[Deck] Zoo

I've been playing countryside crusher in the knight slot.

It makes sure you keep getting gas. and the yard gets filled more for lavamancer to eat from.

Also my builds is more focussed on red and plays 20 burn spells 20 creatures and 20 lands.

Getting a bit personal are we? There's no need to attack me personally. I do test the cards, I do have argumentation. I agree with the fact that KotR is a better topdeck than a Qoatl; it's true that a Qoatl always has to grow and a KotR doesn't (originally I was going to use Polar Kraken as an example, it's also bigger than Tarmogoyf, but since there is no way any Zoo list could ever cast it I switched to Qoatl). But the point of the matter remains the same - if you topdeck a KotR and bring it into play - if it's 6/6; you're usually lategame. I understand that KotR can win you the game here, but perhaps you already should have won before this. I prefer Domain Zoo lists with Dark Confidant and I'll have no Knight of the Reliquary in it. I've explained why. If you still prefer Knight of the Reliquary, that's your business. I feel no need to call you clueless because of it, because being an internet tough guy is really pathetic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

Don't worry, I test the cards alright. I've seen Knight of the Reliquary in action plenty of times, and it seems to me it's simply too slow. Rather than sitting as a blocker, waiting to grow with the tap ability I'd like to go offensive. I must admit that KotR is a way better card than Ranger of Eos, but I still consider it sub-par if you look at the other options you have. Saying KotR is bigger than a Tarmogoyf isn't enough for me: Lorescale Qoatl often gets bigger than Tamogoyf and we don't play that card either, do we? Why don't we play that card? Number 1 reason is because we don't have blue mana, but that put aside, a Domain Zoo list with a Tropical Island next to the Volcanic Island isn't unthinkable, and still wouldn't play Lorescale Qoatl because it's 3 mana: It's too slow. Knight of the Reliquary has the same problem: at 3 mana it comes later in the game than all the other creatures. This also prevents you from playing an extra spell like Bolt or PtE if you need it. Next to the fact that it comes late into the game, it also takes some time to grow. Your opponent could already be dead if you used faster cards. For that matter Whoolly Thoctar is better because it doesn't need time to grow.

---

KotR doesn't really need time to grow if you're playing him close to the midgame. Between your fetchlands and possibly theirs, he should be at least a 4/4 or bigger. Coatl always starts as a 2/2.

While Confidant is undoubtedly badass in decks with low curves, does his benefit outweigh weakening the manabase to get an extra color? And out of curiosity, what else besides Confidant would you include to the deck to make the extra splash worth running?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

Don't worry, I test the cards alright. I've seen Knight of the Reliquary in action plenty of times, and it seems to me it's simply too slow. Rather than sitting as a blocker, waiting to grow with the tap ability I'd like to go offensive. I must admit that KotR is a way better card than Ranger of Eos, but I still consider it sub-par if you look at the other options you have. Saying KotR is bigger than a Tarmogoyf isn't enough for me: Lorescale Qoatl often gets bigger than Tamogoyf and we don't play that card either, do we? Why don't we play that card? Number 1 reason is because we don't have blue mana, but that put aside, a Domain Zoo list with a Tropical Island next to the Volcanic Island isn't unthinkable, and still wouldn't play Lorescale Qoatl because it's 3 mana: It's too slow. Knight of the Reliquary has the same problem: at 3 mana it comes later in the game than all the other creatures. This also prevents you from playing an extra spell like Bolt or PtE if you need it. Next to the fact that it comes late into the game, it also takes some time to grow. Your opponent could already be dead if you used faster cards. For that matter Whoolly Thoctar is better because it doesn't need time to grow.

---

Hey uh, you play at the Twee Klavieren at all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chokin

KotR doesn't really need time to grow if you're playing him close to the midgame. Between your fetchlands and possibly theirs, he should be at least a 4/4 or bigger. Coatl always starts as a 2/2.

While Confidant is undoubtedly badass in decks with low curves, does his benefit outweigh weakening the manabase to get an extra color? And out of curiosity, what else besides Confidant would you include to the deck to make the extra splash worth running?

---

Knight only gets buffs from lands in your graveyard. If that weren't the case, then folks really don't have any reason to knock this guy, as he's a goyf/manafixer and deserves a fuggin' slot no questions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chokin

Between your fetchlands and possibly theirs, he should be at least a 4/4 or bigger.

