The point of Goyf Sligh in the first place is that the creatures it adds, in comparison to straight Burn, give the extra gas to do the full 20 without frantically trying to get the last few points in before losing. Going to the extreme with guys like Bloodbraid Elf aren't necessary at all.
That's exactly the reason I do run the Incineratre, because I generally want to draw into burn rather than guys because that is what finishes. The only time I want to be drawing creatures is in my opening 7... after that, I'd rather see nothing but burn.as opposed to burn with a lower curve that just wouldn't have enough to finish.
But when over half your guys have Haste, what's the difference between that and a burn spell? There is none, because it's immediate damage all the same. I'm not saying that Bloodbraid Elf is necessary, in fact I said that I'd had mixed results. Ball Lightning however, has been nothing but good. Blocking it is always unnatractive, so it's usually going to get in there for 6. Explain to me how Incinerate is better off the top than Ball Lightning? Usually when you're drawing off the top, you're at 3+ land anyway.Originally Posted by Hanni
It's pretty clear that Rg Sligh has been obsoleted by Zoo. Here's why:
1. Incinerate is mediocre. The only reason it sees play in Burn and Sligh is because once you get down to the last 4 or 8 slots in the deck, there's nothing clearly better than Incinerate left to play in those slots. Sure, every deck has to have a worst card, but when your worst card is a Lightning Bolt that costs an extra, that's a problem. Ideally, you want your worst card to be Magma Jet.
2. Sligh usually loses game 1 to CounterTop, and doesn't improve enough after sideboarding to make the matchup a good one overall. Zoo plays maindeck Pridemage, which improves that matchup quite a bit. Sligh can maindeck Shushers, but Shushers are pretty bad against non-CounterTop decks. Pridemages have much more utility.
Team Info-Ninja: Shhh... We don't exist.
/Agree. We don't have to play that card tho.
Countertop beats both decks anyway. Like you said, you can mainboard Shusher if you expect a whole lot of it, but it's going to be a bad matchup regardless. Winnable, but not good.
If you take my list and cross reference it with Zoo, these are the changes.
-4 Kird Ape
-4 Qasali Pridemage
-4 Grim Lavamancer
-2 Wooly/Kotr
-3 Path to Exile
-4 Lightning Helix
-2 Jitte/Sylvan Library
+4 Goblin Guide
+4 Ball Lightning
+2 Bloodbraid Elf
+4 Rift Bolt
+4 Magma Jet
+3 Price of Progress
+1 Chain Lightning
... So, that's a whole lot different. Thats a loss of over half their creature base, and the only thing we're keeping is Goyf and Nacatl. It's worth pointing out that Zoo plays alot differently than this. I'm always willing to throw burn at my opponents life total with this deck, less so with Zoo. You're not battling for your creatures as much, and you're playing less of them. This allows you to run more burn.
Goblin Guide is better than Kird Ape in a deck that's so burn focussed, so I'd consider this an upgrade. This is really the card that makes this deck what it is now. Kird Ape isn't a good card, so I'd consider not playing him a good thing.
Grim Lavamancer is slow. This is a turn 4 deck, and he needs more time to work his wonders. Zoo uses him well, but I'm happy to see him go. Rift Bolt seems like the logical comparison, and it works.
Qasali Pridemage is awesome, but our manabase can't accomidate for him. That being said, I know he'll be sorely missed, but he's a better answer than a threat. This deck is looking to be nothing but threats, and Burn can ignore some of the things that Zoo needs to answer with him. The loss of Pridemage is definitely a negative, but when you replace him with PoP (which is insane), it's not the end of the world. A great card, and a loss here.
Lightning Helix ---> Magma Jet is a bit of a loss in power. Obviously the lifegain works wonders in the red mirror, but we need the library manipulation. Scrying away lands is probably more powerful than the +1 dmg and +3 life. Like Volt said, Magma Jet is the worst card in the deck. Every time I play this card I ask myself, would Lava Spike/Flame Rift be better? Oftentimes, they wouldn't.
Ball Lightning is faster than Woolly or KOTR, and Costs the same amount. Connecting with those guys is tough, and doesn't happen all that often. Sure you gain some lategame with creatures that stick around, but I'm just trying to take away 20 as fast as possible. I'd consider this an upgrade.
Path to Exile is good, but Ball Lightning doesn't care about that Tarmogoyf on the other side of the board. Zoo needs to run this to deal with the big guys that end up outclassing their Kird Apes. We on the other hand say, okay now he's got me on a clock, can I race it? This deck is good at that. If they're swinging with something, that means it aint blockin, and we're gonna get in there. Sure there's things that we'd wish we could stop (Dreadnaught comes to mind), but I'm willing to not play Path.
On the whole, I don't see how Zoo is strictly superior to this deck now. Countertop is a big deal, we all know this, but Zoo gets wrecked by the lock as much as we do pre-board. Pridemage is about as much as you can ask for against their deck, and even that isn't perfect. They still have Counters for it and a coinflips chance of getting to two mana before you. Ball Lightning or Bloodbraid Elf might sneak through for alot under their soft lock. I'll admit, I don't have any CB-Top players at my school to play with, but I don't think the matchup would be that much worse. Of course, Goblin Guide is bad against Top. It's a bad matchup for sure, but speeding the deck up can't be a bad idea. Maybe Zoo is the superior deck, but I think this deck got alot better regardless.
Zoo can deal with 'Goyfs 'Noughts and 'Stalkers easily with PTE (and STP postboard). This is a big deal. (pun intended)
"We are goblinkind, heirs to the mountain empires of chieftains past. Rest is death to us, and arson is our call to war."
Most RG lists also play 2 Plateau so they can also side Pte`s.
I´d say it just comes down to preferences...
DCI: 68 10 43 34
I don't think it's pretty clear at all. Both decks play fundamentally different game plans. If anything, I think Burn is obsolete because of Goyf Sligh, not Goyf Sligh obsolete because of Zoo.It's pretty clear that Rg Sligh has been obsoleted by Zoo. Here's why:
1. Incinerate is mediocre. The only reason it sees play in Burn and Sligh is because once you get down to the last 4 or 8 slots in the deck, there's nothing clearly better than Incinerate left to play in those slots. Sure, every deck has to have a worst card, but when your worst card is a Lightning Bolt that costs an extra , that's a problem. Ideally, you want your worst card to be Magma Jet.
2. Sligh usually loses game 1 to CounterTop, and doesn't improve enough after sideboarding to make the matchup a good one overall. Zoo plays maindeck Pridemage, which improves that matchup quite a bit. Sligh can maindeck Shushers, but Shushers are pretty bad against non-CounterTop decks. Pridemages have much more utility.
Incinerate is mediocre, yes. That doesn't make the rest of the deck bad. Incinerates function is to do exactly what you said; push the final points of damage through for the win. However, it has the ability of destroying blockers early on too, so it's also versatile.
Sligh doesn't lose g1 to CounterTop unless they assemble the lock early. If they don't assemble the lock early, they die. If they do get the lock assembled before they die, we still have cards like Rift Bolt and Fireblast to finish the opponent off. Regardless, Zoo has the same problems against Counterbalance. In the same way Zoo runs Pridemage, Sligh could run Shusher.
Pridemage is a better maindeck card than Shusher, yes, and is a plus for Zoo over Sligh for the CounterTop matchup. I'll agree there.
Goyf Sligh has plenty of sideboarding for CounterTop postboard. Shusher is an absolute beating against them. It's better than Pridemage vs CounterTop... if they have the lock assembled, Pridemage isn't doing anything. Shusher can come down through an assembled CounterTop lock. If they have an StP for him, who cares... in resp, you activate him to push through lethal Price of Progress' or Fireblasts and shit. We still run 2 Krosan Grip too if that was even necessary, which I don't believe it is.
Again, both decks play fundamentally different roles. I'm not saying Goyf Sligh is better or worse against CounterTop, but there are more matchups to consider besides just CounterTop. Zoo is more dependant on creatures and has a slower clock than Goyf Sligh, which is relevant against other matchups.
I can agree with Hanni here: I have tested this matchup a TON bringing in 3 shusher 3 grip and sometimes 2 blast. PreBoard I would say it is slightly in your favor and postboard I would say it is slightly in your favor. If you want to have a good matchup here, if you dedicate some sideboard space (and shusher/grip have other applications, as well as blast), I think you will be fine g1 and g2/3. It's other matchups I worry about that could potentially make zoo obsolete goyf sligh.
The math favors that Zoo has obsoleted Goyf Sligh, but it isn't all in the matchup percentages. Goyf Sligh is much less susceptible to wasteland and moons, for instance, which doesn't necessarily help any specific matchup, but is in general obviously a good thing. Goyf Sligh is much more able to run on basic mountains for longer than zoo. Topdecking burn instead of creatures is often a good thing late in the game. Goyf Sligh is more likely to win goyf wars due to the larger amount of burn (exalted is only 4 cards cmon) and I know I run PtE out of the side in my sligh list to help stuff like tombstalker/goyf/pro:red guys.
