I know that the following idea is not new and that some of you have experience or permanently implemented the idea in their cubes.
I am talking about adding rare lands to the peasant cube.
I think we can all agree that good fixing is beneficial for every cube as it allows more consistent gameplay i.e. more fun.
I think we can also agree that fixing in peasant is not good as WotC refuses to print good fixing at lower rarities - probably not due to power-level but because of economic reasons.
Peasant cubes are lacking good fixing that comes into play untapped. Now there are plenty of rare land cycles available that can fix this problem and I am wondering which ones are the best/most suitable.
Basically, for me there are two routes - i.) best of the best and ii.) cheap solution
i.) would include fetchlands and duals/shocklands, although due to budget restrictions I would go with shocklands over duals
ii.) would include painlands and maybe shocklands (dependent on the budget - shocklands are not as expensive anymore)
I am also considering adding the manlands, although I am not sure if these fit from a power-level point of view as they represent more than just fixing.
It will be also interesting to think about consequences of such changes (especially the addition of fetchlands). Which cards become better? Brainstorm, Sensei's Divining Top, Sylvan Library, Wild Nacatl, everything with landfall, etc..
May I ask you to share your experience and thoughts about this?
Consistency isn't a benefit of rare fixing by itself. Unless you're running ABUR duals, shocks, and fetches, your fixing isn't going to be better than tri-lands and vivids. In 2 colour decks unless you find the shock for your colour combination fetches are just 2 colour fixers. Even in 3 colour decks it's not unlikely that your shocks get swiped by other people in the same colours, speculating, or splashing.
The only way you get consistency through rare lands is that the etb untapped lands are better to play many copies of. But that almost certainly only applies to 3+ colour decks, as 2 colour decks get to their source requirements (90%+ consistency) on only 2-3 duals.
What rare fixing does do is provide etb untapped duals for aggro, which fixes the problem of aggro having bad fixing for 1 drops. I think adding shocks + fetches is really overkill in fixing this. Adding a single cycle of rare lands would probably be enough, as we also have City of Brass, Aether Hub, and Gemstone Mine for t1 fixing (Bonesplitter and the new colourless 1 drop also help). Personally I find aggro to be strong enough in my cube, so I don't see a need for it, but ymmv.
I'm not really sure what problem rare fixing solves outside of aggro 1 drops. They certainly become higher picks than what we have now and are at a higher power level, but that's not a benefit by itself as duals are picked and played regardless of power level. Fetches + shocks also take away the trade off of power vs consistency if you can get enough of them, making 3+ colour mana bases trivial with little downside, which I wouldn't say is a good thing.
I use rare fixing, but outside of manlands (which add a valuable wrinkle to gameplay) I avoid color specific fixing. It dilutes the cardpool too much with a ton of gold cards. At any given 8-man there will be one or two or even three guilds that go unclaimed, making these dead cards at the table. I already don't like how gold has this problem but at least the spells and manlands get to be interesting.
The tradeoff of using 5 color lands does mean that there is less total fixing to go around (wizards hasnt made a lot of 5 color fixing) but on the other hand all of that fixing works for everyone.
So while it's possible for someone to get lucky and draft their way into a 5 color deck with 6 gold lands, but it's not as though they didn't have to fight literally everyone at the table for those lands to end up in such a favorable position.
With the fetches+shocks setup by contrast the multicolor deck is going to benefit much more than any other drafter can. Not just because their deck needs lands more, but because the number of lands that work for them scales up in their favor the more colors they run. Example: A four color deck uses six different guilds worth of lands and is thus six times more likely to run into lands that work for their deck.
I did this for a bit with my peasant cube, but adding rares can be a slippery slope and the line in the sand can be a bit arbitrary. For me I wanted to include fixing lands that "felt" peasant, so I went with pain lands. At this point in the game I could easily see these downshifted to uncommon without causing much of a fuss from either game play or monetary standpoints. They are decent fixers and they help aggro become a better contender.
I've since moved back to a traditional peasant list and removed the pain lands. The only "rares" I allow are cards that have been downshifted online, but not in paper. I also would advise to err on the side of lower power level when drawing that line in the sand for including rare cards. ABU duals, Shocks, and Fetches are the best of the best as far as fixing lands go, so I don't think they fit the mold for peasant cubes and the type of games and game play that we've come to expect and love from these lists. Including those would take something away from the experience for me rather than add to it.
