Just wondering what people think is the best turn two play in general in this deck when all other things are generally equal: Constrictor, Servant, or Siphoner? I think it's clear that if you're about to curve up into a Hydra, Servant is probably best, and if you're about to hit a Rishkar, Constrictor is better. Is Siphoner better in all other circumstances? This question assumes a pretty typical build.
Thanks in advance!
It depends on what you're facing and what you're prioritizing.
That is an exceedingly fair response, but maybe not a particularly helpful one! You obviously don't ahve to spell it out, but do you have any suggestions as to where to find opinions/ analyses of these options?
I get what you're saying, but you're asking a very open-ended question. Some of us value being aggressive more. Some of us value being able to control the battlefield more. There is no "one right way" and there's definitely no real scenario where "all things are equal." Personally, if I believe my turn 2 play will at least survive a round, I want to smash my opponent hard. Let them scramble to find answers to the problems I'm presenting. EDIT: That is to say, I want my Winding Constrictor more often than the others if I have the cards for an aggressive start.
I would say: Servant. Either of the others is a kill-on-sight target. If servant survives, you are ahead on resources, otherwise they spent a removal on a low value target
I've had matches against Grixis Energy come down to who stuck and kept their Glint-Sleeve Siphoner. One or two extra draws makes a huge difference in those games.
I've had matches against Grixis Energy come down to who stuck and kept their Glint-Sleeve Siphoner. One or two extra draws makes a huge difference in those games.
So have I. This just illustrates my original point: It all depends on what you're facing and what you're prioritizing.
I've had matches against Grixis Energy come down to who stuck and kept their Glint-Sleeve Siphoner. One or two extra draws makes a huge difference in those games.
So have I. This just illustrates my original point: It all depends on what you're facing and what you're prioritizing.
Fully agree. Like in a vacuum, the logic that Servant sets you up for the most because it is a "low value" target that gives the most value just by ETB. I think sequencing is pretty important too in determining what you lead with. Hydra in hand, probably go for Servant first. Baiting removal, probably again go with servant. Rishkar or Climb in hand, Snake gets better. Racing to card advantage, Siphoner first. Though you have to be careful that it doesn't eat removal. Match up makes a difference too obviously.
Edit: If you can wait long enough to play Siphoner with protection up, I think that's the best way to play it. Most midrange matches can be decided by whether we draw more threats and removal than our opponent. We have the advantage, that we can start to accrue a lot of Energy for the Siphoner if it gets left unchecked. I've had games where one has drawn me two, three, even four extra cards.
So fellas, ladies (wish women had a version of the word "dudes")... my inner Timmy has me testing Muldrotha, the Gravetide. Someone tell me why I'm crazy. It just feels like a house as a 1-of main deck if you get there, but maybe it's just the Scarab God 2.0. I don't know.
So fellas, ladies (wish women had a version of the word "dudes")... my inner Timmy has me testing Muldrotha, the Gravetide. Someone tell me why I'm crazy. It just feels like a house as a 1-of main deck if you get there, but maybe it's just the Scarab God 2.0. I don't know.
Seems like it could do some fun stuff. I pulled one in the display I bought and have been itching to try it out in the deck.
Could do some pretty fun stuff like having a flipped Hadana's climb, then have another one in play flip, and then play the one in the graveyard to have it out putting counters on everything again.
Muldrotha doesn't have any counter synergy, but I'm thinking it could be fun to use anyway. Maybe pull some Hydra's back from the graveyard after getting hit by a settle the wreckage. It's also big enough to fly in and do 12 damage with a flipped Hadana's climb.
I say go for it!
By the way, just saw a Sultai deck on the SCG Atlanta open beat a U/W Historic control deck (U/W control being one of the new decks to beat) He wasn't using Llanowar elves. Still on Servant for those extra energy counters.
He was using Hinterland Harbour too. That was the only Dominaria card I spotted in his deck.
Yea. A few of rounds of testing with Llanowar Elves told me it wouldn't be in my final cut, but Muldrotha just let's us use the graveyard every round. It helps us tax opponents' removal spells if they're relying heavily on controlling via spot removal. I mean short of Scavenger Grounds (and similar effects) or Muldrotha getting dead herself, it seems like a really solid finisher on top of a potential Scarab God. I have one, but I really think I want to test with two of them main deck. I'll have to see about it later though when I get a second wind to play some.
So fellas, ladies (wish women had a version of the word "dudes")... my inner Timmy has me testing Muldrotha, the Gravetide. Someone tell me why I'm crazy. It just feels like a house as a 1-of main deck if you get there, but maybe it's just the Scarab God 2.0. I don't know.
Seems like it could do some fun stuff. I pulled one in the display I bought and have been itching to try it out in the deck.
Could do some pretty fun stuff like having a flipped Hadana's climb, then have another one in play flip, and then play the one in the graveyard to have it out putting counters on everything again.
Muldrotha doesn't have any counter synergy, but I'm thinking it could be fun to use anyway. Maybe pull some Hydra's back from the graveyard after getting hit by a settle the wreckage. It's also big enough to fly in and do 12 damage with a flipped Hadana's climb.
I say go for it!
By the way, just saw a Sultai deck on the SCG Atlanta open beat a U/W Historic control deck (U/W control being one of the new decks to beat) He wasn't using Llanowar elves. Still on Servant for those extra energy counters.
He was using Hinterland Harbour too. That was the only Dominaria card I spotted in his deck.
A pretty cool snake deck came in first place at the standard event at SCG Atlanta. I'm pretty hype that he's using Phyrexian Scriptures and Tetzimoc, Primal Death in the sideboard. Awesome cards.
Very cool deck, just too bad I don't own three Karn hehe.
Very interesting to see he didn't play Llanowar Elves even though he's not using any energy cards whatsoever. I would have figured it'd be an auto include without the energy cards. But then again, he's running 8 merfolk for card filtering. https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1068081#paper
2nd, 3rd and 4th was U/W Control. Gotta' beat control in this meta (Goblin Chainwhirler is really nasty too)
This may be a sidenote, but how do you all think about verbal bluffing at something like fnm? Some guy I played made a verbal bluff and I took the bait and got two hydras settled. I know I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but I forgot that dude tries to bluff when he's behind in a game, but he won because of it.
I don't mind losing, I just don't like that guy as a person. Too bad he's always at my ******* fnm.... I think it's pretty bad sportsmanship.
A pretty cool snake deck came in first place at the standard event at SCG Atlanta. I'm pretty hype that he's using Phyrexian Scriptures and Tetzimoc, Primal Death in the sideboard. Awesome cards.
Very cool deck, just too bad I don't own three Karn hehe.
Very interesting to see he didn't play Llanowar Elves even though he's not using any energy cards whatsoever. I would have figured it'd be an auto include without the energy cards. But then again, he's running 8 merfolk for card filtering. https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1068081#paper
2nd, 3rd and 4th was U/W Control. Gotta' beat control in this meta (Goblin Chainwhirler is really nasty too)
This may be a sidenote, but how do you all think about verbal bluffing at something like fnm? Some guy I played made a verbal bluff and I took the bait and got two hydras settled. I know I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but I forgot that dude tries to bluff when he's behind in a game, but he won because of it.
I don't mind losing, I just don't like that guy as a person. Too bad he's always at my ******* fnm.... I think it's pretty bad sportsmanship.
I have to disagree that bluffing is bad sportsmanship. Is verbal bluffing worse than card bluffing? It's common practice to hold up a single land card in hand when you're out of everything else to give the opponent the idea that you may have an instant or good card you're saving. I think that is just a wise move. I'll go so far sometimes as to really look at my single land card during combat phase, maybe move my hand over my land before declaring blockers. It can trick your opponent sometimes and cause them to not attack fully when they may have the advantage. I don't see how using words to bluff is any worse than using a land card or your hands to give an opponent an idea. Magic is a bit like poker in that it is possible to bluff and win. If you're not playing or at least paying attention to the psychological game, you're going to lose that part of the game in higher up events.
I'm curious to know how he bated you.
Furthermore, this should actually work to your advantage from now on. If you've recognized a certain player's bluff pattern, you can now use it against them. If he bluffs that he doesn't have a card in hand continuously during pivotal moments in the game, you can start to play around that.
I'm not sure what your boardstate was, but it may have been incorrect to attack with both hydras regardless of the bluff. If you suspect settle the wreckage because you saw it last game, but haven't seen one yet this game, be wary! If you are the aggressor with 2 hydras out, it would be correct to leave one back if you smell a removal spell like that. If you're both at low number of cards, but your creatures/life total position is superior, then it's better to play it safe and attack in with only 1. If it was the case that you were going to lose if you don't kill your opponent this turn, then it is correct to attack with everything in the hopes that he doesn't have that relevant card in hand because it's your only chance to win.
To sum up, if you know this players bluff style, use it against them to win next time. Depending on the circumstance, it may not matter if your opponent is bluffing at, you will only have one "best way" to play at the end of game. The circumstance late game is much more likely to determine your action than your opponent's words in almost every circumstance. For example, you may be losing, but know that a removal spell top decked on your next turn could win you the game. In which case you try to stay alive to draw that card. If you're already winning and your opponent has one card left in hand, don't "win more" by attacking with unnecessary creatures that leave you open to a blow out if your opponent is likely to have a card that will do so. Another example of trying to "win more" is when you have a superior board state that will lead you to win in your next turn or 2. Despite seeing that your opponent has board wipes in the deck, you play the giant creature you top deck. They wipe and play out a creature. If you saved that creature in hand, you'd still be in a position to win even if they have the blow out card.
This concept is hard to explain, but there are some videos out there that do a more thorough job than I did here.
I agree on the bluffing thing. It's part of the game up to a point. Usually that's just a giant tell to me. If you've played any amount of poker, this is should be something that's easily recognizable. Live and learn.
I get what you're saying, I just think it's a lame thing to do. I don't say anything at all that I know could potentially make my opponent sway his decision one way or the other. I don't talk about any of that when I play in a competitive setting.
I do think there's a difference between verbal bluffing and "letting the cards do the talking" and I think the former is bad sportsmanship.
This guy just gets on my nerves and I make bad plays when I play against him because I lose focus. He's just somebody I don't want to be around because I don't like him as a person, so it sucks I keep getting ******* seated against him. Like I said, I don't mind losing to other people, I just don't like this dude. I just don't want to be a baby and concede so I don't have to play with him, but he sure as ***** doesn't make me enjoy myself when playing cards is an escape for a few hours from an otherwise lame life.
I haven't played down there in a while 'cause I've been traveling, so I forgot about his bluffing style. And I haven't honestly played against people who used Settle the Wreckage that much, so I always forget that card exists which is my own damn fault.
I just gotta' not be a ***** and remember his bluffing style, or just hopefully never play that dildo again and actually have fun with the other players.
Man I sound like such a huge whiner... I'm just really ******* tired of that dude.
Whether or not the setting is competitive, bluffing is always a part of the game. It's fine to not use verbal bluffing for your own game. Also, consider you will win more games if you think you can bluff your way out of a loss. Though doing so verbally probably isn't the best way, bluffing that you have a counterspell or something in hand can be beneficial. For example your opponent plays a spell then says move to combat phase. You say something like "wait a second" or simply pause to look at your card as though you're considering countering the spell before replying. It really isn't bad sportsmanship to play within the rules of the game in my opinion.
Magic is much more than just the cards in hand/those on the table. Getting triggered by someone may cause you to lose games whether they bluff, smell bad, treat your cards poorly or what ever. Having mental clarity and becoming unattached from emotions will help you to win games. There's a word for being triggered by someone, you went and tilted.
Nothing to worry about though. Probably worth venting a bit to gain some insight and have a better game plan when facing annoying opponents. Don't focus on "I hope I don't play them again" focus on your plan for avoiding going tilt next time you play them. That puts you in control of the situation instead of putting them in control over your psychological head space next time you play them.
Looking forward to the matches of the Karn Constrictor deck showing up. Though honestly, with as much as Karn has jumped to, I'm hoping it doesn't work all that much better than the standard model. I like my Sultai energy plan. And there was one of those in the top 12.
This guy just gets on my nerves and I make bad plays when I play against him because I lose focus.
Have you considered that he could be acting a certain way with the express purpose of putting you on tilt? I'm not saying he is, but if you let your opponent affect you like this just by being themselves (whether its an act or truly who they are), then you've automatically set yourself at a disadvantage. You have to detach yourself from these kinds of distractions to maintain a level head. If he's not acting, then you're trumping yourself by not maintaining your self-control. If he is acting, then you're letting him trump you! If you have a counterspell in hand and let your opponent resolve a bomb card that you can't deal with, that's a misplay. Well, your counterspell in this situation is merely to maintain control of yourself. Don't misplay and let your opponent's bomb (his personality, feigned or otherwise) go uncountered.
