Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 44

Thread: Did Burn kill Zoo?

  1. #1

    Did Burn kill Zoo?

    This was something I was just thinking about the other day, how it's kind of sad Zoo isn't really an archetype in Legacy or Modern anymore. And I just had the thought that maybe the reason Zoo died wasn't because of the meta, or certain bannings or unbannings, but because they have finally printed enough good burn spells and good red creatures that Burn now does a better job of filling Zoo's role than zoo does.

    Flame Rift, Boros Charm, Tyrant's Choice, Lightning Bolt, Chain Lightning, Rift Bolt, Shard Volley, Fireblast, Price of Progress, Goblin Guide, Hellspark Elemental, Eidolon of the Great Revel, Lava Spike, Bump in the Night, etc. etc.

    I mean, there've been enough variations of Lightning Bolt printed that you can basically play an all bolts and mountains deck now. So, in what way is Zoo a better option than Burn if you've got enough in Red or Brown (Red/Black) to not need the green and white creatures?

    Anyway, I guess I was just thinking about maybe the real reason Zoo went away is because it got outclassed as the pure aggro deck and didn't offer enough as a disruptive creature deck, which is why we see DnT/Maverick still making it, and Burn still making it, but no Naya at all.

  2. #2
    Member
    Barook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2007
    Location

    Germany, Germering, Munich
    Posts

    7,491

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    As I see it, there are three main reasons why Zoo is dead:

    1. It's too slow to race combo and lacks sufficient disruption tools (at least the aggro variant and not the Maverick-style midrange decks).
    2. Delver shits on Nacatl while being ran in a very disruptive shell.
    3. Terminus is dumb.

    Burn isn't an aggro deck, it's a very linear combo deck. D&T isn't an aggro deck either, it's a creature-based Prison/control deck.

  3. #3

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Delver and the Miracle Mechanic together with Brainstorm have made Zoo over a 9 round event a pretty bad choice if you wish to win </topic>

  4. #4

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barook View Post
    Burn isn't an aggro deck, it's a very linear combo deck.
    Agree with your analysis, but disagree that Burn is combo. None of the cards build off of each other in a manner of which, you need X, in order to do Y. Burn is more so a deck built with lands, and Xs. That's like saying every deck is a combo deck because in a combination, the cards result in your opponent dying.

    Zoo died because Blue has the best aggro creatures (Delver, TNN, 'Goyf), and zoo doesn't have any meaningful interaction, nor card advantage engine, except for non-evasive creatures on the battlefield with a little burn and removal.

    Cheers,
    Am I doing it right, do I sound smart'ish?

  5. #5
    The green Ancestral
    ESG's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2010
    Location

    Seattle, WA
    Posts

    1,308

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    This is a somewhat misleading thread title, making it sound like Burn pushed out Zoo. In fact, Zoo is quite strong against Burn and routinely races it via Wild Nacatl and Tarmogoyf (and Steppe Lynx back in the day). Zoo was also the only deck playing Lightning Helix, which is obviously a key card in the matchup. Your query about the decline of Zoo has been asked previously, and the answers are the same as they were then.

    Creature strategies on the whole have suffered, which some people think is a problem (I have been vocal about this). The biggest reasons for that are:






  6. #6
    get outta here, humanity.
    iamajellydonut's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2009
    Location

    Butugychag
    Posts

    2,031

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_coke View Post
    I mean, there've been enough variations of Lightning Bolt printed that you can basically play an all bolts and mountains deck now.
    This has literally been the M.O. of Burn ever since it first distinctly split from the standard RDW. Zoo died out almost three years ago of completely natural causes. The only reason Burn ever was and continues to be prevalent, aside from "fun", is because it's utterly simple to play and is one of the cheapest competitive decks in the format clocking in at about $400-475 cash. About half of that being flexible fetchlands.

