In a two color deck, without budget constraints (so online for me), I'd run the relevant ABU, Shock, 3-5 fetches, then this. Maybe the Zendikar manlands depending on the colors (W/G just isn't that good, but U/B and U/W usually make the cut) and cycles or tangos depending on which is better in the deck (I'll move up my fetch count if I run these because there are more potential targets). Run all of these, and that's 11 lands (5 fetch, shock, dual, tango, cycle, battle, man). 9 or 10 other utility lands and that's still 17-19 basics.
There's no reason NOT to run battle bond lands in 2 color.
Edit: OK, one reason, you might be running all the non basic hate and thus are running 27 basics.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Between these and filters I think it depends what sorts of mana costs you have. Lots of 1cmc, go bbd. Lots of double-colored symbols, go filters. I don't think it's a black and white choice.
In a two color deck, without budget constraints (so online for me), I'd run the relevant ABU, Shock, 3-5 fetches, then this. Maybe the Zendikar manlands depending on the colors (W/G just isn't that good, but U/B and U/W usually make the cut) and cycles or tangos depending on which is better in the deck (I'll move up my fetch count if I run these because there are more potential targets). Run all of these, and that's 11 lands (5 fetch, shock, dual, tango, cycle, battle, man). 9 or 10 other utility lands and that's still 17-19 basics.
There's no reason NOT to run battle bond lands in 2 color.
Edit: OK, one reason, you might be running all the non basic hate and thus are running 27 basics.
While the new lands from Battlebond are good at what they do, I think there are enough reasons to not include them (or in other words, not go out of your way to buy/trade for them). Color-fixing is one of the most fungible aspects of deck-building in EDH. Missing out on one of any of the non-ABU/shock "duals" in a 2-color deck isn't make or break. Even for optimizing a deck, its marginal benefits are lower compared to other kinds of switches (e.g. a better mana rock over Darksteel Ingot).
But I can think of other reasons.
1. Playing a Ravnica Karoo or Odyssey/Shadowmoor/Eventide filter because of an interaction like Mana Reflection or landfall.
2. Playing a painland for access to C.
3. Playing an abundance of utility lands because of choice.
4. Aesthetics in deck building (playing a wedge where you would have access to a non-allied Battlebond land).
5. And of course, balancing all of those things against building for non-basic hate. I know that you're kidding about playing 27 basics, but balancing it all is an exercise when you want access to certain utility lands. Even if you can slot in a Battlebond land, just might not be worth it since the marginal benefit is so much lower compared to fetchable duals.
The Battlebond lands are better in 3 color decks than 2 color decks.
In any deck I would want to run pain lands in, it is for colorless mana production. In any deck I would not run pain lands in, these are simply not good enough to play.
These are worse than pain lands in every scenario they can reasonably be compared. The only conceivable reason to play these are budget constraints.
After having played them some, I think this evaluation is colored by not actually ever using them. Untapped duals (especially in 2 or 3 color) are awesome. They don't need to be fetchable, plenty of other lands fill that roll. Just very solid overall and prices keep getting better.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
Having basic land types goes beyond whether you use fetchlands or not. Checklands (Sunpetal Grove and Co.) and Tainted Lands (Tainted Wood) are better if your duals have basic land types. Nature's Lore, Farseek, Wood Elves, and Yavimaya Dryad can fetch dual lands with the proper basic land type. Effects that count basic lands like Beacon of Creation or Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle, or require you to have a minimum number of a type of basic land like the Hedge-Mage cycle (Duergar Hedge-Mage) get better (or in some cases, go from unplayable to playable)
There is often more to consider than just jamming your deck with as many dual lands as you can.
Agreed 100%, but right now I have them as the 5th best dual land, and I stopped trying to plau ABU duals. So they slide in to quite a few decks with minimal downside. 2 Color its a slam dunk.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
Having basic land types goes beyond whether you use fetchlands or not. Checklands (Sunpetal Grove and Co.) and Tainted Lands (Tainted Wood) are better if your duals have basic land types. Nature's Lore, Farseek, Wood Elves, and Yavimaya Dryad can fetch dual lands with the proper basic land type. Effects that count basic lands like Beacon of Creation or Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle, or require you to have a minimum number of a type of basic land like the Hedge-Mage cycle (Duergar Hedge-Mage) get better (or in some cases, go from unplayable to playable)
There is often more to consider than just jamming your deck with as many dual lands as you can.
