I've been giving Torrent Elemental some thought as a near-never dying threat I could have up on the board or, like Tasigur, a big 5-butt creature for some protection. I dunno, though. Yes, he can keep coming back, but when he does, he comes back tapped, and I don't know how effective that might be in this particular build. Usually when I want to take an action, it's to remove something, draw something, or protect myself somehow, each and every turn. The scenario where I could see him being good is when I have a Kraken or two on the board and attacking with everything for lethal when it taps all my opponents' creatures down. But at that point, I'm making 9/9 Krakens every turn...they usually don't need much help to punch through eventually, y'know?

I would like to hear a little more on how Monastery Siege helped you, in what scenarios, and what mode you chose for those scenarios. As you can see, I've outfitted this deck with a Palace Siege in the main and another in the side, mainly to help with both grindy matches and burn. If Monastery were to make it into this deck, they would essentially take the place of Palace, I would first assume. And I'm torn. For burn matches, it's nice to get 2 life every turn in addition to the life I may gain from Courser (and really, some of those burn decks even burn themselves out a little bit with pain lands and fetch lands and Mana Confluence, so that Palace Siege ain't no joke to them. In a rare case, when the game was decently in hand, I even chose Khans on Palace Siege once just to keep getting Tasigur back into my hand, lol.

i think I'm onto something for this deck. Ive found a new win con that has taken the place of garruk in my main board just to play test. i want to hear what you guys think Colossus of Akros

Nice creature, but he's still vulnerable to some kinds of removal. He also doesn't have the utility of garruk, which is actually sort of important in some match ups.

Hey, syncronym, I think what's better here is for you to answer your own question. Your question: which is better in -this- deck, Garruk, Apex Predator or Colossus of Akros?

Colossus: 10/10 (or 20/20 if you can surrender the 10 mana to do so and not tap out for any instants). Won't die to anything. Can't block a flier. Even though he's indestructible, there's plenty of exile out there like Utter End, Unravel the Aether and Revoke Existence. These all see play, especially Utter End. By the time he can get out there, being an 8-drop, there's a possibility that we're already at 12 life...10 life...8 life...and we may not be able to afford an attacker. Sure, he can be a huge wall to protect if we have low health, but he doesn't have wings.

Garruk: Destroys a planeswalker as soon as he comes down...drops a 3/3 beast with deathtouch as soon as he comes down (which in most cases, can be JUST as effective a wall as a 10/10 Colossus that can't initially attack. Destroys a huge threat on the board if a Beast won't do the trick (think a Stormbreath Dragon). You even get LIFE from the creature! So...y'know...if you have a 9/9 Kraken laying around, you can always destroy it, gain 9 life, and you'll just get another Kraken at the end of your turn. Garruk's ultimate, not a favorite of mine to ever fire off really, would be reeeeally nice for 9/9 Krakens, right? It's fun to tell your opponent "attacking with my 14/14 Kraken with trample."

Soooooo.....YOU tell ME which is better. ;)

you are right but i was just thinking of a more offensive win con. with garruk coming out for 7 mana its not much different tapping out for it bc the fact is he comes out late and can die to downfalls and exile also. I'm not taking garruk out completely bc he is amazing vs control match ups so he hits the sideboard for a week just to play test him. gotta try him out at least once its been on my mind for a bit just didn't know exactly how to fit him in.

Sure, Garruk can eat an Utter End just the same as the Colossus...but he leaves behind a 3/3 deathtouch or a planeswalker's ashes in his wake, right? If a Colossus gets exiled, you have nothing. That's why, when comparing the two, Garruk is the better value in the slot. Give him a turn, you have 3 deathtouch power on the board. Even a Siege Rhino doesn't want to swing into that. Two turns, you have 6 power on the board, three turns, 9 power...he's just better.

I kinda agree about the colossus. Already got enough high end cards. I'm not sure if want to trade Garruk or Ugin for that guy. Torrent elemental I consider because when they kill him, you can delve with dig or Tasigur (or cut), then bring him back. However Loco-Motive is right. Bringing him back tapped isn't helping much when we need a blocker.

With Palace Siege it doesn't come out until turn 5 (not considering ramp). Heck, turn 6 if your stuck with tap-lands. Burn and fast aggro want you dead by then. I usually feel like I've already won if I've survived that long and have more than 4 life! Monastery Siege on the other hand comes out on 3. Which does conflict with Courser of Kruphix as well as Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver. However, spells that target you and your permanents cost 2 more. It's like a free Spell Pierce whenever they try to hit you. Shock costs 3, stoke 6! Downfalls cost 5, thoughtseize... Love it! Lol. Still 3cmc is heavily populated right now. Late game when your opponent had enough mana to pay the extra 2 you can use it to filter your draws to search for answers and ditching dead cards in hand to feed delve. 1 wasnt reliable enough tho unfortunately. Think I want to run a second. Id sideboard Silumgar, but the look on my opponents face when they see him or a wealth coming up on the draw is priceless! I wonder if pulling the Jace's Ingenuity for the second siege.

Hmmm, I wonder, then, if there's a way to get two Monastery Siege into the main and two Palace Siege into the side, switching them out depending on my match-up. That Palace Siege... it's really good on that grindy game...

This deserves some testing.

If you don't like the Apex Predator, you could always play either Pearl Lake Ancient or Ugin, the Spirit Dragon. Either of these will preform his role as a win condition just as well, at comparable mana costs. I know you have Ugin in the sideboard, but you could always main him instead.

I've been brewing on some thoughts that I wanted to share even though they may not be entirely useful as far as making improvements

I think it is fair to assume the problem isn't your deck, or even you. You have been pretty successful with your deck in recent FNM's and I think it is fair to say that your meta is shifting, specifically because of you. It makes perfect sense that red/burn is what is giving you the most trouble because that's what players are going to turn to to try and race a heavy control deck doing well in a format. In that vein, I think it is important to say that you should consider your changes VERY carefully. You already have the deck in a good state. While I don't know how big your meta is, I can say that if I were taking this deck to a big event, I would count on the worst of your matchups (red/x aggro burn) being taken down by other mid-range decks in your meta, and not dilute your deck too far, trying to compensate for everything.

In a similar vein, you are already using optimal cards in optimal quantities (for the most part). I would not overly stress over the amount of 1-of cards in your deck because that's just what control DOES. Why have 2 of something in your deck if the 1st one does what you need, and the 2nd could be a hand killer? Your deck likes to control the pace of the game and do things when YOU are ready. If you are upping card count because you just feel like using something more than you currently do, stop and reevaluate your motives. The natural state of any trade in magic is card-for-card. Obviously, a control deck wants to win by going for better than a 1:1 efficiency, but don't be so quick to label a 1:1 trade as a bad thing. Your deck is DESIGNED to do better than that on average, so if you have to relegate yourself to a 1:1 on something important, it isn't going to kill you. Be a little more patient when doling out the things you care about, or accept the fact that sometimes you just don't get your way and move on. But don't be so quick to clutter your deck with things that will clog your hand because you didn't get what you wanted out of something the first time.

Don't make the mistake of trying to find a better answer than the format. When a deck is under development this can be OK, because you are developing the CONTEXT of your deck at the same time. However, you are well past the development stage of this deck. Sometimes you are just going to have to accept the fact that someone else found a better tool for something you need and you may as well just use the best thing available rather than look for a workaround. Specifically, am referring to Rakshasa Deathdealer + Feed the Clan -- but this can be applied to anything in a deck when you start having very specific issues. In this case, you are having issues with red burn being able to close the game early on you. Rakasha Deathdealer is something that you could MD as a mana-sink based win-con, who has the added utility of being a regenerating blocker, while having the additional option of sideboarding Feed the Clan to break the backs of the red decks trying for the efficient kill. This doesn't mean I think that you should MD the guy (I leave it to you to test) but when something like that is good enough for you to be able to MD, you should run the gauntlet a few times and see how it works out. the answer to your meta-shift might be as simple as 1 MD creature and 1 or 2 SB cards -- which is a far cry better than changing the structure of how the deck operates by adding enchantment based defenses.

I can toss around a few more elaborations, but I think this post is long enough for now... plus a randomly have the bug to post a few decks and write about something else I have been brainstorming that I feel is very relevant to this deck. I'll be available for comment while I pop a cold one and start musing.

Ok ok loco you made a very good point about garruk n I think your right he might not have been doing the best for me lately but his utility is way better than the raw power of colossus.

Sometimes I just get garruk n wish I had something with a little bit faster killing potential. Guess I need to be a little more patient with win cons lol slow n steady wins the war.

Might have to bring monastery siege back in my deck.

Aezuriel, thanks for the thought. It's always enlightening. I was just thinking about the enchantment thing this morning and how I feel that it doesn't feel right, but may just be in there because it did a good thing or two during the night. With others also bringing Rakshasa up here and there, I've been tempted to test with him. I wasn't always sure if I needed more life in a card like Feed the Clan, as I always felt like a card dedicated solely to giving you life one-time just works against an inevitable. I'm more tempted to run just Rakshasa without the instant, but I'm willing to test it out.

Perhaps the enchantments roll out of here and I'll test having 1-2 Deathdealers in the main board. I'll also see if I can jam two Feed into the side and see how I test against aggro.

Appreciate the thoughts. Well-thought out feedback like that really gets my mind going and it's welcome.

Yeah bro feed the clan is the mvp in my sideboard I've felt like I'm saved when I draw it even turn 1 I'm confident in it. Plus rakshasa isn't the only one in the deck that triggers ferocious so does tasigur. Although palace has it's own uses and situations it comes in handy more than feed the clan. Gaining 10 life also means 10 more damage they have to do to you to win which could be devastating to them. I mean think back how many losses came down to 5 or less life and or 1 more turn. I know for me it's quite a few at least 6 or 7 times for me. Plus when I've played feed the clan on a burn opponent it's like they get super depressed and lose hope lol. Also gotta this tasigur can essentially get you feed the clan from your gy a lot bc who wants removal or anything else in your hand lol

syncronym, I'm confused by your comment "Although palace has it's own uses and situations it comes in handy more than feed the clan." Are you saying you had a better experience with Siege or with Feed?

No I was just sayin that palace is better in some matchups than ftc that's all like control matchups ftc would just be useless really. Sorry for the confusion. Ftc is the mvp in my sideboard not siege not saying both don't have a place in the sideboard I've just taken a big liking to ftc

Ah, gotcha!

Initial test game with a Rakshasa Deathdealer saw him nicely come out mid-game when I had about 9-10 mana avail, going against a mono green deck. What was nice was his ability to keep the opponent from attacking in with his Polukranos. Just sitting there as a 2/2 with plenty of buff ability. When testing this, I took out the Palace Siege in the MB and I put two Feed the Clan in the SB in place of a Palace Siege and Ugin. Didn't side those in for testing, but it was nice to see the 1-of Deathdealer timed when I did...meaning, not super early in the game. Will continue to test, the consideration is there.

I like it! My original imagination of the Sultai deck had Rakshasa. Tho it was much more midrange creature beat down.

I don't have the free time to playtest, so I'll have to see how things things work for you. The meta @ my LGS is pretty varied. Tho there is a bit of r/W going around lately.

just got 2 Palace Siege into my sideboard. Dropped a Grindclock for the control match ups to run the 2nd siege. i figure a 10 round timer is just as good if not better than grindclocks timer. Also with Clever Impersonator i essentially have 3 Palace Siege in the deck lol.

I think its gonna work out great in control match ups and burn. I'm excited to try it out this friday. gonna try and get some play testing in tomorrow with some of the other guys at my shop and see what they think.

