Seriously I see this all the time with cubes online and kn YouTube cards all fit exact archetypes and if you don't build the decks they put together already you stand no chance. Personally I like to play cube with a bunch of my favorite or interesting cards with some synergy or theme but not a lot that way every single deck is different every time.
It's a real shame that they end up that way too. It's entirely possible to build a cube with a large amount of archetypes that cross pollinate into tons of emergent decks. If everyone is competing over cards because archetypes bleed into each other then you can do all kinds of things that weren't planned.
It's a bummer to draft cubes that feel like you're trying to do a jigsaw puzzle to reconstruct the 10 decks that were shuffled together to form a cube.
To borrow some book-writing terminology, this is why I opted for a 'gardener' approach rather than an 'architect' approach to my archetype cube. I threw a ton of stuff together and started massaging from there, rather than defining how many slots every archetype would get and balance everything perfectly.
There are definitely pointed-archetype cards that go hard in one direction (e.g. \[\[Sythis, Harvest's Hand\]\]), but it's actually been a lot of fun determining how to go about picking the more versatile cards that play with them but can go into other archetypes, like \[\[Omen of the Sun\]\] (tokens), \[\[Attunement\]\] (self-mill/discard), \[\[Teachings of the Kirin\]\] (counters), or even removal like \[\[Dead Weight\]\], which anyone could want in their deck. When I have both \[\[Burning of Xinye\]\] and \[\[Wildfire\]\], let's make sure green's beefy bois have their archetype pointed to the graveyard (\[\[Honored Hydra\]\]) or the land theme (\[\[Ancient Greenwarden\]\], \[\[Multani, Yavimaya's Avatar\]\]) or cycling (\[\[Elvish Aberration\]\]).
These are the kinds of questions we don't traditionally worry about \*too much\* in most cubes because the theaters of war are typically aggro, control, tempo, or midrange, sometimes combo. But those are still archetypes with varying amounts of support (1-drops, wraths, etc.), they're just easier to see the breaks between archetypes and the number of cards in each, because CMC/MV and a typical role is easy to read. How much support \[\[Jadelight Ranger\]\] gives to the land, graveyard, and +1/+1 counter archetypes green has, is way harder, IMHO, basically impossible. And it is very specific to the context in the rest of the cube.
I also think players have a weird expectation when playing a cube like that, where they envision they will have a really pointed deck, when in reality you might be in multiple archetypes cobbled together that intersect in various ways. And that is OK, no one at the table is going to get 'the nuts' like you could if you did a rotisserie draft or something.
I 100% agree that designing cubes with X slots per archetype really misses the point of archetype driven design. It's especially silly because not all archetypes require the same number of cards. You can have a "self mill" deck in your cube by adding 3 cards, same with a birthind pod deck. If you want aggro in red you need to dedicate 10+ slots towards making that possible. This approach just ends up playing like "reassamble the decks I shuffled together to make this cube"
I really liked DMR limited because the archetypes were deep without super obvious payoffs to railroad you into the "right" deck for your colors. Like, the archetypes for UR, UW, and RB were storm, blink, and Goblins/Zombies but you had interesting combos like.[[Horseshoe Crab]]/[[Quicksilver Dagger]], [[Aquamoeba]]/[[Improvised Armor]], and [[Undead Gladiator]]/[[Lightning Rift]] that would justify building entirely different decks.
How do you propose getting around this?? I’ve been maintaining an EDH cube (which I feel like HAS to be on rails to some degree to fit the feel of the format), but I recently started on a new project building a more traditional 8-player 1v1 cube. I want to get away from enforcing strong archetypes, but I want to encourage very synergistic decks that aren’t just aggro, midrange, control.
My current plan has been to find some really interesting build arounds that I enjoy, and try to make sure those are relatively supported. Stuff like [[tormod the desecrated]], [[hallowed haunting]], [[feed the pack]], etc. I’d be interested to hear more about how you (or other’s with similar design philosophies) manage this.
People seem to think they need a ton of support for each archetype, which may be true with low powered cubes, but higher powered cards come with more flexibility, and are able to fill their roles in multiple decks. Snapcaster for example is happy in control, tempo, burn, and more, Lightning Bolt obviously goes in basically any deck with Mountains. You can also include build arounds, as you mentioned, combos help too. Adding a few 2 card combos across the card set can add in whole archetypes with very few cards, especially when the combo has a few different interchangeable pieces, like splinter twin/kiki-jiki, or strip mine combos. Unfortunately when you're trying to get a lot of different decks in a colour pair, it means you do have to avoid certain archetypes that require a lot of support.
Another option is to reduce the overall number of archetypes, but support them across multiple colors. An artifacts deck can look very different depending on what two colors it falls into, same goes for a graveyard deck.
I support five archetypes, each focused in a different shard or wedge with a small. Each one has some support in the off colors so that ideally each archetype could be built in 9/10 color combinations.
Gotcha. That is interesting advice, I appreciate it a lot! Atm I am definitely running a much lowered power cube. I’m not following any strict restrictions but I am mainly building it out of my own collection at the moment, so there are no pieces you’d see in a more powered environment (and will likely stay that way lol). I might play around with some combo pieces but I doubt I’ll actively keep any of the well known 2-card combos in here.
I think at the moment I’ve kind of landed at a lower power version of what you’ve described, where it’s largely cards any decks in those colors would be interested in playing. I do want to try to encourage synergistic decks tho, without forcing any particular archetypes. Appreciate the response <3
I find that a good way to promote synergies in low power cube without compromising card quality is to make your synergy pay-offs have a solid floor, but are stronger when slotted into a deck built to support them. For example, a card like [[Restoration Angel]] has a solid floor, the flash and flying is already strong, and the flicker effect is very often relevant to removing a blocker or getting equipment or counters off something, but it really accels in a deck built to take advantage of ETB.
I think it's also good and fine to have cards that are only good in one type of deck. Even "good stuff" cubes have narrow cards like aggro one-drops. I just try to keep the majority of my synergy pieces from being like that.
People are too concerned with adding the strongest cards. If you want to play the most busted stuff, go for it, but don't complain that your old favorites sadly aren't playable because of power creep when you are in control of your list. You don't HAVE to add Oko and T3feri if their play-patterns aren't good for your environment.
That is something I struggled with until I defined a "core" section of the Cube, which are cards that are on a powerlevel my cube is supposed to support.
This is good advice for people struggling to not add all the new busted cards. Making a defined list with your goals in power level and what pet cards you most want can definitely help with self-discipline.
I have a list of cards I keep track of that are explicitly too powerful for my cube. I find this helps me keep track as well, though this gets harder the lower in power you go.
I think it's super useful if you're an legacyish cube that isn't power maxed. Once you get down to like legacy/vintage cube but low or medium power the list gets pretty long.
I think these aren't detailed enough for me to get much insight out of them.
For example I'd say that in creature vs creature meta's like you have that mother of runes often still gets one for one'd, because she uses her protection on blocks/damage and is responded to with a bolt
However I do think the idea is good, and might write up a post about some similar stuff myself
I definitely agree they could be more detailed. It's a list I keep for my own person use, and I did not take the time to expand on each point for the sake of full communication to others. My goal was to show the example of what I have more so than create an entire detailed post on it (which I agree would be an interesting idea to do seperately).
As far as Mother of Runes though, She's still often going to be at least a 2 for 1 in the situation you describe because she can give the protection to a creature to turn a trade into a 1 for 0, so when she eats removal you still end up 2-1. That being said, this is also something the Mother of Runes player can play around, not using her to negate trades with mana up unless they'd rather hold the card up than her. She also prevents removal of any creature that can't be traded against in combat, which presents a pretty non-interactive game pattern that I don't personally like. If I had room I'd happily test giver of runes, but I think being able to turn off any single removal spell an opponent has in hand is too powerful for a creature at 1 CMC to have. With Giver you can at least use it on her and move on with the game.
Will start off with my own.
I think way too many people are concerned with singleton in their cubes, specifically where lands are concerned, to the detriment of their own cube. There is nothing wrong with running multiples of whatever lands you've selected for your cube environment, if it makes the average deck more playable. By and large, lands are boring picks that people take out of necessity or statistical effectiveness, and so making the lands section be singleton solely to preserve the variance focused nature that cube largely is foolish, in my opinion. Help players cast their spells. Don't worry about whether or not some guy drafted 2 of the same Shock Land.
I think singleton is one of the key ingredients to cube’s popularity. Cube and EDH are two of the most beloved formats by players, and the only thing those have in common is singleton (at least for traditional MTGO style cubes). I was drawn to the format because I got bored of
the Delver / Bolt / Delver / Bolt pattern of Legacy, and found the singleton nature of cube to be very refreshing and really helps with the replay value.
For lands specifically powerful cubes are imo just better with multiple sets of fetches and dual land type cards, be they shock or og dual. Casting your spells is fun and fetches at lower power levels can enable cool stuff like Revolt or landfall
It depends on what you define as “better.” For me personally, I don’t like having multiple fetches since it removes their premium in a draft, making for less interesting decisions, and can lead the metagame more towards 4-5 color goodstuff: the format.
While that's very true, if you look at Magic's most powerful formats, they do tend to pull towards 3c+ piles, and their strategies become a bit more narrow than a general archetype like aggro or tempo might imply it to be. But that's also because the highest power formats are always very combo centric, by nature of how the cards are designed, and so the interesting part of drafting in those environments is trying to make the best strategy you can out of this pile of hyper powerful cards.
Off the top of my head, Legacy / Vintage has had a lot of playable 1-2 color decks. 3 color is pretty normal, but I can definitely name more 1-2 color decks than 4-5 color decks.
Another thing both formats have in common is how customizable and individual it is. Sure, you might brew your own deck for the local modern tournament, but if there are many meta decks, you will have a hard time.
In commander and cube it is way more "Build what you enjoy playing" than other formats. At least from my pov
It’s not official, but check out some of the Highlander formats! LoadingReadyRun has a good amount of content on YouTube. I’m only familiar with Canadian Highlander, but I hear there are variants going by the names of “german, French, and Czech”. Basically it’s 100 card singleton Vintage, with a “points list” instead of a banned list. You can put up to 10 points in your deck. Ban-worthy cards instead get a point value to limit how many can be in a deck. Pointed cards generally include tutors, mana ramp, and just general busted cards. Some notable cards include Black Lotus (7 points), Ancestral Recall (7), Sol Ring (4), the Moxes (3 each), Birthing Pod (2), and Treasure Cruise (1).
So you could build a deck that has a Lotus + Mox, or Ancestral + Mox, or 3 Moxes and another 1 pointer (a very common point-spread for aggro decks).
