General Need Help with the Design Skeleton of a Cube.

Hello first post here and am having some difficulties laying down the bare bones for a cube I am trying to create. I've played a few cubes before, but this would be my first time creating one.

I am trying to design a 'draft simulator cube' based on a combination of both Ravnica blocks (and some custom cards). The cube is supposed to be built to support the 10 guilds and enforce two color decks with perhaps a hint of splashing for a third color. Additionally this cube isn't going for a strict 1 card limitation (there could for example 2 Goblin Electromancers in the cube).

Furthermore to enforce the draft feel, I was considering having the cube to be split into rarities of common, uncommon, and rare, where drafters would pick up 11 commons, 3 uncommons, and 1 rare to form a pack, and draft from there.

Now here's the rub, I'm unsure both how large I want this cube to be, and how many spots I can feasibly allocate to gold cards (which I define as cards with two symbols in the mana cost). The nature of the cube makes me want to have about 15-20 (we'll go with 17) cards multicolored cards (with a rarity ratio of 7Rares:6Uncommon:4Common) devoted to each guild, which means about 150-170 multicolored cards, not including multiples I might have at common/uncommon, so roughly 200 cards I estimate. However thanks to most of the the multicolored cards being toploaded into the uncommon/rare slots multicolored cards are not seen as oppressively in the draft, and hopefully won't be wheeled into the last picks for favor of more options.

Now in order to both alleviate both the problem of players trying to draft more than two colors, and limited spots in the cube, I have created the rule that at the end of the drafting phase, every person gets 3x of a guildgate of their choice. Fixing in the cube will be limited to most likely the keyrunes, and maybe either the cluestones or the karoos, but not both and definitely not all three.

So yeah, am I on the right track with what I have here, or am I just asking for failure?
 
Maybe try double rare slot, or a land slot, for better fixing saturation! Or downgrade some rare lands to uncommon rarity? I'd really recommend playing some fixing that isn't ravnica native because boy does crappy fixing suck in multicoloured environments.
 
Maybe try double rare slot, or a land slot, for better fixing saturation! Or downgrade some rare lands to uncommon rarity? I'd really recommend playing some fixing that isn't ravnica native because boy does crappy fixing suck in multicoloured environments.


Do you not think the free 3x guild gate rule might not help as much as I expect it to, in addition to the fixing available in the cube?
 
Furthermore to enforce the draft feel, I was considering having the cube to be split into rarities of common, uncommon, and rare, where drafters would pick up 11 commons, 3 uncommons, and 1 rare to form a pack, and draft from there.
Personally this is what I dislike the most about your plan, the sorting required pre and post event sounds like a real pain.

HOWEVER if your goal is to accurately simulate the true 'limited' environment as closely as possible then I think it's kind of a necessary evil. I also think having to draft your fixing is a necessary evil, especially since "gates matters" cards exist (in RTR block anyways). Allowing players free fixing opens up more of their picks to do things like hate powerful cards when their deck's cards are particularly weak in the pack, which is just miserable for everyone.

I already see a couple people pushing for better fixing, and while I think having rares on rares on rares for lands leads to more consistent decks/plays and overall better games / more fun at the expense of color screw, I don't think it's particularly necessary if everyone's decks are on relatively the same power level (no one is going to be playing a 15-rare deck) because of your rarity lock.

It sounds neat but I wouldn't want to own it, sounds like a pain to manage.
 

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
My instinct in a multi-color cube would be to just run a mixture of shocks and karoo lands. Say 3 karoo for every 1 shock, to recreate the sense of rarity. Keep in mind that will probably result in a slower environment overall. If you want something faster, I think you will probably have to go the shock/fetch route.

The guild gates seem like a bad idea since it favors control over aggro--unless you are trying to push aggro into a 2 color mold and control into a multi-color mold.

I'm not sure, but maybe Jason's polycube idea might be helpful for some of what you are trying to do.
 
If you've ever cubed with peasant or pauper land restrictions you might be more eager to play with rare lands.

Then again, if you are just trying to recreate Ravnica Guildpact Dissension then knock yourself out with bouncelands and signets and good old limited dragon cube!
 
Personally this is what I dislike the most about your plan, the sorting required pre and post event sounds like a real pain.

HOWEVER if your goal is to accurately simulate the true 'limited' environment as closely as possible then I think it's kind of a necessary evil. I also think having to draft your fixing is a necessary evil, especially since "gates matters" cards exist (in RTR block anyways). Allowing players free fixing opens up more of their picks to do things like hate powerful cards when their deck's cards are particularly weak in the pack, which is just miserable for everyone.

I already see a couple people pushing for better fixing, and while I think having rares on rares on rares for lands leads to more consistent decks/plays and overall better games / more fun at the expense of color screw, I don't think it's particularly necessary if everyone's decks are on relatively the same power level (no one is going to be playing a 15-rare deck) because of your rarity lock.

It sounds neat but I wouldn't want to own it, sounds like a pain to manage.


It's not actually as bad as it sounds. Have three boxes with each rarity. Pick up required amount of cards from each box to form a pack. Divide them out back into the boxes when you're done as you would do with lands in a normal draft, takes less than two minutes of hassle generally from what I've seen.

As for the 3x gate rule, I just chose gates because they were what I have on hand. As they are lands, I wouldn't mind proxying any form of land to replace the guild gates. Gates I don't think will be a major theme (if I choose to include it at all [though I haven't ruled it out]). The mention of neutering agro with the guildgates is a real problem however, and I might have to reconsider that. Maybe shocklands/checks (I feel like fetches might just make 3-4 colored decks common) instead of gates as the free lands, with some karoos peppered in at common?

I'm not trying to avoid having a dragon-like cube, but I'd like to keep it just under dragon-level, and have some of the faster aggro strategies work. It's why I'm not a huge fan of the signets, to much ramp and if they're in the draft probably to much multicolor fixing.

edit: Also do people think the aforementioned multicolored numbers are healthy for a cube?
 
If you are gonna do some sort of guildgate thing go all out and fill the set in with custom cards that make the theme work more.
I wouldn't rag on someone for trying to remake a format very much like RGD, I'm just not sure how you do that without the weird pack-colour spacing and including RTR block mechanics. I loved RGD, I'm not sure how much RTR I loved.


What parts of these draft formats did you like and what do you want your cube to play like?
Giving people guildgates to their styling seems supes weird though. Especially in a format with bounce lands already. Totally awkward right?
 
If you are gonna do some sort of guildgate thing go all out and fill the set in with custom cards that make the theme work more.
I wouldn't rag on someone for trying to remake a format very much like RGD, I'm just not sure how you do that without the weird pack-colour spacing and including RTR block mechanics. I loved RGD, I'm not sure how much RTR I loved.


What parts of these draft formats did you like and what do you want your cube to play like?
Giving people guildgates to their styling seems supes weird though. Especially in a format with bounce lands already. Totally awkward right?


I find that trying to replicate RGD would be to much of a hassle, it would require a lot of set up. The intent of this cube is to find a format speed in between Gatecrash and RGD (closer to RGD), while having all the guilds being a viable drafting option (which was untrue of certain guilds in RGD like Selesnya) every time one would draft. I liked how in RTR/GC guild identity was preserved much more, but I also really liked the speed and interactions of the RGD format. If I could somehow get a perfect balance of the two that would be ideal.

Gates as the given land is not the final plan, just a suggestion.
 
I feel like it's gonna be supes hard without a lot of fixing or some sort of weird hybrid concentration. That much gold without any structure, or any dynamics to ride on is gonna be rough. You might need more draft gimmicks and I really recommend decent access to rare lands. Seeing Random bounce lands and signets bounce around with no heed to what colours are represented in the packs might give you some weird vibes for your drafters and especially don't support the aggressive and guild oriented play of RTR and GTC.

