Curious to compare with Bant Panorama. A bit better, because you can get white for a bit then blue or green later, but... in fact, isn't this very nearly strictly worse than Seaside Citadel?

Kind of wacky, when you consider the fact that, if this is a full cycle, that this could get you a Swamp or a Mountain in two turns (Sacrifice to get the green one, which is also a Land-Forest, then sacrifice that one to get a Mountain.)

It's not "strictly worse" because it has a basic land type, and it searches your library for nonbasic lands. It thins your deck and provides colorless mana. It's almost certainly better than the Panorama Cycle, but I don't know that it's actually any good.

It's certainly not strictly worse than Bant Panorama. I was asking if it was strictly worse than Seaside Citadel. Okay, yes, this thins your deck, and goes crazy if you have $40 lands. But for most players, isn't the in-game experience going to be worse than Seaside Citadel?

Those tri-lands are some of the most expensive uncommon lands out there. Seaside Citadel currently goes for $1.80 per for the medium price at tcgplayer.com. To be honest, I think they might be the high water mark for triple lands for a little while. Though, for all I know, they could be trumped in the next block. Magic is funny like that.

You're probably right, Alex. Seaside Citadel does compare rather favorably in several ways.