How Simple Sorting Makes You Better at EDH | Magic: the Gathering | Commander
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 ноя 2023
- Check out our decklists here: edhrec.com/articles/edhrecast...
Title sequence by Daniel Woodling / MTG Explainers: bit.ly/3982yYa
Card images courtesy of Scryfall: scryfall.com/
Elevate by LiQWYD / liqwyd
Creative Commons - Attribution 3.0 Unported - CC BY 3.0
Free Download / Stream: bit.ly/liqwyd-elevate
Music promoted by Audio Library / nw 
Игры
![KFF Singapore Badminton Open 2024 | He/Ren (CHN) vs. Alfian/Ardianto (INA) [7] | F](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/an7AykjOaAA/mqdefault.jpg)
Good video Joey! Regarding your last point on win conditions, I do something similar before I brew a deck. I create a mission statement/log line like this: “I win the game with X. I do it by Y.” I then use the statement to guide all of the subsequent deck building decisions.
An example for my Adeline token deck: “I win the game by attacking. I do it by creating an army of tokens.”
I do it weird, I see a combo I like or a card I want to use. Then I figure out the plan and commander that will make it doable and fun
@@Poenasi do almost the same!
No exaggeration, you just completely changed the way I think about deckbuilding. I usually find a cool commander, build around what ever it wants to do and just grab all the cool cards that facilitate it, but when I started analyzing my decks (I didn't even know Archidekt did categories) I saw found serious holes. Thank you for sharing your insight Joey.
Care to share a few holes? When I started I always lacked removal and protection…
Emphasized my “gameplan” a bit too much
I NEEDED this video! I've been using Archidekt for my deckbuilding and had absolutely no idea that I could have cards be in two categories at once!
THANKS A TON JOEY!!!
Me freaking too. Actual game changer for brewing
Same!!
I put reanimation in my card draw category because it fulfills the same purpose: getting me things when I don't have any, at least in non-reanimator decks. I also keep a section specifically for cards I'm thinking of cutting both so I can keep an eye out for how they play and also so when I get a new card to add I have a short list of what to cut.
I love this. Been wanting to overhaul a bunch of existing decks. I think breaking away from my normal brewing habits will help give fresh perspective. Thanks for sharing!
I personally like having payoffs and enablers as two separate categories for my themes, and otherwise keep it to card advantage, removal, board wipes, ramp, win conditions, protection, and lands
Absolutely! If your deck archetype uses set up cards and payoffs it is SO useful to label them that way because there is often a delicate balance between the two that you wouldn't otherwise see. The first time I built life gain, my win con section was half pay off and half life gain triggers. The deck fell on it's face so many times. turns out the deck didn't need 15 payoffs, more like 6 or 7. but it took so long to realize it because in my head they were all just "win con."
Came here to say this, payoffs and enablers do need to be counted separately, and you need different amounts of either in different decks.
Love this concept and I've been unconsciously doing it whenever I go through my cards to build a new deck. One thing I've found though is that depending on the deck, I'd like to sort out the wincons/gameplan into more specific sections, especially if it's a very engine focused deck, like aristocrats or reanimator. Sometimes you have too much payoff without enablers, and you just can't play it out cause you don't have a way to start it
I do similar. My categories are:
Things that help me cast spells/creatures (land, ramp, cost reduction, cheat spells)
Things that help me get cards (draw, exile, recycling)
Things that synergise with the commander and/or what they're trying to do
Interaction and Removal/Board wipes
I generally prioritise cards that fit into multiple categories but if something doesn't fit into any, it probably shouldn't be in the deck.
Mana Boost, Card Advantage, Targeted Removal, Boardwipes, Graveyard, Protection, & a category embracing what the deck does. Sometimes an additional category called Shenanigans is used. Shenanigans involves combos & pet cards. Rarely I also have a Tutor section.