I also dislike dual color lands as the eat up so much cube space for such a little effect. I think many of the 5 color lands we have are perfectly adequate for what I expect from peasant. They have a noticeable drawback, but they can go into any deck. City of Brass, Gemstone Mine or Ash Barrens are perfect in that regard. That's why I run a playset of those and Evolving Wilds instead of messing around with other solutions.
Despite plenty of 5c fixing in my cube I never had a problem with too many/too good 4-5 color decks. The drawbacks on these cards really hurt if you run a lot of them and it's not like you get them for free either. If you want to draft 5+ 5c lands you have to ignore other good cards and most of the time a 4-5 color deck ends up being worse and less reliable than a 2 or 3 color deck. You can't play any xCC cards either, which further limits the card choices you have so ultimately you don't really gain anything by playing more than 2.5 colors.
If the fetch+shock/dual manabases weren't so expensive, I think I would consider having them around for variety's sake. For a single draft, swap trilands+vivids+5 other lands for 10+10 fetch/dual could be interesting to spice things up. At a trillion billion moneys, I will go with no.
As the wiley ol' grizzled veteran, I must say you kids and your darn rare lands. Back in my day we had to walk 8 miles in the snow to play cube with commons and uncommons. Enough of this malarkey. Peasant players play with peasant legal cards.
In all seriousness, I've never felt that fixing was THAT important outside of the 5-color value deck. I won our last cube with a U/B control deck running 9 swamps and 8 islands. If you muddle the cube with all this serious fixing, I think all you are really doing is enabling a 5-color valuetown deck. (which is a deck that I enjoy, but don't want to have come together ideally all the time).
In all seriousness, I've never felt that fixing was THAT important outside of the 5-color value deck. I won our last cube with a U/B control deck running 9 swamps and 8 islands. If you muddle the cube with all this serious fixing, I think all you are really doing is enabling a 5-color valuetown deck. (which is a deck that I enjoy, but don't want to have come together ideally all the time).
Less fixing = more random games. It's as simple as that, just read the manamath article in Leelue's signature or look at the mana base of constructed decks. There is a reason why people play all these fetches and duals in constructed even in two or three color decks and why Blood Moon is a powerful card.
Of course you can have fun even if people win games more often because their opponent couldn't cast the spell they wanted to cast due to bad fixing, but to me that's less fun than it could be. Magic's biggest weakness is the random mana system and the least fun games I've played are the ones were me or my opponent couldn't do anything with the cards in our hands because of bad land draws. Good mana fixing prevents at least some of these games and that's why it's very important.
Also, 5 color value decks aren't even a thing in cube. There are so many disadvantages and so many problems that come with these decks that even if you manage to somehow draft the 6-8 five color lands you need for such a deck it will almost certainly be way, way worse than any streamlined two color deck. It may be fun for the giggles to draft such a deck, but I'm very sure that no true 4 or 5 color deck (and not just a two color deck that splashes a third and fourth color for some high cmc single C cards) could ever be competitive in my cube environment despite all the 5c lands I run.
In all seriousness, I've never felt that fixing was THAT important outside of the 5-color value deck. I won our last cube with a U/B control deck running 9 swamps and 8 islands. If you muddle the cube with all this serious fixing, I think all you are really doing is enabling a 5-color valuetown deck. (which is a deck that I enjoy, but don't want to have come together ideally all the time).
I would agree with this in terms of peasant cube. Peasant tends to play out more like a powerful limited environment where games can be grindy and decided in combat. Fixing is more important to Vintage and Legacy cubes because of what those decks are trying to do and how quickly they want to do it. Peasant is similar to something like M20 draft in a way. If you're in UB and you see a pack that has a card that's really good for your deck, you're probably pick it over the Dismal Backwater. Two color aggro decks want the fixing the most, so I've found that if you want to go aggro it's best to try to stay in RDW or WW with a light splash rather than try to go full on two color aggro just because the fixing is so bad for those decks.
Restricting aggro decks to mono color or almost mono color and not allowing players to actually cast that 2CC card they put into their deck on turn four reliably just because of an arbitrary rule seems odd to me.
I think etb untapped lands and etb tapped lands that are are worth the pick you use up for them are nothing that has anything to do with the format you play. It just makes Magic overall more exciting to play with decent lands and we all know that the only reason why Wizards doesn't print lands like that at c/u is because lands sell boosters.
And it's not like you have to run fetches and ABUR duals, there are enough other options with more downsides that are not as crappy as Trilands in a two color deck.
Thanks for all the input. The idea of adding 4 copies of a specific land is appealing. However, this does not entirely solve the problem of the etb untapped at turn one. I guess we hope that WotC will reprint painlands at UC.
Thanks for all the input. The idea of adding 4 copies of a specific land is appealing. However, this does not entirely solve the problem of the etb untapped at turn one. I guess we hope that WotC will reprint painlands at UC.
City of Brass and Gemstone mine are peasant legal (City of Brass if you count AN uncommons), I run four of each mainly for aggro decks plus 4x Ash Barrens (somewhat playable in aggro as well) and 4x Evolving Wilds. Never had a problem with bad mana fixing since and never had a problem with 4 or 5 color good stuff decks. I can only recommend it, I don't want anything else, except for replacing Evolving Wilds with something like Ash Barrens in the future if we get another good land like that.
Thanks for all the input. The idea of adding 4 copies of a specific land is appealing. However, this does not entirely solve the problem of the etb untapped at turn one. I guess we hope that WotC will reprint painlands at UC.
Wizards is more likely to print Temples at uncommon before painlands. Reminder that duals coming into play untapped, even as a conditional, is considered a rare-level ability. It's such a huge benefit, that it's actually worth two marginal benefits on a land. To see what I mean, consider the rarity of modern duals (printed in the last five years):
M10 Checklands like Dragonskull Summit - seems simple enough to print at uncommon, but coming into play untapped is a rare ability.
Battle for Zendikar manlands like Lumbering Falls - getting a creature with your manafixer is another rare-level ability. Note that manlands are possible at uncommon without manafixing (Frostwalk Bastion).
Battle for Zendikar tangolands like Cinder Glade - two benefits. On top of a chance to come into play untapped, they also have land types.
Shadows over Innistrad taplands like Port Town - chance to come into play untapped. Rare.
Kaladesh fastlands like Inspiring Vantage - chance to come into play untapped. Rare.
Amonkhet bicycle lands like Scattered Groves - another highlight like the tangolands. Although they don't enter untapped, they enjoy the double benefit of land types + cycling.
Battlebond taplands like Morphic Pool - again, coming into play untapped is the only ability needed to make this rare.
Temple of Silence and friends are the biggest outlier to this philosophy. They enter tapped and only have one marginal benefit instead of two. I fully expect them to be downshifted within the next five years. Possibly even in the Return to Theros set, but more likely in a supplemental Masters set, which are known for up/downshifts, or precons like Commander or Planeswalker decks - maybe even in a drip feed of 1-3 Temples per year through those channels. The uncommon Shadows over Innistrad taplands like Stone Quarry were downshifted in planeswalker decks over a period of years, allowing for precedent.
Theros is old enough to potentially fall outside this design theory (note the increase in new dual lands in the last five years compared to the previous five years - in the same time-span, only Worldwake manlands/enemy fetches and Scars fastlands appear) so it may be possible to update their rarity according to new design paradigms.
Also note that this is all circumstantial evidence based on a hunch from many years of playing and observing land cycles, specifically from the perspective of pauper cube where downshifts are important
The only rare downshifts are the strictly-worse painlands from Tempest (Skyshroud Forest and friends). And they're probably not worth mentioning for multiple reasons (different design period/paradigm, online-only, really bad lol).
Generally speaking, a rare to uncommon downshift of a manafixing land in physical copy would be unprecedented. I bring up the Temples because they are the odd ones out in every iteration of modern guild fixing they've done so far. However, as VariSami pointed out, rainbow fixing is a possibility (Tendo Ice Bridge would be my second pick for a downshift since Aether Hub is a thing). So printing under another name is a possible solution? The Zendikar refuges got similarly downshifted into the Tarkir gainlands.
As an aside, printing the second half of the snow taplands could make for a legitimate peasant cycle. Snow mana represents a marginal benefit now, thanks to the influx of snow cards from Modern Horizons.
It's not really about rarity, it's about power level.
So if you're playing ABUR duals + fetches but you're only using them to shove Benalish Hero and Gurmag Angler, it doesn't really matter. Context is important.
You don't need approval from this forum to do anything. If you replaced your pauper/peasant fixing with rare fixing it wouldn't matter. It honestly wouldn't. If I found a Bog Wreckage in a Vintage cube pack I'd still take it if I needed fixing or there were no on-color picks or worthwhile hate drafts left.
If you swapped the fixing between the MTGO Vintage cube and your average Pauper cube it wouldn't really matter that much. I don't really buy that aggro decks don't want ETB tapped lands. An entire deck of them, sure, but 1-2 is fine. Want to know what also slows an aggro deck down? Not having BB to cast skittering skirge with your Rakdos deck because you just drew a mountain instead of a guildgate.
