I stand by the thought that the best way to bridge a power gap at the table is to just play your opponent's cards instead of your own. /s but only kinda
Honestly your content reminds me so much of magicthenoah, just way less shitpost-y. Your content has inspired me to fix some of my decks, and my mtg experience has gotten significantly better since I started watching you. Thanks for the content :)
This is something incredibly important in Tiny Leaders! Being a singleton 1v1 format, with a deck size of 50 with commander(s) means you have to make sure *every* slot can fill a multitude of roles for consistency and flexibility.
For spell slinger decks, and any deck really DO NOT OVERLOOK ADVETURES! In my opinion they are a perfect example for this. They might not be the strongest or most efficient ways to do the thing you want them to do, but they provide options, and having more options is always a valuable asset, especially for us low creature Izzet slingers.
I can’t not watch all the way through your videos. I don’t really play commander anymore, but the topics are so interesting and well explained that you have became my favorite mtg content creator. You seriously deserve any of the attention you get on this platform.
Yesss!! My phenax mill deck does this a little with its mana ramp. I decided to, instead of playing a lot of artifact ramp, play creatures that let me untap permanents paired with lands that tap for multiple mana. That way I can use it to ramp when I need mana or use it to untap a big creature to mill my opponents extra
yeah I have a tendency to overshare sometimes >_>. I have definitely fallen into the "fiddly contraption" trap multiple times as well. Great examples; looking forward to hearing more about mana base construction!
Other ways I “add” more slots 1. Modal spells - can be more expensive mana wise, but the added utility and flexibility is often worth it. You Find the Villains’ Lair is a great example of this. 2. Flexible removal - similar idea with modal spells. I don’t run removal that just targets one type. My removal will usually target any nonland or can even hit spells on the stack, like Divide by Zero or Commit // Memory 3. Split / Aftermath cards - split cards are like modal spells in their own way. Aftermath cards are great because of the added utility in the yard. I like Spring // Mind and Road // Ruin. 4. Flashback - it’s almost like we’re breaking the singleton rule.
I find Equipment is a weird way of compressing enchantments, in a deck that's trying to rely on creature buffs. Each piece of equipment ends up being a few enchantments, because you can reuse them, unlike most enchantments; they often have a lot more limited effects, but you can kinda get around that by going like, 12 equipment instead of like 20 enchants, and using those 8 cards for some of the "other" stuff you're having trouble with. Equipment is also nice because it's usually colorless, so can be plugged into new decks basically wholesale, instead of needing to get new cards if you want to do another creature buff deck in a different color for some reason, AND they're more friendly to multicolored decks to boot.
If you do a video on lands, please talk about the difference between ramping for lands (Kodama's Reach, Farseek), and increasing your lands per turn (Exploration, Burgeoning).
Just my take: ramping for lands -> gives you the cards, more reliable lands per turn -> more value potential, less reliable, less cards on hand if you rely on ramp, use reliable ramp! creatures < artifacts & enchantments < sorceries & ETB the higher you ramp, the riskier. You might want to use *stall* cards too, which are cards that keep the opponent busy in the early game or deal with their threats, e.g. cheap board wipe. Also, there is slow / fat ramp vs. early, fast ramp. If you only want to ramp to 4-5 mana, do not use 3-4 mana ramp spells. Hitting your lands drops is not to be underestimated. If you use ramp but miss your land drops, then you probably would have been better of just using lands instead. Also worth mentioning are *discount* cards that make your spells cheaper instead of giving you mana. This is especially good for low cost decks and enables multi-spelling in a turn. e.g. also see untap, flicker some weird discount like mindsplice apparatus helm of awakening OP spell cost -1 semblance anvil OP 3, ETB discard 1 / discount 2 for shared card type ... Monument discount 1 for ... color creature + extra effect. wrgu affordable urzas filter OP 4 / 2 discount for multicolored caged sun, 2 EUR 6 / target color lands 2x effective forsaken monument, 3 EUR OP 5 / colorless mana sources 2x effectivity gauntlet of power, 2 EUR 5 / basic lands 2x effective nissa who shapes the world 5g / forests 2x effective + loyalty+1 -> untap 1 land one of my personal favorites for ramp: boseiju, who reaches skyward
I'm glad i discovered this channel just when i was starting to feel burned out with EDH. my decks weren't fun to play because they were inconsistent to play and didnt do what i wanted it to do. I feel reinvigorated to fix my old decks, and make new ones
My first EDH was Iname Death Aspect, I’ve recently revisited that deck after 12 years, getting lost in the synergy sauce is real and just last night I found myself brewing Iname and resurfaced with some half built Todmod/Yoshimaru deck
I've been trying to make tormod work what feels like an eternity. hes so neat. but also not good. the engines he hints at are so cool and interesting but the end state just doesnt work too well every time ive tried it. ive done golgari with regrowths and dredge. ive done jund dedicated dredge. ive done abzan tokens ive done dimir ive done esper. none of that worked. my current itteration is Tormod/Kraum which while the EDHRec page for that is all zombie synergies im running 0 of that and just all merfolk looters and dredgers. kraum letting you draw cards on each opponents turn and a dredge card with a discard outlet lets you turb through your deck and get some zombies. its really fun, the thing is i genuinely cannot envision how it ever is going to win a game. just 0 clue.
Great video, I also try to make sure I stay on mana curve while compacting cause sometimes the cards that do multiple things cost more, and I have thrown myself into “oh everything costs 4 mana now” trying to compact my decks.
Perfect timing for you to release this video! I was just taking apart my token deck and was getting overwhelmed by what card types I need to fit into the deck.
One of the best set of cards that fill multiple slots is the lotr landcyclers, especially Lorien Revealed, but I think that all of them are valuable and almost necessary cards for mono, duo, or even triple color decks. Especially since they can also grab the Eldraine lands or I suppose the janky Shadowmoor utility lands with basic types.
Nah, in 3 colors or more you need as many real lands as possible, so "kinda land" is not that great. The real huge boon on those landcyclers is that they're also a colored card for pitch casting evoke elementals or Force of X or are a Reanimate target. That kind of thing is a lot less common/useful in singleton no-sideboard formats. They're still ok because they can grab triple/tricycle lands on top of on-color duals, but they're really slow. Lorien Revealed also gets a pass because Mystic Sanctuary is by far the best basic-typed land there is, and 5 mana draw 3 isn't as awful as the four creatures are. In 2 color or mono color, they're great options, but beyond that, nah.
@@LibertyMonk Yeah honestly I debated saying 3 color and I do think that there are some 3 color decks that would want it (especially lower power ones) but you are right
Thank you snail. This is why I find White to have some of the best land ramp in the game. With Brought Back and the like (second sunrise, faith’s reward, etc) you have a powerful ramp option early in the game and protection/rebuying etbs later in the game. All that’s required is building the mana base with those cards in mind (and shelling out the dough for fetches if you don’t proxy)
MDFC's and Cycling lands are great alternatives to mana rocks and dorks for extending your mana-producing card count into 40+ cards. The drawback to rocks and dorks is paying the casting cost in the first few turns when you have no mana to spare, and conversely, drawing a useless ramp card in the late game when you're already loaded with mana. Dual-mode land cards are exactly what you need to avoid getting mana screwed and/or mana flooded.
