See Kel? Like I said, don't do it if you need confirmation or validation. Do it cause you want to.



I'll have a look but make no promises


So:
1)That's fine. I always debate with folks about the actual value spent on a Bellow's. I mean there's always that game where it won by casting for 12 but typically it's much smaller than that (I'm absolutely fine with a 5-7dmg pump for 1 mana). I think you just need to consider the cards being played and when they need to be cast (It's more about the costs). For reference, I use a general rule of thumb of 14 sources (one color T2) or 18 sources(2 colors T4). Mana is generally easier to build that way. Then; if you have left over, you can play with the remaining lands as you see fit (and how much you want to test variance). The more complicated the color costs, the more I go look up stuff. So by the charts I should have 22 sources to cast a T4 Aetherwind Basker/ Plated Crusher. Yes there's factors in the article for mana dorks and fetching that can offset that but I'm only running 23 lands currently so I really didn't want to play with variance. I'm sure 1 copy would be fine though since you can't draw a 2nd copy to screw color cost.

2)This is GREEN STOMPY! I want to play big bombs. I ain't gots no time for tha crap! Seriously though, that's why you play this sort of build. Yes we could modify it to match meta plays but then why play Green Stompy? Why not add a color or two for better options than sorcery speed Monstrous Onslaught? The point to playing a deck like this is to play bombs and cards like Monstrous.

3)Sequencing. T2 Mana Dork T3 a) Mana Dork and Mana Dork OR b) Explosive Vegetation T4 Gaea's Revenge or Plated Crusher. Translation: Ha Ha. You are REALLY hard pressed to remove these (or as I'm actually thinking - ha ha you're <bleep>ed!). You're literally putting down a bomb on T4 that is pretty impossible to interact with outside of counter magic and sac effects (and can cast T5 Onslaught with successful results). That or you play your Aetherwind Basker that says, remove me right now or lose the game T5. To be truthful, Basker should probably be the other Plated Crusher but again this is Green Stompy. I absolutely want to have games where I put down Basker on T4 and swing for their life total the next turn.

4) See #3. Again they're all fine choices. It really comes down to what bomb(s) you want to ramp to.


elk

This is how I imagine you whenever you see arguing going on in a thread:

"There it is; I know it was coming one day this month."

ZZ I'm confused, am I a child with parents in an abusive relationship? Am I looking on in pride? Am I jealous? That pic isn't clear enough dammit!

So many unanswered questions, but at least I made this all about me. Take pointers Kel.

Not quite. Plated Crusher is likely to survive the turn, Basker is not. Gaea's is also more likely to get stone walled (e.g. a 5/4 Tireless Tracker would be able to trade with Gaea's; it'd take a 6/5 Tracker to trade with Plated Crusher and even then you'd trample for two damage).

If you're able to make Basker a 13/13 it might be a sign of it being a win-more card? After all you not only have lots of other creatures around, you're also able to pump & pump without running into Murder / Skywhaler's / Declaration in Stone etc. I'm not saying that it is a win-more card, but it's something I would think about - I'm having second doubts about Rishkar's Expertise now for the same reason. I used to have fond memories of it drawing 4+ cards and effectively winning the game, but it also requires the big minion to live + the opponent not to have a counterspell.

@elk good point about the sequencing. I'm skeptical about how often it happens but it makes sense. That's what I was referring to as transferable! Maybe eldrazi isn't a good match with green for that reason: the payoffs are at 4-5-6 mana, not the 4-7-10 mana that green ramp gets you to.

Regarding Basker - it gets energy for every creature you have in play and assuming it survives, gets energy when it swings for every creature you still have in play (including any you added that next turn). So maybe you already have a bomb in play and Basker could be win more at that point but more often it's a few dorks in play that need a big bomb. Having a card that can WIN THE GAME the turn it can attack is a good threat. No protection can be an issue but the deck can draw reasonably well to keep you in threats so I'm fine with excluding things like Blossoming Defense.

