[Deck] EATS!

[Di]

This also crossed my mind. I think EATS would greatly benefit by going down to GRB. This allows you to run the 4th Confidant, more Witness, Top and Duress, which nicely assists Therapy and Witness.

Masticore also might be better as the 3rd FTK, as I rarely took down big creatures with it. The only time where Masticore shined was against Angel Stompy (Silver Knight/Priest/MoR), but in all other matchups I rather have the 3rd FTK.

EATS going down to GRB is a completely different deck. Not that I have an problems with RGBSA, but the lack of Tradewind Rider is disturbing to me. He single-handedly won me an entire round at the GAGG, and there is no such card in RGB that can provide constant removal like Tradewind Rider. It's way too good to cut.

I still believe Top is inferior to Brainstorm. In every game I play, if I open Brainstorm, I will cast it on my first turn unless a Bird is in my hand. That Brainstorm will open up more turn 2 plays because it will potentially find a Survival or Dark Confidant. That is what you have to go for. The most important turns for this deck are 1-3, because they will either find the SotF or Bob or not. With Top, I wouldn't be able to cast either of those until turn 3. That is too slow. It also doesn't put the cards in my hand, which is a real issue. Topdecking a Brainstorm is incredibly good because it immediately gives me the chance to find outs, while Top would cost an extra mana, and not draw the card unless I throw on top of the deck. Point is, the deck needs the cards in hand as fast as it can because it needs to generate as much advantage as possible. Not putting the cards in hand really hurts the deck.

I also don't get how you think multiple Confidants is a bad thing unless you're on a really low life total. Even then, Top can reduce the damage and quite frankly, the game should be over in short time if you're drawing 3 cards per turn.

You also need to count the number of high casting cost cards in the deck. I'm at risk running Bob because of this, but it's too strong a card to ignore, and has incredible synergy with the deck already. Yea, Top would help in that sense, but this deck does not revolve around Bob, it revolves around Survival. I need cards to find Survival as fast as they can, and Top is too slow for this. Plus, it's useless once Survival is in play, because I will never have the mana to activate it when I'm using that to get creatures and will have access to whatever I need from thereon out.

If so, what made you choose GRBU over GRB?

Is this a serious question? I suppose a serious answer would be because I play ATS and not RGBSA. My name is Diablos, not Dave Price.

But also, because of the ridiculous power of Brainstorm and Tradewind Rider. If those cards were green, then I assure you my deck would be RGB :)

Also, my second target after survival when playing against you is Rofellos, and third is confidant (I never like to see him on the board unless my opponent is at an insanely low life). You say 3 is enough but he would have my creature removal 3-X on his forehead.

If you have your 3 creature removal aimed at Dark Confidant, that is fine. It is removal not aimed at the Werebears, FTKs, Masticore, and Baloth that will be aiming at your head. Generally decks that run targeted creature removal outside Goblins only run 4, and that is StP. That would potentially give them all of them to target Confidants and Rofellos. While there's nothing wrong with that, what outs do they have to stop the rest of this deck? Keep in mind, the entire deck is composed of creatures. (Oh yeah, don't forget I run Eternal Witness and Genesis)

@ Sylvan Library comments:

If anyone's read my older ATS work (or the primer for that matter) you'd know I used to be a huge advocate of Sylvan Library. And technically I still am, but Dark Confidant is simply better. I'll accept the lifeloss in exchange for the ability to attack, pitch to Survival, pitch to Therapy, and block over Library any day. And no, I'm not going to run Library in addition to it for the same reason I don't run Top, and that is because they won't find a Survival on turn 2.

[AngryTroll]

Well, I've been looking over your list since you put it up. As a longtime Survival Player, I have a couple of questions. Not an attack on it, certainly; I'm going to put it together and start playing with it, but these are just some questions about your list so far.

I've played RGSA for ages, and then RGbSA when that became the stronger choice, and a couple of things stand out the most. First, the manabase seems a lot weaker in this version, between playing 2 fewer land and a forth color. That certainly seems like it won't help the Goblins Matchup. Second, only one Baloth? I guess your list has Tinder Walls to block Goblins early, maybe circumventing the need for life gain, but Baloth is an excellent topdeck if you can't find Survival.

Flametongue Kavus. Only two? I realize you are playing 2+1+1 for four total, counting Bone Shredder and the Masticore, but in RGbSA we run 4 FtK and a Boneshredder, and sometimes Duplicant or Masticore to take out nasty things. I can certainly see the Tradewind Riders making up for this, by serving as removal for things like Akroma and Exalted Angel, while also being useful against things like Solidarity, Iggy, Life, and Salvagers Game. Are they part of the reason you don't use the full four Kavus?

My final question is this: What benefits, specifically, does this deck have over the three color RGBSA list? That one struggles with the same matchups this one does, and is strong in the same places. It also has a stronger manabase, running 2 Swamps, 2 Mountains, a plethora of Forests, and the fetches/duals. Does this deck function that much better without Survival because of the Bobs? Are Tradewind Rider and Bob better then 4 Duress mainboard and Burning Wish? I do not mean these questions to put down this list; I am simply curious to see what your thought process was comparing the two.

Edit: My real last question: And where on earth did the E in E ATS come from? Epic? Eww, not another Angry Tradewind Survival list? Everybodyloves ATS? Eat Artichokes Today Soon?

[Nightmare]

Edit: My real last question: And where on earth did the E in E ATS come from? Epic? Eww, not another Angry Tradewind Survival list? Everybodyloves ATS? Eat Artichokes Today Soon?

I'm terrible at Survival decks, so this is the only question I can answer. Your first guess was correct, the E is for EPIC.

[Obfuscate Freely]

In every game I play, if I open Brainstorm, I will cast it on my first turn unless a Bird is in my hand. That Brainstorm will open up more turn 2 plays because it will potentially find a Survival or Dark Confidant. That is what you have to go for. The most important turns for this deck are 1-3, because they will either find the SotF or Bob or not.

Reading this got me wondering if you've tried Portent in place of Brainstorm. It digs deeper for Survival/Confidant on turn 1 (look at 3 cards, shuffle, draw another random card on upkeep), and actually gets you through chaff so you don't draw it again next turn.

Brainstorm is obviously better if you have trash in hand to shuffle away, or if your opponent has a discard spell on the stack, but Portent is much stronger when you are actually digging for something specific. It's basically a sorcery-speed Impulse for U that can set up more than one draw.

I could see you targeting your opponent with it once in a while, too. Tradewind + Witness + Portent lock? Heh, maybe not.

[Nightmare]

Reading this got me wondering if you've tried Portent in place of Brainstorm. It digs deeper for Survival/Confidant on turn 1 (look at 3 cards, shuffle, draw another random card on upkeep), and actually gets you through chaff so you don't draw it again next turn.

Brainstorm is obviously better if you have trash in hand to shuffle away, or if your opponent has a discard spell on the stack, but Portent is much stronger when you are actually digging for something specific. It's basically a sorcery-speed Impulse for U that can set up more than one draw.

I could see you targeting your opponent with it once in a while, too. Tradewind + Witness + Portent lock? Heh, maybe not.

On the other hand, Portent does nothing to fix what's already in your hand (ie: Shuffle away the crap). Brainstorm is, in 99% of situations, going to be the better spell. Even if I were to want a different cantrip, I'd probably choose Serum Visions, since it digs deeper (actual depth, not virtual like Portent) than either of the two.

[Di]

Well, I've been looking over your list since you put it up. As a longtime Survival Player, I have a couple of questions. Not an attack on it, certainly; I'm going to put it together and start playing with it, but these are just some questions about your list so far.

Just to note, and attack would be fine as well. :) I'm expecting harsh criticisms, but I also feel I can pretty much defend anything thrown at me. Of course though I'll accept defeat on the rare occasion.

First, the manabase seems a lot weaker in this version, between playing 2 fewer land and a forth color. That certainly seems like it won't help the Goblins Matchup. Second, only one Baloth? I guess your list has Tinder Walls to block Goblins early, maybe circumventing the need for life gain, but Baloth is an excellent topdeck if you can't find Survival.

The manabase is weaker, yes. I am fully aware of that. I am fully aware of the potential hazards that brings against Goblins. However, there are almost as many mana accelerants in the deck as there are lands. I'm unsure why everybody is going nuts about the manabase when in reality there are 33 mana sources in the deck. That's more than half the deck. The odds I'm going to be seriously hindered with mana development is rather slim, plus Brainstorm helps it.

There's only a singleton Baloth because that's all the room I could afford. Removal spells are more important than lifegain, because potentially I only need a single one to win. Also, in most circumstances, topdecking an FTK or something of the like is better than topdecking a vanilla 4/4. At the GAGG, the single Baloth won the entire first round matchup (Burn) and game 1 of round 2 (Goblins). You really need only one to stabilize, because you can just recur it turn after turn from then on. Another one would be nice, because it provides another out as well as efficient beater, but there's just a lack of space.

Flametongue Kavus. Only two? I realize you are playing 2+1+1 for four total, counting Bone Shredder and the Masticore, but in RGbSA we run 4 FtK and a Boneshredder, and sometimes Duplicant or Masticore to take out nasty things. I can certainly see the Tradewind Riders making up for this, by serving as removal for things like Akroma and Exalted Angel, while also being useful against things like Solidarity, Iggy, Life, and Salvagers Game. Are they part of the reason you don't use the full four Kavus?

I count Tradewind Riders in the removal aspect of the deck, so technically yes I would say you can count those are Kavu 3 and 4, and a total of 6 removal slots in the deck. Masticore is essentially an FTK in a deck that pumps mana like this. Also, it has the option to kill bigger creatures that FTK can't. It's not often an issue because those creatures can be dealt with by Tradewind, but the option is there. Masticore also mows down the entire Goblin army. FTK is only a 2-for-1.

As far as RGBSA goes, I've yet to see a list online that runs any removal outside of FTK. I'm going from the RGBSA thread and tournament results, and unless Dave Price has changed his list I can't believe otherwise. But even so, that still counts for less than (or if you run the full 4 FTK, 1 Shredder, then 1 Masticore) we'd be even on removal.

My final question is this: What benefits, specifically, does this deck have over the three color RGBSA list? That one struggles with the same matchups this one does, and is strong in the same places. It also has a stronger manabase, running 2 Swamps, 2 Mountains, a plethora of Forests, and the fetches/duals. Does this deck function that much better without Survival because of the Bobs? Are Tradewind Rider and Bob better then 4 Duress mainboard and Burning Wish? I do not mean these questions to put down this list; I am simply curious to see what your thought process was comparing the two.

You hit it on the head with Bob pretty much. Bob is a big reason why this deck can compete, because it has the option to still gain an advantage over an opponent without Survival on the table. It also has Brainstorm to fix draws. Without Survival, all RGBSA is is a deck full of 4cc creatures to attack with. Although that's not a bad gameplan, this deck features more options without Survival. Also, RGBSA seems to have a tougher time with Goblins because they have fewer men to halt the early attack. Granted, if you get to untap with Survival with 4 mana you're in a good position, but that deck has issues with Goblin Lackey moreso than this does. Their only early-game out is Burning Wish -> Pyroclasm.

I really dislike Duress maindeck. If I wanted to play it main I would, but it's a dead draw against Goblins. Game 1 against combo even with Duress it's too much of an uphill battle, but post-board you get so much disruption you can create a positive game. However game 1 against Goblins is highly winnable, and I wouldn't want to jeopardize that by drawing something dead like Duress.

I also personally think Burning Wish is a tad bit overrated in that deck. It just tutors for a card that can be decent in a situation, but doesn't create any advantage in the league of Bob. If you're running without a Survival, which card is going to generate you more of an advantage? Burning Wish, which will find a single card that will only buy you a little time (such as Boiling Seas, Pyroclasm, etc whatever) or something that will allow you to rip the cards you need while providing a threat?

Honestly, I'm not sure why those decks haven't been running with Bob. There's a number of high casting cost men, but the advantage Bob creates well outweights the potential risks.

@ Portent: Mr. Nightmare summed up my thoughts. I really don't know what Va's infatuation is with that card, because I just think it's trash. I mean, you were comparing Portent to Brainstorm. Don't look at that example of finding a turn 1 Survival as an excuse, but Brainstorm is in almost any case the better card.

[Obfuscate Freely]

On the other hand, Portent does nothing to fix what's already in your hand (ie: Shuffle away the crap). Brainstorm is, in 99% of situations, going to be the better spell. Even if I were to want a different cantrip, I'd probably choose Serum Visions, since it digs deeper (actual depth, not virtual like Portent) than either of the two.

Are you saying that you have bad cards in hand 99% of the time? That makes the deck sound unspectacular.

