It is, my point is simply that cards can clearly be tier 1 (or just plain degenerate and broken) while still being creature and board dependent. Not to bring MBS into this one, too, but Phyrexian Rebirth was absolutely tier 1 and was dependent on pretty specific scenarios. A six mana wrath was pretty terrible if it just left you with a 1/1 or 2/2, so you it wasn't anywhere near tier 1 if they just have a creature or two. It was worthless when you were ahead (Arcbond is not - there are going to be times when you're ahead that it's basically a one-sided wrath that ends the game outright).
It's also not entirely dependent on creatures. It can be an instant speed two card one-sided wrath if you've got something like Bring Low with it. It also has the advantage of being reach. They're at six and swing with a 6/7 - you chump it with your last remaining 1/1 token and they lose.
Neither do I, but the tiers are based on comparing the cards to uncommons, not to each other. There's no case needed for why Arcbond is comparable in power to tier 2 rares, or any rares. It's a meaningless distinction. The point of the thread is to identify picks that might actually come up in a draft, such as Arcbond vs Pyro. So would people pick Arcbond over Pyro?
I would not. I would take Pyrotechnics over Arcbond because of the complete lack of work required. I actually drafted an Arcbond not too long ago and I think it sat in my hand multiple times during the draft without getting played. It's not as though it's super easy to get engineer a scenario where it's great for you. On the other hand, Pyro has been good to great for me every time I've played it. Blowing up a morph and a X/2 is huge and there are times where you win just due to the Lava Axe mode that you could choose if you want.
Of course, there is a small caveat in that scenario, similar to what can happen with Temur Sabertooth vs. Whisperwood Elemental, where regardless of your pick, the person to your left will think the color may be open.
So you really have to look at the average. It has way more upside than Pyrotechnics or a wrath. It's got serious potential when behind, at parity or ahead. It can be good against big guys or tons of small guys. Pyrotechnics is similar. It's not accurate to call it a master at anything - a 5 mana burn 5 is bad (Lava Axe), a five mana spell to kill a couple small guys isn't good and a five mana spell for one creature should be much more powerful than 5 damage. They're both jacks of all trade that can regularly just not be quite enough because they have so much variability. Arcbond has far more potential to outright win games or come back from well behind for less mana, with the tradeoff of not being as good at some other times. Pyro is almost always better at parity, Arcbond is almost always better when well ahead or well behind (unless you're just dying to one 4-5 toughness guy). Arcbond is better if you have bigger creatures on average or it's a really late game board stall. Pyro is probably better in a better deck, while Arcbond is better at helping win games with a worse deck. I think it's a toss-up, honestly. Maybe it should be tier 2.5, since I don't think anyone could possibly fault you for taking one over the other.
I think a huge problem with evaluating cards like Arcbond is that must of us aren't perfect players or anywhere near it and cards like it are huge traps. You pass easy two for ones and other very good plays, waiting for the complete blowout. I've done it, you've done it, LSV has done it.
To get more than parity with arcbound you need to have two-fewer creatures on the board and have all creatures die as the result of arcbound. (Plus you must actually have one creature in play and your opponent must not have mana up + removal.) The ceiling for arcbound may be high, but it's a lot harder to get to the correct board state and you probably need to soak up a lot damage previously to get to that board state.
It is better to get back from a near loss, when you're both empty-handed and your opponent is about to win (but not win this very turn! Yet another drawback, you need to let him resolve damage on you, too.)
If you're well behind, your life total still needs to be high enough for Arcbond to be OK to use. If you're at 5 and your boardwipe Arcbond is for 5...
Pierre, that's certainly not at all the case. I'm playing Temur - you're playing Mardu. You have an army of tokens and a couple evasive guys. I have one or two big dudes. Unless I'm literally dying from the alpha this turn, I block your biggest guy, Arcbond my own creature and get a one sided wrath. I can also use it to attack and do the same thing. You're probably throwing away a 1/1 to prevent 5 or 6 damage unless that one guy is going to be lethal on the counterattack - one sided board wipe and I didn't have to absorb a ton of damage to do it. It's not hard to get a good board state, it's more a matter of blocking or attacking correctly to turn that board state into a blowout. Unless you have no creatures at all or they're killing you with evasive guys you can't block and you don't have another burn spell to combo with it, there are very few scenarios where Arcbond can't be used to gain a serious advantage. Even if all of their creatures are giants, as long as you are capable of blocking their biggest, you get to wrath at instant speed when they attack or trick them into eating one of your guys on your turn to preserve life. I don't understand why people think it's so challenging to at least use it as a wrath, if not to make it a complete and total game ender. Its actual weakness is removal, not having a time to use it effectively.
Pulse, if you're well behind on board and that low on life, Pyrotechnics isn't winning you the game either.
Arcbond is in my view an unusual enough card that I would prefer to reserve my judgment on it.
I played it once so far, casting it on my opponent's blocking Highland Game and killing every creature on board including my Woolly Loxodon, so that next turn I could Arrow Storm for the win (with also Crater's Claw in my hand just in case). That play cost me card advantage but it was a winning play. Ironically, I sideboarded it out in game 2 because of the matchup in which almost all of my opponent's creatures had high toughness (and that Loxodon was my only huge creature); my opponent completely declined to attack for the win on a turn fearing that card and my small blocker but he won later anyway because he attacked the next turn and I just had lands in my hand.
With any sweeper it is important in my view to plan for it. Just casting all of your creatures and then hoping for an advantage by casting Arcbond is not the way to go, setting up a 2-or-better for 1 takes some prep work. Sometimes that prep work does not work out or just can't be done, but the auto-game-win potential is big enough that it may be well worth it. I will continue to take Arcbond over most uncommons but I would guess my view will change on it one way or the other as I watch draft videos (LSV, Marshall, and others) and hopefully get to play with it again.
It's definitely conditional but I don't think that conditions to get a favorable 2-for-1 or 3-for-2 are all that difficult (especially when you can have one of your high toughness creatures survive) as long as you don't wait too late when your opponent has mana up.
I would be very interested in finding out who takes Abzan Beastmaster over Valorous Stance. Stance does exactly what you want it to do 100% of the time and is always worth the splash. Can everyone say the same for Beastmaster? I would vote to put Stance in his position.
Yeah, that's probably fair. I got pwned by it a few times at the prerelease and subsequently overvalued it pretty hard. I've been thinking about it for a while about how to fix the tiers without completely resetting them, based on a better evaluation of uncommons. Thing is that Scaleguard, Stance, and Pyro are all so close in power level that it wouldn't really be meaningful to separate tiers by them; there'd be no agreement at all. So I guess think of tier 3 as stuff that's better than Beastmaster, but not necessarily better than Stance or Scaleguard? I'll edit the post to reflect that.
I would be very interested in finding out who takes Abzan Beastmaster over Valorous Stance. Stance does exactly what you want it to do 100% of the time and is always worth the splash. Can everyone say the same for Beastmaster? I would vote to put Stance in his position.
What does Valorous Stance do when you are getting beat down by a couple of Mystic of the Hidden Way/Jeskai Windscouts that you can't race?
Also, for this topic in general some people have Elite Scaleguard as the best non-rare as opposed to the Sabertooth.
In the best case scenario Elite Scaleguard plays like a Torrent Elemental (the best card in FRF limited). In the worse case it's a bigger Master of Diversion, which ain't too bad.
So, I've done a handful of drafts since my last posting, and I'd say there's a handful of cards that I've had p1p1 that I sort of question their draft order in a grand pick order situation. Mostly, I'm discussing the smaller 2-3 drops I've gotten p1p1 vs. Ugin. So, I've gotten mardu strike leader , soulfire grand master , and jeskai infiltrator p1p1s as well as Ugin among drafts I've done since before. I've done more, but the debates are really for these "types" of cards vs a super late game bomb like Ugin. I dunno, and this isn't necessarily results oriented thinking because I 2-1ed with the leader, infiltrator, and ugin drafts. I 0-3ed the soulfire draft! ehhhh........ I digress.
The point is, if I have a foil infiltrator and an ugin sitting in my p1p1 theoretically, it would be incredibly hard for me to not take the ugin. Each game that ugin was cast, I won the game. I know alot of cards have the capability of having that power, but this card really just feels like unless you are within burn range or "have" to cast him with the risk of it being countered, meaning you are so far behind you have to risk that against sultai or jeskai etc, you are going to stabilize and win the match. Because, if you can't kill whatever threat necessary with his +2, you are going to at the very least equalize the board with his minus ability, with the potential of bringing back up his loyalty from there on out unless a valley dasher or burn shows up after nuking their woolly loxodons away, or something extreme.