I think it's unlikely that it's ever correct to play something like valakut or beacon of creation outside of mono-color, so imo they're mostly irrelevant for dual rankings.
Having duals to hit off fetches, nature's lore, etc is great but there's already duals and shocks, and possibly cyclers. That's more than enough targets for most games. Once you already have 2 duals, fetching a basic will be fine 95% of the time.
Checklands are fine, but I'm not playing a crap dual like the BFZ duals to improve another decent dual like a checkland...when I could just play a great dual like the BBD lands. And tainted lands are simply bad.
There's maybe a few corner cases where you'd want to value having the basic land types, but in the vast majority of decks, 2 duals with types is plenty and 3 is overkill. A dual with almost no downsides except having no basic types is great, at least until you get to 4-5 color and duals of any type are mediocre.
Shock and battle lands (and αβ duals, and actually Murmuring Bosk) all have the advantage of being able to be fetched with fetchlands and some ramp spells (Wood Elves, Skyshroud Claim, Nature's Lore, Farseek, Gem of Becoming, a few cyclers, and a few other nongreen cards like Kor Cartographer). Bear in mind that if you're in multicolor, the utility of counting your forests or swamps with cards like Mutilate becomes debatable (unless...) though it certainly becomes easier to add more lands if you add green. But I would say the, I want to call them "arenas" or something equally sporty, are basically αβ duals without that added utility.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
They are not good enough for me to get gyped and wanting to hunt them down. Especially when most of my mana base is done for most of my decks. More so when I use a lot of enemy color combinations and these have only been printed in friendly pairs.
If I come across them in a trade binder and they are cheap, I might get some, but I don't really care.
I have my fetch lands, shock lands, utility lands, and I have a soft spot in my heart for the likes of City of Brass, Mana Confluence in 3+ color decks. With basic lands, Command Tower and so forth, it is difficult for me to even care about these lands.
I am willing to bet that I am not alone.
Even if they are better than pain lands and filter lands (which they might be), those of us who have those lands probably don't care enough to make a change either, as those lands are still reslly good and don't cost us games.
I am old and grumpy. Inam happy with most of my decks and very rarely see a card that really needs to replace something, let alone onnsuch a large scale as all of my 2+ color decks. More often than not, new cards actually make me want to build new decks rather than replace parts of existing ones. These lands are no different.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Whatever style you wish to play, be it fast and frenzied or slow and tactical, the surest way to defeat your opponent consistently is by dominating him or her in the war of card advantage." - Brian Wiseman, April 1996
Kinda off topic, but does anyone run the Temples (scry duals)?
In a few more casual decks. Temple of Triumph is especially helpful as draw smoothing in Boros, so I use it if I'm not hyper aggressive. If I have cards where the top of the library matters to a lot of cards because scry goes up in value, so the green ones get more valuable because of Sylvan library, Oracle of Mul Daya, etc where the scry can translate into skipping a car you know you don't need or setting up an extra land drop or card to cast from the top.
If it's a deck where I already have lots of draw without top of the library effects, or if I need all my lands untapped, they won't be considered let alone make the cut. When they occasionally do make the cut, they are typically one or two of the very few enters tapped lands in the deck so it's not much of a drawback (path of ancestry being the only one I regularly use).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
I really like them, because i play 3 and 4 player EDH usually, yet i consider their current price to be bloated.
This may be the major reason why i haven't seen them a lot, yet. There are a ton of playable color fixing cycles, that don't cost 4-5€ a piece, so i get why people go for something else.
Just a few days ago i traded a few cards and got all but 2 of the bbd-duals i can (and will) run. The sole reason i included them in the trades was that the people i traded with had a bbd draft the day before and we were a few bucks apart in trade value. It's a bit like the Path of Ancestry thing. I'd never pay 5€ for one, but would consider it as trade bait.
