From my reading of the rules, this is acceptable, but I thought I'd throw it out there:
After the first game of a match at FNM, I am allowed to add cards to my deck from my sideboard, even if I don't take any out. So, if I played game 1 with a 60-card deck and 15-card sideboard, I am allowed to play game 2 with a 63-card deck, leaving only 12 cards in my sideboard.
Your sideboard and deck have to be legal at all times. This means at least 60 cards in deck and at most 15 cards in SB. So what you describe is legal. Note that this is a relatively new rule which was introduced somewhere around Magic 2014. Used to be 60+ cards in deck, exactly 15 in SB, and mandatory 1-for-1 swap.
Could someone please clarify the difference between "Big Zoo" and "Naya Company" for me, if in fact there is one?
Big Zoo implies 5 drops (Stormbreath, Hellkite) and lots of walkers.
Naya Company tops the creature curve at 3 and has minimal non-creature spells.
I don't think the Big Zoo moniker necessarily implies 5-drops. It just means that it runs a core set of creatures that are too big for CoCo. It can easily flat at 4cc and indeed many builds do.
This is x-posted from the counterfeit detection FB group and is mostly for folks that handle a lot of cards from different editions: How common are minor inconsistencies in stock in recent printings?
In particular, I have a handful of Return to Ravnica cards and they all seem a little more pliable than what I have from Rise of the Eldrazi. Now, all of a sudden my I got a pair of Abrupt Decays that seem closer to RoE than my other RtR cards in stock, so I'm not sure what to make of it. Any takes?
Okay, so I make a Walking Ballista by choosing how much mana I am willing to use, being sure both X's are of equal amounts. Maybe a 3/3. 3 greens, 3 blacks. I then put 3 +1/+1 counters on it and that is now its Power/Toughness. So, it becomes a 3/3. I am guessing one of the pros of this card is that you get to choose how strong you want it, according how much mana you are willing to use?
Then does the next section mean I have to pay another 4 mana to put another +1/+1 on it?
Then the last part mean I kind of pay with my counters to do damage to target player or creature?
I know this card is extremely popular and costly. Am I missing something here? Seems like a lot of work "constructing" something I might already have in my hand to play, say...a Gitrog Monster or basically anything tougher than what I have constructed it as. Obviously there are cards that must feed this card to make it even more amazing? I guess I am not quite getting the wow factor of it! Anyone want to enlighten me, in fairly simple terms (being a noob) as to what makes this card so desirable and awesome?
The fact that it can deal damage to both creatures and players just for mana. In other hands, regardless of what you draw or have in your hand, you can deal damage with Walking Balista as long as you have mana open. Your Gitrog Monster can't do that.
So. Zoo and Infect currently have roughly similar metagame share (MTGTop8 lists 20 Zoos and only 15 Infects). Why is Infect T1 and Zoo "developing competitive"?
Because If I had to update dynamically like that, as a mod Id probably kill myself.
Or quit. I guess thats a less dramatic option.
Jokes aside, because its a threshold and its also a time frame. Currently, Infect still holds enough wins under its 3 month belt that it stuck to tier 1 after the ban. Likewise, zoo was basically dead a month ago. And we delay because it weeds out flavor of the week. Which happens all the time.
Fair enough. Thanks for the effort you put into this.
I guess this was really more of a question about Infect, which has fallen out of flavor really hard and has been at 2% or less pretty much since January.
So. Zoo and Infect currently have roughly similar metagame share (MTGTop8 lists 20 Zoos and only 15 Infects). Why is Infect T1 and Zoo "developing competitive"?
.. yes, it's a knee-jerk response, but I'm not sure why you're more special than everyone else who "wants to play <insert favorite non-tiered archetype of choice here>". Plus, if you really want to play a certain type of deck, there's nothing stopping you. Heck, Seismic Swans(!) spiked a tournament this month.
Wait, where/when was that? I'd love to know.
Someone won the TCG States in Idaho with Seismic Swans:
.. yes, it's a knee-jerk response, but I'm not sure why you're more special than everyone else who "wants to play <insert favorite non-tiered archetype of choice here>". Plus, if you really want to play a certain type of deck, there's nothing stopping you. Heck, Seismic Swans(!) spiked a tournament this month.
Wait, where/when was that? I'd love to know.
Someone won the TCG States in Idaho with Seismic Swans:
There are some weird choices in flex spots. Heroic intervention, authority of the concals, gruul charm and rachet bomb is a bit odd. Theres better options then those. But sure, the overall deck is solid.
Thanks for the reply. What cards would you recommend I get in order to improve the list?
As others have pointed out, this is clearly a suboptimal list. As a minimum, Heroic Intervention is strictly worse than Boros Charm in this deck, except in the narrow case when you want to cast it off of BTE (which should be about never). The sideboard is entirely suspect: no excuse to play Wear/Tear in a deck that has access to Destructive Revelry, Ratchet Bomb seems to serve no purpose, and Authority of the Consuls (bad) and Gruul Charm (worse) means you're way over-tuning for creature matchups. Not to mention there are also Paths there.
Other than that, the list is fairly stock. Your flex slots are 2 Rampagers, 1 Rancor, Heroic Intervention, and 2 Brawlers. That's 6 cards of which I'd say you need 2 combat tricks and 4 creatures. I'd suggest Mutagenic Growth, Blossoming Defense, Vines of Vastwood or Path of Exile in the main deck, together with either Brawlers, Flinthoof Boor or even Loam Lions. Vexing Devil is also an option. It's also acceptable to keep the extra Rampagers and Rancor.
having different version of aggro is not diverse, it's always aggro
Right, because playing Revolt Zoo, Jund, and Merfolk is just about the same gameplay, right? (they all will fall under your broad definition of "aggro" that covers half of the metagame).
Your sideboard and deck have to be legal at all times. This means at least 60 cards in deck and at most 15 cards in SB. So what you describe is legal. Note that this is a relatively new rule which was introduced somewhere around Magic 2014. Used to be 60+ cards in deck, exactly 15 in SB, and mandatory 1-for-1 swap.
There is also an extremely limited amount of the card available right now... so there's that.
I don't think the Big Zoo moniker necessarily implies 5-drops. It just means that it runs a core set of creatures that are too big for CoCo. It can easily flat at 4cc and indeed many builds do.
In particular, I have a handful of Return to Ravnica cards and they all seem a little more pliable than what I have from Rise of the Eldrazi. Now, all of a sudden my I got a pair of Abrupt Decays that seem closer to RoE than my other RtR cards in stock, so I'm not sure what to make of it. Any takes?
Fixed that for you
The fact that it can deal damage to both creatures and players just for mana. In other hands, regardless of what you draw or have in your hand, you can deal damage with Walking Balista as long as you have mana open. Your Gitrog Monster can't do that.
As good as the number of Blood Moons you're going to see in your local meta
In Revolt Zoo, there isn't really space for either of these.
Fair enough. Thanks for the effort you put into this.
I guess this was really more of a question about Infect, which has fallen out of flavor really hard and has been at 2% or less pretty much since January.
Not surprised. I T8ed the MA "States" last year with budget goblins worth ~$50... field of 20 people.
Someone won the TCG States in Idaho with Seismic Swans:
http://www.hipstersofthecoast.com/2017/03/42-land-seismic-swans-won-state-championship/
As others have pointed out, this is clearly a suboptimal list. As a minimum, Heroic Intervention is strictly worse than Boros Charm in this deck, except in the narrow case when you want to cast it off of BTE (which should be about never). The sideboard is entirely suspect: no excuse to play Wear/Tear in a deck that has access to Destructive Revelry, Ratchet Bomb seems to serve no purpose, and Authority of the Consuls (bad) and Gruul Charm (worse) means you're way over-tuning for creature matchups. Not to mention there are also Paths there.
Other than that, the list is fairly stock. Your flex slots are 2 Rampagers, 1 Rancor, Heroic Intervention, and 2 Brawlers. That's 6 cards of which I'd say you need 2 combat tricks and 4 creatures. I'd suggest Mutagenic Growth, Blossoming Defense, Vines of Vastwood or Path of Exile in the main deck, together with either Brawlers, Flinthoof Boor or even Loam Lions. Vexing Devil is also an option. It's also acceptable to keep the extra Rampagers and Rancor.
Right, because playing Revolt Zoo, Jund, and Merfolk is just about the same gameplay, right? (they all will fall under your broad definition of "aggro" that covers half of the metagame).