But you are taking out a creature Mongrel/Flesh Reaver both of which can compete with Gro's creatures and adding one that can't under any circumstance. As for control decks if a control deck can't answer a 2/1 then it probably never had a chance of beating this deck anyway.Originally Posted by Evil Roopey
So I am spending my turn 2 on playing a creature that isn't going to be involved in combat at all? Any turn that Dark Confidant is cast is a turn that the opponent is not facing an increase in pressure. Yes, if the Dark Confidant survives for several turns while NOT doing anything related to being a creature, then the deck can make up for the tempo and pressure it lost by playing the creature.If your opponent has a creature to throw in front of Confidant that puts them at an advantage, then why are you attacking with it? You don't have to hit your opponent to get his benefits. Just sit there and overrun your opponent with an actual unsurpassable army of cheap dudes.
See that was an example. Not the full width and berth of the reasons that Wild Mongrel has a spot in the deck but Dark Confidant does not (I have tried to fit Dark Confidant in repeatedly). An other example would be the Gro Matchup mentioned below and the Goblin matchup. So, Wild Mongrel is better against Solidarity, Gro, and Goblins.Since when do we take Solidarity into account when putting cards in the main of a deck? Even if we were, Confidant finds answers like Therapy which is really your only hope anyways.
You overrun these decks by dropping lots of damage early, which this deck is capable of without drawing extra cards. The deck has a consistant turn 4 kill. As for mass removal, the most common form of mass creature control currently is Humility and Dark Confidant is as useless under that as every other creature save Mauler.Fuck matches against a specific deck, lets talk archtypes. Control, Combo, and Aggro-Control are all improved a rediculous amount. Getting cards to the point where you can either overrun them, recover from a mass removal, or find cards that are actually relevant in any matchup sounds like a good deal to me.
Besides the pointless and inaccurrate point about Mental Note (I have tested against just about every single build of Gro, Mental Note builds included) the problem with Confidant against Gro is that it is designed for slow and steady card advantage, not damage. Zoo doesn't win in the long term, Gro does.Now, you will probably argue that Mongrel is a faster clock and is good in the Thresh match because he trades with there creatures. Now, let's think about that. Instead of getting +1 card per turn, you are willing to trade 2-3 cards for 1? Giving them even more card advantage than they probably already have from there Bears and Geese already being bigger then all of your creatures. Of course, you guys still haven't evolved to using Mental Note, so that point is less relevant because in your testing you won't have Threshold as fast as a good build would.
Rancor isn't a 4 of because they suck with out a creature and you tend to lose the game when Gro kills the creature you are trying to enchant with it. I would think someone having such a hard one for a card advantage creature would understand the obvious card disadvantage Rancor can present.And if you are still worried about the Threshold match with Confidant in the deck, then stop being a bad player and run 4 Rancors.
Tha is kind of the point. Dark Confidant isn't scary until it has been in play for a number of turns. Early game I want to play a creature that does damage to my opponent.Wrong again. Getting a an extra card a turn at the cost of 0-2 life is nothing that should be taken lightly. Especially when it's in the early game and you want to have as many threats as possible.
Yes drawing more cards will in time allow you to gain control of the board, but that doesn't stop you from giving up board postion in the first 2-3 turns after you have cast Dark Confidant instead of Wild Mongrel. Those would be the 2- 3 turns Zoo is winning the game.That is completely untrue, drawing more removal and more threats keeps control of the board position much more effectively than Mongrel ever will. What happens when you run out of gas because you aren't running Confidant? Confidant is keeps the tempo going throughout the whole game when not dealt with. Meaning your opponent really won't have time to recover because the pressure won't stop.
Humility might not stop the pump of Rancor, but it does make Slice and Dice and Pyroclasm kill the creatures. And Swords in response to Rancor can be bad news. I haven't tested the matchup postboard enough yet. As I said, you can often get Rifter down to very low life before they gain control so I do have hope for the postboard games.I think the matchup is not favorable for Rifter from what Krieger and I found out. Humility doesn't stop Rancor'd creatures or the burn to the dome. Pyroclasm and Lightning Rift won't stop the 3 toughness creatures. RoP: Red doesn't stop Carnophage, Sarcomancy, or Rotting Giant. That means Rifter's only decent removal spells are StP (which doesn't exactly stop Rancor) and Vengeance (can you survive to 6 mana?).
Given that this deck seems to have problems with White-based Control decks like Rifter/Wombat and that the curve of this deck is a very low is Winter Orb a possible solution. This allows you to play all of your spells fairly quickly without having the expensive spells for those decks coming online.
Confidant is absolutely made for this deck. What happens when Thresh blows explosives and leaves you in top deck mode? Bob, whether you feel you need him or not will be killed by your opponent over any other creature in your deck. Any noob knows that unchecked bob will lose the game. Your reasons for not including him are lame and seem quite biased. You should just say I dont want to play bob cause everyone else is.
Theres no such thing as 'I dont play confidant because its too slow'. Affinity plays bob, and affinity is the fastest aggro deck in any format it shows up in.
As far as card disadvantage with Rancor, I think you can afford to abuse it. Rancor and Therapy are the only ways in your deck to gain card advantage, why would you bitch about rancor being a liability? Especially when your worst matchup is white.dec
As far as Im concerned any deck with 20+ creatures should include Confidant, Jitte, or Vial.
Now playing real formats.
Confidant is pretty damn good against white-based control.
I would say that if it were true. However, I have tested him in the deck and he was just subpar. He was always the worst card in my hand for the given situation except excess land. The deck runs very little disruption and as such he isn't capable of engaging in combat ever without dying. If he can't attack then he is strictly worse that Nights Whisper. When was the last time Thresh played explosives? I would have to agree that I am biased against Dark Confidant in this deck. It happens to be a bias stemming from many hours of playtesting.Confidant is absolutely made for this deck. What happens when Thresh blows explosives and leaves you in top deck mode? Bob, whether you feel you need him or not will be killed by your opponent over any other creature in your deck. Any noob knows that unchecked bob will lose the game. Your reasons for not including him are lame and seem quite biased. You should just say I dont want to play bob cause everyone else is.
I haven't seen any Affinity decks playing Confidant, but I will take your word for it. Though getting hit for 4 and 7 seems god awful. Confidant is pretty much the definition of slow. He draws a steady, constant stream of cards. One extra card per turn is slow card advantage. The fact that he has to be alive to reap this windfall is why he isn't in the deck. The format can kill an x/1 without any problem.Theres no such thing as 'I dont play confidant because its too slow'. Affinity plays bob, and affinity is the fastest aggro deck in any format it shows up in.
Rancor is in the deck, I just don't think it deserves to be a 4 of as it can be card disadvantage or just suck if they deal with all your creatures. Rancor getting around Humility against "white.dec" is balanced by the fact that if Humility is out then all your creatures die to a cycled slice and dice or rift activations. Getting 2 for zeroed isn't how you win that matchup.As far as card disadvantage with Rancor, I think you can afford to abuse it. Rancor and Therapy are the only ways in your deck to gain card advantage, why would you bitch about rancor being a liability? Especially when your worst matchup is white.dec
Jitte was also tested but for practial purposes it costs 4 which is outside the curve of the deck. Vial is an interesting idea, but I don't like the thought of the Time Walk it gives the opponent turn one. The deck is all about putting on pressure early and ending the game quicklyAs far as Im concerned any deck with 20+ creatures should include Confidant, Jitte, or Vial.
Confidant is the bomb against Humility, Slice and Dice, and Pyroclasm?Confidant is pretty damn good against white-based control.
I like the idea of Winter Orb in the board and I will be testing it. White based control ends up being about 50/50 postboard and Winter Orb should make that a favorable post board matchup for Zoo.Given that this deck seems to have problems with White-based Control decks like Rifter/Wombat and that the curve of this deck is a very low is Winter Orb a possible solution. This allows you to play all of your spells fairly quickly without having the expensive spells for those decks coming online.
I have updated the first post with matchup info for the Post board Rifter/Wombat (sans Winter Orb) as well as Salvagers Game.
Last edited by Ewokslayer; 03-25-2006 at 10:35 AM.
To be fair if they have Humility and you don't have an answer for it, you will lose no matter what you have in play. And yes he is good against those other cards because he refills your hand after they inevitably blow up your board.Confidant is the bomb against Humility, Slice and Dice, and Pyroclasm?
I am being fair. Confidant isn't really a solution to white decks as you implied because he doesn't deal with Humility. Also, Dark Confidant would be the only two drop that is killed by Pyroclasm and the only creature in the deck killed by a cycled Slice and Dice.
I think your missing the point. The inclusion of Bob is for a mid-late game card. You have nothing going for you past turn 4-5 except recurring rancor.
