I've added closing notes for the 2-drops. Take a look, tell me if I've missed something, and we'll move on to 3CMC creatures shortly!
I think Kor Skyfisher can be expanded upon a bit since it might seem less obvious to a new cuber why the card is so potent since it does appear to have a pretty big drawback when first reading it. You can't really have too much information.
Also minor nitpick but even with Aether Vial you aren't getting Serra Avenger in play on turn 2 since Vial only has 1 counter on it.
EDIT: Soltari Priest being better than Soltari Monk is pretty widely agreed upon since black has a much easier time dealing with pro black than red does with pro red and the can't be blocked by black shadow creatures argument is rarely relevant so I'd separate the two.
I think Kor Skyfisher can be expanded upon a bit since it might seem less obvious to a new cuber why the card is so potent since it does appear to have a pretty big drawback when first reading it. You can't really have too much information.
Also minor nitpick but even with Aether Vial you aren't getting Serra Avenger in play on turn 2 since Vial only has 1 counter on it.
EDIT: Soltari Priest being better than Soltari Monk is pretty widely agreed upon since black has a much easier time dealing with pro black than red does with pro red and the can't be blocked by black shadow creatures argument is rarely relevant so I'd separate the two.
I've expanded the Kor Skyfisher section greatly, and added the other two suggestions.
I think something should be said about Loyal Cathar.
So: I haven't tested this, but I'm keeping it in my mind for running in my 500-card cube. I think it might be more consistently good than Silver Knight. Not a staple, but it should make the cut in larger lists and possibly mid-sized ones as well.
I think it's worth a test as well. I fear that very often the environment that leads to the death of the first side, will make a Jungle Lion damn near useless. This might be overthinking it though, as the difference between Cathar and the other 2/2 first strikers is probably slim enough that the extra Jungle Lion makes him superior.
Vigilance is relevant as well. I think this guy just may be a victim of having too much competition until you get up to about 500+ but he should be added to the list. Good catch rant.
The things that kill off white 2-drops the most are probably cheap burn spells and trading in combat. Getting a free Jungle Lion from the deal seems pretty good in both of those situations.
The things that kill off white 2-drops the most are probably cheap burn spells and trading in combat. Getting a free Jungle Lion from the deal seems pretty good in both of those situations.
I'm hoping this is the case. It seems like a card which will further solidify white weenies matchups against control and other aggro decks, but won't improve the midrange nightmare much. Still value there though.
Ya, it doesn't help much against mid-range, and it's only about the same in the control matchup as other 2-drops. It seems beastly in the aggro mirror though.
Ya, it doesn't help much against mid-range, and it's only about the same in the control matchup as other 2-drops. It seems beastly in the aggro mirror though.
You think it's the same in control (as a knight)? I would assume that is where it would be best, offering some post wrath protection, and another body when you are trying to swarm around a big blocker.
You think it's the same in control (as a knight)? I would assume that is where it would be best, offering some post wrath protection, and another body when you are trying to swarm around a big blocker.
Idk... If I were to cut anything from my list it would be Lone Missionary, but I think that the Missionary is more versatile and is better in more matchups - Loyal Cathar adds something that I don't think most cubes need... To me, its another solid WW Dude that is just outclassed by most other 2-drops. I will add a discussion section on him to the front, though.
Most of the evaluations are pretty much cut and dried here. I'll say my piece for Loyal Cathar, though, which my third favourite WW drop behind the Soltari guys. Surviving Wrath/'Clasm/burn/trading in combat and giving a free 2/1 beater is great. Think of it like this: it's a 2/2 vigilance for two (ok deal) that draws you a card when it dies. That card happens to be a free 2/1 with can't block that gets put instantly into play.
I slightly prefer it to Knight of Meadowgrain in the matchups where the life gain isn't relevant for aggro, which is quite a few.
You think it's the same in control (as a knight)? I would assume that is where it would be best, offering some post wrath protection, and another body when you are trying to swarm around a big blocker.
Not better than a generic Knight against control, but about the same as the other cubeable 2-drops at that relative size. Something like a Pegasus for example would have its pros and cons in the control matchup (playing about the same), whereas I'd rather have the Cathar against aggro. If that makes any sense.
The problem with running Cathar in control is that the 2nd creature can't block. That and its cost are the reasons it didn't make it in our cube. EDIT: I prefer Meadowgrain to it because the Knight can be run in defensive decks as well.