I normally categorize "card selection" which includes draw, scry, tutors, etc. anything that helps move the cards I want into a place I can play it
Something I learned building Galazeth Prismari to be a Dragonstorm goal deck is that you can end up with designs where cards should all be serving multiple roles. Having to balance instants and sorceries with artifacts means that you need to look for ways to have single cards fit into multiple tiers of support. Like the Prismari Command is a removal piece, but also can work for card selection and mana ramp since the Treasure serves more purpose with him than normal.
this is perhaps the most salient video i've seen so far in how to help me improve with my commander gameplay by starting at the deckbuilding process. i've actually made a few connections recently that i wasn't able to fully verbalise. for example, when making my Alela, Cunning Conqueror deck, I realised Wrong Turn was a decent way of making a goaded creature attack multiple times, and another example from your video, Access Denied. people don't really question when you end the turn with 5+ mana untapped since so much of what you're doing is off turn. granted they aren't faeries or rogues, but it's a decent way to build more of a board presence while also interacting with the board on someone else's turn and present a lot of surprise blockers when someone they could swing out against me
like in Command Zone, i had often simply grouped things into card draw, ramp, removal, and then that's about it. i'd identify other categories, like Clever Concealment to protect my board of tokens, but wouldn't really know how to group it per se. i think for me and how i'm taking this video is just allowing me to organise things in a particular way and help analyse what my deck is trying to do. i also appreciate that 'what it says on the tin' is not always what it does when it has particular synergies/functions with your commander and deck's gameplan
This video came at just the perfect time for me! In the middle of several brews and felt like I was hitting a wall. Thank you for everything Joey!
Thank you for this video. The best thing about it is that because of it, I actually started sorting my cards on moxfield, which I never looked into before.
Love that you share every corner of your deck building brain. As someone who has been brewing for 8+ years, it’s always refreshing getting a fresh take on the process.
Thank you for this video! I’ve been very interested in how others categorize their builds!
Putting the same cards in several categories has helped me a lot for making cuts. And also for choosing cards to put in that can fit into several categories. Cards like kolaghans command are my favorite type of cards now, specially in impulse draw decks where you gotta be able to play the cards that you impulsed into.
Great video as always!!
That's great content! I can say from personal experience that following those tips will make your decks play better and upgrade them as new cards are released a breeze.
Excellent video, and very good point about losing sight of the forest for the trees. That was a mistake I made a lot early on in my deckbuilding experience. Another way to group cards that's really helped me out is to make "Beginning," "Middle," and "End" categories. Cards that you can play as early as turn 1 to kickstart things, cards that will add value and keep your engine going, and cards that will end the game. That way you make sure you have things to do in the early game or after a board wipe, as well as only enough win cons that you reasonably need.
I remember when the Command Zone use to give me the thrill of a good in-depth abalysis video about commander. These Joey videos from edhrec are literally the best commander analysis there ia on youtube imo, with all the respect to Matt and Dana. Kudos for awesome content
Your insights as always are on point, powerful, and thought goading.
Appreciate the fresh perspective. I think I may have gotten to linear in my building so we'll try this approach and see where it takes us.
That’s awesome! I have a few more categories in most of my decks, but my favorite by far is a “Stocking up for the cold” category in my Jorn list. It’s a bunch of card that store mana in various forms, but things like horizon stone, kruphix, treasure vault, mana drain and spell swindle are all in there. It helps me to think of those spells as a form of ramp for really explosive turns and X Spells!
I like the way you approach categories. I’ve had people tell me that I should use categories when deck building, but the examples they point out always end up seeming cluttered and far more complicated than organizing by card type. Having 5 or 6 streamlined categories feels like it would work better.
Great video, Joey! I'm always thinking that I just have too many categories, and it makes my deck harder to parse. I'm going to put this into work. Thanks! Also, would you ever consider doing a video where you build a new deck? I'd love to watch you through the process.
This was a great video and discussion point. Until fairly recently I just sorted my online decklists by card type and it was almost always very difficult to figure out cuts when adding a new card and especially when a deck just wasn't really working how I thought it would and I tried to figure out why. Since sorting by these types of categories it has become much easier to see why a deck might be underperforming since if it only has around 3 sources of card advantage that's easy to spot and add more. Also the brago example at the end was literally what ended up happening with my roon deck. So much great synergy and value but very few ways to actually close out the game lol
Great Topic! It would be awesome to see a whole podcast episode dedicated to this, going through examples for different style decks!
It seems that I view the categories very similar to the way you do Joey.
Great video, very well explained 💯🫵😁
Cool video Joey! I'll give your way a shot and see how it feels!
so glad I saw this. I am gonna have to watch this a few times to let it sink in - my husband and I NEED organizational deck building skills!
This actually follows academic research on qualitative data analysis and is currently a transparency problem with the coding process that theorists are trying to address by creating and publishing systems with logics similar to what you’ve outlined here!
I play Boros Artifacts for all of my commanders. Sometimes I get stuck wanting to slot cards in that make sense to me but don’t quite feed the specific machine I’m building. This was a great new approach to thinking about my decks, especially in playing with is such a narrow archetype of the game.
I've never played a game of edh in my life..
Over the last few months I've watched and listened to a plethora of content
I've attempted to make a handful of Commander decks recently.
I stumbled on this video after learning how to use archidekt and after watching it I was able to complete a deck over the course of a few hours off and on today.
My first ever competed deck and I did it in a flash
Using the more flexible category descriptions made it so clear 😮
This, a 10000%! Don't know if it's worse to get a decklist without any categories or one with more than a dozen specific ones, and then be asked for deck help. Will recommend this video to everyone!
Great vid. The win con point at the end is very salient imo. It's easy to get lost in stacking triggers and trying to pull in more and more interactions and synergies in line with your deck's theme, but all of that needs to lead to a board than can overrun or a bunch of burn or you milling them out or something that results in the win. Even if you're keeping it casual, just don't tutor your combo and try to have a couple of other ways to bring it on online maybe. Envision your foes' demise at the hands of this deck's theme, then translate that into a strategy.
Lands, mana acceleration, card advantage, interaction, payoffs. Starting there, I can always deep dive into things further into the category, and compare them to each other to see where I have too much or too little of an effect. It's very helpful for a starting point. After that you need reps on the decks that's how you really get to compare and contrast how actual effects stack up to each other.
Hey Jo great video concept like always. I love those mini episodes where you bring us inside your mind.
A good concept that I think would be very useful in an episode like this is a complete guide/tutorial for archidekt. Showing how to use the site to it's full potential and extract all the value it has to offer.
This could be in the same concept or a completely different video altogether but I'd love to see how you brew your decks. What resources do you use and how you use them. Exemple : how you use edhrec (the advance filters), scryfall etc.
Love the content keep it coming and love the cast !
Once again I see how similar you and me look at deck building. I tend to sort my decks into a total of nine categories. Ramp, Card Advantage, Interaction, Prevention, Enabler, Payoff, Good stuff, Tutors and finally Lands.
I've been using these for about two years now and it works really well for me. Good Stuff is my "cut this next" category in which I put all cards that don't fit anywhere else.
Tutors, while actually just card advantage is a category that helps me define the level of consistency of the deck.
Enabler and Payoff are my two deck specific Categories. In your example that would be the token makers and oomph.
I am building my first commander deck and i am overwhelmed by the amount of interesting cards i could play in it
I am currently sitting at 250 possible cards, and this video really helped me make sense of all that chaos
I made the change to this form of labels when I switched to moxfield a while back. My 5 categories for all decks are Draw, Finisher, Interaction, Land, Ramp. Then I have 1-2 other categories depending on the theme of the deck that let me fill out the synergies. It really is a helpful way of designing, and let's me easily see what can be cut. If I struggle to find a label it can be easily cut. If it has only 1 label and a high cmc then it can probably be cut. If I have more than enough in one label, like 20 interaction then i look to cut from that label first. I feel it has helped me a lot.