Alrighty, I've been out of standard for a while, but Dominaria is looking good for us.
I've retuned my deck using adventurous impulse. This looks great! By using impulse and having plenty of explore creatures, plus Glint-sleeve siphoner, we keep trucking through cards while nearly always having a creature to play.
This as a turn 1 play is crazy good. It makes many unkeepable hands keepable by it's addition. Also, it gives us a chance to plan our turn 2 in an even better fashion. We have so many good creatures that can close out a game, it just makes sense to dig for them when we have the chance. I'm not sure if 4 is correct, but at least 3 seems to be. This card just adds so much flexibility with all of our 2 drops in the deck.
The deck is becoming a consistency machine for me in this build. We are going to see a hydra or gearhulk nearly every game, and probably play them on curve too! I feel this incarnation is going to want at least 1 or 2 ravenous chupacabras. Reasoning is that advernterous impulse can now allow us to dig for removal spells. That is one tricky thing with impulse, you're going to blow by a lot of good non-creature cards. Having removal on a stick helps shore up this weakness nicely.
So everbody seems to be on the sultai or straight GB camp in the first few days of the meta. I'm currently brewing an Abzan list. To me, Shalai, Voice of Plenty fits the deck perfectly, easy splashable and strong by itself. It also provides the evasion the deck often lacks.
You make some interesting points. I'd like to see an abzan list. I don't think I'll go that way myself as I don't have some of the cards for it. You could also play Seal away. That might be pretty relevant against Ramunamap red as you can exile their hazoret the turn they attack with it even if they are on the play.
Shalia looks decent. On the other hand, you probably only want 2 of her. I think Hydra is still better because of the inherent hexproof ability.
I feel like Shalai is interesting, but isn't she just kind of win more? If you have that much mana, hopefully you've found Verdurous Gearhulk and swung for the win? She doesn't protect from board wipes which are generally the biggest weakness of the deck.
I might be wrong, but that's my gut feeling. Blue at least gives us Negate. Plus the black allows us Duress.
I feel like Shalai is interesting, but isn't she just kind of win more? If you have that much mana, hopefully you've found Verdurous Gearhulk and swung for the win? She doesn't protect from board wipes which are generally the biggest weakness of the deck.
I might be wrong, but that's my gut feeling. Blue at least gives us Negate. Plus the black allows us Duress.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I couldn't care less about the second ability. I care about the Oprah Winfrey-style hexproof, which specifically protects from Settle the Wreckage. The flying body isn't bad either. I will say that I'm more interested in it for other decks though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It depends on what you're facing and what you're prioritizing.
RNA Standard: Grixis Midrange, Jund Deathwhirler, Sultai Vannifar
GRN Standard: Red Midrange, Mono-Blue Tempo, Wr Aggro, Gruul Experimental Dinosaurs, Sultai Midrange, Jeskai Midrange
Modern: Bant Spirits
Forcing a single archetype in all formats: too many colors, bad mana.
So have I. This just illustrates my original point: It all depends on what you're facing and what you're prioritizing.
Fully agree. Like in a vacuum, the logic that Servant sets you up for the most because it is a "low value" target that gives the most value just by ETB. I think sequencing is pretty important too in determining what you lead with. Hydra in hand, probably go for Servant first. Baiting removal, probably again go with servant. Rishkar or Climb in hand, Snake gets better. Racing to card advantage, Siphoner first. Though you have to be careful that it doesn't eat removal. Match up makes a difference too obviously.
Edit: If you can wait long enough to play Siphoner with protection up, I think that's the best way to play it. Most midrange matches can be decided by whether we draw more threats and removal than our opponent. We have the advantage, that we can start to accrue a lot of Energy for the Siphoner if it gets left unchecked. I've had games where one has drawn me two, three, even four extra cards.
Seems like it could do some fun stuff. I pulled one in the display I bought and have been itching to try it out in the deck.
Could do some pretty fun stuff like having a flipped Hadana's climb, then have another one in play flip, and then play the one in the graveyard to have it out putting counters on everything again.
Muldrotha doesn't have any counter synergy, but I'm thinking it could be fun to use anyway. Maybe pull some Hydra's back from the graveyard after getting hit by a settle the wreckage. It's also big enough to fly in and do 12 damage with a flipped Hadana's climb.
