I like Timeless Dragon. I've cubed it before. 1 mana vs 2 is so much on the cycling side though, that I feel they play very differently as cards that secure land drops. Dragon is more for value, Eagles are more for utility.
Persist is a solid reanimation spell, and I would encourage testing it if it interests you and your playgroup.
I saw you went up to 630 cards and am stoked to look more closely at the changes + get your feedback on a lot of the cards you’re trying. A lot of the stuff you added was stuff I recently added around 540 or am thinking of adding. I’m curious how the “combo” cards play out for you. I didn’t add as many but have been liking how they have been playing out.
I plan on doing a writeup soon that will explain the philosophy behind the change to 630.
I'm really looking forward to it! The problem is the MTGO Vintage Cube has been incredibly badly managed for years and I find your insights are becoming key in today's environment
Either way, I'll explain why I elected to make my changes, and that's all I can do.
Without trying to sound pushy! (Apologies if I do!) I was wondering if you got around to doing this? I'm really interested in your explanation and I'm worried in just looking in the wrong places for it.
This includes your thoughts on the latest changes that have happened since - hearing your thoughts is always very helpful
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My 420 card Unpowered Vintage Cube:
- Cube Cobra (up-to-date)
- MTG Salvation (outdated; my posts seem to have been deleted at some point, unfortunately)
Here's a crosspost from my CubeCobra blog that discusses my thoughts on the increase to 630:
..........
For those that have been following my content for years, you know that big shakeups in my cube are not something I’m afraid to do. I’ve run every size from 360 to 720, and have experimented with a lot of different archetypes and structural arrangements. I aim to find the best environment I can cultivate for my playgroup, regardless of what that takes to achieve.
In recent months, I had been observing a few things while drafting my cube that I wasn’t 100% happy with, but was unsure of how to go about solving the issues. Overall, the list still played great, and didn’t require any major changes to run smoothly, but I wanted to run some thought exercises to see if I could make some adjustments and see if it would improve gameplay overall.
The issues:
1. I wanted to reduce the density of 3+ color cards and 3+ color mana fixing. Decks were often deep into 3 or more colors, and it didn’t take much discipline to draft functional manabases to make them work. I want those decks to be draftable and competitive, but I want it to require effort to assemble them. But I really like the tri-lands and the 3+ color cards in the cube, and didn’t want to remove them.
2. I wanted to increase the concentration of mono-colored and colorless cards by percentage without sacrificing the suite of guild cards I had in the cube.
3. I wanted to reduce the density of mana rocks without sacrificing the infrastructure I had built around them. Basically, playing with both Signets and Talisman felt like too much at 540, but only running one of the two cycles didn’t feel like enough. The big rocks used for super-ramp, upheaval and wildfire shells are great in those decks, but were representing too much of the pool.
The solution that jumped out was an increase in size. By moving the cube to 630, I could keep my guild and multicolor infrastructure together, but by adding in mostly monocolored and colorless cards, and no additional 3+ color identity cards, I could keep the multicolored cards I wanted to play and decrease their density at the same time. By adding in only one more cycle of fixing lands, I could bolster the support for 2-color decks without adding to the fixing density for 4+ color control. Additionally, the includes could be free of additional mana rocks, allowing me to keep in the suite of cards I wanted to run but reduce the frequency in which they take up real estate in my packs.
Additional benefits showed up when I explored the size increase as well. I was gifted the real estate to re-include archetypes like lands and storm, which I couldn’t find room for before. It gave me the flexibility to include a few more powerful guild cards and another suite of guild fixing without tinkering with the suite of 3+ color cards. It provided me the room to smooth out the curve in various places that had become compressed due to the powerlevels of cards in given spots.
Overall, it’s been playing well at 630 and I’m enjoying the feel of the cube. Mana rocks are available, but not in a dominating density. Mana fixing is better for 2-color decks and decks that are splashing, and building 4+ color goodstuff/control is still viable (but now takes appropriate effort). I hope it has been playing well for those folks that closely follow my list too, and I’m always taking feedback.
Thank you for your insight!
