Mr. Hoogland just beat GR Tron as well. Again, theYoung Pyromancer did close to nothing in the matchup. He did reach a point in which he could have blocked with two tokens and electrolyzed them to avoid the opponents Wurmcoil Engines gaining life, but he flipped his delver for the last three damage before the opponent could attack.
For those of you who are playing Young Pyromancer can you please inform the uneducated, like myself, how young pyromancer is beneficial/powerful and in what matchups she really shines. I can make some educated guesses, but I would love to hear from the actual players who play the card because they would be much more knowledgeable than myself. Thank you in advance.
I am currently watching Hoogland's stream of his Jeskai Delver list. I love to watch any type of WUR/Jeskai Delver list in action. He has been asked on several occasions why he doesn't run Geist of Saint Traft and continues to answer that it is a weak card. I was wondering if anyone else felt this way or if he is alone on his "I hate Geist" island. He got in a relatively heated argument with a fewer in which he stated Geist is just a 2/2 that dies with a sorcery speed 4 damage for three mana. I was wondering if he would play a three drop creature that said when it enters the battlefield it deals three damage to target player. I realize that different, but that is basically what he calls it and I think he might play that card.
His Young Pyromancers have been extremely underwhelming so far, but he is 2-0. He has just lost the games where is has been his main threat. His deck is highly dependent on having the correct answers at the correct time. However, I have gained a little more respect for his build. I wondered why in the heck he doesn't play Path to Exile in his main board and I see why now. His deck takes a more "protect the queen" and keep the board clean kind of approach. He utilizes a bunch of different counter spells to keep things at bay and tries to get through with one threat and burn. I realize that is what we all do in our tempo builds, but some lists (like mine) have a little more of a tempo/midrange approach with removal and a larger threat at the top end. His is all out tempo, much like Valanarch said above. It definitely fits some people's play style, I just prefer to have a little more power at the top end.
With that said, he did lose to WUR/Jeskai Midrange. He won the first game with two flipped delvers and bolt, snap, bolt. He scooped to a turn 5 batterskull because he couldn't get damage across quick enough and then lost the third game after his delvers with electrolyzed. I have found that I dominate the the UR Delver matchup and have a 45/55 against UWR midrange which is to be expected I think.
I have also been testing against a UW control list recently and have found it to be an extremely hard matchup. Gideon Jura is terribly hard to deal with and Supreme Verdict is another tough one. These types of matchups are the ones that I really have to make a plan to go aggro and try to win early. I am currently working on my sideboard plan against control as well so let me know if you have any suggestions. I have been playing around with a Cavern of Souls in the main deck as well and I have actually found it to be rather strong. A Geist with a Cavern is a real beating. I will keep everyone posted on if the Slayer's stronghold and Cavern of Souls in a 20 land deck is too inconsistent.
I have to say I learned a lot from purklepuff's and Curdbros' answers, I'm sure integrating this in my testing!
The one thing I would add: Sometimes I like to switch decks with the opponent. So if I'm playing against UR Delver, I take the Delver and give my opponent my monogreen devotion deck.
Two reasons for the switch: First, first you have to know the enemy to beat it. There isn't a better way than just playing with the enemy's deck. You get a lot of insight into tiny details that you can exploit when the situation arise.
Second reason is every one of us have different styles of play. Maybe my friend will take a different approach against certain deck than I am and I will learn something from it.
Just yesterday we did the Affinity-TarmTwin matchup and rotated the decks among us and the differences between plays were quite big at first.
That's a really smart idea. I'm going to have to start doing this. Fortunately, I get to play all of the other decks (as I often am the "opponent" for a person in our little group and even moreso when my brother is testing his brews...but it would be even more helpful to see how they play against my deck (i.e. being on the other end)...definitely adding this to my testing routine! Cool idea.
Ok...so some of the the GP Kobe decks are AWESOME! Makes me want to brew some more! Between the new "No Affinity", Burn (which won), and the Tezzeret deck....it looks like there may be some new competition coming soon! I love seeing new decks in Modern.
Hi, guys!
I'm so happy that this thread is so much alive and filled with passionate green mages! I, for one, am in love with forests too and can't wait to see Green Devotion decks reach Tier 1 status. I think it's possible!
I had a question for you all regarding playtesting. How do you actually playtest a certain list? Do you take notes while you are playing at a FNM, for instance? Do you focus on one or two cards and imagine how the actual game you are playing would be if you drew something else, then write down first impressions (if so, do you do it at the moment, quickly, or post-game)?
You see, my problem is that, since I see so many interesting ideas here, I want to try all of them, but I usually end up getting no good results because:
1) I'm not an experienced player and have yet a lot to learn about Magic interactions and strategies
2) just keep jumping from one list to another, not really learning how to use them. But my curiosity just kills me.
Also, do you playtest online too, or among friends, or just local and large tournaments?
Thank you for your advise!
First off...Perfect name!
In terms of testing; the things I like to do are:
1. Write down every game. I write down:
A. Play/Draw
B. Mulligan
C. Win/Loss
D. How I won/lost (I.e. "Wave into Craterhoof", "beat by Delver", etc.)
E. Any important interactions (I.e. "Stole green blocker with Sarkhan, attacked through with C.Collosus with pro-B
and triggered twice for 16/16..." "Chord for Archdruid on OP. turn led to Craterhoof..." Etc .
F. What was sided in/out. (All post-sided games below this listed as "3b", 4b", etc. so I know they were after.
2. I try to play a specific 75 for at least 40 matches before I change anything. I've found that a lot of brewing/testing comes down to "feel". It's REALLY hard to just "know" exactly how a card will work in a deck. Sure, you can always point out answers to a certain card or compare it to another in a vacuum; but seeing how a card plays against multiple opponents with wildly different decks, on the play and the draw, seeing how often "answers" to it arise in actual meta gameplay is what makes all the difference. And after playing 40+ matches against differing decks; you'll begin to get a fe for cards that get "stuck" in your hand, cards that seem to underwhelm, interactions you never even thought of (happens more often than you would think ), etc. you also get a "feel" for the number of a specific card your playing. Sometimes you'll notice you're getting a card to early, or you seem to have multiples often when you only need one, or you have too many win-cons (this happened to me at first because I didn't take into account how much card draw I would have), etc. You'll relatively quickly realize which cards you only want 3, 2, or 1 of. Of course in most cases it will follow the CMC of the card, things like "legendary", card-draw, and card resiliency can effect how many you run (especially when playing cards like planeswalkers). Anywho, you'll start to notice trends and can see what works and what doesn't. But that can't be done in only a couple matches (no matter how bad things look to start).
3. If I'm comparing two cards, I will pay attention when I draw said card as to how I think the other card would have played. Its obviously not 100% possible (especially if you go many turns later) as you can't gauge completely how your opponent would react, future draws (I.e . If I'm comparing Prime-Time to something, I'd have two more lands the next turn and would have shuffled the deck); but you can get a very general sense of whether you would have done better /worse with the other card. I don't have the mind to compare one card to multiple others or comparing two different sets of cards in the same game (too many variables) so I generally stick to comparing one card to one other card each game and simply play more games if I have multiple cards to compare.
4. I make sure I'm testing against the meta. If your meta is your local shop, that's perfect (and you probably have a good grasp over who plays what). If its MTGO (which is a little heavier in Burn, etc. that's cool to. I tend to focus on the "overall" meta as outlined in www.mtgtop8.com and www.mtgpulse.com; and as you read about each modern tourney and watch all the modern streams; you'll quickly see when decks are rising in popularity...Regardless of what your meta is; write down the percentages of each deck and play those rough percentages if you can (we have most of the cards; but for testing we often will just proxy the opponents list so we play the exact list we want). If you don't have a testing group or a testing partner; you don't really get this luxury (as you'll have to play whoever is available on MTGO, cockatrice, that new site Hoogland plays on "X-something", and/or at your local shop. That's ok too though. Playing as much as you can will always help.
