[Deck] Survival

[crow_mw]

@Kesta - I believe the 'few bad MU but only few good Ones.' applies to both color choices. I claim (and am looking into discussion on that subject), that outside of Merflok matchup all matchups in which rock is better bant is only slightly worse and on the other hand there are matchups in which bant has a sporting chance, while rock does not.

@hungryboi. Lategame discard is quite useless, but fortunately once we get there we are probably already in good position. I also agree that discard beats opposing countermagic and that a peek at enemy hand is huge. I do not agree however with countermagic being weaker early game. Quite contrary I believe that counters (most importantly FoW) allows you to handle t1 kills, t1 big threats (such a Manabonds) and t2/t3 topdecks.

PS. One more advantage of rock variant is that it is much easier to pretend you are crap deck in first turn or two. You can easily be placed by opponent on Eva Green or maybe even Black Sui. When you open with blue land opponent knows that you mean business.

[hungryboi]

I still feel that Cabal Therapy early on is stronger than Force of Will since it's recurrable. It may not be as good as FoW on the draw, however, it has so much synergy with the deck (Eternal Witness, Kitchen Finks, BoP). Let's not forget that FoW isn't a free counter either. I don't even want to mention how broken first turn thoughtseize second turn cabal is.

I don't feel like BGW has any horrible match-ups. Even combo, I've beaten them 2 out of 3 times at the last few tournaments (beat 1 Belcher, 1 Ad Nauseum, losing to 1 TES). I'd say I'm at least 40% against them. With Legacy shifting around so much as of lately, what decks would most people say still pose a 50% or higher chance of game win against survival? I believe Storm Combo, Dream Halls combo, Eva Green, and Bant Survival pose as strong threats.

[Jak]

In general it is hard to say which deck is better. However, when it comes to those two lists not only they would appeal to similar group of players (I bet majority of sourcers reading those words tried both variants) but also they feel very similar to play. Comparing bant sur to rock sur feels more like debating specific card choices than comparing two different deck types. For a comparison a GW list feels much different to play than both of builds in question - it is much more aggro oriented. It is also worth noting, that while Bant gets a lot more publicity on The Source, both color choices had more or less same impact on archetype score when we entered DTB section at the beginning of this year.

I guess it depends on what builds we are talking about. I really don't know what BGW lists you guys are talking about since I have stayed away from posting in this thread. I look at it whenever there is something new, but the lists look like they just start relying more and more on Survival. If I am looking at these lists, Bant Survival seems much more streamlined and consistent. Cantrips, less of a toolbox approach, and playing more relevant creatures is where it gets the nod from me. The lists that I have seen have a much heavier curve with nothing to really smooth it out. Some have Tops but not really more than a two of.

So, at first lets take a quick glimpse at the most common cards which both colors provide.

Black:
Discard (Thoughtseize, Cabal Therapy, Duress
Removal Creatures (Shriekmaw, Big Game Hunter, Fleshbag Marauder)
Pernicious Deed
Engineered Plague
GY hate (Yixlid Jailer, Withered Wretch, Hardcasting Faerie Macabre)
Recurring Nightmare, Phyrexian Tower, Volrath's Stronghold

Blue:
Countermagic (Force of Will, Spell Pierce, Spell Snare, Daze
Cantrips (Brainstorm, Ponder)
Rhox War Monk
Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
Llawan, Cephalid Empress
Noble Hierarch
Trygon Predator
Meddling Mage
Spellstutter Sprite
Vendilion Clique
Sower of temptation
Wonder
Rafiq of the many

Okay, I guess this looks okay. My only problems are that Bant Survival has GY hate too. I think trying to list something that broad under one category is wrong, especially for reasons like hardcasting Faerie Macabre or for cards that aren't even run (I have yet to see lists run Yixlid Jailer and Withered Wretch). I also have not seen lists running Phyrexian Tower or Volrath's Stronghold. Maybe as one ofs, but you shouldn't be calling those common. This can be said for many things in the Bant Sur lists as well since some of the cards have been removed since Iona offers the same things in most ways.

While at first glance blue list is longer it just means that people have tried more things in it. Basically, the main differences are that black offers Discards and board control tools, while blue offers countermagic, cantrips, and some cool creature tricks. Out of the smaller differences we have RWM vs Finks, Hierarch vs BoP, Kira maybe vs Mom, Llawan vs Plague, and Predator as an option in addition to Pridemage, Wickerbought and maybe Sliver.

