[SCD]Rubblebelt Maaka

[warwizard87]

Rubblebelt Maaka

i dont think this is a card for gruul, but i think it can have serious implications in RDWS and/or Boros builds.
with ash zealot it takes down almost everything in t2.
allows your 1 drops more UMPH in combat.
acts as a pusdo lava spike with unblocked dudes.
it is unfair with Hound of Griselbrand.
if your spotting pyreheart wolf in RDW and they block something with 2 guys it normally lets you take down both.
it is still a hill giant when you pull it off the top after a board sweeper.

what do you think, i havent found the right formula yet for him, either deck or numbers but im working on it. input would be handy =]

[rcwraspy]

In my opinion you're correct that it's not for Gruul, since we have Ghor-Clan Rampager.

And in straight RDW, I'd think that Pyrewild Shaman makes the cut over the Maaka. Similar effect for a slightly higher cost and it gives you a mana sink. I think the Shaman will be especially needed once Stonewright rotates out.

Rubblebelt Maaka is trying to trick you. The numbers just don't quite work with it. +3/+3 for R is nice. But Ghor-Clan Rampager works so well because it's an on-curve threat even when you're not bloodrushing it. a 4/4 Trample for 4. Maaka is a vanilla 3/3 for 4. It's not a card you ever want to hard-cast.

[warwizard87]

i dont know about shaman though, it dosnt make the guy survive a spear. and if people dont see green they still spear in the attackers step. i like the shamans reusablility but i like how maaka makes any blocks bad, trading 1 mana and a giant growth for a guy. yeah i can see shaman being nutty after stonewright leaves though,
you never WANT to cast it obviously but then the option of being able to do so is still important. (hah my spell check made important, impotent before i caught it funny funny spellcheck)

[zemanjaski]

I don't think it is good enough for constructed; it is barely better than Giant Growth which we would never play, and a 3/3 with no abilities of 4 is just awful. GCR being a 4/4 trample is just SO much better.

[windstrider]

Would you play a Hill Giant? Because Maaka is a Hill Giant with a minimal upside. And there are simply better options at 4 cmc right now. If you want the pump effect, Stonewright is excellent.

[zemanjaski]

Just as an aside, Maaka is great in draft because the format is defined by 2/2s and 2/4s as the standard body size, so he fits in well. The faster pace of constructed makes this a much less relevant consideation, where red decks aren't really generating VCA through shutting down a board of opposing weenies.

[warwizard87]

i can def see that, im gonna still playtest with it, never hurts to see how the card is in action.

[LP, of the Fires]

I wouldn't say we'd never play Giant growth. I remember brute force being a card in spiral block and seeing play; granted in a different era of magic. Maaka is quite a bit better then brute force but on the other hand, dynacharge seems like a better overall card if you want a pump affect since it represents more damage. Still...worth thinking about I guess. The problem is currently, I see no reason to be mono red right now and if I want a pump affect, as Z said Ghor-Clan is pretty broken.