Crew 3 is allready such a high cost, you simply dont have a creature with power 3 all the time, its in no way easier to archive than having 2 creatures, and a 3 power creature has an inherent value , the biggest selling point of vehicles is to make even the crappiest tokens ready to fight.
The vehicles with very high crew cost are complety trash, even in Limited they play incredible bad (ever used the crew 4+ vehicles ? They stink a lot, downright terrible in Limited and completly trash in constructed).
It really sounds like you're arguing against the wrong thing. You say it's dumb to have crew use power instead of quantity, but all your arguments and complaints are specifically about high crew costs.
And let's face it, there was never not going to be vehicles with ludicrously high crew costs. It doesn't matter how WotC made crew work, we were always going to get stuff like Aradara Express and Consulate Dreadnought, that had unreasonably high crew costs. If not 4-6 power, then it would be 3-4 creatures. They'd still only be playable in limited. And that's fine, because limited needs some filler cards, and because not every vehicle needs to be Smuggler's Copter.
And let's face it, there was never not going to be vehicles with ludicrously high crew costs. It doesn't matter how WotC made crew work, we were always going to get stuff like Aradara Express and Consulate Dreadnought, that had unreasonably high crew costs. If not 4-6 power, then it would be 3-4 creatures. They'd still only be playable in limited. And that's fine, because limited needs some filler cards, and because not every vehicle needs to be Smuggler's Copter.
Well theres nothing preventing them from making crew 1 (just tap a creature) the cost, which would obvisiously mean to rethink the cards they made, cant just change the cost and keep the card.
----
However, theres explicitly a bunch of 0 power creatures that simply dont work with crew cost at all.
The most prominent are the 0/1 spawn tokens.
So in the end, the mechanic doesnt really change to the better if you make it "power" based, tapping creatures in general would work better, allow more (namely all creatures) to work with it and it makes the cards at the very least reasonable playable, instead of really bad.
And the point of flavour still stands.
Theres simply no point to make "Power" matter to use a vehicle, while the number of creatures makes completly sence (but again, you need specific complex and huge machines that require more than 1 driver).
----
Even with a crew 1 cost that just requires tapping a single creature, almost all the vehicles are still fairly bad, so its not even pushing it to begin with (it just makes the super horrible ones at least reasonable).
The point of crew relying on power is that it creates more decisions in gameplay and deck construction. Do you pick more high-power creatures, at the risk of lower toughness or some form of drawback, or some issue with the mana cost? Do you pick cards that let you spawn a number of smaller creatures to let you pilot the vehicles while holding back some sort of blocker? Do you bring in enchantments or pump spells to boost your smallest creatures to crew level on a time you need it to squeeze out the last of the damage? What colors do you use to best utilize the vehicles you've got? Do you hit with your creatures, and do less damage, but still have the opportunity to hold something back? Or do you tap them all down to send in the Dreadnaught and use a creature you are certain won't be blocked profitably?
If you go with Crew = # of Creatures, there aren't as many variables. There aren't as many choices. In Limited and Standard, you are going to run creatures, and it's not too hard to get into a position where you have a lot of creatures, especially with Kaladesh and Aether Revolt's mechanics and cards. Playing Vehicles at that point is just a matter of comparing your creature count to your vehicle count.
And flavor will always, always, always take a backseat to mechanics because flavor is far more flexible. Even in the "creatures count only" system, you can have vehicles crewing vehicles, or Dromedaries piloting Skyships, or any number of things that don't make sense.
Personally, I'd make it so that only non-token creatures can equip gear and they have to be a sentient creature type unless the card itself specifies it can be equipped. So vermin, squirrels, thopters, constructs, etc can not equip gear, but humans, elves, dwarves, etc can equip gear. Then just make gear that says they can only be equipped to creature types like horses, rhino, etc, such as barding and what not. Yes, old equipment would largely remain a bit powerful because of the lack of keywords, but it would likely be a better starting point than trying to reinvent something.
Subtype-based restrictions for equipment seems like a huge headache, and getting into the nitty-gritty of what such a thing would entail explains why Wizards deliberately sacrificed flavorful accuracy for mechanical uniformity. Back when Walls got singled out and excluded all the time due to their rules-based inability to attack, it was at least one type that had a fairly easy to understand restriction. Combing through the creature type list and dividing them into flavor-based categories has to deal with a great deal of grey area which will just result in game design trumping flavor again. That doesn't even get into changelings, type changing, and type removal. Then again, I might just be biased against any ideas that need a colossal, complex errata to be implemented. It's like the whole instant-supertype thing all over again.
