Monday, July 18, 2016

How Bad Was Mental Misstep, Really?

This is a repost of a breakdown I did re: Mental Misstep and how bad it was, back when we were discussing how bad Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time were, and whether they needed to be banned.
-----

Figured I'd put a little effort into answering this question, since I was curious. Here's what I found.

Misstep
Here are the top 16 decklists from the last 3 SCG Opens before Misstep was banned.
SCG Atlanta - September 10-11
Top 16 Decklists
  • Blue Decks with 4 Misstep - 11
  • Blue Decks with 3 Misstep - 2
  • Blue Decks with 2 Misstep - 0
  • Blue Decks with 0 Misstep - 0
  • Non-Blue Decks with 4 Misstep - 1
  • Non-Blue Decks with 0 Misstep - 2
SCG Boston- August 20-21
Top 16 Decklists
  • Blue Decks with 4 Misstep - 9
  • Blue Decks with 3 Misstep - 5
  • Blue Decks with 2 Misstep - 0
  • Blue Decks with 0 Misstep - 0
  • Non-Blue Decks with 4 Misstep - 0
  • Non-Blue Decks with 0 Misstep - 1
  • Non-Blue Decks with 2 Misstep (board) - 1
SCG Richmond - August 13-14
Top 16 Decklists
  • Blue Decks with 4 Misstep - 5
  • Blue Decks with 3 Misstep - 2
  • Blue Decks with 2 Misstep, 3rd in Board - 1
  • Blue Decks with 0 Misstep - 1
  • Non-Blue Decks with 4 Misstep - 1
  • Non-Blue Decks with 0 Misstep - 6
Cruise / Dig
Compare that to the 3 tournaments we've had with TC/DTT valid. Obviously the first two weeks nobody but Bob believed in Cruise, so you can mostly ignore those, but I went to the effort of calculating them so I included them.
SCG Worcester - October 18-19
Top 16 Decklists[4]
  • Blue Decks with 4 Cruise - 4
  • Blue Decks with 3 Cruise - 2
  • Blue Decks with 2 Cruise - 0
  • Blue Decks with 2 Dig - 1
  • Blue Decks with 0 Cruise, 0 Dig - 4
  • Non-Blue Decks - 5
SCG New Jersey - September 27-28
Top 16 Decklists[5]
  • Blue Decks with 4 Cruise - 1
  • Blue Decks with 3 Cruise - 0
  • Blue Decks with 2 Cruise - 1
  • Blue Decks with 2 Dig - 0
  • Blue Decks with 1 Dig - 1
  • Blue Decks with 0 Cruise, 0 Dig - 7
  • Non-Blue Decks - 6
SCG Indianapolis - September 27-28
Top 16 Decklists[6]
  • Blue Decks with 4 Cruise - 0
  • Blue Decks with 3 Cruise - 0
  • Blue Decks with 2 Cruise - 0
  • Blue Decks with 2 Dig - 1
  • Blue Decks with 1 Dig - 0
  • Blue Decks with 0 Cruise, 0 Dig - 7
  • Non-Blue Decks - 8
Conclusions
  • Misstep really did dominate the format. I'd almost let myself forget how crazy it was, this was a good exercise.
  • Cruise could be on it's way to the same fate, but it's not there yet. Obviously there's a big shift from the first week of availability, but I don't nkow that we can expect that pace to continue.
  • Importantly, there really wasn't a good nonblue way to fight misstep, while a deck like Death and Taxes may still have good ways to fight cruise (Thalia makes it harder to cantrip your way to a full graveyard, for example).
  • Small sample size, of course, but if you look at the two tournaments the weekend of September 27/28, you'll notice that we actually had a pretty decent blend of nonblue decks and blue decks. We should keep an eye on things going forward and see how much that changes as a result of Cruise and Dig.

Saturday, August 22, 2015

How much does it cost to maintain a Legacy collection?

    Today I got into a discussion on reddit that tangentially touched on the reserved list.  In response to a comment that Wizards didn't care about legacy and vintage players because they don't buy new cards, someone pointed out that they're constantly printing new cards for those formats.  It got me thinking, just how much money does Wizards actually make off of me?  For context, I don't play standard.  I don't play modern, vintage, or limited either.  In fact, the only competitive magic I play is legacy.  For the purposes of this discussion I'm ignoring my cube and focusing on legacy alone.
    I don't actually remember when I stopped buying old cards and got my collection up to date, but it was some time inbetween Innistrad and Return to Ravnica.  I'm going to take this back to Innistrad but only count cards I bought as they were printed, so the Sinkholes I know I bought in January of 2013 don't count :)  Below are the Legacy "playable" cards that I purchased between the summer of 2011 and now, and the approximate price I paid.  This is the actual price I remember paying per card, not the lowest price they were ever at.  You'll see where I occasionally got great deals and where I occasionally lost a lot of money, but I figure looking at actual results is way more interesting than some theoretical perfect investor's record.
    It's possible I left something off so if you see some staple missing that I just forgot about, let me know.  I'm pretty sure I covered it all though.
   
  • Innistrad
    • 4 Liliana of the Veil $22
    • 4 Snapcaster Mage $18
    • 2 Nevermore $2
    • 4 Past in Flames $2 
    • 4 Geist of Saint Traft $15
    • 1 Stony Silence $1
  • Dark Ascension
    • 2 Grafdigger's Cage $8 
    • 4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben $3
  • Avacyn Restored 
    • 4 Griselbrand $12 
    • 2 Craterhoof Behemoth $8
    • 4 Terminus $3
    • 3 Entreat the Angels $8
    • 4 Temporal Mastery $25
    • 4 Misthollow Griffin $1
    • 4 Cavern of Souls $20
  • M13
    • 4 Omniscience $8
  • Planechase 2012
    • 4 Baleful Strix $2
    • 4 Shardless Agent $2
  • Return to Ravnica
    • 8 Abrupt Decay $8
    • 8 Deathrite Shaman $12
    • 4 Rest in Peace $2
    • 4 Golgari Charm $0.50
    • 1 Slaughter Games $1 
    • 4 Supreme Verdict $3
  • Gatecrash
    •  4 Enter the Infinite $2
    • 4 Thespian's Stage $1
  • Dragon's Maze
    • 2 Wear/Tear $1 
    • 1 Ruric Thar, the Unbowed $1
    • 1 Notion Thief $1
  • M14
    • 4 Young Pyromancer $1 
  • Commander 2013
    • 4 True-Name Nemesis $15 (bought 4 mind seize sets and resold the boxes for $20 without the TNNs)  
    • 1 Toxic Deluge $11
  • Theros
    • 4 Swan Song $2
  • Born of the Gods
    • 4 Spirit of the Labyrinth $2 
  • Journey Into Nyx
    • 1 Keranos, God of Storms $8 
  • Conspiracy
    • 1 Dack Fayden $22
    • 1 Council's Judgment $9
  • M15
    • 2 Reclamation Sage $0.50 
    • 4 Chief Engineer $1 (don't judge me)
  • Khans of Tarkir
    • 4 Treasure Cruise $1
    • 4 Dig Through Time $8 
    • 4 Jeskai Ascendancy $1
  • Fate Reforged
    • 4 Gurmag Angler $0.50
    • 2 Tasigur, the Golden Fang $9 
    • 3 Ugin, the Spirit Dragon $28
  • Dragons of Tarkir
    • 1 Kolaghan's Command $2
    • 3 Sidisi, Undead Vizier $5
  • Magic Origins
    • 4 Molten Vortex $1.50
    • 4 Dark Petition $2

