2.1 MTG source of life
Mana is one of the main resources in MTG. Almost every spell requires a certain ‘payment’ of mana to cast it. The most important characteristic of mana as a resource is its rarity in the early stages of the game and its abundance in the later stages. At the beginning of the game, the players hold in their hand many spells that they wish to cast. What prevents them from doing so is their inability to generate enough mana because Richard Garfield wisely allowed only one land to be placed per turn. This rule is perhaps the most important in the game as it gives it the required balance and prevents it from becoming randomized. As already discussed, the greater the power of a spell, the higher its mana cost, and the player will have to wait longer before being able to cast it. For the sake of gradual MES, it would be wise to include in the deck also cards of lesser power that can be cast earlier.
2.2 The effect of the cost of the cards on the speed of their casting
The most significant characteristic of mana cost is the speed at which the spells can be cast [casting speed, CS]. There are two main components to this cost: the amount of mana required to cast the spell (converted mana cost) and the complexity of the mana required to do so. Each affects the spell’s CS.
Treasury Thrull mana costs: mana amount: 6, mana complexity: 2
Chaos Channeler mana costs: mana amount: 4, mana complexity: 2
- CS and amount of mana
The amount of mana that spells cost generally determines in which turn we can cast it. Each additional mana needed delays the spell’s casting by one turn. A spell that costs 1 mana can be cast on turn 1. A spell that costs 2 mana can be cast on turn 2 and so on. However, the spells do not become more expensive (in terms of the speed of their casting) at equal intervals―there is a certain point beyond which every additional mana that a spell costs significantly delays the speed of its casting. A spell that costs 4 mana can almost certainly cast on the fourth turn. However, it will almost never be possible to cast a spell that costs 7 mana on the seventh turn. Rather, we will usually have to wait until the tenth turn and sometimes even longer.
The reason for this is that we start the game with 7 cards in hand, of which on average 3–4 are lands. By the time we place these lands in the battlefield, we will draw 2–3 more cards (of which it is likely that at least one card will be a land). It follows that a player can hope to place a land every turn up to the fifth land, on average. So, up to a cost of 5 mana, each additional mana a spell costs delays its casting by one turn. Beyond 5 mana, this equation changes completely. Now, each additional mana a spell costs delays its casting by more than two turns (since we have a 40% chance each turn of drawing an additional land. This is determined by the usual ratio of lands/spells in a deck). Therefore, the difference between a 6-mana and a 5-mana spell is larger than the difference between a 3-mana and a 4-mana spell.
This fact has great significance: we are supposed to examine very cautiously spells that cost 6 mana or more and make sure that the benefit derived from them is worth the delay in being able to cast them. A spell that costs 6 mana must make a significant contribution to your battlefield position, while we can be less demanding with spells that cost 4 or 5 mana. A spell that costs 7 or 8 mana must be a game breaker, otherwise it should not be included in a deck. Regarding spells that cost more than 8 mana, it seems that in the vast majority of cases they should be treated as unplayable in a limited environment. Here we come to the question of the maximum cost limit. It seems that the cost of 9–10 mana is too high for a limited environment, regardless of the value they provide, except perhaps in extreme cases when we have a considerable amount of mana accelerators at our disposal.
Great spells but too expansive for limited!
- CS and the composition of mana
The composition of mana is an important component of the cost of the card, no less than the amount of mana required to cast it. The mana composition is the amount of mana in one color or different colors that the player is required to invest in order to cast a certain spell. A spell that costs WW4 has a mana composition of 2 white mana. A spell that costs GBR1 has a mana composition of 1 green, 1 black and 1 red mana. Since what really matters in MTG is the speed at which we can cast a spell, the mana composition of a spell is no less significant than its converted mana cost. The more complex the mana cost, the harder it will be to cast the spell. The chance of casting a spell that costs BBB on the third turn is small, provided we don’t play only one color, of course. For example, if we play 2 colors, it is likely that we will not be able to cast this spell until we have 5 or 6 lands in play. True―a player can always hope that luck will shine on her and that she will be able to cast the spell as early as the third turn, but relying on this hope is exactly the pitfall into which beginners sometimes fall. In practice, the cost of this spell is higher than that obtained from a simple addition of the mana units, and it should be treated as such when we assess whether its utility is worth the cost.
