The one big downside to the combo is that our opponent can exile your entire board by removing the Worldgorger Dragon in response to its ETB trigger, so this combo ain't for the faint of heart. Ideally you pair this with a lot of discard effects / Teferi, Time Raveler, counter magic, etc. Luckily the combo itself is cheap so it's not too hard to leave up a counter. I think it's worth testing out since the only real parasitic parts of the combo are Worldgorger Dragon / Abdel Adrian / Bazaar of Baghdad , everything else are just random goodstuff cards that you're probably already (can be) playing.
This kills the combo for me. In MTG's beginning, the spells that could have stopped this combo were far rarer, since there weren't as much instant speed hard removal spells except for counterspells - Terror and Swords to Plowshares were the peak of it.
Now, however, the variety of cubable instant kill spells is astounding, and many also exile, which kills the option of a comeback with the combo. White has 5, the newest of which is Get Lost, Black has a ton, the newest of which is Bitter Triumph, and even Blue has Dress Down. This makes the odds of disrupting the combo far greater.
While I agree this is a big downside of the combo , there are a fair number of ways to protect the combo too.
Discard spells, counter spells and legolas' quick reflexes. Gitaxian probe to see what's up.
If a white/black deck has mana open and you aren't forced to go for it, it'll often be correct to wait until they tap out, or you draw protection.
cool!
Not sure how it'll play out. It seems at least novel, fun and powerful enough to be competitive.
Seems hard to put together a consistent-ish version of the combo, but definitely not impossible...
What I wonder is if it's worth jumping through the deck building hoops for. If you have multiple enchantment based reanimation spells.. is it worth drafing/playing the engines/finishers instead of supplemental cards better suited to reanimator?
How often is worldgorger better than another tier 2 reanimation target (given you have to make deck building concessions for it)?
My guess is it IS worth it.. Very little intuition on how many peices of the combo are required to turn the combo from janky/inconsistent to strong.
Triomes would be my 4th and final cycle of land for a 360 vintage cube and > canopy lands.
I also don't think I'd support the cards that leveraged canopy lands? I wouldn't run crucible effects outside of wrenn and six @ 360 I think?
Canopy lands are great on their own, the presence of Crucible effects don't move the needle at all on their viability. And unlike triomes, they ETB untapped and you're not restricted to choosing between playing it as a land or cashing it in for a card.
If I were forced into a situation where I can only run 1 uniform land cycle outside of fetch / dual / shock, I would snap pick a completed Horizon Canopy cycle.
My comment was ment as an aside/related point, not a justification as to why I'd pick triomes over canopy lands. Crucible effects don't move the needle on the viability of the horizon cycle, but the abscence of horizon cycle DOES move the needle on the viability of crucible effects. ESPECIALLY at low densities, where crucible effects will be most commonly paired with fastbond/exploration.
Increased fetchland density and the way power is distributed in multi-colored good stuff cards (top heavy) is what makes triomes even more valuable in a small cube than in larger cubes. ETBT is a bigger deal at small sizes, but the fetchland synergy more than offsets that.
I used to be very high on canopy lands, but I underestimated the downside cost of the pain they cause... Especially in multiples (which matters a tiny bit more at smaller cube sizes). The've dropped to my #5 slot from #4.
For my 4th cycle of lands (after duals/shocks/fetches) would you rather have most of them be:
Triomes
OR
Canopy Lands
There will be a few exceptions to the cycle (Colonnade, Tar Pit) but wondering which cycle people would think is better as the 4th and final cycle of lands in a 360 Vintage Cube.
Thanks!
Triomes would be my 4th and final cycle of land for a 360 vintage cube and > canopy lands.
I also don't think I'd support the cards that leveraged canopy lands? I wouldn't run crucible effects outside of wrenn and six @ 360 I think?
this is where I’m at too. I’m higher on surveil lands than when they were spoiled (by a lot), but not more than triomes.
Triomes are premium mana fixers.
They are incredibly efficient for cube real estate.
For example, orzhov has 3 triomes that can be played to fix for BW vs most other land cycles will only have 1 orzhov land.
if you have say a selesnya or dimir fetchland, youve increased the number of orzhov lands in the cube they can potentially fetch from 2 to 5 with just one cycle of triomes!
