I know. It's the same though. You want to make an environment where every drafter can draft decks that can win. The goal of each player is to win the draft. The goal of the cube designer is to create an environment where everyone has an equal chance to do that. Where the environment doesn't control when players win and lose, but the players do. Creating a balanced format with aggro, midrange and control all being equally powerful, and having multiple archetypes across all the colors is typically how to do this.
Yeah, I'm personally on the side of not adding multiples for my cube myself. The reason being, when you allow multiples, there are just too many avenues and decisions to make.
I equate it with making music, particularly on the computer. When you have infinite ways to create sounds using synths and samples, and all manner of effects, dingles, dongles and whoodickeys, you end up getting overwhelmed by the possibilities and spend too much time just playing around and not enough time making music. I like to work within set restrictions, which allows my musical creativity to come out a lot better.
The same goes for cube, if I were to allow multiples, I would have to set restrictions upon myself for what I will allow and will not allow. Like maybe (these are just ideas to be considered separately):
-No more than two of any card;
-Having a "rarity" system where some cards are 3-ofs, some are 2-ofs and some 1-ofs;
-Having multiples of just select cards that work well together (Accumulated knowledge etc.)
That said, I did run four Mishra's Factory (one of each season) for a little while, for kicks.
The goal of the cube designer is to create an environment where everyone has an equal chance to do that.
This doesn't seem right. Unless you mean 'everyone of equal drafting and playing skills with the same experience' has an equal chance to win regardless which archetype they choose to draft.
Even that is not really universal I think. We can accept that certain archetypes are slightly harder to draft. Reanimator is a bit of a gamble sometimes as you need a bit of luck to have the pieces come together during drafting and playing.
Yes, it is. (see how fun and easy this is? :rolleyes:)
Legacy is designed to be a format where players can construct decks to win, and that there are multiple ways to do so. So is Vintage. And Modern. And Standard. And Limited. And EDH. And Cube.
Wizards puts design restrictions on those formats to make them balanced, competitive and enjoyable. The same reason I put them on my cube.
Designing a cube is the same as designing any other format. Or any other game. You try and optimize the balance, the power and the fun.
..........
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. If you're saying "playing a legacy deck and designing a cube aren't the same thing", the answer is "duh".
But the objectives are identical. Legacy is designed so that the players can sculpt the most powerful decks possible to compete against each other, given the design restrictions put in place to optimize the format. Designing a cube is the exact same thing. My design restrictions are Vintage legal and Singleton legal, and my goal is to allow my players to sculpt the most powerful decks possible within those restrictions.
Winning at Legacy is based on an objective criteria that is set by the rules of the format.
Winning at building a cube is based on the subjective criteria of what gives your players the greatest level of enjoyment.
In one, you conform to a set of criteria that determines how you win, in the other you define it.
Each format functions under the same general principles, but it delivers a different play experience. When you design the cube, you define that play experience. When you play in a format, your gameplay is defined by it.
I don't agree. They design a format. Players play to win. I design a format. Players play to win. Same thing. They make design parameters for the format so it's balanced, fun and exciting. I make design parameters for the format so it's balanced, fun and exciting. It's the same. Wizards has the same objectives creating, designing and managing their formats as I do. Players sit down to win at those objectives the exact same way.
Jesus. It's like you're arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Now that we're all done losing our freaking minds (or at least now that that there is a dedicated thread for losing your mind over multiples) can we discuss this particular change as opposed to the idea of it?
For example, let's say they printed a second set of fetchlands, and I own every copy printed (suck it, teachers would doubted me!). I am adding them to my cube, and would like help balancing said cube. I would appreciate any advice or thoughts.
For example, I mentioned that I would like help controlling the possible rise in greedy manabases. Does anyone have any suggestions, or do people think that will not be a problem?
I don't think it will be that problematic. And if it proves to be too much of a problem and you get free splashes in every deck, then you can do something about it at that time by lowering the amount of fixing in your cube.
Duals will be very high picks with more fetches I would presume as you would have good chances of getting your fetch land later on.
Back to Basics might be a good option for aggressive blue decks against greedy manabases. Things like that would need a good look at as a response to the easier-to-fetch dual lands. Stifle would get even better.
I'm running the quinfecta of Strip Mine, Wasteland, Tectonic Edge and Dust Bowl, and you should probably have all of those.
Plus there's been some fun tech I added, but I don't want to spoil it just yet
**** you Trunkers!
EDIT: Oh yeah, I always thought Tunnel Ignus would be a good include if we get more fetches.
I'd play extra Wastelands, extra Stifles, and maybe look to another Steppe Lynx & Plated Geopede or two. Also, Vinelasher Kudzu, Lotus Cobra and Ob Nix would get better. So would Brainstorm/Jace/Top/Rack/Library and other library manipulation effects. You might need less overall fixing because the quality and consistency would be better.
Well, you've seen some of my proposals. The other thing I would suggest is to give your decks reason to pick up fetchlands that don't have to do with fixing (i.e. Steppe Lynx, Knight of the Reliquary, Deathrite Shaman, etc.). Week after week we see two-color aggro decks grabbing 5 fetchlands.
I'm not really worried about people prioritizing fixing.
Lastly I would recommend to at least try the multiple Wasteland option and see how it feels to you. I picked up a set of gold bordered ones on the cheap to test the idea. I've really liked the dynamic, and worst case you take them out and are out a few bucks. We have loved it.
I might, but I never break the singleton rule without cause, so I'm going to test out reasonable solutions first.
I don't think it will be that problematic. And if it proves to be too much of a problem and you get free splashes in every deck, then you can do something about it at that time by lowering the amount of fixing in your cube.
Duals will be very high picks with more fetches I would presume as you would have good chances of getting your fetch land later on.
It is possible that it will not be a problem at all. After all, I'm not going to be running a ton of fixing, just a slightly higher quality of fixing.
Back to Basics might be a good option for aggressive blue decks against greedy manabases. Things like that would need a good look at as a response to the easier-to-fetch dual lands. Stifle would get even better.
I think B2B really suffers by not affecting fetchlands, and not completely gimping duals. We already run Stifle and love it.
I'm running the quinfecta of Strip Mine, Wasteland, Tectonic Edge and Dust Bowl, and you should probably have all of those.
EDIT: Oh yeah, I always thought Tunnel Ignus would be a good include if we get more fetches.
We run all but Tectonic Edge, which is interesting. Tunnel Ignus looks too specific, but it does remind me that I cut Zo-Zu, who probably got a lot better with this change.
So I want to explore this idea further, and I'm wondering which cards you guys think would be most interesting to run in multiples. A few early candidates:
- Gravecrawler: Synergize well with each other and with cards like Carrion Feeder/Goblin Bombardment/Braids/Smokestack/Attrition/sweepers, as well as being the 1-drops that aggro decks want. Would replace the Carnophage/Diregraf Ghoul/Vampire Lacerator(/Sarcomancy?). Could also do the same thing with Bloodghast.
- Vengevine: Great with any creature-based discard outlet, Survival, graveyard effects in general, makes Buried Alive and Intuition potentially playable in a smaller Cube. Anyone who played Legacy in 2010-2011 knows how brutal a quick start with multiple Vengevines is.
(graveyard strategies in general seems to be well-suited to duplicates; this could be a good starting point for a subtheme ala the landfall one in Trunkers' Cube)
- Life from the Loam
- Faithless Looting
- Burning-Tree Emissary: Enables some blisteringly fast starts, especially in multiples, and resembles Gravecrawler in that drawing >1 copies not only gives you double of the same effect but both/all copies interact well with each other.
- Champion of the Parish/other tribal cards to take aggro in a different direction.
Thoughts?
You are looking for this thread. I would like to keep this thread about multiple fetch lands specifically, as I have seen what happens if we expand the scope.
I have to say, after a lot of drafts, this is one of the best choices I have made with my cube. Running fewer, but higher quality fixing lands has lead to a much better drafting environment. Aggro, control and midrange now fight over all the lands in or near their colors, and we no longer have lands tabling. I highly recommend midsize cubes give it a shot (especially if you often have less than eight drafters), if the idea itself isn't a turnoff.
I have to say, after a lot of drafts, this is one of the best choices I have made with my cube. Running fewer, but higher quality fixing lands has lead to a much better drafting environment. Aggro, control and midrange now fight over all the lands in or near their colors, and we no longer have lands tabling. I highly recommend midsize cubes give it a shot (especially if you often have less than eight drafters), if the idea itself isn't a turnoff.
Duals rarely table here. Maybe the fact that we always Rochester draft with a full table has a lot to do with it. Logically you will see more off colour duals with less players as less combinations will be played.
I am happy this is working out for you:thumbsup: We don't need it, but for those who are not set on singleton this might well be a good way of having a better draft environment.
I really like the possibilities a second set of fetches would offer, but I can't bring myself to disregard the singleton rule. I hope we soon get the full Horizon Canopy cycle of lands or, failing that, at least a full set of Fastlands.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less." -Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass
To Pahntizle, how important is it for playability/drafting that the fetch lands come into play untapped? Reason i am asking is that for people who are bent on following the singleton rule, the Mirage fetchlands are there for the allied cycle.
There is also the Panoramas but they cannot fetch duals, which makes them significantly worse. But they still do later fixing and enable landfall.
I don't intend to steer away from the main topic, but I just want to know exactly the benefits of the duplicate cycle of fetches. Is it the speed of fixing and interaction with duals? Or is the possibility of landfall or late game (slow) fixing good enough? That way we can determine if the Mirage fetches or the Panoramas can serve the same purpose.
Or is the possibility of landfall or late game (slow) fixing good enough? That way we can determine if the Mirage fetches or the Panoramas can serve the same purpose.
Absolutely not. I agree with Phantizle, it is all about the quality of the fixing:
Running fewer, but higher quality fixing lands has lead to a much better drafting environment. Aggro, control and midrange now fight over all the lands in or near their colors, and we no longer have lands tabling.
As soon as you add lands that enter the battlefield tapped, aggro is no longer interested, the lands are less contested and can be picked up later by the slower decks.
He meant the goal of building a cube, not building a cube deck.
Juju Alters - Altered MTG Cards
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 equate it with making music, particularly on the computer. When you have infinite ways to create sounds using synths and samples, and all manner of effects, dingles, dongles and whoodickeys, you end up getting overwhelmed by the possibilities and spend too much time just playing around and not enough time making music. I like to work within set restrictions, which allows my musical creativity to come out a lot better.
The same goes for cube, if I were to allow multiples, I would have to set restrictions upon myself for what I will allow and will not allow. Like maybe (these are just ideas to be considered separately):
-No more than two of any card;
-Having a "rarity" system where some cards are 3-ofs, some are 2-ofs and some 1-ofs;
-Having multiples of just select cards that work well together (Accumulated knowledge etc.)
That said, I did run four Mishra's Factory (one of each season) for a little while, for kicks.
Juju Alters - Altered MTG Cards
This doesn't seem right. Unless you mean 'everyone of equal drafting and playing skills with the same experience' has an equal chance to win regardless which archetype they choose to draft.
Even that is not really universal I think. We can accept that certain archetypes are slightly harder to draft. Reanimator is a bit of a gamble sometimes as you need a bit of luck to have the pieces come together during drafting and playing.
Apart from this nitpicking I agree with you;)
I feel compelled to repeat everything I hear
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!
The key to playing a game is optimizing your ability to win.
The key to designing a game is making the act of optimizing your ability to win enjoyable.
The first is potentially "solvable", because winning is an objective condition as defined by the game's rules.
