General Too Many Lands

sigh

sigh

Onderzeeboot said:
I like 15 card packs mathematically, because that's one card short to wheel completely.
Click to expand...
And that's almost exactly why I'm attracted to the thought of 16. One more card, and you can give so much more potential depth to the pack opener, by wheeling a card not once but twice.

I tested out 10-packs-of-10 Tenchester a while back, and haven't looked back since. It's super great for 4-player, and it lets people see (almost) the entire cube, which is precisely the reason I switched. Honestly, I should cut to 400 so I have a tight Tenchester draft. The decks are probably a little bit better than "normal", but it's led to awesome decks that everybody's loved so far. Seeing all the cards and getting so much more consistent opportunity to close out your deck plan is just so great

Which is why I definitely think it's a better idea to simply increase the pack size and the cube size to match, rather than decrease the land slots. The way I think of it, you still decrease the percentage of lands in the cube, but the absolute number available in the environment doesn't change. This means everyone can still get their 5 lands (or whatever), but you get more non-land picks to sort through for a more awesome deck.

If 16 is too much, it also works out perfectly to being 4 packs of 12.
 
James Stevenson

James Stevenson

Steamflogger Boss
Staff member
sigh said:
Which is why I definitely think it's a better idea to simply increase the pack size and the cube size to match, rather than decrease the land slots. The way I think of it, you still decrease the percentage of lands in the cube, but the absolute number available in the environment doesn't change. This means everyone can still get their 5 lands (or whatever), but you get more non-land picks to sort through for a more awesome deck..
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I was seeing it.
 
Mad Prophet

Mad Prophet

James Stevenson said:
Wait so if I add 24 brushwaggs to my 360 cube, and everybody drafts now 16 card packs, doesn't that mean all the old decks are just as viable as before, but now there's also a 16-land suicide-brushwagg deck, as well as oodles of new possibilities for brushwagg synergies and combos with the rest of the cube?

The debate about 16-card packs hasn't touched upon the importance of seeing the whole cube. The experience of cubers indicates that the more of your cube you see during a draft, the stronger your decks come together. Drafting storm in a singleton 720 cube is going to be a disaster. But if you could guarantee you saw the whole cube, or some high proportion of it, storm decks could be viable in every draft. Or brushwaggs, or zombies, or goblin welder, or whatever.

So if it turns out 16 card packs are not a strain on drafters, surely having 384 cards gives some more space to work with.

Am I missing something? Is everybody else presupposing something? As always, somebody should just try it.
Click to expand...


An important note: some packs end up with more or less than 1 Brushwagg so you've increased the draft variance a little bit.
Either way though, I think this may be the most fruitful idea yet proposed in the Too Many Lands thread.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you:

The Brushwagg Cube

I made sure to add plenty of dual lands so that the occasional drafter can play more than just 23 brushwaggs.
 
Fulcrum

Fulcrum

Mad Prophet said:
An important note: some packs end up with more or less than 1 Brushwagg so you've increased the draft variance a little bit.
Either way though, I think this may be the most fruitful idea yet proposed in the Too Many Lands thread.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you:

The Brushwagg Cube

I made sure to add plenty of dual lands so that the occasional drafter can play more than just 23 brushwaggs.
Click to expand...



I'm trying to decide whether I should take Brushwagg or fixing p1p1.

Screen Shot 2016-10-04 at 9.48.45 PM.png
 
B

blacksmithy

I've been running all-Evolving Wilds manabases in the last few cubes I've made, and it has played fantastic! It also pushes my formats in directions I want them to go, such as giving the format a ton of flavors of "the graveyard deck," making deck-shuffle effects relevant a la Legacy/Vintage, making Restore cool... you get the idea.
P.S. in addition it makes it pretty easy to help my newer players put a working mana base together: "Okay, so you just run all of those Wildses you picked up, this many Islands, this many Swamps... Oh, and maybe add a couple extra lands since you've got so many Wildses. And you're done! Let's play!"
 
O

ossa

blacksmithy said:
I've been running all-Evolving Wilds manabases in the last few cubes I've made, and it has played fantastic! It also pushes my formats in directions I want them to go, such as giving the format a ton of flavors of "the graveyard deck," making deck-shuffle effects relevant a la Legacy/Vintage, making Restore cool... you get the idea.
P.S. in addition it makes it pretty easy to help my newer players put a working mana base together: "Okay, so you just run all of those Wildses you picked up, this many Islands, this many Swamps... Oh, and maybe add a couple extra lands since you've got so many Wildses. And you're done! Let's play!"
Click to expand...


I've put Wilds in the basic box, I've only used it once, two player, but it played well. I'm contemplating a ground up rebuild with basic wilds and very few/zero lands in the cube, as guided by the prophet. You have a list I can take a peek at?
 
Mad Prophet

Mad Prophet

blacksmithy said:
I've been running all-Evolving Wilds manabases in the last few cubes I've made, and it has played fantastic! It also pushes my formats in directions I want them to go, such as giving the format a ton of flavors of "the graveyard deck," making deck-shuffle effects relevant a la Legacy/Vintage, making Restore cool... you get the idea.
Click to expand...
​
​
This method has many merits, as it holds on to most of the advantages of fetchlands at a lower power level. Unfortunately, Evolving Wilds favors slow decks pretty heavily, and bad fixing for your aggro decks is going to make them less interesting. Fortunately there are some options. Mana Confluence is a great aggro fixer, but it's pretty strong compared to Evolving Wilds.​
​
I've been really impressed with Tendo Ice Bridge recently.​
​
It's around the same power level as Evolving Wilds, and gives drafters some other choices to regulate the speed/consistency balance of their mana base.​
Evolving wilds has long been a favorite though, and I'd be curious to hear what the decks look like with wilds in the basic land box...​
​
​
Also, links to the Too Many Lands cubetutor list and associated thread are in my signature.​
Edit: (I guarantee 90% fewer Brushwaggs than in Brushwagg cube)​
Edit2: Final count 17 Brushwaggs at present for 94.7% fewer​
 
B

blacksmithy

ossa said:
I've put Wilds in the basic box, I've only used it once, two player, but it played well. I'm contemplating a ground up rebuild with basic wilds and very few/zero lands in the cube, as guided by the prophet. You have a list I can take a peek at?
Click to expand...
I think my low-power list based loosely on INN is still on CT somewhere. Just search by user and you'll find my cubes, I have the same name over there as here. Having Wilds does favor slow decks, but turn 2 Aggro is a very real thing that wins games as long as you don't give control crazy tools to go along with their favorable mana. In the stupid power cube I made using Wilds, aggro was almost completely replaced by combo, but in the INN cube Aggro is a pretty successful deck type.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top