Regarding sequencing - does it happen every game? No. Sometimes it's a T3 Ballista for 2 into Gearhulk or Nissa Vital Force into emblem into Nissa Vastwood flip or Woodland bellower with an Advocate. . Does it happen though? Yes of course it does and that's why you account for it. It's a line that ends the game potentially by T5 or 6 (so T4 Plated and T5 Gaea's for 15 is a thing). You try to build for as many lines as you can in your mana.


elk

Original


Revision 1

3 x Primal Bellow
2 x Sylvan Advocate
2 x Duskwatch Recruiter
4 x Druid of the Cowl
2 x Deathcap Cultivator
2 x Walking Ballista
2 x Reclamation Sage
2 x Tireless Tracker
1 x Nissa, Vastwood Seer
4 x Explosive Vegetation
1 x Nissa, Vital Force
1 x Verdurous Gearhulk
2 x Monstrous Onslaught
2 x Rishkar's Expertise
1 x Ulvenwald Hydra
1 x Woodland Bellower
2 x Gaea's Revenge
3 x Plated Crusher

22 x Forest
1 x Rogue's Passage


Changes made:
-2x Nature's Way
-1x Aetherwind Basker
-2x Nissa's Pilgrimage
-1x Forest

+1 Reclamation Sage
+1 Plated Crusher
+2 Walking Ballista
+1 Ulvenwald Hydra
+1 Rogue's Passage

So I made a few changes to the build so it's a little less Johnny (I'm so sorry Johnny) and a bit more meta oriented/ flexible. I swapped Nature's Way for Walking Ballista which seems to have better potential/value against a number of decks. I swapped Aetherwind Basker (which absolutely kills me - Johnny HATES me right now ) for another Plated Crusher aiming to be more competitive. Crusher is just harder to interact with (I'm still not looking to add Blossoming Defense) and has trample which is great. I dropped Nissa's Pilgrimage since the deck already has a strong mana/land manipulation theme going on which often makes the card unnecessary. I swapped for 1 additional Reclamation Sage again for competitive reasons (2 Sages along with Woodland Bellower and Walking Ballista can do a lot of work against the current meta) and I'm currently testing Ulvenwald Hydra for synergy/value factors. Since Hydra is being tested, there's reason to run 1 Rogue's Passage. I'm not entirely sold on the Hydra choice yet but we'll see. I'm also going to test the playset of Arborback Stomper at some point too. I think it could have some merit.

If anyone wants to take a break from testing UBx Artifact decks and give this a spin, I'd enjoy hearing your feedback.


elk

I'll see if I can give it a spin tomorrow or the next. I am wondering if 23 lands on a ramp deck is right. Even with the ramp you still have to hit your land drops for 4-5 turns right? I love the basker but I get why you pulled the card. He has to be protected or it's probably not happening.

I know this was already dismissed and I will not argue against running threats over answers. I think that is solid reasoning you made elk if you are going all out aggressive doods and ramping. I will say I would rather run Plummet over Rec sage in a deck like this. Unless you really want an answer to an enchantment? I don't see this deck losing to mill, big hexproof dudes on a creatureless board = game over. I guess you could fear Aligned Hedron Network but is anyone running that? I just don't see what artifacts or enchantments this deck fears outside of flying vehicles. I guess Bellower makes more sense with rec sage so I can see that being the reason to go that way. You want the 2/1 body with the effect vs no body with the effect for less?

As far as Plummet being bad and situational I agree to one part of that, it is for sideboards for sure but its a situation that encompasses a lot of the meta right now. Plummet to me is like a green doom blade and it deals with every flying vehicle at instant speed plus all the other scary fliers that might show up that rec sage can only look at and wish he had wings so he could chump himself into it. Most decks rec sage makes sense because they can't handle flying or ground vehicles that are too big or you need to answer some enchants because they can't win fast enough. This deck can handle the ground vehicles with it's fat creatures. I like Plummet over cards like vines or nature's way because it can't be responded to with removal or tapping effects and it doesn't require you to have a decent sized creature out and it doesn't care if it's a big flier that may or may not trade with Skysovereign. It just does it's job on it's own no other cards needed.

