General Is too good fixing causing 3-color good stuff?

[Rasmus Källqvist]

So this is an issue that has been talked about here a little bit that showed up during the draft I ran today. We had a full 8 man playing my cube sporting the classic double fetch double dual (abu+shock for me). Every single deck was 3 colored except for the winning RDW deck.

The issue of rdw beating mediocre unfocused midrange deck is as old as cubes. Part of this is curtsy to really efficent and easy to splash creatures I think, and possibly also really good mana bases.

But maybe I'm wrong since people do greedily splashed durdle decks even in legacy cubes running god awful mana bases. I brought up the idea of cutting back on the fetches but my drafters say they want to keep them in.

Do I just take a good look at what cards enable good stuff and cut them or is there a lot more to it?

 

[Alfonzo Bonzo]

Can you link to your cube?

Do you have an example of these three colour good stuff decks?

 

[blacksmithy]

I think it does indeed lead to a lot of 3-color decks, especially in a lower-power cube where you're less likely to end up with an overabundance of playables. (Obviously in cube the bar for "playable" is set higher than in retail limited.)
The thing about having lots of 2-color fixing is that if you go 3-color, you're tripling the number of playable fixers available to you. For example, I run 5 duals per guild. If I'm in a 2-color deck, I have 5 duals (plus rainbow lands and one-color fetches but shhhhh) that I can use to fix my deck. If I consider the possibility of splashing a third color, there's now 15 duals available to me. It's just math—more fixing available increases the odds of 3-color decks being built. Is that a bad thing? In my opinion, not really. But it does give cube designers a challenge in providing rewards for playing fewer colors.

 

[FlowerSunRain]

Is there a problem? Its sounds like these "mediocre unfocused midrange deck"s aren't edging out any other decks based on power level. Actually, if 7 people are drafting unfocused midrange decks (and losing to the one dude that just aggros out), maybe you should make those unfocused midrange decks less mediocre (and possibly more focused), because it sounds like that's what people want to play!

Honestly, the same good mana that lets people play splashed out durdle decks also lets wacky synergetic decks come together.

Short answer: I don't think good mana is the problem.

 

[Grillo_Parlante]

It does, which was part of what made signets so good (color fixes and ramps).

I don't know if I would rush to cut down on them though, unless you have something already in mind to replace them. Fixing is important, and this is probably a multi-faceted problem, rather than solely being an issue with the mana base.

 

[tibbelsandbitts]

So is the answer to cut duals entirely ? If you take away fixing people are far less likely to splash a 3rd color.

Im not saying its the right answer, but people would still draft 2 colors right? There isn't any good fixing in magic origins and im always 2 color.

 

[Diakonov]

If anything, this would provide even more justification for Wastelands and non-basic removal spells. I'm in the camp of letting players have access to lots of fixing, and including tools to punish that strategy.

 

[Rasmus Källqvist]

I think ultimately what I'm looking for is a way to promote a format where people draft more focused decks, ie follow certain guidelines I've put in there. I want decks to have more of a game plan than occasional synergy and more of a personality than just a pile of sweet cards.

 

[Grillo_Parlante]

I think you're probably better off looking to create 2 color deck incentives, and figuring out what changes would draw people towards drafting different decks. I don't know how updated your cube tutor list is, but I think the most obvious change would be to shrink the gold section down to 30 cards, and cut the three color incentive cards where you can.

The green spell based ramp/color fixers I also find tend to push people towards multi-color good stuff strategies. With all of the good fixing you have in your mana base, do you really need green as a fixing alternative? You have harrow, cultivate, utopia sprawl, farseek, birds of paradise, deathrite, sakura-tribe elder, mulch, wayfinder and edge of autumn color fixing in green. 20% of your green section is devoted to fixing, which dosen't seem necessary considering how good the fixing is in general in your mana section.

 

[Rasmus Källqvist]

That's a pretty good point. This relates a bit to what you've been talking about regarding power bands, I've been thinking about being conscious about negative space. Maybe people will gravitate towards certain decks if I limit certain effects to certain colors of the themes?

 

[Tzenmoroth]

I've found that most of the decks that come out of my cube are 2 or 3 color decks. Mono decks are super rare because if everyone else at the table is doing a different 2-3 colors, every color is being taken by multiple people so its hard to nab a deck worth of a single color. Even with minimal fixing, its also super easy to splash a second color to the point where I don't know why I wouldn't. Even in retail limited like FRF-DTK-DTK where there's basically no fixing, why am I not 2 colors?

I have also seen some good 4 color decks, but those decks tend to look like two color decks with two splashes and a bunch of fixing. I think its a combination of fixing and splashable cards that do it. I can be UW and just casually splash rg for Keranos, Prophetic Bolt, Thragtusk, Briarhorn if I picked up some fixing.

If you're environment is filled with 3 color decks and say, 2 color/2 splash decks, that's a whopping 40 options. Or an environment with 2-3 color decks everywhere is 20 color identities, as opposed to a zero-fixing environment with only mono and 2 color decks where there's only 15 color identities. I think having enough fixing to enable a variety of 3 color decks actually opens of the field relative to an environment without fixing, so I would argue this isn't a problem at all.

If you do want to have less 3+ color decks for whatever reason, less fixing and/or less splashy cards can really make those decks harder to draft since they do rely on both.

If the problem is that 3-color midrange is mediocre, then maybe you need more support for midrange archetypes. It could also be your players. I've seen powerful Jeskai, Sultai, Temur, Abzan, Jund midrange decks come from more competitive players and plenty of really mediocre random-stuff decks come from more casual players. More powerful ~5 cmc bombs can really help midrange as well as sources of constant value or mana sinks. Without seeing your list, I have no idea what your midrange decks are missing, they might just need more Oomph.

 

[safra]

you could also include more CC or CD costing spells to incentivize tighter splashes!

 

[shamizy]

One reason I never want to put actual duals into my list is that there's no real cost to using them in a given deck. I like that shocklands require the life payment or ETB tapped, that's a fine compromise to fetchable fixing. Having good mana is great, but too much of a good thing is often problematic. I see that you're running double fetch, shock, dual and check. I think if you cut the checks and change the duals to shocks it might do you some good. You'll also need some clear hate aginst 3 color goodstuff. I ran into this same issue recently when I noticed that I tended towards Grixis colored decks in draft b/c the fixing was so good (I only have Khans fetches + 2 Marsh Flats, other colors get Painland + Temple). To deal with this, I've put in a copy of Fulminator Mage and I'm looking to jump up to 2 or 3 Wastelands. Maybe taking a look at the CCs thoughout your cube will help. More costs of XCC will push people towards fewer colors than just splashing all the time.

You'll also need more incentive cards to push people towards certain strategies, maybe more clearly defined two color identities. When I designed my cube initially, I focused upon specific themes for two color pairs and then bled the effects slightly into others so that the theme was present but clearly defined in a given pair.

 

[CML]

often the cause is unimaginative drafting

 

[Rasmus Källqvist]

Then what sparks drafters imagination?

 

[RavebornMuse]

Then what sparks drafters imagination?

The best options for your problem, in my opinion:
1) Draft a cool 2-colour deck and show it off by doing well with it. If you can't do this, the fault is your list, not your drafters; drafters tend to be inclined towards the best there is available, and if your 2-colour strategies aren't on average better and more consistent than 3-colour strategies, then you can't fault them for picking into winning decks.
2) Punish them for running rainbow garbage with more playable LD effects. If they get screwed over more often trying to run rainbow value decks, they'll be less tempted by those lines of play. (This can wind up being a matter of trying to cut a cake with a sledgehammer, so be careful)
3) Cut out the boring multicolour "value" cards (like Electrolyze) and focus on multicolour value roleplayers (like Reaper of the Wilds). This goes a long way to encouraging more focused decks, I think, because without the really generic value effects (like Lightning Helix), there's less of an incentive into splashing into efficiency.
4) Up the counts of double-CC spells, which makes it harder to splash everywhere while rewarding focused lists. This is not as bad as it sounds. Around here, 3-colour lists can still get away with double-CC things often enough, at the cost of playing them occasionally a turn or two behind the 2-colour lists. It all balances out in the end.
5) Soften the manabase. See shamizy's comment, which is totally on the money.

Remember: whatever you allow will be abused. If there's very little reward for imaginative deckbuilding, people will spare themselves the effort of thinking and just do whatever is easiest and best.

 

[Grillo_Parlante]

That's a pretty good point. This relates a bit to what you've been talking about regarding power bands, I've been thinking about being conscious about negative space. Maybe people will gravitate towards certain decks if I limit certain effects to certain colors of the themes?

Yes, they will. I generally find it difficult, however, to think in terms of negative space.

This is kind of a tricky discussion, because there is a macro element, where you are thinking in terms of promoting specific color relationships, but also a micro element where you are encouraging metagame relationships between different cards, across the cube. Both of those elements promote distinct feeling decks.

UG ramp in the penny cube, for example, gets fueled by green and blue untap effects; and the way the draft flows can greatly change the texture and strategy of any given UG deck, from being based around spikes in mana production, to being about consistant big mana production, to something of a hybrid. Even if the deck reaches out into a third color, the deck will still feel very G/U, because thats where its strategy is clearly rooted in.

And if you look at the list, there is only about 3 of those untap creatures in green, and about 4 of those untap effects in blue. While the cards are flexible enough where you can pivot around the draft if you start to get cut, if you want to draft a consistent version of that deck, you kind of have to be thinking in terms of that color pair. Thats the basis of that relationship. You can than meta the individual parts of the deck you are drafting based on what you think you are going to face.

I've moved away from bleeding themes into other color combinations (though I did that with the innistrad theme cube) as I find that this leaves certain cards awkwardly isolated, and any color pair relationships is really looking for a density of a certain effect within that combination to base a strategy upon anyways.

