[Deck] Goyf Sligh [Archive] - Page 4

NjPunk1

08-02-2009, 03:30 PM

Hey guys, i would be Rob the guy who placed second at the vestal tourney with albplayers old list.
I havent tried out the nactls yet, but i feel like if your going that route why not just play zoo? The price of progress was amazing for me all day, in fact it allowed me to win at least 2 of my matches where rift bolt would have been lame. If people want to play around it, so be it, it only slows them down and makes them weaker to your other forms of damage.
Fanatic helped me in several ways that day too, he helped me win through goyf stalls and fed my lavamancers when it mattered most. He also gets that extra 1 damage in to merfolks double lord plays allowing you a clean sweep with fallout.
The marauders did their job fine all day, usually just getting in for 2, and being a clutch blocker to buy me time to draw out more burn to finish the job. I feel like having hell spark in this slot, alongside figure would just be too mana intensive for the slight damage boost.
The 2 main deck shushers weren't bad all day either. They won me a few matches by forcing through burn against gro and canadian thresh. I feel like maindecking 2 in my heavy burn list is right, because drawing them in game 1 in the matchups they are weak for still isnt as bad as not drawing them when you need too. They did get sided out often as expected.

About losing to merolk in the finals.... 1. I played terribly, 2. game 1 i kept a would be strong hand with 2 lavamancers on the play, turn 1 i play lavamancer,resolves, turn 1 he plays pithing needle naming mancer, making 2 dead spells in hand. Game 2 he lands a chalice at 1 with vial on the board, and then lands 5 lords in a short amount of time.
So basically he had a merfolk deck more geared against this style of deck and it got there, i'm sure i messed up a few time as well.

Valtrix

08-09-2009, 11:11 PM

So, I really like zoo, and I've been testing that quite a bit lately, but I feel like the landstill/aggro loam matchup is just too bad (which is a significant portion of my metagame). Countertop is also pretty present, but I think that we probably already have a decent game against them (no?). Anyway, this is the list that I'm toying around with right now:

// Lands (20)
2 [CST] Mountain (1)
2 [R] Plateau
4 [R] Taiga
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ON] Windswept Heath
1 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
1 [IN] Forest (3)
1 [US] Plains (4)
1 [R] Savannah

// Creatures (20)
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [ARB] Qasali Pridemage
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
4 [CFX] Hellspark Elemental
3 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
1 [EVE] Figure of Destiny

// Spells (20)
4 [BD] Lightning Bolt
4 [RAV] Lightning Helix
3 [EX] Price of Progress
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
2 [VI] Fireblast
3 [TSP] Rift Bolt

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 2 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 [TSB] Tormod's Crypt
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [BOK] Umezawa's Jitte

I'd like suggestions on tuning it against landstill/aggro loam/countertop. I could say a lot, but I haven't actually got to play much, so it's hard for me to have that useful of feedback. I feel like with a burn heavy list I have a greater chance in these matchups over a more creature-heavy zoo list though.

Ghoulax

08-18-2009, 12:07 PM

Today I have a tournament at my local store and I hope that today's rain doesn't ruin it.

Even if it continues to poor outside, I'm planning on going with this list:

4 Kird Ape
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Qasali Pridemage
3 Grim Lavamancer

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Magma Jet
4 Price of Progress
3 Fireblast

4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
3 Windswept Heath
3 Taiga
2 Plateau
2 Mountains
1 Savannah

Sideboard is not determined yet, but let me say something about some card choices:

I was one of the people that said that white for nacatl was not worth it. I was wrong. I've found nacatl to be much better than marauders, winning games on it's own, since if you play turn 1 nacatl, you set a clock. And with Ape/Nacatl, a much better. Now, since the release of Alara Reborn and the appearance of Qasali Pridemage, this deck IMHO has gained a powerfull tool against top, Naught, moxes, and sideboard cards. For me it's an auto inclusion because this cards were the most difficult to defeat game 1, and this card containing a natularize and a 2/2 body in my head at least does the job. The manabase doesn't get hurt as much as I thought it would be, the 2 plateau already in the deck help you cast QPM and I've replaced 1 mountain with 1 Savannah.

Tomorrow I'll post my results.
Until next time.

Greets.

Ghoulax

08-19-2009, 11:11 AM

Well, I ended up in the 4th place after 4 rounds of swiss (they should have been 5 cause we were 21 players but there wasn't enough time) after a 3-1 record.

I don't really believe that my results are important at all, this because yesterday I played 2 goblins, 1 Reanimator.dec and 1 BW control.

Round 1: I lost in 3 games against goblins; the first one I didn't take a mulligan because I thought he was playing a different deck. Second I control the board with Volcanic Fallout, and in the last game I made 2 mistakes, the first one being the lost of two lands because of a wasteland I played, and the second was a fireblast to a goblin on crack, when the other creature was a goblin lackey. Stupid!!!!

I don't think I could have won that game, but at least those mistakes took 2-3 turns off from me.

Round 2 against Reanimator, he doesn't do anything. 2-0

Round 3 against goblins again but I win in 2 games, both of them with early board control and beats from Nacatl y Goyf.

Round 4 against BW control. He has nothing to do in both games since my deck is far superior to his. First game ended in 5 turns and the second in 7 turns.

I really love this deck. I didn't played against any countertop decks or dreadstill to take out the best out of Qasali Pridemage, but, Nacatl 1st turn, and Qasali on the second and swing for 4 is priceless!!!

Well my sideboard was:

4 Volcanic Fallout
3 Krosan Grip
3 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 Vexing Shusher
2 Pyroblast

I'm looking forward to next week's tournament and start testing this deck a lot more.

I'll post my results of course.

Greets.

grungyboy

08-20-2009, 05:00 PM

Valtrix

08-21-2009, 12:36 PM

@ Ghoulax: Congrats on the win! :smile: I find your build cool and simple...how i just wished QP was R/G instead of G/W..:mad: seriously, it should have been R/G and i don't care if it lacked the exalted thing if it was R/G...:cry:

That doesn't make sense though. Destroying both artifacts and enchantments is a GW exclusive thing. Besides, you should be running wild nacatl anyway :P

grungyboy

08-22-2009, 08:04 PM

I don't know....i was just looking at Hull Breach...wishful thinking...

Svenyboy

09-06-2009, 06:09 AM

Hello Community,
I have seen a new Card in Zendikar named Scythe Tiger:

1 Forest (cc1)
Creature - Cat
Shroud
When Scythe Tiger enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you sacrifice a Forest.
3/2

What do you think, can Scythe Tiger be played in Goyf Sligh? Better than Kird Ape?

Thanks.

Joon

09-06-2009, 08:25 AM

Of course it's not better than Kird Ape. First, it requires you to sacrifice a land, pretty much of a hard drawback in a deck with 19 lands, as it may screw you alone (you will often have to sacrifice a Taiga for it).

Slightly less important but still remarkable is the fact, that small shroud guys let your opponent keep his spot removal for your big ones.

Hanni

09-09-2009, 11:25 PM

So yea, Goblin Guide is pretty nuts for this deck. 1cc 2/2 Haste is exactly what the deck has always wanted, and it just got it. The drawback is very minimal, considering that most decks will draw an extra card (land) from it 1/3 of the time, and we have a 3-5 turn clock. Goblin Guide increases the clock drastically... and even as a topdeck, it's pretty good, since few opponent's will hold back blockers if you don't have creatures in play, effectively acting as a Shock (unless they have removal). Easy replacement for Mogg Fanatic, IMO.

While I agree that Qasali Pridemage is good and can improve certain matchups (Chalice, CounterTop), it being GW is far too restrictive on the manabase. It opens you up drastically to manabase hate and severly weakens PoP's. I realize t1 Nacatl t2 Pridemage is sick, but let's not stretch things too far. Let's not forget that I was the major promoter for Nacatl in Goyf Sligh when it was first printed and had to fight waves of criticism about running Nacatl and going 3c... and even I have to say that Pridemage is better left for Zoo. Even with the new enemy fetchlands, running GW creatures is simply too much. If you want answers to Chalice and CounterTop, stay in color and run Vexing Shusher.

Here's what I'll be playing as soon as Goblin Guide gets printed:

RGw Goyf Sligh

Lands (19)
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Arid Mesa
3 Taiga
2 Plateau
1 Savannah
4 Mountain
1 Forest

Creatures (14)
2 Grim Lavamancer
4 Goblin Guide
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Tarmogoyf

Spells (27)
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Incinerate
4 Magma Jet
3 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast

Sideboard (15)
1 Price of Progress
2 Krosan Grip (or Smash to Smithereens)
4 Vexing Shusher
4 Path to Exile
4 Chalice of the Void

Exact same MD I used to run, directly swapping Fanatics for Guides. My sideboard has changed, but that's due to the metagame shift and the new cards (in this case, PtE), that have been printed since the last time I played this deck.

The low creature density high burn count is what makes this deck so lethal and seperates it from Zoo. The creatures push through early damage points, backed with burn on small blockers. Once that plan goes to hell, the opponent should be low enough on life, and the reach of all the burn spells should easily finish the opponent off. Very aggressive deck. Some matchups just play out like straight burn, when that's how you're drawing, which is perfectly acceptable... some matchups are better off that way.

Vexing Shusher is the ultimate Chalice/CounterTop stopper. Krosan Grip, if I choose to run it over Smithereens, is not there for Chalice/CounterTop... it's there for other random problematic artifacts/enchantments.

troopatroop

09-09-2009, 11:52 PM

RGw Goyf Sligh

Lands (19)
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Arid Mesa
3 Taiga
2 Plateau
1 Savannah
4 Mountain
1 Forest

Creatures (14)
2 Grim Lavamancer
4 Goblin Guide
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Tarmogoyf

Spells (27)
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Incinerate
4 Magma Jet
3 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast

Looks really good Hanni, I'll be playing it too. Have you given a look at Ankh of Mishra lately? It supplements the Guide pretty well, and with more fetchlands than ever, might steal some wins... although that's iffy. Maybe it's better than Incinerate? Sulfuric Vortex should be a SB Card imo. Pulse of the Fields completely hoses you, and is better than ever.

Hanni

09-09-2009, 11:57 PM

How many decks are seriously packing Pulse of the Fields? CunningStill is the only deck I know that runs it, and most Landstill lists these days are packing Counterbalance in their board instead.

Ankh of Mishra is a bad topdeck. Similarly to why I always opted for Fanatic over Kird Ape, you don't want to topdeck into dead cards. The clock is designed so that if you go into topdeck mode (great part about running so many burn spells), most every spell you draw into is relevant to finishing the almost dead opponent off.

Ankh is only really good when dropped turn 2, when you really want to be dropping creatures or casting burn. If it were to be added, it would be in place of a creature, and I feel that all of the creatures currently run > Ankh. However, I've not tested it, so I have no playtesting results to back that claim up.

Maybe in a list with MD PtE + Guide, Ankh could be busted. I'm not saying it's not a good card. I just feel like everything else currently in the deck is better.

However, I have tested the shit out of this deck (my list) back before the rules change with Mogg Fanatic, and the deck was one hell of a beating.

keys

09-10-2009, 01:05 AM

I would play Keldon Marauders or Hellspark Elemental instead of Incinerate. Both generally do more dmg and Hellspark can unearth under Chalice or Counterbalance lock.

Also, from my experience, Lavamancer is good enough to play at least 3 of. He gets in the last few pts of dmg when the board is gummed up.

-4 Incinerate
+3 Hellspark/Marauder (take your pick)
+1 Grim Lavamancer

Here's my R/g version for those interested:

4 Goblin Guide
4 Figure of Destiny
4 Tarmogoyf
3 Keldon Marauders
3 Grim Lavamancer

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Magma Jet
3 Price of Progress
3 Fireblast

4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Taiga
8 Mountain

Sideboard:
2 Pyroblast
3 Krosan Grip
3 Vexing Shusher
3 Tormod's Crypt
3 Pyroclasm
1 Price of Progress

I really like Figure in Goyfsligh, because he's so good at clogging up the board while you horde burn spells. You can sit on him for 2-3 turns, saving your fire for the dome on turn 4. Nacatl is just as good but that manabase... Figure never shrinks to a Wasteland.

Hello Goblin Guide, goodbye Fanatic.

Hanni

09-10-2009, 01:37 AM

There are reasons why I prefer Incinerate over both Hellspark and Marauders. Hellspark does nothing when the opponent has a blocker (read: X/4 or bigger) on board. Keldon Maurders is in a similar boat, but it is a bit better. Still, Incinerate has reach that neither have; it can hit creatures to act as removal, or go straight to the dome for 3 straight up damage, no questions asked. Not to say my choice is strictly better, it's just my preferred playstyle with the deck. I've playtested the deck a fuckton of times, and Incinerate has always been a great spell for me.

As for Lavamancer, I've done extensive testing with this. 2 is the correct number. You don't really ever need to see a Lavamancer to be effective, and you never want to see multiples, even in the face of removal. Without it's ability, it's a shitty 1/1. With it's ability, supposing you're playing the deck right, it will typically get around 3 activations (removal depending, obviously), and it's typically better later on than early since early you want to be spending your mana on spells rather than activations. Of course, it can get more than 3 activations when the game goes long, against a deck with countermagic or discard, but those are the average statistics I've come across in playtesting. 6 damage for R is good, but it's conditional. In comparison, Nacatl does that in 2 turns rather than 3. I've found 14 creatures to be the ideal creature count, and the weakest one is Lavamancer. All of these things, added up, equal to me that 2 Grim Lavamancer's is the correct number.

I also think Figure is horrible, and I've stated my reasoning on a large number of posts in this thread in earlier pages. Basically, this deck curves out beautifully so that you rarely have excess mana to sink. Figure is a 1cc 1/1, which is horrible. Even though the cost is split, it's still a 2cc 2/2 after pump, which again, is horrible. Then, it pumps to a 5cc 4/4. If you're able to spend 5 mana to make a 4/4 in the early turns of the game, you should have mulliganed cause your hand sucks (i.e you should have been curving out with additional creatures and/or burn). Even at 4/4, that's not at all amazing, especially compared to the rest of the power level of the format. If you're ever able to make it to an 11 mana investment for the 8/8 + stats, you more than likely lost already. As an early drop, it sucks up all your tempo, which is horrible. A 4/4 by turn 3 is just slow (which is bad). As a topdeck mid-late, I'd rather be topdecking burn. Seriously, I know some players sware by the guy, and there are tournament results where Goyf Sligh w/ Figure placed well, but that doesn't change my viewpoint. You can play Threshold with a crap card in the mix and still do well, and that's what I feel running Figure in Goyf Sligh is like.

Plus, Nacatl > Figure by like a million, even against an opponent with Wastelands.

keys

09-10-2009, 02:11 AM

We'll have to agree to disagree. From my experience, the deck will simply run out of steam if you try to play it like a tempo deck.

For all your talk about testing, you're also looking at the pump ability all wrong. You don't need to pump Figure in order for it to be a threat. If you have RRR untapped, your opponent isn't going to block your 2/2 Figure with his Mongoose or 3/4 goyf. That 2 damage gets through when a fully powered Nacatl would just trade or die. That 2 damage, followed by some burn post-combat, can end the game quickly.

tsabo_tavoc

09-10-2009, 04:34 AM

There are reasons why I prefer Incinerate over both Hellspark and Marauders. Hellspark does nothing when the opponent has a blocker (read: X/4 or bigger) on board. Keldon Maurders is in a similar boat, but it is a bit better.

Goblin Guide does nothing when the opponent has a blocker, X/3 or bigger, on board. Is there any other reason to opt it over Seal of Fire or Tarfire as to include Hellspark/Marauders over Incinerate?

ScatmanX

09-10-2009, 03:40 PM

Goblin Guide does nothing when the opponent has a blocker, X/3 or bigger, on board. Is there any other reason to opt it over Seal of Fire or Tarfire as to include Hellspark/Marauders over Incinerate?

Kird Ape does nothing when the opponent has a blocker, X/3 or bigger, on board. Is there any other reason to opt it over Seal of Fire or Tarfire as to include Hellspark/Marauders over Incinerate?

Wild Nacatl does nothing when the opponent has a blocker, X/4 or bigger, on board. Is there any other reason to opt it over Seal of Fire or Tarfire as to include Hellspark/Marauders over Incinerate?

Guess taht you can simply burn the creature, can´t we?

keys

09-10-2009, 04:29 PM

These comparisons are pointless... Hanni is just saying that he prefers 1-time sources of damage (e.g. burn or sac at eot creatures) that aren't conditioned upon your opponent leaving his board open. That's a perfectly understandable position to take.

Hanni

09-10-2009, 10:30 PM

There's a major difference between Goblin Guide and Nacatl vs Hellspark and Keldon Marauder. Want to know the biggest difference? Guide and Nacatl are both 1cc and Hellspark and Marauder are both 2cc. HUGE difference.

Want another reason? Guide and Nacatl are permanent threats (unless removed or whatever). Hellspark and Marauder are 1-time effects.

Goblin Guide and Nacatl will more reliably push damage through in the early turns of the game.

There's a big difference between a 1cc 3/3 and a 2cc 3/1 that dies eot, whether or not it Unearths.

Again, the biggest hurdle is the difference between 1cc and 2cc. If you notice, Tarmogoyf is the only 2cc creature I run. Why? Because 2cc creatures cannot attack until turn 3 at the earliest (Hellspark aside, since it has haste, but again, it's only a 1-time effect, and it is conditional). The decks average curve is turn 4, and should be built as such. The only reason I even play Goyf is because it is cost efficient; 2cc 4/5 is great. If it sac'd at the end of turn, I'd drop it in a heartbeat.

This deck is an evolution of Burn, not R/g Aggro (Zoo). As such, the deck plays fundamentally different. The point of the aggro is not to be aggro, but to stretch more cost to damage effeciency out, giving the deck greater damage output against decks that put up resistence. Once the first 3 or 4 turns pass, the deck doesn't want to keep laying creatures down, it wants to play burn. THAT is why I run 14 creatures, and prefer Incincerate over Hellspark/Marauder. If I was playing straight burn, or didn't run the creature base I already run, then sure... I'd run both Hellspark and Maruader. Since that's not the case, I'd rather run my maindeck exactly the way it is.

I've tested the deck a retarded number of times (with Mogg Fanatic instead of Goblin Guide) right after Nacatl got printed and I wouldn't change a thing to my maindeck. If you don't like Incinerate, feel free to drop it for Marauder's or whatever. There's just no convincing me to do so, though.

keys

09-11-2009, 01:52 AM

IMO, the whole reason to play R/g Goyfsligh over straight burn is the better CounterTop matchup. 1. you have access to Krosan Grip. 2. You have big critters that stick around. As I stated before, Hellspark will unearth under CBTop or Chalice@2 and still hit for 3, unlike Incinerate. Marauders are just good if you're already playing creatures (thus bringing your opponent's removal online), and are even better than goyf at lowering your fundamental turn or stretching your "cost to damage efficiency out" as you put it.

Hanni

09-11-2009, 02:25 AM

Like I said, neither Hellspark or Marauder is bad. Maruader is better than Hellspark, for the fact that it does at least 2 damage regardless if the opponent has a Goyf in play or not. However, I prefer Incinerate over both for the reasons I mentioned.

These comparisons are pointless... Hanni is just saying that he prefers 1-time sources of damage (e.g. burn or sac at eot creatures) that aren't conditioned upon your opponent leaving his board open. That's a perfectly understandable position to take.

Exactly my take on it. =]

Also, I prefer Vexing Shusher over Krosan Grip against Counterbalance.

tsabo_tavoc

09-11-2009, 05:24 AM

Like I said, neither Hellspark or Marauder is bad. Maruader is better than Hellspark, for the fact that it does at least 2 damage regardless if the opponent has a Goyf in play or not. However, I prefer Incinerate over both for the reasons I mentioned.

I thought Incinerate was a beaten-to-death card in Burn which was apparently wrong. I'd like to share the statistics from 26 Burn (monoR Sligh, Ankh Sligh decks included) decks (Source: deckcheck.net, after Feb 2009 to unbias the miss of Hellspark Elemental, tournament placement 20% or higher to exclude 7th out of 12.junkdec): Out of the 26 decks, there are 62 pieces of Incinerate, 61 Keldon Marauders and 32 Hellspark Elemental. 4 of these decks did not play any of the 3 cards, 6 of them chose only Incinerate and 4 decks played only Keldon Marauders. Hellspark Elemental did not show much in the first months since release and gained much popularity recently. To conclude, it is a personal preference.

Hanni

09-11-2009, 10:33 PM

Why are we discussing what Burn is running in Goyf Sligh? I already clearly stated that if I was playing Burn, I would run both Hellspark Elemental and Keldon Marauder's.

While Goyf Sligh is an evolution of Burn, it is still fundamentally different on some levels. That changes my reasoning for why I would run them there and not in here.

Additionally, I also said that neither Marauder's nor Hellspark was bad in Goyf Sligh. I simply stated why I don't run them and why I do run Incinerate. If you do not like my card choice or reasoning, do not do what I do. I'm not trying to convince anyone to do anything.

There is extrenous testing behind my current decklist (-4 Guide, +4 Fanatic) when Nacatl first got printed, and that included Marauder's (not Hellspark) in the testing. What I came up with was what I found to be the ideal configuration. After Fanatic got hosed with the rulings change, I set the deck down for a little while. Now that Guide has been printed, which would be superior to Fanatic regardless of any rules change, I picked the deck back up and did a direct swap for Guides in place of Fanatics. I'm positive that once Guide gets printed and I start playing the deck again, I'm going to come to similar conclusions about the testing results.

keys

09-11-2009, 11:11 PM

Hanni

09-12-2009, 01:16 AM

I don't see how this deck is fundamentally different from mono red sligh. The addition of Goyf, Nacatl, and/or Grip doesn't materially affect the game plan in my eyes. Moreover, I don't see how the addition of any of those warrants the dismissal of both Marauder or Hellspark.

Mono Red Sligh, from days of old, should be the same. That's why guys like Jackal Pup were good then; we only care about the early game, the late game is finished with burn. Hellspark and Marauder's do fuel that; temporary damage producers. My reasoning is that, given the card pool, we have better options. Hellspark and Marauder's are conditional. Nothing else is. Guide and Nacatl are not situational early on because they actually can and do push damage through before the opponent stabalizes, for example.

strenuous??

Tremendous, explosive, enormous, who cares. Bad word choice maybe. The concept is still there.

---

I'm done arguing my point over petty things, I don't care. Incinerate isn't for everybody, Hellspark and Marauder's aren't bad cards.

If you want to engage me in detailed conversation, let's talk about Figure of Destiny. I've got like 10 pages of Word document on why this card is horrible.

troopatroop

09-18-2009, 10:17 PM

If you want to engage me in detailed conversation, let's talk about Figure of Destiny. I've got like 10 pages of Word document on why this card is horrible.

Well what's your opinion on Ball Lightning? And Bloodbraid elf too. Incinerate seems like a pretty weak slot of 4 to me, and the list I've been testing is alot different than yours. My opposition was probably alot worse, but it was a blast Goldishing the kids I played. None of their decks could keep up.

Lands (20)
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Arid Mesa
4 Taiga
3 Plateau
4 Mountain
1 Forest

Creatures (18)
4 Goblin Guide
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Ball Lightning
2 Bloodbraid Elf

Spells (22)
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Magma Jet
3 Price of Progress
3 Fireblast

The Changes to Hanni's list are as follows

-4 Incinerate
-2 Grim Lavamancer
-1 Fireblast

+4 Ball Lightning
+2 Bloodbraid Elf
+1 Plateau

My reasoning behind these changes, is to increase the amount of damage the average card in the deck deals. Ball Lightning is 3 more damage than Incinerate, and only 1 more mana. I know everyone knows the downsides of running Ball Lightning, but here's how I see it. It's 6 damage for one spell, in one of the best CC slots there is against Counterbalance. Bloodbraid Elf can Cascade into it for 9 Hasted power, and while I know that isn't likely, you're also only going to get a couple of possible things from that guy, and they're all attractive.

+2 Damage and Scry 2
+3 Damage to any target
2/2 Haste /w Drawback
x/x+1 Tarmogoyf
x/x Wild Nacatl (often 3/3)
6/1 Haste trample
a PoP to their face

for 4 mana, those all seem like worthy perks on top of the 3/2 Haste. Adding both Ball Lightning and Bloodbraid elf raises your curve a bit, but i feel like it adds alot of power to the deck. Take this sample hand for example, I just goldfished it.

Mountain, Forest, Chain Lightning, Lightning Bolt, Bloodbraid Elf, Lightning Bolt, Fireblast

Turn 1: Chain Lightning takes them to 17

Turn 2: Draw Tarmogoyf, and play it (not always this easy, but w/e)

Turn 3: Draw and play Taiga, Play 2x Lightning Bolt, attack with goyf.

Turn 4: Rip a Fetchland, Play Bloodbraid elf, Cascade into Goblin Guide. Attack with your 3 guys for 8-11 dmg, Fireblast. That's 20 damage, even if Goyf went plowing. Of course, this is only 1 example.

I'm not sure if these changes make the deck alot better. I could see Grim Lavamancer being missed for sure, but I don't think that he would be as good here. I can see this build being a bit more cumbersome on mana, but having alot more inevitability. It's really easy to run out of cards with a burn deck, and I think playing bigger guys helps alleviate that problem. Either way, it's a blast to play.

Hanni

09-19-2009, 04:06 PM

Well what's your opinion on Ball Lightning? And Bloodbraid elf too. Incinerate seems like a pretty weak slot of 4 to me, and the list I've been testing is alot different than yours. My opposition was probably alot worse, but it was a blast Goldishing the kids I played. None of their decks could keep up.

I've never tested either card, so I cannot say.

However, simply off theory, you're raising the fundamental curve. We don't have cantrips, and if you don't hit enough land, you're seeing virtual card disadvantage. Less so with Ball Lightning, but you never want to see 4 lands, which you actually have to have for Bloodbraid.

While you do get 6 damage out of 1 card with Ball Lightning, you also (on the average based on actual play statistics), you get 6 damage out of 1 card with Wild Nacatl. The difference is that you invest 1 mana with Nacatl and 3 with Ball Lightning. When you consider Bolt is 1cc for 3 damage, and that you can cast 3 of those in comparison with Ball Lightning, Ball Lightning seems lackluster.

Again, I've never playtested with Ball Lightning or Bloodbraid Elf, so this is all just my line of thinking. I could be wrong.

FoulQ

09-19-2009, 05:16 PM

In a build like troopa's, could you maybe run lotus cobra? I haven't really tested the card yet but that might help with the bigger curve, especially in getting those bloodbraids.

troopatroop

09-19-2009, 05:34 PM

In a build like troopa's, could you maybe run lotus cobra? I haven't really tested the card yet but that might help with the bigger curve, especially in getting those bloodbraids.

I guess you could, but its another green card in a red deck, that doesn't really want to play alot of land. It would have to be a much different deck.

I was testing Bloodbraid Elf today, and I was on the fence about it. Sometimes it got stuck in my hand. Costing 4 is big, and it might be too much for the deck. That said, I think it's a really powerful card. I did beat an Ichorid player twice by getting to Bloodbraid Elf, cascading into a hasted guy, and Fireblasting ftw. I know the interaction with Ball Lightning has been thought about already, but I think it's legacy worthy.

The thing is, sometimes you're going to draw more land than you'd hope for. In a burn deck, that's the worst thing that can happen. You need to come up with Gas over and over. It's very possible to see your first 4 land drops, or to get a little flooded. By playing Bloodbraid Elf and Ball Lightning you make that alot better for you, because you have bigger plays to dump that mana into, as opposed to burn with a lower curve that just wouldn't have enough to finish. I think it's an interesting concept at least. Goblin Guide has been stellar, and turn 1 Nacatl is still bomb. Try out Ball Lightning a bit, see if you like it. For all the things it's weak too, at least Mogg Fanatic sucks now, and it's not something that people are going to expect in the first place.

Hanni

09-19-2009, 06:15 PM

troopatroop

09-19-2009, 06:34 PM

The point of Goyf Sligh in the first place is that the creatures it adds, in comparison to straight Burn, give the extra gas to do the full 20 without frantically trying to get the last few points in before losing. Going to the extreme with guys like Bloodbraid Elf aren't necessary at all.

That's exactly the reason I do run the Incineratre, because I generally want to draw into burn rather than guys because that is what finishes. The only time I want to be drawing creatures is in my opening 7... after that, I'd rather see nothing but burn.

But when over half your guys have Haste, what's the difference between that and a burn spell? There is none, because it's immediate damage all the same. I'm not saying that Bloodbraid Elf is necessary, in fact I said that I'd had mixed results. Ball Lightning however, has been nothing but good. Blocking it is always unnatractive, so it's usually going to get in there for 6. Explain to me how Incinerate is better off the top than Ball Lightning? Usually when you're drawing off the top, you're at 3+ land anyway.

Volt

09-19-2009, 06:42 PM

troopatroop

09-19-2009, 08:24 PM

It's pretty clear that Rg Sligh has been obsoleted by Zoo. Here's why:

1. Incinerate is mediocre

/Agree. We don't have to play that card tho.

2. Sligh usually loses game 1 to CounterTop, and doesn't improve enough after sideboarding to make the matchup a good one overall. Zoo plays maindeck Pridemage, which improves that matchup quite a bit. Sligh can maindeck Shushers, but Shushers are pretty bad against non-CounterTop decks. Pridemages have much more utility.

Countertop beats both decks anyway. Like you said, you can mainboard Shusher if you expect a whole lot of it, but it's going to be a bad matchup regardless. Winnable, but not good.

If you take my list and cross reference it with Zoo, these are the changes.

-4 Kird Ape
-4 Qasali Pridemage
-4 Grim Lavamancer
-2 Wooly/Kotr

-3 Path to Exile
-4 Lightning Helix
-2 Jitte/Sylvan Library

+4 Goblin Guide
+4 Ball Lightning
+2 Bloodbraid Elf

+4 Rift Bolt
+4 Magma Jet
+3 Price of Progress
+1 Chain Lightning

... So, that's a whole lot different. Thats a loss of over half their creature base, and the only thing we're keeping is Goyf and Nacatl. It's worth pointing out that Zoo plays alot differently than this. I'm always willing to throw burn at my opponents life total with this deck, less so with Zoo. You're not battling for your creatures as much, and you're playing less of them. This allows you to run more burn.

Goblin Guide is better than Kird Ape in a deck that's so burn focussed, so I'd consider this an upgrade. This is really the card that makes this deck what it is now. Kird Ape isn't a good card, so I'd consider not playing him a good thing.

Grim Lavamancer is slow. This is a turn 4 deck, and he needs more time to work his wonders. Zoo uses him well, but I'm happy to see him go. Rift Bolt seems like the logical comparison, and it works.

Qasali Pridemage is awesome, but our manabase can't accomidate for him. That being said, I know he'll be sorely missed, but he's a better answer than a threat. This deck is looking to be nothing but threats, and Burn can ignore some of the things that Zoo needs to answer with him. The loss of Pridemage is definitely a negative, but when you replace him with PoP (which is insane), it's not the end of the world. A great card, and a loss here.

Lightning Helix ---> Magma Jet is a bit of a loss in power. Obviously the lifegain works wonders in the red mirror, but we need the library manipulation. Scrying away lands is probably more powerful than the +1 dmg and +3 life. Like Volt said, Magma Jet is the worst card in the deck. Every time I play this card I ask myself, would Lava Spike/Flame Rift be better? Oftentimes, they wouldn't.

Ball Lightning is faster than Woolly or KOTR, and Costs the same amount. Connecting with those guys is tough, and doesn't happen all that often. Sure you gain some lategame with creatures that stick around, but I'm just trying to take away 20 as fast as possible. I'd consider this an upgrade.

Path to Exile is good, but Ball Lightning doesn't care about that Tarmogoyf on the other side of the board. Zoo needs to run this to deal with the big guys that end up outclassing their Kird Apes. We on the other hand say, okay now he's got me on a clock, can I race it? This deck is good at that. If they're swinging with something, that means it aint blockin, and we're gonna get in there. Sure there's things that we'd wish we could stop (Dreadnaught comes to mind), but I'm willing to not play Path.

On the whole, I don't see how Zoo is strictly superior to this deck now. Countertop is a big deal, we all know this, but Zoo gets wrecked by the lock as much as we do pre-board. Pridemage is about as much as you can ask for against their deck, and even that isn't perfect. They still have Counters for it and a coinflips chance of getting to two mana before you. Ball Lightning or Bloodbraid Elf might sneak through for alot under their soft lock. I'll admit, I don't have any CB-Top players at my school to play with, but I don't think the matchup would be that much worse. Of course, Goblin Guide is bad against Top. It's a bad matchup for sure, but speeding the deck up can't be a bad idea. Maybe Zoo is the superior deck, but I think this deck got alot better regardless.

Amon Amarth

09-20-2009, 04:36 AM

Zoo can deal with 'Goyfs 'Noughts and 'Stalkers easily with PTE (and STP postboard). This is a big deal. (pun intended)

NQN

09-20-2009, 05:09 AM

Most RG lists also play 2 Plateau so they can also side Pte`s.
I´d say it just comes down to preferences...

Hanni

09-21-2009, 12:00 AM

It's pretty clear that Rg Sligh has been obsoleted by Zoo. Here's why:

1. Incinerate is mediocre. The only reason it sees play in Burn and Sligh is because once you get down to the last 4 or 8 slots in the deck, there's nothing clearly better than Incinerate left to play in those slots. Sure, every deck has to have a worst card, but when your worst card is a Lightning Bolt that costs an extra , that's a problem. Ideally, you want your worst card to be Magma Jet.

2. Sligh usually loses game 1 to CounterTop, and doesn't improve enough after sideboarding to make the matchup a good one overall. Zoo plays maindeck Pridemage, which improves that matchup quite a bit. Sligh can maindeck Shushers, but Shushers are pretty bad against non-CounterTop decks. Pridemages have much more utility.

I don't think it's pretty clear at all. Both decks play fundamentally different game plans. If anything, I think Burn is obsolete because of Goyf Sligh, not Goyf Sligh obsolete because of Zoo.

Incinerate is mediocre, yes. That doesn't make the rest of the deck bad. Incinerates function is to do exactly what you said; push the final points of damage through for the win. However, it has the ability of destroying blockers early on too, so it's also versatile.

Sligh doesn't lose g1 to CounterTop unless they assemble the lock early. If they don't assemble the lock early, they die. If they do get the lock assembled before they die, we still have cards like Rift Bolt and Fireblast to finish the opponent off. Regardless, Zoo has the same problems against Counterbalance. In the same way Zoo runs Pridemage, Sligh could run Shusher.

Pridemage is a better maindeck card than Shusher, yes, and is a plus for Zoo over Sligh for the CounterTop matchup. I'll agree there.

Goyf Sligh has plenty of sideboarding for CounterTop postboard. Shusher is an absolute beating against them. It's better than Pridemage vs CounterTop... if they have the lock assembled, Pridemage isn't doing anything. Shusher can come down through an assembled CounterTop lock. If they have an StP for him, who cares... in resp, you activate him to push through lethal Price of Progress' or Fireblasts and shit. We still run 2 Krosan Grip too if that was even necessary, which I don't believe it is.

Again, both decks play fundamentally different roles. I'm not saying Goyf Sligh is better or worse against CounterTop, but there are more matchups to consider besides just CounterTop. Zoo is more dependant on creatures and has a slower clock than Goyf Sligh, which is relevant against other matchups.

FoulQ

09-21-2009, 12:30 AM

I can agree with Hanni here: I have tested this matchup a TON bringing in 3 shusher 3 grip and sometimes 2 blast. PreBoard I would say it is slightly in your favor and postboard I would say it is slightly in your favor. If you want to have a good matchup here, if you dedicate some sideboard space (and shusher/grip have other applications, as well as blast), I think you will be fine g1 and g2/3. It's other matchups I worry about that could potentially make zoo obsolete goyf sligh.

The math favors that Zoo has obsoleted Goyf Sligh, but it isn't all in the matchup percentages. Goyf Sligh is much less susceptible to wasteland and moons, for instance, which doesn't necessarily help any specific matchup, but is in general obviously a good thing. Goyf Sligh is much more able to run on basic mountains for longer than zoo. Topdecking burn instead of creatures is often a good thing late in the game. Goyf Sligh is more likely to win goyf wars due to the larger amount of burn (exalted is only 4 cards cmon) and I know I run PtE out of the side in my sligh list to help stuff like tombstalker/goyf/pro:red guys.

But yeah I still think zoo is better than goyf sligh. But I would go a long way from saying goyf sligh can't beat countertop, and that it has been obsoleted.

Hanni

09-21-2009, 01:54 AM

It's other matchups I worry about that could potentially make zoo obsolete goyf sligh.

The math favors that Zoo has obsoleted Goyf Sligh, but it isn't all in the matchup percentages. Goyf Sligh is much less susceptible to wasteland and moons, for instance, which doesn't necessarily help any specific matchup, but is in general obviously a good thing. Goyf Sligh is much more able to run on basic mountains for longer than zoo. Topdecking burn instead of creatures is often a good thing late in the game. Goyf Sligh is more likely to win goyf wars due to the larger amount of burn (exalted is only 4 cards cmon) and I know I run PtE out of the side in my sligh list to help stuff like tombstalker/goyf/pro:red guys.

But yeah I still think zoo is better than goyf sligh. But I would go a long way from saying goyf sligh can't beat countertop, and that it has been obsoleted.

This is where I agree and disagree. What matchups is Zoo superior against? Their higher dependance on creatures and weaker manabase makes them more susceptible against Aggro Loam. The heavier creature dependance makes them more vulnerable against Landstill. I'd say the manabase stability against Merfolk is relevant, though I'm sure both decks boast positive matchups against them. Against bigger aggro like Rock and Survival, I'd say Goyf Sligh has advantages because after its creatures are outclassed, it has a higher burn denisty. Against combo, which is a horrible matchup for both decks anyway, Goyf Sligh has a faster clock which enables it to possibly race the combo player (in instances where they are forced to combo with Ad Nauseam anyway). Against Ichorid, the faster clock should improve win percentages a little.

I'm sure there are matchups where Zoo is better than Goyf Sligh too. You are better apt to answer Jitte and other problematic artifacts/enchantments because of Pridemage. But what I'm saying is: I fail to see why Zoo is being considered a "better" deck. I think each one fills a different niche for different metagames, with neither being superior to the other.

On another note, with the printing of Goblin Guide to compliment our Wild Nacatl's, the clock has yet again increased. We're getting closer and closer to a fundamental turn of 3. This is a step forward for the archtype, not a step backwards. Hell, in some aspects I'd argue that Guide is better than Nacatl... as a mid+ game topdeck, the opponent probably won't have a blocker open for a hasty Guide, making it essentially a Shock rather than a dead topdeck.

grungyboy

09-21-2009, 10:44 AM

the only thing that makes zoo "better" than goyfsligh is Pridemage...give goysligh a RG or 1G version of Pridemage and you'll see that goyfsligh would be better...PtE's are okay (though i'm still not into splashing any white spell in the deck)...goyfsligh is way faster than zoo...zoo is more creature-based unlike goyfsligh which has more burn to speed things up...like people pointed out here, zoo is more prone to Moon effects and Wastelands than goyfsligh and Counter-Top CAN be beaten...

troopatroop

09-22-2009, 01:58 AM

Take this example for how Ball Lightning got better with Goblin Guide/Nacatl.

Turn 1: Land, Goblin Guide, attack for 2 : 18

Turn 2: Land, Lightning Bolt, Chain Lightning, attack for 2 : 10

Turn 3: Land, Ball Lightning + Fireblast for 10, Guide Gets him to -2. First turn Nacatl Finishes in this situation too. The last card in my hand was a PoP to make it even better.

Ball Lightning has got to get us closer to a more consistant turn 3 Goldfish than Incinerate. I can't imagine a better card with that goal in mind.

Hanni

09-22-2009, 02:30 AM

Hitting 3 lands by turn 3 consistently is a rather difficult task, especially in the face of Stifles and Wastelands. 3 mana for 6 damage is a good investment on 1 card, but its cost efficiency isn't any better than Incinerate. Do you feel yourself running out of gas too quick to warrant Ball Lightning? My testing shows that we don't run out of gas often... that's why this deck is superior to straight up Burn.

The biggest plus of Ball Lightning is that it is out of typical CB range. However, many CB decks now are running more 3cc cards, like Rhox and Trygon.

Turn 1: Nacatl
Turn 2: Guide + Bolt, deal 8
Turn 3: Triple Bolt, Deal 14

Same end result. Swap a Bolt for a PoP with the opponent with 3 nonbasics, same end result. Swap a PoP with an Incinerate and toss a Fireblast in there, same end result. Guide + Nacatl push the fundamental curve further than it's ever been for this style deck, regardless if you run Ball Lightning or not.

troopatroop

09-22-2009, 11:41 AM

Triple Bolt is 3 cards, where Ball Lightning is 1. That matters. I know Goyf Sligh is better at not running out of cards than burn, but it doesn't mean that it's not the deck's fundamental problem. There are plenty of ways we can get a turn 3 Goldfish, but our aim should be making it as common as we can, while accommodating for the times where not everything goes perfectly. When the opponent starts answering our stuff, what you really need is for your cards to do more. This is a 7 card combo deck. We have no draw, so we've got to try and increase the value of our topdecks. Ball Lightning is fantastic at this, a whole 3 damage better than Incinerate by itself. It just makes the job easier, 20 points of damage isn't as hard. We don't have to agree on this, but please test it, and share your experience.

FoulQ

09-22-2009, 11:42 AM

troopatroop

09-22-2009, 11:55 AM

How many ball lightnings are you currently trying, troopa? I might try a couple or something, as it can definitely wreck a lot of players who assume the game comes down to a race and never keep blockers.

I've been playing the full 4. Multiples don't bother me, in fact I think the card is great in doubles. 12 damage in 2 cards is nice to have.

Hanni

09-22-2009, 12:57 PM

If I were to try Ball Lightning, it would be as a 2-of, either replacing Grim Lavamancer or Incinerate. Lavamancer, because it requires a similar mana investment as Ball Lightning, Incinerate because it's the least cost efficient damage spell in the deck (aside from Magma Jet, but Scry is invaluable).

I'm still not convinced, though. It's conditional just like Keldon Marauder's or Hellspark Elemental, with a higher cmc. In that same line of thinking, Browbeat could be an effective card, and we all know that it's not. However, I will test it.

FlyingSkull13

09-23-2009, 12:42 AM

gotta keep grim's in the md, he's mvp usually, goyf sly is usualy one burn spell from winning games, and sometimes u get there, and sometimes u topdeck land. I had more problems with dealing with styfle, bc of rise of fetches, we should think about cutting back to 6 fetches.

Azel Orfat

09-30-2009, 07:20 PM

A partner was going to run Fire/Ice in his Tarmo Sligh. I liked the idea and have been testing it. It seems to work fine inspite of having a vulnerable mana base, but I need to test it more.

This is my list:

// Lands
2 [ON] Wooded Foothills
3 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
3 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn
3 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
4 [A] Taiga
2 [A] Plateau
2 [B] Volcanic Island
4 [TE] Wasteland

// Creatures
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FNM] Kird Ape
4 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
4 [AP] Fire/Ice
4 [FD] Magma Jet
2 [TSP] Rift Bolt
3 [VI] Fireblast

I see Fire/Ice viable here for these reasons:

Now with Zendikar, we can play more red fetchs, then, adding other splash is less problematic. Anyway, the card won’t be dead if we don’t have the volcanic island in play, as it happens with the white splash. So it would basically continue being a RG deck.

I think this deck lacks of good solutions against an enemy Tarmo or other big creatures. Ice could help making our little creatures better. Of course it’s not so definitive as for example Path to exile but IMO it fits better in the deck because it’s also other burn card.

In my opinion POP is not very good in this kind of lists with wasteland. So, I think that Fire/Ice could be a nice alternate. In some cases it could also complement the wastelands. The problem is that I don’t really know how useful are the wastelands in Naya.

Well, I would like to know your opinions.

Nidd

10-01-2009, 12:01 PM

This looks worse than a burn-heavy Zoo to me. To be honest, it's nearly the same as a burn-heavy Zoo.
Maybe pack in some PoP? It is a huge beating against most decks and the hit you take isn't that meaningful - you should be ahead in the dmgrace, anyways.
Might be win-more, though.

Azel Orfat

10-02-2009, 12:18 PM

I would say that in general, a Burn-heavy Zoo is nearly the same as Goyf Sligh. I haven’t played Zoo and I haven’t almost played Goyf sligh, so I can only have a general idea of these decks. I think that the differences are that Sligh can have a better mana base and less resources/stability in favour of a more aggro side.

Then, I think that you mean that as I deteriorate the “Sligh mana base”, it wouldn’t have too much sense to play that list instead of Zoo. I understand you, but as I said, the deck really continues depending only on 2 colours. At first, I thought to keep on one mountain but it seems to harm more than help. Anyway, perhaps Fire/Ice could also work well in a traditional RG Sligh although I find it better in Naya.

About POP, I love the card but I don’t find it so good here. They would make less damage with previous use of the wastelands. With all lands no basic, I think they wouldn’t be too much useful except against control decks. It could be a similar case than Flame Rift in Burn.

Now, I’m thinking about making theses changes: -1 Fetch, -2 Rift Bolt, +3 Hellspark Elemental, trying to make a better mana use. Unearth could help against Counterbalance/COTV as Rift Bolt did. Ice could also make Hellspark better and wastelands would be more useful as “mana land” with this creature.

Hanni

10-07-2009, 11:12 PM

A partner was going to run Fire/Ice in his Tarmo Sligh. I liked the idea and have been testing it. It seems to work fine inspite of having a vulnerable mana base, but I need to test it more.

4c Sligh has too many inconsistencies to be worth it. Running Wasteland is also worthless; the manabase is too shaky to cut lands for it, and you'd rather just run more burn than cut spells for it. This isn't RDW.

---

Anyway, I was testing Bloodchief for a bit in Sligh, which didn't work out well, but it got me testing Sligh, and caused a few changed to my Naya Sligh.

R/G/w Naya Sligh

// Lands
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
4 [B] Taiga
1 [A] Plateau
1 [U] Savannah
4 [RAV] Mountain (2)
1 [8E] Forest (3)

// Creatures
2 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
3 [LRW] Tarfire
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [DLM] Incinerate
4 [VI] Fireblast

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip

I tightened the manabase up a bit by dropping a Plateau for another Taiga. I only need a white source to make Nactal +1/+1 larger, and more green means more consistency. I know I run Path in the SB, but meh.

The value of 1cc burn is just so important. So I added Tarfire. It costs half as much as 2cc burn, which can be invaluable for increasing the clock. I'm considering dropping 1 Incinerate for 1 Tarfire, but the 15 1cc/8 2cc burn configuration feels good right now. Incinerate is obviously a better topdeck later on since it deals an extra damage. Tarfire to Tarmogoyf is kinda like Plains to Wild Nacatl. Every swing with Tarmogoyf after Tarfire has been cast adds the additional +1/+1. This makes the first Tarfire essentially a 1cc 3 damage burn spell if you get at least one swing with a Tarmogoyf.

Price of Progress maindeck is sometimes hit or miss, and I hate losing some g1's because I'm playing against a monocolored deck (or a multicolor deck with alot of basics) because I'm clogged up with multiple Price of Progress in hand. It also feels smoother to have all my burn able to target opposing creatures, ensuring that if I have burn in hand, I can burn away opposing blockers so my guys can swing in. Price of Progress is a house in certain matchups, so it can be boarded in place of Incinerate in those matchups.

I dropped Chalice from the sideboard. The only matchup it comes in for is combo, which is a matchup I almost never see anyway. Just didn't see the point in having it anymore, and I needed room for Price of Progress in the sideboard. I added another Grip with the extra space.

FlyingSkull13

10-10-2009, 03:04 AM

Hanni

10-10-2009, 03:14 AM

i'm just thinking, should we be thinking of goblin guide for this deck? i mean, turn 1 take 2 should put them on a good clock, and if we get to hit them 3 times with this guy, we're in really good shape?

Umm... yes? I thought that was already an established idea.

I guess not everyone read the previous page.

Goblin Guide is just as good as Nacatl, but better in some cases. Guide will do an average of 6 damage for 1cc investment, same as Nacatl (by turn 3). After the initial rush, if the opponent has creatures in play, Guide sneaks through as a Shock, where Nacatl is part of the ground stall (if the opponent doesn't have an available blocker). Obviously a 4-of for the deck, it speeds up the fundamental turn. Nacatl + Guide make for occasional lightning fast turn 3 wins.

The fundamental use of creatures in this deck is all early game. Each 1cc creature averages 6 damage for 1cc if cast turn 1-2. Grim Lavamancer is only a 2-of for that reason: more than 2 makes multiples an occurence, and multiple Lavamancer's won't consistently do 6 damage each. Goyf is a different case, because he's a 2cc creature. Depending on the situation, Goyf may swing for only 3 damage (swings as a 3/4 on turn 3, gets answered after that), but he can also swing for 10 damage (Tarfire on turn 3 to swing as a 5/6, swing for an additional 5 damage on turn 4). 14 creatures (and 27 burn spells) balances the deck out well. Guide plays an essential role in this.

I just posted my decklist above your post. That's an optimized Sligh build.

FoulQ

10-10-2009, 03:23 AM

Hanni

10-10-2009, 03:30 AM

I agree with Hanni that it is 95% optimal, but I'd go...

-1 Fireblast
-3 Tarfire (I mean cmon)

Move 3 PoP to mainboard.
And +1 Grim

Also I'm not sure how necessary stuff like savannah and basic forest is for this deck. I'd probably go -1 savannah, +1 plateau, as that seems to just be carried over as a basically zoo manabase.

That frees up sideboard space where I'd play either combo hate or grave hate, probably crypt because I see an infestation of those shenanigans.

I ran 3 PoP maindeck for a long time. As far as the clock is concerned, Tarfire can enable consistent turn 3 goldfishes. 1cc is huge, +1/+1 pump to Goyf is huge. PoP is 2cc, making it slower, and can sometimes be a blank. I feel that it is better left for the sideboard, in my multiple games of testing.

Savannah is a crucial target since every fetchland grabs it and sometimes Mountain + Savannah is the correct land choice.

When you are dependant on 8 green spells, the basic Forest can be very important. Trust me dude, I've beaten this deck to death. The manabase is fine.

I don't think graveyard hate nor combo hate is necessary in the sideboard, but that's just me.

Fireblast is an essential ingredient for the faster goldfish. You always want to be able to end a game with one, since it oftentimes inceases the fundamental clock by a full turn. Sometimes, the deck can execute a double Fireblast, which can have fantastic results. I wouldn't cut one for any reason in this deck, but I can understand why Zoo may run a low or nonexistent number of Fireblasts.

troopatroop

10-11-2009, 03:04 PM

Just thought I'd mention, that Bloodbraid Elf has been weak. Sometimes he'd be another Tarmogoyf or Ball lightning, but it was too hit or miss. Cascading into Magma Jet is bad. Costing 4 invalidates him for the deck, but could make him slip through Countertop. Could be cool, but there's danger in cool things.

I really like the Tarfire idea BTW. Shock kills creatures all the same, and that extra Goyf pump is actually nice. The other comparison is Seal of Fire, but I don't think there's slots for it. PoP has also been a blank for me at times, similar to your experience, but I think replacing it is giving up a pre-board bomb against plenty of legacy decks. I don't think I can let go of such a potentially devastating card. It slows down the goldfish, but of course it does

[EDIT] How has Ball Lightning been treating you? I can't get off of the card, it's been really good.

Hanni

10-11-2009, 03:13 PM

I've got 4 PoP in my board, and that's probably where I'm going to leave them. They are a massive bomb sometimes, but sometimes they aren't, which makes them a sideboard card for me. I found alot of times they had the exact same effect as Flame Rift.

Of course, boarding all 4 in place of Incinerate is going to be very good in alot of matchups, and that's what I've been doing.

As far as Ball Lightning goes, I still don't like it. Curving up to 3 mana is hit or miss, and I don't find myself needing the extra reach it provides. With both Guide and Nacatl now, my reach has been excellent. Continue to run it if it works well for you, though.

NjPunk1

10-11-2009, 10:47 PM

I made 14th today in the Philly 5k playing this deck. I maindecked 2 vexing shusher, 3 goblin guide, and 3 PoP. I'll post my full decklist later but it performed well all day. It did exactly what i wanted it to do and was much better then a zoo deck would have been.
I lost to Life.dec, (cleric infi life combo), and a close match with NO Thresh in 3 games.
I beat goblins, pox, belcher, d stompy, aggro loam, and my final round opponent scooped to me so we wouldn't draw and both lose prizes.

Pop won me alot of games and was only dead in a few matches. Guide did well and gave me just enough extra speed to beat goblins and belcher. The 2 maindeck shushers really helped against the cb top decks and i don't regret maindecking them.

Albplayer

10-12-2009, 09:51 PM

ok so I went 2-3 drop at the starcity 5 k in philly, well I played against belcher, ant, icharid, show and tell/ hyper, and team america...

1/ ok round one my opp won, IMO, turn one before I even played a land making 10 1/1 goblins and then game 3 he made 16 1/1 goblins before I even played a land.

2/ ant the player miss counted my good fortune, I should of lost.

3/ Ichard guy should of won but I got 2 early crypts in game 2 and 3

4/ show and tell guy made second turn akroma games 2 and 3

5/ team america, I played bad , and he ended out having more goyfs than me

so 4 horrible matchups for me and 1 ok matchup ( that I lost )

I thought I was going to see zoo, merfolk and goblins, guess I was wrong

A person from my area that played my list went 5-1-2 getting 19th... he drew with goblins and counter top... he said he was one turn away , and prob should of top 16

my opps had between 0 and 2 lands in play,,,

my list'
1 Barbarian Ring
4 Taiga
3 plateuas
4 mountain
4 bloodstained mire
4 wooded foothills

4 tarmogoyf
4 wild nacalts
4 figure of destiny
4 grim lavamancer
3 keldon marauders

3 fireblast
3 rift bolt
4 lightning bolt
4 chain lightning
4 magma jet

3 path to exile ( yes I went there, :] Zoo, zoo where was the zoo ) could have been pop or Gguide or ?

sb
1 red elemental blast
1 pyroblast
2 vexing susher
2 pithing needle
3 krosan grip
3 tormods crypt
3 teeg ( I was thinking blue trap, or chailce, ? ) but I liked the diversity of this instead.....

congratz to NjPunk1 for his 14th finish

NjPunk1

10-13-2009, 02:48 PM

@ albplayer, did having the extra white dual hurt you against team america? I like the gaddok teegs in the sideboard, but i really hate playing more non-basics in this deck, especially when i still run 3 PoP in the main.
Have you tested goblin guide anymore? He really made the difference in my matches but got sided out in alot of other matches, especially on the draw. For now i'm going to stick with him.
How was rift bolt? If i was going to add anything else to my main thats what it would be, but i can't see myself taking out the md shushers and 3 Pop. Both of them won me games.

Oh, and Star City listed me down as a zoo deck. Most of my opponents thought i was a zoo deck all day too, even when i explained i wasn't. It worked out in my favor because people don't expect 12-16 points of burn in one turn from a "zoo" deck.

umbowta

10-13-2009, 03:17 PM

Oh, and Star City listed me down as a zoo deck. Most of my opponents thought i was a zoo deck all day too, even when i explained i wasn't. It worked out in my favor because people don't expect 12-16 points of burn in one turn from a "zoo" deck.

Yeah, this is an argumented point among many. I've played "Zoo" for more than 2 years straight and it honestly looks more like "Goyf Sligh" than the one listed in DTB's. If you ask me though, I'm still playing Zoo...it's just a little burn heavy to suit my aggressive playstyle. I really like ending the game with bolt, bolt, Fireblast. It makes me smile.

Hanni

10-13-2009, 03:50 PM

Yeah, this is an argumented point among many. I've played "Zoo" for more than 2 years straight and it honestly looks more like "Goyf Sligh" than the one listed in DTB's. If you ask me though, I'm still playing Zoo...it's just a little burn heavy to suit my aggressive playstyle. I really like ending the game with bolt, bolt, Fireblast. It makes me smile.

Not sure if I understand. I think you meant to say you'd rather play Sligh? Sligh is burn heavy and ends games with Bolt, Bolt, Fireblast. Or did you mean what it looks like you said, i.e burn heavy Zoo? Me confused.

umbowta

10-13-2009, 10:44 PM

Not sure if I understand. I think you meant to say you'd rather play Sligh? Sligh is burn heavy and ends games with Bolt, Bolt, Fireblast. Or did you mean what it looks like you said, i.e burn heavy Zoo? Me confused.Thats the point I'm trying to make entirely. People are confused. Lemme make it plain. Goyf Sligh is Zoo. Or at least it's closer to what I've been playing for a long time.

During that time, before "Zoo" became a DTB, everyone referred to my deck as Zoo, except this guy named Trent, he called it Super Zoo...whatever. Point is, Goyf Sligh and Zoo share the fundamental idea of winning by reducing the opponents life total to zero by means of efficient creatures and burn. Zoo has just evolved in the direction of strenthening the mid/late game whereas Goyf Sligh evolved toward an even tighter complement of aggressive burn spells with the aim of ending the game early.

Both directions are adaptations to the metagame, a fundamental characteristic ability of Zoo decks since Scott Johns first made and won with the deck he called "The Zoo" in 1996.

The deck I play now is closer to the Goyf Sligh evolution...but I still call it Zoo...and so does everyone else I know...except Trent.

Recall the quote;

Most of my opponents thought i was a zoo deck all day too, even when i explained...You can't stop the lemming rush. It's as simple as running headlong off a cliff.

Hanni

10-13-2009, 11:04 PM

Thats the point I'm trying to make entirely. People are confused. Lemme make it plain. Goyf Sligh is Zoo. Or at least it's closer to what I've been playing for a long time.

During that time, before "Zoo" became a DTB, everyone referred to my deck as Zoo, except this guy named Trent, he called it Super Zoo...whatever. Point is, Goyf Sligh and Zoo share the fundamental idea of winning by reducing the opponents life total to zero by means of efficient creatures and burn. Zoo has just evolved in the direction of strenthening the mid/late game whereas Goyf Sligh evolved toward an even tighter complement of aggressive burn spells with the aim of ending the game early.

Both directions are adaptations to the metagame, a fundamental characteristic ability of Zoo decks since Scott Johns first made and won with the deck he called "The Zoo" in 1996.

The deck I play now is closer to the Goyf Sligh evolution...but I still call it Zoo...and so does everyone else I know...except Trent.

I agree and disagree.

Zoo was a deck designed around cheap undercosted creatures. It planned to do the bulk of its damage through creature beats, and in most cases, all of it. The burn it ran was specifically to deal with blockers, because it relies heavily on creature beats. Choosing burn as the removal of choice allowed the deck to finish opponent's last few points off with a burn spell or two. Zoo typically ran around 12 burn spells. Nowadays, I'm seeing alot of Zoo decks with only 8 burn spells and 4 Path to Exile. With only 8 burn spells, using burn to kill the opponent is only an endgame plan.

Sligh runs only a few creatures. This gives reach that normal Burn decks don't have (i.e assume Nacatl/Guide are 1cc 6 damage burn spells), while speeding up the fundamental clock. By running 27 burn spells, the deck can (and sometimes does) play nothing but burn to kill an opponent. Sligh only needs to drop 1-2 guys, swing 1-2 times each, and from there, the remaining burn easily handles the job. This is is the major fundamental difference, and is the seperating factor between the two archetypes.

Sligh is more an evolution of Burn, IMO, than a burn heavy version of Zoo. It's easier to just say that Sligh is a hybrid of the two, but when the actual fundamental gameplan is executed, Sligh is more closely related to Burn than it is to Zoo.

14 creatures and 27 burn spells is clearly Sligh. No question about that.

However, some decks do run a much closer creature to burn count ratio, and those decks fall into a very "difficult to name" classification. 20 creatures, 20 burn, 20 land... that sorta thing. However, I'd still classify those as Zoo. Burn heavy, yes, but not Sligh.

Sligh can be defined by its independance of creatures to win, as well as its faster fundamental clock/goldfish.

It gets tricky sometimes, but in the end, the difference in fundamental playstyle maintains the difference.

Albplayer

10-14-2009, 12:45 PM

goyf sligh IMO is any deck with goyf, other creatures, burn and maybe some other things.... recently I added path to my deck list because of the stall of gyof on goyf match ups or having to waste 2 burn spells or 1 burn and a smaller creature to kill one other there goyfs.... everyone has there own criteria for what constitutes as goyf sligh,...

I believe all lands should produce red and only one land can be a non mountain, this might change ??? I used to believe that goyf could be the only non red creature, but the deck was dryad sligh before it was goyf sligh.. so I didn't feel too bad when I added nactal

I guess burn heavey zoo and low burn goyf sligh are technically the same thing .. SO i don't think any one should care if someone call there deck zoo or goyf sligh....

but when someone goes out of there way to call your deck zoo and disagrees with your opinion that your deck is goyf sligh, because you add 3 plateaus and nactal, and then does the same thing to there deck and calls there deck goyf sligh and not zoo , lol lol lol lol lol lol

susher and pop would have done nothing for me all day, my opp had between 0 and 2 lands out ....

having 3 plats instead of 2 helps because of the nactals and now paths and teeg also, and takeing pops out haveing more non basic didn't matter

still not sold on G guide yet

teeg help me against dredge, the other matchups he would have help I never got him in play ///

my match ups were so bad, I don't believe it to have been a realistic test lol

umbowta

10-14-2009, 01:19 PM

However, some decks do run a much closer creature to burn count ratio, and those decks fall into a very "difficult to name" classification. 20 creatures, 20 burn, 20 land... that sorta thing. However, I'd still classify those as Zoo. Burn heavy, yes, but not Sligh.I fall into this category, and I too call it Zoo...but I have to watch two threads.

JiggatheOG

10-17-2009, 09:34 PM

I've got 4 PoP in my board, and that's probably where I'm going to leave them. They are a massive bomb sometimes, but sometimes they aren't, which makes them a sideboard card for me. I found alot of times they had the exact same effect as Flame Rift.

So I've been playing your exact list to death on MWS for the last few days, and I completely disagree with this assessment. I get your logic, PoP sucks hard against Merfolk, Gobs, etc.. But I think the "Holy Fuck! I Win!" factor that PoP has against many (top tier) decks in the format is worth the possibility of four dead cards in your deck.

So with this in mind, I moved the PoP back to the MD, cut the incinerates completely, and added 4 Relic to combat AggroLoam. Relic is obviously suboptimal,considering the decks focus, but it's purely a meta choice.

Is there a better piece of hate for AggroLoam?

Hanni

10-17-2009, 09:44 PM

Aggro Loam is a bad matchup for you? Seriously, the only problem Aggro Loam poses is Chalice, and the only board cards you'll bring in is Vexing Shusher or Krosan Grip.

This is essentially a combo deck (ala burn). You have a turn 3 clock. Slower decks like Aggro Loam are won before they do anything, or lost because they land a Chalice. Deal with Chalice, and you win. If they don't see Chalice, you win. Simple as that.

PoP MD or SB is a meta decision, and I'm doing PoP SB because it's more consistent against randomness. If you prefer PoP MD, I'm not suggesting that you don't. PoP MD can be great.

How's the rest of the deck been treating you?

JiggatheOG

10-18-2009, 12:14 AM

I suppose your points regarding aggro loam are valid. My adding of Relic was more reactionary than thoughtfully tested. I just know aggro loam is big in my meta so i wanted to add a card that auto-wins versus them. Im not sure if that card is relic, but i think it would work well.

Overall I've been loving the deck. The 14 creatures seems like a really nice and smooth number for the deck. Never has my hand been gunked up with creatures, nor have they all disappeared somewhere in the deck never to be drawn.

I like the burn suite quite a bit as well. I just find myself wishing Tarfire was always something better. It's interactions with goyf are nice, but is there really nothing better to run in this slot?

Finally, as of right now I really want to fit a basic plains into the manabase. I'm not sure if you've already tested this or not, and if so how much it diluted the decks consistency. But PtE is an all-star for me outta the sb, and against the matchups were i bring it in (see: Decks with TS) there is usually a ready amount of sinkholes, wastelands, and to a lesser degree pox and smallpox to say fuck you to both monsieur's plateau and savannah.

Tharamil

10-23-2009, 10:00 AM

@Njpunk1 hey, could you post your list. I'm curious on what it is?

Albplayer

10-25-2009, 11:45 PM

Njpunk1's list from the philly 5 k

Creatures
3 Figure Of Destiny
3 Goblin Guide
3 Grim Lavamancer
3 Keldon Marauders
4 Tarmogoyf
2 Vexing Shusher
4 Wild Nacatl

Instants
3 Fireblast
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Magma Jet
3 Price Of Progress

Sorceries
4 Chain Lightning

Basic Lands
6 Mountain

Lands
4 Arid Mesa
2 Plateau
4 Taiga
4 Wooded Foothills

Sideboard:
3 Tormod's Crypt
1 Vexing Shusher
3 Krosan Grip
1 Price Of Progress
2 Red Elemental Blast
3 Volcanic Fallout
2 Shattering Spree

I would like to point out my deck list (posted 10-12-09) with different sac lands but same number just top 8ed Jupiter games's last tourney

http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14720&page=5

6th place - Rion Marmulstein

4 wild nacatl
4 figure of destiny
4 tarmogoyf
4 grim lavamancer
3 keldon marauders
4 lightning bolt
4 chain lightning
4 magma jet
3 rift bolt
3 path to exile
3 fireblast
4 arid mesa
1 barbarian ring
4 scalding tarn
3 plateau
4 taiga
4 mountain

sb
3 gaddock teeg
1 relic of progenitus
2 tormod's crypt
1 red elemental blast
1 pyroblast
2 vexing shusher
3 krosan grip
2 pithing needle

mackaber

10-26-2009, 06:06 AM

Heya folks. Been testing Naya-Aggro for some time now and was posting to the Zoo thread regularly but folks over there have odd opinions so I was thinking I might get some more constructive feedback in this thread. Has anyone here tested Steppe Lynx? I have and it seems really strong, it's ability to deal 8 in the first 3 turns is impressive to say the least. So here's what I've been testing. It actually goldfishes faster than turn 4 on average and if you count games where it can deal 18 by turn 3 it get's there a little less than 50% of the time.

Goldfish Zoo

4 Goblin Guide
4 Steppe Lynx
4 Nacatl
4 Kird
4 Goyf

3 Rift Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Fireblast
4 PoP

14 Fetches
3 Taiga
2 Plateau
1 Mountain
1 Forest

SB:
4 Path
4 Crypt
3 Lavamancer
4 Pyroblast

So as you can see the list is just balls to the wall aggression packing only the most mana efficient spells and going for the fastest possible kill while basically ignoring the opponents gameplan as much as humanly possible. You'll likely roll over to Combo but less so than other aggro decs cause you might actually be faster from time to time. Tarmogoyf might actually be a little slow here but serves the function of stalling the board to let you draw into more burn nicely none the less. I know that playing 4 maindec PoPs is a gamble but the only other spell which seems fast enough is flame rift and I prefer PoP and helix or magma rift are too slow if you want to be able to deal 20 on turn 3. Also I'm unsure if 4 fireblast is the right number but back in the day it always seemed to be good to have 4.

Illissius

10-26-2009, 10:27 AM

Taking that a step further, I think this is about as balls to the wall as you can get:

4 Goblin Guide
4 Steppe Lynx
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Dark Confidant/Sylvan Library
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Fireblast
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
3 Arid Mesa
3 Scalding Tarn
2 Taiga
2 Plateau
1 Badlands
1 Mountain
SB: 4 Smash to Smithereens
SB: 4 Tormod's Crypt
SB: some stuff.

Is there any point left in having separate Zoo and Goyf Sligh threads with Nacatl around? They're much more like slightly different flavors of the same deck than two different decks these days.

mackaber

10-26-2009, 11:24 AM

Taking that a step further, I think this is about as balls to the wall as you can get:

Well I guess you can go even further with -4 Grim -4 DC/Library -1Mountain
+4 Kird +4Tribal Flames +1 Volcanic Island

Tharamil

10-27-2009, 06:42 PM

@Albplayer, thank you, i appreciate it.

Hanni

11-06-2009, 09:59 PM

So this isn't entirely original, since the lightbulb went off in my head after I looked at the LBoros Landfall ('http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15306") thread. Basically, Godryk posted the decklist that a guy from Madrid Top 8'd with in a tourney.

His post is below:

Some kind of Boros Landfall deck top8'ed this weekendat the invitational final tourney of the Madrid's Legacy League. The list was played by a well-known local player, Omar Rohner (kind of spanish pro-player), who used to pick up Goyf Sligh at the regular tournaments. It's pretty much burn with some dudes:

4 Goblin Guide
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Steppe Lynx
1 Jotun Grunt
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Riftbolt
4 Magma Jet
4 Lightning Helix
4 Price of Progress
2 Fireblast

4 Wooded Foothills
3 Bloodstained Mire
4 Arid Mesa
4 Scalding Tarn
3 Plateau
3 Mountain

SB:
3 Duergar Hedge-Mage
3 Jotun Grunt
3 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Path's to Exile
3 ravenous Trap

From there, this is my response:

That's actually VERY interesting. Aside from some major differences that I would make, the concept of cutting Goyf out of (Naya) Sligh for Steppe Lynx is a very promising idea. Sligh is designed to be a fast deck, and while Goyf is very powerful and cost efficient, he swings at turn 3 at the earliest, in a deck who's fundamental clock is turn 3-4.

In Naya Sligh, Goblin Guide and Wild Nacatl have clearly been the strongest creatures and are what truly make the deck so powerful (albeit everyone thinks Sligh sucks and Zoo is superior, which I disagree with). Steppe Lynx is potentially more explosive than both Goblin Guide and Wild Nacatl, and giving the deck 12 1cc big/fast creature drops seems like it would tremendously increase the fundamental clock, speed, consistency, etc, etc of Sligh.

My current Naya Sligh deck for a starting point.

R/G/w Naya Sligh

// Lands
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
4 [B] Taiga
1 [A] Plateau
1 [U] Savannah
4 [RAV] Mountain (2)
1 [8E] Forest (3)

// Creatures
2 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
3 [LRW] Tarfire
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [DLM] Incinerate
4 [VI] Fireblast

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip

The above decklist I have played hundreds and hundreds of games with in its current incarnation and I can say that the deck is highly tuned for its designed purpose.

From the above shell, I think it would be wise for me to at least consider and playtest Steppe Lynx as a replacement for Tarmogoyf. Doing so does require some manabase modifications (more fetches), and obviously Tarfire isn't as good. Here's what I'm going to playtest with for now:

R/W/g (Goyfless) Naya Sligh

// Lands
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
1 [A] Plateau
1 [B] Taiga
1 [U] Savannah
4 [RAV] Mountain (2)

// Creatures
2 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [ZEN] Steppe Lynx

// Spells
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
3 [DD2] Seal of Fire
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [DLM] Incinerate
4 [VI] Fireblast

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip

It obviously opens up vulnerability to Stifle based tempo decks, but aside from that, I honestly think this would improve every other matchup. 12 fetchlands is more than enough to consistently make Steppe Lynx swing as a 4/5 on turn 2. Swinging for 4 on turn 2 and 2 on turn 3 gives him a net of 6 damage, the exact same as both Goblin Guide and Wild Nacatl. Sounds good so far. Sometimes he may wiff if you don't hit land drop number 3, but at the same time, sometimes Nacatl wiffs as only a 2/2, so it seems like a fair trade for its explosiveness. If you crack a fetchland on turn 2 and 3, he has the potential to do 8 damage by turn 3, for a 1cc investment... that's downright disgusting for Sligh.

(12 fetchlands also strengthens Grim Lavamancer a great deal, which is awesome added synergy.)

I'm actually REALLY excited about this, and I definitely think this is going to be yet another step forward for the evolution of Sligh. As radical as it is right now, I really don't think it is. Everyone disagreed with me when Nacatl was first printed about it being amazing in Sligh... literally everyone, minus like 1 or 2 people. In this same way, I expect very few, if no one to agree with me yet again. I don't have testing put in yet, so I can't give factual information about it right now, but I see this as being a very successful innovation, and eventually becoming mainstream (like Nacatl is now, finally) for (Naya) Sligh.

Thoughts?

EDIT: The Savannah sucks now in this build, so I'd drop it for another Plateau. I'd also say that cutting a Mountain for another Taiga would be fine as well, since there are so many fetchlands, which can easily grab basic Mountain.

-1 Savannah
-1 Mountain
+1 Taiga
+1 Plateau

Gibsonmac

11-06-2009, 10:19 PM

I really like the build, though you can drop seal of fire now that you don't play goyf, how about lava spike instead, seems stronger... the option to hit a creature for 2 doesn't really do much for me. even helix might be better.

Hanni

11-06-2009, 10:29 PM

The reason I opt for Seal of Fire is for a few reasons, which could just as easily still be Tarfire.

First of all, it's 1cc. That's why I prefer it over Helix or PoP. 1cc is so fundamentally important to the curve.

Secondly, it can kill opposing creatures. The point early on is to burn away blockers to maximize damage dealt from the early beats. Seal of Fire doing only 2 damage may not kill a few creatures out there early on, but it still does kill alot of stuff.

The other reason I don't run PoP because of its inconsistency, which is why I feel that it is a perfect sideboard card (usually dropping the Incinerates).

The reason I don't run Lava Spike is because it doesn't damage creatures. However, I'm not saying it's not a good possibility, and it definitely warrants testing. I'm more apt to try it in this proposed build because it does more damage and this deck is faster and more explosive.

My biggest gripe against Lava Spike is:

1cc burn that can hit creatures is more relevant than 2cc burn (like PoP), since it's cast during the early game where you want to drop a 1cc guy and remove the opponent's blocker on the same turn (turn 2), and the more 1cc removal that can target creatures, the better.

Lava Spike doesn't target creatures, which is completely against my reasoning for running more 1cc burn (creature removal) rather than more 2cc burn (like PoP or Helix).

To answer your questioning of the 2 damage vs 3 damage: yes, it cannot kill x/3's or bigger like Wild Nacatl, Kird Ape, and so on. However, it can kill every single Goblin or Merfolk (since its role is to be used early, before they get pumps), and much more. The 1 damage less could potentially be relevant, in games where multiple Seal of Fires vs Lava Spike's are drawn, and in rare cases where the opponent is 1 life away from death, slowing the clock down 1 full turn. More often than not though, I don't see the difference between 3 damage over 2 damage (1 net damage gain) being more important than Lava Spike's inability to hit creatures and Seal of Fire's ability to do so.

That's my extended answer.

Oh, and thanks for the feedback. I'm glad you like the build.

EDIT: Phoenix Ignition brought up a good point in the LBoros Landfall thread.

Looks fast but I really don't see how you justify Seal of Fire with 25 1cc spells and no goyf to feed with enchantments. I would replace that if I were you, you really don't want an opponent's goyf to grow unnecessarily fast and be able to block your lynx early.

Here's my response:

EDIT: Maybe you're right and wrong at the same time. Seal of Fire pumps Goyfs, which should be avoided if possible. That's why I'm going to play *gasp* Shock.

The revised decklist after a few small changes in manabase and spell config:

R/w/g Naya Sligh

// Lands
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
1 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn
2 [A] Plateau
2 [R] Taiga
2 [RAV] Mountain (2)

// Creatures
2 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [ZEN] Steppe Lynx

// Spells
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
3 [ZEN] Burst Lightning
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [DLM] Incinerate
4 [VI] Fireblast

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip

ZOMG I've gotten about 12 games invested with this deck already (the 2/3 match sets don't last long at all), and this deck is really, really good. The consistency of having 12 big/fast 1cc guys that average 6 damage for 1 mana (by turn 3) is sooooo good. The curve is so much smoother now, the goldfish is so much faster, and albeit contradictory to normal logic, dropping Goyf (for Lynx) has actually improved the aggro matchups I played against.

I wonder if this will catch on? Dropping Goyf for Lynx finally puts a large enough seperation between Zoo and Sligh for it to be more than noticeable. I love it.

EDIT AGAIN: I just wanna say how awesome the synergy is within the deck now. Just minor things I guess, but noticeable to me since I've played so many games with Sligh. First of all, there's no more conflict with Grim Lavamancer and Goyf. Secondly, the amount of fetchlands played now makes Grim Lavamancer a bomb everytime I see him (I'm still comfortable with only two because I don't want to get cluttered with them). Magma Jet + Steppe Lynx is also really strong, allowing me to consistently grow him to 4/5. The last game I [just] played, I swung with Lynx as a 4/5 on turn 2, 3 and 4 via a Magma Jet cast on turn 3 and a Magma Jet cast on turn 4. I ended up killing the opponent on turn 4, and I even used a few burn spells to destroy the opponent's early blockers.

EDIT yet again: From the LBoros Landfall thread:

Burst Lightning is strictly better than shock, and could be what you are looking for. Yeah, you probably will hardly use the kicker, but its there.

So yea, definitely makes more sense.

Illissius

11-07-2009, 11:42 AM

crow_mw

11-07-2009, 12:10 PM

While I am not totally sold on Lynx (and going for 3c as a result) I still think running Seal of fire is superior to running shock / burst lightning, for the very similar reason you prefer it over lava spike. Sure, pumping enemy goyf is bad, but 3/4 goyf already 2-for-1s with your dudes regardless. On the other hand I really enjoy the fact, that seal allows you to postpone the decision whether you want to kill a blocker or burn the enemy till the last moment.

Hanni

11-07-2009, 01:20 PM

You could also have looked a mere 2-3 posts back in this very thread. Obviously you've put a lot more thought into the idea though.

Didn't even realize that was above my post, haha. I win the super sekret tech award for reading.

Forbiddian

11-07-2009, 03:57 PM

@ "Zoo" vs. "Goyf Sligh" vs. "Burn" discussion:

Zoo was originally the name for any aggro deck running a lot of colors (especially 3 or more). Before fetchlands, mono decks ruled the aggro scene, so describing a deck as "Zoo" (3+ colors) was actually quite meaningful.

Sligh was originally an extremely fast red deck that ran creatures like Jackal Pup trying to cash in for 2 hits to be cost-effective.

Burn was a "combo" deck that skipped on creatures to give the opponent dead cards. If it ran any creatures, they would be Ball Lightning-type. This didn't evolve until a bit later, after more junky burn spells like Lava Axe got printed and found a home.

Now, going mono is more or less a waste, because fetchlands let you splash so easily (compared to pre-fetchland days), and creatures that are unbelievably efficient have been printed, relative to burn spells staying the same. The burn suites are essentially the same, whereas the creature suites are completely revamped.

So, burn began to add creatures, becoming now identical to the old "Sligh" game plan with creatures like Keldon Marauders. Sligh began to splash colors, becoming Goyf Sligh or Zoo. Zoo (the old name for 3 color + aggro) is now almost meaningless as there are tons of 3+ color aggro decks now.

So call it what you want, I guess. I'm just going to go by number of colors: Sligh = Mono Red. Goyf Sligh = RG, Zoo = RGW+

I guess maybe with the Goblin Guide/Lynx builds we now need a third name to distinguish it from Zoo, maybe Naya Sligh will stick.

Hanni

11-07-2009, 09:13 PM

Regardless of why the decks were originally called what they were called, the fundamental game plans of all 3 of those decks are still in tact. Burn running Keldon Maruaders and Hellspark Elemental doesn't make it a different deck, it's still Burn. Sligh that splashes 2 additional colors is still Sligh. Even if Zoo cut down to 2 colors, as long as it played a large number of low cost creatures and 8-12 low cost burn/removal spells, it's still going to be Zoo.

What makes this deck Sligh is the fact that it runs a low creature count, all of which are designed to do as much damage as possible within the first 3-4 turns of the game, and a very higher burn count, which is designed to remove blockers during the early game (turns 2-4), with every other burn spell going straight to the dome when there are no blockers or (our) creatures get removed.

Basically, there is a spectrum:

Burn -------------- Sligh -------------- Zoo

That's the spectrum.

Burn is on one far end of the spectrum. Burn is very aggressive, ignoring the opponent's gameplan, and attempting to kill them asap.

Zoo is on the other end of the spectrum, and while still aggressive, is less aggressive than burn, and attempts to win with a more consistent/controlled game using lots of creatures.

Sligh is a hybrid that fits right in the middle of the spectrum. I'm of the belief that the hybrid gameplan is the most beneficial.

Sligh is far more aggressive than both Burn and Zoo, and has a much faster clock (turn 3 goldfish is literally the average fundamental turn).

These days, Burn is outclassed by Sligh. Theoretically, Burn should be faster than Sligh, and it's not.

Burn attempts to use up all of its resources to kill the opponent before the opponent kills them. If the deck cannot do so before it runs out of resources, it runs out of steam and likely loses the race. A few years ago, this wasn't a problem, because it could "fizzle" and still win past turn 4 (topdecking) because the fundamental clock was slower. The clock is much faster these days, and running out of resources before winning is likely a loss.

Sligh is much more consistent because creatures can do continual damage, albeit vulnerable to removal, which causes it to run out of steam, or "fizzle," much less often. This is apparent when Goblin Guide, Wild Nacatl, and now Steppe Lynx, all average 6 damage each for 1 mana investment. Going into 3 colors is a double edged blade; the manabase is more vulnerable, but the deck has access to more sideboard (and even maindeck) options.

I don't see why Zoo is widely considered as better than Sligh. Zoo slows its clock down to have more control over the board with Path to Exile, Qasali Pridemage, and Wooly Thoctar (and now Tarmogoyf too, at least for me). While this is not a bad approach by any means, there are scenarios and even matchups where a faster approach with less control is a stronger gameplan. Zoo is also more vulnerable to manabase hate because it has a higher demand for non-red sources, whereas (Naya) Sligh can function in many matchups strictly off of Mountains (I run 4 green spells and 4 white spells maindeck).

The only reason why Zoo is a DTB and Sligh is not, IMO, is because Zoo is seeing more play. Simple as that. Especially in this heavy aggro metagame we are in, I would think that a smarter player would opt for Sligh, since Sligh is the stronger "aggro" deck in aggro vs aggro matchups. Zoo is better preboard against CounterTop, because more guys means more pressure before CounterTop goes online, and Qasali Pridemage is a maindeck answer to it if it is in play prior to. However, Sligh brings in Vexing Shusher out of the board, which is a stronger answer against CounterTop than Qasali. Regardless, CounterTop seems to be coming down in numbers. Against control, less creatures and more burn, i.e reach, would also seem to be the better gameplan. Against combo, a faster clock is a faster clock.

I guess I'm just a bad player for thinking that Sligh is a better choice than Zoo.

FoulQ

11-07-2009, 09:50 PM

GGoober

11-07-2009, 10:33 PM

Would it be better to replace either Seal/Shock/Burst Lightning with Kird Ape that technically shocks every turn?

I don't think Burst Lightning is going to matter with the kicker because this deck will die if the game drags on.

I think I'll be testing this list:

4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
2 [A] Plateau
2 [b] Taiga
1 [u] Savannah
2 [RAV] Mountain (2)

// Creatures
3 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [ZEN] Steppe Lynx
3 [b] Kird Ape or Goyf? which is better? I think Jotun Grunt is actually better in this build.

// Spells
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
3 [EXO] Price of Progress
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [DLM] Incinerate
4 [VI] Fireblast

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [CFX] Path to Exile
SB: 4 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip

Hanni

11-08-2009, 12:39 AM

Hanni, I've been testing this deck a little bit, and the main problem I'm coming across is mana issues. I got flooded a little bit, but it might just be a statistical anomaly that in the 4 matches I played I was flooded. I'm also not entirely sure if a turn 3 win is as often as you'd like to think.

My build was the same as yours, with your manabase changes you recommended, but I went +1 grim lavamancer, +2 price of progress, -3 burst lightning. And then +2 whatever in the sideboard. I know grim is kind of slow but he is a nice tool against a lot of matchups where we might be able to go a little slower.

But I think you may be onto something. This deck has some raw power that is currently unique in the format. No other deck seems to be as reliably fast as this one.

The land flood was an anomaly. 19 lands is the correct number of lands. In truth, the deck should have even less flood issues now with 12 fetches instead of 8, since it has increased land thinning.

Turn 3 goldfishes are consistent. Keep in mind I said goldfishes. Of course, against any sort of resistance, it's obviously slower than that. The goldfish consistently turn 3-4, rarely going past turn 4. I'd say I goldfish turn 3 hands approximately 75% of the time.

You really don't want to run more than 2 Lavamancers. I've posted detail reasonings why a few times in earlier pages, so I don't want to repeat a long explanation. To sum it up with a few points:

You never want to see more than 1 Lavamancer a game, regardless if the opponent has removal or not. Grim Lavamancer requires more mana investment for damage production than any other spell in the deck, which is the main reason you don't want to run more than 2. They can be great in many situations, but the deck can function perfectly fine without them. There's alot more content to this, but I'm not gonna dig my brain for everything and I don't wanna search pages and pages back to copy/paste.

However, with 4 more fetchlands and no Tarmogoyf now, it is possible to revisit the Lavamancer count. When I ran 8 fetches and 4 Goyf, extensive testing showed 2 to be correct. While most of the reasons why still apply with 12 fetches and no Goyf, I'm not going to say that adding 1 more Lavamancer is wrong until I do extensive testing with the new config.

Price of Progress maindeck is a meta call. If you expect alot of heavy nonbasic decks, go for it. For me, I hate the inconsistency in game 1 in matchups where it nets 0-4 damage. I run the full 4 in the board because they are very strong against some matchups, and are an easy swap for the 4 Incinerates in those cases. In some metas, 4 PoP is a good call. Burst Lightning is not the spell to cut for PoP; Incinerate is.

I also agree that this new variation of Sligh truly pushes it over the edge. With 12 very large 1cc drops now, the decks fundamental curve has significantly lowered and its damage output has significantly increased. I mean, compare this to Dryad Sligh. Hell, compare this to the original Goyf Sligh. The new 1 drops they printed just completely push Sligh over the edge, IMO. If the deck ever starts to see tournament play, i.e people start playing Sligh, it'll easily be a DTB. I've been saying this for a long time though.

Would it be better to replace either Seal/Shock/Burst Lightning with Kird Ape that technically shocks every turn?

I don't think Burst Lightning is going to matter with the kicker because this deck will die if the game drags on.

I think I'll be testing this list:

The point of the Burst Lightning is because you want additional 1cc burn. Especially now with 12 big 1cc guys, you want to have enough 1cc burn spells to drop a guy on turn 1 and remove the opponent's blocker on turn 2 so he can swing. 1cc burn allows you to do so through Wasteland and Daze, or it allows you to drop another 1cc guy in the same turn. It's important, trust me.

Even if I was going to drop the Burst Lightnings for additional guys, it wouldn't be Kird Ape. It also wouldn't be Jotun Grunt, who doesn't play well with Grim Lavamancer. It would be Tarmogoyf.

Also, cutting Magma Jet is a very bad idea. I don't know what conclusions were made in the Zoo thread for why they don't run it, but it's mandatory here. Also, they run Sylvan Library, which they can get away with because their deck is much slower, and replaces the Magma Jet effect. In here, Magma Jet is essential. Especially now that the deck runs Steppe Lynx, Magma Jet is even more important. If you want a detailed reason why, I have no problem doing so, but just trust me on this.

TotallySweet

11-08-2009, 06:06 AM

=some quality information=

I guess I'm just a bad player for thinking that Sligh is a better choice than Zoo.

No, you aren't, it's just your opinion. The reason I personally feel Zoo is better (and my opinion isn't neutral since I play Zoo) is three small differences between the decks:
1) Exile target creature. This is a huge advantage over Goyf Sligh just having burn in the majority of matchups (exile ichorids, can't burn 12/12s, can't burn tombstalkers without 2 cards, goyf-be-gone, etc).
2) Qasali Pridemage. This admittedly used to be more powerful than it currently is, due to the decline (at least from what I've noticed) in countertop decks, but still has the power of a sideboard card maindeck while still being an excellent creature in its own right.
3) Doesn't run suboptimal (suicide-esque) cards for risky short term gain. I must, of course, mention Path to Exile that we run as an exception, otherwise I would have said 'doesn't run cards that help the opponent as a drawback'. In this one I'm including a bunch of bad cards that often find in Goyf Sligh like Goblin Guide, Shock, Incinerate, Seal of Fire, Steppe Linx, etc.

The biggest net difference, as you said, is the fundamental turn. Goyf Sligh just straight up has a faster clock than Zoo. By a turn, certainly, and perhaps even 2 turns goldfishing (!). Where my opinion enters this, because Sligh being faster is fact (why else would you run stuff like Goblin Guide and inefficient burn for 1?), is that if you can't win on turn 1, 2, or 3 with protection and/or through disruption of some sort from the opponent, then a more stable, less dangerous turn 5 or 6 is preferable. To me.

I'm sure I'm missing something important (why would there be a huge, active thread if I was totally correct? there wouldn't, so I'm overlooking something) so maybe someone can explain some matchups that Goyf Sligh outperforms Zoo in, and thus, in certain metas would be far and away the better choice (a meta with slowish (turn 3&4) combo decks for example, or a field without 3+ toughness blockers).

As an aside, I like Sligh. I used to play it back in the day, and I mean no offense, in case this post comes across as such.

FoulQ

11-08-2009, 07:51 AM

@ TotallySweet

1) PtE is in most goyf sligh decks too now actually, mostly in the sb.
2) The game is short enough that we aren't going to as much need a qasali pridemage. And we got grip out of the side if things are a problem. The only thing a quick qasali will help is t2 counterbalance, and against hanni's version they better hope they have some good shit on top or they are going to lose very quickly. Or I suppose turn 1/2 chalice, which will be a real bummer.
3) Not sure what to say about this

The thing is, disruption is less likely to occur if the game ends quicker.

@ Hanni: Ok I'll look back at your posts on grim. I'm guessing you are right about it. I guess you are also right that if you are going to play PoP to cut incinerate, I just really have a hard time telling people "I'm playing a competitive legacy deck with burst lightning" :P

Hanni

11-08-2009, 11:00 AM

@ Hanni: Ok I'll look back at your posts on grim. I'm guessing you are right about it. I guess you are also right that if you are going to play PoP to cut incinerate, I just really have a hard time telling people "I'm playing a competitive legacy deck with burst lightning" :P

Burst Lightning might come off as jank, but then again, Goblin Guide and Steppe Lynx come off the same way. Hell, people think that even Magma Jet is jank these days. While these cards may be jank on their own, when you combine them all in the same deck, they are actually really good.

Hopefully, Wizards will print another 1cc 3 damage burn spell that targets creatures that can replace the Burst Lightnings sometime in the future. Give it the same drawback Path to Exile has, and I don't see it being too good to print, either.

As an aside, I like Sligh. I used to play it back in the day, and I mean no offense, in case this post comes across as such.

No offense taken. Most players right now feel the same way as you. I just want to point out that even when this deck doesn't win on turn 3 or 4, it still has inevitability because it has plenty of reach because of its large amount of burn spells.

troopatroop

11-08-2009, 11:19 AM

Also, cutting Magma Jet is a very bad idea. I don't know what conclusions were made in the Zoo thread for why they don't run it, but it's mandatory here. Also, they run Sylvan Library, which they can get away with because their deck is much slower, and replaces the Magma Jet effect. In here, Magma Jet is essential. Especially now that the deck runs Steppe Lynx, Magma Jet is even more important. If you want a detailed reason why, I have no problem doing so, but just trust me on this.

While I think that you're probably right, more testing needs to be done on this. This was the question I always asked myself when testing sligh, How good is Magma Jet? When my hand was already good, Magma Jet was garbage. Magma Jet is by FAR the "worst" card in the deck. It does nothing to speed the deck up, but it also helps fix the most pressing issue, which is losing due to bad luck/drawing lands/playing red (Along with setting up landfall now). Multiples are awful imo, totally gum up my hand sometimes, and the 2 damage can't kill everything. EOT "Jet you" could have been Goyf. Basically, it increases consistency, but at the steep cost of speed. Could another more redundant card like Lava Spike work more toward the decks goals? I'm not necesarily suggesting that card, but it's a good basis for comparison. Sometimes Magma Jet is invaluable, like when you're removing a blocker, but I don't think that it's a card choice that should be pinned as mandatory.

Hanni

11-10-2009, 11:19 AM

Alright, I'll concede. Magma Jet isn't mandatory. However, it's really not a card that should be dropped. While multiples do slow tempo tremendously, it falls under a similar philosophy as Fireblast; yea, multiples suck, but it's necessary because of it's role in the deck.

Magma Jet might initially slow down tempo, requiring 2 mana for only 1 damage, but it makes up for the tempo lost by gaining tempo by putting 2 worthless topdecks to the bottom of library. If you don't need landfall to trigger and have 2-3 lands in play already, a Scry 2 revealing 2 lands would have normally cost you 2 full turns of tempo loss, which is far greater of a tempo gain than doing only 2 damage for 2 mana.

Magma Jet fixes draws in a deck that relies heavily on the topdeck, and has no other means of fixing draws. To me, this is invaluable.

Also, I want to end my Magma Jet discussion on this final point:

If you play a Steppe Lynx on turn 1, casting Magma Jet on turn 2 to destroy the opponent's blocker is a very strong play, often setting Steppe Lynx up for two 4 damage swings.

---

On a different note, inspired by zabuza from the LBoros Landfall thread:

The problem is that this deck needs at least 14 fetch to effectively abuse from landfall. The less fetch you play, the worst lynxes are. Rohner (the player who uses this deck for first time) and his teammates assures that 15 fetch is the right number. In testing 14 fetch is ok, but less make the deck worse.

I disagree. 12 has been sufficient in testing, especially with 4 Magma Jet. I'm not saying that more couldn't be better. The problem with running any more than 12 fetchlands, though, is that you either need to run more than 19 lands (which is wrong), or cut mana producing lands.

Running 2/2 Plateau/Taiga is the correct call. Cutting one shuts you off of a color for the rest of the game from a single Wasteland. Do not go below 2/2.

Other than that, I'm running 3 basic Mountains. I would not go below 2 basic mountains. I run 33 spells that require red mana (only), and in alot of games, I don't even need green or white. Especially if you know you're facing Wasteland, having 2 mountains in play is very strong. This deck needs at least 2 lands in play to function properly.

Now that you mention it though, I'll go ahead and drop down to 2 Mountains for 1 Scalding Tarn. 2 basic Mountains is all the deck needs to function off of through Wasteland/Wastelock, and the 13th fetchland should improve consistency.

---

Oh, and this "new" Sligh deck probably needs a thread new primer, because the entire concept has changed from the OP. The entire creature base, aside from the 2 Grim Lavamancer's, is completely different now. 3 new creatures have been printed that have radically changed Sligh. The deck no longer runs Tarmogoyf, which is the trademark of this threads name and deck design. If Goyf Sligh got a new thread and primer when being switched from Dryad Sligh, especially considering that those two are much more closely related than Goyf Sligh to his one, I'd say that warrants a new thread and primer.

I'd say that a title of R/w/g Naya Sligh would be the appropriate name for it, but I definitely don't have the time to write up a huge detailed primer. I haven't even gotten around to working on the U/W Counterbalance Landstill primer I was supposed to, and probably won't ever get around to.

If anyone wants to take this job on, kudos to you my good sir. On the bright side, if this deck picks up in popularity, you'll have your name (since you created the thread) on a deck that's DTB.

Hanni

11-10-2009, 11:07 PM

Sorry for the double post, but I had some new content.

Before I get started, I'd like to say that I love how Steppe Lynx makes me hate land floods much less than before. Between the increased fetchlands for land thinning, Steppe Lynx, and Fireblast, I'm very pleased with the curve. Normally I never wanted to see more than 3 lands, and was often content with 2, but I find myself less angry about seeing 4 lands now. Seeing more than 4 still sucks most of the time, especially without Steppe Lynx or Fireblast, but that's obviously no worse than before. The fact that I can keep excess lands in hand (or uncracked fetchlands in play), and actually put them to good use when I topdeck a Steppe Lynx (or Fireblast), makes the deck less effected by land floods now.

---

I'm wondering if Grim Lavamancer is really worth it anymore, with the new changes. While Grim Lavamancer offers a very unique and very powerful ability to the deck, it's also fairly slow and requires a fairly big mana investment. Is the extra reach/staying power it adds really necessary anymore? It costs two mana to deal the first 2 damage, and one additional mana for each additional 2 damage after that.

In comparison with the other 1cc creatures, Grim Lavamancer can still average 6 damage in one spell, and oftentimes can do more than that, but it requires a much larger mana investment.

In comparison with the other 1cc creatures, Grim Lavamancer costs four mana to average 6 damage instead of just one.

The thing that keeps me loyal to Grim Lavamancer is the fact that he functions as a reusable burn spell rather than an attacking creature. This makes him great at removing blockers for your other creatures to swing through with, and allows him to still push damage through after the ground gets stalled by guys like Tarmogoyf.

The other thing that keeps me loyal to him is that I've won alot of matchups with him. The mana investment is split between multiple turns rather than all at once, and sometimes uses excess mana sources that would otherwise be unused.

What I like is that it's basically a Burst Lightning on a "stick." The first turn you cast it, it does nothing but consume 1 mana, which costs tempo. Every turn after that though, # of cards in the graveyard depending, it is basically an extra Burst Lightning. This adds a huge amount of extra reach and last power that I'm not sure I'm ready to get rid of.

Only problem is, 3 Burst Lightnings do the same damage as 2 Lightning Bolts, and this guy costs a pre-emptive 1 mana which also has no immediate effect the turn it's cast. So essentially, I'm spending 4 mana to do the same amount of damage I could have done spending only 2 mana. Again, the question is: Is the extra reach/staying power it adds really necessary anymore?

With all the radical innovation I've implemented into Sligh in the last few days, with much help from many others, I think his inclusion warrants new testing.

---

For those that still have some faith in Tarmogoyf, it could quite possibly be the correct desicion to run 2 Tarmogoyf instead of 2 Grim Lavamancer. The role of Tarmogoyf in here would be similar to the role of Woolly Thoctar in Zoo. Basically, a higher-costed big ass creature, that is ran as a 2-of to round out the curve.

Tarmogoyf only requires a two mana investment one time. The only thing I don't like about that, is that Tarmogoyf cast on turn 2 consumes the entire turns mana resources, and he cannot swing until turn 3. Sometimes he only swings for 3 damage, which makes it even worse. On turn three, even when he does swing for 4, I'm spending two mana on a creature that averages 4 damage on the same turn that my other 12 (1cc) creatures average 6 damage. Often, I'm done attacking by turn 3, rarely do I go past turn 4. Regardless, Tarmogoyf is almost always a 4/5 by turn 4, and can sometimes be even bigger depending on the opponent's deck (or whether or not I run Tarfire or Seal of Fire).

Anyways, much of the reason I'm done attacking by turn 3 or turn 4 is because larger creatures are now in play. Unlike Wild Nacatl and Goblin Guide, Tarmogoyf can still be a threat during this time, and now with Steppe Lynx, he (Lynx) can also be a threat if I can manage to drop another fetchland or two. 4 Steppe Lynx 2 Tarmogoyf may make it possible for me to effectively attack for an extra turn or two that I normally wouldn't.

A new conflict arises from an extended attacking plan though, which is whether or not to cut Burst Lightning for Path to Exile. Path to Exile is a worthless topdeck if the attacking plan is no longer effective (or the opponent has no blockers in the first place), where Burst Lightning is never a dead card. Both function as a 1cc early game removal spell, though, and Path to Exile offers a removal option that burn doesn't, which is to answer guys with larger tougnesses. Interesting conflict.

If one were to go this route, this would slow the deck down some. The point of Lynx was to speed the deck up. Just like my questioning for Grim Lavamancer: Is the extra reach/staying power it adds really necessary anymore?

Obviously, no Goyf and no Path to Exile is going to be faster and more aggressive, at the cost of midgame strength. Is faster better, or is more midgame strength better? That's the recurring question here, and that's something that I truly need to do extensive playtesting with to come up with the correct answer.

---

Basically, both Goyf and Lavamancer are slow, but they both give the deck additional reach/staying power. Goyf slows the deck down much worse than Lavamancer when cast on turn 2, but doesn't require any additional mana investment after that. Grim Lavamancer doesn't slow the deck down as bad as Goyf on any particular turn, but slows the deck down continuously over the course of all turns. Goyf is going to do a far greater amount of damage for the mana invested, while Grim Lavamancer is going to more reliably deal damage.

One final comparison to note is that Tarmogoyf costing 2 mana helps give the deck a few extra spells out of the 1cc range, even though Chalice@1 is going to be a bitch preboard regardless.

I'm pretty sure that after testing, I will conclude that Grim Lavamancer is still the correct call, I just wanted to toss this idea out there. In all honesty, it's possible that neither Grim Lavamancer nor Tarmogoyf are necessary in the deck anymore, and that either another creature or burn spell would be better, or that another card will get printed in an upcoming set that will take over this 2-of spot. My guess is that nothing fills the void well enough right now, and if anything, it would be Price to Progress.

However, I'm very hopeful that Wizard's will eventually print just one more insane spell that affects this deck, that will either replace the current Grim Lavamancer spots, replace the current Burst Lightnings spots, or both.

Long post is long.

That is all.

heroicraptor

11-11-2009, 12:48 AM

What about Reckless Abandon (http://magiccards.info/ud/en/94.html)?

FoulQ

11-11-2009, 01:07 AM

Hanni

11-11-2009, 01:06 PM

Hey yo Hanni, I wasn't doing much official testing, but after my initial somewhat untested praise of grim, I've come to the conclusion that I'm not really liking him either. He's best at totally neutering opposing armies and this deck has faster plans than just removing guys (basically just removing guys for big steppe lynx/guide swings). I'm not sure what I would replace him with. I know you hate lava spike and I agree with you but I'm going to try it for a little bit and see what happens.

I'm not ready to cut Grim Lavamancer yet, just wanted to toss that idea out there.

The only other thing that worries me is that with creature heavy hands, you are somewhat forced to overextend in order to hasten the clock so your opponent can't stabilize, which makes you die badly to sweepers. Don't know if you have encountered this at all, just something I've noticed a couple times. Is it worth it to play around a deck you know is running sweepers if your hand is creature heavy? Or should we just always go balls to the walls...

Seems like less of an issue for us than it would be for Zoo, though. I'd play the creature heavy hands and overextend, because the 27 burn spells in the deck have to get topdecked sometime. Maybe hold a guy back if you fear a sweeper, but most sweepers come online a bit too late.

Also what do you side PTE in against exactly? Having swords effects is a little different for this deck so I was wondering what you were doing with that.

Ichorid. Dreadnought. Dark Depths. Pretty savage against the low threat density decks like Tempo Thresh and Team America, too.

heroicraptor

11-11-2009, 01:08 PM

Maybe hold a guy back if you fear a sweeper, but most sweepers come online a bit too late.

EE can come online turn two, especially during games 2 and 3, if they mull into it.

Hanni

11-11-2009, 01:09 PM

I said most.

TotallySweet

11-12-2009, 12:34 AM

Seems like less of an issue for us than it would be for Zoo, though.

God Tier: Wrath of God, Damnation. Slow and almost never see play.
Normal Tier: Firespout, Flamebreak, EE, Moat. Goyf and Thoctar/Knight live through the first two, EE can't hit everything, and Moat is an enchantment. Slight downsides but all good vs me.
Shit Tier: Pyroclasm, Volcanic Fallout. 2 damage doesn't kill anything but pridemages and grim (if the list even runs him).

That being said, as Zoo I haven't had any problems with overextending into sweepers. One goyf and a nacatl is plenty to ride to victory while keeping dudes in my hand (I play very conservatively and default to falling into the control role even as aggro - which is a mixed blessing). A lot of these new decks seem to think it's fine to run a tiny amount of creatures so even one resolved path really hurts. Plus I have plenty of burn to go the distance after the man plan slows down (I run 13-15 odd burn).

JudasKilled

12-03-2009, 03:02 AM

As I see it you have the following as MUST haves or the deck core:

13+ fetches
2 taiga
2 plateu
1 mountain
and extra fetch or mountain

4 steppe lynx
4 gobo guide
4 wild nactl

4 lightning bolt
4 chain lightning
4 rift bolt

3 magma jet (4)
3 fire blast (4)

So your optional slots:
4th fireblast or magma jet ( i likely agree 4 is correct)

2-3 grim lavamancer
i think 2 is required and 3 is better, it beats for 1, kills blockers , and gives u dmg options if u get slowed down or get cb locked.

I personally run 2 seals of fire which has single handedly won me dredge games.

Now the real point of my post and the question I ask myself is this:
I have been testing 4 goyf and as much as I love goyf when the games going well you dont want him. When its going bad or your playing mid range naya zoo you pray for him. I have been considering md'ing 3 and sbing 1.

The other thing I have been considering is Q pridemage:
It gets rid of jitte, chalice at 1 and counterbalance. Hes also a 3/3 attacker on his own and +1 dmg on turn 2 if you made your 1 drop.

The only thing that bothers me is the GW.

Also do ppl think duergar hedge mage or k grip is optimal for a diverse meta.

Additional Comment:
Your storm match up is good. I played ANT 5 matches and won 60% on the play and about 55% on the draw ( im aware thats not alot of dats) It just seems like unless they have the nuts opener they dont have 2 turns to ponder then ad naus. Yer often having them at 10 at the end of your turn 2 with fireblast 6 they cant adnaus out of that.

I also havent had much concern for dredge after playing it. Its rough but I have managed to race them about 50/50 throughout the match so the die rolls super important.

So in effect my sideboard has nothing to deal with either.
3 price of progress
4 vexxing shusher
3 sulfuric vortex
1 tarmo
4 pridemage

questions comments etc i have a week till a scg 5k and want to get thing optimised.