Enemy battle lands
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on Nov. 24, 2015, 10:24 p.m. by wwhitegoldd
I don't think enemy battle lands will get printed in Oath because wizards likes to keep land bases the same for differant color combinations so no deck has an advantage simply because it has better fixing. They're printing enemy colored man lands as well so if they print enemy colored battlelands AND enemy colored man lands enemy colors would have better fixing even if the man lands don't get played.
What do you guys think?
pookypuppy6 says... #6
I doubt they'd print both the remainder of the enemy manlands and the full cycle of enemy battle-lands in the same small set. That's a lot of rare slots to use on land, and especially if yu are printing, say, 2 Boros-colour rare duals.
November 25, 2015 7:05 a.m.
I actually don't see why they reprinted the enemy coloured pain lands, when the allied coloured ones haven't been reprinted since 10th Edition.Not that they're expensive, but it would have been nice.
But yeah, enemy coloured pain lands, man lands, AND tango lands?Compared to the allied selection of fetches and tangos, I don't think they're likely to add more enemy coloured lands.
More than likely they'll be another allied selection of lands, but maybe not since this is a small set.
November 25, 2015 10:59 a.m.
MindAblaze says... #8
That being said Zendikar is a "lands matter" plane so you never know.
November 25, 2015 12:21 p.m.
@MindAblaze true, but in this specific set it's more like Eldrazi matter more than lands.... And then allies matter slightly more than lands XD
November 25, 2015 1:18 p.m.
wwhitegoldd says... #10
Another reason why it would make sense that they don't print EBL (enemy battle lands) is because of the expeditions. We all know that if EBL where printed Wizards would be dicks and use up 5 of the Expedition spots for them and then there would only be 15 expeditinos left which is enough for one set of ten and then some set of 5 which wouldn't be great. But, if EBL aren't printed two sets of ten lands would be eligible for expeditions. Personally, I'm hoping for man lands and filter lands.
November 25, 2015 1:29 p.m.
Manlands will definitely be 10 of the Expedition lands, it's just a matter of what the other 10 are.
It would have to be a valuable land cycle, so my money would be on Filter lands. Of course it's probable they might fuck us over by giving us pain lands, ravnica karoos, Tarkir life gain lands, Scry lands, etc etc and so forth.
A non-zero chance mind you, but if they wanted to promote the expeditions, they'd put filter lands in.
November 25, 2015 1:54 p.m.
wwhitegoldd says... #12
Frankly, the only reason BFZ did so well was because of the Expeditions. The rest of the set was basically crap except for Gideon and a few chase, quite cheap, cards (which is basically what Origins is and that set didn't sell nearly as well as Khans and BFZ). And, for reasons I don't want to get into right now, Oath is shaping up to be another terrible set. So, I'm guessing the Expeditions will be value cards (like filters) so people will actually want to buy the set.
November 25, 2015 2:12 p.m.
I just really hope they finish the man enemy man lands so I can have 3 play sets in my deck!
November 25, 2015 3:43 p.m.
@wwhitegoldd just to play devils advocate, have we had any confirmed spoilers yet to prove/disprove your statement that Oath is shaping up to be a terrible set?
So far all I've seen are 3 cards that may or not be confirmed, so I think you might be jumping to conclusions there.
But my basis for why this set will be just as terribad as BFZ is because of what Wizards has aimed to do: water down the power level of the standard sets. Its why barely anything from BFZ has seen competitive play, excluding lands.
November 26, 2015 7:15 a.m.
The problem is that right now it is easier to play 3-4 color than it is to play some 2 color.
The mana fixing and fetching is 'near' perfect... but not perfect. - Enemy colors have almost no fixing.
A 
deck, for example, has only it's basics and Battlefield Forge (and... sure... Wind-Scarred Crag, I guess., but Lands coming in tapped is not what a deck would want.)
This is a far cry from an Abzan deck that can use Wooded Foothills or Flooded Strand to fetch for any (or a combination of) 
/
/... as well as Windswept Heath for and/or . - While being able to splash and/or 
quite easily.
And that's for Wedge. Mana gets better with Shard colors and, to some degree, even 4-color.
Right now, play 2 Enemy colors and you get punished for it. - Poor mana fixing with fetching only being for 'thinning', and, because of FRF being allied color, you don't have access to the slightly raised power level of multicolour cards.
Not putting in the other 5 Tango lands would be a huge mistake. - Wizards has stated they want to always print full cycles of lands, and they have stated that they don't want the mana base to be the reason for people to play (or not play) certain color combinations. - Not printing the last 5 Tangos will effectively cause them to go back on both of those statements.
November 26, 2015 8:53 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #16
Until WotC explicitly reveals that there shall not be enemy-colored "battle lands" in Oath of the Gatewatch, I shall remain hopeful that there shall be such lands in that set; did not WoTC say that they would be giving equal support to all ten two-color combinations, and printing dual lands in cycles of ten? The shocklands, filter lands, and scrylands are all cycles of ten, so why would they break from that pattern, now? Also, I really need enemy-colored battle lands, because I have a red/white deck and a red/blue deck that could use them, and I do not wish to spend an exorbitant amount of money on four copies of Sacred Foundry, Steam Vents, Rugged Prairie or Cascade Bluffs.
November 26, 2015 12:13 p.m.
MindAblaze says... #17
They didn't say they'd print lands in cycles of ten, they said they'd make sure colours are equally represented. Enemy colored pairs actually have 10 rare non basics right now and allied has 5 and the fetches.
November 26, 2015 1:07 p.m.
Actually, not only did they say they would be printing full cycles but when the Pain Lands were originally announced for M15... HERE..., they restated that this was their goal.
"I mentioned last year that we were moving more toward printing full cycles of lands in a block to make the mana work for Constructed and for Block Constructed. That isn't changing." - Sam Stoddard
It's now been over 2 years since the original statement, and over a year since they restated it... yet they have yet to print a full cycle of anything. - Half the Fetches... Half the pain lands, TWICE! - It will be a dig disappointment to the playing community if they are only printing half of a NEW cycle.
November 26, 2015 1:36 p.m. Edited.
MindAblaze is correct, they went on record a while back to say that they'd deviate from printing cycles of ten, to say that they would not print cycles of 10 for cards, probably 5 at most (I forget the specifics of the article as it was ages ago that I read it...)
I think it was just after Theros block that they announced it, because that was the last set to have a mega cycle of 10 rare lands
November 26, 2015 1:42 p.m.
The link I provided is dated June 26, 2014, which is after any announcements they would have made around Theros.
If you have any newer information on Wizards stance on this, please feel free to provide a link.
November 26, 2015 1:51 p.m.
MindAblaze says... #21
He outright says "expect a cycle of dual lands in khans of Tarkir" then we get common duals and 5 fetches. So many shades of grey.
MindAblaze says... #2
Enemy pain lands are also standard right now.
I wouldn't be surprised. Save them for another set.
November 24, 2015 10:34 p.m. Edited.