I have debated having a land round after the draft.
Here's how I was thinking:
Laying all land cards out.
Then all players secretly list up to 5 lands on a sheet of paper numbered from 1 to 5.
Then all players show what they picked.
If any players have the same first pick it is discarded.
All players then get their 1st picks if the card is still available.
Repeat with each number.
It could be useful to have a "block" option at a 2 vote cost.
I am cutting the two shrines for an indefinite period of time. Not because I think they are OP, but because they make a weird subgame that I don't appreciate. It's like mull to 6, but kill me (or the card) before turn 8 or I win.
That's what I did a while back. I actually had some control players play the red shrine... without having any red spells in their deck...
I have some durdly control players that will put the shrines in off color decks, and try to make the game go super long.
So, I have been counting them as 0.5 color and 0.5 colorless.
Kind of like the half hybrid business.
It's still not perfect, but it feels about how they play in my group.
The problem with Browbeat is that although both effects are good for 3 mana, it's always going to be the worse of the two. It's going to deal 5 damage when you want to be drawing cards and you're going to draw cards when you want to deal 5 damage.
Maybe I am wrong about Browbeat, but I was thinking this might be an exception to the "don't let your opponent choose" rule. If you're playing this as an aggressive deck on turn five or six, say, the opponent is going to be fairly low on life. They really won't want to take five and they really won't want to give you three cards to work with. Yes, you're getting the worse of the two, but that means they either have to give you threats and burn to kill them with or they go so low that you can probably kill them with any burn spell you're going to draw. If they're low enough that they have to give you cards, the same thing applies.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's a great card, I was just surprised I hadn't seen it at all. It seems like the kind of card that could play well in C/Ubes with a lowered power level.
I have had browbeat in my CUbe before, it's... Okay.
It was just always next to be cut.
If you want to play other serviceable red choice cards you could try a card that everyone on here hates but me...
It's a board presence which can stem the tide of damage in a ramp deck, while guaranteeing that you can go tall next turn if that's what you want to do.
In a token deck (one of my players insists on drafting GW tokens to make a point that it's viable in my format even though I've never tried to push green tokens) I could imagine it being great value too.
It took me way longer than it should have to figure out you were talking about Brood Monitor.
But I got you now.
Yeah, I am on the fence about G/W tokens.
Comparing our two lists, maybe I can try and figure out why it is doing so for you
WHITE
In creatures, there are more cards here that conceivably promote a board stall in your list.
Guardian of the guildpact: primarily defensive and shines in grinding out a long game. This card could be a canary for gauging differences in the way cubes play out.
Attended knight and doomed traveler: While both of these can be a minor role in a more attacky plan, these cards also lend themselves to slowing down the game.
Virtually all of the creatures I have in white that you don't have push the board away from being a board stall, except belfry spirit. Even topan freeblade vs wandering champion could be argued, since having more than 1 health means it can attack into clumped up boards with random tokens.
In the instants and sorceries, you have some extra grounded token makers, which are also components to facilitating longer games when in small numbers.
I do have story circle, but it is a new inclusion.
-
I don't have much more time to go through all of the colors, but in black our durdle-to-endgame ratios are interesting. You have more 1 drops than I do because of my strict self-imposed rules, but after that we have comparable control oriented cards that draw the game out: Pestilence, crypt rats, nezumi graverobber, plague spitter vs my haunted crossroads, vampiric rites, thoughtpicker witch, and rakshasa gravecaller. Mine are spottier in their control deck inclusion rates, so you probably see yours more.
I also have a couple of late game cards that might end the game more quickly: incremental blight, homicidal seclusion, and wight of precinct six. Top that off with reckless spite for faster decks to break through boards, and maybe the mystery is more clearly resolved.
Wow, thanks for taking a look, and giving such solid analysis.
Yeah, our compared lists are useful to look at.
You bring up an interesting way to look at control, that I don't often think of. The control cards that win fast vs. slow.
Because maybe the issue is time. Probably my players hate knowing the game is basically over, and just having to slowly go through the motions until their inevitable demise. Where as if the control card just won then and there, they might not complain about it at all.
I may need to (after I overhall green) go through the list and rank the cards on a how fun/exciting is this card.
And see overall why the games that go long, go long; and what cards just stall the game, or clog up the board.
Hey, maybe that can be green's identity "clog, and stall".
(Only half kidding)
So, I cubed a bit over the past week.
And in addition to general compliants about green, some folks thought diabolic servitude was "ban-worthy skullclamp" good.
Although I thought this was a bit of an exaggeration, the card is quite strong.
Has anyone else had an issue with diabolic servitude?
If you start playing worse removal because removal is too good at some point I imagine you'll start playing worse threats because removal isn't keeping up at all. Repeat forever till you're pack1pick1ing Sorrow's Path.
Don't downgrade, sidegrade.
really necessary?
Lots of people have started to move away from power-max philosophies in their cube building. There's no need make weird value judgments or slippery slope arguments about it. Using a removal suite that fits your preferences isn't a downgrade of anything.
I'd classify it as hyperbole and not a slippery slope. My actual argument has nothing to do with ending up playing the worst 360/450/whatever cards in magic. I don't believe this will actually happen (unless you want it to, in which case go for it). I used to think that there was an ideal peasant cube. Now I think that each cube is a reflection of the person/people who designed it. Everything I say about cube has the caveat, "I'd do this but feel free to do what you want, these are my ideas and I share them for you to use, ignore, or otherwise do with what you wish."
I understand that some people (myself included) have move away from power-maxing to format-building. Doesn't mean I have to agree with every idea or choice people make. Doesn't mean I don't have a right to express my opinion on this forum as long as I do it according to the rules. Doesn't make Lightning Strike not a downgrade compared to Lightning Bolt on a card-vs-card basis.
In conclusion? Is backseat modding and being a dick to people really necessary?
I don't foresee this heading in a positive direction.
Soooo.....
I'm looking for space in my blue section to test some of the new cards.
What archetypes do folks support in blue?
Is r/u spells working out for people?
Is b/u reanimator worth the card slots to support?
Has u/w skies gotten to good?
Is g/u doing... whatever it's supposed to be doing?
Are there cards that blue should just have regardless of archetype (like counterspells or card draw)?
My concerns with pick one, burn one in small groups:
In my play group people never burn guild cards.
This makes mono-color decks practically impossible.
Only 3 or 4 guilds may be desired by players, so most of the guide cards left in the pack are of no use.
Players will occasionally be forced into mediocre 3 color decks.
I do not feel that this is what I want for any draft.
This is why I prefer the "discard the last X per pack" plan.
So, I may have to sharpie over a mountain for a while to see if it's worth going off the grid for.
Here's how I was thinking:
Laying all land cards out.
Then all players secretly list up to 5 lands on a sheet of paper numbered from 1 to 5.
Then all players show what they picked.
If any players have the same first pick it is discarded.
All players then get their 1st picks if the card is still available.
Repeat with each number.
It could be useful to have a "block" option at a 2 vote cost.
I have some durdly control players that will put the shrines in off color decks, and try to make the game go super long.
So, I have been counting them as 0.5 color and 0.5 colorless.
Kind of like the half hybrid business.
It's still not perfect, but it feels about how they play in my group.
I have had browbeat in my CUbe before, it's... Okay.
It was just always next to be cut.
If you want to play other serviceable red choice cards you could try a card that everyone on here hates but me...
Blazing Salvo.
In before hate mail.
It took me way longer than it should have to figure out you were talking about Brood Monitor.
But I got you now.
Yeah, I am on the fence about G/W tokens.
I understand.
It feels weird punishing people who are playing correctly.
(Although the daze argument is the same...)
As was said already, mirror match needs so much mana, people kinda expect some shenanigans, so it's not totally out of the blue.
Do what you want Leelue, haters tend to hate.
Wow, thanks for taking a look, and giving such solid analysis.
Yeah, our compared lists are useful to look at.
You bring up an interesting way to look at control, that I don't often think of. The control cards that win fast vs. slow.
Because maybe the issue is time. Probably my players hate knowing the game is basically over, and just having to slowly go through the motions until their inevitable demise. Where as if the control card just won then and there, they might not complain about it at all.
I may need to (after I overhall green) go through the list and rank the cards on a how fun/exciting is this card.
And see overall why the games that go long, go long; and what cards just stall the game, or clog up the board.
Hey, maybe that can be green's identity "clog, and stall".
(Only half kidding)
And in addition to general compliants about green, some folks thought diabolic servitude was "ban-worthy skullclamp" good.
Although I thought this was a bit of an exaggeration, the card is quite strong.
Has anyone else had an issue with diabolic servitude?
I don't foresee this heading in a positive direction.
Soooo.....
I'm looking for space in my blue section to test some of the new cards.
What archetypes do folks support in blue?
Is r/u spells working out for people?
Is b/u reanimator worth the card slots to support?
Has u/w skies gotten to good?
Is g/u doing... whatever it's supposed to be doing?
Are there cards that blue should just have regardless of archetype (like counterspells or card draw)?
Edit: spelled foresee incorrectly :-(
If Leelue has both Calciderm, and Latch Seeker in the same deck, he will now be running 17 land instead of 16, because of math.
In my play group people never burn guild cards.
This makes mono-color decks practically impossible.
Only 3 or 4 guilds may be desired by players, so most of the guide cards left in the pack are of no use.
Players will occasionally be forced into mediocre 3 color decks.
I do not feel that this is what I want for any draft.
This is why I prefer the "discard the last X per pack" plan.