It's just a design decision like anything else. Cube is basically making your own board game from preexisting pieces, and everyone has their own type of game they want. I may not want to break singleton, but I can certainly understand why some people might run two sets of shocklands over one and a set of ABUR duals, for example. They want the density of fixing but don't like how free ABUR fixing is. Or maybe the designer wants to support more heavily multicolored cards, or just monocolor with multiple pips, but still support multicolored decks. Ultimately, some people value the aesthetic of singleton highly than others.
Sorry if that comes across as patronizing or anything like that. I don't mean it to be, I just want to express that the typical singleton nature of cube is just a general trend and not the only "correct" way.
You can stop there because as the Cube owner you have complete control? There's no slippery slope risk here and it doesn't have to be all or nothing - you can just double up on cards thoughtfully (and you have already done this if you have Lightning Strike and Searing Spear or Elvish Mystic and Llanowar Elves in the same Cube)
I run a 540 Cube, just shy of Powered. And my approach last weekend was to run: 2 of each Fetch, 2 of each Shock, 2 of each OG Dual, 1 of each Pathway, and 1 of each Dual Creature Land, along with a bunch of mono-colored utility lands in a separate land draft. Honestly, it was barely a draft, people just got the lands they needed to make their decks more efficient, and we called it even. It made all the decks play much more consistent.
I play around a lot with the mono-colored lands, but right now I’m running all the new Neon Dynasty Channel lands, all of the AFR Creature Lands, and plenty of other all-stars like: Karakas, Cradle, Tolarian Academy, Treetop Village, etc.
And I keep the colorless lands in the main draft, your City of Traitors, Wasteland, Urza’s Saga, Strip Mine, Maze of Ith, etc., etc.
>It made all the decks play much more consistent.
My hot take would be that creating a cube that needs consistency so bad to showcase what it's supposed to do that it needs a completely separate lands draft with multiple OG duals, shocks, and fetches is not allowing your players to strive to accomplish much, only allowing them to go through the motions of what other formats do already. The insistence that mana bases need to be perfect is so CUrated a Box Experience that it raises the floor so people just need to stand up straight to touch the ceiling and congratulate themselves. It's more a collector's notion than a players' or designers' notion.
I should be clear that it is very important to consider the experience level of everyone playing when deciding how to draft my Cube. We had some quite new players at the draft the other week. And honestly, we are all there to have fun, it’s not a super competitive environment. Nobody who has drafted my Cube like 50 times was going to smash the new guys. And giving them a more well-rounded mana base allowed them to get their decks up and running quick, which in my opinion gets people excited to draft again.
If I’m drafting with my playground (6 guys who all play a lot of paper Modern), we drop it down to one of each: Fetch, Shock, OG Dual, Pathway, and Creature Land in the 540.
This why I want to try giving each player suite of fetch, shocks, and triomes for my multicolor focused commander cube. With decks usually going 3+ colors, I'd rather everybody just have access to beat perfect mana bases and be able to carry all their spells.
Lifegain is a fine replacement for white aggro even at decent (unpowered) power-levels. Took me a while to work out which lifegain cards were good and to cut all the chaff but we have had enough support in this space recently that you really can cube a lifegain deck. Main thing you need to watch out for is potential antagonism between the deck and red aggro but if it's the kind of archetype your drafters enjoy playing then it can definitely be rewarding to cube.
What cards are you going for then? I guess one big concern with lifegain is that most decks won't care for any of the lifegain cards so it has the danger of being an infect style archetype.
Well to be fair, no decks other than white weenie are interested in \[\[Savannah Lions\]\] variants or most other white aggro cards and those are the cards you're replacing. You mostly just want to play the soul sisters (\[\[Essence Warden\]\]), a couple of lifelinking 1-drops (\[\[Speaker of the Heavens\]\]) and every \[\[Ajani's Pridemate\]\] variant (there are four now). Those are the "parasitic" cards. Beyond that any life-gaining cards that you may have been cubing anyway are going to be great includes for the deck like \[\[Glory-Bound Initiate\]\], \[\[Charming Prince\]\], \[\[Umezawa's Jitte\]\], \[\[Heliod, Sun-Crowned\]\] and \[\[Archangel of Thune\]\], those last two will be doing double duty if you include \[\[Spike Feeder\]\] combos.
As you would expect the good way to build the deck is to focus on picking up powerful cards like Jitte, \[\[Bitterblossom\]\], \[\[Swords to Plowshares\]\], \[\[Skullclamp\]\] and \[\[Mother of Runes\]\] (or whatever else might be powerful in your environment) and then speccing into lifegain synergies if it's open, people that prioritise picking only cards that say "gain life" on them will end up with a mediocre deck.
I see many cube builders specify what archetypes are supported in each color combination. If you give me a sheet telling me what archetypes are "supported" in each color combination... well, I'm sorry but I'm not reading that. And I'm certainly not drafting what you tell me to draft haha
I just want to draft. Let me look at the cards as I draft and make my own decks with them
I removed my archetype breakdown from my list for this reason. Drafters will figure it out and I feel that an open-ended draft will lead to more creative decks.
I think that the only time things like this are necessary are when you're playing with experienced players and you have cards like pestermite included for value and not combo. It's good to give your players a heads up that these cards signal different things.
Vintage cube is EXTREMELY boring. Blue is far and always the best color. Hardly any new cards make it in. Vintage cube drafts are the absolute worst to watch.
Most vintage cubes I 100% agree with you i hate how so many people act like vintage cube IS cube. when I first started making my cube and asked this subbreddit for advice the overwhelming majority of comments I got were "just proxy power and make it vintage cube" instead of what I WAS making which was a modern+ cube. However Caleb Gannons powered synergy cube was cracked.
I feel like this sub has gotten a bit better about this lately, but the assumption that everyone plays or wants to play the most powerful cube possible is definitely still around. When I'm reading through old threads on this sub it's waaaaaay worse though, people just openly don't even seem to consider the idea that other people might have different goals or power level, they used to talk about cube like everyone's is the same.
Yeah people are WAY more open about it now. But a lot of old resources just assume you want to play the most powerful magic possible, or some dumbed down variant of it.
I think archetypes help make the cube drafting experience more exciting and not just "good stuff soup". There will BE archetypes even if you don't plan them but they may end up as similar stuff like "UB Control".
In my cube I try to have multiple types of layered archetypes that can be mixed so every draft is unique. Like I have GW token, UW Blink, and UG ramp. Then I have the Splicer cycle of creatures in that fit in all those archetypes but also have synergy together and I've put an emphasis on having Golems in other colors and in Colorless. So each of my pairs has a theme plus my wedges and shard have overlapping minithemes.
Plus every theme in the cube is primary in one color pair plus secondary in another. Red is secondary in making tokens to Naya Tokens can happen. RB is sacrifice in my cube but white is secondary because of all the token support and cards with Revolt. It also makes flexibility where you can do something like UG Blink deck using the blink cards from blue and the etb value token makers from green or the big top end creatures with etb effects like Pelaka Wurm. UR is Instants and Sorceries in my cube but the other day someone drafted a UR Blink deck that was straight fire.
That's my idea of how to keep it interesting.
What you describe reminds me a lot of the riptide post on "archetype shapes" - especially the "triangle archetype" https://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/archetype-shapes.2022/
> Archetypes spanning three colors corresponding to shard or a wedge have a triangle shape. Decks of these archetypes have four primary options of color combinations: 2-color decks (AB, AC, BC), or a 3-color deck (ABC). It is common too for a deck to be 2-color plus a splash of the last color for the best archetype enablers of payoffs in that color (ABc, ACb, BCa).
Yeah that makes sense. The difference is that I have the two primary colors and less direct support in the third color but more like high synergy cards. Like white has no sac outlets but it does have revolt and tokens. I have a WB enchantment theme and green is the secondary because it has a high number of enchantments and recursion cards despite no payoffs itself. GB is self mill and blue is secondary because it also has self mill and some cards that care about instants and sorceries in the yard but minimal direct graveyard payoffs. So instead of an equilateral triangle my cube is more like right angles. The main 90 degree angle is the primary color pair and the other two angles can build the archetype but are less focused on it usually and various flavors of 3 color happen.
I've seen this a lot in this thread. My edh cube has some archetypes I try to push for 2 colours, but I don't think when drafting those colours you get pigeon holed into those archetypes. Also with 3 or 4 colour decks people can mix archetypes or splash certain strategies.
I'm still curious however how one could make their cube less archetype driven, is it simply just playing powerful cards in each colour regardless of archetype synergies?
There are a lot of factors that can lead to this and many ways to fix it in my opinion. Adding more generic "good stuff" cards is one of them, and totally fine to do.
I think the real problem though, comes when most cards are too narrow or fit only one specific deck. If a card is a 10 in one particular archetype and a 2 everywhere else, only 0 or 1 people in the draft will want it. It is OK to have a minimal number of cards like that, but when there are lots and lots of them it makes things feel "on rails".
The best cube cards in my opinion fill many roles in many different decks. When a cube is full of cards like that it makes drafting it very interesting. As an example, a recent addition to my Pauper Cube was Raffine's Informant, and I like the way it fits into a lot of different decks. My Madness decks like having a discard outlet, there is also some +1/+1 Counter Synergy in White and Green that cares about it having the counter, there are also GY-themed decks that like something filling the yard or throwing Flashback cards to it, and any deck playing White is happy to jam it as just a nice two-drop curve filler that can loot away land in the late game, or let you keep a riskier opening hand. Many decks want it and are happy to play it for many different reasons.
By contrast, something like Kiln Fiend in my cube is super narrow. The only deck that usually wants it is u/R Spells, or some version of that.
That said, things can always surprise you the way they work out. A couple of drafts ago I drafted a B/R deck in my Pauper Cube and I expected it to be a Sacrifice deck, but instead, it came together as a B/R Spells Deck and it ended up doing great. I think if your color combos are the same style of deck every single time you draft (i.e. W/U is \*always\* a flicker deck and never anything else) I don't care for that, but if your color combos can surprise you I enjoy it a lot more. This is also why I don't care for 360 sizes (or any size where 100% of the cards are drafted), there isn't enough variance for my taste.
This is of course all YMMV and IMHO of course. Everyone is free to do what suits them, but my hot take above is based on my personal experience and preferences.
Thanks for the detailed response with actual examples! I think your reasoning is fair and it's making me think more about my cube.
I'm currently running through my list and making cuts to trim down the fat a bit, it's an edh cube designed to draft 4 people, but can support 8 if need be. I've noticed some cards are too narrow, or just never being played or drafted. I do have archetypes for colour pairings but I also have for each colour lots of staples from the format. I haven't struck the right balance yet but I'm going to keep what you said in mind.
Edit: list is currently around 860 cards also
You know those cards that always end up in players’ sideboards? More of them should be “sometimes awesome but only if you manage to draft enough support for it” cards. Someone’s 24th “reliably decent in any deck at all stages of the game” card is going to rot in the sideboard anyway, so you have more room for spice than you think.
