Captive > Lion > Geist
Rabblemaster > Gargadon > Feldon. I have no idea on Alesha yet.
Vapors > Command
Tasigur > Tombstalker
Relic Warder >> Sanctifiers (Sanctifiers should not still be played in cubes IMO, I would much rather play tons of other disenchant effects in white)
Snapper vs. Omenspeaker is a cube based call on whether you're really trying to support tempo. If you are, I'd go with the Snapper.
I think all three of those black creatures are really close, and they all do really different things. I don't have a huge opinion on that one.
Oh okay cool. It needs to make half the submitted lists to count. That works better.
Yep, and if we have a situation where there aren't enough cards total to make a full list of 10, we'll figure out what to do when that happens, but it'll likely involve plurality counting, so the cards that got voted on by the most amount of people are up next for consideration.
Not entirely true. He still triggers himself if your opponent has 2/1s 1/1s etc. Thinking about him with wall of roots, wall of blossoms, sylvan caryatid, etc.
Also worth noting is that green pairs very well with every color for toughness creatures if you're doing something rampy or controlling.
Posted more information about how voting on power works if you don't play with it in your cube, as well as information on how the tallying system works.
I think there needs to be a minimum number of votes reached in order to use that metric. Because if 1 person ranks a rogue card #1 overall, it'll be the best card by default, which is a bad idea, IMO.
Also, people may intentionally exclude cards because they think they're garbage. Using your voting metric, you're actually helping the card rather than hurting it by excluding it, which seems like a really bad way to tally votes.
The problem I can forsee not being accounted for with this is a card like Contract From Below. Let's say 2 of those 10 people ranked Contract From below as #1. Well, based on the same metric, I'd have to place Contract From Below as #1, even though most of the votes chose to completely leave that card out. I think the majority should be represented rather than the minority. As long as half of the people have a card anywhere on their list, it will be tallied up accordingly. I can forsee this causing very few issues -- if there is the circumstance where there are not enough cards voted on by the majority to bring 10 total spots, we'll adjust things to include cards that are voted on with a plurality of votes for the lower ranked positions.
I'm not really sure on how I should be handling power cards, since I run an unpowered cube I have deliberately chosen to exclude cards like Ancestral Recall and Sol Ring. I'd say this means they don't go into the Top 10 cards I consider important for my cube so I don't plan to rank them. Is this violating the spirit of the project
If it's a card you don't feel like you can accurately judge because you don't have experience with it, it seems fine to exclude it. But if you know in your heart of hearts that it's one of the best cards, you should probably include it.
But ultimately that's up to Colby. Is the idea to list the best cards or something else?
However people want to do it is fine with me.
If people don't want to include Ancestral Recall, that's fine. I figured out a way to do tallies so it won't make much of a difference one way or the other. Unless over 50% of people are not including Ancestral Recall, it won't really affect Ancestral's ranking.
I'm going to add up points like this:
#1 = 10 points
#2 = 9 points
#3 = 8 points
I'm going to add those points up for each card, then divide those cards based on how many times they were actually voted on. So, let's say 10 people vote. Ancestral Recall is voted on 5 times, each receiving the #1 spot for blue. That gives it 50 total points. I divide the 50 points by 5 (amount of times voted on) = 10 points, i.e., 1st place.
The problem I can forsee not being accounted for with this is a card like Contract From Below. Let's say 2 of those 10 people ranked Contract From below as #1. Well, based on the same metric, I'd have to place Contract From Below as #1, even though most of the votes chose to completely leave that card out. I think the majority should be represented rather than the minority. As long as half of the people have a card anywhere on their list, it will be tallied up accordingly. I can forsee this causing very few issues -- if there is the circumstance where there are not enough cards voted on by the majority to bring 10 total spots, we'll adjust things to include cards that are voted on with a plurality of votes for the lower ranked positions.
I think Fire Imp is insane. 3 mana for a baby flametouge kavu ping 2 damage is awesome. It's no where near chopping block in my 360, even with my dislike of old border card and portal format. Certainly much better than this card.
I cut Fire Imp from my 360. It's not a may ability, which hurts it a lot.
That being said, Fire Imp is much better than any of the guys being discussed in this thread I think.
The modo cube uses 4 enablers: Ral Zarek, Tezzeret the Seeker, Voltaic Key, and Kiora's Follower along with Time Vault in a 540 card cube. This is 5 total combo pieces (Time Vault + 4 enablers) in a 540 card cube.
