I have a flex section specifically for cards like this, so it's fairly easy for me.
If I had a more traditional cube, I'd put them in their respective mono color section. For me, classification is all about intent. For example, we seperate gold cards because they can really only (or mostly) be played in those two colors, so they are (again mostly) less flexible than mono cards.
So let's look at something like Yasova Dragonclaw. I have run it as a straight green card. I have run it in decks with literally 2-3 red/blue sources. I have run it in blue decks that barely splash green. Color wise, the card is more flexible than a card that would cost 1GGG, so I really think its home would be mono.
Having them compete with wedge cards is the worst idea imo (for my cube at least) for the same reason gold anf hybrid cards shouldn't compete. I like to keep cards of similar flexibility in similar sections, or else the comparisons become wonky. I wouldn't have a five color card compete for an artifact spot (as an extreme example).
Note, I have a cube group of 3-6 people most nights, so we do a lot of smaller drafts that reward flexibility, so it is possible I value it too high.
I think people are underrating how much of a lightning rod this guys is going to be. Generally, once bears are outclassed on the board they are fairly poor commodities. Would you ever feel comfortable letting this guy live until the opponent gets over four mana?
So versus aggro he is great thanks to the lifelink, and versus slower decks he is great because he is a must remove two drop.
I think Generator Servant is going to be the suprise card of the set for a lot of people. I think the hast clause is actually a mental trap for people, because they A) focus on creatures and B) think about all the creatures with haste already. This distracts from discussions of T3 Plow Unders and Kalonian Hydras and swords onto swinging bodies. Acceleration is always difficult to theory craft because it's easy to underestimate the difference it makes when something arrives early. i know we have all had an awesome card in our hand that we just never managed to get out because the board state kept forcing us to do other things.
Just for fun, I goldfished the that deck tomchaps posted above as an example of a good Metalworker deck. I drew 20 hands (10 cards + an automatic metalworker) and asked whether the Myr would be better. Myr was the better choice 14/20 times, and this was before considering things like board presense or if ramping into plow under was superior to ramping into Trike (I gave Metalworker every win where it would produce 4+ mana on T4 or 5).
Try it for yourself, or go draft a deck on cubetutor and post it and we'll try it out, and see if we can answer what kind of build really prefers Metalworker.
I still am having a lot of trouble wrapping my head around this guy being better than the myr with any consistency. Let's run through the situations:
We all agree it's far worse than the Myr if you have it in your opening hand and no other artifacts.
We all agree it's far worse than the Myr if you want to ramp into non artifacts.
We all agree it's worse than Myr when forced to attack or block.
IWe all agree it's worse than the Myr if you have it in hand with two other artifacts than cost less than 3.
I assume we all agree it's nearly always worse than Myr when topdecked after turn three?
It's better than Myr when Metalworker is in your opening hand and you have either a crazy amount off cheap (but not too cheap) artifacts or two or more expensive artifacts (4+ cost and/or swords).
I find it really difficult to believe that the slight upside of the last situation outweighs the downside of all of the previous ones unless you are really pushing artifact ramp, and thus are running a lot of really high cost targets. I think I would much rather be guaranteed the 2 mana (and be able to use it on walkers and wraths and draw spells), than have to hope a narrow situation so that I can occasionally get 4. Maybe my math or above assumptions are wrong though.
@tomchaps: I can't see the list for some reason, but my first draw had one artifact (a talisman) and it took me seven draws to get to another (a sword). My second opening hand had zero artifacts. I'm sure the card can be crazy, but it's instability in power + fragility are just too much to only support one deck.
We added it for a while, but found it underwhelming. Even in the decks where it is supposed to shine, it just consistently underperformed when compared to straight mana producers or even the 2/2 Myr. Too many things had to go just right for it to be busted.
Maybe if you play in a list with a ton of 5+ cost artifacts? We currently run ten (plus five swords), and they are all fought over.
If you want to push damage through, you will basically need two 5/5s or bigger if they have an instant to play every turn.
Now, maybe building decks that include this card and a bunch of instants isn't that reasonable, but it seems promising.
If I had a more traditional cube, I'd put them in their respective mono color section. For me, classification is all about intent. For example, we seperate gold cards because they can really only (or mostly) be played in those two colors, so they are (again mostly) less flexible than mono cards.
So let's look at something like Yasova Dragonclaw. I have run it as a straight green card. I have run it in decks with literally 2-3 red/blue sources. I have run it in blue decks that barely splash green. Color wise, the card is more flexible than a card that would cost 1GGG, so I really think its home would be mono.
Having them compete with wedge cards is the worst idea imo (for my cube at least) for the same reason gold anf hybrid cards shouldn't compete. I like to keep cards of similar flexibility in similar sections, or else the comparisons become wonky. I wouldn't have a five color card compete for an artifact spot (as an extreme example).
Note, I have a cube group of 3-6 people most nights, so we do a lot of smaller drafts that reward flexibility, so it is possible I value it too high.
So versus aggro he is great thanks to the lifelink, and versus slower decks he is great because he is a must remove two drop.
Seriosuly though, this guy is a beast, both in W/R and W/U
Try it for yourself, or go draft a deck on cubetutor and post it and we'll try it out, and see if we can answer what kind of build really prefers Metalworker.
We all agree it's far worse than the Myr if you have it in your opening hand and no other artifacts.
We all agree it's far worse than the Myr if you want to ramp into non artifacts.
We all agree it's worse than Myr when forced to attack or block.
IWe all agree it's worse than the Myr if you have it in hand with two other artifacts than cost less than 3.
I assume we all agree it's nearly always worse than Myr when topdecked after turn three?
It's better than Myr when Metalworker is in your opening hand and you have either a crazy amount off cheap (but not too cheap) artifacts or two or more expensive artifacts (4+ cost and/or swords).
I find it really difficult to believe that the slight upside of the last situation outweighs the downside of all of the previous ones unless you are really pushing artifact ramp, and thus are running a lot of really high cost targets. I think I would much rather be guaranteed the 2 mana (and be able to use it on walkers and wraths and draw spells), than have to hope a narrow situation so that I can occasionally get 4. Maybe my math or above assumptions are wrong though.
Maybe if you play in a list with a ton of 5+ cost artifacts? We currently run ten (plus five swords), and they are all fought over.