- Mana complexity index
Is it possible to introduce an index by means of which we can ‘translate’ mana complexity into CS? It is possible, but the task is not so simple. Here I will present a number of constraints that should be taken into account when evaluating spells with a certain mana complexity. The analysis below is relevant to a typical deck in a limited environment: two balanced colors (more or less) and the possibility of a third color as a splash.
Spells Costing One Colored Mana (U, B2, G5): If the spell in question is one of your main colors, it is likely that the complexity of the mana will not influence the CS. True, there is always a risk that the player will not be able to draw a land that produces the required color. But this situation is the exception. At the same time, if this spell is in the color that is splashed, it may have consequences that must be considered. If it is a spell whose effectiveness depends on being cast early in the game (a small creature costing 2 mana is a good example of such a spell), we should generally avoid including it in a deck as there is only a small chance that we will be able to use it effectively.
Spells Costing Two Colored Mana (WW, GG2, BB1): If these are expensive spells (GG4, RR3), there should be no problem casting them once you have the required total amount of mana. Cheap spells, by contrast (WW, RR), may prove more problematic. The player must take into account, for example, the possibility that she will not be able to play a WW creature on turn 2. If so, how do you evaluate such a card? Three considerations must be taken into account. First, one must ask at what stage of the game the spell will be considered useful. If the spell can make a decent contribution at any stage of the game, mana complexity is not a problem. Second, the number of lands in the deck that can produce the relevant color is of great significance when evaluating the suitability of such spells. Nine lands seem okay for an RR spell you want to cast early on, while 6 seem a little bit shaky. Thirdly, it is important to properly evaluate the returns you receive for the risk of including the spell in the deck. If casting a certain spell at an early stage will give the player a big advantage, it may be worth including it even if there is a risk that casting it at a later stage will greatly reduce its effectiveness. Regarding Splash: It is almost always advisable to avoid including spells that cost 2 mana in the splash color due to the low chance of casting them until the very late stages of the game.
Some 2-drop creatures are always useful
Spells Costing Three Colored Mana or More (BBB, WWWW, GGG3): Spells with a mana composition of 3 mana of the same color or more should be treated with particular caution. This is because the amount of mana required to cast them does not usually parallel the actual CS. As mentioned, a spell that costs G1 can be cast on turn 2, while a spell that costs R2 can be cast on turn 3. Therefore, an R2 or G1 creature spell enjoys a high level of transparency―the player can almost certainly assume in which turn she will be able to use it. A creature that costs RRR, by contrast, is like a lottery ticket: in some cases, it can be cast on turn 3 or 4 and gain a serious advantage; in other cases, the player may find herself playing a fifth land without being able to do so. A good player, when evaluating a card, does not rely on blind luck but tries to identify its CS. In this case, the CS value is turn 5 or 6. Now, an interesting point should be noted: the CS value of a spell costing RRR1 or RRR2 also amounts to turn 5 or 6. Since the RRR2 spell will tend to be better than the RRR spell (in absolute terms of effect), the player gets a greater payoff for the same CS. True, a spell with an RRR2 cost will never be cast by the player at 3 mana. But stability should be preferred over randomness. For this reason, an RRR2 spell is generally better than a RRR spell in a limited environment.
What is the casting speed of these spells?
