1) I would rather have Goblin Guide 4-of than Kird Ape,
2) Take out the wastelands.
I disagree on Goblin Guide. Yes, it nets you 2 more damage than a turn one Kird Ape, but the advantage it gives makes it less useful than a Kird Ape in the long run. If I were going for a Small Zoo list that goes all-in, I'd agree (and I used to run such a deck), but I find that deck to be less stable in mid to late-game matches where Small Zoo generally runs out of steam.
As for Wasteland, I strongly disagree. That card has singlehandedly won me games against NO RUG. The way to beat NO RUG is to destroy all their creatures they are going to NO with and Wasteland gives you yet another removal for their Dryad Arbor. Also a double Wasteland in the first four turns against most decks is usually a gg as well. An extra fetch or dual has nowhere near the same value.
Cannot say the same for Lybrary, since i rarely draw it :7
I shall also reduce fireblast, once I mulling to 6 and got 3 of them *ouch*
What should I put?
-1 Fireblast +1 Lybrary, or + 1 Lavamancer?
I am also considering Reckless Abandon over Rift Bolt, yet rift has proven to be quite useful...
1) 3 Lavamancers is fine. It'll give you a pretty high percentage chance of getting one in a game.
2) I'd take out the Rift Bolts for Path to Exile.
3) 4 Fireblast is also pretty high although it looks like you're going with more of a burn list than small zoo. I'm guessing you don't have Tarmogoyfs, but if you do, take out the 4 Fireblasts for 4 Goyfs.
4) I'd swap Steppe Lynx for Loam Lions, but there's a reasonable debate for either. I personally prefer the consistent damage over the spike damage.
5) I'm going to guess there's no Savannah since you lack the extra dual. Same with the lack of Windswept Heaths. If not, goes without saying to swap some lands to maximize your dual draws (i.e. 2 Taiga, 2 Plateau, 1 Savannah).
6) Related to that, 14 fetches is way too high. I usually go 10 and would never go above 12. I'd put in one of each basic land for matchups where you know they will Wasteland your duals, Price of Progress or Blood Moon.
7) I actually somewhat agree with you (and disagree with many) on Sylvan. I know card advantage wins games, but A) I either rarely draw Sylvan with only 2 or B) when I draw it, it's a dead card (i.e. first 3 - 4 turns when I'm tapping out to play creatures or removal) with the second reason being the main disadvantage. It doesn't synergize very well with Zoo since the vast majority of the deck is threats and early on you don't have mana to spend on a Sylvan. Maybe add some Qasali Pridemages if you want some versatility against Stoneblade, Affinity, etc.
On a related note, I took out two threats to put in 2 Sylvans for this week's tournament and instead of going undefeated like last week (with no Sylvans), I went 1 - 3. It's probably a coincidence, but even in play testing (~20 matches), Sylvan only helped me in one of the 20 games.
I know the card is great, but it apparently hates me. I am still on the fence if I should take it out though since I know it's such a great card so I'll continue play testing with it. If the numbers keep showing the lack of value though, it's gone.
Hey all, first time poster here at MTGSalvation, but loooong time lurker. I decided to put in a tourney report from SCG ATL Open last weekend where I placed 3rd. Since, I find everyone else’s reports so helpful, I figured I needed to return the favor.
All in all I was very happy with the deck and my choice to switch. I had never done terribly well in any event before So I was extremely excited to say the least! I will definitely run Goblin Guides and Libraries next time, I know a lot of people debate on those cards, but they proved themselves to me throughout the day. I like the Qasalis 2/2 MB/SB. I will probably keep this 75 for next time except I’ll swap 2 Kird Apes for 2 Loam Lions so I’m not so strapped for red mana next time.
Happy Zooing!
Congratulations on the solid finish. For me, seeing a Zoo deck do well is kind of like seeing the home team do well. Zoo gets some flack as not a top deck anymore due to UW Stoneblade and NO RUG (at least in my circle) so it's good to see it continue to put up consist numbers. Now we just need a top 1 finish for this season!
In my opinion, you don't have to run 2 Wasteland in a Zoo deck because the goal is to beat your opponent as soon as possible. Not only wasteland will cost you a land but will also cause mana screw. I suggest that you can focus on Zoo's strength which is speed and power of your threats rather than trying to have some control cards here and there.