Also, from the deck building perspective, it's hard to compete being as open as you are drafting a colorless planeswalker p1p1. Strike leader and infiltrator were neutered in both my drafts a few times from not being able to gain their ability without the tradeoff of sacrificing them, which is obviously fair considering they are 3 drops, but it still makes me question taking a "solid" 3 drop over a colorless 8 mana bomb.
Now, I know that I'm "wrong" because I haven't found a single source that ranks ugin above all 3 of these creatures, especially not infiltrator. So I am just wondering whats the draft objective once you get any of these quality 2-3 drops p1p1 in order to bring them out to the fullest that makes them better than an Ugin p1p1. Maybe Ugin just seems easier to build around since you pretty much make the best durdling ramping biding your time type deck, or just slap it in as a parity destroyer that makes you win turn 12+, etc. Thanks for any help or advice.
I think it's pretty much something I can mostly agree with, naturally with some minor variations. I'd drop Temur War Shaman and Jeskai Infiltrator down a category in my own ranking (I see the potential, but just feel both take a while and call for some often to get really going), and maybe have Silumgar up in the low end of the highest category.
I strongly disagree with putting Yasova at the top tier, too. Unimpressive stats and an ability that really isn't that powerful, despite making you skip your turn generally early on. I've had it played against me more times than you might think given its rarity and I've never once seen it do anything noteworthy or even come close to it, even without killing it. I like his rankings for the most part, though.
So, I've done a handful of drafts since my last posting, and I'd say there's a handful of cards that I've had p1p1 that I sort of question their draft order in a grand pick order situation. Mostly, I'm discussing the smaller 2-3 drops I've gotten p1p1 vs. Ugin. So, I've gotten mardu strike leader , soulfire grand master , and jeskai infiltrator p1p1s as well as Ugin among drafts I've done since before. I've done more, but the debates are really for these "types" of cards vs a super late game bomb like Ugin. I dunno, and this isn't necessarily results oriented thinking because I 2-1ed with the leader, infiltrator, and ugin drafts. I 0-3ed the soulfire draft! ehhhh........ I digress.
The point is, if I have a foil infiltrator and an ugin sitting in my p1p1 theoretically, it would be incredibly hard for me to not take the ugin. Each game that ugin was cast, I won the game. I know alot of cards have the capability of having that power, but this card really just feels like unless you are within burn range or "have" to cast him with the risk of it being countered, meaning you are so far behind you have to risk that against sultai or jeskai etc, you are going to stabilize and win the match. Because, if you can't kill whatever threat necessary with his +2, you are going to at the very least equalize the board with his minus ability, with the potential of bringing back up his loyalty from there on out unless a valley dasher or burn shows up after nuking their woolly loxodons away, or something extreme.
Also, from the deck building perspective, it's hard to compete being as open as you are drafting a colorless planeswalker p1p1. Strike leader and infiltrator were neutered in both my drafts a few times from not being able to gain their ability without the tradeoff of sacrificing them, which is obviously fair considering they are 3 drops, but it still makes me question taking a "solid" 3 drop over a colorless 8 mana bomb.
Now, I know that I'm "wrong" because I haven't found a single source that ranks ugin above all 3 of these creatures, especially not infiltrator. So I am just wondering whats the draft objective once you get any of these quality 2-3 drops p1p1 in order to bring them out to the fullest that makes them better than an Ugin p1p1. Maybe Ugin just seems easier to build around since you pretty much make the best durdling ramping biding your time type deck, or just slap it in as a parity destroyer that makes you win turn 12+, etc. Thanks for any help or advice.
If games started with 8 mana in play, then Ugin would be the best card in the set, hands down. He has the strongest effect on the board of anything that's available and if you get him out, you will pretty much just win the game on the spot. That's all true. But you don't start the game with 8 mana in play. In fact, in a hefty chunk of games, you never hit 8 mana at all, and in those game, Ugin is just a brick, sitting in your hand weighing you down. Even if you do eventually hit 8 mana, there's no guarantee that the winner of the game will still be in question at that point; if you already have the game locked up enough to hit 8 mana in the first place, there's a solid chance that you don't need him to win and there's no reason to play him other than for kicks.
That said, he *is* still a bomb. There are still plenty of games where he's powerful and relevant, and he's worth 1st picking out of most packs. But his mana cost is a highly relevant drawback that does mean there are more reliably good cards in the set.
Well, here's where maybe the "meta" could matter... if I am still in the swiss queues maybe decks overall aren't as fast, since they in the long run are probably not built as well than in say 8-4s. Because, I actually feel like many of my matches end up at 8 or more mana, and that's not only counting decks that I am going for a longer game. I find that in parity situations it seems like I'll end up with 11-12 of my lands out easily, especially if I run 18. Especially for a novice like me who most likely has deckbuilding and drafting flaws galore. So, that's why I "know" ugin isn't as good because I'm sure %'s of how good cards are are based on a higher level player than me. I watched my replays, when I had ugin, the only match I lost I didn't see ugin at all, two of the games were parity and ugin uprooted that, and the 3rd game I was behind but killed a 3/3 aven surveyor which led my return back to stabilization since that was the tiebreaker creature getting to swing. So it just "seems" like its raw power is off the charts to the point where it's worth hoping to just reach 8 in a random match and have your win % skyrocket, without too much deck building expertise necessary.
One card, which I see is now close within the tier, that I would not take over ugin for sure is soulfire. I'd take strike leader or infiltrator because they are essentially x for 1's on sticks when you deal with them, but soulfire requires some luck in the draft for it to turn out better than Ugin I feel like. If you get sandblasts and burn then yea the card would be awesome, but by then if you are also doing buybacks, you are almost at 8 mana anyway. And,if you are married to the colors to get value out of the buyback, which for lifelink purposes in khans limited is either R/W with small blue splash since blue instants/sorceries aren't lifelinking so you'd most likely prefer r/w damage spells, or, you end up mardu, which then has harsh sustenance and douse, which is indeed great, but these cards need to get drafted too and could be risky depending on how early of picks they are and how the colors are playing out. So, in a way, I almost find soulfire as a more constricting card than ugin. I know it's 2/2 lifelink on it's own so it's never bad as long as you're running white as color 1/2, but I feel like the odds of "squandering" the potential of those two cards falls in soulfire's favor (or lack thereof) and can be just a better tempoed smoke teller sometimes. I'm sure I will eventually have a match where Ugin had to sit in my hand as I was getting beat down, but in a way, those were the games I was going to lose anyway, until my skill gets better and make better quicker decks where that situation is null and void possibly. In my draft, and I know this is results oriented, but I only ended up with 3 burn spells by the end of the draft and I was indeed seeking them out, harsh, bring low, and collateral damage. I'll admit the whole deck was a nightmare, but the draft went poorly so it was expected. I ended up W/R/b with lackluster burn, expensive removal otherwise like smites and serpents, and weak midrange creatures, so the deck was horrendous as well. So, the draft went poorly, I'll have to look at the draftlog to see how much better that particular draft could have went if I wouldn't have focused on the soulfire as much early on. I honestly don't think I got passed too many good things however.
I also know that this argument are for cards only 2 slots away, but I like discussing this only because it's helping me learn why cards are better than others. So, just assume my messages take into account an understanding that I could be entirely wrong and am hoping to learn why!
Even if you regularly get to 8 lands, it still is a drawback. For starters, you still aren't going to get there every time and every game decided before 8 lands that you draw him was effectively a mulligan. Even if you get to 8+, if you start with it in your hand or draw it early, you're effectively down a card for the first ten or so turns of the game, reducing your options and maybe falling behind (even, perhaps, far enough behind that Ugin won't save you). Finally, even if you get to 8 mana and the game hasn't been decided, you're probably going to win with him, but there's a chance that his cost could still hurt you, given that it means you won't be doing anything else with that turn. Like if you're clocking them with Archer's Parapet or building an Outlast army, you're taking a turn off to play him. Certainly a worthwhile tradeoff, but still a weakness. Practically, you're probably going to draft and play him every single time you open him since most of us aren't playing in anything competitive enough that it's worth passing $20, but if you do draft Mardu Strike Leader, you're probably more likely to win a higher percentage of your games since you'll play him and let him take over so much more frequently.