I have to say i feel my deck building is getting a lot better having to focus on the aspect of control and still have enough in the deck to still pull off consistent wins. Sideboarding which i used to be terrible at now is something I'm feeling more confident in now that i better understand what to take out in certain match ups. its funny now i can see a deck game 1 within 4 turns i already know what I'm bringing in and almost exactly what I'm taking out.

Loco-Motive being honest i don't think you should drop ugin ever. he is great in almost every setting especially b/w heroic. also if you want to take something out id say Drown in Sorrow or Silumgar, the Drifting Death maybe even 1 Thoughtsieze if you want to get Palace Siege in the sideboard as a 2 of. also I'm noticing you are heavy sideboard equipped to fight control match ups 8-10 cards in the sideboard are control side's. so dropping a few for Feed the Clan might not be so bad.here are my suggestions if you want to be a little more equipped for burn or just any red deck.-1 Drown in Sorrow +1 Palace Siege

-2 of any combination of these Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver Negate Thoughtsieze Silumgar, the Drifting Death for 2+ Feed the Clanid say drop 1 negate and 1 thoughtsieze or just both negates bc you have plenty of removal and counters in the main board to handle things

also to get deathdealer in the main board i would drop 1 Bile Blight and 1 courser to fit 2 rakshasa into the deck but thats just what i would do. GL on finding what works for you.

just my thoughts on possible options.

Please don't mind the self promotion for one post, but I think everyone reading this thread might enjoy the "article" I started the other day and just finished (too many cold beverages... lolsorry).

Part 1--- Part 2 --- Part 3

Hope you enjoy!

After talking it through with a few control players at my local gaming place, chatting with a few people here on the TappedOut forums, and doing some good play testing today and yesterday, I've decided to make the following change to the deck:

-1 Palace Siege and -1 Dissolve from the main, replacing them with +2 Monastery Siege.

-1 Palace Siege from the sideboard, replacing it with the Dissolve that I took out from the main.

Reasons: in testing against aggro/burn, which a good majority of my FNM is showing lately, the Palace did come out too late, waiting a whole turn to get a modest return on it. Only having one in the main made it a gamble on when it would come up. Testing with Monastery against burn, it really did limit what the opponent could do to me or my planeswalkers. In game one, if it came up, it was immediately helpful. If the match would go long enough, then the Khans version of Monastery was much appreciated for additional draw. I wanted to have two in the main to start for more reliability.

I felt OK taking out one Dissolve for this move, but keeping it nearby in the sideboard. I'd be tempted to get Dissolve back in if there was something else to reasonably take out... only other thing I could remotely think of was one Charm, keeping it in the side, but the card's so versatile that that doesn't feel right. It might have to be Dissolve.

I think the format is efficient to the point that leaving 3 up for Dissolve really isn't that good. That said.. I think you should look again at putting 1 Villainous wealth away. It seems like you want to cast it at 9+ mana (x for 6) which means its a pretty clunky card to have early, especially if you get 2. You have plenty of ways to sculpt your hand and get it in there if you do eventually want it, and you have other ways of dealing with the board early if you need to.

Cool, hope Monastery Siege works out. I agree with Aezuriel about the downside of wealth. I find myself wanting to cast for atleast x=4, with mana up to counter a counter. Seems whenever I tapped out for Wealth it gets countered. Maybe if we squeeze Lili back in, we can drop a Wealth because we can tutor it when it's not being drawn. She also helps find that Garruk, Aetherspouts or any other answer you need.

Oh, something else I just thought of. Due to Khans side of the siege, I think you could drop the ingenuity for the third crux or the Lili. By the time you can play ingenuity, your at 5 mana sources. I wonder if playing siege with 2 open representing a counter is better and calling Khans, to get an extra draw each upkeep. What do you think about that? Or perhaps trading the ingenuity for a third Siege so it is a more reliable draw early and late game?

I gave that dropping of Ingenuity some thought, actually. And honestly, I'm not that hurt over the suggestion of potentially dropping a Wealth for a Lilly, that could tutor one on command when I'm ready for it, as well as putting in a third Monastery Siege in place of the Ingenuity. I'll test it!