Locally zurgos have not only been topping our last few tournaments, but 2 have actually won all the way. Dunno what the hell is goin on exactly, but the bans have done nothing to monoR's power level it seems.
Totally agree with your analysis. That said, i wonder if you have matchup balance chart on this deck? something like:
good matchups: leovold and prosh
bad matchups: karlov titania
neutral matchup: baral, doran
Good: Any control with no lifegain outs (grixis, izzet, dimir, mono blue), animar, maelstrom wanderer
Bad: titania, karlov, atraxa, gitrog, Kalitas monoblack control
Neutral: Mirror match, MonoW aggro (we have additional avenues for offense in burn, but they have superior combat presence with first strike. Tie breaker comes down to how much life gain they have in the deck), partner decks
These matchups to me are variable, which means they can range from bad to good to neutral depending on how the deck is built.
Queen Marchesa control: If it's a superfriends control with a lot of mana rocks, zurgo's gonna have a fiesta. But if the deck plays with less rocks and more spot removal, mini-sweeps and lifegain (timely reinforcements, blessed alliance, etc), i would say the matchup is more balanced, though still slightly in zurgo's favor.
Ojutai: If authority of the consuls comes down early, GG. But outside of that, if no lifegain is prioritized, zurgo is at a heavy advantage.
Long story short: Outside of the inherently bad matchups mentioned, whether or not the matchup is good or not depends a LOT on how well prepared the deck is for monoR. Decks that are built totally ignoring the damage output of monoR will most likely be unable to take a best of 3, and are free wins regardless of how the matchup is on paper. Flip side, supposedly good matchups that find ways to compensate for red's damage output (playing blue elemental blast and hydroblast for example) can give us a hard time.
Ok, I tested a bit more with zurgo last night and I wanna share my takeaway and analysis.
Here's the thing.. he actually plays a bit more smoothly. Let's go over the bans 1 by 1:
1.) PoP is not as useful in mono colored decks. Titania is one of our worst matchups, and most of their nonbasics end up in the grave anyway. Another bad matchup where Price is not so useful is karlov. They can just fetch for basics all day without screwing themselves, and they have life gain outs. So losing PoP for another card that can function equally well across all matchups (AKA any generic burn spell) actually added consistency.
2.) If you replace [card sulfuric vortex[/card] for a rampaging ferocidon, the pros of a 3 power body with evasion, a decent passive and the identical can't gain life clause hurts as much as vortex. Here's where the difference lies actually. Vortex requires a bit more timing than one would think. If the titania matchup turns out into a straight up brawl, vortex helps them more than it helps us. Same situation with karlov if he somehow gets big enough to escape burn range (probability of this goes even higher the less burn the deck has) and starts hitting like a truck. Casting vortex with an 8/8 karlov in play hurts your clock as much as it hurts theirs. The difference is, you're the one who tapped 3 mana for it. With ferocidon on the other hand, you just cast it and let them deal with the 3/3 body however they please, with minimal detriment to your own life total in case the race doesn't turn out in your favor. There's much less risk.
3.) Eidolon of the great revel is the card most likely to backfire on us especially agianst titania. I apologize for bringing up titania every 2 sentences, but she and karlov are 2 of the most well-positioned meta decks today, and are coincidentally terrible matchups for zurgo. Anyway, when the midrange-y threats start coming out, there will come a point where eidolon will be dealing way more damage to us than to them. Same concept applies to karlov. Though their curve is lower than titania's, they can gain life. Point is, I wasn't so sad to see this go, as good as he is.
4.) Which leaves us with fireblast. Losing fireblast is an obvious nerf, but this is one card, in a deck that has no tutors and does not rely on a single card to win anyway.
Bottomline: Overall, zurgo as a whole was not nerfed, but rather a single aspect of his game was: burst. It's harder to win out of nowhere now via PoP for 14 damage against a 4 color deck, or by tapping out to all your burn and then dumping 2 lands for a fireblast. But losing access to 4 cards makes way for less burst-y but more consistent picks. Combined with the Edgar Markov ban, this announcement actually buffed MonoR's position in the meta.
How viable are the deck post bans? whats lists are you playing?
replaced sulfuric with the new dinosaur with menace, replaced fireblast with sonic burst, replaced PoP with a random burn spell, eidolon with the new 1-drop pirate. It plays just the same. We're no worse against our good matchups, and no better against the bad ones. Again, yes on paper zurgo's worse, but by it's very nature, monoR has never been reliant on a few individual cards to win. These nerfs did nothing but piss zurgo players off IMO, which to me is the mark of a very poor banlist decision by the committee. This was I think meant to silence all the whiners who still struggle with zurgo in 2017. Seriously guys, adapt or die.