Outside of supporting domain, slot compression is definitely a big selling point that isn't often talked about. However, I personally don't see this coming into play until you go beyond 6 lands lots per guild unless you forsake things like Horizon Canopy / manlands / etc.
I could see not wanting to play them to reduce the # of 3-4 color decks that see play (increase the penalty to play those decks), or for variety, but not if you are trying to keep your cube max power.
I think triomes being "more max power" than surveil duals is an extremely silly notion. To quote Economist Thomas Sowell: “There are no solutions, only trade-offs": it's going to be very cube dependent. 4+ color decks have thrived long thrived in my cube before triomes were even a thing. With the combination of mana fixing options getting better in general in combination of pip requirements being lower, I've found the extra mana fixing of triomes to be extraneous more often than not. Having access to a surveil dual can be a huge difference maker between keeping a shakey hand vs a mulligan. Mana fixing becomes very superfluous much faster than card filtering / fueling the graveyard does.
To be clear, I generally do think that triomes >= surveil duals overall, but it's not completely black and white. If someone were to ask me if they should play triomes or surveil duals without any other context, I'd probably say triomes since it's a safer bet. I can see myself going back to triomes in the future when we get more domain / land type matters cards in the future, or if I want to cut my land section a bit but still want my mana fixing to be as consistent as possible. That being said, I do think there's a lot of merit in substituting triomes for surveil duals in a decent amount of cubes that want a 3rd cycle of fetchable lands but don't necessarily need the extra fixing that triomes come with.
“There are no solutions, only trade-offs" is nice poetry but doesn't apply to what I'm talking about when I say max power.
Cube design criteria is subjective, but can still be modeled. Our goal as designers should be to maximize the objective function of "fun" or "positive experience" with people who view/play our cube. Examples of constraints that can contribute to a positive play experience would be : power level, fun combos, fun archetypes, symmetry, fun gameplay, art, drafting experience etc. This is where the trade offs exist. You can't maximize one of these constraints without sacrificing another. Most of those criteria are subjective and vary person to person.
One of the least subjective of those constraints is power level. When I say "max power" I mean, maximizing the power level of your cube, independent of other contraints. This is a maximization of a constraint and there are no trade offs present there.
We likely have different definition of what that means to maximize power level, but there are plenty of proxies for it that we have direct experience with. IE A card that contributes to our overall winrate is a proxy for a cards overall power level within our cube.
Power level is what most people argue about on these forums partially because it is a constraint we value highly and it is among the least subjective.
The best objective definition I've come up with for the power level of card would be:
If everyone drafted and played perfectly game theoretically optimal, what combination of cards in a singleton cube of size n would produce the best average decks. Best would be defined as highest win % against decks from other similarly powered cubes.
(There's holes with that definition because of potential for multiple equilibria, but it's close)
tl;dr
Under my definition of power above, I estimate triomes are "more powerful" than surveil lands for a cube who's primary design constraint is most powerful average deck. It is a loose estimation of an objective measure.
That might not maximize your overall objective function of "best cube experience" and that's where the trade offs come in.
I like these lands in testing so far ...but not more than Triomes. Unless you're actively trying to prevent multicolor control decks from being too good, Triomes are pretty sick lands.
this is where I’m at too. I’m higher on surveil lands than when they were spoiled (by a lot), but not more than triomes.
Triomes are premium mana fixers.
They are incredibly efficient for cube real estate.
For example, orzhov has 3 triomes that can be played to fix for BW vs most other land cycles will only have 1 orzhov land.
if you have say a selesnya or dimir fetchland, youve increased the number of orzhov lands in the cube they can potentially fetch from 2 to 5 with just one cycle of triomes!
I could see not wanting to play them to reduce the # of 3-4 color decks that see play (increase the penalty to play those decks), or for variety, but not if you are trying to keep your cube max power.
I like kaldra more. It’s tier 1 stoneforge equipment that also is totally playable in some artifact shells. If I ever get a creature based stoneforge + artifact deck it’s a high premium pick.
I didn’t test too much ASI, cut it early in the testing process back when it was spoiled, but remember feeling medium-whelmed. I feel plenty saturated with options for the decks that want it. A fine card, but not special.
