Laz
Developer
So, Reid Duke posted this:
Channel Fireball - The Definitive Guide to Cube Drafting
While I am sure we can argue a lot about its contents, and point out the meaning of 'definitive' as opposed to 'basics-of', it did cause me to consider a wider point. Given all of the people who simply link to a Cube Tutor list without providing a solid 'Cube Philosophy and List of Supported Archetypes/Concepts', I think it might be of interest to consider how to handle what essentially boils down to a 'long list of cards'. Maybe we will learn something about design on the way? Who knows? We will definitely learn some things about my preferences.
For me, I tend to have two metrics, 'sense of derision' and 'fascination'. 'Facination' happens rarely, though earning derision is easy, and get too high on that scale and I won't even reach the point of trying to work out how the thing plays (since I presume by this stage that there are no design principles).
So, step by step assessment, similar but more concise than Reid.
Cube Size, along with colour balance. Too large earns derision points. Exactly equal colour/guild sections also makes me suspicious.
Check the artifacts list. Are there Moxen/Sol Ring/Grim Monolith? If so, I tend to get a little derisive, those cards are really hard to balance. Exception: If there are multiple of each Moxen, then stop here, I am going to read your whole list, test draft it a whole bunch of times, try to work out how it plays, ask lots of questions in your thread, the whole shebang.
No Moxen? Are there Swords/Jitte? Very Suspicious...
Check count of non-basic lands. If there is less than 40/360, then I will assume that it is promising a a solid, well designed, lower power cube. If the cube goes back on that promise later, then I will feel betrayed and angry.
At that point I have to start looking at individual cards, which you would think significantly slows down how quickly I can become derisive, but you would be surprised.
Wurmcoil Engine? Derisive.
Show and Tell? Derisive.
Time Vault? Derisive.
Jace of the Mill 10? Derisive.
Wall of Denial? Derisive.
Carnophage? Derisive.
Storm Cards? Fascinated, but usually immediately afterwards, double derisive.
Somewhere during this I get a feel for how powerful aggressive decks are, which shapes how I interpret the rest of the format. If a Cube manages to suffer my attentions this long, I start looking at theme and archetype anchors and rewards and can actually provide meaningful feedback. Or I get overwhelmed trying to get my head around it (I admit, I am guilty of creating needlessly complicated and convoluted cubes, so forgiven) and go and watch cat videos.
How do other people handle being confronted by huge lists of cards?
Channel Fireball - The Definitive Guide to Cube Drafting
While I am sure we can argue a lot about its contents, and point out the meaning of 'definitive' as opposed to 'basics-of', it did cause me to consider a wider point. Given all of the people who simply link to a Cube Tutor list without providing a solid 'Cube Philosophy and List of Supported Archetypes/Concepts', I think it might be of interest to consider how to handle what essentially boils down to a 'long list of cards'. Maybe we will learn something about design on the way? Who knows? We will definitely learn some things about my preferences.
For me, I tend to have two metrics, 'sense of derision' and 'fascination'. 'Facination' happens rarely, though earning derision is easy, and get too high on that scale and I won't even reach the point of trying to work out how the thing plays (since I presume by this stage that there are no design principles).
So, step by step assessment, similar but more concise than Reid.
Cube Size, along with colour balance. Too large earns derision points. Exactly equal colour/guild sections also makes me suspicious.
Default suggestion line: 'Beware all of the good work you are doing in designing archetypes is going to be watered down by having so many cards. Things just won't come together very often'.
Check the artifacts list. Are there Moxen/Sol Ring/Grim Monolith? If so, I tend to get a little derisive, those cards are really hard to balance. Exception: If there are multiple of each Moxen, then stop here, I am going to read your whole list, test draft it a whole bunch of times, try to work out how it plays, ask lots of questions in your thread, the whole shebang.
No Moxen? Are there Swords/Jitte? Very Suspicious...
Default suggestion line: 'Having a really broad power curve is fine if you enjoy really swingy, high variance games, but games will come down to 'having it' far more than rewarding solid play'.
Check count of non-basic lands. If there is less than 40/360, then I will assume that it is promising a a solid, well designed, lower power cube. If the cube goes back on that promise later, then I will feel betrayed and angry.
Default suggestion line: 'Smooth mana bases are the best thing you can do for your cube'.
At that point I have to start looking at individual cards, which you would think significantly slows down how quickly I can become derisive, but you would be surprised.
Wurmcoil Engine? Derisive.
Show and Tell? Derisive.
Time Vault? Derisive.
Jace of the Mill 10? Derisive.
Wall of Denial? Derisive.
Carnophage? Derisive.
Storm Cards? Fascinated, but usually immediately afterwards, double derisive.
Somewhere during this I get a feel for how powerful aggressive decks are, which shapes how I interpret the rest of the format. If a Cube manages to suffer my attentions this long, I start looking at theme and archetype anchors and rewards and can actually provide meaningful feedback. Or I get overwhelmed trying to get my head around it (I admit, I am guilty of creating needlessly complicated and convoluted cubes, so forgiven) and go and watch cat videos.
How do other people handle being confronted by huge lists of cards?