Mrmaul, if you're ok with that I have some constructive criticisms for the way you're handling the notes:
I'm afraid I don't much like the notes posted so far. They contain too much pseudo-information (example, Mother of Runes: 'Staple. Arguably the best 1-drop in white') and too much opinion (calling cards borderline that some or even many people consider staples).
Instead, I'd like to see more descriptions of what the card offers to cube - something like the rest of the Mother of Runes note, except maybe a little less poetic and more factual. If you want to say something about the card's power level, maybe just say something like 'consensus for this card is very broad', or compare different opinions that were stated. The entry for Knight of the White Orchid is perfect IMO, this is the style you should be aiming for.
On specific notes:
Perimeter Captain: please remove 'Requires more testing?'. It doesn't make sense after calling it a very powerful control creature, also it just really doesn't require more testing: it's a very powerful control creature indeed, people are banning it for exactly that reason.
Porcelain Legionnaire: On '...he's put in white because having the ability to pay 2W for him makes him slightly better in white decks.' This is opinion. I run it in colorless and I'm not alone in doing this.
Soltari Monk/Priest: these guys need separate entries. I consider Priest one of the strongest aggro 2-drops and Monk one of the weakest. Pro red protects against an entire color, pro black only against a handful of spell. They're really not in the same league.
Lone Missionary: far from borderline in my book. This entry needs more nuance and less opinion.
t
Finally, could you leave a little more time to give input? I haven't had time for one day and I've already almost missed the boat on the 2-drops.
In any case, thanks for the effort you're putting into this. Please don't take my remarks the wrong way, I really appreciate what you're doing here.
Fredo brings some some excellent points. Here's some second opinions:
Porcelain Legionnaire: I run it in white, but it's not better in white decks. It's best in red decks. I could justify running it in colourless for that reason.
Perimeter Captain: Depends on philosophy on cube construction. Nothing to do with 'needs more testing'. I don't run it, but it is good enough.
Lone Missionary: It looks so mundane, but the splashable beater and lifegain upside is so welcome in so many decks.
Porcelain Legionnaire: On '...he's put in white because having the ability to pay 2W for him makes him slightly better in white decks.' This is opinion. I run it in colorless and I'm not alone in doing this.
I run him in colorless as well. If you are the deck playing Porcelain Legionnaire on turn 2, you do NOT care about the 2 life lost. Classifying him as white is especially bad because of the huge number of playable white 2 drops. I frequently run Legionnaire in colors outside of white; the only reason I'd consider him white is because of Honor of the Pure, but that would just be gravy.
Another note: saying stuff in the OP like'they both easily make the grade for just about every cube' and 'is easily one of the best XCMC cards' should really, really be avoided, IMO. Make the argument for/against the card and let the reader make his/her own judgement.
Soltari Monk/Priest: these guys need separate entries. I consider Monk one of the strongest aggro 2-drops and Priest one of the weakest. Pro red protects against an entire color, pro black only against a handful of spell. They're really not in the same league.
I think they're about even. There are some members of my playgroup that would argue the pro:black is more relevant even. It's true that pro:red guards against a greater number of removal spells, but the pro:black is relevant in the matchup where the unblockable aggro beater needs to stick around. Black is more of a control color, and red is certainly more aggro. The reason why that's relevant is because the black player has more of a need to remove the Soltari than the red player does. Your opponent's creature that can't block your aggro dudes doesn't hurt red as much as the inability to target down the creature that's killing you does when you're playing black. In the aggro mirror, killing off their Soltari isn't as critical as stopping your opponent's critter from beating you down when you're playing control. So on paper, the Priest looks better because it's protected from a greater number of cards, but I feel the Monk is better at doing what you included it in your deck to do.
Mrmaul, if you're ok with that I have some constructive criticisms for the way you're handling the notes:I'm afraid I don't much like the notes posted so far. They contain too much pseudo-information (example, Mother of Runes: 'Staple. Arguably the best 1-drop in white') and too much opinion (calling cards borderline that some or even many people consider staples).
I have no problems with criticism, as I did ask for it.
To be fair, however, if you go back and look at the thread that I am basing this on (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=5909526), my notes are far more objective than the ones found there. However, if you guys want more objective notes, than post suggestions rather than saying "make this more objective" (and to be fair, you did do this, but I'm just saying it to the masses).
Also, if you notice, I reserve terms like "Staple" and "best" for very, very few cards. But if the masses don't like those terms, than they shall be gone.
Instead, I'd like to see more descriptions of what the card offers to cube - something like the rest of the Mother of Runes note, except maybe a little less poetic and more factual. If you want to say something about the card's power level, maybe just say something like 'consensus for this card is very broad', or compare different opinions that were stated. The entry for Knight of the White Orchid is perfect IMO, this is the style you should be aiming for.
Again, I try and give more thorough descriptions on cards that aren't played as widely as something like Mother of Runes. The entries for a cube staple and something like Knight of the White Orchid are going to be very different, because one card is a staple and should be played in every cube that can run it, and the other is a card that most people no longer play. So, in one description, I give a short snippit of the card's strengths to illustrate its "staple" quality, whereas in the other description, a bit more is needed because its not so easy to see why the card is played, or why some people play it and some people don't.
And the "style I should be aiming for" is a completely opinionated thing, because I, personally, like a balance between "poetic" and "factual", but to each his own, I suppose. Like I said before, I was trying for more of a balance on every card, whereas in the Pauper Thread, I would say it was 80/20 in favor of poetic.
Perimeter Captain: please remove 'Requires more testing?'. It doesn't make sense after calling it a very powerful control creature, also it just really doesn't require more testing: it's a very powerful control creature indeed, people are banning it for exactly that reason.
Porcelain Legionnaire: On '...he's put in white because having the ability to pay 2W for him makes him slightly better in white decks.' This is opinion. I run it in colorless and I'm not alone in doing this.
Putting him in white is opinion, but the fact that the card functions better in an environment where he has two casting costs seems pretty factual to me. But I will alter the description a bit.
Soltari Monk/Priest: these guys need separate entries. I consider Priest one of the strongest aggro 2-drops and Monk one of the weakest. Pro red protects against an entire color, pro black only against a handful of spell. They're really not in the same league.
How relevant the protections are varies from cube to cube (and pro black also protects from the only other shadow color - I would argue that it protects against more spells than kills it), and I would argue that in most matchups, they serve the same function (entering the red zone being very difficult to block)
Finally, could you leave a little more time to give input? I haven't had time for one day and I've already almost missed the boat on the 2-drops.
I haven't moved on yet, I merely suggested it because discussion was slowing down. But then people started discussing again, and thus we haven't moved on.
Porcelain Legionnaire: I run it in white, but it's not better in white decks. It's best in red decks. I could justify running it in colourless for that reason.
"best in red decks" is a very opinionated term - White decks can be just as aggressive as red decks, and the versatility of multiple casting costs isn't something you can get in red decks. But, as stated above, I've changed his entry a bit, but I still hold that having two different casting costs makes him better (if only slightly, which I do point out) in white decks, as that's the only color that gives you that versatility.
Another note: saying stuff in the OP like'they both easily make the grade for just about every cube' and 'is easily one of the best XCMC cards' should really, really be avoided, IMO. Make the argument for/against the card and let the reader make his/her own judgement.
I don't think that they should be avoided, to be honest. However, I do think that these types of statements should only be made about certain cards, and the arguments should be there regardless. To someone who's completely new to cube and is building one or learning the format, statements like these can give them a bit of connotation behind the cold, hard facts that can help when drafting and playing.
To everyone: I appreciate the feedback, and keep it coming!
I don't think that they should be avoided, to be honest. However, I do think that these types of statements should only be made about certain cards, and the arguments should be there regardless. To someone who's completely new to cube and is building one or learning the format, statements like these can give them a bit of connotation behind the cold, hard facts that can help when drafting and playing.
To everyone: I appreciate the feedback, and keep it coming!
I still kind of disagree with this. I think that the fact that we're discussing the cards at least should imply that they are cubeable and appropriate for consideration. In fact there are very, very few cards that I would actually feel comfortable saying 'this has to be in every cube'. A lot of our cubes share cards, yes, but it's an extremely personal draft environment. Listing the cards' assets allows a reader to decide if that's what they want in their cube, and they can infer that it is somewhat widely played from the mere fact that it's being discussed. I don't think they need any hand-holding with us saying things like 'should be in every cube' or '100% staple' because they might make a personal decision based on the facts available to not include it - a group that doesn't want to support with aggro-only cards, for example. If you get my drift
I don't expect you to include my bit about Porcelain Legionnaire being better in red decks; it's an opinion (because red's two drops are so much worse, I will fully defend it). But so is a comment about 'should be in every cube'. More so, possibly, because philosophical differences on cube construction come into play.