I will stay at 420, since this is ideal for Burn-2 drafts for 4 players that run relatively infrequently, and I am not interested in Storm, but all your changes still heavily influence my updates as well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My 420 card Unpowered Vintage Cube:
- Cube Cobra (up-to-date)
- MTG Salvation (outdated; my posts seem to have been deleted at some point, unfortunately)
I'm actually on a bit of a different path is that I actively would like to see more 3c-4c decks because I just really like seeing interactions like end of turn, Collected Company into Uro/ Grist/ Broadside etc. I found archetypes, especially Flicker, Artifacts.dec, Persist, Storm etc. receive a significant boast as a 3c/ 4c archetype without devoting enormous amounts of real estate supporting it.
I have a similar dilemma which is that I really like the Surveil lands, but I'm unwilling to part with my Manlands. I'm considering cutting 2 mono color cards and adding the Surveil Lands or just adding the Surveil lands and going to 730.
Interesting! I like the idea and the concept.
Thank you for taking the time to write it up.
Now I think to consider if I want to increase my cube size, however, it currently has an "expansion" cube to allow it to increase to 720 if plenty of people want to play it.
Thank you for the food for thought.
Hey Wtwlf! I know you dropped the red storm cards. If you were still playing them, would you consider playing Elemental Eruption over Empty the Warrens?
Maybe. I'm not sure. Eruption is more powerful, but Warrens has that potential early play for like 6-8 goblins that can randomly win games, and plays better in Purphoros decks and stuff.
hi, wtwlf123, our playgroup is following your decklist and here is one of my member of the playgroup thoughts.
'''
I wonder what you guys think of dice-rolling effects, specifically Comet, Stellar Pup, in the vintage cube. Last week I managed to tinker blight steel colossus on the battlefield. Then I got insta killed simply because my opponent casted Comet and rolled 6 and two 4. The dice rolling effect is not about deck building or any magic skills. This is no skill just luck. This is not MAGIC. I wonder if you have the same feeling and therefore, considering removing Comet from the vintage cube.
'''
thanks a lot for your cube list which brings us a lot of fun. Looking forward to your reply.
If you don't enjoy cubing with Comet, you should remove it.
But to be honest, I don't disagree with you. I don't like Comet either. Not because it's too good, but because I have no control over what it does. All its abilities are powerful, and collectively it's above rate, but the lack of control over what it does has led to a lot of disappointing performances. It's on the block for me for consistency issues, and I don't expect it to be in my cube forever.
I'm crossposting this over from another thread since it pertains to my cube and my meta, and don't want it to get lost in the sauce:
Quote from LucidVision »
In the cubes I've been playing (my own, LSV and MTGO), "savannah lion" agro is dead.
Agro decks now are actually agressive mid-range decks. That's partially by design and partially because of how the format's evolved.
There are cubes where this is the case, and there are lists where this is not. I think it has more to do with the intentional design of the format and less to do with the natural evolution of the cardpool. I think it has a lot to do with the players' desires to see certain types of cards and decks sculpt their experiences, too. The strength of savannah lion aggro isn't limited by the quality of the 2-4 drops (it was king even in the era where signet -> 4-drop was the best thing you could be doing) ...the curtailing of its power came from the de-popularizing of traditional control. In cubes that don't play traditional control shells, the incentive to draft a hyper aggressive aggro deck drops off, because the decks it's good against don't appear like they usually do. The more aggressive midrange decks got, the less "traditional" control decks needed to look to compete. As control decks got faster and leaner, there is less incentive to draft aggro because your edge against that portion of the table got slimmer. So the homogenization of the cube into various speeds of midrange piles has less to do with aggro being edged out and more to do with players being unwilling to draft/support traditional control.
I would make the opposite argument for the need for savannah lion aggro right now. Dedicated, traditional draw-go control is still a stellar archetype if you're both willing to support it and have players that want to draft it. It actually has a very good matchup against the multicolor midrange goodstuff decks that cubes have naturally evolved into thanks to the influx of powerful 3-5cc cards that had gone by the wayside for a while. In my environment, for example, having multiple dedicated control decks (like true control, not mana rocks and expensive threats like new players seem to think make up "control" decks) show up in every event makes drafting zoo aggro an appealing option still. In the mtgo cube where the control meta is dead, that incentive is gone, and therefore savannah lion aggro is gone.