I was pretty salty when I read the news yesterday, I admit. Rightfully so, I think. Who bans Fireblast in any kind of competitive format? Such a joke. That's pretty hard for me to get past.
That said, I guess the creature heavy versions (like mine) are going to come out a little easier than the burn heavy versions (like Yuji's). Maybe Zo-Zu comes back to the decklist now. Maybe I start playing fringe cards like Skullcrack & Flames of the Blood Hand. Maybe I can get Keldon Marauders, & Vexing Devil into the list finally (I love Devil as a fantastic post-combat play). Hell, I played Browbeat before...............
Yeah if fireblast was banned, force of will should be too. Just sayin. Different sides, same coin.
funny you say that though coz my burn heavy list actually has a zo-zu. too good into titania. One would argue turn 3 is too late for that especially on the draw, but it punishes ramunap/crucible/fastbond shenanigans. As for skullcrack I do play it, but yeah with sulfuric gone, flames of the bloodhand is suddenly more viable again.
Ok I actually think that the edgar ban caused a slight net positive for zurgo in terms of meta positioning despite the nerf. PoP doesn't do much to karlov, and in a matchup with life gain eidolon can actually backfire on zurgo anyway. Plus we have that new dino to replace sulfuric. Fireblast ban is ouchy tho. Not denying that nerf hurts, but I actually think that in my local meta at least, there'd be more zurgos finishing top 8 than when edgar was legal.
Yea, the sorcery speed is an issue at times. for sure. Buuutttt......one mana for four damage. it's like they made that for me because I'm feelin the pooowweeerrrr of loooovvveeeeee.
...probably didn't need the Mike & Maria Kanellis reference.
You see the new one drop 2/2? Pretty easy to enable. Great way to curve a Teetering Peaks opening. raid - ~ etb with a +1/+1 counter on it. 1/1 for R, goblin pirate. t1 mountain, zurgo < t2 Peaks Zurgo and bash 4 < post combat this guy. Seems legit.
oh maria. took me years to unsee the kayfabe brainless diva gimmick that WWE forced on her for so long.
definitely playing that pirate. keep em quality 1 drops coming wizards, zurgo needs em! eminence has downgraded zurgo from a tournament sledgehammer that gets stonewalled only by green decks into a mid tier meta deck imo.
Sooo I saw sonic burst in action and it is amazing. Sometimes opportunities come up on the fly where you just need an explosive turn to just end the game, and this helps loads. The drawback wasn't as terrible as I thought it would be.
Plus, the art resembles opponents when they see it resolve so that's something to consider as well.
I wonder just how much we can afford to throw cards away...between collateral damage and shard volley, fireblast and now this? I'm not writing it off. It's two cmc for 4 damage at instant speed, I can't dismiss it. I am however, skeptical if this is reliable enough.
Mathematically speaking, we want to discard a land all the time because otherwise it's better damage wise if we'd have just cast two burn spells rather than one and one thrown away. Hmm.
If the variation of zurgo you play is full of 1 and 2 drops with barely any 3's and no 4's, this will be less useful, since you'll most likely be emptying your hand. In this scenario the only way you'll get miles off this is when you're flooded, which means you lose anyway. However, I play a looot of 3's and i think five 4 drops, and having that 4 damage out when stuck on 2 lands is a huge help. Also, I think of the random card lost as an acceleration cost, coz seriously 4 freaking damage to any target for only 2 mana at instant speed is huge. This messes with an opponent's math big time, which is something we want to do often with zurgo.. We often win when an opponent overestimates the time he has left to survive.. though extremely different from sonic burst, it's the same reason i keep thunderous wrath in my deck.
In that light, it *may* be worth playing over Reckless Abandon, though I like having control over the card I lose, even if it's sorcery over instant. Hmmm.
I'm not sure if it's a tie or if sonic burst beats it out, but one thing's for sure.. though reckless abandon is amazing, you can seriously feel the restriction of that sorcery speed I guess it's down to preference. the more creatures in the deck though the more use you'll find in reckless abandon. I'd say in less than 28 creatures sonic burst wins, above 30 reckless abandon wins, then in between is like 50-50. Coz I run around 27 critters right now, and a whopping 70% of the time I don't cast reckless abandon because 1.) I need the board state for now 2.) there are no more creatures in play because they were removed, and you can't respond with reckless abandon.
Sooo I saw sonic burst in action and it is amazing. Sometimes opportunities come up on the fly where you just need an explosive turn to just end the game, and this helps loads. The drawback wasn't as terrible as I thought it would be.
Plus, the art resembles opponents when they see it resolve so that's something to consider as well.
I wonder just how much we can afford to throw cards away...between collateral damage and shard volley, fireblast and now this? I'm not writing it off. It's two cmc for 4 damage at instant speed, I can't dismiss it. I am however, skeptical if this is reliable enough.
Mathematically speaking, we want to discard a land all the time because otherwise it's better damage wise if we'd have just cast two burn spells rather than one and one thrown away. Hmm.
If the variation of zurgo you play is full of 1 and 2 drops with barely any 3's and no 4's, this will be less useful, since you'll most likely be emptying your hand. In this scenario the only way you'll get miles off this is when you're flooded, which means you lose anyway. However, I play a looot of 3's and i think five 4 drops, and having that 4 damage out when stuck on 2 lands is a huge help. Also, I think of the random card lost as an acceleration cost, coz seriously 4 freaking damage to any target for only 2 mana at instant speed is huge. This messes with an opponent's math big time, which is something we want to do often with zurgo.. We often win when an opponent overestimates the time he has left to survive.. though extremely different from sonic burst, it's the same reason i keep thunderous wrath in my deck.
Sooo I saw sonic burst in action and it is amazing. Sometimes opportunities come up on the fly where you just need an explosive turn to just end the game, and this helps loads. The drawback wasn't as terrible as I thought it would be.
Plus, the art resembles opponents when they see it resolve so that's something to consider as well.
Long time since I have posted anything! So I think we are getting some pretty good cards out of Ixalan, and just wanted to share them here to see what you guyz were thinking about those cards, if they were worth an inclusion. Since my decklist differs a bit, I will use OP's one for comparisons. Also, at the end of the post. Let's start (with the decklist for reference here):
We already have in our deck one card that prevents lifegain, and it is so strong it is the only enchantment in the deck. This one comes attached to a difficult to block creature that has the advantage of dealing damage to opponents easily. Since the meta has shifted to fast aggro decks that run a lot of creatures, this could pull it's weight. It would hurt to cast creatures for opponents, more than for us. I think it would be pretty great. I would take out one of the other 3 CMC or more card for her, simply I don't know what are the worst picks because I have been off until recently, so I would like an advice on this one... I am pretty sure it could be included but simply don't know what to remove yet. For now I am thinking Goblin Rabblemaster would be the one to remove, as every time I have played it I have been deceived, but what do you guyz think?
This one I think would be really busted in the deck. In fact, it could almost be considered a 2 mana 3/2 with haste that can be casted on turn 3. I mean, you will always attack, always netting a token...? This would let us ramp and give us some more fuel to cast either a bigger finisher one turn faster, get out of situations where we are missing lands. Imagine casting this, crack the token to make it 3/2 then use the mana for a Bolt. That would be a pretty awesome turn 3 play in my opinion. This card is really good at being aggressive and is also awesome to help survive a bit longer if the game goes to 5/6 turns. I would remove any card for this one really. I think it would be an amazing inclusion. I think I would remove Fleetwheel Cruiser for it. I don't know how good the vehicle can be, but I think this pirate would be better. It can come down 1 turn earlier, so it would deal 3 damage on T3 and 3 T4 (6 total), while the vehicle would have done only 5 on T4, then would have been dead if we have no other creature. The vehicle also is dependant on your other creatures to attack on the following turns. If the only other card you have is a 4 power card, you don't really want to tap it, so you swing for 5. But imagine you have the 4 power card AND this pirate, you swing for 6 or even 7, keeping one spare mana to cast an instant, like Lightning Bolt, to deal a total of 10 in a single turn. I would like you guyz to think about this and would clearly like to know what you are thinking about this 3drinks.
This one I am less sure about. It would be really dependant on the creatures we have in play (see my above comment on vehicles) and would not even work with Zurgo, but in the right situation we could copy some really ridiculous stuff. Imagine attacking with a Ball Lightning or Blistering Firecat and copying it with this, going for 12/14 damage in a single attack from two creatures!!! I think this deserves some testing, but I see it being really good with a lot of those high-power cards. And I also think copying anything at like 3 or more CMC in the deck becomes really good. I think testing would be required.
first 1 could easily find a spot in the deck with all the life gain tech in my meta.. the second 1 is a 50/50 depending on how often i get to use the treaure to make extra plays on the same turn it's created. the last one is meh, too much competition in the 3 drop spot.
So we have arahbo and Edgar Markov happening soon. Any thoughts on our matchip against those decks?
Bad. The only way you steal a game is an early tangle wire, or a well-timed price of progress. Otherwise you'll always get chump blocked, and the few lifelink outs in the vamp lineup mitigates burn damage. rolling earthquake and maybe adding sudden demise helps.
A bigger problem for zurgo IMO is arahbo. You have to save all your burn for the kitties esp when their lifelink, otherwise you auto-lose the race. problem is one of those lifelinkers have freaking embalm for one so you have to waste 2 burn spells to avoid your opponent gaining 4 every turn, all the while getting his life to zero. It's a nightmare.
cut the 5 drops, cut gamble, cut final fortune add in monastery swiftspear and moar burn spells, play spellshock,
I've never been a fan of Swiftspear. I don't get they hype. G-Guide he is not haha.
Really? Spellshock?! That was when we had the 30 life format, it's a bit slow for 20 right?
nope. spellshock does more work against midrangey stuff like titania, punishes big spells and is therefore less likely to backfire on us than pyroP. the extra 1 mana cost is worth it based on testing. i also found it too much to play both pyrostatic and eidolon.
i mentioned swifty coz i think the guy mentioned not having gob guide budget. that aside though, a single prowess trigger already makes her better than guide coz extra toughness aside, she doesn't help opponents make land drops. guide is still overall better of course. swifty is just a more than adequate sub. i'll probably find room to play both.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playtest First Policy
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Good: Any control with no lifegain outs (grixis, izzet, dimir, mono blue), animar, maelstrom wanderer
Bad: titania, karlov, atraxa, gitrog, Kalitas monoblack control
Neutral: Mirror match, MonoW aggro (we have additional avenues for offense in burn, but they have superior combat presence with first strike. Tie breaker comes down to how much life gain they have in the deck), partner decks
These matchups to me are variable, which means they can range from bad to good to neutral depending on how the deck is built.
Queen Marchesa control: If it's a superfriends control with a lot of mana rocks, zurgo's gonna have a fiesta. But if the deck plays with less rocks and more spot removal, mini-sweeps and lifegain (timely reinforcements, blessed alliance, etc), i would say the matchup is more balanced, though still slightly in zurgo's favor.
Ojutai: If authority of the consuls comes down early, GG. But outside of that, if no lifegain is prioritized, zurgo is at a heavy advantage.
Long story short: Outside of the inherently bad matchups mentioned, whether or not the matchup is good or not depends a LOT on how well prepared the deck is for monoR. Decks that are built totally ignoring the damage output of monoR will most likely be unable to take a best of 3, and are free wins regardless of how the matchup is on paper. Flip side, supposedly good matchups that find ways to compensate for red's damage output (playing blue elemental blast and hydroblast for example) can give us a hard time.
Here's the thing.. he actually plays a bit more smoothly. Let's go over the bans 1 by 1:
1.) PoP is not as useful in mono colored decks. Titania is one of our worst matchups, and most of their nonbasics end up in the grave anyway. Another bad matchup where Price is not so useful is karlov. They can just fetch for basics all day without screwing themselves, and they have life gain outs. So losing PoP for another card that can function equally well across all matchups (AKA any generic burn spell) actually added consistency.
2.) If you replace [card sulfuric vortex[/card] for a rampaging ferocidon, the pros of a 3 power body with evasion, a decent passive and the identical can't gain life clause hurts as much as vortex. Here's where the difference lies actually. Vortex requires a bit more timing than one would think. If the titania matchup turns out into a straight up brawl, vortex helps them more than it helps us. Same situation with karlov if he somehow gets big enough to escape burn range (probability of this goes even higher the less burn the deck has) and starts hitting like a truck. Casting vortex with an 8/8 karlov in play hurts your clock as much as it hurts theirs. The difference is, you're the one who tapped 3 mana for it. With ferocidon on the other hand, you just cast it and let them deal with the 3/3 body however they please, with minimal detriment to your own life total in case the race doesn't turn out in your favor. There's much less risk.
3.) Eidolon of the great revel is the card most likely to backfire on us especially agianst titania. I apologize for bringing up titania every 2 sentences, but she and karlov are 2 of the most well-positioned meta decks today, and are coincidentally terrible matchups for zurgo. Anyway, when the midrange-y threats start coming out, there will come a point where eidolon will be dealing way more damage to us than to them. Same concept applies to karlov. Though their curve is lower than titania's, they can gain life. Point is, I wasn't so sad to see this go, as good as he is.
4.) Which leaves us with fireblast. Losing fireblast is an obvious nerf, but this is one card, in a deck that has no tutors and does not rely on a single card to win anyway.
Bottomline: Overall, zurgo as a whole was not nerfed, but rather a single aspect of his game was: burst. It's harder to win out of nowhere now via PoP for 14 damage against a 4 color deck, or by tapping out to all your burn and then dumping 2 lands for a fireblast. But losing access to 4 cards makes way for less burst-y but more consistent picks. Combined with the Edgar Markov ban, this announcement actually buffed MonoR's position in the meta.
replaced sulfuric with the new dinosaur with menace, replaced fireblast with sonic burst, replaced PoP with a random burn spell, eidolon with the new 1-drop pirate. It plays just the same. We're no worse against our good matchups, and no better against the bad ones. Again, yes on paper zurgo's worse, but by it's very nature, monoR has never been reliant on a few individual cards to win. These nerfs did nothing but piss zurgo players off IMO, which to me is the mark of a very poor banlist decision by the committee. This was I think meant to silence all the whiners who still struggle with zurgo in 2017. Seriously guys, adapt or die.
Yeah if fireblast was banned, force of will should be too. Just sayin. Different sides, same coin.
funny you say that though coz my burn heavy list actually has a zo-zu. too good into titania. One would argue turn 3 is too late for that especially on the draw, but it punishes ramunap/crucible/fastbond shenanigans. As for skullcrack I do play it, but yeah with sulfuric gone, flames of the bloodhand is suddenly more viable again.
oh maria. took me years to unsee the kayfabe brainless diva gimmick that WWE forced on her for so long.
definitely playing that pirate. keep em quality 1 drops coming wizards, zurgo needs em! eminence has downgraded zurgo from a tournament sledgehammer that gets stonewalled only by green decks into a mid tier meta deck imo.
I'm not sure if it's a tie or if sonic burst beats it out, but one thing's for sure.. though reckless abandon is amazing, you can seriously feel the restriction of that sorcery speed
If the variation of zurgo you play is full of 1 and 2 drops with barely any 3's and no 4's, this will be less useful, since you'll most likely be emptying your hand. In this scenario the only way you'll get miles off this is when you're flooded, which means you lose anyway. However, I play a looot of 3's and i think five 4 drops, and having that 4 damage out when stuck on 2 lands is a huge help. Also, I think of the random card lost as an acceleration cost, coz seriously 4 freaking damage to any target for only 2 mana at instant speed is huge. This messes with an opponent's math big time, which is something we want to do often with zurgo.. We often win when an opponent overestimates the time he has left to survive.. though extremely different from sonic burst, it's the same reason i keep thunderous wrath in my deck.
Plus, the art resembles opponents when they see it resolve so that's something to consider as well.
first 1 could easily find a spot in the deck with all the life gain tech in my meta.. the second 1 is a 50/50 depending on how often i get to use the treaure to make extra plays on the same turn it's created. the last one is meh, too much competition in the 3 drop spot.
Bad. The only way you steal a game is an early tangle wire, or a well-timed price of progress. Otherwise you'll always get chump blocked, and the few lifelink outs in the vamp lineup mitigates burn damage. rolling earthquake and maybe adding sudden demise helps.
A bigger problem for zurgo IMO is arahbo. You have to save all your burn for the kitties esp when their lifelink, otherwise you auto-lose the race. problem is one of those lifelinkers have freaking embalm for one so you have to waste 2 burn spells to avoid your opponent gaining 4 every turn, all the while getting his life to zero. It's a nightmare.
nope. spellshock does more work against midrangey stuff like titania, punishes big spells and is therefore less likely to backfire on us than pyroP. the extra 1 mana cost is worth it based on testing. i also found it too much to play both pyrostatic and eidolon.
i mentioned swifty coz i think the guy mentioned not having gob guide budget. that aside though, a single prowess trigger already makes her better than guide coz extra toughness aside, she doesn't help opponents make land drops. guide is still overall better of course. swifty is just a more than adequate sub. i'll probably find room to play both.