Quote from wtwlf123 »
I'll replay the combo when there are more enablers, because the math simply doesn't support combo viability at 360 with only 3 enablers, even when the nut deck is drafted with 8 players.
4 total combo pieces (TV + 3 enablers) in a 360 is actually a higher ratio than what the MODO cube had. If my math is right...
5/540 = 0.009259
4/360 = 0.011111
It would actually be stronger at 360 than at 540 due to auxiliary support, like a higher chance of opening and being passed tutors, in addition to combo pieces.
However, I can tell you beyond math, and using my own personal years of experience, that your math is wrong. You can actually hear expert witnesses on why your numbers are wrong. LSV said Time Vault was the best card in the MODO Holiday cube. Other cube managers that have actually have played the card have vouched for its power level.
You haven't even tested it since Ral Zarek was released. I guess you'd rather use your own abstract guesswork rather than looking at testimonials or data. In addition to everyone on this thread who has vouched for Time Vault's power level, I can also present data from the MODO 2014 holiday cube on Cubetutor, which has Time Vault as the #11 most drafted card.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
-------
For those of you who don't want to include Time Vault because it's a two-card combo win, -- I feel you guys. I personally don't really like Time Vault or Kiki-Jiki because the actual wins just feel cheesy. It's the same reason I wouldn't include Contract From Below if I were playing with ante cards.
However, to say that the card isn't good enough on power level merit is just fallacy.
It would depend on the number of tutors paired with the combo, I suppose. It can be successful with just 1 way to untap it, but it won't be very consistent. 2 would make it better. 3 would be better than that. So we can split the difference and say 2 and a tutor or 1 and 2 tutors? That would be pretty close, I think.
In decks that have 3 ways to untap Vault (either by raw draw or Tutor) Time Vault is still a completely dead card more than half the times you draw it. It's not until you have 6 or more Tutors/Untap pieces that the number reaches 66% that Vault will be paired with something of value. Oh, and that's assuming that Vault is actually seeded into your opening hand.
Now, when the number in the cube goes up to ~6, so the number in my deck can go to ~4-5 + tutors, things look a lot better. With Vault + 5 combo pieces + 1 Tutor, It at least goes up to 52%, so it works more than half the time. That seems a bit more reasonable to me.
TL;DR- I'll replay the combo when there are more enablers, because the math simply doesn't support combo viability at 360 with only 3 enablers, even when the nut deck is drafted with 8 players.
These numbers seem way different than the ones you just quoted.
Just because it worked some of the times it was streamed on MTGO doesn't mean it's a good cube card. For each success we witnessed, it was probably an utter failure 10x as many times.
So you think when LSV and other pros describe Time Vault as being one of the best, if not the very best card in the entire cube, they're actually losing with it 10x more than they win with it?
Am I reading this right?
Also, because you're sticking with your numbers, could you tell me which ones they are?
I'd be more comfortable playing those drafted decks with something besides Time Vault/Key in them, until they can go into a deck that has a huge percent chance of going infinite with Vault every time it's drawn, which probably requires somewhere around 4 enablers in the same deck as it.
There are two or maybe three cubeworthy ways to untap it, and it won't ever see maindeck play without access to at least two others in the same deck. It's trash.
Just no. I wouldn't put this in a deck unless I had at least three enablers in the same deck as Vault. Better yet the whole cube. I would want 5-6 enablers at 360, and that would be if I was drafting 6+ players in each event.
I'd be more comfortable playing those drafted decks with something besides Time Vault/Key in them, until they can go into a deck that has a huge percent chance of going infinite with Vault every time it's drawn, which probably requires somewhere around 4 enablers in the same deck as it.
So even the nut Time Vault deck with every piece in the cube in it (if you support 3 untap pieces) still fails more times than it succeeds.
Now, when the number in the cube goes up to ~6, so the number in my deck can go to ~4-5 + tutors, things look a lot better. With Vault + 5 combo pieces + 1 Tutor, It at least goes up to 52%, so it works more than half the time. That seems a bit more reasonable to me.
TL;DR- I'll replay the combo when there are more enablers, because the math simply doesn't support combo viability at 360 with only 3 enablers, even when the nut deck is drafted with 8 players.
You’re still standing firm on these quotes and numbers ?
Rabblemaster > Gargadon > Feldon. I have no idea on Alesha yet.
Vapors > Command
Tasigur > Tombstalker
Relic Warder >> Sanctifiers (Sanctifiers should not still be played in cubes IMO, I would much rather play tons of other disenchant effects in white)
Snapper vs. Omenspeaker is a cube based call on whether you're really trying to support tempo. If you are, I'd go with the Snapper.
I think all three of those black creatures are really close, and they all do really different things. I don't have a huge opinion on that one.
Yep, and if we have a situation where there aren't enough cards total to make a full list of 10, we'll figure out what to do when that happens, but it'll likely involve plurality counting, so the cards that got voted on by the most amount of people are up next for consideration.
Also worth noting is that green pairs very well with every color for toughness creatures if you're doing something rampy or controlling.
When I read this originally, I was like "Pffffttt? What? It's green."
And then a flood of examples poured in my head before I even read all your examples.
This is definitely true. Good insight, Goodking.
You can find all relevant information in post #2 of this thread on the first page.
Did you see this part ?
However people want to do it is fine with me.
If people don't want to include Ancestral Recall, that's fine. I figured out a way to do tallies so it won't make much of a difference one way or the other. Unless over 50% of people are not including Ancestral Recall, it won't really affect Ancestral's ranking.
I'm going to add up points like this:
#1 = 10 points
#2 = 9 points
#3 = 8 points
I'm going to add those points up for each card, then divide those cards based on how many times they were actually voted on. So, let's say 10 people vote. Ancestral Recall is voted on 5 times, each receiving the #1 spot for blue. That gives it 50 total points. I divide the 50 points by 5 (amount of times voted on) = 10 points, i.e., 1st place.
The problem I can forsee not being accounted for with this is a card like Contract From Below. Let's say 2 of those 10 people ranked Contract From below as #1. Well, based on the same metric, I'd have to place Contract From Below as #1, even though most of the votes chose to completely leave that card out. I think the majority should be represented rather than the minority. As long as half of the people have a card anywhere on their list, it will be tallied up accordingly. I can forsee this causing very few issues -- if there is the circumstance where there are not enough cards voted on by the majority to bring 10 total spots, we'll adjust things to include cards that are voted on with a plurality of votes for the lower ranked positions.
I cut Fire Imp from my 360. It's not a may ability, which hurts it a lot.
That being said, Fire Imp is much better than any of the guys being discussed in this thread I think.
We have data that proves your math is wrong.
The modo cube uses 4 enablers: Ral Zarek, Tezzeret the Seeker, Voltaic Key, and Kiora's Follower along with Time Vault in a 540 card cube. This is 5 total combo pieces (Time Vault + 4 enablers) in a 540 card cube.
4 total combo pieces (TV + 3 enablers) in a 360 is actually a higher ratio than what the MODO cube had. If my math is right...
5/540 = 0.009259
4/360 = 0.011111
It would actually be stronger at 360 than at 540 due to auxiliary support, like a higher chance of opening and being passed tutors, in addition to combo pieces.
However, I can tell you beyond math, and using my own personal years of experience, that your math is wrong. You can actually hear expert witnesses on why your numbers are wrong. LSV said Time Vault was the best card in the MODO Holiday cube. Other cube managers that have actually have played the card have vouched for its power level.
You haven't even tested it since Ral Zarek was released. I guess you'd rather use your own abstract guesswork rather than looking at testimonials or data. In addition to everyone on this thread who has vouched for Time Vault's power level, I can also present data from the MODO 2014 holiday cube on Cubetutor, which has Time Vault as the #11 most drafted card.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
-------
For those of you who don't want to include Time Vault because it's a two-card combo win, -- I feel you guys. I personally don't really like Time Vault or Kiki-Jiki because the actual wins just feel cheesy. It's the same reason I wouldn't include Contract From Below if I were playing with ante cards.
However, to say that the card isn't good enough on power level merit is just fallacy.
I think you're moving the goalposts.
These numbers seem way different than the ones you just quoted.
I'm asking about statements you made, I'm not even presenting arguments for the card.
So you think when LSV and other pros describe Time Vault as being one of the best, if not the very best card in the entire cube, they're actually losing with it 10x more than they win with it?
Am I reading this right?
Also, because you're sticking with your numbers, could you tell me which ones they are?
It just reinforced what you already knew about the card?
What about these quotes: (emphasis in bold and orange mine)
You’re still standing firm on these quotes and numbers ?
http://www.channelfireball.com/videos/channel-lsv-holiday-cube-draft-6/
He calls it "the best card in the cube" : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tCfT5rHX7c&t=1m20s
He takes Time Vault over Sol Ring and Black Lotus later on in the draft: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tCfT5rHX7c&t=9m30s