...make me question how it can remain consistent outside of being a secondary color.
It is a secondary color.
I'm pretty sure we had a fairly recent/lengthy discussion where you were championing green as being more than just a secondary aggro colour. I think green adds some great cards to aggro (especially in the aggro mirror) but it is definitely only a secondary colour.
I'm pretty sure you should have proof if you're going to suggest I said something. Not to come down hard on you, but my opinion on this hasn't changed that radically in a short period of time.
First, the nonbasic lands. Why even bother with Blood Crypt or Stomping Ground? You don't need red and you certainly don't want cipt in an aggro deck.
Plow Under is another extremely odd aggro deck choice. Plow under is a card you want to ramp into to create an insurmountable mana advantage early, not an aggro finisher.
Also beyond a handful of mostly average green 1-2 CC drops the Black is what is making this deck work.
I think you're missing some interactions.
Blood Crypt and Stromping Ground are in there for one reasion. BC is a swamp that can cast Tattermunge Maniac and SG is a forest that can cast Rakdos Cackler. Both insure constancy in 1-drop casting on turn 1. Both it is just a Cubetutor's list anyway, I haven't tested it for real. I think it still pretty good though and that the decklist does contain some green unique cards that help make it awesome. Rancor is one of them. Same as Evolutionary Leap. Warden of the First Tree is one of the fattest pace creature in the game. Hitting for 3 on turn 2 is huge. I think there's just Goblin Goblin that can match it in terms of damage dealt over turn, but at some cost since your opponent is going to draw a few lands while your attacking him. Lotus Cobra is just absoluty awesome in those kind of decks. Easily opens green decks to 2 other colors with its powerful landfall ability while being able to attack. Fianlly, Plow Under is a insane close and I think it's not necessarily reserve to ramp deck. By experience, I can tell that it's more than decent in green aggro decks. Especially is a powered cube that use free fast mana like moxes and others.
In our recent discussion about green aggro, I think the general agreement among those that didn't cut it completely was that green is a good secondary, but a terrible primary color for an aggro deck. The core of such a deck should always be white, black or red, with green filling some holes in the curve and providing some effects that the main color doesn't have. Note that running some green in your white or red aggro deck makes Loam Lion and Kird Ape fantastic 1-drops.
Experiment One is not a pure aggro card though. It also works in most midrange builds. An early EO can build up to a 4/4 or even 5/5 in those decks. Yes, those decks prefer mana elves, but this much potential for growth still makes EO a valuable 1-drop in those decks. (Warden of the First Tree is another aggressive green 1-drop that also works nicely in more traditional green midrange decks.) This flexibility means that I am really happy with Warden and EO in my cube, even if green is not a great aggro color. I am less happy with pure aggro 1-drops like Wolfbitten Captive, Scythe Leopard and Wild Nacatl.
Plow Under is another extremely odd aggro deck choice.
Well if this is what you think, we're clearly playing entirely different games altogether, so discussing nuance is probably a waste of time.
Plow Under is probably the best green aggro card in the cube.
Quote from hardb0dy »
I'm pretty sure we had a fairly recent/lengthy discussion where you were championing green as being more than just a secondary aggro colour.
I'm pretty sure you misinterpreted my intent in that thread just like you're doing here. I've never championed for mono green aggro. Ever. But I have championed for green making up half of a good aggro deck, and often. I would consider that "secondary", but if you don't than it's a matter of semantics.
While green doesn't have the same aggro power level that white, red, or even black have, I still believe that it's a solid option as a color to support those in my aggro decks. Gruul Beats is one my favorite decks to draft and something like Experiment One is right at home in that list. I'd also agree that Plow Under, while indeed an old card, is still one of the most powerful 5cc cards you can throw into an aggro shell. It works in a similar way to Armageddon by setting your opponent back far enough that you can get the final shots in for victory. With that said, I'm not comparing the card directly to Armageddon. Plow Under's power level decreases somewhat as the game goes on while Armageddon is just as powerful on turn 8 as it is on turn 4. And early Plow Under can be devastating, though, and it shouldn't be underestimated.
I'm pretty sure you misinterpreted my intent in that thread just like you're doing here. I've never championed for mono green aggro. Ever. But I have championed for green making up half of a good aggro deck, and often. I would consider that "secondary", but if you don't than it's a matter of semantics.
I don't think I'm misinterpreting anything because I never said anything about mono-green aggro... on the other thread either. You were talking about Gx aggro and "mostly/heavy" green aggro decks where green is the primary and not the secondary colour. I stated multiple times that it isn't about mono-green. Gx and GX or mostly/heavy/primary or secondary isn't really a question of semantics. Other thread
Well, depending on how many of the tools show up in a given draft, it can wind up being a primary color in a good aggro deck. But the design intent is for it to have enough tools to have a G/X or X/G aggro/tempo deck, where green makes up about half the playables. But sure, an aggro deck can be base green and it can still be good. It just shows up less often than the aggro decks where green makes up half of the deck or less.
