 2.4 cards)
So this draws between 2 and 2.5 cards worth of power and FoF is between 2.5 and 3 (ish). Note that there is a mill attached to this, which is generally an upside.
There are some interesting cases to consider. If the power level of your deck is completely flat, this is exactly the same as drawing 2 cards (plus the mill). If the power level is incredibly spiky (say 1 card is worth 40 points and the rest worth 0), this is worth nothing (the wrath scenario). Lastly, if land is worthless and your spells are all pretty close to even, you should expect to draw a little better than 1 spell (about 1/3 of the time you draw 2), which works out to just over 2 cards worth of power, assuming 24 spells, 16 lands (17 or 18 lands is close to the same and the numbers are prettier for 16).
By comparison, FoF is worth 3 vs 2, more than 0 vs 0, and 2.9 vs 2.1 in those cases
Basically the point is that the theory conforms to intuition: you draw just worse than 2.5 cards with it because you can't always split well. In the case where you don't want land, it's harder to get a good split (3 spells, 2 lands is tough to split), so the value goes down to just over 2 cards.
The number above for 2.4 cards comes from assuming your deck is distributed as a continuous uniform distribution. I then just simulated it, assuming perfect information and the same valuations for both players.
@Eidolon: I'm confused as to where your numbers are coming from. If we take a continuous uniform distribution for power level in our deck, I simulated that you get just under 2.4 cards worth of power (assume average power level of a card is normalized to 1). You say that you used a discrete uniform distribution, but I'm curious as to what your range was. For example, in [1,5], there's no split at all that's worse than 2:3 (the usual worst splits are big, big, big, small, small or big, small, small, small, small, but here those are fine). From reading your post, you seemed to have a theoretical (rather than simulated) justification for your answer - my statistics training is probably not up to yours, so I'm very interested in your process since I needed to simulate for the general case (for the 40% land, 60% spell, flat power level, it's easy to get 2.08 with straight theory, but in general I don't know how to do it without simulating)
@synergy people: I'm honestly confused as to what kind of synergies people are seeing commonly in their splits. Someone mentioned always getting "a pile of cards that always work together", which seems pretty unreasonable to hope for unless we're counting "Island, Cryptic Command" as a combo. You don't have a ton of control over the split since the cards are just the top 5 of your library, so it's not a Gifts Ungiven-type thing. I think if you're using the card hoping for synergy beyond "Counterspell + Lightning Bolt is sweet synergy since one kills little things and the other stops big things" you're going to be sadly disappointed most of the time. Do your decks really have so many awesome synergies that you're going to have 2 disjoint pairs of synergistic cards among your top 5? Or is it more like with divination where your deck is full of sweet cards, so pretty much any pair of cards in your deck works well together?
That said, I definitely agree with the point that this is a reasonable card draw spell. It's somewhere a little better than inspiration in terms of card draw if you don't want lands, with milling upside and, in my opinion, it's fun to resolve. In fact, if your deck looks like a uniform distribution (basically you value lands to some extent and you have more and less powerful cards in your deck), it's actually closer to Fact or Fiction than to intuition.
Great post. I'll speak to the synergy thing because I think it's relevant. A lot of decks in cubes are highly synergistic. Pox/Braids, Reanimator, Reveillark, just to name a few. These decks have a lot of redundant synergy in them, by design. Consider the theoretical group of cards [cryptic command, island, kiki jiki, pestermite, island]. With FoF, they can split the piles into [Kiki/island/island] vs [Cryptic/Pestermite]. With Steam Augury, you get to split them into [kiki/pestermite] vs [cryptic/island/island]. In this case, the piles are clearly much better in the second case. You still get the worse pile, but on average your piles will be better due to synergies. Will every case be this clear? no. Will you get synergy in every pile? No. But on average you're getting some value from choosing the piles. And that's, I think, what people are talking about when we're discussing synergy.
L2 Judge
Instead of it being split Mountain/Cryptic/X and Thundermaw/Island (like your opponent would do with FoF) you pair the lands you need to cast the spells with the spells that you plan on casting with them. This guarantees you cards you can cast, and resources that will pair well with them.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
Absolutely. And that's one particular reason why I like it so much in UR. I'm usually not digging for something specific, just a refill on counters/burn/bounce and additional resources. It's been a fantastic EOT spell for counterburn decks, and I look forward to seeing continued success with the card in the cube.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
Took a few different distributions of card power level ratios that added up to 5 (normalized) with equal and non-equal power spacing between them, and also arrived at 2.4 to 2.6.
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
(Pile 1.2 , 1.4) (Pile 0.6, 0.8 and 1)
2.6 vs 2.4
0.2 0.8 1 1.2 1.8
(pile 1.8, 0.8) (pile 1, 1.2, 0.2)
2.6 vs 2.4
0.333333 0.6666666 0.9999999 1.3333333 1.66666666
2.33333 vs 2.6666
(Im probably doing something wrong here)
Then looked at some of the corner cases:
Worst case scenario is when one card is worth WAY more than the other cards combined (digging for ONE answer or dying).
When one card is worth more than the value of all the other 4 cards combined, you start losing significant value. Id say this is pretty uncommon.
and a bad average case scenario is when the value of the two card pile cannot add up to 2.4/5 of the value of the three card+ pile. Worst situation of that case is when all cards are equal and steam augur = inspiration + graveyard value.
Id also say this is pretty uncommon...
OK OK, card IS as good as I thought, I reconvinced myself. Thanks ferret =D
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
My $40 MTGO cube
Draft my cube at Cubetutor!
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
If you can really use the discard outlet mode on the Charm, I give it the edge over Fire // Ice. (Basically, the artifact deck and Grixis reanimator love Charm for that mode.) If you don't play those two decks all that often, I prefer Fire // Ice because of the dividable damage, tempo plays and easier casting costs.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
My cube
My cube on Cube tutor
I'm OP_Forever. I'll be putting this in my signature for a while so everyone know I change my nickname.
That's what I think too, but it's really close between Charm and Fire/Ice.
Cheers,
rant
My Cube
CubeCobra: https://cubecobra.com/cube/overview/5f5d0310ed602310515d4c32
Cube Tutor: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/1963
Visual Spoiler
Draft!
I can't agree with cutting electrolyze but with that philosophy I like prophetic bolt over dracogenius.
Visual Spoiler
Draft!
Electrolyze is great too but I'm running gelectrode instead because it's more fun and I'm pushing spells matter.
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/modular-cube-5-colors.800/
Retro combo cube thread
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/retro-combo-cube.1454/