I am starting this thread with the ultimate hope of a better understanding of the strengths of cyclers. This is a continuation of a post I made in the "[Single Card Discussion] Street Wraith" (
http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=33545.0) thread in the Vintage Open Forums:
As an aside (and perhaps beyond the scope of this topic): If there were no rule on deck size, what would the optimal size of a reactive Type 1 deck? (That is, setting aside Doomsdayesque auto-win combo piles)? I would be astounded if the answer actually turned out to be 60 . . . a number picked by WOTC more or less arbitrary at the beginning of time.
Scott Limoges answered:
Nice question. Each deck would have a different optimal size, dependant on what the deck does. Combo would want a 7 card deck. Fast aggro might want an 11 card deck. Control, a 20 card deck. Factors like how a deck wins and role determine this. I think we can agree that anything over 30 cards would almost never be optimal, it would make starting hands to random. That said, 56 cards is far from limiting.
Scott Limoges's gut response is consistent with my intuition, but I'd like to take a more scientific approach to understanding this problem.
As an experiment, I propose that we start building a format from the ground up with unrestricted deck size (and all other restrictions intact). I intend this to be an iterative process, starting with doomsday piles (i.e. 7 card combo decks), and then proposing decks that beat those, then decks that beat those, etc. All other magic rules apply--e.g. paris mulligans, play or draw, players lose if they cannot draw a card, 15 card sideboards, same B&R list (for now), etc.
Ideally, what will happen is that over the course of many iterations we will all reach a concensus as to the ideal size of an MtG deck utilizing the T1 cardpool, or alternatively the ideal size of various archetypes. I hypothesize the ideal deck sizes are close to what Limoges proposes, which would suggest that cyclers have at least theoretical value. Or we might discover that the ideal deck size is actually 63 cards (and therefore that cyclers suck, contrary to popular belief). Or perhaps, we'll find an unbeatable 7-8 card pile, and that will be that.
Most likely, after a few iterations the possibilities become unweildy to theorize about, but even then useful information might be gleaned. And if not, this might still be a fun exercise!
A few notes before we get started.
1) Even combo decks might consider running an 8 card deck, unless they want to mulligan every game on the draw.
2) Better play at least 10-11 if your plan includes ancestral Recall (though you might not draw it in your opening 7).
3) Leylines are good in this "format." It will be very easy for your opponent to have LotV in the opening grip, so yawg will decks should assume they'll face leyline every game.
4) If there is a strictly superior 7-8 card "doomsday pile", it will likley be on the back of Pact of Negation. Thus, we might consider "banning" PoN in this experiment if that happens.
5) Oath/flash/other decks that count on *not* drawing cards probably won't be a plan A in early iterations. (It would be interesting to see at what point such strategies become optimal if the format "evolves" long enough).
So, to get things rolling, I propose the following "deck":
1 Black Lotus
1 Dark Ritual
1 Research/Development
1 Underground Sea
1 Mind's Desire
1 mox Sapphire
1 mox emerald
Notes about this deck.
- You mulligan on the draw (so you don't auto-lose)
- You beat LotV
- On the play, you lose to FoW or SSG + REB
- On the draw lose to almost any form of disruption (except misdirect)
- You have no defense, so you lose to any first turn deck.
I'm 99.99% certain this is NOT the best deck in this format. Who can beat me???