Can you think of any sweet gimmicks to get that rolling? I wonder what the gold card (or effectively gold card) saturation would be. Remember in DGM where you pretty much wanted to draft monocolour cards from a GTC guild that pack and then see where it led you? Going heavy on hybrids from those blocks (and others) might let your drafters stay more open for longer.
 
I had to look up what you meant by 'dragon cube.' If you want something just under the level of a powerful cube you're not going to be able to rare-lock (make "true" packs based on rarity), you're going to end up with a peasant cube that has a sprinkling of rares, which is a far FAR cry from 'just under'
The mention of neutering agro with the guildgates is a real problem however, and I might have to reconsider that. Maybe shocklands/checks (I feel like fetches might just make 3-4 colored decks common) instead of gates as the free lands, with some karoos peppered in at common?
To be frank if you're rare-locking your packs and strictly looking at Ravnica and Return to Ravnica blocks, aggro does not need the mass of rare lands it needs to do well in other lists.
Instead of a line like
Wild Nacatl (you can mix/match these with each other or other cards, but the point stands IMO)
Kird Ape + Loam Lion
Boggart Ram-gang
That you might see in the 'average' zoo deck, with all of the off-land abilities being fulfilled, a return to ravnica aggro line might look more like
Rakdos cackler / bellows lizard
Gore-house chainwalker / rakdos shred-freak / thrill-kill assassin
splatter thug / dead reveler / hellhole flailer
Deviant Glee / Madcap Skills / auger spree / ogre jailbreaker / Bloodfray Giant
Which isn't very demanding of early colors/lands at all, if you have something resembling an even split.

As far as making all 10 guilds work I think you need to have a pretty fair amount of hybrid and mono-color cards that more than 1 guild/deck wants, with your gold cards solidifying those strategies as anchor cards. Syndic of tithes can actually work in pretty much every white deck, but cartel aristocrat is only really good when you have the auras and the plentiful weenies to throw away. Guildmages are pretty awesome anchors- look to them for guidance or whatever you want to call it.

EDIT: expanded and cleaned up
 

Onderzeeboot

Ecstatic Orb
I think the standard is playing 3-4 gold cards per guild in a 360 cube, with 40-60 mana fixing lands (not including the utility land draft). If you want to bump this to 15-17 cards per guild, you'll need to very aware of the mana support. The two main reasons that original Ravnica is such a slow format are the fact that it's mana fixing options (Karoos & Signets) are better suited to slow decks, and the fact that slow decks are easier on the mana fixing requirements as well. I would start with figuring out your mana base, and if you want Boros to stand a decent chance in limited, it better not consist of guildgates and Karoos! :)
 

Laz

Developer
Shit. I remember reading an excellent article where the mana fixing options in both Ravnica blocks and Shards of Alara was compared, but I can't for the life of me find it back...


Andy Cooperfauss said:
FixersCoop-1024x6141.png

The first thing that may stand out is how much more fixing I include in my Cube than Ravnica or the MTGO Cube. This is a conscious decision on my part—I want aggro to be a major player, which means it’s important to play your spells in the first three turns of the game. As a natural side effect of aggro reliably hitting its stride in more games, it is paramount that the control decks not stumble. Plentiful fixing makes for a fast-paced, interactive environment.

The second point of interest is that Ravnica, a format with a reputation for exceptional greediness, contained the lowest distribution of fixers. However, the speed of the format allowed you to take your time setting up your colors, and the high power level of its cards made come backs common. You could often wait until turn four or five to play a relevant spell, and easily be in firm control of the game.

Shards of Alara, however, was a more aggressive Limited format, and you can see that Wizards increased the fixing ratio accordingly. Curving out would have been incredibly difficult had the fixing in Shards more closely resembled that of Ravnica.

Given the contrast between Ravnica and Shards, we see that the MTGO Cube’s fixing ratios discourage streamlined aggro decks. I don’t think this was the intention, but it was certainly the outcome.