Another Example of subjective ratings in the descriptions; Knight of Meadowgrain's entry is very positive, while the two pegasi are 'unexciting'.
I don't run Knight of Meadowgrain because I don't think it is good enough, but I do include both pegasi. Some perspective there; I rank evasion much higher than lifelink or first strike. The only cards I am willing to pay WW for are Soltari Priest and Monk.
Not to mention that the pegasus brothers are getting better as more and more high-powered finishers are released which don't fly and start replacing the big flyers. (Titans, Planeswalkers, etc.).
My 360 Commons Cube
Your favorite MTG website
I think Kor Skyfisher can be expanded upon a bit since it might seem less obvious to a new cuber why the card is so potent since it does appear to have a pretty big drawback when first reading it. You can't really have too much information.
Also minor nitpick but even with Aether Vial you aren't getting Serra Avenger in play on turn 2 since Vial only has 1 counter on it.
EDIT: Soltari Priest being better than Soltari Monk is pretty widely agreed upon since black has a much easier time dealing with pro black than red does with pro red and the can't be blocked by black shadow creatures argument is rarely relevant so I'd separate the two.
I've expanded the Kor Skyfisher section greatly, and added the other two suggestions.
My 360 Commons Cube
Your favorite MTG website
So: I haven't tested this, but I'm keeping it in my mind for running in my 500-card cube. I think it might be more consistently good than Silver Knight. Not a staple, but it should make the cut in larger lists and possibly mid-sized ones as well.
Cheers,
rant
My Cube
CubeCobra: https://cubecobra.com/cube/overview/5f5d0310ed602310515d4c32
Cube Tutor: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/1963
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!
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!
I'm hoping this is the case. It seems like a card which will further solidify white weenies matchups against control and other aggro decks, but won't improve the midrange nightmare much. Still value there though.
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!
You think it's the same in control (as a knight)? I would assume that is where it would be best, offering some post wrath protection, and another body when you are trying to swarm around a big blocker.
Idk... If I were to cut anything from my list it would be Lone Missionary, but I think that the Missionary is more versatile and is better in more matchups - Loyal Cathar adds something that I don't think most cubes need... To me, its another solid WW Dude that is just outclassed by most other 2-drops. I will add a discussion section on him to the front, though.
My 360 Commons Cube
Your favorite MTG website
I slightly prefer it to Knight of Meadowgrain in the matchups where the life gain isn't relevant for aggro, which is quite a few.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
Not better than a generic Knight against control, but about the same as the other cubeable 2-drops at that relative size. Something like a Pegasus for example would have its pros and cons in the control matchup (playing about the same), whereas I'd rather have the Cathar against aggro. If that makes any sense.
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!
Mrmaul, if you're ok with that I have some constructive criticisms for the way you're handling the notes:
Instead, I'd like to see more descriptions of what the card offers to cube - something like the rest of the Mother of Runes note, except maybe a little less poetic and more factual. If you want to say something about the card's power level, maybe just say something like 'consensus for this card is very broad', or compare different opinions that were stated. The entry for Knight of the White Orchid is perfect IMO, this is the style you should be aiming for.
On specific notes:
Perimeter Captain: please remove 'Requires more testing?'. It doesn't make sense after calling it a very powerful control creature, also it just really doesn't require more testing: it's a very powerful control creature indeed, people are banning it for exactly that reason.
Porcelain Legionnaire: On '...he's put in white because having the ability to pay 2W for him makes him slightly better in white decks.' This is opinion. I run it in colorless and I'm not alone in doing this.
Soltari Monk/Priest: these guys need separate entries. I consider Priest one of the strongest aggro 2-drops and Monk one of the weakest. Pro red protects against an entire color, pro black only against a handful of spell. They're really not in the same league.
Lone Missionary: far from borderline in my book. This entry needs more nuance and less opinion.
t
Finally, could you leave a little more time to give input? I haven't had time for one day and I've already almost missed the boat on the 2-drops.
In any case, thanks for the effort you're putting into this. Please don't take my remarks the wrong way, I really appreciate what you're doing here.
Porcelain Legionnaire: I run it in white, but it's not better in white decks. It's best in red decks. I could justify running it in colourless for that reason.
Perimeter Captain: Depends on philosophy on cube construction. Nothing to do with 'needs more testing'. I don't run it, but it is good enough.