No Jitte, no Iwamori, ect. If your opponent does drop Humility your chances of beating them without Jitte are quite small. The reason bob is so good is because he's a friggen 2/1 for 2 that WILL draw you a card every turn left unchecked. Thats so fucking huge. Play him, draw your card, and attack with him, who cares? rancor his ass and send him in the red zone. The point is he's card draw that does infact swing for 2 damage a turn. Even if he's killed, your opponent had to use precious removal for that lowly 2/1 instead of bigger better fat. No one in their right mind wouldnt kill bob when he shows up. Sometimes you want to play him cause there is a target on his face. He'll also create difficult combat situations where your opponent will block him instead of a better creature just to rid you of his card drawing masterfulness.
I think you should reconsider him, or at least the Jitte.
Now playing real formats.
I agree with bain, if you run out of gas you really need something to get you going again. You have no solid high power beatsticks, so confidant is neccessary.
I think you are missing the point. This deck has no late-game. Trying to add one card and pretending that you have a late-game is a very bad strategy. You have to win in the early turns of a game or you lose its that simple.
Have you ever played with DC? He should be in any aggro deck that splashes black just because like Bane said, he's a must-kill. Maybe you should actually play with it instead of saying the first thing that comes out of your mouth, it doesnt help the deckbuilding process to not playtest something.
Team Solo
Well, this is an aggro deck. Running cards specifically for the mid-lategame is a terrible idea.
Rancor and Scab-Clan Mauler both help get around Humility, but the main way to beat it is to get the opponent low on life before Humility hits, then finish them off with burn and 1/1s. W/x control actually has a very hard time winning against this deck if they don't have a Swords to Plowshares in the first few turns, since things like Wrath and Humility are so slow.No Jitte, no Iwamori, ect. If your opponent does drop Humility your chances of beating them without Jitte are quite small.
This is a very good analysis of why Bob is a good card, but I don't think it applies to this deck.The reason bob is so good is because he's a friggen 2/1 for 2 that WILL draw you a card every turn left unchecked. Thats so fucking huge. Play him, draw your card, and attack with him, who cares? rancor his ass and send him in the red zone. The point is he's card draw that does infact swing for 2 damage a turn. Even if he's killed, your opponent had to use precious removal for that lowly 2/1 instead of bigger better fat. No one in their right mind wouldnt kill bob when he shows up. Sometimes you want to play him cause there is a target on his face. He'll also create difficult combat situations where your opponent will block him instead of a better creature just to rid you of his card drawing masterfulness.
Zoo has to put down as much pressure as absolutely possible as early as absolutely possible. That is where this deck's strength lies, and it is how it aims to win games, since most decks in the format are vulnerable in those early turns.
Running Confidant represents a sacrifice in the early game speed of the deck. Even if that sacrifice is less than a turn on average, it is still poor in a deck that cannot hope to match its opponent in the mid-late game, anyway.
In short, investing 2 mana and a card in something that will cycle into a better threat later is NOT what this deck wants to do. This deck wants to invest the 2 mana and card in that better threat, right now.
When I played this deck at the Duel for Duals, I ran 3 Jittes and liked them. They give you a way to randomly crush Goblins, and help against Humility and decks with larger creatures. However, Ewokslayer is right in saying they are slow, and cutting them lets you fit in Edicts, which improve the Gro matchup (a harder matchup than Goblins). Jitte is also similar to Confidant in that it can take several turns (or several turns worth of mana) before it's worth the investment, and it can also lose you the game if the opponent has a removal spell or two. Replacing Jitte with Edict is an acceptable trade of effectiveness for speed and consistency.I think you should reconsider him, or at least the Jitte.
Ewokslayer has already stated multiple times that he has tested Confidant thoroughly. I have also tested the card. Anwar has at least played against Confidant in this deck. We have found that, despite conventional wisdom, Confidant is not an optimal choice.
I think you should do some testing of your own, with this deck, before so harshly criticizing our deckbuilding.
Last edited by Obfuscate Freely; 03-25-2006 at 01:44 PM.
I did test it. Sarah playing this and me play Gro. In the 10 games played with Mongrel in there, Zoo won 5 of them. That's a 50/50 match. Now in the 10 games with Confidant in she won 8 of them. That is a significantly better match. We haven't got around to testing the Goblin match and it might have decreased just the match just as much as the Gro match increased, but I don't see why it would have.
@Roop: Me and Bane saw the same results TESTING confidant in this deck, and I think anyone who actually did test it saw the same results.
Team Solo
You could always not play bob on turn 2?? If you have a better threat then play it. Bob is great to play after a wrath or after wingshards. You want him in the chance that you do get to mid-late game. The reason he's phenominal is because he's a 2/1 for 2 that does this! If you dont have a better 2 drop then oh well. But as far as cost efficient card drawing on a body that swings for 2, Id say he's worth it.
Also, if the early turns are the most important then why arent you playing any acceleration? No ESG, no Moxen? If what your stressing is the first 4 turns or so then I'd highly recommend Chrome Mox.
Now playing real formats.
I hate Bob debates, because they're usually everyone who's ever played him against everyone who hasn't. I've never tested this deck, but when I played Bob in my 4-color aggro deck, he was the backbone. That dude's so good.
I understand that you don’t have to play bob turn 2. This is were it gets a bit difficult to discuss since you, SillyMetal GAT, and Evil Roopey are all arguing from different perspectives and answering one can distort the argument from another. Evil Roopey has stated that Dark Confidant is a good early, mid, and late game creature. SillyMetal Gat has argued that Anwar is incapable of reading and doesn’t like black cards, and you have argued I think very effectively as to why Bob is good. However, I think you are missing the point as to why he isn’t good in this particular deck.
Mid to Late game Dark Confidant doesn’t “refill the hand” as has been stated. He slowly gains card advantage. How many turns do you think that a deck that has successfully stalled this deck into the late game will keep Dark Confidant alive before either a)using a card to kill it (i.e. Mogg Fanatic or Lightning Bolt) or b) kill it incidentally (i.e. cycle Slice and Dice, Pyroclasm, Lightning Rift, cycled Gempalm)? If the answer is less than 3 turns (the turn you play it and two more of your turns after that) then Dark Confidant is worse than Nights Whisper in terms of filling your hand. Dark Confidant asks the deck to make a trade not in life for cards but more damaging to this particular deck turns for cards. By playing him I am stating that I am going to kill my opponent a few turns later than I could but at the exchange of having more cards in hand. Too many things can go wrong for this deck to be able to make that exchange. Decks like Deadguy Ale and Black Gro can make that exchange because they run a crap ton of disruption, either proactive (hymn, sinkhole, duress, etc.) or reactive (daze, counterspell, etc) to both protect Dark Confidant and to ensure that those decks don’t lose control of the board and the match during those intervening turns gifted to the opponent as a result of playing Dark Confidant over an efficient P/T creature.
I would think that would be obvious. Every card in this deck is as efficient as possible. ESG and Moxen would make horrible top decks and would be dead past the opening hand. I don’t need them to cheat mana costs, having an average mana cost of 1.9 does that for me.Also, if the early turns are the most important then why arent you playing any acceleration? No ESG, no Moxen? If what your stressing is the first 4 turns or so then I'd highly recommend Chrome Mox.
Londes.com Article
In addition, I now have data on the Angel Stompy matchup.
It was expected to be bad, but it is so far the worst matchup ever.
Angel Stompy was able to crush Zoo via evasion, equipment, and Parallax Wave.
Sideboarding didn't help really at all so some more work is going into the board.
Right now I will be testing Dystopia in the board as an Angel Stompy, Gro, Rifter answer.
This matchup might even necessitate some main deck changes assuming those changes don't compromise other matchups significantly.
Cards currently on the bubble:
Sacromancy (Sacromancy seems to deal the most damage to you in the matchups you can afford that loss the least)
Chain Lightning (Replacing Burn for targeted removal shouldn't effect most matchups with the exception of Solidarity)
Diablolic Edict (These might have to be moved to the board if Chain lightning is replaced by targeted removal)
Rancor (Some times golden, some times crap)
Cards currently under consideration:
Plant Elemental
Skyshroud Ridgeback
Black Targeted Removal (probably Vendetta)
Drekavac
No testing on these changes has been made except for Plant Elemental in place of Rancor, which seemed to slow the deck down by about a half a turn.
Last edited by Ewokslayer; 04-24-2006 at 09:27 AM.
Good work on the article. I think you gave an accurate description of Rancor and how it can backfire. I would prefer another creature in that spot maybe even Ghazban Ogre? He would definitely make a good case for burn being in the deck and he gives you another 2/2 for 1 (which is essentially what Rancor is).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote