mtg cards "magic cards" "magic the gathering" magic articles

Mana Ratios: The Nonbasics

by mistergreen527, 27 January 2010

Mana Ratios: The Nonbasics

I first want to apologize for some of the formatting errors in my last article, Im still trying to figure this whole thing out and hopefully Ive worked out most of the errors for this article.

Editor's note- those were actually my fault. -KC

As I mentioned last week in Mana Ratios: The Basics, one of the ways to increase the likelihood of being able to cast your spells is to use nonbasic lands. To be more specific, Im referring to nonbasic lands that have the ability to produce more than one color of mana.

Replacing Basic Land with Nonbasic Land

At this point, Im going to assume that you have a fair enough grasp on the equation that I presented in my last weeks article. If not, this may be a good time to go back and look it over. Lets say youve got your newly built deck, youve applied the ratio equation and have your basic land counts. The next step is to replace these basic lands with nonbasic lands. For this article, we are only going to focus on one attribute of these nonbasic lands: the colors of mana the land can produce. Here are some simple tips on how to do this:

1) Nonbasic lands should only replace a basic land if at least one of the colors it can produce is the same as the basic land it is replacing. For example, if youre building a Bant deck and want to use Sejiri RefugeMTG Card: Sejiri Refuge, it should not replace a Forest. Sure, your blue and white spells will be easier to cast, but your green spells will be more difficult to cast. If you replace a Plains with a Sejiri RefugeMTG Card: Sejiri Refuge, however, the difficulty of casting white spells and green spells remains the same, but it will be easier to cast your blue spells. The same goes for fetch lands, such as Verdant CatacombsMTG Card: Verdant Catacombs, since it will turn into a land that can either produce green or black mana. Finally, the only land a Lonely SandbarMTG Card: Lonely Sandbar should replace is an Island. Hopefully this is common sense to most of you, but it needed to be said just in case.

2) Try to replace basic lands evenly. For example, if you have a deck with 13 Mountains and 7 Swamps and you want to add 4 Dragonskull SummitMTG Card: Dragonskull Summits, then replace 2 Mountains and 2 Swamps. If youre forced to choose to replace one more than another, such as if you only own 3 Dragonskull SummitMTG Card: Dragonskull Summits, then replace more of whatever land has the higher count. So, since this example has more Mountains than swampss, replace 2 Mountains and 1 Swamp with 3 Dragonskull SummitMTG Card: Dragonskull Summits.

3) If a nonbasic land produces only colorless mana, use the same method in tip #2, treating the nonbasic land as though it can produce any color of mana. This makes it so that each colors ratio is decreased by about the same amount. However, do this knowing that it will make it more difficult to cast your color-specific spells.

4) If a nonbasic land produces no mana and does not allow you to fetch for a land, then it should not be counted as a land in your calculations at all. For example, if you want to use ArenaMTG Card: Arena, you should count it as a spell that costs 0 mana, rather than a mana producer.

Calculating Mana Ratios with Nonbasic Lands

Alright, lets head back to the home page and pick out a Newb deck to work with. Here are the current contents of ArtyPatys Giants Ftw:

2x Zektar Shrine ExpeditionMTG Card: Zektar Shrine Expedition, 2x FireballMTG Card: Fireball, 4x PonderMTG Card: Ponder, 2x PyroclasmMTG Card: Pyroclasm, 3x SleepMTG Card: Sleep, 4x Lightning BoltMTG Card: Lightning Bolt, 3x Alphetto Alchemist, 2x Bladetusk BoarMTG Card: Bladetusk Boar, 3x Dragon WhelpMTG Card: Dragon Whelp, 2x GomazoaMTG Card: Gomazoa, 4x Jackal FamiliarMTG Card: Jackal Familiar, 1x Siege-Gang CommanderMTG Card: Siege-Gang Commander, 1x Sphinx of Jwar IsleMTG Card: Sphinx of Jwar Isle, 4x Stone GiantMTG Card: Stone Giant, and 3x Wall of FrostMTG Card: Wall of Frost

Now, lets use the progressive pattern method that we learned last week to find out the counts for each color.

