General CBS
- Thread starter James Stevenson
- Start date
That's what so great about the card. If your format can afford a 6cmc enchantment that doesn't immediately impact the board, it will completely transform a spells deck by itself.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Worried that random drafters might not force UWx for you?
is my spirit animal 
(note to self: draft a Jund deck next time!)
for "storming" off with spells I also like
I just realized how crazy this is with:
+12/+12!
and delve in general:
etc
Funny, to me at least, that it's anti-synergistic with the Izzet mechanic of Overload.I just realized how crazy this is with:
+12/+12!
and delve in general:
etc
Just bumping this question, because I'm still curious to see which guide formats have been the most useful/enjoyable for folks.
I really enjoyed using the archetype snapshot format in the past like:
Madness Berserkers: Aggressive deck converting Wheel effects to bursts of damage
The brevity is nice to take in a lot of information quickly and get a general sense of what is happening in a cube. The problem with this format for my next guide is that archetypes bleed into one another much more now. The snapshot format oversimplifies, and implies there are these X supported decks, and this is what they do, and this is how you should draft them to win....which is a bit antithetical to my current design goals.
Organizing themes based on shards, wedges, etc feels forced, and not as informative.
Right now, my most promising attempt at a guild analysis has been through illustrating it as a nexus of intersecting mechanics, and relies a bit more on a narrative. It doesn't provide decklists or snapshots, but provides spotlights on general mechanics and discusses the way they synergize with other mechanics in a color pairing. It gives a little more insight to the nuances present, but leaves room for imagination. I want the guide to be a useful reference for cube designers, but also a useful primer for my drafters. This format is a bit lengthier than I'd like. I prefer to say as much as I can in the fewest words. So I'm interested to see what cube breakdowns have been your personal favorite.
Last edited:
I think that for "small storm" to work, you need to be playing a critical mass of cheap cantrips, free spells and mana acceleration that other decks are also interested in.
Inscho has a great list of enablers and I would add:
Pentad Prism is a mana investment for the turn you go off. Bonus points if you have something to do with sacrificing artifacts and/or proliferate. Harrow isn't free, but it only costs "one" mana since you get untapped lands. Petition gives you mana + tutor which is perfect for going off.
As for payoffs, don't forget
Experimental Frenzy can be played in a storm deck and low to the ground aggro decks alike.
Conjecture isn't exactly storm, but you can get a lot of value from playing cheap spells and it feels almost like the real thing.
Onyx has the same downside as Thousand-Year Storm in the sense that you need to untap before you go off, but she actually gives you the tools to do so with her minus ability.
At least, that is my understanding of small storm!
Inscho has a great list of enablers and I would add:
Pentad Prism is a mana investment for the turn you go off. Bonus points if you have something to do with sacrificing artifacts and/or proliferate. Harrow isn't free, but it only costs "one" mana since you get untapped lands. Petition gives you mana + tutor which is perfect for going off.
As for payoffs, don't forget
Experimental Frenzy can be played in a storm deck and low to the ground aggro decks alike.
Conjecture isn't exactly storm, but you can get a lot of value from playing cheap spells and it feels almost like the real thing.
Onyx has the same downside as Thousand-Year Storm in the sense that you need to untap before you go off, but she actually gives you the tools to do so with her minus ability.
At least, that is my understanding of small storm!
Experimental Frenzy is also fun with Exploration effects. I'm a fan. I should reconsider it for my cube as cards in hand easily become cards in the yard to profit from.
Similar to Onyx, there's:
Which doesn't count copies, but is cheap and can end games quickly if left on the board.
Similar to Onyx, there's:
Which doesn't count copies, but is cheap and can end games quickly if left on the board.
Last edited:
Thousand-Year is definitely the way to go for most environments. Add some Magecraft for extra payoff.
I'm only supporting a bit of storm because it was a keyword in the original Onslaught block and because a storm count of 2-4 is fine in such a low powered format. I wouldn't want to make anyone go for a 10x Tendrils.
I'm only supporting a bit of storm because it was a keyword in the original Onslaught block and because a storm count of 2-4 is fine in such a low powered format. I wouldn't want to make anyone go for a 10x Tendrils.
To be honest, I can't think of an example of a 'guide' that has really stood out as a prime example of how to do it.Just bumping this question, because I'm still curious to see which guide formats have been the most useful/enjoyable for folks.
I really enjoyed using the archetype snapshot format in the past like:
Madness Berserkers: Aggressive deck converting Wheel effects to bursts of damage
The brevity is nice to take in a lot of information quickly and get a general sense of what is happening in a cube. The problem with this format for my next guide is that archetypes bleed into one another much more now. The snapshot format oversimplifies, and implies there are these X supported decks, and this is what they do, and this is how you should draft them to win....which is a bit antithetical to my current design goals.
Organizing themes based on shards, wedges, etc feels forced, and not as informative.
Right now, my most promising attempt at a guild analysis has been through illustrating it as a nexus of intersecting mechanics, and relies a bit more on a narrative. It doesn't provide decklists or snapshots, but provides spotlights on general mechanics and discusses the way they synergize with other mechanics in a color pairing. It gives a little more insight to the nuances present, but leaves room for imagination. I want the guide to be a useful reference for cube designers, but also a useful primer for my drafters. This format is a bit lengthier than I'd like. I prefer to say as much as I can in the fewest words. So I'm interested to see what cube breakdowns have been your personal favorite.
It's interesting you say guide, because that implies you're almost writing it for the players. But I think here, you're more writing it to be understood by other cube designers. So I think for me at least, I would be more interested in understanding what your design principles and intentions were, and how you think the content displays that. There's probably two separate guides, for different audiences.
I think the archetype format is good to illustrate this. For the reader it whets their appetite for what is possible when drafting the cube but doesn't present them with all the answers. Traditionally this would be what each of the guilds do, but I think for me, you and other similar design approaches it's about what the themes and intentions are - so an example might be, I dunno, self mill. (As an aside, I think it's important when describing a them to differentiate between the enablers and pay-offs and not just chuck them in together. Personally it annoys me when somebody describes an archetype as 'graveyard' or 'madness' when it's more sophisticated and distinct than that).
I guess maybe the other thing would be to describe some of the more unusual card choices (though again that's subjective) or some of the things which are exciting you as a designer - what's 'unique' or different about your cube, and what kind of things could the drafter experience. Maybe another thing is talking about some of the challenges/struggles in trying to force a particular theme in?
Now of course, I'm going to have to take my own advice when I write mine up...
Right. Finding an adequate way of organizing the information is just so challenging. There's so much to say and so many ways to say it!
I feel you. I'm currently differentiating between mill vs self-mill vs dredge, discard vs looting, recursion vs reanimation, hand flicker vs blink...lol
All good suggestions. Thanks!
Yessssir
If you want to keep the exploration aspect of your cube alive, maybe that is too much differentiating for the player guide. For the cube designer guide, go nuts!
I personally like the small archetype snapshots with 6ish cards. You lose some subtlety, but the message is transmitted efficiently.
Cool, yeah....maybe I’ll stick with that but with more accompanying text about the cube. It seemed like people enjoyed it. I suppose I can also select cards so that when you look at all of the archetypes of a guild next each other you see more intersections and possibilities beyond what is highlighted.
I feel like if someone handed me a guide for a game I already know how to play, I wouldn't read it. I also can't imagine my playgroup being interested in that, but maybe that's unique to us.
If the decks you're supporting are too complex for your players, maybe different decks is a better solution? Or add some intentionally simple decks or brutally obvious signposts to the draft. Empyrean Eagle. for example, is a guide on its own. There's no question what you're supposed to draft with that one.
If the decks you're supporting are too complex for your players, maybe different decks is a better solution? Or add some intentionally simple decks or brutally obvious signposts to the draft. Empyrean Eagle. for example, is a guide on its own. There's no question what you're supposed to draft with that one.
I've always subscribed to this philosophy of minimal primer because no one will read it if it's too large, but there's the matter of opening things in the right pack. What if Empyrean Eagle is in pack 3?
I'm thinking of showing the archetypes just by listing them out and showing a card of each color that they are in, maybe plus a one liner like @inscho said.
Once, I was going to do a slideshow with one slide per archetype, but my wife said "this is going to be super boring" and decided to put it in one single slide. So she put in that slide a picture of each archetype like this:
It was a fun minigame to start the night to figure out what each one meant. This was one of the easy ones
Guide was maybe a poor choice of words...I don’t want to instruct people how to draft my cube
For some context...Several people in my group have/had their own cubes and can appreciate it from a design perspective. All have some experience with cubing and may come to a draft with expectations when they see a sneak attack for instance. Many have drafted my cube multiple times and want to know what has changed. Many of the guys will pore over a new set’s spoilers and read set analyses before drafting. A primer is good to give someone a rough idea of what to expect. But ultimately it’s more for the cube community than my drafters
My cube isn’t the most approachable, and I’m okay with that. I think it offers a unique creative experience that is valuable. It’s an acquired taste that’s not for everyone. But there are others in my group that have more beginner friendly cubes whether it be the person with the classic bordered cube or the peasant cube. I used to stress out over the complexity of my cube, but when I started to alter my design to compensate I started to like the cube less. I’m just accepting it for what it is now.
For my usual group, only one other person curates a cube and it's really out there. Also, only a few people draft regularly--for two of them, my cube was their fourth (?) draft experience ever, though they'd been playing EDH for about six months by then and could handle complexity. This is what I wrote as a primer both on drafting and on my cube in particular:
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CUBE AND NORMAL MAGIC
Lands--cubes host a bunch of lands. In mine, you can expect to see 2 in each pack or so. They tend to be good, so if you see a land in your color combination, prioritize it!
Duplicates--there are no duplicates in most cubes, and that's true here with the notable exception of Ash Barrens, of which there are 10 for fixing purposes.
Card quality--cards tend to be both better and more complex. Read things carefully, as you won't see any vanilla cards!
Colors don't matter--there SHOULD be an aggro deck and a control deck for every color pairing, I think. However, that means that you can't just pick every card in a color combination and expect to do well.
This is not a powermax/MTGO cube--we have no instawin combos (I think), and no colors should be significantly better than others (lookin' at you, blue).
THEMES-- THINGS TO LOOK OUT FOR
Azorius--Blink. Recycle your enter/leave the battlefield triggers for fun and value!
Dimir--Ninjutsu/steal your shit. Your 4-drop? My 4-drop. Plus, your creatures transform into sneaky ninjas.
Rakdos--The Mosh Pit. Sure, you'll get a black eye--but you should've seen the other guy.
Gruul--Gruul. ...what? Okay, we ramp and stomp and like lands a bit.
Selesnya--+1/+1 Counters. Help a comrade out, won't you?
Orzhov--Worthy Sacrifice. Gain value from things dying--and from bringing them back.
Golgari--You Gonna Eat That? Those Orzhov punks like things dying and being brought back. We just like things existing in the graveyard.
Simic--Value Town. Look, I can't actually stop you from playing EDH, but if you play Simic we will have to hold a ramp-and-drawing-cards intervention.
Izzet--Spells Matter. They sure do, so play a lot of them and get rewarded for it.
Boros--Crush Them. Make lads, make the lads go to the gym, give them equipment, and take no prisoners.
-----------------------------------
Anyways, my philosophy was to keep things simple and fun. Did it help anyone? Maybe, I dunno, but it kept me from overthinking it. As Alfonzo Bonzo and inscho are saying, what you write will really depend on your audience. I know that mine has a short attention span, so I wrote descriptions like the ones you'd find on the back of the old theme decks (if you're reading this and part of my playgroup, no offense). We also tend to not spike things too hard, and I knew that this would be a much more complex adventure than any we'd taken together before then in terms of draft set, so I wanted to keep the atmosphere lighthearted.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CUBE AND NORMAL MAGIC
Lands--cubes host a bunch of lands. In mine, you can expect to see 2 in each pack or so. They tend to be good, so if you see a land in your color combination, prioritize it!
Duplicates--there are no duplicates in most cubes, and that's true here with the notable exception of Ash Barrens, of which there are 10 for fixing purposes.
Card quality--cards tend to be both better and more complex. Read things carefully, as you won't see any vanilla cards!
Colors don't matter--there SHOULD be an aggro deck and a control deck for every color pairing, I think. However, that means that you can't just pick every card in a color combination and expect to do well.
This is not a powermax/MTGO cube--we have no instawin combos (I think), and no colors should be significantly better than others (lookin' at you, blue).
THEMES-- THINGS TO LOOK OUT FOR
Azorius--Blink. Recycle your enter/leave the battlefield triggers for fun and value!
Dimir--Ninjutsu/steal your shit. Your 4-drop? My 4-drop. Plus, your creatures transform into sneaky ninjas.
Rakdos--The Mosh Pit. Sure, you'll get a black eye--but you should've seen the other guy.
Gruul--Gruul. ...what? Okay, we ramp and stomp and like lands a bit.
Selesnya--+1/+1 Counters. Help a comrade out, won't you?
Orzhov--Worthy Sacrifice. Gain value from things dying--and from bringing them back.
Golgari--You Gonna Eat That? Those Orzhov punks like things dying and being brought back. We just like things existing in the graveyard.
Simic--Value Town. Look, I can't actually stop you from playing EDH, but if you play Simic we will have to hold a ramp-and-drawing-cards intervention.
Izzet--Spells Matter. They sure do, so play a lot of them and get rewarded for it.
Boros--Crush Them. Make lads, make the lads go to the gym, give them equipment, and take no prisoners.
-----------------------------------
Anyways, my philosophy was to keep things simple and fun. Did it help anyone? Maybe, I dunno, but it kept me from overthinking it. As Alfonzo Bonzo and inscho are saying, what you write will really depend on your audience. I know that mine has a short attention span, so I wrote descriptions like the ones you'd find on the back of the old theme decks (if you're reading this and part of my playgroup, no offense). We also tend to not spike things too hard, and I knew that this would be a much more complex adventure than any we'd taken together before then in terms of draft set, so I wanted to keep the atmosphere lighthearted.
That's a good primer Zoss! It might be helpful for color pairs like Simic and Gruul to give an example of the types of cards or interactions those decks want to be playing. "Ramp and Draw" or "Ramp and stomp and like lands a bit" is a little vague, since players might not know exactly what that means in the context of your environment. Having said that, I think certain color pairs like Boros are easy to understand: go wide, make equipment, equip creatures, kill opponent.
This exercise is making me wonder what a primer for my Cube should look like... Maybe just a link to the 2014 world championships top 8 would do
.That's probably the coolest thing I've heard all dayNo joke, my primer draft includes a link to the 2001 extended metagame
Oh, absolutely that would be more helpful, but my players would never pay attention to something like that. Besides, it was the first draft ever of the cube, so even I was unclear on what the crucial cards would be. If they'd been draft fiends the way we all are here, I'd have taken a stab at what I thought was important, but given that their baseline of "lands matter" is "kind of like Zendikar?" I wasn't too concerned with it.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Download the front side art, upload it somewhere, put the image url of your upload in the Image URL field of the card in Cube Cobra.
There's a front side and back side URL now.
I could use some card not at all related to the DFC, I guess, but that seems weird.