This is a really interesting concept and I have noticed it a lot in my restricted creature only Abazan Kathril deck which has almost turned into a control deck. It plays only creatures, I try to not have self mill and graveyard tutor. And rhe deck has the strategy of playing just a lot of creatures with keywords that does additional stuff. So then ramp, card draw removal etc leads into the gameplan. The whole deck is built around the commander, but most games it never cast the commander. I tries to win the creatures it plays, and when the opponents boardwipe it can come instantly back with a giant monster based on all the keywords going into the graveyard naturally. This has lead to the deck being able to play 20 interaction focused cards, 15 card draw, 13 ramp without those categories feeling like they take up a lot of space in thr deck. Probably my weirdest deck which feels way more powerful in action than it got any right to be compared to looking at the list. Though it is buit to br played in casual metas.
I'm building a voltron deck, but I was worried about not having enough creatures to block with. I eventually made the theme of the deck cards that can be either creatures or upgrades - not just bestow and reconfigure, but things like creatures with adventures that make roles, or Concealed Weapon (an equipment with disguise).
i currently have the exact problem you described at the end with many of my decks. only running consistency because my card evaluation is usually how well cards play when i'm behind. that way i am often lacking win conditions.
I think lands are definitely the area I suffer the most. Looking forward to that video Back on topic, it feels like such a simple concept to have cards do things you want and be the things you want. I made an Urza chief artificer deck a while back and noticed it was markedly stronger than my other decks (I'm both new and bad at the game) because there are a lot of artifacts that do good things. Definitely need to rewatch your videos again when going over my next deck, thanks for sharing your knowledge
I play 37 lands (including MDFCs and LTR landcyclers in that number) in the vast majority of my decks. In decks with expensive commanders, I run as many as 40. I need to make sure I have enough card draw to balance out the pockets of lands in the deck, but making ten or twenty land drops in a row just feels good. And casting a ramp spell while missing a land drop is one of the worst feelings.
I've pretty much cut ramp from all of my commander decks since almost none of them have a commander above 3cmc. I think trying to run below 36-37 is kind of foolish unless it's something like my Lier, Disciple of the Drowned deck which is about 40% cantrips by volume with a bit of ramp. Keeping a 1 lander with a 5 cost commander may seem daunting until you realize that hand also digs 8-12 cards deep looking for more, and you get to reuse those cantrips later.
It's hard to balance cost vs flexibility sometimes! Like running the cheapest mana cost version of each spell possible means you can afford to cast more spells, but paying twice as much mana for a modal card that can do two or three different things can be so useful! I tend to run the cheapest versions of everything when it's a combo deck; I'm usually trying to win as fast as possible rather than being flexible, interactive, or resilient. Though, if you're faced a lot of uniquely different threats each game, then variety/flexibility can out weigh costs!
One of my fave "mdfc's" isn't one at all. Zoetic Cavern is a land with morph. While not particularly powerful as a creature (2/2 for 3 colorless) or a land (tap to add 1 colorless) being able to use it as either is a nice option to have. Need land for turn? Zoetic cavern. Need an extra blocker for a wave of attacks coming your way? Zoetic cavern. It also has the nifty feature of being a pseudo-ramp. Definitly not efficient, but you can cast it as a morph, and then flip it up on a later turn. It costs 3 for the morph cast, and 2 to flip, so its 5 for an extra colorless land. So if you got extra mana, or dont need the creature, or you wanna double up on lands in a turn or 2, Zoetic cavern can go face up for an "extra land drop".
I think for the land count video, the concept do I run out of lands or things to do first is a very important question to ask(I credit this to sam black bc i heard it there). I think a lot of casual decks should Play around 40 lands. Especially if their commander doesnt provide card advantage and the deck does not try to win fast. Mdfc's and to a lesser extent fetches are even better if try to increase you land count to higher numbers as mentioned in the video
Slot compression is how I make decks running 35+ fat timmy creatures while having almost 30 pieces of interaction… because a lot of the creatures in the deck draw cards, provide interaction, etc. It’s nice because I end up having the highest individual card quality - if each player draws a card, I’m confident I’m ahead. That said, I’ve also found this raises the average cmc of the deck. The average nonland cmc of these decks is 4.9+, which scares off people who don’t consider mulliganing for several lands and a ramp spell in the opening 7.
Slivers gotta be the most slot compressable creatures-- just run a bunch of creatures with effects and abilities and suddenly they make mana, draw cards, revive allies, and you dont need a single sorcery or instant lmao
I have a mono green combo deck (the commander is kinda irrelevant as it changes like 10 cards who have specific interactions, with the commander) which runs 30 or 31 lands if memory serves right. The reason the deck usually doesn't brick is the fact that I run over 40 mana sources in the form of creatures. Why would you want to play creatures instead of lands? Creatures often trigger draw effects in this deck. Therefore they are preferable to lands. However this idea can only be applied to decks and players that are willing to sit one out if they draw badly. and honestly I am fine with it. Also you need a table that doesn't care for one player trying to combo out all game. However what I see with cedh decks as well is that even if land count is land mana sources almost always exceed 40. And I feel this is really important for many people to hear. And yeah maybe you have a super low curve deck. And you need less mana sources. You can be right. Just make sure to run the numbers (there tools online) that ensure that you are never mana screwed even if you miss lands.
Compacted slots > raw power This is most true about hate and sideboard cards. Especially in 60 cards formats. As "meh" quality hate cards in hand > perfect lone hatecard hiding somewhere in the deck (that you didnt draw)
My hot deckbuilding take is that when I am constructing my deck, I count any card that is mana-positive or mana-neutral as being in a “land” slot. Sol ring is a land slot, llanowar elves is a land slot, etc. I do this because, one, it works, and I fully encourage anyone who is comfortable taking a mull or two once in their life to try it, and two, because functionally, when you look down at your seven off the top, Sol Ring *is* a land and mana dorks *are* lands in terms of what you’ll keep in your hand, so why not cut down from 36 to 32 lands and some dorks? You’re cutting 4 dead lands that would just make you sad in the lategame after you kept that turn one sol ring.
Can you make a video on finding said cards? I’ve heard that like moxfield or whatever can have you put in parameters to find cards or whatever but it’s so complicated putting like “rbg; dog” or stuff like that
This is great but I haven’t built enough edh decks to abstract the points to be able to think on and apply them to 60 card formats. Wish there was some one that could and would xl
As someone new to magic, I wish to know how using flexible spells that fit multiple roles with less efficiency compares to running cards dedicated to certain roles effectively. For example, Boros charm is amazing but doesn't prevent exile like Heroic Intervention or evasion like Temur Battle Rage
Talking about land counts, is it possible for a deck to have “too many lands”? As in, my deck is an Omnath 5c Ramp Landfall deck, and I’ve been trying to run a bit more lands, now it’s 44 lands where 2 are MDFCs. However, I’m starting to notice that my win rate is actually going lower. This is 1v1 Brawl, so I’m wondering, is running too many lands causing myself to not be able to roll out as quickly as consistently? As in, not having enough 1,2 mv plays to smooth out the tempo more during the rollout phase. I don’t think my deck ever runs out of gas, but I do often die to bad tempos, not being able to make important plays it the first 4 turns, making myself get overrun. I wonder if removing some lands and adding a bit more 1mv cantrips will smooth it out a bit more.
Love your videos. Nobody makes content on this higher level stuff like you do. For your land video- I run ~32-39 lands in my decks, lower end being like 2 average CMC goblins and 39 being 5 color, with 35-36 on average. Am I wrong to just be slapping together like ~10-12 ramp and 35 lands, seeing i have a 60% shot to play my commander on curve in Moxfield, and esssseeennntially calling it a day? Talking similar levels of power to your Glissa here, not my Tutor mania fast mana BS decks lol
I'm super bad for building "fiddly contraption" decks - I really enjoy doing creative things, but have a hard time finding ways to end games in a way that feels right. For example, I have a hidden Brudiclad deck featuring Kykar. The goal of the deck is to create a token copy of an enchantment, and use Brudiclad to get many of them. Often the deck just beats everyone down with the spirits prematurely. And even when it does its' copy an enchantment game plan, it's often something like Jeska's Ascendancy which results in a very long turn. : / Another example is my shaman tribal deck. I had to remove powerful pump cards like Coat of Arms and Eldrazi Monument because they made the deck wildly inconsistent, making every match exclusively reliant on drawing one or more of them with no smooth transition or clear finishers that suits the deck.
I have a similar problem with my dragon deck. On paper, what "SHOULD" happen, is that the deck hits a critical point where some of the more supportive dragons come online and can cascade into big, stupid plays where tons of dragons get dumped out, and/or generate tons of mana to fuel their various "+1/+0" abilities to do silly, stupid numbers of numbers. In practice... having just 2 or 3 support dragons on the field usually means I can just swing for game with them, and by all accounts the deck would be just as good, but more consistent if I just focused on getting those dragons out. But I don't WANT to consistently win with a few dragons, I WANT to vomit 7 dragons each with a set of stats and abilities that could end the game alone, all at once!
Shit like this is exactly how I described putting "Cycling" Lands into the mana base. Most of the time, people and critics will say, "a Tap land is bad" In which my reply is, A tap land in the first 3 turns deal the minimum damage. Additionally if your critical turn requires 4 or 5 mana then putting down a tap land doesn't hurt you. Also the Lands cycle, so unless you managed to empty your mana EVERY TURN. I doubt a Cycling Land is ever gonna be a "bad draw" Yet when I go on to Moxfield or EDHRec barely any have Cycling Lands as a permament include in their decks.
Cycling duals are a favorite of mine too, I put them in just about every 2-3 color deck that can run them. They're fetchable, which is a nice quality to have in a land. I think people forget that you're more likely to have taplands in your opening hand than you are to draw them, until you're at the point where they don't really hurt you. If you're not playing at a power level where you're proxying original duals, having 6-7 taplands is perfectly fine. Even in my super low to the ground Laelia deck that wants to cast her for 3 mana on turn 2 every single game, having 5 taplands out of 33 barely hurts its consistency at all.
@@siosilvarif you're playing 33 lands + land-ish cards, you're already unreasonably light on land that you'd better know what you're doing. But, in a mono-color deck where your Commander costs ancient tomb mana, I'd think about casting the commander on turn 2. If you don't want to ever do that, tapped lands are fine, so long as you keep the count low. If you want to do that consistently, it's more important to get your acceleration on the battlefield while having your color mana available for turn 2. But yeah, if you don't play sol ring etc, tapped lands are fine.
@@LibertyMonk You're reading things I didn't say. Just because my Laelia has 33 lands doesn't mean she's not running 48 total mana sources which includes at least 10 different ways to power her out turn 2. I'm simply saying that turn 1 tapland, turn 2 Crystal Vein / Mountain + Ritual doesn't actually make it worse at what is fundamentally a casual strategy that goldfishes the table on turn 7-8. Sure, it can kill with Aggravated Assault+Neheb or storm on turn 5, but neither of those is slowed down either.
Slot compression is a great concept, but I wish the name was different. It highlights to me how people often build decks more off of superstition and heuristics than thinking about the actual game they're trying to play. "Slots" are a useful idea for when you're building a rough framework for a deck, and maybe even help get some data on how well a finished list can perform, but ultimately all cards are the same: you draw them, and then they're useful in that situation or they aren't. The idea of slot compression isn't +1 draw and +1 ramp at the cost of one deck slot, it's the idea that during a game, you doubled the usefulness of that card by making sure it's relevant when you randomly draw it and need card draw, and it's relevant when you randomly draw it and need ramp. As an aside, this is often not an actual doubling in average relevancy, since it comes at a very real cost of efficiency. Cemetery Desecrator is good graveyard hate and removal, but in a situation where you have two mana to spare, Rest in Peace or Doom Blade are relevant where CD is not. This is still usually a good trade off, especially in commander where mana is more plentiful, but it's worth considering. I don't know what it should be called instead of slot compression, or if changing the name really matters at all. I just wanted to highlight that the real concept isn't packing more stuff into your deck, it's playing more cards that have more chance at being useful in the moment you have access to them. It's pre-game virtual card advantage, you might start with seven cards no matter what, but you can make sure none of them are useless if they can be used for multiple things.
most of my edh decks run 40-46 lands. and it drives me crazy when my buds tell me they're only running 31 lands and they complain about being mana screwed
I’ve recently had a hard time making decks and them being absolutely monstrous. I’d wanted a human deck to mess with in commander and it ended up being around 450 cards and I had a hard time picking what to get rid of. 😅
450 cards. Wow. There's got to be at least two good decks in there maybe as many as six entire decks in there (depending how much of that is land). It might be easier to identify what decks are in that phat pile, then divide cards between them. Then either try those decks out (they can share land) or cut each deck down to 5 or 30 cards depending on what the decks are.
So, I'm very new to MTG and got lucky and got a whole Ur Dragon deck. I modified it as I've gotten new and more fitting cards and find myself struggling to get myself to bring even 30 lands. There's just so much that synergizes with dragons! I'm actually incredibly low on lands at the moment in this deck as I work on it. I'm believe it or not only at 19. However, the deck is packed full of cards that cheat out dragons for free or reduces their cost. Two cards in particular even let me put MULTPILE (one is actually "any number") dragons on the field for free! I've yet been given the chance to play with the deck much but in the one game I played I at least wasn't the first to die. So then my question is how far can "kinda lands" and/or cheats/reducers get you? A follow up question would be how many lands would you need absolute minimum no matter the circumstances?