---

Knight of the Reliquary gets +1/+1 for each land card in your graveyard.

Aha... that's why you're such a fan :tongue:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chokin

While Confidant is undoubtedly badass in decks with low curves, does his benefit outweigh weakening the manabase to get an extra color? And out of curiosity, what else besides Confidant would you include to the deck to make the extra splash worth running?

---

2-3 Vindicates. Oh, and indirectly Tribal Flames.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jandax

Hey uh, you play at the Twee Klavieren at all?

---

Yes. Do I know you? - Any personal stuff like this via PM please, let's not clog up the forum :smile:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waikiki

Also my builds is more focussed on red and plays 20 burn spells 20 creatures and 20 lands.

---

Would you care to share that list Waikiki? Sounds a lot like what I'm trying to put together but I haven't quite gotten there yet. Are you leaving out Pridemages?

Also all this catfighting about KotR is really childish. I think the question wheter you want to play him or not, really comes down to the question if you can afford to run a 3 drop and cast it consistently.
While in a format without wastelands you'll be able to bring him out a liitle later than turn 4 on average assuming a list with 21 lands. The question remains if you really need a fatty boom boom in the dec or if you just want to go for b2f as your lategame plan. I think this discussion might have a bit more merrit if you started to compare KotR with what you'd replace it with and for me that would be Chain Lightning no4 and PoP no4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

2-3 Vindicates.

---

Nice effect? Yes.

Beats? No.
Burns? No.
Costs 1 or 2? No...
The deck lacks removal? No (especially after WotC printed Pridemage).
Bad colors? Yes...

So why play it in this deck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eq.firemind

The deck lacks removal? No (especially after WotC printed Pridemage).

---

He definetly has a point there...

You are asking the right questions eg.firemind. Vindicate seems like something that doesn't belong in such an aggressive deck as Zoo. But since it's very versatile it can bail you out of situations you normally would have a problem with. Try casting a Qasali Pridemage when there's a Counterbalance in play. Vindicate tends to get through a bit easier. Vindicate is almost never a dead card. It's not exactly the best against ANT for instance, nor is it any good if you have nothing to target - but in that case you're already winning. However, I think Vindicates are good, but optional. The black splash is primarily for Dark Confidant - without him, running Vindicate would just be silly because it's a reactional control card. With Dark Condifant, you draw your extra card and therefor you can afford to put some extra effort in destroying your opponent's stuff.

Agreed. To keep zoo's awesome consistancy, just splash a couple of B/U (Badlands/Volcanic Island/Underground Sea) producing duals that can be fetched appropriately, and find a slot for four Bob's and four Tribal flames. There is nothing outside of the blue in the p9 that is worth a card slot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

You are asking the right questions eg.firemind. Vindicate seems like something that doesn't belong in such an aggressive deck as Zoo. But since it's very versatile it can bail you out of situations you normally would have a problem with. Try casting a Qasali Pridemage when there's a Counterbalance in play. Vindicate tends to get through a bit easier. Vindicate is almost never a dead card. It's not exactly the best against ANT for instance, nor is it any good if you have nothing to target - but in that case you're already winning. However, I think Vindicates are good, but optional. The black splash is primarily for Dark Confidant - without him, running Vindicate would just be silly because it's a reactional control card. With Dark Condifant, you draw your extra card and therefor you can afford to put some extra effort in destroying your opponent's stuff.

---

Black also gives you access to Snuff Out, which may be better in matchups against decks with Chalice. Hyper aggressive decks may also like Snuff Out as it A) doesn't cost any mana, allowing you to cast more during your first few turns, and B) doesn't give your opponent an advantage of a land or life. Anyway, if one were to run black, Snuff Out should definitely be tested.

I don't know about you but I'm hesitant in running Dark Confidant + Snuff Out in a deck with alot of fetches and no way to alter the first few cards on top of your deck.

Well, it can be agreed that splashing for Bob isn't a difficult thing to do, and won't compromise consistency or aggressiveness, right?

Adding other black spells where the RGW ones you already have listed will do is kind of counter productive. Bob is a two power Sylvan Library, virtually taking up two extra slots and replacing the two Libraries already occupy. Not tough at all to find a way for him to fit in. And in that case I'd rather run Lavamancer over Cursed Scroll, as you might have cards in hand by the time Scroll gets online.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

I don't know about you but I'm hesitant in running Dark Confidant + Snuff Out in a deck with alot of fetches and no way to alter the first few cards on top of your deck.

