[Deck] The EPIC Elf Survival

Quote:

---

Don't gain speed? Are you aware of the difference between a Priest of Titania that can tap on turn 2 as opposed to turn 3? Another scenario example:

I just quickly took the deck out and shuffled until I hit a hand with ESG and Priest.

Hand:
Forest
Forest
ESG
Priest of Titania
Llanowar Elves
Imperious Perfect
Wren's Run Vanquisher

Turn 1: Land, ESG, Priest.
Turn 2: (Drew land) Land, Llanowar Elves, , tap Priest for GG and land, Imperious Perfect.
Turn 3: (Drew Imperious Perfect). Land, tap Priest for GGG and two lands, Wren's Run Vanquisher, Imperious Perfect.

The fact that Priest was able to tap a whole turn earlier sped the deck up a lot. Now, lets assume that ESG is just another mana elf, but all the same draws.

Turn 1: Land, Elf.
Turn 2: Land. Do you want to play Priest + Elf, Perfect, or Vanquisher + Elf? Regardless on how you look at it, you will be behind in both damage and mana.

---

Now assume, that the mana elf is a quirion arnger and the vanquisher is a timberwatch elf, cards that I am playing in your slots.
You have a turn one quirion, turn two priest followed by turn three perfect+timberwatch.
And you can go nutz with timberwatch something like +8+8 or go nutz with
imperious perfect with 3 2/2 each turn.

For me, I've found the arguments and uses for Quirion Ranger pretty compelling - I'm messing around with a deck in MWS with 4 Ranger + 4 ESG...

I'm not sure I'm sold on Timberwatches yet though - mainly because in the area I play in, Pyroclasm isn't that uncommon, which the Vanquishers are much better against.

Do you ever want multiples of Ranger? I like him as a 2- or 3-of. Pretty good chance I'll see him, but not a high chance I'll see two of him.

Well, if you have an active Priest or a Perfect out, multiple Rangers can get silly.

Esper, that didn't answer my question, which was, do you ever WANT multiple Quirion Rangers. If you aren't going to be winning that turn, it can throttle your mana hard.

Di, shouldn't you have created an Elf Warrior with your Perfect before you tapped Priest. If you want to talk about best plays, make sure you've reviewed all of your options.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waSP

Esper, that didn't answer my question, which was, do you ever WANT multiple Quirion Rangers. If you aren't going to be winning that turn, it can throttle your mana hard.

Di, shouldn't you have created an Elf Warrior with your Perfect before you tapped Priest. If you want to talk about best plays, make sure you've reviewed all of your options.

---

You could. I'm well aware of the possibilities on what you can do here, I was just highlighting the speed of what turn 1 Priest would accomplish and neglected to mention it. Odds are a token would be created here.

Regarding the Quirion Ranger debate, it's rather weird. It's one of the strongest cards in the deck, but running 3-4 is incredibly clunky. As strong as they are, you almost never have the amount of lands to really go as ridiculous as it implies. There have been dozens of occasions where I'd be doing Perfect + Ranger, but after a turn or two, I have no lands left in play. The only time multiples of Ranger in play are relevant are with Survival and Priest of Titania. Otherwise, it can't be taken advantage of because we don't have the lands to fuel it, and will be useless. It's good to see them consistently, but it's rare that I want to draw multiples outside of using them with Survival, which by then I should already be ahead.

Also, I wouldn't ever be able to justify running Timberwatch Elf. It's a card that is good solely when you're in a favorable board position, which is unnecessary and arguably winmore. To get really good use out of it, you want at least 3-4+ elves in play. If that's the case, I'll assume you're in a favorable position anyway. If you don't, then the card is absolutely awful.

Quote:

---

Also, I wouldn't ever be able to justify running Timberwatch Elf. It's a card that is good solely when you're in a favorable board position, which is unnecessary and arguably winmore.

---

I really don't see how it's worse than elvish champion :
timberwatch + a lonly quirion ranger is 5 damage a turn

elvish champion + a lonly elf

is rather weak cause sometimes you can't even swing you are going to lose your elf
-if timberwatch elf stays only one turn you are safe from blasts

I have even killed turn 3 (goldfishing) with turn one elf turn two timberwatch turn three triple quirion=> game

I have killed nought with him without trading

I tried to include Pro-Order, but still keep Entity in, because I love Wirewood Symbiote nearly as much as Quirion Ranger in this deck.

Here is with which I came out:

1 Anger
4 Elvish Champion
2 Elvish Spirit Guide
3 Fyndhorn Elves
1 Genesis
1 Harmonic Sliver / Viridian Zealot (I like the Sliver more, because of Plague)
4 Imperious Perfect
4 Llanowar Elves
1 Mirror Entity
4 Priest of Titania
2 Quirion Ranger
4 Sylvan Messenger
3 Wirewood Symbiote
1 Wood Elves

1 Progenitus
3 Natural Oder
4 Survival of the Fittest

4 Forest
1 Gaea's Cradle
3 Savannah
3 Taiga
3 Windswept Heath
3 Wooded Foothills

Wirewood Symbiote bounces creatures, giving you recurring chumpblockers, he saves you from removal (though he's the target #1) and he bounced you Messanger to give you Card Advantage.

I don't know what to cut for Order #4 or if I should play the #4.

The Cradle as 1-off turned out to be SOMETIMES good, but also let you get screwed if you draw it early (it lost me some games).
On turn 2 Cradle can be nuts i you dropped a first turn mana elf, but gets mostly negate by Priests if you don't have a Survival out (since you don't need that much mana without Survival).

I've kept Entity in, as Esper3k and I discussed while testing out the decks. The Mirror match was retarded and was determined on who drew Champion and Priests lol.

Here's my current NO-Elf Survival List:

Manabase: 17
6 Forest
3 Savannah
3 Taiga
2 Windswept Heath
3 Wooded Foothills

Creatures: 35 (32 Elves)
4 Llanowar Elves
3 Fyndhorn Elves
3 Quirion Ranger
4 Priest of Titania
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Imperious Perfect
4 Elvish Champion
2 Mirror Entity
1 Sylvan Messenger
1 Wren's Run Packmaster
1 Birchlore Ranger
1 Viridian Zealot
1 Anger
1 Squee
1 Progenitus

(combo/super) Win Conditions: 8
4 Natural Order
4 Survival of the Fittest

Some comments:
Sylvan Messenger: In NO builds, this is the first to go since you are relying on NO for a win-condition more than chaining Sylvan Messengers with Anger for win condition. Chaining Messengers isn't easy since the mana consumption is huge. I still run 1 Messenger in the slot so that if my hand is dry with Survival, this helps in recovering some gas. In the pre-Elf Survival builds, I only ever wanted to see 1 Messenger, and multiple Messenger in opening hands without Priests is annoying as hell since it's too slow.

Squee: As much as I dislike goblins being in Elves, I think Squee needs to make the cut. Some testing showed that the deck runs out of gas and gets relevant cards countered/destroyed. A Survival sitting in play is useless if you have no creatures, and Squee saves the day. It is annoying to see Squee in your opening hand without Survival, but that is usually rare (1 out of 60 cards).

Quirion Ranger: This card has never been a bad card for me in the pre-Elf Survival builds that ran 2. In fact, I've always started to wonder back then that this guy generated much more mana than Symbiote + Priest could. It allows you to play with a 2 land hand and go through smoothly. Most importantly, in the NO builds, you are playing 5 more non-elf cards so Quirion Ranger over Symbiote is a natural decision to up the elf count. Also, Qurion Ranger protects against Wasteland/Sinkholes, and also allows the deck to become Forest-less against Forest-walkers (not that this comes up frequently except in the mirror lol). He's an Elf, so he beats with the Lords well, unlike Symbiote. Most of the time, Symbiote has annoyed me if I didn't draw enough elves to bounce and exploit Priest/Perfect. Quirion Ranger keeps the elves in play, so Priest isn't netting 1 less mana per activation.

Birchlore Ranger:
Esper3k tested this out, and I saw a game where he was simply ridiculous with Perfect + Quirion Ranger. Perfect tokens provided mana for another activation etc. More importantly, I think that Birchlore Ranger is more important in the Symbioteless builds since Woodelves become mediocore without Symtiote recursion. Birchlore is much less clunky. It is sometimes hard to play Wood Elves and then combo off since 3 mana is not easy to pull off. Birchlore's ability is immediate, and provides the mana you need to play Entity. Although we lose the ability to search for Taiga if Anger is in the yard. However, I think that in NO builds, Birchlore>Wood Elves for sure if you're seeking to go for faster Progenitus.

Wren's Run Packmaster: She seriously solves the Goyf + non-flying problems. There were a few cases where my wolfies alone attacked and won the game because my opponent refused to trade his Tombstalker with my wolfies :P She has a HUGE 5/5 body and can attack straight past a Goyf, not to mention she gets pumped by Lords into bigger proportions, and a Priest allows her to poop wolfies so fast it's scary. She's more of a fun-win condition, but I was never disappointed in drawing or playing her. 4 mana 5/5 with a good ability is a rare choice in Legacy.


Elvish Spirit Guide: Never run less than 4. I think this card is too perfect in Elf Survival, and I'm feeling even non-Elf Survival should consider this card. It allows for turn 1 Survival/Priest, dodges daze, speeds up NO-Progenitus, feeds to Survival in the mid-game, and beats as an Elf with Lord pumps. It does EVERYTHING the deck needs, and is more crucial in NO-builds for either comboing out faster against non-control decks, or become Daze fodder against control decks.

Mirror Entity: Esper3k and I discussed on Mirror Entity. It should be included since it not only acts as lords 9-10 in the deck, but it is simply explosive with a board position of 4 Elves or more with Priest + Ranger in play. Also importantly, the white splash for Entity also makes the sideboard more diverse to the deck's weaknesses, namely Absolute Law against Goblins/Burn/Aggro Loam, and Gaddock Teeg against combo.

Last comment on Mirror Entity: It's cool we found the infinite combo with Priest + Mirror Entity + Symbiote. However, after much testing, it is often redundant. 2 Activations from Priest alone is good to win with Entity. We don't have to go infinite at all. Mirror Entity, as I shall argue, should be part of the NO-build as to provide another win condition outside of lord beats or Progenitus beats. Entity beats with Priest is almost an unstoppable win-condition. So currently, the board has 2 situations:
[1] good board position = good Lord/Entity beats
[2] bad board position = good Progenitus beats

If we simply stick to NO without Entity, then we would be relying on [2] too often. More importantly, white allows us to splash for key cards in the sideboard that help improve certain matchups. Absolute Law against Goblins/Burn/Goyf Sligh/Aggro Loam, and Teeg against Combo/Landstill.


And seriously, Timberwatch is far weaker than Mirror Entity. Both Timberwatch and Mirror Entity requires a good board position for the pumps to be relevant. But Mirror Entity pumps all creatures, while Timberwatch only pumps one. Sure, you can argue that Ranger/Symbiote would make Timberwatch more effective, but similarly, with that same arguement, Ranger/Symbiote + Priest will be much more powerful as you swing in with multiple Timberwatch-pumped elves with Entity.

Birchlore Ranger is very interesting. It's not something I've ever thought of, so I'm going to look into that.

Quote:

---

Wren's Run Packmaster: She seriously solves the Goyf + non-flying problems. There were a few cases where my wolfies alone attacked and won the game because my opponent refused to trade his Tombstalker with my wolfies :P She has a HUGE 5/5 body and can attack straight past a Goyf, not to mention she gets pumped by Lords into bigger proportions, and a Priest allows her to poop wolfies so fast it's scary. She's more of a fun-win condition, but I was never disappointed in drawing or playing her. 4 mana 5/5 with a good ability is a rare choice in Legacy.

---

Actually, Wren's Run Packmaster is, aside from Mirror Entity, the most optimal win condition in the deck with Survival in play. A lot of the time one I have Survival, I find myself going for a plan of Priests + Ranger + Packmaster a majority of the time. The deck can take Survival options of Dudes + Lords, Goyfs or something, Entity, or Packmaster, but as I didn't run Entity, I did resorted to adding a ton of mana and making 5/6 wolves over any other option. It's like a two turn clock that also completely halts aggro.

I've done some testing on MWS and found the following with my build above:

The deck almost wins if Natural Order or Survival goes unanswered. Both require 2 turns to win, with Survival going through multiple steps to set up (each set up is different with respect to board position).

Things I've noticed:
Quirion Ranger: Definitely enjoying the 3 copies in the deck. She has better synergy with Priest than Symbiote since she's an Elf to count, and she doesn't bounce an elf, therefore doesn't make a net loss with Priest. And to be honest, with Symbiote, you would chain into multiple of Priest and then combo with Mirror Entity to beat. But with Ranger, you no longer have to chain into Priest, but rather, you can chain into Ranger, which are cheaper to cast, and they count as untapped creatures that can swing in with haste with Mirror Entity. If you played the Symbiote route, you would have to chain into Priests, each of them tapping to pump Mirror Entity and the rest of the elves, and you find yourself with a lack of untapped beaters. Ranger has been a much better consideration after the testing I've done. Mostly she doesn't lead to a loss of mana which Symbiote does since it bounces elves. One can argue that bouncing elves save against EE or Deed activation, but seriously, you shouldn't be playing a bunch of crucial elves if you're not planning to win in one turn by aggro-comboing out.

Sylvan Messenger: Definitely happy with the 1 copy. I'm still annoyed drawing him in the opening hand, but I tutor for him if I'm dry on hand with Survival in play. Another option is Squee, but Messenger gives you that possible win-on-that-turn

Squee: I think this Goblin deserves to be an elf in NO-Elf Survival. Just imagine him as a land instead of a non-elf. He does quite a lot for the deck. Genesis on the other hand is stupid slow and not worth the slot.

Wren's Run Packmaster: Agreeing with what Di said. In cases where I'm lacking white, or have a board position of little critters, I search Packmaster up over Entity since she creates creatures. In cases where I have a ton of elves out, I would search out Mirror Entity for the win. I think Packmaster has to be in the deck since she allows you to win with a mediocore board position by establishing a better one with her ability. Mirror Entity needs a board position of at least 4 Elves including Priest to be effective.

Mirror Entity: Half of my wins are from Entity beats. And that's solely because this deck empties elves onto the board fast. In cases where I don't have Priests or enough elves to abuse Entity, I go for Packmaster or Perfect beats.

Birchlore Ranger v.s. Wood Elves: I considered this again. Birchlore is more tight and goes off faster, but I think this deck just cannot cut Wood Elves. Grabbing that Taiga is key when you have Survival and Anger without a Mountain. Maybe both cards can be included in the deck, although space is already very tight. I might end up playing Birchlore as the 7th mana-elf or 8th mana-elf.

Turn 2 NO-Progenitus are not too uncommon, and require ESG and turn 1 Llanowar to pull it off. And a angered-Progenitus? Lol. I've goldfished Turn 4 wins very often. Turn 3 wins are a little hard, and usually involve Survival. Natural Order is much slower but it guarantees a win if you don't see Wrath/Perish/Damnation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adrieng

I really don't see how it's worse than elvish champion :
timberwatch + a lonly quirion ranger is 5 damage a turn

elvish champion + a lonly elf

is rather weak cause sometimes you can't even swing you are going to lose your elf
-if timberwatch elf stays only one turn you are safe from blasts

I have even killed turn 3 (goldfishing) with turn one elf turn two timberwatch turn three triple quirion=> game

I have killed nought with him without trading

---

I played Di's exact list at the GP. I have to say that I would never play the deck without Elvish Champion. How many decks in the format do not play a forest? It is ridiculous how often your dudes are unblockable and just swing in for the win unimpeded. He also gets around Plague in games 2-3, the most commonly boarded card against this deck.

As Colin said, Timberwatch is winmore most of the time, needing those elves in play. It might be a quicker goldfish, but you aren't going to have the resiliency and mid-game clock that champion gives you. And the deck already has several options for 2 turn clocks readily available.

Quote:

---

As Colin said, Timberwatch is winmore most of the time, needing those elves in play. It might be a quicker goldfish, but you aren't going to have the resiliency and mid-game clock that champion gives you. And the deck already has several options for 2 turn clocks readily available.

---

Did you even try the card ? It seems to me you didn't give it a try and that you are just saying that without testing. Has anyone but me tested timberwatch with 4 quirion ranger in the deck ?

Timberwatch is obviously better than champion cause
-they are not going to block either ( other way their goyf is gone be killed)
-they are not going to attack cause you can kill their goyf

Timberwatch is better than mirror entity lots of times

- you don't want to spend your whole turn just tap mana for attacking
- timberwatch doesn't need mana meaning you can block easily
- you can attack or block and PLAY cards
- you don't need to splash white

In lots of matchup such as threshold you are not the aggro player meaning
your opponent has to attack with goyf before you play your oops I win spells. There timberwatch is better cause it lets you block.
Timberwatch elf is THE main kill of the deck (attacking with elf).


If you don't want to play messenger which I play four and you should, play at least a one off regal force !!!
Man this card is so good just go priest quirion, play your hand with mana tutor for it draw 8 cards and win.
It happens also(more often that it seems) that you have progenitus in hand, regal force is a nice target for order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adrieng

Did you even try the card ? It seems to me you didn't give it a try and that you are just saying that without testing. Has anyone but me tested timberwatch with 4 quirion ranger in the deck ?

Timberwatch is obviously better than champion cause
-they are not going to block either ( other way their goyf is gone be killed)
-they are not going to attack cause you can kill their goyf

Timberwatch is better than mirror entity lots of times

- you don't want to spend your whole turn just tap mana for attacking
- timberwatch doesn't need mana meaning you can block easily
- you can attack or block and PLAY cards
- you don't need to splash white

In lots of matchup such as threshold you are not the aggro player meaning
your opponent has to attack with goyf before you play your oops I win spells. There timberwatch is better cause it lets you block.
Timberwatch elf is THE main kill of the deck (attacking with elf).


If you don't want to play messenger which I play four and you should, play at least a one off regal force !!!
Man this card is so good just go priest quirion, play your hand with mana tutor for it draw 8 cards and win.
It happens also(more often that it seems) that you have progenitus in hand, regal force is a nice target for order.

---

No, I have not tested the card, and if I did it would be in place of Wren's Run Vanquisher, not Champion.

You say that your opponent will not block, but I think that if you can kill them they will block. With Champion they do not have that choice. Also, you never mentioned the fact that Champion shuts down the most popular SB card this deck sees, Engineered Plague.

As for your comment about not being the aggro player in the threshold matchup... What?! Their whole game plan is to drop Counterbalance and slow the game down. You want to win before they can do that. If you are not the aggro player then what are you? This deck is the aggressor in basically every match you will play. If you cannot race your opponent you will lose most of the time.

Champion is also better in any counterbalance matchup because it's a 3cc slot that can get around Counterbalance rather than a 1 drop that just gets countered as soon as they get countertop going, and will get countered lots of times even without top in play.

Some points don't really make sense to me.