 

[Rasmus Källqvist]

Can you link to your cube?

Do you have an example of these three colour good stuff decks?

I don't have any lists sadly from that draft, and I'll post the cubetutor in my thread. I did notice though that 6 out of 8 drafters played green! The decks that got drafted were
2 Temur midrange decks, 2 Junk midrange decks, 1 Sultai control deck, 1 Jund aggro deck and finally me on Esper control and the 3-0 deck running RDW with Thalia and Imposing Sovereign.

I think a lot of the 3 color decks came from splashing for good stuff gold cards, so I'm definitely going look through my green section and do some very big cuts in the gold section (Which during that draft was still only around 27-30 cards so it's a matter of the cards themselves and not the number of them).

 

[Jason Waddell]

Too much fixing causing 3-color? Yes
Too much fixing causing "good stuff"? Not really. Let's be clear, you can have two color "good stuff" decks too. How much of a focused game plan your decks have depends on how your synergies and themes are implemented, how they're communicated, and how your drafters are. Cube is pretty complex, and taking "good stuff" is a pretty comfortable approach when you're not super well versed with the environment.

What kind of decks do you want your environment to produce?

 

[Eric Chan]

On the flip side, you can have three and even four colour decks that are tightly focused, well-oiled pieces of machinery, where all the moving parts mesh perfectly with one another. I guess it comes down to what you're trying to do with your environment - neither multicolour decks nor good-stuff decks are inherently a problem, but it might be that you want to decrease the emphasis on either one or both. But either way, I think it's important to focus on these as two separate goals.

 

[Grillo_Parlante]

No, his fixing actually is too good. I just drafted a B/G deck splashing for sun titan and inferno titan.

G/B/w/r Titan Splash from CubeTutor.com

Whether this deck is good or not I don't know, but the fact I can splash a double red and double white card and not feel terrible (sun titan being picked up in pack 2, and inferno titan picked up pack 3), is a pretty good sign theres a real issue here i.m.o.

Color me surprised as well, but I think its a combination of the ample green fixing, with a 56 land section, 54 of which are 2 color fixers at 360. For reference, I usually have somewhere between 40-45 mana fixing lands.

A green deck already has access to eight additional mana fixers, but can choose from an extra 10-14 (than I normally run) from the mana section in the main draft. That seems to make it very easy to pivot around the draft and make some greedy, speculative picks on powerful cards, that can then be jammed into a deck.

 

[Eric Chan]

Cubetutor draft bots are notoriously fickle, though, especially ones without a lot of draft data to train them. I recall Ben saying that for the first five or so instances of a card appearing, the bots don't look at the past draft data, and essentially make a random decision to select or not select that card.

Maybe it's because I'm so used to good fixing that I can't cube without it anymore, but I don't think 50 duals out of 360 is too many, unless you're specifically trying to encourage two-colour decks while discouraging three-colour ones. I'm currently running 54 in ~370, and while there was an initial "shock to the system", my playgroup's since adapted and are pleased as punch that they can stretch their wings a little bit.

 

[CML]

Then what sparks drafters imagination?

drugs and tournaments, i guess. i'd say drugs but then we get wtwlf. i'd say tournaments but then we get fatso buehler.

 

[Grillo_Parlante]

I still think it may be part of the problem: the combination of incentive cards and easy fixing working together to create a class of pseudo multi-color cards. Maybe this is part of why we've both been drawn towards changing the focus of our multi-color sections.

The difference between your fixing and mine, in the land section, is only about a 3-4% difference, and I think your land fixing is about equal with his at 15%.

 

[Diakonov]

No, his fixing actually is too good. I just drafted a B/G deck splashing for sun titan and inferno titan.

G/B/w/r Titan Splash from CubeTutor.com

Whether this deck is good or not I don't know, but the fact I can splash a double red and double white card and not feel terrible (sun titan being picked up in pack 2, and inferno titan picked up pack 3), is a pretty good sign theres a real issue here i.m.o.

Color me surprised as well, but I think its a combination of the ample green fixing, with a 56 land section, 54 of which are 2 color fixers at 360. For reference, I usually have somewhere between 40-45 mana fixing lands.

A green deck already has access to eight additional mana fixers, but can choose from an extra 10-14 (than I normally run) from the mana section in the main draft. That seems to make it very easy to pivot around the draft and make some greedy, speculative picks on powerful cards, that can then be jammed into a deck.

OK so I think this sort of highlights the issue that I have had with certain curve-toppers. Inferno Titan is straight-up the main offender here IMO. I'd start by addressing the goodstuff cards that don't have a difficult color-requirement before getting too concerned with the fixing. Personally, I want it to be possible for a green player to be in four colors if they're stretching a bit.

This goes right back to why Thragtusk is terrible for most environments. I know that Inferno Titan is RR, but at six mana that's still not very restrictive. Honestly I'd slot the card back into my cube if it were .