As someone who also has a much beloved 5 color dragon deck I have tinkered with. Land cheats, in my experience, count as a sorta "half land" because there's usually a catch that you might not be able to take advantage of in your opening hand, and hiccups in the early game are really painful for dragons. As a rule, I tend to hover around 25%-33% of my "mana cards" being things that aren't basic or mostly basic lands as a maximum. So, if I have 20 mana total, only 5 of it is going to be "fake land". Higher ratios for more colors, since it's more and more imperative to get colors of mana out, and mana cheats TEND to be better for getting precise mana. Dragons in particular I actually go a bit higher, but that's for a reason actually relevant to this video, and also because dragons are an expensive back end engine to kickstart, and you do NOT want to sit on 4 effective mana for 3 turns hoping you top deck something. Bit of a case by case depending on exactly what the card does. Cards like Teramorphic Expanse are auto-includes and generally exempt from the ratio because they thin the deck while fetching exactly what you need, which is of concern for a deck like this, while green cards that are like, "two mana to search a land" or something need to have their cost factored in to the deck, and things that give you any mana but only for a dragon won't help you get essential sorceries or other mana support off. On a 5 color, they have increased value, and going as far as running only one or two of a basic land you have relarively little to play off of, just to pull it with a teramorphic expanse or whatever, and getting the rest from alternative mana sources is actually usually fine. One of my iterations of that deck had literally one island, that existed entirely for the sake of searching it, and otherwise got all the blue it needed from artifacts. For dragons specifically, I go higher, sometimes as high as 45-50% land and support, off the top of my head like 25-30 lands, 20-25 support, but that's largely because I go ham on mana dorks. (uh. Like, creatures that generate mana, and that's basically it. Lanawar Elf is like their mascot). Dragons can be a bit dead in the water for a while, and cheap creatures like this are at a premium, for putting stuff in the board. Ideally you're using them for mana, but they can also save you from getting life chipped off, tank a big hit, or other utility that can keep you in the game for that extra turn or two to get The Big Turn. This mana support isn't JUST mana support, it's more some generally applicable tools to help live long enough to throw dragons at people. Card compression, in real life! But, dragons are a bit of a special case, in general that's overkill for most decks, even 5 colors. Usually, depending on the speed of the deck and what it wants to do, I have found that about 25% 33% of my total mana support being non-basic or near basic land is usually fine, assuming the deck is in a position where mana support is more helpful than just a land, like multicolors or decks that need disgusting amounts of mana badly. Like, hydras or something. As for lowballing land... excluding any weirdo decks that are doing their own, highly specialized thing, in general I would say it's very, very inadvisable to go beneath like, 12-14 in a standard deck, and like 16-18 in a commander deck. Even then, I'd say pull that up, extra land is not as bad as not enough, usually, and you want to account for reasonably bad luck.
so I only play low curves in 60card formats, and my average land count is 18-20 (pay for a 3-cost? nah, I'l recommission it for 2 mana and it gets a +1 counter! Helping hand for 1 if i'm desperate) in commander if it's low curve I'm around... 30 lands I believe, while higher ones will have 40-ish land (most of those are commander-damage builds like Rielle or Saint Traft, and they still don't need a lot of mana) why not play big stompy stuff? cause I have a turn 1 play, a turn 2 play, 2 turn 3 plays, and on turn 4 I play another 2 things, this generally means I get more creatures and more removal out than my opponent!
I completely disagree, I find 27-32 being the best range to keep lands too with my preferred amount being 28. A proper depth of good card draw can significantly mitigate how often you miss land drops and even if you do go higher on the curve a decent ramp package at 1 and 2 will do wonders.
There are ways to make that number work, those being playing fewer colors (or paying for fetches), and running lots of low cost filtering and ramp. The issue is when people see the land counts of people who do those things and then assume that number is generally correct.
Not saying you’re guilty of it, but a lot of people will mistakenly push their land count too low. A lot of the misunderstanding comes from the fact that, while ramp and card draw reduce that number, the hidden caveats are that you should only really count the
27 is a wildly low amount of lands. I don't even trust in the consistency of elves below 32-33, and that's a deck that's over half mana sources. Below that it's not even *ramp* as in being able to spend more mana than the turn count, you're just trying to get back to being able to curve out turns 1-4 in 85-90% of games which is something you get automatically for running ~36 lands with ~8 pieces of ramp.
Why on earth are you running 36 land decks?! Am I building my decks wrong? Even my dimir specters lists ran 40-43 to make land drops until t6 so it could cast vela the night clad...
That sounds to me like you're not running enough ramp or not enough card draw, unless you're running a lot of lands that have utility effects. In something like Vela, which is Dimir, I admit that ramp is going to be hard to find and the efficient rocks are going to be more on the pricey side, so this is a deck where cheap card draw (and card velocity effects like looting) is going to be king -- and because you're in black, looting will also be good to put things in your graveyard for reanimation later, which can then give you more bodies to trigger Vela & other Blood Artist effects. You can run things like Silver and Leaden Myr as ramp that are also creatures -- and since they're colorless artifacts as well, Vela's Intimidate effect means they can only be blocked by other artifact creatures in those times you want to get in chip damage.
Lands aren't the only thing that contributes to mana. 36 lands is my favorite number, but my decks are all running 40 or more mana sources, of which 33-38 are the actual lands. My rule of thumb is to start at 36 lands and add 2 pieces of ramp or 3 cantrips for every mana the commander costs, then tweak from there. At the low end of mana sources, Nalia has a straight 37 land + 4 signets because there's no time to ramp when she wants to have a full party on turn 4. At the high end, over half of my Lonis deck makes mana... but only 34 of them are actual lands. I didn't go full elves build but he's still got 10 mana dorks and 8 ways to spit out a bunch of extra Treasures or tap his Clues for mana.
If you play enough steal effects, you can fit your opponents cards in your deck too.
learned this with my captain ngathrod deck
I stand by the thought that the best way to bridge a power gap at the table is to just play your opponent's cards instead of your own. /s but only kinda
Also improves deck variety!
Thank you so much for manually inputting captions instead of letting Google's automation handle it! It's important and appreciated.
Honestly your content reminds me so much of magicthenoah, just way less shitpost-y. Your content has inspired me to fix some of my decks, and my mtg experience has gotten significantly better since I started watching you. Thanks for the content :)
This is something incredibly important in Tiny Leaders! Being a singleton 1v1 format, with a deck size of 50 with commander(s) means you have to make sure *every* slot can fill a multitude of roles for consistency and flexibility.
This isn't supposed to be sparky but people still play tiny leaders?
For spell slinger decks, and any deck really DO NOT OVERLOOK ADVETURES! In my opinion they are a perfect example for this. They might not be the strongest or most efficient ways to do the thing you want them to do, but they provide options, and having more options is always a valuable asset, especially for us low creature Izzet slingers.
I can’t not watch all the way through your videos. I don’t really play commander anymore, but the topics are so interesting and well explained that you have became my favorite mtg content creator. You seriously deserve any of the attention you get on this platform.
