|
I'm an old Magic player who has recently picked up the game again on the cheap after 15 years away. I picked it up again because some cards dropped into my lap and I found out Cubes and Commander were things I could do. So I'm looking to build my first cube here pretty soon. I'm leaning toward a pauper cube because my collection isn't huge (maybe 4,000 cards?) and I need a lot of my fun rares and uncommons for Commander. I could make a peasant cube work, and I may even have to if I don't have a good amount of commons. Here's what I was thinking: -Hjghlander/Singleton cube -Pauper or peasant -360 card cube, no multi-color cards (trying to keep it simple here with my first go) -Low cost (most of what I have are from the cards gifted to me, from repacks or "value lots" of commons, uncommons, and rares that I got specifically to make a cube. The whole reason for turning Magic into an LCG was to keep costs down, so I'm not going to spring for Ursa's Black commons that go for $5 each. I'll use whatever crap I have lying around). Right now, I'm just kind of stuck on where to start. I have a good base for non-basic lands that covers all the dual color identities well, but I don't know where to start with each individual color. I thought of doing a tribe for each color, but from what I've read about cube construction that seems like a bad idea. I like the idea of threading the cube with an over-arching mechanical theme or two. I like Morph/Megamorph, and I have a lot of Tarkir block stuff so that might work. But I'm open to suggestions in any other direction. Any tips?
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Aston posted:Honestly the best thing to do is to build a cube and just play it. It's the fastest way to find out what cards you like or dislike and for me at least it's a lot more fun than trawling through endless lists of cards. Remember a cube isn't some perfect list chiseled whole out of marble, it's always a work in progress and iterating on the design by playing and refining it is by far the best way to improve it and get to something that you enjoy playing. Thanks! That first piece of advice is good, and something I'm coming to terms with. It's going to be a work in progress no matter what I do, so I think it'll be better if I just keep that in mind. quote:For more specific tips, first of all remember that it's your cube and should represent what you and your play group want to do. As you said many people dislike tribal themes, as they tend to lead to more "on-rails" drafting, but if you like doing that don't let anyone tell you different. If you don't mind using proxies they're a great way to keep the cost down. I'd also suggest putting in a lot more lands than you might think you need - they don't have to be expensive rare lands, but I'd suggest a density of about 10% to start off with. Lands are probably not exciting but having good fixing means that less games will be decided on colour screw, which is a big plus. I think I'm going to steer clear of the tribal stuff. Our play group likes to draft for the sake of drafting, rather than a means to an end. I think a tribal cube would be a simple, efficient way to make a cube, but it would be boring to draft, if not to play. (I have had a separate idea to make a few tribal precons just for quick pick-up games, but that's another story.) As for the cube composition vis-a-vis non basic lands and color fixing, I think I'm going to have: 60 W 60 G 60 U 60 R 60 B 30 Artifacts 30 Non-basic lands The non-basic lands are probably going to be 2 of each color pair (a guild gate and a Kahns gain land), plus one of each Kahns 3-color land, and 5 random utility lands. Without the utility lands, that's 25 lands, with each color pair represented 3 times. Is that enough? 10% of 360 is 36, so 25 is significantly short of that. Should I shave off some from each color to add more color-fixing non-basics? I have more options than the guild gates and gain lands, but I'm trying to keep it to what I have, which is commons and uncommons from various sets. I have at least one more "enters play tapped" dual color lands for each pair, if need be. I'm not planning on putting in rares of any type, let alone the things like the Kaladesh ones that go for $5+ currently. quote:Don't forget to budget for sleeves and some sort of box. Already done. When I found out about cubes, I got 600 of those nice KMC matte sleeves that shuffle like a dream, and a hard plastic box that should work well for 360 sleeved cards + a ton of sleeved basic lands. Up to this point, it felt a little silly having all of that stuff just sitting around, but building a cube was always a thing I was definitely going to do, it was just a matter of when. quote:Finally if you'd like a starting point, I'd recommend looking at this list: http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/21835 That's a good list. <$2 is a good number for what I already have, or what I am willing to pay for what I don't have. I just shipped off a Worship on Puca Trade that gave me about $18 worth of points. That's going to turn into a poo poo load of dumb but fun commons. Having no interest in any format besides cube and commander means I can ship off valuable rares much more easily. I don't need four of everything, and I don't need to keep any copies of speedy but boring things that are the life blood of Modern and Legacy. What's the advice on limiting the cube to pauper or peasant for balance reasons? I know I can get weird, stupid rares for 25 cents to a buck (hell, my Narset commander deck is made of lovely rares that are functionally impossible to cast in normal formats, so that deck was surprisingly cheap for being as broken as it is). But does doing so mess with the balance of how the cube drafts? If I include rares, should I set up the draft packs like normal packs, or just shuffle everything together and let people catch as catch can? Thanks again for the advice!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
I just thought of something, but this may be too much to handle for a first cube: How viable is a multi-player cube? Like, hold an eight person draft, but seat two tables of four players each? the multiplayer element is one of the reasons I like commander, and a few of the folks in our play group are also VTES players who like table politics and wheeling n' dealing. It seems like it would be fun to put a lot of stuff in a cube that has a high degree of interactivity between players. I just don't know if a 40 card deck draft format would work for that kind of game (my instinct says no). But there may be a way to design the rules to be more feasible. Like: * A circular attack relationship, like in VTES (you may only attack the person to your left, and you get rewarded when they are eliminated). Rewards for eliminating your opponent could include more life and/or shuffling any number of cards from your discard pile into your deck, so you don't deck yourself out after the first opponent goes down. * Bigger draft decks. I don't like this idea because it makes the cube bigger, and slimmer draft decks are what work best and are what everyone is used to. But maybe there is a way to make it work. Any other ideas? Is this even a thing that anyone has tried? I just don't want to bite off more than I can chew here, or try to do something that doesn't work. But this concept, at least, would play well in our group.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
Aston posted:I wouldn't rely on rarity level being a barometer for strength, especially with older cards. There are plenty of broken commons and unplayable rares. Try and keep track of cards which routinely go 14-15th pick or end up in sideboards a lot, as they're probably not worth a slot. If your playgroup complains about losing to a particular card over and over, it might be worth cutting that too, and they might not always be the cards you expect. You can do a retail style pack with a rare, uncommons and commons (and you don't have to stick to printed rarities for this) but I find that way too much of a hassle, and i try and aim for a fairly flat powerlevel anyway. That's good to know. I had a feeling this was the case. Prior to the last few months, I was used to playing from Legends through Masques, so I saw firsthand how power creep happened and how rarity was not synonymous with power level. seemingly half of the commons from Ursa's Bloc are more valuable than most rares from The Dark through Weatherlight. It's kind of gross. But I guess it frees me up to have one less thing to worry about in balancing the cube. It also lets me put some of the janky poo poo to use that I have from repack boxes and this hand-me-down collection. quote:I've seen people make multiplayer cubes before and they do work. I'd look to Conspiracy draft for inspiration, especially Conspiracy: Take the Crown and the Monarch mechanic which helps to make sure one player doesn't get ganged up on too much. If this is the kind of game you're looking for I'd suggest building the cube specifically to accommodate it - the games will necessarily be slower, so very aggressive cards are going to be a lot weaker, and 1-for-1 removal goes way down in usefulness when there are three opponents to contend with. I don't think a multiplayer cube would really be much harder to design than a 1-v-1 cube, with the caveat that I've never done it myself. One of the guys in my playgroup has an unopened Conspiracy: Take the Crown box that we've been waiting for the right time to draft. But I've read what's in it and have gotten a few of them via Puca Trade, and it's right up the alley of what I'm looking to make. I'll probably hold off on starting to make the cube until I buy into drafting form his box and get my haul from it, assuming the multiplayer cube idea is feasible (which it sounds like it is). Balon posted:My cube is multiplayer - enough for an 8man draft, peels in to groups of 4. The 4-player matchups are ffa and is great - plays like a game of draft commander almost. This is great to know. As long as it has worked for someone out there, I'll give it a shot. This might also solve one of my prior problems, of the cube having a direction, just to get me started. Now I have some work to do on Cubetutor while I wait for students to show up in my office for term paper conferences.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
I made my first cube! It's definitely a work in progress, even more than most cubes. I don't have everything to fill it out the way I want to quite yet, so there is some filler. http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/69208 I tried to thread the morph/megamorph mechanic throughout the cube, while sticking to the janky multiplayer theme. Cards in the cube are supposed to offer multiple options, random effects, and a high degree of interactivity between players. The general idea is to make every turn, if not every card played, an event of some kind of as many players as possible. Things like: Illicit Auction Chain of Silence Siren of the Fanged Coast (and the tribute mechanic in general) Collective Voyage Etc... I'm going to be looking for more cards like that, a lot of which I can get from Conspiracy 1 and 2. With the cube being designed for multiplayer games, I decided to use some of the conspiracy cards that I have. What little I have from the set