Suggest adding Minotaur to Hubs

TappedOut forum

Posted on April 12, 2017, 10:24 a.m. by Argy

I noticed that my friend and I both built Minotaur decks in the past 12 months.

They have now just come back into Standard, along with a Legendary Minotaur that would work well as a Commander.

Given all of that I think it would be well worth adding Minotaur to the list of deck Hubs.

clayperce says... #2

Totally. Along with a permanent "Advertise your Minotaur deck" thread.

:-D

April 12, 2017 10:32 a.m.

Argy says... #3

Well I don't want to be TOO greedy.

April 12, 2017 10:34 a.m.

Atony1400 says... #4

I would like to watch what Neheb, the Worthy does before we get a hub for this.

9 decks so far and counting!

April 12, 2017 11:06 a.m.

Argy says... #5

As I said, though, the Hub would be for more than just the current Standard.

April 12, 2017 11:47 a.m.

MindAblaze says... #6

I think it's covered by the Tribal hub

April 12, 2017 2:59 p.m.

Argy says... #7

We've had this discussion before.

There are plenty of other Tribes who get their own hub.

Minotaurs keep popping back into Standard all the time. It would be great to have a hub for them.

April 12, 2017 3:08 p.m.

Eiti3 says... #8

While we are at it, why not the hubs Chaos, Landless, Paradox (Engine), and Donate?

Chaos and Donate have been themes for quite some time.

Landless is my own personal "gimme" but I know quite a few modern and standard decks that simply don't run lands.

Paradox Engine has figuratively defined a new genre of playing EDH and Casual. A hub was added for another card that did this: Stoneforge Mystic.

Just thought I'd pitch in enough to derail! Although, I feel like Minotaur isn't as big as some tribals that should be added like Hydra, Changeling/Shapeshifter, Snakes, or even Elemental.

April 12, 2017 3:39 p.m.

Atony1400 says... #9

As far as I stand, I would like to see where Neheb takes it before it's added. Similar stance on Paradox Engine. It's a staple in Commander, but I would like to see more prominence in other formats before it's considered. However, I agree with landless. The strategy has been played in Legacy to some sucess, and it makes sense for it to be a hub. Sadly, I do not know enough about Donate and Chaos for me to take a stance.

April 12, 2017 5:39 p.m.

clayperce says... #10

Ok, here's my serious $0.02:

I think the best list available of tribal popularity and viability is the Tribes page on EDHREC. Sure, it shows EDH only, but unless yeaGO has some way to automatically find Tribal decks in T/O I can't imagine anything better.

Right now (unless I'm missing one), the smallest Tribe T/O recognizes is Werewolf (the 28th biggest tribe of 64 in EDHREC). All the smaller Tribes are just 'Tribal' in T/O :-(

Adding Tribes down to Minotaur would mean hubs for Giant, Hydra, Druid, Beast, Rebel, Wall, Rogue, Monk, and God too. And though Gods and Hydras are the only ones big in Standard now, all of these would be great additions ... though of course none hold a candle to Minotaurs!

Plus we should really add Dwarf, Cat, Warrior, Rat, Spider, Bird, Treefolk, Cleric, Snake, Soldier, and Elementals ... all of these are actually bigger tribes than Werewolves!

April 12, 2017 7:57 p.m.

Atony1400 says... #11

I think it would be best to give it a few months and see what people do with the new toys. I'm almost positive Minotaurs will jump up on that list quite a bit, thanks to Neheb.

April 12, 2017 8:08 p.m.

clayperce says... #12

This:

Source

April 12, 2017 8:17 p.m.

MindAblaze says... #13

Lol indeed

April 12, 2017 8:38 p.m.

clayperce says... #14

Atony1400,
In the few hours since your earlier post, we've gone from 9 Modern, Standard, and EDH decks with Neheb to 64 and counting!

April 12, 2017 9:31 p.m.

Atony1400 says... #15

@clayperce It's a great start!

April 12, 2017 9:44 p.m.

Argy says... #16

Atony1400 there are now an absolute tonne of Standard and EDH decks featuring Neheb, the Worthy.

Can we PLEASE have a Minotaur hub? If you feel that it drops off in future you can just delete the hub.

It would also make searching other people's Minotaur builds that much easier than looking at Rakdos + Tribal all the time.

April 28, 2017 4:28 p.m.

yeaGO says... #17

I'm okay with it but I think we should try to come up with a consistent strategy as clayperce kinda makes it seem a little arbitrary, or has Minotaurs shot up further in the list? Is our current tribal hub system even useful?

May 3, 2017 2:20 a.m.

Eiti3 says... #18

I use the hub system daily. I look at the decks that use the same hubs and compare lists for each theme. Every once in a while, but not always, I find a card or combo that I haven't thought up before and use it.

May 3, 2017 7:13 a.m.

clayperce says... #19

I'm with Eiti3; the current hub system is super-elegant. I use it regularly too ... it's a great way to see what other folks are doing with the tribe (or archetype ... I've been looking up Land Destruction a lot lately), both to get ideas and to give advice.

Since the start of this thread, Minotaur has risen from the 38th most popular tribe on EDHREC to the 33rd. And here on T/O, we've already grown to 30 pages of Modern, Standard, and EDH decks with Neheb, the Worthy.

So here's my proposal for a consistent strategy, yeaGO: I can pull together some info over the next few days on the 'iconic cards' for the various tribal decks, and see how many decks we have on T/O using those. You can then use that data to figure out where to 'draw the line' on tribal hubs. Tagging Legendxp (pretty much the world's expert on tribal tech) here too, in case he or she has a better idea.

In the meantime though, could you please go ahead and add Minotaurs as a hub? :-)

May 3, 2017 8:36 a.m.

Argy says... #20

I think clayperce's suggestion seems like a sound way to move forward.

Just putting this out there: would it be worth giving clayperce the authority to be able to make changes to Hubs, since he will be so invested in researching them?

May 3, 2017 4:10 p.m.

Argy says... #21

Oh and thanks for the new Hub.

Sorry for the double post. I timed out.

May 3, 2017 4:27 p.m.

Please login to comment