That test doesn't work because Tezz only works in a certain subset of UB decks, not all of them.
Doesn't matter. If only 1:8 of your U/B decks will be playing the card. It isn't worth running over a card that your UB decks actually do want to play. If that's the case your cube needs more Blue and Black "artifact" cards before running Tez becomes worth it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
That's the remarkable thing about life. It's never so bad that it can't get worse
Calvin and Hobbes Cube Tutor
Doesn't matter. If only 1:8 of your U/B decks will be playing the card. It isn't worth running over a card that your UB decks actually do want to play. If that's the case your cube needs more Blue and Black "artifact" cards before running Tez becomes worth it.
It clearly does matter. Maybe the deck wouldn't play Tezz but if it drafted him it would've picked differently to be able to play it. The if this was X test, is problematic to begin with for that reason, but it's especially true for a card as linear as Tezz 2.0
My point is, Multicolored cards by there very definition have a narrower application than a mono colored card. Specific situation cards like Tezz 2.0 are also narrow in their application. If you stick a archetype specific card (and by that I mean not one of the three big archetypes) on a card that can only be played in specific colored decks at the same time. If you were to draft that card in that color of a deck and still not want to play it, it's better to use a more ubiquitous effect in that slot instead.
If tezz 2.0 was mono colored I would be willing to play it because it's not narrow + narrow on one card. But as is, I'm not willing to use one of my very limited UB slots on a card that won't see play (most of the time) if I'm playing both swamps and islands in my deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
That's the remarkable thing about life. It's never so bad that it can't get worse
Calvin and Hobbes Cube Tutor
My point is, Multicolored cards by there very definition have a narrower application than a mono colored card. Specific situation cards like Tezz 2.0 are also narrow in their application. If you stick a archetype specific card (and by that I mean not one of the three big archetypes) on a card that can only be played in specific colored decks at the same time. If you were to draft that card in that color of a deck and still not want to play it, it's better to use a more ubiquitous effect in that slot instead.
If tezz 2.0 was mono colored I would be willing to play it because it's not narrow + narrow on one card. But as is, I'm not willing to use one of my very limited UB slots on a card that won't see play (most of the time) if I'm playing both swamps and islands in my deck.
I see this going the same route that the venser debate went as they are both two colored cards that are only good in certain decks. While I agree with you that multicolor cards are already limited in the decks they can go in so they shouldn't have any other restrictions, people are still going to do it.
My point is, Multicolored cards by there very definition have a narrower application than a mono colored card. Specific situation cards like Tezz 2.0 are also narrow in their application. If you stick a archetype specific card (and by that I mean not one of the three big archetypes) on a card that can only be played in specific colored decks at the same time. If you were to draft that card in that color of a deck and still not want to play it, it's better to use a more ubiquitous effect in that slot instead.
If tezz 2.0 was mono colored I would be willing to play it because it's not narrow + narrow on one card. But as is, I'm not willing to use one of my very limited UB slots on a card that won't see play (most of the time) if I'm playing both swamps and islands in my deck.
Fair Enough. I can see your point in that the situation where the card is playable is quite restricted. On the other hand, I can see the reverse argument for multicolored cards. That is, they're limiting to begin with so they should either be significantly better than single-colored options or provide a unique effect. Oona might be playable in more decks, but Oona doesn't really make any UB decks significantly better. You ought to be able to get enough UB finishers without her. Whereas Tezz will see a lot less play when he does see play he'll be an all-star. Put another way, if I see Tezz I can take it and build around it where as Oona will always be just another fatty.
I'm ok with swapping out palinchron from a power perspective, but not from an awesome perspective. Palinchron is just so cool.
Well, I think drawing 3 times as many cards as my opponents is pretty awesome!
And I'm looking forward to testing Tezz. I'm stoked to have another key card in the cube for the artifact archetype, which is always cool when it comes together. It will happen more often with Tezz 2.0 in the mix.
I've tested Future Sight, and I wanna test the Sphinx and compare which one generates more CA on average, and determine if there's value in running the Sphinx as a non-finisher CA investment card (like you would with FS or Opportunity, etc).
I didn't want to include Consecrated Sphinx because I thought it was worse than all of my blue finishers, but looking at is that way, I will try her in Opportunity's place. Both are card drawers for 4UU and while the one is an instant, the other one can block, attack and potentially draw a lot more cards than four.
Well, I think drawing 3 times as many cards as my opponents is pretty awesome!
And I'm looking forward to testing Tezz. I'm stoked to have another key card in the cube for the artifact archetype, which is always cool when it comes together. It will happen more often with Tezz 2.0 in the mix.
It is, but it's not infinte mana awesome. U'm going to add in the sphinx. Just saying that Palinchron is more awesome, not that the Sphinx isn't awesome.