Timberwatch is obviously better than champion cause
-they are not going to block either ( other way their goyf is gone be killed)
They can't block ANY if they're playing Goyf and you're playing Champion. You might want to risk them still blocking your Elf, and then while you pump, they stifle and you're at a loss

-they are not going to attack cause you can kill their goyf
Point taken, but that means you have blockers in elves? The only situations where I don't attack is when I don't draw into Lords. I ALWAYS attack to put them on a clock before they have an answer to the board. Similarly, if I drew into Lords, I would be attacking and race their goyfs, while if you drew into Timberwatch, you're leaving them to block?

Timberwatch is better than mirror entity lots of times
- you don't want to spend your whole turn just tap mana for attacking
I wouldn't if I'm playing Mirror Entity or other spells. Similarly, you wouldn't attack the turn Timberwatch came into play since he has no haste. But I would definitely attack with Entity FIRST before casting spells second main phase since I would force my opponent to make a choice of blocking and losing his creatures before I go ahead and play out spells.

Most importantly, if you played Timberwatch, you have to overextend to make his ability useful, playing out multiple elves and rangers, to untap him multiple times on SEPARATE targets to pump your elves for the swing. Mirror Entity allows you not to overextend by simply beating with a group of 4/4s or 6/6s. You don't need your creatures to be 20/20s. You win on the back of 6/6s pretty easily.

- timberwatch doesn't need mana meaning you can block easily
Once again, I only block in Elf Survival if I don't draw the offensive. I can't see your point using my point since if I don't draw the offensive and were playing Timberwatch elf, then I can't block effectively either since my elves aren't big.

- you can attack or block and PLAY cards
Maybe your meta let's you afford to lose time to block around but this deck really tries to win on turn 3 (It goldfishes turn 4 very frequently). And see my point on playing cards on the 2nd main phase after bluffing an attack. Also, if you have Elvish Champion, your team swings in for quite a lot without even the investment of mana.

- you don't need to splash white
With the new builds with more Quirion Rangers, splashing a color is fine since your mana base is protected by Ranger. You usually fetch basics anyway until you really need that white source. And I don't see how white is a bad splash. It gives you so many answers in the sideboard: Absolute Law which tremendously improves our bad matchups against burn/sligh/aggro loam/pyroclasm/goblins. And we have Teeg which hoses combo. This deck dies to combo a lot and I think Teeg/Canonist are key to stopping combo along with Thorn of Amethyst.

I've never played the Timberwatch build, but I had an old elf deck, and played with Classic Timberwatch + Wellwisher + Symbiote and I had trouble with a bad board position or no Symbiote. Timberwatch becomes mediocore if it uses its ability only once. I've been amazed at Mirror Entity after picking up this deck, and it is one of the reason why I'm still playing the deck. Entity is just nuts with Survival Engine with multiple chains of Priest mana. If you really like Timberwatch, I would recommend playing just 1 copy to tutor up for. Drawing multiple of them sucks since they're useless by themselves unlike the Lords (namely Perfect), and without Haste or untapping effects, they become so mediocore. I would agree they shine with Ranger, but then again I think Priest shines more with Ranger as she allows you to play your whole hand and proceed to combo off in that turn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adrieng

Timberwatch is obviously better than champion cause
-they are not going to block either ( other way their goyf is gone be killed)
-they are not going to attack cause you can kill their goyf

Timberwatch is better than mirror entity lots of times

- you don't want to spend your whole turn just tap mana for attacking
- timberwatch doesn't need mana meaning you can block easily
- you can attack or block and PLAY cards
- you don't need to splash white

In lots of matchup such as threshold you are not the aggro player meaning
your opponent has to attack with goyf before you play your oops I win spells. There timberwatch is better cause it lets you block.
Timberwatch elf is THE main kill of the deck (attacking with elf).

---

These arguments are basically leading me to the conclusion that you are either playing against incompetant opponents, you're not playing against any opponents, or you don't know how to play the deck correctly.

Saying that the Elf deck is not the aggressor against Threshold, or any match for that matter, is completely wrong. That's like saying Landstill is trying to play the aggressor against Goblins.

If you have Elvish Champion in play, you will always be aggressive. Odds are, the opponent can't block, so you're swinging for free each turn. If they can, you can still potentially race them anyway. The way you're describing Timberwatch is as if you're trying to play control with him rather than be aggressive. If you're going to misassign roles on how to play the deck, then you won't be beating Threshold very often.

If you're arguments against Mirror Entity are based on experience, then you don't know how to play the card correctly. You aren't going to simply dump all your mana to it then swing. You have options on how you want to do this. If you attack, they can choose to block or not. Either way, even if you dump a lot of mana for the turn, they will be taking a lot of damage. If you're at a point where you can be dumping all your mana into Mirror Entity and swinging for a lot, I fail to see why you need to be playing more cards as is. They need to deal with that asap or they will die. It's pointless to slow yourself down to play more creatures when you can be killing the opponent instead. Plus, if you're trying to keep guys back to block, you're already finding yourself in a losing position. This is not a defensive deck, and it sucks at playing defense. You need to be on the offensive to put pressure on the opponent or else they will stabilize and be able to deal with your threats.
Also, white should be in the deck regardless if you run Mirror Entity or not. You need some sort of answer to handle combo decks and hate cards, and white is the only color that offers this.

Quote:

---

Most importantly, if you played Timberwatch, you have to overextend to make his ability useful, playing out multiple elves and rangers, to untap him multiple times on SEPARATE targets to pump your elves for the swing. Mirror Entity allows you not to overextend by simply beating with a group of 4/4s or 6/6s. You don't need your creatures to be 20/20s. You win on the back of 6/6s pretty easily.

---

This. This basically says it all.

Overextending to make the card stronger is terrible. The only time you will ever want to be overextending in this deck is if you're playing against aggro and need to match their creatures, or on the verge of death and really don't have a choice. If you're playing against aggro decks that's a moot point because you run more creatures than aggro anyway, and at that point Timberwatch is merely win more. Against Counterbalance decks, in order to make Timberwatch useful you need to get a lot of creature in play and naturally overextend. For game 1 at least this is almost acceptable because Pyroclasm is in the sideboard, but it most certainly isn't likely to happen. Most of the guys you need to play cost 1-2 to really buff up Timberwatch. If you don't have many in play before Counterbalance hits, then Timberwatch is incredibly weak, because odds are you won't be resolving many of them after Counterbalance resolves. What will resolve, however, are lords, and those are what will push you through to win, not trying to assemble a horde against Counterbalance. Point is, in a matchup like Threshold, Timberwatch is highly reliant on Counterbalance not seeing play, and that's not something I'm going to base my luck on.

Or think of other matchups where we're looking for help against, such as Aggro Loam, Landstill, or other decks with Engineered Plague and Pyroclasm. Again, in order to make good use out of Timberwatch, you need to play out as many guys as you can. And when you drop your hand to give him the biggest boost, and the opponent plays Devastating Dreams, Wrath of God, or Engineered Plague and wipes out your board, you're left with a weak board and almost no hand. That doesn't cut it when we're trying to get cards in here that fight against that stuff. Although I don't run Mirror Entity currently, I can speak on its behalf that it can get the job done just fine with 2-3 creatures and can hold more back in those matchups. Turning all of your creatures into 4/4-6/6+ rather than one of them is a whole lot faster than Timberwatch, not to mention you can keep cards in hand to play once you get hit by a sweeper. If you're going to bother doing that with Timberwatch, then it's pointless to run it in the first place because it wouldn't be taking advantage of its full potential, which is almost suicial already with it's all-in approach.

However, I cut Mirror Entity for the same reason I wouldn't run Timberwatch Elf: it doesn't address any issues with the above hate cards. Entity still died to Plague, DD, Pyroclasm, etc, hence why I cut it. I felt that was also a bit win more, but neither of them do anything against the hate. Granted, you can play out Entity + Elf against a deck like Landstill and put pressure on, but it's still weak against hate.

@ Timberwatch v. Champion argument:

A majority of the format runs green. That makes all of your creatures threats, no matter the numbers. Take what I said above about that overextension business with Timberwatch, and apply the opposite to Elvish Champion. I've won countless games alone with simply Champion and 1-2 elves in play, simply because they can't block. You cannot assume that you will have a copious amount of creatures in play against any given deck. Rather, you should focus on how to get the best out of what few creatures you have if you're stuck on few resources. That's why I've been running Tarmogoyf, because there are far too many instances where I'm stick with very few creatures and can't play defense. The deck is at its strongest when a lot of creatures are in play, but has serious problems when it doesn't. That's why you need creatures that can fit that niche slot for when you don't have a big board. Lords can help this because they make all your creatures grow, but Timberwatch is too conditional for this. Also while I'm at it, I'll add that as lords, they still fight against Plagues and Pyroclasm. Although Pyroclasm requires 2 of them, with 8 in the deck it's still reasonable to do so. Timberwatch offers no such outs against any hate (and hell, it can be Pithing Needled in a pinch). Plus, it's a terrible topdeck. If I sat on an empty board and drew Timberwatch Elf, I'd be a lot worse off than if I drew something like Elvish Champion.

Regarding Birchlore Rangers, the main reason I started testing them was because I wanted a way to get white mana while under a Moon effect (so I could play Absolute Law and more importantly, Mirror Entity).

I found that, as Crz87 saw, that they also have pretty good synergy with cards like the Quirion Ranger (since you usually play it and it sits around after you untap a Priest with it, now it generates 1/2 mana for you as well) and tokens generated by Imperious Perfects. Using that mana to jumpstart a large Priest activation can be huge.

I know Di has taken Mirror Entity out, but I've liked it a lot still since it gives you just another way to win. I haven't been a fan of Packmaster myself since every time I've drawn it, I always want to pitch it to Survival, but still looks decent on paper to me.

I'm tempted to put it back in just because I think it'd be hilarious to have a deck with so many strong win conditions (Lord beatdown, NO/Progenitus, Mirror Entity, Packmaster).

Regarding Timberwatch, I've played it before in Elf decks in the past and my issue is similar to many that others have stated above (it only pumps one guy, gives you the tendancy to overextend yourself). Another bonus that I've seen quite often to the Mirror Entity over the Timberwatch elf that I think is also overlooked is that if you don't have an active Anger in the graveyard, Mirror Entity can come down and still pump your guys. Timberwatch takes you a turn to get going if you don't give him haste.

Also, numerically if you look at Mirror Entity vs Timberwatch, Mirror Entity+Priest is so sick compared to Timberwatch + Priest.

With Timberwatch, you give one creature +1/+1 per Elf in play. So say you have 4 Elves, you're giving a +4/+4.

With Mirror Entity, Priest, and say a total of 4 Elves in play, you're giving usually +3/+3 per elf for really a net of +12/+12. The multiplier gets even sicker when you dump mana from lands in there, etc.

Another nice bonus is that against the red sweepers, Mirror Entity can actually keep your entire board alive, while Timberwatch really can only protect one (assuming no untapping shenanigans).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Di

Afterwards, I was still pleased, but decided the list needs some changes. The 18th land will be going into the deck somewhere, but I'm not sure where. I also will be adding Masticore into either the main or sideboard. I was craving removal all day, and that's the best for a green deck.

---

So what were the changes you wanted to make before that Timberwatch-discussion ?

@Esper3k:
What did you cut to fit in Birchlore Rangers?
I found it extremely difficult to fit them in, as I didn't want to cut any mana elves or other creatures as I really like them all in there.

The only thing I can imagine is the lone Viridian Zealot, as it won't get through the counterwall/balance and is useless against Humility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radiant

So what were the changes you wanted to make before that Timberwatch-discussion ?

@Esper3k:
What did you cut to fit in Birchlore Rangers?
I found it extremely difficult to fit them in, as I didn't want to cut any mana elves or other creatures as I really like them all in there.

The only thing I can imagine is the lone Viridian Zealot, as it won't get through the counterwall/balance and is useless against Humility.

---

This is the build I'm currently fiddling around with:

Wooded Foothills 3
Windswept Heath 3
Savannah 3
Taiga 2
Forest 5

Llanowar Elves 4
Fyndhorn Elves 3
Imperious Perfect 4
Elvish Champion 4
Priest of Titania 4
Sylvan Messenger 1
Quirion Ranger 2
Mirror Entity 2
Elvish Spirit Guide 4
Anger 1
Thornweald Archer 1
Viridian Zealot 1
Birchlore Rangers 1
Progenitus 1
Wren's Run Packmaster 1
Squee, Goblin Nabob 1
Wirewood Symbiote 1
Survival of the Fittest 4
Natural Order 4

Sorry for the posting format, I posted from MWS.

I pretty much call this my "greedy" version. I'm running NO/Progenitus, Mirror Entity (and 1 Symbiote so I can go infinite if I need to), Squee (in case I stall out), and Packmaster.

Again, I haven't been really happy with the Packmaster. My problem with it is that if I have a bunch of mana, I'm going to probably just go for the Entity finish.

Anyone have any thoughts on that?

In my early version of the deck, I played 2 Entity, 1 Packmaster. Now I've also moved to NO, you would cut one of those 3 since you already have an alternative way to win.

