Thoughts on Building and Curating a SWU Cube

Discussion

With a new set and rotation on the horizon, I thought it would be a good time to put some thoughts about Cube into writing and share them with the community. I love Premier and Twin Suns as much as anyone, but limited formats hold a special place for me. Drafting is one of the purest ways to experience a card game: you work with what you’re given, you discover unexpected synergies, you flex your deckbuilding prowess, and no two sessions ever quite feel the same. Cube lets you play your favorite cards in a curated environment that you control, without relying on randomized product or needing to keep buying boosters just to run another draft.

So… What Is Cube?

Cube originated in Magic: The Gathering, but the concept translates incredibly well to Star Wars Unlimited. At its core, a Cube is a carefully selected pool of cards (often built around a vision, theme, or set of design goals) that you and your friends use to draft. Instead of opening random boosters, players draft from packs assembled out of your Cube. That means every draft experience is unique, but still shaped by the choices you made during construction: which cards to include, which themes to support, and what kinds of decks you want players to be able to build.

A Cube Can Be Anything You Want

One of the reasons Cube is so beloved is its flexibility. Your Cube can reflect your personal tastes, mechanical obsessions, nostalgic favorites, or wild experiments. A few possibilities:

“Best cards in the game” Cubes
Set Cubes that emulate a specific traditional draft environment
Only Heroes; only Villains
Only commons
Only Original Trilogy era cards
Theme-first Cubes (e.g., all Underworld, all Space units, all Force)

There’s no limit to how creative you can be. If you can imagine it, you can probably build it. And someone out there will want to draft it with you.

My own Cube supports 8 drafters for a full table but can also run sealed events for up to 4 players. I’ve spent a lot of time iterating on structure, balance, and mechanical identity: what to include, what to avoid, and how to make sure all aspects feel draftable without forcing archetypes. Some of my choices are grounded in gameplay philosophy; others are simply personal taste. But the goal is always the same: create something that feels fun, thematic, and replayable.

Cube Structure, Design Philosophy and Goals

A good Cube aims for a relatively flat power band: not perfectly equal, but close enough that most cards feel similarly strong. This makes each pick genuinely interesting: instead of just grabbing the “best card”, drafters weigh synergy, curve, archetype needs, and table signals. I also use a singleton structure, meaning only one copy of each card exists in the Cube. This makes choices feel more consequential: once you pass something, you can’t count on ever seeing it again.

### Aspect Distribution

Villainy and Heroism behave differently from the other aspects because players draft leaders first. On average, one out of eight players will end up with all three leaders in only one of those two aspects. That means they are effectively locked out of drafting some cards before the draft even starts.

For example, if you have no Heroism leaders, every Heroism card is off-limits unless you’re willing to pay the aspect penalty, which is horrible on early-game cards and rarely worth it outside of some bombs.

In contrast, a Vigilance or Aggression card is potentially playable by any player at the table, even if none of their leaders show that aspect. That flexibility makes those aspects far more desirable than Villainy/Heroism

How aspects function in draft leads to a few practical conclusions for Cube design:

**Villainy/Heroism cards should be included sparingly.**These aspects are narrower by nature, since some players will simply not have access to them based on their leader draft. Keeping their density low helps avoid dead picks and keeps the draft healthier.
Double-aspect cards should feel rewarding, not punishing. Because they’re the hardest cards to include in a deck, I try to make sure these are slightly above-rate or particularly synergistic. They’re also excellent signposts that communicate what a given aspect pairing wants to do. That said, too many will just wheel around the table untouched, which lowers the strategic tension of the draft.
Neutral cards are intentionally weaker but still playable. They tend to be late picks and exist mostly to give drafters a little flexibility if they pivot late. Their job is to be better than paying an aspect penalty, not to compete with premium single-aspect cards.

All of this supports the larger goal: every aspect feels playable, players shouldn’t be punished too severely for their leader spread, and archetypes should naturally emerge through the packs.

Why Double & Triple Aspects Are Complicated

Like I mentioned before, double-aspect cards are meant to be strong, but the drafting incentives around them are tricky.

Two-aspect cards with Villainy/Heroism (e.g., Vigilance/Villany)Because roughly 1 in 8 players won’t have access to either Villainy or Heroism, some seats simply can’t draft these cards. In practice, they often wheel multiple times until they reach the one or two players who can actually use them. When a pack contains too many of these, it creates uninteresting picks for most of the table.

If you include multi-aspect leaders, this category is the most tolerable: these cards are playable in 3 of the 12 possible three-aspect combinations, meaning roughly two players in an 8-player pod can use them.

Two-aspect cards without Villainy/Heroism *(e.g., Vigilance/Aggression — coming in A Lawless Time)*These are even narrower. Only 2 of the 12 possible leader combinations want them (Vigilance/Aggression paired with either Villainy or Heroism). If the mechanics are compelling enough for both Villainy and Heroism, Cube designers might include them, but they should be used sparingly.

Double-aspect cards (with the same aspect) *(e.g., Double Command)*These are the toughest of all. Locking yourself into a single aspect is extremely risky in Cube, and players often won’t find enough cards to complete a 30-card deck. These almost always go undrafted, making them wasted Cube slots. I generally avoid them.

Triple-aspect cards *(e.g., Command/Cunning/Villany — coming in A Lawless Time)*These are the most restrictive cards possible. Only 1 of the 12 leader combinations wants them, and sometimes that player simply won’t exist in your draft. Unless the payoff is absurd, these are traps.

Yes, players can technically run these restrictive cards by paying the aspect penalty. But that penalty is brutal on anything below 5–6 cost and effectively removes many cards from consideration. Only expensive finishers tolerate it. For most cards, it may as well read: “unplayable unless you’re in the perfect deck.”

Because of this, I keep double-aspect cards very sparse. Single-aspect cards are the backbone of a healthy, flexible Cube.

This evaluation may change over time, especially once we see more ways to ignore the aspect penalty. [[Daimyo’s Palace]] is part of a new cycle of common bases that lets players do exactly that for a single card, at the cost of starting with 3 less HP on your base. I really like these and may either include them in the main Cube list or simply make them universally available. This creates interesting tension around splashing: How many off-aspect cards justify losing 3 HP? Will players instead choose the 30-HP bases?

My Own Cube

Like I said, my primary goal was to support up to eight players in a way that produces consistent, fun drafts while keeping power bands tight and archetypes visible. After experimentation, I settled on:

360 cards + 32 leaders

Players draft their three leaders first, then receive three packs of 15 to build their decks. This structure mirrors retail drafting with 16-card packs (with a seeded leader), but without a seeded base. Since common bases are simply available to all players after the draf, as usual, and this means each player ends up seeing slightly more total cards than they would in retail. I like this because it lets players stay open longer, pivot more easily, and avoid being forced into the first bomb they see.

**Why 32 leaders instead of 24?**Leaders have a huge effect on gameplay because they start on the board and flip in almost every game. Some are stronger than others, which is fine, playing sweet cards is fun. But if a leader is significantly above the curve, I don’t want it to appear in every draft. Including more leaders increases variety and reduces repetition, which leads to healthier drafts and more interesting deckbuilding decisions.

Taking everything into consideration, here’s where my Cube currently sits:

Vigilance / Command / Aggression / Cunning

55 cards each
2 rare bases Villainy / Heroism / Neutral
12 cards each Each Villainy/Heroism combination
12 cards per pair (e.g., Aggression + Heroism)

Color Pair Philosophies

My goal in designing aspect color pair is to make deckbuilding feel rewarding and organic. I want players to discover synergies during the draft rather than being pushed into obvious rails (“Cad Bane = Underworld,” “Mon Mothma = Officials,” etc.). This is also the reason I avoid single-aspect leaders. More flexible leaders create wider decision space and keep players from being locked into narrow archetypes too early.

Each aspect pair in the cube has a clear identity, and my double-aspect cards serve as the signposts that subtly tell players what that pair wants to do, without forcing them into it.

Below is the broad direction I’ve shaped for each combination, with leaders listed as examples, and to give a sense of the style.

Villainy Pairs

Vigilance – Villainy

Theme: Damage, or even destroy your own units for value
Leaders: Director Krennic, Jabba the Hutt, Qi’Ra, Grand Admiral Thrawn
This pair uses wounded units as a resource, turning drawbacks into advantages.

Command – Villainy

Theme: Go-wide boards and token strategies
Leaders: Colonel Yularen, Darth Vader, Supreme Leader Snoke, Emperor Palpatine
Strong synergy with Vigilance (Command provides bodies that Vigilance can weaponize)

Aggression – Villainy

Theme: Classic aggro with direct damage and high pressure
Leaders: Dedra Meero, Boba Fett, Grand Inquisitor, Darth Vader
This pair excels at pushing damage quickly and leveraging cheap threats. Pairs naturally with Command’s wide strategies.

Cunning – Villainy

Theme: Sneaky tempo, and tricky sequencing
Leaders: Asajj Ventress, Boba Fett, Jango Fett, Sly Moore
This is the loosest Villainy pair at the moment. While I have some strong individual cards, the overarching theme is still developing. (Also: many leaders flip on 5, which can feel samey.)

Heroism Pairs

Vigilance – Heroism

Theme: Durability, healing, and buffing units
Leaders: Satine Kryze, Luke Skywalker, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Rey
This pair wants to grind value through damage mitigation and upgrades. It plays the longest games of any Heroism pair.

Command – Heroism

Theme: Aggression with tempo and bounce potential
Leaders: Captain Rex, Leia Organa, Padmé Amidala, Boba Fett
This pair has the weakest identity right now. Many of my leaders ask for specific traits, which I deliberately avoid supporting. I'm experimenting with giving this combination a tempo/bounce angle.

Aggression – Heroism

Theme: Self-damage payoffs and sacrificing units for burst damage
Leaders: Sabine Wren, Han Solo, Anakin Skywalker, Luthen Rael
There’s strong cross-synergy with Vigilance’s healing themes. Aggression inflicts damage on your own base and units, which Vigilance can mitigate.

Cunning – Heroism

Theme: Trick-heavy tempo, exhausting units, playing and replaying them
Leaders: C-3PO, Fennec Shand, Quinlan Vos, Admiral Ackbar
This pair isn’t fully unified yet. There are powerful leaders here, but no clean identity across all four. Long-term I want this pair to lean into Command-style tempo: bouncing, replaying, and sequencing units for incremental advantage.

General Aspect Themes

These are the macro identities that inform all pairings:

Vigilance: thrives with damaged units
Command: wide boards and value units
Aggression: self-damage and burst damage
Cunning: tricks, tempo, and exhausting effects

I intentionally avoid supporting narrow traits like Rebel, Underworld, Imperial, etc. These often create “trap” archetypes unless heavily saturated. Ground/Space already matters organically, so those axes provide enough structure on their own. The same is true for aspects.

For this reason, I only include leaders whose abilities don’t demand heavy trait/mechanical support. Leaders like Vader (Pilot) and Snoke, for example, work in Cube because their abilities don’t require you to draft deep into a specific trait, they play well with generally strong cards rather than needing a dedicated package.

One more personal design rule I follow whenever I can: each character appears only once in the Cube. I don’t like having multiple versions of the same named character across units and leaders. I think it keeps the environment clean and avoids flavor repetition.

Mechanics I Support (or Avoid)

Some mechanics shine in Cube; others create memory issues, ask for too much support, or simply don’t pull their weight without constructed-level density. Since many SWU mechanics are set-bound and appear in small numbers, you often can’t rely on volume alone: each one has to stand on its own.

Here’s how I evaluate them for my Cube:

Great Mechanics

These are consistently fun, impactful, and require little support.

Ambush – One of the best mechanics in the game. It functions like removal, and creates immediate board impact
Grit – Encourages interactive combat and naturally synergizes with many leaders. Fantastic in my own environment. My favourite mechanic in the game.
Sentinel – Healthy and intuitive. It shapes combat without generating memory problems. I’d like more Sentinel cards that aren’t simply large vanilla walls.

Workhorse Mechanics

Solid, reliable, and functional without carrying archetypes by themselves.

Overwhelm – Helps close games and gives players tools to push through Sentinel units.
Raid – Clean and effective. Built-in catch-up mechanic since units hit weaker on defense.
Experience Tokens – Perfectly serviceable. Better when you care about upgraded units, but still fine in isolation.
Restore – Useful in moderation
Exploit – A solid role-player in my environment
Hidden - Gives aggressive strategies an edge while letting players “stage” an attacker.
Shielded - Helps players establish and protect early board presence, letting their units stick. Like Hidden, it’s stronger when you’re ahead or at parity, but less helpful when you’re behind. Great in moderation.
Saboteur – Fine. Provides built-in counterplay to Sentinel and Shielded.

Situational or Weak Mechanics

Playable in small doses, but often narrow or dependent on the right setup.

Piloting – Often win-more and too dependent on having a good vehicle. Works best only when the unit side of the card is independently strong.
Capture - Weak when behind and can create awkward board states. Not a good comeback mechanic.
Bounty – Not a fan. Has unintuitive interaction quirks not reflected in reminder text, making it risky in casual draft environments.
Coordinate – Another win-more mechanic: powerful when ahead, bad when behind.
Indirect Damage – Generally low-impact unless you include dedicated build-arounds, which I prefer not to.
Disclose – Totally fine as a mechanic, but Cube tends to favor only a few aspects at a time. Ends up being weaker outside constructed.

Mechanics I Avoid

These either create memory issues, rules confusion, or require more density than Cube can reasonably provide.

Smuggle – The reminder text is misleading for new players and encourages checking resourced cards repeatedly. Not worth the mental overhead.
Plot – Similar to smuggle, it forces players to constantly reread their resourced cards and actively detracts from board-focused gameplay.
The Force – Needs massive support, otherwise most payoffs are traps. Works best only on leaders, where you’re guaranteed the payoff every game. If you want to run Force cards at all, you also need to provide bases that generate Force tokens.

A Note on Ramp and Cost Reduction

Not a named mechanic, but resource ramp is something I use very sparingly. Too much ramp enables early leader flips and snowballing advantages that warp the environment. Cost reducers are often the cleaner version as they don’t disrupt the pacing of the game as much.

Closing Thoughts

Cube is a fantastic long-term format for SWU. As the card pool grows, I’m constantly revisiting old cards, reevaluating leaders, and swapping out underperforming options. New sets are an endless source of tweaks and experiments. I’d love to hear what others have tried, what’s worked for them, and what challenges they’ve run into in their own Cubes.

Posted Nov 28, 2025, 1:05 PM UTC

4029