I say go for it!
By the way, just saw a Sultai deck on the SCG Atlanta open beat a U/W Historic control deck (U/W control being one of the new decks to beat) He wasn't using Llanowar elves. Still on Servant for those extra energy counters.
He was using Hinterland Harbour too. That was the only Dominaria card I spotted in his deck.
Deck still looks brutal in the new meta.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJbtOHxjjMY
Game you mentioned starts at 1:19:00.
A pretty cool snake deck came in first place at the standard event at SCG Atlanta. I'm pretty hype that he's using Phyrexian Scriptures and Tetzimoc, Primal Death in the sideboard. Awesome cards.
Very cool deck, just too bad I don't own three Karn hehe.
Very interesting to see he didn't play Llanowar Elves even though he's not using any energy cards whatsoever. I would have figured it'd be an auto include without the energy cards. But then again, he's running 8 merfolk for card filtering.
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1068081#paper
2nd, 3rd and 4th was U/W Control. Gotta' beat control in this meta (Goblin Chainwhirler is really nasty too)
This may be a sidenote, but how do you all think about verbal bluffing at something like fnm? Some guy I played made a verbal bluff and I took the bait and got two hydras settled. I know I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but I forgot that dude tries to bluff when he's behind in a game, but he won because of it.
I don't mind losing, I just don't like that guy as a person. Too bad he's always at my ******* fnm.... I think it's pretty bad sportsmanship.
Also, as long as Bristling Hydra is in your main deck, you will need all the energy you can get.
I have to disagree that bluffing is bad sportsmanship. Is verbal bluffing worse than card bluffing? It's common practice to hold up a single land card in hand when you're out of everything else to give the opponent the idea that you may have an instant or good card you're saving. I think that is just a wise move. I'll go so far sometimes as to really look at my single land card during combat phase, maybe move my hand over my land before declaring blockers. It can trick your opponent sometimes and cause them to not attack fully when they may have the advantage. I don't see how using words to bluff is any worse than using a land card or your hands to give an opponent an idea. Magic is a bit like poker in that it is possible to bluff and win. If you're not playing or at least paying attention to the psychological game, you're going to lose that part of the game in higher up events.
I'm curious to know how he bated you.
Furthermore, this should actually work to your advantage from now on. If you've recognized a certain player's bluff pattern, you can now use it against them. If he bluffs that he doesn't have a card in hand continuously during pivotal moments in the game, you can start to play around that.
I'm not sure what your boardstate was, but it may have been incorrect to attack with both hydras regardless of the bluff. If you suspect settle the wreckage because you saw it last game, but haven't seen one yet this game, be wary! If you are the aggressor with 2 hydras out, it would be correct to leave one back if you smell a removal spell like that. If you're both at low number of cards, but your creatures/life total position is superior, then it's better to play it safe and attack in with only 1. If it was the case that you were going to lose if you don't kill your opponent this turn, then it is correct to attack with everything in the hopes that he doesn't have that relevant card in hand because it's your only chance to win.
To sum up, if you know this players bluff style, use it against them to win next time. Depending on the circumstance, it may not matter if your opponent is bluffing at, you will only have one "best way" to play at the end of game. The circumstance late game is much more likely to determine your action than your opponent's words in almost every circumstance. For example, you may be losing, but know that a removal spell top decked on your next turn could win you the game. In which case you try to stay alive to draw that card. If you're already winning and your opponent has one card left in hand, don't "win more" by attacking with unnecessary creatures that leave you open to a blow out if your opponent is likely to have a card that will do so. Another example of trying to "win more" is when you have a superior board state that will lead you to win in your next turn or 2. Despite seeing that your opponent has board wipes in the deck, you play the giant creature you top deck. They wipe and play out a creature. If you saved that creature in hand, you'd still be in a position to win even if they have the blow out card.
This concept is hard to explain, but there are some videos out there that do a more thorough job than I did here.
I do think there's a difference between verbal bluffing and "letting the cards do the talking" and I think the former is bad sportsmanship.
This guy just gets on my nerves and I make bad plays when I play against him because I lose focus. He's just somebody I don't want to be around because I don't like him as a person, so it sucks I keep getting ******* seated against him. Like I said, I don't mind losing to other people, I just don't like this dude. I just don't want to be a baby and concede so I don't have to play with him, but he sure as ***** doesn't make me enjoy myself when playing cards is an escape for a few hours from an otherwise lame life.
