{"ops":[{"insert":"This 360 card Cube is made from the principle that all cards should have approximately same impact value when hitting the board. Therefore it is artisan, that is comprised of common and uncommon cards, where the relatively insanely impactful cards available in rare and mythic have been weeded out of scope. There is no “throw down one big impact card” to win strategies. There is no deckbuilding around the insane cards in one’s cardpool, it’s all about finding strategies between almost equal cards to make advantages and maximize their combined impact. \n\nWhen all cards have approximately same impact value, then games tend to be less about powerful cards and more about smart ways to create something between them!"},{"attributes":{"blockquote":true},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"The idea is that good games are close games"},{"insert":"\nI wanted to make a cube that would generate fun games, where no one would run over their opponent, but rather have relatively tight games where the right decisions and timing in pivotal moments would be decisive. I wanted to discourage lazy deckbuilding and lazy playing styles, such as “building around owerpowered cards” or “comboing to win without really interacting with opponent”. I wanted games to be decided less by the power of the cards and more by the talent and wit of the deckbuilders and players. Losing is more a result of mistiming your plays and misreading the situations, than being overpowered or pure rock-paper-scissor mechanics resulting in obvious disadvantages in one deck type versus another. \n\nWith close to equal card impact and openended strategies, we’re less likely to end up in the boring scenarios, where one deck literaly couldn’t win against the other. With this emergence focus cube-design, all players are likely to have cards available to deal with the strategies their opponents throw at them.\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Cube designed around emergence and openendedness"},{"insert":"\nIn game theory, researchers often talk about emergence, which is when simple rules interact to create complex scenarios. It’s one of the guiding design principles in MTG cardgame in general, but often deckbuilders tend to design after progression principles, where they play in simple steps, and tend to avoid unexpected situations or minimize them as much as possible. Many players follow mechanical scripts for how to win and especially in standard playpatterns tend to be rigid and formularic.\n\nThis Cube is a singelton cube, where all 360 cards are unique and combine in criss-cross patterns to weave nets of possiblities. There is no right set of formulars, even across the different play themes. This is also the reason why the Cube is filled with cards with different openended mechanics from different sets. And a tightly focused synergy strategy will in this meta not necessarily outperform a more broad interactive toolbox strategy. For example, will a ‘going broad strategy’ with many creatures not outperform a ‘going deep strategy’ with huge creatures, nor will either ends of this spectrum outperform a mix inbetween, where both strategies are combined. There is no just going one way, and if you ‘go broad’ then you have to go all the way. The very trickiness and unexpectedness of your deckbuild, might be what wins you the game here.\n\nThe Cubes design will demand of players that they assess more on a situation to situation basis than in regular games. And more attention to detail is also required in this Cube, since many of the common and uncommon cards are not that well-known. It is the hope that the Cube will generate som quite unexpected games.\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Combat focus to create interaction and emergence"},{"insert":"\nThe Cube is generally focused on combat strategies (going fast, broad, deep, or with different forms of evasion) and much interaction, such as combat tricks, removal and protection. This is because these combat mechanics generally create way more meaningful interaction between players than the more ‘solitaire’ like strategies. \n\nIn combat you have to access your opponents board, how they might block, what they might play from their hand, if you punch them and so on. Combat is, in essence, pure interation. And interaction between players is where unexpected things are most likely to occur, therefore the playzone for emergence. Players can trick each other, bluff their way through and in need go for weird plays.\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Openended color identities and play themes"},{"insert":"\n\nThe color identities are connected to different themes and are as such:\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"White: "},{"insert":"\n+1/+1 counters, tokens, lifegain, and humans\n\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Blue: "},{"insert":"\nspellslinging, prowess, flying, tokens, and wizards\n\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Black: "},{"insert":"\ndeathtouch, lifegain and -drain, +1/+1, and outlaws\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Red:"},{"insert":"\naggro, tokens, spellslinging, direct damage, burn, and outlaws\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Green:"},{"insert":"\n+1/+1 counters, tokens, buff, proliferate, big hitters, humans\n\nThe Cube generally encourages players to build dualcolor identities, where players can get the combined advantages of two colors and include the multicolored cards that focuses on more streamlined synergies such as:\n\nAzorius: fly, cast multiple spells and generate tokens \nBoros: go broad, buff creatures and do combat tricks to win\nDimir: \n\n\n\n\n\n"}]}