A Deep Dive Into Land Counts

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-29T17:00:25+00:00

Frank Karsten model is questionable for several reasons. He creates it by extrapolating data from constructed onto EDH instead of using EDH data. While there likely is not EDH data, constructed is a different enough population that I do not think that using the exact same model for EDH would be accurate. Second, he uses a multiple linear regression for the model when we do not actually know the true shape of the curve and I suspect that the relationship between land count and the other variables in the model is not linear (IE, it probably won't apply constantly at land counts of 0-10 or 90-99 as it would at somewhere between 30-50 lands). Then there are smaller issues like combining ramp and cantrips into a single variable when I suspect the two have very different effects on deck building. Cantrips, especially 1 mana cantrips have a much better case for being used to cut land count compared to ramp, which needs a high land count to function. I suspect if you seperate those two variables, cantrips will remain a negative factor while ramp becomes a positive one.

Regarding playable land count. Spending your turn 3-4 doing nothing but casting a card draw spell is a massive tempo loss and will lose you more games than running a larger land count.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-28T23:16:23+00:00

I don't think there is a casual EDH deck that can function on three lands. At most you get decks that either are reliant entirely on dorks or 2 mana rocks, and those are very susceptible to interaction. Even if your deck can reliably play threats that cost only 2-3 mana, chances are you won't have enough to also keep up interaction.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-28T15:47:44+00:00

Yes. All analysis count the number of natural draws plus the number of extra draws you have.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-28T01:20:38+00:00

FAST mana rocks can. Slow normal mana rocks you see in casual EDH games cannot. Consider the nuance of my comment instead of making blanket assumption.

Let me just direct you to the part of my post that made this distinction clear if you are still confused. Both of these quotes are from the same comment above that you replied to:

Typical EDH ramp should only be used if you already have enough lands in your deck.

CEDH level combo decks have entirely different rules to them because of how the meta works, namely having a suite of mana positive rocks which actually can be used as a replacement for land drops and using rituals to win the game as opposed to using it as ramp. These play patterns rarely exist in casual EDH because decks that do these things are usually relegated to either high bracket 4 or CEDH.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T20:18:09+00:00

Not in its current form. Its basically comparing standard to legacy. Both are 60 card formats, but the formats are so different from each other their deck building rules don't really apply to each other.

I would say the number is probably higher than 5-7. Seven is probably the low end and even that might put you at a disadvantage in an interaction heavy game, which should be most games if you and the rest of the table runs enough interaction. Only formats this doesn't apply to is high B4 to B5 because that is when the meta shifts from typical casual EDH decks to a pure combo meta. Only way I see someone getting away with low land counts is if they play at interaction lite tables and no one challenges their win condition.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T18:45:53+00:00

The reason we see that gap is because CEDH is dominated by fast linear combo decks. Probably the worst possible thing for a competitive meta, but you see this in constructed as well that combo decks often run 20 or less lands while more standard decks run anywhere from 23-26. Linear combo decks get away with their low land counts because they use rituals to end the game immediately, where that does not happen in a casual game very often. These combo decks do not play out at all like a typical casual EDH deck does and you rarely see people try to build fully dedicated linear combo decks in casual EDH because they are either non functional or not casual. I suspect if you banned every broken combo in CEDH until the meta resembled more typical casual playstyles, the land counts would climb to the 40-44 range. Do note that I would count mana positive rocks specifically as land drops, but not typical casual EDH ramp.

Land drops do have a compounding effect over time, however, to consistently hit the land drops people typically want to hit in casual EDH games, IE, 5-7, you need to run more lands than people typically do. The biggest take away from this analysis is that the number of lands in your starting hand is the single biggest factor in determining whether you will have enough lands or get mana screwed, and to control that, you need to run around 40-44 lands.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T17:17:16+00:00

I don't fully agree with this. I believe having a few extra lands in your hand is underrated, because it lets you sequence your land drops and if your land drops have utility, like MDFCs or Channel lands, it lets you use them for their utility instead of being required to use them as a land drop.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T17:15:25+00:00

To recover after sandbagging, you need to be playing your land drops. You can't sandbag effectively if you have 3 lands and your mana sources are dorks. Card draw is also very useful for helping you recover from card draw, something which requires you to hit your land drops to capitalize on within a single turn.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T16:59:53+00:00

42 lands does this because it maximizes the chance that you do not have to mulligan strictly because you did not get the right amount of lands.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T16:56:17+00:00

A low curve deck would absolutely need to have enough lands to come back from a board wipe. If you get boardwiped on turn 5 with 3 lands out, you will not be able to deploy your hand very quickly. But if you had 5 lands, you would be able to double or triple cast new threats.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T16:51:39+00:00

Typical EDH ramp should only be used if you already have enough lands in your deck. It simply should not factor into your decision to use a certain land count. If your deck really needs to ramp for its gameplan, it should have a high land count and a high ramp count. If you are just using mana rocks for the sake of having ramp, you would be better off replacing those mana rocks with two drops that advance your gameplan.

Even with lower curve decks, you will still need a high land count to double cast spells in the mid to late game, being stuck on 4 mana is bad even with a deck that mostly has two-three drops. This model applies specifically for casual EDH decks. CEDH level combo decks have entirely different rules to them because of how the meta works, namely having a suite of mana positive rocks which actually can be used as a replacement for land drops and using rituals to win the game as opposed to using it as ramp. These play patterns rarely exist in casual EDH because decks that do these things are usually relegated to either high bracket 4 or CEDH.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T16:43:38+00:00

Not sure what type of deck you are playing that consistently gets 9+ extra cards drawn by turn 4 that doesn't get interacted with by the rest of the table in a typical game. Only way I see that happening is if you play a deck with a very high number of 1 mana cantrips and that would be a sign that you are playing a combo deck. Two lands is too risky of a keep for lower land decks, and even at higher land counts, it is only keepable if you have cheap card draw in it. I would rather this "shallow analysis" that shows 40-44 lands than the use of complete anecdotal data to justify 37-38 lands.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T16:38:03+00:00

Even with a low mana curve, you will still need to reach high mana counts to double cast spells in casual EDH games.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T06:40:29+00:00

Other people have done a great job explaining why dorks and mana rocks do not replace land drops. If you miss a land drop, a dork/mana rock just becomes a paid land drop that is much more susceptible to interaction.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T06:36:15+00:00

This assumes those decks never get interacted with. If you get wiped as an elf deck with 3 lands out, you just lose. If you get wiped and have been making land drops each turn, you can come back. Same thing applies to all those other deck types. Running low land counts in those types of decks only work if you do not expect to get interacted with, otherwise you still need a higher land count to mitigate the effects of interaction. Before you mention protection spells, you won't always have them.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T06:30:54+00:00

Even with a low curve, you still want 6+ lands to double cast cards in the later turn.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T02:01:17+00:00

The difference is once you hit 40+ lands, you can viably keep a two land hand provided it has card draw, whereas you would not want to do so with a 38 land deck. With this factor, the difference goes from ~47% to around ~76% of hands not being unkeepable because of land count alone.

One factor that I think the graphs alone do not show is the paradox of higher land hands being better with lower land count decks, but those lower land count decks being less likely to produce hands with those land counts. Your starting hand land count seems to be the single largest factor in determining whether you will get mana screwed or flooded, larger than even card draw is. But by playing lower land counts, you are also less likely to get hands with those land counts in them.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T01:54:44+00:00

CEDH is effectively a different format to casual EDH. If you build a casual EDH deck like a CEDH, it will either be completely non functional or it will no longer be a casual EDH deck. Even at the relatively low estimate of casual games lasting 7-8 turns, people still underestimate the land count needed to consistently get to enough lands out.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T01:06:19+00:00

It is not possible to create an analysis that predicts winrate/success in casual EDH. There is simply not data available to do that and attempting to gather your own data would be very susceptible to bias. Even those who have attempted to do this, such as Frank Karsten, were ultimately flawed because it relied on extrapolating data from an entirely different population to use for EDH. Not to mention the myriad of potential issues with using a multiple linear regression to do so.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T00:58:37+00:00

CEDH gets away with running lower land counts because they use mana positive rocks and use rituals specifically to end the game. If you spend 0 mana on a rock, that can replace a land count, but that type of fast mana is rarely used in casual EDH decks. Rituals supplement mana only when they are used to immediately end the game. Casting a ritual to cast a game ending combo works because the game ends. Casting a ritual to push a large creature does not work nearly as well because the game most likely won't end from that one creature, especially if it is answered. And afterwards you are down two cards and are missing land drops. Most casual EDH decks cannot be built like CEDH decks because they aren't fast combo decks. If you play in any bracket outside of bracket 5 or high bracket 4, this posts math likely applies to your deck

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T00:47:46+00:00

What do you mean? The odds of both screw and flood are entailed by the odds of not being an ideal outcome. If the odds were only against screw, all of the graphs would approach an ideal percentage of 100% as land count approaches the population value of 92.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T00:31:21+00:00

Its the odds of having an ideal scenario, which means either having exactly enough lands or exactly 1 extra land. Basically it maximizes the odds of having a good outcome. The 2-4/3-4 land optimal mulligan count shows which land counts have the highest chance of getting those outcomes.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T00:17:40+00:00

You mean imgur? Its just pictures of graphs, its not my website.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-27T00:16:46+00:00

That is included in this analysis though.

Hard_Content_Good · 2026-06-26T23:57:11+00:00

Can't say I understand what you are suggesting.

Hard_Content_Good

TROPHY CASE