[Deck] 43 Lands

[Julian23]

The best answers to reanimator are actually Karakas and Glacial Chasm which deal with almost anything they can come up with. Maybe Terastodon will get there through Glacial Chasm but the chances of that happening are actually way too little to justify putting 4 Leylines in the board. And no: we don't need anything but a single Crypt/Bojuka Bog from the sb against Dredge (which is an awesome matchup already).

[Infinitium]

Reanimator used to play It that betrays specifically to combat Glacial locks back when either were considered relevant. Just saying.

[mchainmail]

The best answers to reanimator are actually Karakas and Glacial Chasm which deal with almost anything they can come up with. Maybe Terastodon will get there through Glacial Chasm but the chances of that happening are actually way too little to justify putting 4 Leylines in the board. And no: we don't need anything but a single Crypt/Bojuka Bog from the sb against Dredge (which is an awesome matchup already).

One of the big differences with Reanimator is now they get Jin Gitaxis, so at some point in the game they *will* reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, and eventually win.


In the past, we used to be able to just use chasm or maze to stop Iona / Inkwell.

[metamet]

The Problem With Lands, or What’s Cooler Than Being Cool?

Jason Schousboe wrote an article that went out this morning discussing Lands in the current meta, and how playing for the "cool" factor may sometimes take away from the fun.

As Lands players, what're you thoughts on his observations in the meta? What of his list with Scapeshift and Valakut? I've seen the deck win on turn 4 when the combo goes off, but I can see how interrupting it in the current meta is fairly easy. Thoughts?

The Problem With Lands, or What’s Cooler Than Being Cool?

[ESG]

That list looks like it's trying to do everything at once. No wonder it did nothing well. Also, he talks of making several missplays, which I'm assuming were because he did little -- zero? -- testing with the deck. Ultimately, Lands is trying to play a fair game, and Legacy has drifted further into the unfair, so unless you know what the meta is going to be and know that your bad matchups are few, then you're likely setting yourself up for disappointment. He doesn't give any indication that he knew what the meta was going to be or had a plan to attack it, so he just ran his ship into the rocks. I didn't know a player could receive more than one bye based on losses over the course of a tournament (and this one, if his report is correct, was only six rounds long).

Back when Lands was better positioned, I tested Scapeshift and found it lacking unless the entire plan was built around Valakut. The way he's trying to squeeze it in here is beyond greedy.

[rocketrae21]

I agree. The combo is just too cute for the deck. Yes, having Wish targets can be super helpful in match ups but then again they are spots being wasted that if countered you are just in trouble. I do agree that lands is poorly positioned and it is upsetting but you can't help the deck by playing a random combo in it. Counters have always been bad for the Lands player and Mental Misstep has made it worse. If the card does end up getting banned, the deck may see some rise again.

[Keiichi]

Back when Lands was better positioned, I tested Scapeshift and found it lacking unless the entire plan was built around Valakut. The way he's trying to squeeze it in here is beyond greedy.

It does seem like he picked a poor version of the deck and just started slinging cards on a wing and a prayer, then wrote about his preconceived notions. I've played with Jason at the Monster Den more than a few times, and based on casual conversations there his opinions on Lands.dec in general have always been a bit suspect in my view.

No doubt he's a decent player, but he's not someone I would consider to be a leading authority on the deck.

On the other hand, some of his concerns are legitimate. The biggest problem is that we have no way to efficiently recur our enchantments, and we don't have a reliable and cheap way to simply end games quickly. Until we find a way around that the deck isn't going to be able to compete strongly against a field of Blue control decks with Force, Misstep, and a fast clock.

[Julian23]

One of the big differences with Reanimator is now they get Jin Gitaxis, so at some point in the game they *will* reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, reanimate a fatty, draw cards, and eventually win.


In the past, we used to be able to just use chasm or maze to stop Iona / Inkwell.

However, you can still use Karakas on their turn to stop any Jin Gitaxis shenanigans. I admit, that this will most often require a Mox to transmute Tolaria West early on.

[fdiv_bug]

The biggest problem is that we have no way to efficiently recur our enchantments, and we don't have a reliable and cheap way to simply end games quickly. Until we find a way around that the deck isn't going to be able to compete strongly against a field of Blue control decks with Force, Misstep, and a fast clock.

I agree on both counts. Regarding recurring enchantments, the list I've been fiddling with lately has a Volrath's Stronghold and an Eternal Witness in it for that purpose, but it's often still not enough to get me there. I wish they'd print an enchantment version of Volrath's Stronghold or Academy Ruins.

[Antonius]

I agree on both counts. Regarding recurring enchantments, the list I've been fiddling with lately has a Volrath's Stronghold and an Eternal Witness in it for that purpose, but it's often still not enough to get me there. I wish they'd print an enchantment version of Volrath's Stronghold or Academy Ruins.

If they did, we would just dominate everyone with deed every turn.

[questionmuppet]

I am the guy who wrote the article for Quiet Speculation. I would like to clarify a few things that perhaps were not obvious from the article. (Please forgive me if this is too verbose.)

My conclusions about Lands are NOT a result of the particular tournament outlined in the article. To the contrary, they have developed gradually while piloting standard builds of the deck over the course of more than a year. I've played it in a GP, several SCG Legacy 5Ks (one of which I top-8ed), and countless local events. I've also tested a wide variety of different tutor engines and singletons (including most of the stuff you can find in this thread).

True, I cannot claim to be an “authority” on this deck. That being said, my opinions are based on concrete experience in a tournament setting, and they were not formed hastily. They may be wrong, but they are not unfounded.

That list looks like it's trying to do everything at once.

ESG is absolutely correct to point out how loose my decklist was. While I have a lot of experience with Lands in general, he surmises correctly that I ran this particular version pretty much blind. Unsurprisingly, I suppose, it preformed significantly worse than more traditional lists.

It does seem like he picked a poor version of the deck and just started slinging cards on a wing and a prayer.

I wasn’t running the Valakut combo because I was under the impression that it positioned me better, nor did I think it the strongest version. My intention was to ascertain what kind of strengths and weaknesses that version had, a task I think best accomplished in a live tournament.

Ultimately, Lands is trying to play a fair game, and Legacy has drifted further into the unfair.

This is precisely the argument I make in the latter half of my article. While metagame tweaking can resolve some of these issues, my contention is that even an optimal build is less powerful and consistent than strategies based on FoW and Brainstorm.

Of course, what fun would it be to quit trying? I am writing another article for QS, about what I think a close-to-optimal build of lands looks like (beginning with E Tutor and Bob.) Hopefully I can offer some more constructive commentary on the deck in that article.

[Keiichi]

I wasn’t running the Valakut combo because I was under the impression that it positioned me better, nor did I think it the strongest version. My intention was to ascertain what kind of strengths and weaknesses that version had, a task I think best accomplished in a live tournament.

Fair enough. The fact that you used your experience with a suboptimal deck list as an example for the general shortcomings of the archetype, even if that wasn't your intent, made me doubt the voracity of your arguments.

Of course, what fun would it be to quit trying? I am writing another article for QS, about what I think a close-to-optimal build of lands looks like (beginning with E Tutor and Bob.) Hopefully I can offer some more constructive commentary on the deck in that article.

While I may have been quick to write your last article off as somewhat lacking in credibility, I always give fair hearing to new opinions. Please do post a link here when you've posted it to QS, I'm looking forward to reading it.

[Antonius]

I just realized that the "lands theme" block has come and gone and given us jack shit for it.

WTF wizards.

[Keiichi]

I just realized that the "lands theme" block has come and gone and given us jack shit for it.

WTF wizards.

Powerful lands are taboo... Kind of like how powerful land destruction is taboo. I know, if they print powerful LD, they can print powerful lands. Screw the complainers, problem solved.

[GoldenCid]

The Problem With Lands, or What’s Cooler Than Being Cool?



The Problem With Lands, or What’s Cooler Than Being Cool?

Pfff, sad and upset to read an article like this, what was it objetive? :@

On lands what about this guy??



Has anybody tested it? You can maze the big guy and destroy the small one with him! It's a way to cut the creatures of our opo.

[rocketrae21]

Hmm seems interesting? I have not tested it but would totally be willing to. How many do you think you would run in a list?
I honestly want to run Jace, TMS in Lands because well Jace is the boss

[GoldenCid]

Hmm seems interesting? I have not tested it but would totally be willing to. How many do you think you would run in a list?
I honestly want to run Jace, TMS in Lands because well Jace is the boss

Just 1, the difference beetwen jace and pahraon is that this onme acts from yard without spending mana ;)

[rocketrae21]

Oh I know. The Jace was a separate thought. I wasn't saying that he replaces Pharaoh or anything. Just brainstorming (no pun intended)

[GoldenCid]

Oh I know. The Jace was a separate thought. I wasn't saying that he replaces Pharaoh or anything. Just brainstorming (no pun intended)

Yeah but pharaoh is a real strong choice!!

[rocketrae21]

Yeah but pharaoh is a real strong choice!!

Well you make me want to play it more and more. I don't know why. The only problem is Lands isn't good in the meta game right now with the whole Mental Misstep being everywhere. I promise you though if Mental Misstep gets banned or I don't care that much about a tournament I will test your Pharaoh