There are decks where going into pack 3 , kaldra could be a top 30-40 sought after pick, and I value that upside highly.
I also value constructed pedigree when assessing a cube card, but ymmv.
His youtube channel is also a great channel to learn how to think about drafting cube (and it's entertaining).
I get the most insight into how to draft combo from him, especially in a cube that doesn't focus on archetypes.
Pia isn't good enough for good stuff decks or red agressive decks anymore, but she's still a good card in artifact synergy decks.
Great on defense , good at retaking the monarch and when you have a lot of mana she is a strong finisher.
I cut her a while ago, but it was a cut I wasn't happy to make.
I think this might actually be slightly better than Shadowspear in Saga deck because:
1. It can give the summoning sick Karnstruct haste, which is a huge beating - get to swing with 2 large Karnstructs immediately rather than 1
2. Being 1 to equip rather than 2 is a big difference - means greater probability of immediately being able to equip after fetching with Saga.
I think this might actually be slightly better than Shadowspear in Saga deck because:
1. It can give the summoning sick Karnstruct haste, which is a huge beating - get to swing with 2 large Karnstructs immediately rather than 1
2. Being 1 to equip rather than 2 is a big difference - means greater probability of immediately being able to equip after fetching with Saga.
I strongly disagree that this is a better urzas target than shadowspear in most saga/artifact decks.
hasted damage is way less important than Lifelink and trample on a big karnstruct token.
there’s exceptions, but that’s mostly for decks where lightning greaves is a great card.. e.g show and tell , tinker, eureka style decks that want to haste a blightsteel/eldrazi before the opponent can untap.
Yeah, I like this.
Lower on the totem pole relative to current green 3's, but it's a solid agressive splashable 3 drop for green that has a sub-counters theme (but doesn't require it).
I've been looking to shift green more agressive and this card could be part of a new wave of cards that hopefully take green in that direction.
Shuffle effects are a pretty big deal for brainstorm. The lack of them, can demote a card from one of the best cards ever printed, restricted in vintage level quality, into simply a "good card".
If you are digging to a combo and brick on your brainstorm, you effectively got no deeper to the combo than if you played a U: draw a card.
However, getting 3 cards deeper in a single turn can often get you to a type of card that you are looking for.
There's also additional utility like putting lands on the top of your deck for courser/dark confidant,
putting tutor targets back from your hand to in your libary for tinker/natural order, protecting your hand from thoughtseize,
setting up miracles.
With zero shuffle effects in your whole deck, sleight of hand is prob similar power level, maybe a little better?
Not confident about their relative strength. With a couple shuffle effects, brainstorm blows it out of the water.
The recent addition of the land cyclers have put more cubeable shufflers in the format.
Fwiw when I say “blue deck” I mean a deck where blue is a primary or significant secondary color.
There are plenty of blue shells that are pretty creature heavy where Seedshark isn't idea: UR Kiki-Twin / UW blink / UB Recurring Nightmare / UG Survival / many UX tempo shells / a good amount of artifacts matters decks are getting creature heavy / etc.
I see oath of druids as a near pointless comparison. Oath decks in cubes I draft come together like 1/100 decks… and even if they came together more (as is clearly the case in some cubes here). Shark typhoon is not a good card in them, it’s a low priority playable.
YMMV, but Oath of Druids comes together in my cube all the time since I heavily support cheaty face (and Oath of Druids is probably the deck I force the most). Shark Typhoon is often a card that will make the deck since it's a cantrip that can buy time or steal initiative / monarch in a pinch.
I think chrome host is better than all the other spells matters cards.
The highest average case performance and only less upside than mentor.
This I generally agree with, the only spells matters card I think that is better than Seedshark is Third Path Iconoclast. Mentor has a high ceiling, but its average case scenario in a singleton environment is so bad that I ended up cutting it from my cube. Shark is pretty much everything I wanted mentor to be in terms of defensive prowess and generating value through a sweeper.
Yeah I dont think i'd play mentor in an unpowered cube tbh. Reasonable cut.
I may be over-estimating the % of blue decks chrome host is good in, but high confidence >60%, low confidence ~75-80%.
