Yeah, i just know that i ended up scrapping Karakas and Horizon Canopy because they just felt like they made my more vulnerable to wastes than anything else. I also didn't like upping the fetch count past the playset of Heaths because it felt like I was being forced to fetch duals more often.
Being nearly immune to wasteland is a big deal for me given the deck's gameplan, so a lot of my choices have been made to limit the potential for interaction with my manabase by other decks.
Also, I heartily recommend giving Chrome Moxen a try, they improve the early game speed of the deck, but they also increase your ability to chain plays off the topdeck. Mox Diamond is one that I tested on a lark awhile back, and while I think it's generally worse than Chrome Mox in the deck due to taking a spell slot rather than a land slot, I've been very impressed with it as a singleton. It gives you more fixing, more ways of landing t1 enchantress, etc.
I rarely feel forced to fetch up dual lands, and usually end the game with most of my basics out. Then again I run far fewer WW costing cards in the main than you do, so my early game usually only has to comprise of 1 maybe 2 white sources, mostly from a plains and a utopia sprawl.
I've always been very happy with my Canopy, as I hate bricking on early and/or critical turns from not having an enchantment. I agree though that I'm starting to just not care much about Karakas, we have no way to search it, our Reanimator matchup is so abysmal, and it is on the decline anyway what with Dr Shaman running around. It has been one of those things that has just stayed because it has always been there.
In the 3 years I've played this deck, I have never tried out the various forms of accelerants that other people use, such as Elvish Spirit Guide, Chrome Mox, Lotus Petal, Mox Diamond. I understand their merits, and I guess I should probably give them a go. I have always been resistant to change with this deck, as evidenced by the fact that it took me awhile to switch to GSZ when it was brand new. Ever since that, though, I have never looked back, so maybe this will be the same. My only concern is that we have to aggressively mulligan with this deck, so how has that been for you, as far as being useful more often than not? Because Chrome Mox is almost equivalent to another mulligan.
I'm a little surprised at the large non-basic count in your list. How often do you find yourself vulnerable to wasteland?
Not often at all, to be honest. Every time I fetch against either a blind opponent or someone I know that plays wasteland, I go for a basic. Even against aggressive wasteland decks like Thresh and UR Delver I do pretty well. I also sandbag Sanctums for as long as I can, and assume they will be wastelanded the turn after I play them, so I almost count them as pseudo rituals with a possible rebound. I'm almost considering going back to 21 lands, as I've been mulliganing a ton lately, but every time I do I get mana flooded. It has always been a damned if I do, damned if I don't situation for me lol.
I have been playing this list or very close to it for quite some time now. There are a number of flex slots available in the main as well as the side, depending on your meta. Other common mainboard/sideboard cards I switch back and forth between playing are Ground Seal, Blood Moon, Raking Canopy, Lignify, and Aura of Silence. These choices are largely meta dependent. I played Raking Canopy largely when Esper Stoneblade first hit the scene, as it killed all their win-cons except when they were holding a Sword of Feast and Famine. It was also my answer to UW Miracles, which was also another popular deck choice around that time. A few years ago I tried out a mainboard Choke, and have never gone back. I absolutely love it, and don't see myself replacing it soon. It is simply too good against many popular decks like Stoneblade, Thresh, Team America, BUG, and others. Blood Moon does many of the same things against these opponents, but I greatly enjoy the fact that it is one sided, as the symmetry from Blood Moon has hurt me a few times in the past. What with the rise of BUG, I may go back to running it in the 75 again, though.
The choice of Unlife may seem odd to people new to the deck, or even veterans, but I do have a method for my madness. We used to play it in the golden days when Zoo ran rampant over the format after Shards block, before Batterskull came around. It worked to essentially gain us 10 life to play with in order to lock them out. I am currently testing it against all the Deathrite decks. I got rather tired of stabilizing at 4-6 life just to die to a few Shamans because we can't afford to be aggressive with our Groves in order to find our Words of War. Unlife shuts it down cold, and also works to make it more difficult for decks like TES to combo us out, seeing as they need an additional 5 storm (or a few more goblins). In order to answer this, many people have started running Ground Seals in the main again, but I was never a huge fan of that, and enjoy the wider array of usage that Unlife gives us. Testing will tell if I'm wrong, and Ground Seal is the better choice, but as it stands I'm giving this old gem another go.
As ExpiredRascals said, I do not care for the vulnerabilities that the Helm versions have. Especially concerning that Energy Field does not give us shroud, which is a HUGE problem. From being vulnerable to cards like Liliana of the Veil, Jace, the Mindsculptor, discard is a big one, Tendrils of Agony, etc. I also feel that that version doesn't shore up any weaknesses this archetype has against its worst matchup (combo), doesn't make much of a change in our aggro matchup, doesn't run Grove for shroud (which is another point of weakness with Abrupt Decay being in existence), and the shortcomings of Field. So I have never really been a fan, nor have I been tempted to try it out.
If you want to read a tourney report I made to give some insight on my thought processes and playstyle in tournaments, or simply want to familiarize yourself with the deck and how it plays before pulling the trigger and buying it, check this out http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=8742438&highlight=10th#post8742438 post number #1809. Granted it was a year ago, but aside form meta game shifts and new cards, many of the ideas, sideboarding, decision paths, etc remain the same.
Nykthos is fringe playable if you need either a budget sanctum or a sanctum that adds G over W
Spear is great if you want removal and don't want to delve outside of GW, the anthem effect can do something if you are running Humility
Commune With The Gods is okay in heavier Replenish focus builds it digs and fills up the GY
Bow fits the same niche role of the Spear if your meta is infested with Delver decks Bow should be fine in the sideboard as other than the counter it is good vs Delver
Heliod and the other Enchantment creatures just seem unplayable, but I may test Archon a 4/4 flying lifelinker with shroud is nice
I'm thinking your line of thought with Commune was the same as vintage MUD that used to run Ancient Stirrings. Sadly, Commune costs 1 more mana and does not get a land, where as Stirrings grabs literally everything in the decks that play it.
As far as the bow goes as a counter to Thresh (as well as UR Delver), I'd much rather just play Choke and Elephant Grass. Cards that impact the game the moment they hit play, unlike bow. I will admit it is interesting and does afair bit to counter their gameplan, but we already tend to have a fairly positive matchup vs those decks anyway, especially game 1, that I'm not sure I'd warrant sideboard space with it. Testing may prove me wrong, but that's where I stand from a purely theorycrafting point of view. I have found weirder cards effective, such as when I came up with the idea of playing CoP: Green in my 'Geddon Stax deck against SurvivalVine a few years back, so this may very well prove the same, but the circumstances were quite different.
If you want to play Archon, why not just play a Sigarda? I'm not a fan of her either, but at least she shuts down annihilator and has shroud. Speaking of, Archon doesn't have shroud. If you are thinking of Replenishing it into play on an Enchantress, you probably need to know that Bestow only works when you CAST the spell, not when you return it to play. It also doesn't have lifelink? So maybe you are talking about a card that I'm not familiar with
Bottom line, there really isn't anything from Theros that helps out the traditional GWr Enchantress in ways that cards already at our disposal don't do already.
@MagicMouse On the topic of Carpet of Flowers, keep in mind that a fair bit of this deck is made up of silver bullets that tend to be extremely powerful against certain decks, and anywhere from mediocre to completely useless against other decks. Luckily, because of our engine, at worst a card is a cantrip, so take some solace in that. Some people play Carpet for the same reason that we play City of Solitude, and I play Choke or Blood Moon. Against the decks that they are relevant against, they are often times backbreaking. In the other matchups you simply don't tutor for them or cast them to draw cards game 1 and games 2 and 3 board them out. Simple as that. If it is an issue of power, Carpet is extremely misleading. On paper it seems lackluster, but it does a great deal for us, and against decks like Thresh it is a must counter. If you doubt me, try it a few times and see for yourself. The card is a cornerstone in green combo decks against blue decks for a reason. Being Enchantress, we do fall into the combo category, but Carpet is more of an option for us because we have a fairly large pool of cards to counter the blue decks so that's why it isn't quite the auto-include as it is for Belcher or Spanish Inquisition.
1) Enchantress hasn't had a great deal of high level success for quite some time. It, like Armageddon Stax, really had its hayday back during the reign of goblins, and before cards like Delver, Ad Nauseum, Emrakul, Griselbrand, etc. Since those days, combo has gotten better, faster, more consistent and creatures do things on top of stupidly efficient bodies. As far as whether or not it is viable anymore somewhat has to do with the meta (I'll continue that topic down below). If there isn't much combo, you'll do fine. This deck crushes Canadian Thresh, Maverick, Merfolk, UW Stoneblade (usually), and has at least a decent matchup against most every other blue deck. It loses to Pernicious Deed and has a hard time against heavy discard game 1, but they aren't as autolose as the combo mathcup is. Simply put, the game has evolved a great deal, and it is somewhat difficult for older archetypes to keep up when everything else seems to be getting amazing card after amazing card and we occasionally get another sideboard card/mainboard silver bullet (Nevermore, Rest in Peace, Sphere of Safety). Granted, GSZ has been absolutely remarkable for us, but that aside the main core of traditional GWr Enchantress has remained the same for quite some time. I'll leave the RiP/Helm version for other people to discuss.
2) That would be something to ask the mods about. And yes, I agree the primer is somewhat lacking and sorely needs an update.
I have always been a firm believer that the pilot of a deck is most of the time a more determining factor of whether or not you will do well in a tourney. Playing smart, outplaying your opponent, knowing your deck inside and out, knowing how to sideboard, having a better knowledge of the meta or even their deck are all huge factors in deciding how far you'll go. That may all seem like common sense, but I feel as if people often get too wrapped up in chasing the meta and the decks that are "winning" right now. With the advent of the internet the meta shifts dramatically from tourney to tourney. Look at SCG Opens for instance; one week there are 3 thresh decks in the top 8, the next there are zero, and who knows what there will be next time. Yes there are pillar decks in the format and tier 1 decks, but things aren't how they used to be, and you should never discount a rogue archetype in any particular meta.
Bottom line, no matter what, this deck is very powerful in the hands of someone that knows what they are doing. And it only gets more powerful if you opponent is either unaware of your deck or out of practice against it. So my opinion is, if you enjoy the deck, play it, learn it, master it and understand that it does have weaknesses, but that shouldn't stop you from picking it up if you're interested. If you want easy wins, play Sneak & Show. You'll have the most boring time of your life, and in my opinion, will learn little to nothing more about the game than what you know now. That's what herp derp 2 card combo decks do for you. But if you are interested in on the edge of your seat games, learning a complex deck's proper lines of play, learning how to play a prison/combo deck, mastering a meta to be efficient at your own deck, and plenty of other things, then I highly suggest Enchantress.