To sum up: I don't agree plummet is worse than the other green vehicle answers but it is a situational answer card and I can see rec sage as a better option when you can tutor it with one of the fatties the deck runs or the deck has GY recursion that targets creatures.

I guess I will play the deck and figure out whats up.

Normally in ramp decks I would have 26+ lands to ensure consistency per turn but there's a few cards that help out here so generally we need to get to about 3 lands with Druid of the Cowl, Deathcap Cultivator or Nissa, Vastwood Seer (also at 3 lands and a dork, Explosive Vegetation comes on line). That generally gets us playing a reasonable amount of the deck. Duskwatch Recruiter; which isn't ramp and can require effort to flip, does factor into casting so I'll consider that as a modifier. So 6 early mana sources, 1 mana draw and 2 'modifiers' with access to 4 ramp spells is how I'm justifying such a low land count. It could be wrong but hasn't seemed so yet. 24+ might be worth testing. Still the deck feels like it's consistently playing ahead of curve even at 23 lands. Let me know how it goes for you.


You sort of answered yourself here. Rec Sage hits any enchantment and any artifact. There is just a huge ratio of decks that incorporate vehicles right now. There's also that AER was an artifact themed set. Rec Sage deals with a lot of situations that are in the meta and covers a lot of other fringe options too. You also mentioned it has a body and my answer is yes to that question. I'd much rather have something like a 2/1 to put down with no effects than a dead card in my hand. As meaningless as the 2/1 can be, it still has the chance to get involved in the game. It could swing with other creatures and then get Primal Bellow cast on it after blocks or it could receive a counter or two from Verdurous Gearhulk and become a threat or it could just flat out do 2 damage. It could chump and then be recurred by Nissa, Vital Force. It could chump and allow me to Gaea's Revenge on the crack back. It could stack block. Heck in a worst case scenario, it could draw me 2 cards off Rishkar's Expertise. Rec Sage just has more potential than something like Plummet (which is extremely narrow). In this sort of deck, you should want your cards to be as flexible as possible and cover as many situations as you can. And as you said, Bellower further increases that flexibility.


Maybe you're seeing different things in the meta than I am (and there's always some flying threats no matter what the meta is) but I haven't been seeing an abundance of 'flying' themed decks. Sure thopters happen from time to time or even things like Spirts etc but I still wouldn't play Plummet for the times those games do happen. Individual flying cards are absolutely a thing and do happen (and is a weakness of this deck) but Plummet is a sideboard card through and through.


That'd be awesome. Thanks! Credit still goes to Nighthawk for starting this mess


elk

It's like I am pointing at a shark and all you see is the beach. Plummet isn't a sorcery it kills vehicles mid flight instant speed. I'm not worried about generic flier spirits so much but it will handle those just fine, a queller countered an explosive vegies, Plummet and your ramp is back on the stack. I'm looking over at improvise demon and avacyn more so as additional targets that rec sage is like "uhh yeah I got no dice". There are other fliers that make racing difficult like angel of invention and gisela the broken blade and of course if they somehow can assemble brisela voice of nightmares its over unless you have plummet in hand and open just before they merge. More than likely though you will be hitting hearts, looter scooters, aethersphere harvesters or the mighty skysov with a plummet but the additional targeting I think is worth consideration. I still don't know what enchants you would fear but I could see thopter sky network needing to go when you have Gaea's out. Why is this hard? Am I missing something?

I won't argue the body part, if you want a chumper with your removal then he's it. I just don't like this "it's situational" pointing at an option when you are running a 2/1 that is also situationally good or bad depending if he has a target.

See that last part of what you said is exactly it.

Rec Sage is good if your opponent plays an artifact or enchantment. Rec Sage is still decent if your opponent never plays an artifact or enchantment. Rec Sage can still chump/trade, he can still provide a clock (albeit a slow one). Being a creature is significant for more reasons than just being able to attack and block though. Rec Sage can be fetched off of Duskwatch Recruiter and also works with its cost reduction unlike Plummet. It can be fetched off of Woodland Bellower. Rec Sage can be targeted by our Primal Bellow, Monstrous Onslaught, or Rishkar's Expertise, while it definitely isn't the ideal target for those spells, the fact they can be used together is relevant if we are discussing replacing them with Plummet (which has no synergy with anything at all in the deck). Rec Sage can also accept counters from Gearhulk which Plummet can not.

On the other hand. Plummet is good if your opponent has a flying creature. If your opponent doesn't have any flying creatures though then the card is completely dead and does absolutely nothing for you.

Plummet is a million times more situational than Rec Sages is. Both are good in the specific scenarios we run them for. The difference is that in the situations outside of the ones we run them for (Fliers for Plummet, Artifacts/Enchants for Sage) Sage still does something, whereas Plummet is a completely dead draw and does nothing at all.

Elk, your list is very similar to mine now (apart from cutting the Basker you monster, i had it up to a 62/62 last night!)

Ended up agreeing with GoA and cut the pilgrimages for ballista, sometimes it makes you sad but overall i found the versatility was just too good to pass up.

Also agree on the nature's way, i've cut all of them from the deck and have barely missed them, i just rely on monstrous onslaught now to clear the way.

Actually looking at the lists i think the only real difference between mine and yours is blossoming defence for rec sages and you cut a land for hydra (which totally should be the BIG LIZARD)

Eon has reiterated my points but lets tackle a few more of yours.


- So to all of these I say, so will Rec Sage. Rec Sage will also hit Fleetwheel Cruiser and Cultivator's Caravan which see play. It also hits Gearhulks, forces Ballista's to sac, covers any other artifact and/or enchantment you can think of and then leaves a body for things already discussed. The only thing that Plummet will get you here; by being instant, is a tempo play (they crew and then you remove) which is always fine but it's all the gaping holes it doesn't cover. Again it's about card flexibility. You want the card to give you multiple choices for as many situations as you can. Plummet only does one thing. Rec sage does multiple things (even if some of them aren't the strongest, some choice is better than no choice).


- Here I say, the deck still has other answer cards for these situations. Walking Ballista can easily get to a 3/3 or 4/4 in this deck while still having the potential to be even larger due to the ramp (which can get to the demon). That takes care of every angel example you gave with the exception of a merged Nightmare (which is fairly uncommon/rare). The only concern could be that Ballista isn't on the field when someone flashes in Avacyn end of turn to crack back for a win. Also, Monstrous Onslaught can deal with all these examples including the nightmare after merge and the demon.

My point here is that there are answers in the deck that can deal with a lot of the situations you've come up with. There may not be a ton of answers but there ARE answers. That's generally what you want too, 'outs' in your deck to a board state that you can draw/find/play. The deck does a really decent job of drawing cards so you do have better odds of finding those answers you need (if you don't already have them). Then it comes down to how you play the deck. If you know you've got certain cards that are 'answers' to problems your deck has, you need to weigh when you play them and how you play them. That's all situational and based on the judgement of the pilot (so if Barney were running this deck, he'd tank horribly and blame the builder even though he cast Ballista for X=1 and sac'd it to Toolcraft Exemplar on T2 instead of playing T2 Druid of the Cowl, T3 Walking Ballista for x=2, T4 Verdurous Gearhulk for a 6/6 Ballista)


- Then the beach must be full of sharks already from the sharknado.

We get the situations you're talking about but it seems like you're missing how narrow the card is for those situations/examples. Yes they happen but the deck does have other potential answers to most of the examples you come up with. Then; like Eon said, if the examples you gave DON'T show up, you have nothing. A dead card is useless and even worse when you're looking for an answer card or you're in top deck mode. Again Plummet has only ONE option and that's just not good enough. It'd be fine if we had a side board (again flying can be a problem for the deck) but we don't, so it just becomes a weakness of the deck (and EVERY deck has weaknesses/ bad match ups).