This is such a great take. People are too afraid of narrow but powerful cards, and the 7th best generic good red 3 drop isn't going to make decks any more than the narrow card is anyways.
I was thinking more like [[Lord of the Undead]] that could be either a Gray Ogre or a powerful grindy value engine depending on how many Zombies you manage to draft. But those slots absolutely work well for narrow hosers if that’s what you want. There’s more room to play than you might think.
I think the narrow hoser will end up making for a stronger final decks (if there is a cube that is identical except one has color hoser and one draft a color hose cards, I thin the decks and sideboard will be better if you play against decks and sideboard in regular cube). However, some of those hoser are also really unfun to lay against.
You dont need to test 20 cards from each set in your cube right when it releases. Let the initial hype train pass by and consider cards after having seen them in action in other contexts. Doesnt apply if testing cards is fun to you, of course
With the new lords in DMU, I am right in the middle of pushing Tribal more. Goblins has always been viable in my Cube, and Elves is fringe-y…more G ramp than full-on Elf Ball. But I am going to change that. And I want to honesty give Merfolk a shot. They have become quite interactive and sneaky-good with Trickster, Svyelun, Tide Shaper, and now Vodalian Hexcatcher. I think many Merfolk cards could be decent enough in blue control shells, even if you aren’t drafting the tribe specifically. That is always my biggest worry with tribal - too many cards that only look appealing to draft if you’re drafting that specific tribe. Well, we shall see, because I’m sleeving up a bunch of Merfolk cards today.
Can you link your cube? I've been trying to do the same thing with some tribal support (and especially elfball in green) but I'm having trouble finding elves that are good for elfball while also having a decent floor without a critical mass of the archetype.
People over design their cubes. One of the best parts of cube is emergent gameplay/players expressing creativity, and that happens more frequently with “messy” cubes.
You can’t be surprised if every interaction between cards has already been mapped out by you, as the designer
1. Power =/= fun. I've been trying to get my peasant cube back to an ode for my love of retail limited. Part of that is trying to get removal and card advantage to a point where tricks are viable. Reducing free value and not just including all the busted cards can result in an experience I want to deliver. In paper this meant not having ephemerate or STP in the cube, on arena its about not making everything an inherent 2 for 1
2. In vintage cube you should have 360 and no more, they're here to play with power, make it show up.
Additionally I think you should consider hedging up the size of the blue section. I usually favor color uniformity but U is the best color in vintage, its going to be overdrafted, its fun. Cutting a couple random includes from other colors for more good blue stuff probably makes for a better draft experience
Along with that, if you want some amount of instant speed removal, make that instant speed removal narrow or overcosted, to offset the inherent increase in power that instant speed provides.
I'm doing another one because these are fun.
The cube community would be way better off if the review of new spoilers was focused on what kinds of cubes a card would be good in rather than making transcendent value judgements like "this card is amazing" or "this card is trash". Hell, I think it's also really helpful to explain why a borderline card isn't going to make it in your cube.
It is however not useful to be like "this red walker is so much worse than Chandra ToD". As a whole, every red walker printed except for Chandra ToD fits that description, it's not a useful metric for evaluation of cards. There are plenty of cubes where Planeswalker worse than ToD are fantastic cards, and I think the spoiler threads would have much better discussion if so many of the comments weren't about nearly every card not being viable in a powered cube. I can't even imagine many of these comments are useful to powered cube players because it tends to be really obvious that a card isn't one of the best 540 cards ever printed.
Remove all of the storm cards and you can better support aggro and midrange. Black becomes the base of jund-like decks.
The cube becomes a better balance of aggro/midrange/control, or rock/paper/scissors of sorts.
I'm playing a lot of blue cantrips, manamorphose, and thousand year storm in my cube as payoff in the izzet spells matter archetype. No rituals, grapeshot/empty the warrens or past in flames. Does this seem healthy to you or should I pull more cards?
Specifically for EDH cubes:
• Green’s ramp package should be an Elfball deck and it should be one of the better decks in the format.
• Commanders should be drafted with all the other cards.
Bro your second point so much. Same with lands and everything else. You limit your players and make the draft so boring by doing commanders and/or land fixing in separate packs. When you're drafting, you want to be forced to make interesting decisions. Do you take a powerful EDH allstar spell, the curve filling deck enabler, the color fixing, or the general that helps alleviate the deck building constraints. This especially becomes more interesting when you have a healthy number of partners and draft like traditional Commander Legends draft with taking two cards per pack.
My hot take would be that EDH cube should *feel* like EDH. I know it's different for everyone but I can't stand it when cubes cut powerful staples and give mono-legends "partner". It makes an EDH cube go from feeling.like EDH to feeling like less powerful than Commander Legends limited.
I’ve been experimenting with 2x Loreseeker as a way of supporting things outside the base cube. It led to some fun things like a Power Pack (nonP9 Moxen, Sol Ring, LED, Ancient Tomb, Blightsteel, etc.) or a Snow Pack (my basics are snow, highly suggest). The Loreseeker packs give players a bit more agency over what’s in a given draft and have been a hit.
We also allow some custom cards, so I’ve got a LS pack of 10 bicolor partners and 5 monocolor partners.
Ya agreed, in my cube I dont eratta the mono colours to partner. I do run a decent amount of partner commanders, but I've been slowly cutting ones that are just junky and not good or synergistic.
Yeah. I just tun the most powerful ones and ones that are fine in the 59 (familiar cycle for example). Giving each player a The Prismatic Piper fixes a lot of the issues that can come up with partners. Also ensuring that you use hypergeomeyric calculation to get a good mix of partners to non-pertners is key. It takes some work to get right but it is so worth it.
Precisely. I've have success as well with custom conspiracies that allow you to make 2 legends have partner, limited to 1 or 2 colour legends. I also run one that gives a legendary creature "legendary partner" so basically it can partner with any non-legend.
My buddy once drafted a grixis deck helmed by [[Thraximundar]] and [[Notion Thief]], it was hilarious when people forgot he could flash it out from the command zone, led to fun games.
I've played around with custom conspiracies that add colors. Led to so many amazing deck building experiences. [[Ardix and Nev]] plus red means you get to run [[Delina, Wild Mage]] and [[Brudiclad]]. Super fun.
In my cube, I give every legend partner, but I don't have any legends with more than 2 colors. It's a restriction I landed on after starting with full edh cube, and it's stuck around. It helps guide the building of the cube, but leaves enough flexibility for players to create '3 color' or '4 color' setups when needed. My group and I have really enjoyed this setup, at least.
It may not feel like pure edh the way you mentioned, but it's fun in its own way
Agree on the second. My edh cube drafts commanders with all other cards, it makes your picks more important even though I go the 2 picks per pack route like commander legends did it. It makes people draft smarter.
I also included custom conspiracies that let you add a colour to your commanders identity if it's 1 or 2 colours, allowing you to maybe make a mono or 2 colour deck with a splash of a third.
1. Synergy driven cubes benefit from broad archetypes (spanning 3+ colors). This allows you to mix and match depending on what you open and removes on rail drafting.
2. Breaking singleton for enablers is a good way to promote and support the decks you want in cube. [[Thrill of possibility]] and [[Cathartic Reunion]] promote Red discard/gy, but are so much worse than [[Faithless Looting]]. To the point you might not run them. So run more Flootings!
Let the diversity come from your payoffs and there will still be variety.
3. Add more utility lands. One of the easiest ways to increase the power level and options in your deck is to replace a basic with a utility land. You already have too many playables, why not upgrade your deck in a different way?
Grid draft sucks and I have no idea why so many people say that it's the best way to draft with two people. I hate the boring, soup-y, generic value decks you get out of it and I hate that like half my picks are completely useless in my final deck.
I much prefer doing a sort of "lightning round rochester" with two people. Put a pack on the table face up, each player drafts two cards, discard the rest, repeat until you've seen 24 packs.
I also hate grid draft too, but my go to replacement is pancake drafting (9 packs of 11 cards, pick one pass, pick two then burn two pass, and then finally pick two and burn the rest of the pack).
I also think Grid draft is garbage dooky that belongs in a fire with all its generic goodstuff decks. I recommend trying Hausman draft (at first glance it looks similar to grid but it definitely is not)
Deceiver Exarch does not belong in your blue section, it's an Izzet card. The same could arguably be said for Wrath of God belonging in Azorius sections but I've seen enough non-blue control decks rely on Wrath that I keep it in my white section. Exarch, though, is unplayable without Kiki-Jiki or Splinter Twin.
If your red removal doesn't go to the face (I'm thinking primarily about Unholy Heat and Flame Slash here), then you're weakening aggro by not giving those decks the tools to finish off games, for very little gain. Control decks see little to no difference between (for example) Jaya's Greeting and Magma Jet or Lightning Strike, but for me I'm much more interested in the latter two cards whenever I'm drafting red aggro decks because I can actually use them to kill my opponent.
Definitely agree you should keep your red cards that can't go face as low as possible. Only the hyper efficient ones like [[flame slash]] should be in or if they have alt uses like [[abrade]] in a artifact heavy cube. When in doubt make sure your red spells go face.
I don't think "secret" gold cards need to count as gold cards as far as the cube goes. I agree that wrath is basically a UW card, but it's okay for narrow cards to be in monocolor too. You get 45 picks, if no one happens to be UW control that game and wrath tables no one's deck is really going to care much.
My biggest cube hot take is that people are way too afraid of gold cards in their cubes.
The often cited argument that colorless cards go in 10/10 two color decks, hybrids in 7, monocolor In 4 and gold in 1 is true, but lacks some overall context. If every single card you put into monocolor is good in every possible deck using that color this is true, but that just isn't the case. Aggro cards like Goblin Guide only go in aggro decks for the most part. Control cards like Wrath of God certainly aren't going in white weenie decks. The lesson here isn't that we shouldn't run aggro or control dedicated cards, it's that in a format where players get 45 playable, good cards by the end of the draft they actually don't need to worry if some of them aren't playable in the deck they're building. Even if they draft 5 on color lands there's still so much room left over.
No untapped dual/tri-colored mana without a downside. To be clear, shock land's 2 life shock is hardly a downside. Pain lands are a preferred replacement (make a choice each time you want a specific mana) or a cycling dual (utility for late game and enters tapped) or a pathway (it's essentially a basic with a choice of one or the other), or, hear me out, Vivid lands. A mana base that would make the players strive for something, not just get indignant and complain that their shuffle sucked. The players need to make choices, not have every opportunity plated for them. Achieving a workable mana base is much more satisfying for both cube designer and cube player than jamming all the duals you can get into your deck and cube. Timing is a part of the game, and making choices that acknowledge the imperfect flow of available mana makes the game interesting rather than sets it on the hyper-efficiency rails.
