[Deck] Zoo

[Waikiki]

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)

[hungryLIKEALION]

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.

[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...

[Skeggi]

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.

[xycsoscyx]

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.

[jandax]

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

[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. 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 .

[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:

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.

[Eldariel]

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.

[Pastorofmuppets]

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?

[Volt]

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.

[hungryLIKEALION]

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.

[chokin]

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.

[Thoughtseizer]

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.

[keys]

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.

[Pastorofmuppets]

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.

[Eldariel]

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.

[hungryLIKEALION]

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.

[chokin]

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?

[Skeggi]

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.)