General Removal density
- Thread starter japahn
- Start date
Has someone done a count for the "we make the cube" cube?
6w 4u 14b 14r 12m 3a, 53 total out of 303 nonland = 17.5% for We Make the Cube. On the low side, but not that much. Many are pretty bad and just technically removal though (like Staff of Nin and Decimate), but I guess that's true of other cards as well so it might end up being an accurate count.
I have basically two interpretations for the word removal. While constructing my deck in a draft, I look for everything that can deal with opposing threats. But to get the tag "removal" in my cc spread sheet a card needs to deal with a 2/2 or bigger without having you to jump through extra hoops.
That means, this is removal:
This is kinda removal, but I don't count it as such for number crunch:
Of course these can become very strong removal spells in the right deck. However, not counting these (or boardwipes) I am around 13% of all cards, but it's effectively quite a bit more. But if removal spells are a precious resource not too easy to come by for goodstuff decks, that means that spells like the ones listed become real incentives to integrate a madness/lifegain/spells theme in your deck.
That means, this is removal:
This is kinda removal, but I don't count it as such for number crunch:
Of course these can become very strong removal spells in the right deck. However, not counting these (or boardwipes) I am around 13% of all cards, but it's effectively quite a bit more. But if removal spells are a precious resource not too easy to come by for goodstuff decks, that means that spells like the ones listed become real incentives to integrate a madness/lifegain/spells theme in your deck.
Anyone know the removal density of the MTGO Bant Cube?
Necro, but I just realized that we may have been asking the wrong question here. Instead of percentages of spells dedicated to removing other permanent, I'd like to pose the following: what is the ratio of spells that can remove creatures to the number of creatures you have? No need to take into account things like 2- vs. 3-damage burn spells.
The context of this question is, of course, that I've been struggling with removal in my cube recently and felt like I had way too much even at 89 on average out of 384, a reasonable 23%. However, on examining my "target-to-spell ratio," I realized that I only have 144 creatures on average, meaning that my drafters can answer at least 60% of creatures. My ratio is therefore 1.61 and I suspect it's lower than average. Thanks in advance!
The context of this question is, of course, that I've been struggling with removal in my cube recently and felt like I had way too much even at 89 on average out of 384, a reasonable 23%. However, on examining my "target-to-spell ratio," I realized that I only have 144 creatures on average, meaning that my drafters can answer at least 60% of creatures. My ratio is therefore 1.61 and I suspect it's lower than average. Thanks in advance!
Good upgrade to this data.
My ratio is 204 creature : 85 removal ≅ 2.4:1
I included token-producers in this count, as IMO a token can just as much need removal pointed at it as any other creature, depending on the situation. If we don't want to do that though, my nontoken:removal is 185 creature : 85 removal ≅ 2.2:1
My ratio is 204 creature : 85 removal ≅ 2.4:1
I included token-producers in this count, as IMO a token can just as much need removal pointed at it as any other creature, depending on the situation. If we don't want to do that though, my nontoken:removal is 185 creature : 85 removal ≅ 2.2:1
This is a great necro! I completely agree that one should use ratios of removal and what it can remove instead of removal to number of cards!