Blue = 20 ||| Red = 28 ||| Total = 48

Next, we calculate the ratios:

Blue = 20/48 = 0.417 ||| Red = 28/48 = 0.583

Multiply the ratios by the number of lands that the deck is going to use (in this case, 20) to get the basic land counts:

Islands = 0.417 x 20 = 8.340 = 8 ||| Mountains = 0.583 x 20 = 11.660 = 12

Alright, now lets say that we want to add some nonbasic lands. Lets calculate in 4x Steam VentsMTG Card: Steam Vents and 3x Scalding TarnMTG Card: Scalding Tarn. Both of these nonbasic lands produce or fetch for lands that produce blue or red mana, so they should replace Islands and Mountains evenly. Since were adding an odd number of nonbasics, the extra one should replace the basic land that is currently represented more, in this case, Mountains. This results in the following land counts:

3x Island, 8x Mountain, 3x Scalding TarnMTG Card: Scalding Tarn, and 4x Steam VentsMTG Card: Steam Vents

We can work backwards to see the effect that adding these nonbasic lands has on the difficulty to cast spells. Before we added the nonbasic lands, we had a 13% (8/60) chance of drawing a card that resulted in blue mana being produced and a 20% (12/60) chance of drawing a card that resulted in red mana being produced. Now, with the addition of the nonbasics, we have a 17% (10/60) chance of drawing a card that results in blue mana being produced and a 25% (15/60) chance of drawing a card that results in red mana being produced. Since our percentages for both blue and red production went up, it is now easier to cast both blue and red spells.

As I said, for this article, we were only focusing on the colors the nonbasics produced in order to make it easier to cast our spells. However, there are many other factors to consider when deciding to add a nonbasic land. I mean, you can build a two colored deck that has all nonbasics where each nonbasic land produces both colors and enters the battlefield tapped, but is that really a good idea? Well look into these other factors next week.

So Long, But Not for Long

Thanks for reading! If you have a method for incorporating nonbasics that differs from mine, let me know. As always, Im willing to help anyone with any problems they are having with calculations or deck-building in general. Im also still interested in hearing recommendations on what youd like to read about. Comment with your methods, ideas, questions, and anything else below!

#1 | SirNips says...
10:57 p.m. on January 27, 2010

there should be 5 islands, 8 mountains 3 scalding tarns and 4 steam vents.

But other than that this was quite helpful in providing reasons why to use nonbasic.

#2 | mistergreen527 says...
10:59 p.m. on January 27, 2010

@SirNips: Aah, right you are! I should look my work over more carefully. Thanks!

#3 | Squire1 says...
8:52 a.m. on January 28, 2010

again good article. I think it should have delved a bit deeper about the many conditional nonbasis (i.e., ones with charge counters, depletion, pain, reflection, etc.) I suppose that is good fodder for a follow up.

After that I propose an areticle on calculating mana to be used in a deck while taking into consideration spell based and creature based mana

#4 | mistergreen527 says...
10:32 a.m. on January 28, 2010

@SquireMTG Card: Squire:

It's like you can read my mind.

#5 | Squire1 says...
11:34 a.m. on January 28, 2010

really great idea though, doing a continuing themed set of articles. I am enjoying them

#6 | kabrazell says...
4:53 a.m. on January 29, 2010

Love 'em too, keep it up!

#7 | M457ERSP00K says...
noon on January 29, 2010

Kudos, I love the articles.. Math o' Magic is at its best here..

Thanks again, helps a lot! (though i am usually close winging it :))

#8 | mistergreen527 says...
5:23 a.m. on February 17, 2010

To those who care:

The next article in this "weekly" series was written on time, but due to formatting errors (I desperately wanted to include some tables), its posting has been severely delayed. Expect it to be posted soon as I am now editing the article to not include tables. Thanks to everyone for your patience and thanks to KrazyCaley for your gallant effort in trying to get those tables to work.

#9 | kabrazell says...
5:27 a.m. on February 17, 2010

I care! Thanks Mistergreen!

Who are we?

This site © 2008-2010 Oberfraktur, LLC

Terms of Use

Privacy statement

DMCA requests

Who aren't we?

Magic the Gathering is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved.

This site is unaffiliated. Articles and comments are user-submitted and do not represent official endorsements of this site.

Need hosting?

Use Linode!

And while you're at it, give me referral bucks by clicking my handy link. Pays for server!

An ongoing Django Adventure