My apologies if that was long winded. I hope that helped answer your question, though.
For what it's worth, I also run both Moat and Sphere of Safety in my mainboard, but I'm no longer of the opinion that Moat is irreplacable. The prevalence of flying creatures like Delver, Clique, Angels, etc. has made it much less of a hard lockout.
Glad to see I'm not the only one, coandco. Sometimes I feel alone in the opinion that Moat still does have a place, even if it isn't the whole nine yards anymore. It hasn't reached the stage that Enlightened Tutor reached a few years back, where I hated/was not impressed by drawing into at almost every stage of the game. Once it reaches that point, then I will gladly replace it, but that day is not today.
Ground Seal takes care of DRS. It's yard hate which cantrips and doesn't hurt replenish; so it's easily main deck playable.
I will probably go back to running a mainboard copy of it again, seeing as Dr Shaman is everywhere. As of late I have just been tutoring up WoW to kill them.
@asw122
I have actually been playing both Moat and Sphere in my mainboard. As I've said in the past, in the early game of prison style taxing decks like Geddon Stax, I have lost to one or twocreatures getting through. I understand it should be a rarity, and in conjunction with grass they probably won't be able to attack anyway, but I still enjoy the security that Moat brings me. Keep in mind, I am a purist and rather resistant to change, it took me forever to start playing GSZ, so that is also part of my reluctance to getting rid of it.
I'm kinda new to this deck (I've tested it only on cockatrice, actually) and I have some questions:
1) Is moat still a good card in this meta? It's kinda hard to decide for me (since I have it in 1x thanks to a little tournament I've won :p).
2) Could the Tabernacle be a decent land for this deck?
3) Could a black splash be good for this deck? I'm thinking about adding 3 Chains of Mephistoteles in my sideboard cause of decks like Spiral Tide, Omnitell, Ad Nauseam and colvo elves (I know that it will slow me alot, but against these decks I feel like I could play more like a prison deck, since with a combo playstile i would be just too slow).
In answer to your questions:
1) I consider it to be a silver bullet card now. 3-4 years ago, every deck that turned sideways scooped to a resolved Moat. Those days are long gone, but there are still a few decks out there that cannot beat it. The new incarnations of Combo Elves that don't run Emrakul anymore, Maverick, Jund (aside from that pesky Deathrite), goblins (other than them running a combo package), dredge (if you live long enough), etc. Even with those, notice how most had some exceptions. So, many will say no, I just hold that it has changed from a catch all to any other silver bullet we play.
2) No, simply because we don't run any manipulation in order to get it out. And it would hurt us on heavy Argothian draws. We don't really tax the opponent's mana base aside from Elephant Grass.
3) It's an interesting option, but as you said, it would hurt us just as much. I'll be honest, you really don't have much of a chance beating those decks. The only match I ever beat High Tide in required me to draw multiple copies of RiP, Runed Halo, Sterling Grove, and Solitary Confinement. And even then it required him to fizzle once and draw dead for a few turns. In a couple of games. Try out Blind Obediance for combo elves. They flat out cannot combo with it out. You'd be surprised. The other matchups are almost impossible unless you get a perfect turn 2 Solitary hand (if you search up my posts on here, I go into detail breaking down that scenario, and believe me, it isn't pretty). Not to mention, there really isn't anything else in black we'd want to be running.
Some thoughts:
I miss 2x Humility. How else do we stop Elves?
I miss Crop Rotation. Can get me Sanctum for mana or Karakas to bounce Mavrick's haters or Reanimator's fatties.
I never played E Tutor, but also never faced combo.
Rest In Peace wouldn't last long before being removed, so Energy Field wasn't as effective. Sterling Grove was needed, making the setup more complex.
I have always been a proponent of running Blind Obedience if you fear combo elves. It slows them down to a crawl, and they cannot combo with it out. So if you fear a bunch of it, I'd say try Blind out, seeing as it doesn't destroy an engine piece and ruin a win-con for us (in regards to GWr).
I have felt E. Tutor to be quite lacking for a couple of years now, seeing as the blue deck bends you over the table by countering your target and you don't need it against fair decks. More often than not I would end up discarding it late game during game 1 and boarding it out game 2. Which is why I no longer play it at all.
I continue to feel that Crop Rotation is a card we don't really want or need. If you feel it works for you, then by all means run it, but I don't see the great appeal. I am always very conservative with my Sanctum's whenever possible, and assume that they will get immediately wastelanded the turn after I play them. So I have always used them as a pseudo ritual that gets better if it lives. And as far as Reanimator goes, that matchup is such a crapshoot anyway that I flat out stopped worrying about it. It is absolutely abysmal, and I can't even recall a match I have beaten them aside from them just mulliganing into oblivion for 2 games. It is truly that sad for GWr Enchantress. Granted, you are playing the Helm version so you mainboard your RiPs, but I feel it is pretty bad for you, too.
I'll say it again, I feel that the blue version that plays Energy Field>Solitary is a weaker deck. It requires more pieces to assemble a lock, doesn't stop planeswalkers (and what with BUG being everywhere, that is a very real concern), and does nothing against the combo decks. It only helps us beat the decks we already beat, and doesn't shore up other weaknesses aside from playing mainboard RiP for the graveyard decks.
