I personally favor Nissa, Vastwood Seer and am surprised that she hasn't been mentioned more often. She's, IMO, the most resilient of the bunch, being much more capable of bouncing back after a sizeable amount of hate due to her basically being an every turn Coiling Oracle and in a pinch a Borderland Ranger as well. Neither of those two abilities are true all-star tricks, but they do add up in the consistency of the deck. She's not as explosive as some of the other options noted but that doesn't matter, you don't always need to be the archenemy when playing mono-green.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
There's a big difference between 1vs1 and multiplayer. The amount of removal, hate, and disruption is many times higher in multiplayer. When your general is a tutor on a stick expecting to get multiple activations from Yisan is a bit farfetched. If you sit across from a decent Marath list I'd like to see how well Yisan does.
It was never my intention to suggest otherwise. I recognize that 1v1 and multiplayer are different animals entirely, but I would argue that the amount of spot removal in a dedicated 1v1 deck is likely just as saturated as multiple multiplayer decks since multiplayer scenarios typically put such a high premium on mass removal. I don't know if it just requires playing the deck, or if my "meta" is very insular, but it has been my experience that getting multiple activations is not at all "farfetched". I'm seeing the same decks that I'm sure most everyone does...Karador, Mimeoplasm, Narset, Sharuum, Azusa, you get the picture, and I've found resounding success with Yisan, moreso than I ever did with my own Azusa or Rofellos decks.
That being said, something like Rofellos could be more devastating with a nut draw...Turn 2 Rofellos into Turn 3 Primeval Titan into Turn 4 Kozilek, but it's just that, draw dependant, and even so it is not much faster than Yisan's critical turn, and WAY less consistent.
Marath is one of the tougher matchups, but not awful either. Marath on the play is much better than Marath on the draw assuming they have a mana accelerant on turn 1. A lot of the time I will go for Phyrexian Revoker on Yisan's second activation if I'm staring down Marath. Even if they successfully deal with Yisan, you are still running a very capable monogreen deck that can pull off the same victories that are typically seen in non-Yisan monogreen decks. It just so happens that Yisan enables the monogreen deck better than all of the competitors in my expierience.
No offense, but have you honestly seen Rofellos in action? I agree that Yisan's better than Azusa and potentially the current best mono-G general, but he doesn't even hold a candle to Rofellos. If you untapped with Rofellos, you would invariably win because of running literally all gas. Whether it was Plow Under, Primeval Titan, Primal Command into Terastodon, or anything else, a single untap with Rofellos was absolutely backbreaking; 2 untaps meant you won on T4, and even if he was killed, you'd just replay him T4 anyway. Even after he was banned as a general, mono-green deck often revolved around getting him out frequently and often (it was for example correct to forgo a T1 GSZ for Arbor in order to have a T3 GSZ into Rofellos).
Rofellos was far more powerful than Yisan, and it's not particularly close. Yisan's both more expensive and requires you to untap 2 or 3 times after resolving him, and uses all your mana in the meantime. Untapping with Rofellos often meant game over for all your opponents.
Your "inconsistency argument" works very well for Azusa. Azusa is a deck that needs to run an overwhelming amount of lands (50-60), and fails to lift off if even 1 or 2 of her threats are dealt with properly (she has room for maybe ~20-30 threats tops). Rofellos was 35-40 Forests, maybe 10-15 utility spells, but 50-60 threats. You just couldn't win against him if built properly.
For the record, my Freyalise build has a winning record against a variety of competitive Omnath, Azusa, Elfball Yisan, and Ezuri decks. But that's pretty anecdotal, so I'd be willing to concede that in lieu of a larger following, Yisan is the best of the commonly accepted mono-G decks, with Omnath and Azusa being the most overrated. But none of them are even close to Rofellos. There's a reason he was banned; he was stronger than most of the blue power generals (Zur, Azami, etc, etc). Unless your opponent had an answer for Rofellos at every turn, him being unanswered even for a single turn would generally win the game on the spot.
Perhaps my argument came on a bit strong and I seemingly did not give enough credence to the explosive power of Rofellos, but make no mistake I am very aware of it. By my own admission, I played a Rofellos deck back when he was legal, and yes, the saturation of bombs afforded by such an explosive general was often more than opposing decks could handle. I think where we are finding disagreement is simply in the definition of "powerful". By your definiton of powerful (as I gather from your reply), Rofellos is clearly superior. As I've maintained in my previous posts, my interpretation of "powerful" as it stands currently stems from consistency and I've yet to play a deck that's as consistent as Yisan, Rofellos included. The Yisan deck needs to resolve and protect Yisan and make its opening land drops, that's it. The Rofellos deck needs to resolve and protect Rofellos, make its opening land drops, and draw and resolve its bombs. The only counterspell that matters against Yisan is the one on turn 2 to stop him in his tracks, the same cannot be said for Rofellos. All that being said, if I gave the impression that Yisan is better than Rofellos, I should have chosen my words more carefully. Then again, it's entirely possible that it may have just been so long since I've played Rofellos that I've forgotten, and my current bias in favor of Yisan is clouding my memory.
I'll echo the handful of voices recommending Ezuri, Renegade Leader. An inexpensive commander with a relevant protection ability and Overrun in the command zone. It requires that you build around elves, but I love that explosive potential.
To be honest, I've held off posting my list publicly for a long time, but I figure at this point I need to put my money where my mouth is. I've also been slowly working on a primer of sorts for the deck, however, I'm not sure if I'll ever get around to posting it. Here's my current iteration, admittedly there are a few slots that are currently under testing and are therefore indeterminate. Note that there is a brief explanation of the ideal play sequencing in the description of the deck for those who might scratch their heads in trying to figure out exactly what to do and how I can stake claim to consistent turn 5-6 wins. The biggest trick to the deck, and I firmly believe this comes from playing it a lot, is knowing when to jump ship from your "ideal play sequencing" to address the boardstate and bolster your inevitability.
As strong as the deck looks in the perfect play sequence, a single piece of removal will set the deck back a lot, I'd fear. Not a high threat density at all. Which is part of why I don't really like Yisan myself; he's slow usually, and needs a lot of enablers to fish out the big guns.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I'll be the first to admit that in-game scenarios often require you to abandon the ideal play sequence, but the deck is much more resilient than you might think, provided you take the necessary measures to have an insurance policy, again, sacrificing speed to bolster inevitability. It also depends greatly on when the opponent attempts said removal. If removal is attempted prior to first activation, Sylvan Safekeeper makes an appearance to shut it down, if later, you've got the Rangers to put another activation or two on the stack, or in a last-ditch effort, Temur Sabertooth. The bigger picture is that any opponent attempting a proactive approach to beating Yisan will lose out to speed and consistency almost every time. This requires that the opponent take a reactive approach and play off the back foot, which can be a dangerous proposition when faced with a deck that can be as explosive as Yisan.
There's also another play sequence that can be almost as deadly as the former and it doesn't require having Yisan available for nearly as long. Q Ranger > Priest of Titania > Shaman of Forgotten Ways > Karametra's Acolyte allows you to activate Shaman on turn 5-6 while only going to rung 4 of the Yisan ladder.
On a separate note, it wasn't my intention to monopolize this discussion on the Yisan deck, perhaps a separate thread would be more appropriate?
Perhaps my argument came on a bit strong and I seemingly did not give enough credence to the explosive power of Rofellos, but make no mistake I am very aware of it. By my own admission, I played a Rofellos deck back when he was legal, and yes, the saturation of bombs afforded by such an explosive general was often more than opposing decks could handle. I think where we are finding disagreement is simply in the definition of "powerful". By your definiton of powerful (as I gather from your reply), Rofellos is clearly superior. As I've maintained in my previous posts, my interpretation of "powerful" as it stands currently stems from consistency and I've yet to play a deck that's as consistent as Yisan, Rofellos included. The Yisan deck needs to resolve and protect Yisan and make its opening land drops, that's it. The Rofellos deck needs to resolve and protect Rofellos, make its opening land drops, and draw and resolve its bombs. The only counterspell that matters against Yisan is the one on turn 2 to stop him in his tracks, the same cannot be said for Rofellos. All that being said, if I gave the impression that Yisan is better than Rofellos, I should have chosen my words more carefully. Then again, it's entirely possible that it may have just been so long since I've played Rofellos that I've forgotten, and my current bias in favor of Yisan is clouding my memory.
I'm curious what you mean by "more consistent." Rofellos ran a high enough threat density that if you untapped, you won. Sure, if you have infinite time, Yisan can win by himself and a deck of cards. However, relying on both having an active creature for 4 turns and winning on turn 6 is wildly inconsistent. Proactive decks win before T6; reactive decks you'll be lucky to have Yisan on-board for more than 1 or 2 turns.
Rofellos runs enough bombs that you have a higher chance of not drawing enough lands than not drawing bombs. And all the consistency in the world doesn't matter when you've been T3 Plow Undered, and have to wait an additional two turns on top of the 4!!! turns you need Yisan to stick in order to win with him. By comparison, the Freyalise deck in my signature only needs 2 turns with a resolved Freyalise, and generally gets Freyalise out only a turn later than Yisan would be.
Your Yisan opening for example, requires one of ~6 mana dorks from your deck. You know what Rofellos needs? 3 of 35-40 lands and 1 of 40+ bombs.
I'll be the first to admit that in-game scenarios often require you to abandon the ideal play sequence, but the deck is much more resilient than you might think, provided you take the necessary measures to have an insurance policy, again, sacrificing speed to bolster inevitability. It also depends greatly on when the opponent attempts said removal. If removal is attempted prior to first activation, Sylvan Safekeeper makes an appearance to shut it down, if later, you've got the Rangers to put another activation or two on the stack, or in a last-ditch effort, Temur Sabertooth. The bigger picture is that any opponent attempting a proactive approach to beating Yisan will lose out to speed and consistency almost every time. This requires that the opponent take a reactive approach and play off the back foot, which can be a dangerous proposition when faced with a deck that can be as explosive as Yisan.
There's also another play sequence that can be almost as deadly as the former and it doesn't require having Yisan available for nearly as long. Q Ranger > Priest of Titania > Shaman of Forgotten Ways > Karametra's Acolyte allows you to activate Shaman on turn 5-6 while only going to rung 4 of the Yisan ladder.
On a separate note, it wasn't my intention to monopolize this discussion on the Yisan deck, perhaps a separate thread would be more appropriate?
I disagree with this HEAVILY. Your openings WITH mana dorks result in T6 kills. Something like Azami, Rofellos, or Zur wins (or locks) far before T6. How exactly are you planning on activating Yisan ~6-7 times when your T3 consists of being Plow Undered?
My Freyalise deck also wins T5-6. As I said, I feel it's similar to Yisan in terms of speed (but I do feel it wins the mirror). However, I'll be the first to admit it doesn't hold up to the sheer insanity of Rofellos. Against Rofellos you simply don't get to play Magic unless you have a strategy that massively interferes with your opponent's opening turns. And even then, Rofellos doing something eventually is simply inevitable.
By consistent I suppose I mean that I can craft an opening hand to be positioned to win the game on turn 5-6. Yes it requires a mana dork or other redundant acceleration (perhaps I should have clarified) in the form of Exploration, Utopia Sprawl, Wild Growth, Mana Crypt, Sol Ring, Chrome Mox, Mox Diamond, Ancient Tomb, Green Sun's Zenith, though I will concede that some of those are more conditional to the rest of your draws than others. That being said, you get the point, it's not just 6 mana dorks. In reality we're looking somewhere in the neighborhood of 14-15 cards that can net the turn 2 Yisan and proceed from there. On top of that, as I said prior, being a deck that is almost completely draw independent you can use the Partial Paris mulligan to statistically guarantee hitting one or more of the aforementioned accelerants. Additionally, the possibility of mana screw/flood has an almost entirely irrelevant effect on Yisan, again, consistency.
I'd just like to point out, again, that you're only playing for the turn 5-6 win when you can. It's there for the taking if you are in the position to take it, though it is sometimes correct, depending on the matchup to abandon the ideal play sequence altogether.
For example, I often win games by Strip locking opponents with Tilling Treefolk > Temur Sabertooth. I frequently have opponents who think they've got me once they wrath only for me to tutor out Kamahl and animate all of their lands, or opponents who think it wise to try and race me with their own mana dorks for me to tutor out Polukranos and wreck their day. Also, at a certain point, typically after a few Yisan activations, it really doesn't matter if they deal with Yisan himself as I will have crafted a boardstate that will be very difficult for them to come back from. I'll say it again, despite having a very clear linear path to a turn 5-6 win, the real power of the deck is in its versatility and ability to stray from that path to close out games.
To be honest, I've held off posting my list publicly for a long time, but I figure at this point I need to put my money where my mouth is. I've also been slowly working on a primer of sorts for the deck, however, I'm not sure if I'll ever get around to posting it. Here's my current iteration, admittedly there are a few slots that are currently under testing and are therefore indeterminate. Note that there is a brief explanation of the ideal play sequencing in the description of the deck for those who might scratch their heads in trying to figure out exactly what to do and how I can stake claim to consistent turn 5-6 wins. The biggest trick to the deck, and I firmly believe this comes from playing it a lot, is knowing when to jump ship from your "ideal play sequencing" to address the boardstate and bolster your inevitability.
By consistent I suppose I mean that I can craft an opening hand to be positioned to win the game on turn 5-6. Yes it requires a mana dork or other redundant acceleration (perhaps I should have clarified) in the form of Exploration, Utopia Sprawl, Wild Growth, Mana Crypt, Sol Ring, Chrome Mox, Mox Diamond, Ancient Tomb, Green Sun's Zenith, though I will concede that some of those are more conditional to the rest of your draws than others. That being said, you get the point, it's not just 6 mana dorks. In reality we're looking somewhere in the neighborhood of 14-15 cards that can net the turn 2 Yisan and proceed from there. On top of that, as I said prior, being a deck that is almost completely draw independent you can use the Partial Paris mulligan to statistically guarantee hitting one or more of the aforementioned accelerants. Additionally, the possibility of mana screw/flood has an almost entirely irrelevant effect on Yisan, again, consistency.
I'd just like to point out, again, that you're only playing for the turn 5-6 win when you can. It's there for the taking if you are in the position to take it, though it is sometimes correct, depending on the matchup to abandon the ideal play sequence altogether.
For example, I often win games by Strip locking opponents with Tilling Treefolk > Temur Sabertooth. I frequently have opponents who think they've got me once they wrath only for me to tutor out Kamahl and animate all of their lands, or opponents who think it wise to try and race me with their own mana dorks for me to tutor out Polukranos and wreck their day. Also, at a certain point, typically after a few Yisan activations, it really doesn't matter if they deal with Yisan himself as I will have crafted a boardstate that will be very difficult for them to come back from. I'll say it again, despite having a very clear linear path to a turn 5-6 win, the real power of the deck is in its versatility and ability to stray from that path to close out games.
Right, but all the versatility in the world doesn't save you from the raw power of a general like Rofellos or Azami. EDH has a very high power ceiling, and "versatility" only matters if you're still alive. At the very top of this formats you have decks like Hermit Druid and dedicated Ad Nauseum. Then you have very powerful decks that win in the first 4 turns of the game, like Imperial Animar, Azami, Zur, formerly Rofellos, etc. Then you have the decks that can switch strategies. It's nice to say things like "versatile" and "having a backup plan"; these are things I think about in my own mono-green deck.
But that's amongst fair decks. You say you're going to punish mana-dork heavy strategies with Polukranos. Let's assume you have T2 Yisan (already a pretty hefty assumption). The next turn you tutor Quirion Ranger. Now, even in your dream scenarios where you go crazy with Rangers and Azusa and no one's doing anything to stop you, you're still not looking at a Polukranos until T4, and untapping with that Polukranos on T5. This is WAY after mana dorks have done work in any other reasonable deck. You keep positing all these scenarios about how you answer your opponent's plans, but you don't answer your own problem of how slow the deck is.
I've played with and against the Yisan deck, as well as a number of other "fair" decks. Are they strong? For fair decks, yes. But it absolutely loses to unfair decks, because it doesn't do anything unfair, and has no way of interacting with decks that do unfair things. Rofellos is an unfair deck that does unfair things. From reading your posts, I'm really not sure if you've played with or against the Rofellos deck, and let me tell you that deck won the game T4 unchecked, and maybe T6 checked. Yisan doesn't win until T6 unchecked, and then you're looking at T8 checked.
you guys are arguing if agrro/ combo/ control or whatever is better.
there is no better - it just depends on the metagame to play in
the only thing to measure is which deck goldfishes faster - wich is irrelevant.
except you play strangers only AND powerlevel is not in the same league amongst all players. a goldfish deck can goldfish there best
By consistent I suppose I mean that I can craft an opening hand to be positioned to win the game on turn 5-6. Yes it requires a mana dork or other redundant acceleration (perhaps I should have clarified) in the form of Exploration, Utopia Sprawl, Wild Growth, Mana Crypt, Sol Ring, Chrome Mox, Mox Diamond, Ancient Tomb, Green Sun's Zenith, though I will concede that some of those are more conditional to the rest of your draws than others. That being said, you get the point, it's not just 6 mana dorks. In reality we're looking somewhere in the neighborhood of 14-15 cards that can net the turn 2 Yisan and proceed from there. On top of that, as I said prior, being a deck that is almost completely draw independent you can use the Partial Paris mulligan to statistically guarantee hitting one or more of the aforementioned accelerants. Additionally, the possibility of mana screw/flood has an almost entirely irrelevant effect on Yisan, again, consistency.
I'd just like to point out, again, that you're only playing for the turn 5-6 win when you can. It's there for the taking if you are in the position to take it, though it is sometimes correct, depending on the matchup to abandon the ideal play sequence altogether.
For example, I often win games by Strip locking opponents with Tilling Treefolk > Temur Sabertooth. I frequently have opponents who think they've got me once they wrath only for me to tutor out Kamahl and animate all of their lands, or opponents who think it wise to try and race me with their own mana dorks for me to tutor out Polukranos and wreck their day. Also, at a certain point, typically after a few Yisan activations, it really doesn't matter if they deal with Yisan himself as I will have crafted a boardstate that will be very difficult for them to come back from. I'll say it again, despite having a very clear linear path to a turn 5-6 win, the real power of the deck is in its versatility and ability to stray from that path to close out games.
now what Miscalcul8edRisk said here is the deal:
a tutortollbox-commander offers the ability in playing out a role or another!
ever read "Who's the Beatdown"?
all other green legends give their ability do boost one of the needed strength.
yisan doesnt push a particular strenght more than others, but gives the option to switch !!
there is a reason why Arcum, Sisay, Zur, Sidisi even Zirilian are strong.
(of cousre zirialian ain't as strong as those others, but for mono red its so damn versatile, only Godo can top it)
The best Sidisi decks aren't versatile, they're centric around cards like Ad Nauseum. Arcum sounds like a toolbox, but is realistically very centric around T3-T4 Nev Disk locks. You listing Zirilian and Godo as powerful shows the exact REASON that versatile decks aren't great; EDH at its highest level is an extremely high power level format that rewards very linear strategies that win very fast. You don't see "toolbox" Vintage decks for the same reason; Vintage decks revolve around strategies that take control of the game in some fashion at a breakneck pace. EDH is a 100-card Vintage format when you get down to it, and decks that forget that fact will lose quickly and often.
Now, mono-green doesn't have the potential to do this since the banning of Rofellos. That's why Yisan is likely the best mono-green deck currently in the format. But to ludicrously claim he's better than Rofellos really showcases that you're not familiar with the reason Rofellos was banned as a general, unbanned shortly, and banned again. The RC tried to make him work because he accelerated powerful plays; but ultimately, he simply breaks games in half.
I am super-duper unconvinced that Yisan is the best mono-G commander. I've read all the arguments here and I fail to see how Yisan's fragility isn't a huge concern, especially in a competitive meta.
I am super-duper unconvinced that Yisan is the best mono-G commander. I've read all the arguments here and I fail to see how Yisan's fragility isn't a huge concern, especially in a competitive meta.
It's not like mono-green has a great bunch of options. You have Azusa and Omnath, which are similarly fragile, and some slower and less fragile Commanders. Yisan's the closest mono-green has to a balance between the two sides, but its last Azami-tier general died with Rofellos.
Fragile Azusa and Omnath may be in your eyes, but among all the mono-green generals these two are imo, the most resilient to wipes. They are also the two fastest mono-green generals. This combination of speed and resiliency represents the best of mono-green. In regards to Yisan, you cannot convince me its possible to get multiple activations from Yisan in a game; either you are so low a threat that the table doesn't care about you or your meta is so bad you can run over it. Is your table going to watch you play Yisan T2, and activate it repeatedly like nothing bad is going to happen in their near future? No a decent table will wipe the board or kill off Yisan immediately. When Zur hits the table in my meta he hardly ever gets to swing. Maybe once a night.
Fragile Azusa and Omnath may be in your eyes, but among all the mono-green generals these two are imo, the most resilient to wipes. They are also the two fastest mono-green generals. This combination of speed and resiliency represents the best of mono-green. In regards to Yisan, you cannot convince me its possible to get multiple activations from Yisan in a game; either you are so low a threat that the table doesn't care about you or your meta is so bad you can run over it. Is your table going to watch you play Yisan T2, and activate it repeatedly like nothing bad is going to happen in their near future? No a decent table will wipe the board or kill off Yisan immediately. When Zur hits the table in my meta he hardly ever gets to swing. Maybe once a night.
Omnath is far more vulnerable to spot removal than Yisan, and has very little extra resiliency vs board wipes. Azusa represents more in terms of immediate value, but is very vulnerable to both a single piece of countermagic (as the deck runs little inherent ramp in order to get yourself back on track) and runs such a high density of lands that ~2-3 pieces of removal on your engines also destroys you similarly. Compared to Omnath, Yisan is more vulnerable to wipes but less vulnerable to spot removal. Compared to Azusa, Yisan is more vulnerable to creature removal or wipes, but is less vulnerable against countermagic and key piece removal (as the Yisan deck runs enough gas to win on other axes if Yisan's countered multiple times, or his key pieces are taken out.
It's really a balancing game of what you want to lose to. You can't make a mono-green deck that is both fast and can bounce back from anything, because mono-green doesn't have the tools or the generals for such a strategy.
When I played Yisan granted it was more casually than whats being discussed in this thread one thing I enjoyed was being able to develop your board while building your hand that you can then start to play with after there are a few wraths so in that sense he helped "protect" or "recover" fairly well.
On the other hand ever since I switched over to Nissa she has been nothing but impressive. Providing green with a steady stream of card adavantage is dangerous and having a way to consistently hit land drops has been invauleable. Just my thoughts. I don't have the link right on hand may post later but if you haven't go watch the Commander vs Series by star city games on youtube were they test the Origins walkers and you can see the power of Nissa. Obviously she is better in EDH than those other walkers but the power level in a broad range is undeniable.
I haven't built or played Omnath but if I were to do so turning it into one big mana factory should give it a lot more resiliency than other mono-green options, Yisan among them. Azusa's greatest weakness is mana denial strategies and fast combo. A couple counters or wipes will slow her down but not shut her out. She is very consistent and the fastest mono-green general I've seen. I haven't played Yisan. But I can see he doesn't have the mana generation of either Omnath or Azusa. It cannot be emphasized how important a fast start is for mono-green. If we can't generate more mana than the rest of the table by a significant margin we are in trouble. Yisan's performance is entirely dependant on the number of activations you get with him. Without any activations he is significantly worse than either Omnath or Azusa. With one activation a game he is bad. With 2 activations I still think he is bad. 3 activations ok we are in toolbox territory and we can begin to affect the board in a meaningful way. So after spending only 12 mana we can get to something nice. For all that mana we're better off just paying for a chord/GSZ/Fierce Empath/tutor and casting it. Yisan is cute. Sure we can get a couple creature untappers and Elvish Piper/Seedborn then cheat in some big boys, with a haste enabler maybe even all in one turn. But that's after an unreasonable number of activations. With the amount of mana spent such a strategy is terribly inefficient and just not practical in a decent meta. Zur swings once a night in my meta. Narset swung twice. My T1 or T2 Bloom Tender has never ever come back to me alive. I'd have a much better chance playing Azusa or Omnath over Yisan
My comments assume a table of 4-6 players, obviously biases this comment. I ask the question about many of these commanders whether they would do as well in the deck rather than as commander. Easy to tutor up and would they ever see the field more than once anyway? In my experience, Yeva and Freyalise invite discussion but rarely are hated on, there just always seems to be better targets for other player's hate; these generals are not recognized for their power until it's too late. Yisan gets hated on quickly. With mono-green in general, I feel as though you need to be the quiet player early (few harmless elves LOL !) and then by the time you are out of control, there is little others can do, save board clear. A couple of these generals do not keep you quiet early; you invite hate and take that hate off other players.
I would say that Seton, Krosan Protector combo was the best before Primeval Titan got the axe. Without primetime entwining Tooth and Nail is no longer infinite mana, and losing partial paris mulligans hurt his chances too. He can still have explosive starts and win turns 3-4, but he still encounters the problems of mono-green decks that is stalling out after removal and board wipes. So it ends up being either you win fast or get answered and do nothing. That and the lack of removal and ways to interact with the opponent in mono-green are the reasons why I dislike mono-green decks. The other mono-colors have more ways to interact and more resilient strategies.
2. yisan, the wanderer bard. Insane resiliency. He plays almost like a control build, pulling answers to every possible scenario while rapidly building towards his own win condition. Averages turn 5.5 goldfish wins, but makes up for his lack of speed with his incredible toolbox ability.
3. azusa, lost but seeking. She ramps quickly into big things. Not much else to say. She lacks Ezuri's ray speed or Yisan's resiliency, but she's still quite powerful.
5. titania, protector of argoth. She has tons of combos, but all of them take a bit of work to assemble. She plays very nicely with stax pieces, generating value to make even effects like MLD entirely lopsided. The only problem is that there isn't a ton of stax support in green. Still quite strong as a commander though.
"Instead of building a fast car to win the race, you fill the race track with manure and drive your tractor to victory.
That is stax."
~cmv_lawyer, 2016
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Rofellos was far more powerful than Yisan, and it's not particularly close. Yisan's both more expensive and requires you to untap 2 or 3 times after resolving him, and uses all your mana in the meantime. Untapping with Rofellos often meant game over for all your opponents.
Your "inconsistency argument" works very well for Azusa. Azusa is a deck that needs to run an overwhelming amount of lands (50-60), and fails to lift off if even 1 or 2 of her threats are dealt with properly (she has room for maybe ~20-30 threats tops). Rofellos was 35-40 Forests, maybe 10-15 utility spells, but 50-60 threats. You just couldn't win against him if built properly.