  7. #7
    Site Contributor
    Admiral_Arzar's Avatar
    Join Date

    Feb 2010
    Location

    Denver, CO
    Posts

    1,289

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    The responses so far are good, and are putting pieces of the puzzle together, but there's more to it. I'm going to post an analysis I wrote some time ago on the Mtglegacy subreddit regarding the demise of Zoo. Source: I have played various incarnations of one-drop Zoo at numerous points, finally abandoning the deck for good after the printing of TNN.

    Aggro has been dropping off ever since the printing of Batterskull. SFM + Batterskull is an extremely cheap and compact package that allows midrange and control to basically slam Baneslayer Angel on turn 3 (and it doesn't really die to removal, plus vigilance means you must overcome 8 lifegain per turn functionally). Sure, you can kill the mystic, but countermagic and Mother of Runes exist. This printing started the decline.

    Innistrad brought two printings that warped Legacy - Delver of Secrets and Snapcaster Mage. Delver of Secrets passed Wild Nacatl as the best aggressive one-drop ever printed. It was blue, was not dependent on land types, and even had evasion. This printing made Canadian Threshold much faster, enabling it too kill nearly as quickly as Zoo while maintaining high consistency due to cantrips as well as enormous disruption and stack control. While it was not obvious at first, Delver.dec had largely made pure aggro obsolete. Snapcaster Mage had an entirely different impact. It gave control and mid-rangy blue decks functionally eight Swords to Plowshares while also providing a body to block with. Devastating two-for-ones against aggro decks became the norm, and a draw heavy on Plows and SCMs was almost impossible to play though, especially as these decks usually played SFM + Batterskull as well.

    The next big hit came in Avacyn Restored. The Miracle mechanic produced a literal one-mana Wrath of God which requires only Brainstorm, SDT, or Jace to set up - cards that were already played in control decks to begin with. Miracles is an almost unwinnable matchup for aggro, which upsets the old "combo beats aggro, aggro beats control, control beats combo" cliche. In the same set, Griselbrand was printed. This card created a whole new fast combo archetype (TinFins) while returning Sneak and Show from the dead where it rightfully belonged. Sneak and Show in particular dodges most of the hate that aggro decks could pack for Storm and Dredge. Griselbrand makes Sneak much more consistent and powerful while being almost impossible to race.

    Return to Ravnica block brought Enter the Infinite, creating the Omnishow deck, which is basically Sneak that doesn't lose to Sneak hate (Karakas, Gilded Drake, Pithing Needle, etc.). Now there was yet another combo deck that was difficult for aggro to hate out or race. You may be getting the impression that I hate combo decks - this is absolutely untrue as I am a combo player by nature. However, the impact of Show and Tell-based combo on the aggro archetype has been devastating, as there just aren't enough sideboard slots to prepare for another combo deck on top of aggro's traditional enemies (Storm, High Tide, Dredge, Reanimator to name a few).

    This brings us to Return to Ravnica. Deathrite Shaman has empowered grindy midrange decks to a great extent (Jund is exhibit A). These decks are strong against pure aggro because of high amounts of removal and blockers along with card advantage to win the lategame. Deathrite Shaman provides acceleration, a clock, and the all-important lifegain to survive the early rush. Abrupt Decay isn't particularly important by comparison as it is just another removal spell.

    Finally, we reach commander 2013. Delver wasn't enough, WOTC had to go and print a 3/1 Progenitus for 3 mana in heavy blue. Now every blue deck has a wall that aggro can't attack through and that can also carry Jitte or Batterskull for a blowout. This is obviously terrible for aggro decks unless they are also playing blue (Canadian Threshold says hi).

    As you can see, WOTC has spent several years printing anti-aggro cards that empower midrange and control strategies to beat those matchups. This has allowed control to lock down the aggro matchup and also perform strongly against traditional combo using recent toys like Flusterstorm and Rest in Peace. They have also printed blue creatures that are stronger and more aggressive than non-blue alternatives, making Canadian Threshold and other tempo strategies like Patriot much more compelling than pure aggro. Finally, they have printed dumb permanents that have enshrined Show and Tell.dec as a third, difficult to hate out, combo pillar. All of these factors have combined to make pure aggro a difficult proposition, as you have very few good matchups and a heck of a lot of bad ones nowadays.
    Lord of the Chalice

    Quote Originally Posted by Julian23 View Post
    Since playing against Spiral Tide provides a lot fun for both players is something only someone who's not had sex for quite a while could enjoy, I pull out GW Maverick.
    Quote Originally Posted by Brainstorm Ape View Post
    Spikes are supposed to enjoy winning by leveraging their talents, but this card can't fetch the most SKILL INTENSIVE card in all of Magic?

    Clearly aimed at Modern plebs, not gonna be a pillar of our format.
    Stompy Discord: https://discord.gg/6cesvkz

  8. #8
    Keep Calm and Brainstorm
    (nameless one)'s Avatar
    Join Date

    Apr 2009
    Location

    GTA, Ontario
    Posts

    2,878

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    I heard Batterskull is bomb against Zoo
    I am convinced that WotC is "dumbing" the game because of all the stupid posts they come across on MTG-related forums
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
    13NoVa plays Force of Will from his hand.
    Finglonger plays Spell Pierce from his hand.
    [10:22:43]  13NoVa: lol
    sure
    Finglonger points from his Dack Fayden to 13NoVa's Sol Ring.
    [10:23:04]  13NoVa: lol dumb ******; nice draws with retard.dec
    stupid cocksucker
    You have been kicked out of the game.

  9. #9
    Member

    Join Date

    Apr 2009
    Location

    Sweden, Trelleborg
    Posts

    816

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Pure aggro has been quite dead for a while now. Midrange is punishing them alot. It goes for every format standard, modern and legacy. Low dropps gets outclassed way faster then it used to. Especially in standard its showed easier. Courser / sylvan carytid invalidates pretty much ever 1-2 dropps. Polukranos, Master of Waves and Desecration demon puts the nail in to the coffins.

    For modern lightning bolt, goyf, courser, Anger of the Gods and turn 3-4 combos hinders aggro.

    Non-interactive aggro like zoo have comboproblems as well being easy to hate.

    Wild Nacatl hasnt been a force in legacy and modern for years, nothing seem to making it either. Midrange and combo is everywhere.

  10. #10

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Quote Originally Posted by Admiral_Arzar View Post
    The responses so far are good, and are putting pieces of the puzzle together, but there's more to it. I'm going to post an analysis I wrote some time ago on the Mtglegacy subreddit regarding the demise of Zoo. Source: I have played various incarnations of one-drop Zoo at numerous points, finally abandoning the deck for good after the printing of TNN.
    The question is, then, why isn't Zoo great in Modern? Most of the things you listed aren't present in the format. Terminus is really weak in Modern and sees very little play due to the lack of Sensei's Divining Top and Brainstorm. Stoneforge into Batterskull doesn't exist. Show and Tell doesn't exist. Delver of Secrets exists, but it's much weaker because the best thing it has to transform with is Serum Visions. Deathrite Shaman is banned. True-Name Nemesis isn't legal.

    I guess it is fair to point out that Zoo isn't as dead in Modern as it is in Legacy, but it's still not particularly impressive.

  11. #11

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rizso View Post
    Pure aggro has been quite dead for a while now. Midrange is punishing them alot. It goes for every format standard, modern and legacy. Low dropps gets outclassed way faster then it used to. Especially in standard its showed easier. Courser / sylvan carytid invalidates pretty much ever 1-2 dropps. Polukranos, Master of Waves and Desecration demon puts the nail in to the coffins.
    Wait, what? Aggro in Standard is fine right now. Sure, the biggest deck (Black Devotion) is midrange, but there's still plenty of aggro decks. I mean, you cite Master of Waves as an issue for aggro... the problem is that Master of Waves is a card that's played in an aggro deck, Blue Devotion.

    I mean, a full half of the Top 8 at the last SCG Standard Open (Worcester) was aggro. There were three Blue Devotion decks, and then a Selesnya Aggro deck.

  12. #12

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Because of terminus first and foremost. Burn is better because the creatures burn has all do something when they enter play except grim lavamancer if they play that card since goblin guide has haste as well as hellspark elemental. It's way easier to interact with creatures in comparison to flame rift and company just burning you out.

    Zoo in modern is outclassed by combo decks like twin and storm and pod is really good against it as well with kitchen finks and just the piles of good creatures it runs that are good against zoo. Anger of the gods also hurts zoo a lot and is played because of pod.

    In standard aggro is fine. That's what WotC pushes in standard anyways crappy format that standard is where people love to turn dudes sideways or cast sphinx's revelation for 6.
    Bread Connoisseur on MTGSalvation Forums
    Currently Playing:
    All flavors of storm combo
    Quote Originally Posted by Vacrix
    Lands is a joke for Solidarity. Its like asking a morbidly obese parapalegic to run the mile with his shoes tied.

  13. #13
    Clergyman of Cool
    lordofthepit's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2009
    Location

    Daisy Hill Puppy Farm
    Posts

    1,954

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Stoneforge Mystic + Batterskull pretty much killed normal Zoo, which the majority of players played.

    Terminus pretty much drove away everyone else who was on Big Zoo.

    True-Name Nemesis was the nail in the coffin for me and some of the last devotees on the Zoo thread (I was going to say "many", but that implies there were still many of us left).

    It's not the fact that Zoo has a poor combo matchup that drove it out of the metagame: it always was inherently soft to combo, but you could tweak the deck to beat specific combo decks. Rather, it's the fact that even the fair matchups (which were once the reason to play Zoo) can give you issues that require very different strategies and cards to address, combined with the normal problems against combo. While it's probably still possible to make a Zoo deck that's competitive in the current meta, your efforts as a deckbuilder and pilot are probably more efficiently used elsewhere.

  14. #14
    Member
    mishima_kazuya's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2008
    Location

    NJ USA
    Posts

    230

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Seth View Post
    The question is, then, why isn't Zoo great in Modern? Most of the things you listed aren't present in the format. Terminus is really weak in Modern and sees very little play due to the lack of Sensei's Divining Top and Brainstorm. Stoneforge into Batterskull doesn't exist. Show and Tell doesn't exist. Delver of Secrets exists, but it's much weaker because the best thing it has to transform with is Serum Visions. Deathrite Shaman is banned. True-Name Nemesis isn't legal.

    I guess it is fair to point out that Zoo isn't as dead in Modern as it is in Legacy, but it's still not particularly impressive.
    Creature power creep has mostly pushed away vanilla creatures from viability from Modern and Legacy. Like Pod and BGx in Modern have access to creatures that act as spells on a body. A few blocks and a few removal spells is usually all it takes for Midrange decks to start burying Zoo in card advantage.

    Ditto for Legacy, as people have already said, why play vanilla 3/3s or 2/3s when you can play Knight of the Reliqurary, Stoneforge Mystic, Deathrite Shaman, Snapcaster Mage, Scavenging Ooze, etc,


    I will also add to the argument that Burn is indeed a combo deck. It may goldfish slower than a typical combo deck, but in exchange you get to ignore half your opponent's gameplan of interaction, such as ignoring removal spells and Wasteland.

  15. #15
    Member

    Join Date

    Apr 2009
    Location

    Sweden, Trelleborg
    Posts

    816

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    While monoblue is an aggro deck it tends to play tempo. There is currently 4 t1 decks in standard, monored, monoblue, monoblack and jund-monsters, Sphinx is close to t1, the rest are t2 at best. Mono red the only pure aggro gets hated out easlie by to many mono blue decks in the meta.


    Zoo has lots of bad matchups and inconsistant draws, even worse in modern with no sylvan library, gsz etc and Lighting Bolt and Anger of the God is everywhere. It gets hated by the hate that is targeting pod decks.

  16. #16
    Land Destruction Enthusiast
    Megadeus's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2012
    Location

    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts

    5,572

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthepit View Post
    Stoneforge Mystic + Batterskull pretty much killed normal Zoo, which the majority of players played.

    Terminus pretty much drove away everyone else who was on Big Zoo.

    True-Name Nemesis was the nail in the coffin for me and some of the last devotees on the Zoo thread (I was going to say "many", but that implies there were still many of us left).

    It's not the fact that Zoo has a poor combo matchup that drove it out of the metagame: it always was inherently soft to combo, but you could tweak the deck to beat specific combo decks. Rather, it's the fact that even the fair matchups (which were once the reason to play Zoo) can give you issues that require very different strategies and cards to address, combined with the normal problems against combo. While it's probably still possible to make a Zoo deck that's competitive in the current meta, your efforts as a deckbuilder and pilot are probably more efficiently used elsewhere.
    Basically this. I tried an even more mid range version of Zoo (with Bobs, Bloodbraids, and Lingering Souls) and still was un-able to overcome SFM + Batterskull and Terminus. The tools that every fair deck has now is just too much. You just can't have a way to beat everything. At the point that you are playing enough cards to be able to beat all of these threats, you are suddenly way too slow for Nacatl to be good.
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Cheese View Post
    I've been taking shitty brews and tier 2 decks to tournaments and losing with them for years now. Welcome to the club. We meet for cocktails after round 6.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevestamopz View Post
    Top quality german restraint there.

    If I'm at the point where I'm rage quitting, you can bet your kransky that I'm calling everyone involved a cunt.

  17. #17
    Site Contributor
    Scott's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2013
    Location

    Virginia
    Posts

    656

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    So, an aggro deck with built-in Batterskull killers: Harmonic Sliver, Terminus dodgers: Hibernation Sliver, TNN fly-overs: Galerider Sliver, and removal blankers: Crystalline Sliver is aggro's savior?

    Half kidding.

  18. #18
    The green Ancestral
    ESG's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2010
    Location

    Seattle, WA
    Posts

    1,308

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott View Post
    So, an aggro deck with built-in Batterskull killers: Harmonic Sliver, Terminus dodgers: Hibernation Sliver, TNN fly-overs: Galerider Sliver, and removal blankers: Crystalline Sliver is aggro's savior?

    Half kidding.
    Don't forget Cavern of Souls, which smooths your mana and allows you to ignore Counterbalance. All told, Slivers have a lot going for them as a tribe. The biggest problem is the mana. But then there's the issue that Merfolk exists, which allows you to play the same game as Slivers but also run a bunch of basic Islands. And TNN is conveniently one of the fish.

  19. #19
    Member
    bakofried's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2009
    Location

    Bakersfield, Ca
    Posts

    744

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    When every land is a rainbow land, is it a problem? That and Aether Vial could lead to some shenanigans.
    Quote Originally Posted by ktkenshinx View Post
    The Reserved List is a) not legally binding, b) antiquated, c) broken, and d) preventative of maximum game enjoyment. Wizards will remove as many cards from that list as possible to increase the fun of their game. Using market research, they can find a balance between printing enough cards to lower a price from $40 to $15-$20, and not utterly ruining their value. This will be both an economically feasible AND sensible move.
    -ktkenshinx-

  20. #20
    Bands with Others
    menace13's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2009
    Location

    NY, NY
    Posts

    1,220

    Re: Did Burn kill Zoo?

    Misstep and SFM into Batterskull. Along with the rise of Blade decks began the push and eventually steered the meta away from Zoo. Pre Batterskull, before May- New Phyrexia release- of 2011 and going as far back as 2009. Any of the following decks had high placings and would play musical chairs with the top stops. Using TC data. Not including the Survival+Vengevine months, which couldnt have helped Zoo either.

    Zoo
    Merfolk
    Goblins
    Dredge
    DnT
    Rock
    Bant

    Post Blade, after May 2011, it became 3 decks in the top spot.

    Blade
    Maverick
    RUG order then September Misstep banning replaces it with RUG Delver

    This little trio lasted until Avacyn Restored- May 2012- brought in Terminus and Grislebrand. TNN Then to even further rub it in to Zoo and crush any hopes of Nacatl lovers worldwide.

    TL:DR Lord of the Pit's post. And ESG has pics!
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavius The Great View Post
    Respect my shine bitch!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)