I don't know what build you're playing, but that reason seems weak. Why? Because the only creature that should worry about mongoose is kird ape, and that's what, 4 cards in your deck? (Maybe you play Isamaru, but you shouldn't because it's not good enough.) Rancor is not really needed for goyf either, because you have burn. Which, by itself rarely kills goyf, it makes goyf trades go in your favor.
Also, how does "If you allow yourself to get 2 for 1'd then that was your player error" make sense for reasing? It seems to me that rancor should be an aggroish card, you want to put it on your creatures, right? But now...If you fear removal and don't play it, then it's not doing you any good at all. And if they had removal, wouldn't you just want a creature (to replace the one that was removed), or some other good spell you could actually play?
Rancor can be good, but I feel that you have to jump through too many hoops to actually make it worthwhile, and at the same time I don't feel that it speeds the deck up more/enough/at all over another creature or some good spell instead.
@Valtrix: Have you ever played this deck against a serious legacy deck? Your build is decent but you actually might have problems with Goblins. You don't play enough cheap and big creatures. Also, have you ever played against Eva Green or any deck with any form of land destruction? With 19 lands its a near auto loss. And only 19 lands with 3x Thoctar is awful. Fireblast is also not good, this deck doesn't need "BIG FINISHERS", it just needs to be good. Fireblast in your opening hand, Fireblast in hand staring at Tombstalker/Goyf in play with 2 creatures on your side of the board .... horrible, a 4-1 trade seems bad. Point is, Fireblast is not a good idea for Zoo, it can fuck you up to badly. Run more lands and Watchwolf and your build will get a lot better. Also, play against a few decks with Wasteland, then add more land and play against them again. MUCH more reliable, especially against Wasteland + Sinkhole.
@Viscosity: Please think about your posts before saying anything. HOW THE HELL IS A THRESHOLDED MONGOOSE COMMON????????? They are dead before then and all your creatures are better than Nimble Mongoose anyway so this is not relevant to anything. And your argument that Jitte slows the deck down yet you commonly play against decks with thresholded Mongeese?? Wouldn't Jitte be fucking spectacular in the lategame with ANY creature in the deck? And you are talking about speed, if Thresh commonly hits Threshold in every game you seriously need to reconsider what you are playing or possibly how you are playing it. Please gain experience with the deck in a non-MWS setting then comment.
"I just shot Marvin in the face!"
"Why the fuck'd you do that??"
You have 11 or 12 creatures that are often smaller than goose. Nacatl can be stuck at 2/2 if they stifle/waste a land or your land draw is weak. Figure is commonly a 2/2 for a while. And of course, the kird apes.
I'll admit one weakness of rancor vs equipment: As said, if they remove the creature you are attempting to target, you lose 2 cards to one removal. This hasn't been much of a problem for me yet.
Here is why: I play 2 rancors, so I generally have way more threats than rancors. The most common spot removal is 4x STP in the opponent's deck. Zoo runs around 20+ fast creatures. You play a Nacatl first turn and you start attacking, as you continue to drop early threats, the spot removal comes out fast. Why would they wait? They wait, they lose. The rancor goes on the next creature at the most opportune moment, after spot removal has been played. On the other hand, if they choose to play something of their own like a goyf on turn two, then there is your opening to play rancor and swing into their goyf. 5/3 trampling nacatl vs a 3/4 or 4/5 goyf is common (a good trade). I've really not had much trouble playing rancor without WALKING into a two-for-one situation.
At the very least, you play it on your less significant creatures (ape) and pull the removal away from the larger threats like goyf and Thoctar.
I'm open to it not being an absolute inclusion into the deck. All I know is that thus far, 2x rancor have been very strong and every time I have one in opening hand, it is better.
You mention you'd rather run another threat or a more useful spell; like what? Give examples please.
Thresh being the most popular deck in the meta, I guess I would say: VERY COMMON? The thresh player is not "dead" before then. Thresh hits threshold fast as hell. Did you not realize that?Originally Posted by Pulp_Fiction
OK, if they do nothing as you play your creatures and swing, then yes, they are dead. But if they are not retarded, then no, they are not dead. Thresh is one of the best decks in the format, it will survive your RGW zoo's first few turns, trust me.
Swords. Daze. Engineered Explosives. Force of Will. Goyf. < ----- I'm sure these cards won't affect the match at all (thick sarcasm)... They have thresh on turn 4 or 5, after slowing you down and removing your larger threats. A smart thresh player reduces you to creatures he can handle, like 2/3 creatures...
its not just about a 3/3 mongoose of course. Goyf is the most common creature and it has a large butt. Pumping the power of your nacatl or goyf or figure really do help vs goyfs. Against a non-creature situation. Rancor speeds up the deck substantially. IE - 5/3 nacatl swinging on turn 2. I'd rather swing with a 5/3 Cat on turn two than drop a 2/3 ape alongside her. At least I get the rancor back when they EE for one...
I'll think before I post if you promise to start thinking at all.
Last edited by Viscosity; 01-31-2009 at 02:36 PM.
I'm honestly getting sick of the whole getting 2 for 1'ed Rancor nonsense. Noodles. Dont noodles. Play the card. Dont play the card. Really, does anyone ever say Dark Ritual sucks because if you cast a creature off of the mana you might get 2 for 1'ed. Waaaaaaaaaaahhh I drew another Dark Rit when all I needed was a threat!
The point is sometimes the benefit is worth risking the potential drawback. I like the explosiveness of Rancor enough that I accept the potential drawbacks and I've made room for it in the deck. Please note, my version of Zoo didn't get approved for the established forum and you can see which one did. Does this change my opinion of the card? No. NOOOODLES!
Im glad to see this deck picking up in interest, albeit not all positive. I just ran my Zoo deck tonight in a local tourney and swept it, granted the decks I played against werent...amazing. The only game I lost all night was game 2 of my match against Welder/Survival, I got nothing, he got the nuts.
I love this deck and have put a lot of thought/work into mine and Ive come to a few conclusions, all my own opinion so take them at that.
- Jitte is better than Rancor. I used to run both, but its just too many slots not occupied by legit threats. Sure, a 5/3 Nacatl on turn 2 is amazing, but its also improbable. I run 2 Jittes now, no rancors. I got tired of top decking them late game and loosing because of it.
-Kird Ape and I are being to part ways. Ive been testing Figure of Destiny and Im finding him more of a fit. Granted, he is a mana hog, but if I open a hand with him and some removal and a few lands, Im a lot happier than an ape with the same scenario. Plus, land destruction wont make FoD smaller.
-20 lands is plenty, even against a land destruction deck. The last match of my night tonight was actually against a guys deck who had 34 land removal spells in it, not counting wastelands. I had no problems beating him, at all. Deadguy would run a fraction of that, I also have no problem with that MU, my friend runs it. I loose some, but most are decisive.
Im really not sure what other things have been addressed, Im kinda tired, but thats the jist of what I got from the catch up reading I did.
Deck I ran Today:
8 Fetchs
3 Taiga
3 Savannah
2 Plateau
2 Mountain
1 Forest
1 Plains
4 Nacatl
4 FoD
4 Goyf
4 Watchwolf
3 Thoctar
4 Bolt
4 Chain
4 Swords
3 Lightning Helix
3 Magma Jet
2 Jitte
1 Garruk (The obviously out of place card, I just wanted to see how he worked. I plan on replacing him, I wasnt too thrilled.)
to be honest, rancor should find it way into this deck somehow. trample is probably one of the best abilities thats so underused. why trade all day when you trade and get trample damage? I know thats what burn is there for to clear the way but if youre facing cop red, chill or any other annoyance for red you just have to trade til the cows come home.
Also another ability thats rarely used is first strike too; trade and your creatures live. If there are creatures out there that have either of these should be in strong consieration.
Found a rather neat card, im not sure how much play it would see but it is something to look into since we like creatures with good abilities and have bang for their buck
techy move against random fliers, faries, stalkers, drakes, serindibs. chumps for free and then burn the creature down
Jim: good list. I agree about kird ape, I've regularly considered pulling it completely; just not big enough. My conclusion is that creatures must have 3 power to really matter. The more I think on it, the more it makes sense. In the control match: Turn one Nacatl, turn two watchwolf. Then don't overextend. Play equipment and burn. Mass removal removes two creatures instead of 3 and then you drop thoctar/goyf, etc. Using a deck full of 1 drop/smallish creatures opens you up to the slaughter at the hands of WoG and EE. So... I'm sold on your creature base..
Wouldn't a top decked Jitte late game result in a loss the same as a rancor? I don't understand the difference in that regard. I respect your experience though, and sometimes (especially after being owned by jitte) I rethink including it.
Also, can you explain why not -1 mountain +1 Plateau????
Ambusher sure would be nice against attacking critters, but he isn't big enough. And a 2/3 for 3 is not good at all the rest of the time. thnk about playing the control match-up. 2/3 for 3 in your hand would be the worst card in your deck, by far. The real problem is that this card is good against decks where you already have a very positive match up. Anything playing small creatures attacking you. Those decks get kileld by your better creatures and massive spot removal.
Last edited by Viscosity; 01-31-2009 at 11:47 AM.
Sure Kird Ape is underwhelming when u play a turn 1 Nacatl. But u don't always get to play a turn 1 Nacatl... And this deck NEEDS an agresive turn one critter! Kird ape is simply the second best card for this slot.
I believe the turn-1-agresive-critter-play is crucial to the succes of this deck. I would run no less than 10 at any tme.
I´m not sure how Figure fits this slot. I can see how it can be very good sometimes, but there has got to be times when he wants all ur mana, and the rest of ur deck hates him for it. Yes?/No?
I´m a Derek, and Derek's don't run...
Figure > Kird Ape
You realize that figure becomes the larger creatures permanently, right? I'm not saying don't run kird ape. But I've been in situation after situation where I just wish I had something better. Apes increase the speed of your first few turns. BUT your topdeck is much weaker as you draw into apes later in the game. And average hand will have one ape in the opening draw. So that is 3 apes left in the deck that are very underwhelming to draw into. Figure has the advantage of being a quick 2/2 or often a 4/4 swinging on turn 3, and also is a better mid/late game card than ape. I think if you were choosing between the two, Figure would be best.
It's most common that figure sits as a 2/2 for a while, so his clock is generally not much slower than kird ape. Even if it swings in as a 1/1 for a turn or two, he will make up for it as a 4/4 later. The ability to became a 4/4 permanently is very strong; a 4/4 is just BIG.
I do play 8 lands that produce white/red (just in case), but I've not yet used his last ability.
I generally play a playset of nacatl, kird ape, and figure, simply because I love 1 drops.
as for two drops, i play tarmo, watchwolf, etc.
Yes...
And I understand that Figure is a way better topdraw than Ape. But you didn't answer my question: How often are you forced to keep figure at 1/1, or accept a tempoloss in order to get him to 2/2?
I have been playing 4 Kird Apes and 2 Isamaru, because i win more often if i resolve an agressive critter turn 1.
I´m a Derek, and Derek's don't run...
Ok i'm going to get on my soap box for a moment..
What you described happens. Of course it really depends on the draw. I'd prefer to leave him as a 1/1 rather than accept tempo loss. He can/will make up for the lost damage when he becomes a 4/4. But it really depends on what deck I'm playing against. Sometimes it is favorable to just start making him larger and forcing your opponent to blow up some removal to clear one creature.
Investing mana into figure isn't always tempo loss. going from 2/2 to 4/4 adds 2 damage to the attack that turn. For example, If your 2/2 figure is staring down a 3/4 goyf on turn 3 (not that uncommon). I often have 2 choices: 1) play a 3/3 wolf or Nacatl and don't swing 2) OR make figure a 4/4 and swing.
Option 2 is better
That is another reason I like rancor. Because playing a rancor on a 2/2 and swinging into a 3/4 goyf (or other blocker) is an even better option, as it allows you to drop the Nacatl or Wolf after combat.
And if they choose NOT to block the 4/2 trample, then you make it a 6/4 trample next turn.. If they do trade figure for Goyf (yippy), the rancor drops on the wolf/nacatl and again you're swinging in for 5+ damage next turn.
In many matches (not all), holding creatures is GOOD. You can't draw extra cards, so you better not be losing them. Figure is better at allowing you to play around mass removal. Yes it took mana investment, but it also is only ONE card that presents an equal damage threat as 2 kird apes. Thus, stronger vs mass removal (one of this deck's primary weaknesses). If your opponent's deck is mostly spot removal, then you don't hold creatures and figure ends up another 2/2 much like isamaru or a 2/3 ape. And even in this situation, he has more potential to become a 4/4 stick. It is just more versatile, allowing you 'the player' to outplay your opponent. Decks like Zoo are non-thinking decks. Anything you can do to give the deck some options to actually think, is good IMO.
One thing is for sure though, figure is way better than isamaru. I hope you aren't playing isamaru instead.
I have also experienced games where kird ape gets stuck as a 1/1. Stifling fetches and wastelands only promote this. Figure is able to at least be a 2/2 permanently. I've had some games where kird ape really shines alongside nacatl, but I've also had that ape leave a bad taste in my mouth on many occasions.. lol
I have another question for you to consider. Which hand would you prefer? The way I see things, I'd grab the figures. But I understand some would take the apes for the lack of mana investment. Everyone has different play styles, so everyone should make their own deck decisions.
Hand one:
2x kird ape
1x swords
1x helix
1x bolt
2x land
Hand two:
2x Figure
1x swords
1x helix
1x bolt
2x land
This discussion is pointless if your decklist includes both ape and figure, which many do. But if choosing one OR the other, do some playtesting.
So,there's a lot of debate in this thread, but I think that we need some stronger testing to really decide what will help the most. If anybody wants to test the deck with me on Magic Workstation, let me know. Send me a message via PM or IM on Disilllusioned. I think that the deck is strong right now, and has the potential to be even better, but needs some more extensive testing to find a more optimal list.
That said, the 3 power creatures are seeming more and more necessary the more I play. I don't necessarily like cutitng all kird apes, since I think we need a reasonable number of one drops, but maybe 4x nacatal, 4x figure, and 2x ape is appropriate? I don't know. I'm just playing some more with the deck. Honestly, I think that cutting ape might actually be okay. (Unopposed) You can still fish turn 4 fairly well, and should have enough damage almost every game to win by turn 5 for sure. I'm also starting to wonder what kind of balance between speed/late game power we need.
I think Kird Ape is worth playing if you play Rancor, and not worthwhile if you don't play Rancor.
I think Rancor is worth playing if you 20+ creatures, and isn't worth it otherwise. My build plays 22 creatures, so Rancor is definately worthwhile for me.
I think that mass removal is a lot rarer than point removal, and you'll be 2 for 1ing your threats/burn/pump to deal with big dudes like Goyfs and Tombstalkers so I think more threats is better than less.
I think that FoD, like Wolly Thoctor, is best as a 2 of or 3 of because it sucks in a ton of mana to use effectively.
I also think this deck displaced Goyf Sligh's role in the metagame completely.
Here is the list that I just put together btw, let me know what you think...
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Windswept Heath
3 Taiga
3 Savannah
3 Plateau
1 Mountain
1 Forest
1 Plains
4 Kird Ape
4 Nacatl
4 Goyf
4 Watchwolf
3 Thoctar
3 FoD/Grim Lavamancer
4 StP
4 Rancor
4 Bolt
4 Chain
2 Lightning Helix/Fireblast/Magma Jet
IMHO, it's a lot better than the list in the OP.
Oh most definitely a topdecked jitte is just as bad, if not worse (depends on mana situation) . I dont debate that at all, but still, I used to run 2 jitte and 3 rancor so id have a 1/6 (ish) probability of topdecking a dead card later in the game, with just 2 jittes, my odds are better to get a threat. And I will always play Jitte over rancor, always.
The plateau....its a two part reason, part one: I only own two :p Part two..I kind of like having the two red mana basics so if I am getting wastelanded to hell I can still drop a good amount of removal (burn anyway) if need be. I think in the long run though, I would want to add another plateau, as soon as I stop being stingy and buy one, haha.
And Ambusher is AMAZING in type 2. Note the end of that sentance. He just doesnt cut it for legacy imo. I like to think of this..."Anything he can kill, goyf can kill better". You can replace goyf with bolt, helix, chain lightning, watchwolf, whatever makes your rhyme more fun for you, but you get the idea.
Do you always get a first turn ape? I know I never did when I ran him. And you really dont NEED to drop a turn 1 threat. Granted, its amazing if you can, but ive won my share of games with my first creature played being watchwolf. It all depends how you drive the deck. Figure is awesome in this deck. Hes awesome in pretty much any deck you can fit him in. Sure, hes a mana hog, but the ability to make him grow as you go is just pure win. If I see a hand with 1 FoD, land, and removal, Im keeping. Everytime. The same cant be said for kird ape.
Thats begging for Chalice set to 1 (which already cripples this deck enough) or an EE. Gotta watch for that.
Thats all I got for now...Oh, I had the pleasure of playing against a Cliffrunner Behemoth today in the pre-release event I went to. Yea, hes good. But I just cant get over his 3 sized ass and 4cc....if only he wasnt so bad, hed be good. Ya know?
@Viscosity:
Where do you test again? Bc i mean if the deck is so good with Figures and Rancors like you say, then hey top 8 for once and post a tournament report
Yes i'm being asshole, but just sit down and test instead of posting hypothetical questions about Thresholded Mongeese and how you'll always have the mana for FoD. Because the amount of mana you run, i doubt you'll ever see FoD get more than a 4/4. Yes a 4/4 is better than a 2/3, but by the time you get to late game you have probably lost anyway. Wasteland runs rampant these days. and even with fetching basics it's hard to pump FoD.
And i am a fan of Rancor more than anyone... but it just doesn't even compare to Jitte at all... sure it recurs but it's worth it to pay to cast the Jitte and to equip because it's THAT good. Sure you can say that about FoD, but i think Jitte just is better anyway.
Dead or Alive, you're coming with me.
-Robocop-
Maybe we should play only critters with CC 4 or more? Then we could avoid Counterbalance too!Thats begging for Chalice set to 1 (which already cripples this deck enough) or an EE. Gotta watch for that.
Have you ever actually played this deck? I have, and turn 1 aggressive critter IS crucial to this deck.
I´m a Derek, and Derek's don't run...
Jitte is good and I like FoD but playing both is way too mana intensive. Like you said about FoD not being any bigger than a 4/4 same goes for jitte; unless you topdeck it midgame and have the mana to use it its almost a dead draw. Like what other people say you wanna go first turn creature, 2nd turn creature and start getting the beats on and plowing through. With jitte you gotta wait a few turns to build threats to abuse it with.@Viscosity:
Where do you test again? Bc i mean if the deck is so good with Figures and Rancors like you say, then hey top 8 for once and post a tournament report
Yes i'm being asshole, but just sit down and test instead of posting hypothetical questions about Thresholded Mongeese and how you'll always have the mana for FoD. Because the amount of mana you run, i doubt you'll ever see FoD get more than a 4/4. Yes a 4/4 is better than a 2/3, but by the time you get to late game you have probably lost anyway. Wasteland runs rampant these days. and even with fetching basics it's hard to pump FoD.
And i am a fan of Rancor more than anyone... but it just doesn't even compare to Jitte at all... sure it recurs but it's worth it to pay to cast the Jitte and to equip because it's THAT good. Sure you can say that about FoD, but i think Jitte just is better anyway.
If speed is what this deck is about, rancor should get the nod just because its 1 mana one time not 4 with 2 more to switch around. Dont get my wrong I like jitte, best equipment ever and just the versitility of it can change a game. gain some life, kills 1/1s all day and when paired with rancor, gg huge pump + trample. A possibility is to move jitte to the SB but theres little room to work with.
Its just that this deck has little to no room to work with when it comes to taking things out for something else. Might as well make this deck 100 cards and have all the stuff we want :P
Nothing I've stated is based on anything other than playing the deck in legacy events and play testing dozens of games against competitive and competent legacy players/decks.
I only ran the deck twice in legacy events, placing 2nd and 3rd. But I'm preparing better decks for GP Chicago, so I won't have any reports on RGW zoo.
The small differences between running one creature or another are irrelevant. The inherent problem is the same problem that RG beats had when it first started during Ice Age block; lack of card draw or deck manipulation, a weakness to removal, and a weakness to combo.
Hey, we agree on something!
If your game plan is to win before turn 4-5, why do you need card draw?
You're only weak to mass removal, which no one plays, you can afford to lose creatures to StP and Snuff Out because you play 22 creatures to their 4-6 removal spells per deck.
Yes, you lose to combo game one. But game two, you can bring in Gadook Teeg + Canonist + all the other hate that these three colors have access to bring down your opponent.
What do you guys think of my list?
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...9&postcount=54
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
