I didn't vote for City of Ass at all, while I did vote for Paliano. I do understand the upside of City of Ass when it can be abused with something like Garruk or similar effects to be able to get three mana out of it, but I just don't like this type of card. If I saw it in a draft, I doubt I'd take it very highly and I'd certainly never take it P1P1. With Paliano, I could see it going somewhere in the first eight picks. I doubt I'd ever take it P1P1, but at least at that stage you can try to craft your deck around the named colors.
Um, City of Ass is a strictly better Grand Coliseum; a card you not only voted for, but ranked hither than Paliano.
Frankly, some people apparently consider Conspiracy cards as "more un-cards" than the actual un-cards. I mean, no one bats an eye when Booster Tutor gets voted or when Symbol Status gains a couple of #1s, but as soon as conspiracies show up in lists someone has to ask, all surprised, if they are actually valid to be voted.
And if anyone looks at the actual votes on the Land thread, they'll see how City of Ass is getting better votes than Paliano (and City is obviously rarer among the voter's cubes).
This really surprises me. All Un-cards are marked on the cards themselves as not tournament legal by having a silver border, while conspiracies and other draft-altering cards have a regular black border. I would never include silver-bordered cards in my cube and find it weird to see such cards in the top 20 lists. While I think conspiracies shouldn't be in the colorless list because they are so different from all the normal spell cards, I have no problem with them being on a cube power top 20 list.
If City of Ass wasn't silver-bordered, it would totally be in the top 5 for me. Ever since the removal of mana burn, this land has absolutely no drawback over Grand Coliseum.
Um, City of Ass is a strictly better Grand Coliseum; a card you not only voted for, but ranked hither than Paliano.
True, but the 1/2 mana makes the card feel ridiculous. Also, it's called City of Ass and has butt cheeks all over it. To be completely honest, I really dislike Unglued and Unhinged cards and the way they play. The basics are sweet, but everything else in those sets is a total miss for me and what I want to be doing while playing Magic. I wouldn't pass the card because it's not good enough, I'd pass it because I just don't want to play with it.
The purpose of this exercise is to create good data. To show new cubers what cards they should take if they encounter them while drafting. I voted on cards I didn't like when they were the best cards, because that's the point of the project. Not to intentionally skew the data just because you dislike the flavor of a card. Oh well.
I thought the idea was to vote the way we would pick cards at P1P1? Given the option, I would never take City of Ass (or any Un cards) that early and if I took a land at P1P1 I would absolutely take all 20 of the choices from my list over it. I don't think that's skewing the vote in a negative way. I also didn't vote for Mana Crypt in my colorless vote. I did that because I don't take that card P1P1. It's fine, but it's killed me or put me in range for death enough times to give it a stigma. Everyone has a right to vote the way they see fit. It doesn't skew the data, it is the data.
Your data isn't based off picking cards based on skill when it comes to your opinion on uncards. You are saying that you wouldn't pick Mana Crypt highly because it deals you damage. That makes sense as a legitimate concern based on experience within the game. Then you say that you would take Grand Coliseum over City of Ass just because you don't like uncards even though it can kill you or put you in range for death. This seems inconsistent.
Everyone has the right to vote the way they see fit, but the results are going to have a stigma of not being 100% based on the actual value of the card in play. You are bringing personal beliefs on if a card should be used in the cube at all into a poll that is intended to be a Power Ranking. Voting for Grand Coliseum over City of Ass shows that you are not interested in Power Ranking at all. With that obvious a set of intentions that go against the spirit of the whole project, it devalues the results.
Grand Coliseum doesn't normally deal enough damage during the course of the game to compare it to the damage output of Mana Crypt. I'm basing that vote off of real world experiences for both cards. As far as the City of Ass vote is concerned, I'm happy to exclude my vote from the final ranking if everyone feels that my personal opinion of Un cards somehow skews the final result in a negative way.
The object is to rank the most powerful cards based on a P1P1 metric. So intentionally leaving off a card that's strictly better than one that you put high on your ranking just because you dislike the flavor certainly does skew the data. The object is to rank the best cards. Not your favorite cards. That's an entirely different set of 20 cards than what we're trying to come up with here.
Quote from calibretto »
Grand Coliseum doesn't normally deal enough damage during the course of the game to compare it to the damage output of Mana Crypt.
But that's irrelevant, because it's still strictly worse than a card you didn't vote on. What good is this data if it doesn't reflect what it's supposed to reflect?
I voted on cards I don't particularly care for based on how they should be placed in the top 20 for the sake of providing good data. But if not everybody uses the same metric for voting, we might as well strive for subjective data rather than calling it the "Power Rankings".
Someone's not voting of one card or whatever is not really devaluing anything. I'm not ever going to look at this list and think "well, these don't mean anything because so-and-so didn't vote for this or did vote for that." At the end of the day, this is still a great resource for figuring out our forum's opinion on the power level of cards or what-not that I would be happy to share with anyone who was just getting into cube. Whether or not this is the spirit of the lists is one thing, but the end results are still a great representation of the top-tier cards of what is available for cube for different types of cards. I mean, it's not like the name of the voting process is "P1P1 choices", it's "Power Rankings", and I know if I stumbled here from a google search or whatever I'd probably skip past all the rules on voting and just see what was on the list since it's a pretty good representation of a potential "Power Ranking".
I get that it's not what the vote was initially intended for, but it doesn't seem like the biggest deal to me as the results are still pretty great and--if anything--this is a great way to learn what to do for the next vote. Someone is always not going to read the rules and do it wrong, so it'll be good to figure out a voting method that will be easier to adhere to for all voting types.
It's not just 1 vote. It's a collection of voters taking an approach to voting that's different from the outlined/intended metrics that makes the data less valuable.
Quote from Salmo »
I mean, it's not like the name of the voting process is "P1P1 choices", it's "Power Rankings"...
The metrics for sculpting your list are in the OPs, and it's supposed to be based on P1P1 value.
It's not just 1 vote. It's a collection of voters taking an approach to voting that's different from the outlined/intended metrics that makes the data less valuable.
Quote from Salmo »
I mean, it's not like the name of the voting process is "P1P1 choices", it's "Power Rankings"...
The metrics for sculpting your list are in the OPs, and it's supposed to be based on P1P1 value.
Right, but like I said, if you're stumbling on this voting process from who knows where or it's your first time cubing, it wouldn't be out of the question that you don't read the long OP/skim through it and just get to the meat to start somewhere. In those cases, these lists still perform a function of helping new players or what-not figure out what cards are the best cards for their respective color. Again, I get that some people are not voting correctly, but it still doesn't feel like these lists are poor representations of anything by the end even with the non-100%-by-the-rules voting, and it'll be good for the next time to see what we didn't like how this went and re-adjust it for the future. The data is plenty valuable as is, IMO.
All I'm saying, is that if you understand the intent of the results, and the criteria/metrics for voting, if you vote accordingly, the resulting data will be better than if you elect to ignore it. The degree/severity of the impact on the results wasn't the topic under debate.
I thought the idea was to vote the way we would pick cards at P1P1? Given the option, I would never take City of Ass (or any Un cards) that early and if I took a land at P1P1 I would absolutely take all 20 of the choices from my list over it. I don't think that's skewing the vote in a negative way. I also didn't vote for Mana Crypt in my colorless vote. I did that because I don't take that card P1P1. It's fine, but it's killed me or put me in range for death enough times to give it a stigma. Everyone has a right to vote the way they see fit. It doesn't skew the data, it is the data.
You do have a point. I looked through the initial post and at no point did it say to vote on cards that you should pick if you wanted to win.
I thought it was implied, but implications maybe aren't strong enough in what's often percieved as a casual format.
If your criteria for evaluating P1P1 cards is independent of winning or good logic, then eh, exclude mana crypt all you want
I didn't vote for City of Ass at all, while I did vote for Paliano. I do understand the upside of City of Ass when it can be abused with something like Garruk or similar effects to be able to get three mana out of it, but I just don't like this type of card. If I saw it in a draft, I doubt I'd take it very highly and I'd certainly never take it P1P1. With Paliano, I could see it going somewhere in the first eight picks. I doubt I'd ever take it P1P1, but at least at that stage you can try to craft your deck around the named colors.
Um, City of Ass is a strictly better Grand Coliseum; a card you not only voted for, but ranked hither than Paliano.
I just noticed that city of ass didn't deal damage to you for tapping it *forhead smack*
While I can see the point of view (I did not rank a card that's strictly better than a card I did rank and I left it off for flavor reasons, not power reasons), the ranking metric is P1P1, not power. "What would you take P1P1?" and "What is more powerful?" are similar questions that can have wildly different answers depending on who you ask. Is City of Ass more powerful than Grand Coliseum? Yes. Would I ever take it P1P1? No.
While we're on the subject of the voting metric, I'll add that, while I do try to pick my lands highly, the likelihood that I take a non-Library land P1P1 is very slim. Slots 1-4 on my list have a much higher chance of being my actual P1P1 than anything below them. Because of this, I feel like the land top twenty is probably the least relevant of them all. I'm only ever taking Mana Confluence as my first pick if the rest of the pack is full of tier 2 support cards.
With all this said, and because this came up at all, I really hope that next year's vote excludes these types of cards from the "normal" rankings and gives them their own vote. This way the people who vote similar to me and leave these cards off for whatever reason can just choose not to participate in the Un vote. The results aren't skewed in any way and the people who wish to play those cards have a more accurate metric to go by when judging their power level.
You do have a point. I looked through the initial post and at no point did it say to vote on cards that you should pick if you wanted to win.
I thought it was implied, but implications maybe aren't strong enough in what's often percieved as a casual format.
If your criteria for evaluating P1P1 cards is independent of winning or good logic, then eh, exclude mana crypt all you want
I'm honestly not sure how to respond to "guess you don't like winning" statements referring to my opinion on cards or my top 20 votes.
With all this said, and because this came up at all, I really hope that next year's vote excludes these types of cards from the "normal" rankings and gives them their own vote. This way the people who vote similar to me and leave these cards off for whatever reason can just choose not to participate in the Un vote. The results aren't skewed in any way and the people who wish to play those cards have a more accurate metric to go by when judging their power level.
I think the same. I'd like to keep the Un-cards/Conspiracies/etc. in a separate vote.
I'm honestly not sure how to respond to "guess you don't like winning" statements referring to my opinion on cards or my top 20 votes.
You would pick a less powerful card (grand coliseum) over a more powerful card (city of ass) or would skip over very powerful uncards/conspiracy cards in this theoretical cube draft that allows for them to show up in the P1P1. Other people are going to take these cards that are clearly more powerful and win more games with them. You are willing to sacrifice power for principle.
Voting for un-like cards seperately will make a lot of unnecessary bad feelings go away. Well, I do hope nobody really gets worked up about minimal, changes on a power ranking on an online forum, but hey it is the internet and you never know.
I know I dislike seeing the uncards in votes and lists, as they don't have any value for me. I can imagine that people who do play un cards get annoyed at seeing very powerful cards ignored even if the rules state that people should vote for them. And they do have a point. I feel a bit guilty for ignoring them, but I forget they exist and I don't get how people draw the line between un, and too un, but that is just me.
Powered- unpowered has a similar problem, but a lot less severe. There are very few real 'power cards' and they are easy to evaluate.
Also I hope Wildlice doesn't take anything in this discussion personal! Most of us love this yearly ranking and project. We appreciate all the effort that goes into it. Nobody blames the one who does all the work and has done it all with open discussions beforehand.
I'm honestly not sure how to respond to "guess you don't like winning" statements referring to my opinion on cards or my top 20 votes.
You would pick a less powerful card (grand coliseum) over a more powerful card (city of ass) or would skip over very powerful uncards/conspiracy cards in this theoretical cube draft that allows for them to show up in the P1P1. Other people are going to take these cards that are clearly more powerful and win more games with them. You are willing to sacrifice power for principle.
ExActly. Sorry had to be a dick when pointing it out, but I was exposed to that type of thinking day in day out for 7 years from fishy poker players. All the bloody lips from repressing explanations manifested itself with a sarcastic Internet forum post.
They would lose with a great hand many times in a row , then not play it anymore because it burned them too many times. You'd be amazed how many otherwise smart people think like this. Winning players don't.
Mana crypt is an absurdly powerful card. There's a reason almost everyone has it high in their top 20.
It requires minor building around to utilize its full potential, but you can throw it in 90+ percent of decks and not think twice about it. Ideally if you p1p1 it, you draft a deck that has curves that end the game fast with a mana crypt in your opening hand.. Life gain is also important.
Passing it for anything other than another broken card is spewing value , no matter how unlucky you've been in the past with it.
Not to start another crazy discussion, but in a theoretical pack of 5 basic lands and 10 rakdos cards, people are first picking a cackler over the new command? That is nuts to me. Is he that good of a 1 drop to commit to aggro with or am I overvaluing the flexibility of the BR command?
Also, I don't feel that voting on uncards in their own section is a good solution to the problem either. No one is sitting at home trying to figure out if they are going to include Symbol Status over Double Stroke or City of Ass. People who want to include those cards want to know how they would stack up against other cards in the section they would be included in (green, colorless, lands, etc..)
I think I am going to pass on voting for the guilds. Guild voting is so weird. For colors, colorless and land, I look at a long list and cut down to 20 cards. For guilds, I look at a very small list and have to somehow fill it up to 10. That's not only weird, but also means more work, since I have to look up all the options that even exist, but that I've never played in my cube. Since my cube is unpowered, there are also several cards in the other categories that I've never played, but I certainly don't need to look those cards up. Voting for those cards wasn't hard, even though I never played them. Ranking unknown guild cards is a different business entirely.
Plus, I don't want to rank colorless artifacts and especially lands in lists for multicolor cards. So, I better skip this entire guild business.
Honestly, we have had so many better guild cards printed in the last few years I just had to look through the list of cards I used to play to find enough to fill out the list. Looking at a few cube lists for people I trust and the average 720 list on cubetutor helped a bit too.
Not to start another crazy discussion, but in a theoretical pack of 5 basic lands and 10 rakdos cards, people are first picking a cackler over the new command? That is nuts to me. Is he that good of a 1 drop to commit to aggro with or am I overvaluing the flexibility of the BR command?
The Command is crazy good, but Cackler is better. Yes, you're committing to aggro (which isn't as bad as you make it sound; I mean, you're drafting a Rakdos card), but at least you're not restricting yourself to both colors.
Cackler is certainly one of the best aggro one-drop in either color.
Also, I don't feel that voting on uncards in their own section is a good solution to the problem either. No one is sitting at home trying to figure out if they are going to include Symbol Status over Double Stroke or City of Ass. People who want to include those cards want to know how they would stack up against other cards in the section they would be included in (green, colorless, lands, etc..)
Yeah, that's how I see it too. We should just keep the un-cards and draft cards as if they were regular cards, and people should just vote for them as such.
Conspiracies are another story. They don't really fit among 'colorless' cards. They have very little to do with the regular castable artifacts and such. Maybe the whole process would have gone better if they were ignored in all but the final "everything goes" Overall ranking, just like three-colored cards were until this year, i.e. waiting until they got enough variety to gain their own Top 10 or the like.
We should just keep the un-cards and draft cards as if they were regular cards, and people should just vote for them as such.
I think this should be put to a vote when the time comes to do this next year.
I also agree that the guild votes seems like a P1P1 metric and more like an actual Top 10 Guild X Cards metric. Honestly, I feel like you could throw that P1P1 metric out the window next year and simply call it the 20 most powerful X cards. You'd get a lot of the same data. It's hard to adhere to that metric in some colors as there comes a point in the ranking where you're probably not actually ever taking any of these cards at P1P1.
Um, City of Ass is a strictly better Grand Coliseum; a card you not only voted for, but ranked hither than Paliano.
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!
If City of Ass wasn't silver-bordered, it would totally be in the top 5 for me. Ever since the removal of mana burn, this land has absolutely no drawback over Grand Coliseum.
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
True, but the 1/2 mana makes the card feel ridiculous. Also, it's called City of Ass and has butt cheeks all over it. To be completely honest, I really dislike Unglued and Unhinged cards and the way they play. The basics are sweet, but everything else in those sets is a total miss for me and what I want to be doing while playing Magic. I wouldn't pass the card because it's not good enough, I'd pass it because I just don't want to play with it.
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
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!
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
Everyone has the right to vote the way they see fit, but the results are going to have a stigma of not being 100% based on the actual value of the card in play. You are bringing personal beliefs on if a card should be used in the cube at all into a poll that is intended to be a Power Ranking. Voting for Grand Coliseum over City of Ass shows that you are not interested in Power Ranking at all. With that obvious a set of intentions that go against the spirit of the whole project, it devalues the results.
Draft my cube!
Watch me stream!
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
The object is to rank the most powerful cards based on a P1P1 metric. So intentionally leaving off a card that's strictly better than one that you put high on your ranking just because you dislike the flavor certainly does skew the data. The object is to rank the best cards. Not your favorite cards. That's an entirely different set of 20 cards than what we're trying to come up with here.
But that's irrelevant, because it's still strictly worse than a card you didn't vote on. What good is this data if it doesn't reflect what it's supposed to reflect?
I voted on cards I don't particularly care for based on how they should be placed in the top 20 for the sake of providing good data. But if not everybody uses the same metric for voting, we might as well strive for subjective data rather than calling it the "Power Rankings".
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 get that it's not what the vote was initially intended for, but it doesn't seem like the biggest deal to me as the results are still pretty great and--if anything--this is a great way to learn what to do for the next vote. Someone is always not going to read the rules and do it wrong, so it'll be good to figure out a voting method that will be easier to adhere to for all voting types.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
The metrics for sculpting your list are in the OPs, and it's supposed to be based on P1P1 value.
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!
Right, but like I said, if you're stumbling on this voting process from who knows where or it's your first time cubing, it wouldn't be out of the question that you don't read the long OP/skim through it and just get to the meat to start somewhere. In those cases, these lists still perform a function of helping new players or what-not figure out what cards are the best cards for their respective color. Again, I get that some people are not voting correctly, but it still doesn't feel like these lists are poor representations of anything by the end even with the non-100%-by-the-rules voting, and it'll be good for the next time to see what we didn't like how this went and re-adjust it for the future. The data is plenty valuable as is, IMO.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
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 do have a point. I looked through the initial post and at no point did it say to vote on cards that you should pick if you wanted to win.
I thought it was implied, but implications maybe aren't strong enough in what's often percieved as a casual format.
If your criteria for evaluating P1P1 cards is independent of winning or good logic, then eh, exclude mana crypt all you want
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
I just noticed that city of ass didn't deal damage to you for tapping it *forhead smack*
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
While we're on the subject of the voting metric, I'll add that, while I do try to pick my lands highly, the likelihood that I take a non-Library land P1P1 is very slim. Slots 1-4 on my list have a much higher chance of being my actual P1P1 than anything below them. Because of this, I feel like the land top twenty is probably the least relevant of them all. I'm only ever taking Mana Confluence as my first pick if the rest of the pack is full of tier 2 support cards.
With all this said, and because this came up at all, I really hope that next year's vote excludes these types of cards from the "normal" rankings and gives them their own vote. This way the people who vote similar to me and leave these cards off for whatever reason can just choose not to participate in the Un vote. The results aren't skewed in any way and the people who wish to play those cards have a more accurate metric to go by when judging their power level.
