Community

Could anyone explain to me what EXACTLY mana curve is and possibly how to calculate it?

I have a solid idea but not sure what it really, really is though I know I've been thinking of it when I build decks. I tried reading online (Wiki) about curve calculations "60 cards, draw first" but didn't understand it at all. Not the shiniest foil in the pack.

The mana curve is simply a graph that shows, how many cards you have at each converted mana cost (CMC). To see any decks mana curve, just count the cards for 1 mana, 2 mana, 3 mana, etc.

This is a rough example of the mana curve a midrangy deck might have:
CMC - number of cards
1 - 4
2 - 8
3 - 12
4 - 8
5 - 2
6 - 2
7 - 0

Typically, the mana curve roughly resembles a bell curve with the peak around the 3-4 mana slots. Most deck archetypes have a very telling mana curve, like an aggro deck having one with the peak around the 2 mana slot and then going a downward fast, usually ending at 4 mana already, having nothing at 5+.

Examining your deck's mana curve can show you some problems, like having too few or too many cards in a particular slot. A deck with a mana curve like this

1 - 4
2 - 7
3 - 15
4 - 2
5 - 6
6 - 2
7 - 0

has a serious lack of 4 mana spells and a bit too much in the 3 and 5+ departments. So the deckbuilder should try to get some 4 mana cards in and cut some of the costlier stuff as well as some 3 CMC cards. But even this wonky mana curve already tells you, that the deck is likely a midrange one, neither going for the fast win nor trying to stall the game with heavy control.

By fixing your mana curve, you can avoid wonky plays, where you have nothing to put down in an early turn because your cards are too costly, or where you can only cast a spell without using all your available mana. Thus mostly wasting either an entire turn, or at least a portion of your available mana for the turn.

In short, the mana curve is a tool you can use to find the rough edges and some serious flaws in your deck. By adjusting your curve you can smooth out your early plays during a game, getting a stronger deck by being able to utilize all your available mana.

Arg. No. That's an end result of the theory behind mana curve.

So, try this on: Time is a resource in the game. You want to make as much of saud time as you can. As such, most decks want to use the mana available each turn. If you build your deck in a way that you're able to do things on the early turns you're either taking 'more' turns than your opponent or you're at least keeping up.

Granted, cards are also a commodity. You want each card to do as much as possible. As such, things that you'll need to wait to play because they're more expensive still bear value.

So! The math winds up being about figuring out how much mana you'd like to hit, then running the right ballance of 'stuff' and lands to be able to maximize the odds of you being involved in the game early (low drops for aggro, ramp for midrange, removal for control as nonrestrictive examples. This is why 2 cost restrictive targeting black removal is better than Murder) .

In the end, the concept of a Mana Curve in deck design isn't a prescription. There isn't a 'right' in. It's a set of principles and a way of looking at the behavior of a deck using math.

I'd post examples and explain them, but... well, it'd ve a lot to type from a mobile and it'd turn this into a novel. PM me if you want a bit more explanation



ALSO: we really just need to keep a few good articles bookmark and post them. It's key fundamentals and it comes up every month.

Mana curves will also vary in between archtype and within those archtypes.

A white/blue control deck will usually run 24-26 lands because it usually run more big 4-5-6 mana cards. But for example a colorless/artifact control deck can get away with running 20 lands even if it's mana base is even heavier than the W/U deck because it's running 4 cloudpost 4 glimmerpost 4 vesuva 4 thespian's stage and I forgot the last 4... and obviously 4 expedition map and 4 amulet of vigor

it gives you one curve that all decks should aim for?

that sounds pretty worthless.