Speaking of BUG, I am really considering playing a mainboard copy of Phyrexian Unlife again. It was run in the hayday of zoo to gain an extra 10 life, but I want to use it in an effort to help counter Mr. Deathrite Shaman. I have found some games where I stabilize at a low number with Solitary, just to have that little critter kill me before I can find a WoW or and Oblivion Ring. I'll post my conclusions after awhile.
All in all, I think the meta may be swinging back in our favor, gentleman. As long as some of the newer BUG decks continue to run few discard spells mainboard or don't play Deeds that matchup will get better. Maverick is making a little bit of a return to form, Stoneblade decks are coming back again, Thresh is still running around, some goblins are popping up again, Deathrite has all but destroyed Reanimator, etc. So as long as we keep seeing the decks that try to beat out S&S, we should have a better time than we've been having as of late.
Maybe I'm being a bit of an optimist, but my biggest concerns have always been combo, heavy discard, and Deed decks. Everything else I believe are very manageable for us. So I won't feel as hopeless if I get to go to another SCG as it has looked for over a year now. Here's hoping for a Top 8 from me next time, not just a couple of Top 16's.
The fact that you have to metagame quite a bit against show and tell means the format isn't healthy, there were anti flash decks too that people built for the sole purpose of beating flash hulk and was that deck good for the health of the format? Not even remotely. Or people playing decks to combat survival? Again, not healthy.
Don't compare Survival to Flash. Big difference. Flash was easily one of the fastest and most consistent combo decks of its time. If you answered the Vengevines in Survival you were playing against Type II Madness. Not exactly a tier 1 Legay deck.
During that era I was playing Armageddon Stax and decided to try out CoP: Green as an answer for kicks and giggles. I had no hope that it would actually be a good answer to the deck. In EVERY game that it resolved, I won. Hands down. No contest. I shared this info with the 'Geddon Stax forum, where, they too, thought it was ludicrous...until they tried it themselves. From that moment on, every one of those decks on that forum ran 3 CoP: Greens in the sb.
There was a simple card that completely countered the explosiveness of that deck. That was all you had to do in order to beat it. Other cards at the time were very viable as well, including Extripate (which apparently everybody forgot existed) and Faerie Macabre. Now we have cards like Surgical and Deathrite Shaman that would have laughed at SurvivalVine.
My point is, Legacy has a huge cardpool of answers as well as decks. It is in Legacy's nature to have a "perfect imbalance" (thank you LordREwind for that vid, it voiced everything I have believed in for years quite concisely) with it's own meta game. That's how the game works.
For that reason I have always (and will always) be firmly in the camp of, "Survival should NEVER have been banned."
Now, I'm not saying I am ever against the banning of a card. But I truly believe that it should be the absolute last resort. It is up to the players to try and find an answer to the "problem" and if WOTC banned everything people didn't like, the banlist would have 2,000 cards on it and we would attack each other with Craw Wurms all day.
I do, however, completely agree with your frustration over how easy the deck is to pilot. Our Show and Tell player has Top 8'ed 2 SCGs, winning one, while I have only gotten Top 16 twice. And I play Enchantress, which is an infinitely more complex deck than S&S is. Is that injustice? Perhaps. But no more so than watching a mono red burn player Top 8 as well.
Also keep in mind that Flash was also able to perfectly counter the most widely played gravehate at the time, which was Leyline, with Energy Field. S&S doesn't do that. If it had the capabilities to seamlessly beat all the hate or decks that preyed on it without compromising very much, then I would agree with you on the banning. That is, however, not the case and as such I don't believe it should be banned.
I highly disagree with taking out any Elephant Grasses in the Canadian Thresh matchup. They run so few lands that they rarely hit more than 3, and if they draw into them, tend to shuffle them away with Brainstorm. Elephant Grass bottlenecks them, forcing them to stop laying down threats. Not to mention that the second you land a Choke against them after they tapped out to attack you, they have essentially lost. Grass is easily one of our best answer for them.
To me, bringing in more City of Solitudes isn't very necessary. Most of their counterspells are taxing based, so after the first couple of turns, they become almost irrelevant. Usually by turn 3 you start casting spells with impunity.
Canadian Thresh is one of our best matchups, and I have rarely ever dropped a game to them, and never dropped an entire match.
The rest of your sideboarding is pretty spot on. I would like to point out that in almost every case, you board out an Enlightened Tutor. It can lose you games against any blue deck, and is usually unnecessary against other decks. This is why I stopped playing them a long time ago. Granted I still play the traditional GWr Enchantress, but I feel the parallels can transition over to your version as well. Storm is such a crapshoot anyway that it doesn't even really make much of a difference playing an additional copy. TES will just silence you on the turn you try to cast what you tutored for, ANT will force it, Omnitell will just counter whatever piece of hate you went for, and Show will just Through the Breach or Sneak Attack around your Humility/O-Ring.
So I'd just rather open up those slots to something more relevant.
I've never found Counter-Top to be too hard. We have Stony Silence an Aura Of Silence, and O-Ring to hose their lock, plus plenty of high cc spells to doge it. Also we have the traitional hosers for U control as well (Choke and City). I don't think that match warrants diluting our deck with a non-enchantment hoser.
I agree we don't need much help in that department. I simply wished to point out that Shusher has been used in our sideboards in the past as an answer to countertop. An early lock set up by them can be very troublesome to get through and an uncounterable answer is never a bad thing if someone is having trouble with that matchup.