It's rare I play a deck where >25% of my nonlands are blue and there are more creatures than non-creaturs.
Unlike mentor/pyromancer, you don't need to "go off" with shark for it to be a strong card because of how good the body is. A few 4+ CMC non-creature spells and a deck that's ~50%+ non-creature spells is really all that's needed.
With Tolarian Academy and/or multiple alternative casting cards like FOW/Pyrokenesis/Fireblast/Leyline binding it can be really powerful.
My experience with spells matters payoffs such as Young Pyromancer / Monastery Mentor is they are incredibly play draw dependent. TBH I dread having to play UR spells matters/ tempo in limited as I've observed win rate discrepancies as far as 70/30 (Khans/ Brother's War Limited for example).
I found the problem with this card extends even further that this effect itself is also very feast/ famine. For every game you get to Sea Chrome + Force of Will, you'll have games where you have to pay 2-4 mana just to have a 1/1 and a 2/2 on the field.
I've found that we have enough spells matters payoffs that we could cut this for the next set.
I think chrome host is better than all the other spells matters cards.
The highest average case performance and only less upside than mentor.
While I agree this is a big downside of the combo , there are a fair number of ways to protect the combo too.
Discard spells, counter spells and legolas' quick reflexes. Gitaxian probe to see what's up.
If a white/black deck has mana open and you aren't forced to go for it, it'll often be correct to wait until they tap out, or you draw protection.
Not sure how it'll play out. It seems at least novel, fun and powerful enough to be competitive.
Seems hard to put together a consistent-ish version of the combo, but definitely not impossible...
What I wonder is if it's worth jumping through the deck building hoops for. If you have multiple enchantment based reanimation spells.. is it worth drafing/playing the engines/finishers instead of supplemental cards better suited to reanimator?
How often is worldgorger better than another tier 2 reanimation target (given you have to make deck building concessions for it)?
My guess is it IS worth it.. Very little intuition on how many peices of the combo are required to turn the combo from janky/inconsistent to strong.
If anyone tests, curious how the experiences are.
My comment was ment as an aside/related point, not a justification as to why I'd pick triomes over canopy lands. Crucible effects don't move the needle on the viability of the horizon cycle, but the abscence of horizon cycle DOES move the needle on the viability of crucible effects. ESPECIALLY at low densities, where crucible effects will be most commonly paired with fastbond/exploration.
Increased fetchland density and the way power is distributed in multi-colored good stuff cards (top heavy) is what makes triomes even more valuable in a small cube than in larger cubes. ETBT is a bigger deal at small sizes, but the fetchland synergy more than offsets that.
I used to be very high on canopy lands, but I underestimated the downside cost of the pain they cause... Especially in multiples (which matters a tiny bit more at smaller cube sizes). The've dropped to my #5 slot from #4.
Triomes would be my 4th and final cycle of land for a 360 vintage cube and > canopy lands.
I also don't think I'd support the cards that leveraged canopy lands? I wouldn't run crucible effects outside of wrenn and six @ 360 I think?
“There are no solutions, only trade-offs" is nice poetry but doesn't apply to what I'm talking about when I say max power.
Cube design criteria is subjective, but can still be modeled. Our goal as designers should be to maximize the objective function of "fun" or "positive experience" with people who view/play our cube. Examples of constraints that can contribute to a positive play experience would be : power level, fun combos, fun archetypes, symmetry, fun gameplay, art, drafting experience etc. This is where the trade offs exist. You can't maximize one of these constraints without sacrificing another. Most of those criteria are subjective and vary person to person.
One of the least subjective of those constraints is power level. When I say "max power" I mean, maximizing the power level of your cube, independent of other contraints. This is a maximization of a constraint and there are no trade offs present there.
We likely have different definition of what that means to maximize power level, but there are plenty of proxies for it that we have direct experience with. IE A card that contributes to our overall winrate is a proxy for a cards overall power level within our cube.
Power level is what most people argue about on these forums partially because it is a constraint we value highly and it is among the least subjective.
The best objective definition I've come up with for the power level of card would be:
If everyone drafted and played perfectly game theoretically optimal, what combination of cards in a singleton cube of size n would produce the best average decks. Best would be defined as highest win % against decks from other similarly powered cubes.