I've said it before, but the Wastelands are pretty valuable since they A) buy me a turn against decks like NO RUG and B) allow me to kill things such as Mutavaults and Mishra's Factory that are used to block and kill a creature. If you look at recent SCG tournaments, Zoo is consistently running Wastelands and in my experience, I think it is because the reasons outlined above. Personally I find the NO RUG reason to be the more important of the two. Usually in an NO RUG match up, they tend to NO around turn 3 or 4 and if you are able to kill their Dryad Arbor and/or Weenies, you can buy yourself another turn, which is just enough time for Zoo to win. Basically I am trying to give myself more options to slow down NO RUG.
Sylvan Library is a great card and I have used it quite some time. But if you use this as a solution to mana screw I suggest that you can now exchange the Libraries for 1-drop creatures to make sure that you have a one drop on your opening hand, and being able to cast multiple threats a turn.
+2 Loam Lions for me. (Goblin Guide maybe an option but I would rather have 4 of them)
This is probably due to your first reply to my decks (which is OK :tongue:), but I actually ran a version of "Small Zoo" immediately prior to this (it's somewhere in the previous replies) where I had 4 Loam Lions instead of the SFM's. I even ran Goblin Guides at one point, but that was a failure. I basically went to this Stoneforge/mid-level Zoo since I was having problems against UW Stoneblade and other Control Decks. It was suggested to me that I should go with "Big Zoo," but I didn't want to lose to Combo badly so I compromised and made a mid-level version. I did successfully at the previous tournament (went undefeated) so I believe the current changes compromising Small and Big are working.
Don't get me wrong, I do like Loam Lions and one mana drops and I do mention mana screw, but I should de-emphasize that since the reality is, I went undefeated and it was only a problem where I'd have to mulligan once and it did not lead to a loss.
Problem with Batterskull is when Stoneforge Mystic dies or countered, it'll be stuck on your hand. Based on my experience running them on UW deck, there are times that I am unable to cast Batterskull because they managed to disable my Stoneforge Mystic. I am running a counterspell deck and this still happens sometimes. I see that running multiple copies of Stoneforge Mystic may answer that problem, then again, I would rather play more creatures that will bring more pressure to your opponent.
You're absolutely right about the Batterskull, but the positives it brings (if it comes on the board) are huge.
As for the pressure, as noted above, it came down to Small Zoo running out of steam. Once they deal with your weenies and establish board control, Zoo can't do anything. They cast things significantly larger and it's usually a loss. That's why I added both the equipment pack and ways to cheat them into play. It gives me options in the mid-game if my initial onslaught fails. Then again, it is a catch-22 since the initial onslaught is now weaker with the lack of Loam Lions.
To summarize:
-2 Wasteland, +1 Plateau, +1 Taiga
-2 Sylvan Library, +2 Loam Lion OR +2 Goblin Guide
-2 Stoneforge Mystic, +2 Loam Lion OR +2 Goblin Guide
-1 Batterskull, +1 Qasali Pridemage OR +1 Sword of Fire and Ice
I hope this helps.
I appreciate the advice, but the suggested deck would be nearly the same as my "Small Zoo," which did poorly at the previous tournament :tongue:. It's all a matter of the meta you're facing. I do however, appreciate the criticism.
Edit: Here is the previous list I was using unsuccessfully in my meta:
The ironic part now is I'll probably lose terribly next week with the same (virtually same) deck that did well last week, but that's the fun of Magic. Having to change your deck around in a dynamic setting (i.e. local meta).
Decided to take out one Stoneforge Mystic and one Qasali Pridemage (both were set at 4) for two Sylvan Libraries. I don't like messing with something that did successfully in the previous tournament, but then I remember the handful of times I got mana screwed or was digging for a certain card.
At the same time, I dislike having only 21 creatures in a Zoo deck. I had as many as 25 when it was Small Zoo so I was pretty much guaranteed 2 (if not 3) creatures opening draw, but 21 seems kind of low.
Merfolk would like a word with you. Playing Blue does not necessarily mean that you are playing Brainstorm, you need to be playing Blue and Shuffle effects for it to work.
Yeah, but many of us would not argue that Merfolk is an "unfair" or "overpowered" deck. It is kept in check by decks like Zoo that slaughter it and in turn Zoo is slaughtered by Combo and so on and so forth.
Being a Zoo player, I'd be perfectly fine with Merfolk being the dominant Blue deck :tongue:.
In all seriousness, I don't think many people believe Merfolk is one of the problem decks or something we'd want to die out. It's been excluded in most of this conversation regarding Blue dominance. That's why Brainstorm and not Mental Misstep might be the correct card to reevaluate. It would nerf combo decks (maybe too much, but hopefully Preordain is a suitable replacement), add some more diversity to Legacy, wouldn't affect a deck like Merfolk and would allow MM to stay legal, which would keep CounterTop at bay.
dwchang, I have the same fear than you. With the actual format we have lot of non-CB control decks. When Misstep will be gone, CB Top will again be the only viable control strategy. How funny it's supposed to be to watch your opponent look at is top 3 during 30 minutes each match?
And add to this more "fun" game against opponent playing some storm combo deck, who play alone a 10 minutes turn to kill you, or worst, watching an opponent playing High Tide and taking a 25 minutes turn to kill you...
And you are true: the meta will still be dominated by blue decks. With or without Misstep, that change nothing (because Brainstorm is the real powerful card there).
Agreed. I view MM as the lesser or two evils if it means facing Stoneblade and NO RUG instead of CounterTop.
At the same time, the meta is too Blue dominated and I don't know what the solution is to "liven things up." The only thing I see is Brainstorm, but a lot of the veterans seem to disagree so who knows? Guess we'll see in a week.
I will however add that I feel Show and Tell is unfair *because* of Brainstorm. If you banned Brainstorm I have absolutely no issues with Show and Tell. I feel it's Brainstorm that enables those combos to go off consistently. As someone said, Preordain is a reasonable replacement so it's not like those decks are completely destroyed. Anyway, as I said, we'll see soon.
This is a biased opinion, but my only fear with MM being banned is the resurgence of CounterTop. I am not favored against NO RUG or Stoneblade (I play Zoo), but with NO RUG I've at least figured out what I'm supposed to do. That leads me to believe NO itself isn't that broken since I have ample tools to slow the deck down and buying an extra turn or two for Zoo usually means I can eke it out.
Stoneblade is probably harder for me and losing MM will definitely help me get my one drops on the board, but I feel Stoneblade is the lesser or two evils if it means playing one hour games against CounterTop :tongue:.
With all that said, even if MM is banned, I don't think it will change the main problem (for me). The format is oversaturated with Blue and lacks diversity. Maybe that's not a problem for most folks though.
I meant what I said about brainstorm. If you notice my sentence it said it was last printed 11 years ago, which is truth. I know brainstorm was printed in ice age; how could I forget that awkward as **** art.
Sorry about that. I need to not these forums while at work and not fully paying attention :tongue:.
brainstorm was last printed 11 years ago in masques. Also of note, brainstorm has been a part of legacy for years and years while mental misstep broke the format in 3 months.
I'm being annoying here, but Brainstorm was printed in Ice Age, 16 years ago. SO it's been "breaking" things for an additional 5 years!
Anyway, although I agree that Brainstorm requires *some* skill to play properly, I think people are overselling how much skill it takes. You look at fetch lands and look at Brainstorm and it's pretty easy to see that you have A) a bad Ancestral Recall, B) massive card advantage and C) if you don't like it, shuffle away the bad juju. Even one of those effects is great, but both in one card at instant speed for one blue? A bit ridiculous.
On the counter-side though, it has been around for a long time and become a "staple" in the format, so it might do more bad than good banning a card everyone has come to rely on. Then again, to play Devil's Advocate, maybe it'll help the creativity and diversity of the format since people won't auto pick Blue and then pick the rest of their deck/colors.
What is with people in trying to ban natural order? I don't even find the card to be that good. It's 4 mana, you have to sack a green creature, and if it gets countered it trades evenly with a force of will.
I'd have to agree. When I first got back into Magic I thought Show and Tell and Natural Order were pretty broken, but having figured out how to beat NO RUG decks at a reasonable percentage by burning away all their NO bait, I don't think NO is that broken anymore. I'm not sure about Show and Tell.
Apologies to DWChang, it isn't actually anti-American sentiment, it's just Anti-SCGopen type 2 grinders.
I love the fact that SCG support legacy I really do , but the fact that people now take the opinion of so called "pros" who are not pros in the relevant format but in another one and then only because they attend every event across a whole continent to grind their way there.
Fair enough. I have only been back playing for ~2 months now after quitting 12+ years ago (started during revised) so I was actually happy to see so much Legacy support since it's the only format I can play in. At the same time, some of the comments seemed a bit jaded, but at least you admit that :P.
With that said and back on topic, since I'm an aggro/Zoo player, I guess the biased part of me would rather Brainstorm be banned since it'd neuter both Blue control and Blue combo, but the other part of me wonders if that is healthy either.
As I said earlier, I feel Blue is too dominant in the format, but I don't know which card is worth banning for the health of the format. As others have said, if MM is banned, that might mean CounterTop comes back and having played against that, I hope that's not the case. It's one of the most un-fun decks to play against and games take FOREVER. If they don't ban MM, that might be the reason.
At the same time, twelve years later, Blue is *still* the dominant color and I personally wish they'd do something about it instead of printing stuff like Snapcaster Mage -_-.
I bought some Ultra Pros since that's what I used 12+ years ago, but they break all the time. I only use them for draft now and about 10/100 have broken in 5 or so drafts.
I now only use Dragon Shield for my decks. I highly recommend them. They are easy to shuffle with (sharp edges) and sturdy.
First off, I don't particularly like the tone of some of the replies. This should be a intelligent B/R discussion and yet I've seen multiple times people insulting other regions or putting their region on a pedestal. Things like this:
So what does this tell us, firstly America lacks innovation and they stick with pet netdecks exactly the same as during Survival period.
Secondly Europe has a very nicely varied meta despite MM.
So really I think the problem is actually laziness on the part of SCG players.
If 75% of field takes one deck then of course you will see high numbers in top 8.
Europe does not have that problem because our legacy community is largely built independant of standard so we innovate much more and have a better and more interesting meta.
Your post is about 50% arrogance and 50% ignorance.
It sees play in Europe because a) the pilots skill with it is a higher level and b) because misstep is not a huge deal.
too many of the scg open players are wannabe standard players who liked playing their netdecked cawblade decks and wanted to get a few more points
Meh never mind I give up, people are too focussed on scg opens these days they have forgotten what real tournaments are like anyway. We don't get this problem in Europe because we don't have SCG opens and Legacy players tend to be just Legacy and not Standard grinders looking to get their extra points for lvl8 or whatever.
Yeah we get it, blah blah blah, Europe is superior and has better pilots and the US is just full of whiners and netdeckers.
Arguing that people who disagree with you are either A) not skilled or B) whiners is not a good way to argue. Stick to the actual topic rather than attacking people or regions. From a new user's perspective, you come across as pretty arrogant in many or your replies while those disagreeing with you have tried to keep things on topic and base their arguments on statistics or their own experiences. I"m sure that is what you are intending to do, but personally I think you are coming across as a bit insulting and off-topic. I will however agree that different regions have different metas and we should take that into account, but people are speaking from their experiences so it's only natural for them to use data from their region.
With that said, I'll take my own advice and go back on topic. I just read through most of these replies and felt this superiority complex was getting a bit out of hand.
Anyway, I still haven't seen anyone argue how a meta where people use MM or avoid MM is a healthy meta. Sure Dredge won the last open, but it can't be healthy that one of the things when designing a deck is "I either use MM or need to build around it." A single card shouldn't have that much influence.
Then again, a part of me wishes they'd ban Brainstorm instead since it's basically a "bad" Ancestral Recall when you factor in fetch lands. It'd certainly weaken NO RUG, Stoneblade, etc., but a part of me isn't sure about banning that either.
For the record, I don't think MM should be banned. I do however, think the meta needs something banned so Blue isn't so powerful and prevalent. I just don't know what that banning is.
I usually don't have problems with Aggro except for Affinity which is a 50/50 I guess.
If later on you have issues with Affinity, I suggest more removal or even Ancient Grudge in SB. I have 3 in SB and they singlehandedly won me the game. And not only won me the game, but won it easily. I had their entire board cleared (artifacts and lands). Makes that match-up a lot easier.
Just remember, as stated in the Dojo article, you're the control deck so stabilize and then drop creatures around turn 4 or 5 and finish. They can't do anything with no artifacts in play.
StP on SB: Yes you're right, more burn might be better since StP is good versus small-but-threatening creatures and burn is also good against those and late game reach. Maybe Chain Lightning because it buffs goyf, however, I was never a fan of sorcery-speed removal.
Yeah Sorcery-speed isn't great, but as you noted, it helps pump up Goyf. With Chain Lightning, you can reliably get Goyf up to a 4/5 (Land, Creature, Instant, Sorcery) instead of a 3/4. Enough to kill Batterskulls :P. I do however like Instants since it's fantastic for after they animate their Mishra's Factory to block your Nacatl.
PoP to SB: I like the finishing effect of PoP. Sure it's dead vs many match ups but it's also a surprise finisher in many G1.
