I play 20, because I like to have a lategame plan if things fall apart. For me, this manifests itself in 4 figure of destiny, 2 Cursed scroll. Both of these work best with a fair amount of lands, so I use 20. 0 of them are Horizon Canopy.
Printable View
I play 20, because I like to have a lategame plan if things fall apart. For me, this manifests itself in 4 figure of destiny, 2 Cursed scroll. Both of these work best with a fair amount of lands, so I use 20. 0 of them are Horizon Canopy.
With Horizon Canopy I think as long as you keep the fetch count high to hit whatever land you need to pump guys as often as possible I think a 2-of is ok.
20-21 Lands is to help keep up with wastelands and stifles, because in 3-color zoo just getting wasteland-ed once or twice or losing a turn or two of aggression can lose you the game. Also if you want to jam basics in there (avoid moon effects and total wasteland/price of progress blowout) 20-21 is the number that comes out naturally. like with
4 Windswept Heath
4 Wooded Foothills
3 Taiga
2 Horizon Canopy
2 Plateau
1 Savannah
2 Bloodstained Mire
1 Forest
1 Plains
1 Mountain
you wouldn't really want to cut anything, maybe a taiga or canopy if you really wanted 20. It hits 21 to be able to support Pridemage and Thoctar also.
Baileyarch- with the high land count and no Canopies do you ever sb out a land or two vs zoo/ aggro?
To tell ya the truth, I'm the only person in my weekly 25 to 30 person tourney that actually plays Zoo.Quote:
Originally Posted by oneiros76
Goyf Sligh is played, but I'm not scared of that matchup at all. As long as i watch how i fetch so PoP doesn't fuck me I'm fine. Your threats stay around theirs don't.
Plus with my Sideboard, i couldn't think of anything to put in except for maybe Ancient Grudge in those kinda matchups.
You guys really aren't thinking about Canopy correctly, at all. The reason it is amazing is because you can use it to "cheat" your manabase numbers; the card actually lets you run extra lands.
I've been doing a lot of testing against decks with mana denial elements (there are a lot of them currently in the format, after all), and many of those matchups are in Zoo's favor, as long as the mana denial doesn't cause a blow-out. Obviously, one way to help prevent that scenario is to add more lands to the deck, but that has the drawback of lessening the threat density, which has a negative impact in practically every matchup.
What Horizon Canopy is is an almost tailor-made solution to this problem. It is a beautifully-designed compromise between running more lands and maintaining a deck's threat density. It taps for mana when you need it, and cycles for an extra card when you don't. You can add Horizon Canopy to any deck as an additional mana source without increasing the likelihood of mana flood, because an unnecessary Canopy can easily replace itself with an extra draw.
Based on my testing, the correct number of lands for a Zoo deck is somewhere between nineteen and twenty. That is where you have the best odds of avoiding both manascrew and manaflood. However, with three or four Horizon Canopies incorporated into the manabase, you can easily run 21 or 22 lands without the expected decrease in threat density. My current set-up, with three Horizon Canopies and 21 lands total, is actually less vulnerable to either manascrew or manaflood than a list without Canopies, because it simultaneously has more mana sources and fewer "normal" lands that can't cycle into business.
There are, of course, some trade-offs to playing with Horizon Canopy. Although it taps for two of Zoo's colors (so lucky!), it doesn't tap for red, the most important one. This means that a manabase with Canopy may have fewer red sources than it would have otherwise (mine, for example, has fifteen red sources with Canopy, but would have sixteen or seventeen without it, even if it would have fewer lands total). This is acceptable, but finding the right balance is a matter of testing. I have tried playing four Canopies in a list with only twenty lands total, which meant that there was only room for thirteen red sources. This gave the deck tremendous threat density, but it made Fireblast unreliable, and it did indeed cause some problems powering Apes and Nacatls in the face of mana denial, as some of you have suggested.
However, since I have arrived at the current arrangement, I have noticed a greater resiliency to mana denial, thanks to the extra lands, and I pop Canopies all of the time in order to draw into game-winning spells. I'm completely sold on the card, both theoretically and through experience. Can anybody who has tested a similar list tell me they aren't?
This kind of logic is why I listen when Alix talks.
Yeah I'm thinking about cutting a land, and It'll be a Savannah before anything else. That's what kills me about Canopy too, It's just another Savannah, and that is the weakest dual in the deck ya know? I just found myself in situations where i had to decide to cast spells or pop Canopy for a card i couldn't play in the same turn. Idk i totally see the good points that everyone are making though.
I'm gonna give Lavamancer a shot too i think. I wouldn't ever run him as over a 3 of because multiples would be crappy, but if i cut a land and my 2 Isamaru, which are bad in multiples too, i could fit in Lavamancer.
Thoughts?
Alix, could you post your current list please?
This really doesn't make sense to me. If you have something to play, play it. Why would you want to pop Canopy? It's there to function as a land until you need the card or as a card to "cycle" if you draw it late.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loxodon Baileyarch
Damage from it IS relevant. And digging for an answer as well. That's what i meant. Sorry i didn't clarify.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
I think I will try 1 Canopy in my 19 land-build, obv instead of a Savannah. I feel that 19 lands are the way to go for me and I think Iīm going to try Hellspark Elemental instead of Kird Ape. Iīll let you know the results.
Baileyarch- lavamancer has always been nuts for me, while you can kind of choke on him when you don't have enough red mana for spells plus his activation, the damage that he can generate directly to your opponent definitely makes up for it. Also in multiples you're right he can be awkward, but you can also get situations where you have two, activate 1 or 2 eot, next turn Fireblast+activate them both again. He's incredibly important in merfolk matchups too, I was running 3 for a while and switched to 4 because of merfolk. He's able to perform targeted removal on their lords, where other Isamaru types just swing in while they build up their horde and run you over, and keeping up with removing their lords is more important now that they're adding 4 more to their list (maybe?). His ability to trade his activation for a creature is really valuable also, and in a last ditch Ichorid situation he can blast himself (;_;).
Snief- Definitely let us know, whenever I test out Hellspark or Marauders I always find myself wishing they were more permanent cheap pounders though.
Regarding playing around daze, does and should this deck play around daze? Or are there only specific situations to do that? (eg. playing burn spells once a turn, ensuring you have that one mana to pay for daze)
I don't ever see this deck playing around Daze in the early turns by forfeiting early creature drops. Am I correct? Or dead wrong?
I usually do not play around daze turn one. If they counter my Nacatl that's fine by me because then they're behind one land and I just love to play my Grim Lavamancer on turn 2 with only FOW as my opponents out. But the other way around happens too depending on the deck my opponent is playing.
Some examples:
Vs Merfolk its almost always Nacatl first and then Lavamancer.
Vs ThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh its usually the other way around. Because Nacatl is such a good beater (early game) and Lavamancer can't target mongeese.
When I want to play Tarmogoyf I almost always do take Daze into account because he's such a big beater (most times) and I want it to stick.
@: CB4SN13
I've done alot of testing with NLU and other countertop variants, and them countering your turn one Nacatyl is bad. It allows you to race them and perhaps burn them out after they have set up.
Playing around Daze is risky, because they might just have the Counterbalance or Shackles they need, and then you're fucked. Those are the only two cards i worry about while playing around Daze to be honest. It's best to bait their counters with your mediocre spells, and then try and land a bomb. If they have the FOW then they have it, too bad. Magic is partially a game of luck.
@: oneiros76
Yeah he seems to be a bit on the ridiculous side. I hardly ever worry about the Merfolk matchup. I've only lost once with Zoo that i can recall. And that was with him chaining Standstills and the Merfolk Ringleaders, so It's understandable. I don't run Fireblast either haha.
Yeah, with this deck you "play around daze" by thinking about what's less useful to be countered. You try and bait them to counter your "less useful" spells, and then lay down better things. It's always dependent on the build, hand, and what you're playing against, but it's okay for your things to get countered.
It's likewise okay, because then you're buying yourself time to lay down a pridemage or some other strong beaters in the face of their counterbalance, or straight up just getting more tempo than them. Force of will can likewise be useful, because it gives us a chance for some card advantage with is good for us. Most of the time I just get upset when pridemage is countered, because he's really your best guy in most blue matchups, killing problem artifacts/enchantments, and lettting your other creatures swing through to contend with goyf.
I was thinking about Lavamancer, and idk wtf i was thinking about adding him. My list is WAY too permanent heavy. I'll prolly drop a land for a 4th Chain or PTE.
Seems WAY better.
Grim Lavamancer is insane. He lets you win Tarmogoyf wars. If you don't have a goyf, he'll help shrink your opponent's goyf. You can kill off plenty of small creatures or combine it with a bolt to knock off a bigger dude without expending a second burn spell. And sacrificing 2 mountains for Fireblast helps feed your Lavamancer's ability.
Anyone else tried out 1 or 2 Ajani Vengeant? I know what you're all thinking and lots of people have told me Ajani was way too slow. I've played with him in a few local tournaments. It's like an extra Lightning Helix + draws some damage away from you. It gets past Chalice, Spell Snare, and Counterbalance. Be interesting to know if anyone else has had luck with Ajani.
(I run 2 Jitte and 2 Ajani in place of 4 Chain Lightning.)
I think Sarkhan Vol is better than Ajani if you're considering planeswalkers.
I don't think that we really have any planeswalkers that make sense in zoo right now...
Ajani Vengeant seems worse than lightning helix, since more often than not that's probably about all the use you'd get out of him. Plus, the four cost can be a huge detriment.
Sarkhan Vol seems likewise not so useful, because of the 4 cost, but more importantly the fact that he doesn't really do any good by himself, and he's not easy to protect. However, the fact that he can threaten can maybe be useful? I just don't think that the 4 cost justifies their use when we have so many cheaper, and more powerful threats to be played with.
I definitely run 4 Lightning Helix. Usually, when I land Ajani, he gets to helix twice. Ajani has helped in my matches so far, but I limit him to 2, maximum.
Here's the list I run.
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Qasali Pridemage
4 Kird Ape
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Grim Lavamancer
2 Woolly Thoctar
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lightning Helix
2 Fireblast
4 Path to Exile
2 Umezawa's Jitte
2 Ajani Vengeant
4 Windswept Heath
4 Wooded Foothills
3 Taiga
2 Savannah
3 Plateau
1 Mountain
1 Plains
2 Forest
@:LaphroaigFan
A 4cc spell in Zoo, that totally describes what this deck does. Cheap efficient threats and cheap efficient burn. I mean right?
Sorry, but that idea is just bad. If you care that much about the control matchup, which you shouldn't, then run Shusher main or something else. And i mean, i don't think ANYONE has had some REAL success with any planeswalker in Zoo.
Also.. Lavamancer is bad in my build. I realized that, and i know his pros and cons, people have been jerking off to him on here for a while.
@everyone else:
I really don't know why more people don't play maindeck Jitte in this deck. It's an auto include in any aggro deck, it is that damn good. People swear up and down by Dark Confidant, weakening the already semi-weak mana base of Zoo, but don't run Jitte, which is just as powerful!?
I dont believe Bob has any place in this deck, The mana base is too shaky already. As for jitte, its good against other aggro decks, but thats all, so i would keep them in the board.
I absolutely feel the same about Lavamancer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loxodon Baileyarch
So, after testing, this is my new list. I wanted a deck to be as fast as possible and this is the result after tuning/testing:
2 Taiga
2 Plateau
2 Savannah (still not convinced of Horizon Canopy)
3 Mountain
1 Forest
1 Plains
3 Wooded Foothills
2 Bloodstained MIre
3 Windswept Heath
4 Nacatl
4 Kird Ape
4 Qasali Pridemage
4 Goyf
4 Hellspark Elemental
2 Thoctar
2 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Lightning Helix
3 Price of Progress
3 Fireblast
4 Magma Jet
SB
3 PtE
3 Krosan Grip
3 Pyroclasm/Fallout
3 Gaddock Teeg
3 Ethersworn Canonist
My Choices:
I changed PtE from Main to SB and Relic had to go. So Iīm accepting Ichorid as a bad matchup, where I have to be lucky (or faster, sure! :tongue: ).
PtE often is a dead card mainboard for me, so i removed it and replaced it with Hellspark Elemental which Iīm totally convinced of. Noone wants to block this guy, you still can deal damage under standstill and normally he is 6dmg for 4mana.
I donīt play Jitte because I think itīs too slow. That sounds ridiculous, but itīs the same for me like playing a planeswalker in this deck; i donīt like it. VS all aggro decks you should anyway have a positive matchup (except monored, maybe) where you donīt need Jitte at all. Plus you have Helizes.
I'd look into cutting a Mire and running the 4th Foothills, it's pulling the 2 colors you use most. Since you're heavy burn Canopy would not be good as more than a 2 of in this build.
I'm curious as to why you think Ichorid is a bad MU. Doesn't Hellspark do his job, then remove their bridges? What about burning one of your guys?
In what MU has PtE been a dead card? There is always something over there that I don't want to see and double bonus if they don't have any basics.
I thought you said you wanted your deck "as fast as possible"? Curious that you run 2 chain and 3 helix. Chain allows you to burn their guy, then cast another one drop on turn 2. = FAST
You are also heavy burn and afraid of lavamancer? I would not dismiss him so quickly, especially with 8 fetches and all that burn. How many times have you played with him and of those games how many times was he INOP? I run a more creature heavy list, but can still activate my mancers 2-4 times a game.
Ok, Ichorid is not a bad matchup, but there are better ones. :smile:
PtE was dead against Landstill, ANT and Enchantress. In all matchups a burn card would have been better. I donīt say that PtE isnīt a nice spell but I prefer burn at the moment.
I tested Lavamancer and he dealt ~4 dmg every game, but when I tested Kird Ape he always hit for ~6dmg, maybe with support from Pridemage. The downside of Lavamancer for me is, that you donīt wanna (or canīt) beat with him if you donīt have 2 cards in your grave. Maybe Iīll give him a try again after the next tournament.
What are peoples thoughts on the new Great Sable Stag?
Compared to Woolly Thoctar Is a 3/3 body for 3 too weak, or does the double Protection & uncounterable offer some value?
i top8ed yesterday with this list: ( i didn't have money for other fetches/duals)
// Lands
3 [R] Taiga
1 [ON] Windswept Heath
1 [R] Plateau
1 [RAV] Sacred Foundry
1 [UNH] Forest
4 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
1 [OD] Plains (3)
4 [MR] Mountain (1)
// Creatures
3 [ARB] Qasali Pridemage
3 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
3 [EVE] Figure of Destiny
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
2 [ALA] Woolly Thoctar
// Spells
4 [R] Lightning Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
3 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [CFX] Path to Exile
3 [VI] Fireblast
3 [EX] Price of Progress
// Sideboard
SB: 2 [CH] Tormod's Crypt
SB: 2 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 1 [ALA] Ethersworn Canonist
SB: 2 [10E] Pyroclasm
SB: 4 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 1 [GP] Burning-Tree Shaman
SB: 3 [SC] Pyrostatic Pillar
I won against a land-denial GBw and aggro loam,lose to bant control(kitchen finks,jitte,countertop xD) and to ubg landstill(manaflood 11 lands with 5 fetch i GY),then i won to another deck but don't remember the game
i ended 3-0-2
This is my current list...