Unless I'm just replying to a facetious comment again, in which case whatever. Those things are harder to spot than sarcasm.
Maybe if they made better removal for artifacts across all colors (don't say that black doesn't get it... they could easily make some aura for artifacts that drains life and still make it a part of the color pie) or more versatile removal, then they could make better equipment again.
That's a punisher effect, not removal. Black's artifact removal takes the form of discard. They have made black punishers for artifacts like Relic Putrescence and Artificer's Hex.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
Personally, I'd make it so that only non-token creatures can equip gear and they have to be a sentient creature type unless the card itself specifies it can be equipped. So vermin, squirrels, thopters, constructs, etc can not equip gear, but humans, elves, dwarves, etc can equip gear. Then just make gear that says they can only be equipped to creature types like horses, rhino, etc, such as barding and what not. Yes, old equipment would largely remain a bit powerful because of the lack of keywords, but it would likely be a better starting point than trying to reinvent something.
Subtype-based restrictions for equipment seems like a huge headache, and getting into the nitty-gritty of what such a thing would entail explains why Wizards deliberately sacrificed flavorful accuracy for mechanical uniformity. Back when Walls got singled out and excluded all the time due to their rules-based inability to attack, it was at least one type that had a fairly easy to understand restriction. Combing through the creature type list and dividing them into flavor-based categories has to deal with a great deal of grey area which will just result in game design trumping flavor again. That doesn't even get into changelings, type changing, and type removal. Then again, I might just be biased against any ideas that need a colossal, complex errata to be implemented. It's like the whole instant-supertype thing all over again.
Unless I'm just replying to a facetious comment again, in which case whatever. Those things are harder to spot than sarcasm.
Probably more of a random thought. My comment isn't facetious in nature as much as brainstorming on a flavor level for gear.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Well i just think that Amonkhet is just dominaria 2.0 (for bolas) as we have seen he owns some part of influence on the plane, maybe he is a god-emperor siting in his chair planning his next plot while the gatewatch invades his plane ( how rude).
For the question: Is Bolas more powerfull than a god? I would say Yes. Kruphix said prety loud that he had couserns with the threats that Elspeth and Ajani where possibly facing, and one of the things was clearly Bolas. Like he never really lost a batle against other being, Ajani? Yeah, he got a chalenge against a Avatar mirroring hinself, he "died" because Umezawa destroyed a portal to his meditation healm while he was in it, killed Ugin with litle help. Yeah Bolas is a foe that needs to be feared.
I think it's important to keep in mind that even though Bolas is powerful he's incredibly manipulative. That's more likely to destroy the Gods, in fighting while Bolas goes about doing whatever Bolas does, turning the population against them and what have you. I'm not saying he can't overpower all 14 of them working together, but at the same time I would say that is an unlikely scenario to occur.
Well i just think that Amonkhet is just dominaria 2.0 (for bolas) as we have seen he owns some part of influence on the plane, maybe he is a god-emperor siting in his chair planning his next plot while the gatewatch invades his plane ( how rude).
For the question: Is Bolas more powerfull than a god? I would say Yes. Kruphix said prety loud that he had couserns with the threats that Elspeth and Ajani where possibly facing, and one of the things was clearly Bolas. Like he never really lost a batle against other being, Ajani? Yeah, he got a chalenge against a Avatar mirroring hinself, he "died" because Umezawa destroyed a portal to his meditation healm while he was in it, killed Ugin with litle help. Yeah Bolas is a foe that needs to be feared.
I think it's important to keep in mind that even though Bolas is powerful he's incredibly manipulative. That's more likely to destroy the Gods, in fighting while Bolas goes about doing whatever Bolas does, turning the population against them and what have you. I'm not saying he can't overpower all 14 of them working together, but at the same time I would say that is an unlikely scenario to occur.
That and also he has achieved Super Dragon Planeswalker God Super Dragon Planeswalker or SDPGSDP Nicol Bolas. Although after that will come Super Planeswalker Grixis.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life is a beautiful engineer, yet a brutal scientist.
As we all know, there are two different types of set design. Top down is where they design the flavor first and then make mechanics that fit into that desired flavor. Bottom up is where they design the mechanics and then add flavor to them.
Then, according to Maro's blog, Amonkhet design is top down.
I missed most of the discussion on vehicles; but I imagine it has to do with equipment, and with that being said I hope that cards like the Sword of X and Y cycle hasn't ruined equipment for future sets to come.
Cards like Sword of Vengeance are still really good and I think something along those lines is fine for standard.
Probably not as there will still be fetchable duals from Battle for Zendikar block in standard as Amonketh is released.
Somesthing they were not able to plan for when Amonkhet was being developed, btw.
Well only two senarios can come of that...
1) Enemy-fetches weren't going to be in Amonkhet anyway so standar isn't going to have fetches and fetchable duals. Explains why they choose put them in MM17 instead.
2) Enemy-fetches are in Amnonkhet but the new rotation was recivied so badly that they where going where going to take a bullet either way and decided players would be happier with haveing much wanted reprints and be ok just suffering extra shuffling and stronger mana bases for seven months.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOut of the ground,I rise to grace...W BAfter the lights go out on you, after your worthless life is through. I will remember how you scream...B
They most likely never were even considered for Amonkhet, regardless of rotation changes.
They tend to balance rare dual lands between enemy colour and allied colours, and between "fast" and "slow" duals. In this context, a "fast" dual land is one that can produce coloured mana on turn one (like fetchlands, painlands, shocklands, innistrad-"reveal-lands", etc.), while a slow dual land is one that cannot (like the creature-lands, the canopy vista-cycle, the Theros Temples etc.)
The next lands to leave standard are "slow" (the canopy vista cycle and the Shambling Venta cycle), so almost certainly the next lands to come out will also be "slow".
The one assurance we have is that amonket will have allied lands, while atlazan is probably enemy lands. Otherwise, everything else is up in the air.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
The one assurance we have is that amonket will have allied lands, while atlazan is probably enemy lands. Otherwise, everything else is up in the air.
I disagree with everything : ) Even myself, apparently.
1-Battle for Zendikar block has both allied (Canopy Vista) and enemy (Shambling Vent) dual lands. All of these will rotate at the same time, and would have rotated at the same time even before the change in rotation. If Amonkhet has lands that would originally replace some or all of the lands rotating with BFZ block, then both allied, or enemy, or both, are possible.
2-The distinction between "slow" and "fast" dual lands really seems to be a thing, and has been in place more or less since INN-RTR standard. Sam Stoddard also wrote something along these lines when he wrote about the Painlands in Magic 2014. Thus, if the amonkhet-lands were designed to replace the BFZ-lands, then it is highly likely that it is a slow cycle (or two slow cycles).
3-It is possible that they made a change to the dual lands after they made the decision to change the rotation schedule. While they work a good bit ahead, we don't know exactly when they made the decision to change rotation, so they might have had the time to change things. Dual lands are also most often dictated by development, so I don't think we can rule out zero dual lands in Amonkhet, if they wish to avoid going above 20 dual lands in standard.
4-I forgot that the SOI (Port Town) lands will also leave with the BFZ lands, leaving only the Spirebluff Canal-cycle in terms of existing dual lands. If they did make changes to Amonkhet lands after the change in rotation, it might be that this fact influenced them. However, that seems unlikely. If they want Amonkhet to have dual lands, I can't think of a reason why they shouldn't just keep the ones they had originally planned there.
One of the key features of BFZ is that Zendikar was a set where "lands mattered", thus it made sense to have two complete cycles in the set. The enemy man lands were there to fit that theme and most likely were there to fill in utility slots. What we will most likely see is allied colored rare lands and uncommon enemy lands, but then again, this is based off of what we saw in SoI block a year ago.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Well, yes, "lands mattered" in BFZ. But ten slow rare dual lands had also just left Standard with the Theros temples.
As you can see below, what has rotated out has been exactly balanced by what has been rotating in:
INN-RTR standard:
Slow lands: allied Glacial Fortress-cycle in M2013 and enemy Sulfur Falls-cycle in INN.
Fast lands: Full Shocklands-cycle in RTR-block.
RTR-THR standard.
Slow lands: Full Temples-cycle in Theros block.
Fast lands: Full Shocklands-cycle from RTR block.
THR-KTK standard.
Slow lands: Full Templescycle from Theros block.
Fast lands: Enemy painlands from M2015. Allied fetchlands from KTK.
KTK-BFZ standard.
Slow lands: Allied Canopy Vista-cycle and enemy creature-lands from BFZ block.
Fast lands:Fast lands: Enemy painlands from Magic Origins. Allied fetchlands from KTK.
This leaves for the hypothetical SOI-Amonkhet standard as it was planned out prior to rotation changes:
Fast lands: Enemy fastlands from Kaladesh. Allied "reveal-lands from SOI.
Plus "whatever lands were planned in Amonkhet prior to rotation changes".
So the speculation, as far as I can see it, is whether they changed the amonkhet-lands due to the changes in rotation schedule. Under the old rotation it seems incredibly likely that slow dual lands were planned to replace (some of) the lands rotating out with BFZ.
Ah okay. I see what you are getting at now. Can't say I'm looking forward to another temple land "comes into play tapped" type of cycle, but given what you just posted that seems pretty likely.
I feel like the allied lands are a little weak this standard and was hoping we'd see a better cycle come amonket.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I would really like to see the filter lands reprinted and the cycle finished
failing that, some option to draw cards
(Blank comes into play tapped, you may draw a card when it etb. if you do, Blank does not untap on your next untap)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
And let's face it, there was never not going to be vehicles with ludicrously high crew costs. It doesn't matter how WotC made crew work, we were always going to get stuff like Aradara Express and Consulate Dreadnought, that had unreasonably high crew costs. If not 4-6 power, then it would be 3-4 creatures. They'd still only be playable in limited. And that's fine, because limited needs some filler cards, and because not every vehicle needs to be Smuggler's Copter.
Well theres nothing preventing them from making crew 1 (just tap a creature) the cost, which would obvisiously mean to rethink the cards they made, cant just change the cost and keep the card.
----
However, theres explicitly a bunch of 0 power creatures that simply dont work with crew cost at all.
The most prominent are the 0/1 spawn tokens.
So in the end, the mechanic doesnt really change to the better if you make it "power" based, tapping creatures in general would work better, allow more (namely all creatures) to work with it and it makes the cards at the very least reasonable playable, instead of really bad.
And the point of flavour still stands.
Theres simply no point to make "Power" matter to use a vehicle, while the number of creatures makes completly sence (but again, you need specific complex and huge machines that require more than 1 driver).
----
Even with a crew 1 cost that just requires tapping a single creature, almost all the vehicles are still fairly bad, so its not even pushing it to begin with (it just makes the super horrible ones at least reasonable).
----
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
If you go with Crew = # of Creatures, there aren't as many variables. There aren't as many choices. In Limited and Standard, you are going to run creatures, and it's not too hard to get into a position where you have a lot of creatures, especially with Kaladesh and Aether Revolt's mechanics and cards. Playing Vehicles at that point is just a matter of comparing your creature count to your vehicle count.
And flavor will always, always, always take a backseat to mechanics because flavor is far more flexible. Even in the "creatures count only" system, you can have vehicles crewing vehicles, or Dromedaries piloting Skyships, or any number of things that don't make sense.
Subtype-based restrictions for equipment seems like a huge headache, and getting into the nitty-gritty of what such a thing would entail explains why Wizards deliberately sacrificed flavorful accuracy for mechanical uniformity. Back when Walls got singled out and excluded all the time due to their rules-based inability to attack, it was at least one type that had a fairly easy to understand restriction. Combing through the creature type list and dividing them into flavor-based categories has to deal with a great deal of grey area which will just result in game design trumping flavor again. That doesn't even get into changelings, type changing, and type removal. Then again, I might just be biased against any ideas that need a colossal, complex errata to be implemented. It's like the whole instant-supertype thing all over again.
Unless I'm just replying to a facetious comment again, in which case whatever. Those things are harder to spot than sarcasm.
That's a punisher effect, not removal. Black's artifact removal takes the form of discard. They have made black punishers for artifacts like Relic Putrescence and Artificer's Hex.
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
Probably more of a random thought. My comment isn't facetious in nature as much as brainstorming on a flavor level for gear.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I think it's important to keep in mind that even though Bolas is powerful he's incredibly manipulative. That's more likely to destroy the Gods, in fighting while Bolas goes about doing whatever Bolas does, turning the population against them and what have you. I'm not saying he can't overpower all 14 of them working together, but at the same time I would say that is an unlikely scenario to occur.
That and also he has achieved Super Dragon Planeswalker God Super Dragon Planeswalker or SDPGSDP Nicol Bolas. Although after that will come Super Planeswalker Grixis.
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>
transformascend into Godhood. That would be DOOOPE.Morphling that would be amazing.
Then, according to Maro's blog, Amonkhet design is top down.
Cards like Sword of Vengeance are still really good and I think something along those lines is fine for standard.
Dunes of Zairo
SHANDALAR
Innistrad - The Darkest Night
~THE RAVNICAN CONSORTIUM~
A Community Set
Commander: Allies & Adversaries
THIS GUY ALMOST GOT IT.
[Commander] Rafiq of the Many (Tier 1)
[Commander] Marchesa, the Black Rose (Tier 1)
[Commander] Five Color Artifacts (Tier 2)
Well only two senarios can come of that...
