This is an iPhone post so be kind.
First and foremost, @ jotun grunt, in my experience, nine out of ten times
your opponent wilm kill the grunt or it will kill them. Many decks
seek to set up a graveyard advantage to overwhelm other decks in the
mid to late game. Grunt comes in and either dies right away or destorys
everything they have fought to establish. He can single handedly beat
any loam deck and is a wall against many of zoos creatures and tarmogoyfs.
Suprizinglu he is good against most superfast decks in that he is a 4/4 for two that puts burn spells to the bottom and swings for for when he can.
As for stop vs path. Swords is 1-4 path is 5-8. More on this in a minute.
"eggs... why'd it have to be eggs"
Sorry for the double post. iPhone issues.
Path vs swords, if on turn 2 your opponent 2 mana and searched for a basic land you would not think much, if instead of land searching they gained seven life you would think "what a noob". It is th same case here. Path to exile actually can affect board position which means it will be more of a downside more of the time.
The reason peoe don't see this is because they cannot see bow it effected the game on a direct way. The mana difference can cause the opponent to out tempo you and you will never even see it unless you can see their hand.
On the flip side, using the cards on our own creatures, I would muh rather be able to gain life than land search. Life gain is a much better oh. crap button then land search.
"eggs... why'd it have to be eggs"
Please don't kill me for the posts but I can't figure out how to scroll down and add to the end of my posts.
I believe Finns exact words were " even when path is better it is only a little better ,all other times it is a worse card" or something like that.
"eggs... why'd it have to be eggs"
See, path can make them "out tempo" you, but at the same time giving them an extra turn can do just the same thing.
I'm actually a fan of running a 3/3 split of swords and path, because I feel that path is definitely superior later in the game, but swords is better early and against aggro. Plus I like having a lot of answers to goyf/any other large creature. Most people would probably say 6 swords effects is too many though.
Originally Posted by beastman
I believe both these stigmas stem from a misappropriation of Zoo's role in a game. Zoo is not the deck to play if you want just want to beat face as fast as possible; That's what Goyf Sligh is for. Zoo is set up to have more mid game and a passable late game, along with more answers to problem cards your opponent is playing. It is an aggro deck, yes, but it's an aggro deck with a much larger focus on interaction (and card advantage) than pretty much any other. I've only very rarely had trouble casting fireblast when I wanted to thus far, and 3 Jittes works out well against every deck in the format but combo. Against so many decks a resolved jitte straight up wins you the game, and against the rest it puts you far, far ahead.
Regarding Knight, he is a card that I now swear by and will never cut from my list. I've already argued for him in this thread in the past, but I believe one of the problems is that I like to play my zoo list differently from how others play it. When I drop Knight against most decks, if I'm ahead on board, he'll be a 4/4 or 5/5 and he can get right into the swinging. If I'm behind, he can become a ticking time bomb. The next three turns I fetch out a horizon canopy with my extra lands, and draw an extra card as well as grow the knight by +2/+2. In this phase of the game, most blue players are unwilling to risk their tarmogoyfs in the attack phase, so I go unmolested until I've got a knight who is easily large enough to kill two goyfs, a slew of extra burn in hand/creatures on the board, and a pretty much unlosable game state.
Some examples of what he's capable of:
In a game against Tempo Thresh, He was winning but I managed to resolve Knight as a 5/5 with a 3/4 goyf on the board. He has three goyfs and a nimble mongoose. I have two uncracked fetchlands and all three of my basics in the face of his wasteland. Following turn EOT I crack a fetchland and he submerges my knight in response. I use my other fetchland to get a taiga, then sac it to knight to get horizon canopy. Submerge resolves, putting knight on top of my library. I then draw it with the horizon canopy before my original fetch land resolves, replay it next turn, and ride it to victory.
In another game against a goyf deck, I have a 10/10 knight against his nimble mongoose(threshed) and 3 goyfs at 3/4. I have a wild nacatl and a qasali pridemage. I attack with my knight. He blocks with all his creatures. I sac two mountains to fireblast a goyf and clear his board without losing my knight.
He dodges Chills and BEBs, which is a great thing. I once played a game where I smashed a guy with a knight while he was holding 3 BEBs that would have gladly wrecked a thoctar.
Also, since Knight rarely needs to be bigger than a 5/5 or 6/6 in most games, he can infinitely fuel your lavamancer. Infinite stream of direct damage=very good.
The most important thing he does is he lets you play a more intelligent game than thoctar does. You get tricks and a real source of inevitability. It doesn't matter if he's not as fast as thoctar; Being fast isn't the total game plan anymore.
I'm willing to concede that maybe fireblast is not neccesary, but I like it quite a bit right now. What would you suggest in its place?
9 1 drops is a little low, but I feel Kird Ape is not worth it. I don't want to run too many figures because he stays a 1/1 too long too often. And I don't want to run a fourth lavamancer.
22 lands is a lot, but the horizon canopies help offset that. And in the face of wastelands and sinkholes, the extra lands are awesome. The canopies don't give me problems playing fireblast since I'm still running the 15 red sources I'd be running even without them, assuming 19 lands.
Anyway, I'm playing this list in a tournament sunday, so I'll be sure to let you guys know how it goes.
Well, you say that you like to play zoo as not a hyper-aggressive deck (which I completely agree with for its role), yet fireblast is quite clearly an aggressive card. It does not help you in your main game plan, which is to still have a middle and late game, if it comes to that, because you can still play a really aggressive game if nacatl sticks around. Fireblast may work better with knight, but I think that that's a small amount of synergy there to have it worth keeping.
I'd say that pretty much any of the standard spells would work better, depending on how you want to play, any mix of chain lightning/helix/swords. Since you're playing 3 jitte helix is probably not needed much, and with knight and lavamancer you probably don't need extra creature removal. So probably 3 chain lightnings would work out best. It's only 1 less damage than fireblast, but should be a lot more usable than it.
(Also, about the board, I think that you'd want to run 3 teeg/2 canonist, since teeg can be useful against more things than canonist, and is harder for anything with burning wish to answer.)
I'm not really sure what you mean when you say that zoo doesn't want to beat down as fast as possible, thats exactly what it wants to do.
About knight: I guess I might have judged him a little quickly, if you're running a build with canopy, I guess hes better as a two of than thoctar.
@Fireblast: You're argument is that zoo is not a mindless aggro deck like goyf sligh. I believe that Fireblast is one of the most mindless burn spells (Besides second rite) ever. With three colors, you have access to enough removal and other burn spells that the free cost and one extra damage from blast is not worth the tempo loss if it gets countered, especially if you have canopies.
Team Unicorn: We're horny...get it?
I always thought the difference between goyf sligh and zoo was that where goyf sligh had more burn zoo had more little dudes hence the "zoo" deckname. Both of them are near mindles. Aggro decks and any notion of a Kate game other than throwing burn to the dome seems foolish.
"eggs... why'd it have to be eggs"
What I mean by Zoo doesn't want to just beat down as fast as possible is that Zoo is a deck with two plans of attack in any given game. The first plan is to drop the opponent from 20 to 0 before they can stabilize. However, when the opponent does stabilize, zoo is able to recover and push through the ending damage much more easily than other decks of its kind because it has the potential to play bombs like the Knight and Jitte.
It's hard to articulate why I like fireblast so much, so I'm not going to try because I know I'll fail to get my point across. However, I will begin testing other spells in its place and get back to you on it.
So...has anyone tried Mold Adders so far, or are they worse than the not-really-played Hidden Gibbons? They should on average at least be bigger than Isamaru, Kird Ape, and sometimes Figure if playing against Thresh-style decks, Team America, Eva Green, Merfolk etc...although the point could be made that sideboard cards really should do something more specific than just being undercosted creatures with no disruptive ability whatsoever.
georgjorgeGeistreich sind schon die anderen.
An early game swords gives the opponent maybe 2-3 life. That is by no means an "extra turn" if you are playing any form of decent offense. Path on the other hand can allow the opponent to drop two nasty things on turn 3 rather than one. That very well can be an extra turn.
Then add the fact that Zoo is very focused on the early game and generally whishes to end the game before big effects and cardadvantage take their course. This also aids to Swords superiority.
