How do you, personally, balance the Mana:Pips ratio?
General forum
Posted on May 30, 2022, 3:37 p.m. by TypicalTimmy
I never really considered this until just now, reviewing my newest deck. I have it setup that all three colors are evenly represented among my lands. So I have 15 lands that produce , 15 that produce and 15 that produce . Now of course this does not mean I have 45 lands; We must recognize that lands such as Command Tower, City of Brass and Haven of the Spirit Dragon produce all three and are thus counted "three times". Similarly, a card such as Breeding Pool counts toward both and , while Cinder Glade counts toward both and .
By evenly distributing mana production among lands, theoretically I am always getting the color(s) I need, on average. However, this does raise a concern. An average is not an absolute. There are times during playtest when I become overly saturated with mana.
Moving over to the pips tracker, only shows up 12 times. That is not to say there are 12 cards with in it - There are 12 total pips within the entire deck (Excluding those on lands, of course). So, a card such as Kindred Discovery counts 2x pips, despite it only being 1x card. In total, there are 9 cards in the deck with 12 total pips.
When looking at the percentages, mana production compared to pip requirements is as follows:
-
: 15 total lands for 33.33% compared to 22 pips for 22.92%. A difference of +10.41% excess mana production.
-
: 15 total lands for 33.33% compared to 12 pips for 12.50%. A difference of +20.83% excess mana production.
-
: 15 total lands for 33.33% compared to 62 pips for 64.58%. A difference of -31.25%. A very serious net loss of mana production.
The staggering displacement of requirement feels like it should be addressed, and can be taken from .
However, when doing this, what appears to happen is the deck becomes significantly less reliable when I do have spells to cast, as now I am far more likely to have mana instead.
So, the question is, how do you reconcile this? Do you always try to keep your mana production even, or do you try to tie your mana production to the pip percentages?
Or, is there a happy median, somewhere in between?
- EDIT: None of this takes into account mana rocks and / or mana dorks. So Arcane Signet would add an additional pip to each of the three colors. Similarly, Savage Ventmaw adds 3x and 3x . Likewise, Klauth, Unrivaled Ancient adds however much I happen to swing with of all three, in theory. So, for the purposes of the discussion, let's only focus on the lands and costs, not rocks and dorks ^-^ Thank you!
Last_Laugh says... #3
All my decks are 3 colors and run pretty optimized mana bases. All 9 fetches, command tower, and the 3 shocklands that they can. After that it's 3-4 of each basic which gets me to 22-25 lands. The last 7-11 lands (I usually run 32-33 lands with 10 rocks/ramp and a 2.8ish cmc) are utility pieces and/ or lands that tap for any color.
May 30, 2022 5:01 p.m.
psionictemplar says... #4
Generally speaking, I will use pips as my primary guide to how many lands/ sources each color would get. From there, I adjust the colors depending on where their spells fall on the mana curve. Early plays will get more sources since they will set up the other color/plays later on. (I find this very crucial for ramp strategies.) For example, if I have a lot of ramp, I might trim the other lands to ensure my early plays and the following ones mana sources as well. If you don't have heavy pip requirements, I think this is the way to go. Splash requirements can be accounted for this way.
If playing a format with fetches, I will use a set of each useful fetch and then work the mana costs on the curve from there. There could probably be a lot more wrote in this section, but this is where I'll leave it for now. Look forward to seeing others methods.
May 30, 2022 5:08 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #5
Pip percentage with weighting going toward colors that I need early, colors that help fix, and colors with 3+ pip costs in the deck. Mana production percentages I also prefer to express as percentage of lands that produce a color instead of percentage of production that is that color. I feel that this more accurately represents how often you are going to be able to cast spells of each color. For example if you have 30 lands comprised of 10 each Forest, Island, Mountain production percentage is 33.33% in either case and it doesn't matter. Once you make them dual lands, say 10 of each color combination, percent of production remains at 33.33%, but percent of lands goes to 66.67% and that is more representative of the fact that your spells have become easier to cast.
May 30, 2022 10:36 p.m.
Squee_Spirit_Guide says... #6
I have a fool proof method. I count the pips, balance that with how many individual cards require each colour, and then go by gut instinct. I usually play green so I add in ramp/fixing and sometimes a Birds of Paradise or two.
On second thought, having looked at my results in major tournaments, my gut is probably not the best gauge of mana ratios...
May 30, 2022 11:25 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #7
My gut instincts usually tell me to go get food because this is too much math and math is for blockers.
May 31, 2022 12:13 a.m.
wallisface says... #8
The “depressing-but-true” answer is that you’re having colour-fixing problems, then play a more expensive landbase. There’s no colour-fixing issue that can’t be solved by throwing money at it.
^ Now, obviously that answer sucks. But its something those on a budget need to be aware of - and in that vein, I would suggest reining-in your card choices to align better with your land-budget. There’s no point playing decks with large colour variety, or exotic mana-requirements (high-pip-count), if your decks just going to fumble trying to play those cards.
May 31, 2022 4:01 a.m.
I am inherently lazy, so I usually start with an eqully balanced manabase and the rest of my deck here on tappedout. So for 3-color its 3 shocks, 3 checks, 3 pain, 3 temple, Command Tower, Temple of the False God, Reliquary Tower, and equal balance of basics and whatever triome is required.
Once its all plugged in, then I start making balance decisions, but I've found more often than not, I have the best luck with an equal balance of my colors plus various ramp. Alterations are most oftne made with the addition of filter lands, and some minor adjustments to my ramp to grab more specific lands/colors.