Originally made by Andy Cooperfauss here: http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/cuberhauss-please-try-this-at-home-part-2/

Or if you like your articles a little more 'raw stream of consciousness'-styled (and inclusive of the RTR block), you can read CML's discussion here: http://riptidelab.com/an-off-color-joke-fixing-dgr-cube-and-you/
 

Onderzeeboot

Ecstatic Orb
Awesome Laz, that was indeed the article I was looking for!

Edit: That was a pretty nice example of Dunglish I gave there. "Find it back" is a literal translation of the Dutch word "terugvinden". I think it should be "find it again" in English, right?
 
Thanks for the responses and the articles everyone! It's been a lot to take in/read. It seems like regular cubes have an average fixing rate of around 4 cards per person. My little rule of already giving everyone 3 fixing lands already almost reaches this average. So in a high multicolored density cube that I want to keep at around 2 colors + a splash, I would have to add around 2-3 more cards per person of fixing. In my mind this fixing would probably best be done with, primarily fetches, and a sprinkling of some artifact ramp, be it signets/cluestones/keyrunes or something like Prophetic Prism/Coldsteel Heart/Prismatic Lens.

The free lands given allow you to draft a certain strategy with more ease, but do not guarantee it will be streamlined if you don't get the appropriate fixing. Fetches play nicely with shocks if I decide to make that the 'gimme' land and work great as duel color fixer. They would probably be docked in rarity to common however so they don't take up a rare slot and are more available. I don't like the 'loading screen' effect of fetches but drafts will decide if that will be a problem.

Finding the proper mix of land fixing and artifact fixing will be interesting.
 

Onderzeeboot

Ecstatic Orb
Keep in mind that handing out multiple guildgates will ensure control/midrange strategies are naturally stronger in your environment, as the enters the battlefield tapped clause sucks in aggro decks. Artifact fixing of the 2-/3-mana variety likewise promotes control/midrange strategies.
 
Keep in mind that handing out multiple guildgates will ensure control/midrange strategies are naturally stronger in your environment, as the enters the battlefield tapped clause sucks in aggro decks. Artifact fixing of the 2-/3-mana variety likewise promotes control/midrange strategies.


Yeah, I'll probably just have shocks, they reward aggressive play in the sense that aggro doesn't care about their own life total, yet are good enough for control to use to stabilize if need be.

Or if I want I could just make gates that don't tap with they ETB and fetchlands that fetch for gates... but I might want to avoid that.
 

Jason Waddell

Administrator
Staff member
Keep in mind that if you are running a retail draft power-level cube that you don't necessarily need fetches. I sing the praises of fetches all day, but it's not as important in those environments that decks be able to access 3 colors of mana on T1, since games play out at a slower pace. E.g. in RTR even aggro decks are pretty happy with guildgates, as they usually have a mana to spare somewhere along their curve.
 

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
I really don't like giving away free fetchlands. Those cards are incrediably good both for the library thining and the shuffle effect.

Here is (yet another) article, this one comparing RGD with RTR. It might help you get the format speed you want.
 

Eric Chan

Hyalopterous Lemure
Staff member
Yeah, I think that whatever land configuration you end up using, it's fine to just throw them in the main cube list, rather than giving out freebies at the end. Making players work for their fixing by spending draft picks on them is a Good Thing, provided that you provide enough to go around. Like Jason mentions, shock + fetch might not be necessary for something approximately a retail limited format. At the same time, if you want to avoid the typical colour screw problems that DGR limited was plagued with, you probably want to sprinkle in plentiful aggro-friendly fixing at a lower rarity. Such as by slotting in the shocklands at uncommon, or perhaps by guaranteeing one land slot per pack (replacing a common).
 
Should I assume you've already read this article? http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/cube-design-declassified-information/

You seem to be fighting against natural draft dynamics here. There's going to be 10 guilds for 8 players (will you even have that many?), but you want one-guild decks to be the norm. It's probably not going to happen. If players just pick one guild each with no overlap, you have the most boring draft ever, plus the other two guilds' cards will never get picked. If there is some overlap, then even more multicolor cards will go unwanted.
 
Top