// Lands
2 [U] Savannah
3 [FUT] Horizon Canopy
1 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
3 [A] Taiga
2 [R] Plateau
4 [ON] Windswept Heath
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Mountain
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Forest
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Plains
// Creatures
4 [ARB] Qasali Pridemage
3 [CNF] Knight of the Reliquary
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
3 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
2 [EVE] Figure of Destiny
// Spells
3 [BOK] Umezawa's Jitte
3 [CNF] Path to Exile
3 [EX] Price of Progress
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
2 [REW] Lightning Helix
3 [FNM] Fireblast
// Sideboard
SB: 1 [CNF] Path to Exile
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 3 [CNF] Volcanic Fallout
SB: 3 [SHM] Vexing Shusher
SB: 3 [ALA] Ethersworn Canonist
SB: 2 [LRW] Gaddock Teeg
I'm pretty fond of it, I gotta run right now but I'll talk about it later.
I think 2 jittes is the most you can run, at least in the main, and I really dont like fireblast in zoo, your manabase is already hurt by waste and other mana denial, it gets countered way too often for it to be worth it, as there are so many other great burn spells to run.
I agree. I mean, if you're in a situation where a free fireblast accelerates your plan to a win, I figure you'd probably be able to win next turn with a burn spell that gets in virtually the same damage. No need to commit yourself so much for a finisher, when it will really hurt you in the games that it doesn't end the game.
I think that 3 Jitte is still fine to run. It really is that good. Whether or not it's better than 2, I'm not sure. But I definitely think that everybody should run at least 2 in the main.
I know for a fact that knight has no place in the deck either, you want cost efficient, fast creatures. Knight is niether, you dont even have utility lands for zoo to want to find.
Only 9 1-drops seems a bit low, even with 13 I can have problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by hungryLIKEALION
22 lands also seems like a lot, although you do have 3 horizon canopies. Do 3 canopies ever give you problems when casting fireblast?
Hey guys, I have some questions about this deck. (RGw Zoo)
Especially, the pros and cons of this deck over Goyf sligh. I've tried to find some opinions on match ups, but I didn't really found one.
First, in what metagame would a Zoo be played over Goyf Sligh
Second, in a metagame full of ThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh, and blue based deck, (Survival with blue, Merfolk, Canadian ThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh, Land still), should a zoo or goyf sligh be played.
Also, would it be a good choice, running 2 shusher maindeck in this kind of metagame.
Thanks
Actually, I kinda disagree with you on that. I recently switched from Thoctars to Knights to see how it worked. I havent tested it a whole lot yet but there were a couple games I won because it was a Knight and not a Thoctar.Quote:
Originally Posted by beastman
He may not drop 3rd turn as big as Thoctar, but he can easily get bigger. There was one game I was on the defensive, used him to snag a fetch land, used that to find another land and he just got a cool +2/+2 and eventually led me to win. Its a really neat mechanic and Id say test it out before dismissing it completely.
Knight of the Reliquary is probably better than thoctar as goyf 5-x, but really only if you're not running Lavamancer, who tends to chew up the lands. Knight is easier on the manabase than Thoctar, can be bigger, and can fix your mana if necessary. Works well with Canopies and Fireblast too. Knight can't be red-blasted.
Hey guys. I don't really follow this thread, but I built Zoo a few months ago ago, and I noticed that really nobody else is making it the way I did. I am just now getting around to talking about it. The card choices worked for me (from memory here), but then I did't stick with it very long.
4 Wild Nacatl (Kird Ape before Nacatl came out)
4 Figure of Destiny
4 Noble Hierarch (Birds of Paradise before Hierarch came out)
4 Tarmogoyf
3 Jotun Grunt
3 Qasali Pridemage (Oblivion Ring before Pridemage came out)
4 Serra Avenger
4 Rancor
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Fireblast
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Taiga
4 Savannah
4 Plateau
4 Wooded Foothills
3 Windswept Heath
sb:
3 Krosan Grip
4 Ethersworn Canonist
4 Orim's Chant
4 Tormod's Crypt
--------------------------------------
Flying Serra Avengers and Rancor were very important to the deck. Both were magnified when the opponent had Tarmogoyf in play.
Jotun Grunt provides a modicum of disruption against a variety of decks. And yeah, it doesn't play well with Tarmos, but in practice this is a plus in a lot of cases. You can use it to bait counters and removal against all the opponents playing Tarmos when you are holding one yourself. And with Rancor and all the reach in a Zoo deck, even a couple of hits is a big deal, so your opponents pretty much have to deal with it.
I understand that the popular play is to eschew STP for PTE, but I would wager that this is a mistake and eventually we will all recognize it as such. I imagine someone will be taking me up on this, and that is OK. But Lavafrogg and I have spoken at length on the topic, and ultimately we agree pretty strongly against PTE.
Kird Ape is utter crap in this deck due to the abundance of better plays. I will never use it again.
Noble Hierarch makes the deck a bit more dynamic and a lot more explosive. It is part of a strategy. Lemme explain.
Zoo is an extremely linear and predictable deck to face. That is a big weakness against smart opponents. I have tried to eliminate a lot of that with my choices. By not going for Thoctar (I had him at first and switched to Jotun Grunt), and by including Rancor, and Hierarch, the deck is far more explosive and gives the opponent extra opportunities to make mistakes and bad guesses about what you are holding. The mana curve is very low, increasing the odds of playing several creatures on turns 2, 3, and 4, and leaving plenty for Figure of Destiny mana.
The sb is pretty raw and not tuned for anything in particular.
----------------------------------------
Now, there are some weaknesses incurred here. Engineered Explosives hurt a lot. Perhaps Teeg in the sb is a good plan. Counterbalance is similarly difficult. Between the Grips and Pridemages, though, I was reasonably successful at keeping it from owning me in the few games I encountered it. But it was still hard when I got a slow start.
-----------------------------------------
I am assuming that my perspective is unique not from some vast knowledge, but just because I am the only person I know of playing the deck this way. Has anyone else gone this route? Was he successful? And finally, can anyone see any glaring weaknesses that I simply never came across from my limited experince?
Thanks
@ Finn:
I LOVE that list. I've been trying to work on some sort of WG aggro deck for a while, and that seems good. How have no basics worked for you? And the only suggestion for the deck i would make is, cut the Heirarchs, Exalted is good, but you could run another Pridemage or more removal, and plus the mana doesn't seem needed ya know?
@Finn: The biggest question I can ask is why?
For Serra, do you only say that because of the flying, or is there some other reason why it's very important to the deck? I can understand Rancor in general (it pushes your Goyfs past your opponents Goyfs), but you lumped Rancor and Serra together, any particular reason (they seem to serve very different roles)? Also, do you ever have a problem casting Serra, since you can only cast her starting turn 4, and you have no basic lands, do you ever have a problem keeping WW available?Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
How is Grunt disruption, he's potentially a beater, but I don't see how he disrupts anything? Ultimately, the number of cards in graveyards seems to be the most limiting factor with him as a clock; an early Grunt will most likely die to it's own upkeep cost before your opponent does. Working against your own Goyf really does seem to be more detrimental than you give it credit, as well, especially with multiple Grunts on the board (which you can control yourself, obviously, but it can still be an issue). Both are likely to get countered in the mid-late game, but early game it's not as much of an issue since there shouldn't be as many cards in graveyards (which means he's actually less likely to get countered). He also dies to graveyard hate (where Goyf just shrinks (and most likely dies) ), a Relic means he has no cards left and WILL get sac'ed next upkeep, while a Goyf will just cower as a 0/1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
Back to my original question, why do you think STP is stronger than PTE? You just say you've discussed it at length, but don't actually tell what you discussed and why you came to that conclusion. The argument for one over another is pretty well expained in this thread, though, the most common conclusion being that the possibility of an extra basic land is much easier to manage than basically giving them an extra turn worth of life (especially considering PTE "may" give them a land, while STP "will" give them life).Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
I'd also like to hear a little more on why you think Heirarch is more useful. You've limited the red spells, but still have enough that not producing red seems like it can bite you when you least expect it. Exalted seems like the main reason to run him, and there are better Exalted creatured than him (like a 4x Pridemage instead of just 3x).
@ Finn: running no red spells except for 4 bolts, and 4 spells that you are required to sac 2 mountains for is a really bad plan.
I'd suggest getting rid of bolt for swords and path and blast for more removal, or dare I say it??? BERSERK FTW!!!!!
I'm better. Anyway, It would help your manabase alot, and you could play jitte too.
a. I had run into problems when I was first building the deck, but the Hierarchs go a long way to minimize this these days. With one in play there are really only seven spells that I can't play. (I actually finished off a guy on MWS with Fireblast X2 while he had Back to Basics in play) Other versions of Zoo would find this to be more of a hassle, but this design gets away with it. That said, I don't see any compelling reason why the manabase has to remain that way. Point of fact, I think I was using this base when I had BOP and just didn't change it for the Hierarchs. How about:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loxodon Baileyarch
4 Windswept Heath
4 Wooded Foothills
2 Plateau
1 Forest
4 Taiga
4 Savannah
A turn 1 Blood Moon on the draw is still going to rape you, but I don't see much of a way around that anyway unless you completely kill the manabase. I also want to note that I only have 19 lands (where I figure this deck really wants the equivalent of 21) so the Hierarchs take up little space.
b. I actually think I covered this fairly well already. The one thing I want to stress is that Hierarch (or Birds) work quite well in the meta, and that is what I like. If you land one on turn one, you are set up to land extra dudes until your hand is exhausted. What are the important turn one plays the opponent can make that really put a crimp in this deck's style?
Chalice
Trini
Blood Moon
Ghostly Prison
Tendrils x10
I don't think a better turn 1 threat is going to make any difference here. But I am guessing that the real detail is the late topdeck of a Hierarch versus a Pridemage. Well, Rancor (which can sit in your hand if you don't land a critter) minimizes this affair rather often. But yeah, Pridemage is clearly the better topdeck in most cases. So the question becomes "How do you prefer the deck to operate?" I am shooting for my opponent's death before I get to some desperate topdeck mode, so I prefer the explosive starts.
1. Rancor and Serra both provide a form of evasion. They help in a lot of the same scenarios.Quote:
Originally Posted by xycsoscyx
2. WW has been an issue from time to time, but only in games in which I am facing steep anti-nonbasic stuff (recurring Wasteland, Blood Moon, etc). I think I was unable to cast anything useful in those games anyway. I had to rely on 1cc stuff mostly. The turn 4 requirement has not been a problem (see the Jotun Grunt info below)
I can see the argument for going to 2, but I can tell you from my vast experience with this card in Death and Taxes, that you will lose him to lack of gy food in far fewer circumstances than where you benefit from the graveyard clearing he does. I understand that this is highly meta-dependent, but I have been playing D+T for a long time now. In the aggregate, I have been pleased. Also realize, that I am only stating that you come up better than even by just playing the card. When you factor in the fact that he is a 4/4 for 2 beater with an upkeep that benefits you more often than hurts you, you really have to wonder what the holdup is.Quote:
Originally Posted by xycsoscyx
Also, about Grunt in general. You will see folks like TacoSnape say how much he does not like Jotun Grunt. But I know the reason. He and just about all of the denizens of this website have been using it exclusively in decks that do not have the 26 creatures this one does. With Threshold, which has 10-ish attackers to choose from, you are likely to be holding just this one in your hand at any given time. To be effective, he HAS TO stick around while you protect him. In this deck, you will have options to play other similar threats in just about all circumstances. And the opponent will pretty much always have to assume that you have others anyway. The opponent HAS TO deal with it instead of letting it die to its own upkeep after two swings. It is a world of difference. So to answer your question directly, gy disruption is still disruption. You just play the right guys at the right time. Be selective with your Grunts. You can afford to be.
Lemme make another post about that.Quote:
...why do you think STP is stronger than PTE?
I don't see why it is a bad plan. The deck seems to do well with the color scheme I have. The red is also for Nacatl, which is a crazy unfair card. I don't like drawing Fireblast X2 in most games, but there are only 3 of them, so it is cool. I am not going to play Jitte. It is slow. And neither the removal nor lifegain is terribly important here.Quote:
Originally Posted by beastman