But yeah I still think zoo is better than goyf sligh. But I would go a long way from saying goyf sligh can't beat countertop, and that it has been obsoleted.
This is where I agree and disagree. What matchups is Zoo superior against? Their higher dependance on creatures and weaker manabase makes them more susceptible against Aggro Loam. The heavier creature dependance makes them more vulnerable against Landstill. I'd say the manabase stability against Merfolk is relevant, though I'm sure both decks boast positive matchups against them. Against bigger aggro like Rock and Survival, I'd say Goyf Sligh has advantages because after its creatures are outclassed, it has a higher burn denisty. Against combo, which is a horrible matchup for both decks anyway, Goyf Sligh has a faster clock which enables it to possibly race the combo player (in instances where they are forced to combo with Ad Nauseam anyway). Against Ichorid, the faster clock should improve win percentages a little.It's other matchups I worry about that could potentially make zoo obsolete goyf sligh.
The math favors that Zoo has obsoleted Goyf Sligh, but it isn't all in the matchup percentages. Goyf Sligh is much less susceptible to wasteland and moons, for instance, which doesn't necessarily help any specific matchup, but is in general obviously a good thing. Goyf Sligh is much more able to run on basic mountains for longer than zoo. Topdecking burn instead of creatures is often a good thing late in the game. Goyf Sligh is more likely to win goyf wars due to the larger amount of burn (exalted is only 4 cards cmon) and I know I run PtE out of the side in my sligh list to help stuff like tombstalker/goyf/pro:red guys.
But yeah I still think zoo is better than goyf sligh. But I would go a long way from saying goyf sligh can't beat countertop, and that it has been obsoleted.
I'm sure there are matchups where Zoo is better than Goyf Sligh too. You are better apt to answer Jitte and other problematic artifacts/enchantments because of Pridemage. But what I'm saying is: I fail to see why Zoo is being considered a "better" deck. I think each one fills a different niche for different metagames, with neither being superior to the other.
On another note, with the printing of Goblin Guide to compliment our Wild Nacatl's, the clock has yet again increased. We're getting closer and closer to a fundamental turn of 3. This is a step forward for the archtype, not a step backwards. Hell, in some aspects I'd argue that Guide is better than Nacatl... as a mid+ game topdeck, the opponent probably won't have a blocker open for a hasty Guide, making it essentially a Shock rather than a dead topdeck.
Last edited by Hanni; 09-21-2009 at 11:57 AM.
the only thing that makes zoo "better" than goyfsligh is Pridemage...give goysligh a RG or 1G version of Pridemage and you'll see that goyfsligh would be better...PtE's are okay (though i'm still not into splashing any white spell in the deck)...goyfsligh is way faster than zoo...zoo is more creature-based unlike goyfsligh which has more burn to speed things up...like people pointed out here, zoo is more prone to Moon effects and Wastelands than goyfsligh and Counter-Top CAN be beaten...
Last edited by grungyboy; 09-21-2009 at 09:56 PM.
Take this example for how Ball Lightning got better with Goblin Guide/Nacatl.
Turn 1: Land, Goblin Guide, attack for 2 : 18
Turn 2: Land, Lightning Bolt, Chain Lightning, attack for 2 : 10
Turn 3: Land, Ball Lightning + Fireblast for 10, Guide Gets him to -2. First turn Nacatl Finishes in this situation too. The last card in my hand was a PoP to make it even better.
Ball Lightning has got to get us closer to a more consistant turn 3 Goldfish than Incinerate. I can't imagine a better card with that goal in mind.
Hitting 3 lands by turn 3 consistently is a rather difficult task, especially in the face of Stifles and Wastelands. 3 mana for 6 damage is a good investment on 1 card, but its cost efficiency isn't any better than Incinerate. Do you feel yourself running out of gas too quick to warrant Ball Lightning? My testing shows that we don't run out of gas often... that's why this deck is superior to straight up Burn.
The biggest plus of Ball Lightning is that it is out of typical CB range. However, many CB decks now are running more 3cc cards, like Rhox and Trygon.
Turn 1: Nacatl
Turn 2: Guide + Bolt, deal 8
Turn 3: Triple Bolt, Deal 14
Same end result. Swap a Bolt for a PoP with the opponent with 3 nonbasics, same end result. Swap a PoP with an Incinerate and toss a Fireblast in there, same end result. Guide + Nacatl push the fundamental curve further than it's ever been for this style deck, regardless if you run Ball Lightning or not.
