Great discussion, I just wanted to add that some use the Vindicate test as a complementary measure: How good is the creature if it dies to sorcery-speed removal? This comes up more often than one would think. According to this measure, Consecrated Sphinx becomes reasonable.
Specialities about the cube: U tempo, B aggro, R slow-ish are supported. G aggro is not.
Currently trying to support tokens in all colors but blue, in different ways: W pumps them, B sacrifices them, R suicides them, G has decent-sized ones.
cube list outdated
*literal C/U definition according to gatherer
**some cards are banned. Library of Alexandria, Land Tax, Sol Ring.
I have a normal amount of removal. Not too much removal. And even in that case, the removal test has to be applied to expensive investments because they're exactly that. The Terminate test isn't important because there's too much removal in the cube ...it's important because spending 5-7 mana on a card and getting nothing from it if they kill it is awful for you. Ignoring that test would do you a disservice.
I don't think anyone is really saying to ignore the Terminate test outright, irrespective of the amount of removal in the cube.
I would, however, venture to say that the Terminate/Vindicate test is one of the less useful criterion in assessing an expensive creature. It certainly has some value, and I think that by this point in time the Vindicate test has been ingrained in the subconscious of virtually every cube designer. Nevertheless, it's merely one of several criterion in assessing finishers, and not even the premier one at that.
I would argue that the Evasion/Reach test is much more important in assessing an expensive creature. I think most of us would not run a 5WW 50/50 Shroud creature. I think most of us would still pass on it even if it passed the Vindicate test - when 5WW 50/50 Shroud comes into play, place a 0/1 Saproling token into play under your control. I would even venture to guess that most people would not play Keiga if it lost flying but was 4U instead of 5U.
Maybe my point is a bit obvious or overly didactic. But what I'm saying is that we should probably emphasize tests other than the Vindicate test, a test whose reputation has probably outgrown its role in cube evaluation.
I don't think anyone is really saying to ignore the Terminate test outright, irrespective of the amount of removal in the cube.
I would, however, venture to say that the Terminate/Vindicate test is one of the less useful criterion in assessing an expensive creature. It certainly has some value, and I think that by this point in time the Vindicate test has been ingrained in the subconscious of virtually every cube designer. Nevertheless, it's merely one of several criterion in assessing finishers, and not even the premier one at that.
I would argue that the Evasion/Reach test is much more important in assessing an expensive creature. I think most of us would not run a 5WW 50/50 Shroud creature. I think most of us would still pass on it even if it passed the Vindicate test - when 5WW 50/50 Shroud comes into play, place a 0/1 Saproling token into play under your control. I would even venture to guess that most people would not play Keiga if it lost flying but was 4U instead of 5U.
Maybe my point is a bit obvious or overly didactic. But what I'm saying is that we should probably emphasize tests other than the Vindicate test, a test whose reputation has probably outgrown its role in cube evaluation.
Agreed. The Terminate, Vindicate, Evasion/Reach, Wall of Denial, Icy Manipulator, Goblin Guide and so on tests are an arsenal of tools to evaluate a cmc>=5 card. A card doesn't have to pass all of them. In fact, it doesn't necessarily have to pass a single one of them, but the more the merrier. Sometimes a given test is adequate for a card, sometimes it misses the point. A test is more important if its correlating situation comes up more frequently, and it weighs more if the difference between passing and failing is more severe. One could construct an intricate heuristics function for all of this, but it's a) very complicated/de facto impossible and b) basically what we all do intuitively when we see a card for the first time.
So, what's the point in discussing a single one of them, then? Well, the Terminate test is arguably the most important one because both the abundance of its occurence and the severity are generally pretty big, making it contribute a lot to the heuristic function. Consequently, the Terminate test is very relevant, but a card can be viable despite failing the Terminate Test if it scores high on pretty much every other test. That card would feel more do-or-die in practice, but it might be viable (think Phage with unblockable, for instance).