I choked when you said “mid-power najeela build” 🤣
Yesss!! My phenax mill deck does this a little with its mana ramp. I decided to, instead of playing a lot of artifact ramp, play creatures that let me untap permanents paired with lands that tap for multiple mana. That way I can use it to ramp when I need mana or use it to untap a big creature to mill my opponents extra
yeah I have a tendency to overshare sometimes >_>. I have definitely fallen into the "fiddly contraption" trap multiple times as well.
Great examples; looking forward to hearing more about mana base construction!
I definitely appreciate it in this instance!
Other ways I “add” more slots
1. Modal spells - can be more expensive mana wise, but the added utility and flexibility is often worth it. You Find the Villains’ Lair is a great example of this.
2. Flexible removal - similar idea with modal spells. I don’t run removal that just targets one type. My removal will usually target any nonland or can even hit spells on the stack, like Divide by Zero or Commit // Memory
3. Split / Aftermath cards - split cards are like modal spells in their own way. Aftermath cards are great because of the added utility in the yard. I like Spring // Mind and Road // Ruin.
4. Flashback - it’s almost like we’re breaking the singleton rule.
I find Equipment is a weird way of compressing enchantments, in a deck that's trying to rely on creature buffs.
Each piece of equipment ends up being a few enchantments, because you can reuse them, unlike most enchantments; they often have a lot more limited effects, but you can kinda get around that by going like, 12 equipment instead of like 20 enchants, and using those 8 cards for some of the "other" stuff you're having trouble with.
Equipment is also nice because it's usually colorless, so can be plugged into new decks basically wholesale, instead of needing to get new cards if you want to do another creature buff deck in a different color for some reason, AND they're more friendly to multicolored decks to boot.
If you do a video on lands, please talk about the difference between ramping for lands (Kodama's Reach, Farseek), and increasing your lands per turn (Exploration, Burgeoning).
Just my take:
ramping for lands -> gives you the cards, more reliable
lands per turn -> more value potential, less reliable, less cards on hand
if you rely on ramp, use reliable ramp!
creatures < artifacts & enchantments < sorceries & ETB
the higher you ramp, the riskier. You might want to use *stall* cards too, which are cards that keep the opponent busy in the early game or deal with their threats, e.g. cheap board wipe.
Also, there is slow / fat ramp vs. early, fast ramp. If you only want to ramp to 4-5 mana, do not use 3-4 mana ramp spells.
Hitting your lands drops is not to be underestimated. If you use ramp but miss your land drops, then you probably would have been better of just using lands instead.
Also worth mentioning are *discount* cards that make your spells cheaper instead of giving you mana. This is especially good for low cost decks and enables multi-spelling in a turn. e.g.
also see untap, flicker
some weird discount like mindsplice apparatus
helm of awakening
OP spell cost -1
semblance anvil
OP 3, ETB discard 1 / discount 2 for shared card type
... Monument
discount 1 for ... color creature + extra effect. wrgu affordable
urzas filter
OP 4 / 2 discount for multicolored
caged sun, 2 EUR
6 / target color lands 2x effective
forsaken monument, 3 EUR
OP 5 / colorless mana sources 2x effectivity
gauntlet of power, 2 EUR
5 / basic lands 2x effective
nissa who shapes the world
5g / forests 2x effective + loyalty+1 -> untap 1 land
one of my personal favorites for ramp:
boseiju, who reaches skyward
I'm glad i discovered this channel just when i was starting to feel burned out with EDH. my decks weren't fun to play because they were inconsistent to play and didnt do what i wanted it to do. I feel reinvigorated to fix my old decks, and make new ones
My first EDH was Iname Death Aspect, I’ve recently revisited that deck after 12 years, getting lost in the synergy sauce is real and just last night I found myself brewing Iname and resurfaced with some half built Todmod/Yoshimaru deck
I've been trying to make tormod work what feels like an eternity. hes so neat. but also not good. the engines he hints at are so cool and interesting but the end state just doesnt work too well every time ive tried it. ive done golgari with regrowths and dredge. ive done jund dedicated dredge. ive done abzan tokens ive done dimir ive done esper. none of that worked. my current itteration is Tormod/Kraum which while the EDHRec page for that is all zombie synergies im running 0 of that and just all merfolk looters and dredgers. kraum letting you draw cards on each opponents turn and a dredge card with a discard outlet lets you turb through your deck and get some zombies. its really fun, the thing is i genuinely cannot envision how it ever is going to win a game. just 0 clue.
I’ve been doing this for a few years now and it’s made my decks a lot better
Great video, I also try to make sure I stay on mana curve while compacting cause sometimes the cards that do multiple things cost more, and I have thrown myself into “oh everything costs 4 mana now” trying to compact my decks.
Perfect timing for you to release this video! I was just taking apart my token deck and was getting overwhelmed by what card types I need to fit into the deck.
I love that Molder Slug made it onto my screen! I've had a beautiful foil one for years now, and it just never makes the cut
One of the best set of cards that fill multiple slots is the lotr landcyclers, especially Lorien Revealed, but I think that all of them are valuable and almost necessary cards for mono, duo, or even triple color decks. Especially since they can also grab the Eldraine lands or I suppose the janky Shadowmoor utility lands with basic types.
Nah, in 3 colors or more you need as many real lands as possible, so "kinda land" is not that great. The real huge boon on those landcyclers is that they're also a colored card for pitch casting evoke elementals or Force of X or are a Reanimate target. That kind of thing is a lot less common/useful in singleton no-sideboard formats.
They're still ok because they can grab triple/tricycle lands on top of on-color duals, but they're really slow. Lorien Revealed also gets a pass because Mystic Sanctuary is by far the best basic-typed land there is, and 5 mana draw 3 isn't as awful as the four creatures are.
In 2 color or mono color, they're great options, but beyond that, nah.
@@LibertyMonk Yeah honestly I debated saying 3 color and I do think that there are some 3 color decks that would want it (especially lower power ones) but you are right
Shoutout to deathsprout for being instant speed removal and ramp at the same time.
Ramos Charms is the pinnacle of deck compression and playing the deck feels like looking into the matrix there's so much going on
Thank you snail. This is why I find White to have some of the best land ramp in the game. With Brought Back and the like (second sunrise, faith’s reward, etc) you have a powerful ramp option early in the game and protection/rebuying etbs later in the game. All that’s required is building the mana base with those cards in mind (and shelling out the dough for fetches if you don’t proxy)
MDFC's and Cycling lands are great alternatives to mana rocks and dorks for extending your mana-producing card count into 40+ cards. The drawback to rocks and dorks is paying the casting cost in the first few turns when you have no mana to spare, and conversely, drawing a useless ramp card in the late game when you're already loaded with mana. Dual-mode land cards are exactly what you need to avoid getting mana screwed and/or mana flooded.
This is a really interesting concept and I have noticed it a lot in my restricted creature only Abazan Kathril deck which has almost turned into a control deck.
It plays only creatures, I try to not have self mill and graveyard tutor. And rhe deck has the strategy of playing just a lot of creatures with keywords that does additional stuff. So then ramp, card draw removal etc leads into the gameplan. The whole deck is built around the commander, but most games it never cast the commander. I tries to win the creatures it plays, and when the opponents boardwipe it can come instantly back with a giant monster based on all the keywords going into the graveyard naturally.