so far is great, and I'm looking at getting some more. (I pulled a Ludevec from one pack, and I already flipped it on Puca Trade so I can get an ungodly amount of janky cards with those points). I included the conspiracy-type cards, like Sovereign's Realm, but I'm iffy on a lot of those because a lot of them call for naming a card for use during play. With it being a singleton cube, the likelihood that the named card comes up is less likely than in a normal draft, but that's something I need to test. The cube also uses the monarch mechanic, because I like that as a way to get a multiplayer game moving along. I'm still concerned about people decking themselves near the end of a 4 player game, so I'll have to test that. If that ends up being an issue, I can just have a rule like, "shuffle x number of cards from your graveyard back into your deck whenever another player dies." I also toyed with the idea of having a circular attack relationship, like in VTES, but I'm going to go with the monarch mechanic as-is, and see how that does. So I have a few things to look for in initial tests. If anyone has any ideas, feel free to shout them out (and type them up too so I can read them).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2016 13:16
|
|
|
Aston posted:Leonin Iconoclast destroys enchantment creatures, and you only have one of those in the cube. Oh, poo poo. I misread that as "enchantment." That one's getting cut. That's what I get for spending too much time on this yesterday. I think my brain went a little wobbly by the end.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Moogs posted:I love having CNS or CNS2 cards in my cube. Some of my playgroups favorites are Unexpected Potential, Paliano, the High City, and Cogwork Librarian. Both of my cubes are singleton and it definitely doesn't come up as frequently as it would in pack draft, but it comes up enough to still be fun. Three people in our play group are veteran VTES players, so we like a lot of table politics and wheeling-and-dealing. Conspiracy 2 has been rad as hell for this, and is exactly what we have been looking for. We've done one draft, but I'm looking forward to doing another soon. It's good to know the conspiracy-type cards work in a singleton cube, because I'll probably end up with more soon.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/69208 I picked up some more CN2 cards and used them to trim the fat a bit on my cube. I also rounded out the Conspiracy-type cards so that there's one for each color, plus a few more that are less dependent on color activations. I also removed some of the bland cards and some of the downright useless cards that got in there by accident (like Leonin Iconoclast). The cube is now much closer to being all about multiplayer play, draft weirdness, and player interactivity, with Morph thrown in as well because I like it. Adding a few extra Conspiracy-type cards bumped the cube up above a clean 360 cards (it's at 363), so now I'm considering adding more non-basic lands if I'm going to go above 360 anyway. Maybe one of each color pair, which I think I can scrounge up. The cube is singleton, but I may have to break that rule for a couple of the color pairs. I have a guild gate and a gain land for each, but other CIPT or pain lands may be in commander decks, so I may be short a couple. I don't mind that, but I'm thinking out loud about the costs/benefits of adding more cards. Having tested the draft on Cubetutor, the non-basic lands and color-fixing artifacts don't come up quite as much as I'd like. I could even add a few more mana-producing artifacts too. My thinking is, even if I'm adding cards without taking more out, the proportion of lands/mana-producing artifacts goes up anyway. But if I go above 360, then I don't have that nice, even number so that every card gets drafted in an 8 player draft (which my group can sometimes muster). I don't know if I care enough about that to hold the line at 360, though. For one thing, I'm not always going to have 8 players. For another thing, I kind of like the idea of having a small percentage of the cube not get drafted, so that people don't know what has or hasn't been dealt out even if I have 8 players. I may have already convinced myself of this, but I'm curious what people's thoughts on this are. Is more uncertainty in the draft a good thing? And do I need more non-basic lands and/or color-fixing artifacts here?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
Agentdark posted:So I never thought I would go for this, but recently this is the direction that my magic interests have sort of gone for me. I have alot less time to play then I used to, and my magic playing time might start going to playing with friends once a month or so. Having built a cube within the last couple months myself, here's what I found worked really well: Cubetutor is the real deal. It's fairly easy to use, and the free version gives you all the analytics you need to build and maintain the cube. It being my first cube, I stuck to only 2-color cards, and just a couple of each. I didn't want to get into 3 or more colors yet because I didn't want to mess around with the balance too much until I tested it. I wouldn't necessarily recommend against using 3-color cards, though, especially if you're free to proxy in whatever you want to even things out. Color fixing will be easier for you, too, so I'd say go for it. For the storage, I used a KMC 1000 count card box. It's simple, durable, and fairly cheap. I shopped around and all of the cheaper options were a little dicey. I have a 390 card cube with basic lands and tokens, all sleeved, and they all fit just fine. If you're going for a 450 card cube, that would work in this box if you didn't have the stupid amount of tokens I have in there. This box of 600 matte sleeves works really well for my cube and commander decks. I like the matte backing because they're easier to shuffle, and these are matte on the front side too, to reduce glare. It's kind of a trade-off, though, because the matte front also kind of dulls the art. I don't mind that, but others might disagree. About $50 to sleeve a whole cube in quality sleeves (and have some sleeves leftover) is a good deal. But if you're using proxies, you can probably use cheaper sleeves. I'd just be more worried about ease of shuffling with cheaper ones.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