Kinda off topic, but does anyone run the Temples (scry duals)?
I certainly do.
To be exact, other than Bojuka Bog and Cyclelands in 2C decks they are the only tapland cycle i run. With usually less than 5 taplands including them per deck i am happy to make use of the scry 1.
Any other cycle i run has to etb untapped, allow me to choose (shocks) or at least be able to trigger easily (buddies & bbd-duals).
Of the tapland cycles Trilands outside of G, Cyclinglands in mono decks, some manlands and karoos are somewhat playable, even though i consider the latter to be the definite sign of an unfinished and yet to be streamlined mana base.
Kinda off topic, but does anyone run the Temples (scry duals)?
I love them. I have one in my Mizzix (U/r) deck, a full set in my Edgar Markov (Mardu) build, put a full set in my wife's Inalla (Gixis) deck, and have a full set in Roon (Bant).
I wouldn't us them in 4c or 5c decks, but they shine in 2c and 3c.
As was said, they are about the only CiP/EtBT lands I would run. They are worth the turn 1 "scry, go" playor the mid game 2nd main phase scry.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Whatever style you wish to play, be it fast and frenzied or slow and tactical, the surest way to defeat your opponent consistently is by dominating him or her in the war of card advantage." - Brian Wiseman, April 1996
Kinda off topic, but does anyone run the Temples (scry duals)?
Sometimes I will, in enemy-color decks like Orzhov, or a wedge like Mardu, but I'd rather run painlands for budget-level fixing. Untapped really matters a lot, especially when holding up removal. It's decent for a first-drop when there's no Sol-Ring/Mana Dork/Soul Sister/other relevant one-drop, but there's a lot of those in this format including one-mana removal.
I think it's unlikely that it's ever correct to play something like valakut or beacon of creation outside of mono-color, so imo they're mostly irrelevant for dual rankings.
I run Beacon of Creation in 2-color, although it's Wort, so really more like tokens equal to 2x my forests, and that's assuming I have no token doubler out.
I also play Emeria in 5-color, and have no issue getting it online thanks to 10x shocks, 10x Revised duals, 11x fetchlands (including Krosan Verge), Mistveil Plains, and a basic Plains.
I think it's unlikely that it's ever correct to play something like valakut or beacon of creation outside of mono-color, so imo they're mostly irrelevant for dual rankings.
I run Beacon of Creation in 2-color, although it's Wort, so really more like tokens equal to 2x my forests, and that's assuming I have no token doubler out.
I also play Emeria in 5-color, and have no issue getting it online thanks to 10x shocks, 10x Revised duals, 11x fetchlands (including Krosan Verge), Mistveil Plains, and a basic Plains.
You'd have to be playing for a very late-game plan for that to work in most circumstances. Counting every fetch as a plains, you've got 21 plains-sources, which means to hit 7 you'd need to have drawn about a third of your deck - plus you need to draw the actual emeria.
I've run emeria in a child of alara deck before, but it uses a decent number more plains sources than that - mostly in the form of nonbasic land tutors (which also get sac outlets) - and tends to aggressively tutor for LFTL to recycle fetches, which makes it much faster. And even then, it's a very slow plan.
Anyway, as I've said, there are corner cases where it does matter, but generally-speaking those sorts of type-matter cards are significantly worse in multicolor decks.
I run Temples in 2 and 3-colored decks. Scry 1 can be very helpful in a lot of situations that aren't that uncommon to Commander matches, but I would prefer to rarely (preferably never) see more than one in my opening hand.
I've run emeria in a child of alara deck before, but it uses a decent number more plains sources than that - mostly in the form of nonbasic land tutors (which also get sac outlets) - and tends to aggressively tutor for LFTL to recycle fetches, which makes it much faster. And even then, it's a very slow plan.
Yes, I've also got spells that can fetch up plains (in fact, I think all of my land ramp spells can), and Life from the Loam (Entomb, too, which primarily exists in the deck to tutor LftL). I have never had a game where I control Emeria and I don't control enough plains for it to be online for more than 3 turns.
After having played them some, I think this evaluation is colored by not actually ever using them.