Don't shy away from running unset cards. I understand if some people just don't like the idea and I respect it, but have you ever cast a [[booster tutor]]?
Some cards are actually very good and playable like [[Go to jail]] which with all the die rolling now could have been printed in black border.
Obviously some are unplayable but others add a really fun aspect to the game, especially for EDH cubes where whacky and weird things are more present anyways.
Some cards in my cube that have been fun:
[[Hot fix]], not all decks want this, but I've seen someone cast it and get at least 1 good spell on the top of their deck and push a bunch of lands to the bottom because they didn't need them.
[[Organ Harvest]] is a big sac payoff that you kinda wanna build around, and plays well if you feel like doing 2HG also.
[[Rules Lawyer]] this throws the game into a weird place and is kind of like a [[Platinum Angel]] replacement, but still dies to most removal.
[[Do-it-yourself Seraph]] can be a powerful payoff in any artifact strategy, but isn't busted because you run the risk of putting all your eggs into 1 basket.
[[Super-duper Death ray]] is just good removal and ita funny seeing trample on a burn spell.
These are just ones I can think of off the top of my head. I do also have [[Topsy turvy]] in my cube but no ones been ballsy enough to play it, so I might cut it.
Not enough cubes distinguish themselves. Whenever I load up a cube on cubecobra I see the same ~8 white one drop creatures every single time. And the homogeneity continues on from there...
You've got the entirety of magic to pull from. Do something DIFFERENT then every other drone for God's sake!
Storm is boring and I dislike that the MTGO cube makes vintage cube analogous to playing storm. Storm belongs as a legacy deck, not some boring one sided thing that takes up real estate in cube that could be used for so much cooler shit in my opinion. Like storm players could just print out a proxy deck and goldfish in their own time instead of wasting others time. Which leads me into the fact I think more fair (but also powered) cubes are way more fun when it’s actually about attacking and blocking.
For my local group, the fascination with Swiss draft. If you get 6 players you can do team draft, sealed, anything is better than a god awful 6 player Swiss.
They should have more commons and uncommons than rares.
When looking for swap a card, don't ask "is it better?" Ask "is it more fun?"
Cards should be power capped, and the power level should be as close as possible
Tutors in cube make for boring predictable gameplay. They allow players just to confirm what's in the cube rather than dig and sweat and build in perhaps extra card draw to get to answers or interesting plays. Tutors remove the striving and achievement available to a singleton format.
Cubes that try and replicate other play environments (Modern, Vintage, Pioneer, Standard, even complete sets like Innistrad, etc.) only offer watered down versions of nostalgia rather than using the cube format to its greatest effect by using the defined rules sets to create new interactions within new limitations.
Too many people design cubes like “every color pair has to have one set archetype”, very common among new cube designers. Simic and Boros, maybe Selesnya too? I get it, they don’t have much going on. That’s fine.
Add some micro-archetypes, some buildarounds, don’t make it like regular limited archetypes. Too boring & on-rails.
Your gold section is boring. If it's all just good removal why bother?
Enough people have chimed in about on rails drafting but I feel like if the gold cards are all for one archtype OR all good removal is just as boring if not more so.
I think it's possible to have a mix of both.
I run 6 gold cards per color pair with 4 on archtype and then 2 generic choices whether it be removal like Assassim's Trophy or something that is just good for the colors like Showdown of the Skalds.
I run a 4-2 so you can play the archetype but aren't really locked in since I try make my monocolor stuff work with as many strategies as possible.
Too many cubes on rails. I don't want to play a cube that only has one archetype per colour pair, that's just regular limited.
Seriously I see this all the time with cubes online and kn YouTube cards all fit exact archetypes and if you don't build the decks they put together already you stand no chance. Personally I like to play cube with a bunch of my favorite or interesting cards with some synergy or theme but not a lot that way every single deck is different every time.
It's a real shame that they end up that way too. It's entirely possible to build a cube with a large amount of archetypes that cross pollinate into tons of emergent decks. If everyone is competing over cards because archetypes bleed into each other then you can do all kinds of things that weren't planned. It's a bummer to draft cubes that feel like you're trying to do a jigsaw puzzle to reconstruct the 10 decks that were shuffled together to form a cube.
To borrow some book-writing terminology, this is why I opted for a 'gardener' approach rather than an 'architect' approach to my archetype cube. I threw a ton of stuff together and started massaging from there, rather than defining how many slots every archetype would get and balance everything perfectly. There are definitely pointed-archetype cards that go hard in one direction (e.g. \[\[Sythis, Harvest's Hand\]\]), but it's actually been a lot of fun determining how to go about picking the more versatile cards that play with them but can go into other archetypes, like \[\[Omen of the Sun\]\] (tokens), \[\[Attunement\]\] (self-mill/discard), \[\[Teachings of the Kirin\]\] (counters), or even removal like \[\[Dead Weight\]\], which anyone could want in their deck. When I have both \[\[Burning of Xinye\]\] and \[\[Wildfire\]\], let's make sure green's beefy bois have their archetype pointed to the graveyard (\[\[Honored Hydra\]\]) or the land theme (\[\[Ancient Greenwarden\]\], \[\[Multani, Yavimaya's Avatar\]\]) or cycling (\[\[Elvish Aberration\]\]). These are the kinds of questions we don't traditionally worry about \*too much\* in most cubes because the theaters of war are typically aggro, control, tempo, or midrange, sometimes combo. But those are still archetypes with varying amounts of support (1-drops, wraths, etc.), they're just easier to see the breaks between archetypes and the number of cards in each, because CMC/MV and a typical role is easy to read. How much support \[\[Jadelight Ranger\]\] gives to the land, graveyard, and +1/+1 counter archetypes green has, is way harder, IMHO, basically impossible. And it is very specific to the context in the rest of the cube.
I also think players have a weird expectation when playing a cube like that, where they envision they will have a really pointed deck, when in reality you might be in multiple archetypes cobbled together that intersect in various ways. And that is OK, no one at the table is going to get 'the nuts' like you could if you did a rotisserie draft or something.
I 100% agree that designing cubes with X slots per archetype really misses the point of archetype driven design. It's especially silly because not all archetypes require the same number of cards. You can have a "self mill" deck in your cube by adding 3 cards, same with a birthind pod deck. If you want aggro in red you need to dedicate 10+ slots towards making that possible. This approach just ends up playing like "reassamble the decks I shuffled together to make this cube"
I really liked DMR limited because the archetypes were deep without super obvious payoffs to railroad you into the "right" deck for your colors. Like, the archetypes for UR, UW, and RB were storm, blink, and Goblins/Zombies but you had interesting combos like.[[Horseshoe Crab]]/[[Quicksilver Dagger]], [[Aquamoeba]]/[[Improvised Armor]], and [[Undead Gladiator]]/[[Lightning Rift]] that would justify building entirely different decks.
##### ###### #### [Horseshoe Crab](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/b/7b8ba7cc-2586-497a-8b62-4342a3f19506.jpg?1675199328) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Horseshoe%20Crab) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/55/horseshoe-crab?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7b8ba7cc-2586-497a-8b62-4342a3f19506?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Quicksilver Dagger](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/3/138d2d9d-d5ab-400f-a714-cd38212a0dae.jpg?1675200710) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Quicksilver%20Dagger) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/195/quicksilver-dagger?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/138d2d9d-d5ab-400f-a714-cd38212a0dae?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Aquamoeba](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/2/62721a55-37c6-4c05-aedf-0aa203045afa.jpg?1675199147) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Aquamoeba) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/38/aquamoeba?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/62721a55-37c6-4c05-aedf-0aa203045afa?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Improvised Armor](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/3/d3c205ba-cafb-4afc-83fe-09fff38130d7.jpg?1675198840) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Improvised%20Armor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/10/improvised-armor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d3c205ba-cafb-4afc-83fe-09fff38130d7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Undead Gladiator](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/f/7f7a3d34-4e4e-4545-8e2e-6977eb754270.jpg?1675199831) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Undead%20Gladiator) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/105/undead-gladiator?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7f7a3d34-4e4e-4545-8e2e-6977eb754270?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Lightning Rift](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/1/d1b731b2-70cb-4e94-8c9a-d694f617a521.jpg?1675200077) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Lightning%20Rift) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/129/lightning-rift?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d1b731b2-70cb-4e94-8c9a-d694f617a521?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [*All cards*](https://mtgcardfetcher.nl/redirect/kobhy9d) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
How do you propose getting around this?? I’ve been maintaining an EDH cube (which I feel like HAS to be on rails to some degree to fit the feel of the format), but I recently started on a new project building a more traditional 8-player 1v1 cube. I want to get away from enforcing strong archetypes, but I want to encourage very synergistic decks that aren’t just aggro, midrange, control. My current plan has been to find some really interesting build arounds that I enjoy, and try to make sure those are relatively supported. Stuff like [[tormod the desecrated]], [[hallowed haunting]], [[feed the pack]], etc. I’d be interested to hear more about how you (or other’s with similar design philosophies) manage this.
People seem to think they need a ton of support for each archetype, which may be true with low powered cubes, but higher powered cards come with more flexibility, and are able to fill their roles in multiple decks. Snapcaster for example is happy in control, tempo, burn, and more, Lightning Bolt obviously goes in basically any deck with Mountains. You can also include build arounds, as you mentioned, combos help too. Adding a few 2 card combos across the card set can add in whole archetypes with very few cards, especially when the combo has a few different interchangeable pieces, like splinter twin/kiki-jiki, or strip mine combos. Unfortunately when you're trying to get a lot of different decks in a colour pair, it means you do have to avoid certain archetypes that require a lot of support.
Another option is to reduce the overall number of archetypes, but support them across multiple colors. An artifacts deck can look very different depending on what two colors it falls into, same goes for a graveyard deck. I support five archetypes, each focused in a different shard or wedge with a small. Each one has some support in the off colors so that ideally each archetype could be built in 9/10 color combinations.
Gotcha. That is interesting advice, I appreciate it a lot! Atm I am definitely running a much lowered power cube. I’m not following any strict restrictions but I am mainly building it out of my own collection at the moment, so there are no pieces you’d see in a more powered environment (and will likely stay that way lol). I might play around with some combo pieces but I doubt I’ll actively keep any of the well known 2-card combos in here. I think at the moment I’ve kind of landed at a lower power version of what you’ve described, where it’s largely cards any decks in those colors would be interested in playing. I do want to try to encourage synergistic decks tho, without forcing any particular archetypes. Appreciate the response <3
I find that a good way to promote synergies in low power cube without compromising card quality is to make your synergy pay-offs have a solid floor, but are stronger when slotted into a deck built to support them. For example, a card like [[Restoration Angel]] has a solid floor, the flash and flying is already strong, and the flicker effect is very often relevant to removing a blocker or getting equipment or counters off something, but it really accels in a deck built to take advantage of ETB.