Here's the challenge to you. Tell us how many Plummets you would run and how many Rec sages you'd cut for them. Then play a large number of games with each version of the deck and let us know how it goes. I say a large number games to allow for variance, draw and to hit enough meta games to see comparable results (so folks can chime in on the # of games they think but I'm assuming in excess of 15 ladder games each). Just be critical here. Keep stats and record your results (your own paper notes are fine, I'm not interested in watching videos etc. I trust ya ) so that you can refer to them when you reply. I'm interested in how many times Plummet was played, how many times it 'made a difference' and how many times it was dead. Also do the 'if I had' or 'would I want' question. So if you're playing Plummet, ask yourself, "if I had Rec Sage right now" or "would I want Rec Sage right now" and visa versa. Again be critical and as unbiased as you can (you're already fighting for the Plummet choice so it's likely you're going to side with that decision) and then let us know you're results. I think after a decent volume of tested games, you'll see how narrow Plummet really is.


elk

Funny thing is im actually not even advocating you run it here. Im just saying in a vacum in a deck that plays big creatures and isnt worried about the ground game, not worried about handling hulks or ground based vehicles because your creatures trump them, plummet could be better. The deck is running creature synergies and i agree the sage gets the nod.

It was erking me you calling plummet situational but running rec sage like its a treat. 3cmc for a 2/1 in green is aweful, same cost as tireless tracker for comparison. Of course its great value if he has a target. Yes plummet is a dead card with no target but imho sage isnt playable in the same situation. I do agree she has more targets she can hit but i have been preaching that those additional targets sage hits arnt threats to this deck, esspecially a balista that you mentioned. While plummet is more target narrow it deals with other problem cards this deck dies to that sage does not. No one has acknowledged this but thats ok this is my last post on the subject and we dont disagree that these cards are sideboard material.

Im sorry i have ranted for so long on this basically moot point becouse i wouldnt run more than 2 copies of either and the current set up is bult to use sage and thats not a bad thing. I liked your reasoning on running threats over answers, sage isnt in the threat catagory so why run 2x? Because you need answers if you dont explode out of the gate. Keep on trucking brother.

Because it is. Not sure how you don't seem to be getting this. Rec Sage is a threat and an answer in one card, which is why we run it over other more situational answers (like Plummet).

Think about it this way. Instead of trying to compare Reclamation Sage to Plummet, instead let us compare Reclamation Sage to Appetite for the Unnatural since the effects and cost are similar and they answer all of the same threats.

Why is it that Reclamation Sage sees a ton of play while Appetite for the Unnatural doesn't (even though Appetite is Instant and has life gain attached, both advantages over Rec Sage)?

The answer is the Rec Sage is considerably less narrow than Appetite is specifically because Rec Sage comes with a creature attached to the effect. In a situation where the artifact/enchantment destruction doesn't do anything, Rec Sage is still a threat/blocker on the board. While a 2/1 for 3 definitely isn't anything amazing, it is still better than a card that does absolutely nothing for you in that situation, and yes, a 2/1 is indeed a threat, hell, a 1/1 token is a threat if it can successfully attack and goes unanswered.

That is even before you get into all of the other synergy it potentially has in decks because it is a creature.

Simply put, if we are given the option between running a narrow answer, or a threat with a narrow answer attached to it, most of the time you will simply be better off running the latter. If there was a creature identical to Rec Sage (3cmc, 2/1 body) that instead had Plummet attached to it I could tell you right now that it would likely see a ton of play.

Just another thought. Do a quick search and see how many decks you can find that have ever run plummet (not just duels). I was looking but had a tough time finding anything (other than a debate as to which was better. Clip wings or plummet). If that isn't an indication to it's playability let alone "main decking" it, I don't know what is.

elk

Daily Magic Update on March 23, 2017 http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/daily-magic-update/update-2017-03-23
A list by Mayhem1287, who went 5-0 in a Standard Competitive League. energy deck runs 1 copy of Plummet in the sb. He also has some options that are also artifact specific probably just for mardu vehicles that we do not have access to. 3 Natural Obsolescence, 1 Plummet, 2 Release the Gremlins and 2 Aetherspheres.

I actually don't know how to research what is being run in standard tournaments that would be pretty neat. I just went and looked around the magic articles looking for green decks and spotted it. If we had side boards this wouldn't be a discussion, both rec sage and plummet would be in it.

Eon your point is meh. Playing a 3 cmc expedition envoy imho isn't worth casting. I will hold a rec sage in my hand until the end of the game if I don't have a target because I know the second I cast it the op will play skysov or something else ridiculous making me hate myself.

I do agree with you, wide answers are better than the narrow ones. My point has been (i can't believe I am typing this same thing again) if the wider possible targets aren't a game ender for the deck and can be handled by your creatures in combat or ignored because the deck will end the game before they matter, maybe the more narrow answer that also hits other problems might be a better option. I'm not being sarcastic either, it might be but it might not be because it's so focused. I think it comes down to speed of the deck, synergies and weaknesses. If the deck is fast enough you aren't worried about wide answers as much, you just have to make sure you don't die first so tempo matters. If it's not fast then it better have wider disruption to help keep you in the game. What is the deck weak to? I was thinking the ground game is the strength of the deck. There is also personal preference and I won't fault anyone for that.

Cards like duskwatch and bellower have synergy with the elf so running them in this deck makes this discussion not even matter. For fun I might just not run bellower, recruiters or sages and see how it all works out. I love the idea of an anti-control deck running all the hexproof dudes it can. That or I go back to dimir artifacts and make it happen with inventor. I have also not made a deck that uses Lifecrafter's Bestiary, would love to find a build that is a near all creatures and uses it to keep drawing gas. The elf would be a good card there.

Except that there ARE scenarios where it is worth casting as just a 3cmc 2/1. Lets say the opponent has an empty board and nothing left in hand, would you play it out as a 2/1 for 3cmc? What if you also had a Primal Bellow in hand so it could potentially represent lethal the following turn? Scenarios DO exist where it is worthwhile to just cast the card for the body on the table. I will agree with you, there are times where it is worthwhile to hold onto it just in case the opponent plays something worth removing, I don't deny that at all. The ability to play it out as a threat though is more relevant than you seem to be willing to admit, and having more options is never a bad thing.




While I don't think this is a bad way of looking at thing at all, I think we also have to consider the Duels format that we are playing in.

We have established already that cards like Plummet and Reclamation Sage are generally the types of cards that tend to end up in Sideboards.

Normally (aka Paper/Modo) we are able to create a deck that focuses on doing what it does, and the particular weaknesses that the deck has can be handled by cards in your SB. Should we run up against a deck with a ton of fliers for example we can board in Plummet. In this fashion, we know pretty well that the card is going to find it's mark, since it is coming in G2/3 after we already know at least some of what is in the opponents deck. As such narrow answers can much better be used as silver bullets.

Without SBs though we are forced into making a choice. Do we just accept the weakness and potentially eat some losses because of it, or do we include those typically SB hate cards into the MD to shore up the weakness, potentially making the deck less focused and worse all around?

It is a difficult question honestly. This is a big part of why those cards that pull double duty as threat and answer (like Rec Sage) see so much play though. If you are going to run a card in your main deck that you would normally only ever run in your SB, having it do something other than just be an answer for that specific thing goes a long way towards not diluting your deck too much.

Sometimes though I just feel you are better off just accepting the weakness. A great example of this would be my Temur DynaFog deck, which has a horrendous matchup against Sphinx's Tutelage. The deck is perfectly capable of running multiple different answers to it, but if I were to run those in the MD it would dilute the deck to the point it would make all of our other matchups significantly worse.

Fun debate!

Now both of you have to test the deck and leave feedback


elk