"Try building a deck without them" Oops all spells is up to the challenge I think In all seriousness, as a 31 land player, how do you cancel out the fact that once you have enough draw, 40% of your draws are "dead" I must admit that both decks (Sram and a 4 color Lurrus as companion artifact pile) have a very low curve, and are meant to draw yes amount of cards
As stated in the video it depends heavily on what your deck means to do, if you're running something like egg tribal, you want to keep very lean so as not to brick out. However while I wasnt arguing that its a requirement that you run a high land count, I believe its crucial to at least consider the impact that it has on your keepability of your starting hands. If you think of going down in cards off mulligans as negative card advantage, it would generally serve best to minimize that as much as possible while having a higher land count lets you greed more since you have confidence you'll draw enough lands to fuel your next hand. I think stormy lean decks alter this generalization just as a landfall deck might in the opposite direction. Its mostly the philosophy I'm trying to convey is all
No matter how many mathematicians, philosophers, and personal experiences tell me that ~40 land counts are optimal I am going to ignore them in favor of the arbitrary number 34 I made up once upon a time. With enough faith it will work !! I will never take the land pill >:(
Just remember we play the game to do our things and if we dont do our things we're having less fun. I'm not going to tell you to run more if you prefer less, just recognize the opportunity cost of the fun that youre missing out on
Great video.
Thanks. Unfortunately it didnt get much traction
@ToggoRock Give it time you definitely deserve more views
Thanks man, genuinely means a lot
"Try building a deck without them"
Oops all spells is up to the challenge I think
In all seriousness, as a 31 land player, how do you cancel out the fact that once you have enough draw, 40% of your draws are "dead"
I must admit that both decks (Sram and a 4 color Lurrus as companion artifact pile) have a very low curve, and are meant to draw yes amount of cards
As stated in the video it depends heavily on what your deck means to do, if you're running something like egg tribal, you want to keep very lean so as not to brick out. However while I wasnt arguing that its a requirement that you run a high land count, I believe its crucial to at least consider the impact that it has on your keepability of your starting hands. If you think of going down in cards off mulligans as negative card advantage, it would generally serve best to minimize that as much as possible while having a higher land count lets you greed more since you have confidence you'll draw enough lands to fuel your next hand. I think stormy lean decks alter this generalization just as a landfall deck might in the opposite direction. Its mostly the philosophy I'm trying to convey is all
No matter how many mathematicians, philosophers, and personal experiences tell me that ~40 land counts are optimal I am going to ignore them in favor of the arbitrary number 34 I made up once upon a time. With enough faith it will work !!
I will never take the land pill >:(
Just remember we play the game to do our things and if we dont do our things we're having less fun. I'm not going to tell you to run more if you prefer less, just recognize the opportunity cost of the fun that youre missing out on