I run rare fixing because I like the art on some of the cards and they have synergy with other fixing lands and cards like Gush and Tithe. Otherwise I'd run cloudcrest lake and bog wreckage and Ancient Spring. It's not really relevant how good your fixing is or even if you play any or not.
The way your average cube is constructed you don't actually need any fixing if you're okay with mono or dual colored decks 90% of the time and decks being a little less consistent.
I've dropped Pauper rarity. I get to play more of mechanics that I enjoy and my environment hasn't been ruined by rares or whatever because I try not to put much if any broken cards in my cube.
I play a lot of fixing in my cube (trilands, khans gainlands, painlands, vivids, +some 5 color lands), and have run the painlands for years, mainly because i wanted fixing that was good in aggro. I have contemplated also adding the fastlands for the same reason. I also added mana confluence as a second city of brass, again to buff aggro manabases. I added the rarelands a couple of years back and would not dream of going back, aggro deserves good mana as well
I play with Checklands and Painlands to help aggro, then with Bouncelands, Trilands, Vivids, City of Brass, Gemstone Mine, Prismatic Vista and Fabled Passage. Also with some uncommon utility lands.
I am talking about adding rare lands to the peasant cube.
I think we can all agree that good fixing is beneficial for every cube as it allows more consistent gameplay i.e. more fun.
I think we can also agree that fixing in peasant is not good as WotC refuses to print good fixing at lower rarities - probably not due to power-level but because of economic reasons.
Peasant cubes are lacking good fixing that comes into play untapped. Now there are plenty of rare land cycles available that can fix this problem and I am wondering which ones are the best/most suitable.
Basically, for me there are two routes - i.) best of the best and ii.) cheap solution
i.) would include fetchlands and duals/shocklands, although due to budget restrictions I would go with shocklands over duals
ii.) would include painlands and maybe shocklands (dependent on the budget - shocklands are not as expensive anymore)
I am also considering adding the manlands, although I am not sure if these fit from a power-level point of view as they represent more than just fixing.
It will be also interesting to think about consequences of such changes (especially the addition of fetchlands). Which cards become better? Brainstorm, Sensei's Divining Top, Sylvan Library, Wild Nacatl, everything with landfall, etc..
May I ask you to share your experience and thoughts about this?
My Peasant Cube: @ mtgsalvation---- @ cubecobra
My Peasant Cube: @ mtgsalvation---- @ cubecobra
The only way you get consistency through rare lands is that the etb untapped lands are better to play many copies of. But that almost certainly only applies to 3+ colour decks, as 2 colour decks get to their source requirements (90%+ consistency) on only 2-3 duals.
What rare fixing does do is provide etb untapped duals for aggro, which fixes the problem of aggro having bad fixing for 1 drops. I think adding shocks + fetches is really overkill in fixing this. Adding a single cycle of rare lands would probably be enough, as we also have City of Brass, Aether Hub, and Gemstone Mine for t1 fixing (Bonesplitter and the new colourless 1 drop also help). Personally I find aggro to be strong enough in my cube, so I don't see a need for it, but ymmv.
I'm not really sure what problem rare fixing solves outside of aggro 1 drops. They certainly become higher picks than what we have now and are at a higher power level, but that's not a benefit by itself as duals are picked and played regardless of power level. Fetches + shocks also take away the trade off of power vs consistency if you can get enough of them, making 3+ colour mana bases trivial with little downside, which I wouldn't say is a good thing.
The tradeoff of using 5 color lands does mean that there is less total fixing to go around (wizards hasnt made a lot of 5 color fixing) but on the other hand all of that fixing works for everyone.
So while it's possible for someone to get lucky and draft their way into a 5 color deck with 6 gold lands, but it's not as though they didn't have to fight literally everyone at the table for those lands to end up in such a favorable position.
With the fetches+shocks setup by contrast the multicolor deck is going to benefit much more than any other drafter can. Not just because their deck needs lands more, but because the number of lands that work for them scales up in their favor the more colors they run. Example: A four color deck uses six different guilds worth of lands and is thus six times more likely to run into lands that work for their deck.
My CubeCobra (draft 20 card packs, 2 packs.)
430, Peasant, Very Unpowered
Why you should take your hybrids out of your gold section
Manamath Article
I've since moved back to a traditional peasant list and removed the pain lands. The only "rares" I allow are cards that have been downshifted online, but not in paper. I also would advise to err on the side of lower power level when drawing that line in the sand for including rare cards. ABU duals, Shocks, and Fetches are the best of the best as far as fixing lands go, so I don't think they fit the mold for peasant cubes and the type of games and game play that we've come to expect and love from these lists. Including those would take something away from the experience for me rather than add to it.
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
Despite plenty of 5c fixing in my cube I never had a problem with too many/too good 4-5 color decks. The drawbacks on these cards really hurt if you run a lot of them and it's not like you get them for free either. If you want to draft 5+ 5c lands you have to ignore other good cards and most of the time a 4-5 color deck ends up being worse and less reliable than a 2 or 3 color deck. You can't play any xCC cards either, which further limits the card choices you have so ultimately you don't really gain anything by playing more than 2.5 colors.
My Old School Battlebox
My Premodern Battlebox
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
In all seriousness, I've never felt that fixing was THAT important outside of the 5-color value deck. I won our last cube with a U/B control deck running 9 swamps and 8 islands. If you muddle the cube with all this serious fixing, I think all you are really doing is enabling a 5-color valuetown deck. (which is a deck that I enjoy, but don't want to have come together ideally all the time).
My Peasant Cube thread !!! (380 cards)
Draft my Peasant Cube on Cube Cobra !!!
Less fixing = more random games. It's as simple as that, just read the manamath article in Leelue's signature or look at the mana base of constructed decks. There is a reason why people play all these fetches and duals in constructed even in two or three color decks and why Blood Moon is a powerful card.
Of course you can have fun even if people win games more often because their opponent couldn't cast the spell they wanted to cast due to bad fixing, but to me that's less fun than it could be. Magic's biggest weakness is the random mana system and the least fun games I've played are the ones were me or my opponent couldn't do anything with the cards in our hands because of bad land draws. Good mana fixing prevents at least some of these games and that's why it's very important.
Also, 5 color value decks aren't even a thing in cube. There are so many disadvantages and so many problems that come with these decks that even if you manage to somehow draft the 6-8 five color lands you need for such a deck it will almost certainly be way, way worse than any streamlined two color deck. It may be fun for the giggles to draft such a deck, but I'm very sure that no true 4 or 5 color deck (and not just a two color deck that splashes a third and fourth color for some high cmc single C cards) could ever be competitive in my cube environment despite all the 5c lands I run.
My Old School Battlebox
My Premodern Battlebox
I would agree with this in terms of peasant cube. Peasant tends to play out more like a powerful limited environment where games can be grindy and decided in combat. Fixing is more important to Vintage and Legacy cubes because of what those decks are trying to do and how quickly they want to do it. Peasant is similar to something like M20 draft in a way. If you're in UB and you see a pack that has a card that's really good for your deck, you're probably pick it over the Dismal Backwater. Two color aggro decks want the fixing the most, so I've found that if you want to go aggro it's best to try to stay in RDW or WW with a light splash rather than try to go full on two color aggro just because the fixing is so bad for those decks.
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
I think etb untapped lands and etb tapped lands that are are worth the pick you use up for them are nothing that has anything to do with the format you play. It just makes Magic overall more exciting to play with decent lands and we all know that the only reason why Wizards doesn't print lands like that at c/u is because lands sell boosters.
And it's not like you have to run fetches and ABUR duals, there are enough other options with more downsides that are not as crappy as Trilands in a two color deck.
My Old School Battlebox
My Premodern Battlebox
I put 8 terramorphic expanses in my cube in lieu of guildgates and it seems to work fine
Ash barrens isnt quite as cheap, but it would be my choice if I had to pick one. That or city of brass, depending on things
My CubeCobra (draft 20 card packs, 2 packs.)
430, Peasant, Very Unpowered
Why you should take your hybrids out of your gold section
Manamath Article
My Peasant Cube: @ mtgsalvation---- @ cubecobra
City of Brass and Gemstone mine are peasant legal (City of Brass if you count AN uncommons), I run four of each mainly for aggro decks plus 4x Ash Barrens (somewhat playable in aggro as well) and 4x Evolving Wilds. Never had a problem with bad mana fixing since and never had a problem with 4 or 5 color good stuff decks. I can only recommend it, I don't want anything else, except for replacing Evolving Wilds with something like Ash Barrens in the future if we get another good land like that.
My Old School Battlebox
My Premodern Battlebox
Wizards is more likely to print Temples at uncommon before painlands. Reminder that duals coming into play untapped, even as a conditional, is considered a rare-level ability. It's such a huge benefit, that it's actually worth two marginal benefits on a land. To see what I mean, consider the rarity of modern duals (printed in the last five years):
M10 Checklands like Dragonskull Summit - seems simple enough to print at uncommon, but coming into play untapped is a rare ability.
Battle for Zendikar manlands like Lumbering Falls - getting a creature with your manafixer is another rare-level ability. Note that manlands are possible at uncommon without manafixing (Frostwalk Bastion).
Battle for Zendikar tangolands like Cinder Glade - two benefits. On top of a chance to come into play untapped, they also have land types.
Shadows over Innistrad taplands like Port Town - chance to come into play untapped. Rare.
Kaladesh fastlands like Inspiring Vantage - chance to come into play untapped. Rare.
Amonkhet bicycle lands like Scattered Groves - another highlight like the tangolands. Although they don't enter untapped, they enjoy the double benefit of land types + cycling.
Battlebond taplands like Morphic Pool - again, coming into play untapped is the only ability needed to make this rare.
Temple of Silence and friends are the biggest outlier to this philosophy. They enter tapped and only have one marginal benefit instead of two. I fully expect them to be downshifted within the next five years. Possibly even in the Return to Theros set, but more likely in a supplemental Masters set, which are known for up/downshifts, or precons like Commander or Planeswalker decks - maybe even in a drip feed of 1-3 Temples per year through those channels. The uncommon Shadows over Innistrad taplands like Stone Quarry were downshifted in planeswalker decks over a period of years, allowing for precedent.
Theros is old enough to potentially fall outside this design theory (note the increase in new dual lands in the last five years compared to the previous five years - in the same time-span, only Worldwake manlands/enemy fetches and Scars fastlands appear) so it may be possible to update their rarity according to new design paradigms.
Also note that this is all circumstantial evidence based on a hunch from many years of playing and observing land cycles, specifically from the perspective of pauper cube where downshifts are important
My Cube (DeckStats)
My Pauper Cube: 540 (CubeTutor link!)
Level 1 Judge
My CubeCobra (draft 20 card packs, 2 packs.)
430, Peasant, Very Unpowered
Why you should take your hybrids out of your gold section
Manamath Article
Generally speaking, a rare to uncommon downshift of a manafixing land in physical copy would be unprecedented. I bring up the Temples because they are the odd ones out in every iteration of modern guild fixing they've done so far. However, as VariSami pointed out, rainbow fixing is a possibility (Tendo Ice Bridge would be my second pick for a downshift since Aether Hub is a thing). So printing under another name is a possible solution? The Zendikar refuges got similarly downshifted into the Tarkir gainlands.
As an aside, printing the second half of the snow taplands could make for a legitimate peasant cycle. Snow mana represents a marginal benefit now, thanks to the influx of snow cards from Modern Horizons.
My Cube (DeckStats)
My Pauper Cube: 540 (CubeTutor link!)
Level 1 Judge
So if you're playing ABUR duals + fetches but you're only using them to shove Benalish Hero and Gurmag Angler, it doesn't really matter. Context is important.
You don't need approval from this forum to do anything. If you replaced your pauper/peasant fixing with rare fixing it wouldn't matter. It honestly wouldn't. If I found a Bog Wreckage in a Vintage cube pack I'd still take it if I needed fixing or there were no on-color picks or worthwhile hate drafts left.
If you swapped the fixing between the MTGO Vintage cube and your average Pauper cube it wouldn't really matter that much. I don't really buy that aggro decks don't want ETB tapped lands. An entire deck of them, sure, but 1-2 is fine. Want to know what also slows an aggro deck down? Not having BB to cast skittering skirge with your Rakdos deck because you just drew a mountain instead of a guildgate.
I run rare fixing because I like the art on some of the cards and they have synergy with other fixing lands and cards like Gush and Tithe. Otherwise I'd run cloudcrest lake and bog wreckage and Ancient Spring. It's not really relevant how good your fixing is or even if you play any or not.
The way your average cube is constructed you don't actually need any fixing if you're okay with mono or dual colored decks 90% of the time and decks being a little less consistent.
I've dropped Pauper rarity. I get to play more of mechanics that I enjoy and my environment hasn't been ruined by rares or whatever because I try not to put much if any broken cards in my cube.
Ignoring what Magic players say isn't the answer, it's listening to what they have to say and doing the exact opposite that's correct.
It works for my drafters and me.
My Omniscience Draft Cube[/b]
My Commander Cube
My Pai Gow Cube
My Two-Headed Giant Cube