This has lead to the deck being able to play 20 interaction focused cards, 15 card draw, 13 ramp without those categories feeling like they take up a lot of space in thr deck.
Probably my weirdest deck which feels way more powerful in action than it got any right to be compared to looking at the list. Though it is buit to br played in casual metas.
MDFCs are fantastic for role compression, especially in mono colored decks. I play all 6 mono green ones in Gargos.
I'm building a voltron deck, but I was worried about not having enough creatures to block with. I eventually made the theme of the deck cards that can be either creatures or upgrades - not just bestow and reconfigure, but things like creatures with adventures that make roles, or Concealed Weapon (an equipment with disguise).
This reminds me of my Umori companion Stickfingers deck.
This exact concept is how I finally got brudiclad to work as a commander
same with guitar pedalboards, compression is underrated but everyone needs it honestly
i currently have the exact problem you described at the end with many of my decks. only running consistency because my card evaluation is usually how well cards play when i'm behind. that way i am often lacking win conditions.
I think lands are definitely the area I suffer the most. Looking forward to that video
Back on topic, it feels like such a simple concept to have cards do things you want and be the things you want. I made an Urza chief artificer deck a while back and noticed it was markedly stronger than my other decks (I'm both new and bad at the game) because there are a lot of artifacts that do good things.
Definitely need to rewatch your videos again when going over my next deck, thanks for sharing your knowledge
It's hard to play Urza and not have a broken deck...
Man i just discovered this channel it's pure gas wtf great video dude !
I play 37 lands (including MDFCs and LTR landcyclers in that number) in the vast majority of my decks. In decks with expensive commanders, I run as many as 40.
I need to make sure I have enough card draw to balance out the pockets of lands in the deck, but making ten or twenty land drops in a row just feels good.
And casting a ramp spell while missing a land drop is one of the worst feelings.
I've pretty much cut ramp from all of my commander decks since almost none of them have a commander above 3cmc. I think trying to run below 36-37 is kind of foolish unless it's something like my Lier, Disciple of the Drowned deck which is about 40% cantrips by volume with a bit of ramp. Keeping a 1 lander with a 5 cost commander may seem daunting until you realize that hand also digs 8-12 cards deep looking for more, and you get to reuse those cantrips later.
It's hard to balance cost vs flexibility sometimes!
Like running the cheapest mana cost version of each spell possible means you can afford to cast more spells, but paying twice as much mana for a modal card that can do two or three different things can be so useful!
I tend to run the cheapest versions of everything when it's a combo deck; I'm usually trying to win as fast as possible rather than being flexible, interactive, or resilient.
Though, if you're faced a lot of uniquely different threats each game, then variety/flexibility can out weigh costs!
In yugioh, you will often hear it said "X is crazy - it's a starter and an extender"
I love your videos. Subscribed.
I love your content. And want more of it
One of my fave "mdfc's" isn't one at all.
Zoetic Cavern is a land with morph. While not particularly powerful as a creature (2/2 for 3 colorless) or a land (tap to add 1 colorless) being able to use it as either is a nice option to have. Need land for turn? Zoetic cavern. Need an extra blocker for a wave of attacks coming your way? Zoetic cavern. It also has the nifty feature of being a pseudo-ramp. Definitly not efficient, but you can cast it as a morph, and then flip it up on a later turn. It costs 3 for the morph cast, and 2 to flip, so its 5 for an extra colorless land. So if you got extra mana, or dont need the creature, or you wanna double up on lands in a turn or 2, Zoetic cavern can go face up for an "extra land drop".
I think for the land count video, the concept do I run out of lands or things to do first is a very important question to ask(I credit this to sam black bc i heard it there). I think a lot of casual decks should Play around 40 lands. Especially if their commander doesnt provide card advantage and the deck does not try to win fast. Mdfc's and to a lesser extent fetches are even better if try to increase you land count to higher numbers as mentioned in the video
Slot compression is how I make decks running 35+ fat timmy creatures while having almost 30 pieces of interaction… because a lot of the creatures in the deck draw cards, provide interaction, etc. It’s nice because I end up having the highest individual card quality - if each player draws a card, I’m confident I’m ahead.
That said, I’ve also found this raises the average cmc of the deck. The average nonland cmc of these decks is 4.9+, which scares off people who don’t consider mulliganing for several lands and a ramp spell in the opening 7.
Slivers gotta be the most slot compressable creatures-- just run a bunch of creatures with effects and abilities and suddenly they make mana, draw cards, revive allies, and you dont need a single sorcery or instant lmao
I have a mono green combo deck (the commander is kinda irrelevant as it changes like 10 cards who have specific interactions, with the commander) which runs 30 or 31 lands if memory serves right. The reason the deck usually doesn't brick is the fact that I run over 40 mana sources in the form of creatures. Why would you want to play creatures instead of lands? Creatures often trigger draw effects in this deck. Therefore they are preferable to lands.
However this idea can only be applied to decks and players that are willing to sit one out if they draw badly. and honestly I am fine with it. Also you need a table that doesn't care for one player trying to combo out all game.
However what I see with cedh decks as well is that even if land count is land mana sources almost always exceed 40. And I feel this is really important for many people to hear. And yeah maybe you have a super low curve deck. And you need less mana sources. You can be right. Just make sure to run the numbers (there tools online) that ensure that you are never mana screwed even if you miss lands.
Compacted slots > raw power
This is most true about hate and sideboard cards. Especially in 60 cards formats. As "meh" quality hate cards in hand > perfect lone hatecard hiding somewhere in the deck (that you didnt draw)
My hot deckbuilding take is that when I am constructing my deck, I count any card that is mana-positive or mana-neutral as being in a “land” slot. Sol ring is a land slot, llanowar elves is a land slot, etc.
I do this because, one, it works, and I fully encourage anyone who is comfortable taking a mull or two once in their life to try it, and two, because functionally, when you look down at your seven off the top, Sol Ring *is* a land and mana dorks *are* lands in terms of what you’ll keep in your hand, so why not cut down from 36 to 32 lands and some dorks? You’re cutting 4 dead lands that would just make you sad in the lategame after you kept that turn one sol ring.
My dude I'd love to know more about your Liesa deck
I wish you’d link their decks
my first precon had like 43 lands in it (Swell the Host)
Can you make a video on finding said cards? I’ve heard that like moxfield or whatever can have you put in parameters to find cards or whatever but it’s so complicated putting like “rbg; dog” or stuff like that
This is great but I haven’t built enough edh decks to abstract the points to be able to think on and apply them to 60 card formats. Wish there was some one that could and would xl
Thoughts on making a video on your deck making process?
As someone new to magic, I wish to know how using flexible spells that fit multiple roles with less efficiency compares to running cards dedicated to certain roles effectively. For example, Boros charm is amazing but doesn't prevent exile like Heroic Intervention or evasion like Temur Battle Rage
Talking about land counts, is it possible for a deck to have “too many lands”?
