TheManaDrain.com
July 24, 2014, 01:26:11 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18
  Print  
Author Topic: Noble Fish: GUW variants here!  (Read 69058 times)
psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #480 on: January 27, 2012, 07:46:49 PM »

I mean, putting aside the fact that I have always disagreed with you on MD Gitaxian probe (if you want to play all 4-ofs I'd run 4 Selkie before I'd run 4 Probe, they are a dude that draws you more forces, dazes and dudes). like Oxidize is really better than a second claim? Purify the grave is better than surgical? Wheel Of Sun and Moon is better than the new Cage card? Needle is better than another Cage? Samurai is better than another rav trap or cage or surgical? How often you expecting to see that 1 Mental Misstep.

Just as you have frowned upon my inclusion of Gitaxian Probe, all my lists from my inaugural first place until present have been devoid of Cold-Eyed Selkie, your intended replacement.  The nice part about Magic is being able to tailor a deck to suit one's playing style.  All other things equal, if you and I were given an identical opponent with an identically stacked deck, ourselves playing with an identically stacked deck, we would not generate an identical play-by-play game.  This, of course, assumes a certain threshold of complexity, but is a rather sound argument most of the time.  Meddling Mage by himself offers an amazingly complex range of scenarios, especially when paired with Gitaxian Probe.  This freedom of choice will always be present on a player by player basis, and is the basic foundation that generates a metagame.

Your second point is refuted by a more granular interpretation of "strictly better".  Does Nature's Claim have a larger percentage of permanents that it can destroy than Oxidize?  Of course.  However, Oxidize offers two factors that Nature's Claim fails to offer, in that it doesn't allow the destroyed permanent to regenerate and doesn't give the opponent four life.  Therefore, Nature's Claim cannot be strictly better or worse than Oxidize.  Heck, given the fact that we are piloting a deck that wins through damage in a metagame that actively uses life as a resource (Ancient Tomb, Fastbond, Dark Confidant), the four life of Nature's Claim is an amazingly real factor to consider.  Purify the Grave offers us the chance to remove two differently named cards from a graveyard without the cost of life, therefore not making it strictly better or worse than Surgical Extraction.  Samurai of the Pale Curtain proactively, rather than reactively, disrupts Bridge from Below, and unlike Ravenous Trap and Surgical can attack for two, which meshes very well with the deck's primary win condition.  The only time on my spreadsheet where a card could be evaluated against another card in my sideboard is Swords to Plowshares vs Path to Exile, since all occurrences of one being sideboarded in lead to the other coming in as well.  I will fix this with the Dark Ascension update.

Statistically speaking, the chance of seeing a single Mental Misstep in your opening hand, no mulligans, is roughly 12%, or about one in every eight games.  This percentage raises to 24%, or almost one in every four games, when you see an additional seven cards.  Keep in mind, fetchlands and Ancestral Recall allow you to see more cards, so this isn't necessarily seven turns later.  However, with every instance of Mental Misstep coming in, according to the spreadsheet, there will be at least three other cards coming in (or as many as ten others with Dredge).  The importance of Mental Misstep specifically isn't the focus, but the importance of sideboard cards improving matchups by removing "dead weight" for stronger tools.  Without mulligans, the chance of seeing one of four sideboard cards in your opening hand is 40%, 67% after seeing seven more cards.  Since I have varied the tools so greatly, as Nick said, the opponent won't know which of those four cards I might be holding.  If my opponent is forced to play around four unique sideboard cards, it will create more risky avenues of play than if I used four of a single tool.  Once again, this is my sideboard at its weakest (only bringing in four cards), and gets stronger as the number of swapped cards increases.

If you'd like I can go into more detail about my general philosophy rather than specific card choice at a later date, but this post is already huge and it was more important to answer the questions that were actually asked.
Logged

credmond
Basic User
**
Posts: 478


View Profile
« Reply #481 on: February 18, 2012, 06:08:00 PM »

Oxidize is strictly inferior to nature's claim. However, if you can point to one artifact that sees regular play in Vintage that regenerates you might indeed have a solid argument.

Otherwise, I like having a lot of Oath hate in a list of dudes and cards that hit Oath and MUD and Fastbond and Time Vault and Blood Moon all-in-one card for one mana sounds like a strictly better card. Additionally, the card hits threads and control magic which are solid counter measures sometimes brought in against fish lists.
Logged
Phele
Basic User
**
Posts: 529


Tom Bombadil


View Profile
« Reply #482 on: February 19, 2012, 02:28:09 AM »

I found this a very interesting question. Would a Fish deck with access to four Cages out of the board (so having a very solid answer to Oath) really wants to play Claim over Oxidize? Beside Fastbond (and this might be the main reason to keep with Claim) I don't see any really relevant Enchantment to be cared about by Fish (Threads and Control Magic are not common these days, which has to do with the big amount of Shop Aggro, where both suck and you need your sideboard slots for creature removal work against MUD as well). And here we come to Mikes very relevant point: The life count matters a lot against Shop Aggro, the deck where you need the Oxidizes/Claims the most. So why bother with giving them additional life?
Logged

Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow; Bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow.

Free Illusionary Mask!!
credmond
Basic User
**
Posts: 478


View Profile
« Reply #483 on: February 19, 2012, 04:41:27 AM »

I don't quite understand the logic here. Fish doesn't win by a mad dash to the red zone against MUD. Having versatile cards in the sideboard will increase the win percentages across the board. Why give up 10% against the Oath matchup? or come up short when a slaver player is playing Blood Moon? Or be caught off guard when Landstill pulls threads on you? If you lose against MUD it is not because you gave them an extra 4 life. Heck, nature's claim can be used on your own stuff to give you a snap extra 4 life when you need it. It's flat out an awesome card, best in its class, and outclasses oxidize.

Now if there were regenerating artifacts lurking in type 1 then I think it might get the edge. But as is, its not even close. Using oxidize over claim is handicapping the deck plain and simple and giving away percentages when it doesn't need to.

Again, to reiterate - if you lose against MUD it is not because you gave them an extra 4 life.Their life count doesn't matter. Your life count matters and the number of threats they have and the number of answers you have. If you don't come out from under all the disruption and tempo and quick clock they throw at you you will lose. If you do come out from under all that tempo you will win. Once you break out from the tempo and remove their clocks and you have answers in hand for anything they top deck you could kill them at a leisurely rate of a noble heirarch hit per turn. You are the control in the MUD aggro matchup, not the beatdown.
Logged
Phele
Basic User
**
Posts: 529


Tom Bombadil


View Profile
« Reply #484 on: February 19, 2012, 10:30:38 AM »


Again, to reiterate - if you lose against MUD it is not because you gave them an extra 4 life.Their life count doesn't matter.

I have different experiences here and that is why we come to different conclusions. The life count of the MUD player using Ancient Tombs and Phyrexian mana counts a lot. They hurt themselves quite a bit and a Goyf can easily become a major threat for them. On the other side and as said before: With Cage Fish has a very powerful new tool for the only really counting enchantment, which is Oath. Cage helps in another difficult matchup (Dredge) too, so there nothing hinders you from playing four of them in the board. This should be enough against Oath, as you also have Meddling Mage and Trygon to fight Oath, if they hit early enough (and imo it will become more and more unattractive to play Oath at all). For the rest: Threads and Blood Moon are only marginal used - at least in our meta. And it is not, that both of them absolutely destroys you. So ...
Logged

Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow; Bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow.

Free Illusionary Mask!!
credmond
Basic User
**
Posts: 478


View Profile
« Reply #485 on: February 19, 2012, 01:24:18 PM »

If you have developed your board against MUD to the point where you can land a Goyf and there is enough stuff in all of the graveyards to make him big enough to kill a golem then (you have forced a lot of interactivity with a deck that wants you not to interact) and you have already won. So like I said, their life doesn't matter. You getting to a point in the match where you can cast stuff matters! Besides, the MUD player knows his life is not that relevant either. That's why he is packing 4 x Tombs, trading life for tempo and pressure because he knows once you break out from under the tempo that is it. So any game where you think the MUD players life matters is a game you would have already won.

Oath is an incredibly powerful deck, especially in a creature meta infested with cages. It's only a hurkyll's recall away or a proactive mental misstep away from destroying a creature based deck that plays cages. The more creature decks rise in the meta, the better Oath gets.

Don't make the same mistake that other players have made by discounting Dredge or Oath. Those monsters can adapt, which is especially easy if you hang all your hopes on one card. The latest winning Dredge list wants you to play Cages!
« Last Edit: February 19, 2012, 01:34:57 PM by credmond » Logged
Phele
Basic User
**
Posts: 529


Tom Bombadil


View Profile
« Reply #486 on: February 19, 2012, 02:29:44 PM »

Where exactly did I discount Dredge? I would never discount Dredge at all and would never just rely on Cages to fight Dredge, which is indeed a monster. But this is leading away from the topic and I actually never talked about that.

And I would never seriously talk about Oath and Dredge in one sentence, like you do. Oath powerwise has never been such a monster like Dredge and imo probably never will. It has been a good deck and now - at least in my eyes - got worse. I totally disagree that Oath will become stronger in a meta, where EVERY deck can pack four one mana colorless solutions for your main win route. Especially MUD (the deck to beat as far as I see it) will now get much stronger against Oath. But again: It seems that we are arguing on different basements. I say again, that I think that in an expected meta with less Oath it might be a better choice, especially in Fish, which just wins by beating down, to exchange Claims with Oxidizes, as there are no other relevant enchantements beside Fastbond around and you have enought disruption and removal left (Trygon, Meddling Mage, Pridemage, COUNTER SPELLS) to care about a maybe annoying enchantements.

And here we come to the next different perceptions we have, in this case, how matches against MUD can go. In my experience, these matches don't follow strictly linear, ideal pathes like Sphere, Sphere, Sphere and thats it. Fighting MUD (and there is no matchup I played more in so many tournaments) is very often a back and forward with enough opportunities to bring through critters or spells. Otherwise, this matchup would be unbeatable which it isn't. And during this back and forward MUD inflicts itself damage - quite a lot. And in this occasion a lonely critter, let it be a Goyf, a Pridemage, a Delver, whatever can become a serious threat for them. Especially when you don't give them four live for removing their Golems, Metamorphs etc.
Logged

Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow; Bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow.

Free Illusionary Mask!!
psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #487 on: February 26, 2012, 05:12:53 PM »

I sent Mark Hornung a list for his friend Alex a few days prior to the Grudge Match IV in South Jersey.  He managed, as the only Noble Fish pilot (I chose to work for the TO rather than play), to get top eight out of 84 players at his very first event:

MD:
4 Meddling Mage
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Qasali Pridemage
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Trygon Predator

4 Force of Will
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Mental Misstep
4 Path to Exile
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk

4 Misty Rainforest
4 Tropical Island
4 Wasteland
3 Tundra
1 Black Lotus
1 Forest
1 Island
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Strip Mine

SB:
4 Grafdigger's Cage
3 Nature's Claim
3 Surgical Extraction
3 Threads of Disloyalty
2 Mindbreak Trap

http://www.morphling.de/printview.php?c=1551&d=6

I know my 15 1-ofs builds are hard to grok, so I made sure the sideboard was both unorthodox as well as straightforward.  Threads of Disloyalty, in particular, seems to be a powerhouse against the heavy-Gro metagame that Philly is shaping up to be.  The strength and addition of Grafdigger's Cage to the metagame simultaneously increased the power level of Mental Misstep as a counteractive thwart to Cage, and Path to Exile as a way of dispatching decks that rely on larger creature counts to overcome Cage Fever.  Flooded Strand always seemed like an eyesore when I wrote it on a decklist, so the change from it to Tropical Island was purely cosmetic.

