General Re-examining The Basic Land Box

Dom Harvey

Contributor
I don't see why Barrens vs the Thicket cycle is the comparison rather than Barrens vs Terramorphic Expanse. They do very different things. Does Satyr Wayfinder 'obliterate' Impulse?
 
I'm still puzzled over how my off handed remark has gone this far. Ash Barrens is a better card! That's it! If I had to choose one cycling land (the original argument), I'd be more likely to choose Barrens.
 

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
It's not unequivocally better though! Ash Barrens is always a mana source. Cycling lands are a [CIPT land/random card] split card. The whole appeal of cycling lands is that they fight both mana screw and mana flood.


I agree. But that is again a different framing. Ash barrens doesn't need to be unequivocally better than cycling lands to still manage to be the higher power card.

I think we're all reading a bit too much into sigh's use of the term "obliterate." Lets all be cool here.
 

Onderzeeboot

Ecstatic Orb
I'm still puzzled over how my off handed remark has gone this far. Ash Barrens is a better card! That's it! If I had to choose one cycling land (the original argument), I'd be more likely to choose Barrens.
I completely missed that that was the original argument, I merely responded to your statement that Ash Barrens completely obliterates the old cycle lands. My gut response to your side of the argument was basically...

I don't see why Barrens vs the Thicket cycle is the comparison rather than Barrens vs Terramorphic Expanse. They do very different things. Does Satyr Wayfinder 'obliterate' Impulse?
That was my angle, and that's why it didn't make much sense to me that you were trying to prove Ash Barrens is the better cards. It does different things, that's all I was pointing out as well. Also, I still feel the old cyclers are more interesting for the synergies they have with different kinds of cards, but yes, if you are going to include a single card in your BLB to help mana fixing, of course Ash Barrens is the pick!
 
I wasn't using frequency of use as a power level indicator, but as an indication of it being "better". (Grillo put forward the notion that we should look at power level only). The debate wasn't about that originally either. My original supposition was:

I think the {2} cost ones are the best for the BLB cuz they can mitigate both flood and color screw.

whydirt put forward a solid argument that I wasn't correct, and the single-color mana cyclers work better in both cases, flood and screw.

I hyperbolized that Ash Barrens wins the argument of "best for the BLB" solidly now, though it didn't exist to be in contention for the spot back then

RTL, myself included, went nuts???
 

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
RTL, myself included, went nuts???

Unfortunately, because you said that barrens "obliterated" the old cycling lands, it makes everyone stop and instantly start thinking of all the ways that this might not be true.

When your head is filled with 50 ways to disclaim a truth, the truth becomes disclaimed, regardless of what was actual reality.
 
Question to all:
How many of each Basic land do you usually run in your cube? (Let's assume 8 players)

My guess would be in the area of 20 of each Basic land type.
 
Question to all:
How many of each Basic land do you usually run in your cube? (Let's assume 8 players)

My guess would be in the area of 20 of each Basic land type.


I usually run 25 of each- that's enough to hedge the possibility that there is a monocolored player on top of one or two other players who are fighting over the color. I can't imagine youd need more than that, and tbh you're probably fine with 20 of each.
 
I run 30 of each land. This hasn't led to any issues with an abundance of fixing. The only time this was a problem was when I had 25 of each and was running Worldknit for a while. That drafter had picked up Koth of the Hammer and decided to just pick up Mountains as the basic of choice. We were short by like 3 lands that night.
 
Top