I'm testing Di's GP list and the list feels pretty optimal. I can understand your feelings of needing Entity, but I've been pretty happy without it.

I would at least keep in the Packmaster and cut an Entity. Seeing you don't play Vanquisher nor Tarmogoyf, you really want some answers to fat opposing creatures (Goyf, Dreadnought, Countryside Crusher, etc) besides the lone Thornweald.

I would even go as far as:
- 1 Mirror Entity
- 1 Birchlore Rangers
+ 2 Vanquisher

When cutting an Entity, you would pretty much lose the need for the Rangers. You want to maximise the amount of green creatures you play for NO. Also, Entity sucks under any Engineered Plague, where Packmaster is pretty decent.

Note that I haven't tested with Rangers yet, but although the idea of it seems pretty decent in theorie, I believe it's too weak to play it over Vanquishers.

EDIT: Also, Timberwatch sucks! I've tested it in Survival Elves and it does nothing for this deck. Hell, around Onslaught block I build a casual elves deck with Messengers, Priests, Wellwishers, and all sort of other goodies and even in that deck it sucked, and that was before the good cards like Vanquisher and Perfect were printed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esper3k

Again, I haven't been really happy with the Packmaster. My problem with it is that if I have a bunch of mana, I'm going to probably just go for the Entity finish.

Anyone have any thoughts on that?

---

Packmaster was put in because Entity was taken out. It is also a secondary NO target in case you have Progenitus in your hand. It really does not make much sense to run both, and I can understand completely why you don't like him. If you cut the Entity, then he is awesome, if not, then he's just a 5/5 dork most of the time, because you will go crazy with Entity.

I played Di's version without Entity and with NO and Packmaster at Chicago, but have been testing some other versions lately.

I really want some form of removal in this deck, and it's looking like Masticore would be the best because of Priest. Any ideas?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigbear102

Packmaster was put in because Entity was taken out. It is also a secondary NO target in case you have Progenitus in your hand. It really does not make much sense to run both, and I can understand completely why you don't like him. If you cut the Entity, then he is awesome, if not, then he's just a 5/5 dork most of the time, because you will go crazy with Entity.

I played Di's version without Entity and with NO and Packmaster at Chicago, but have been testing some other versions lately.

I really want some form of removal in this deck, and it's looking like Masticore would be the best because of Priest. Any ideas?

---

If you're running the white splash, there's always Swords or you could run a few red removal spells since we're running Taigas anyways.

I actually think if you're going to do removal, red would probably be the best way to go anyways since if you're under a Magus, you can always pop him and reactivate your duals/fetches (if you don't have any basic forests out).

I haven't really found lack of removal to be a problem though.

For me, my experience so far is that you absolutely just die to combo :)

Even post board, combo seems to be a really rough matchup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigbear102

I really want some form of removal in this deck, and it's looking like Masticore would be the best because of Priest. Any ideas?

---

I run 3 Thornscape Battlemages main deck - Direct damage and/or Artifact removal in an easy elf friendly package - paired with Wirewood Symbiote or Quirion Ranger just make it better.

So today was a little EPIC fail Elf Survival for me. I think I played fairly well, and made the right plays playing against the only blue control (Painter Servant deck) by baiting key spells and landing an Angry Progenitus in play.

My list was:
Lands
5 Forest
3 Taiga
3 Savannah
4 Wooded Foothills
2 Windswept Heath

Creatures
4 Llanowar Elves
3 Fyndhorn Elves
3 Quirion Ranger
4 Priest of Titania
4 Elvish Champion
4 Imperious Perfect
2 Mirror Entity
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
1 Sylvan Messenger
1 Wirewood Symbiote
1 Viridian Zealot
1 Squee
1 Progenitus
1 Wren's Run Packmaster
1 Anger

Win/combo condition
4 Survival of the Fittest
4 Natural Order


Matchup one: Against Bryan ANT with Burning Wish (Good deck, best ANT deck against a non-blue metagame. Burning Wish makes it more resilient to moon/3sphere hate as you can wish for Shattering spree)

Game1: I joked to Bryan how I would lose the first game if he went first since Elf Survival just shits to combo. We drawed on the first die roll, then he beat the second roll by 1 point to go first.

He drew into some crap and comboed out on turn 3 with Ad Nauseam. My hand meanwhile was nutty. I played Llanowar turn 1 and Survival turn 2, pitching for anger EOT. My hand at the moment is Natural Order with 1 Land and a couple of creatures. I would have had an angry Progenitus out on Turn 3, dropping his life low for ANT, and Bryan proceeds to Duress on his Turn 3 and grab my Natural Order.

Sad face. I chained into Priests and 1 Mirror Entity but Turn 3 wasn't enough to kill him, and he went off with ANT and tendrilled me. He would have lost next turn. Most importantly, he would have lost if he didn't Duress NO since he would be too low to Ad Nauseam.

Game 2: I sided out Elvish Champions and the slower stuff and boarded in 1 Magus of the Moon, 2 Choke, 4 Thorn, (didn't acquire Teeg since I last minute decided to play this deck). I mulled down to 5 (first hand was godly good against him, but I only had 1 land, no mana elf and 2 Thorns). I decided not to risk that hand. My 5 land hand was: 2 Forest, 1 Llanowar Elf, 1 Thorn, 1 Natural Order. Great hand for a 5-land hand against him if I land Thorn on turn 2.

I went first with mana elf. Expectedly he duressed me out, and comboed off on his next turn after I land a Priest (could natural order for next turn and give him only 2 turns). Had the Thorn resolved, it would be game for him since I would buy at least 2 turns, one of which Progenitus would drop his life to 10, making it very difficult for him to go off.

Notes: I did not lose to ANT. I lost to Duress. The MU is bad, but I had a good chance, and would had won both games if not for Duress. But then again, first game Bryan got a slow turn 3 undisrupted win for ANT.

Matchup 2: Blue/Red Painter Servant (the storeowner's first Legacy deck. Not too great, but I helped him improve it, so I know his deck inside out)

Game 1: I won the die roll, kept a hand of 1 Llanowar Elf, 1 Forest, 1 Fetch, 1 Survival, 1 Priests, 1 Quirion Ranger, 1 Natural Order. Beautiful. I played elf and passed. He ponders off Seat of Synod and passes. I played Priest baiting a FOW, he resolves. It's good against him anyway since I know how his deck works and resolving priests early is a good thing to have mana to combo out with Survival. He got some nutty draw and lands Painter and Grindstone off tomb. I topdeck Zealot. Played Survival which he FOWed, and I landed Zealot and activated with Priest + Ranger, killing Painter. I then resolved Natural Order and beat his face, although I was 1 damage short while he played another Painter and grinded me away.

Dang it

Game 2: Boarded out Elvish Champions and in goes 1 Grip, 1 Shaman, 2 Choke. I would have had more grips, but like I said, I decided to play this deck last minute.

He went first and pondered. I resolved first turn Survival off ESG and another ESG that paid for Daze. Yaay! The next few turns involving me setting up an angry army and beating him with a couple of Elves.

Game 3: Once again, I won, Natural Order was involved. This match was a little harder since he had pressure with Servant and Grindstone. I managed to get some hate and killed 2 Servants in the process:

Notes: Progenitus actually stops grindstone and be the sole card left in your library, but you'll draw into him and have another turn left to beat your opponent


Matchup 3: Monoblack aggro
Game 1: I've played against my opponent before. Dan has no chance against this deck game 1, but seriously, Duress hits me all the time on Turn 1 that I never get Natural Order + Survival. I basically beat him down with a lame T2 deck with Elvish lords.

Game 2: He boarded in Plagues. I regretted playing this deck simply because I know he played Plagues. I should have played Landstill today. Esper3k mentioned to me Plague shouldn't be a problem since you have Lords. That's true, but Dan was running an unconventional list with so much creature hate. And he has smothers against the Lords. I managed to get his life down to 10 by Elf beats. Once again he Duressed my Natural Order AND Survival on turns 1 and 2. After which he mutilates, killing my board, and lands Plague. I needed a Lord in order to play through plague, but even then, my creatures were 1/1. Viridian Zealot was a dead draw, and I never got to see Natural Order or Survival to get my way out.

Game 3: He got the nuts: Turn 1 Duress, Hymn. Taking out first Natural Order, followed by 2 lands. I had a land and elf, and next turn, he lands bob and starts the nuts. I eventually lost due to a combination of plagues and mutilates.

Notes: Black discard just sucks unless you quickly land Survival/Natural Order. In either games I played. I could not land Survival turn 1 due to no ESG. This shows how crucial Turn 1 2cc plays are, and how ESG is essential in this deck. I would never run less than 4. Overall, the deck did well, but not well in my meta full of Ritual+Discard We had: 1Eva Green, 2 Monoblack discard and ANT with Duress. 4 Decks with MD Duress oh man, in a 8-played tourney. Seriously Duress is MVP against Elf Survival if we don't land Survival. We simply become some stupid T2 Elf Aggro deck. I'm annoyed today with the MU. The deck has good potential, but the MUs I had were terrible, especially the luck I had against ANT and Black Discard. I didn't lose to the decks. I lost to Duress. I would have a fine chance otherwise.

Yeah in my testing, the matchup against Combo is really really bad game 1. Game 2, you get a little better since you have Teeg and the Thorns to bring in.

Against Eva Green, it seems to me that whoever goes first wins, so that initial die roll is so important. I can't see the matchup against Mono Black Discard is that terribly different. I was playing Dragon Stompy, which was a pretty good choice against Dan's deck since Chalice for 1 = gg.

It sounded like to me if you had had time to get together a better sideboard, you could've done better (had more Grips, Teeg). In the matchup against Mono Black Discard, Grips can be really good to get rid of Plagues, Racks, etc.

As I stated before I do not like Viridian Zealot.
The only good thing about it is that it is powered up by our lords.

I now run Harmonic Sliver instead, which I really like much better.
It has a CC of 3, which gets around Counterbalance most of the time and it's not affected by Engineered Plague (set to 'Elf'), which is a huge point.

We already splash white, so why not play Harmonic Sliver instead.
Usually you would survival both only when needed so the + power Zealot gets by the lords is not that relevant, as you usually have better creatures at hand.

What makes the Sliver really better is, that it is not an Elf, so you won't need the lords to kill an Engineered Plague in play, which makes your whole gameplan very vulnerable.
And since the Sylvan Messenger got kicked from the deck or is played as a 1-off, you don't need a that high elf-count.

What do you think?

@Esper3k. That was the problem: incomplete sideboard. I only had 1 grip, 4 Thorns, 1 Magus of the Moon, no Teegs. Terrible. But I'm getting myself some grips for $4 a playset and will see how it goes. Even with Teegs, ANT still seems hard since you have to ideally drop turn 1 Survival, and get Teeg online by second turn or lose slowly, unless you have Thorn backup. Thorn is the key card in winning against ANT but just 4 Thorn usually isn't enough. The discard matchup wasn't bad at all and I'm annoyed because it wasn't supposed to be a bad matchup but I was extremely unlucky with Duress hitting both key cards (NO Survival) in all 3 games against Monoblack discard. Not to mention Dan ran way too much creature removal for a typical Discard deck. I agree if I had the Grips, it would have been much better. The matchup gets bad if they kill your key creatures and discard Survival/NO, then we just become a lame T2 Elf deck. Chances are you should be luckier, and they shouldn't be that lucky, but Dan was extremely lucky with Turn 1 Ritual on all 3 plays.

I dislike Zealot, in the NO builds. And Radiant's right. Harmonic Sliver hits CB and dodges CB, Chalice@2, and avoids Plague if we don't have an online lord. Without Messenger, the Elf Synergy is no longer that important.

Think about it this way: Zealot doesn't care about synergy anyway. Why? You solely kill him to get rid of troublesome enchantment/artifacts. Harmonic Sliver actually sticks to beat, not to mention Mirror Entity converts it to an Elf and gets some Synergy. Overall, Zealot dies to CB, Plague, Stifle, and requires 4 mana. Harmonic Sliver dies to CB (less often), Stifle, and requires 3 mana. I think I'm running Harmonic Sliver instead.

You know, looking through creatures that do the "destroy target artifact or enchantment", Harmonic Sliver is looking better and better over the Zealot, especially with less focus on the Sylvan Messengers.

I'll give it a try :)

@crz87: I think Gaddock is more important to stick than Thorns against ANT. They usually just can't go off with him in play. It's possible for them to go off with a Thorn in play. However, he's harder to stick than a Thorn unless you're boarding in like 4 of him (which could be a consideration). Thorn is also more generally useful for the deck than Teeg is (Teeg shuts off Natural Order).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esper3k

You know, looking through creatures that do the "destroy target artifact or enchantment", Harmonic Sliver is looking better and better over the Zealot, especially with less focus on the Sylvan Messengers.