Balon posted:I've updated my cube! CubeTutor is here: http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/31202 Probably a good call to switch from fliers to flicker in UW. Having that around would necessitate a bunch of anti-flier removal in every color, and that can be kind of meh. Flicker is as fun as that is boring, and you have a King Brago in there so that should be fun and good. I'm still not wild about mill as an archetype, especially in multiplayer. Maybe if it was sort of an opposite to your GU, but instead of card advantage by drawing it's card advantage by forcing discards? That's might be too similar to your GU, though. Stealing and/or copying is pretty fun in UB. I dunno. While we're on the subject of low-power, multiplayer cubes, I recently updated mine a bunch. I probably made a mistake by not deliberately assigning archetypes. Instead, it's based around table politics and multiplayer stuff from Conspiracy 1 & 2, or any cards with a high degree of player interactivity. I also threaded morph through it, because I and my group like it. Here's a link: http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/69208 I'd appreciate feedback in general, but there's a few things I'm concerned about : *Is the lack of clear archetypes a problem? *What are some good options for 1-drops in W and U that fit the theme? *A lot of the multicolor stuff doesn't fit well, so I'm looking for better options that are more interactive. Less like Skyknight Legionnaire, more like Gwafa Hazid.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2017 11:45
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:Tried yours as well. Tried making a Guttersnipe based spells deck but it didn't seem the tools were there. Thanks for the recommendations! I think Guttersnipe was on the chopping block before, but if it wasn't it definitely is now. It doesn't really fit the cube's themes of player interactivity and morph, so he was always kind of a filler card that I had in there because I love it. I agree with 3 color cards in your cube. I didn't include them in mine because people are usually making 2-color decks. You have to really build the whole cube around them and include a lot more color fixing to make them work right. It's almost like it's own kind of cube. I think someone posted a cube in here posted earlier that included every 2- and 3-color charm and things like that, so the cube was all about improvising solutions from multiple choices. That cube pulled it off, but the whole thing was built around the assumption that you'd be running 3 or even 4 colors to make things work. I guess that was a long-winded way of saying, "3 colored cards are more trouble than they're worth in most low-power cubes."
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:I also have been updating my cube with several different cards to try and make better defined two-color archtypes. I feel like I may just cut most of the three color cards because no one in my playgroup has tried to actually making a three color deck in person. I just drafted from your cube. I like how many flashback cards you have in there, because I've had the mechanic work particularly well in other drafts' games. I also ran into the Burning Vengeance, so that was fun. Balon posted:I've updated my cube! CubeTutor is here: http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/31202 I also drafted this. I saw a couple of good mill options early and decided to go after that, coincidentally. It ended up practically mono-U, and I'm not sure if it has the firepower to mill more than one player off the table. I also think I forgot to draft with 4, so... welp.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
I want to put some of my commons to use, so I'm looking to build a pauper cube. I've looked up a few lists on Cube Tutor, but does anyone have any fun suggestions? I have literally no specific ideas for it yet besides to include a bunch of the Conspiracy commons I have that do poo poo during drafting, because that's fun. I'm just in a brainstorming phase right now.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2017 12:37
|
|
|
So here's what I'm thinking for a pauper cube, keeping in mind that there are a ton of cool archetypes that don't work/work poorly with only commons: WG +1/+1 counters WU Fliers WR Enchantment synergy WB Life Gain GU Artifact synergy GR Stompy GB Reanimation UR Instant/Sorcery synergy UB Discard RB Suicide/Aggro 60 cards per color (15 per archetype - more with overlaps) 30 Lands (2 per color pair + 10 others) 30 Artifacts (10 ramp/color fixing + 2 supporting each archetype) 360 cards total (singleton) A few concerns: -Do I need or want multicolor cards? I just think that it might be hard to do that meaningfully with only commons. -Is GU alright for an artifact archetype? UR would normally be what I'd go to for that, but I have a ton of good stuff for Prowess-type Ins/Sor synergy that I kind of want UR for that. -Will this be enough color-fixing lands and mana ramp via artifacts? Obviously green (and other colors, to a much lesser extent) will have their own ramp built-in, but I want a healtyh amount from artifacts like Cluestones because they both ramp a bit and do color fixing. -I'm probably going to sprinkle as much draft manipulation stuff from Conspiracy as I can justify within these archetypes, just because I like that stuff. But this is not going to be meant for multiplayer games.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
This is cube-adjacent, so I figured this would be the best thread for this kind of thing: I am about to start making a set of constructed decks for 1v1 play. Every other format I play--cube, EDH, draft--are all multiplayer affairs that take a bit of time. But I want to have a set of decks around that compete well with each other that two of us can just pick up and play. I love the Khans block, since that is the block I got back into the game with after almost fifteen years away. I also have a ton of Khans stuff since I drafted that block a lot. I was thinking of making five decks, one for each of Tarkir's clans. I want to have coherent mechanical themes for each deck, but they also need to compete well with each other. So I'm thinking aloud here about the decks' themes: Mardu (WRB): Tokens? Jeskai (WUR): Prowess? (more about combat tricks than Storm type stuff, given what the block provides) Sultai (GUB): Reanimator? Abzan (WGB): Counters? (seems a little on-the-nose, but it also seems like the best and obvious thing to do with them) Temur (GUR): Morph? Sultai and Temur both have good morph stuff, as Trail of Mystery and Secret Plans are both in-clan for them. I like Morph, and there's certainly enough of it in the block to support it as a major mechanical theme, but I want to make sure it can compete with the more conventional mechanics in the set of decks. Tokens, Prowess, Reanimator, and Counters are all tried and true deck archetypes, so I want to make sure Morph can compete (or if there's another option for Temur besides midrange/stompy). So, I guess my questions in a nutshell are: Do the above themes make the most sense for each of those clans, or are there more interesting options? Is Morph viable alongside the other themes? If not, what are some other options for Temur? Any fun ideas for cards to include from outside the block that are both thematic and mechanically fun with what the block provides?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
KaoliniteMilkshake posted:KTK was sweet, and morph played well because the format was designed around it playing well - nothing unmorphed for less than 5 that would auto-kill a 2/2. So, 3 mana 2/2 was a playable body in the set. When designing decks to play out, I would keep this in mind, for power level. I'm planning on using KTK and FRF, and maybe splashing a bit from DTK if need to spice things up a bit. I think, given what you said about Morph, that it's important to stay in-block, as much as some stuff from other sets might be tempting. I'll probably flesh out the spot removal and card draw with staple cards from other sets, but it's a pretty balanced block in general so hopefully I won't need to do too much of that. Thanks for the feedback!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
BaronVonVaderham posted:Working on it. I found some coworkers in Nashville who play, so I'll bring it with me next time I have to visit HQ. Working on setting up a draft for this upcoming weekend here at home, though.  Awesome. Congrats! Live the dream, dude.  I usually play casual commander, but some of us want some regular, 60-card decks to play quick, 1v1 pickup games. I was thinking of making a set of five decks from the Tarkir block, one for each clan. For theme and for the challenge it adds to deckbuilding, I want to limit the cards to KTK and FRF, and maybe sprinkle a bit from DTK. This originally was a pauper project, then it expanded to peasant, and now it's all rarities.  I can post decklists later, but here's my thinking:Jeskai: prowess storm (not truly a storm deck, but lots of value and card draw and prowess triggers) Mardu: aggressive, low cost token rush  Temur: midrange stompy (with morph synergies) Sultai: delver value town  Abzan: counters Currently, I have these in singleton construction, but I can change that. I like singleton construction because it'll make each game play out a bit differently, and I can use things like Treasure Cruise without worrying about a whole playset unbalancing the deck. So my questions for the thread are: Do these deck archetypes sound balanced? Should I keep them to singleton construction? How much should I worry about balancing rarities of each deck against each other? (I suspect this doesn't matter too much, but I want other opinions.) Anything I may not have thought of as I move forward? I'm finishing up the last of them today and I'll post lists when that's done.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2018 12:45
|
|
|
Propane C3H8 posted:How are people liking the current iteration of the Vintage Cube on MTGO? It looked reasonable to me, and it was always one of my favorite things to draft around the holidays so I pulled the most recent list I could find on Cubecobra and printed it through MPC. I don't know how much they matter in the card list you're working with, but a slot for tokens might be nice if you're already custom-building the box.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2023 23:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Propane C3H8 posted:Final product That's excellent work!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2023 20:00
|
|