This is a really important video. Thank you
You make the world a brighter place, Joey :)
This is actually the video I needed to work on how to tag my decks thanks
Great video, very helpful!
I usually start with thirty lands balancing the colors I need, add 10-15 forms of ramp, and from there dump in any card in my collection that will prove useful and go from there. Usually I end up with 110-120 cards and have to cut a lot of painful choices, but it helps me narrow down which cards are just strictly better than others.(though I usually end up removing almost all protection, I need to get better with that)
super interesting and helpful, I really enjoyed and appreciated this :)
Starting off 2024 with a banger video 🎉❤
Definitely needed this
I usually tend to sort by two main methods: CMC, then color. I've never found sorting by categories all that helpful, considering a majority of cards in my deck tend to have multiple functions. But what HAS been useful to me during brewing and finetuning is keeping an eye on my mana curve, then my color distribution.
If sorting by cmc works for you, more power to you, but I do have a few warnings when deckbuilding this way.
Firstly, quite a few cmcs are kinda wrong, given stuff like cost reduction, kicker equivalents etc. Make sure you know how much you typically plan on paying for the spell and sort accordingly.
Secondly cmc tells you different things depending on how proactive the cards are. Having 15 spells with cmc 2 in your deck, doesn't help much with a t2 play, when most of it is interaction.
@@Krunschy Fair points all.
Could not agree more!! Have been doing this for years.
When laying out cards in these categories, ill sub-sort by CMC, type, or whatever is useful
Typically I have about 6-9 categories in a deck. Any more and that probably means too many themes. One might miss this by organizing in too many and/or unnecessary ways.
Didnt know about archidekt. Thx! Getting back into magic again after a while (again, lol). Feels like mtg is much more convenient now. Having cross-cutting categories is very useful. Will probably try with one for "situational" or "depends" cards, for when u cant necessarily decide until the deck is at least half formed or nearing completion.
I rarely subscribe to a channel after only 1 video, but ill make an exception ❤
My tags for decks are dependent on the deck! I always have ones for Draw (advantage I tend to put in other categories) same with Ramp etc… But for aristocrats as an example I use Fodder for things to be sacrificed, and so forth! Found the video helpful regarding the inclusion of more obvious win cons instead of value as ending games is useful! Sometimes games in my pod go 2/3 hours! 😅
Lands
Ramp
Draw
Removal
Those are the four sections in every one of my deck lists, and from there more sections get added depending on the game plan of the deck. An “other” section sometimes pops up, if cards have synergies with the gameplan but don’t really fit in with the other categories
For instance, my Henzie deck also has sac outlets, recursion, and a section called “veggies” for creatures that are just good to play to help fuel Henzie’s blitz abilities.
Honestly this should be required viewing for anyone who wants to use the category stuff in archidekt. Far too often I look at a list, see like 10 categories and several cards are in 5 of them. You really put it well how to use the feature like a seasoning not a spice.
That last topic really spoke to me xD i don't usually struggle with finishing the game, but i once built a Shorikai, Genesis Engine deck and when i played for the first time, i dominated the whole game, but got my deck to it's very last card before i was able to kill everyone, since i didn't have a concrete win con...
I got out of that game and promptly added a Moonshaker Cavalry 😂
Very wel said.. I generally sort them very wide at first, to see what every card on its own does. Token makers versus +1/+1 counters for example.
Then I make them more simple, sorting them in the base groups:
Draw/Search, Mana Ramp, Removal, Win cons, Main theme, Lands...
That way I have an oversight on the amount of every card type I have. I could put for example Professional Face Breaker in Mana Ramp (its not actually ramp in a sense), but his function is similar.
For removal I generally sort them in Board wipes and single target removal at first, then add them just to removal as a whole, to see how much I have. I might be a bit low on my removal at times I wil say though.
Also I generally test my decks and play them, if I find something not working I alter it. This is something many might not seem to do. They build a deck, they play it and that is it.
Generally you learn the most what is wrong with your deck with playing the deck. You can goldfish, but that is not the same as an actual game.
I have my standard categories for all my decks:
Ramp
Card Advantage
Removal
Protection
Enders (win cons/ways to close out the game)
And then I’ll have deck specific categories depending on the synergy/plan of the deck.
Great video! A good follow up could be how to play test efficiently to make decisions on cuts, mana curve, synergies, etc. to have a better rounded brew =)
Strongly recommend subheadings. For example Interaction: Removal and Interaction: Protection. This keeps my lists tidy without having overwhelmingly sized categories.
I build my decks analog on my desk. Most of the time i organize my deck in ramp, draw, removal and Commander specific cards like dragons in a dragon tribal deck.
Then i try to fill most of the first three categories with those dragons and the rest with staples from the given category. After that i sort the cards in creatures at the top and non creatures at the bottom while keeping the mana value in check from left to right.
This allows me to see all of the deck and make decisions wether i want more creatures or non creatures and how fast the deck is.
Simple is key here.
Moxfield allows me to tag my cards on either a local (just this deck) or global (across all my decks) level. I use this to tag universal things like "removal" or "ramp" and also specific things like "attack triggers" in my Isshin deck or tagging combos together. All with just an exclamation point. :)
I've been brewing Don Andres and ran into an issue with my removal. On my initial brew, I included a full suite of everything I usually put in my decks. Some removal, some board wipes, ect. But I quickly realized with my plan to steal my opponents' creatures that targeted removal and even most board wipes were actual detrimental to my game plan because it deprived me of targets to steal. Instead, I pivoted away from hard removal and towards bounce spells. I don't want the creature gone entirely because I want to beat my opponents with it. Bouncing helps take it off the board whenever I need to avoid damage or get damage in, slows them down, and leaves it as a target on later turns of they recast it. Hell, even something that puts a creature on top of its owner's library works well because I can then exile that card via numerous effects and take it for myself.
Best video on the channel. Foundational.
The categories I use in all decks are: Ramp, Draw/Tutor, Removal, Sweepers, Land, and after that it goes into categories that are specific for the deck (ie: Sac-Outlet, Sac-Target, Win-Con, Landfall Triggers, Token Makers, ETBs, Death Triggers, and so on). Even my “specific” ones aren’t overly specific and it makes the deck easy to look at, and easy to see where I’m lacking (ie “oh I have lots of sac outlets but not enough repeatable ways to make things to sac”)
Also, for your examples for Zuran Orb and Forever Young, you could just give them each multiple labels if need be. In those decks they’re basically modal cards.
Ramp
Card Advantage
Removal
Synergy/Gameplan
Bombs/Wincons
Other
MDFC'S
Lands
The Other category is usually protection, reanimation in non-reanimator decks, and tutors. Every once in a while it'll be a card that is hard to categorize. However those cards are far and few. As for why I have an MDFC category... Both spells and lands. Always running MDFC'S.
I remember, when I first started playing commander, just piling a bunch of cards together without any categories. I was playing Kamahl, Fist of Krosa, and it was just mono-green stompy, so that actually worked pretty well. Then, I built a Teysa, Orzhov Scion deck, and it really struggled to work how I wanted it to work. Then i read an article about sorting, and I sorted it into 4 categories, prey (token generators, recurable creatures, etc.), predators (things that eat my prey), scavengers (things that get value from everything else dying), amd resources (lands, ramp, card draw, removal, etc.). Keeping it that simple made me realize immediately what was wrong. I had way too many sac outlets and not nearly enough to sacrifice. I had a bunch of cool cards that did cool things, but I cut my Torment of Hailfire for a Sacred Mesa or a Spirit Mirror or something and the deck worked so much better.
This sounds really helpful. When pooling together 250 different cards as I try to design for a commander really inspiring me at the moment, I can end up with thirty different tags so I know exactly what engines come as a package. But then getting into a list I've already built, those many different tags become burdensome, rather than helpful.
I use a 9 category system:
Ramp, Draw/Advantage, Interaction, Recursion, Tutor, Threat, Defense (including wraths), Theme Enablers and Theme Payoffs
I also use Archidect which allows for cards to be in multiple categories at the same time.
I generally use: land, mana, removal/answers/wipes, protection, draw, tutors, win con, combo, utility. Sometimes I combine protection with removal and tutors with draw, and win con with combo. Also utility is kind of a catch all.
While overall I do agree with this idea, I wanted to add something I've noticed in my own deckbuilding, which is the need to be more specific about the cards that go towards the deck's theme. Some commanders have a very straightforward gameplan like Tatyova where you make lands and then land big stompys to win, and some have much more complex plans, like Tawnos. In my tawnos deck, I have the classic categories with ramp, card advantage, finishers etc, but when it comes to what I want to do with the deck, there are enough steps that separating them out makes it easier to make sure there's a balanced number of cards to fill the many roles I need filled. Even in simpler decks though, I like further dissecting the themed section of the deck to make sure I have a fairly balanced amount of cards doing whatever I need.
I like what you said about cards being used outside of the norm. My example is in my Akroma, Angel of Wrath deck, since I weaponize the catch-up ramp/draw by manipulating my land count, I run a Lotus Field in it to assist in that; however, if I have my Strict Proctor (which is normally a tax creature), it turns into a ramp function for my Lotus Field or Guildless Commons, because why would I pay two mana to sacrifice two lands, when I can just say, "nah, I think I'll just let it counter the ETB and up myself two more mana." In addition, Strict Proctor also functions as an outlet for my hit/attack trigger equipment cards, by virtue of its evasion and low CMC to get it out early.
Getting multiple uses out of a card, especially when it has a lower CMC, will put you in way better positions at different points of the game.
I actually lay out the physical cards on my bed in stacks depending on their function, then the cards with several functions that depends on the situation on the board end up in a pile and then there is more stack with cards that serve a primary function and give me a added bonus that benefits that deck I am playing, though I try to keep those under the 4 mana cost, preferably 3.
Here is my method for brewing:
1. Each card belongs to exactly one of three categories: (land) / (mvp) / (support).
Usually 37 lands, 10-15ish mvp, the rest are support.
mvp cards are the best cards in the deck, which are really hard to cut and define what i'm trying to do.
2. Each deck also has around 5-6 more categories. All cards can belong to any number of these.
3. Four of the categories are always: ramp, draw, disruption, finisher.
Ramp includes any mana acceleration.
Draw includes any card advantage.
Disruption includes pinpoint, boardwipes, graveyard hate etc.
4. The last category or two are flexible, and unique to what the deck is trying to do. For example:
My kyler deck has: humans, protection
My tameshi deck has: tameshi targets (artifacts/enchantments i like bringing back)
My yawgmoth deck has: sac fodder, payoff (mostly aristocrats)
I typically max out at 6 categories with 4 being my most common amount. Generally keep pretty broad categories though like 'mana,' 'card advantage,' and 'removal' as my standard across all decks. It helps me keep my decks focused on actually being able to function xD With those 3 mentioned categories being core, imo, to all decks and then 1 or 2 others for what I want a specific deck to do.
Great tips, actually I use very similar method. Another advice is also to run fresh deck like in solitaire fashion few times - this can help to do necessary cuts. It turns out that you never want to play specific cards.
What most programs miss, but my kitchen table offers is columns of categories or super-types of categories, if you will.
One column is interaction, but then it's separated between wipes, single taget, etc.
Some categories build groups and, at least all program I know of, don't appreciate that.
I've always been big on having a good curve so I tend to separate by cost and separate it by rolls within the piles a lot like you do.
Ramp and Reduction
Card Advantage
Disruption
Protection
Threats
Tech
I describe disruption for anything that interferes with opponents gameplan such as targeted removal, board wipes and sacrifice effects.
Tech is anything that doesn't fit into a particular category but may have such a strong interaction with the playstyle/commander itself that it's worth running
I just look for reasonable numbers in land+ramp, removal/interaction/protection (see below for how much of each), and draw that is mana affordable and consistent, and enough ways to advance the deck's strategy or win with the strategy.
When assigning cards to draw/card advantage you need 10+ card draw/impulse draw that's unconditional and 4 cost or less. Don't short yourself on card draw needed to help you hit land drops and have answers available.
Tomer's rule of 50 cards for land plus ramp is useful. Whether extra land drops count as ramp depend son how many land and lands-to-hand spells/effects your deck has. Like Sam Black says, consider running more than mana producing lands over (bad) ramp to meaningfully develop your board earlier than opponents.
JLK's rule of 26+ cards (more is better) that do the thing needed for your strategy (like exile cards in a War Doctor deck) is also good to keep in mind separate from categories.
How much protection you need depends on how much you depend on having your commander in play, how much removal you expect, and how many replacements for your commander you have in the deck.
How much removal/interaction you need partly depends on how much mana you need for your strategy to win. Slower strategies need to use removal (and/or life gain) to gain time because trying to reduce the time requirement by just playing more ramp can lead to flooding on ramp when you need action. Note too that if you use mana rocks, mass artifact wipes can knock you out of the game unless you have a defense against that.
More competitive decks play more tutors to help offset the ramp/action tension but casual players may resent how linear and consistent your deck becomes if you do that.
The joy of magic comes in the fencing match of interesting questions and effective answers.
If your deck EITHER
is extremely hard to interact with (soft of counter-spells or some other narrow type of interaction) because the deck "wins from the hand" with combos that can win the game on the spot
OR if opponents cannot push through your deck's intense amounts of interaction until you have inevitability or resolved your combo, then opponents are going to have a bad time. This is why mismatched power levels in games are bad.
Conversely, if your deck is very poor at interacting with opponents (which can mean constraining their life total and time to execute their strategy like with Slicer decks) then you are going to have a bad time.
Lands and ramp pile 40.
Interaction suite varies but usually 1 to 2 board wipes, 6 to 8 spot removal and optional protection(fog, swiftfoot boots, etc)
10 card positive with at least 5 being permanents or perpetual.
40 cards of pure fun and strategy.
Out of those 40, I tend to split the deck in three. Commander synergy, commander faults, and flavour combos.
Stuff that works, stuff that covers my ass, and stuff that defines the deck.
Usually including 5 game enders, trying especially hard to stay on theme. For instance, in my Raffine deck, I run public enemy as a late game close out. Really nice when I got a board, my target has a board, and someone has just enough life that they would be a threat if they weren't taken out before eliminating the guy with the board who very much can kill me.
Thanks. This helped a lot
GREAT video, TY
We now need the "How a Commander Murder Board will help you build better and more hipster decks" from Dana. In all seriousness, great video, Joey. I haven't done this in Archidekt yet, though I do it when I build in paper.
On god I would just see a cool commander, go i want to build that. Then slap cards from edhrec into moxfield and call it a day. I had no idea Archideck could do all that. I'll definitely go through all my decks and reevaluate them now thanks to this video.
10:44 i can't stop hearing the bee gees in my head
I get the feeling Joey stumbled upon my brews in Archidekt XD
Im a big sucker for specific categories for all my things, but making it all a little tidier would probably be helpful too.
For me the most important aspect is to build the deck from the ground up, meaning I force myself NOT to start with the coolest deck-specific synergy pieces, but with ramp, board wipes, targeted removal and card draw. You'll find that there are often only 20-25 free slots for cards that facilitate the deck's unique purpose, not 50. There are exceptions of course, if you're in a very well-supported theme like enchantress.