It is a rather moot point though, seeing as countertop isn't running rampant like it once was and with a few of the answers that are now at our disposal.
Shusher is a fantastic sideboard card if you expect a ton of Countertop. It has always excelled at helping us on that front, and now even more so with the advent of GSZ.
I don't really want more Sanctums. One of this deck's greatest strengths is the fact that it doesn't rely much on nonbasics. Whenever I draw into a Sanctum, I always sandbag it if possible, and immediately expect it to die next turn. With that mentality running more than two simply isn't necessary.
Even when this deck played Emrakul, I never struggled in casting him. By the time it was viable you already have around 9+ enchantments in play. Not to mention that his casting cost is not one of the reasons why we stopped playing him.
Usually if you have a single Sanctum and a Words out, you win that turn or the next. Chaining another isn't going to do all that much more to win it for you.
All in all, I would be more keen on playing a second Horizon Canopy rather than more Sanctums. That at least covers a problem we sometimes run into.
I've only played GWr, but I can tell you it shuts down creature based decks and dies to pretty much everything else.
I disagree. The only matchup I feel that I've already lost is combo. Decks that play targeted discard can hurt and cripple us game 1, but with Leyline are generally better games 2 and 3. We have a fantastic matchup against blue decks as well. The minute an engine piece sticks, all the counters in the world usually won't help them (and a Replenish becomes the nail in the coffin for them). And if we play properly, MiracleTop can be positive as well, especially if we resolve a City of Solitude.
Creature based decks pretty much encompasses everything except for Lands, Stax, MiracleTop, and combo. The two former decks being all but dead anymore.
Will I say that the meta is ripe for Enchantress? Not at all. It hasn't been for awhile now. When Maverick was running around it was great, and if there is a ton of Canadian Thresh in the room it rocks. But not with a ton of combo, abrupt decay, and hymn decks running around.
I rarely feel forced to fetch up dual lands, and usually end the game with most of my basics out. Then again I run far fewer WW costing cards in the main than you do, so my early game usually only has to comprise of 1 maybe 2 white sources, mostly from a plains and a utopia sprawl.
I've always been very happy with my Canopy, as I hate bricking on early and/or critical turns from not having an enchantment. I agree though that I'm starting to just not care much about Karakas, we have no way to search it, our Reanimator matchup is so abysmal, and it is on the decline anyway what with Dr Shaman running around. It has been one of those things that has just stayed because it has always been there.
In the 3 years I've played this deck, I have never tried out the various forms of accelerants that other people use, such as Elvish Spirit Guide, Chrome Mox, Lotus Petal, Mox Diamond. I understand their merits, and I guess I should probably give them a go. I have always been resistant to change with this deck, as evidenced by the fact that it took me awhile to switch to GSZ when it was brand new. Ever since that, though, I have never looked back, so maybe this will be the same. My only concern is that we have to aggressively mulligan with this deck, so how has that been for you, as far as being useful more often than not? Because Chrome Mox is almost equivalent to another mulligan.
Not often at all, to be honest. Every time I fetch against either a blind opponent or someone I know that plays wasteland, I go for a basic. Even against aggressive wasteland decks like Thresh and UR Delver I do pretty well. I also sandbag Sanctums for as long as I can, and assume they will be wastelanded the turn after I play them, so I almost count them as pseudo rituals with a possible rebound. I'm almost considering going back to 21 lands, as I've been mulliganing a ton lately, but every time I do I get mana flooded. It has always been a damned if I do, damned if I don't situation for me lol.
4 Argothian Enchantress
Enchantments 32
4 Enchantress's Presence
4 Sterling Grove
4 Wild Growth
4 Utopia Sprawl
3 Solitary Confinement
3 Elephant Grass
2 Mirri's Guile
1 Oblivion Ring
1 Phyrexian Unlife
1 Moat
1 Sphere of Safety
1 Word's of War
1 Sigil of the Empty Throne
1 Choke
1 City of Solitude
2 Green Sun's Zenith
2 Replenish
Lands 20
4 Windswept Heath
2 Verdant Catacombs
2 Savannah
1 Taiga
5 Forest
2 Plains
1 Karakas
2 Serra's Sanctum
1 Horizon Canopy
4 Leyline of Sanctity
3 Rest in Peace
1 Choke
1 Stony Silence
1 Humility
1 Karmic Justice
1 Oblivion Ring
3 Flex Slots
I have been playing this list or very close to it for quite some time now. There are a number of flex slots available in the main as well as the side, depending on your meta. Other common mainboard/sideboard cards I switch back and forth between playing are Ground Seal, Blood Moon, Raking Canopy, Lignify, and Aura of Silence. These choices are largely meta dependent. I played Raking Canopy largely when Esper Stoneblade first hit the scene, as it killed all their win-cons except when they were holding a Sword of Feast and Famine. It was also my answer to UW Miracles, which was also another popular deck choice around that time. A few years ago I tried out a mainboard Choke, and have never gone back. I absolutely love it, and don't see myself replacing it soon. It is simply too good against many popular decks like Stoneblade, Thresh, Team America, BUG, and others. Blood Moon does many of the same things against these opponents, but I greatly enjoy the fact that it is one sided, as the symmetry from Blood Moon has hurt me a few times in the past. What with the rise of BUG, I may go back to running it in the 75 again, though.
The choice of Unlife may seem odd to people new to the deck, or even veterans, but I do have a method for my madness. We used to play it in the golden days when Zoo ran rampant over the format after Shards block, before Batterskull came around. It worked to essentially gain us 10 life to play with in order to lock them out. I am currently testing it against all the Deathrite decks. I got rather tired of stabilizing at 4-6 life just to die to a few Shamans because we can't afford to be aggressive with our Groves in order to find our Words of War. Unlife shuts it down cold, and also works to make it more difficult for decks like TES to combo us out, seeing as they need an additional 5 storm (or a few more goblins). In order to answer this, many people have started running Ground Seals in the main again, but I was never a huge fan of that, and enjoy the wider array of usage that Unlife gives us. Testing will tell if I'm wrong, and Ground Seal is the better choice, but as it stands I'm giving this old gem another go.
As ExpiredRascals said, I do not care for the vulnerabilities that the Helm versions have. Especially concerning that Energy Field does not give us shroud, which is a HUGE problem. From being vulnerable to cards like Liliana of the Veil, Jace, the Mindsculptor, discard is a big one, Tendrils of Agony, etc. I also feel that that version doesn't shore up any weaknesses this archetype has against its worst matchup (combo), doesn't make much of a change in our aggro matchup, doesn't run Grove for shroud (which is another point of weakness with Abrupt Decay being in existence), and the shortcomings of Field. So I have never really been a fan, nor have I been tempted to try it out.
If you want to read a tourney report I made to give some insight on my thought processes and playstyle in tournaments, or simply want to familiarize yourself with the deck and how it plays before pulling the trigger and buying it, check this out http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=8742438&highlight=10th#post8742438 post number #1809. Granted it was a year ago, but aside form meta game shifts and new cards, many of the ideas, sideboarding, decision paths, etc remain the same.
I'm thinking your line of thought with Commune was the same as vintage MUD that used to run Ancient Stirrings. Sadly, Commune costs 1 more mana and does not get a land, where as Stirrings grabs literally everything in the decks that play it.
As far as the bow goes as a counter to Thresh (as well as UR Delver), I'd much rather just play Choke and Elephant Grass. Cards that impact the game the moment they hit play, unlike bow. I will admit it is interesting and does afair bit to counter their gameplan, but we already tend to have a fairly positive matchup vs those decks anyway, especially game 1, that I'm not sure I'd warrant sideboard space with it. Testing may prove me wrong, but that's where I stand from a purely theorycrafting point of view. I have found weirder cards effective, such as when I came up with the idea of playing CoP: Green in my 'Geddon Stax deck against SurvivalVine a few years back, so this may very well prove the same, but the circumstances were quite different.
If you want to play Archon, why not just play a Sigarda? I'm not a fan of her either, but at least she shuts down annihilator and has shroud. Speaking of, Archon doesn't have shroud. If you are thinking of Replenishing it into play on an Enchantress, you probably need to know that Bestow only works when you CAST the spell, not when you return it to play. It also doesn't have lifelink? So maybe you are talking about a card that I'm not familiar with
Bottom line, there really isn't anything from Theros that helps out the traditional GWr Enchantress in ways that cards already at our disposal don't do already.
@MagicMouse On the topic of Carpet of Flowers, keep in mind that a fair bit of this deck is made up of silver bullets that tend to be extremely powerful against certain decks, and anywhere from mediocre to completely useless against other decks. Luckily, because of our engine, at worst a card is a cantrip, so take some solace in that. Some people play Carpet for the same reason that we play City of Solitude, and I play Choke or Blood Moon. Against the decks that they are relevant against, they are often times backbreaking. In the other matchups you simply don't tutor for them or cast them to draw cards game 1 and games 2 and 3 board them out. Simple as that. If it is an issue of power, Carpet is extremely misleading. On paper it seems lackluster, but it does a great deal for us, and against decks like Thresh it is a must counter. If you doubt me, try it a few times and see for yourself. The card is a cornerstone in green combo decks against blue decks for a reason. Being Enchantress, we do fall into the combo category, but Carpet is more of an option for us because we have a fairly large pool of cards to counter the blue decks so that's why it isn't quite the auto-include as it is for Belcher or Spanish Inquisition.
2) That would be something to ask the mods about. And yes, I agree the primer is somewhat lacking and sorely needs an update.
I have always been a firm believer that the pilot of a deck is most of the time a more determining factor of whether or not you will do well in a tourney. Playing smart, outplaying your opponent, knowing your deck inside and out, knowing how to sideboard, having a better knowledge of the meta or even their deck are all huge factors in deciding how far you'll go. That may all seem like common sense, but I feel as if people often get too wrapped up in chasing the meta and the decks that are "winning" right now. With the advent of the internet the meta shifts dramatically from tourney to tourney. Look at SCG Opens for instance; one week there are 3 thresh decks in the top 8, the next there are zero, and who knows what there will be next time. Yes there are pillar decks in the format and tier 1 decks, but things aren't how they used to be, and you should never discount a rogue archetype in any particular meta.
Bottom line, no matter what, this deck is very powerful in the hands of someone that knows what they are doing. And it only gets more powerful if you opponent is either unaware of your deck or out of practice against it. So my opinion is, if you enjoy the deck, play it, learn it, master it and understand that it does have weaknesses, but that shouldn't stop you from picking it up if you're interested. If you want easy wins, play Sneak & Show. You'll have the most boring time of your life, and in my opinion, will learn little to nothing more about the game than what you know now. That's what herp derp 2 card combo decks do for you. But if you are interested in on the edge of your seat games, learning a complex deck's proper lines of play, learning how to play a prison/combo deck, mastering a meta to be efficient at your own deck, and plenty of other things, then I highly suggest Enchantress.