Edit:
I'm honestly not sure how to respond to "guess you don't like winning" statements referring to my opinion on cards or my top 20 votes.
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
I think the same. I'd like to keep the Un-cards/Conspiracies/etc. in a separate vote.
Cheers,
rant
My Cube
CubeCobra: https://cubecobra.com/cube/overview/5f5d0310ed602310515d4c32
Cube Tutor: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/1963
You would pick a less powerful card (grand coliseum) over a more powerful card (city of ass) or would skip over very powerful uncards/conspiracy cards in this theoretical cube draft that allows for them to show up in the P1P1. Other people are going to take these cards that are clearly more powerful and win more games with them. You are willing to sacrifice power for principle.
Draft my cube!
Watch me stream!
I know I dislike seeing the uncards in votes and lists, as they don't have any value for me. I can imagine that people who do play un cards get annoyed at seeing very powerful cards ignored even if the rules state that people should vote for them. And they do have a point. I feel a bit guilty for ignoring them, but I forget they exist and I don't get how people draw the line between un, and too un, but that is just me.
Powered- unpowered has a similar problem, but a lot less severe. There are very few real 'power cards' and they are easy to evaluate.
Also I hope Wildlice doesn't take anything in this discussion personal! Most of us love this yearly ranking and project. We appreciate all the effort that goes into it. Nobody blames the one who does all the work and has done it all with open discussions beforehand.
I feel compelled to repeat everything I hear
ExActly. Sorry had to be a dick when pointing it out, but I was exposed to that type of thinking day in day out for 7 years from fishy poker players. All the bloody lips from repressing explanations manifested itself with a sarcastic Internet forum post.
They would lose with a great hand many times in a row , then not play it anymore because it burned them too many times. You'd be amazed how many otherwise smart people think like this. Winning players don't.
Mana crypt is an absurdly powerful card. There's a reason almost everyone has it high in their top 20.
It requires minor building around to utilize its full potential, but you can throw it in 90+ percent of decks and not think twice about it. Ideally if you p1p1 it, you draft a deck that has curves that end the game fast with a mana crypt in your opening hand.. Life gain is also important.
Passing it for anything other than another broken card is spewing value , no matter how unlucky you've been in the past with it.
Last Updated 02/07/24
Streaming Standard/Cube on Twitch https://www.twitch.tv/heisenb3rg96
Strategy Twitter https://www.twitter.com/heisenb3rg
Also, I don't feel that voting on uncards in their own section is a good solution to the problem either. No one is sitting at home trying to figure out if they are going to include Symbol Status over Double Stroke or City of Ass. People who want to include those cards want to know how they would stack up against other cards in the section they would be included in (green, colorless, lands, etc..)
Draft my cube!
Watch me stream!
Plus, I don't want to rank colorless artifacts and especially lands in lists for multicolor cards. So, I better skip this entire guild business.
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
Draft my cube!
Watch me stream!
The Command is crazy good, but Cackler is better. Yes, you're committing to aggro (which isn't as bad as you make it sound; I mean, you're drafting a Rakdos card), but at least you're not restricting yourself to both colors.
Cackler is certainly one of the best aggro one-drop in either color.
Yeah, that's how I see it too. We should just keep the un-cards and draft cards as if they were regular cards, and people should just vote for them as such.
Conspiracies are another story. They don't really fit among 'colorless' cards. They have very little to do with the regular castable artifacts and such. Maybe the whole process would have gone better if they were ignored in all but the final "everything goes" Overall ranking, just like three-colored cards were until this year, i.e. waiting until they got enough variety to gain their own Top 10 or the like.
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
I think this should be put to a vote when the time comes to do this next year.
I also agree that the guild votes seems like a P1P1 metric and more like an actual Top 10 Guild X Cards metric. Honestly, I feel like you could throw that P1P1 metric out the window next year and simply call it the 20 most powerful X cards. You'd get a lot of the same data. It's hard to adhere to that metric in some colors as there comes a point in the ranking where you're probably not actually ever taking any of these cards at P1P1.
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.