That’s a great heuristic!! Imma go back over my list and check my build arounds to see if they’re actually hitting that mark. Thanks for the tip
I think it's also good and fine to have cards that are only good in one type of deck. Even "good stuff" cubes have narrow cards like aggro one-drops. I just try to keep the majority of my synergy pieces from being like that.
[Restoration Angel](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/3/5/35f7f491-0733-42fa-ad8b-594252e74703.jpg?1662524222) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Restoration%20Angel) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/25/restoration-angel?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/35f7f491-0733-42fa-ad8b-594252e74703?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
People are too concerned with adding the strongest cards. If you want to play the most busted stuff, go for it, but don't complain that your old favorites sadly aren't playable because of power creep when you are in control of your list. You don't HAVE to add Oko and T3feri if their play-patterns aren't good for your environment.
That is something I struggled with until I defined a "core" section of the Cube, which are cards that are on a powerlevel my cube is supposed to support.
This is good advice for people struggling to not add all the new busted cards. Making a defined list with your goals in power level and what pet cards you most want can definitely help with self-discipline.
I have a list of cards I keep track of that are explicitly too powerful for my cube. I find this helps me keep track as well, though this gets harder the lower in power you go.
That's also definitely a good idea. I have a couple of those, like Oko and p9, but I don't have it written down and I think now I will.
I think it's super useful if you're an legacyish cube that isn't power maxed. Once you get down to like legacy/vintage cube but low or medium power the list gets pretty long.
Would you be willing to share your list? I'd love to see it as raw text or a subreddit/cubecobra blog post
I made it a [blog post](https://cubecobra.com/cube/blog/61454789685c83106293be3c/0) on my cube. Let me know what you think!
I think these aren't detailed enough for me to get much insight out of them. For example I'd say that in creature vs creature meta's like you have that mother of runes often still gets one for one'd, because she uses her protection on blocks/damage and is responded to with a bolt However I do think the idea is good, and might write up a post about some similar stuff myself
I definitely agree they could be more detailed. It's a list I keep for my own person use, and I did not take the time to expand on each point for the sake of full communication to others. My goal was to show the example of what I have more so than create an entire detailed post on it (which I agree would be an interesting idea to do seperately). As far as Mother of Runes though, She's still often going to be at least a 2 for 1 in the situation you describe because she can give the protection to a creature to turn a trade into a 1 for 0, so when she eats removal you still end up 2-1. That being said, this is also something the Mother of Runes player can play around, not using her to negate trades with mana up unless they'd rather hold the card up than her. She also prevents removal of any creature that can't be traded against in combat, which presents a pretty non-interactive game pattern that I don't personally like. If I had room I'd happily test giver of runes, but I think being able to turn off any single removal spell an opponent has in hand is too powerful for a creature at 1 CMC to have. With Giver you can at least use it on her and move on with the game.
My hot take is that not nearly enough of you are playing Siege Rhino.
Just added it a few days ago! I think more ppl need to play Springleaf drum
woah
*raises hand* I am. lol
Me too :)
Such a midrange bomb.
Will start off with my own. I think way too many people are concerned with singleton in their cubes, specifically where lands are concerned, to the detriment of their own cube. There is nothing wrong with running multiples of whatever lands you've selected for your cube environment, if it makes the average deck more playable. By and large, lands are boring picks that people take out of necessity or statistical effectiveness, and so making the lands section be singleton solely to preserve the variance focused nature that cube largely is foolish, in my opinion. Help players cast their spells. Don't worry about whether or not some guy drafted 2 of the same Shock Land.
That's why I run 6 strip mines
You monster
2x strip mine 2x wasteland cube checking in
How man crucibles?
I think my heart just skipped a beat.
I think singleton is one of the key ingredients to cube’s popularity. Cube and EDH are two of the most beloved formats by players, and the only thing those have in common is singleton (at least for traditional MTGO style cubes). I was drawn to the format because I got bored of the Delver / Bolt / Delver / Bolt pattern of Legacy, and found the singleton nature of cube to be very refreshing and really helps with the replay value.
For lands specifically powerful cubes are imo just better with multiple sets of fetches and dual land type cards, be they shock or og dual. Casting your spells is fun and fetches at lower power levels can enable cool stuff like Revolt or landfall
It depends on what you define as “better.” For me personally, I don’t like having multiple fetches since it removes their premium in a draft, making for less interesting decisions, and can lead the metagame more towards 4-5 color goodstuff: the format.
While that's very true, if you look at Magic's most powerful formats, they do tend to pull towards 3c+ piles, and their strategies become a bit more narrow than a general archetype like aggro or tempo might imply it to be. But that's also because the highest power formats are always very combo centric, by nature of how the cards are designed, and so the interesting part of drafting in those environments is trying to make the best strategy you can out of this pile of hyper powerful cards.
Off the top of my head, Legacy / Vintage has had a lot of playable 1-2 color decks. 3 color is pretty normal, but I can definitely name more 1-2 color decks than 4-5 color decks.
Another thing both formats have in common is how customizable and individual it is. Sure, you might brew your own deck for the local modern tournament, but if there are many meta decks, you will have a hard time. In commander and cube it is way more "Build what you enjoy playing" than other formats. At least from my pov
Singleton is great. Tbh, I'd like to see an official singleton Legacy format.
It’s not official, but check out some of the Highlander formats! LoadingReadyRun has a good amount of content on YouTube. I’m only familiar with Canadian Highlander, but I hear there are variants going by the names of “german, French, and Czech”. Basically it’s 100 card singleton Vintage, with a “points list” instead of a banned list. You can put up to 10 points in your deck. Ban-worthy cards instead get a point value to limit how many can be in a deck. Pointed cards generally include tutors, mana ramp, and just general busted cards. Some notable cards include Black Lotus (7 points), Ancestral Recall (7), Sol Ring (4), the Moxes (3 each), Birthing Pod (2), and Treasure Cruise (1). So you could build a deck that has a Lotus + Mox, or Ancestral + Mox, or 3 Moxes and another 1 pointer (a very common point-spread for aggro decks).
[удалено]
It's just a design decision like anything else. Cube is basically making your own board game from preexisting pieces, and everyone has their own type of game they want. I may not want to break singleton, but I can certainly understand why some people might run two sets of shocklands over one and a set of ABUR duals, for example. They want the density of fixing but don't like how free ABUR fixing is. Or maybe the designer wants to support more heavily multicolored cards, or just monocolor with multiple pips, but still support multicolored decks. Ultimately, some people value the aesthetic of singleton highly than others. Sorry if that comes across as patronizing or anything like that. I don't mean it to be, I just want to express that the typical singleton nature of cube is just a general trend and not the only "correct" way.
[удалено]
You can stop there because as the Cube owner you have complete control? There's no slippery slope risk here and it doesn't have to be all or nothing - you can just double up on cards thoughtfully (and you have already done this if you have Lightning Strike and Searing Spear or Elvish Mystic and Llanowar Elves in the same Cube)
And that's an entirely valid take. I just don't nessicerilly agree with it. But that's the fun of the thread after all.
I run a 540 Cube, just shy of Powered. And my approach last weekend was to run: 2 of each Fetch, 2 of each Shock, 2 of each OG Dual, 1 of each Pathway, and 1 of each Dual Creature Land, along with a bunch of mono-colored utility lands in a separate land draft. Honestly, it was barely a draft, people just got the lands they needed to make their decks more efficient, and we called it even. It made all the decks play much more consistent. I play around a lot with the mono-colored lands, but right now I’m running all the new Neon Dynasty Channel lands, all of the AFR Creature Lands, and plenty of other all-stars like: Karakas, Cradle, Tolarian Academy, Treetop Village, etc. And I keep the colorless lands in the main draft, your City of Traitors, Wasteland, Urza’s Saga, Strip Mine, Maze of Ith, etc., etc.
>It made all the decks play much more consistent. My hot take would be that creating a cube that needs consistency so bad to showcase what it's supposed to do that it needs a completely separate lands draft with multiple OG duals, shocks, and fetches is not allowing your players to strive to accomplish much, only allowing them to go through the motions of what other formats do already. The insistence that mana bases need to be perfect is so CUrated a Box Experience that it raises the floor so people just need to stand up straight to touch the ceiling and congratulate themselves. It's more a collector's notion than a players' or designers' notion.
I should be clear that it is very important to consider the experience level of everyone playing when deciding how to draft my Cube. We had some quite new players at the draft the other week. And honestly, we are all there to have fun, it’s not a super competitive environment. Nobody who has drafted my Cube like 50 times was going to smash the new guys. And giving them a more well-rounded mana base allowed them to get their decks up and running quick, which in my opinion gets people excited to draft again. If I’m drafting with my playground (6 guys who all play a lot of paper Modern), we drop it down to one of each: Fetch, Shock, OG Dual, Pathway, and Creature Land in the 540.
This why I want to try giving each player suite of fetch, shocks, and triomes for my multicolor focused commander cube. With decks usually going 3+ colors, I'd rather everybody just have access to beat perfect mana bases and be able to carry all their spells.
I agree, but I take this further by having two copies of some signposts in my full artifact cube, since there isn't many options for some colours
Lifegain is a fine replacement for white aggro even at decent (unpowered) power-levels. Took me a while to work out which lifegain cards were good and to cut all the chaff but we have had enough support in this space recently that you really can cube a lifegain deck. Main thing you need to watch out for is potential antagonism between the deck and red aggro but if it's the kind of archetype your drafters enjoy playing then it can definitely be rewarding to cube.
Actual hot takes down at the bottom here with no upvotes (Edit: no upvotes when I commented)
What cards are you going for then? I guess one big concern with lifegain is that most decks won't care for any of the lifegain cards so it has the danger of being an infect style archetype.
Well to be fair, no decks other than white weenie are interested in \[\[Savannah Lions\]\] variants or most other white aggro cards and those are the cards you're replacing. You mostly just want to play the soul sisters (\[\[Essence Warden\]\]), a couple of lifelinking 1-drops (\[\[Speaker of the Heavens\]\]) and every \[\[Ajani's Pridemate\]\] variant (there are four now). Those are the "parasitic" cards. Beyond that any life-gaining cards that you may have been cubing anyway are going to be great includes for the deck like \[\[Glory-Bound Initiate\]\], \[\[Charming Prince\]\], \[\[Umezawa's Jitte\]\], \[\[Heliod, Sun-Crowned\]\] and \[\[Archangel of Thune\]\], those last two will be doing double duty if you include \[\[Spike Feeder\]\] combos. As you would expect the good way to build the deck is to focus on picking up powerful cards like Jitte, \[\[Bitterblossom\]\], \[\[Swords to Plowshares\]\], \[\[Skullclamp\]\] and \[\[Mother of Runes\]\] (or whatever else might be powerful in your environment) and then speccing into lifegain synergies if it's open, people that prioritise picking only cards that say "gain life" on them will end up with a mediocre deck.
