So I have looked around and no one seems to be discussing the viability of boderposts in non-pauper lists. I am currently running the enemy cycle of signets along with the allied cycle of borderposts and it has been working out for me in my limited testing. Here is my argument/reasoning:
Enemy Signets:
In my cube, the most important color for artifact fixing is blue. This inherently makes blue signets more powerful. However control decks in cube often have to go into 2, 3 or even 4 colors to be truly powerful and effective. This makes the other signets worth considering for their off color cards (non-blue) they play. In my experience American, Bug, Esper, and Grixis are the four big three color combinations for control in cube. This means that the golgari, boros, orzhov, and rakdos signets are all worth considering in a control deck, not just the blue ones. That means in a cube, the golgari, rakdos, boros, simic, izzet, dimir, orzhov, and azorius signets are all worth considering as ramp/fixing in both blue control and midrange. This is interesting because this list includes ALL of the enemy signets, but leaves out two of the allied signets.
Allied Borderposts:
Unlike the signets, borderposts (bp) will probably not be powering out a T3 wrath, however they do open up a few doors that most cubes only knock on. First off, the strategies that want borderposts the most are the Wildfire, and Armageddon strategies. These strategies aren't looking to ramp out these spells quickly, but rather get the most value for them when they resolve. This makes the red and white bp the most essential and versatile of the cycle. The gruul and azorius bp in particular are the best since they directly facilitate the color pair that wants them the most. The off white and red bp's are also viable for the same reason their on color counterparts are. Dimir, selesnya, and rakdos offer a wide range of use in their particular archtype, and, unlike signets, can be played on turn 1 as a land, or later if they would miss a land drop. The blue and red posts also function as a prowess enabler since their ability to bounce a land and pay 1 is worded as an alternate casting cost, they do in fact go on the stack and trigger prowess. In my experience, lands that trigger prowess are pretty good.
Why the Split Cycle:
The full cycle of signets goes to far in enabling an oppressive control deck. Since the best signets are in allied colors, I have increased their cost by 1, but also given them more versatility as a functioning land. This slows the control deck down a little (which helps out my struggling aggro archtype), but not to the point where it is unplayable. The change has also made the tinker strategy more interesting because tinker now has a plethora of 1 drop artifacts to throw away when needed.
Overall I think this change is for the better, but I want to know what you guys think. Is this a good idea? I have some testing, but most of what I have said is only from extrapolation, so any feedback would be helpful.
If you want to remove Signets because they're too powerful for a low-power environment, than the Borderposts can be passable options. But they're nowhere near as good. They basic land restriction hurts decks that want to be splashing the artifact for fixing, entering tapped is a bummer, not bridging the critical 2->4 gap is a big drawback ...but the worst is the potential tempo blowout you suffer if an early Borderpost is dealt with. So unless you're trying to intentionally lower the powerlevel of your manafacts, I'd pass on them altogether. But if that was the case, removing all of them just makes more sense, IMO.
Allied Talisman are arguably better than Signets in a lot of cases, but still diversify the mana rock suite if that's what you're aiming to do.
If you want to remove Signets because they're too powerful for a low-power environment, than the Borderposts can be passable options. But they're nowhere near as good. They basic land restriction hurts decks that want to be splashing the artifact for fixing, entering tapped is a bummer, not bridging the critical 2->4 gap is a big drawback ...but the worst is the potential tempo blowout you suffer if an early Borderpost is dealt with. So unless you're trying to intentionally lower the powerlevel of your manafacts, I'd pass on them altogether. But if that was the case, removing all of them just makes more sense, IMO.
Allied Talisman are arguably better than Signets in a lot of cases, but still diversify the mana rock suite if that's what you're aiming to do.
For the most part I agree with you. The signets are better mana fixers than the borderposts, but the question I tired to pose is whether or not this change is better for the play-ability of the cube. I used to run all 10 signets, and it felt like it killed green's color identity and overpowered the control, tinker, and welder archetypes. I felt like the cut from 10 to 5 signets gave the right consistency to the cube and preserved the green color identity. However by doing so I imbalanced the fixing, so therefore the bps.
Now however I am thinking of changing the 2 half cycles to a singleton guild specific fixing. For example, I could include the blue signets and red fast lands.
You should do what works best for your cube and your cube group. I'm including a partial Signet/Talisman cycle in my low power list just to see how they play out. It won't be a full 10-card cycle, but a partial cycle paired with some generic rocks to fill out the need of the cube. As we draft I can make cuts where I see they fit based on play. If your group is loving the Borderposts and they're working for you, then you should definitely go that route.