Don't get me wrong. PoP has one me a handful of games, but not as many as having more removal. More removal helps you against Merfolk, NO RUG (nothing for them to NO is how I usually try to beat NO), Goblins and Elves. PoP could also help you finish, but many times they may see it telegraphed since you'll be fetching basics and make them wonder.
It all comes down to which scenario you see yourself in more often. Again, I don't know your meta, but the removal has helped me more in my local tourneys.
On a related note, I remember beating a Team America deck in the finals where he put down a 5th non-basic and said "I fetch Tropical Island going to 10 life and hope you don't have price of progress." I show him the card and he scoops :).
Big Zoo: Is this Big Zoo? I like to call this Toolbox Zoo It's not that Big though.
I see. Well I only came back to Magic about 2 months ago so things are new to me. I said "Big Zoo" since I saw multiple Knights and I thought that was the common "fatty" in Big Zoo.
In any case, glad I could be of help and good luck.
Personally think only 2 Guides isn't that good. Your one drop aggros should be 3 - 4x. With that said, I think only 2 Grim Lavamancer is also not that great. I run 3 Lavamancers and that seems to be consistent enough that I get one a game.
I also think 3 Sylvans is a bit excessive since once you get a Sylvan, the other Sylvans are dead cards. I'd run 2 at most so you minimize your chance of drawing the dead card. Same with GSZ. Pretty sure I read somewhere that with 3 GSZ and reshuffling it in has the same (or close to) percentage as having 4 GSZ.
11 removal is also pretty low for Zoo. If you're going to stick with 11, I'd go 4 Bolts, 4 Helix and 3 Paths with 1 Path in the side. Related to this, Swords in sideboard is counter to your strategy. You never want to give life if you're the aggro deck. It's the main reason we run Path over StP. If you want more removal, I'd suggest swapping the Price of Progress to sideboard and put in two more removal like Chain Lightning or the 4th Path to Exile.
Short version:
Take out 1 Sylvan, 1 GSZ, 1 Path
Add 2 Guides, 1 Lavamancer and 1 Lightning Helix
I'm still missing one card to take out, but you get the idea. I also don't know what to do with the sideboard other than taking out the Swords for 1 Path and something else. Depends on your meta.
Hope that helps. I tried to keep your deck theme (Big Zoo) in mind since I don't know your meta.
I hate to encourage trolling, but the green thing has a point in the sense of getting MORE powerful, although obviously not overpowerful.
Garruk, Primal Hunter, Dungrove Elder and Primeval titan all look like efforts by WotC to make green stronger.
Yes, but Green *needs* to get some strength. Most players would not disagree with that. Only a troll would say Green is *over* powered in comparison to colors like Blue. Historically speaking at least.
I disagree on Goblin Guide. Yes, it nets you 2 more damage than a turn one Kird Ape, but the advantage it gives makes it less useful than a Kird Ape in the long run. If I were going for a Small Zoo list that goes all-in, I'd agree (and I used to run such a deck), but I find that deck to be less stable in mid to late-game matches where Small Zoo generally runs out of steam.
As for Wasteland, I strongly disagree. That card has singlehandedly won me games against NO RUG. The way to beat NO RUG is to destroy all their creatures they are going to NO with and Wasteland gives you yet another removal for their Dryad Arbor. Also a double Wasteland in the first four turns against most decks is usually a gg as well. An extra fetch or dual has nowhere near the same value.
1) 3 Lavamancers is fine. It'll give you a pretty high percentage chance of getting one in a game.
2) I'd take out the Rift Bolts for Path to Exile.
3) 4 Fireblast is also pretty high although it looks like you're going with more of a burn list than small zoo. I'm guessing you don't have Tarmogoyfs, but if you do, take out the 4 Fireblasts for 4 Goyfs.
4) I'd swap Steppe Lynx for Loam Lions, but there's a reasonable debate for either. I personally prefer the consistent damage over the spike damage.
5) I'm going to guess there's no Savannah since you lack the extra dual. Same with the lack of Windswept Heaths. If not, goes without saying to swap some lands to maximize your dual draws (i.e. 2 Taiga, 2 Plateau, 1 Savannah).
6) Related to that, 14 fetches is way too high. I usually go 10 and would never go above 12. I'd put in one of each basic land for matchups where you know they will Wasteland your duals, Price of Progress or Blood Moon.
7) I actually somewhat agree with you (and disagree with many) on Sylvan. I know card advantage wins games, but A) I either rarely draw Sylvan with only 2 or B) when I draw it, it's a dead card (i.e. first 3 - 4 turns when I'm tapping out to play creatures or removal) with the second reason being the main disadvantage. It doesn't synergize very well with Zoo since the vast majority of the deck is threats and early on you don't have mana to spend on a Sylvan. Maybe add some Qasali Pridemages if you want some versatility against Stoneblade, Affinity, etc.