Triple Bolt is 3 cards, where Ball Lightning is 1. That matters. I know Goyf Sligh is better at not running out of cards than burn, but it doesn't mean that it's not the deck's fundamental problem. There are plenty of ways we can get a turn 3 Goldfish, but our aim should be making it as common as we can, while accommodating for the times where not everything goes perfectly. When the opponent starts answering our stuff, what you really need is for your cards to do more. This is a 7 card combo deck. We have no draw, so we've got to try and increase the value of our topdecks. Ball Lightning is fantastic at this, a whole 3 damage better than Incinerate by itself. It just makes the job easier, 20 points of damage isn't as hard. We don't have to agree on this, but please test it, and share your experience.
How many ball lightnings are you currently trying, troopa? I might try a couple or something, as it can definitely wreck a lot of players who assume the game comes down to a race and never keep blockers.
I've been playing the full 4. Multiples don't bother me, in fact I think the card is great in doubles. 12 damage in 2 cards is nice to have.
If I were to try Ball Lightning, it would be as a 2-of, either replacing Grim Lavamancer or Incinerate. Lavamancer, because it requires a similar mana investment as Ball Lightning, Incinerate because it's the least cost efficient damage spell in the deck (aside from Magma Jet, but Scry is invaluable).
I'm still not convinced, though. It's conditional just like Keldon Marauder's or Hellspark Elemental, with a higher cmc. In that same line of thinking, Browbeat could be an effective card, and we all know that it's not. However, I will test it.
gotta keep grim's in the md, he's mvp usually, goyf sly is usualy one burn spell from winning games, and sometimes u get there, and sometimes u topdeck land. I had more problems with dealing with styfle, bc of rise of fetches, we should think about cutting back to 6 fetches.
A partner was going to run Fire/Ice in his Tarmo Sligh. I liked the idea and have been testing it. It seems to work fine inspite of having a vulnerable mana base, but I need to test it more.
This is my list:
// Lands
2 [ON] Wooded Foothills
3 [ZEN] Arid Mesa
3 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn
3 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
4 [A] Taiga
2 [A] Plateau
2 [B] Volcanic Island
4 [TE] Wasteland
// Creatures
4 [ALA] Wild Nacatl
4 [FNM] Kird Ape
4 [TO] Grim Lavamancer
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf
// Spells
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [A] Lightning Bolt
4 [AP] Fire/Ice
4 [FD] Magma Jet
2 [TSP] Rift Bolt
3 [VI] Fireblast
I see Fire/Ice viable here for these reasons:
Now with Zendikar, we can play more red fetchs, then, adding other splash is less problematic. Anyway, the card won’t be dead if we don’t have the volcanic island in play, as it happens with the white splash. So it would basically continue being a RG deck.
I think this deck lacks of good solutions against an enemy Tarmo or other big creatures. Ice could help making our little creatures better. Of course it’s not so definitive as for example Path to exile but IMO it fits better in the deck because it’s also other burn card.
In my opinion POP is not very good in this kind of lists with wasteland. So, I think that Fire/Ice could be a nice alternate. In some cases it could also complement the wastelands. The problem is that I don’t really know how useful are the wastelands in Naya.
Well, I would like to know your opinions.
This looks worse than a burn-heavy Zoo to me. To be honest, it's nearly the same as a burn-heavy Zoo.
Maybe pack in some PoP? It is a huge beating against most decks and the hit you take isn't that meaningful - you should be ahead in the dmgrace, anyways.
Might be win-more, though.
I would say that in general, a Burn-heavy Zoo is nearly the same as Goyf Sligh. I haven’t played Zoo and I haven’t almost played Goyf sligh, so I can only have a general idea of these decks. I think that the differences are that Sligh can have a better mana base and less resources/stability in favour of a more aggro side.
Then, I think that you mean that as I deteriorate the “Sligh mana base”, it wouldn’t have too much sense to play that list instead of Zoo. I understand you, but as I said, the deck really continues depending only on 2 colours. At first, I thought to keep on one mountain but it seems to harm more than help. Anyway, perhaps Fire/Ice could also work well in a traditional RG Sligh although I find it better in Naya.
About POP, I love the card but I don’t find it so good here. They would make less damage with previous use of the wastelands. With all lands no basic, I think they wouldn’t be too much useful except against control decks. It could be a similar case than Flame Rift in Burn.
Now, I’m thinking about making theses changes: -1 Fetch, -2 Rift Bolt, +3 Hellspark Elemental, trying to make a better mana use. Unearth could help against Counterbalance/COTV as Rift Bolt did. Ice could also make Hellspark better and wastelands would be more useful as “mana land” with this creature.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