5. Learn from other peoples testing :). That's what makes sites like this so great! I'm trying to get better at listing out exact interactions, important points about each match-up, etc. without leaving a two-page post but there are a ton of great brewers/players on here constantly posting their list and how they did, what worked and what didn't, etc. If possible; try to give less weight to "theory" (where someone shoots down a card or idea by bringing up the answers for the card...). All cards have answers in this game. What matters is how often those answers/scenarios actually arise in actual games within the actual meta. I've found that cards are considered "awful", "janky", "garbage", up until they are "awesome"; so if you have an idea...try it. It may not work (and most times it won't) but it may hit some crazy interactions, fill that perfect little he in your list, or in most cases be the sideboard card that helps push you to "favored" in otherwise tough match ups.
6. I tend to play 50/50 pre-board and post- board matchups. While its true that you will only play 33% pre-board games; I like to play a little higher ratio to make certain I see where the strengths and weaknesses are in each match up. The post-board games then can show if the "answers" I chose are worth it.
Beyond this just play, play, play! I hope this helps a little (but I can imagine most of this is kinda common knowledge). You'll find the deck that fits your playstyle. Good luck in your testing !!
One thing I do have to say is vs Twin I absolutely love responding to their Pestermite or Deciever Exarch with a Boil especially if they do it early (on turn 3 or 4) and tap out! After that; they will wait until they have counter back up; and those extra two turns can be huge. I'm not sure how effective Blood Moon is against Twin; but I guess with things like Combust, Nature's Claim, and Beast Within we have other good options for them. Tempo Twin I found to be the Elf-Versions toughest match-up (close second is heavy control builds) so I wanted to side strongly against them. Its possible, however, that I over-side for it (and would be better off with Blood moons for an array of other match-ups.). Either way, its gonna be fun trying it!
I did have Magus of the Moom in the deck for a while (at the time I thought I was a genius because of Chord of Calling :)) ha. Blood Moon, however, even if it can't be Chorded, is way better. I will try them out tonight over Boil and Choke to see how it is. It seems like it could just be better. I like Boil if Scaprshift continues to grow; but Blood Moon is good against MANY more decks. Great idea!!! I'll test it ASAP this evening. I'll add the results to the end of testing "batch 2". :). Let's keep our fingers crossed! I'm always up for improvements!
Root Maze is an interesting idea indeed. I may have to test this against a few match-ups where it could be relevant and see how it goes (especially with 4 Garruk and 2 Nissa's, Arbor Elves, etc. untaping things....for those of you wanting to play Voyaging Satyr; Root Maze may be an interesting main-board card for you...kinda a "mini-time walk" effect for the early turns. Seems a little too "cute" to me; but there may be definite side board options for it. Certainly worth testing.
Ugh....I so badly want to get Nylea in my deck...The very idea that she can instant-speed pump things AFTER they've declared blockers seems so powerful. She's easily a 6/6 creature most games shes in; and the trample is nothing to sneeze at (especially with Chameleon Colossus....so many cards; so few slots. Going to have to try some variations.
Fortunately, however, I will have "set two" of my testing results up tonight (finishing tying them in word now to be copy/pasted over here). I'll make sure to post the list before the results so you see any small changes made prior to this set of results. Tested against the "main decks" as before but also tried out a few opponents that make up smaller, but visible portions of the meta. Excited to see how everyone else is doing as well! I think I'm going to get back on MTGO tonight (been a lnog time) to see if I can't play a few dailies. May take some time getting used to the system; but at least it allows for "posted results".
Anywho, hope everyone else is doing GREAT! I'll get the results up tonight!
I'm not too sure about Twoo's brew :). And I don't hate Primalcrux or Khalni Hydra. But I'd be interested to see how it's tested. It seems not great; but who knows...it's extremely possible it plays entirely different than I think it would.