The second isn't "solvable" because enjoyable is a subjective condition defined separately and distinctly by each player of the game.
Saying that a particular set of cards is the solution to Cube is the rough equivalent of saying Caylus is the solution to board games.
Yes, it is. (see how fun and easy this is? :rolleyes:)
Legacy is designed to be a format where players can construct decks to win, and that there are multiple ways to do so. So is Vintage. And Modern. And Standard. And Limited. And EDH. And Cube.
Wizards puts design restrictions on those formats to make them balanced, competitive and enjoyable. The same reason I put them on my cube.
Designing a cube is the same as designing any other format. Or any other game. You try and optimize the balance, the power and the fun.
..........
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. If you're saying "playing a legacy deck and designing a cube aren't the same thing", the answer is "duh".
But the objectives are identical. Legacy is designed so that the players can sculpt the most powerful decks possible to compete against each other, given the design restrictions put in place to optimize the format. Designing a cube is the exact same thing. My design restrictions are Vintage legal and Singleton legal, and my goal is to allow my players to sculpt the most powerful decks possible within those restrictions.
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!
Winning at Legacy is based on an objective criteria that is set by the rules of the format.
Winning at building a cube is based on the subjective criteria of what gives your players the greatest level of enjoyment.
In one, you conform to a set of criteria that determines how you win, in the other you define it.
Each format functions under the same general principles, but it delivers a different play experience. When you design the cube, you define that play experience. When you play in a format, your gameplay is defined by it.
Jesus. It's like you're arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.
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!
For example, let's say they printed a second set of fetchlands, and I own every copy printed (suck it, teachers would doubted me!). I am adding them to my cube, and would like help balancing said cube. I would appreciate any advice or thoughts.
For example, I mentioned that I would like help controlling the possible rise in greedy manabases. Does anyone have any suggestions, or do people think that will not be a problem?
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!
Duals will be very high picks with more fetches I would presume as you would have good chances of getting your fetch land later on.
I feel compelled to repeat everything I hear
I'm running the quinfecta of Strip Mine, Wasteland, Tectonic Edge and Dust Bowl, and you should probably have all of those.
**** you Trunkers!
EDIT: Oh yeah, I always thought Tunnel Ignus would be a good include if we get more fetches.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
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 not really worried about people prioritizing fixing.
I might, but I never break the singleton rule without cause, so I'm going to test out reasonable solutions first.
It is possible that it will not be a problem at all. After all, I'm not going to be running a ton of fixing, just a slightly higher quality of fixing.
I think B2B really suffers by not affecting fetchlands, and not completely gimping duals. We already run Stifle and love it.
We run all but Tectonic Edge, which is interesting. Tunnel Ignus looks too specific, but it does remind me that I cut Zo-Zu, who probably got a lot better with this change.
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!
-AA
I use descriptive language. Assume that I'm being nice and respectful. (I'll tell you when I'm not.)
My Cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9029
You are looking for this thread. I would like to keep this thread about multiple fetch lands specifically, as I have seen what happens if we expand the scope.
Duals rarely table here. Maybe the fact that we always Rochester draft with a full table has a lot to do with it. Logically you will see more off colour duals with less players as less combinations will be played.
I am happy this is working out for you:thumbsup: We don't need it, but for those who are not set on singleton this might well be a good way of having a better draft environment.
I feel compelled to repeat everything I hear
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!
"What am I looking at? Ashes, dead man."
My 380 Beginners’ Cube on Cube Tutor
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less." -Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass
There is also the Panoramas but they cannot fetch duals, which makes them significantly worse. But they still do later fixing and enable landfall.
I don't intend to steer away from the main topic, but I just want to know exactly the benefits of the duplicate cycle of fetches. Is it the speed of fixing and interaction with duals? Or is the possibility of landfall or late game (slow) fixing good enough? That way we can determine if the Mirage fetches or the Panoramas can serve the same purpose.
Thanks
"What am I looking at? Ashes, dead man."