(There's holes with that definition because of potential for multiple equilibria, but it's close)
tl;dr
Under my definition of power above, I estimate triomes are "more powerful" than surveil lands for a cube who's primary design constraint is most powerful average deck. It is a loose estimation of an objective measure.
That might not maximize your overall objective function of "best cube experience" and that's where the trade offs come in.
this is where I’m at too. I’m higher on surveil lands than when they were spoiled (by a lot), but not more than triomes.
Triomes are premium mana fixers.
They are incredibly efficient for cube real estate.
For example, orzhov has 3 triomes that can be played to fix for BW vs most other land cycles will only have 1 orzhov land.
if you have say a selesnya or dimir fetchland, youve increased the number of orzhov lands in the cube they can potentially fetch from 2 to 5 with just one cycle of triomes!
I could see not wanting to play them to reduce the # of 3-4 color decks that see play (increase the penalty to play those decks), or for variety, but not if you are trying to keep your cube max power.
Chrome Host Seedshark >> Trinket Mage > Tishana's Tidebinder > Aether Channeler
I like kaldra more. It’s tier 1 stoneforge equipment that also is totally playable in some artifact shells. If I ever get a creature based stoneforge + artifact deck it’s a high premium pick.
I didn’t test too much ASI, cut it early in the testing process back when it was spoiled, but remember feeling medium-whelmed. I feel plenty saturated with options for the decks that want it. A fine card, but not special.
There are decks where going into pack 3 , kaldra could be a top 30-40 sought after pick, and I value that upside highly.
I also value constructed pedigree when assessing a cube card, but ymmv.
Go to timestamp 11:21 where LSV talks about dig through time.
Mirrors my thoughts exactly.
His youtube channel is also a great channel to learn how to think about drafting cube (and it's entertaining).
I get the most insight into how to draft combo from him, especially in a cube that doesn't focus on archetypes.
Great on defense , good at retaking the monarch and when you have a lot of mana she is a strong finisher.
I cut her a while ago, but it was a cut I wasn't happy to make.
I strongly disagree that this is a better urzas target than shadowspear in most saga/artifact decks.
hasted damage is way less important than Lifelink and trample on a big karnstruct token.
there’s exceptions, but that’s mostly for decks where lightning greaves is a great card.. e.g show and tell , tinker, eureka style decks that want to haste a blightsteel/eldrazi before the opponent can untap.
Lower on the totem pole relative to current green 3's, but it's a solid agressive splashable 3 drop for green that has a sub-counters theme (but doesn't require it).
I've been looking to shift green more agressive and this card could be part of a new wave of cards that hopefully take green in that direction.
Looking forward to curve this into inti, seneschal of the sun (or vice versa)
If you are digging to a combo and brick on your brainstorm, you effectively got no deeper to the combo than if you played a U: draw a card.
However, getting 3 cards deeper in a single turn can often get you to a type of card that you are looking for.
There's also additional utility like putting lands on the top of your deck for courser/dark confidant,
putting tutor targets back from your hand to in your libary for tinker/natural order, protecting your hand from thoughtseize,
setting up miracles.
With zero shuffle effects in your whole deck, sleight of hand is prob similar power level, maybe a little better?
Not confident about their relative strength. With a couple shuffle effects, brainstorm blows it out of the water.
The recent addition of the land cyclers have put more cubeable shufflers in the format.
Yeah I dont think i'd play mentor in an unpowered cube tbh. Reasonable cut.
I may be over-estimating the % of blue decks chrome host is good in, but high confidence >60%, low confidence ~75-80%.
It's rare I play a deck where >25% of my nonlands are blue and there are more creatures than non-creaturs.
Unlike mentor/pyromancer, you don't need to "go off" with shark for it to be a strong card because of how good the body is. A few 4+ CMC non-creature spells and a deck that's ~50%+ non-creature spells is really all that's needed.
With Tolarian Academy and/or multiple alternative casting cards like FOW/Pyrokenesis/Fireblast/Leyline binding it can be really powerful.
I think chrome host is better than all the other spells matters cards.
The highest average case performance and only less upside than mentor.