In a three color deck, I play 9 fetch lands. I do not play shock lands - they are not good enough.
In two color decks, I start with 8 basic lands, dual, shock, filter, and 7 fetch lands. Wasteland, Strip Mine, and Ancient Tomb are always included without a very specific reason not to, along with another 2 or 3 colorlessno basics, depending on the colors.
Now we get to mono-colorno basics, and other deck specific utility lands.
I would increase my basic count to at least 12 before I would ever consider these, and I rarely have room for even that.
I do not have to play with them to accurately assess there value as worthless outside of budget restrictions. At no point would they conceivably be better than what I already play.
Even if they are better than pain lands and filter lands (which they might be)
They are not.
In any deck that does not want to play pain or filter lands, these are also not good enough to play.
In any deck that does include pain or filter lands, these are incapable of acting as a substitute (heavy color requirements, &/or colorless mana - if I want to be able to cast Necropotence on turn 3 & Cryptic Command on turn 4, for example).
I do not have to play with them to accurately assess there value as worthless outside of budget restrictions. At no point would they conceivably be better than what I already play.
I think maybe you should consider them a little more carefully before you dismiss them out of hand.
Filters cannot help you play a colored one-drop, or a colored 3-drop with a mana crypt, for example, plus they have the risk of being colorless-only, especially in decks with 3+ colors. If you don't have heavy colored requirements cards like necro, I'd probably rather have a guaranteed source of 1 fixed mana, rather than the opportunity for 2 with the risk of zero.
If you aren't playing in a meta with nonbasic hate and you don't have a ton of basic-only ramping, you'd almost certainly rather have a BBD dual than a basic in 2-color. Honestly it seems pretty hard to justify not running them in almost any 2-color deck unless you're really worried about B2B or ruination or something. You've only listed 18 lands whose primary goal is color fixing. I would think you'd want more - especially for a commander like, say, lazav, who wants significant fixing for reliability. command tower and BBD duals would be towards the top of the list after fetches and duals.
Even as far as running fetches/shock/dual over BBD duals, that can definitely make sense if you're getting value from the shuffle or the land in your graveyard, or if you value the ability to search for a basic under B2B or something. If you aren't getting any value from those, though, then the BBD is basically equivalent minus the life loss and the insignificant deck thinning, so I'd say it's roughly equivalent. And those are the best fixing lands out there.
You seem to make a lot of assumptions about what sorts of decks might want to run pains and filters, but there's a lot of diversity out there. Which lands you run is always going to depend on what you're trying to cast - how early, which colors, and how much of those colors. You can reasonably say that no optimal manabase is going to include, say, timber gorge since there are so many strictly better lands, but BBD duals are close enough to the best available fixing lands that it's going to come down to what the deck is trying to do. Maybe in your decks they aren't optimal, but there are plenty of decks out there where they will be.
I'd like to hear more from Muspellsheimr. Specifically, I'd like to know exactly how Muspellsheimr reached the point where the Battlebond lands didn't make the cut. Is it because, after including all desired gold, utility, and basic lands, that there was no room left for duals?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
I'd like to hear more from Muspellsheimr. Specifically, I'd like to know exactly how Muspellsheimr reached the point where the Battlebond lands didn't make the cut. Is it because, after including all desired gold, utility, and basic lands, that there was no room left for duals?\
Let us assume, for sake of argument, enemy color Battlebond lands exist. Now take a look at the Teysa & Glissa lists in my signature.
In Glissa, I play Twilight Mire because I need that type of fixing. Black is the primary color, but Glissa herself costs GG. I am still trying to decide which colorless nonbasics to cut for the missing Bloodstained Mire & Wooded Foothills.
In Teysa, I play both Caves of Koilos & Fetid Heath, for both color fixing and colorless production. I also want to increase the basic land count to 6 each of Plains & Swamp, but cannot find any suitable lands to cut to do so, except maybeWestvale Abbey. I am not trying to add colored production - I am trying to add basic lands.
Similar applies to any future two color decks I would ever build. Red in particular would need to play around its own Blood Moon effects.