I haven't played down there in a while 'cause I've been traveling, so I forgot about his bluffing style. And I haven't honestly played against people who used Settle the Wreckage that much, so I always forget that card exists which is my own damn fault.
I just gotta' not be a ***** and remember his bluffing style, or just hopefully never play that dildo again and actually have fun with the other players.
Man I sound like such a huge whiner... I'm just really ******* tired of that dude.
Magic is much more than just the cards in hand/those on the table. Getting triggered by someone may cause you to lose games whether they bluff, smell bad, treat your cards poorly or what ever. Having mental clarity and becoming unattached from emotions will help you to win games. There's a word for being triggered by someone, you went and tilted.
Nothing to worry about though. Probably worth venting a bit to gain some insight and have a better game plan when facing annoying opponents. Don't focus on "I hope I don't play them again" focus on your plan for avoiding going tilt next time you play them. That puts you in control of the situation instead of putting them in control over your psychological head space next time you play them.
Have you considered that he could be acting a certain way with the express purpose of putting you on tilt? I'm not saying he is, but if you let your opponent affect you like this just by being themselves (whether its an act or truly who they are), then you've automatically set yourself at a disadvantage. You have to detach yourself from these kinds of distractions to maintain a level head. If he's not acting, then you're trumping yourself by not maintaining your self-control. If he is acting, then you're letting him trump you! If you have a counterspell in hand and let your opponent resolve a bomb card that you can't deal with, that's a misplay. Well, your counterspell in this situation is merely to maintain control of yourself. Don't misplay and let your opponent's bomb (his personality, feigned or otherwise) go uncountered.
I've retuned my deck using adventurous impulse. This looks great! By using impulse and having plenty of explore creatures, plus Glint-sleeve siphoner, we keep trucking through cards while nearly always having a creature to play.
This as a turn 1 play is crazy good. It makes many unkeepable hands keepable by it's addition. Also, it gives us a chance to plan our turn 2 in an even better fashion. We have so many good creatures that can close out a game, it just makes sense to dig for them when we have the chance. I'm not sure if 4 is correct, but at least 3 seems to be. This card just adds so much flexibility with all of our 2 drops in the deck.
The deck is becoming a consistency machine for me in this build. We are going to see a hydra or gearhulk nearly every game, and probably play them on curve too! I feel this incarnation is going to want at least 1 or 2 ravenous chupacabras. Reasoning is that advernterous impulse can now allow us to dig for removal spells. That is one tricky thing with impulse, you're going to blow by a lot of good non-creature cards. Having removal on a stick helps shore up this weakness nicely.
4x Winding Constrictor
4x Glint-sleeve Siphoner
2x merfolk branchwalker
2x walking ballista
4x Jadelight ranger
2x Rishkar, Peema Renegade
4x Bristling Hydra
2x Ravenous Chupacabra
3x Verdurous Gearhulk
1x Blossoming defense
4x Adventurous Impulse
3x Fatal Push
1x Cast Down
land 24
4x Blooming Marsh
4x Woodland Cemetery
1x Foul Orchard
9x forest
6x swamp
3x Vraska's contempt
4x Duress
3x Blossoming defense
2x Prowling serpopard
2x Lifecrafter's Bestiary
1x Liliana, Death's Majesty
1x Carnage Tyrant
I'd like to discuss what else would warant the white splash. I.e. Cast Out over Vraska's Contempt to make room for more Ravenous Chupacabra next to our new addition, Adventurous Impulse.
I do feel a deck like this would need some jump/ramp @ 2cmc to make up for the 4cmc heavy curve.
Modern: WUBRG Humans - GBW Traverse - GWU Knightfall - GRW Bushwhacker Zoo -
Shalia looks decent. On the other hand, you probably only want 2 of her. I think Hydra is still better because of the inherent hexproof ability.
I might be wrong, but that's my gut feeling. Blue at least gives us Negate. Plus the black allows us Duress.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I couldn't care less about the second ability. I care about the Oprah Winfrey-style hexproof, which specifically protects from Settle the Wreckage. The flying body isn't bad either. I will say that I'm more interested in it for other decks though.