And Purkle, I posted a link to the CFB PTQ that the devotion deck hit the top 8 while it was playing. From what I saw, it only got one game on camera (and it wasn't a great game) but obviously he had plenty of great games prior to that! They do talk about it though; so definitely a plus for the archetype!
Sometimes posts get kinda "eaten up" if a bunch of posts get posted all at once; so it's super smart to re-post!
I was interested in game one to see how Primal Command and Genesis Wave worked together to win the game. We tend to split them up because of the nature of the decks they tend to run in; but it was fun to see a game where they worked together.
I was interested to see how Predator Ooze would work (seemed a little too slow for my version, but a sound devotion card); so it was really helpful to see your testing with it. There's no better way to know if it's a good fit than trying it out; so now you know that BTE and/or Visionary is better. That helps us all.
I liked how your testing showed where Genesis Wave can pull you right into a win. I've had more games than I can count where I went from a loss to an instant-speed win with Wave. I need to do more of what you've done and discuss more exactly what happened turn-by-turn within each match up (rather than just things I've learned and strategy against each match up). It helps to know why. Many other people have done this here; so it is very helpful.
Keep up the great work! Exciting to see other decks and how they play!
I Will buy the deck on MODO to get some real testing as opposed to Cockatrice where a guy acted like real jerk because he wanted some "real testing" and face popular decks (he never saw this deck until that day). He was playing MonoU Tron who is not very popular itself. Go figure...
Anyway, when I switch Misty Rainforest with Windswept Heath, which is cheaper on MODO and does the same thing as Misty, I have to spend 260 tickets for the deck. Quite a lot! I wanted to ask you for an advice on budget cards to replace with, for example a Chameleon Colossus instead of Titan, Nissa...? If I'm successful with it, I'll buy more "original" cards with the prizes I win.
Also Wurmcoil Engine's price is busted. I'm attaching the prices. Btw, aside from burn, this is one of the cheaper modern decks on MODO.
You could get away with a Chameleon Colossus over one of the Titans. You could probably also play only one Nissa (and put in a second Colossus, or any card you are interested in trying. Of course, you can try out any 4-6 drops you like in place of either a Titan or a Nissa. You never know; you may find even a better assortment of win-cons then the current list has!
It will be great to have another hard-core tester playing the deck! You already seem pretty well versed with the deck; so the whole "play a couple dozen games first" (because there are a ton of synergies and sequencing decisions that are not easy to see just from the list) preface is not needed in your case.
On the Prime Time front; while I'm gonna stick with Primeval Titan for a bit (he's just seemed really strong in my testing); it is interesting to hear about other ideas! That's the worst part about green devotion...so many great cards and so little room! I will try to pay attention in my current testing if I would have preferred a different card when casting them and/or if any "sit" in my hand where I could have benefited from a different card.
Interesting discussions guys.
What about a Chameleon Colossus for one Titan? Since you don't rely too much on Nykthos or Kessig to win you the game, you utilize Titan as a beatstick far more than the rest of us. So Colossus fits here as a beatstick as good as Titan, if not even better. Of course it doesn't net us lands and needs Kessig to be truly effective (which is, ironically, fetchable only with Titan who colossus would replace).
Other than Titan, I don't see who would Colossus replace...maybe one Nissa?
These are literally the best two choices! Right now I'm testing with 2 Titans and 1 Chameleon, but if it really works out and I decide to add another Chameleon Colossus I'll probably have to go with a Nissa...you must really have a really good handle on the deck because those are the perfect choices (basically the only cards at this point that can be removed). Great points!
Hey Caspian...Looks like you're on the "stompy" route. That's cool. Please keep up updated on how testing/playing goes!
I agree on U Tron variants Purkle...I've tested against U Tron versions plenty; and they seemed popular for about 2 weeks online...but they really aren't a super important portion of the meta right now.