I'll give it a try :)

@crz87: I think Gaddock is more important to stick than Thorns against ANT. They usually just can't go off with him in play. It's possible for them to go off with a Thorn in play. However, he's harder to stick than a Thorn unless you're boarding in like 4 of him (which could be a consideration). Thorn is also more generally useful for the deck than Teeg is (Teeg shuts off Natural Order).

---

good ANT decks pack Slaughter Pact + Spell Snare in the board, so hate in form of 2 drop is hard to keep on the table/to resolve.
also, most lists pack 1 rushing river main.
this is why i think black splash is stronger than white splash, black green red.

playing duress/cabal therapy mix from the board is very strong.

thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce

good ANT decks pack Slaughter Pact + Spell Snare in the board, so hate in form of 2 drop is hard to keep on the table/to resolve.
also, most lists pack 1 rushing river main.
this is why i think black splash is stronger than white splash, black green red.

playing duress/cabal therapy mix from the board is very strong.

thoughts?

---

I do like the idea, however I'd rather keep my sideboard against AggroLoam, Goblins, Burn and Slight in the form of Absolute Law than cutting it for a match up so bad, you won't beat it 50% for the time even with the black splash.

A turn 1 Teeg or Thorn is too good to pass. When you want discard to make a difference, you'll need to side in at least 7 spells en even then you won't be guaranteed to swing the matchup enough to make it favorable.

I'll keep on playing with my Thorns, which are actually usefull against other decks (like burn). I won't dedicate half my board and bastardize my deck to make a lost cause a little better. I'd rather make the close matches a little better beatable.

Yeah, I like the white splash a lot especially because I like Mirror Entity maindeck and Absolute Law/Gaddock Teeg in the board.

I've just resigned myself to losing to ANT when I hit it, heh.

wouldnt a hurricane be just as good as mirror entity if you already can go infinite mana pretty much? so teeg is good, but i think you can play thorn of amethyst + pyrostatic pillar?

put down an elf and pyrostatic pillar them out of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce

wouldnt a hurricane be just as good as mirror entity if you already can go infinite mana pretty much?

---

I actually played 2x Hurricane in my casual elves deck. I like it pretty much, although it get's so much better with Wellwisher, Seeker of Skybreak and Wirewood Lodge, all cards this deck doesn't play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce

So teeg is good, but i think you can play thorn of amethyst + pyrostatic pillar?
put down an elf and pyrostatic pillar them out of the game.

---

So your plan is slowing yourself down a lot while they shape a decent hand and when ready to combo out, bounce the Pillar and win from there? Or play 5 spells, tendrils, play another 2 spells and Tendrils again? If you are playing a few elves of your own, your opponent won't even have to play 9 spells before playing Tendrils.

I'd rather play only Thorn and race them to death.

Let's all face it, combo is a matchup we are only going to win with luck. You can board in any 8 cards and you still won't make the matchup 50/50. The only thing decent to board against them are Thorns, which are also pretty decent against other decks like Burn and even Threshold and Orim's Chant (which is pretty narrow).

Plans like discard or Pillar are only going to weaken your board against matchups which are about even or slightly unfavourable. The only combo hate I am ever going to run in the side are Teeg and Thorns, and maybe in the right meta a Magus of the Moon. And I only run those because they are also usefull against other decks. Dedicating sideboard slots purely for combo is a waste of space, since it won't win you the game. Modern combo is resilient enough to win through the few cards we can board in.

I'd rather have the space to make sure I win against the rest of the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce

wouldnt a hurricane be just as good as mirror entity if you already can go infinite mana pretty much? so teeg is good, but i think you can play thorn of amethyst + pyrostatic pillar?

put down an elf and pyrostatic pillar them out of the game.

---

For me, sometimes I'm actually lower on life than my opponent and Mirror Entity comes down to win the game that turn. Also, without Mirror Entity, you can't actually go infinite with the Symbiote (you need Mirror Entity to make Symbiote an Elf so he can bounce himself). You can generate a bunch of mana with Priest + Ranger, definitely, though.

I've considered putting Orim's Chant in my sideboards since there's quite a bit of Dark Ritual based decks around in my meta (Ritual + Discard, ANT). I find it hilarious when they Ritual, then you Chant in response :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esper3k

I've considered putting Orim's Chant in my sideboards since there's quite a bit of Dark Ritual based decks around in my meta (Ritual + Discard, ANT). I find it hilarious when they Ritual, then you Chant in response :)

---

Then you have just countered Ritual and you buyed a turn. Sure not bad, but whene you dont kill them till their next turn they could go off again. Also soon they dont even mana burn.

The best use of Chant you will get whene they bounce your Thorn/Chalice then you chant them and play your hate again. But that happens very rarly...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HdH_Cthulhu

The best use of Chant you will get when they bounce your Thorn/Chalice then you chant them and play your hate again. But that happens very rarly...

---

I would say the best use of chant is when they don't duress/chant you as they only expect permanent/bears hate from a creature deck, and you can chant them when they IT (retaining priority to pop LED) that seems like a swell time to chant.

/sarcasm

I think teeg and chant are the best options the deck has against combo, which is unfortunate, but the goblins 'glass cannon' approach may be the best option.

Maybe a little late, but I'd like to adres crz87's report. In the Paintermatchup, you're going for a Progenitus. Why? With Progenitus in your deck, you CANNOT lose to grinding. I think it was more wise to bait FoW with the Order, eat his artifact with the Zealot, and play survival. With survival in play, and progenitus NOT in play, you always have one card left in your library. If he didn't draw the artifact, you could have fetched a champion or entity or something. Am I missing something, or do you have to revise your quote?

Quote:

---

made the right plays playing against the only blue control (Painter Servant deck) by baiting key spells and landing an Angry Progenitus in play.

---

Yeah against ANT, I'd probably let them build up some spells before I Chant them.

@Elf_Ascetic: I agree with you on this one - against decks that win through grinding, Survival + Progenitus means you don't immediately die. However, you're unfortunately still left with no more cards to draw, so hopefully you still have enough on the board/in hand to win. What's even nicer about Progenitus is that since his ability is a replacement effect, there's no gap for them to screw with your graveyard (Tormod's Crypt, Relic of Progenitus, etc.).

Survival + Progenitus means you NEVER die to decking because you can use Survival to shuffle it back every turn (you don't HAVE to fetch out a creature when you activate Survival).

Yes, I meant you don't immediately die because while you won't die to decking, you aren't going to be drawing any more cards either for the rest of the game. So, you have to win based off of what you have on board and what you have in hand. If you can't, you're probably in for a slow and painful death.