On a related note, I took out two threats to put in 2 Sylvans for this week's tournament and instead of going undefeated like last week (with no Sylvans), I went 1 - 3. It's probably a coincidence, but even in play testing (~20 matches), Sylvan only helped me in one of the 20 games.
I know the card is great, but it apparently hates me. I am still on the fence if I should take it out though since I know it's such a great card so I'll continue play testing with it. If the numbers keep showing the lack of value though, it's gone.
Congratulations on the solid finish. For me, seeing a Zoo deck do well is kind of like seeing the home team do well. Zoo gets some flack as not a top deck anymore due to UW Stoneblade and NO RUG (at least in my circle) so it's good to see it continue to put up consist numbers. Now we just need a top 1 finish for this season!
I've said it before, but the Wastelands are pretty valuable since they A) buy me a turn against decks like NO RUG and B) allow me to kill things such as Mutavaults and Mishra's Factory that are used to block and kill a creature. If you look at recent SCG tournaments, Zoo is consistently running Wastelands and in my experience, I think it is because the reasons outlined above. Personally I find the NO RUG reason to be the more important of the two. Usually in an NO RUG match up, they tend to NO around turn 3 or 4 and if you are able to kill their Dryad Arbor and/or Weenies, you can buy yourself another turn, which is just enough time for Zoo to win. Basically I am trying to give myself more options to slow down NO RUG.
This is probably due to your first reply to my decks (which is OK :tongue:), but I actually ran a version of "Small Zoo" immediately prior to this (it's somewhere in the previous replies) where I had 4 Loam Lions instead of the SFM's. I even ran Goblin Guides at one point, but that was a failure. I basically went to this Stoneforge/mid-level Zoo since I was having problems against UW Stoneblade and other Control Decks. It was suggested to me that I should go with "Big Zoo," but I didn't want to lose to Combo badly so I compromised and made a mid-level version. I did successfully at the previous tournament (went undefeated) so I believe the current changes compromising Small and Big are working.
Don't get me wrong, I do like Loam Lions and one mana drops and I do mention mana screw, but I should de-emphasize that since the reality is, I went undefeated and it was only a problem where I'd have to mulligan once and it did not lead to a loss.
You're absolutely right about the Batterskull, but the positives it brings (if it comes on the board) are huge.
As for the pressure, as noted above, it came down to Small Zoo running out of steam. Once they deal with your weenies and establish board control, Zoo can't do anything. They cast things significantly larger and it's usually a loss. That's why I added both the equipment pack and ways to cheat them into play. It gives me options in the mid-game if my initial onslaught fails. Then again, it is a catch-22 since the initial onslaught is now weaker with the lack of Loam Lions.
I appreciate the advice, but the suggested deck would be nearly the same as my "Small Zoo," which did poorly at the previous tournament :tongue:. It's all a matter of the meta you're facing. I do however, appreciate the criticism.
Edit: Here is the previous list I was using unsuccessfully in my meta:
4 Kird Ape
3 Grim Lavamancer
4 Loam Lion
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Qasali Pridemage
2 Gaddock Teeg
4 Tarmogoyf
Removal:
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lightning Helix
3 Path to Exile
4 Arid Mesa
3 Wooded Foothills
3 Windswept Heath
2 Taiga
2 Plateau
1 Savannah
2 Wasteland
1 Mountain
1 Forrest
1 Plain
1 Gaddock Teeg
2 Pyroblast
2 Red Elemental Blast
3 Angel's Grace
3 Tormod's Crypt
1 Path to Exile
3 Ancient Grudge
The ironic part now is I'll probably lose terribly next week with the same (virtually same) deck that did well last week, but that's the fun of Magic. Having to change your deck around in a dynamic setting (i.e. local meta).
At the same time, I dislike having only 21 creatures in a Zoo deck. I had as many as 25 when it was Small Zoo so I was pretty much guaranteed 2 (if not 3) creatures opening draw, but 21 seems kind of low.
Anyway, the new decklist is as follows:
4 Kird Ape
3 Grim Lavamancer
4 Wild Nacatl
3 Stoneforge Mystic
3 Qasali Pridemage
4 Tarmogoyf
Planeswalkers:
1 Elspeth, Knight-Errant
Removal:
3 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Lightning Helix
3 Path to Exile
Equipment:
1 Batterskull
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Sword of Body and Mind
2 Sylvan Library
Land:
2 Taiga
1 Savannah
2 Plateau
2 Wasteland
3 Wooded Foothills
3 Windswept Heath
4 Arid Mesa
1 Mountain
1 Forest
1 Plains
2 Gaddock Teeg
2 Pyroblast
2 Red Elemental Blast
2 Angel's Grace
3 Tormod's Crypt
1 Path to Exile
3 Ancient Grudge
Yeah, but many of us would not argue that Merfolk is an "unfair" or "overpowered" deck. It is kept in check by decks like Zoo that slaughter it and in turn Zoo is slaughtered by Combo and so on and so forth.
Being a Zoo player, I'd be perfectly fine with Merfolk being the dominant Blue deck :tongue:.
In all seriousness, I don't think many people believe Merfolk is one of the problem decks or something we'd want to die out. It's been excluded in most of this conversation regarding Blue dominance. That's why Brainstorm and not Mental Misstep might be the correct card to reevaluate. It would nerf combo decks (maybe too much, but hopefully Preordain is a suitable replacement), add some more diversity to Legacy, wouldn't affect a deck like Merfolk and would allow MM to stay legal, which would keep CounterTop at bay.
Agreed. I view MM as the lesser or two evils if it means facing Stoneblade and NO RUG instead of CounterTop.
At the same time, the meta is too Blue dominated and I don't know what the solution is to "liven things up." The only thing I see is Brainstorm, but a lot of the veterans seem to disagree so who knows? Guess we'll see in a week.
I will however add that I feel Show and Tell is unfair *because* of Brainstorm. If you banned Brainstorm I have absolutely no issues with Show and Tell. I feel it's Brainstorm that enables those combos to go off consistently. As someone said, Preordain is a reasonable replacement so it's not like those decks are completely destroyed. Anyway, as I said, we'll see soon.
Stoneblade is probably harder for me and losing MM will definitely help me get my one drops on the board, but I feel Stoneblade is the lesser or two evils if it means playing one hour games against CounterTop :tongue:.
With all that said, even if MM is banned, I don't think it will change the main problem (for me). The format is oversaturated with Blue and lacks diversity. Maybe that's not a problem for most folks though.
Sorry about that. I need to not these forums while at work and not fully paying attention :tongue:.
Speaking of which...
I'm being annoying here, but Brainstorm was printed in Ice Age, 16 years ago. SO it's been "breaking" things for an additional 5 years!
Anyway, although I agree that Brainstorm requires *some* skill to play properly, I think people are overselling how much skill it takes. You look at fetch lands and look at Brainstorm and it's pretty easy to see that you have A) a bad Ancestral Recall, B) massive card advantage and C) if you don't like it, shuffle away the bad juju. Even one of those effects is great, but both in one card at instant speed for one blue? A bit ridiculous.
On the counter-side though, it has been around for a long time and become a "staple" in the format, so it might do more bad than good banning a card everyone has come to rely on. Then again, to play Devil's Advocate, maybe it'll help the creativity and diversity of the format since people won't auto pick Blue and then pick the rest of their deck/colors.
I'd have to agree. When I first got back into Magic I thought Show and Tell and Natural Order were pretty broken, but having figured out how to beat NO RUG decks at a reasonable percentage by burning away all their NO bait, I don't think NO is that broken anymore. I'm not sure about Show and Tell.
Fair enough. I have only been back playing for ~2 months now after quitting 12+ years ago (started during revised) so I was actually happy to see so much Legacy support since it's the only format I can play in. At the same time, some of the comments seemed a bit jaded, but at least you admit that :P.
With that said and back on topic, since I'm an aggro/Zoo player, I guess the biased part of me would rather Brainstorm be banned since it'd neuter both Blue control and Blue combo, but the other part of me wonders if that is healthy either.
As I said earlier, I feel Blue is too dominant in the format, but I don't know which card is worth banning for the health of the format. As others have said, if MM is banned, that might mean CounterTop comes back and having played against that, I hope that's not the case. It's one of the most un-fun decks to play against and games take FOREVER. If they don't ban MM, that might be the reason.
At the same time, twelve years later, Blue is *still* the dominant color and I personally wish they'd do something about it instead of printing stuff like Snapcaster Mage -_-.
I now only use Dragon Shield for my decks. I highly recommend them. They are easy to shuffle with (sharp edges) and sturdy.