As far as Kiki-Pod goes; it's not too bad. It's definitely a tougher match-up for us than Melria-Pod (as they can top deck into more combos); but still it is generally about 1-2 turns too slow on average. It is still a creature-based deck (which tend to be on the easier end for us). This, however, is based on testing/findings from the Elf-version. I don't know exactly how match ups correlate from one version to the next. I assume they are relatively similar, however; with slight differences in speed and/or consistency. Some of the more "extreme" match-ups (like twin, affinity, control, etc.) may be a little larger variance between the versions; but for match-ups like Kiki-Pod I bet we are relatively close.
On the Prime Time front; while I'm gonna stick with Primeval Titan for a bit (he's just seemed really strong in my testing); it is interesting to hear about other ideas! That's the worst part about green devotion...so many great cards and so little room! I will try to pay attention in my current testing if I would have preferred a different card when casting them and/or if any "sit" in my hand where I could have benefited from a different card.
The default three-drop for aggressive U/W/R decks like this has always been Geist of Saint Traft in the past. Simply put, I am generally not a fan of this card in Modern. A three-mana sorcery speed threat that needs supplemental cards to be powerful is not something I am interested in casting.
Let's be clear; Geist of Saint Traft on it's own can take over games and more than a few played decks just dump to it.
I totally agree Black_Dog. I tend to consider Geist of Saint Traft as a fairly powerful card on it's own, but to everyone has their own opinion.
For those of you who are playing Young Pyromancer can you please inform the uneducated, like myself, how young pyromancer is beneficial/powerful and in what matchups she really shines. I can make some educated guesses, but I would love to hear from the actual players who play the card because they would be much more knowledgeable than myself. Thank you in advance.
His Young Pyromancers have been extremely underwhelming so far, but he is 2-0. He has just lost the games where is has been his main threat. His deck is highly dependent on having the correct answers at the correct time. However, I have gained a little more respect for his build. I wondered why in the heck he doesn't play Path to Exile in his main board and I see why now. His deck takes a more "protect the queen" and keep the board clean kind of approach. He utilizes a bunch of different counter spells to keep things at bay and tries to get through with one threat and burn. I realize that is what we all do in our tempo builds, but some lists (like mine) have a little more of a tempo/midrange approach with removal and a larger threat at the top end. His is all out tempo, much like Valanarch said above. It definitely fits some people's play style, I just prefer to have a little more power at the top end.
With that said, he did lose to WUR/Jeskai Midrange. He won the first game with two flipped delvers and bolt, snap, bolt. He scooped to a turn 5 batterskull because he couldn't get damage across quick enough and then lost the third game after his delvers with electrolyzed. I have found that I dominate the the UR Delver matchup and have a 45/55 against UWR midrange which is to be expected I think.
I have also been testing against a UW control list recently and have found it to be an extremely hard matchup. Gideon Jura is terribly hard to deal with and Supreme Verdict is another tough one. These types of matchups are the ones that I really have to make a plan to go aggro and try to win early. I am currently working on my sideboard plan against control as well so let me know if you have any suggestions. I have been playing around with a Cavern of Souls in the main deck as well and I have actually found it to be rather strong. A Geist with a Cavern is a real beating. I will keep everyone posted on if the Slayer's stronghold and Cavern of Souls in a 20 land deck is too inconsistent.
That's a really smart idea. I'm going to have to start doing this. Fortunately, I get to play all of the other decks (as I often am the "opponent" for a person in our little group and even moreso when my brother is testing his brews...but it would be even more helpful to see how they play against my deck (i.e. being on the other end)...definitely adding this to my testing routine! Cool idea.
First off...Perfect name!
In terms of testing; the things I like to do are:
1. Write down every game. I write down:
A. Play/Draw
B. Mulligan
C. Win/Loss
D. How I won/lost (I.e. "Wave into Craterhoof", "beat by Delver", etc.)
E. Any important interactions (I.e. "Stole green blocker with Sarkhan, attacked through with C.Collosus with pro-B
and triggered twice for 16/16..." "Chord for Archdruid on OP. turn led to Craterhoof..." Etc .
F. What was sided in/out. (All post-sided games below this listed as "3b", 4b", etc. so I know they were after.
2. I try to play a specific 75 for at least 40 matches before I change anything. I've found that a lot of brewing/testing comes down to "feel". It's REALLY hard to just "know" exactly how a card will work in a deck. Sure, you can always point out answers to a certain card or compare it to another in a vacuum; but seeing how a card plays against multiple opponents with wildly different decks, on the play and the draw, seeing how often "answers" to it arise in actual meta gameplay is what makes all the difference. And after playing 40+ matches against differing decks; you'll begin to get a fe for cards that get "stuck" in your hand, cards that seem to underwhelm, interactions you never even thought of (happens more often than you would think ), etc. you also get a "feel" for the number of a specific card your playing. Sometimes you'll notice you're getting a card to early, or you seem to have multiples often when you only need one, or you have too many win-cons (this happened to me at first because I didn't take into account how much card draw I would have), etc. You'll relatively quickly realize which cards you only want 3, 2, or 1 of. Of course in most cases it will follow the CMC of the card, things like "legendary", card-draw, and card resiliency can effect how many you run (especially when playing cards like planeswalkers). Anywho, you'll start to notice trends and can see what works and what doesn't. But that can't be done in only a couple matches (no matter how bad things look to start).
3. If I'm comparing two cards, I will pay attention when I draw said card as to how I think the other card would have played. Its obviously not 100% possible (especially if you go many turns later) as you can't gauge completely how your opponent would react, future draws (I.e . If I'm comparing Prime-Time to something, I'd have two more lands the next turn and would have shuffled the deck); but you can get a very general sense of whether you would have done better /worse with the other card. I don't have the mind to compare one card to multiple others or comparing two different sets of cards in the same game (too many variables) so I generally stick to comparing one card to one other card each game and simply play more games if I have multiple cards to compare.
4. I make sure I'm testing against the meta. If your meta is your local shop, that's perfect (and you probably have a good grasp over who plays what). If its MTGO (which is a little heavier in Burn, etc. that's cool to. I tend to focus on the "overall" meta as outlined in www.mtgtop8.com and www.mtgpulse.com; and as you read about each modern tourney and watch all the modern streams; you'll quickly see when decks are rising in popularity...Regardless of what your meta is; write down the percentages of each deck and play those rough percentages if you can (we have most of the cards; but for testing we often will just proxy the opponents list so we play the exact list we want). If you don't have a testing group or a testing partner; you don't really get this luxury (as you'll have to play whoever is available on MTGO, cockatrice, that new site Hoogland plays on "X-something", and/or at your local shop. That's ok too though. Playing as much as you can will always help.
5. Learn from other peoples testing :). That's what makes sites like this so great! I'm trying to get better at listing out exact interactions, important points about each match-up, etc. without leaving a two-page post
6. I tend to play 50/50 pre-board and post- board matchups. While its true that you will only play 33% pre-board games; I like to play a little higher ratio to make certain I see where the strengths and weaknesses are in each match up. The post-board games then can show if the "answers" I chose are worth it.
Beyond this just play, play, play! I hope this helps a little (but I can imagine most of this is kinda common knowledge). You'll find the deck that fits your playstyle. Good luck in your testing !!
I did have Magus of the Moom in the deck for a while (at the time I thought I was a genius because of Chord of Calling :)) ha. Blood Moon, however, even if it can't be Chorded, is way better. I will try them out tonight over Boil and Choke to see how it is. It seems like it could just be better. I like Boil if Scaprshift continues to grow; but Blood Moon is good against MANY more decks. Great idea!!! I'll test it ASAP this evening. I'll add the results to the end of testing "batch 2". :). Let's keep our fingers crossed! I'm always up for improvements!
Ugh....I so badly want to get Nylea in my deck...The very idea that she can instant-speed pump things AFTER they've declared blockers seems so powerful. She's easily a 6/6 creature most games shes in; and the trample is nothing to sneeze at (especially with Chameleon Colossus....so many cards; so few slots. Going to have to try some variations.
Fortunately, however, I will have "set two" of my testing results up tonight (finishing tying them in word now to be copy/pasted over here). I'll make sure to post the list before the results so you see any small changes made prior to this set of results. Tested against the "main decks" as before but also tried out a few opponents that make up smaller, but visible portions of the meta. Excited to see how everyone else is doing as well! I think I'm going to get back on MTGO tonight (been a lnog time) to see if I can't play a few dailies. May take some time getting used to the system; but at least it allows for "posted results".
Anywho, hope everyone else is doing GREAT! I'll get the results up tonight!
And Purkle, I posted a link to the CFB PTQ that the devotion deck hit the top 8 while it was playing. From what I saw, it only got one game on camera (and it wasn't a great game) but obviously he had plenty of great games prior to that! They do talk about it though; so definitely a plus for the archetype!
I was interested in game one to see how Primal Command and Genesis Wave worked together to win the game. We tend to split them up because of the nature of the decks they tend to run in; but it was fun to see a game where they worked together.
I was interested to see how Predator Ooze would work (seemed a little too slow for my version, but a sound devotion card); so it was really helpful to see your testing with it. There's no better way to know if it's a good fit than trying it out; so now you know that BTE and/or Visionary is better. That helps us all.
I liked how your testing showed where Genesis Wave can pull you right into a win. I've had more games than I can count where I went from a loss to an instant-speed win with Wave. I need to do more of what you've done and discuss more exactly what happened turn-by-turn within each match up (rather than just things I've learned and strategy against each match up). It helps to know why. Many other people have done this here; so it is very helpful.
Keep up the great work! Exciting to see other decks and how they play!
You could get away with a Chameleon Colossus over one of the Titans. You could probably also play only one Nissa (and put in a second Colossus, or any card you are interested in trying. Of course, you can try out any 4-6 drops you like in place of either a Titan or a Nissa. You never know; you may find even a better assortment of win-cons then the current list has!
It will be great to have another hard-core tester playing the deck! You already seem pretty well versed with the deck; so the whole "play a couple dozen games first" (because there are a ton of synergies and sequencing decisions that are not easy to see just from the list) preface is not needed in your case.
I can't wait to see your future posts!
These are literally the best two choices! Right now I'm testing with 2 Titans and 1 Chameleon, but if it really works out and I decide to add another Chameleon Colossus I'll probably have to go with a Nissa...you must really have a really good handle on the deck because those are the perfect choices (basically the only cards at this point that can be removed). Great points!
I agree on U Tron variants Purkle...I've tested against U Tron versions plenty; and they seemed popular for about 2 weeks online...but they really aren't a super important portion of the meta right now.
As far as Kiki-Pod goes; it's not too bad. It's definitely a tougher match-up for us than Melria-Pod (as they can top deck into more combos); but still it is generally about 1-2 turns too slow on average. It is still a creature-based deck (which tend to be on the easier end for us). This, however, is based on testing/findings from the Elf-version. I don't know exactly how match ups correlate from one version to the next. I assume they are relatively similar, however; with slight differences in speed and/or consistency. Some of the more "extreme" match-ups (like twin, affinity, control, etc.) may be a little larger variance between the versions; but for match-ups like Kiki-Pod I bet we are relatively close.
On the Prime Time front; while I'm gonna stick with Primeval Titan for a bit (he's just seemed really strong in my testing); it is interesting to hear about other ideas! That's the worst part about green devotion...so many great cards and so little room! I will try to pay attention in my current testing if I would have preferred a different card when casting them and/or if any "sit" in my hand where I could have benefited from a different card.
Interesting discussions guys.
I totally agree Black_Dog. I tend to consider Geist of Saint Traft as a fairly powerful card on it's own, but to everyone has their own opinion.