How A Low Land Count Affects Mulligans

[@jaceg810]

"Try building a deck without them" Oops all spells is up to the challenge I think In all seriousness, as a 31 land player, how do you cancel out the fact that once you have enough draw, 40% of your draws are "dead" I must admit that both decks (Sram and a 4 color Lurrus as companion artifact pile) have a very low curve, and are meant to draw yes amount of cards

[@ToggoRock]

As stated in the video it depends heavily on what your deck means to do, if you're running something like egg tribal, you want to keep very lean so as not to brick out. However while I wasnt arguing that its a requirement that you run a high land count, I believe its crucial to at least consider the impact that it has on your keepability of your starting hands. If you think of going down in cards off mulligans as negative card advantage, it would generally serve best to minimize that as much as possible while having a higher land count lets you greed more since you have confidence you'll draw enough lands to fuel your next hand. I think stormy lean decks alter this generalization just as a landfall deck might in the opposite direction. Its mostly the philosophy I'm trying to convey is all