Lone Missionary: It looks so mundane, but the splashable beater and lifegain upside is so welcome in so many decks.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
I run him in colorless as well. If you are the deck playing Porcelain Legionnaire on turn 2, you do NOT care about the 2 life lost. Classifying him as white is especially bad because of the huge number of playable white 2 drops. I frequently run Legionnaire in colors outside of white; the only reason I'd consider him white is because of Honor of the Pure, but that would just be gravy.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
I think you got your holy Soltari's mixed up.
Lol, yeah you're right. *scoots off to edit post*
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!
I have no problems with criticism, as I did ask for it.
To be fair, however, if you go back and look at the thread that I am basing this on (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=5909526), my notes are far more objective than the ones found there. However, if you guys want more objective notes, than post suggestions rather than saying "make this more objective" (and to be fair, you did do this, but I'm just saying it to the masses).
Also, if you notice, I reserve terms like "Staple" and "best" for very, very few cards. But if the masses don't like those terms, than they shall be gone.
Again, I try and give more thorough descriptions on cards that aren't played as widely as something like Mother of Runes. The entries for a cube staple and something like Knight of the White Orchid are going to be very different, because one card is a staple and should be played in every cube that can run it, and the other is a card that most people no longer play. So, in one description, I give a short snippit of the card's strengths to illustrate its "staple" quality, whereas in the other description, a bit more is needed because its not so easy to see why the card is played, or why some people play it and some people don't.
And the "style I should be aiming for" is a completely opinionated thing, because I, personally, like a balance between "poetic" and "factual", but to each his own, I suppose. Like I said before, I was trying for more of a balance on every card, whereas in the Pauper Thread, I would say it was 80/20 in favor of poetic.
Fair, and done.
Putting him in white is opinion, but the fact that the card functions better in an environment where he has two casting costs seems pretty factual to me. But I will alter the description a bit.
How relevant the protections are varies from cube to cube (and pro black also protects from the only other shadow color - I would argue that it protects against more spells than kills it), and I would argue that in most matchups, they serve the same function (entering the red zone being very difficult to block)
Any suggestions for his entry?
I haven't moved on yet, I merely suggested it because discussion was slowing down. But then people started discussing again, and thus we haven't moved on.
I've taken nothing the wrong way, I sincerely appreciate the criticism and the discussion that it creates.
"best in red decks" is a very opinionated term - White decks can be just as aggressive as red decks, and the versatility of multiple casting costs isn't something you can get in red decks. But, as stated above, I've changed his entry a bit, but I still hold that having two different casting costs makes him better (if only slightly, which I do point out) in white decks, as that's the only color that gives you that versatility.
I agree fully; to be honest, I'm not even sure why I put that testing bit in there...
I added a bit to this entry.
I don't think that they should be avoided, to be honest. However, I do think that these types of statements should only be made about certain cards, and the arguments should be there regardless. To someone who's completely new to cube and is building one or learning the format, statements like these can give them a bit of connotation behind the cold, hard facts that can help when drafting and playing.
To everyone: I appreciate the feedback, and keep it coming!
My 360 Commons Cube
Your favorite MTG website
I still kind of disagree with this. I think that the fact that we're discussing the cards at least should imply that they are cubeable and appropriate for consideration. In fact there are very, very few cards that I would actually feel comfortable saying 'this has to be in every cube'. A lot of our cubes share cards, yes, but it's an extremely personal draft environment. Listing the cards' assets allows a reader to decide if that's what they want in their cube, and they can infer that it is somewhat widely played from the mere fact that it's being discussed. I don't think they need any hand-holding with us saying things like 'should be in every cube' or '100% staple' because they might make a personal decision based on the facts available to not include it - a group that doesn't want to support with aggro-only cards, for example. If you get my drift
I don't expect you to include my bit about Porcelain Legionnaire being better in red decks; it's an opinion (because red's two drops are so much worse, I will fully defend it). But so is a comment about 'should be in every cube'. More so, possibly, because philosophical differences on cube construction come into play.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
I don't run Knight of Meadowgrain because I don't think it is good enough, but I do include both pegasi. Some perspective there; I rank evasion much higher than lifelink or first strike. The only cards I am willing to pay WW for are Soltari Priest and Monk.
Not to mention that the pegasus brothers are getting better as more and more high-powered finishers are released which don't fly and start replacing the big flyers. (Titans, Planeswalkers, etc.).
[Remixes] - [The Brutal Cube - 360 Powered] - [My Cube Article] - ['Print-This' Wishlist]