[Official]
The Top 50 List (Indefinite Hiatus)
Poll: Which WHITE CREATURE should be removed from the list?
Ended Feb 16, 2019
Poll: Which BLACK CREATURES should be removed from the list? (Pick 4)
Ended Feb 16, 2019
Poll: Which GREEN NONCREATURE should be removed from the list?
Ended Feb 16, 2019
Poll: Which COLORLESS NONCREATURE should be removed from the list?
Ended Feb 16, 2019
The number before each cardname is the number of decks in the decklist database that play that card that have been posted and/or updated in the last year.
159 Cultivate
150 Sylvan Library
134 Kodama's Reach
109 Green Sun's Zenith
106 Krosan Grip
99 Skyshroud Claim
97 Worldly Tutor
92 Birthing Pod
88 Tooth and Nail
82 Garruk Wildspeaker
81 Greater Good
79 Mana Reflection
78 Harmonize
77 Chord of Calling
75 Regrowth
70 Genesis Wave
70 Life from the Loam
69 Garruk, Primal Hunter
What is in the statistical breakdown but not here:
134 Kodama's Reach
99 Skyshroud Claim
82 Garruk Wildspeaker
78 Harmonize
What is here but not in the statistical breakdown:
59 Praetor's Counsel
37 Exploration
27 Natural Order
21 Earthcraft
I would like to support Cultivate/Kodama's Reach
BTW, for your information: Here are the creature/non-creature splits for all the top 50s of all the colors in the the statistical breakdown. The 20/30 split for blue might be ok, but maybe we need to rethink the 30/20 split for green. White is actually the only color that plays more creatures than non-creature spells.
White: 26/24
Blue: 15/35
Black: 20/30
Red: 22/28
Green: 21/29
Colorless: 6/44
Multicolor: 22/28
DECKS
Ertai | Squee | Roon | Aurelia
USEFUL RESOURCES
Commander Decklist Database
Statistical breakdown of the commander metagame
50 Commanders / 50 Decks
27 Colors / 27 Decks
If I look at the top 200 (any color, not counting lands) there is a 28%/72% split between creature and non-creature spells but if I look at the whole database of results (top 5430 cards) I get a 49%/51% split between creature and non-creature spells. That means people on average play as much creatures as non-creature spells but the choice of creatures is much more diversified than the non-creatures.
DECKS
Ertai | Squee | Roon | Aurelia
USEFUL RESOURCES
Commander Decklist Database
Statistical breakdown of the commander metagame
50 Commanders / 50 Decks
27 Colors / 27 Decks
It doesn't even exile so it's actually worse if they have a tutor and only better if they have recursion so you're paying double the mana to maybe have a better effect. Mana cost is also very important.
I'd rather have Nature's Lore/Three Visits than Cultivate/Kodama's Reach.
EDIT: Also dislike the 30/20 split in green...
Cultivate has enough support to go to next week. Kodama's and cultivate will be treated as functional same cards and only take up one line.
The following have been nominated but need additional support: Defense of the Heart, Burgeoning, Deglamer, momentous fall
Bur / alblaster / and scoeri may vote or nominate again as your votes were not required to pass the cards you voted for.
We can come back to the topic of breakdown counts for card sections when we finish this run through of the sections. We might take a week to vote on what we would like to do for green and blue at the same time. Until then, lets focus on this week's nominations / support as well as what to take off.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Currently, we are using a de facto stratified sampling which relies on somewhat arbitrary weights (which may need to be adjusted constantly).
I propose that we eliminate the weights such that we vote for the Top 50 cards of each colours regardless if they are creatures or noncreatures. If that ends up having more creatures nominated for Green, so be it -- Green's forte is its creatures anyway. Assigning arbitrary weights would be, well, arbitrary. That said, as ISBP mentioned, lets keep this in mind for later.
I like this suggestion. Seems like it would be worthwhile to take a vote on it.
This. I feel people massively overvalue Burgeoning and possibly undervalue Exploration.
Definitely agree with this. Doesn't seem right to force a color to have more creatures when the noncreatures are better, even if it is "the creature color".
I'll vote to support Deglamer.
I voted to remove Vernal Bloom as the obvious worst card, but I think the next two would be Praetor's Counsel and Worldly Tutor, in my experience anyway.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
I was under the impression that card links don't work within polls. If that option is available to us when Beta comes out we will most certainly start doing it.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Deglamer stops Gods, Sharuum, Karn, and all kinds of artifact based combos.
I feel tuck generally outclasses exile because while they may be able to tutor the tucked card back, they still have to actually have that tutor in hand or draw into it.
A card that makes someone blow a tutor and then recast a spell they already paid for (at which point it is now again vulnerable to counters) is not bad in my book.
Sure, exile has it's place, but the ability to deal with problem generals in a color like green shouldn't be dismissed.
The card is also certainly better than Nature's Claim, which was my original assertion.
WBRG Saskia the Unyielding
WUB Sharuum the Hegemon
RWU Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest
RG Wort, the Raidmother
WU Brago, King Eternal
B Chainer, Dementia Master
I'm not saying it's bad just that it's not as good as Nature's Claim due to costing twice as much for an effect that might be better (and possibly worse). There's a few niche applications such as Karn and indestructibles but this isn't enough for me to double the mana cost.
One mana is so irrelevant in this format in all but the most cut-throat decks. Surely this list is not based around them; if it is we should have added Hermit Druid to the creature section.
All of the cards I've listed are very common in the format. Blightsteel and Darksteel Plate would be two more. If you are monogreen and you are not playing Deglamer you are pretty much helpless if someone plays Purphoros, God of the Forge. Something that is one of the very few answers in its color to a very common and powerful threat should probably be considered one of the best cards in the format.
Additionally, I can kind of see Praetor's Counsel being cut. It's really good, but it's expensive/often less relevant by the time it is cast.
I would also be happy to second Fade into Antiquity if it is eligible yet and someone would be willing to nominate.
WBRG Saskia the Unyielding
WUB Sharuum the Hegemon
RWU Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest
RG Wort, the Raidmother
WU Brago, King Eternal
B Chainer, Dementia Master
I support Defense of the Heart.
I'm sure once decks get battlecruisery enough Deglamer is a better call in most cases but I don't think the list is that casual. It's not for super cutthroat decks like you said but it's still looks aimed at more competitive decks (white and red are filled with mass LD for example).
If you're in monogreen and run Deglamer as your answer you'll probably still lose since green can't tutor for it. Accessibility is very important for answers otherwise you won't have them when you need them unless you have a lot of redundancy which really isn't an option in this case. I'd rather run Brutalizer Exarch or Duplicant if cards like that are really such an unbeatable problem for me since I can at least tutor for those but really I'd rather try to build my deck to win and accept that I'll lose to random indestructible cards on occasion.
On the whole Nature’s Claim debate, lowering the removal costs to make them more relevant is a definite thing that's going to continue to expand as more metas start running resource denial, Torpor Orb and Humility to cut back and counter all the top-heavy DEN, and ETB abuse lists. As someone with decks playing on both sides of that conflict, I'm finding I'm running both because both are versatile and relatively cheap. I haven't had occasion to care about the tuck effect on Deglamer yet, the Theros gods haven't taken off with the gusto everyone thought they might. I've definitely found situations where I appreciated the cheap cost of Nature's Claim though. No one expects you to do anything with a single green open. Actually though, I don't know I've I think of either of these as Top 50 cards. The strength of a straight up Naturalize effect seems really situational, more so even than Vernal Bloom or Greater Good, without the extra gravy Krosan Grip provides.
Speaking of Greater Good, I used to run it everywhere, but in the interest of lowering the curve I’ve cut out a lot of the big-bodied creatures and now it's become a lot more nuanced. It’s good, sure, but it shines when played in decks with a good number of large sacc-able creatures, and reanimation decks who can cycle their libraries into their yards with little fear of repercussion.
As for which to support, Defense of the Heart vs Burgeoning, I’m supporting Defense of the Heart. Left unanswered, it wins.
Oh Rider, my heart will go on...
I disagree that Deglamer is only good in battlecruiser. If you can pay 7 to play Tooth and Nail you can pay one more mana to tuck an enchantment.
I don't understand this argument. You can not tutor Nature's Claim either. So by your logic you should not run either of them and run creatures which are sorcery speed and even more expensive than the two mana instant you dismissed.
Now I run Duplicant as well as other creature based removal in my green/red deck, so I am not knocking creature based removal. But, saying you shouldn't run an answer because there aren't multiple sources of that answer is ridiculous. So, should we not run Beast Within as well as it can't be tutored and there isn't a whole lot of green creature removal?
But, then you aren't building to win. You are building to lose to common and easily preventable problems. If people want to build that way that is fine, but this is not acceptable to me as a deck builder when it comes to my decks.
WBRG Saskia the Unyielding
WUB Sharuum the Hegemon
RWU Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest
RG Wort, the Raidmother
WU Brago, King Eternal
B Chainer, Dementia Master
This is... misleading. I mean, it is technically true that Deglamer is double the cost of Nature's Claim but lets not forget that it is just... one... mana =_=
It is not really a niche application with indestructible. Considering that graveyard recursion remains more common (than say, repeated tutoring), Deglamer is often a superior option relative to Nature's Claim.
I believe that the Top 50 list should reflect cards that are good in a majority of meta rather than well-developed ones. I mean, I love Brooding Saurians to bits (and I do run it) but in less developed metas (which probably describes the larger EDH meta given that the format is relatively young -- or rather, popularised rather recently), it is just a 4/4 that gets pitched to Survival fairly often.
In younger metas, I think Deglamer would be superior simply because cost efficiency is a secondary concern to its relative versatility -- note that Deglamer is not really irrelevant in developed metas. I would argue that Deglammer is better than Nature's Claim because Deglammer is more useful in less developed metas (which is arguably the majority) and in more developed meta, the utility of Deglammer versus Nature's Claim is more of a toss up.
Edited for brevity but this a thousand times over.
OP is up to date if you want to take it back over from here cryo.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
The most important thing for answers is accessibility, even more than mana cost. You can either run a lot of tutors for your answers or run a lot of redundant answers but answers are pretty useless if you don't have them when you need them. Deglamer and Nature's Claim are as accessible as each other (aside from odd cases like transmute) so for me it comes down to mana cost. I don't think Deglamer is bad at all, I just think Nature's Claim is so good it outclasses it. Running both is perfectly fine but in most cases I'd choose Nature's Claim first.
Beast Within is a good point to bring up. I feel that the difference here is that Beast Within is an extremely flexible answer (it kills almost anything at instant speed!) whereas Deglamer is more focused. Basically what I'm saying is that if you're running monogreen and your meta is made up of Indestructible.dec running Deglamer probably isn't going to help much. You need a different solution.
My intention was not really to be misleading but I can see how it was interpreted that way. 1 mana is a lot when we're talking about answers!
I don't think they need repeated tutoring, just 1 tutor is enough just like 1 piece of recursion is enough. There is also the issue of graveyard hate being far more common than library hate so it's much easier to deal with the problem card in a permanent manner if you send it to their yard (though as you mentioned it is probably easier for them to access as well).
This is the main reason people like Nature's Claim. Lowering your mana curve just makes things go that much more smoothly. I'm definitely a fan of Deglamer, but this usually goes in first. I have found many times that leaving 1 mana open was possible where 2 was not. For the person comparing this to TaN...these are apples/oranges, and you don't have to leave 9 open for a response.
Both cards are good, but Nature's Claim lets me do more on my turn if I leave mana open for a response.
I wasn't comparing the two so much as I was pointing out how ridiculous it is to me to to dismiss Deglamer because it is two mana rather than one. Green is undoubtedly the best color at acceleration, and it is really hard for me to believe this is a problem outside of metas where people are consistently winning within the first few turns of the game.
If you play in a meta where everyone's deck is stuffed to the brim with tutors then I can see why claim might be better.
But, as I said earlier:
1. You making them blow a tutor
2. You making them pay for a spell they already payed for.
3. You are opening the spell up to being countered again and giving control players another shot at it.
4. I would still rather have an answer than have none at all.
(Uhg, I am using lists too much again.)
Even if these things were not so, I would still personally rather have Fade into Antiquity or Krosan Grip.
Or, better yet, a Mimic Vat with an Acidic Slime.
WBRG Saskia the Unyielding
WUB Sharuum the Hegemon
RWU Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest
RG Wort, the Raidmother
WU Brago, King Eternal
B Chainer, Dementia Master
I didn't know anyone dismissed Deglamer. You don't have to win in the first three turns to play a tight game. By tight, I mean not having extra mana all over the place. Green is great at accelerating, but I like to get the most out of my cards and have adopted the philosophy that a lower mana curve usually plays better. Maybe I am wrong in thinking that...but I have been in many games where 1 mana was the difference. I run both cards, but generally consider Claim the better card. I am not a cutthroat player.
NO.
Crop Rotation was lost in the shuffle but was nominated.
RE: Nature's Claim vs. Deglamer: Both of these cards have enough support to make it to Week 2, where we will discuss the merits of each. Please save the debates for next week, as this week we want to focus on cards we want to cut. Thanks.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg