[Primer] Elves!

I have compared my current deck to that of Danyul at the SCG in 21-4-2013 and I see that I have mostly the same main 60 now.

From my 60 to those 60:
-1 Craterhoof Behemoth (2>1)
-1 Viridian Shaman (1>0)
-1 Forest (3>2)
+1 Heritage Druid (3>4)
+1 Regal Force (0>1)
+1 Gaea's Cradle (2>3)

Then again. Looking at the list form August, I see that Danyul made some changes.
From my 60 to those 60 are:
-1 Forest (3>2)
-2 Crop Rotation (2>0)
-2 Llanowar / Fyndhorn Elves (2>0)
-1 Priest Of Titania (1>0)
+1 Heritage Druid (3>4)
+2 Birchlore Rangers (1>3)
+1 Dryad Arbor (1>2)
+2 Gaea's Cradle (2>4)


@Danyul: what is your current stance at
- 2 Craterhoof vs 1 Hoof, 1 Force?
- 3 Birchlores vs 1 Birchlore, 2 Llanowar / Fyndhorn Elves / Mystic Elf?
- 2nd Dryad Arbor?
- 13 initial lands vs 14 initianl lands? Still on the 13?


Obviously at least a -1 CR, +1 Cradle is a good idea and most here would vote for the -2, +2 Cradle. However, Cradles aren't cheap, I don't play that much, so wether I keep it at 2,3 or 4 Cradles, is not a matter of choice, really.

I will test 13 initial with 4 Heritage, going -1 Forest (3>2), +1 Heritage (3>4). It seems like a good idea: not only you are doing it, I see also Chranderson having it, also Lukas Maurer, albeit pre-DRS 2nd place @ GP Ghent had 13 initial lands. So for those who already have only 13 initial lands - you are iin good company.


@Chranderson....
- I like your ideas. 3 or 4 Llanowar / Fyndhorn Elves / ME feels right to me. Do you miss the Birchlore you traded in for 1 though?

@kayradis
- you have the least initial lands of all I have in my spreadsheet. Only 12 initial lands! I'd advise you to ditch your Multani's Acolyte or Crop Rotation for a Fetch or even a Forest. Better yet, ditch both and a Forest and a Taiga to support your maindeck Thar.


Thanks in advice for all three to answer those questions!

Some of the lists you are referencing are out of date. The new legendary rules changed things a little bit.

I have been slowly updating the primer on my home computer but have yet to move it over to this thread. There have been back to back to back Legacy tournaments up here and I haven't had much free time to sit around poking at a primer. But it will get updated sometime after the Seattle SCG Open on October 19th with current lists.

Right now I think most of us can agree that:

-4 Cradles are standard. If you can't afford them, Crop Rotation is a decent substitute.
-2 Hoof main. Unless you live in Comboville, USA. Then you might run -1 Hoof, +1 Ruric Thar.

And actually, that's about it.

Some are maxing out on Birchlores. Some only run a single Dryad Arbor.

I am currently on 1 Birchlore, 2 Llanowar, 2 Dryad Arbor, 19 lands (9 fetch, 4 GCradle, 2 Arbor, 2 Bayou, 2 Forest) but I'm thinking about going to 20.

That said, *you should just run whatever list makes you happy*. There are merits for the faster builds with 4 Birchlores and there are merits for the slower builds with 2 Arbors and fewer Birchlores. I don't know your meta so it seems presumptuous for me to tell you how to build your deck. But those are the paths that people are taking right now.

I am a thoughtless netdecker zombie so my list constantly changes with what seems to be winning at the moment. My current mainboard list is 1 card off of Andrew Cuneo>Reid Duke's revised list from his SCG Premium article.

@kayradis - lol we need to get you a new phone. Spend less $ on foils and buy one! I'll get pictures up in a bit. I don't think my list is as pretty as some others (Lemnear? ChineseEricguy?)

http://www.twitch.tv/gay_jesus_of_nazareth

currently streaming legacy elves

@Kay
Was about time! One less to worry

@Daniel
My decks are usually englisch new-frame FOIL with german FBB duals ... Nothing toooooooo fancy imo. German cards tend to have some really stupid names and I like to have my opponents be able to read the cards without calling a judge over every 2 minutes at international events and ask for the rules text. (That crap Breaks my concentration)

Lately I am thinking a lot about elves and I want to try out a new build. Usually I would brew and test first, but elves is one of the few threads with decent discussions so I want to know your thoughts. :) I think some of you already worked in similar directions.

