CML
Contributor
the planeswalker is a card type loathed by the conventional cube world, mainly because they are too willfully stupid to design their cube in such a way that someone could answer one in a timely fashion ("multicolor aggro? what's that??? here, have another thran dynamo), and also because they include such iconic cards as Gideon and Good Elspeth, both of which caused no problems in their respective standard environments and are totally pass-able and beatable in every limited environment.
these are dumb reasons to hate planeswalkers. planeswalkers are an interactive card type that lead to untrimmed, willowy decision-trees for both players, even if those decision-trees sometimes have low-hanging fruit, or are bonsai, or are clear-cut by a sweeper, or whichever direction you wanna take the deadwood metaphor. some time ago i made a list of PWs that i loved; it is in a thread that i cannot find; i will reproduce some of this below:
ajani g
ajani v
ashiok
original chandra
good chandra
domri
bad (5cmc) elspeth
big elspeth
all 4 garruks
all non-5cmc jaces
koth
lilly
nicky b
ral
both sarkhans
both sorins
tamiyo
venser
vraska
xenagos (kinda)
however, i am only running: ajani g, ajani v, ashiok, good chandra, domri, big elspeth, wildspeaker, relentless, koth, baby jace, king jace, lilly, ral, sarkhan vol, BW sorin, and venser, and even these might be a little much. there are two objections to running too many PWs, the latter more serious than the former:
-power-level concerns (either too good or too bad) -- only Elspeth, Knight-Errant has been problematic in my Cube, while JTMS has been a lot of fun. (note that with the stillborn printing of True-Name Nemesis, JTMS is now second -- a distant second -- to lilly in Legacy.) though there are a dozen PWs not worth running due to low power, there are more than enough that fit in the window that i simply don't run, because (w8 for it)
THEY ALL COST 4.
the "everything costs 4" joke is one of my favorites because it exposes the autism (if not hypocrisy) of MTGS-style cube design -- these morons drool over exact color-balance and a million other scintillas of quantitative data, then ignore the most important "hidden" data set in Cube, which is curve. i also know it to be a favorite of Dom's. there was a nice discussion on another thread about how official WotC Limited environments differ quite subtly on matters of curve, yet feel drastically different; for me, the only way to interpret this data is that keeping good track of your curve is hugely important, since LIMITED FORMATS ARE VERY SENSITIVE TO SLIGHT CHANGES IN CURVE. to kick the dead horse a little more, a few of the "old guard" in Seattle were speaking of the Modo Cube the other day; one of them had first-picked a JTMS and another criticized the otherwise lapidary deck for its lack of a 2-mana rock since "all the nut cards in blue are at 4cmc"; the drafter replied with some butt-hurt, "yeah i prioritized those but none came around." i hope he lost to a sulfuric vortex or some recurring nightmare-kitchen finks-shriekmaw loop
anyway! beyond the intermingled stupidity and arrogance, i don't need to explain to y'all why this is depressing. it's why we're here.
with a bottleneck at cmc=4 it's also worth noting that, though the natural enemy of a card that costs N is a card that costs N+1 (Baneslayer Angel was a lot less cool with the Titans running around), the best way to fight PWs is proactively, with a nice curve or at least a swarm of cheaper threats. my point is that none of the other "nut cards" at cmc4 ever beat a JTMS; for draw spells like FoF or Deep Anal, he is impossible to out-durdle, and for creatures, there's a good reason my MBS standard deck ran only Hero of Oxid Ridge and Vengevine at cmc4; I want to suggest that the "Jace test" can be generalized to all PW's for Cube. (not much passes the Elspeth, Knight-Errant test; she's just so beefy and good at self-defense -- this is what people mean when they praise PW's for "plussing to defend themselves.")
i'm way too lazy to look at the Modo cube's curve data, but a quick glance at the curve chart for the average 720 (http://cubetutor.com/analysis/495) shows that 2>3>1=4, which is also the construction of a typical NWO Limited set; i don't need to tell you guys why this won't work with Constructed cards when Constructed curves tend heavily towards 1>>2>3>4>n+1 etc.
as this is one of the things about cube which obsesses me, i've been keeping track of curve data for a few months. the below numbers describe seven major revisions. take a look (cmc5 = cmc5 and up, switch from 405 to 450 at 4th data set):
cmc1 85,94,87,98,95,90,87
cmc2 82,86,91,92,91,92,94
cmc3 84,74,88,90,83,91,89
cmc4 50,42,54,60,58,52,59
cmc5 48,45,53,57,55,56,51
at some point, though, i had too many 1cmc cards; there's no use in doubling up on figure of destiny and throwing in a half-assed delver of secrets theme if nobody takes them until 14th pick. even if these 1-drops are good at fighting planeswalkers, it's similar to "wasting slots" with lands on low-quality fixing when collapsing them into 20 fetches / 30 fetchable duals would allow for greater choice in design, drafting, deckbuilding, and gameplay.
the latest iteration of the cube greatly pleases me -- it's better than ever before, and with more people coming over the decks get even 'themier' and therefore stronger and more interesting; drafting with 10 was really fun on wednesday -- but here i see a problem. there are too many 4-cmc cards. if there are too many 4-cmc cards, then there are not enough early beaters for aggro, not enough fatties for hardcore control or reanimator, not enough ways to combat planeswalkers by sliding under and going over the top, and too many durdle spells at 4 that are functionally similar in creating value, which is what planeswalkers are unrivaled at doing and fighting against. my ideal curve would look something like 90, 95, 85, 50, 60; otherwise we risk making "4-color midrange" an actual thing, and what would be worse than living up to the demented criticism of MTGS and old-guard moron alike?
DISCUSS
these are dumb reasons to hate planeswalkers. planeswalkers are an interactive card type that lead to untrimmed, willowy decision-trees for both players, even if those decision-trees sometimes have low-hanging fruit, or are bonsai, or are clear-cut by a sweeper, or whichever direction you wanna take the deadwood metaphor. some time ago i made a list of PWs that i loved; it is in a thread that i cannot find; i will reproduce some of this below:
ajani g
ajani v
ashiok
original chandra
good chandra
domri
bad (5cmc) elspeth
big elspeth
all 4 garruks
all non-5cmc jaces
koth
lilly
nicky b
ral
both sarkhans
both sorins
tamiyo
venser
vraska
xenagos (kinda)
however, i am only running: ajani g, ajani v, ashiok, good chandra, domri, big elspeth, wildspeaker, relentless, koth, baby jace, king jace, lilly, ral, sarkhan vol, BW sorin, and venser, and even these might be a little much. there are two objections to running too many PWs, the latter more serious than the former:
-power-level concerns (either too good or too bad) -- only Elspeth, Knight-Errant has been problematic in my Cube, while JTMS has been a lot of fun. (note that with the stillborn printing of True-Name Nemesis, JTMS is now second -- a distant second -- to lilly in Legacy.) though there are a dozen PWs not worth running due to low power, there are more than enough that fit in the window that i simply don't run, because (w8 for it)
THEY ALL COST 4.
the "everything costs 4" joke is one of my favorites because it exposes the autism (if not hypocrisy) of MTGS-style cube design -- these morons drool over exact color-balance and a million other scintillas of quantitative data, then ignore the most important "hidden" data set in Cube, which is curve. i also know it to be a favorite of Dom's. there was a nice discussion on another thread about how official WotC Limited environments differ quite subtly on matters of curve, yet feel drastically different; for me, the only way to interpret this data is that keeping good track of your curve is hugely important, since LIMITED FORMATS ARE VERY SENSITIVE TO SLIGHT CHANGES IN CURVE. to kick the dead horse a little more, a few of the "old guard" in Seattle were speaking of the Modo Cube the other day; one of them had first-picked a JTMS and another criticized the otherwise lapidary deck for its lack of a 2-mana rock since "all the nut cards in blue are at 4cmc"; the drafter replied with some butt-hurt, "yeah i prioritized those but none came around." i hope he lost to a sulfuric vortex or some recurring nightmare-kitchen finks-shriekmaw loop
anyway! beyond the intermingled stupidity and arrogance, i don't need to explain to y'all why this is depressing. it's why we're here.
with a bottleneck at cmc=4 it's also worth noting that, though the natural enemy of a card that costs N is a card that costs N+1 (Baneslayer Angel was a lot less cool with the Titans running around), the best way to fight PWs is proactively, with a nice curve or at least a swarm of cheaper threats. my point is that none of the other "nut cards" at cmc4 ever beat a JTMS; for draw spells like FoF or Deep Anal, he is impossible to out-durdle, and for creatures, there's a good reason my MBS standard deck ran only Hero of Oxid Ridge and Vengevine at cmc4; I want to suggest that the "Jace test" can be generalized to all PW's for Cube. (not much passes the Elspeth, Knight-Errant test; she's just so beefy and good at self-defense -- this is what people mean when they praise PW's for "plussing to defend themselves.")
i'm way too lazy to look at the Modo cube's curve data, but a quick glance at the curve chart for the average 720 (http://cubetutor.com/analysis/495) shows that 2>3>1=4, which is also the construction of a typical NWO Limited set; i don't need to tell you guys why this won't work with Constructed cards when Constructed curves tend heavily towards 1>>2>3>4>n+1 etc.
as this is one of the things about cube which obsesses me, i've been keeping track of curve data for a few months. the below numbers describe seven major revisions. take a look (cmc5 = cmc5 and up, switch from 405 to 450 at 4th data set):
cmc1 85,94,87,98,95,90,87
cmc2 82,86,91,92,91,92,94
cmc3 84,74,88,90,83,91,89
cmc4 50,42,54,60,58,52,59
cmc5 48,45,53,57,55,56,51
at some point, though, i had too many 1cmc cards; there's no use in doubling up on figure of destiny and throwing in a half-assed delver of secrets theme if nobody takes them until 14th pick. even if these 1-drops are good at fighting planeswalkers, it's similar to "wasting slots" with lands on low-quality fixing when collapsing them into 20 fetches / 30 fetchable duals would allow for greater choice in design, drafting, deckbuilding, and gameplay.
the latest iteration of the cube greatly pleases me -- it's better than ever before, and with more people coming over the decks get even 'themier' and therefore stronger and more interesting; drafting with 10 was really fun on wednesday -- but here i see a problem. there are too many 4-cmc cards. if there are too many 4-cmc cards, then there are not enough early beaters for aggro, not enough fatties for hardcore control or reanimator, not enough ways to combat planeswalkers by sliding under and going over the top, and too many durdle spells at 4 that are functionally similar in creating value, which is what planeswalkers are unrivaled at doing and fighting against. my ideal curve would look something like 90, 95, 85, 50, 60; otherwise we risk making "4-color midrange" an actual thing, and what would be worse than living up to the demented criticism of MTGS and old-guard moron alike?
DISCUSS