I think the evolution in the powerlevel of 3-4cc cards has made midrange decks better. Which hurts the validity of traditional aggro, unless your playgroup has responded by drafting more control to combat midrange. My playgroup did the latter, and I've continued to support bigger control decks in an era where pruning them down for more midrange has been the popular approach. The result has been an increased level of importance (and performance, for that matter) from my traditional aggro shells, as it's far and away the most effective tool for beating traditional control, which has seen a natural increase in powerlevel due to the evolution of powerful midrange cards making those decks better. It's been a beautiful balance to see unfold, and it's unfortunate that a lot of playgroups don't get to experience it because those patterns don't exist for their respective groups.
Anyways, just my $0.02. I think it highlights the beauty of this format perfectly. Cheers, and happy cubing everybody.
Persist is a solid reanimation spell, and I would encourage testing it if it interests you and your playgroup.
Glad you enjoyed the review!
Cheers, and happy cubing.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/articles-podcasts-and-guides/831476-set-p-review-my-top-20-lost-murders-at-karlov
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
I'm really looking forward to it! The problem is the MTGO Vintage Cube has been incredibly badly managed for years and I find your insights are becoming key in today's environment
Either way, I'll explain why I elected to make my changes, and that's all I can do.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
Without trying to sound pushy! (Apologies if I do!) I was wondering if you got around to doing this? I'm really interested in your explanation and I'm worried in just looking in the wrong places for it.
Thank you!
This includes your thoughts on the latest changes that have happened since - hearing your thoughts is always very helpful
- Cube Cobra (up-to-date)
- MTG Salvation (outdated; my posts seem to have been deleted at some point, unfortunately)
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
..........
For those that have been following my content for years, you know that big shakeups in my cube are not something I’m afraid to do. I’ve run every size from 360 to 720, and have experimented with a lot of different archetypes and structural arrangements. I aim to find the best environment I can cultivate for my playgroup, regardless of what that takes to achieve.
In recent months, I had been observing a few things while drafting my cube that I wasn’t 100% happy with, but was unsure of how to go about solving the issues. Overall, the list still played great, and didn’t require any major changes to run smoothly, but I wanted to run some thought exercises to see if I could make some adjustments and see if it would improve gameplay overall.
The issues:
1. I wanted to reduce the density of 3+ color cards and 3+ color mana fixing. Decks were often deep into 3 or more colors, and it didn’t take much discipline to draft functional manabases to make them work. I want those decks to be draftable and competitive, but I want it to require effort to assemble them. But I really like the tri-lands and the 3+ color cards in the cube, and didn’t want to remove them.
2. I wanted to increase the concentration of mono-colored and colorless cards by percentage without sacrificing the suite of guild cards I had in the cube.
3. I wanted to reduce the density of mana rocks without sacrificing the infrastructure I had built around them. Basically, playing with both Signets and Talisman felt like too much at 540, but only running one of the two cycles didn’t feel like enough. The big rocks used for super-ramp, upheaval and wildfire shells are great in those decks, but were representing too much of the pool.
The solution that jumped out was an increase in size. By moving the cube to 630, I could keep my guild and multicolor infrastructure together, but by adding in mostly monocolored and colorless cards, and no additional 3+ color identity cards, I could keep the multicolored cards I wanted to play and decrease their density at the same time. By adding in only one more cycle of fixing lands, I could bolster the support for 2-color decks without adding to the fixing density for 4+ color control. Additionally, the includes could be free of additional mana rocks, allowing me to keep in the suite of cards I wanted to run but reduce the frequency in which they take up real estate in my packs.
Additional benefits showed up when I explored the size increase as well. I was gifted the real estate to re-include archetypes like lands and storm, which I couldn’t find room for before. It gave me the flexibility to include a few more powerful guild cards and another suite of guild fixing without tinkering with the suite of 3+ color cards. It provided me the room to smooth out the curve in various places that had become compressed due to the powerlevels of cards in given spots.
Overall, it’s been playing well at 630 and I’m enjoying the feel of the cube. Mana rocks are available, but not in a dominating density. Mana fixing is better for 2-color decks and decks that are splashing, and building 4+ color goodstuff/control is still viable (but now takes appropriate effort). I hope it has been playing well for those folks that closely follow my list too, and I’m always taking feedback.
As always, cheers, and happy cubing!
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
I will stay at 420, since this is ideal for Burn-2 drafts for 4 players that run relatively infrequently, and I am not interested in Storm, but all your changes still heavily influence my updates as well.
- Cube Cobra (up-to-date)
- MTG Salvation (outdated; my posts seem to have been deleted at some point, unfortunately)
I'm actually on a bit of a different path is that I actively would like to see more 3c-4c decks because I just really like seeing interactions like end of turn, Collected Company into Uro/ Grist/ Broadside etc. I found archetypes, especially Flicker, Artifacts.dec, Persist, Storm etc. receive a significant boast as a 3c/ 4c archetype without devoting enormous amounts of real estate supporting it.
I have a similar dilemma which is that I really like the Surveil lands, but I'm unwilling to part with my Manlands. I'm considering cutting 2 mono color cards and adding the Surveil Lands or just adding the Surveil lands and going to 730.
Thank you for taking the time to write it up.
Now I think to consider if I want to increase my cube size, however, it currently has an "expansion" cube to allow it to increase to 720 if plenty of people want to play it.
Thank you for the food for thought.
Maybe. I'm not sure. Eruption is more powerful, but Warrens has that potential early play for like 6-8 goblins that can randomly win games, and plays better in Purphoros decks and stuff.
OTJ article is up!
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/articles-podcasts-and-guides/832066-set-p-review-my-top-20-outlaws-of-thunder-junction
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
'''
I wonder what you guys think of dice-rolling effects, specifically Comet, Stellar Pup, in the vintage cube. Last week I managed to tinker blight steel colossus on the battlefield. Then I got insta killed simply because my opponent casted Comet and rolled 6 and two 4. The dice rolling effect is not about deck building or any magic skills. This is no skill just luck. This is not MAGIC. I wonder if you have the same feeling and therefore, considering removing Comet from the vintage cube.
'''
thanks a lot for your cube list which brings us a lot of fun. Looking forward to your reply.
But to be honest, I don't disagree with you. I don't like Comet either. Not because it's too good, but because I have no control over what it does. All its abilities are powerful, and collectively it's above rate, but the lack of control over what it does has led to a lot of disappointing performances. It's on the block for me for consistency issues, and I don't expect it to be in my cube forever.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
There are cubes where this is the case, and there are lists where this is not. I think it has more to do with the intentional design of the format and less to do with the natural evolution of the cardpool. I think it has a lot to do with the players' desires to see certain types of cards and decks sculpt their experiences, too. The strength of savannah lion aggro isn't limited by the quality of the 2-4 drops (it was king even in the era where signet -> 4-drop was the best thing you could be doing) ...the curtailing of its power came from the de-popularizing of traditional control. In cubes that don't play traditional control shells, the incentive to draft a hyper aggressive aggro deck drops off, because the decks it's good against don't appear like they usually do. The more aggressive midrange decks got, the less "traditional" control decks needed to look to compete. As control decks got faster and leaner, there is less incentive to draft aggro because your edge against that portion of the table got slimmer. So the homogenization of the cube into various speeds of midrange piles has less to do with aggro being edged out and more to do with players being unwilling to draft/support traditional control.
I would make the opposite argument for the need for savannah lion aggro right now. Dedicated, traditional draw-go control is still a stellar archetype if you're both willing to support it and have players that want to draft it. It actually has a very good matchup against the multicolor midrange goodstuff decks that cubes have naturally evolved into thanks to the influx of powerful 3-5cc cards that had gone by the wayside for a while. In my environment, for example, having multiple dedicated control decks (like true control, not mana rocks and expensive threats like new players seem to think make up "control" decks) show up in every event makes drafting zoo aggro an appealing option still. In the mtgo cube where the control meta is dead, that incentive is gone, and therefore savannah lion aggro is gone.
I think the evolution in the powerlevel of 3-4cc cards has made midrange decks better. Which hurts the validity of traditional aggro, unless your playgroup has responded by drafting more control to combat midrange. My playgroup did the latter, and I've continued to support bigger control decks in an era where pruning them down for more midrange has been the popular approach. The result has been an increased level of importance (and performance, for that matter) from my traditional aggro shells, as it's far and away the most effective tool for beating traditional control, which has seen a natural increase in powerlevel due to the evolution of powerful midrange cards making those decks better. It's been a beautiful balance to see unfold, and it's unfortunate that a lot of playgroups don't get to experience it because those patterns don't exist for their respective groups.
Anyways, just my $0.02. I think it highlights the beauty of this format perfectly. Cheers, and happy cubing everybody.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!