Yeah we get it, blah blah blah, Europe is superior and has better pilots and the US is just full of whiners and netdeckers.
Arguing that people who disagree with you are either A) not skilled or B) whiners is not a good way to argue. Stick to the actual topic rather than attacking people or regions. From a new user's perspective, you come across as pretty arrogant in many or your replies while those disagreeing with you have tried to keep things on topic and base their arguments on statistics or their own experiences. I"m sure that is what you are intending to do, but personally I think you are coming across as a bit insulting and off-topic. I will however agree that different regions have different metas and we should take that into account, but people are speaking from their experiences so it's only natural for them to use data from their region.
With that said, I'll take my own advice and go back on topic. I just read through most of these replies and felt this superiority complex was getting a bit out of hand.
Anyway, I still haven't seen anyone argue how a meta where people use MM or avoid MM is a healthy meta. Sure Dredge won the last open, but it can't be healthy that one of the things when designing a deck is "I either use MM or need to build around it." A single card shouldn't have that much influence.
Then again, a part of me wishes they'd ban Brainstorm instead since it's basically a "bad" Ancestral Recall when you factor in fetch lands. It'd certainly weaken NO RUG, Stoneblade, etc., but a part of me isn't sure about banning that either.
For the record, I don't think MM should be banned. I do however, think the meta needs something banned so Blue isn't so powerful and prevalent. I just don't know what that banning is.
If later on you have issues with Affinity, I suggest more removal or even Ancient Grudge in SB. I have 3 in SB and they singlehandedly won me the game. And not only won me the game, but won it easily. I had their entire board cleared (artifacts and lands). Makes that match-up a lot easier.
Just remember, as stated in the Dojo article, you're the control deck so stabilize and then drop creatures around turn 4 or 5 and finish. They can't do anything with no artifacts in play.
Yeah Sorcery-speed isn't great, but as you noted, it helps pump up Goyf. With Chain Lightning, you can reliably get Goyf up to a 4/5 (Land, Creature, Instant, Sorcery) instead of a 3/4. Enough to kill Batterskulls :P. I do however like Instants since it's fantastic for after they animate their Mishra's Factory to block your Nacatl.
Don't get me wrong. PoP has one me a handful of games, but not as many as having more removal. More removal helps you against Merfolk, NO RUG (nothing for them to NO is how I usually try to beat NO), Goblins and Elves. PoP could also help you finish, but many times they may see it telegraphed since you'll be fetching basics and make them wonder.
It all comes down to which scenario you see yourself in more often. Again, I don't know your meta, but the removal has helped me more in my local tourneys.
On a related note, I remember beating a Team America deck in the finals where he put down a 5th non-basic and said "I fetch Tropical Island going to 10 life and hope you don't have price of progress." I show him the card and he scoops :).
I see. Well I only came back to Magic about 2 months ago so things are new to me. I said "Big Zoo" since I saw multiple Knights and I thought that was the common "fatty" in Big Zoo.
In any case, glad I could be of help and good luck.
Personally think only 2 Guides isn't that good. Your one drop aggros should be 3 - 4x. With that said, I think only 2 Grim Lavamancer is also not that great. I run 3 Lavamancers and that seems to be consistent enough that I get one a game.
I also think 3 Sylvans is a bit excessive since once you get a Sylvan, the other Sylvans are dead cards. I'd run 2 at most so you minimize your chance of drawing the dead card. Same with GSZ. Pretty sure I read somewhere that with 3 GSZ and reshuffling it in has the same (or close to) percentage as having 4 GSZ.
11 removal is also pretty low for Zoo. If you're going to stick with 11, I'd go 4 Bolts, 4 Helix and 3 Paths with 1 Path in the side. Related to this, Swords in sideboard is counter to your strategy. You never want to give life if you're the aggro deck. It's the main reason we run Path over StP. If you want more removal, I'd suggest swapping the Price of Progress to sideboard and put in two more removal like Chain Lightning or the 4th Path to Exile.
Short version:
Take out 1 Sylvan, 1 GSZ, 1 Path
Add 2 Guides, 1 Lavamancer and 1 Lightning Helix
I'm still missing one card to take out, but you get the idea. I also don't know what to do with the sideboard other than taking out the Swords for 1 Path and something else. Depends on your meta.
Hope that helps. I tried to keep your deck theme (Big Zoo) in mind since I don't know your meta.
Yes, but Green *needs* to get some strength. Most players would not disagree with that. Only a troll would say Green is *over* powered in comparison to colors like Blue. Historically speaking at least.