That debate was about whether or not a base green aggro deck can be good. Not whether or not the design intent of the cube is to have green as the primary color for your aggressive decks. Which it's not. The intent is to have it be the 2nd color in an aggro/tempo deck. But it can show up in big numbers, wind up being the primary color, and still be good. Which was what the other debate was about.
The biggest deciding factor in whether or not Plow Under will work for your playgroup or not is if you play green aggro. If you do, Plow Under is likely a staple. If you don't, it's much more cuttable. Largely due to how monstrous of a card it is in that deck.
But if you consider it to not only miss as one of the best aggro cards in green, but consider it an "odd choice" for aggro decks ...it just confirms my suspicions that you and I are going to be unable to have a productive discussion regarding Plow Under or green aggro as an archetype.
Quote from hawkeye »
I wouldn't even put Armageddon as the best aggro card in white...
Again, I think we must be playing different games altogether. So this debate is largely useless.
I didn't misquote you. You said Armageddon wasn't the best white aggro card, which was the point I was responding to. One of the best is all fine and good, but I think there's an immeasurable gap between 'Geddon and the next best white aggro card. Enough so that it being anything but the best card is the point that matters.
Quote from hawkeye »
...it is because of those kind of statements that I'm done participating in this conversation.
If you read the rest of my comments on this page (and the last page), I was hoping to get to the point where we'd both be done, and soon. You and I have completely different understandings of how aggro works and what cards are good in aggro that agreeing to disagree and moving on is for the best. The purpose of my last two posts have been to arrive at this point.
It's okay to agree to disagree, and I look forward to debating with you on other topics in the future. The quicker we arrive to the impasse on this subject, the friendlier our future debates can be. Cheers hawkeye, and happy cubing.
I think the soft cap for this is around 3/3 with the occasional 4/4.
Why hasn't anyone talked about the regeneration yet? I think that's going to be more tham just a sidenote. Opponent plays a non-*** sweeper, this survives at 1/1 and is back to growth phase. Swinging for 2 after a sweeper is great for an Isamaru/Nacatl.
I actually like the name and artwork if they don't make any other Experiment N. Maybe one at rare/mythic.And what's wrong exactly with the artwork? It's a translucent half-man half-jellyfish for crying out loud!
Can't wait for the photoshop/alter with trollface and "U jelly?"...
Yeah, I love the name, flavor, and artwork. Some people are just so small minded on this site it hurts.
I don't support Jungle Lion aggro, but I still run Experiment One because I think it's efficient enough to hold it's own as a one drop that can get absolutely massive in a midrange deck, or in multicolor Zoo decks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
465 card Unpowered cube thread. Draft it here and I'll be happy to return the favor.
450 card Peasant cube thread. Draft it here.
That debate was about whether or not a base green aggro deck can be good. Not whether or not the design intent of the cube is to have green as the primary color for your aggressive decks. Which it's not.
I just went and read the thread just to make sure... you clearly stated that you believed green is just as good at aggro as white, red and black are. There was no mention of 'design intent' on the other thread so I don't really know what that refers to. But in rereading it it is clear that you're arguing that green is equivalent to the other aggro colours and is not just a secondary or support aggro colour... which is what my argument was.
The decks it churns out can be as good as the aggro decks from other colors. But the quantity of available support prevents it from being designed as a base aggro color. It can function in that role if you get enough of the options in a draft, but it's usually the 2nd color in an aggro deck just because of the number of available options.
Sorry man, no "Gotcha!" moment here. The last thread was arguing if base green aggro decks are good, and this thread is discussing what the design intent of supporting green aggro decks are.
A perfect example would be red control. Red is designed to be a secondary color in control decks. But there have certainly been times where I've drafted control decks that are base red, and they've been good. So if someone said that base red decks can't be good, I'd argue that they're wrong. And if they accused me of designing my red section so that control was red's primary function, they'd be wrong there too.
Like I said before, I think you're pouncing on semantics, and misunderstanding both positions. Green aggro is good. Green aggro can be the base color for an aggro deck, but the design intent is to have enough green aggro support so that 2-color aggro decks featuring green can be drafted with regularity.
The discussion in the previous thread stemmed from these two comments:
There's actually nothing [green aggro] does better than the other colors.
They are way too slow if you are playing against competent drafters. If I lose to [insert typical green aggro curve] I probably either got stuck on a land or I drafted a pile of shyt.
both of which assault the quality of green aggro decks once they're built, and not the design intent behind how the green section is crafted.
..........
Edit: And here are some relevant points from the other thread that make me think you may have misinterpreted the intent of the discussion in that thread too:
Quote from wtwlf123 »
...every aggro deck we play is more than one color, outside of some rare corner-cases. I'm not suggesting mono-green aggro is what players should be striving for, because I wouldn't suggest that of any color. But 2-color aggro decks featuring good green cards doesn't make it worse than a deck featuring non-green cards. If you get enough of those great cards, then it can be base green. Otherwise, the base color will be the other color.
Quote from wtwlf123 »
Supporting "green aggro" is analogous with supporting Zoo kinds of decks. That could change in the future, depending on the quality and quantity of future green aggro support cards. But right now, there simply isn't enough support to have the same density as white, black or red. Green aggro decks are typically half green at the most, but they can get slightly heavier in green depending on what the draft pool looks like.
Quote from wtwlf123 »
I never said it was as dense as the other colors. Just that heavy green aggro decks can be built, and when they do, they're good.
Note that the argument wasn't that green aggro should strive to be base green, only that they can be base green if the pool allows it.
That's not the debate in hand (if you believe it is, you are arguing something people aren't saying).
The debate is where HEAVY (65%+) Green agro ranks RELATIVE to other archetypes. The specifics of the wording is very important.
At no point have you conceded that heavy green agro is weaker than the other agro archetype on average (excuse me if I missed it). This is the point calibretto, hardb0dy and myself are focusing on.
My "thesis" is that heavy green agro is one of the weakest supported archetypes. That doesn't exclude it from ever being a contender or worth being supported.
I believe the reason why hopefulhawkeye made his suggestion on the previous page is because he also thinks green aggro isn't as strong as white/red/black.
If you're relying on green to be the core color for your aggro decks, it's not as deep as the other colors, and can fall short. Since it's designed to be played in 2-color decks. But once constructed, green aggro decks can be just as good as aggro decks from other colors. That was the point in the last thread, and it's the same one being dredged up here. The last thread stemmed from the comments I listed above, and debated the strength of aggro decks once they're built. It had nothing to do with the design intent of green, and if green aggro was intended to be the core aggro color in the majority of the decks it shows up in. You accused me of changing my position, when I didn't. Two different things are being discussed, and as I said before, you've misinterpreted my stance in both threads now.
Ignoring the last two pages of discussion, I think E1 looks like an interesting card. It seems like it could likely be as good as Wild Nacatl, while potentially being easier to get to 3/3 in a deck that curves beyond pure aggro 1 & 2 drops.
Im curious if people have found E1 better or worst than Nacatl. I wonder if I post that question in the this/that thread which card people would feel is better? Let's see...
It's not for everybody. Folks in my group don't like Storm, so even in the cases where I've brought it in to experiment with the archetype, people just never wanted to draft it. Green aggro may be that way for your group, and if nobody wants to play it, you shouldn't support it. If you want to test its validity, you can force it into a few drafts yourself and see how it performs and how people react to it. You might find an attraction to the archetype by doing that, or you may confirm that it doesn't fit your interests. No harm, no foul.
It really depends on the draft. If there's enough 2-power 1-drops from your other color, you can get away with just E1. But normally you need to snag a couple from green to reach enough for your deck. Try Naya first, snagging things like Nacatl, Cobra, 'Goyf, Plow Under and BBE and see how it plays, and move up in the green support from there.
This is a really good example of a effective green aggro list. I think this archetype is totally viable if well support.
Zetsu's Cube on CubeTutor.com
Zetsu's Ebay MTG Online Store
Zetsu's Poker Draft Method
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/modular-cube-5-colors.800/
Retro combo cube thread
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/retro-combo-cube.1454/
I think harbody is referring to wtwlf...
I think you're missing some interactions.
Blood Crypt and Stromping Ground are in there for one reasion. BC is a swamp that can cast Tattermunge Maniac and SG is a forest that can cast Rakdos Cackler. Both insure constancy in 1-drop casting on turn 1. Both it is just a Cubetutor's list anyway, I haven't tested it for real. I think it still pretty good though and that the decklist does contain some green unique cards that help make it awesome. Rancor is one of them. Same as Evolutionary Leap. Warden of the First Tree is one of the fattest pace creature in the game. Hitting for 3 on turn 2 is huge. I think there's just Goblin Goblin that can match it in terms of damage dealt over turn, but at some cost since your opponent is going to draw a few lands while your attacking him. Lotus Cobra is just absoluty awesome in those kind of decks. Easily opens green decks to 2 other colors with its powerful landfall ability while being able to attack. Fianlly, Plow Under is a insane close and I think it's not necessarily reserve to ramp deck. By experience, I can tell that it's more than decent in green aggro decks. Especially is a powered cube that use free fast mana like moxes and others.
Zetsu's Cube on CubeTutor.com
Zetsu's Ebay MTG Online Store
Zetsu's Poker Draft Method
Experiment One is not a pure aggro card though. It also works in most midrange builds. An early EO can build up to a 4/4 or even 5/5 in those decks. Yes, those decks prefer mana elves, but this much potential for growth still makes EO a valuable 1-drop in those decks. (Warden of the First Tree is another aggressive green 1-drop that also works nicely in more traditional green midrange decks.) This flexibility means that I am really happy with Warden and EO in my cube, even if green is not a great aggro color. I am less happy with pure aggro 1-drops like Wolfbitten Captive, Scythe Leopard and Wild Nacatl.
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
Well if this is what you think, we're clearly playing entirely different games altogether, so discussing nuance is probably a waste of time.
Plow Under is probably the best green aggro card in the cube.
I'm pretty sure you misinterpreted my intent in that thread just like you're doing here. I've never championed for mono green aggro. Ever. But I have championed for green making up half of a good aggro deck, and often. I would consider that "secondary", but if you don't than it's a matter of semantics.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
MTGS Average Peasant Cube 2023 Edition
Follow me. I tweet.
That debate was about whether or not a base green aggro deck can be good. Not whether or not the design intent of the cube is to have green as the primary color for your aggressive decks. Which it's not. The intent is to have it be the 2nd color in an aggro/tempo deck. But it can show up in big numbers, wind up being the primary color, and still be good. Which was what the other debate was about.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
But if you consider it to not only miss as one of the best aggro cards in green, but consider it an "odd choice" for aggro decks ...it just confirms my suspicions that you and I are going to be unable to have a productive discussion regarding Plow Under or green aggro as an archetype.
Again, I think we must be playing different games altogether. So this debate is largely useless.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
If you read the rest of my comments on this page (and the last page), I was hoping to get to the point where we'd both be done, and soon. You and I have completely different understandings of how aggro works and what cards are good in aggro that agreeing to disagree and moving on is for the best. The purpose of my last two posts have been to arrive at this point.
It's okay to agree to disagree, and I look forward to debating with you on other topics in the future. The quicker we arrive to the impasse on this subject, the friendlier our future debates can be. Cheers hawkeye, and happy cubing.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/3pq
Yeah, I love the name, flavor, and artwork. Some people are just so small minded on this site it hurts.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
450 card Peasant cube thread. Draft it here.
I agree Plow Under is a sick aggro curve topper, I've played gruul aggro decks with bloodbraid, curse of predation, etc and it was sweet.
However, even as a one drop, X1 never quite made it or did enough for me. It'll be replaced with a mana elf.
WGURBLands!WGURB
WGUInfectWGU
Legacy Lands Primer
Top 8 SCG Oakland 2014
Helpdesk
My Cube on CubeTutor
Sorry man, no "Gotcha!" moment here. The last thread was arguing if base green aggro decks are good, and this thread is discussing what the design intent of supporting green aggro decks are.
A perfect example would be red control. Red is designed to be a secondary color in control decks. But there have certainly been times where I've drafted control decks that are base red, and they've been good. So if someone said that base red decks can't be good, I'd argue that they're wrong. And if they accused me of designing my red section so that control was red's primary function, they'd be wrong there too.
Like I said before, I think you're pouncing on semantics, and misunderstanding both positions. Green aggro is good. Green aggro can be the base color for an aggro deck, but the design intent is to have enough green aggro support so that 2-color aggro decks featuring green can be drafted with regularity.
The discussion in the previous thread stemmed from these two comments:
both of which assault the quality of green aggro decks once they're built, and not the design intent behind how the green section is crafted.
..........
Edit: And here are some relevant points from the other thread that make me think you may have misinterpreted the intent of the discussion in that thread too:
Note that the argument wasn't that green aggro should strive to be base green, only that they can be base green if the pool allows it.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
Ignoring the last two pages of discussion, I think E1 looks like an interesting card. It seems like it could likely be as good as Wild Nacatl, while potentially being easier to get to 3/3 in a deck that curves beyond pure aggro 1 & 2 drops.
Im curious if people have found E1 better or worst than Nacatl. I wonder if I post that question in the this/that thread which card people would feel is better? Let's see...
Old school group, sometimes more beer than cards. Revised thru Tempest block (and a little of Urza), sorry if I don't know all the new cards
Ye' Olde Schoole Casual Decks: BUReanimate -- GRAggro -- BWPestilence -- G10-land Stompy -- GRElfball -- GWEnchantress -- RAnkh Sligh -- BDiscard -- MUC "Draw-go" -- BRSuicide -- UWSkies -- UHigh Tide Mill -- WWeenie -- UMutated Bombers -- URThe great land-toss -- UB Molasass
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!