Specialities about the cube: U tempo, B aggro, R slow-ish are supported. G aggro is not.
Currently trying to support tokens in all colors but blue, in different ways: W pumps them, B sacrifices them, R suicides them, G has decent-sized ones.
cube list outdated
*literal C/U definition according to gatherer
**some cards are banned. Library of Alexandria, Land Tax, Sol Ring.
I would, however, venture to say that the Terminate/Vindicate test is one of the less useful criterion in assessing an expensive creature. It certainly has some value, and I think that by this point in time the Vindicate test has been ingrained in the subconscious of virtually every cube designer. Nevertheless, it's merely one of several criterion in assessing finishers, and not even the premier one at that.
The other 'tests' are things that are more obviously apparent to cube designers. These are for creatures with CMC 5+
Card Advantage Test: Will this card provide me with card advantage?
Power Test: How does this card's power relate to its casting cost? Bigger? At least equal?
Evasion Test: Does this creature have trample/unblockable/flying to allow it to connect?
Added Benefits Test: Does the creature have First Strike/Lifelink/Haste? Does it provide benefits to my other creatures?
Cost test: How much more than 5 does the creature cost?
Color Test: Does the creature costs 2 or less colored mana?
etc. etc. etc.
The thing is that we understand what is a 'good deal' and a 'bad deal' for our mana. And there are plenty of very powerful creatures who can quickly end games if they are unanswered. But what separates many of them from the creatures we typically cube with is their inability to provide some value for your mana when the opponent removes your 5+ mana spell with a 1 or 2 mana card. We cite the terminate test as a way to differentiate the 'good' creatures from the 'great' ones, and it is a very good tool for that purpose.
Penumbra Wurm passes the Terminate test. But we don't talk about including it because it falls short of what we expect for its mana cost.
There are 1695 creatures with CMC greater or equal to 5 in print (at the time of this post). I include 21 in my cube. Probably 80-100 of those 1600+ are 'good enough' to cube with if you discount the terminate test.
I would, however, venture to say that the Terminate/Vindicate test is one of the less useful criterion in assessing an expensive creature. It certainly has some value, and I think that by this point in time the Vindicate test has been ingrained in the subconscious of virtually every cube designer. Nevertheless, it's merely one of several criterion in assessing finishers, and not even the premier one at that.
I think it's pretty critical. I think it is the premier one. All of the other tests of value that expensive creatures can pass are all contingent upon or necessitate the removal test.
Does it guarantee card advantage? It would pass the test anyways.
Does it protect itself? It would pass the test anyways.
Does it have an immediate board impact? It would pass the test anyways.
Creatures that don't do one of those above things that cost 5+ mana aren't really good anyways. "Passing the test" is a way to briefly analyze if the card is good. 7-drops that die to generic removal spells and don't give you anything are pretty bad. Whether you're evaluating it based on the Terminate Test or any other way to determine value, the end result is the same.
450, Peasant*, unpowered**
Specialities about the cube:
U tempo, B aggro, R slow-ish are supported. G aggro is not.
Currently trying to support tokens in all colors but blue, in different ways: W pumps them, B sacrifices them, R suicides them, G has decent-sized ones.
cube list outdated
*literal C/U definition according to gatherer
**some cards are banned. Library of Alexandria, Land Tax, Sol Ring.
I don't think anyone is really saying to ignore the Terminate test outright, irrespective of the amount of removal in the cube.
I would, however, venture to say that the Terminate/Vindicate test is one of the less useful criterion in assessing an expensive creature. It certainly has some value, and I think that by this point in time the Vindicate test has been ingrained in the subconscious of virtually every cube designer. Nevertheless, it's merely one of several criterion in assessing finishers, and not even the premier one at that.