As in, my deck is an Omnath 5c Ramp Landfall deck, and I’ve been trying to run a bit more lands, now it’s 44 lands where 2 are MDFCs.
However, I’m starting to notice that my win rate is actually going lower. This is 1v1 Brawl, so I’m wondering, is running too many lands causing myself to not be able to roll out as quickly as consistently? As in, not having enough 1,2 mv plays to smooth out the tempo more during the rollout phase.
I don’t think my deck ever runs out of gas, but I do often die to bad tempos, not being able to make important plays it the first 4 turns, making myself get overrun.
I wonder if removing some lands and adding a bit more 1mv cantrips will smooth it out a bit more.
Love your videos but can I suggest a darker background colour for your slides? Feels like I'm getting flashbanged all the time lol
Love your videos. Nobody makes content on this higher level stuff like you do. For your land video- I run ~32-39 lands in my decks, lower end being like 2 average CMC goblins and 39 being 5 color, with 35-36 on average. Am I wrong to just be slapping together like ~10-12 ramp and 35 lands, seeing i have a 60% shot to play my commander on curve in Moxfield, and esssseeennntially calling it a day? Talking similar levels of power to your Glissa here, not my Tutor mania fast mana BS decks lol
How much cheap draw do you have? That part matters a lot for how many lands it's best to run
I'm super bad for building "fiddly contraption" decks - I really enjoy doing creative things, but have a hard time finding ways to end games in a way that feels right.
For example, I have a hidden Brudiclad deck featuring Kykar. The goal of the deck is to create a token copy of an enchantment, and use Brudiclad to get many of them. Often the deck just beats everyone down with the spirits prematurely. And even when it does its' copy an enchantment game plan, it's often something like Jeska's Ascendancy which results in a very long turn. : /
Another example is my shaman tribal deck. I had to remove powerful pump cards like Coat of Arms and Eldrazi Monument because they made the deck wildly inconsistent, making every match exclusively reliant on drawing one or more of them with no smooth transition or clear finishers that suits the deck.
I have a similar problem with my dragon deck.
On paper, what "SHOULD" happen, is that the deck hits a critical point where some of the more supportive dragons come online and can cascade into big, stupid plays where tons of dragons get dumped out, and/or generate tons of mana to fuel their various "+1/+0" abilities to do silly, stupid numbers of numbers.
In practice... having just 2 or 3 support dragons on the field usually means I can just swing for game with them, and by all accounts the deck would be just as good, but more consistent if I just focused on getting those dragons out.
But I don't WANT to consistently win with a few dragons, I WANT to vomit 7 dragons each with a set of stats and abilities that could end the game alone, all at once!
Shit like this is exactly how I described putting "Cycling" Lands into the mana base. Most of the time, people and critics will say, "a Tap land is bad"
In which my reply is, A tap land in the first 3 turns deal the minimum damage. Additionally if your critical turn requires 4 or 5 mana then putting down a tap land doesn't hurt you.
Also the Lands cycle, so unless you managed to empty your mana EVERY TURN. I doubt a Cycling Land is ever gonna be a "bad draw"
Yet when I go on to Moxfield or EDHRec barely any have Cycling Lands as a permament include in their decks.
Cycling duals are a favorite of mine too, I put them in just about every 2-3 color deck that can run them. They're fetchable, which is a nice quality to have in a land.
I think people forget that you're more likely to have taplands in your opening hand than you are to draw them, until you're at the point where they don't really hurt you. If you're not playing at a power level where you're proxying original duals, having 6-7 taplands is perfectly fine. Even in my super low to the ground Laelia deck that wants to cast her for 3 mana on turn 2 every single game, having 5 taplands out of 33 barely hurts its consistency at all.
@@siosilvarif you're playing 33 lands + land-ish cards, you're already unreasonably light on land that you'd better know what you're doing. But, in a mono-color deck where your Commander costs ancient tomb mana, I'd think about casting the commander on turn 2. If you don't want to ever do that, tapped lands are fine, so long as you keep the count low. If you want to do that consistently, it's more important to get your acceleration on the battlefield while having your color mana available for turn 2.
But yeah, if you don't play sol ring etc, tapped lands are fine.
@@LibertyMonk You're reading things I didn't say. Just because my Laelia has 33 lands doesn't mean she's not running 48 total mana sources which includes at least 10 different ways to power her out turn 2. I'm simply saying that turn 1 tapland, turn 2 Crystal Vein / Mountain + Ritual doesn't actually make it worse at what is fundamentally a casual strategy that goldfishes the table on turn 7-8. Sure, it can kill with Aggravated Assault+Neheb or storm on turn 5, but neither of those is slowed down either.
But is there really a mid power Najeela deck?
Slot compression is a great concept, but I wish the name was different. It highlights to me how people often build decks more off of superstition and heuristics than thinking about the actual game they're trying to play. "Slots" are a useful idea for when you're building a rough framework for a deck, and maybe even help get some data on how well a finished list can perform, but ultimately all cards are the same: you draw them, and then they're useful in that situation or they aren't. The idea of slot compression isn't +1 draw and +1 ramp at the cost of one deck slot, it's the idea that during a game, you doubled the usefulness of that card by making sure it's relevant when you randomly draw it and need card draw, and it's relevant when you randomly draw it and need ramp.
As an aside, this is often not an actual doubling in average relevancy, since it comes at a very real cost of efficiency. Cemetery Desecrator is good graveyard hate and removal, but in a situation where you have two mana to spare, Rest in Peace or Doom Blade are relevant where CD is not. This is still usually a good trade off, especially in commander where mana is more plentiful, but it's worth considering.
I don't know what it should be called instead of slot compression, or if changing the name really matters at all. I just wanted to highlight that the real concept isn't packing more stuff into your deck, it's playing more cards that have more chance at being useful in the moment you have access to them. It's pre-game virtual card advantage, you might start with seven cards no matter what, but you can make sure none of them are useless if they can be used for multiple things.
most of my edh decks run 40-46 lands. and it drives me crazy when my buds tell me they're only running 31 lands and they complain about being mana screwed
I have a deck with 28 lands and a bunch of high cost cards
but it's a Jhoira deck.
I’ve recently had a hard time making decks and them being absolutely monstrous. I’d wanted a human deck to mess with in commander and it ended up being around 450 cards and I had a hard time picking what to get rid of. 😅
I had something similar, but not quite as extreme. Found it quite hard to get down to 99 for jeskai drawing
450 cards. Wow. There's got to be at least two good decks in there maybe as many as six entire decks in there (depending how much of that is land).
It might be easier to identify what decks are in that phat pile, then divide cards between them. Then either try those decks out (they can share land) or cut each deck down to 5 or 30 cards depending on what the decks are.
wednesday boiiiiiii
it's thursday
So, I'm very new to MTG and got lucky and got a whole Ur Dragon deck. I modified it as I've gotten new and more fitting cards and find myself struggling to get myself to bring even 30 lands. There's just so much that synergizes with dragons! I'm actually incredibly low on lands at the moment in this deck as I work on it. I'm believe it or not only at 19. However, the deck is packed full of cards that cheat out dragons for free or reduces their cost. Two cards in particular even let me put MULTPILE (one is actually "any number") dragons on the field for free! I've yet been given the chance to play with the deck much but in the one game I played I at least wasn't the first to die. So then my question is how far can "kinda lands" and/or cheats/reducers get you? A follow up question would be how many lands would you need absolute minimum no matter the circumstances?