For the record, I don't think artifact mana of any kind hurts green at all as far as being a ramp color. IMO, it gives you the option of building the green ramp deck or including some ramp in your non-green control and midrange decks.
I'd run cluestones and those 3 color cluestones before these IMO. They fix more colors, and if someone disenchants a borderpost you played with its alternate cost the game might as well be over as sinkhole is not a fair card when it's so versatile as to kill 'lands' and other big cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
I'd run cluestones and those 3 color cluestones before these IMO. They fix more colors, and if someone disenchants a borderpost you played with its alternate cost the game might as well be over as sinkhole is not a fair card when it's so versatile as to kill 'lands' and other big cards.
I'd run keyrunes way before I'd touch cluestones; keyrunes are way better than cluestones.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Check out the thread for my cube if you have the time, and tell me how terrible it is.
Generals meant to be drafted first in a single pack of 6 cards.
And here is the actual cube, meant to be drafted in 4 regular sized packs. (60 card decks)
Okay fine run keyrunes then. My original post still stands, cluestones are better than borderposts. If you disagree, say so. There are tons of cards that are better than other cards, don't think I'm ignorant in that regard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
-Freyalise
Currently Playing:
Retired
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Enemy Signets:
In my cube, the most important color for artifact fixing is blue. This inherently makes blue signets more powerful. However control decks in cube often have to go into 2, 3 or even 4 colors to be truly powerful and effective. This makes the other signets worth considering for their off color cards (non-blue) they play. In my experience American, Bug, Esper, and Grixis are the four big three color combinations for control in cube. This means that the golgari, boros, orzhov, and rakdos signets are all worth considering in a control deck, not just the blue ones. That means in a cube, the golgari, rakdos, boros, simic, izzet, dimir, orzhov, and azorius signets are all worth considering as ramp/fixing in both blue control and midrange. This is interesting because this list includes ALL of the enemy signets, but leaves out two of the allied signets.
Allied Borderposts:
Unlike the signets, borderposts (bp) will probably not be powering out a T3 wrath, however they do open up a few doors that most cubes only knock on. First off, the strategies that want borderposts the most are the Wildfire, and Armageddon strategies. These strategies aren't looking to ramp out these spells quickly, but rather get the most value for them when they resolve. This makes the red and white bp the most essential and versatile of the cycle. The gruul and azorius bp in particular are the best since they directly facilitate the color pair that wants them the most. The off white and red bp's are also viable for the same reason their on color counterparts are. Dimir, selesnya, and rakdos offer a wide range of use in their particular archtype, and, unlike signets, can be played on turn 1 as a land, or later if they would miss a land drop. The blue and red posts also function as a prowess enabler since their ability to bounce a land and pay 1 is worded as an alternate casting cost, they do in fact go on the stack and trigger prowess. In my experience, lands that trigger prowess are pretty good.
Why the Split Cycle:
The full cycle of signets goes to far in enabling an oppressive control deck. Since the best signets are in allied colors, I have increased their cost by 1, but also given them more versatility as a functioning land. This slows the control deck down a little (which helps out my struggling aggro archtype), but not to the point where it is unplayable. The change has also made the tinker strategy more interesting because tinker now has a plethora of 1 drop artifacts to throw away when needed.
Overall I think this change is for the better, but I want to know what you guys think. Is this a good idea? I have some testing, but most of what I have said is only from extrapolation, so any feedback would be helpful.
Here is a link to my cube.
BRGProssh Skyraider of Kher
Allied Talisman are arguably better than Signets in a lot of cases, but still diversify the mana rock suite if that's what you're aiming to do.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
For the most part I agree with you. The signets are better mana fixers than the borderposts, but the question I tired to pose is whether or not this change is better for the play-ability of the cube. I used to run all 10 signets, and it felt like it killed green's color identity and overpowered the control, tinker, and welder archetypes. I felt like the cut from 10 to 5 signets gave the right consistency to the cube and preserved the green color identity. However by doing so I imbalanced the fixing, so therefore the bps.
Now however I am thinking of changing the 2 half cycles to a singleton guild specific fixing. For example, I could include the blue signets and red fast lands.
BRGProssh Skyraider of Kher
For the record, I don't think artifact mana of any kind hurts green at all as far as being a ramp color. IMO, it gives you the option of building the green ramp deck or including some ramp in your non-green control and midrange decks.
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
Currently Playing:
Retired
I'd run keyrunes way before I'd touch cluestones; keyrunes are way better than cluestones.
Generals meant to be drafted first in a single pack of 6 cards.
And here is the actual cube, meant to be drafted in 4 regular sized packs. (60 card decks)
Currently Playing:
Retired