General Poll: How many lands in your 360?
- Thread starter Velrun
- Start date
I know you literally asked us to only answer if we have a 360 card cube, but I'm wondering--why do you think you wouldn't get useful data from a differently-sized cube? Do you think that the ratio of lands to spells isn't the important bit? That's always how I've conceived of it, so it's exciting to hear that the absolute number of lands might be something important to consider independently of their proportions.
Also, are you asking about fixing lands or just lands in general? I'm curious where this poll is headed.
-----
I'm on about 106 out of 420ish, with 80 of them being fixing lands, so roughly 90 in a proportional 360, fwiw. And I dont think I'm the person with the highest proportion of lands, either. I say this because I think that you may want to include some poll options over 50 if you're interested in capturing the granularity of people's cubes.
Also, are you asking about fixing lands or just lands in general? I'm curious where this poll is headed.
-----
I'm on about 106 out of 420ish, with 80 of them being fixing lands, so roughly 90 in a proportional 360, fwiw. And I dont think I'm the person with the highest proportion of lands, either. I say this because I think that you may want to include some poll options over 50 if you're interested in capturing the granularity of people's cubes.
@Zoss
You probably know as well as I do that if you enlarge the population of both the entire pool and the specific markers you’re looking for, you get instability. I don’t exactly know how to explain it in English but I am sure you know the concept.
If I should only go for ratio, then I should in theory get various results because a larger cube should want a higher ratio if the cube owner wants their players to have access to a certain amount of lands each. In a 360 cube you are guarenteed that all lands and all spells are seen by the players. This is not true with 420, 720 or whatever size.
However if you are intereste in the ratio, you can create a poll. I think that would be interesting.
Did these answers satisfy your question?
——
You say you run roughly 90 lands in a 360 cube if you scale your cube to 360. That is 25 % of all cards. This means your players will more often see 4 lands in a 15 card booster pack. Are you sure you are running this many?
I could change the poll but if I made a mistake with the numbers, I would much prefer to create an entirely new poll to not corrupt the data. Some people have already voted 50+ and that could be anything from 50 to 360 meaning I would corrupt the data if I changed the poll now.
Do you think I should create a new poll?
You probably know as well as I do that if you enlarge the population of both the entire pool and the specific markers you’re looking for, you get instability. I don’t exactly know how to explain it in English but I am sure you know the concept.
If I should only go for ratio, then I should in theory get various results because a larger cube should want a higher ratio if the cube owner wants their players to have access to a certain amount of lands each. In a 360 cube you are guarenteed that all lands and all spells are seen by the players. This is not true with 420, 720 or whatever size.
However if you are intereste in the ratio, you can create a poll. I think that would be interesting.
Did these answers satisfy your question?
——
You say you run roughly 90 lands in a 360 cube if you scale your cube to 360. That is 25 % of all cards. This means your players will more often see 4 lands in a 15 card booster pack. Are you sure you are running this many?
I could change the poll but if I made a mistake with the numbers, I would much prefer to create an entirely new poll to not corrupt the data. Some people have already voted 50+ and that could be anything from 50 to 360 meaning I would corrupt the data if I changed the poll now.
Do you think I should create a new poll?
For sure, variability is a big issue. Thanks, that's a good answer to the question I intended to ask!
And yes, it's definitely 106 lands. 26 utilities and two full cycles of fetches, bounces, and completed horizons and bicycles makes 80 fixers. It might be overkill, but I wanted to force people away from first-picking lands by making them almost overly abundant.
I don't think you need to make a new poll, just curious as to your reasoning! Thanks for clarifying.
And yes, it's definitely 106 lands. 26 utilities and two full cycles of fetches, bounces, and completed horizons and bicycles makes 80 fixers. It might be overkill, but I wanted to force people away from first-picking lands by making them almost overly abundant.
I don't think you need to make a new poll, just curious as to your reasoning! Thanks for clarifying.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I nearly forgot Heritage is a 360 cube! (Even though Cube Cobra says it's 400, the 40 mods are drafted seperately from the 360 main cube.) It runs exactly 40 lands (all of them fixing), which is actually over 3% less than my main 450 cube, which has to compensate for variance and has a heavier multicolor theme!
This is only true if you run a 360 cube and are drafting with the full 8 players.
And? I don’t understand the need for your comment.
I created a poll with 360 cards in mind for 8 players (8 players x 3 packs each x 15 cards each = 360)
And then I said I wanted only answers from 360 cards cubers.
Why can I not create a poll on this site without having to defend the reasonings for creating the poll in one way over another? You are all welcome to create your own polls and I promise I will contribute if I can. I hope other users will benefit from this poll and not just me. Thanks <3
Last edited:
People are just asking for context, @Velrun. We don't know the context of the question, and I for one am unsure if I can help you. You mention that you hope others will benifit from this poll, but it's so specific that it seems to miss the forest for the trees.
I for one have a 180 cube that is drafted with 4 players. I don't see why my land ratio wouldn't be relevant for this poll, as it ticks all the boxes you've mentioned for restricting it to 360-sized cubes (you are guarenteed that all lands and all spells are seen by the players). If I would resize my 4-player cube to 360 cards, it would suffer from the same variance that makes you disregard 720 cubes, for example, while still being elegible for your criteria. This makes the 360-size feel arbitrary to me.
I feel like most people here like discussions, and I feel like you're trying to facilitate those with this poll. A land ratio would involve more community members and probably give you more reliable results than sticking to a 360 size. Please understand that this is not a criticism, but a call for context to help us answer your question, as that's a little unclear.
I understand you all want me to add more text to the poll.
That was not my intention. I didn’t mean to clarify what the purpose of the poll was before people were done voting. I just wanted the information. Simply “How many lands do you run in your 360 cube?” and nothing else.
To everyone:
The dynamics of a cube tournament changes whenever you go from 8player 360cards to anything else. Both because of statistics and because of how social and play pattern change. This is a long discussion that I wasn’t seeking to participate in with this thread.
This was never meant to be a discussion thread and I tried to make sure it wasn’t. This was just for data. I feel like I normally create enough content on this page for others and here I just wanted some information.
That was not my intention. I didn’t mean to clarify what the purpose of the poll was before people were done voting. I just wanted the information. Simply “How many lands do you run in your 360 cube?” and nothing else.
To everyone:
The dynamics of a cube tournament changes whenever you go from 8player 360cards to anything else. Both because of statistics and because of how social and play pattern change. This is a long discussion that I wasn’t seeking to participate in with this thread.
This was never meant to be a discussion thread and I tried to make sure it wasn’t. This was just for data. I feel like I normally create enough content on this page for others and here I just wanted some information.
Last edited:
Okay I’m going to shut down this poll
I definitely learned a lesson here. And also I have learned that out of 10 cubes, 9 of them have at least 40 lands. That should certainly tell me that 20 lands is too few for my starter set (360 low-powered cube) My goal with this poll was not to steal your time but to get a quick overview and see if 20 lands was a little too few or MANY too few. Now I know!
Thank you to the 10 participants
I definitely learned a lesson here. And also I have learned that out of 10 cubes, 9 of them have at least 40 lands. That should certainly tell me that 20 lands is too few for my starter set (360 low-powered cube) My goal with this poll was not to steal your time but to get a quick overview and see if 20 lands was a little too few or MANY too few. Now I know!
Thank you to the 10 participants