Seems like a pretty oversimplified view. Board control is broad. Are we talking about stuff like Shriekmaw or things like Deed? I'd argue that Bant Sur doesn't need them and if it did need or want them, Sower is a better answer if it sticks around and a small red splash can be done for Firespout. Anyway, all the board control tools (if referring to the 187 creatures) are slow and clunky. In a format infested with Zoo, Merfolk, and other cheap, big monsters, paying 2-4 mana to remove one just puts you behind on tempo. I think the only good comparison is Discard versus Countermagic.

Countermagic vs Discard is a long story to discuss, but all in all they seem equally potent in allowing us to get our Survival into play. Main differences are in interrupting enemy plans. I will not go into detail why countermagic seems to be a better choice overall, but there are also aspects in which discard is superior. One is CA you can get, especially with therapy. The other is information added to discard spells. The second difference has a big tournament appeal for me. If you are to assess certain matchup this fact is not as important as in tournament play, where you are matched against unknown deck. The fact that after your first turn you know what exactly is your opponent playing is crucial. Even against a known deck peek at hist hand t1 goes a long way.

This is the biggest distinction between the deck. I think with Countermagic, the deck just works better. Survival decks are trying to play out what they have and with free counterspells, the deck can put all of its resources into playing out creatures and Survival. With discard, you play it and pick whats in there hand. You can get the best card, but what if the best card in their hand isn't something you wanted them not to have? Counters can get you the advantage if you know decks, whats played in the, and what spells to stop. Basically, the bane of discard is the topdeck or what they draw in the future. I'll leave it at that since there are pros and cons. Also, your second point is pretty mute since Clique gets Bant Sur that information as well.

Board Control vs Cantripping is maybe not the best match, but I find those two aspects to be second most important benefits of choosing each color. Between deeds, maws and plagues black has a control over board which blue can only try to mimmic with inferior choices such as Sower or Llawan. On the other hand blue can dig for answers or for survival better. It also has better possibilities to control enemy plays once Survival hits.

Bad comparison, but at least you know that. Again, Bant Sur has access to board control as well. It doesn't always use it main deck because the meta just isn't that great for it. Shriekmaw is a great answer but when you are playing 2-3 mana to remove a 1-2 mana creature, you aren't gaining any kind of card advantage or tempo advantage. I think Deed (which isn't even widely played) can be substitued with Jitte or Firespout pretty effectively. But Cantrips are a definite boon for Bant Sur. The only comparison is Top, but it is a mana sink and again, Survival wants to do other stuff with its mana (circles back to the Discard versus Counters argument).

RWM vs Finks. In my oppinion it is hard to compare. Each of them, while serving the same function is better in certain circumstances. All in all I would say however, that RWM is superior here in 75% of cases.

Bant Survival can play both so I don't think there is much to discuss.

Bop vs Hierarch was discussed a few pages ago so I will skip it.

I haven't read the discussion, but Hierarch is better in every possible way.

Llawan - it is a nice tool against progenitus and against merfolks. It seems however, that black is better equipped to deal with the former with Fleshbag Marauder (along with better tools to get rid of the cannon fodder) and has a better matchup against folks in first place.

K, again, it is a one of sideboard card. Why are you trying to compare it to compare it to things GBW runs maindeck? Anyway, Llawan is a great answer to Progenitus, Inkwell, Empryrial Archangel, and Merfolk.

Predator vs other artifact / enchantment tools - Predator is awesome against some decks that are not widely played. If not for that last fact he would be a big advantage in favor of blue.

Also not much to discuss since Bant Sur can play any of them.

Kira - While he goes between MD, SB and not being played at all I find him a great tool. From my pov, while fighting removal generally is good, he is best because he protects the hate cards - ranging from Teeg through Meddling Mage till Iona. I would love to see Mother of runes played in black decks to mirror that ability, moms are narrow and hard to fit in the list.

Again, Bant can play both of them, some even do.

Hardcasting Macabre. Even blue lists occasionally run one MD and probably even more will with the hype the reanimator win in GP rouse up. Being able to cast it when its ability is not needed is maybe not gamebraking, but certainly has its appeal.

I'll flat out say that the Bant Survival builds maindecking this are bad builds for that fact. If you want GY hate, there are much better answers that don't suck in 95% of the games you play. But anyway, when would you ever cast Faerie Macabre? You side it in to hate on decks, why would you take that away?

Ok, after this long list finally, lets take a look on matchups.
CB-Top - As far as I am concerned both color choices seem to perform equally well in this matchup.
Zoo - Black seems to deal better with aggro strategies overall. Blue still has a good game though.
Goblins - Between deeds, better removal package and plagues this seems to be a way better matchup for black than it is for blue.
Ichorid - I would again say, that black has a stronger game here than blue. While blue is better equipped to stop a fast DR and discard, especially on the draw, does nothing black has much better tools to deal with bridges and zombie tokens. It is also worth noting, that this is one of the matchups in which RWM > Finks by miles.
Aggro Loam - Blue is way better at stopping their engine, especially with MD meddling mages. While black has better tools to deal with their beaters it also suffers much more from mana denial, than blue does.
Merfolks - Merfolks is the matchup that could actually convince me to play rock over bant in a given tournament. For bant it is hard (while still possibly being more or less equal) while for black it is quite positive. Obviously they can still be too fast for you, especially if they run stifle, but it is nowhere near as hard as for bant.
ANT - Quite bad matchup for both archetypes. While discard does not fear silence, bant has obviously much better game here (admittedly I have a limited experience in this matchup)
Thresh - Again, this seems hard for both color choices, but black suffers much more than mana denial strategy and while in theory it has better tools to get rid of their sparse threats in practice blue has more power to actually land them.

I don't want to just argue matchups but I disagree with most of this. I think Bant has a much better ability at adapting to its metagame, whether it be packing Jittes or splashing red for Firespout against aggro, playing more proactive and reactive disruption against combo, or any random cards for general problem cards.

[crow_mw]

I guess it depends on what builds we are talking about. I really don't know what BGW lists you guys are talking about since I have stayed away from posting in this thread. I look at it whenever there is something new, but the lists look like they just start relying more and more on Survival. If I am looking at these lists, Bant Survival seems much more streamlined and consistent. Cantrips, less of a toolbox approach, and playing more relevant creatures is where it gets the nod from me. The lists that I have seen have a much heavier curve with nothing to really smooth it out. Some have Tops but not really more than a two of.

Thanks for a replay. The BGW list I am using is a quite standard list without any fancy tehs. Goyfs, Finks, Pridemages, Birds, Survival package, two black removal creatures, swords, discard package and deeds. The Bant list I am using is simmilar to your list, without red splash and before you started running 3 MD MMs. What I wanted to focus the discussion on however is more about possibilities color choices give. At least you don't seem to disagree that (while Bant has some nice advantages) both color choices feel simmilar to play.

Okay, I guess this looks okay. My only problems are that Bant Survival has GY hate too. I think trying to list something that broad under one category is wrong, especially for reasons like hardcasting Faerie Macabre or for cards that aren't even run (I have yet to see lists run Yixlid Jailer and Withered Wretch). I also have not seen lists running Phyrexian Tower or Volrath's Stronghold. Maybe as one ofs, but you shouldn't be calling those common. This can be said for many things in the Bant Sur lists as well since some of the cards have been removed since Iona offers the same things in most ways.

I did not try to state that Bant can't run GY hate, but as far as I know, bant lists aren't using any blue-specific gy hate cards. The card picks for black are all from this thread. While I fully agree people don't run Wretch (I did see few sidebords with Jailer) again - I wanted to point out possibilities that are given by both colors.

Seems like a pretty oversimplified view. Board control is broad. Are we talking about stuff like Shriekmaw or things like Deed? I'd argue that Bant Sur doesn't need them and if it did need or want them, Sower is a better answer if it sticks around and a small red splash can be done for Firespout. Anyway, all the board control tools (if referring to the 187 creatures) are slow and clunky. In a format infested with Zoo, Merfolk, and other cheap, big monsters, paying 2-4 mana to remove one just puts you behind on tempo. I think the only good comparison is Discard versus Countermagic.

Yes, by board control I did mean the card choices you mentioned. Also black usually runs more Witnesses and MD Genesis, which helps as well. It is quite possible that Bant doesn't need that and indeed sometimes black is just too slow. If they are not too slow however I do claim they offer greater possibilities, than blue. Resolved Sower does a lot, but it is actually even slower than black tools.

This is the biggest distinction between the deck. I think with Countermagic, the deck just works better. Survival decks are trying to play out what they have and with free counterspells, the deck can put all of its resources into playing out creatures and Survival. With discard, you play it and pick whats in there hand. You can get the best card, but what if the best card in their hand isn't something you wanted them not to have? Counters can get you the advantage if you know decks, whats played in the, and what spells to stop. Basically, the bane of discard is the topdeck or what they draw in the future. I'll leave it at that since there are pros and cons. Also, your second point is pretty mute since Clique gets Bant Sur that information as well.

Agreed with most, but in terms of gaining information Clique isn't all that great - obviously it does provide you with information, but t1 discard spell provides you with that information much faster.

Bad comparison, but at least you know that. Again, Bant Sur has access to board control as well. It doesn't always use it main deck because the meta just isn't that great for it. Shriekmaw is a great answer but when you are playing 2-3 mana to remove a 1-2 mana creature, you aren't gaining any kind of card advantage or tempo advantage. I think Deed (which isn't even widely played) can be substitued with Jitte or Firespout pretty effectively. But Cantrips are a definite boon for Bant Sur. The only comparison is Top, but it is a mana sink and again, Survival wants to do other stuff with its mana (circles back to the Discard versus Counters argument).

What I have written is based on both my experience and what people claim in both this and Bant threads. The second strongest point (after countermagic) of blue is cantripping which leads to better consistency. The second strongest point of black, I still believe, is its ability to deal with cards (creatures mostly) on board. Shriekmaw is the tutor target I miss the most when playing Bant.

Bant Survival can play both so I don't think there is much to discuss.

Bant can play both but usually doesn't. Again, maybe the more precise question would be 'Is the ability to play RWM a very big advantage for Bant, bearing in mind Rock can play Finks in his place'? I believe that all in all RWM is stronger and it is a big deal, that blue can run him. Finks do have their ninches though.

I haven't read the discussion, but Hierarch is better in every possible way.

The discussion started with question, if it would be interesting to run hierarch in black list. The general consensus was, that no.

K, again, it is a one of sideboard card. Why are you trying to compare it to compare it to things GBW runs maindeck? Anyway, Llawan is a great answer to Progenitus, Inkwell, Empryrial Archangel, and Merfolk.

Yes. A sideboard card, that fills the role of stuff that Rock build would usually run MD. Significally narrower than black tools, but does its job better against targets it can hit.

Also not much to discuss since Bant Sur can play any of them.

Same question as in RWM vs Finks paragraph. This time I believe that being able to run predator on top of other options is not that much of a deal in current meta.

I don't want to just argue matchups but I disagree with most of this.

Too bad, I would love to hear more about your experience.

I think Bant has a much better ability at adapting to its metagame, whether it be packing Jittes or splashing red for Firespout against aggro, playing more proactive and reactive disruption against combo, or any random cards for general problem cards.

Ok, thank you for the input. One of the reasons why I wanted to bring that discussion up was because more and more often I was asking myself a question 'is Bant build strictly superior to Rock build'. Here is a definite 'yes', and it is very valuable to hear about that. Obviously I have read the Bant primer and I totally agree with all bant advantages you have listed there. However I always acknowledged positive aspects of playing rock and I do wonder, if they are just my misperception or that observation can be verified by others. Clearly, here is a vote for 'misperception', but I am looking forward for other replies.

[Jak]

Thanks for a replay. The BGW list I am using is a quite standard list without any fancy tehs. Goyfs, Finks, Pridemages, Birds, Survival package, two black removal creatures, swords, discard package and deeds. The Bant list I am using is simmilar to your list, without red splash and before you started running 3 MD MMs. What I wanted to focus the discussion on however is more about possibilities color choices give. At least you don't seem to disagree that (while Bant has some nice advantages) both color choices feel simmilar to play.

Well, they really don't play the same at all. I mean, the goal of getting Survival out is the same, but the GBW version tries a lot harder to control the board and is much more of a lategame deck with all of the recrusion elements and more powerful spells. Bant plays more of a tempo game with the cheapest spells available. It does a lot more early trying to maximize its mana to take the advantage there. Survival can then win the late game, but it isn't always necessary to win the late game.

I did not try to state that Bant can't run GY hate, but as far as I know, bant lists aren't using any blue-specific gy hate cards. The card picks for black are all from this thread. While I fully agree people don't run Wretch (I did see few sidebords with Jailer) again - I wanted to point out possibilities that are given by both colors.

I know. Black does have more GY hate, but since most aren't running it, should it be considered common?

Yes, by board control I did mean the card choices you mentioned. Also black usually runs more Witnesses and MD Genesis, which helps as well. It is quite possible that Bant doesn't need that and indeed sometimes black is just too slow. If they are not too slow however I do claim they offer greater possibilities, than blue. Resolved Sower does a lot, but it is actually even slower than black tools.

Yeah, this is just the difference between the builds. I'll go ahead and sy Bant doesn't need it, but I am not saying it wouldn't want something like Shriekmaw. I think Bant gets by with exalted to overpower opposing creatures, flying to go over the top, or just overwhelming them with more efficient creatures. Black has access to the tools so it does use them. I think this is a plus for GBW.

Agreed with most, but in terms of gaining information Clique isn't all that great - obviously it does provide you with information, but t1 discard spell provides you with that information much faster.

Yes, but information that early isn't that great. It helps you resolve Survival through 1 piece of countermagic but so does Force and all that information you got is useless later on. Maybe I am underestimating the value of knowing if that Survival will resolve, but most of the time I doubt my opponent will have multiple counters for Survival so I'll just play it.

What I have written is based on both my experience and what people claim in both this and Bant threads. The second strongest point (after countermagic) of blue is cantripping which leads to better consistency. The second strongest point of black, I still believe, is its ability to deal with cards (creatures mostly) on board. Shriekmaw is the tutor target I miss the most when playing Bant.

I agree. I am just saying that Bant does have access to these kinds of things. They aren't ass efficient as Shriekmaw, but things like Winged Coatl, Sower, Gilded Drake, etc can be just as effective or even better.

Bant can play both but usually doesn't. Again, maybe the more precise question would be 'Is the ability to play RWM a very big advantage for Bant, bearing in mind Rock can play Finks in his place'? I believe that all in all RWM is stronger and it is a big deal, that blue can run him. Finks do have their ninches though.

That's my point, Bant can play both. It chooses not to because Kitchen Finks is worse in more situations. It isn't a big plus, but it definitely is in Bants advantage.

The discussion started with question, if it would be interesting to run hierarch in black list. The general consensus was, that no.

I just wasn't sure if people were arguing that Birds was better for some stupid reason like, "It blocks Tombstalkers".

Yes. A sideboard card, that fills the role of stuff that Rock build would usually run MD. Significally narrower than black tools, but does its job better against targets it can hit.

It is narrow because that is what a SB card does; it answers specific matchups. I just don't see the value of trying to compare a narrow card played in the SB to a broad card in the MD.

Same question as in RWM vs Finks paragraph. This time I believe that being able to run predator on top of other options is not that much of a deal in current meta

Either do I, but again, it is obviously in Bant Survivals favor so I didn't think it needed to be brought up. I think discussing the trade offs of discard vs. counters and removal vs tempo is more important and if people really want to get in depth about it, it should be analyzed more.

Too bad, I would love to hear more about your experience.

I just didn't want to get into it because I am trying to finish up the Bant Sur primer and am writing matchups. I don't want to say people are playing things wrong, but I have never had trouble with CounterTop (some people have been saying this is a tough matchup), Tempo Thresh, board control, or ANT, and Merfolk has always been more of a toss up.

Ok, thank you for the input. One of the reasons why I wanted to bring that discussion up was because more and more often I was asking myself a question 'is Bant build strictly superior to Rock build'. Here is a definite 'yes', and it is very valuable to hear about that. Obviously I have read the Bant primer and I totally agree with all bant advantages you have listed there. However I always acknowledged positive aspects of playing rock and I do wonder, if they are just my misperception or that observation can be verified by others. Clearly, here is a vote for 'misperception', but I am looking forward for other replies.

I actually really like that this discussion is happening. I think peope are interested in what build excels against what decks and so on. I don't think any build is strictly better, but with both being Survival decks, even to good matchups all around is something both have. I think the GBW builds have an imporved game against CounterTop and control while Bant is better versus combo. Both are good versus all those decks but the percentages are most likely different.

[hungryboi]

Is it me or is the Loam matchup incredibly difficult? I've done some extensive testing and I've come to realize just how resilient they are on the Graveyard hate. Macabre usually isn't enough to stop them G1 unless they get really unlucky or we get lucky. G2 and 3, even 4x Leyline a lot of times isn't enough to stop them. They have grips, pulses, and their own leylines. Everything about their deck is annoying...Chalice, wastelands, maelstrom pulse, engineered explosives, seismic assault, Life from the loam. Pretty much any time you play them, they'll run into some combinations of these cards. What do people suggest in battling opponent GY based decks?

[Kesta]

I tried veteran explorer in my GBw rock sur and it works really well against AggroLoam, Loaming shaman too :-)

Veteran explorer are just insane in the place of BoP, it speed up the game, and quickly send you in mid/late-game mod where you can beat almost every decks. I always get problems against ANT, combos,... but if you're playing in a heavy Combo meta you shouldn't play survival.

[hungryboi]

Hmmm, I will definitely test the Explorers - been wanted to test them for a while, I forgot all about them. I assume that aggro usually doesn't like attacking into them since Explorer provides so much tempo? How many Explorers do you recommend to start of testing with? What ways do you have of getting him into your GY?

[Kesta]

I started with 4BoP and 1 Exporer as survival target. I ended (after 2-3 weeks of moderate testing) with 2 birds and 4 explorer. I play 4 cabal therapy, 3 Pernicious Deed, 1 Diabolic Intent (in testing), 1 Fleshbag Marauder, 1 Shriekmaw and 1 Recurring nightmare.
Usually aggro decks dont fear it the first time. But they should 'cause you get board control 1-2 turn later. You have to arange your mana base too, you need at laest 9 to 10 basic lands.

[yakisoba]

If one runs Volrath's Shapeshifter (for the old Breakfast combos) and Iona, does one need to run Loyal Retainers?

[Waikiki]

Unless you can prevent a card to go to your graveyard yes. A single wasteland could stop your plan.

[memnarch]

Is it me or is the Loam matchup incredibly difficult? I've done some extensive testing and I've come to realize just how resilient they are on the Graveyard hate. Macabre usually isn't enough to stop them G1 unless they get really unlucky or we get lucky. G2 and 3, even 4x Leyline a lot of times isn't enough to stop them. They have grips, pulses, and their own leylines. Everything about their deck is annoying...Chalice, wastelands, maelstrom pulse, engineered explosives, seismic assault, Life from the loam. Pretty much any time you play them, they'll run into some combinations of these cards. What do people suggest in battling opponent GY based decks?

I think relic of prognosis could help you somewhat when facing off against goyfs and terravors.

[memnarch]

Wrong thread sorry.

[aznepyon7]

Has anyone considered Doomed Necromancer as an alternative to Loyal Retainers? I haven't found it as useful due to the summoning sickness but at least it can be useful without Iona.

[Barnie25]

Can someone give me an example of an good Survival decklist? I've been looking for one for a while now. Is there one in perticular that you guys have been working on?

[Shabbaman]

Doomed Necromancer is nice, but you have to run Anger or Vial to get it to activate. The upside is that you could reanimate Tarmogoyfs or whatever else there might be in your graveyard. The downside is that it requires more mana and more cards to get it to work. Running Recurring Nightmare might be a better alternative.

[aznepyon7]

Doomed Necromancer is nice, but you have to run Anger or Vial to get it to activate. The upside is that you could reanimate Tarmogoyfs or whatever else there might be in your graveyard. The downside is that it requires more mana and more cards to get it to work. Running Recurring Nightmare might be a better alternative.

Problem is that Recurring isn't fetchable.

I dislike adding in Anger which will screw up my mana base and there just doesn't seem to be room for Vial.

My current decklist is a bit different as well.

I'm running 3 Veteran Explorers so I can pull out an early deed to deal with dredge, zoo, and merfolk. It also has an Academy Rector to fetch out the Deeds and a SotF if I need one. I guess Recurring will be better now that I'm using one, but I may have to run a second to get recurring out reliably.

My reason for running Rector:

1. Fetches out Deed, so you really only need to run 2 deeds.
2. SotF. It's costly but it's not as if you can do much with SotF if you don't have the mana for it.
3. Free block. Killing it usually isn't a problem due to the high no. of aggro decks and the 3-4 cabal therapies I'm running.

[Shabbaman]

If you're already running Academy Rector then Recurring Nightmare seems like an obvious inclusion, instead of Doomed Necromancer :)

[aznepyon7]

I'm playtesting Doomed Necromancer right now and I have to say that I really hate it. You think I should try a second rector to up the chances of recurring?

[1mpulse]

I run two Rectors in my GBW Survival, which has always worked out perfectly as my enchantment line up is:

4 Survival of the Fittest
2 Deed
1 Recurring Nightmare
1 Moat

Also, I don't see how anyone could be running GBW Survival without Vials, the deck is very mana hungry. I run 4 in my build, and wouldn't have it any other way.