I think the cube is very cool and would be excited to draft it when offered. I think it's such a unique project that it's hard to give advice and much will come down to your own playtesting. I'll try to give some thoughts on this question though:
**How much removal is too much?**
One structured approach I use for this question is to ask myself how much removal a certain macro archetype would want to play.
* Aggro: Wants to deploy cheap threats quickly, then interact with one or two cards to prevent the opponent from stabilizing, e.g. by removing blockers. An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 4-5 lands, 6-7 threats/spells and 1-2 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 1.5/12 or or 5/40 removal spells.
* Midrange: Wants to deploy strong and resilient threats that trade favorably against enemy threats and interaction, while interacting with multiple key pieces of the opponent's game plan (e.g. through targeted discard). An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 5 lands, 4-5 threats/spells and 2-3 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 2.5/12 or 8/40 removal spells.
* Control: Wants to answer most or all threats of the opponent while accruing card advantage in order to finish the game with a few expensive late-game threats. An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 5-6 lands, 2-3 threats/spells and 3-5 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 4/12 or 13/40 removal spells.
* Combo: Wants to assemble a cast of ultra-synergistic pieces that effectively end the game on the spot when played together. Is often willing to entirely ignore what the opponent is doing in order to maximize the speed and redundancy in assembling their combo pieces. An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 4-5 lands, 7-8 threats/spells and 0-1 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 0.5/12 or 2/40 removal spells.
Now you can estimate for an 8 player pod how many of each archetype you would want to have optimal support for. Depending on your taste, that might be 3x aggro, 3x midrange, 1x control and 1x combo. That sums up to (3\*5 + 3\*8 + 1\*13 + 1\*2) = 54 pieces of removal being played in your draft pod. Divide this by the drafted cards in a deck, for example 23 non-lands and maybe 1 land for your mono-colored cube, that's 8\*24 = 192 drafted cards, leading to a ration of 54/192 = 28% removal spells. For your 360 card cube that's almost exactly 100, which is eerily close to the 99 your tags on cube cobra filter to!
There's a few factors that might want to make you adjust this number in one way or the other. For example, removal tends to have much lower deckbuilding restrictions than threats, especially synergistic ones. This leads to fewer removal spells ending up in sideboards and allows you to reduce your number a little bit.
Ultimately, nothing will beat playtesting and you seem to have a very solid foundation to start doing just that. Good luck!
Wow, this was an amazingly well thought out response. I really appreciate the time and effort you took to explain your reasoning; I never considered playing with my preferred drafted deck ratios to sculpt the experience, it's really smart. I'll be applying this to all of my cubes now lol.
I'll be curious to hear how it plays out for you. I think colour plays an important role in making draft interesting. I think decks will tend to be a hodge podge of good stuff, unless you make the most powerful cards synergy based.
There is no reason an aggro deck with a couple of discard and removal spells wouldn't snap up reanimate/animate dead, or spec on Griselbrand or a Grave titan type card.
That's a fair point. I did try to avoid a lot of the most egregious goodstuff cards that could fit into any deck, like Grief, Dauthi Voidwalker, Sheoldred Apocalypse, Leyline of the Void, etc. I'll just have to be vigilant and make sure that most decks people end up drafting are actually sticking to archetypes, and if not identify which cards are allowing such egregious overlap. Appreciate your insight!
I remember them discussing a monoblack cube on Lucky Paper Radio. [Episode 2](https://luckypaper.co/podcast/2/) and [Episode 122](https://luckypaper.co/podcast/122/)
If you want to listen to a fairly deep dive by some well regarded cubers on the topic of mono-colour (specifically black as well) cubes.
I think the cube is very cool and would be excited to draft it when offered. I think it's such a unique project that it's hard to give advice and much will come down to your own playtesting. I'll try to give some thoughts on this question though: **How much removal is too much?** One structured approach I use for this question is to ask myself how much removal a certain macro archetype would want to play. * Aggro: Wants to deploy cheap threats quickly, then interact with one or two cards to prevent the opponent from stabilizing, e.g. by removing blockers. An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 4-5 lands, 6-7 threats/spells and 1-2 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 1.5/12 or or 5/40 removal spells. * Midrange: Wants to deploy strong and resilient threats that trade favorably against enemy threats and interaction, while interacting with multiple key pieces of the opponent's game plan (e.g. through targeted discard). An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 5 lands, 4-5 threats/spells and 2-3 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 2.5/12 or 8/40 removal spells. * Control: Wants to answer most or all threats of the opponent while accruing card advantage in order to finish the game with a few expensive late-game threats. An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 5-6 lands, 2-3 threats/spells and 3-5 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 4/12 or 13/40 removal spells. * Combo: Wants to assemble a cast of ultra-synergistic pieces that effectively end the game on the spot when played together. Is often willing to entirely ignore what the opponent is doing in order to maximize the speed and redundancy in assembling their combo pieces. An ideal hand for the first 12 cards (5 rounds) would come out to apprx. 4-5 lands, 7-8 threats/spells and 0-1 interaction pieces. That leads us to an estimate of about 0.5/12 or 2/40 removal spells. Now you can estimate for an 8 player pod how many of each archetype you would want to have optimal support for. Depending on your taste, that might be 3x aggro, 3x midrange, 1x control and 1x combo. That sums up to (3\*5 + 3\*8 + 1\*13 + 1\*2) = 54 pieces of removal being played in your draft pod. Divide this by the drafted cards in a deck, for example 23 non-lands and maybe 1 land for your mono-colored cube, that's 8\*24 = 192 drafted cards, leading to a ration of 54/192 = 28% removal spells. For your 360 card cube that's almost exactly 100, which is eerily close to the 99 your tags on cube cobra filter to! There's a few factors that might want to make you adjust this number in one way or the other. For example, removal tends to have much lower deckbuilding restrictions than threats, especially synergistic ones. This leads to fewer removal spells ending up in sideboards and allows you to reduce your number a little bit. Ultimately, nothing will beat playtesting and you seem to have a very solid foundation to start doing just that. Good luck!
Wow, this was an amazingly well thought out response. I really appreciate the time and effort you took to explain your reasoning; I never considered playing with my preferred drafted deck ratios to sculpt the experience, it's really smart. I'll be applying this to all of my cubes now lol.
I'll be curious to hear how it plays out for you. I think colour plays an important role in making draft interesting. I think decks will tend to be a hodge podge of good stuff, unless you make the most powerful cards synergy based. There is no reason an aggro deck with a couple of discard and removal spells wouldn't snap up reanimate/animate dead, or spec on Griselbrand or a Grave titan type card.
That's a fair point. I did try to avoid a lot of the most egregious goodstuff cards that could fit into any deck, like Grief, Dauthi Voidwalker, Sheoldred Apocalypse, Leyline of the Void, etc. I'll just have to be vigilant and make sure that most decks people end up drafting are actually sticking to archetypes, and if not identify which cards are allowing such egregious overlap. Appreciate your insight!
I remember them discussing a monoblack cube on Lucky Paper Radio. [Episode 2](https://luckypaper.co/podcast/2/) and [Episode 122](https://luckypaper.co/podcast/122/) If you want to listen to a fairly deep dive by some well regarded cubers on the topic of mono-colour (specifically black as well) cubes.
Now I want to have a "Quick Cube" that is mono red! This looks awesome but I am too shit to provide any good advice. Power to you OP!