I would argue that the Evasion/Reach test is much more important in assessing an expensive creature. I think most of us would not run a 5WW 50/50 Shroud creature. I think most of us would still pass on it even if it passed the Vindicate test - when 5WW 50/50 Shroud comes into play, place a 0/1 Saproling token into play under your control. I would even venture to guess that most people would not play Keiga if it lost flying but was 4U instead of 5U.
Maybe my point is a bit obvious or overly didactic. But what I'm saying is that we should probably emphasize tests other than the Vindicate test, a test whose reputation has probably outgrown its role in cube evaluation.
Agreed. The Terminate, Vindicate, Evasion/Reach, Wall of Denial, Icy Manipulator, Goblin Guide and so on tests are an arsenal of tools to evaluate a cmc>=5 card. A card doesn't have to pass all of them. In fact, it doesn't necessarily have to pass a single one of them, but the more the merrier. Sometimes a given test is adequate for a card, sometimes it misses the point. A test is more important if its correlating situation comes up more frequently, and it weighs more if the difference between passing and failing is more severe. One could construct an intricate heuristics function for all of this, but it's a) very complicated/de facto impossible and b) basically what we all do intuitively when we see a card for the first time.
So, what's the point in discussing a single one of them, then? Well, the Terminate test is arguably the most important one because both the abundance of its occurence and the severity are generally pretty big, making it contribute a lot to the heuristic function. Consequently, the Terminate test is very relevant, but a card can be viable despite failing the Terminate Test if it scores high on pretty much every other test. That card would feel more do-or-die in practice, but it might be viable (think Phage with unblockable, for instance).
450, Peasant*, unpowered**
Specialities about the cube:
U tempo, B aggro, R slow-ish are supported. G aggro is not.
Currently trying to support tokens in all colors but blue, in different ways: W pumps them, B sacrifices them, R suicides them, G has decent-sized ones.
cube list outdated
*literal C/U definition according to gatherer
**some cards are banned. Library of Alexandria, Land Tax, Sol Ring.
The other 'tests' are things that are more obviously apparent to cube designers. These are for creatures with CMC 5+
Card Advantage Test: Will this card provide me with card advantage?
Power Test: How does this card's power relate to its casting cost? Bigger? At least equal?
Evasion Test: Does this creature have trample/unblockable/flying to allow it to connect?
Added Benefits Test: Does the creature have First Strike/Lifelink/Haste? Does it provide benefits to my other creatures?
Cost test: How much more than 5 does the creature cost?
Color Test: Does the creature costs 2 or less colored mana?
etc. etc. etc.
The thing is that we understand what is a 'good deal' and a 'bad deal' for our mana. And there are plenty of very powerful creatures who can quickly end games if they are unanswered. But what separates many of them from the creatures we typically cube with is their inability to provide some value for your mana when the opponent removes your 5+ mana spell with a 1 or 2 mana card. We cite the terminate test as a way to differentiate the 'good' creatures from the 'great' ones, and it is a very good tool for that purpose.
Penumbra Wurm passes the Terminate test. But we don't talk about including it because it falls short of what we expect for its mana cost.
There are 1695 creatures with CMC greater or equal to 5 in print (at the time of this post). I include 21 in my cube. Probably 80-100 of those 1600+ are 'good enough' to cube with if you discount the terminate test.
[Remixes] - [The Brutal Cube - 360 Powered] - [My Cube Article] - ['Print-This' Wishlist]
I think it's pretty critical. I think it is the premier one. All of the other tests of value that expensive creatures can pass are all contingent upon or necessitate the removal test.
Does it guarantee card advantage? It would pass the test anyways.
Does it protect itself? It would pass the test anyways.
Does it have an immediate board impact? It would pass the test anyways.
Creatures that don't do one of those above things that cost 5+ mana aren't really good anyways. "Passing the test" is a way to briefly analyze if the card is good. 7-drops that die to generic removal spells and don't give you anything are pretty bad. Whether you're evaluating it based on the Terminate Test or any other way to determine value, the end result is the same.
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!