Aaah, I see what you mean now. Bouncelands aren't good in our cube so the infinite mana thing hasn't ever happened with Palinchron - I guess we only have Tolarian Academy to pull it off. Infinite mana is pretty awesome.
Aaah, I see what you mean now. Bouncelands aren't good in our cube so the infinite mana thing hasn't ever happened with Palinchron - I guess we only have Tolarian Academy to pull it off. Infinite mana is pretty awesome.
Rec. Nightmare also does it. Or Mirari's Wake. Or Mana Flare (but I'm pretty certain I'm the only person running that)
While Palinchron is the weakest blue finisher that I run, I still liked him more than Consecrated Sphinx. Since I started thinking of the new Sphinx as an alternative to Opportunity though, I like it a lot more and will include it in addition to the finishers.
Palinchron is a beast. I won't be replacing it for anything that's currently been printed. The new Sphinx needs testing, but I won't be including it in a creature light control deck with the intent of it finishing my opponent (like Palinchron). I'll be including it in mid-range decks and creature heavy control, where he'll be right at home. If he doesn't pan out, I'll simply replace it with something else. But it's one of those cards that requires testing to see what it's capable of.
Palinchron is a beast. I won't be replacing it for anything that's currently been printed. The new Sphinx needs testing, but I won't be including it in a creature light control deck with the intent of it finishing my opponent (like Palinchron). I'll be including it in mid-range decks and creature heavy control, where he'll be right at home. If he doesn't pan out, I'll simply replace it with something else. But it's one of those cards that requires testing to see what it's capable of.
This ^
Heck I'm thinking it might even be a decent top of the curve in a variety of midrange decks. The thought of getting this down after Kira makes me a happy camper.
Doesn't matter. If only 1:8 of your U/B decks will be playing the card. It isn't worth running over a card that your UB decks actually do want to play. If that's the case your cube needs more Blue and Black "artifact" cards before running Tez becomes worth it.
Calvin and Hobbes
Cube Tutor
It clearly does matter. Maybe the deck wouldn't play Tezz but if it drafted him it would've picked differently to be able to play it. The if this was X test, is problematic to begin with for that reason, but it's especially true for a card as linear as Tezz 2.0
If tezz 2.0 was mono colored I would be willing to play it because it's not narrow + narrow on one card. But as is, I'm not willing to use one of my very limited UB slots on a card that won't see play (most of the time) if I'm playing both swamps and islands in my deck.
Calvin and Hobbes
Cube Tutor
I see this going the same route that the venser debate went as they are both two colored cards that are only good in certain decks. While I agree with you that multicolor cards are already limited in the decks they can go in so they shouldn't have any other restrictions, people are still going to do it.
Draft my cube!
Watch me stream!
Fair Enough. I can see your point in that the situation where the card is playable is quite restricted. On the other hand, I can see the reverse argument for multicolored cards. That is, they're limiting to begin with so they should either be significantly better than single-colored options or provide a unique effect. Oona might be playable in more decks, but Oona doesn't really make any UB decks significantly better. You ought to be able to get enough UB finishers without her. Whereas Tezz will see a lot less play when he does see play he'll be an all-star. Put another way, if I see Tezz I can take it and build around it where as Oona will always be just another fatty.
Well, I think drawing 3 times as many cards as my opponents is pretty awesome!
And I'm looking forward to testing Tezz. I'm stoked to have another key card in the cube for the artifact archetype, which is always cool when it comes together. It will happen more often with Tezz 2.0 in the mix.
I didn't want to include Consecrated Sphinx because I thought it was worse than all of my blue finishers, but looking at is that way, I will try her in Opportunity's place. Both are card drawers for 4UU and while the one is an instant, the other one can block, attack and potentially draw a lot more cards than four.
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
It is, but it's not infinte mana awesome. U'm going to add in the sphinx. Just saying that Palinchron is more awesome, not that the Sphinx isn't awesome.
Rec. Nightmare also does it. Or Mirari's Wake. Or Mana Flare (but I'm pretty certain I'm the only person running that)
While Palinchron is the weakest blue finisher that I run, I still liked him more than Consecrated Sphinx. Since I started thinking of the new Sphinx as an alternative to Opportunity though, I like it a lot more and will include it in addition to the finishers.
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
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!
Now I'm compelled to check.
But I won't.
My Pauper Cube ♤ The Pauper Cube Thread Common Knowledge — 1 2
This ^
Heck I'm thinking it might even be a decent top of the curve in a variety of midrange decks. The thought of getting this down after Kira makes me a happy camper.
http://hgcube.blogspot.com/ (help me Make my Custom CUBE!)
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=382498
The "Make a Proxy Thread
Redit Proxy Article "current gallery"
MY LEGACY ALTERS