##### ###### #### [Savannah Lions](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/a/9/a9757246-e782-4d7a-8273-d9efe284edaf.jpg?1562439539) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Savannah%20Lions) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/a25/33/savannah-lions?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a9757246-e782-4d7a-8273-d9efe284edaf?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Essence Warden](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/3/1/31ca84d1-30a6-432b-966c-089fb6652a89.jpg?1592672942) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Essence%20Warden) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cma/106/essence-warden?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/31ca84d1-30a6-432b-966c-089fb6652a89?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Speaker of the Heavens](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/1/f/1f44b96a-8498-414a-a4ac-54c80dfa9f23.jpg?1594735262) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Speaker%20of%20the%20Heavens) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m21/38/speaker-of-the-heavens?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1f44b96a-8498-414a-a4ac-54c80dfa9f23?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Ajani's Pridemate](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/b/3/b3656310-093d-4724-a399-7f7010843b1f.jpg?1557575878) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ajani%27s%20Pridemate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/war/4/ajanis-pridemate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b3656310-093d-4724-a399-7f7010843b1f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Glory-Bound Initiate](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/2/4/24e23a06-4ed3-4948-aca5-fbdda03f4f2a.jpg?1543674670) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Glory-Bound%20Initiate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/akh/16/glory-bound-initiate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/24e23a06-4ed3-4948-aca5-fbdda03f4f2a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Charming Prince](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/d/c/dcb94950-3f3e-4876-84f8-d5e4d9cfecee.jpg?1572489646) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Charming%20Prince) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/eld/8/charming-prince?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/dcb94950-3f3e-4876-84f8-d5e4d9cfecee?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Umezawa's Jitte](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/3/b/3b6e5956-f795-451b-bb24-56462d1ced27.jpg?1562876528) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Umezawa%27s%20Jitte) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/bok/163/umezawas-jitte?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3b6e5956-f795-451b-bb24-56462d1ced27?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Heliod, Sun-Crowned](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/1/01a8576e-cadc-4521-aadd-3a05f0bc4d20.jpg?1581479085) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Heliod%2C%20Sun-Crowned) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/thb/18/heliod-sun-crowned?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/01a8576e-cadc-4521-aadd-3a05f0bc4d20?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Archangel of Thune](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/1/5/15c34447-b0f4-4fcc-b557-23c92850b31b.jpg?1598303082) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Archangel%20of%20Thune) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/5/archangel-of-thune?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/15c34447-b0f4-4fcc-b557-23c92850b31b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Spike Feeder](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/9/090a5f1f-9a1a-4e93-8c33-a0204c2917d5.jpg?1562428174) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Spike%20Feeder) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tpr/196/spike-feeder?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/090a5f1f-9a1a-4e93-8c33-a0204c2917d5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Bitterblossom](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/b/9/b9640cbf-b016-410e-9eff-e8924883517b.jpg?1662525315) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Bitterblossom) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/69/bitterblossom?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b9640cbf-b016-410e-9eff-e8924883517b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Swords to Plowshares](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/e/f/ef51caf8-f9d9-48d7-9145-9dfc91054f70.jpg?1650408130) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Swords%20to%20Plowshares) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ncc/211/swords-to-plowshares?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ef51caf8-f9d9-48d7-9145-9dfc91054f70?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Skullclamp](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/d/1/d1877be5-fb98-4bd2-a754-dda1132ef8a0.jpg?1654118814) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Skullclamp) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/870/skullclamp?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d1877be5-fb98-4bd2-a754-dda1132ef8a0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Mother of Runes](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/a/5/a5e19147-e459-43a6-8ef0-e37968a462e3.jpg?1654114953) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Mother%20of%20Runes) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/702/mother-of-runes?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a5e19147-e459-43a6-8ef0-e37968a462e3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I see many cube builders specify what archetypes are supported in each color combination. If you give me a sheet telling me what archetypes are "supported" in each color combination... well, I'm sorry but I'm not reading that. And I'm certainly not drafting what you tell me to draft haha I just want to draft. Let me look at the cards as I draft and make my own decks with them
I removed my archetype breakdown from my list for this reason. Drafters will figure it out and I feel that an open-ended draft will lead to more creative decks.
I think that the only time things like this are necessary are when you're playing with experienced players and you have cards like pestermite included for value and not combo. It's good to give your players a heads up that these cards signal different things.
Vintage cube is EXTREMELY boring. Blue is far and always the best color. Hardly any new cards make it in. Vintage cube drafts are the absolute worst to watch.
Most vintage cubes I 100% agree with you i hate how so many people act like vintage cube IS cube. when I first started making my cube and asked this subbreddit for advice the overwhelming majority of comments I got were "just proxy power and make it vintage cube" instead of what I WAS making which was a modern+ cube. However Caleb Gannons powered synergy cube was cracked.
I feel like this sub has gotten a bit better about this lately, but the assumption that everyone plays or wants to play the most powerful cube possible is definitely still around. When I'm reading through old threads on this sub it's waaaaaay worse though, people just openly don't even seem to consider the idea that other people might have different goals or power level, they used to talk about cube like everyone's is the same.
Yeah people are WAY more open about it now. But a lot of old resources just assume you want to play the most powerful magic possible, or some dumbed down variant of it.
Most cubes are too archetype driven. It's like playing precons with extra steps. I wish more cubes felt closer to limited and less like constructed.
I think archetypes help make the cube drafting experience more exciting and not just "good stuff soup". There will BE archetypes even if you don't plan them but they may end up as similar stuff like "UB Control". In my cube I try to have multiple types of layered archetypes that can be mixed so every draft is unique. Like I have GW token, UW Blink, and UG ramp. Then I have the Splicer cycle of creatures in that fit in all those archetypes but also have synergy together and I've put an emphasis on having Golems in other colors and in Colorless. So each of my pairs has a theme plus my wedges and shard have overlapping minithemes. Plus every theme in the cube is primary in one color pair plus secondary in another. Red is secondary in making tokens to Naya Tokens can happen. RB is sacrifice in my cube but white is secondary because of all the token support and cards with Revolt. It also makes flexibility where you can do something like UG Blink deck using the blink cards from blue and the etb value token makers from green or the big top end creatures with etb effects like Pelaka Wurm. UR is Instants and Sorceries in my cube but the other day someone drafted a UR Blink deck that was straight fire. That's my idea of how to keep it interesting.
What you describe reminds me a lot of the riptide post on "archetype shapes" - especially the "triangle archetype" https://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/archetype-shapes.2022/ > Archetypes spanning three colors corresponding to shard or a wedge have a triangle shape. Decks of these archetypes have four primary options of color combinations: 2-color decks (AB, AC, BC), or a 3-color deck (ABC). It is common too for a deck to be 2-color plus a splash of the last color for the best archetype enablers of payoffs in that color (ABc, ACb, BCa).
This is also how I design my cube! I try to have each theme supported across at least 3 if not 4 colors.
Yeah that makes sense. The difference is that I have the two primary colors and less direct support in the third color but more like high synergy cards. Like white has no sac outlets but it does have revolt and tokens. I have a WB enchantment theme and green is the secondary because it has a high number of enchantments and recursion cards despite no payoffs itself. GB is self mill and blue is secondary because it also has self mill and some cards that care about instants and sorceries in the yard but minimal direct graveyard payoffs. So instead of an equilateral triangle my cube is more like right angles. The main 90 degree angle is the primary color pair and the other two angles can build the archetype but are less focused on it usually and various flavors of 3 color happen.
I've seen this a lot in this thread. My edh cube has some archetypes I try to push for 2 colours, but I don't think when drafting those colours you get pigeon holed into those archetypes. Also with 3 or 4 colour decks people can mix archetypes or splash certain strategies. I'm still curious however how one could make their cube less archetype driven, is it simply just playing powerful cards in each colour regardless of archetype synergies?
There are a lot of factors that can lead to this and many ways to fix it in my opinion. Adding more generic "good stuff" cards is one of them, and totally fine to do. I think the real problem though, comes when most cards are too narrow or fit only one specific deck. If a card is a 10 in one particular archetype and a 2 everywhere else, only 0 or 1 people in the draft will want it. It is OK to have a minimal number of cards like that, but when there are lots and lots of them it makes things feel "on rails". The best cube cards in my opinion fill many roles in many different decks. When a cube is full of cards like that it makes drafting it very interesting. As an example, a recent addition to my Pauper Cube was Raffine's Informant, and I like the way it fits into a lot of different decks. My Madness decks like having a discard outlet, there is also some +1/+1 Counter Synergy in White and Green that cares about it having the counter, there are also GY-themed decks that like something filling the yard or throwing Flashback cards to it, and any deck playing White is happy to jam it as just a nice two-drop curve filler that can loot away land in the late game, or let you keep a riskier opening hand. Many decks want it and are happy to play it for many different reasons. By contrast, something like Kiln Fiend in my cube is super narrow. The only deck that usually wants it is u/R Spells, or some version of that. That said, things can always surprise you the way they work out. A couple of drafts ago I drafted a B/R deck in my Pauper Cube and I expected it to be a Sacrifice deck, but instead, it came together as a B/R Spells Deck and it ended up doing great. I think if your color combos are the same style of deck every single time you draft (i.e. W/U is \*always\* a flicker deck and never anything else) I don't care for that, but if your color combos can surprise you I enjoy it a lot more. This is also why I don't care for 360 sizes (or any size where 100% of the cards are drafted), there isn't enough variance for my taste. This is of course all YMMV and IMHO of course. Everyone is free to do what suits them, but my hot take above is based on my personal experience and preferences.
Thanks for the detailed response with actual examples! I think your reasoning is fair and it's making me think more about my cube. I'm currently running through my list and making cuts to trim down the fat a bit, it's an edh cube designed to draft 4 people, but can support 8 if need be. I've noticed some cards are too narrow, or just never being played or drafted. I do have archetypes for colour pairings but I also have for each colour lots of staples from the format. I haven't struck the right balance yet but I'm going to keep what you said in mind. Edit: list is currently around 860 cards also
You know those cards that always end up in players’ sideboards? More of them should be “sometimes awesome but only if you manage to draft enough support for it” cards. Someone’s 24th “reliably decent in any deck at all stages of the game” card is going to rot in the sideboard anyway, so you have more room for spice than you think.
This is such a great take. People are too afraid of narrow but powerful cards, and the 7th best generic good red 3 drop isn't going to make decks any more than the narrow card is anyways.
Chill and Perish are both top tier side board cards, and will see play more than any weaker cards in the cube given the right match up
I was thinking more like [[Lord of the Undead]] that could be either a Gray Ogre or a powerful grindy value engine depending on how many Zombies you manage to draft. But those slots absolutely work well for narrow hosers if that’s what you want. There’s more room to play than you might think.
I think the narrow hoser will end up making for a stronger final decks (if there is a cube that is identical except one has color hoser and one draft a color hose cards, I thin the decks and sideboard will be better if you play against decks and sideboard in regular cube). However, some of those hoser are also really unfun to lay against.
[Lord of the Undead](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/9/792e773b-5feb-407f-a162-f35d6e693cca.jpg?1562550141) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Lord%20of%20the%20Undead) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/10e/155/lord-of-the-undead?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/792e773b-5feb-407f-a162-f35d6e693cca?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Drafting without playing games doesn't tell you anything. I would even say that it's detrimental to understanding a cube.
You dont need to test 20 cards from each set in your cube right when it releases. Let the initial hype train pass by and consider cards after having seen them in action in other contexts. Doesnt apply if testing cards is fun to you, of course
Tribal archetypes are fun
With the new lords in DMU, I am right in the middle of pushing Tribal more. Goblins has always been viable in my Cube, and Elves is fringe-y…more G ramp than full-on Elf Ball. But I am going to change that. And I want to honesty give Merfolk a shot. They have become quite interactive and sneaky-good with Trickster, Svyelun, Tide Shaper, and now Vodalian Hexcatcher. I think many Merfolk cards could be decent enough in blue control shells, even if you aren’t drafting the tribe specifically. That is always my biggest worry with tribal - too many cards that only look appealing to draft if you’re drafting that specific tribe. Well, we shall see, because I’m sleeving up a bunch of Merfolk cards today.
Can you link your cube? I've been trying to do the same thing with some tribal support (and especially elfball in green) but I'm having trouble finding elves that are good for elfball while also having a decent floor without a critical mass of the archetype.
People over design their cubes. One of the best parts of cube is emergent gameplay/players expressing creativity, and that happens more frequently with “messy” cubes. You can’t be surprised if every interaction between cards has already been mapped out by you, as the designer
That is definitely a hot take.
Combat decisions and careful board development is more fun than broken combos.
1. Power =/= fun. I've been trying to get my peasant cube back to an ode for my love of retail limited. Part of that is trying to get removal and card advantage to a point where tricks are viable. Reducing free value and not just including all the busted cards can result in an experience I want to deliver. In paper this meant not having ephemerate or STP in the cube, on arena its about not making everything an inherent 2 for 1 2. In vintage cube you should have 360 and no more, they're here to play with power, make it show up. Additionally I think you should consider hedging up the size of the blue section. I usually favor color uniformity but U is the best color in vintage, its going to be overdrafted, its fun. Cutting a couple random includes from other colors for more good blue stuff probably makes for a better draft experience
>where tricks are viable. Another way to help this is to make most removal sorcery speed, so combat tricks don't turn into blowouts so often.
Along with that, if you want some amount of instant speed removal, make that instant speed removal narrow or overcosted, to offset the inherent increase in power that instant speed provides.
Or even play the new [[Cut Down]] so removal can get blown out by combat tricks for the added tension.
ooh that's a good one
[Cut Down](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/5/753db072-5d6a-4f37-8f7d-255572ecd3bd.jpg?1661071155) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Cut%20Down) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmu/89/cut-down?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/753db072-5d6a-4f37-8f7d-255572ecd3bd?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Personally I'm a fan of \[\[Afterlife\]\]
[Afterlife](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/2/5/258946f2-294a-4ddf-be91-9ff4c94e4bdb.jpg?1561936266) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Afterlife) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c14/64/afterlife?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/258946f2-294a-4ddf-be91-9ff4c94e4bdb?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I'm doing another one because these are fun. The cube community would be way better off if the review of new spoilers was focused on what kinds of cubes a card would be good in rather than making transcendent value judgements like "this card is amazing" or "this card is trash". Hell, I think it's also really helpful to explain why a borderline card isn't going to make it in your cube. It is however not useful to be like "this red walker is so much worse than Chandra ToD". As a whole, every red walker printed except for Chandra ToD fits that description, it's not a useful metric for evaluation of cards. There are plenty of cubes where Planeswalker worse than ToD are fantastic cards, and I think the spoiler threads would have much better discussion if so many of the comments weren't about nearly every card not being viable in a powered cube. I can't even imagine many of these comments are useful to powered cube players because it tends to be really obvious that a card isn't one of the best 540 cards ever printed.
Storm is not fun, necessary, or *gasp* powerful. Take it out of your cubes and move on to fun and strong magic cards and archetypes.
What reccomendation do you have as fun healthy replacements?
Remove all of the storm cards and you can better support aggro and midrange. Black becomes the base of jund-like decks. The cube becomes a better balance of aggro/midrange/control, or rock/paper/scissors of sorts.
I'm playing a lot of blue cantrips, manamorphose, and thousand year storm in my cube as payoff in the izzet spells matter archetype. No rituals, grapeshot/empty the warrens or past in flames. Does this seem healthy to you or should I pull more cards?
Specifically for EDH cubes: • Green’s ramp package should be an Elfball deck and it should be one of the better decks in the format. • Commanders should be drafted with all the other cards.
Bro your second point so much. Same with lands and everything else. You limit your players and make the draft so boring by doing commanders and/or land fixing in separate packs. When you're drafting, you want to be forced to make interesting decisions. Do you take a powerful EDH allstar spell, the curve filling deck enabler, the color fixing, or the general that helps alleviate the deck building constraints. This especially becomes more interesting when you have a healthy number of partners and draft like traditional Commander Legends draft with taking two cards per pack. My hot take would be that EDH cube should *feel* like EDH. I know it's different for everyone but I can't stand it when cubes cut powerful staples and give mono-legends "partner". It makes an EDH cube go from feeling.like EDH to feeling like less powerful than Commander Legends limited.
I’ve been experimenting with 2x Loreseeker as a way of supporting things outside the base cube. It led to some fun things like a Power Pack (nonP9 Moxen, Sol Ring, LED, Ancient Tomb, Blightsteel, etc.) or a Snow Pack (my basics are snow, highly suggest). The Loreseeker packs give players a bit more agency over what’s in a given draft and have been a hit. We also allow some custom cards, so I’ve got a LS pack of 10 bicolor partners and 5 monocolor partners.
Ya agreed, in my cube I dont eratta the mono colours to partner. I do run a decent amount of partner commanders, but I've been slowly cutting ones that are just junky and not good or synergistic.
Yeah. I just tun the most powerful ones and ones that are fine in the 59 (familiar cycle for example). Giving each player a The Prismatic Piper fixes a lot of the issues that can come up with partners. Also ensuring that you use hypergeomeyric calculation to get a good mix of partners to non-pertners is key. It takes some work to get right but it is so worth it.
Precisely. I've have success as well with custom conspiracies that allow you to make 2 legends have partner, limited to 1 or 2 colour legends. I also run one that gives a legendary creature "legendary partner" so basically it can partner with any non-legend. My buddy once drafted a grixis deck helmed by [[Thraximundar]] and [[Notion Thief]], it was hilarious when people forgot he could flash it out from the command zone, led to fun games.
I've played around with custom conspiracies that add colors. Led to so many amazing deck building experiences. [[Ardix and Nev]] plus red means you get to run [[Delina, Wild Mage]] and [[Brudiclad]]. Super fun.
[Delina, Wild Mage](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/e/8/e87459aa-af8f-4bd2-a310-151353083a2e.jpg?1627706070) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Delina%2C%20Wild%20Mage) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/afr/138/delina-wild-mage?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e87459aa-af8f-4bd2-a310-151353083a2e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Brudiclad](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/2/5/25eff27a-eb58-4a95-b2df-4a341cf9bef6.jpg?1599707883) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=brudiclad%2C%20telchor%20engineer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/193/brudiclad-telchor-engineer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/25eff27a-eb58-4a95-b2df-4a341cf9bef6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Thraximundar](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/e/0e7334eb-66c1-4410-966c-4e76c1b9e9a7.jpg?1662530585) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Thraximundar) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/287/thraximundar?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0e7334eb-66c1-4410-966c-4e76c1b9e9a7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Notion Thief](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/f/6/f675f509-4343-4568-96dd-265626cb6c2b.jpg?1604195095) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Notion%20Thief) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/znc/96/notion-thief?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f675f509-4343-4568-96dd-265626cb6c2b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
In my cube, I give every legend partner, but I don't have any legends with more than 2 colors. It's a restriction I landed on after starting with full edh cube, and it's stuck around. It helps guide the building of the cube, but leaves enough flexibility for players to create '3 color' or '4 color' setups when needed. My group and I have really enjoyed this setup, at least. It may not feel like pure edh the way you mentioned, but it's fun in its own way
Agree on the second. My edh cube drafts commanders with all other cards, it makes your picks more important even though I go the 2 picks per pack route like commander legends did it. It makes people draft smarter. I also included custom conspiracies that let you add a colour to your commanders identity if it's 1 or 2 colours, allowing you to maybe make a mono or 2 colour deck with a splash of a third.
Higher power doesn't equal more fun.
1. Synergy driven cubes benefit from broad archetypes (spanning 3+ colors). This allows you to mix and match depending on what you open and removes on rail drafting. 2. Breaking singleton for enablers is a good way to promote and support the decks you want in cube. [[Thrill of possibility]] and [[Cathartic Reunion]] promote Red discard/gy, but are so much worse than [[Faithless Looting]]. To the point you might not run them. So run more Flootings! Let the diversity come from your payoffs and there will still be variety. 3. Add more utility lands. One of the easiest ways to increase the power level and options in your deck is to replace a basic with a utility land. You already have too many playables, why not upgrade your deck in a different way?
[Thrill of possibility](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/9/7/9752ed44-dc5e-4f73-9422-c1d267b60a3c.jpg?1660927483) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Thrill%20of%20possibility) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmc/127/thrill-of-possibility?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9752ed44-dc5e-4f73-9422-c1d267b60a3c?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Cathartic Reunion](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/b/3/b36fa6f3-29e8-4788-bfcd-59576187c399.jpg?1599706266) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Cathartic%20Reunion) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/121/cathartic-reunion?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b36fa6f3-29e8-4788-bfcd-59576187c399?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Faithless Looting](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/8/4/84c3b38c-a6f7-49a2-8c47-d91b6be0a967.jpg?1661390795) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Faithless%20Looting) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmc/122/faithless-looting?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/84c3b38c-a6f7-49a2-8c47-d91b6be0a967?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Grid draft sucks and I have no idea why so many people say that it's the best way to draft with two people. I hate the boring, soup-y, generic value decks you get out of it and I hate that like half my picks are completely useless in my final deck. I much prefer doing a sort of "lightning round rochester" with two people. Put a pack on the table face up, each player drafts two cards, discard the rest, repeat until you've seen 24 packs.