I see lots of people recommending a "removal" and a "protection" section. I chose to lump those together as "interaction" because both sections are reacting to what your opponents are doing.
Also, in my proactive decks, I have more "protection" and less "removal", mm but in my control decks, it's the inverse. In both however, I have about the same amount of "interaction" (20-25 usually, but I like to run this number pretty high).
The part that gets me I think is having the same card in multiple sections. It always trips me up but I can’t stop myself from doing it.
I split mine into Creature, Land, Ramp/Mana, Draw/Tutor, Removal/Burn/Counterplay, and a "Miscellaneous" pile, and then by mana cost in each catagory. Some decks I'll also make an extra pile, like Self-Mill or Equipment, depending on if a deck's gameplan leans deep into one.
My categories are normally:
Mana sources, card selection/advantage, general value (capped around or 10 cards), deck mechanism 1, deck mechanism 2.
I was having problems with how to categorize cards with multiple jobs and I found it was difficult to find the count of relevant parts if everything was scattered by logic categories. So now I leave all the card type categories as main and then I use a bunch of seccondary categories as "out of the deck". That way is easier to find how many of the relevant card type that deck has.
This way the deck is easy to read but you can also explore the many other logical categories
Moxfield, and tagging is my OCC. I tag like crazy for each role they play.
My personal categories are:
Lands
Ramp
Card Advantage
Interaction
Pressure
Utility
Protection
(Pressure is sometimes swapped to Gameplan)
I agree about win conditions, but at the same time I am looking for on-theme vs generic wincons. For example, in my Bant Chants deck I have multiple creatures that get +1/+1 counters whenever an enchantment hits the battlefield, and I also have multiple creatures (and an equipment) that get +1/+1 for each enchantment on the battlefield. Both synergize with my deck, and each is a way to win, but they are definitely different in terms of when I want to see them. I also have different options for going wide. But I'm not looking to put a card like Craterhoof or Moonshaker Cavalry in my deck as if it was any other beatdown deck. It just doesn't feel right to me.
As for the sorting aspect, I love your take on it. I sort each of my decks differently, depending on the feel I have for it. For example, I have a mono-red deck that is a little off the wall. While I am working on it, I divide it into five categories: Lands/Mana, Borrow, Copy/Redirect, Burn, and Other. The wincons for the deck are spread throughout the different sections, but whenever I remove any cards I ask how it affects my chances of winning. The "Other" category includes random cards such as Smoke, Leyline of Punishment, Chaos Warp, and Artifact Blast.
But I also have decks that I simply divide into Creature/Non-creature/Land and be done with it.
I usually start with all the extra, specific categories as I collect cards in the brainstorming stage, then I clean it up as I look deeper
Great video
Lands, ramp, removal/interaction, creatures, then sub categories depending on the deck.
I definitely could use the advice.
I have a category of really cool art cards. I have kept cards in a deck because the art was better than another card I was contemplating cutting.😂
I have more than once chosen a worse card over a better one because "this one fits the theme of my commander better"
Guilty.
I have exactly 6 categories with several subcategories: Lands, Cards, Ramp, Interaction, Protection, Gameplan and Tutor.
Ah yes my favorite category, cards
Damn I was not expecting the need for an Oxford comma to be in the RUclips comment section, but here we are
I love Gameplan as a category
Always expect the Oxford comma inquisition!
-proud member
@@The_Davester can only assume he meant card draw, thru me the heck off too.
I usually have a rough idea of what I'm doing when I build a deck, but tbh certain categories tend to be skimped on because good solutions either don't exist (yet) or I don't know about them (way more often due to how many cards exist at this point), it's hard to have too many 2 mana draw 2 spells in a deck, but their aren't enough to make an issue out of it. One category I like finding room for is interaction... a deck either needs to be able to remove bigger stuff or be in Simic colours, those are the options if you want to win (very spicy take, but Simic has nuts board states).