[Primer] Elves!

Lol okay. My brain may have wandered off there. I guess I missed your original intent.

That boarding plan seems fine.

I agree that the matchup is somewhat dependent on the cards you listed, but in my experience I actually think the matchup hinges more on whether or not they have a Force in their hand. Because if they don't have that, then all they have is discard to stop us. So in that regard, bringing in your own proactive discard seems like a good idea.

As far as approaching the matchup more generally, I don't think I'd want to play the long game against Shardless, since they just have so many stupid ways to get card advantage and you give them more time to draw into their 2x Golgari Charm. Whenever I play against that deck, I just go for the combo as hard and fast as possible. They don't have enough countermagic to keep up. However, if you get hit with the 1, 2, discard punch, then perhaps you may be forced to change gears and try to assemble the best friend team to get back into the game.

Has anybody else noticed how insanely easy it is to hardcast CHoof with four Cradles? I'm starting to think maybe Natural Order is unnecessary. My maindeck, just for reference-

//Lands-18
4 Gaea's Cradle
4 Verdant Catacombs
3 Windswept Heath
2 Wooded Foothills
2 Bayou
1 Forest
2 Dryad Arbor

//Creatures-31
4 Deathrite Shaman
4 Nettle Sentinel
4 Heritage Druid
4 Wirewood Symbiote
4 Elvish Visionary
4 Quirion Ranger
2 Llanowar Elves
2 Birchlore Rangers
2 Craterhoof Behemoth
1 Viridian Shaman

//Spells-11
4 Glimpse of Nature
4 Green Sun's Zenith
3 Natural Order


I'm gonna run some tests without the Natural Orders to see how it runs. Something like
-3 Natural Order
+1 Hoof
+2 Crop Rotation

I grow to hate the 2nd Arbor. Every time I find it in an opening hand it feels like a blank in a deck which wants to race his opponent. Even worse if you get it in a mulligan hand or you have to open with it, just to see it hit by Wasteland or a Lightning Bolt (Topic: RUG).

The extra activation of Quirion via GSZ into Arbor #2 isn't worth doubling the danger of seeing it in your opener. Atm i'm perfectly fine having 1 to GSZ into but I don't see it necessary to have a second in MB or SB, not even for the NO-Progenitus plan in games 2 & 3, 'cause if your deck Full of 1cc green dorks needs the Arbor to have a green creature for NO something went terribly wrong.

To the folks with tournament expertise running the Arbor #2: Didn't it "lose" more games like described above than winning with the additional Quirion activation like I noticed in my testing? Is it worth doubling the Chance to draw it in your opener? I seriously doubt it. I'll kick it out of my 75 for the rest of my testing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HammafistRoob

Has anybody else noticed how insanely easy it is to hardcast CHoof with four Cradles? I'm starting to think maybe Natural Order is unnecessary. My maindeck, just for reference-

//Lands-18
4 Gaea's Cradle
4 Verdant Catacombs
3 Windswept Heath
2 Wooded Foothills
2 Bayou
1 Forest
2 Dryad Arbor

//Creatures-31
4 Deathrite Shaman
4 Nettle Sentinel
4 Heritage Druid
4 Wirewood Symbiote
4 Elvish Visionary
4 Quirion Ranger
2 Llanowar Elves
2 Birchlore Rangers
2 Craterhoof Behemoth
1 Viridian Shaman

//Spells-11
4 Glimpse of Nature
4 Green Sun's Zenith
3 Natural Order


I'm gonna run some tests without the Natural Orders to see how it runs. Something like
-3 Natural Order
+1 Hoof
+2 Crop Rotation

---

Sure you can generate enough mana to hardcast Hoof with Cradle-Rotation, but don't forget that NO gives you additional virtual copies of Hoof and that all for a significantly reduced cost against decks which may won't let you develop a board of half a dozen elves, Yet alone having the flex'y to run Progenitus or to Tutor into a V. Shaman or a Teeg

I'm aware of Natural Orders utility. I just want to try something different for some games but I will probably realize it's not as good and go back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absolutflipz

I was more just looking on thoughts of how to board the matchup.

I'm pretty set on +1 Progenitus, +2 Ooze, +1 Eternal Witness (or insert whatever c/a card you have).

My question now is whether a couple Discard spells are worth it to bring in to hit devastating cards like Charm or to get a FoW out of the way to get Progenitus out.

This matchup seems very dependent on Progenitus, Visionary/Symbiote, and Ooze/Deathrite. What do you think?

---

If you're going to use progenitus, you should replace e-wit with the 4th NO. One of the biggest mistakes elf players make is over-boarding against fair decks. You don't need your own discard when you can straight race shardless BUG and other decks relying primarily on discard. Glimpse on turn 2/3 can usually bait out the FoW in their hand. If they don't counter it, you're already way ahead (and can possibly combo out). If they were able to discard/counter glimpse, it's fairly straight-forward to set-up a t3 NO->progenitus/hoof. If they have t1 thoughtseize and t2 hymn, gsz->symbiote/visionary should still let you draw into more gas. Between 4x glimpse, NO, and gsz, it's hard for them to stop everything AND apply a clock.

@Lemnear: The 2nd arbor was in my sb the last time I played. The games where the 2nd arbor was needed most were ones where they wasted/stp'ed/decay'ed my 1st one and I wanted the 2nd one to fight jitte and sofaf. There were times where I wanted it game 1 but I still pulled those games out. While it might not be needed, it definitely can save time and allow you to rest more in between rounds. It's a nice-to-have in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nudon

@Lemnear: The 2nd arbor was in my sb the last time I played.

-snip-

It's a nice-to-have in my opinion.

---

Atm i'm more concerned wirh the "shit, there is it again!" Moments in my opening draws, which not only deny my turn 1 elf-drop but are also a thankful target for removal. I've lost too many Test-games this week because of having to Start with Arbor that i'm fed up. Being on the draw against RUG and having Arbor in your 7 or 6 it the worst feeling I can imagine atm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Atm i'm more concerned wirh the "shit, there is it again!" Moments in my opening draws, which not only deny my turn 1 elf-drop but are also a thankful target for removal. I've lost too many Test-games this week because of having to Start with Arbor that i'm fed up. Being on the draw against RUG and having Arbor in your 7 or 6 it the worst feeling I can imagine atm.

---

Why are you playing arbor out on turn 1? If it's your only land, I would definitely mulligan those hands. What does your mana base look like (you might be light on the number of turn 1 playable lands)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nudon

Why are you playing arbor out on turn 1? If it's your only land, I would definitely mulligan those hands. What does your mana base look like (you might be light on the number of turn 1 playable lands)?

---

Nah, pretty Standard:

4 Cradle
3 Misty Rainforest
2 Verdant Catacombs
2 Wooded Foothills
2 Windswept Heath
2 Bayou
1 Savannah
1 Forest
1 Dryad Arbor

Aka 18 lands. Still sucks if you have a 6 or 7 with Arbor (sometimes als your only Land) or a hand which would Profit from having Arbor + Elf/symbiote turn 2 to drop a cradle (for 2 more Elves or to assemble the BFF combo). Previously there was an Arbor in the place of the savannah but I test with the white Splash for the moment

@nudon: if we Mull hands with Arbor or cradle (even multiples of them) we only have 12 lands left in the deck which make a hand keepable. That's on a Level with TES and I really feel bad to run that many "non-mana-lands" like Cradle and Arbor. Unlike Cradle, Arbor is a miserable draw in like any situation

I used to run the 2nd Arbor in my SB.
Got turned into what I call "random-utility-slot" based on the metagame that can change in a heartbeat.

Note: Played Dredge to a 2-1 finish yesterday to get myself out of the Elves! way of thinking.
Jeez. That's an interesting deck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

@nudon: if we Mull hands with Arbor or cradle (even multiples of them) we only have 12 lands left in the deck which make a hand keepable. That's on a Level with TES and I really feel bad to run that many "non-mana-lands" like Cradle and Arbor. Unlike Cradle, Arbor is a miserable draw in like any situation

---

Adding savannah in place of the 2nd arbor gives you 13 turn 1 lands. The discussion of 12/13/14 playable lands was somewhat addressed a few pages ago. Personally, I think 14 is safe but use 13 since there's a tradeoff between the number of cradles/arbor(s) you can fit in addition without diluting your glimpse draws. 12 is more explosive for glimpse but more prone to mulligan hands. I know where you're coming from with drawing arbors in the opener so maybe you can try it in the sb? Games 2 and 3 generally take longer so playing out arbor after all your other lands have hit the table isn't nearly as bad. It doesn't cost mana but still gives NO a sac outlet while improving the overrun effect from craterhoof.

Forums at my response, agh.

Now, in much a shorter version -

Went 3-1 losing in the last round g3 to RUG Delver for exactsies the turn before I would've killed him (he was 2) with a Delver attack and 2x bolt as his last 2 cards in hand (already using 2x chain and 1x bolt earlier).

I played against pox. Sorry, SOMEONE is still playing that deck. Beat dark rit. into e. plague t1 as Scavenging Ooze is the shit.

Went off turn 2 against dredge. Just fun and pretty sweet to hit the actual turn 2. Opponent thought I should bring in Thorns/Thalia while I opted for 2x Ooze and a Teeg for Dread Return. Think I'd rather control the yard while comboing off as soon as possible tho (does this mean maybe no Teeg, too?); thoughts on Thorn effects here?

I would not play less than 2 Oozes between main/side - the card is a house in postboard games and makes up for a lot of our postboard weakneses.

I think I do want the 4th NO in the board over something because Progenitus was huge for me against BUG (along with Deathrite/Ooze being key, and obv. Visionary). This begs the question of the 2nd Arbor in the board (prevent edict from liliana, easy NO sac, etc..) but sideboard space is so tight in legacy, so I don't know.

So I am going to run this in 2 days and I just want some opinions. I decided to take out Realm Razer and I am thinking about putting something else in the place of Jitte. Maybe another Decay. I am still waiting on my 4th Cradle, Taiga will be coming out for it. Anyway:

Creatures: 32
3 Birchlore Rangers
2 Craterhoof Behemoth
4 Deathrite Shaman
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Elvish Mystic
4 Elvish Visionary
4 Heritage Druid
1 Llanowar Elves
4 Nettle Sentinel
1 Progenitus
3 Quirion Ranger
4 Wirewood Symbiote

Spells: 11
4 Glimpse of Nature
4 Green Sun's Zenith
3 Natural Order

Land: 17
2 Bayou
2 Forest
3 Gaea's Cradle
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Savannah
1 Taiga

Side: 15
1 Gaddock Teeg
1 Loaming Shaman
1 Harmonic Sliver
1 Ruric Thar, the Unbowed
1 Terastodon
1 Scavenging Ooze
1 Umezawa's Jitte
3 Abrupt Decay
4 Cabal Therapy
1 Natural Order

To be honest right now I am set on nothing. This we be my first game with them in a while so I will try anything once. I have been reading on the 2 Dryad discussion and I am in agreement that 2 is not the best number so I cut one for a mana elf. I cut a Birchlore for another mana elf to have 2 and the four DRS. I have this wish to cut a DRS for a Mystic. Any thoughts on that too would be appreciated.

Dice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dice_Box

So I am going to run this in 2 days and I just want some opinions. I decided to take out Realm Razer and I am thinking about putting something else in the place of Jitte. Maybe another Decay. I am still waiting on my 4th Cradle, Taiga will be coming out for it. Anyway:

Creatures: 32
3 Birchlore Rangers
2 Craterhoof Behemoth
4 Deathrite Shaman
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Elvish Mystic
4 Elvish Visionary
4 Heritage Druid
1 Llanowar Elves
4 Nettle Sentinel
1 Progenitus
3 Quirion Ranger
4 Wirewood Symbiote

Spells: 11
4 Glimpse of Nature
4 Green Sun's Zenith
3 Natural Order

Land: 17
2 Bayou
2 Forest
3 Gaea's Cradle
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Savannah
1 Taiga

Side: 15
1 Gaddock Teeg
1 Loaming Shaman
1 Harmonic Sliver
1 Ruric Thar, the Unbowed
1 Terastodon
1 Scavenging Ooze
1 Umezawa's Jitte
3 Abrupt Decay
4 Cabal Therapy
1 Natural Order

To be honest right now I am set on nothing. This we be my first game with them in a while so I will try anything once. I have been reading on the 2 Dryad discussion and I am in agreement that 2 is not the best number so I cut one for a mana elf. I cut a Birchlore for another mana elf to have 2 and the four DRS. I have this wish to cut a DRS for a Mystic. Any thoughts on that too would be appreciated.

Dice.

---

Progenitus Mainboard is useless as the combination of 3 NO, 3 Cradles but 3 Fatties just doesn't make any sense (with even 2 more Fatties in the board). You'll need more Oozes to Battle RUG Delver and graveyard strategies.

Edit: You missed 4 fetchlands in the list, I guess ;)

I played with 4 Birchlore Rangers, 0 Llanowar Mana Dorks & Ruric Thar MD yesterday.
I think I'll never go back to mana dorks (except the obvious 4 DRS) since Birchlore is so good now with the splash colors & the speed (4 cradles), it helped me a lot & IMO is the way to go.
Also, Ruric Thar overperformed, I GSZ him into play more often than to spend a NO for him so counterspells aren't that crucial. But watch out not to run into a Karakas! He's great in this metagame.

Starting to get really irritated with the lack of maindeck interaction combined with the near total uselessness of our individual pieces. So, so want to figure out a build that can play Inquisition or Thoughtseize or something maindeck. Crutch? Sure. Do I feel I need it? Yes. Or maybe I'm just too used to playing engine combo decks built from ETB critters instead of totally useless Elves. Dunno.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zombie

Starting to get really irritated with the lack of maindeck interaction combined with the near total uselessness of our individual pieces. So, so want to figure out a build that can play Inquisition or Thoughtseize or something maindeck. Crutch? Sure. Do I feel I need it? Yes. Or maybe I'm just too used to playing engine combo decks built from ETB critters instead of totally useless Elves. Dunno.

---

I think that the more interaction you put into the deck you push your fundamental turn forward making comboing off early harder. However, I'm not completely sure I agree that the best way to go with this deck is to build it to be able to go off as early as possible. I win most of my games playing as a resilient aggro-deck that threatens to Hoof or go off with Glimpse at any time. The opponent can't let their guard down and has to play around that all the time. In my experience the main deck Scavenging Ooze and DRS's are doing heavy work being good threats on their own in that scenario.

So I could see adding even more interaction to the main deck. Against what decks do you feel that you don't have enough interaction?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Progenitus Mainboard is useless as the combination of 3 NO, 3 Cradles but 3 Fatties just doesn't make any sense (with even 2 more Fatties in the board). You'll need more Oozes to Battle RUG Delver and graveyard strategies.

Edit: You missed 4 fetchlands in the list, I guess ;)

---

I do have the second grave hate in the from of Loaming. Might not be the best choice buts it's more a test anyway. I might trade out Pro from Harmonic and give that a go. I like it. Also I did forget 4 catacombs. Oops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

@nudon: if we Mull hands with Arbor or cradle (even multiples of them) we only have 12 lands left in the deck which make a hand keepable. That's on a Level with TES and I really feel bad to run that many "non-mana-lands" like Cradle and Arbor. Unlike Cradle, Arbor is a miserable draw in like any situation

---

I did some math regarding the second arbor, and it appears that the problem with it is the fact that it pushes our "mulligan" percentage to nearly 50%. With 14 "forests" and 4 dead cards (2 hoof 2 arbor, let's face it, no one likes these in hand), we have 48.27% of either getting no lands, or getting at least 1 of 4 dead cards. That's terrible for a deck with no way to fix its hand. That said, running one less dead card only drops the probability to 41.03%, which is still really awful. It's just not worth the jump IMO. These probabilities don't even count the chance to draw the dead cards after the opening hand, which obviously increases with more dead cards in the deck. The chance to draw other bad openers like 4-5 land hands, or hands full of spells and no creatures is also not accounted for in these probabilities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Ix

I did some math regarding the second arbor, and it appears that the problem with it is the fact that it pushes our "mulligan" percentage to nearly 50%. With 14 "forests" and 4 dead cards (2 hoof 2 arbor, let's face it, no one likes these in hand), we have 48.27% of either getting no lands, or getting at least 1 of 4 dead cards. That's terrible for a deck with no way to fix its hand. That said, running one less dead card only drops the probability to 41.03%, which is still really awful. It's just not worth the jump IMO. These probabilities don't even count the chance to draw the dead cards after the opening hand, which obviously increases with more dead cards in the deck. The chance to draw other bad openers like 4-5 land hands, or hands full of spells and no creatures is also not accounted for in these probabilities.

---

Are you saying here that 7% less mulligans isn't worth cutting the Second Arbor and that the random cute block-tricks are worth it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .Ix

I did some math regarding the second arbor, and it appears that the problem with it is the fact that it pushes our "mulligan" percentage to nearly 50%. With 14 "forests" and 4 dead cards (2 hoof 2 arbor, let's face it, no one likes these in hand), we have 48.27% of either getting no lands, or getting at least 1 of 4 dead cards. That's terrible for a deck with no way to fix its hand. That said, running one less dead card only drops the probability to 41.03%, which is still really awful. It's just not worth the jump IMO. These probabilities don't even count the chance to draw the dead cards after the opening hand, which obviously increases with more dead cards in the deck. The chance to draw other bad openers like 4-5 land hands, or hands full of spells and no creatures is also not accounted for in these probabilities.

---

A Craterhoof in hand is perfectly fine, especially for the 4 Cradle builds. It isn't ideal but it's by no means a dead card. In fact, it's a lifesaver if your opponent has something like Gaddock Teeg, Aven Mindcensor, or Grafdigger's Cage on the board.

A Dryad Arbor in hand is much more awkward, but I wouldn't mull it either if the rest of the hand were playable. You should not be mulling anywhere near 50% of your hands.