---

Suicide Zoo. :wink: If you ran Helix, that would help a little with the life loss. As I said, if one were to run black, Snuff Out ought to at least be tested. It has great potential on paper.

I still don't understand why one wouldn't run a set of Helix's

Skeggi, how much of your meta plays wasteland? I see a lot of merfolk and tempo thresh, a little dragon stompy, and now that lands.dek has been performing well, I expect to see some of that. This would make splashing black more of a risk.

If I were to splash black, I would just do it for Dark Confidant. Vindicate seems to do too little for too high a cost. I'd rather play maindeck Krosan Grip, or play path to exile in that slot. It just seems like a card I'd be boarding out a lot of the time.

It looks like my meta is about the same - wastelandwise. Wastelands actually aren't that bad if you have a Dark Confidant in play. And you can play around Wasteland good enough. For instance, you have a manabase with all fetches and duals, and only 1 mountain. Your hand has 2 fetches; a Bloodstained Mire and a Windswept Heath. Your first fetch could be to the singleton Mountain if you have a Kird Ape in your hand - otherwise you can opt to not fetch. Turn 2 you fetch for Bayou and play Dark Confidant. I understand both options are not optimal, and I would only do it if I knew for sure the opponent has access to Wastelands.

Naya Zoo has a more stable manabase than Domain Zoo, that's a fact. But like Naya Zoo, you don't die of 1 Wasteland. Not even two. The Stifles can be a problem, I must say, but isn't the same true for Naya Zoo? The actual difference between the decks is that Back to Basics can really cripple Domain Zoo, while Naya Zoo usually still manages just fine with the basics. So the question really is - how many Back to Basics do you see in your meta?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mackaber

Would you care to share that list Waikiki? Sounds a lot like what I'm trying to put together but I haven't quite gotten there yet. Are you leaving out Pridemages?

---

Sure my list:

// Lands
1 [A] Savannah
2 [US] Mountain (3)
4 [ON] Wooded Foothills
3 [ON] Windswept Heath
4 [A] Taiga
3 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
2 [A] Plateau
1 [ON] Forest (1)

// Creatures
3 [ARB] Qasali Pridemage
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [AN] Kird Ape
3 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
2 [MOR] Countryside Crusher

// Spells
3 [VI] Fireblast
3 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [B] Lightning Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
2 [RAV] Lightning Helix/Pop not sure what I like best in this slot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jandax

I still don't understand why one wouldn't run a set of Helix's

---

Speed mostly, and in true aggro decks, your own life is insignificant, and in that case the life gain is meaningless. It does come in handy in the mirror though or indeed against any aggro deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

Naya Zoo has a more stable manabase than Domain Zoo, that's a fact. But like Naya Zoo, you don't die of 1 Wasteland. Not even two. The Stifles can be a problem, I must say, but isn't the same true for Naya Zoo? The actual difference between the decks is that Back to Basics can really cripple Domain Zoo, while Naya Zoo usually still manages just fine with the basics. So the question really is - how many Back to Basics do you see in your meta?

---

It would seem to be, unless I'm missing something, that Stifle on Zoo's fetches is better than having something you've fetched for Wastelanded. If you have already fetched and then have it Wasted (assuming you didn't go for basics), you'd have one less chance of a land draw to compensate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waikiki

Sure my list:

---

How's rift bolt been working out for you? I loved it in Type2 and extended but when testing it in legacy I wasn't overly fond of it. I think my main qualf was waiting the turn to burn a duder.

I think its pretty good, I dont know of any better burn spell.

And when cost T1 or T2 the opponent most of the times holds his creep in hand for another turn which gives you another turn to kick in with your ape.

Also it dodges CB better then the rest. (dont count fireblast there)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

Getting a bit personal are we? There's no need to attack me personally. I do test the cards, I do have argumentation. I agree with the fact that KotR is a better topdeck than a Qoatl; it's true that a Qoatl always has to grow and a KotR doesn't (originally I was going to use Polar Kraken as an example, it's also bigger than Tarmogoyf, but since there is no way any Zoo list could ever cast it I switched to Qoatl). But the point of the matter remains the same - if you topdeck a KotR and bring it into play - if it's 6/6; you're usually lategame. I understand that KotR can win you the game here, but perhaps you already should have won before this. I prefer Domain Zoo lists with Dark Confidant and I'll have no Knight of the Reliquary in it. I've explained why. If you still prefer Knight of the Reliquary, that's your business. I feel no need to call you clueless because of it, because being an internet tough guy is really pathetic.