For example, if I've got a temur deck thats heavily weighted toward green, I may cut a temple and a pain for a GU and GR filter, and swap Rampant Growth for Nature's Lore. But I never do any math, its mostly just looking at that deck and trusting my gut.
Hopefully this is helpful, I use a similar process when making 4-color manabases as well.
May 31, 2022 6:42 a.m.
golgarigirl says... #10
If I'm feeling like a tryhard (by my own definition), I count pips, and then match the ratio of pips to lands that make the color. I never go so far as to break out a calculator, but as long as I get a rough estimate, I'm good. And then playtest the bejesus out of it.
More often, I just eyeball things and mess it up, and play and mess it up some more. I am lazy and do not like math. Despite what my time playing this game may have you believe...
May 31, 2022 9:15 a.m.
I start with an even distribution of basics at 36 slots, add in Evolving Wilds, Terramorphic Expanse, and Ash Barrens.
I rebalance the number based on the pie chart. depending on the number of colors I run, I switch out for dual lands (preferably that don't enter tapped), command tower, whatever else I feel may fit. If my costs are roughly even, I add my basic mana rocks (Sol Ring, Marble Diamond, Azorius Signet).
usually though my distribution is 80% 1 color, 20% another (on my 2 colored decks) so I will not run a rock for the larger color, I will run more cycle lands, if my overall costs are lower, or if I don't have many creatures with multiple pips in their casting cost, I will be more willing to run a lifegain land or a scry land, even though they enter tapped.
May 31, 2022 10:03 a.m.
- Start with an idea of a rough count of the lands you want, eg 24 for a standard deck or somewhere around 34 for commander.
- Reduce this number by 1/2 for each non-land permanent that produces mana.
- Count pips to work out the distribution for each colour.
The total coloured pips is also important (basically how mana intensive your deck is).
Then the rough formula to work out the lands required for each colour is:
Lands for one Colour = ( Pips_Of_One_Colour * Lands_Desired ) / Total Pips
This is just a starting point, but it's a good base.
You need to shift it around based on if certain colours are predominantly cheap and/or being played early in the curve (so increasing the lands for that colour and reducing others), or primarily being played later after your mana is probably fixed (so reducing lands for those colours). And a lot of other factors which you'll discover through playing the deck.
Then you play the heck out of the deck and add or remove lands, or lands of specific colours, based on if you notice you're regularly stifled on that colour of mana. But you need to play at least a dozen games before and after making changes (ideally more) to avoid just random variance affecting your decisions. Only cut/add one land at a time.
For the lands you include: - count those that enter tapped or fetches as half of whatever pip they produce (you can do the same for those that have some kind of requirement, such as a creature that only produces mana based on lands in play). - count double faced cards as a land or creature (or half of each) depending on whether you are most likely to cast that side, ideally.
If you're playing on Arena then you need to count your pips (and lands) yourself, because it doesn't do it entirely correctly (although the calculation it uses is very similar to the formula above and it does end up giving similar land ratios).
Having 50/50 mana is usually doomed to failure unless your deck is very good at filtering draws, you'll generally lack one of either colour.
Don't include too many ETB tapped lands in dual colour decks unless the format is very slow. I usually draw the line at 3 in 60 card decks. Just having basics is usually better.
legendofa says... #2
Pip percentages all the way. I start off with "5-color basics" in play testing; I use tokens or off-color lands or other generic cards to fill land slots and pretend they enter untapped and tap for any color, no downside. So play testing with perfect mana. All nonland ramp and fixing should be in place at this point. Lands are the last thing I work on.
Once I get the main deck in a good spot and start looking at color balancing, I count the total pips and pips of each color, and divide them proportionally into basic lands, including hybrids as full pips. Let's say I'm putting together a EDH deck and have landed on 38 land slots. I count the green pips and get 50, blue pips are at 66, and white pips are at 45, for a total of 161 pips. I want at least 50/161 of my mana base to be green, 66/161 to be blue, and 45/161 to be white. That's 31% green, 41% blue, and 28% white.
The next step is to put that into the 38 land slots. I start with basic lands to ensure the balance. Using the percentage above, that's 12 Forests, 16 Islands, and 11 Plains, for a total of 39 lands. Cut one from the highest (rounding error), dropping Islands to 15. Next, check if any colors are overrepresented at mana value 1-2, and take 1-2 from the highest and give it to that color. In this example, let's say I loaded up on low MV green cards for ramp, so cut one more Island for a Forest. Final basic land totals are 13 Forest, 14 Island, and 11 Plains.
Finally, because I want multicolor lands in there, I switch basics out for nonbasics, keeping the colors as proportional as possible. So I'll take out a Forest and and Island for a Breeding Pool and Yavimaya Coast, a Forest and a Plains for Bountiful Promenade and Overgrown Farmland, a Plains and an Island for Port Town and Nimbus Maze, one of each for Seaside Citadel, Treva's Ruins, and Spara's Headquarters, and so on. Fetchlands are treated as lands that can add mana of the colors it searches for, and single-color lands like Eiganjo Castle are switched out one for one with their basic lands.
I always try to keep enough basic lands to cast any spell in the deck off basic lands alone. If I have cards that cost and in the deck, I will keep at least five basic lands. At least two of those will be Islands, and at least one will be a Forest and a Plains each. You never know when a Back to Basics or Ruination will come by to mess up your day.
Finally, colorless lands. I add these on a case by case basis, usually skimming from the color I have the most sources for.
So it's a process, but I've found it to be very reliable in the long run.
May 30, 2022 5 p.m.