The following cards are ones that a legacy player might have purchased during this time, but I didn't, mostly because I haven't felt the need to play the the decks they would go in lately.
  • Vryn Wingmare
  • Monastery Mentor
  • Eidolon of the Great Revel
  • Containment Priest 
  • Mana Confluence
  • Brimaz, King of Oreskos
Even with some really bad buys ($100 on Temporal Mastery alone and the Geists of Saint Traft that were only relevant for about a year), that's still only $1102 spent over 4 years maintaining a legacy collection.  That breaks down to $275.50/year and $22.95/month.  It's still not a cheap hobby by any stretch, but I'd wager if you took a poll of current standard players and asked how much they were spending on cards, the vast majority of them are spending more than $22.95 a month.

In fact, if you look closely you can see that this is all heavily tilted towards 2011/2012, where Innistrad and Avacyn Restored were loaded with $20+ mythics I bought.  From Innistrad to Planechase 2012 I spent $593.  From Return to Ravnica forward, I spent $509.  That means in the 3 years from Return to Ravnica to Magic Origins, I averaged  $169.67 a year, or $14.14 a month.

I don't really have a point for all of this, I just found it kind of interesting to sit down and work out.  The numbers are pretty much where I expected them to be.  This obviously ignores the cost of getting the initial collection going, but that part has been covered over and over and I don't think I've ever seen anyone break down these numbers quite like this. I hope you found it interesting, if not particularly useful or relevant.

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Legacy Brew Spotlight: Dark and Stormy

Lately I've been a little bored with my available options in legacy, so last night I decided to try something goofy at my local shop.  I was playing around with Dark Petition in storm, and while I liked it in Caleb Scherer's ANT list, I felt like there was more that could be done with it.  After some quick googling, I happened upon this article from Carsten Kotter, where he goes through several potential storm builds.  I decided to take a tweaked version of his Legacy Perfect Storm decklist to the tournament.  Here's what I played.


Spells Lands
Card Selection
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Gitaxian Probe
2 Preordain
2 Dig Through Time
1 Sensei's Divining Top
Interaction
4 Force of Will
2 Duress
2 Thoughtseize
Mana
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Lotus Petal
2 Rain of Filth
Action
4 Dark Petition
1 Past in Flames
1 Tendrils of Agony
4 Polluted Delta
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
2 Island
1 Swamp
Sideboard
3 Xantid Swarm
3 Abrupt Decay
3 Massacre
2 Flusterstorm
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Tropical Island

Considering I started building this at 5:30pm, and the tournament started at 7:00pm, there are obviously several things I'll change before playing it again, but it was a perfectly good place to start.  I know tournament reports are usually pretty boring but it's hard to explain how the deck actually plays out without one.  I've tried to include conclusions about the deck's construction as they came up during the rounds.  Here's how things went.

Round 1
U/B Countertop Control

This was a regular at our shop who has an extensive legacy collection and never plays established decks, so I had no idea what to expect.  I mulled to five (seeing no lands) and had to keep 3 lands, Dark Petition, Force of Will.  We started off both with undergrounds, fetches, brainstorms, thoughtseizes, and forces, mostly just generically good blue and black cards.  Around turn 5 or 6 he brainstormed, then cast Counterbalance/Top back to back, which I was unable to respond to.  We played draw go for a while, he eventually stuck a True-Name Nemesis and started threatening my life total slowly.

The turn before he killed me I manage to bait a counterspell and a top flip with two Dark Rituals, respond with Rain of Filth, then sacrifice all of my lands, play a few Lotus Petals, and cast Dark Petition for a natural Tendrils kill.

Game 2 he mulliganed, then I led on a turn 1 Divining Top.  He played a turn two counterbalance, but I just spun the top every turn until I had the kill and a decay, cast decay EOT, then untapped and killed him with Force backup in case his last card in hand was Counterspell.  That hand wouldn't have beaten Flusterstorm, but thankfully he didn't have it.

Surprisingly, both hands won with natural tendrils kills, no Past in Flames.  It helped that he did some damage to himself both times with probes and thoughtseizes, but I was still impressed with the deck's ability to combo off without the traditional pieces.

Round 2
Shardless BUG

Game 1 went the way all Storm vs Shardless matchups go: he didn't draw Hymn to Tourach, so I won.

Game 2 I faced graveyard hate for the first time.  I kept a one lander with a preordain, shipped two nonlands to the bottom, didn't find a 2nd, and got wastelanded.  Fortunately for me he'd kept a two lander with one being the wasteland, and he couldn't find a second for a while.  He eventually played a Nihil Spellbomb and had to choose between leaving my yard alone so he could pop it in response to hurt Cabal Ritual and Dark Petition, or nuking the yard early to draw a card and look for land and keep me from casting the Dig Through Time he knew about.  He decided to blow it early, I discarded the dig to hand size, then eventually found a land, cantripped into a second, and used rain of filth to get my cabal rituals to threshold, then cast Dark Petition for Past in Flames.

I was surprised by what the Dig Through Time did for the decision with the Nihil Spellbomb.  I think he made the wrong choice, but it's still interesting that the digs are able to force people to behave differently with regards to graveyard hate.  He also aggressively used Deathrite on his turn to keep my yard small instead of holding it back to snipe something in response to a spell, which didn't end up being relevant but could've been.

Round 3
4 Color Delver

Game 1 I made a terrible keep, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Force of Will, Gitaxian Probe, 3 fetches.  He leads on a delver, I probe and see double force double blue card, never draw anything but land and rituals after that point and quickly die to the delver.  Uninteresting from a deck design standpoint.

Game 2 I keep a hand with Dark Ritual, Force, Dark Petition, Brainstom, Brainstorm, Ponder, land.  I fetch up a land and ponder into a second land and a second dark petition, take the land and pass.  He probes me, sees that I've got a slow developing hand, plays a delver and passes back.  I draw the Dark Petition, then brainstorm into Petal, Ritual, Probe.  I probe him and see absolutely no relevant interaction, just creatures and a pyroblast (he's tapped out).  I cast Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Dark Petition (getting Cabal Ritual), Cabal Ritual, Dark Petition (getting Tendrils), Petal, Tendrils for exactly 18.  (he probed).  Another natural tendrils kill, 3 on the day.

Game 3 I mull to 5, keep a hand with two lands, tendrils, preordain, and past in flames.  He leads on a mainphase brainstorm then passes back.  I preordain and he dazes.  He replays his land and plays a delver, I draw a ritual, play a land, and pass.  He doesn't flip delver, then plays two more delvers.  I draw another ritual and realize that i'm one mana short of killing the following turn if he has no interaction.  He of course flips all 3 delvers with a force of will off the top, swings for 9, and passes back.  I draw a lotus petal.  If Lotus Petal and the first cabal ritual resolve, then I can win through the force of will because I have enough mana to cast the Past in Flames and the Tendrils, but he's smart and counters the first cabal ritual leaving me stuck.  Oh well.

Round 4
Imperial Taxes

Game 1 my opponent mulls to 5 on the draw.  I cantrip and pass, he plays a Vial and passes back.  I cantrip again and find a force of will for Thalia, but on his turn two he doesn't have one.  I play another land and pass back, a little light on interaction.  His turn 3 he plays a 3rd land and casts Imperial Recruiter (which will probably get Thalia and then immediately enter play because of the vial on 2).  I Force Imperial Recruiter.  This is the first time all day Force has done anything special, but it definitely did something regular ANT wouldn't have been able to do very easily.  I would've needed a probe before a therapy to tag the recruiter, since therapy would absolutely have named Thalia in the dark instead of recruiter. 

He doesn't draw anything else relevant and I find the combo pretty quickly after that.

Game 2 I mull to 5, he has a turn 2 thalia.  I find a removal spell for thalia but he kills me anyway before I can put together the win.

Game 3 I'm back on the play, I probe him turn 1 and see a hand of Vial, Canonist, Thalia, Rest in Peace, three lands.  I play a fetch and pass the turn with a hand of Brainstorm, Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, Past in Flames, Dark Petition, second fetch, which is one ritual off of a turn 2 kill.  He plays the vial and passes back, I brainstorm into a second dark ritual, tendrils, brainstorm.  Put the brainstorm and tendrils back, untap, draw the tendrils, and it's academic from here. 

---

I ended up at 3-1, with my loss coming to a mull to 5 that featured a lucky force of will flip combined with a bad decision not to mulligan, which seems pretty good to me.  I think there are some really good things about this deck to consider going forward, so here are my thoughts in no particular order.

  • I had three natural storm kills without Past in Flames and two Turn 2 kills.  Both numbers are higher than I expected.  The turn two kill R3G2 would not have been possible with Infernal Tutor over Dark Petition, which is neat.
  • I only cast Force relevantly once, but it definitely had a huge impact on the game.  Being able to avoid a Thalia game 1 against death and taxes without getting lucky enough to tag it with therapy turn 1 is a big deal.  I liked having it, but I did find myself with Force but no blue card in hand several times.  It's possible only playing 3 is correct, or maybe replacing the 4th with Pact of Negation as Ari Lax suggested in one of his articles.  More games are definitely required to figure out this balance.
  • I only cast Dig Through Time once all day, but it was a sweet extra card to have available.
  • I'd like to add a single Grim Tutor to this list.  Probably where the Top is main, but maybe over the 2nd Preordain or 2nd Dig.  I'm not positive it's necessary but I think it could be good.  The lifeloss is less of a big deal without Ad Nauseam in the list.  The only reason I didn't play one last night was that I didn't think about it until I was at the shop and I had left my only copy at home.
  • The sideboard obviously needs help.  I included Empty the Warrens to give me something to do against Rest in Peace or Leyline, since I was pretty all-in on Past in Flames, not realizing that Cabal Ritual and Dark Petition's graveyard reliance means I'm incredibly unlikely to do anything with a single Empty the Warrens.  The sideboard alternate win-con absolutely needs to have no reliance on the graveyard.  I think most likely it should be Young Pyromancers.  Xantid Swarm is far less necessary than in previous iterations of the deck because of the Forces, we can move the Tropical Island to the main, and only play a single Flusterstorm and that buys 4 slots.  Death and Taxes will still be a little rough because they have RiP but Pyromancer won't be very good against them, so I'll have to think about that more (definitely open to suggestions)
  • I'm not 100% sold on the discard configuration.  I do think having Force of Will means I'm more interested in playing targeted discard than Cabal Therapy, even though I'm still playing the probes, but maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe I should be playing more Thoughtseizes and fewer Duresses, but I feel like that only really matters versus Death and Taxes, and even then only game 1 because I'd usually rather answer their things on the board than try to get lucky and catch them in their hand turn 1.
  • I'm sure the deck name won't stick and if anyone ever does well at an SCG event they'll call it "Dark Ritual Combo" or something equally useless for comparing it to other storm decks, but I'm calling it Dark and Stormy for now because it fits and I like rum.
I'm definitely interested in thoughts from other people on the list, if you've tried anything similar and results if you give it a shot.  As of right now, this is what I'm thinking the decklist will look like next time I play. I'd like to find room for a second top but I'm not sure where. I figure I'll find out of the Grim is worth it and if it isn't I'll just go back to the top in that slot.

Spells Lands
Card Selection
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Gitaxian Probe
2 Preordain
2 Dig Through Time
Interaction
4 Force of Will
2 Duress
2 Thoughtseize
Mana
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Lotus Petal
2 Rain of Filth
Action
4 Dark Petition
1 Past in Flames
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Grim Tutor
4 Polluted Delta
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Tropical Island
1 Island
1 Swamp
Sideboard
4 Young Pyromancer
3 Abrupt Decay
3 Massacre
2 Xantid Swarm
1 Flusterstorm
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Sensei's Divining Top

Sunday, May 24, 2015

How do I know if my brew is Ready?

This post was inspired by a comment response I made in /r/legacy last week.  Apologies to those of you who don't speak legacy, but as it's the only format I play, I don't have any examples from other formats.


I brew a lot of decks.  I self identify as a Johnny/Spike (see this article if you don't know what that means).  I want to create something new and unique and I want to put my touch on every deck I play.  That said, I still want to win.  I always want to win.  Depending on the quality of the deck, sometimes I'm content with 2-2 and sometimes I think it should go 4-0, but I'm never content with just playing the deck if it can't put up results.