It's worth stressing again that Ugin is still great. He'll still win the game for you a lot of times you draw him. But at 8-mana, he kind of has to in order to be playable at all, to balance out the games where your deck craps out on you and never gives you the chance to play him. 2-drops do not have this issue. Soulfire Grand Master is a *vastly* lower impact card than Ugin is, no question, but you are basically guaranteed to get *some* impact from him every game you draw him, because he's cheap.
Think of it like stats in an RPG. Ugin has strength 10, reliability 5. Soulfire Grand Master has strength 5, reliability 10. Which is better? Who knows?
(Also, the rankings within the tiers are alphabetical, there are no card slots. No one is saying Ugin is a better pick than SGM.)
Haha oops... well I missed that part sorry. I guess now it looks to be obviously alphabetical. That makes many of my arguments about cards within the same tiers null and void, although discussing them was still helpful.
Color me a bit surprised at Mistfire Adept. I like the card but I don't understand how it's that high. I note that both Scaleguard and Adept prevent blocking, which kind of points to a certain type of deck preference which may be coloring opinions.
Besides tempo being more important now than in triple Khans, I think strength of the underlying colors may factor in too. Blue and white fairly clearly have the best commons, while green's are lackluster and red's are rather one-dimensional.
That was my guess as well, that Sabretooth was downgraded by Karsten because green suxors. Remember that there are areas in the ranking where the power level is pretty flat.
There are 15 cards on his list between Scaleguard and Tasigur and 13 between Scaleguard and Sabretooth. In a vacuum those cards are pretty close in power level (scale guard being a ~4/5 for 5 that taps someone on attack, Tasigur being a 4/5 DELVE for 5 with "4 mana draw a spell")
So, this is pretty interesting and I just noticed it because of this list and considering things, but I have played a ton of FTF online, and have opened zero Pyrotechnics, Wild Slash, or Temur Sabretooth.
I have had wild Slash played agianst me once, and have yet to see anyone even play Pyrotechnics or Sabertooth against me. I would guess that I have done at least 20 drafts. I also have not opened any of the Mythics (I'm not sure. I know I ended up with a Temporal Trespass in one draft, but it wheeled and I'm not sure if I opened it or not). Now, I'm not complaining, as during this time I've opened Citadel Siege 4 times, but it feels very odd that I'm just not seeing these cards, either in my pile or on the other side of the table.
For what it's worth, I think Citadel Siege is Pack Rat/Jitte level good, i.e. in contention for most dominant rares ever contextually. In the 4 8-4s I have opened it in, I am 12-0. I have not lost a game that I cast it. I've chose Khans all but one time that I cast it, and that time I was facing down the 4/5 Prowess bounce when attacks guy and wondering how I was going to possibly win, until after about 5 minutes of tanking I realized that Siege had a second mode, that was also ridiculously good. Ironcially, I've played against it only once and won the game that it was played in, but it didn't come down turn 4 and I was able to chain a bunch of Crippling Chills, Pressure points, and Kill Shots to squeak out the win.
It's certainly the best limited card in this format.
Anyone who played with that drake 3/3 flyer for 5 in a recent core set knew just how game ending anything that gives another creature flying repeatedly can be.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's also not entirely dependent on creatures. It can be an instant speed two card one-sided wrath if you've got something like Bring Low with it. It also has the advantage of being reach. They're at six and swing with a 6/7 - you chump it with your last remaining 1/1 token and they lose.
I don't think it's a stretch to call it tier 2.
Of course, there is a small caveat in that scenario, similar to what can happen with Temur Sabertooth vs. Whisperwood Elemental, where regardless of your pick, the person to your left will think the color may be open.
The fact that Arcbond is not as reliable as a Wrath when you want it as a Wrath says it all.
When you want it as a spot removal you may find 2-1'ing or even 3-1'ing yourself.
When you want it to finish your opponent/s it may not finish the job.
Jack of all trades, but master of none.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
I think a huge problem with evaluating cards like Arcbond is that must of us aren't perfect players or anywhere near it and cards like it are huge traps. You pass easy two for ones and other very good plays, waiting for the complete blowout. I've done it, you've done it, LSV has done it.