For the record, my Freyalise build has a winning record against a variety of competitive Omnath, Azusa, Elfball Yisan, and Ezuri decks. But that's pretty anecdotal, so I'd be willing to concede that in lieu of a larger following, Yisan is the best of the commonly accepted mono-G decks, with Omnath and Azusa being the most overrated. But none of them are even close to Rofellos. There's a reason he was banned; he was stronger than most of the blue power generals (Zur, Azami, etc, etc). Unless your opponent had an answer for Rofellos at every turn, him being unanswered even for a single turn would generally win the game on the spot.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
Current EDH Decks:
G Multani, Maro-Sorcerer
B Xiahou Dun, the One-Eyed
GU Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
http://www.commandercast.com/category/articles/generally-speaking
Follow me on Twitter: @generalspeak
Current EDH Decks:
G Multani, Maro-Sorcerer
B Xiahou Dun, the One-Eyed
GU Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
There's also another play sequence that can be almost as deadly as the former and it doesn't require having Yisan available for nearly as long. Q Ranger > Priest of Titania > Shaman of Forgotten Ways > Karametra's Acolyte allows you to activate Shaman on turn 5-6 while only going to rung 4 of the Yisan ladder.
On a separate note, it wasn't my intention to monopolize this discussion on the Yisan deck, perhaps a separate thread would be more appropriate?
Current EDH Decks:
G Multani, Maro-Sorcerer
B Xiahou Dun, the One-Eyed
GU Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Rofellos runs enough bombs that you have a higher chance of not drawing enough lands than not drawing bombs. And all the consistency in the world doesn't matter when you've been T3 Plow Undered, and have to wait an additional two turns on top of the 4!!! turns you need Yisan to stick in order to win with him. By comparison, the Freyalise deck in my signature only needs 2 turns with a resolved Freyalise, and generally gets Freyalise out only a turn later than Yisan would be.
Your Yisan opening for example, requires one of ~6 mana dorks from your deck. You know what Rofellos needs? 3 of 35-40 lands and 1 of 40+ bombs. I disagree with this HEAVILY. Your openings WITH mana dorks result in T6 kills. Something like Azami, Rofellos, or Zur wins (or locks) far before T6. How exactly are you planning on activating Yisan ~6-7 times when your T3 consists of being Plow Undered?
My Freyalise deck also wins T5-6. As I said, I feel it's similar to Yisan in terms of speed (but I do feel it wins the mirror). However, I'll be the first to admit it doesn't hold up to the sheer insanity of Rofellos. Against Rofellos you simply don't get to play Magic unless you have a strategy that massively interferes with your opponent's opening turns. And even then, Rofellos doing something eventually is simply inevitable.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
I'd just like to point out, again, that you're only playing for the turn 5-6 win when you can. It's there for the taking if you are in the position to take it, though it is sometimes correct, depending on the matchup to abandon the ideal play sequence altogether.
For example, I often win games by Strip locking opponents with Tilling Treefolk > Temur Sabertooth. I frequently have opponents who think they've got me once they wrath only for me to tutor out Kamahl and animate all of their lands, or opponents who think it wise to try and race me with their own mana dorks for me to tutor out Polukranos and wreck their day. Also, at a certain point, typically after a few Yisan activations, it really doesn't matter if they deal with Yisan himself as I will have crafted a boardstate that will be very difficult for them to come back from. I'll say it again, despite having a very clear linear path to a turn 5-6 win, the real power of the deck is in its versatility and ability to stray from that path to close out games.
Current EDH Decks:
G Multani, Maro-Sorcerer
B Xiahou Dun, the One-Eyed
GU Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
http://www.commandercast.com/category/articles/generally-speaking
Follow me on Twitter: @generalspeak
But that's amongst fair decks. You say you're going to punish mana-dork heavy strategies with Polukranos. Let's assume you have T2 Yisan (already a pretty hefty assumption). The next turn you tutor Quirion Ranger. Now, even in your dream scenarios where you go crazy with Rangers and Azusa and no one's doing anything to stop you, you're still not looking at a Polukranos until T4, and untapping with that Polukranos on T5. This is WAY after mana dorks have done work in any other reasonable deck. You keep positing all these scenarios about how you answer your opponent's plans, but you don't answer your own problem of how slow the deck is.
I've played with and against the Yisan deck, as well as a number of other "fair" decks. Are they strong? For fair decks, yes. But it absolutely loses to unfair decks, because it doesn't do anything unfair, and has no way of interacting with decks that do unfair things. Rofellos is an unfair deck that does unfair things. From reading your posts, I'm really not sure if you've played with or against the Rofellos deck, and let me tell you that deck won the game T4 unchecked, and maybe T6 checked. Yisan doesn't win until T6 unchecked, and then you're looking at T8 checked. The best Sidisi decks aren't versatile, they're centric around cards like Ad Nauseum. Arcum sounds like a toolbox, but is realistically very centric around T3-T4 Nev Disk locks. You listing Zirilian and Godo as powerful shows the exact REASON that versatile decks aren't great; EDH at its highest level is an extremely high power level format that rewards very linear strategies that win very fast. You don't see "toolbox" Vintage decks for the same reason; Vintage decks revolve around strategies that take control of the game in some fashion at a breakneck pace. EDH is a 100-card Vintage format when you get down to it, and decks that forget that fact will lose quickly and often.
Now, mono-green doesn't have the potential to do this since the banning of Rofellos. That's why Yisan is likely the best mono-green deck currently in the format. But to ludicrously claim he's better than Rofellos really showcases that you're not familiar with the reason Rofellos was banned as a general, unbanned shortly, and banned again. The RC tried to make him work because he accelerated powerful plays; but ultimately, he simply breaks games in half.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
BRGrenzo, Dungeon Warden EDH
GAzusa, Always in a Rush EDH
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Warlord EDH
Trade thread on MOTL
It's really a balancing game of what you want to lose to. You can't make a mono-green deck that is both fast and can bounce back from anything, because mono-green doesn't have the tools or the generals for such a strategy.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
On the other hand ever since I switched over to Nissa she has been nothing but impressive. Providing green with a steady stream of card adavantage is dangerous and having a way to consistently hit land drops has been invauleable. Just my thoughts. I don't have the link right on hand may post later but if you haven't go watch the Commander vs Series by star city games on youtube were they test the Origins walkers and you can see the power of Nissa. Obviously she is better in EDH than those other walkers but the power level in a broad range is undeniable.
BRGrenzo, Dungeon Warden EDH
GAzusa, Always in a Rush EDH
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Warlord EDH
Trade thread on MOTL
Currently Playing:
Multiplayer EDH Lists (click italics for a link to the thread!)
[Primer] Lord of Tresserhorn - Don't Tell Me What I Can't Do[Primer] Roon of the Hidden Realm - Rhino Blink
5 Color Tribal Guide (Slivers, Atogs, Allies, Spirits)
Also Playing (most decklists can be found on my profile)
MarathGeistKamahlGrenzoBolasThassaGitrog
PiratesZurVial Smasher&ThrasiosYennettJhoira(cEDH)Strix(Pauper)
Legacy: Maverick
Modern:
Melira PodRIP 1/19/15GWHatebearsMy comments assume a table of 4-6 players, obviously biases this comment. I ask the question about many of these commanders whether they would do as well in the deck rather than as commander. Easy to tutor up and would they ever see the field more than once anyway? In my experience, Yeva and Freyalise invite discussion but rarely are hated on, there just always seems to be better targets for other player's hate; these generals are not recognized for their power until it's too late. Yisan gets hated on quickly. With mono-green in general, I feel as though you need to be the quiet player early (few harmless elves LOL !) and then by the time you are out of control, there is little others can do, save board clear. A couple of these generals do not keep you quiet early; you invite hate and take that hate off other players.
In search of a foil french Dromar, the Banisher, pm me if you have one you want to part with, also foil Stratadon's.
2. yisan, the wanderer bard. Insane resiliency. He plays almost like a control build, pulling answers to every possible scenario while rapidly building towards his own win condition. Averages turn 5.5 goldfish wins, but makes up for his lack of speed with his incredible toolbox ability.
3. azusa, lost but seeking. She ramps quickly into big things. Not much else to say. She lacks Ezuri's ray speed or Yisan's resiliency, but she's still quite powerful.
4. omnath, locus of mana. See above.
5. titania, protector of argoth. She has tons of combos, but all of them take a bit of work to assemble. She plays very nicely with stax pieces, generating value to make even effects like MLD entirely lopsided. The only problem is that there isn't a ton of stax support in green. Still quite strong as a commander though.
That is stax."
~cmv_lawyer, 2016
WUI Don't Mean to Brago, But... RWBI'll Kaalia Back Later GBWKaradora the Graveyard Explorer BRGLive Long and Prosshper
BGUMuscle Plasm URGImperial Animarch BGLemon Meren Pie GWStop Being Such a Sisay UTefearsome RGWMarath of the Titans
UBRNow Watch me Trai Trai RWBAleshstax GWUPrison Can Roon Your Life BRGrenzo: Your Doom UArcum's Asylum of Stax
BGFeel the Ground Croak GThe All New 2016 Yisan Wanderer URFo Rizzle Mah Mizzle UBRA Game of Marchess