Would you care to work out why Serum Visions digs deeper (in "actual depth," at least) than Portent? I think that would be entertaining.

@ Portent: Mr. Nightmare summed up my thoughts. I really don't know what Va's infatuation is with that card, because I just think it's trash. I mean, you were comparing Portent to Brainstorm. Don't look at that example of finding a turn 1 Survival as an excuse, but Brainstorm is in almost any case the better card.

Would it be asking too much for you to explain why you think Portent is "trash," and why it is so obviously worse than Brainstorm?

I mean, I understand the power of Brainstorm, but the card is a lot less impressive when you consistently have to play it on turn one. Portent is leagues better in that case.

[Di]

Would it be asking too much for you to explain why you think Portent is "trash," and why it is so obviously worse than Brainstorm?

It doesn't put cards in the hand immediately. That is my biggest gripe. If I'm going into the midgame in topdeck mode, I'd be much happier plucking a Brainstorm than a Portent. It also won't hide cards in hand, and replace the bad cards in my hand with better ones to be shuffled away.

I mean, I understand the power of Brainstorm, but the card is a lot less impressive when you consistently have to play it on turn one. Portent is leagues better in that case.

You don't have to play it on turn 1, but if the option is there I will often take it because it will open up the turn 2 play. It's good in basically any scenario. If I play a Survival without a creature in hand but have Brainstorm, it will find a creature that turn to be used. Or if Goblin Matron just put a Ringleader in their hand, I can Brainstorm to at least find a Cabal Therapy (actually, that example happened twice at the GAGG).

[MattH]

The problem with Brainstorm is that it makes you want U on turn one, 1G or 1B on turn two, and GG after that. It looks hell on the mana.

It's still probably worth it, though.

[Tacosnape]

The problem with Brainstorm is that it makes you want U on turn one, 1G or 1B on turn two, and GG after that. It looks hell on the mana.

It's still probably worth it, though.

What you forget is that Brainstorm itself improves your manabase. So in addition to picking up those Survivals that started out 9th from the top, it'll help you smooth out your mana as well.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Seriously, though, ninjas. Try them. They have strong synergy with CIP creatures, and guys like Mistblade Shinobi, Deep Hours, and Skullsnatcher all have highly useful abilities at a fair price.

In the SB, at least, Okiba-Gang is pretty much Hyppie without double black.

[Di]

Seriously, though, ninjas. Try them. They have strong synergy with CIP creatures, and guys like Mistblade Shinobi, Deep Hours, and Skullsnatcher all have highly useful abilities at a fair price.

In the SB, at least, Okiba-Gang is pretty much Hyppie without double black.

Their abilities require an unblocked attacker, which limits their usefulness if I'm on defense. Otherwise they are just overcosted cards that aren't as strong as the others in the deck already.

Okiba-Gang I actually tried before I went to Hypnotic Specter, but it's 5cc was a problem. Plus, it's 4 mana Ninjitsu didn't help much because it was so slow. The option of getting Hippy down turn 2 is insanely good against decks like Thresh or Solidarity, so that's why it's there.

The problem with Brainstorm is that it makes you want U on turn one, 1G or 1B on turn two, and GG after that. It looks hell on the mana.

It's still probably worth it, though.

What you forget is that Brainstorm itself improves your manabase. So in addition to picking up those Survivals that started out 9th from the top, it'll help you smooth out your mana as well.

What he said. Opening a Brainstorm will alow you to use that Trop turn one, and if you don't have a fetch/Bayou/whatever in hand, it'll at least help find it if you need to.

Also Matt, all of these lands add green in the deck, so I don't know why you were making a point to find 1G or GG. Finding U and B early can be difficult at times, but you have Birds of Paradise to smooth that out, Brainstorm to find them, and fetchlands. (I may have forgotten to add that I draw more fetchlands that anyone ever. I draw at least 4-5 every game I play for some ungodly reason.)

[AngryTroll]

I played tonight for a few hours using this list, Minus one Rofellos, Plus one Baloth. Shame on me, but I didn't have a second Rofellos.

Here are my thoughts on the matter. Against Goblins, things are not good, but not terrible. Therapy for Lackey, and Tinder Wall is surprisingly good. All in all, its not great, but I won a couple Pre board (lost a lot more then I won), but I imagine things get better post board with Plagues and Goblin Wrath.

Slivers is NOT GOOD. The entire match comes down to Crystalline Sliver. If one sticks, the options are Tradewind land to keep Slivers off enough land...oh. They already have enough land for Sinew and Muscle, and we can't FTK or Boneshredder or Masticore the Slivers. Bad. So we have Therapy vs Crystalline Sliver, but they have Brainstorm, Force of Will, and Daze (half the time) to stop that one card from resolving. Not good.

I played against Angel Stompy, and the Masticore was great, as was the Dark Confidants. This was a matchup where ATS really shone over RGbSA, as the Masticore and Tradewind Riders answered things that had Pro Red, Swords of Fire and Ice, and other troublesome permanents RGbSA usually can't handle.

In both of the first two matchups, having access to Burning Wish makes a huge difference. BWish is also great against Angel Stompy, but ATS felt stronger against the deck with only a few games. I am not convinced adding Blue for Brainstorm and Tradewind Rider is worth the loss of Burning Wish, and the mana base weakening that happens by adding a fourth color.

However, I will be adding Confidants and Masticore to RGbSA after playing with them in a Survival list tonight. I really like some of the things EATS does, but I feel that RGbSA is stronger overall so far. On the other hand, this was one night of preboard testing. These are just initial impressions, but I don't see testing results by anyone else so far, so I thought I would throw them out there.

[Di]

All your testing from what I see is pretty accurate with my own. As I said, Goblins isn't a good pre-board matchup, but it's not awful. They can do some broken things, but if you're able to do them as well you can pull it out. That matchup kind of relies on the sideboard a bit for Plagues, Needles, and Pyromancer, so I'm not overly concerned if you lose game 1, but when it happens it's a nice cushion for the round.

I've never tested against Slivers, but the other day after glacing over the thread, I projected that it would be an awful matchup. Well, not awful, but you have a very difficult time winning after Crystalline Sliver is in play, because it negates most of your deck. Basically the way I see it, you shift into pure RGBSA mode and send out man after man and just attack away. If they have 3 Sinew/Muscle Slivers in play with Crystalline you're fucked because their men will be larger than yours, but if you're able to go head-to-head with their men or if they don't have multiple pump slivers you can easily aggro them out with Werebears and other beatsticks.

I played against Angel Stompy, and the Masticore was great, as was the Dark Confidants. This was a matchup where ATS really shone over RGbSA, as the Masticore and Tradewind Riders answered things that had Pro Red, Swords of Fire and Ice, and other troublesome permanents RGbSA usually can't handle.

I am not convinced adding Blue for Brainstorm and Tradewind Rider is worth the loss of Burning Wish, and the mana base weakening that happens by adding a fourth color.

After hearing that first statement, it seems strange to hear the latter. It sounds like the Tradewind helped a tremendous deal where RGBSA couldn't contend with it. Idk, they both have advantages and disadvantages. I sacrifice the manabase for flexibility (and Brainstorm finds Survival whereas Burning Wish won't.), and you have a stronger manabase but a more strait-forward approach. It's up in the air really, but I personally (obviously) prefer the flexibility.

[MattH]

My metagame went Orim's Chant-crazy since I was last there in November, so I need to stop playing combo. This and hi-val's article have brought my attention back to my first love, Survival decks.

After playing around with this, here's what I've noticed.

1. Do you really need two Tradewinds? One is good for utility purposes but why the second?

2. I kind of like a second Baloth, since Confidant eats a lot of life. This may be due to my running 4 Confidants or it may not.

3. Masticore is pretty blehhh. He takes a shit-ton (technical term) of mana. I don't like him much at all.

3. Threshold has been hard to achieve without an active Survival.

4. Tinder Wall is hot sauce.

5. I really want to board some kind of grave-hating man. Wretch or Loaming Shaman.

6. I really want a Goblin Sharpshooter somewhere in the 75.

That is all for now.

[Alfred]

Why not a single Juzam Sliver or Dormant Sliver in the SB for the Sliver matchup? Dormant Sliver seems particularly devistating when they have played out a Crystalline Sliver, because they have no way of removing it, or any way of winning at all. Clear the way with Cabal Therapies, and it could be an excellent silver bullet.

[Whit3 Ghost]

If your metagame is that infested with Slivers, then it may a very good idea. However, the fact that they don't do much in other matchups would count them out for a major tournament.

[Di]

1. Do you really need two Tradewinds? One is good for utility purposes but why the second?

One is probably enough, but I really like the second for safety reasons. If for some reason this deck needs to go into control mode and play very definsively, having multiple Tradewinds go a long way to helping me out. Also, they are very effective against Solidarity if I can hit them down early, and if I'm able to resolve Tradewind (or both) against them game 1 it helps a great deal. Post-board not as much though, because you have a lot more help from the sideboard. It's also one of the few maindeck outs this deck has of dealing with stuff like Pithing Needle. It's always nice to draw it if I'm staring at a Needle or something. However in the event I were to cut one, it'd be for an FTK, but I really don't see it happening.

2. I kind of like a second Baloth, since Confidant eats a lot of life. This may be due to my running 4 Confidants or it may not.

If you got the space for another Baloth that's great. But 4 Confidant can really end up being suicidal. When I originally ran 4 I had a number of problems with life from them. Then again, I was running more high-cc critters, but still I think 3 is the perfect number.

3. Masticore is pretty blehhh. He takes a shit-ton (technical term) of mana. I don't like him much at all.

6. I really want a Goblin Sharpshooter somewhere in the 75.

You're really the only person I've seen who doesn't like him. He takes a shit-ton of mana, but there should rarely be a time when you don't have access to that. Plus, he gets around pro-red men and is an able 4/4 beater.

I really don't like Sharpshooter very much. It's awful against Threshold and will either die against Goblins before I can use it or won't kill their x/2 men. It is also a terrible topdeck being a measly 1/1 for 3. Masticore in this deck is much better because it is a threat on its own and with more than half the deck adding mana it's ability just goes retarded.

3. Threshold has been hard to achieve without an active Survival.

This is true. Well, sort of. Werebear is rather weak until the midgame without Survival, but I think overall it's worth it. At times it can be very difficult to hit Threshold, but it also depends on the deck you're playing against. You should be able to get 3-5 cards in the graveyard on your own no problem, and in most cases the opponent will help put those final few there for you.

4. Tinder Wall is hot sauce.

Oh yes, that it is.

5. I really want to board some kind of grave-hating man. Wretch or Loaming Shaman.

Unless decks like reanimator or LftL are very popular in your metagame, I don't really see why. Threshold is already a favorable matchup, and their creatures even after gaining thresh aren't very intimidating. Survival maybe, but as a Survival player I really don't fear graveyard removal, because for the most part it's rather ineffective unless under some bizarre circumstances.

Why not a single Juzam Sliver or Dormant Sliver in the SB for the Sliver matchup? Dormant Sliver seems particularly devistating when they have played out a Crystalline Sliver, because they have no way of removing it, or any way of winning at all. Clear the way with Cabal Therapies, and it could be an excellent silver bullet.

If Slivers was a metagame concern, maybe. However, considering I've never even seen the deck played, and most likely won't because I live in the northeast where good decks reign supreme, I doubt I'll be wasting my time with it. However, if by some freak occurance Slivers decides to overrun the metagame over here, then something might make a possible sideboard slot. But right now I need to focus on decks that actually see play, like Goblins.

[Volt]

If Slivers was a metagame concern, maybe. However, considering I've never even seen the deck played, and most likely won't because I live in the northeast where good decks reign supreme,

Ouch.

[MattH]

You're really the only person I've seen who doesn't like him. He takes a shit-ton of mana, but there should rarely be a time when you don't have access to that. Plus, he gets around pro-red men and is an able 4/4 beater.

I admit, I have not tried him in this particular deck. But I have always hated him in every other build of Survival I have run.

I really don't like Sharpshooter very much. It's awful against Threshold and will either die against Goblins before I can use it

This is true, but neither of those decks for some reason are heavily played here. I dunno, I just have a feeling that were I to run without it, I would end up smacking myself in the head.

It's pretty good against Affinity.

This is true. Well, sort of. Werebear is rather weak until the midgame without Survival, but I think overall it's worth it. At times it can be very difficult to hit Threshold, but it also depends on the deck you're playing against. You should be able to get 3-5 cards in the graveyard on your own no problem, and in most cases the opponent will help put those final few there for you.

I can see this. On my own it takes forever to get threshold.

Unless decks like reanimator or LftL are very popular in your metagame, I don't really see why.

Actually we do see a lot of Loam here. Enough that I may maindeck a Wretch if I run this. If you had to maindeck one, which would it be?