As someone who also has a much beloved 5 color dragon deck I have tinkered with.
Land cheats, in my experience, count as a sorta "half land" because there's usually a catch that you might not be able to take advantage of in your opening hand, and hiccups in the early game are really painful for dragons. As a rule, I tend to hover around 25%-33% of my "mana cards" being things that aren't basic or mostly basic lands as a maximum. So, if I have 20 mana total, only 5 of it is going to be "fake land". Higher ratios for more colors, since it's more and more imperative to get colors of mana out, and mana cheats TEND to be better for getting precise mana. Dragons in particular I actually go a bit higher, but that's for a reason actually relevant to this video, and also because dragons are an expensive back end engine to kickstart, and you do NOT want to sit on 4 effective mana for 3 turns hoping you top deck something.
Bit of a case by case depending on exactly what the card does. Cards like Teramorphic Expanse are auto-includes and generally exempt from the ratio because they thin the deck while fetching exactly what you need, which is of concern for a deck like this, while green cards that are like, "two mana to search a land" or something need to have their cost factored in to the deck, and things that give you any mana but only for a dragon won't help you get essential sorceries or other mana support off.
On a 5 color, they have increased value, and going as far as running only one or two of a basic land you have relarively little to play off of, just to pull it with a teramorphic expanse or whatever, and getting the rest from alternative mana sources is actually usually fine. One of my iterations of that deck had literally one island, that existed entirely for the sake of searching it, and otherwise got all the blue it needed from artifacts.
For dragons specifically, I go higher, sometimes as high as 45-50% land and support, off the top of my head like 25-30 lands, 20-25 support, but that's largely because I go ham on mana dorks. (uh. Like, creatures that generate mana, and that's basically it. Lanawar Elf is like their mascot). Dragons can be a bit dead in the water for a while, and cheap creatures like this are at a premium, for putting stuff in the board. Ideally you're using them for mana, but they can also save you from getting life chipped off, tank a big hit, or other utility that can keep you in the game for that extra turn or two to get The Big Turn. This mana support isn't JUST mana support, it's more some generally applicable tools to help live long enough to throw dragons at people. Card compression, in real life!
But, dragons are a bit of a special case, in general that's overkill for most decks, even 5 colors. Usually, depending on the speed of the deck and what it wants to do, I have found that about 25% 33% of my total mana support being non-basic or near basic land is usually fine, assuming the deck is in a position where mana support is more helpful than just a land, like multicolors or decks that need disgusting amounts of mana badly. Like, hydras or something.
As for lowballing land... excluding any weirdo decks that are doing their own, highly specialized thing, in general I would say it's very, very inadvisable to go beneath like, 12-14 in a standard deck, and like 16-18 in a commander deck. Even then, I'd say pull that up, extra land is not as bad as not enough, usually, and you want to account for reasonably bad luck.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 can I see your dragon deck so I can compare?
Do you have a decklist for your glissa deck?
www.archidekt.com/decks/5035210/glissacruiser
It IS Sunday! How'd you know?!
MDFCs!
so I only play low curves in 60card formats, and my average land count is 18-20 (pay for a 3-cost? nah, I'l recommission it for 2 mana and it gets a +1 counter! Helping hand for 1 if i'm desperate)
in commander if it's low curve I'm around... 30 lands I believe, while higher ones will have 40-ish land (most of those are commander-damage builds like Rielle or Saint Traft, and they still don't need a lot of mana)
why not play big stompy stuff? cause I have a turn 1 play, a turn 2 play, 2 turn 3 plays, and on turn 4 I play another 2 things, this generally means I get more creatures and more removal out than my opponent!
it’s thursday actually
Oh I was 110% click baited by this video. I was hoping you actually stuck a magic deck into a compactor. I'll be back when you do that!
um its FRIDAY
Im very disappointed you didnt just whip put a hydrolic press
Clearly the easiest way to cram more powerful cards in your deck is by removing basic lands. It's a tried and true method.
I'm starting to think this channel is just an excuse to talk about your glissa deck a lot (great vids fr)
Actually first trust
I completely disagree, I find 27-32 being the best range to keep lands too with my preferred amount being 28. A proper depth of good card draw can significantly mitigate how often you miss land drops and even if you do go higher on the curve a decent ramp package at 1 and 2 will do wonders.
There are ways to make that number work, those being playing fewer colors (or paying for fetches), and running lots of low cost filtering and ramp. The issue is when people see the land counts of people who do those things and then assume that number is generally correct.
Not saying you’re guilty of it, but a lot of people will mistakenly push their land count too low. A lot of the misunderstanding comes from the fact that, while ramp and card draw reduce that number, the hidden caveats are that you should only really count the
27 is a wildly low amount of lands. I don't even trust in the consistency of elves below 32-33, and that's a deck that's over half mana sources. Below that it's not even *ramp* as in being able to spend more mana than the turn count, you're just trying to get back to being able to curve out turns 1-4 in 85-90% of games which is something you get automatically for running ~36 lands with ~8 pieces of ramp.
Why on earth are you running 36 land decks?! Am I building my decks wrong? Even my dimir specters lists ran 40-43 to make land drops until t6 so it could cast vela the night clad...
That sounds to me like you're not running enough ramp or not enough card draw, unless you're running a lot of lands that have utility effects. In something like Vela, which is Dimir, I admit that ramp is going to be hard to find and the efficient rocks are going to be more on the pricey side, so this is a deck where cheap card draw (and card velocity effects like looting) is going to be king -- and because you're in black, looting will also be good to put things in your graveyard for reanimation later, which can then give you more bodies to trigger Vela & other Blood Artist effects. You can run things like Silver and Leaden Myr as ramp that are also creatures -- and since they're colorless artifacts as well, Vela's Intimidate effect means they can only be blocked by other artifact creatures in those times you want to get in chip damage.
Lands aren't the only thing that contributes to mana. 36 lands is my favorite number, but my decks are all running 40 or more mana sources, of which 33-38 are the actual lands. My rule of thumb is to start at 36 lands and add 2 pieces of ramp or 3 cantrips for every mana the commander costs, then tweak from there.
At the low end of mana sources, Nalia has a straight 37 land + 4 signets because there's no time to ramp when she wants to have a full party on turn 4.
At the high end, over half of my Lonis deck makes mana... but only 34 of them are actual lands. I didn't go full elves build but he's still got 10 mana dorks and 8 ways to spit out a bunch of extra Treasures or tap his Clues for mana.
"Slot compression" is such a pretentious way to say "flexible" LOL
f*rst
Here I thought this would be a video with tips on fitting large double sleeved decks into smaller deck boxes... 🤡