My quest for the next big thing means I'm always trying strange things at my local shop's weekly tournaments.  I've had to develop some shortcuts to figure out which decks are worth sleeving up and taking to the shop, though, because I still only get one shot a week to play something goofy and I want it to be worth it.  Once I've articulated a basic idea for what my deck concept does, whether it's a new combo deck or based around some underexplored synergy, I put together 60 cards, goldfish them a few times, and then ask myself the following questions.
  1. What exactly does this deck DO? There should be a basic plan that you can articulate. This is probably the same sentence that articulated your original idea.  Some classic examples are below.
    • Sneak and Show wants to put a single game winning threat into play with Sneak Attack or Show and Tell, and devotes all cards other than those 16 combo pieces to protection and filtering.
    • Delver wants to play one or maybe two aggressive threats and protect them until it wins while disrupting your mana to prevent you from stopping them.
    • Elves wants to play a hybrid combo/aggro deck that can win in one fell swoop with Craterhoof Behemoth but has a solid backup plan of attacking with guys they can flood the board with.
  2. How exactly does an average game against the 2 or 3 best decks of different strategies in the format go? Right now, I'd be asking how an average game against RUG, Miracles, and OmniTell would go. You don't have to be right, but you should have a one or two sentence answer that would describe it. 
    • If I were building mono green 12post, for example, I'd say about my Miracles matchup "I'll use all of my cheap spells to make land drops consistently, force them to counter every spell that would put a Primeval Titan in play, and win as soon as I resolve a Primeval or get enough mana and an Eye of Ugin".
    • If I were building Grixis Control I'd say about my RUG matchup "As long as I'm able to make my land drops I'll use True-Name Nemesis and Baleful Strix to control Tarmogoyf and Nimble Mongoose, I'll use burn spells to control Delver of Secrets, and eventually I'll use Dig Through Time to pull ahead on cards against a deck that has no built in card advantage"
  3. IF everything goes right, why would this deck be better than $SimilarDeck?  Most decks you come up with are close to something.  Aggro/Combo/Prison/Control/Tempo, the established archetypes have all been built around before.  Look at the closest deck to what you're building and explain why I should try it.  Cool Factor shouldn't apply here.  This doesn't have to be a perfect answer, and there will always be holes in it, but you should at least be able to create a theoretical situation where what you're doing is better than what's already out there.
    •  Recently I built a U/B Omnitell deck with 4 Dream Halls, 4 Griselbrand, and 2 Tendrils of Agony. My answer to why it would be better than normal Omnitell is that it gets to win the turn it combos off more often as well as playing a full sideboard instead of losing space to a wishboard.  It's backup plan of just Show and Telling Griselbrand is also better than regular OmniTell's backup plan of . . . . losing.
    •  I've put a lot of work into a U/W Chief Engineer prison/aggro deck.  It's very similar to Death and Taxes.  If it's better than D&T, it's because it has actual ramp to get to it's bigger spells (Mox Opal, Chief Engineer) and it's mana denial can also act as answers to creatures (Vedalken Certarch). 
  4. How likely is it that everything will go right? Once you know what your dream scenario is, how likely is it, and what happens when it doesn't go that way? The difference between Jund's dream scenario and below average game is a lot smaller than the difference between Belcher's dream scenario and below average game. Both of those are viable decks, you just need to understand what you're building and plan accordingly. If you're just as unlikely as Belcher to hit your dream scenario, then you'd better win the game when it happens. You don't want a situation where it's rare for everything to go just right, and when it finally does you just find yourself in a slightly advantageous board position.

There's no right answer to all of these questions, but asking them is the first step to noticing problems.  Once you've done this a bunch of times it'll all become second nature and you won't find yourself having to stop and ask them at the end because you caught all the problems on the way through the first time.  This test won't make your brews win every tournament you enter, but it'll prevent you from showing up with an 0-4 clunker that never has a chance.  There's nothing worse than showing up with a sweet new idea and realizing after round 1 that you're not going to win a match the rest of the night. 
I doubt much of this post is groundbreaking to any experienced brewer, but to those of you trying to get off the ground and wondering why you're not seeing real results, I hope you'll find these four questions help you show up to your local shop with a deck that's a little more ready for prime time.

Monday, January 26, 2015

Tournament Report - 8th with Grixis at SCG: DC

This weekend I played a variant on Eli Kassis's Grixis Control deck in the Legacy Premier IQ in Washington DC to an 8th place finish. I had no experience with this deck prior to the event, and basically threw it together Friday night because it looked fun and I didn't want to play my usual Storm deck in a field I expected to be full of people excited to cast Hymn to Tourach again.

Obviously Eli's list isn't viable as is anymore because of the banning, but I felt like playing 4 Dig Through Time might be good in the same shell. Because of the shifted metagame, I also wanted more answers to Tarmogoyf than he originally played, and after much debate I settled on Terminate. Abrupt Decay has proven that 2CMC removal spells are viable, and with 5 burn spells to handle early threats I felt like I wouldn't be forced to run my Terminates into Dazes all that often, which is where Decay shines. I also increased my brick wall creatures by playing an extra Baleful Strix and an extra True-Name Nemesis. I wasn't sold on Dack Fayden, but I played the one copy because he is awesome and I was hoping that wanting him to be good would result in him actually being good.

I settled on this decklist.

Spells Lands
Creatures (10)
2 Baleful Strix
2 Snapcaster Mage
2 True-Name Nemesis
4 Young Pyromancer

Planeswalkers (1)
1 Dack Fayden

Spells(32)
4 Dig Through Time
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Gitaxian Probe
1 Preordain

4 Lightning Bolt
1 Forked Bolt
2 Terminate

3 Cabal Therapy

4 Force of Will
1 Counterspell
4 Polluted Delta
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Flooded Strand
4 Volcanic Island
3 Underground Sea
1 Island
Sideboard
3 Pyroblast
2 Hydroblast
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Null Rod
1 Notion Thief
1 Smash to Smithereens
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Vendilion Clique
1 Cabal Therapy
1 Massacre
1 Sudden Demise


Round 1 - Jameson Helfrich - U/R Delver

Like all delver decks, I felt advantaged in this matchup.  Strix and Nemesis present great walls they can't get through, and we have enough cheap removal to get to the bigger stuff.  I got game 1 after he got a hot start but ran out of gas.  Lost game two because I left Dack Fayden in the deck, drew him in my opener, and made a bad keep with a slow hand on the draw that I should've mulliganed because he had a very good start.  Got game 3 after fixing my sideboard and drawing removal early for his delver and swiftspear.

-1 Dack Fayden
-1 Gitaxian Probe
-4 Force of Will

+3 Pyroblast
+2 Hydroblast
+1 Sudden Demise

Round 2 - Chris Keller - Shardless BUG

I expected this to be a more difficult matchup than it was.  Lightning Bolt kept Deathrite in check, Terminate did a god job of handling Tarmogoyf.  He never resolved an Ancestral the entire match, and I cast a lot of dig through times.  At least twice I 2-for-1'd myself with burn spells to kill Jaces, but was able to get enough card advantage back from Digs that I got there anyway.  Overall I would say this matchup is even at best, and that I got fairly lucky that he didn't draw well.  In game 2 he had a sylvan library in play and couldn't find a 3rd land (and I was putting enough pressure on that he couldn't pay a bunch of life for cards).  In game 3 he spent a lot of time with green cards in hand and no green land, and I kept killing his Deathrites that would've helped him.

-1 Dack Fayden (even though he can take strixes)
-4 Force of Will (relying on Pyroblast for Jace, don't want Force vs the Hymn deck)

+3 Pyroblast
+1 Vendilion Clique
+1 Notion Thief

Round 3 - Shawn Casey - Junk

The highlight of this match: Game 1, turn 4.  Opponent says "here's a card you don't see in legacy often" and casts Siege Rhino.  It resolves, I get helixed.  I respond "here's another one" and cast terminate.  Won 2-0 after we both played discard on eachother to get to basically hellbent, and then I was playing Brainstorm, Ponder, and Dig Through Time and he wasn't.  I had some nutty Cabal Therapies that really helped here.

-4 Force of Will


+1 Sudden Demise
+1 Cabal Therapy
+1 Vendilion Clique
+1 Nihil Spellbomb

I didn't particularly want the clique or spellbomb here, I just didn't want Force vs his 10-12 discard spell deck.  I figured Siege Rhino was the biggest problem for me to deal with and between 4 Therapies, 2 Terminates, 1 Counterspell, and 2 Strixes I could probably handle it without Force.


Round 4 - Zack Kanner - RUG Delver

The RUG matchup is all about making my land drops.  If the game goes long, I almost can't lose.  Both games he kept hands that led on Ponders and were light on mana denial, I managed to land TNNs and Strixes and buy enough time for Dig Through Time to take over the game.

-4 Force of Will
-1 Dack Fayden

+3 Pyroblast
+2 Hydroblast

In testing I wasn't sure if I wanted Hydroblast in this matchup becuase it hits so few spells, but everything it hits is very important.  Countering a single burn spell thrown at pyromancer can win the game on it's own.  Plus RUG sometimes plays things like Sulfuric Vortex out of the board and having answers to that if necessary seems good.  I don't know that I'd rush to side them in if I didn't have space, but there's no reason to keep Dack or Force in this matchup, and they fill an excellent role.

Round 5 - Doug Azzano - Blaverick

I classify this as Black Maverick, but really who knows what the hell to call it.  It's definitely hatebears the deck.  I Cabal Therapied game one naming Knight of the Reliquary, which apparently isn't in the deck at all.  Game 1 was dumb because Doug flooded on 3 Mother of Runes and 2 Deathrites, and then just didn't draw any other threats.  I had a pyromancer out, but didn't have many instants/sorceries to fuel it, and every 1/1 I made would mean another 2 damage dealt to me by a shaman.  I finally lost when he Living Wished for Orzhov Pontiff, wiped my board, and swung with 3 moms and 2 shamans.

I got game two after he overcommitted into Massacre (which we agreed there was no logical reason for the Young Pyromancer/TNN deck to be playing), and then game 3 we ended up going to time.  I think I might've been able to pull game 3 out, but he had a Jitte on board and a Windswept Heath in play, and I shuffled away a Ponder with a Young Pyromancer that probably could've taken over because I expected him to fetch dryad arbor end of turn, equip the jitte, and hit me, so I kept looking for a burn spell that could answer the arbor.  Turns out he didn't play Green sun or Dryad Arbor at all.  The moral of these two stories is that sometimes it really pays to be the deck people don't expect.  I won a game because he didn't know what to expect out of my board, and I didn't win a game because I was playing around stuff he didn't have.

-4 Force of Will

+1 Smash to Smithereens
+1 Null Rod
+1 Massacre
+1 Sudden Demise

Round 6 - Myles Housman - RUG Delver

In round 4 I said RUG is all about making my land drops.  It is, and I didn't.  Game 1 I drew two Volcanics and an Island.  My turn 1 probe showed double wasteland, which he used on my volcanics, and I never managed to find another land before dying to mongeese.  Game 2 we both mulled to six, I kept a two lander with a probe and a ponder.  Probe reveals Fetch, Fetch, Pierce, Stifle, Snare, Ponder.  He ponders into a waste for my first land, and I never found an answer to his stifle, so my fetchland sat uselessly in play until I died without drawing another land.

I still think all delver matchups are positive with this deck, but even an 80% matchup (which this isn't) means you lose 2 out of 10, and this was one of 'em.

-4 Force of Will
-1 Dack Fayden

+3 Pyroblast
+2 Hydroblast

Round 7 - Richard Cox - Tezzeret Helm/Leyline Combo

This matchup is atrocious.  I lost game one after he played a Leyline of the Void on turn 3, then played Helm on turn 4, which I countered.  He put it on top with Academy Ruins.  I countered it again.  He put it on top again, and I didn't have a third counter.

Game 2 had an extremely unfortunate judge call.  I won't go deep into the details, but suffice to say that I screwed up maintaining the board state, he didn't catch it, and by the time we realized it and judges were called, things had progressed too far to reverse things, and the partial fix that was applied ended up heavily in my favor.  I apologized for the mistake, but we've all been there and it sucks all the way around when that happens.  I believe I would've won that game anyway, but it was still not pleasant for anyone.

Game 3 He opens with double leyline, which is essentially a mull to 5 unless he resolves a helm.  Probe reveals a helm in his hand, but he's short on mana.  I manage to stick a Pyromancer and we fight over a thopter foundry that he rebuys with Academy Ruins at least once.  The fights just generate more tokens for me, and I win while he has all of the pieces necessary to combo off in hand, and just can't get them into play.

-3 Dig Through Time
-2 Snapcaster Mage
-1 Forked Bolt
-1 Lightning Bolt
-1 Terminate
-1 Preordain

+1 Nihil Spellbomb
+1 Null Rod

+3 Pyroblast
+1 Smash to Smithereens
+1 Surgical Extraction
+1 Vendilion Clique
+1 Cabal Therapy

I went a little deep cutting most of my graveyard relevant spells.  Dig Through Time is a very important part of this deck, but if he's mulliganing to leyline some of the time anyway, I have no answers to it, and I didn't want to get stuck with a bunch of Digs in hand.  He opened both postboard games with Leylines on the board and I was very happy to draw relevant spells instead of digs.

Round 8 - Anthony Laflamme - Jeskai Control

I won a close game 1 while we were battling back and forth and I was 2for1ing myself to kill Jace.  We both resolved multiple Dig Through Times, and had tons of cards, but eventually I found a True-Name with him at 7 life, and he couldnt' find one of his 3 maindeck answers to it in time.

Game 2 He sided in the stoneforge package.  I had a fast start while he mulliganed and came out of the gates slowly.  I had a bunch of Pyromancer Tokens quickly taking over the game when he found stoneforge and searched for batterskull.  I could probably have made enough tokens to race the batterskull, but was able to cast Brainstorm into fetch into Dig Through Time, looking at 10 cards to find a copy of Lightning Bolt or Cabal Therapy to take care of it.  This is one of those cases where Dig just completely overperformed Treasure Cruise, allowing me to be incredibly selective and find the exact card I needed right then.  I found a bolt and a Force of Will, killed the stoneforge and was able to have Force of Will available for his next turn to seal the win.

-2 Terminate
-1 Forked Bolt
-2 Baleful Strix

+ Notion Thief
+3 Pyroblast
+1 Vendilion Clique

Quarterfinals - TJ Martin - Lands

The moment standings were announced and I found out I was playing TJ, I knew I was in trouble.  The decklist I ended up on is extremely soft to Lands.  Our match was pretty boring.  Game 1 he played a T1 Mox Diamond, Land, Exploration.  I forced Exploration and he passed.  He played a T2 Depths, T3 Stage, and the remaining countermagic in my hand was useless against Marit Lage

Game 2 I probe him and see Exploration, Gamble, Crop Rotation, Tabernacle, Port, and two fetches.  I force his turn 1 Exploration, Cabal Therapy his Gamble, and get a Pyromancer down with a token friend.  Unfortunately he draws a wasteland and a loam, and with the Tabernacle is able to keep me at either 1 or 2 creatures the whole game because I couldn't pay upkeep.  I eventually got him to 3 before having to give up the pyromancer and start digging for a Lightning Bolt and a fetch for my last red source, but I didn't find it before he found Marit Lage, ending my day.

-2 Terminate
-1 Forked Bolt
-1 Dack Fayden
-1 Baleful Strix

+1 Nihil Spellbomb
+1 Smash to Smithereens
+1 Surgical Extraction
+1 Vendilion Clique
+1 Cabal Therapy

Conclusions

The deck is sweet, and some version of it can exist in the metagame because of how good it naturally is against Delver.  You play control against the delver decks and you play the beatdown against the control and combo decks.  There are obviously several changes I would make.

  • Dack Fayden simply wasn't good.  I suspect he was better in this deck when fueling Cruises, but he wasn't worth the card disadvantage just to fuel Dig.  I played against only 2 Stoneforge decks, neither which had mystic as plan 1, and the 1 tezzeret deck i played against had a ton of artifacts, but not that many worth taking control of.  Controlling the Chalice of the Void doesn't help much, y'know?
  • I suspect the deck needs an 18th land.  I lost 8 games on the day.  Of those 8, 4 of them were because I didn't have enough mana to cast my spells when my opponent attacked my manabase.  It should probably be either a mountain, to help against Wasteland (and probably switch the fetches around a bit as a result), or a Wasteland.  This deck is obviously not interested in being a mana denial wasteland deck, but having access to Wasteland in the 75 would've been nice for things like Academy Ruins or Tabernacle.  Buying even a single turn without Tabernacle game 2 of the quarterfinals would've won me that game before he stabilized. 
  • I like to mention this because people sometimes read more into sideboards from these tournaments than is actually there: I never cast Notion Thief, Null Rod, Grafdigger's Cage, or Vendilion Clique all day.  I only cast Nihil Spellbomb, Smash to Smithereens, Surgical Extraction, Massacre, and Sudden Demise once each.   I leaned heavily on the blasts and the 4th Therapy, but other than that it's all pretty flexible.
  • I'd like a bounce spell in the 75.  Oddly enough I routinely felt like I would've been happy with a Cryptic Command in hand, but I don't think there's room for it in the maindeck and I'd never side it in.  Eli played Recoil, and maybe that's the right answer, but even something like Vapor Snag would've been useful at buying a turn or two against Marit Lage. 
  • Counterspell and Terminate were the last three cards in the deck, and they both dramatically overperformed.  I wouldn't play this with fewer than 2 Terminates.  I probably wouldn't play it with more than that either, but they were excellent.  
  • I never played against a traditional combo deck, so I can't speak to the Show and Tell/Storm matchups.  I suspect they're pretty decent but not amazing.
  • Even in a world without maindeck Pyroblasts everywhere, I really liked the 2 Hydroblasts in the board.  They were relevant versus bolts on my pyromancers, and while it only came up in testing and not the tournament itself, they were very relevant versus something like Blood Moon or Sulfuric Vortex.

If I were playing this deck in a tournament tomorrow, this is what I would register. If you're feeling spicy, replace the second Counterspell with a Cryptic Command or the Vapor Snag with a Recoil.


Spells Lands
Creatures (10)
2 Baleful Strix
2 Snapcaster Mage
2 True-Name Nemesis
4 Young Pyromancer

Spells(32)
4 Dig Through Time
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Gitaxian Probe

4 Lightning Bolt
1 Forked Bolt
2 Terminate

3 Cabal Therapy

4 Force of Will
2 Counterspell
4 Polluted Delta
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Bloodstained Mire
4 Volcanic Island
3 Underground Sea
1 Mountain
1 Island
Sideboard
3 Pyroblast
2 Hydroblast
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Null Rod
1 Vapor Snag
1 Smash to Smithereens
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Vendilion Clique
1 Cabal Therapy
1 Massacre
1 Sudden Demise

Friday, November 21, 2014

Cube Design: A Series of Shifting Archetypes

    Cube design has evolved significantly since I built my first cube in 2008.  At the time, the format was described to me as "all the best cards".  I went through all of the cube lists I could find, and if I owned a card, and someone else was cubing with it, it went into my cube.  That strategy didn't last very long, however, and I have slowly tweaked my cube over the past six years to create an environment where every card has a purpose.  Over that time the goal of my cube has changed significantly.  Instead of trying to play all the best cards, I'm trying to create a fun drafting environment that constantly provides new challenges for my playgroup.  As a result, I tend to view my cube as the sum of it's parts, instead of as a collection of individual powerful cards.

    Typical cubes have some elements of aggro, midrange, and control represented in each color.  The most basic cube might give each color an identity, and then you can mix and match the five color identities to create ten to fifteen different strategies.  Cube design, though, is much deeper than that.  Cube designers have the ability to shape the way each strategy plays out.  Even for a strategy as simple as red aggro, there are decisions to make.  One cube might focus on one drops, playing even questionable cards like Reckless Waif or Tattermunge Maniac.  Another might focus more on the burn spells in the deck, playing cards like the often inefficient but occasionally powerful Brimstone Volley.  There are a surprising number of ways to build even the most straightforward strategies, but the choices don't stop there.

Managing The Available Archetypes


    That power can be expanded to control over distinct archetypes.  I use the term archetype to broadly refer to any specific strategy being supported by the cards in the cube, whether it's something as specific as a combo deck (Splinter Twin) or as broad as a color strategy (Green Aggro).  I lump archetypes into three classes:
  1. Archetypes where all cards are good on their own
  2. Archetypes with one or two build-around cards, where other cards are good on their own
  3. Archetypes with cards that are only good in that archetype, but that are powerful when assembled together

Class 1 - Independently Good Pieces


    Reanimator is often one of the first archetypes beyond aggro, midrange, and control that cube designers run into.  It is one of the easiest combo decks to support in a cube, and most of the cards required to support it are good on their own in a variety of decks.  Discard outlets like Liliana of the Veil or Looter il-Kor see play even when you aren't trying to discard.  Reanimation spells have value in midrange attrition decks.  Reanimation targets can be selected so that ramp decks can easily cast them.  New cube designers are drawn to Reanimator because it's fun, interesting, and simple to add.

    Unfortunately there aren't nearly as many interesting archetypes in this class as cube designers might like.  It's rare that the key combo piece in the archetype (Reanimate, for example) is a perfectly fine card in an average midrange deck.  Still, there are several archetypes available in this class if you want to explore them (for example, some variations of Tokens).

Class 2 - Building Around a Card or Cards


    Wildfire is the perfect example of a build-around archetype.  In order to build a good Wildfire deck, you need three things: Artifact ramp, Creatures or Planeswalkers that don't die to Wildfire, and Wildfire effects.  Mana rocks, big creatures, and planeswalkers will always be good in a variety of decks, so the only fringe cards that get included in the cube in order to support the archetype are the Wildfire effects themselves.

    The quantity of effects you include varies depending on how you want to support the archetype.  If you only include Wildfire, the deck may come together when someone sees it in pack 1, but it's unlikely to get built if Wildfire happens to be in pack 3 because drafters can't draft early expecting to see it.  On the other hand, if you include Wildfire, Burning of Xinye, and Destructive Force, you're increasing the chances of one of the three being in pack 1 and encouraging drafters to pick it while simultaneously making it easier to pick artifact mana early planning to pick up a Wildfire effect later.  With multiple copies in the draft, it's far easier to count on seeing one.

    Increasing the density of the build-around card also increasing the quality of the deck once drafted, which increases the desire of drafters to play an offbeat strategy.  If the rewards aren't there for committing to something beyond a "good stuff" deck, people won't be incentivized to try something new.

Class 3 - Putting It All Together


    Storm is an oft-maligned archetype that tends to polarize the cube community.  Unlike the archetypes from the first two classes, storm requires a lot of cards that are only good in the storm deck.  Like the second class, you need the build-around card for the deck to work (Mind's Desire, Tendrils of Agony), but the support cards (like Heartbeat of Spring or Lotus Petal) are often useless outside of the deck as well.  This has two effects: The storm deck can be very difficult to draft effectively, and the draft can get cluttered with cards that most decks don't want.  The upside of this is that when the deck comes together it can be very exciting and create the type of games that many cube designers want to encourage.

    Storm is probably the most extreme example of this approach.  Another example is the more popular Pox deck, which has otherwise unplayable cards like Reassembling Skeleton, but requires less space in the cube than Storm does.  Finding the right balance that makes an archetype in this category draftable but doesn't generate constant 15th pick cards is the most difficult part of including one of these archetypes.


Finding the Lynchpins


    All three classes of archetypes influence the other cards you choose to include in your cube.  A cube that wants to encourage reanimation, for example, might choose to play Terastodon over Worldspine Wurm as a high end green creature, since Worldspine Wurm can only support the ramp deck and Terastodon can support Reanimator as well.  A cube that wants to play Sneak Attack might play Sundering Titan over Inkwell Leviathan as a Tinker target, since ETB effects are more desirable if you don't plan for your creature to stick around.  The key to making your cube function as a cohesive whole once you've included many disparate archetypes is finding the cards like this that support multiple archetypes.  Too many cards that are only good in one deck will find their way to the 15th pick in the pack if an archetype goes undrafted.

    As an example, one popular archetype these days is Red/White Tokens.  In recent sets red has gotten several incredible token enablers (Ogre Battledriver, Purphoros, God of the Forge), and those cards get paired with white's efficient token makers to create a unique deck that gives red some identity beyond aggro.  A cube that is trying to support Storm might decide to also support Tokens in order to give Empty the Warrens multiple decks to shine in.  Similarly, a cube trying to support Pox might also support Tokens in order to find room for Goblin Bombardment.  Having multiple decks that support some of the narrower cards can lead to more drafters competing for them, which prevents them from being in the way during the draft.

    The interaction between niche archetypes and the more basic strategies can help archetypes feel different every time you include them based on how the cube around them is configured.  A cube that supports Pox and Land Recursion (Life from the Loam, Crucible of Worlds) is going to find the Pox deck playing very differently than a cube that supports Pox and Tokens.  The first build will find Pox decks focusing more on recurring their own resources to stay ahead, while the second build will focus on generating multiple permanents for a single card to accomplish the same goal.  The first build will find Pox decks leaning more towards green as an auxiliary color while the second might find them leaning towards white or red.  By mixing up the environment every time you play an archetype, you can keep even old strategies appearing fresh.


 Changing Archetypes Regularly


    Of course, mixing up the environment only works if you're not playing the same archetypes all the time.  Some of the more linear archetypes have the downside of a fairly repetitive draft experience.  Drafters can get tired of there always being a Wildfire or Tinker deck they have to beat.  Drafters who don't like one of the archetypes that requires lots of support can get tired of seeing so many cards they don't want in packs.  It's important to recognize this when it happens and work to keep your cube from getting stale.
    The best way to resolve this problem is to constantly rotate archetypes in and out, tweaking them each time so they look different when they come back.  Since the cube environment is constantly changing, a strategy that wasn't good in it's original iteration might become much stronger the second time around.  Often new cards will come out that change the way a deck plays or make previously bad cards better in context.
    By constantly trying new things, you also give yourself permission to fail.  Sometime an archetype you're trying to support just doesn't work out for your cube (I'm looking at you Green Aggro).  It's important for drafters to know that you're willing to give up on things that aren't working.  If it took you far too long to cut the last offbeat strategy that didn't work, your drafters will be less excited about trying your newest one.  When you try new archetypes, don't get so caught up in the excitement about adding them that you can't see if they aren't working.

Signaling


    Changing the supported archetypes in your cube on a regular basis does have it's downsides.  If your playgroup shifts regularly and you don't have the same drafters every time, or if you have drafters who don't keep up with your changes regularly, a constantly changing cube can be a recipe for a disastrous draft.  For example, my cube used to push Reanimator pretty strongly..  After the deck dominated for several months, my playgroup decided to back off the strategy for a while and cut the two best reanimation targets while keeping only three reanimation spells.  Reanimate was still a perfectly good card to play in midrange, but it wasn't part of a turn 3 combo deck like it had been.  A player who doesn't draft with us often came, opened up pack 1, and first picked Reanimate in an attempt to force a previously strong archetype.  His deck ended up playable, but nowhere near the power level he expected at the beginning of the draft.

    This is a cautionary tale because experienced cube drafters have expectations based on what they see in the packs.  If pack 1 contains Sundering Titan, it's reasonable to expect that Tinker is in the cube.  Seeing Splinter Twin can lead to the assumption that the combo is being pushed and that there are at least four creatures to be drafted that win instantly (while seeing Kiki-Jiki lets you know the combo is probably supported, but doesn't tell you how much).  Even something as innocuous as seeing Thran Dynamo could suggest that a big artifact ramp deck is supported, since Thran Dynamo is far enough down the list of quality mana rocks that it's inclusion suggests there are a significant number of them in the cube.  As you make changes to the archetypes you support, make sure to consider the archetypes you aren't supporting anymore, and look to see if there are any cards that send mixed signals.



Moving Forward


    I'm planning to write a series of spotlight articles on different cube archetypes, including lessons learned from my attempts at each one.  Some of the attempts have gone better than others, but I think there is much to learn even from the archetypes that didn't work out for my playgroup.  If there are any archetypes in particular you want to read about, let me know.  If I tried that archetype, I'll bump it to the front of the list, and if I haven't, maybe I'll give it a shot in my next update.  I look forward to trying some new things and writing about them as I go.

Monday, November 17, 2014

Tri-Color cards - A Practical Experiment

Background


    Recently I was inspired by this post by Channel Fireball's Jason Waddell to give tri-color cards another attempt in my cube.  Like many cube designers I had slowly eliminated all tri-color cards from my cube over the past several years as I tuned and refined my list, cutting the cards that were commonly picked last.  Still, I was inspired by Jason's ideas on how to increase the chances of cards being relevant, and with all the sweet new goodies from Khans block I figured I'd give it a shot.
    I'll be assuming you've read Jason's article in my comments below.

Tri-Color Options


    The first thing I needed to decide was which 5 Tri-Color factions I wanted to support.  I'm no mathematician, but I believe I figured out all of the available options.  Aside from the obvious options of playing just the five shards or the five wedges, there are ten other configurations available. 


    I started off with the desire to play both Temur and Grixis, because I wanted to include Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker, and Maelstrom Wanderer.  There are only two combinations in the list above that include both of those factions.  I settled on the version in the top left: Bant, Grixis, Abzan, Temur, and Mardu.

Cube Construction


    My original goal was to play two cards in each tri-color pair, and cut two cards from each relevant guild in order to make them fit.  I never was able to settle on a second Mardu card I thought would actually draw people into three colors, though, and so eventually I just decided to only play one Mardu card and only cut one card from Boros.  In doing so, I ended up with the following multicolor configuration.


    In an attempt to further increase the incentives to play the supported three color combinations, I also included the uncommon tri-lands for each faction (although I decided to use Murmuring Bosk for Abzan).

Drafting and Gameplay


    I did two ten person drafts with the cube in this configuration.  I didn't take specific notes for the first draft but our consensus in discussion afterwards was that the tri-color cards were fun, but there was very little noticeable incentive to choose a faction.  In a 465 card cube, 10 cards here or there simply wasn't enough to shift the draft strategies one way or another.  Roughly half of the three color drafters in that draft were in supported factions, which means the support provided had no real effect on the draft.  In the second draft, we saw the exact same results.  There were only four tri-color drafters.  Two of them were in the supported factions, two were not.
    In both drafts, however, tri-color cards saw play.  People splashed to include them, people wanted to play with them, and they made space to fit them in, even the ones that arguably weren't the best for their strategy, because they were fun and interesting.  The consensus among the people I spoke with was that they enjoyed having the three color cards, especially the splashy ones that did unique things they couldn't get elsewhere, but that they didn't think all the extra stuff I did made a difference.  Before the first draft I made sure everyone knew which factions were supported, and everyone agreed that once the draft started, they promptly forgot which ones I had mentioned and it never seemed to matter.

Conclusions


    I've drawn two separate conclusions from the drafts we did with the cube in this configuration.

    If you want to support tri-color drafting in the way Jason suggests, you have to go further than I did.  Eliminate off color guilds entirely, instead of just backing off the support of them.  Actually decrease the available manafixing for those guilds and increase the fixing for the guilds you want to support.  Make enough of a change that it resonates throughout your cube.  Changing 14 cards in a 465 card cube simply wasn't enough to make a noticeable difference when you were looking at a pack during a draft.  The downside to this approach is obvious (and Jason mentions it in his article): The tri-color cards in existence just aren't deep enough to make it worth it.  You have to really warp your cube for the support make a difference, and when you do that you've made a huge change to your cube just so that someone can draft Siege Rhino.  Until we have better tri-color cards available to us, I suspect this approach won't catch on.

    The more interesting conclusion, to me at least, is the natural followup to the first one.  If changing 14 cards in an intentional effort to warp the cube in the direction of specific tri-color factions didn't make a noticeable impact on color balance, why not just play the few tri-color cards that are actually worth cubing with in a separate multicolor section, and forget about trying to balance it all?  There are few enough of them that you'd want to draft anyway that it simply won't matter.  Based on this experience, I have trouble believing that including only Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker and Maelstrom Wanderer in my cube would have any real impact on Izzet as a guild during a draft.  Two cards one way or another won't skew the draft to the extent that colors or guilds are any easier or harder to draft.

    I know some cube designers have long advocated unbalanced multicolor sections, and I'm coming around to their way of thinking.  The guilds are all deep enough at this point that I won't be unbalancing them anytime soon, but the next time I make changes to my cube, I expect to include a few of my favorite tri-color cards, and I won't worry about the color balance when I do so.