My apologies if that was long winded. I hope that helped answer your question, though.
Glad to see I'm not the only one, coandco. Sometimes I feel alone in the opinion that Moat still does have a place, even if it isn't the whole nine yards anymore. It hasn't reached the stage that Enlightened Tutor reached a few years back, where I hated/was not impressed by drawing into at almost every stage of the game. Once it reaches that point, then I will gladly replace it, but that day is not today.
I will probably go back to running a mainboard copy of it again, seeing as Dr Shaman is everywhere. As of late I have just been tutoring up WoW to kill them.
@asw122
I have actually been playing both Moat and Sphere in my mainboard. As I've said in the past, in the early game of prison style taxing decks like Geddon Stax, I have lost to one or twocreatures getting through. I understand it should be a rarity, and in conjunction with grass they probably won't be able to attack anyway, but I still enjoy the security that Moat brings me. Keep in mind, I am a purist and rather resistant to change, it took me forever to start playing GSZ, so that is also part of my reluctance to getting rid of it.
In answer to your questions:
1) I consider it to be a silver bullet card now. 3-4 years ago, every deck that turned sideways scooped to a resolved Moat. Those days are long gone, but there are still a few decks out there that cannot beat it. The new incarnations of Combo Elves that don't run Emrakul anymore, Maverick, Jund (aside from that pesky Deathrite), goblins (other than them running a combo package), dredge (if you live long enough), etc. Even with those, notice how most had some exceptions. So, many will say no, I just hold that it has changed from a catch all to any other silver bullet we play.
2) No, simply because we don't run any manipulation in order to get it out. And it would hurt us on heavy Argothian draws. We don't really tax the opponent's mana base aside from Elephant Grass.
3) It's an interesting option, but as you said, it would hurt us just as much. I'll be honest, you really don't have much of a chance beating those decks. The only match I ever beat High Tide in required me to draw multiple copies of RiP, Runed Halo, Sterling Grove, and Solitary Confinement. And even then it required him to fizzle once and draw dead for a few turns. In a couple of games. Try out Blind Obediance for combo elves. They flat out cannot combo with it out. You'd be surprised. The other matchups are almost impossible unless you get a perfect turn 2 Solitary hand (if you search up my posts on here, I go into detail breaking down that scenario, and believe me, it isn't pretty). Not to mention, there really isn't anything else in black we'd want to be running.
Hope that helps.
I have always been a proponent of running Blind Obedience if you fear combo elves. It slows them down to a crawl, and they cannot combo with it out. So if you fear a bunch of it, I'd say try Blind out, seeing as it doesn't destroy an engine piece and ruin a win-con for us (in regards to GWr).
I have felt E. Tutor to be quite lacking for a couple of years now, seeing as the blue deck bends you over the table by countering your target and you don't need it against fair decks. More often than not I would end up discarding it late game during game 1 and boarding it out game 2. Which is why I no longer play it at all.
I continue to feel that Crop Rotation is a card we don't really want or need. If you feel it works for you, then by all means run it, but I don't see the great appeal. I am always very conservative with my Sanctum's whenever possible, and assume that they will get immediately wastelanded the turn after I play them. So I have always used them as a pseudo ritual that gets better if it lives. And as far as Reanimator goes, that matchup is such a crapshoot anyway that I flat out stopped worrying about it. It is absolutely abysmal, and I can't even recall a match I have beaten them aside from them just mulliganing into oblivion for 2 games. It is truly that sad for GWr Enchantress. Granted, you are playing the Helm version so you mainboard your RiPs, but I feel it is pretty bad for you, too.
I'll say it again, I feel that the blue version that plays Energy Field>Solitary is a weaker deck. It requires more pieces to assemble a lock, doesn't stop planeswalkers (and what with BUG being everywhere, that is a very real concern), and does nothing against the combo decks. It only helps us beat the decks we already beat, and doesn't shore up other weaknesses aside from playing mainboard RiP for the graveyard decks.
Speaking of BUG, I am really considering playing a mainboard copy of Phyrexian Unlife again. It was run in the hayday of zoo to gain an extra 10 life, but I want to use it in an effort to help counter Mr. Deathrite Shaman. I have found some games where I stabilize at a low number with Solitary, just to have that little critter kill me before I can find a WoW or and Oblivion Ring. I'll post my conclusions after awhile.
All in all, I think the meta may be swinging back in our favor, gentleman. As long as some of the newer BUG decks continue to run few discard spells mainboard or don't play Deeds that matchup will get better. Maverick is making a little bit of a return to form, Stoneblade decks are coming back again, Thresh is still running around, some goblins are popping up again, Deathrite has all but destroyed Reanimator, etc. So as long as we keep seeing the decks that try to beat out S&S, we should have a better time than we've been having as of late.
Maybe I'm being a bit of an optimist, but my biggest concerns have always been combo, heavy discard, and Deed decks. Everything else I believe are very manageable for us. So I won't feel as hopeless if I get to go to another SCG as it has looked for over a year now. Here's hoping for a Top 8 from me next time, not just a couple of Top 16's.
Don't compare Survival to Flash. Big difference. Flash was easily one of the fastest and most consistent combo decks of its time. If you answered the Vengevines in Survival you were playing against Type II Madness. Not exactly a tier 1 Legay deck.
During that era I was playing Armageddon Stax and decided to try out CoP: Green as an answer for kicks and giggles. I had no hope that it would actually be a good answer to the deck. In EVERY game that it resolved, I won. Hands down. No contest. I shared this info with the 'Geddon Stax forum, where, they too, thought it was ludicrous...until they tried it themselves. From that moment on, every one of those decks on that forum ran 3 CoP: Greens in the sb.
There was a simple card that completely countered the explosiveness of that deck. That was all you had to do in order to beat it. Other cards at the time were very viable as well, including Extripate (which apparently everybody forgot existed) and Faerie Macabre. Now we have cards like Surgical and Deathrite Shaman that would have laughed at SurvivalVine.
My point is, Legacy has a huge cardpool of answers as well as decks. It is in Legacy's nature to have a "perfect imbalance" (thank you LordREwind for that vid, it voiced everything I have believed in for years quite concisely) with it's own meta game. That's how the game works.
For that reason I have always (and will always) be firmly in the camp of, "Survival should NEVER have been banned."
Now, I'm not saying I am ever against the banning of a card. But I truly believe that it should be the absolute last resort. It is up to the players to try and find an answer to the "problem" and if WOTC banned everything people didn't like, the banlist would have 2,000 cards on it and we would attack each other with Craw Wurms all day.
I do, however, completely agree with your frustration over how easy the deck is to pilot. Our Show and Tell player has Top 8'ed 2 SCGs, winning one, while I have only gotten Top 16 twice. And I play Enchantress, which is an infinitely more complex deck than S&S is. Is that injustice? Perhaps. But no more so than watching a mono red burn player Top 8 as well.
Also keep in mind that Flash was also able to perfectly counter the most widely played gravehate at the time, which was Leyline, with Energy Field. S&S doesn't do that. If it had the capabilities to seamlessly beat all the hate or decks that preyed on it without compromising very much, then I would agree with you on the banning. That is, however, not the case and as such I don't believe it should be banned.
I highly disagree with taking out any Elephant Grasses in the Canadian Thresh matchup. They run so few lands that they rarely hit more than 3, and if they draw into them, tend to shuffle them away with Brainstorm. Elephant Grass bottlenecks them, forcing them to stop laying down threats. Not to mention that the second you land a Choke against them after they tapped out to attack you, they have essentially lost. Grass is easily one of our best answer for them.
To me, bringing in more City of Solitudes isn't very necessary. Most of their counterspells are taxing based, so after the first couple of turns, they become almost irrelevant. Usually by turn 3 you start casting spells with impunity.
Canadian Thresh is one of our best matchups, and I have rarely ever dropped a game to them, and never dropped an entire match.
The rest of your sideboarding is pretty spot on. I would like to point out that in almost every case, you board out an Enlightened Tutor. It can lose you games against any blue deck, and is usually unnecessary against other decks. This is why I stopped playing them a long time ago. Granted I still play the traditional GWr Enchantress, but I feel the parallels can transition over to your version as well. Storm is such a crapshoot anyway that it doesn't even really make much of a difference playing an additional copy. TES will just silence you on the turn you try to cast what you tutored for, ANT will force it, Omnitell will just counter whatever piece of hate you went for, and Show will just Through the Breach or Sneak Attack around your Humility/O-Ring.
So I'd just rather open up those slots to something more relevant.
I agree we don't need much help in that department. I simply wished to point out that Shusher has been used in our sideboards in the past as an answer to countertop. An early lock set up by them can be very troublesome to get through and an uncounterable answer is never a bad thing if someone is having trouble with that matchup.
It is a rather moot point though, seeing as countertop isn't running rampant like it once was and with a few of the answers that are now at our disposal.
I don't really want more Sanctums. One of this deck's greatest strengths is the fact that it doesn't rely much on nonbasics. Whenever I draw into a Sanctum, I always sandbag it if possible, and immediately expect it to die next turn. With that mentality running more than two simply isn't necessary.
Even when this deck played Emrakul, I never struggled in casting him. By the time it was viable you already have around 9+ enchantments in play. Not to mention that his casting cost is not one of the reasons why we stopped playing him.
Usually if you have a single Sanctum and a Words out, you win that turn or the next. Chaining another isn't going to do all that much more to win it for you.
All in all, I would be more keen on playing a second Horizon Canopy rather than more Sanctums. That at least covers a problem we sometimes run into.
I disagree. The only matchup I feel that I've already lost is combo. Decks that play targeted discard can hurt and cripple us game 1, but with Leyline are generally better games 2 and 3. We have a fantastic matchup against blue decks as well. The minute an engine piece sticks, all the counters in the world usually won't help them (and a Replenish becomes the nail in the coffin for them). And if we play properly, MiracleTop can be positive as well, especially if we resolve a City of Solitude.
Creature based decks pretty much encompasses everything except for Lands, Stax, MiracleTop, and combo. The two former decks being all but dead anymore.
Will I say that the meta is ripe for Enchantress? Not at all. It hasn't been for awhile now. When Maverick was running around it was great, and if there is a ton of Canadian Thresh in the room it rocks. But not with a ton of combo, abrupt decay, and hymn decks running around.