It is better to get back from a near loss, when you're both empty-handed and your opponent is about to win (but not win this very turn! Yet another drawback, you need to let him resolve damage on you, too.)
Pulse, if you're well behind on board and that low on life, Pyrotechnics isn't winning you the game either.
I played it once so far, casting it on my opponent's blocking Highland Game and killing every creature on board including my Woolly Loxodon, so that next turn I could Arrow Storm for the win (with also Crater's Claw in my hand just in case). That play cost me card advantage but it was a winning play. Ironically, I sideboarded it out in game 2 because of the matchup in which almost all of my opponent's creatures had high toughness (and that Loxodon was my only huge creature); my opponent completely declined to attack for the win on a turn fearing that card and my small blocker but he won later anyway because he attacked the next turn and I just had lands in my hand.
With any sweeper it is important in my view to plan for it. Just casting all of your creatures and then hoping for an advantage by casting Arcbond is not the way to go, setting up a 2-or-better for 1 takes some prep work. Sometimes that prep work does not work out or just can't be done, but the auto-game-win potential is big enough that it may be well worth it. I will continue to take Arcbond over most uncommons but I would guess my view will change on it one way or the other as I watch draft videos (LSV, Marshall, and others) and hopefully get to play with it again.
It's definitely conditional but I don't think that conditions to get a favorable 2-for-1 or 3-for-2 are all that difficult (especially when you can have one of your high toughness creatures survive) as long as you don't wait too late when your opponent has mana up.
Signature courtesy of Rivenor and Miraculous Recovery
EDH Altered Cards by Galspanic (Seriously, this guy's awesome.)
My Pauper Cube
Tapped-Out Simulator
My Trade Thread
-Decks-
Commander:
GWR Rith, the Awakener RWG
U Kami of the Crescent Moon U (Flagship Deck)
BW Teysa, Orzhov Scion WB
Under Construction:
UBR Crosis, the Purger RBU
Cube:
WUBRGX Pauper XGRBUW
What does Valorous Stance do when you are getting beat down by a couple of Mystic of the Hidden Way/Jeskai Windscouts that you can't race?
Also, for this topic in general some people have Elite Scaleguard as the best non-rare as opposed to the Sabertooth.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
The point is, if I have a foil infiltrator and an ugin sitting in my p1p1 theoretically, it would be incredibly hard for me to not take the ugin. Each game that ugin was cast, I won the game. I know alot of cards have the capability of having that power, but this card really just feels like unless you are within burn range or "have" to cast him with the risk of it being countered, meaning you are so far behind you have to risk that against sultai or jeskai etc, you are going to stabilize and win the match. Because, if you can't kill whatever threat necessary with his +2, you are going to at the very least equalize the board with his minus ability, with the potential of bringing back up his loyalty from there on out unless a valley dasher or burn shows up after nuking their woolly loxodons away, or something extreme.
Also, from the deck building perspective, it's hard to compete being as open as you are drafting a colorless planeswalker p1p1. Strike leader and infiltrator were neutered in both my drafts a few times from not being able to gain their ability without the tradeoff of sacrificing them, which is obviously fair considering they are 3 drops, but it still makes me question taking a "solid" 3 drop over a colorless 8 mana bomb.
Now, I know that I'm "wrong" because I haven't found a single source that ranks ugin above all 3 of these creatures, especially not infiltrator. So I am just wondering whats the draft objective once you get any of these quality 2-3 drops p1p1 in order to bring them out to the fullest that makes them better than an Ugin p1p1. Maybe Ugin just seems easier to build around since you pretty much make the best durdling ramping biding your time type deck, or just slap it in as a parity destroyer that makes you win turn 12+, etc. Thanks for any help or advice.
I strongly disagree with putting Yasova at the top tier, too. Unimpressive stats and an ability that really isn't that powerful, despite making you skip your turn generally early on. I've had it played against me more times than you might think given its rarity and I've never once seen it do anything noteworthy or even come close to it, even without killing it. I like his rankings for the most part, though.
If games started with 8 mana in play, then Ugin would be the best card in the set, hands down. He has the strongest effect on the board of anything that's available and if you get him out, you will pretty much just win the game on the spot. That's all true. But you don't start the game with 8 mana in play. In fact, in a hefty chunk of games, you never hit 8 mana at all, and in those game, Ugin is just a brick, sitting in your hand weighing you down. Even if you do eventually hit 8 mana, there's no guarantee that the winner of the game will still be in question at that point; if you already have the game locked up enough to hit 8 mana in the first place, there's a solid chance that you don't need him to win and there's no reason to play him other than for kicks.
