AJ Sacher
9/7/2009 11:00:00 AM
There. I have changed my profile picture. Now you can all stop critiquing how photogenic I am and focus more on the material I discuss.

Standard season is over. M10 limited is irrelevant to almost everybody. There's no point in writing about what the new formats will be like without knowing what Zendikar will bring. MTGO has become stale and stagnant. The Baneslayer deck is being routed out by Merfolk and 5cc with lots of hate, and grinding is hard when you know there are 3-4 people in your 8 man that you are a 70-30 underdog to. It's these lulls of the tournament schedule that are great for a mixture of introspection and a healthy mental-break. Otherwise, interest just continues to wane. That's one of the ways people lose their fire.

In an article I wrote a long time ago, I discussed the theory of stock mana, which is a somewhat Unifying Theory on a lot of the core principles on the efficient usage of mana. The basic concept was based on some advice I received a few years ago from Aaron Hauptman. The advice was simply, “mana not used is mana wasted” with the follow-up, “you can never get that mana back; if you don't use it, it is gone forever.”

I recommend that you read that old article, which can be found here. I think it is one of the most helpful articles I have written (not that that's saying anything). When reading this article, keep in mind that this thought process requires a schema of “total mana” as well as thinking of cards as merely tools to help you use your mana, instead of the other way around (while both are helpful to consider, the latter is much more common, and probably more helpful as well).

This article is probably going to be pretty short. I would like to add a few clauses to the theory in order to make honing your mana efficiency more accurate. Then I will give some specific examples of where the concept can be applied in today's formats. It's nothing groundbreaking; just some food for thought.

The first thing I want to say on the matter is that one drops are underrated. This section applies mostly to limited, but has its moments of relevance in constructed as well. There are many quotes attributed to many people along the lines of “never underestimate the ability to do two things in one turn”. What this means is that 1 drops aren't necessarily good because they can be cast on turn one, before anything else could be done thus giving you an early on-board advantage (which is true, but not the point), but rather because you have something to do with that extra mana when you hit a clot in your curve. What I mean by this is if you draw two three drops, then you are going to be wasting a mana on turn four that could have potentially been used to further your board. The solution can't be “play more four drops” because then you're just doing the same thing with 4 drops on turn 5. One drops fill that gap. Not to mention that most playable one-drops are above the power-curve. It's like a wild-card when laying out your curve. Say you have a limited deck with a curve like this:

2 one-drops
5 two-drops
7 three-drops
2 four-drops
4 five-drops
2 six-drops
1 X-Spell

If you draw a one-drop after turn one, it fits snuggly into any opening in your hand's curve to let you maximize your mana effectively. Of course, this idea only really applies to tempo-oriented decks that want to be able to aggressively curve properly. There are other wild-cards that help with this, but they are less underrated. They would include mana sinks such as Looming Shade and Figure of Destiny, and X spells such as Fireball or Mind Spring. Card draw is another way to use more mana more effectively, as you have more spells to cast which lets you use more of the resources available to you. Again, this takes into consideration the theory that mana used is what matters, and cards are only the tools that allow you to successfully use said mana. Merfolk Looter isn't good because he turns virtually dead cards (like lands 7 and on) into relevant spells, but because it turns cards that don't let you actively use mana into cards that let you effectively spend those resources so they don't go to waste.

The theory of stock mana gives some more weight to the reasoning behind playing first. You get to make the first land drop and spend the first mana, so you have successfully used one more mana than they have. On a completely unrelated note, some people are choosing to go on the draw in the 5cc mirror in standard because of a Patrick “Coca-Cola” Chapin article that suggested it. This is wrong. It may actually be correct in game one, but you have to know what they are playing beforehand, as well as whether or not they have Planeswalkers in their deck. If they are maindecking Jace Beleren or Ajani Vengeant, you have to choose to play in order to have the highest chance of being able to beat it. Broken Ambitions is active no matter how many comes into play untapped lands you draw, and you are more likely to have an opportunity to get an answer for it online quickly enough to not just lose to the advantages they give. Post-board, the face of the match-up changes entirely. Instead of dead removal spells, you have to face Planeswalkers, Great Sable Stags, Glen Elendra Archmages and the like. These are cards that benefit the person on the play. This has nothing to do with what I am talking about, but there you have it. Back to stock mana talk!

I understand that some people say that this type of thinking doesn't apply for 5cc, and that just isn't true. The deck has lots of instants that do different things. I agree that it wouldn't apply to draw-go archetypes, but as I said in my first stock mana article, draw-go is dead. If you leave mana up for a Counterspell nowadays and they don't cast a spell, you didn't “get had” like you would back when Magic was more skill intensive. You merely cast an Esper Charm or Plumeveil or Vendilion Clique or Cryptic Command in bounce-draw mode or Volcanic Fallout or Lightning Bolt or Doomblade or whatever and no potential mana is wasted! It's no longer a matter of risking leaving men on base because you can always do something, whether or not they cast a counterable spell into your open mana.

This principle of stock mana is particularly relevant in today's formats. Playing standard matches against a counter-based deck demands knowledge of these concepts to play effectively. A lot of these decks play Cryptic Command and some number of Broken Ambitions (although some are cutting them for a split of Negate and Essence Scatter, but the Ambitions-filled counter suites are still far more popular). My examples are going to be from the point of view of UW Baneslayer, as that is the deck I have been playing online.