2.3 The sensitivity of spells to mana cost
As we have seen, mana cost (amount, complexity) is important because it affects the CS of spells. However, not all spells are equally sensitive to this cost. While the effectiveness of some spells is greatly affected by their casting speed, other spells are ‘indifferent’ to this cost: we wouldn’t want to cast them early in the game anyway. Creatures are spells that are relatively sensitive to mana cost because the player usually wants to get them into play as quickly as possible. Another group of spells very sensitive to mana cost are mana accelerations. Mana accelerators are designed to allow the player to cast spells that require more mana, faster. Therefore, their effectiveness is conditional on being cast in the early stages of the game: there is no point in casting a mana accelerator after the player has already placed a large number of lands on the battlefield.
In mana accelerators, less is more!
Creature boosters are a group of spells that aim to upgrade a creature by adding to its strength/toughness values, or by granting it special abilities such as flying. The group is divided into three main archetypes of spells: sorcery-speed amplifiers, auras, and equipment. As a group, creature boosters are sensitive to their mana cost as they are designed to give the player using them tempo. Their value drives from the fact that they are relatively cheap in terms of mana to make a creature stronger. Take for example the following spell:
The inherent advantage of this spell in terms of gaining tempo is clear. If we wanted to cast a creature +1/+1 larger than the one we actually cast and that benefits from the first strike ability, the increase in its mana cost would undoubtedly be greater than one. And this is without even taking into account the additional ability that protects the creature from destruction. In terms of CS these cards tend to be very profitable!
There is one exception to this rule – equipments. Equipments are usually more expensive in terms of mana than other creature boosters. Of course they enjoy other advantages (see: card cost in cards). However, many times their cost is excessive and their use damages the tempo instead of contributing to it.
An opposing example is another group of spells called finishers. These spells are used as the ‘coup de grace’―the final move to vanquish an opponent (for example: direct damage to the opponent’s life points or neutralization of his defenses). For various reasons (which will be elaborated later), it is not worthwhile casting these spells except to achieve victory. Therefore, casting them is intended for the relatively late stages of the game when the player is able to generate a high amount of mana. It follows that finishers are not sensitive to mana cost and the more expensive they are, the better, up to a certain limit of course. Creature removals are another group of cards whose sensitivity to mana cost is relatively low, although much less than finishers.
2.4 Mana cost and tempo
The cost of the spells is the main factor influencing tempo. The higher the spell cost in mana, the more it may slow down the player’s tempo. There are 3 main ways that the player can deal with this problem and thus improve tempo:
- Using mana accelerators
Using mana accelerators may improve a player’s tempo by allowing her to cast stronger spells at a faster rate. As already mentioned, the cost of these mana accelerators is very important as their effectiveness decreases the later they are cast. Mana fixers also belong to this group: they deal with the problem of mana complexity, which, as you will remember, is also a component of the cost of the spell and may delay their casting.
- Using alternative resources
As we will see in the next chapter, mana is not the only resource that can be used to cast spells. Certain spells have a particularly good mana cost/return ratio because they require the use of additional resources (life, cards, etc.). Including these spells in the deck is another way to achieve a good tempo.
- Balanced mana curve
As discussed in Chapter 1, a balanced mana curve may optimize the player’s MES and contribute to achieving tempo. If I can play a 2-drop creature on turn 2, then a 3-drop at turn 3, followed by a 4-drop at turn 4, it puts me in a good place in terms of tempo.
Figure 2: Typical mana curve and card type distribution in limited[1]
Every time I go to a pre-release tournament of a new set in Magic, I do the same thing. While we wait for the packs to be opened, I ask the people sitting next to me what they think about the cards of the new set and what highlights should be taken into account. I almost always get the same answer: this set is fast, so the tempo is especially important! It turns out that tempo is always important. Today more than ever. Over the years there has been a constant increase in the power of the cards. Anyone who compares the spells today to those that existed during Homelands and Weathertight will have a hard time believing that this is the same game. In contrast, the starting life point of the players has not changed and it’s still 20 like in the old days. This means that it is increasingly difficult for a player to survive the first few turns if she misses casting spells early on.
[1] Guide: How to Curve the Perfect Magic: the Gathering Draft Deck (epicstream.com)