That said, he *is* still a bomb. There are still plenty of games where he's powerful and relevant, and he's worth 1st picking out of most packs. But his mana cost is a highly relevant drawback that does mean there are more reliably good cards in the set.
One card, which I see is now close within the tier, that I would not take over ugin for sure is soulfire. I'd take strike leader or infiltrator because they are essentially x for 1's on sticks when you deal with them, but soulfire requires some luck in the draft for it to turn out better than Ugin I feel like. If you get sandblasts and burn then yea the card would be awesome, but by then if you are also doing buybacks, you are almost at 8 mana anyway. And,if you are married to the colors to get value out of the buyback, which for lifelink purposes in khans limited is either R/W with small blue splash since blue instants/sorceries aren't lifelinking so you'd most likely prefer r/w damage spells, or, you end up mardu, which then has harsh sustenance and douse, which is indeed great, but these cards need to get drafted too and could be risky depending on how early of picks they are and how the colors are playing out. So, in a way, I almost find soulfire as a more constricting card than ugin. I know it's 2/2 lifelink on it's own so it's never bad as long as you're running white as color 1/2, but I feel like the odds of "squandering" the potential of those two cards falls in soulfire's favor (or lack thereof) and can be just a better tempoed smoke teller sometimes. I'm sure I will eventually have a match where Ugin had to sit in my hand as I was getting beat down, but in a way, those were the games I was going to lose anyway, until my skill gets better and make better quicker decks where that situation is null and void possibly. In my draft, and I know this is results oriented, but I only ended up with 3 burn spells by the end of the draft and I was indeed seeking them out, harsh, bring low, and collateral damage. I'll admit the whole deck was a nightmare, but the draft went poorly so it was expected. I ended up W/R/b with lackluster burn, expensive removal otherwise like smites and serpents, and weak midrange creatures, so the deck was horrendous as well. So, the draft went poorly, I'll have to look at the draftlog to see how much better that particular draft could have went if I wouldn't have focused on the soulfire as much early on. I honestly don't think I got passed too many good things however.
I also know that this argument are for cards only 2 slots away, but I like discussing this only because it's helping me learn why cards are better than others. So, just assume my messages take into account an understanding that I could be entirely wrong and am hoping to learn why!
Think of it like stats in an RPG. Ugin has strength 10, reliability 5. Soulfire Grand Master has strength 5, reliability 10. Which is better? Who knows?
(Also, the rankings within the tiers are alphabetical, there are no card slots. No one is saying Ugin is a better pick than SGM.)
There are 15 cards on his list between Scaleguard and Tasigur and 13 between Scaleguard and Sabretooth. In a vacuum those cards are pretty close in power level (scale guard being a ~4/5 for 5 that taps someone on attack, Tasigur being a 4/5 DELVE for 5 with "4 mana draw a spell")
I have had wild Slash played agianst me once, and have yet to see anyone even play Pyrotechnics or Sabertooth against me. I would guess that I have done at least 20 drafts. I also have not opened any of the Mythics (I'm not sure. I know I ended up with a Temporal Trespass in one draft, but it wheeled and I'm not sure if I opened it or not). Now, I'm not complaining, as during this time I've opened Citadel Siege 4 times, but it feels very odd that I'm just not seeing these cards, either in my pile or on the other side of the table.
For what it's worth, I think Citadel Siege is Pack Rat/Jitte level good, i.e. in contention for most dominant rares ever contextually. In the 4 8-4s I have opened it in, I am 12-0. I have not lost a game that I cast it. I've chose Khans all but one time that I cast it, and that time I was facing down the 4/5 Prowess bounce when attacks guy and wondering how I was going to possibly win, until after about 5 minutes of tanking I realized that Siege had a second mode, that was also ridiculously good. Ironcially, I've played against it only once and won the game that it was played in, but it didn't come down turn 4 and I was able to chain a bunch of Crippling Chills, Pressure points, and Kill Shots to squeak out the win.
It's certainly the best limited card in this format.