I would love to watch LSV play this cube.
General Wetness
- Thread starter Jason Waddell
- Start date
Oh, shit. It's fully drafted by the end and you have full information of your opponent's cards. I can't even wrap my head around that without doing it. That said, it's about 25% removal as opposed to the more typical ~12.5-15%. That kind of difference on it's own is enormous and shuts down a lot of ideas someone could come up with.
I could not help but noticing the blatant sexual references in posts over the last few weeks. Some make me smile while others make even me cringe a little (I am known to be rude and inconsiderate, so go figure). I would like to kindly request to tone them down, since I assume they are not meant to be offensive. It would be a shame if someone would not join this great forum due to some friendly banter which arguably went a tad to far.
Oh no, not sex references. Please let's go back to wholesome magic content
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I think these two posts nail down what's going on here. The rest of the thread seems to be about big powerful plays and powerful combos vs edging out small advantages through synergistic, but lower-powered cards. But the new idea I'm getting here is about drafting a deck which presents you with fairly different lines of play, not just micro-optimisations of a single, focussed strategy. I don't think this has anything to do with the power level of the cards.
I remember a great game on stream against Jason where I was playing aggro. The beat-down plan didn't work out, but my deck had the tools to switch gears and win with burn, as long as I could drag the game out long enough, and not blow too many burn spells on opposing threats. It was a long shot, and I would have to commit to it. These decisions, moments of "tactical divergence" perhaps, make for a great game of magic. Perhaps you can have formats that are really interesting to draft, and lead to hard games, but have decks which don't present these moments. Is this what you're talking about, Jason?
On another note, one things I love of cube, and the community, and this forum, and the Quest for Ultimate Fun, is how people keep finding new ways to shed light on this whole cube thing. In the beginning it was just "put the 400 best magic cards ever in a shoebox and draft it - it's the most fun way to play magic". But eventually there was some acknowledgement of archetypes and the need for archetype support. Get this right and you had the new most fun way to play magic. And over time, more landmark changes in thought: You can break singleton, you should understand and support specific archetypes, you should look for archetype overlap, you should ban unfun things, you should understand what in gods name tempo even means, you should keep the curve low, you should make the format decision dense. We went so far on some of these ideas that more landmark thoughts have just been about reversing some of these ideas: The archetypes shouldn't be set in stone, there should be room for players to find decks no-one thought of before. There are ways to include wacky cards, perhaps only some of the time, to keep the spirit of wonder and exploration alive. And perhaps, if we figure out what this thread is about, we'll have another element to consider in crafting the most fun way to play magic.
It's all an examination of what exactly we find fun about magic. It turns out to be a large number of things, and we keep finding new ones, not only by seeing what we enjoy about cubes, but also what we miss in cubes. I'm not good at any of this, but it's been great seeing it evolve for so many years.
I think the storytelling element is a bit of it. I loved the game where I had to Ender's Game hide my wincon from you and then had a secret last minute sneak win with Thassa's Oracle.
Perhaps swinginess is what I'm looking for. In some formats / decks, I just have this feeling of peril as the game slowly edges away from me. In others I feel like, even though I'm behind, there's still enough swing in my deck to make something of it. I love when the decks feel like heavy hitters, and every turn has the possibility of shifting the boardstate in some novel way. I love getting blown out by Electrolyze or Twisted Image or some ludicrous Slayers' Stronghold line.
Like, when we played that Sudden Death Cube, I didn't get the feeling of swinginess/splashiness at all. Each turn had its own puzzle, but there wasn't any joy in it for me. There was 'the correct line' to find, and there was some fun in searching for it, but it felt a bit hollow somehow.
I love when you hatch the plan to not play Nissa, Steward of Elements until you can ult her for 10 damage to the dome, and you spend the rest of your game plan focusing on keeping the skies clear.
I guess my ideal gameplay would be 'open, swingy and interactive'. I love giggling to myself as I hatch a plan.
By contrast, I felt absolutely miserable playing this linear RG Forgotten Realms deck. The deck basically played itself and had almost no way to swing the board state if it fell behind.
Perhaps swinginess is what I'm looking for. In some formats / decks, I just have this feeling of peril as the game slowly edges away from me. In others I feel like, even though I'm behind, there's still enough swing in my deck to make something of it. I love when the decks feel like heavy hitters, and every turn has the possibility of shifting the boardstate in some novel way. I love getting blown out by Electrolyze or Twisted Image or some ludicrous Slayers' Stronghold line.
Like, when we played that Sudden Death Cube, I didn't get the feeling of swinginess/splashiness at all. Each turn had its own puzzle, but there wasn't any joy in it for me. There was 'the correct line' to find, and there was some fun in searching for it, but it felt a bit hollow somehow.
I love when you hatch the plan to not play Nissa, Steward of Elements until you can ult her for 10 damage to the dome, and you spend the rest of your game plan focusing on keeping the skies clear.
I guess my ideal gameplay would be 'open, swingy and interactive'. I love giggling to myself as I hatch a plan.
By contrast, I felt absolutely miserable playing this linear RG Forgotten Realms deck. The deck basically played itself and had almost no way to swing the board state if it fell behind.
Yeah, I often think a good measure of "fun" is how densely an activity is packed with meaningful decision. What meaningful is, will of course be context dependent, but I suppose a rule of thumb is that you should feel like things are the way they are in the game to a large degree because of the choice you made. If it's just on the rails, there's nothing to play around and interact with.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Not necessarily "agency" I think, but rather specifically "comeback potential" and "tactical swinginess"?
I think both of those things tie into how much agency the cards are giving the player. If you can't make intelligent choices on how to utilize your cards in gameplay, you won't be able to use them in ways that enable comebacks and swings as easily.
Welcome to cubes built around grid-drafting.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Oh, for sure, but agency is a broader term that also encompasses things not relevant to the discussion, I feel. Like, Flesh to Dust gives a player agency, but it definitely isn't the type of card Jason was talking about.