My thought is that the "regular" elves gameplan got so powerful that I want to have a really streamlined maindeck without shenanigangs like crop rotation, ooze, titania/archdruid, but as much fast mana as possible and 4 Natural Orders and maybe a Progenitus main. Most decks can't really beat a progenitus anyway...

Preboard I want to have a couple of different routes:
1) Glimpse
2) Play a lot of dudes and NO craterhoof
3) In case you are disrupted heavily or have to bait stuff play only a couple of dudes NO -> Progenitus
4) BFF

Questions arising are:
- birchlore vs. mana elves? - what's the best to generate mana in your experience...
- 2nd dryad -> hate it but might be valuable enough?
- 2 hoof and 1 prog or 1:1 split?
- playing 4 NO without the progenitus?

Thanks...

I still maintain that you don't want to have too many "enablers" and not enough density of creatures. This is even more important with Natural Order -> Hoof plan, since you want 3-4 creatures in play to make it worthwhile. The deck is already at a core of 11 non-creature spells, which I think may be at the upper limit. Adding more Natural Order means a higher chance of seeing it, but you also risk hands that have too many spells and not enough creatures. Added to that, the deck can cycle through a lot of cards very easily; making it more likely to see cards that may not be 4-ofs. I think 3 Natural Order is a good balance between those two competing ideas.

Birchlore vs Llanowars -- We have about 3-4 slots for this mana elf. A mix might be correct. I'm currently on 1 Birchlore and 2 Llanowars. This seems stable for me and I always enjoy seeing Llanowar Elf in the opening hand.

The second Dryad Arbor might make more sense in the SB against matchups where you want the high density of Natural Order into Progenitus/Ruric Thar, or other standalone targets. The SB plan then becomes +1 Natural Order, +1 fattie, and +1 Dryad Arbor to complement that plan. This is similar to CFB's sideboard from GP Denver.

What do you think about U splash in side ?

Swan Song, Pierce, fluster

Am between B and U splash but which is better ?

Splash :u:?

No. Sorry.

Omni-tell Match up : T1 Leyline, u got 2 cabal in main hand. Counts are your only out.

Just an uncommon situation.

Just be the faster deck. assuming the go T1 Leyline, that's 1 less card in hand they have to find their combo.

Here's my side :

3 Thoughtseize
4 Cabal
1 Qasali
1 Gaddock
1 Pro
1 NO
3 Decay
1 Ooze

Assuming the T1 leyline when you side in 7 discard ? Really ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eternal

Assuming the T1 leyline when you side in 7 discard ? Really ?

---

I'll have to find the SCG Live game where that plan goes horribly, horribly wrong for the Elf player. It's common knowledge Elves plays discard in the sideboard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koby

I'll have to find the SCG Live game where that plan goes horribly, horribly wrong for the Elf player. It's common knowledge Elves plays discard in the sideboard.

---

I believe he was agreeing with you.

The question then becomes how good are Thorns/Thalia. I have played with that package for a while, too. They can be great, but they can also really disrupt your own plan (GSZ, NO, Glimpse) to the point of equally-hurting yourself.

Are there any other options beside discard and thorn/thalia? Does the only option remaining in this same vein boil down to what he was suggesting...blue counterspells?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absolutflipz

Are there any other options beside discard and thorn/thalia? Does the only option remaining in this same vein boil down to what he was suggesting...blue counterspells?

---

Silence
Orim's Chant

Which conveniently also trump Terminus if you manage to get around Counterbalance.

For now, I'm on Choke in the sideboard; at least for the MODO meta. Miracles much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koby

I still maintain that you don't want to have too many "enablers" and not enough density of creatures. This is even more important with Natural Order -> Hoof plan, since you want 3-4 creatures in play to make it worthwhile. The deck is already at a core of 11 non-creature spells, which I think may be at the upper limit. Adding more Natural Order means a higher chance of seeing it, but you also risk hands that have too many spells and not enough creatures. Added to that, the deck can cycle through a lot of cards very easily; making it more likely to see cards that may not be 4-ofs. I think 3 Natural Order is a good balance between those two competing ideas.

Birchlore vs Llanowars -- We have about 3-4 slots for this mana elf. A mix might be correct. I'm currently on 1 Birchlore and 2 Llanowars. This seems stable for me and I always enjoy seeing Llanowar Elf in the opening hand.

The second Dryad Arbor might make more sense in the SB against matchups where you want the high density of Natural Order into Progenitus/Ruric Thar, or other standalone targets. The SB plan then becomes +1 Natural Order, +1 fattie, and +1 Dryad Arbor to complement that plan. This is similar to CFB's sideboard from GP Denver.

---

Basically agree on what you write... I also worked with these assumptions/plans, but I want to explore new routes.
NO is so freaking strong that it feels strange having only 3 maindeck. The problem of having too many enablers is also a consideration, which is why I would opt to include NO-Prog in the maindeck. NO-Prog is clearly the "win-con" with the least precondition considering creatures on board/in hand.

In a 4 NO configuration I would learn more towards Birchlore in the split since he is much better at dumping out guys for NO even if your early manadorks are killed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

In a 4 NO configuration I would learn more towards Birchlore in the split since he is much better at dumping out guys for NO even if your early manadorks are killed.

---

I disagree completely with this reasoning. Birchlore Ranger utilizes two elves to generate one mana. Llanowar uses only one. Llanowar Elves and Quirion Ranger provide more explosive mana in the early turns and towards reaching 4 mana than does Birchlore Rangers. In my experience, Birchlore Ranger helps more in Glimpse chains than helping to cast Natural Order. I will concede that Birchlore chains help Natural Order become lethal; but those situations are rare. A turn 2 "partial non-lethal" NO for Hoof is about equal to a turn 3 "lethal" NO in terms of damage output.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koby

(...) A turn 2 "partial non-lethal" NO for Hoof is about equal to a turn 3 "lethal" NO in terms of damage output.

---

That is a situation not too uncommon to me. So, I'd like to propose a quick "opinion gathering":


If that happens to you, guys, considering the two following "maindeck situations", which option do you generally go for?


>>> MAINDECK SITUATION (1): 2x Craterhoof Behemoth

a) Go NO > Hoof on T2.
b) Wait to go NO > Hoof on T3.

>>> MAINDECK SITUATION (2): 1x Craterhoof Behemoth / 1x Ruric thar, the Unbowed

a) Go NO > Hoof on T2.
b) Go NO > Ruric on T2.
c) Wait to go NO > Hoof on T3.
d) Wait to go NO > Ruric on T3.


And if you could also comment on your reasons (or circumstances that change that), it would be much appreciated.

In my case, "in a vacuum" I think I'd lean toward:

(1.b) for I would prefere a surprise killer NO; and
(2.b) for I would like the relative "safety" that Ruric would offer;

What I meant is: Llanowar is better with glimpse because it makes mana while you still have your guy in your hand. Birchlore does not care and you can just dump your guys. So for the 2 NO use-cases birchlore is good since you can
1) dump guys "with a haste llanowar effect" for a NO (behemoth) in the following turn.
2) dump guys and play NO (for Prog) in the same turn if you have cradle.

Another pro birchlore factor is the Problem of disruption: If llanowar is killed or you play him after turn 1 it sucks. In these situations birchlore is stronger since it turns every elf in a "haste-llanowar" and makes Nettle ridiculous. If Llanowar is killed you are often stuck with a slow turn 2. If you play an "innocent elf" turn 1 like a quirion or a nettle and then follow up with a birchlore you can surprise "dump" your hand.. With a cradle, a turn 3 Natural Order (behemoth) or a surprise turn 2 Natural order for Progenitus (or Ruric vs. combo) is an easy game.

So in a way Birchlore has also a better synergy with cradle and helps you to get back faster if disrupted. Being able to surprise "NO" is also an important factor in outplaying your opponent.

These "glimpse chaining" situations you mentioned are also interesting when evaluation birchlore. In the "old pre-behemoth elves", birchlore was often cut, because just this use-case was too weak. In this "new elves" Glimpse is more often just a better ancestral or you want to play it turn 2 as a bait and if they don't pierce/force it get something out of it where birchlore shines.

I know people ran lists out there with 3 Birchlores, so it's nothing new. It came to me when thinking about maxing out NO and including Progenitus maindeck. By the way I think it might be "ok" to run 2 behemoth and 1 progenitus because the new Legend rule supports casting behemoth without tapping all your guys.

The question is: if I want to play 18 lands (with 4 cradle which is correct I think), the fat pack of 2 behemoth, 1 progenitus, 4 NO, 4 Glimpse leaves me with "only" 31 bodies (27 creatures and 4 GSZ; The creatures of course streamlined without GSZ targets like priest/ooze/teeg,...).