Three color decks begin with an additional 2 each of Fetch & Dual lands, and have a larger breadth of colored & colorless nonbasics likely to be included; even with the typically higher land count I include in 3+ colors, I do not have room for Shock lands, let alone something as weak as Battlebond lands.
Edit: Upon review, those deck lists were out of date slightly. I have fixed the land bases, and will resolve any other discrepancies as I find them.
So basically because you want a really really high number of basics.
Sounds like a meta call to me. In my meta I've seen 1 b2b and 1 ruination in years with no blood moon. Running 12 basics plus fetches in a 2-color deck would be absurd.
I'd like to hear more from Muspellsheimr. Specifically, I'd like to know exactly how Muspellsheimr reached the point where the Battlebond lands didn't make the cut. Is it because, after including all desired gold, utility, and basic lands, that there was no room left for duals?\
Let us assume, for sake of argument, enemy color Battlebond lands exist. Now take a look at the Teysa & Glissa lists in my signature.
In Glissa, I play Twilight Mire because I need that type of fixing. Black is the primary color, but Glissa herself costs GG. I am still trying to decide which colorless nonbasics to cut for the missing Bloodstained Mire & Wooded Foothills.
In Teysa, I play both Caves of Koilos & Fetid Heath, for both color fixing and colorless production. I also want to increase the basic land count to 6 each of Plains & Swamp, but cannot find any suitable lands to cut to do so, except maybeWestvale Abbey. I am not trying to add colored production - I am trying to add basic lands.
Similar applies to any future two color decks I would ever build. Red in particular would need to play around its own Blood Moon effects.
Three color decks begin with an additional 2 each of Fetch & Dual lands, and have a larger breadth of colored & colorless nonbasics likely to be included; even with the typically higher land count I include in 3+ colors, I do not have room for Shock lands, let alone something as weak as Battlebond lands.
Edit: Upon review, those deck lists were out of date slightly. I have fixed the land bases, and will resolve any other discrepancies as I find them.
Taking a look at your updated Teysa list, why do you think you need Caves to serve as your 13th source of colorless when you only have one card that needs colerless in the whole deck? Granted, you can activate displacer multiple times in a turn, but I don't think the one extra colorless source will help raise your ability to do that much. You have some sources of life gain, but plenty of cards that require life payment as well, so it isn't like the pain is completely negligible. An enemy battle bond land would be, at worst, a lateral move from Caves.
But Caves wouldn't be the land I'd swap out. Flagstones of Trokair has no reason at all to be in the deck. You only have one card that sends it to the graveyard, and in that case it makes Armageddon slightly better. Otherwise, its just a non basic white source that does nothing and is generally worse than a plains. 90% of the time, either a plains or a hypothetical enemy battle bond dual would be a major upgrade.
Mistveil Plains is another marginal card that on the balance is probably a wash with a battle bond dual, and only because your deck is built in such a way that it turns it from a do nothing card to something that's occasionally useful. Lets be real, its a bad card, it enters tapped and has an incredibly weak effect. I wouldn't cut it from your deck are because you run a large number of tutor effects, which let you use it as effective recursion, and enough cards with unique effects that you'd actually want to put them from your yard to your library so you can tutor for them rather than just using your tutor on something else. You enough ways to fetch plains that you can tutor for it at the end of your opponents turn to somewhat mitigate it entering the field tapped, and you can somewhat reliably get it in the occasions where it is actually useful. Most importantly, however, I'm a sucker for bad cards being made useful because of unique deck conditions, otherwise I'd probably still cut it in favor of an enemy battle bond dual. Or Command Tower.
Really, the deck is fairly unique in that its construction makes a number of the nonbasics better than they would normally be. Fetid Heath is better because you have a lot of heavy colored mana costs on cheap spells, High Market is better because its a sacrifice deck, ditto Westvale Abbey, and both Heath and Caves are better than normal because of Displacer. Its hard to think of a two color deck that wants more non basic lands that aren't command tower or a battle bond dual if they made enemy ones, and yet you still have room for them. At least for the Command Tower which actually does exist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's no reason NOT to run battle bond lands in 2 color.
Edit: OK, one reason, you might be running all the non basic hate and thus are running 27 basics.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
While the new lands from Battlebond are good at what they do, I think there are enough reasons to not include them (or in other words, not go out of your way to buy/trade for them). Color-fixing is one of the most fungible aspects of deck-building in EDH. Missing out on one of any of the non-ABU/shock "duals" in a 2-color deck isn't make or break. Even for optimizing a deck, its marginal benefits are lower compared to other kinds of switches (e.g. a better mana rock over Darksteel Ingot).
But I can think of other reasons.
1. Playing a Ravnica Karoo or Odyssey/Shadowmoor/Eventide filter because of an interaction like Mana Reflection or landfall.
2. Playing a painland for access to C.
3. Playing an abundance of utility lands because of choice.
4. Aesthetics in deck building (playing a wedge where you would have access to a non-allied Battlebond land).
5. And of course, balancing all of those things against building for non-basic hate. I know that you're kidding about playing 27 basics, but balancing it all is an exercise when you want access to certain utility lands. Even if you can slot in a Battlebond land, just might not be worth it since the marginal benefit is so much lower compared to fetchable duals.
The Battlebond lands are better in 3 color decks than 2 color decks.
The issue of basic lands is very similar. If you run a heavy green deck with Rampant Growth, Cultivate, Kodama's Reach, etc., you need to commit to having a certain percentage of basics in the deck. You also need them for non-green ramp like Solemn Simulacrum, Myriad Landscape, or Burnished Hart. The Battle Lands (aka Tango lands) like Sunken Hollow get better. It's not just about dodging Blood Moon.
There is often more to consider than just jamming your deck with as many dual lands as you can.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
Having duals to hit off fetches, nature's lore, etc is great but there's already duals and shocks, and possibly cyclers. That's more than enough targets for most games. Once you already have 2 duals, fetching a basic will be fine 95% of the time.
Checklands are fine, but I'm not playing a crap dual like the BFZ duals to improve another decent dual like a checkland...when I could just play a great dual like the BBD lands. And tainted lands are simply bad.
There's maybe a few corner cases where you'd want to value having the basic land types, but in the vast majority of decks, 2 duals with types is plenty and 3 is overkill. A dual with almost no downsides except having no basic types is great, at least until you get to 4-5 color and duals of any type are mediocre.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
On phasing:
They are not good enough for me to get gyped and wanting to hunt them down. Especially when most of my mana base is done for most of my decks. More so when I use a lot of enemy color combinations and these have only been printed in friendly pairs.
If I come across them in a trade binder and they are cheap, I might get some, but I don't really care.
I have my fetch lands, shock lands, utility lands, and I have a soft spot in my heart for the likes of City of Brass, Mana Confluence in 3+ color decks. With basic lands, Command Tower and so forth, it is difficult for me to even care about these lands.
I am willing to bet that I am not alone.
Even if they are better than pain lands and filter lands (which they might be), those of us who have those lands probably don't care enough to make a change either, as those lands are still reslly good and don't cost us games.
I am old and grumpy. Inam happy with most of my decks and very rarely see a card that really needs to replace something, let alone onnsuch a large scale as all of my 2+ color decks. More often than not, new cards actually make me want to build new decks rather than replace parts of existing ones. These lands are no different.
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
In a few more casual decks. Temple of Triumph is especially helpful as draw smoothing in Boros, so I use it if I'm not hyper aggressive. If I have cards where the top of the library matters to a lot of cards because scry goes up in value, so the green ones get more valuable because of Sylvan library, Oracle of Mul Daya, etc where the scry can translate into skipping a car you know you don't need or setting up an extra land drop or card to cast from the top.
If it's a deck where I already have lots of draw without top of the library effects, or if I need all my lands untapped, they won't be considered let alone make the cut. When they occasionally do make the cut, they are typically one or two of the very few enters tapped lands in the deck so it's not much of a drawback (path of ancestry being the only one I regularly use).
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
This may be the major reason why i haven't seen them a lot, yet. There are a ton of playable color fixing cycles, that don't cost 4-5€ a piece, so i get why people go for something else.
Just a few days ago i traded a few cards and got all but 2 of the bbd-duals i can (and will) run. The sole reason i included them in the trades was that the people i traded with had a bbd draft the day before and we were a few bucks apart in trade value. It's a bit like the Path of Ancestry thing. I'd never pay 5€ for one, but would consider it as trade bait.
I certainly do.
To be exact, other than Bojuka Bog and Cyclelands in 2C decks they are the only tapland cycle i run. With usually less than 5 taplands including them per deck i am happy to make use of the scry 1.
Any other cycle i run has to etb untapped, allow me to choose (shocks) or at least be able to trigger easily (buddies & bbd-duals).
Of the tapland cycles Trilands outside of G, Cyclinglands in mono decks, some manlands and karoos are somewhat playable, even though i consider the latter to be the definite sign of an unfinished and yet to be streamlined mana base.
I love them. I have one in my Mizzix (U/r) deck, a full set in my Edgar Markov (Mardu) build, put a full set in my wife's Inalla (Gixis) deck, and have a full set in Roon (Bant).
I wouldn't us them in 4c or 5c decks, but they shine in 2c and 3c.
As was said, they are about the only CiP/EtBT lands I would run. They are worth the turn 1 "scry, go" playor the mid game 2nd main phase scry.
Sometimes I will, in enemy-color decks like Orzhov, or a wedge like Mardu, but I'd rather run painlands for budget-level fixing. Untapped really matters a lot, especially when holding up removal. It's decent for a first-drop when there's no Sol-Ring/Mana Dork/Soul Sister/other relevant one-drop, but there's a lot of those in this format including one-mana removal.
Beating Face with Bane
Beatrice, the Golden Witch
I also play Emeria in 5-color, and have no issue getting it online thanks to 10x shocks, 10x Revised duals, 11x fetchlands (including Krosan Verge), Mistveil Plains, and a basic Plains.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
I've run emeria in a child of alara deck before, but it uses a decent number more plains sources than that - mostly in the form of nonbasic land tutors (which also get sac outlets) - and tends to aggressively tutor for LFTL to recycle fetches, which makes it much faster. And even then, it's a very slow plan.
Anyway, as I've said, there are corner cases where it does matter, but generally-speaking those sorts of type-matter cards are significantly worse in multicolor decks.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
In a three color deck, I play 9 fetch lands. I do not play shock lands - they are not good enough.
In two color decks, I start with 8 basic lands, dual, shock, filter, and 7 fetch lands. Wasteland, Strip Mine, and Ancient Tomb are always included without a very specific reason not to, along with another 2 or 3 colorlessno basics, depending on the colors.
Now we get to mono-colorno basics, and other deck specific utility lands.
I would increase my basic count to at least 12 before I would ever consider these, and I rarely have room for even that.
I do not have to play with them to accurately assess there value as worthless outside of budget restrictions. At no point would they conceivably be better than what I already play.
They are not.
In any deck that does not want to play pain or filter lands, these are also not good enough to play.
In any deck that does include pain or filter lands, these are incapable of acting as a substitute (heavy color requirements, &/or colorless mana - if I want to be able to cast Necropotence on turn 3 & Cryptic Command on turn 4, for example).
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
Filters cannot help you play a colored one-drop, or a colored 3-drop with a mana crypt, for example, plus they have the risk of being colorless-only, especially in decks with 3+ colors. If you don't have heavy colored requirements cards like necro, I'd probably rather have a guaranteed source of 1 fixed mana, rather than the opportunity for 2 with the risk of zero.
If you aren't playing in a meta with nonbasic hate and you don't have a ton of basic-only ramping, you'd almost certainly rather have a BBD dual than a basic in 2-color. Honestly it seems pretty hard to justify not running them in almost any 2-color deck unless you're really worried about B2B or ruination or something. You've only listed 18 lands whose primary goal is color fixing. I would think you'd want more - especially for a commander like, say, lazav, who wants significant fixing for reliability. command tower and BBD duals would be towards the top of the list after fetches and duals.
