Maybe the other guys here can correct me if I'm wrong but I wouldn't say this deck is "better" than Ponza. I would say that it does a similar thing but plays differently. It may have been in this thread (or somewhere else) where someone described Ponza as being a Tempo/Aggro deck that uses Stone Rains and Blood Moons to cut the opponent off mana for a few turns while they land Bloodbraid Elf (also good at finding more tempo cards) and Stormbreath Dragon/Inferno Titan to finish out the game. I think our deck is centered more around using land destruction to lock an opponent out of playing Magic altogether -- destroying all their lands then keeping them from drawing action by placing the lands they still have back on top of their deck with Plow Under and Primal Command lock. Ponza does have tournament results to back up it's competitiveness. But Mono Green Control did get 3rd in an 86-man IQ. That may not be very impressive or could even be just a fluke but I would hope that at the very least it means that the deck can compete against some of the Tiered decks out there.
Yes, I think that going from mono-colored to multi-colored definitely adds more to any deck simply because adding an additional color essentially gains you access to 25% of all the Modern-playable cards that you couldn't play before. Unfortunately with Fetchlands/Shocklands being in Modern, there are very few advantages that mono-colored decks have over multi-colored decks. These being:
Painless mana -- you're not taking damage from Fetches or Shocks so your life total will remain high
Consistency -- you're not having to worry if you'll have the right mana combination to cast your cards
The last point -- Budget -- is most important to a player like me and it seems like was a big component in the creation of the deck. If you look at the original list, you can buy all the cards in the main deck for about $85. Neilson's big finisher for the deck (Cloudthresher) is a 25 cent "junk rare". GR Ponza decks are going for about $750
TL;DR: No, I don't think this is better than Ponza. This deck is similar but a bit different. Yes, I think that adding Red could gain you access to more cards and make the deck more resilient if you choose to go down the multi-colored path. As for the players who want to stick with Mono Green for the (unfortunately small) list of advantages mono-colored decks provide, I think we should aim to try and leverage those advantages -- like looking at cards that require more G in their mana cost or cards that punish multi-color/fetch/non-basic lands.
I'm still not 100% in on Temur Sabertooth just yet. I'm curious to know if you all think that my 'fears' are unjustified..
The age-old test for creatures in Modern -- dies to Bolt. Or has Bolt gone out of style nowadays? Do we just wait to cast it when we have 2 open mana and a creature to bounce?
Wildebeests/Serow can go head-to-head with Tasigur, the Golden Fang/Gurmag Angler. I feel like these are two threats that are easy for an opponent to power out even if we destroy their lands. Or are we just safe having Acidic Slimes/Prime-Time/Cloudthresher to take care of these?
Wildebeests/Serow have Trample. I feel like as we start to pressure opponents into the late-game, they will be more likely to try and throw chump-blockers out until they can stabilize and chipping in 4 damage through a 1/1 sounds like a way to keep them on the back foot.
From 20, Wildebeests/Serow are a 4 turn clock. Sabertooth is a 5 turn clock. Maybe this isn't relevant at all but I personally like to close out a game without giving an opponent time to stabilize.
I do very much agree that the bounce ability being optional is a plus but I'm unsure if Sabertooth is an overall improvement (and I guess I also have a soft spot for Wildebeests/Serow )
As for some of the other talking points brought up:
I agree that if we want to include Red (or really any other color), we're probably just better off playing Ponza. I think this point brings back up the question of "What does Mono Green do better or offer us that Ponza, Green Devotion, or the other strategies don't?" and I think we should start focusing on asking ourselves that. I just recently watched the MTGGoldfish video on Budget Brewing and I think the concept in the video applies to us here -- There are two ways of building/brewing a [budget] deck: 1) Playing a watered down version of an established deck or 2) taking underplayed cards/strategies and utilizing those. What would you guys say our 'mission statement' is as a deck? Where do we outperform Ponza/Green Devotion? What are our underplayed cards/strategies?
I haven't necessarily played the two, but I would think that we're trying to be more oppressive than Ponza and less direct-ramp-into-game-ending-fatties than Green Devotion. I feel like our "underplayed cards/strategies" are surely Plow Under and Stampeding Wildebeests/Stampeding Serow/Temur Sabertooth bouncing our own creatures to keep our opponent under a lock of sorts. I feel like we should somehow use our Mono Green aspect as an advantage, whether it be punishing opponents that use fetchlands/duel lands (like Root Maze or Encroaching Wastes), playing green cards that multi-colored decks can't support/have a hard time supporting (like Cloudthresher or something ridiculous like Primalcrux), or playing cards that reward us for playing basics/Forests (like Early Harvest or Vernal Bloom)
I don't mean to get all 'deep and philosophical' or whatnot but I've just seen some suggestions where I've thought to myself "If we splash Red, won't we basically be Ponza?" and "If we run Nykthos and Garruk won't we basically be Green Devotion?". And I hope I don't come off like I'm putting down anyone's suggestions -- I think those are great cards/combos but I'd just hate for us to be seen as a "watered down version of an established deck". Just my two cents.
Now I'll just go sit in time-out for posting a wall of text..
I'm wondering if I'm including too many mana dorks/acceleration here -- I'm still designing my decklist after Neilson's versions.
I actually like Reclaiming Vines over Bramblecrush. The only thing that it hits that Vines doesn't is Planeswalkers and if we're executing our gameplan well enough, a Planeswalker shouldn't hit the board anyway. If one does, we can always bounce with Primal Command. Or we're already on the losing end of the match. Vines can also hit Artifact and Enchantment creatures as well as creature lands once they're activated; Bramblecrush doesn't. It could very well be correct to do an even split of the two but I feel like we're more likely to need removal from random Artifact/Enchantment/Land creatures (Eidolons/Coursers/Affinity/Inkmoths/Blinkmoths/Colonnades/Tar Pits/Mutavaults/etc..) than Planeswalkers. I could be totally wrong though. lol
I'm starting to warm up to the idea of Primeval Titan as our big beater. I was initially thinking that after 6 mana, the extra lands shouldn't make a difference to us but Titan performs multiple jobs -- grabbing our Treetops for the next turn beats, thinning our deck, and ultimately allowing us to cast multiple P Commands/creatures/LD spells in one turn.
And if you're not testing on untap...you really need to try it. Unless of course you're an MTGO guy who laughs at us freeware plebs.
My freeware platform of choice has been XMage. I recommend checking it out if you haven't heard of it before.
FYI -- I've been tinkering with this deck as well and have been 'lurking' in the thread since its creation. Really enjoying the conversation so far. Keep up the good work and testing. Hoping I can chime in with some suggestions as well as the deck evolves.
Anyway, after building literally hundreds of lists (some of my very early attempts can be seen deep in this thread somewhere) and playing loads of solitaire, free games and 2-mans on MTGO, I decided to take my current list (which I have been honing for a while now)for a run in the casual modern league.
Finished the league 4-1. The list and the win image is below.
I've never played a Belcher deck before but after seeing your list and rundown I decided to give it a whirl.
Before I tried out a few games I just assumed that hitting land drops/getting mana was going to be tough with only 7 Forests in the whole deck but, man, it is pretty damn consistent. Only one time (that I can remember) did I have to mulligan into oblivion. Color me impressed.
I also like how the deck goes into 'beatdown mode' after sideboarding, hoping to take advantage of the opponent likely going into the next game a bit lighter on removal spells.
Just played a couple quick games with it. I think you really want Fiery Tempers in the list. There's a lot of aggro out there - particularly RW decks running stuff like Smuggler's Copter. Maybe consider switching the numbers for the Cathartic Reunion and Tormenting Voice - I ran into a few times where I couldn't afford to discard 2. Either I didn't have 2 in hand or really didn't want to pitch something important.
1
Yes, I think that going from mono-colored to multi-colored definitely adds more to any deck simply because adding an additional color essentially gains you access to 25% of all the Modern-playable cards that you couldn't play before. Unfortunately with Fetchlands/Shocklands being in Modern, there are very few advantages that mono-colored decks have over multi-colored decks. These being:
- Painless mana -- you're not taking damage from Fetches or Shocks so your life total will remain high
- Consistency -- you're not having to worry if you'll have the right mana combination to cast your cards
- Budget -- Dual lands are relatively pricey. Stomping Ground and Wooded Foothills are each around $20/copy
The last point -- Budget -- is most important to a player like me and it seems like was a big component in the creation of the deck. If you look at the original list, you can buy all the cards in the main deck for about $85. Neilson's big finisher for the deck (Cloudthresher) is a 25 cent "junk rare". GR Ponza decks are going for about $750TL;DR: No, I don't think this is better than Ponza. This deck is similar but a bit different. Yes, I think that adding Red could gain you access to more cards and make the deck more resilient if you choose to go down the multi-colored path. As for the players who want to stick with Mono Green for the (unfortunately small) list of advantages mono-colored decks provide, I think we should aim to try and leverage those advantages -- like looking at cards that require more G in their mana cost or cards that punish multi-color/fetch/non-basic lands.
3
- The age-old test for creatures in Modern -- dies to Bolt. Or has Bolt gone out of style nowadays? Do we just wait to cast it when we have 2 open mana and a creature to bounce?
- Wildebeests/Serow can go head-to-head with Tasigur, the Golden Fang/Gurmag Angler. I feel like these are two threats that are easy for an opponent to power out even if we destroy their lands. Or are we just safe having Acidic Slimes/Prime-Time/Cloudthresher to take care of these?
- Wildebeests/Serow have Trample. I feel like as we start to pressure opponents into the late-game, they will be more likely to try and throw chump-blockers out until they can stabilize and chipping in 4 damage through a 1/1 sounds like a way to keep them on the back foot.
- From 20, Wildebeests/Serow are a 4 turn clock. Sabertooth is a 5 turn clock. Maybe this isn't relevant at all but I personally like to close out a game without giving an opponent time to stabilize.
I do very much agree that the bounce ability being optional is a plus but I'm unsure if Sabertooth is an overall improvement (and I guess I also have a soft spot for Wildebeests/SerowAs for some of the other talking points brought up:
I agree that if we want to include Red (or really any other color), we're probably just better off playing Ponza. I think this point brings back up the question of "What does Mono Green do better or offer us that Ponza, Green Devotion, or the other strategies don't?" and I think we should start focusing on asking ourselves that. I just recently watched the MTGGoldfish video on Budget Brewing and I think the concept in the video applies to us here -- There are two ways of building/brewing a [budget] deck: 1) Playing a watered down version of an established deck or 2) taking underplayed cards/strategies and utilizing those. What would you guys say our 'mission statement' is as a deck? Where do we outperform Ponza/Green Devotion? What are our underplayed cards/strategies?
I haven't necessarily played the two, but I would think that we're trying to be more oppressive than Ponza and less direct-ramp-into-game-ending-fatties than Green Devotion. I feel like our "underplayed cards/strategies" are surely Plow Under and Stampeding Wildebeests/Stampeding Serow/Temur Sabertooth bouncing our own creatures to keep our opponent under a lock of sorts. I feel like we should somehow use our Mono Green aspect as an advantage, whether it be punishing opponents that use fetchlands/duel lands (like Root Maze or Encroaching Wastes), playing green cards that multi-colored decks can't support/have a hard time supporting (like Cloudthresher or something ridiculous like Primalcrux), or playing cards that reward us for playing basics/Forests (like Early Harvest or Vernal Bloom)
I don't mean to get all 'deep and philosophical' or whatnot but I've just seen some suggestions where I've thought to myself "If we splash Red, won't we basically be Ponza?" and "If we run Nykthos and Garruk won't we basically be Green Devotion?". And I hope I don't come off like I'm putting down anyone's suggestions -- I think those are great cards/combos but I'd just hate for us to be seen as a "watered down version of an established deck". Just my two cents.
Now I'll just go sit in time-out for posting a wall of text..
1
I'll admit. No shame. Ok, maybe a little..
I personally like going forward with the oppression route as well. I guess that's goes back to the sadist comment above.
Just something I noticed -- Root Maze and Trinisphere don't necessarily play well together so be aware of the interaction.
Edit:
What about a decklist like this?:
17 Forest
3 Treetop Village
Creatures (18):
1 Elvish Mystic
1 Llanowar Elves
4 Arbor Elf
3 Sakura-Tribe Elder
4 Eternal Witness
3 Acidic Slime
2 Primeval Titan
2 Root Maze
4 Utopia Sprawl
Spells (13):
4 Mwonvuli Acid-Moss
2 Reclaiming Vines
3 Plow Under
4 Primal Command
3 Trinisphere
I'm wondering if I'm including too many mana dorks/acceleration here -- I'm still designing my decklist after Neilson's versions.
I actually like Reclaiming Vines over Bramblecrush. The only thing that it hits that Vines doesn't is Planeswalkers and if we're executing our gameplan well enough, a Planeswalker shouldn't hit the board anyway. If one does, we can always bounce with Primal Command. Or we're already on the losing end of the match. Vines can also hit Artifact and Enchantment creatures as well as creature lands once they're activated; Bramblecrush doesn't. It could very well be correct to do an even split of the two but I feel like we're more likely to need removal from random Artifact/Enchantment/Land creatures (Eidolons/Coursers/Affinity/Inkmoths/Blinkmoths/Colonnades/Tar Pits/Mutavaults/etc..) than Planeswalkers. I could be totally wrong though. lol
I'm starting to warm up to the idea of Primeval Titan as our big beater. I was initially thinking that after 6 mana, the extra lands shouldn't make a difference to us but Titan performs multiple jobs -- grabbing our Treetops for the next turn beats, thinning our deck, and ultimately allowing us to cast multiple P Commands/creatures/LD spells in one turn.
2
My freeware platform of choice has been XMage. I recommend checking it out if you haven't heard of it before.
FYI -- I've been tinkering with this deck as well and have been 'lurking' in the thread since its creation. Really enjoying the conversation so far. Keep up the good work and testing. Hoping I can chime in with some suggestions as well as the deck evolves.
1
I've never played a Belcher deck before but after seeing your list and rundown I decided to give it a whirl.
Before I tried out a few games I just assumed that hitting land drops/getting mana was going to be tough with only 7 Forests in the whole deck but, man, it is pretty damn consistent. Only one time (that I can remember) did I have to mulligan into oblivion. Color me impressed.
I also like how the deck goes into 'beatdown mode' after sideboarding, hoping to take advantage of the opponent likely going into the next game a bit lighter on removal spells.
I'm starting to agree with this sentiment
1
Neat deck list - I'll keep trying to test it out!
1
1
1