1) Enemy-fetches weren't going to be in Amonkhet anyway so standar isn't going to have fetches and fetchable duals. Explains why they choose put them in MM17 instead.
2) Enemy-fetches are in Amnonkhet but the new rotation was recivied so badly that they where going where going to take a bullet either way and decided players would be happier with haveing much wanted reprints and be ok just suffering extra shuffling and stronger mana bases for seven months.
BAfter the lights go out on you, after your worthless life is through. I will remember how you scream...B
They tend to balance rare dual lands between enemy colour and allied colours, and between "fast" and "slow" duals. In this context, a "fast" dual land is one that can produce coloured mana on turn one (like fetchlands, painlands, shocklands, innistrad-"reveal-lands", etc.), while a slow dual land is one that cannot (like the creature-lands, the canopy vista-cycle, the Theros Temples etc.)
The next lands to leave standard are "slow" (the canopy vista cycle and the Shambling Venta cycle), so almost certainly the next lands to come out will also be "slow".
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
375 unpowered cube - https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/601ac624832cdf1039947588
I disagree with everything : ) Even myself, apparently.
1-Battle for Zendikar block has both allied (Canopy Vista) and enemy (Shambling Vent) dual lands. All of these will rotate at the same time, and would have rotated at the same time even before the change in rotation. If Amonkhet has lands that would originally replace some or all of the lands rotating with BFZ block, then both allied, or enemy, or both, are possible.
2-The distinction between "slow" and "fast" dual lands really seems to be a thing, and has been in place more or less since INN-RTR standard. Sam Stoddard also wrote something along these lines when he wrote about the Painlands in Magic 2014. Thus, if the amonkhet-lands were designed to replace the BFZ-lands, then it is highly likely that it is a slow cycle (or two slow cycles).
3-It is possible that they made a change to the dual lands after they made the decision to change the rotation schedule. While they work a good bit ahead, we don't know exactly when they made the decision to change rotation, so they might have had the time to change things. Dual lands are also most often dictated by development, so I don't think we can rule out zero dual lands in Amonkhet, if they wish to avoid going above 20 dual lands in standard.
4-I forgot that the SOI (Port Town) lands will also leave with the BFZ lands, leaving only the Spirebluff Canal-cycle in terms of existing dual lands. If they did make changes to Amonkhet lands after the change in rotation, it might be that this fact influenced them. However, that seems unlikely. If they want Amonkhet to have dual lands, I can't think of a reason why they shouldn't just keep the ones they had originally planned there.
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
As you can see below, what has rotated out has been exactly balanced by what has been rotating in:
INN-RTR standard:
Slow lands: allied Glacial Fortress-cycle in M2013 and enemy Sulfur Falls-cycle in INN.
Fast lands: Full Shocklands-cycle in RTR-block.
RTR-THR standard.
Slow lands: Full Temples-cycle in Theros block.
Fast lands: Full Shocklands-cycle from RTR block.
THR-KTK standard.
Slow lands: Full Templescycle from Theros block.
Fast lands: Enemy painlands from M2015. Allied fetchlands from KTK.
KTK-BFZ standard.
Slow lands: Allied Canopy Vista-cycle and enemy creature-lands from BFZ block.
Fast lands:Fast lands: Enemy painlands from Magic Origins. Allied fetchlands from KTK.
DTK-SOI standard:
Slow lands: Allied Canopy Vista-cycle and enemy creature-lands from BFZ block.
Fast lands:Fast lands: Enemy painlands from Magic Origins. Allied "reveal-lands from SOI.
BFZ-KLD standard:
Slow lands: Allied Canopy Vista-cycle and enemy creature-lands from BFZ block.
Fast lands: Enemy fastlands from Kaladesh. Allied "reveal-lands from SOI.
This leaves for the hypothetical SOI-Amonkhet standard as it was planned out prior to rotation changes:
Fast lands: Enemy fastlands from Kaladesh. Allied "reveal-lands from SOI.
Plus "whatever lands were planned in Amonkhet prior to rotation changes".
So the speculation, as far as I can see it, is whether they changed the amonkhet-lands due to the changes in rotation schedule. Under the old rotation it seems incredibly likely that slow dual lands were planned to replace (some of) the lands rotating out with BFZ.
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
I feel like the allied lands are a little weak this standard and was hoping we'd see a better cycle come amonket.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
URW PillowFort Stasis (costruction)
modern:
U Taking Turns combo
pauper:
UB Servitor Control
xenob8 : you know you are going to have a bad time when opponent starts with snow covered island
failing that, some option to draw cards
(Blank comes into play tapped, you may draw a card when it etb. if you do, Blank does not untap on your next untap)