@serracollector No. it is far too slow and leaves the deck too vulnerable.
Absent some circumstance where the opponent has nearly killed themself the critical mass on this card is way too high. If you had enough lands in play to kill someone with this you are incredibly far ahead already or should have already been able to make merit lage and win many turns ago.
It also leaves you insanely vulnerable if you don’t kill them. I don’t want my opponent to be able to swords my bazaar and I certainly don’t want a balance coming down on me which would basically end the game in their favor. I don’t think this has a place.
@tittliewinks22 I have not yet but yet seems like it would have good synergy with the deck for sure. It’s a shame it isn’t instant speed then it would be much easier to run.
Certainly would provide a nice little tempo boost in the blue matchup if you blow up a hate piece or even a mox and get a free land out of it. It also adds a little more tempo to a hand that doesn’t have a fastbond effect but gets you ahead.
I think we should def try to test this card out. I can see a lot of good interactions happening with this.
I’ve tested Hull Breach in the past and I see a lot of similarities here but this seems better on several levels.
One of the pitfalls of deck analysis is the question "why aren't you running X?" X can be anything, new or old, tested or untested, released or just on the horizon. It's not a very good question because diminishes the importance of the rest of the deck. 99.9% of the time players are trying to run 75 cards total, so each suggested card comes at the expense of another card. When you say "why aren't you running X?", you can take your question one step further and say "why aren't you running X in place of Y?" Y can still be broad, but it helps both parties understand that we are on the same page to how the deck functions.
@serracollector, your suggestion suggests you don't understand the deck's plan.
@tittliewinks22, your suggestion is much better, but again, readers of the thread may benefit by knowing where you are suggesting this change occur. Broken Bond is a Naturalize effect with the rider of an extra land drop. In the build I posted above, copies could replace some number of Nature's Claim (same effect), Ancient Grudge (same effect plus some), Abrupt Decay (some of the same effect), or Song of the Dryads (some of the same effect). I know what I would do, but what were you considering when you suggested it?
If this post comes off heavy-handed it's because it is. Too often threads like this are filled with every poster's passing thoughts that benefit no one.
@hierarchnoble I agree with this sentiment.
To clarify, my initial thought in response was a replacement for Nature’s Claim out of the board.
I don’t like it as a replacement for grudge because grudge is so important in the main giving us not only extra graveyard interaction and instant speed, but we can also move faster game one given we normally have the element of surprise (unless it’s someone that knows what deck you’re on) and can pitch extra cards to the yard.
I am not a fan of replacing decay due to the uncounterable nature of the card which I think places it ahead of Broken Bond quite a bit in my opinion despite being harder to cast.
I think it can replace nature’s claim for several reasons despite the fact it is a sorcery. First, it avoids misstep which I think is important for the deck on several levels because at first glance it is a card id be interested in for the blue match or against dredge for an out to leyline and extra tempo. Second, it doesn’t give the opponent 4 life which can be very relevant when swinging with Merit Lage. I think it is worth testing for these reasons.
As a side note, I tested Balance in the side this weekend and was very impressed with the card. I think it presents a strong out against a lot of decks especially as a hand destruction piece and I’m going to continue testing it in different matchups
@hierarchnoble I have just gotten my feet wet with lands in vintage (also I only play paper so much less proficient than most). I have been playing lands in legacy the past few years though.
My initial thought was to replace a manabond effect maindeck with a copy of broken bond. Much like you say on your stream, manabond is a double edge sword because you don't like discarding sideboard cards at the expense of gaining land tempo. I think broken bond is strong enough to maindeck, I wouldn't cut an Ancient Grudge because it's flashback is so important when you're dredging or bazaaring stuff.
Definatley would replace natures claim in the board, makes blowing up a 3ball or chalice on 1 much more enjoyable.
One other suggestion I have to your maindeck that you streamed recently, why not cut the mox ruby for a second mox diamond? I feel that the green production is way more important then a red mox.
So I also only play in paper as I’ve mentioned here before. I think in paper it’s so much of your meta game compared to modo. I love a high concentration of grudge in the main because I know I’ll see a lot of shops and I think that’s something to keep in mind as you go forward if you’re playing paper. If you’ve played legacy lands you have the mechanics down and it’s about learning the matchups and interactions in vintage. Personally I think broken bond is far inferior to grudge in the shops match.
I also want to point out I think a lot of people underestimate the power of manabond in vintage. I run a 3/3 split because I think the card is better than exploration in vintage and in my experience has proven that over and over again. The interaction between bazaar and loam with manabond is incredibly strong. In certain matchups you need to move faster and don’t need to worry about picking up side board cards as you go but would rather pitch as fast as possible to the yard. They share similarities but in a lot of ways this deck is much different than the legacy version which I think you’ll discover the more you play it.
The other nice thing is you can go a lot of different ways with this build as you see between my list and Mikes. I also like the manabond interaction a lot more and I’ve built in a lot more redundancy into my list to find those pieces I really need before a manabond comes down or after. Good luck building and testing!
In Legacy, there is another deck that shares some common point with Land deck, it is Jund Depths. It is more of something between a POX and a Land so basically it is less forward and more control, it runs several nice toolboxs. I don't think it could be intesting for Vintage but maybe some of the tools could be of interest.
Here is a link to a Legacy list of it.
Some hints about what could be tested for Vintage IMHO :
- Entomb : people often forgets that it can catch any kind of card. In that deck it is often used to get nether spirit, punising fire, raven crime, loam or any sideboard card we want as silver bullet (grudge, coffin purge, ...).
- Nether spirit : endless blocker. Maybe for the sideboard.
- Raven's crime : is a real blast when running loam engine but it requires lots of black mana (Urborg)
- Smallpox and Lilliana : are amazing cards but i am not sure we can afford to play them.
- Flame Jab : is the red raven's crime. I am not sure we need it (it can be entombed but it is very slow)
- Molten vortex : is nice as an alternate kill when surgical extraction or blood moon are played.
- coffin purge / ancient grudge / ray of revelation : silver bullets that can be entombed.
- Mirri's guile : is great too with loam but we have bazar so i am not sure we will need it.
@albarkhane you have to remember the massive differences between vintage and legacy regarding your magchups, and the power of the cards. I’m not sure any of these cards would be good in vintage lands outside of ancient grudge.
There’s no reason to play something like entomb when we can run vampiric tutor and demonic tutor if we want to.
Cards like nether spirit and smallpox are way too slow in vintage and they cost the deck double black which can be hard to produce. Something like smallpox just makes our deck fall way behind in a blue matchup where our opponent can easily produce a lot more card advantage than we can.
Also remember that graveyard hate is extremely prevalent in vintage. Something like never spirit will just get removed by graveyard hate or gives the opponent extra outs with cage and containment priest, cards that usually don’t affect the deck at all, or very little. It’s also a really bad blocker in vintage. All of our matchups are going really wide (dredge, shops, mentor) or going really large (oath). Presenting one 2/2 every turn won’t be scary at all.
Liliana presents the same issues she’s double black and costs three and there’s no way for the deck to protect her. She’s not good against the decks good matches and she’s too slow to present a really meangingful threat against the bad matches in this deck. Her power level is much less imposing in vintage.
Ravens crime is close to the same vein. It requires a deck that is very heavy on black sources and spends a lot of resources picking off one random card of the opponents choice at a time. This is significantly worse in vintage when spells like recall and time twister are legal because we have to spend a whole turn stripping a card or two and the opponent can get everything back in a flash.
Cards like coffin purge aren’t necessary in a deck that runs 2 bojuka bog and 2-3 crop rotations. It’s a significantly worse option to an effect the deck already has plenty of.
I’ve tested molten vortex and it’s also a really slow option for the deck. It’s slighlty closer to playable but requires a lot more time and more search effects for the deck.
You also have to remember to look at matchups and see where the deck needs help. This deck really struggles against really fast decks like storm and certain builds of mentor. A lot of the cards listed just don’t affect those matchups at all or do too little.
I do think some of these cards could have a home in a vintage turbo depths list. That is also a viable list that I’ve seen work and it has the luxury of being a deck that is heavy in black, can run more tutors, and more hand destruction spells, and can operate on a much different axis. I just don’t see these cards being an option for a lands list in vintage.
I agree with your analysis but for one point : tutor can't get you a silver bullet in instant whereas entomb can. However, maybe we don't need that technology.
I understand that relying too much on the graveyard can be a problem but IMHO any card with flashback or retrace can have a potential in that deck. Raven's crime is better than you think and can easily deal with 3 cards a turn but i agree that the strong black requirement would make this deck very different and is not worth it on its own.
@nungnum I've been running it in place of some of the Null Rods to improve the redundancy of those slots. It's a trade-off since Null Rod has been much stronger, but multiple Null Rods do nothing (ha!). Multiple Damping Spheres add to the storm tax, but it's a much weaker effect. I took my list with four Null Rods, split two and two between maindeck and sideboard, and swapped in a maindeck and sideboard Damping Sphere.
It looks like @POXEVERYTURN has removed himself from the website. I'll try my best to contribute, but I don't play the deck much anymore due to testing a variety of strategies instead of sticking to just this one.
@serracollector I don't like it that much. What you need is Loam, not lands. If you don't have loam, you Realms into what?
I suppose something like Depths, Stage, Petrified Field and Bazaar? But then you're diluting your good lands with Field and playing a 3 cmc spell that does almost nothing for you. I'd play Gamble 1-4 before 1 Realms.
Its all dependant on board position I would imagine, but Realms into multiple strip efx, tabernacles, bojoku bogs, etc etc could all lead to a win. Its not just necessarily for combos, it can just be a value play as well.
I do understand gamble as well, but this can "gamble" for 4 cards for 1 less mana, and less deck space (assuming you run 1 or 2 Realms vs 4 Gamble). Gamble does have the benefit of getting loam or hopefully Fastbond tho, so maybe a mix of both could be very helpful?
@serracollector Gamble is mainly for Loam. IF you already have Loam it tutors the land you need. The problem with Realms is that it's too slow and doesn't get you what you want. Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but I feel you really need a Loam for Realms to work well.
@serracollector Suggesting Realms Uncharted, and not understanding the usefulness of Gamble, suggests to me that you don't understand the core of the deck. Yes, it's called Vintage Lands, but that doesn't mean we test every single card that interacts favorably with the Land card type. It's a Life from the Loam deck, and the remaining 56 cards aim to optimize Life from the Loam and try to make it a recurring draw 3 as often as possible.
If there were a card to run instead of Gamble it would be Entomb. It finds you your Life from the Loam, or finds you the land you want when you have Life from the Loam. However, I've been steering clear of black in current lists since I've felt my mana stretched thin trying to support so many colorless lands.
I understand Loam is the main engine, but it is a "draw" card that randomly fills your grave with lands, Realms is a tutor that finds the lands you need at that time for whatever situation is at hand. Loam is useless if you either dont have lands in your grave or dont have the lands you need in the grave. I do not understand how Realms doesnt 100% compliment Loam in helping you get the lands you need to Loam back?
Space is tight, @serracollector, and every other card in my current 75 is better than a three-mana double Entomb for only lands. This is my current build. In its current iteration there isn't even room for Gamble, a card that can make the cut. What would you cut, why would you cut it, and how do you expect Realms Uncharted to perform better than the cut card in the scenario the cut card was included for?