I honestly like FS Goyf better because of what the futureshifted frame does for the colors
and a may be biased by the foil I have of it. I agree all the way on MM Confidant. He looks so appropiatley slimy and sinister, and his effects are far more appropiate and visually pleasing than the orzhov loser in the original.
I honestly don't like most of the high-end duals. Yeah, they do nice things for decks but playing at the level I do I have never missed them running between all basics and mostly basics with a few EtBT lands. Yes, my Evolve deck would probably be better if its mana base was 4x
Breeding Pool, 4x
Misty Rainforest, 4x
Hinterland Harbor, and then maybe 6 forests and 6 islands, but I'm quite happy at 4
Simic Guildgates and 10 of each relevant basic. I don't need the $300 version and when I get the parts for it, into the trade binder they go.
I believe in Land Destruction. Is it great to end up shut out of a game by hardcore Ponza? No. But no degeneratley overspecialized strategy is a blast to play against, be it Ponza, Burn, Counterspells.dec, or Creatures: the Tappening. By being so specialized, they fail to interact on more than one level, and that's the killer for me. Hell, on that scale Ponza is less bad than most of the others listed. As part of a broader deck (say, in EDH) LD reduces reliability, forcing players to make choices both in game (especially with mulligans) and in deck construction between the rewarding option that might never see the board and the safer alternative. Spot LD also provides a safety valve against really powerful nonbasics like Gaea's Cradle, Cabal Coffers, Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth, and so on. For the same reason, I believe in Stax, (especially the face card itself,
Smokestack) and in Countermagic.