---

I'm not trying to be an internet tough guy, I'm just telling you that to compare KoTR with coatl is retarded and shouldn't be done, and if you are seriously trying to use the comparison to prove a point you're flat out wrong.

And not to be an internet ref. but when you make a claim you should provide some substance. I mean, comparing KotR to Qoatl is like apples and oranges; both are round, grow on trees, contain citric acids and naturally occuring sugars, contain seeds within a juicy pulp, have colorful skin, are round....

Point is, they have mroe in common than they have differences. For the sake of Qoatl/Kotr being better or worse than the other, what are the differences that outweigh the common ground for these two cards? Besides requiring blue mana...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hungryLIKEALION

I just don't understand why people hate on a creature that will literally be larger than tarmogoyf 4 out of every 5 times you play him.

---

I was replying to this. You said you don't understand why people hate on a creature that will literally be larger than Tarmogoyf. My point is that there are lots of creatures that are (or will become) bigger than Tarmogoyf. Tarmogoyf is good because he is undercosted. Knight of the Reliquary is alot of things, but I wouldn't call her undercosted. That's the entire point: it's not about Lorescale Qoatl per se. It's about any creature that is or can get bigger than Tarmogoyf. You don't run Wild Nacatl because they're bigger than Tarmogoyf (because often they're not). You run them because they're undercosted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jandax

And not to be an internet ref. but when you make a claim you should provide some substance. I mean, comparing KotR to Qoatl is like apples and oranges; both are round, grow on trees, contain citric acids and naturally occuring sugars, contain seeds within a juicy pulp, have colorful skin, are round....

Point is, they have mroe in common than they have differences. For the sake of Qoatl/Kotr being better or worse than the other, what are the differences that outweigh the common ground for these two cards? Besides requiring blue mana...

---

They actually don't have as much in common as you seem to think, one is constant and one is variable. If you drop KotR, you know exactly what her P/T is and will be, regardless of when and how many times you play her. If I play her with 3 lands in the grave, she WILL be 5/5. Coatl is variable, every time you play it it is only a 2/2, guaranteed. Especially without extra draw, it'll only be a 3/3 when it's able to attack. All the while KotR is able to block as a 5/5 the turn it's played, and then still swing in for 5 when she attacks.

Especially with a lot of Merfolk and bounce in general, Coatl becomes worse because you have to start from scratch every time, while KotR is the same every time you play her. Fearing burn the turn you play Coatl seems bad as well, they can just burn Coatl while KotR is instant beef. I think the only guarantee for Coatl is that it WILL get one larger every turn, but I think that is far outweighed by the fact that you have no control over increasing that in a deck like Zoo, while you have plenty of control over KotR thanks to fetches and canopy.

And to build on that; if you have an active Knight out before a player drops a wasteland....it is a practical Pithing Needle if you leave it open to activate.

All of the previous post is justified though, I agree with it

I think you guys are missing the point I'm making. I used Lorescale Qoatl as an example because it's a ridiculous card to use in Zoo. KotR isn't as ridiculous, but I see it as a sub-par card, because of the reasons I mentioned earlier. But that's just my humble opinion. By all means, if you feel KotR is the right creature for you, go right ahead. I won't mind :wink:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

I think you guys are missing the point I'm making. I used Lorescale Qoatl as an example because it's a ridiculous card to use in Zoo.

---

Really... how can I make it more clear... do I have to spell it out?

To add some relevance to the thread:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMogg

It would seem to be, unless I'm missing something, that Stifle on Zoo's fetches is better than having something you've fetched for Wastelanded. If you have already fetched and then have it Wasted (assuming you didn't go for basics), you'd have one less chance of a land draw to compensate.

---

I think Stifle is worse than Wasteland because Wasteland costs your opponent a landdrop and therefor it costs him tempo. Also, the ability to fetch to a basic is not to be underestimated. Stifle also negates that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeggi

An unanswered Dark Confidant wins you the game. If people can't see this point of view, my posts are useless: Domain Zoo's success is driven by Dark Confidant. If you don't like him, I don't think there's a reason to go Domain.

I can't seriously believe there are people who prefer Ranger of Eos over Dark Confidant. Or other sub-par creatures like Knight of the Reliquary.