I'm happy that Nature's Claim vs Oxidize is becoming an important debate, and I retain, as I do with most cards, the side of "whichever makes more sense".  I gave Alex Nature's Claim because a new player may need more versatility to overcome a lack of familiarity.  However, Oxidize makes sense right now, especially in this build, since the balance of power lies in four life instead of game-winning enchantments.
Logged

Guli
Basic User
**
Posts: 1685



View Profile
« Reply #488 on: February 26, 2012, 07:36:33 PM »

Yes I saw this list a couple days ago. The lack of Stony and a draw engine is what caught my eye. It is pure tempo and cards with value. I like it.
Logged

Kymagicplayer
Basic User
**
Posts: 23


View Profile Email
« Reply #489 on: March 22, 2012, 09:12:22 AM »

Why are all of you omitting Thalia, Guardian of Thraben? I played her in my deck last weekend, and always wished she was in my hand on the first 7.... I won the game off the back of a turn 1 thalia... She is amazing....
Logged
Kymagicplayer
Basic User
**
Posts: 23


View Profile Email
« Reply #490 on: March 23, 2012, 12:33:27 PM »

So I played the deck, and I love it, but I have a question... why no Aether Vial? Turn 1 vial cheating in meddling mage, or qasali pridgemade whatever = win and it gets around standstill....

Would you run the off color moxes to help boost the speed?

What is this decks weakest matchups?



So getting a discussion going on this deck is starting to seam impossible, I have posted on 3 forums now, and hardly anyone wants to talk about the deck, is it that boring or is vintage just not a highly talked about format?
« Last Edit: April 09, 2012, 06:51:54 PM by Kymagicplayer » Logged
Anusien
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 3668


Anusien
View Profile
« Reply #491 on: April 18, 2012, 09:41:12 AM »

Detailed breakdown of my post-Innistrad list w/ sideboarding techniques: http://goo.gl/aALAt

This list has gotten me two 4-X finishes this month at NEV events, 4-2 for a 15th place out of 66, and 4-1-1 for a 9th place (on breakers, dammit) out of 45.  It is simple and brutal as always, and I will be playing it at every upcoming event until Dark Ascension settles out price-wise.
Why do you leave in Path against Gush and Tez?
Logged

Magic Level 3 Judge
Southern USA Regional Coordinator

Quote from: H.L. Mencken
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #492 on: May 31, 2012, 03:24:09 PM »

Why do you leave in Path against Gush and Tez?

Their primary win conditions are creatures.  I understand the creature density isn't as high as other decks, but the reliance is still there.
Logged

psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #493 on: June 10, 2012, 12:14:52 PM »

I figured I'd share my most recent build of Noble Fish, mostly due to my recent win with it in Bloomsburg, but also because a friend of mine informed me that this thread felt outdated and to hopefully facilitate discussion.  Although it may become more generally accepted than my use of Gitaxian Probe, it still bears discussion about the impact of Shardless Agent on the archetype:

MD:
4 Meddling Mage
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Qasali Pridemage
4 Shardless Agent
4 Tarmogoyf
1 Trygon Predator

4 Daze
4 Force of Will
4 Grafdigger's Cage
4 Stony Silence
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk

4 Misty Rainforest
4 Wasteland
3 Tropical Island
3 Tundra
1 Black Lotus
1 Forest
1 Island
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Strip Mine

SB:
4 Dismember
4 Ravenous Trap
4 Serenity
3 Trygon Predator

I'd like to reiterate that Noble Fish is a tutorless archetype (unless you run Green Sun's Zenith), and therefore my builds aim to create good, old-fashioned 4-of consistency.  It might not be the best, but it's certainly solid, and a starting point for an archetype that is severely lacking a clear one otherwise.
Logged

JustABee
Basic User
**
Posts: 23


View Profile Email
« Reply #494 on: June 13, 2012, 12:25:27 PM »

I've read a good part of the thread and I wanted to talk about the substitution of Tarmogoyf with Scavenging Ooze. I don't think a 4 for 4 replacement is ideal, but perhaps a 1Ooze/3Goyf or 2/2 split could be right. The last time I played Noble Fish at an event (full disclosure a few years ago) I just remember many times goyf would sit as a 1/2 to 3/4 and I really would have rather played a Pridemage or Meddling Mage to put more pressure on the types of plays my opponent could make instead of just a big guy.

Two positive thoughts
1. Ooze is a valid card against Snapcaster Mage, and can help make Yawgmoth's will less good.
2. Midgame vs other creature deck I think the life advantage and ability to grow the ooze could prove very good.

Counter point
1. With the inclusion of MD Graffdigger's cage is the Snapcaster and Will insurance as important?

I'd love to hear other peoples thoughts and experiences with the card in Noble Fish.
Logged

Team 0-2 Drop

NJ/PA Vintage since 2003
psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #495 on: June 25, 2012, 03:02:45 PM »

I've read a good part of the thread and I wanted to talk about the substitution of Tarmogoyf with Scavenging Ooze.

Tarmogoyf and Scavenging Ooze certainly are interchangeable curve-wise, but one of my largest reservations with Ooze is the post-casting mana investment.  I have, on occasion, had trouble pushing forward the game state due to Qasali needing to remain active while my mana is light.  This seemed to happen mostly during games against Workshops, when a non-basic draw leaves us susceptible to Wasteland.  In these situations, Tarmogoyf would shine over Scavenging Ooze, as a 3/4 either holds off or trades with Lodestone Golem, Phyrexian Revoker, and Karn, Silver Golem, while a Scavenging Ooze would need to rely on a creature to have already died and a green mana investment to not cause a back breaking loss of tempo to achieve the same status.  I also recall one of JustABee's games at NYSE NEV V being decided because it was Scavenging Ooze instead of Tarmogoyf, where an opposing 4/5 Tarmogoyf attacked into Scavenging Ooze and Thrun, the Last Troll, and after tapping out to regenerate the Scavenging Ooze was Lightning Bolted.  A Tarmogoyf would have killed the opposing Tarmogoyf under the same attack with a double block and regeneration.

There is, however, the definition of a fish to reflect on.  Tarmogoyf is not a fish, as it isn't disruptive, just big.  Scavenging Ooze is a fish, disrupting Yawgmoth's Will, the Dredge mechanic, Tendrils math, etc.  Scavenging Ooze has a potentially limitless size as well, especially since our creatures are dead forever.  I worry about the anti-synergy of having both on board at the same time, but a specific metagame could absolutely necessitate having one entirely over the other.  Northeast events have shown more Workshops than Dredge recently, and relying on past events to fuel future ones I'd keep 4 Tarmogoyf or JustABee's 3/1 Tarmogoyf/Scavenging Ooze split.

Also, I typed Scavening much more often than Scavenging while writing that, while Tarmogoyf flows effortlessly from my fingers.
Logged

TheWhiteDragon
Tournament Organizers
Basic User
**
Posts: 1308


ericdm69@hotmail.com MrMiller2033 ericdm696969
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #496 on: June 25, 2012, 07:53:51 PM »

I've read a good part of the thread and I wanted to talk about the substitution of Tarmogoyf with Scavenging Ooze.

Tarmogoyf and Scavenging Ooze certainly are interchangeable curve-wise, but one of my largest reservations with Ooze is the post-casting mana investment.  I have, on occasion, had trouble pushing forward the game state due to Qasali needing to remain active while my mana is light.  This seemed to happen mostly during games against Workshops, when a non-basic draw leaves us susceptible to Wasteland.  In these situations, Tarmogoyf would shine over Scavenging Ooze, as a 3/4 either holds off or trades with Lodestone Golem, Phyrexian Revoker, and Karn, Silver Golem, while a Scavenging Ooze would need to rely on a creature to have already died and a green mana investment to not cause a back breaking loss of tempo to achieve the same status.  I also recall one of JustABee's games at NYSE NEV V being decided because it was Scavenging Ooze instead of Tarmogoyf, where an opposing 4/5 Tarmogoyf attacked into Scavenging Ooze and Thrun, the Last Troll, and after tapping out to regenerate the Scavenging Ooze was Lightning Bolted.  A Tarmogoyf would have killed the opposing Tarmogoyf under the same attack with a double block and regeneration.

There is, however, the definition of a fish to reflect on.  Tarmogoyf is not a fish, as it isn't disruptive, just big.  Scavenging Ooze is a fish, disrupting Yawgmoth's Will, the Dredge mechanic, Tendrils math, etc.  Scavenging Ooze has a potentially limitless size as well, especially since our creatures are dead forever.  I worry about the anti-synergy of having both on board at the same time, but a specific metagame could absolutely necessitate having one entirely over the other.  Northeast events have shown more Workshops than Dredge recently, and relying on past events to fuel future ones I'd keep 4 Tarmogoyf or JustABee's 3/1 Tarmogoyf/Scavenging Ooze split.

Also, I typed Scavening much more often than Scavenging while writing that, while Tarmogoyf flows effortlessly from my fingers.

In my builds, I always go with scavenging ooze.  Late game, a goyf can immediately be 6/7 which is huge, but the utility of ooze is awesome.  In the example you said you want pridemage active, I'd just pop him to kill the golem - now you have a 4/4 ooze.  Ooze shines at stunting welder/crucible in that match as well.  The ability to hit yawg/snapcaster/dredge/dragon is fantastic, but just pulling recurable wastes, flashback spells, etc. is really huge.  For what it's worth, metamorph also becomes an X/X+1 goyf whereas it is a 2/2 ooze regardless of how many counters it has (this is not irrelevant).
Logged

"I know to whom I owe the most loyalty, and I see him in the mirror every day." - Starke of Rath
psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #497 on: June 25, 2012, 10:31:02 PM »

In my builds, I always go with scavenging ooze.  Late game, a goyf can immediately be 6/7 which is huge, but the utility of ooze is awesome.  In the example you said you want pridemage active, I'd just pop him to kill the golem - now you have a 4/4 ooze.  Ooze shines at stunting welder/crucible in that match as well.  The ability to hit yawg/snapcaster/dredge/dragon is fantastic, but just pulling recurable wastes, flashback spells, etc. is really huge.  For what it's worth, metamorph also becomes an X/X+1 goyf whereas it is a 2/2 ooze regardless of how many counters it has (this is not irrelevant).

Your tone is one of disagreement, yet you managed to agree with everything I said.  I think you may have misread the post you quoted, as it mentioned Ooze's utility, just with different examples and an et cetera to imply it silly to list every card in Vintage that interacts with the graveyard.  My Qasali Pridemage example didn't include a Lodestone Golem nor a Scavenging Ooze, as it only highlighted the hassle of mana management with tempo decks and Scavenging Ooze's commonality with Qasali Pridemage, in that it has an activated ability that requires mana.
Logged

TheWhiteDragon
Tournament Organizers
Basic User
**
Posts: 1308


ericdm69@hotmail.com MrMiller2033 ericdm696969
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #498 on: June 25, 2012, 10:45:08 PM »

Sorry - I read it as you would take tarm over ooze.  I'd ALWAYS take ooze, regardless of meta because he's good vs so many things.  I don't even go with a split...all ooze.
Logged

"I know to whom I owe the most loyalty, and I see him in the mirror every day." - Starke of Rath
ramrodjon
Basic User
**
Posts: 141



View Profile
« Reply #499 on: July 04, 2012, 07:22:04 PM »

    Now (thanks to Chris V. and Mike N.) that I'm finally on "the drain" and have a few events under my belt as a Noble Fish pilot, I hope to be more involved in this thread a bit more.  The deck and its many variants can be very fun to play and remain competitive in an environment that has seen its share of turn 2 wins.  I, for one, have always been a fan of turning doods sideways and having just enough tempo/disruption to beat out the opposition.  As football fans say, "on any given Sunday", this deck can do just that. 
    I've played decks very similar to Mike Noble's G-Probe/Mage version to top 8 and also the Shardless Agent to top 8.  The deck has just enough room to tailor to ones preferred tastes and still play like a "fish" deck.  I am by no means the best pilot around, but for now, I'll be one of the decks proponents as I thoroughly enjoy playing it. 
    With all of this being said, I am finding that with Noble Fish, as with many Vintage decks, a player starts with a "shell" to work around.  The shell I've used at the past few events has changed a bit since the Shardless Agent tech came onto the scene, but is it safe to say that the following maindeck is a good place to start?

-4 Noble Hierarch
-4 QPM
-4 MedMage
-4 Goyf/Ooze
 
-4 Force of Will
-2 Ancestral/Walk
-4 Mox E/P/S Lotus
-16/18 lands

That may be oversimplifying it but I'm curious to see if there are other folks out there that start with a similar "shell".  I've played between 19-24 doods maindeck, 8-10 counters maindeck, and 16-18 lands maindeck, but the above cards seem to always make there way into my first 60.  Does anyone else have a different method/tactic when building?
Logged

Team Ramrod, we're spreading like a slow movig virus.  Hope you got your shots!
serracollector
Basic User
**
Posts: 1058

serracollector@hotmail.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #500 on: July 05, 2012, 03:16:20 PM »

in the current meta with an uprise of Jace, Grislebrand, Kuldotha, Welder, and the like, I think 4 revoker should be somewhere in that 75 shell.
Logged

B/R discussions are not allowed outside of Vintage Issues, and that includes signatures.
ramrodjon
Basic User
**
Posts: 141



View Profile
« Reply #501 on: July 07, 2012, 09:48:30 AM »

in the current meta with an uprise of Jace, Grislebrand, Kuldotha, Welder, and the like, I think 4 revoker should be somewhere in that 75 shell.

I had tried swapping them out for the Meddling Mage before I had a bit more experience with the deck.  Mage is too valuable in there to cut, so I like your idea of trying to get Revokers on board in addition.
Logged

Team Ramrod, we're spreading like a slow movig virus.  Hope you got your shots!
psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #502 on: July 07, 2012, 02:08:07 PM »

My absolute shell that I use when I build Noble Fish:

4 Meddling Mage
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Qasali Pridemage

4 Force of Will
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk

4 Misty Rainforest
4 Wasteland
3 Tropical Island
3 Tundra
1 Black Lotus
1 Forest
1 Island
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Strip Mine

21 Open Slots

I started keeping a list of potential creatures to run maindeck, which became about 20 cards long very recently.  One of the places that my core deviates is that I don't list the Tarmogoyf/Scavenging Ooze slot, mainly because I consider Stoneforge Mystic as a possibility under the right circumstances as the non-disruptive beatstick.

Phyrexian Revoker is a very possible inclusion, and if you know your metagame is devoid of Dredge (much like FoW #4 was), you should definitely run it over the Ravenous Traps.

EDIT: Here's the list of potential creatures I had saved.  It's neither complete nor well thought out, just ideas that came to mind:

Delver of Secrets
Ethersworn Canonist
Gaddock Teeg
Geist of Saint Taft
Hex Parasite
Kataki, War's Wage
Leonin Arbiter
Magus of the Unseen
Phantasmal Image
Phyrexian Revoker
Samurai of the Pale Curtain
Scavenging Ooze
Snapcaster Mage
Sower of Temptation
Spiketail Hatchling
Stoneforge Mystic
Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
Thrun, the Last Troll
True Believer
Vexing Shusher

Obviously some have seen use (recently in fact), but it's simply food for thought.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2012, 02:41:15 PM by psyburat » Logged

ramrodjon
Basic User
**
Posts: 141



View Profile
« Reply #503 on: July 08, 2012, 08:40:40 AM »

Recently making the transition from Standard/Limited only to Vintage only, I always wonder why Phantasmal Image doesn't see play in a deck like Fish?  I guess I saw it in a Euro/Asia list somewhere as a one-of, but never anywhere else.  It has "fish" size, color, and disruption.  Maybe it's just too cute?
Logged

Team Ramrod, we're spreading like a slow movig virus.  Hope you got your shots!
ed0
Basic User
**
Posts: 54


View Profile
« Reply #504 on: July 08, 2012, 01:01:24 PM »

It has mostly to do with the fact that the majority of vintage fish decks rely on a selection of creatures with effects that are most powerful in synergy with other different effects, and not creatures that are most powerful in multiples on the board.
With the selection of creatures so broad it's in most cases better to add a new creature to the deck so you have a different angle of disruption than to double up on creatures you have already on the board.
Among the frequently played vintage creatures Meddling Mage, Phyrexian Revoker and Snapcaster Mage are the only ones i would consider to not have diminishing returns by doubling up.

In addition Phantasmal Image can be a reliability on drawing your initial hand. In the worst case scenario you have no creature to copy (legendary, or a mostly dead effect for the match up), thus a dead card in your hand.
Logged
Gangles
Basic User
**
Posts: 3


View Profile Email
« Reply #505 on: September 04, 2012, 02:41:37 PM »

http://www.magicspoiler.com/mtg-spoiler/dryad-militant/



Possibly makes the cut in the 75 for fish?  Seems like it could be pretty solid against dredge and most blue control decks.
Logged
TheWhiteDragon
Tournament Organizers
Basic User
**
Posts: 1308


ericdm69@hotmail.com MrMiller2033 ericdm696969
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #506 on: September 04, 2012, 05:57:41 PM »

This is actually fantastic, miandeckable dredge hate - killing therapies and dread return.  Then it becomes just a race between ghasts, that can't block, narcomebas, against your exalted beatsticks.  Also great against snapcaster decks or anything depending on a big yawg will turn.

Yours truly,
-Captain Obvious
Logged

"I know to whom I owe the most loyalty, and I see him in the mirror every day." - Starke of Rath
voltron00x
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1623


View Profile WWW
« Reply #507 on: September 04, 2012, 07:39:06 PM »

I like this card, but I think its tough to main deck.  I wouldn't play this over Cage, I don't think. 

I have a Vintage Maverick deck sitting in my deck file, though, and this fits in perfectly there.
Logged

“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”

Team East Coast Wins
psyburat
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 452


Mike Noble


View Profile
« Reply #508 on: September 05, 2012, 08:22:33 AM »

Dryad Militant and Judge's Familar have both been added to my list of considerations, but also share a lack of relevancy against the Workshop metagame.  I'd be hesitant to include it in the main unless you want to weigh it against Grafdigger's Cage, but I think its failure to stop Lodestone Golem, combined with its susceptibility to Jace, the Mind Sculptor, makes it far from the haymaker it statistically showcases.  There is the consideration that a given metagame trends either pro-Workshop or pro-Mental Misstep, both sides of a spectrum that harass both Dryad Militant and Judge's Familiar, so I look forward to being proven wrong.
Logged

credmond
Basic User
**
Posts: 478


View Profile
« Reply #509 on: September 05, 2012, 04:43:12 PM »

I like this card, but I think its tough to main deck.  I wouldn't play this over Cage, I don't think. 

I have a Vintage Maverick deck sitting in my deck file, though, and this fits in perfectly there.

I think the card is playable in a 4 x GSZ style toolbox approach and featuring 1 maindeck along with other disrupto-bear singletons that cumulatively work together to bury the opponent deeper and deeper into a hole. That way you minimize the weakening of the deck to the workshop menace -- GSZ can always be used to grab heirarch or kataki or pridemage in the workshop matchup.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.169 seconds with 20 queries.