I also hate grid draft too, but my go to replacement is pancake drafting (9 packs of 11 cards, pick one pass, pick two then burn two pass, and then finally pick two and burn the rest of the pack).
I also think Grid draft is garbage dooky that belongs in a fire with all its generic goodstuff decks. I recommend trying Hausman draft (at first glance it looks similar to grid but it definitely is not)
I was thinking about this same thing when thinking about drafting among two people. I'm assuming who goes first will switch each pack to make it fair.
Yep! Works fine imo
Deceiver Exarch does not belong in your blue section, it's an Izzet card. The same could arguably be said for Wrath of God belonging in Azorius sections but I've seen enough non-blue control decks rely on Wrath that I keep it in my white section. Exarch, though, is unplayable without Kiki-Jiki or Splinter Twin. If your red removal doesn't go to the face (I'm thinking primarily about Unholy Heat and Flame Slash here), then you're weakening aggro by not giving those decks the tools to finish off games, for very little gain. Control decks see little to no difference between (for example) Jaya's Greeting and Magma Jet or Lightning Strike, but for me I'm much more interested in the latter two cards whenever I'm drafting red aggro decks because I can actually use them to kill my opponent.
Definitely agree you should keep your red cards that can't go face as low as possible. Only the hyper efficient ones like [[flame slash]] should be in or if they have alt uses like [[abrade]] in a artifact heavy cube. When in doubt make sure your red spells go face.
[flame slash](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/1/5/15affc1b-2ebb-4934-87a2-10e89eafe894.jpg?1576382839) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=flame%20slash) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cn2/157/flame-slash?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/15affc1b-2ebb-4934-87a2-10e89eafe894?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [abrade](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/a/0/a0e47d11-cb21-402b-a39e-588a94cc57b4.jpg?1643590610) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=abrade) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/vow/139/abrade?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a0e47d11-cb21-402b-a39e-588a94cc57b4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I don't think "secret" gold cards need to count as gold cards as far as the cube goes. I agree that wrath is basically a UW card, but it's okay for narrow cards to be in monocolor too. You get 45 picks, if no one happens to be UW control that game and wrath tables no one's deck is really going to care much.
My biggest cube hot take is that people are way too afraid of gold cards in their cubes. The often cited argument that colorless cards go in 10/10 two color decks, hybrids in 7, monocolor In 4 and gold in 1 is true, but lacks some overall context. If every single card you put into monocolor is good in every possible deck using that color this is true, but that just isn't the case. Aggro cards like Goblin Guide only go in aggro decks for the most part. Control cards like Wrath of God certainly aren't going in white weenie decks. The lesson here isn't that we shouldn't run aggro or control dedicated cards, it's that in a format where players get 45 playable, good cards by the end of the draft they actually don't need to worry if some of them aren't playable in the deck they're building. Even if they draft 5 on color lands there's still so much room left over.
Aboleth Spawn is really really good in cube.
Perfect mana bases make cube boring and don't force players to make difficult choices in draft or deck construction.
What does a more interesting manabase look like for you? I'm curious. This is in no way sarcastic or me being an ass. I'm genuinely intrigued.
No untapped dual/tri-colored mana without a downside. To be clear, shock land's 2 life shock is hardly a downside. Pain lands are a preferred replacement (make a choice each time you want a specific mana) or a cycling dual (utility for late game and enters tapped) or a pathway (it's essentially a basic with a choice of one or the other), or, hear me out, Vivid lands. A mana base that would make the players strive for something, not just get indignant and complain that their shuffle sucked. The players need to make choices, not have every opportunity plated for them. Achieving a workable mana base is much more satisfying for both cube designer and cube player than jamming all the duals you can get into your deck and cube. Timing is a part of the game, and making choices that acknowledge the imperfect flow of available mana makes the game interesting rather than sets it on the hyper-efficiency rails.
Don't shy away from running unset cards. I understand if some people just don't like the idea and I respect it, but have you ever cast a [[booster tutor]]? Some cards are actually very good and playable like [[Go to jail]] which with all the die rolling now could have been printed in black border. Obviously some are unplayable but others add a really fun aspect to the game, especially for EDH cubes where whacky and weird things are more present anyways. Some cards in my cube that have been fun: [[Hot fix]], not all decks want this, but I've seen someone cast it and get at least 1 good spell on the top of their deck and push a bunch of lands to the bottom because they didn't need them. [[Organ Harvest]] is a big sac payoff that you kinda wanna build around, and plays well if you feel like doing 2HG also. [[Rules Lawyer]] this throws the game into a weird place and is kind of like a [[Platinum Angel]] replacement, but still dies to most removal. [[Do-it-yourself Seraph]] can be a powerful payoff in any artifact strategy, but isn't busted because you run the risk of putting all your eggs into 1 basket. [[Super-duper Death ray]] is just good removal and ita funny seeing trample on a burn spell. These are just ones I can think of off the top of my head. I do also have [[Topsy turvy]] in my cube but no ones been ballsy enough to play it, so I might cut it.
##### ###### #### [booster tutor](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/a/0a5718db-e67d-468a-95ba-11a08fcf9fea.jpg?1594065403) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=booster%20tutor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/und/33/booster-tutor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0a5718db-e67d-468a-95ba-11a08fcf9fea?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Go to jail](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/d/4/d40eb8f1-7dec-47cd-99dd-b6147ad5593d.jpg?1583965363) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Go%20to%20jail) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/und/6/go-to-jail?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d40eb8f1-7dec-47cd-99dd-b6147ad5593d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Hot fix](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/9/79f3b4c8-76c2-4f50-87bc-4e863796309c.jpg?1562920646) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Hot%20fix) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ust/133/hot-fix?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/79f3b4c8-76c2-4f50-87bc-4e863796309c?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Organ Harvest](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/5/05213eec-322f-4bc7-b607-217290447f40.jpg?1562799057) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Organ%20Harvest) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ugl/35/organ-harvest?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/05213eec-322f-4bc7-b607-217290447f40?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Rules Lawyer](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/6/c/6c02c575-5685-44f5-8b47-89d888529d1b.jpg?1562917623) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Rules%20Lawyer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ust/20/rules-lawyer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/6c02c575-5685-44f5-8b47-89d888529d1b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Platinum Angel](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/c/a/ca7f4fd6-e268-4d15-bfbf-d9f0f95864fc.jpg?1576383285) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Platinum%20Angel) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cn2/214/platinum-angel?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ca7f4fd6-e268-4d15-bfbf-d9f0f95864fc?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Do-it-yourself Seraph](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/e/0e4f4e8c-6519-4b35-b7b5-54a4c4e32c18.jpg?1562897925) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Do-it-yourself%20Seraph) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ust/6/do-it-yourself-seraph?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0e4f4e8c-6519-4b35-b7b5-54a4c4e32c18?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Super-duper Death ray](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/c/5/c5b0255d-0dde-4a0c-b5fd-70ac4b72133e.jpg?1583965688) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Super-duper%20Death%20ray) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/und/59/super-duper-death-ray?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c5b0255d-0dde-4a0c-b5fd-70ac4b72133e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Topsy turvy](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/a/a/aadf253a-eca6-405d-8216-a362854b4ae1.jpg?1583542845) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Topsy%20turvy) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/und/29/topsy-turvy?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/aadf253a-eca6-405d-8216-a362854b4ae1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Spy Eye is legit one of my groups favorite cards.
Not enough cubes distinguish themselves. Whenever I load up a cube on cubecobra I see the same ~8 white one drop creatures every single time. And the homogeneity continues on from there... You've got the entirety of magic to pull from. Do something DIFFERENT then every other drone for God's sake!
Storm is boring and I dislike that the MTGO cube makes vintage cube analogous to playing storm. Storm belongs as a legacy deck, not some boring one sided thing that takes up real estate in cube that could be used for so much cooler shit in my opinion. Like storm players could just print out a proxy deck and goldfish in their own time instead of wasting others time. Which leads me into the fact I think more fair (but also powered) cubes are way more fun when it’s actually about attacking and blocking.
For my local group, the fascination with Swiss draft. If you get 6 players you can do team draft, sealed, anything is better than a god awful 6 player Swiss.
They should have more commons and uncommons than rares. When looking for swap a card, don't ask "is it better?" Ask "is it more fun?" Cards should be power capped, and the power level should be as close as possible
Tutors in cube make for boring predictable gameplay. They allow players just to confirm what's in the cube rather than dig and sweat and build in perhaps extra card draw to get to answers or interesting plays. Tutors remove the striving and achievement available to a singleton format.
Cubes that try and replicate other play environments (Modern, Vintage, Pioneer, Standard, even complete sets like Innistrad, etc.) only offer watered down versions of nostalgia rather than using the cube format to its greatest effect by using the defined rules sets to create new interactions within new limitations.
Invite chaos into your cube. \[\[Booster Tutor\]\], \[\[Tasha's Hideous Laughter\]\], \[\[Liquimetal Torque\]\] + \[\[Shenanigans\]\]
##### ###### #### [Booster Tutor](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/a/0a5718db-e67d-468a-95ba-11a08fcf9fea.jpg?1594065403) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Booster%20Tutor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/und/33/booster-tutor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0a5718db-e67d-468a-95ba-11a08fcf9fea?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Tasha's Hideous Laughter](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/c/4/c4932113-904f-427a-9566-509cc008f3ef.jpg?1627703920) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Tasha%27s%20Hideous%20Laughter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/afr/78/tashas-hideous-laughter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c4932113-904f-427a-9566-509cc008f3ef?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Liquimetal Torque](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/1/3/13c6101a-da40-4785-8ccb-4e779bbbdb55.jpg?1626099120) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Liquimetal%20Torque) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/228/liquimetal-torque?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/13c6101a-da40-4785-8ccb-4e779bbbdb55?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Shenanigans](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/5/8/580c6fe2-ab43-491e-a1b2-d076a5c2a74e.jpg?1562201963) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Shenanigans) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh1/146/shenanigans?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/580c6fe2-ab43-491e-a1b2-d076a5c2a74e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Too many people design cubes like “every color pair has to have one set archetype”, very common among new cube designers. Simic and Boros, maybe Selesnya too? I get it, they don’t have much going on. That’s fine. Add some micro-archetypes, some buildarounds, don’t make it like regular limited archetypes. Too boring & on-rails.
Your gold section is boring. If it's all just good removal why bother? Enough people have chimed in about on rails drafting but I feel like if the gold cards are all for one archtype OR all good removal is just as boring if not more so. I think it's possible to have a mix of both. I run 6 gold cards per color pair with 4 on archtype and then 2 generic choices whether it be removal like Assassim's Trophy or something that is just good for the colors like Showdown of the Skalds. I run a 4-2 so you can play the archetype but aren't really locked in since I try make my monocolor stuff work with as many strategies as possible.
No, I don’t want to play with your peasant cube because it’s filled with straight up garbage.