What if the criteria was most effective/most impactful? Something like that.
Cubetutor rankings seem to suggest that most of the cubes there are unpowered, but that lumps together cubes trying to include the best cards along with C/Ubes and all manner of wacky cubes. So I don't know what the stats are here, but my guess is that it is still true most cubes are unpowered. Given that, I don't think including "powered" as a qualifier makes sense.
In the future I may try to make the argument that we shouldn't even include power in our rankings, since all of those cards minus Timetwister just rocket to the top of every category...
I like the idea of putting the creme de la creme into a "hall of fame." We acknowledge they are the best and want to see the rest. Library has been the best land every time. Ancestral topped the blue rankings. Sol Ring topped artifacts. I think we could safely keep the list pretty conservative at Library of Alexandria, Ancestral Recall, Sol Ring, Jitte, Time Walk, Lotus, Moxen. Heck, it might be fun to pull out all those perennial category winners and put them into a separate voting category and rank them. The point is that including them in the individual sections is rather uninteresting because we know those cards are good, and irrelevant for many cubers because they've excluded them for power reasons. I suppose there is some value in having those cards anchor the scale, but I, personally would rather see them in their own ranking.
Landfall/Lands matter is a natural fit for Gruul and "creatures matter"/go wide is a natural theme for Boros (battalion, battlecry, Rabble-Rouser, etc.)
I am thinking about what would make a good entry. They don't want something that is too much like the Vintage, Legacy, or Legendary cube, so that rules out the mainstream cubes here. Plus, we tend to evaluate cubes and cube cards from a mostly Spike perspective, whereas the MTGO cubes have a lot of stuff for Timmy/Tammy and Jenny/Johnny. The criteria they will use is based on "fun, originality/creativity, feasibility, and replayability."
Fun
I think having the Timmy/Tammy/Jenny/Johnny (TTJJ) cards is important. There needs to be cool, splashy things. While hitting all my land drops with Crucible + fetch land is a cool interaction to me, it isn't exciting. Other than that, Magic is fun. Cubes are fun.
Originality/Creativity
This is going to be one of the biggest things, I think. There are a lot of theme cubes out there, tribal and graveyard theme seem relatively popular. I'm not sure if one of these options would count as original. Something like The Desert Cube is certainly original and cool, but adding a new mechanism (can't add basic lands after the draft), is likely to be disqualified based on feasibility. My guess is that one of the finalists will be a tribal cube. It's a popular theme, offers stuff for Spike and TTJJ, and the card pool is pretty deep.
Feasibility
This criterion will kill stuff like The Desert Cube and other zany ideas like the split card cube, Conspiracy-esque draft mechanics, "Legacy" cube (as in Risk Legacy-like) and so forth.
Replayability
I think this one is where a lot of theme cubes suffer. If the theme is too present, then you learn the archetypes and just draft those cards. Every draft is basically like drafting monored aggro in a MTGSally cube; just pick the best red card in each pack and ignore everything else. Lorwyn draft suffered from this "drafting on rails" problem too. It's hard to balance replayability, complexity, and power level.
Conclusion
As I said, I think tribal is a good way to go for this. The problem is avoiding the "drafting on rails" trap.
The other idea would be to do a 3-color cube. People love shards/wedges, and drafting 3-color decks would be different from most draft formats. I am also thinking a "color matters" theme would be cool for this. The problem is that this theme is a bit mechanical, and not too exciting as a concept.
I don't love that goad doesn't have reminder text and works different in 2p than multiplayer. I think this card is good and interesting, but I'm worried about complexity issues. I tend to cube with people with a wide range of Magic experience, and so I try to limit the weird mechanics unless a card is just too fun to not include. He might make the cut.
That said, having the option of either forcing their creature to attack or pseudo-draw is great, and that ignores his lord effect of giving that ability to all your creatures!
What do you mean it works differently in multiplayer vs 2p? It works the same, has to attack, and has to attack someone else if able.
I don't think this mechanic is very complicated, but I also think rejecting mechanics on a complexity basis will hurt your cube in the long run. The first time someone plays with the mechanic, they get it (it makes great sense flavor wise). The lack of reminder text hurts 1 time...during the draft, someone says "wtf is goad?", and you can say "the creature has to attack next turn."
It doesn't really work differently, but in multiplayer, the implication is that the creature has to attack someone else. I try to only include cards that feature reminder text unless the abilities are evergreen. However, I agree with you though that goad is relatively straightforward compared to say, morph, so I will likely run this guy. I think he has an interesting and powerful effect.
i really wish it only had the exile ability and then they could just get rid of the "choose one" and "goad" text. not really sure about this one.
Why would you want to change it to something strictly worse? I don't get the notion of excluding mechanics in order to 'simplify' the game. Magic is enormously complex and has a billion key words:
[list went here]
Granted, not all of these appear in most cubes but excluding a good card because it has Goad is weird to me. Especially in 2016 where everyone at the table has the internet in their pocket.
I think there's some good responses to this, but I don't want to derail this thread with a general discussion on complexity.
Grenzo is sweet and if you are cubing with experienced MtG players or a consistent group, I think he totally deserves a shot.
I don't love that goad doesn't have reminder text and works different in 2p than multiplayer. I think this card is good and interesting, but I'm worried about complexity issues. I tend to cube with people with a wide range of Magic experience, and so I try to limit the weird mechanics unless a card is just too fun to not include. He might make the cut.
That said, having the option of either forcing their creature to attack or pseudo-draw is great, and that ignores his lord effect of giving that ability to all your creatures!
I am definitely going to try this out in Sorin, Lord of Innistrad's place. Sorin is good, but WB has become a bit less aggro/token and so while Sorin is perfectly playable, he's just a value card rather than also an archetype card. Kaya has a lot of interesting uses and BW is full of ETB creatures. The -1 is still reasonable in a BW aggro deck too, giving it some much needed reach.
When siding out vs. Zoo, I'll first remove the fat and heavy-cmc cards. Then remove chaff like Dispel and VClique (maybe). And of course I'll shave a couple copies of Remand/Leak. But depending on what I'm taking out, I might not cut all the copies.
Leak seems respectable vs. zoo. Plus, it's good to have a counter for Choke.
The idea of counter magic is great in theory, a general answer in a widely varying field of threats. The problem is that Leak and Remand aren't general answers; they are only good in some match-ups, at certain times. Leak is the closest thing we have to a good, general answer, but it's at its best vs. faster decks. It becomes dead in control or midrange match-ups, and we also play 4x Path to hasten that. Vs. fast aggro or burn, I think Lightning Helix is generally better, costs the same, gets around stuff like Vial and Cavern, and gains life. Vs. spell-based combo, Leak is better for sure. Personally, I think they are pretty close, and I like how Helix makes the plan of Colonnade + Burn better. Remand has some of the same problems as Leak, but also has more applications and cycles, so I don't find it as much of a detriment.
So I am trying to cut the Leaks and go with 3 Spell Snare, 2 Remand, 1 Cryptic Command as my counter mage. Cryptic isn't really a spell in the Leak/Helix category because it doesn't help early. More of a pet card/metagame hedge.
bro i dig your analysis here. i have noticed in my play that sometimes i wonder why am i holding countermagic up anyways...why not play interactive spells instead of reactive spells. i like to think of the nahiri deck as a glorified burn deck that has mid and late game finishers too
Also it seems like my local metagame skews towards creature decks as opposed to spell/combo decks relative to the protour/GP metagame.
The idea of counter magic is great in theory, a general answer in a widely varying field of threats. The problem is that Leak and Remand aren't general answers; they are only good in some match-ups, at certain times. Leak is the closest thing we have to a good, general answer, but it's at its best vs. faster decks. It becomes dead in control or midrange match-ups, and we also play 4x Path to hasten that. Vs. fast aggro or burn, I think Lightning Helix is generally better, costs the same, gets around stuff like Vial and Cavern, and gains life. Vs. spell-based combo, Leak is better for sure. Personally, I think they are pretty close, and I like how Helix makes the plan of Colonnade + Burn better. Remand has some of the same problems as Leak, but also has more applications and cycles, so I don't find it as much of a detriment.
So I am trying to cut the Leaks and go with 3 Spell Snare, 2 Remand, 1 Cryptic Command as my counter mage. Cryptic isn't really a spell in the Leak/Helix category because it doesn't help early. More of a pet card/metagame hedge.
On one hand it could be cool to have more modern playable cards. I say could be because more cards =/= more decks. Sometimes more cards = fewer unique cards being played. For example, how many 1-mana red removal spells get played? Basically one because bolt invalidates the rest. It's generally more interesting when you have a bunch of similarly powerful cards that do a thing, each with their pluses and minuses. That said, there are cards like Birthing Pod that inspire or open up whole new decks. I would like to see more cards like Collected Company, Pyromancer Ascension, or others in the format. They open up new strategies and ways to play.
So that's the metric I use for deciding whether a card would be good for the format. Cards like True Name Nemesis are not the kind of cards I love, they don't do something new, but are just powerful. These cards can be good if they boost strategies that otherwise wouldn't see play, but they often have unintended consequences. As much as I would like to see Stoneforge Mystic unbanned to help make Mardu or White Weenie decks good, it could just slot into control decks and shut these other decks down.
The problem is that many Commander cards are more True Name Nemesis than Birthing Pod. They could just do what they always do, print cool cards and ban them if they are a problem. I would like to see a way to get cards into modern without going through standard, but the Masters sets have shown reprints would be in low quantities. I think that in either case, card availability would be a problem. They just don't reprint cards enough to have these extra, smaller printings of new cards without prices being too high on them.
I think this card has a reasonable power level, but I just don't want to cut an existing card for it. I think Ulamog 2.0 is better and I only have room for one big colorless creature. I want reanimator/sneak attack/oath of druids to have targets but fatties too narrow. If I were to add in another colorless bomb, it would be this card or Kozilek 1.0. Might be different in a powered cube running Show and Tell (I don't run for color pie reasons) and Channel (I don't run because broken). If I wanted the broken, powerful stuff, which is totally fun sometimes, I'm not sure this Emrakul is worth it. I mean, if I'm cheating it in, I think Emrakul 1.0 is probably better?
I always thought the quote on Shimian Night Stalker was sweet, though a waste on those abilities and that weirdo art.
Cubetutor rankings seem to suggest that most of the cubes there are unpowered, but that lumps together cubes trying to include the best cards along with C/Ubes and all manner of wacky cubes. So I don't know what the stats are here, but my guess is that it is still true most cubes are unpowered. Given that, I don't think including "powered" as a qualifier makes sense.
I like the idea of putting the creme de la creme into a "hall of fame." We acknowledge they are the best and want to see the rest. Library has been the best land every time. Ancestral topped the blue rankings. Sol Ring topped artifacts. I think we could safely keep the list pretty conservative at Library of Alexandria, Ancestral Recall, Sol Ring, Jitte, Time Walk, Lotus, Moxen. Heck, it might be fun to pull out all those perennial category winners and put them into a separate voting category and rank them. The point is that including them in the individual sections is rather uninteresting because we know those cards are good, and irrelevant for many cubers because they've excluded them for power reasons. I suppose there is some value in having those cards anchor the scale, but I, personally would rather see them in their own ranking.
Fun
I think having the Timmy/Tammy/Jenny/Johnny (TTJJ) cards is important. There needs to be cool, splashy things. While hitting all my land drops with Crucible + fetch land is a cool interaction to me, it isn't exciting. Other than that, Magic is fun. Cubes are fun.
Originality/Creativity
This is going to be one of the biggest things, I think. There are a lot of theme cubes out there, tribal and graveyard theme seem relatively popular. I'm not sure if one of these options would count as original. Something like The Desert Cube is certainly original and cool, but adding a new mechanism (can't add basic lands after the draft), is likely to be disqualified based on feasibility. My guess is that one of the finalists will be a tribal cube. It's a popular theme, offers stuff for Spike and TTJJ, and the card pool is pretty deep.
Feasibility
This criterion will kill stuff like The Desert Cube and other zany ideas like the split card cube, Conspiracy-esque draft mechanics, "Legacy" cube (as in Risk Legacy-like) and so forth.
Replayability
I think this one is where a lot of theme cubes suffer. If the theme is too present, then you learn the archetypes and just draft those cards. Every draft is basically like drafting monored aggro in a MTGSally cube; just pick the best red card in each pack and ignore everything else. Lorwyn draft suffered from this "drafting on rails" problem too. It's hard to balance replayability, complexity, and power level.
Conclusion
As I said, I think tribal is a good way to go for this. The problem is avoiding the "drafting on rails" trap.
The other idea would be to do a 3-color cube. People love shards/wedges, and drafting 3-color decks would be different from most draft formats. I am also thinking a "color matters" theme would be cool for this. The problem is that this theme is a bit mechanical, and not too exciting as a concept.
It doesn't really work differently, but in multiplayer, the implication is that the creature has to attack someone else. I try to only include cards that feature reminder text unless the abilities are evergreen. However, I agree with you though that goad is relatively straightforward compared to say, morph, so I will likely run this guy. I think he has an interesting and powerful effect.
I think there's some good responses to this, but I don't want to derail this thread with a general discussion on complexity.
Grenzo is sweet and if you are cubing with experienced MtG players or a consistent group, I think he totally deserves a shot.
That said, having the option of either forcing their creature to attack or pseudo-draw is great, and that ignores his lord effect of giving that ability to all your creatures!
Leak seems respectable vs. zoo. Plus, it's good to have a counter for Choke.
Also it seems like my local metagame skews towards creature decks as opposed to spell/combo decks relative to the protour/GP metagame.
So I am trying to cut the Leaks and go with 3 Spell Snare, 2 Remand, 1 Cryptic Command as my counter mage. Cryptic isn't really a spell in the Leak/Helix category because it doesn't help early. More of a pet card/metagame hedge.
So that's the metric I use for deciding whether a card would be good for the format. Cards like True Name Nemesis are not the kind of cards I love, they don't do something new, but are just powerful. These cards can be good if they boost strategies that otherwise wouldn't see play, but they often have unintended consequences. As much as I would like to see Stoneforge Mystic unbanned to help make Mardu or White Weenie decks good, it could just slot into control decks and shut these other decks down.
The problem is that many Commander cards are more True Name Nemesis than Birthing Pod. They could just do what they always do, print cool cards and ban them if they are a problem. I would like to see a way to get cards into modern without going through standard, but the Masters sets have shown reprints would be in low quantities. I think that in either case, card availability would be a problem. They just don't reprint cards enough to have these extra, smaller printings of new cards without prices being too high on them.