deckstats.net
You need to be logged in to do this.
The buttons above will open in a new window. Please return to this window after you have logged in. When you have logged in, click the Refresh Session button and then try again.

Author Topic: Green or No Green?  (Read 1583 times)

GeekMagicWarp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Karma: 10
  • Decks
Green or No Green?
« on: May 02, 2016, 01:28:15 pm »
In a Tron deck is it worth adding green and making my 8 non-Tron lands all dual lands for no other reason than to have Sylvan Scrying?
I have a mono-black tron that works ok but I tend to have trouble getting Tron "online" (despite running 4 Expedition Maps). If I add green I can run Sylvan Scrying and was thinking about sideboarding Putrefy. Thoughts?

This is roughly the deck in question:
http://deckstats.net/decks/57478/412439-black-tron

I would be swapping out the Cruel Edicts for the Sylvan Scrying and adding the edicts to the sb.

EBWonder

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Karma: 23
  • Doing the voodoo that I do so well
  • Decks
Re: Green or No Green?
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2016, 04:54:59 pm »
If you did, I'd swap the swamps for dual lands that do not come into play tapped. I'd probably move ugin and the lanterns to the SB for sylvan scrying personally, but then I'm nowhere near a pro.

WWolfe

  • Patron
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
  • Karma: 1368
  • Banging and (spell) slanging!
  • Decks
Re: Green or No Green?
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2016, 04:59:10 am »
If there's something else you'd include that was green like you mentioned with Putrefy I could see adding it, Sylvan Scrying, & some dual lands, but I wouldn't for just four cards and I wouldn't take out all the basics in case someone is running Blood Moon or some kind of Ruination effect.

This space for rent.

G. Moto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3101
  • Karma: 472
  • Helping Planeswalkers one post at a time.
  • Decks
Re: Green or No Green?
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2016, 05:56:07 am »
   I recommend green. One thing to consider is swell of growth. That way even the lands that do come in tapped you can play them on your OPPONENT's turn. This way you can give a quick power boost to a creature you need, on your turn you get a untapped dual land, and you still get to play your land for turn. With green you get lands AND you get to play them fast.

EBWonder

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Karma: 23
  • Doing the voodoo that I do so well
  • Decks
Re: Green or No Green?
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2016, 03:53:42 pm »
If there's something else you'd include that was green like you mentioned with Putrefy I could see adding it, Sylvan Scrying, & some dual lands, but I wouldn't for just four cards and I wouldn't take out all the basics in case someone is running Blood Moon or some kind of Ruination effect.
in this case, I'd run basic in my sb, probably two of each

GeekMagicWarp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Karma: 10
  • Decks
Re: Green or No Green?
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2016, 04:57:48 pm »
If there's something else you'd include that was green like you mentioned with Putrefy I could see adding it, Sylvan Scrying, & some dual lands, but I wouldn't for just four cards and I wouldn't take out all the basics in case someone is running Blood Moon or some kind of Ruination effect.
in this case, I'd run basic in my sb, probably two of each

This is pretty much exactly what I'm thinking. Swap out the swamps for duals and run 2 of each basic in SB. I think I'm gonna also do away with or at least sideboard In Garruk's Wake as well. It's awesome when it happens but with 4 spatial contortions and if I add in the putrefy then by the time I can cast it the opponent shouldn't have much of a board state anyway. Also considering something like ruinous path for targeting planeswalkers. Thanks for all the opinions.