---

The question is how aggressive you want to go. Given choice between Price and Confidant, I'll take Price every time 'cause just a resolved Price tends to be enough to win, while Confidant needs to sit around for multiple turns before he's done his thing.

Also, Price complements the deck's normal strategy, while Confidant instead wants to go into the long game. This is the principal reason I prefer Price to Confidant; it gives me the option to make the goldfish as fast as possible.


That said, I agree with your assessment of the format being able to slow the deck down enough that the deck wants some draw engine. I feel Sylvan Library does the same role Confidant does surprisingly well; it translates extra turns into extra cards and better cards, while being extremely hard to remove.

Confidant being a creature is a disadvantage in my book since it's easier to remove. If Sylvan Library didn't exist, the faster nature of answers in Legacy might very well convince me that a 4th splash is a necessary evil, but given Sylvan Library exists, that seems unnecessary.

Knight is also nice; you rarely tap it. Generally couple of fetches and a Fireblast make it the biggest thing in game really quick and it can be swinging for the fences the turn after it comes into play - we can't play more than 4 Goyfs and we're worse at resolving and protecting them than the blue decks, so we need some more redundancy to win past opposing Goyfs and frankly, KotR feels like the best option.

You only turn it into card advantage mode when both players are spent and the board is stalled, or you know the opponent has a removal spell (that's pretty easy to tell). I wouldn't run it for the CA function alone, but being a trump beater AND a CA machine depending on the board state is pretty damn good.


I do know Confidant is a good card, but it just feels wrong for this deck. Sure, I'd consider replacing the 2 Libraries with Confidant if Confi were Green, but as it's black, I don't think the advantages it has are large enough to warrant a splash. And no, I really wouldn't run much more since the card hardly facilitates the "20 damage ASAP" this deck uses as its primary plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eq.firemind

Nice effect? Yes.

Beats? No.
Burns? No.
Costs 1 or 2? No...
The deck lacks removal? No (especially after WotC printed Pridemage).
Bad colors? Yes...

So why play it in this deck?

---

black does leave an opening for Carno-/Lithophage.
Of what I've seen of Zoo, I still wouldn't suggest it...
although Blue for Serendib Efreet is a bit of a different matter... Lol
What do you guys think of Qasali Pridemage in the SB for Mirror/Aggro matchups?

Eldariel said everything I wanted to say but was too lazy to articulate.

I made the switch from Woolly Thoctar to KotR a few weeks ago, even though I had been pretty happy with Thoctar up to that point. If KotR isn't bigger than goyf the turn it enters the battlefield, it will be on the next turn, whereas Thoctar typically just trades with goyfs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pastorofmuppets

black does leave an opening for Carno-/Lithophage.
Of what I've seen of Zoo, I still wouldn't suggest it...
although Blue for Serendib Efreet is a bit of a different matter... Lol
What do you guys think of Qasali Pridemage in the SB for Mirror/Aggro matchups?

---

If you're not playing Pridemage as a 4 of in your main, you're doing it wrong. Seriously, he is absurd in the amount of things he does.

-Turn two swing for 3/4 with ape/nacatl respectively
-Wins Goyf standoffs, as well as letting your apes/nacatls swing past early goyfs
-Removes all the annoying permanents that can give this deck serious problems
-Beats for 2, 3 if it's alone

Seriously, the card is absurd, and it's the primary reason I believe Zoo has become a DTB at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hungryLIKEALION

If you're not playing Pridemage as a 4 of in your main, you're doing it wrong. Seriously, he is absurd in the amount of things he does.

-Turn two swing for 3/4 with ape/nacatl respectively
-Wins Goyf standoffs, as well as letting your apes/nacatls swing past early goyfs
-Removes all the annoying permanents that can give this deck serious problems
-Beats for 2, 3 if it's alone

Seriously, the card is absurd, and it's the primary reason I believe Zoo has become a DTB at this point.

---

Pesky things it eats from the DTB section:
-Standstill
-CB
-B2B
-Propaganda
-Chill
-Vials
-EE
-Deeds

And so on. I read somewhere that Aggro Loam used to be able to beat Zoo with Seismic Assault, but QP gives maindecked hate against that nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chokin

Pesky things it eats from the DTB section:
-Standstill
-CB
-B2B
-Propaganda
-Chill
-Vials
-EE
-Deeds

---

You forgot the following:

-chalice (at 1)
-vodalian shackles
-blood moon
-Trinisphere
-Top

He is the bomb! Would you ever consider running any less then 4x Tarmogoyf main deck? Of course not!

Well, in my view, the same thing applies to Pridemage; he breaths new life into zoo decks of all kind. That is in fact a gross understatement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chokin

Pesky things it eats from the DTB section:
-Standstill
-CB
-B2B
-Propaganda
-Chill
-Vials
-EE
-Deeds

And so on. I read somewhere that Aggro Loam used to be able to beat Zoo with Seismic Assault, but QP gives maindecked hate against that nonsense.

---

Aggro Loam still beats Zoo with Devastating Dreams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hungryLIKEALION

If you're not playing Pridemage as a 4 of in your main, you're doing it wrong. Seriously, he is absurd in the amount of things he does.

-Turn two swing for 3/4 with ape/nacatl respectively
-Wins Goyf standoffs, as well as letting your apes/nacatls swing past early goyfs
-Removes all the annoying permanents that can give this deck serious problems
-Beats for 2, 3 if it's alone

Seriously, the card is absurd, and it's the primary reason I believe Zoo has become a DTB at this point.

---

Actually I meant Qasali Ambusher. You know, the free guy. I know Pridemage is of Epic Proportions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keys

Aggro Loam still beats Zoo with Devastating Dreams.

---

That depends. I've beaten Aggro Loam before; it's all in the tempo. Aggro Loam is a relatively slow deck and has no lifegain effects meaning you can sandbag lands and burn them out when they're recuperating from DD; you should be able to put enough pressure on them that they don't have the choice of waiting until they have 5-6 lands to DD.

The key is to keep their creatures dead; that way they have to do a balanced DD that sets them back just as bad as you. Of course, sometimes Wasteland+Loam can prove to be a real problem, but ultimately that involves dicking around while your dudes beat them in the face so unless you haven't seen more than 2 lands in the whole game, you should be able to deal with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pastorofmuppets

Actually I meant Qasali Ambusher. You know, the free guy. I know Pridemage is of Epic Proportions.

---

Oh. Well then, no, because a 2/3 is not worth it in the mirror since it gets munched by nacatl. It's decent against merfolk, but bad against all the other aggro control decks since he won't be able to reliably eat anything.

And in regards to loam, that matchup tends to be entirely about extremely early beats and price of progress, and the resolution thereof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hungryLIKEALION

Oh. Well then, no, because a 2/3 is not worth it in the mirror since it gets munched by nacatl. It's decent against merfolk, but bad against all the other aggro control decks since he won't be able to reliably eat anything.

And in regards to loam, that matchup tends to be entirely about extremely early beats and price of progress, and the resolution thereof.

---

True that. A conditionally free Kird Ape that costs 3 to use normally is very lackluster.

And Aggro Loam can be challenging with DDreams, but it's not always game over. Goyf can live through it and you have a lot of cheap burn. It does suck when they drop Vore though. But aren't decks picking up KotR or other stuff now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldariel

The question is how aggressive you want to go. Given choice between Price and Confidant, I'll take Price every time 'cause just a resolved Price tends to be enough to win, while Confidant needs to sit around for multiple turns before he's done his thing.

Also, Price complements the deck's normal strategy, while Confidant instead wants to go into the long game. This is the principal reason I prefer Price to Confidant; it gives me the option to make the goldfish as fast as possible.

---

While Price of Progress is a really good card and I'd really like to play it, I still prefer the alternative of Dark Condidant and Tribal Flames. Price of Progress depends on the gamestate of your opponent. For instance, it's very good against Landstill, but in that match-up it has a big chance of recieving a counter. Price deals usually somewhere between 0-10 damage, 6-8 being most common, but it can be a pretty dead card against certain decks. Next to that, it also deals 4-6 damage to you. Tribal Flames deals a consistant 4-5 damage. You can count on it because its based on your gamestate and Dark Confidant manages to make sure you'll get there every time. It just seems a whole more synergetic to me.

But perhaps it's a meta call. If you're in a meta where decks with nonbasics do well, nonbasic hate drops and Domain Zoo seems to be the better option. If you're in a meta with only nonbasics... well... shouldn't you just play Dragon Stompy then? (Or Canadian Thresh or Eva Green or Merfolk with maindeck Back to Basics.)