Did someone test in that direction?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

I know people ran lists out there with 3 Birchlores, so it's nothing new. It came to me when thinking about maxing out NO and including Progenitus maindeck. By the way I think it might be "ok" to run 2 behemoth and 1 progenitus because the new Legend rule supports casting behemoth without tapping all your guys.

The question is: if I want to play 18 lands (with 4 cradle which is correct I think), the fat pack of 2 behemoth, 1 progenitus, 4 NO, 4 Glimpse leaves me with "only" 31 bodies (27 creatures and 4 GSZ; The creatures of course streamlined without GSZ targets like priest/ooze/teeg,...).

Did someone test in that direction?

---

I think this is what you may be looking for. The only difference is that Progenitus is in the sb. On that note, I wouldn't advise running 3 fatties... It's very similar to Lemnear's build. He first proposed cutting llanowar completely for birchlores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absolutflipz

Are there any other options beside discard and thorn/thalia? Does the only option remaining in this same vein boil down to what he was suggesting...blue counterspells?

---

Myself, I keep coming back to Winter Orb. While not a clear replacement for Thorn/Thalia, they are mighty powerful against MANY decks and the effect on us is minimal.

But Winter Orb doesn't do anything against combo, except maybe High Tide and fairly rarely Omnitell. Most combo decks have a very minimal reliance on lands in general and they only need at most two untapped lands to just kill you. I feel like dropping a Winter Orb slows you down as much if not more than other combo decks because you essentially waste your 2nd turn playing it.

Winter Orb holds less sway in my mind than Choke does. If i was going to run one of them it would be choke.

Really, the best answer to fighting combo I think is raking their hands or being faster.

IMO Winter Orb is better vs fair decks than combo decks. Teeg + discard + resistors + speed are your best tools vs combo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nudon

I think this is what you may be looking for. The only difference is that Progenitus is in the sb. On that note, I wouldn't advise running 3 fatties... It's very similar to Lemnear's build. He first proposed cutting llanowar completely for birchlores.

---

Thanks Nudon.. this is indeed very similar to what I have in mind. Congrats to your finish!
You are probably right that 2 NO targets is better than 3. But have you seriously considered running 1 Progenitus and 1 Hoof maindeck?
If you reflect on your report are how often would a Progenitus get the job done against the fair decks?
And would it have been possible to cast NO-Prog. a turn earlier than hoof?
Or what if they would have disrupted you more by discarding/killing small dudes, wouldn't NO-Prog have been a nice alternative route?
Except Miracles there are no G1 answers for Prog and with the creature heavy midrange and tempo decks not playing perish or supreme verdict, also the post-board answers are very limited.

I don't understand anyone playing Ruric main over Progenitus unless your meta is something like 40%+ combo. Ruric can be sworded/blocked by fair decks where Progenitus just wins. However do you still want to cut Ruric from the SB nudon? Your build is really focused on powering out NO and with Ruric and Teeg you have 8 business spells that become combo hate postboard.

One big advantage of playing 4 NO and the Prog main is that you have more sideboard cards for high impact cards for specific matchups like thorn and winter orb.

@catmind: Against fair decks you dont need progenitus game 1, as you said, no deck has specific hate (perish, plague etc.) So game 1 is should be easier, problems come with sideboard hate so progenitus is a common answer game 2/3. Against most combo decks we have a hard time, sure sometimes we are faster but without ruric (or weird teeg) maindeck, you will lose more often. Sure you can fight back game 2, but even if you win, game 3 they will start and can kill you before you apply any pressure/defense. I prefer winning game 1 against other combo decks.

To be honest, against combo decks, I try to resolve Ruric Thar, thru NO or hardcast him, as fast as possible.
To get rid of him G1, they have to dig in their SB(-6 lives) then cast a bounce spell(-6 lives). Ruric just did 12 damages.

Usually he seals the game against combo.

Why does everyone, arguing in favor of Llanowar over Birchlores, defraud the fact that it produces black/white mana for Sideboard-cards and DRS-activations, as well as turning summoning sick Elves into mana for turn 2 Cradle boosts (NO!) or Glimpse chains?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Why does everyone, arguing in favor of Llanowar over Birchlores, defraud the fact that it produces black/white mana for Sideboard-cards and DRS-activations, as well as turning summoning sick Elves into mana for turn 2 Cradle boosts (NO!) or Glimpse chains?

---

I agree. I think his greatest utility comes in SB games where you want more ways to reliably cast your Thoughtseize/Therapy, Abrupt Decays, etc.

I personally would cut a Heritage Druid before cutting a Birchlore Ranger from my list (currently running 2 Birchlore). Heritage Druid is really one of the weaker cards in the deck and does nothing when not comboing, and you only need 1 to go off. As a 3-of with 4 GSZ, I think it's fine. This is a sidenote to the point, but I think cutting one of her is a definite spot for something else to come in to the maindeck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Why does everyone, arguing in favor of Llanowar over Birchlores, defraud the fact that it produces black/white mana for Sideboard-cards and DRS-activations, as well as turning summoning sick Elves into mana for turn 2 Cradle boosts (NO!) or Glimpse chains?

---

Because we're already running 10!!!! fetchlands to find Bayou, including a pair of Bayou. That's >65% of your mana draws.

EDIT: as for the 2nd point, yes it certainly helps and I've conceded that point in my earlier post(s). I still posit that a Turn 2 non-lethal Hoof is just as deadly as a Turn 3 in terms of damage output.

My Bayou dies almost instantly to Wasteland about 75% of the time I pull it out. Maybe that's just me. My second one does not, but the first does not have a good shelf life. Also if you want Green, White and Black, Bayou is not going to help you. I have seen some nuts things happen with Mana elves, I have done some nuts things with Rangers. I think in this we have hit a personal choice wall. I am not a fan of Llanawar, others are. That's fine but I do not see there being a whole lot to gain by trying to push a topic when people have made their choices, each for totally valid reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koby

Because we're already running 10!!!! fetchlands to find Bayou, including a pair of Bayou. That's >65% of your mana draws.

---

"We"? Dood, your latest list you posted and I remember had 16 Lands in total among 8 Fetches and 3 Cradles while I was already running 19 lands and 10 Fetches, so I don't see the sudden Reid Duke bandwagoning as given.

I wouldn't act as if Wasteland and Stifle do not exist :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

"We"? Dood, your latest list you posted and I remember had 16 Lands in total among 8 Fetches and 3 Cradles while I was already running 19 lands and 10 Fetches, so I don't see the sudden Reid Duke bandwagoning as given.

---

You remember wrong. I've always had 4 Cradles!
I also realize my manabase is in the minority of such configurations, so it's pointless to argue with my dissenting view. Hence, I'm talking for the majority list, which appears to be inching closer to 18 lands and 2 Dryad Arbor. I'm still of the opinion that it's 2 lands too many (-1 fetch -1 Dryad Arbor).

There is a huge disconnect between these two statements:

Quote:

---

the fact that it produces black/white mana for Sideboard-cards and DRS-activations

---

Quote:

---

I wouldn't act as if Wasteland and Stifle do not exist :/

---

Decks in which we need to utilize the black cards and Teeg are rarely decks that also play a full set of Wastelands.
Against such decks, I have zero reservations to deploy Bayou and Savannah.

Streaming the Legacy Daily Event with Elves! Tune in and have a good time :-) http://www.twitch.tv/itsjulian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MD.Ghost

@catmind: Against fair decks you dont need progenitus game 1, as you said, no deck has specific hate (perish, plague etc.) So game 1 is should be easier, problems come with sideboard hate so progenitus is a common answer game 2/3. Against most combo decks we have a hard time, sure sometimes we are faster but without ruric (or weird teeg) maindeck, you will lose more often. Sure you can fight back game 2, but even if you win, game 3 they will start and can kill you before you apply any pressure/defense. I prefer winning game 1 against other combo decks.

---

There are situations against fair decks where a Progenitus has it's benefits in game 1:
- Behemoth being not good due to low creature count as caused by: Heavy disruption (Multiple removal/discard spells), mulligans, spell heavy hands, a countered Natural Order
- The opponent might have Stifle
- You don't want to pass the turn to wait for the creatures to be able to attack because opponent is more likely to counter/discard the NO in hand.
- The opponent can plow behemoth and stabalize.
- The opponent has some lock pieces like chalice/trinisphere.

But even if you work with the wrong assumption that Progenitus has no value game 1, the question should not be "do I need Progenitus game1". The question is "do I need 2 behemoth game 1 or can I free up a sideboard slot because in 95% of the cases either Progenitus or Behemoth get the job done anyway".

The only scenarios coming to mind where Progenitus G1 hurts:
- Not castable compared to a relatively dead behemoth.
- We draw behemoth and NO for Progenitus does not get the job done (Terminus, we are outraced).

Not saying to have the right answer whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. I think it goes in favour of Prog maindeck and maybe you can keep an open mind while testing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

Thanks Nudon.. this is indeed very similar to what I have in mind. Congrats to your finish!
You are probably right that 2 NO targets is better than 3. But have you seriously considered running 1 Progenitus and 1 Hoof maindeck?
If you reflect on your report are how often would a Progenitus get the job done against the fair decks?
And would it have been possible to cast NO-Prog. a turn earlier than hoof?
Or what if they would have disrupted you more by discarding/killing small dudes, wouldn't NO-Prog have been a nice alternative route?
Except Miracles there are no G1 answers for Prog and with the creature heavy midrange and tempo decks not playing perish or supreme verdict, also the post-board answers are very limited.

I don't understand anyone playing Ruric main over Progenitus unless your meta is something like 40%+ combo. Ruric can be sworded/blocked by fair decks where Progenitus just wins. However do you still want to cut Ruric from the SB nudon? Your build is really focused on powering out NO and with Ruric and Teeg you have 8 business spells that become combo hate postboard.

One big advantage of playing 4 NO and the Prog main is that you have more sideboard cards for high impact cards for specific matchups like thorn and winter orb.

---

Thanks, glad I was able to help. I haven't considered running Progenitus in place of the 2nd hoof due to not needing him game 1 in my experiences. Progenitus was key in winning me several game 2s because I was fairly liberal with playing glimpse (baiting counters) since I knew NO->prog was my backup plan. With that said, I didn't drop a single game all tournament to any fair deck so I don't feel as if having Progenitus game 1 would have done much. The situations where you want to wait a turn before NO->hoof but wouldn't wait with NO->Progenitus game 1 is rare in my opinion.

Under heavy disruption (i.e. jitte lock), having Progenitus available is nice but I don't think it outweighs the burden of increasing the chances of drawing him (much worse than drawing hoof) over the course of a long tournament. I haven't been able to play much recently due to other obligations so my sb is still the same except for +1 thorn, -1 ruric. Thorn doesn't work very well with NO so I think it's correct to board NO out. With that said, if you're running 7+ discard like some others on this thread, it may be worthwhile to keep ruric.

Played this at a BoM trial last weekend. I chose the 1 birchlore plan:

http://mtgpulse.com/event/14477#205012



2 Quirion Ranger
4 Wirewood Symbiote
4 Deathrite Shaman
4 Nettle Sentinel
4 Elvish Visionary
4 Heritage Druid
1 Llanowar Elves
1 Fyndhorn Elves
1 Craterhoof Behemoth
1 Birchlore Rangers
1 Regal Force
1 Priest of Titania
1 Viridian Shaman
1 Joraga Warcaller
1 Dryad Arbor



Instant [1]
1 Crop Rotation

Sorcery [11]
4 Green Sun's Zenith
4 Glimpse of Nature
3 Natural Order

Land [17]
4 Gaea's Cradle
3 Windswept Heath
3 Verdant Catacombs
2 Misty Rainforest
2 Forest
2 Bayou
1 Savannah

SB:
1 Progenitus
2 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
3 Abrupt Decay
3 Cabal Therapy
2 Thorn of Amethyst
4 Dread of Night


Meta was combo light, had many DnT (and Merfolk wtf)

Id probably play a ruric thar in the board and a second hoof in the main if I had to do it Again (cutting 1 dead of night from the board)

Lost only one game 2-1 in the finals vs Wb DnT-ish deck (game three i had triple dread of night in play on turn two, and lost. go figure)

How good was joraga warcaller? I can see that it is a wincondition thats still good in a glimpse turn but is this good enough? Why did you play only 2 Quirion ranger? for me it always was a natural 4off and it was never a card a was unimpressed with.

You would need to go absolutely bananas with Birchlore Rangers in order to hardcast Progenitus. Tragically, I have drawn him literally every single time I sided him in, so I am heavily biased against having Prog maindeck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wurst2000

How good was joraga warcaller? I can see that it is a wincondition thats still good in a glimpse turn but is this good enough? Why did you play only 2 Quirion ranger? for me it always was a natural 4off and it was never a card a was unimpressed with.

---

puurdy good. if I bring in hoof number 2, i will probably cut the warcaller - the bad thing about him is that none of the tutors lets us use the kicker on him, but when he is drawn "naturally" he is a total beast. after boarding he is of course lovely in dodging Engineered plague

on Quirion ranger: he is allright, but imo one of the weakest Cards in the deck. as a 4 off, very often you dont have more than 1 or two forrests to bounce, and on turn two, you often cant use the bounce anyway, in order to go off on turn 3. I think a lower number 2-3 has a pretty good argument.