Even as far as running fetches/shock/dual over BBD duals, that can definitely make sense if you're getting value from the shuffle or the land in your graveyard, or if you value the ability to search for a basic under B2B or something. If you aren't getting any value from those, though, then the BBD is basically equivalent minus the life loss and the insignificant deck thinning, so I'd say it's roughly equivalent. And those are the best fixing lands out there.
You seem to make a lot of assumptions about what sorts of decks might want to run pains and filters, but there's a lot of diversity out there. Which lands you run is always going to depend on what you're trying to cast - how early, which colors, and how much of those colors. You can reasonably say that no optimal manabase is going to include, say, timber gorge since there are so many strictly better lands, but BBD duals are close enough to the best available fixing lands that it's going to come down to what the deck is trying to do. Maybe in your decks they aren't optimal, but there are plenty of decks out there where they will be.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Let us assume, for sake of argument, enemy color Battlebond lands exist. Now take a look at the Teysa & Glissa lists in my signature.
In Glissa, I play Twilight Mire because I need that type of fixing. Black is the primary color, but Glissa herself costs GG. I am still trying to decide which colorless nonbasics to cut for the missing Bloodstained Mire & Wooded Foothills.
In Teysa, I play both Caves of Koilos & Fetid Heath, for both color fixing and colorless production. I also want to increase the basic land count to 6 each of Plains & Swamp, but cannot find any suitable lands to cut to do so, except maybe Westvale Abbey. I am not trying to add colored production - I am trying to add basic lands.
Similar applies to any future two color decks I would ever build. Red in particular would need to play around its own Blood Moon effects.
Three color decks begin with an additional 2 each of Fetch & Dual lands, and have a larger breadth of colored & colorless nonbasics likely to be included; even with the typically higher land count I include in 3+ colors, I do not have room for Shock lands, let alone something as weak as Battlebond lands.
Edit: Upon review, those deck lists were out of date slightly. I have fixed the land bases, and will resolve any other discrepancies as I find them.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
Sounds like a meta call to me. In my meta I've seen 1 b2b and 1 ruination in years with no blood moon. Running 12 basics plus fetches in a 2-color deck would be absurd.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Taking a look at your updated Teysa list, why do you think you need Caves to serve as your 13th source of colorless when you only have one card that needs colerless in the whole deck? Granted, you can activate displacer multiple times in a turn, but I don't think the one extra colorless source will help raise your ability to do that much. You have some sources of life gain, but plenty of cards that require life payment as well, so it isn't like the pain is completely negligible. An enemy battle bond land would be, at worst, a lateral move from Caves.
But Caves wouldn't be the land I'd swap out. Flagstones of Trokair has no reason at all to be in the deck. You only have one card that sends it to the graveyard, and in that case it makes Armageddon slightly better. Otherwise, its just a non basic white source that does nothing and is generally worse than a plains. 90% of the time, either a plains or a hypothetical enemy battle bond dual would be a major upgrade.
Mistveil Plains is another marginal card that on the balance is probably a wash with a battle bond dual, and only because your deck is built in such a way that it turns it from a do nothing card to something that's occasionally useful. Lets be real, its a bad card, it enters tapped and has an incredibly weak effect. I wouldn't cut it from your deck are because you run a large number of tutor effects, which let you use it as effective recursion, and enough cards with unique effects that you'd actually want to put them from your yard to your library so you can tutor for them rather than just using your tutor on something else. You enough ways to fetch plains that you can tutor for it at the end of your opponents turn to somewhat mitigate it entering the field tapped, and you can somewhat reliably get it in the occasions where it is actually useful. Most importantly, however, I'm a sucker for bad cards being made useful because of unique deck conditions, otherwise I'd probably still cut it in favor of an enemy battle bond dual. Or Command Tower.
Really, the deck is fairly unique in that its construction makes a number of the nonbasics better than they would normally be. Fetid Heath is better because you have a lot of heavy colored mana costs on cheap spells, High Market is better because its a sacrifice deck, ditto Westvale Abbey, and both Heath and Caves are better than normal because of Displacer. Its hard to think of a two color deck that wants more non basic lands that aren't command tower or a battle bond dual if they made enemy ones, and yet you still have room for them. At least for the Command Tower which actually does exist.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!