Zoo
Goblins
This is not about the MU Zoo VS Goblins.
Okay, now let's move on to business.
Which deck can assume the Control role better in any MU the deck might face?
Reasoning your choice = free cookie.
This looks like a job for me.
Most of my posts will be written from my phone, so please excuse the eventual lack of proper typing.
Zoo beats goblins every time, duh.
The E.P.I.C. Syndicate: I mean, if they play a lullaby for babies they should at least play the Monster Mash when somebody dies.
Originally Posted by herbig
Zoo has far more options postboard and preboard as well because of Quasali, burn and path to exile. Goblins can't deal with some creatures or enchantments.
That's not the topic.
It's not about the Zoo - Goblins MU, it's about which deck can assume the Control role better in other MUs.
This looks like a job for me.
Most of my posts will be written from my phone, so please excuse the eventual lack of proper typing.
Zoo can take on the control role vs merfolk depening on what you side in and what they side in and out. Also Zoo plays like an aggro control deck vs some creature based combo decks.
Goblins, by a mile. I actually think of Goblins as a control deck naturally. Goblins is a control deck that transitions to the aggro/combo role almost seamlessly. Occasionally, you get those turn 3-4 unanswered hands, and with your opponent keeping that in mind it does forces him to play differently. But, I think of that as Goblins' feint. Your opponent bends over backwards to make sure they can't get blown out early, and then you get to drag your opponent into deep water and drown 'em. It has by far the best mid and late game of any aggro deck in Legacy.
Goblins:
- Mana disruption -- Port and Wasteland -- slowing your opponents down so that you can generate tempo and card advantage.
- Very versatile removal toolbox -- Incinerator (CA, uncounterable largely), Weirding (sac is amazing in so many circumstances), SGC (too much to say), Stingscourger (bounce, which can do things nothing else can -- nicely Vial-able), Sharpshooter...
- Card Quality/Advantage -- Matron, Ringleader, Wort
- Other permanent control -- Grip, TSH, Tinkerer, Tuktuk
Zoo has a few analogs, but not many are even in the same league when it comes to the control role. For example, QPM is an aggressive card, not a control card -- it helps you win before your opponent can use artifact/enchantment bombs to stabilize on you. Bolt and PtE demonstrate something far different from a control role as well.
At its control'iest, Zoo plays a disruptive role, like an aggro-control deck (it marginally plays a control role, and only very temporarily), but it simply isn't built to play the 'control role' in any long-term sense. The deck is designed to be hard to control, not to play control. Zoo is the beatdown deck of Legacy. It has just enough control elements that it can force through its damage (whether by removing blockers or by burning over the top), but it doesn't sit back and generate incremental advantage like any real control deck does. The only two primary times you get any incremental advantage: 1) Library, and you can only get +1 a couple times, and only when it will allow you to combo your opponent out usually, 2) When your opponent is in the control role, desperately seeking not die, throwing chump blockers at your dudes, whereby you gain card advantage as the attacker.
[Actually, I'm wondering if I'm being trolled with this post-- It is that straightfoward]
peace,
4eak
In many matches Goblins has to take the control role. Zoo and Landstill come to mind as MUs where Goblins is the control deck. In those MUs, your early game is more focused on Wasteland and Rishadan Port rather than Goblin Lackey. In the late game, Goblins can Card Advantage out many decks with Ringleader, Matron, Seige-Gang, etc. Zoo can gain a late game through Sylvan Library and plays lots of removal, but usually, it's not trying to go to the late game, and hopes to win early on. Goblins, on the otherhand, is perfectly happy waiting around until it can gain control of the board and swing with the army it's gathered throughout the game.
I'm gonna take Goblins on this one.
Goblins has:
1. Mana Disruption - Port and Waste together in one convenient mono-colored shell wreaks havoc on manabases that are trying to be cute (Zoo). I've done this against Landstill, Zoo, UXx Countertop, Stompy, Stax, you name it. The mana-disruption plus increased resources provided by vial is just lights out sometimes. This is a pretty control-ish way to win.
2. Card Advantage - Sylvan Library is good, but can do some pretty precarious things with your life total. Zoo wants to win through efficiency and not relying on card advantage. That's the whole MO of the deck: be more efficient and your opponent will never catch up. Goblins however, can go to straight card advantage by chaining matrons, ringleaders, and incinerators (cantripping uncounterable removal!).
3. Card Selection - Zoo is redunancy at it's finest. All the cards do pretty well the same thing. Every card that you add that does something else detracts from your gameplan. Goblins' card advantage and tutors allow you to singleton around a lot of things maindeck (stingscourger for emrakul being one prime example). Also those searchable singletons can lead to the...
4. Combo Finish - Wow, things have stalled out and there's no way to punch through? Matron up that hastey sharpshooter or prospecter and just blow your opponent out with your little green gattlin' gun.
I play mono-red, but splashes give the deck a lot of adaptability if you know you need to play around something in your metagame.
Maybe Green Sun's Zenith will improve Zoo's ability to switch to the control mode, but I'm still taking Goblins on this one.
Obv you missed the point.
Anyway.
It's Zoo, because it ownz Gobz.
Goblins. Zoo is literally the beatdown against everything but the mirror.
Storm? Guess I can't really interact, bash you.
Goblins? Guess I can't beat you drawing a ton of cards late game. Bash you.
Merfolk? Guess I'm playing a tempo game of trade my 1 mana for your 3...... while bashing you.
The answer is clearly Goblins. While Goblins can and often does take the beatdown role, it is well-equipped to take the control role. Consider these hallmark elements of Goblins: tutors, card draw, mana denial... Zoo does none of these things.
Curious how I became a Magic writer? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onR9Y...eature=channel
Goblins always take the control part when matched up againts zoo. Zoo becomes the beatdown. So I can say that Goblins with its complete toolbox of little green men is better at control DUH :)
I thought it was fairly obvious that Goblins has a strong control role to it whereas Zoo is legacy's one true aggro deck (of the major players of course).
I haven't played zoo, but I've played goblins for a long time. I'm always surprised at how easily goblins can become the "control deck" against almost any opponent.
Goblins has FoF's on a stick, D. Tutors on a stick, cantripping removal, fog effects that last for multiple turns, and a manabase that inverts your anus. They easily play control.
On top of that, Goblins does not get owned by Zoo. That MU is about 50/50.
RB Gobs should beat Zoo 55/45 or 60/40. Wasteland/Ports matter a lot, but most importantly, RB gobs running Weirding and Mogg War Marshall is just going to stall until they get more creatures with Ringleader and go off with a superior board. If Zoo needs to overextend against MWM, then Perish eats it up.
Seriously, if the pilot knows there will be a large presence of Zoo, he'll pack some Moggs, Weirdings and Perishes. It will, at the least, be an uphill battle for the Zoo player.
I can't really think of many situations where Zoo would be realistically able to assume the control role. Even against something like Merfolk they can still trump you with Perish. And that's one of Zoo's good matchups. Zoo can't say "no", they play no discard or LD and they can't out draw most decks even with Sylvan Library. I'll leave it at that.
Everyone seems to be arguing that Zoo is terrible at assuming the control role. Playing defensively with huge creatures and relying on burn spells and Grim is a very solid strategy (if you fall behind something). A couple of fatties can stall a large number of little creatures until you draw the removal you need to go to town attacking again. KoTR with any kind of land toolbox is also a strong "control" gear shift.
@Metalwalker Note: This isn't totally directed at you but... Win/Loss percentages are always the most biased shit. People always assume that post board their chances improve against bad match-ups. This is very often, not the case. If a deck like RB Goblins beats Zoo 55-60% of the time, what are its bad match-ups? If decks had the Win/Loss percentages that people claim they have, there would be more wins than losses (unless unreported rogue decks and homebrews are secretly the best decks in the format lol).
Problem is not that Zoo can't be a control deck, it's in the case of the MU Goblins-Zoo, Goblins is way better at taking a control route with the mana disruption + Vial, whereas sitting on Lavamancer/Burn isn't going to do really much to make you progress to a win ; Bolts or Warren Weirding are going to hit, and on the long game, even with Knights in multiple, I tend to think that goblins will almost always outdo you, being able to draw and tutor way more than Zoo.
That being said, it may be correct for Zoo to take a controllish stance some turns in some board situations, and it may also be correct for Goblins to be the aggro deck in the MU - it's just that you have to understand tempo, and know about the decklist you're playing against, so you can choose optimally which role you must assume to progress in your gameplan for the victory.
People tend to "overthink" about these concepts - they are game-related terms (Control and Aggro role) that make sense when applied to a MtG game, and not in the abstract. Goblins, on paper, has more tools for being an efficient control deck ; Zoo has less. But you're not playing on paper, you're playing in actual games.
And win percentages have nothing to do here - it's silly and totally devoid of interest in the context of talking about the roles which deck are better equipped to assume in a certain MU. If I claim 70% match-win with my Zoo list against Goblins, does it say anything about the way I earned this percentage ? Absolutely nothing. Maybe most of the game would be won with a very aggressive approach, killing the Goblins deck within 4 turns... Then, it would be a sign that Goblins should be the control deck, and not trying to rush early, because, when it does this, it's missassigment of role and Zoo can easily outrun it, and win from there. But it's not an observation you can build upon to get to an absolute law.
We should read more Popper, about the problem of induction. I, for one, firmly believe that inductive reasonning, while applied to Magic, fails. Hard. It could lead to very interesting discussion, but it's also a means to get ourselves into false beliefs (like that Goblins should take the control role in order to beat Zoo - everytime) while the actual gamestate prevails on theory.
Discussing in the abstract is okay, but we shouldn't derivate from there "rules" to apply to the real games, played out and not dreamed of.
/my 2 cents...
Last edited by frolll; 02-15-2011 at 10:05 AM. Reason: paragraphs
"In general admittedly the Wise of all times have always said the same thing, and the fools, that is to say the vast majority of all times, have always done the same thing, i.e. the opposite; and so it will remain in the future."
Schopenhauer
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote