There have been a lot of good lands coming out these past sets and I haven't really revisited my lands in a while. I am currently using:
Fetch, Dual, Shock, Manland/Horizon land + 5 Prismatic Vista (10.7% of the cube).
This has been playing well, but it's not super exciting and I would really like to have all the manlands. I like the 15 "fetches" as they fuel the GY and have good synergy with some cards.
I was thinking of expanding the number of lands by 5 (11.9%) and there are a few options to explore. If possible, I want to push aggro decks (so lands that damage the opponent are nice, as are having some untapped lands).
1. Fetch, Shock, Manland, Cycle/Horizon, 5 Triomes + 5 Prismatic Vista
Pros: 15 fetches, 9 cycling lands and 6 Horizon lands to mitigate flood.
Cons: Only 19 fetchable lands, but Triomes increase possible combination, 19 lands ETB tapped.
2. Fetch, Shock, Shock, Manland, 5 Triomes + 5 Prismatic Vista
Pros: 15 fetches, 25 fetchable lands, 5 triomes to mitage flood. 15 lands ETB tapped.
Cons: Not many late game lands.
3. Fetch, Shock, Shock, Manland, Cycle/Horizon
Pros: 14 ETB tapped lands,
Cons: 10 fetches.
4. Fetch, Fetch, Shock, shock, Manland
Pros: 20 fetches, 20 fetchable lands. 10 lands ETB tapped.
Cons: No horizons or cycling lands.
I'm leaning towards options 1 and 3 because I like the manlands + horizon lands. Not sure how to rate the Triomes at higher power level.
Any ideas or options I missed?
I think your best option is actually:
10 Fetches
20 Shocks
5 Ally Manlands
5 Enemy Horizon Lands
5 Triomes
5 Five-Color/Utility Lands (City of Brass,Mana Confluence, Prismatic Vista, Mutavault Etc.)
The idea here is to keep the full Fetch/Shock mana base together while still including manlands, horizon lands, and triome lands for fun and value. Since you want to push aggro, cutting down on ETB tapped lands is going to be key to this mana base construction. While having lands that can be cycled or animated in the late game are nice for many decks, entering the battlefield tapped is hostile towards aggro. If I'm on Red Deck Wins, ideally I want to be starting by playing a one-drop of some sort on turn 1 (even if it's a noncreatue card like Bonesplitter). If I have to play a tapped
Needle Spires, I'm putting myself behind. Therefore, it is sensical to skew an aggressive manabase towards lands that can be played untapped.
One way to achieve a manabase's untapped (get it?!) potential is to split cycles where relevant. The ally and enemy manlands were produced during very different periods of Magic design and development. The ally manland cycle was designed during a high-point in Magic's power level. They were meant to exist in a high-powered format full of Cascade spells and
Jace, the Mind Sculptor. Meanwhile, the enemy manlands were designed for an intentionally powered- down set to help transition standard away from the value-oriented RTR-Theros-Khans era of standard. As such, the enemy manland cycle is extremely weak compared to the majority of their allied counterparts. None of the enemy lands are able to hit as hard or do as much as their allied counterparts. The only Battle for Zendikar man land which even comes to it's worldwake counterparts is
Shambling Vent, and that's only because lifelink is a good ability. What this means is that cutting the enemy manlands isn't a very big loss for the cube environment as a whole.
Celestial Colonnade is a win condition for a U/W deck.
Lumbering Falls is usually just doing a
Woodland Stream impression in a U/G deck.
Similarly, the allied cycling lands are not very powerful in most decks. While they are useful in fixing mana and smoothing draws in control decks, I would argue that they are actively bad in many aggro decks, and not as good as the ally manlands in midrange strategies. While they are fetchable, they are worse at fixing than the triome lands and they don't provide the flexibility of the shocklands. A control deck would rather have a dual land that gives them the flexibility to enter untapped than an always tapped dual that can occasionally act as a cantrip. The only reason this rule doesn't apply to the triome lands is because they are so insanely good at helping decks fix mana. Triomes are the
best tri-lands, the "bicycle" lands are mediocre dual lands at best.
Conversely, the Horizon Lands are great lands for aggro decks. While having to pay life for mana is an unfortunate drawback, the ability to recycle the land for a card makes up for this. Aggro decks don't have to worry about life total anyway in the majority of their matches, so painful lands aren't as big of a deal here. They'd certainly rather waste a little bit of life than waste an entire turn dealing with a tapped land. In addition, the Enemy Colors generally have a more aggressive slant than their allied counterparts. The only enemy color pair which doesn't greatly benefit from Horizon lands is Simic ramp, and those decks don't mind having a re-draw in the late game. Meanwhile, Boros and Orzhov can both play great traditional aggro strategies, Izzet can easily play very quick prowess builds, and Golgari decks really want to be playing a mana dork on turn 1 when they can.
If you're ok with it, using the Manland/Horizon Land slots on an "anarchy slot" would also be a good use of space. While
Celestial Colonnade,
Creeping Tar Pit, and
Raging Ravine are great for their respective color pairs,
Lavaclaw Reaches and
Stirring Wildwood are only ok.
Waterlogged Grove also isn't the best card ever in Blue/Green. Replacing these cards with
Sulfurous Springs (With the Ice Age art,
Duh!),
Horizon Canopy, and
Temple of Mystery would be a defensible position.
Please note that everything I've said here is backed up with gameplay data. The enemy manlands are way worse than the Horizon lands in their color pairs, and the ally cycling lands never carried their weight when I've tested them. I cut the cycle lands a long time ago, and the enemy manlands are what I plan to cut if I can ever get the 3 enemy fetches I'm missing.
You're desperately missing two:
