So from the list you posted would it be -2 needle +2 ajani +1 baneslayer?
Printable View
So from the list you posted would it be -2 needle +2 ajani +1 baneslayer?
I'd probably go:
-3 Pithing Needle
-2 Wasteland
+2 Ajani Vengeant
+1 Plains
+1 Fetch/Treetop Village/Mountain or something
+1 Late Game Bomb X (Library, Jitte, Baneslayer) or the 4th Chain Lightning
With 4 knight i think wastelands can be awesome, agian this is all in my head as I havent actually tested this list yet and I'm REALLY drunk right now. Also, I think banslayer would be great.
Lastly, I like boobs.
Not being a colored source or business that swings the board is what turned me off of wastes since you're usually cutting one of the two for them. Baneslayer looks awesome but I'd hate to pay 5 mana to see it stped or pathed.
A couple of us have been posting about it in Developmental and have been having good results with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by beastman
Two of my friends played Big Zoo so I have some insight on its pros and cons when compared to 'normal' Zoo;
Pros:
- More suitable for the (slightly) Aggro-Control-minded.
- It's late-game is very very good.
- one of the best Aggro decks against Aggro, defeats 'normal' Zoo, (lategame) goblins, (ofcourse) Merfolk, Countertop (because of the manacurve and costs of threats), BGW rock and more.
- Better against Firespout and other burn
- Every creaturespell you play is a threat (whereas normal zoo usually has to swarm for the win)
- Various ways for cardadvantage
- It's threats are harder to answer (like Elspeth & big dudes)
- Exciting games :p
Cons:
- The combo match-up is slightly weakened
- Manadenial is weaker (which isn't a deal if you would play Noble Hierarch)
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Tom
Pretty much spot on from what I've seen. Some nitpicking I would do:
-Goblins in general seems to be an easy match for me, but I'm also running Sword of Fire/Ice & Basilisk Collar main which other builds aren't. Early game I have Bolt & Path for creatures and Pridemage for Vials.
-I wouldn't say its really better against Firespout. Most of the stuff will still die to that. I've been considering Sivvi's Ruse or Absolute Law in the SB if it becomes too much of a problem. But I'm also running Bloodbraid which helps me recover fast.
-I'd say the Combo match is more than slightly weakened. It's pretty much horrible. I'm still working on the SB options for those matches. Currently I have 3 Leyline of Sanctity and 3 Null Rod.
-Not sure what you mean for the mana denial. If you mean disrupting your opponent's mana, then that's pretty much nonexistent in most Big Zoo builds since you generally want the land drop to use for your "big" spells like Elspeth.
From my understanding, by playing "Big" Zoo, you improve your matchups against aggro and aggro-control, worsen your matchup against straight control, and completely throw away any chance versus fast combo.
Slightly weaker? It is substantially weaker!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom T
This is false. How substantial? Zoo is about 35% against combo decks, even with Steppe Lynx. Big Zoo is what, 30%? It depends on how many Wastelands you play. Your only hope, with both decks, is that they stumble/fizzle. It seems to be just about the same stakes. More Burn spells doesn't help your case, and neither does Grim Lavamancer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demonic_Attorney
It's more complicated than this. I don't think straight control is worse, I think it's better. Are we talking Counterbalance and Landstill here? If so, Big Zoo is superior. You play more bombs, and more of your guys can attack through Mishra's Factory due to more Exalted triggers. You're playing less Burn spells, so that's less dead cards. I would rather be playing Big Zoo against both decks. Also, I've beated combo plenty with Big Zoo. You need to play good answers in your sideboard, and draw Wild Nacatl + Wasteland game 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Admiral_Arzar
To the contrary, it is manifestly true!Quote:
Originally Posted by troopatroop
How substantial? Palpably substantial and I suspect you either don't play competitive (with big zoo against combo), or your metagame has little to no combo and your subjective view of big zoo has impaired your logic on proven and solidified facts, namely that fast traditional zoo (utilizing lynx and blast) is much more consistent and is optimally better than big zoo is against combo (especially the more recent versions of big zoo that are running little to no burn).
Steppe Lynx in and of itself increases the chances of fast zoo beating combo over big zoo 10-25% depending on if you are on the play or draw and if you drop it on turn one. This fact is further compounded by the use of fireblast and burn to have in hand to play in response to the IGG trigger.
You are factually incorrect on your erroneous 35% estimated range. A traditional fast zoo deck with 4x steppe lynx, with 11-12 fetches, fireblast, library and at least twelve burn spells with MBT, Teeg and Canonist boarded in is well over 50% post board; pre board it is at least 40% and quite ostensibly, big zoo is no better than 25% and that is being generous. I suggest you actually play and by play I mean play a lot with both variations of zoo against the top three combo decks in the format and the results will be conspicuous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Demonic_Attorney
Big Zoo improves matchups that are already good matchups, and weakens matchups that are already bad matchups. The only matchup where Big Zoo seems to have the advantage is against other fast aggro (like the mirror), and the CounterTop matchup (when they resolve CounterTop early).
If you go one step further, and compare Sligh to Big Zoo, you can get an even better understanding. For reference, here's my Sligh list:
R/g/w Naya Sligh
// Lands
4 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
3 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
3 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn
2 [R] Taiga
2 [R] Plateau
2 [UNH] Mountain
// Creatures
4 [ZEN] Goblin Guide
4 [AN] Kird Ape
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [ZEN] Steppe Lynx
// Spells
4 [R] Lightning Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [ROE] Forked Bolt
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [VI] Fireblast
// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [GP] Shattering Spree
SB: 3 [UL] Erase
SB: 4 [SOK] Pithing Needle
Both Big Zoo and Sligh are going to beat Goblins and Merfolk, although Sligh has a much better tribal matchup than Big Zoo.
Sligh runs enough burn to beat most non-Counterbalance control decks, and can often race an active CounterTop lock (i.e kill them before they get the lock going). Big Zoo struggles against most non-Counterbalance control decks because it's not capable of putting enough pressure on with early beats/late burn, and it's bigger guys are still very manageable. Against CounterTop, Big Zoo has enough cards out of the Counterbalance curve to play through an active CounterTop lock. CounterTop is one of two matchups where I'd say Big Zoo is better than Sligh.
Against other fast aggro decks, Big Zoo wins because it's more midrange-y, although Sligh can still beat Big Zoo by burning them out. Still, I'd say this is Big Zoo's other matchup that is better than Sligh. Against other midrange aggro decks, Sligh will win by simply burning the other player out midgame if they don't have lifegain (Jitte/Rhox, etc). Against other midrange aggro decks, Big Zoo is outclassed by better midrange gameplans (like The Rock).
Against Combo, Sligh can goldfish turn 3, almost always by turn 4. Against slower combo like Show and Tell, Sligh usually wins. Against faster combo like Belcher, Sligh can sometimes survive a turn 1 EtW Assault. Against Tendrils, they cannot effectively use Ad Nauseam as a draw engine, typically slowing them down a turn or two, which is sometimes enough to get in there. Big Zoo dies miserably to all forms of combo.
That's my evaluation of it, but maybe I'm wrong.
I think that's a reasonable assessment (in general, there are exceptions), and the implication is "you want to strengthen your bad matchups, rather than your good ones".Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanni
That implication isn't entirely accurate though. First of all, you want to strengthen your matchups against the expected metagame, weighting according to how much you expect a given archetype to be represented. But my second contention is that it's more important to strengthen those matchups that can go either way. In other words, assuming decks A, B, and C are equally represented, you don't gain much by improving your deck A matchup (per-game) from 90% to 100%, but you also don't gain much by improving your matchup against B from 0% to 10%. Even if you do fluke into a win against B or a loss against A, the other two games in the match are likely to go as expected. Moreover, you probably have to devote a disproportionate number of resources (maindeck and sideboard choices) to improving matchup B for such a small incremental gain. It's better to focus on making matchup C (a 50-50 matchup) a slightly favorable one.
Advantages of Big Zoo
As for the individual archetypes, I'd say Big Zoo is stronger the following:
- Merfolk: Still a great matchup, but now you're less likely to lose to manascrew.
- Goblins: See above. Note, however, both have the caveat that you are much more reliant on green creatures than before, so your games 2 and 3 become substantially weaker if they're splashing for Perish.
- Zoo (pseudomirror): This usually comes down to whoever can stick the big creature or planeswalker, and you simply run more.
- Counterbalance: You run a higher curve (helps against Counterbalance and Engineered Explosives) and more guys that survive Firespout. Planeswalkers are hard to deal with. I've found this more than offsets fast Zoo's speed advantage.
- Control decks: You don't need to overextend as much, so in general, this is in Big Zoo's advantage. Note, however, that Thopter decks is more of a "combo" that almost locks you out immediately unless you have dedicated hate, so to that extent, I'd rather be playing fast Zoo (at least preboard before I bring in my hate). I also think this is where decks running Punishing Fires (I'd hesitate to even call them Zoo at this point) have an additional advantage because they have inevitability that cannot get removed, but obviously, running that tech introduces weaknesses in other matchups.
- Stompy decks: A higher curve gets around Chalices much more easily, and is less susceptible to Trinisphere. In addition, Noble Hierarch > Blood Moon effects.
- Lands decks: Being able to run Wasteland to get rid of that annoying Tabernacle or Glacial Chasm can mean the difference in the game. Noble Hierarch pays for itself even under a Tabernacle and slides under Ensnaring Bridges. Elspeth and Ajani are hard to drop, but pretty much not removable outside of EE at 4 or recurring Barbarian Rings, which are unlikely, and they will single-handedly own the Lands deck with their ultimate abilities. More lands means they'll have to work harder to Wastelock you out. I find that this combination works better than the speed of Big Zoo (unless you're running Price of Progress, which is amazing in this matchup).
- Tempo decks: You run more lands, Noble Hierarchs, and Knight of the Reliquaries, and you're not as reliant on running a fetchland into a Stifle to satisfy Steppe Lynx, so you have some inherent advantage against their strategy.
Advantages of regular Zoo
- Merfolk and Goblins with the black splash, after games 2 and 3. Sometimes, you just get blown out by Perish because you may or may not run Lavamancer, and you generally don't have the Steppe Lynxes, Kird Apes, Loam Lions, Figures of Destiny, and Stoneforge Mystics (or at least not as many).
- Fast combo. I'm actually 2-0 against good storm players with Big Zoo, whereas I've never beaten one with Fast Zoo, even with amazing draws (Nacatl, Steppe Lynx for 4, multiple burn), but that comes at the expense of dedicating more hate cards in the sideboard against Tendrils combo and less against "fair" decks. But the problem is that my hate cards of choice, until recently (Leyline of Sanctity and Null Rod, the latter of which is very versatile) aren't very good against other combo decks (Reanimator, Show and Tell, High Tide combo, etc.).
I wouldn't say Fast Zoo is a full turn faster in goldfishing, but I'd say it's capable of goldfishing a turn faster maybe 30-50% of the time than Big Zoo (esp. with Steppe Lynxes and Fireblasts), which can certainly be the difference. Moreover, fast Zoo "frontloads" that damage whereas Big Zoo only sort of catches up by swinging a turn later with bigger creatures (or more creatures, powered out by Hierarch). This means that even in those games where Big Zoo might goldfish in the same turn as fast Zoo, fast Zoo might be able to bring an Ad Nauseam deck out of range faster (note: similar reasoning applies for Doomsday combo).
Note: Meddling Mage is a very versatile card that can provide some level of hate against every combo deck in the format, but it's generally not crippling as crippling as a Gaddock Teeg or Null Rod can be. If you have a lot of diverse combo in your format, then I don't know why you're running Zoo, but if you had to run Zoo, Big Zoo can give you reliable access to Meddling Mage, which fast Zoo can't. troopatroop has much more experience with this.
Tossup?
- Dredge: I'm not sure this goes one way or another, and it really comes down to ripping your gravehate, but if I had to guess, I think this is slightly better for fast Zoo. This is because it's more likely to burn through or swarm for the final damage despite a bunch of Zombies, and the smaller Apes and Lions actually are useful because you can kill them more easily to remove their Bridges.
Conclusion
I'm a proponent of Big Zoo in the current metagame, because at least locally, it comes down to beating the Tribal decks, the mirror, and Counterbalance.
I already said that here but people tend to ignore it... Although in your analysis i would add this Countertop decks are tier 1 again so as expected storms decks are decreasing in numbers wich keeps favoring big zoo that has good matchups against everything except storm combo decks...Quote:
Originally Posted by lordofthepit
So again... I'll say Big Zoo is the best metagame call right now...
Again this discussion? Big Zoo fans, go back to you thread on Developmental Decks. Here I want bash with creatures, not play Red Bant.
^Agreed. I'm looking to pick up this deck (I need a change from storm combo once in a while), and would love to discuss optimal fast lists instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy
Alternatively though, you have to think about what other aggressive decks you could be running instead. It seems like the better choice would be between playing a midranged Zoo and Storm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanni
Storm combo is faster, more consistent, and just plain better against all of fast Zoo's good MUs (D&T, Goblins, Merfolk, Zoo). Storm and fast Zoo both have bad MU's VS Countertop, although admittedly Storm has a worse MU against CTop than Zoo. Storm is also better at some of Zoo's fair-to-bad MUs (Rock, Enchantress, other combo). Even a good MU that splashes Black for Perish is potentially terrible for any Zoo. Both Zoo's have trouble with Combo, although the faster Zoo would obviously have a better chance.
So why play Zoo at all? Because with the right build, you can get a fair MU vs Countertop and still keep your good MUs good. You're trading game against Storm for game against CTop. Let CTop decks hate out the Storm, they're better at it anyways.
Speaking of hating out storm, what do you guys think about Phyrexian Revoker? Seems like it could help out with storm by naming LED, and would also work against top in the CB MU. I don't play big zoo, so its the only Pithing Needle I would playing my 75. Has anyone tested it out?
If you're playing Big Zoo, it's more consistent to play Needle over the revoker. In many match ups, there is opposing removal that otherwise misses the plain artifact Needle is. Yet, it can't do other things like Revoker can. It has a 2/1 body and indeed abuses abilities Needle doesn't cover like the aforementioned LED.
Depending on what you're up against, you could go one or the other. In a scene with lots of agro, Zoo Goblins maybe Bant colored decks, there's going to be lots of spot removal, so needle would therefore be better than revoker. In a stormy or control oriented scene, revoker would probably be handy.
But I gotta agree with Fuzzy. Read what he did thur