But most importantly you are comparing the two cards only under the aspect of tempo. This comparison would hold true if path let the opponent put a land into play from his hand. However path rather lets him tutor a land from his library and put it into play. This is not only a) tempo but also b) an extra card, c) colorfixing and d) ensures hitting more land. If you count the number of mana- and colorscrews an opponent is going to be able to evade the possible lategamesuperiority of path really pales.
Come on... Swords is just worse in this deck. Almost every deck plays Goyf, trys to swords a Goyf, or anything fat for that matter and you're giving them an extra turn to find an answer. At least with Path, they don't get better odds of getting that answer.
It's just better. It helps like the Goblins matchup. And if you're scared of that matchup, and you're playing Zoo, idk what's wrong with you.
@hungryLIKEALION:
Dude run Aether Vial in the place of Fireblast LOLOLOLOL
Dead or Alive, you're coming with me.
-Robocop-
Do you actively try to be a jackass or is it just something that happens?
Pretty sure I'll get a warning from this post, but somebody needed to say it.
Ya just can't make jokes on The Source... Because everybody's list is better than everyone elses
Oh and kudos for running Jitte. You're like the only other guy i know that does. Does Knight help the mana base at all? It seems like it would.
Dead or Alive, you're coming with me.
-Robocop-
Dude chill...Hes just making a joke.
Team Unicorn: We're horny...get it?
Sorry, haven't had much taste for your humor since you posted that 5c combo zoo post. I was pretty offended.Ya just can't make jokes on The Source... Because everybody's list is better than everyone elses
Oh and kudos for running Jitte. You're like the only other guy i know that does. Does Knight help the mana base at all? It seems like it would.
Knight helps when you keep getting your red sources wasted, but usually once you have 3 lands your mana base is okay.
I'm not saying my list is better than anyone elses, I'm saying that I like it and have had pretty good success with it.
Chill out man, i don't mean to offend anyone on here. People just take every post in these threads way too far. And that 5c Zoo Combo was funny now come on.. Everyone was just pretty much bitching out each other over Aether Vial so i figured i'd try and lighten the mood.
This deck is my baby, ya gotta remember that [:
And i've like the KoTR idea since it was thrown out there. I'll prolly make the switch once i get enough money to get some foil ones.
Dead or Alive, you're coming with me.
-Robocop-
Okay. Sorry I got upset. I guess there's a stick in my ass I need to dislodge.
It's all good. Me and you have agreed on most card choices for the deck, and argued together for those card choices against other Sourcers since you started posting.
Dead or Alive, you're coming with me.
-Robocop-
To chime in on the swords/path conversation, I think it depends primarily on where you want to take the deck. As you guys were touching on a little further back in the thread, there seems to be two distinct takes on this archetype.
The first is full out aggro and burn that tries to end the game quickly. For this game plan, you'd only play your swords/path variant to force through an alpha strike, hopefully ending the game by turn four. In this situation, swords runs counter to your goal, as it provides an extra hurdle of life you need to account for. The extra land from path is irrelevant (tempo, mana-fixing, or otherwise) because there shouldn't be another turn for your opponent to benefit from it. If you're using your swords/path variant at any other point of the game, it's because you absolutely have to and have no other answer for whatever problem creature is sitting across from you. In that case, you're game plan is pretty much screwed regardless of which spell you play.
The second take on the archetype adapts a more conservative approach, incorporating cards designed to respond to a mid- or late-game situation at the expense of a deck full of speed and explosive creatures/burn. Answer and utility cards like Jitte, Teeg, Knight, Lavamancer, Figure even, sacrifice some raw power for a more well-rounded deck. As the focus shifts away from pure speed, for this game plan playing a swords/path earlier than an alpha strike is more likely, but not as devastating because you have greater support for the later stages of the game. This means that the extra land from path actually starts to matter. Whether or not the loss of tempo, extra mana-fixing for the opponent, etc . is worst than life gain can still be debated, but I can see swords as the more appealing choice for this approach.
Finn I like your take on the deck, and wonder if a more controlling version could be made that is solely GW with a red splash to pump the cats.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote