Why are UW decks suddenly running 1 Aetherling/1 Elixir/2 Elspeth instead of 1 Aetherling/3 Elspeth? I was glad to Elixir gone, as it feels like a terrible Magic card in a Monoblack meta (basically a mulligan when you draw it). It has utility in the mirror, sure, but the games I watch in Control mirrors are Aetherling fights, not Elixir fights.
Having the option to scum up Game 1 (by wasting 40 minutes winning a game that was won 25 minutes ago, courtesy of your opponent not scooping) and then just sit on fingers in Game 2 is powerful I guess, but I prefer to play Magic cards that actually do something. If I get Thoughtseize'd by my T1 Mono-Black opponent and he sees Elixir, he knows that I've basically taken a mulligan, as 5 life is not a Magic card (and it'll be 10+ turns before the shuffling effect becomes relevant in improving our draws). Perhaps RW Burn has prompted us to play a nerfed Angel's Mercy? No clue.
Think of it this way. Control decks have a lot of draw mechanics, and early game that draw mechanic is going to net us nearly 1/2 land and 1/2 actual cards when we use it. In longer games when we're rocking 10+ lands on the field our draw mechanics get potential so much better if we're able to throw our graveyard in. The ability to play it on turn 1 and then only needing 2 mana to activate it is also quite nice compared to Angel's Mercy.
Also, with the set's "if it's your turn scry 1 mechanic" elixir gives you the opportunity to shuffle your deck and dig for an answer to anything. Lastly, smart mono black players will not throw all their thoughseizes at a control opponent as soon as they draw it. It's much better to say thoughtseize, force them to either counterspell it or see there hand, and then play a threat late game and if they potentially see one of your best win cons in your hand they might get the idea to rip it out.
All in all, Elixir really isn't for Aetherling per say. It's more so that we can run fewer win cons and get away with it. I play a fast control with 1 Aetherling + 1 Elspeth + Elixir and have yet to have a problem with hitting time and the excess utility from the additional spells I get as opposed to win con is really noticeable imo.
It isn't that one is better than the other, it's that Elixir offers utility and a play where a 6-mana spell can't happen. Opening a hand with Aetherling is a mulligan in the very same way, and Elspeth is only borderline.
I remember asking the opposite question when U/W first began winning with just Elixir by itself: why can't the deck include Aetherling as an alternate win-con? All I got were dogmatic and unbalanced responses talking down Aetherling, a time-tested control finisher. Here we see the other end of the spectrum.
Elixir is the control finisher of control decks; with it you are guaranteed inevitability even though it "does nothing." The functional applications you are looking for are more subtle but still important; many games with mono-black control do go long, do involve resolving one or multiple Revelations, and therefore do benefit from shuffling back in Verdicts and counterspells. Would you accomplish the same win percentage against black with an Elspeth instead? Probably. To me this question is much less of a metagame call and much more a matter of preference. Play it if you like it.
Having the option to scum up Game 1 (by wasting 40 minutes winning a game that was won 25 minutes ago, courtesy of your opponent not scooping) and then just sit on fingers in Game 2 is powerful I guess, but I prefer to play Magic cards that actually do something. If I get Thoughtseize'd by my T1 Mono-Black opponent and he sees Elixir, he knows that I've basically taken a mulligan, as 5 life is not a Magic card (and it'll be 10+ turns before the shuffling effect becomes relevant in improving our draws). Perhaps RW Burn has prompted us to play a nerfed Angel's Mercy? No clue.
Also, with the set's "if it's your turn scry 1 mechanic" elixir gives you the opportunity to shuffle your deck and dig for an answer to anything. Lastly, smart mono black players will not throw all their thoughseizes at a control opponent as soon as they draw it. It's much better to say thoughtseize, force them to either counterspell it or see there hand, and then play a threat late game and if they potentially see one of your best win cons in your hand they might get the idea to rip it out.
All in all, Elixir really isn't for Aetherling per say. It's more so that we can run fewer win cons and get away with it. I play a fast control with 1 Aetherling + 1 Elspeth + Elixir and have yet to have a problem with hitting time and the excess utility from the additional spells I get as opposed to win con is really noticeable imo.
I remember asking the opposite question when U/W first began winning with just Elixir by itself: why can't the deck include Aetherling as an alternate win-con? All I got were dogmatic and unbalanced responses talking down Aetherling, a time-tested control finisher. Here we see the other end of the spectrum.
Elixir is the control finisher of control decks; with it you are guaranteed inevitability even though it "does nothing." The functional applications you are looking for are more subtle but still important; many games with mono-black control do go long, do involve resolving one or multiple Revelations, and therefore do benefit from shuffling back in Verdicts and counterspells. Would you accomplish the same win percentage against black with an Elspeth instead? Probably. To me this question is much less of a metagame call and much more a matter of preference. Play it if you like it.