Against one of these decks, they have 2 lands up and a Vivid that just came into play. You play your third land. This is when you cast your Meddling Mage or Knight of the White Orchid (assuming Borderpost) instead of your Kitchen Finks. This disallows Broken Ambitions. When they have 3 up, you are more likely to be willing to play into the Broken Ambitions, as if you don't, they can still use that mana for an Esper Charm so you won't gain anything by sandbagging your spell. Sometimes, you'll get into situations where they'll have 3 mana up and you'll have 4. Then a two drop is perfect, both because it allows you to play around Broken Ambitions and because it allows you to Broken Ambitions them. This is the perfect spot for your Broken, as it is hard to get value out of it late since you have too many fat drops that you have to cast to be able to kill them. This spot lets you Force Spike an end of turn 3 drop like Esper Charm or Plumeveil, or they can play an untapped land and a Hallowed Burial or Baneslayer Angel. It's also possible that, if you don't have the Broken and are against a player able to play around things, you can pretend to think before playing your 2 drop and discourage them from laying a threatening Angel.

Speaking of Vendilion Clique, MAN that card is good! When they pass with 4 mana up, you can look at that Clique in your hand with confidence as you make your land drop and pass the turn right back to them. It's so good at battling countermagic, as it makes them do something to deal with it, which opens you up to cast whatever threat you want. It lets you not play into a Cryptic Command without having to waste your turn to dodge getting Dismissed. Not to mention that the creature has some words on it, too. It allows you to find out their game plan, poke a hole in it, then develop one of your own that trumps theirs. Late, it can cycle away a Baneslayer you won't be casting in order to hold up Broken Ambition, or a Borderpost you drew when you already have more than enough land to do what you need to do. The card does it all, and I feel foolish for shaving it down to 3 for even one 8-man.

Measuring cards in terms of mana can give a better understanding of why some cards are ridiculously good. There's no doubt that there are efficiency baselines that exist in the game; they are the unwritten rules of how much an effect should cost that R+D tries to use to keep power-levels in check. Things like “cantripping costs 2” and “a 3/3 in anything but Green costs 4.” These baselines are everchanging, such as how 1 Red mana used to be worth 2 damage and is now worth 3, or how 3/3 for Green used to cost 1GG and now it's 2G. A quick look into mana equivalence along these efficiency baselines can give perspective on how cards are powerful in terms of tempo (total mana used) as well as in terms of cards. My example in the previous article was how Tarmogoyf in Extended “should have” cost 3.5 for the size he was. People's argument against it being a great card was that it is “just a guy” and doesn't give you any card advantage, but it gives you a pretty good TMU advantage without costing you cards. Then on top of that, against red decks they would occasionally have to spend multiple burn spells to drag it down which means card advantage. The best cards give both CA and positive TMU.

Take Bloodbraid Elf for example. It is the rawest of the raw 2 for 1s. For the cost of one card, you are casting two cards. The mana advantage is significant as well. A 3/2 haste probably costs just under 3 mana nowadays, then you are casting a 2 or 3 mana spell with it for free. That means you are getting 5 or 6 mana for your 4 mana investment. That's not even including the fact that Blightning has a mana equivalency of 4, Putrid Leech at about 3, and Anathemancer anywhere from 2 to 5 depending on the timing and match-up. That means you are getting a lot of mileage out of your Elf, and how you always feel robbed when you hit a removal spell with no targets: now you overspent for your 3/2.

Time to break down Cruel Ultimatum. Discard three cards is worth BBB to 3BB mana (Raven's Crime vs Three Tragedies. I'm unsure how to view it.), Draw three cards is UUU to 2UU (Reach through Mists vs Concentrate), gain 5 life is worth 1W, lose 5 is worth RR or 4R (Bolt+shock vs Lava Axe), Raise Dead is B, and 1B for Cruel Edict. That means that, depending on which scale you use, you are getting the effect of either 2WUUUBBBBBRR -or- 11WUUBBBBR for the price of UUBBBRR. I think the actual answer is somewhere in between the two, but the point stands that you are getting more than you paid for in terms of both cards and mana.

Gargoyle Castle is the epitome of Total Mana Used advantage. Not only does it let you do something when you have nothing else to do thus letting you use 6 mana that you wouldn't have used otherwise, but also adds to your total mana in the meantime instead of sitting in your hand waiting to be cast like a normal spell would. If you want to think of it in terms of cards instead of TMU, it's also absurdly good. Horizon Canopy costs you a life to tap, and when you do finally crack it when you flood, you're drawing another dead land about 40% of the time. That means it's a “free” .6 cards. The Gargoyle Castle's drawback is that it makes colorless, but when you sacrifice it you are getting a decently bodied flier at instant speed in your more controlling deck (Lark, Faeries, and mana ramp decks are the only builds that can play it). That sounds like a full card's worth of value to me.

Another noteworthy play that you may encounter in the coming weeks where stock mana affects your decision-making is dictated by the fact that there is a functional reprint of Neck Snap called Divine Verdict in M10. If you are drafting that set, you will be playing against it as it is very good in that format. There are also times where you can get a read on them having either Essence Scatter or Negate depending on what you have seen in past games (on MTGO, you can watch replays of the other matches in your draft) and cast either a non-creature spell or a creature spell depending.

That's all I have for this week. I have an article that talks a lot about game design and Magic history, as I analyze the evidence of and ramification of the dreaded “power creep”. See you next time.

-AJ Sacher