|
voltron00x
|
 |
« on: January 15, 2010, 10:12:30 am » |
|
Where are the creatures in American Vintage?
My article on Monday discusses this topic, but it focuses mostly on providing some of the available creature-centric options and what makes them viable. I’ve specifically focused on Selkie-less Noble Fish, as I’ve tested it a little bit lately and found that it has some very good match-ups for the meta in the mid-Atlantic.
In any case, while I acknowledge that creature-based strategies exist in Vintage and are viable, what are the forces at work that keep those strategies from gaining traction in the US Vintage scene? There are some areas where a good player has been dedicated to a certain strategy (in some metas Selkie / Noble Fish have done well, as have G/W Beats), but there has been very little corresponding meta adjustment even after such a deck does well. For example, BUG Fish was a flash in the pan this summer, and G/W didn’t seem to pick up much popularity at all despite the good showing at Vintage Champs.
[Note: Not to anger any BUG Fish players, but I happen to think that specific deck is pretty much the nut low at the moment and I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole. It's a shame that, for whatever reason, people have defaulted to that build when Fish comes up. When you look at it in the abstract, it plays "powerful" cards compared to most Fish decks, but I just don't think it has the right "skill set" (if you will) to beat Tezz and Oath consistently, and beating Ichorid requires 50%+ of the sideboard. Add that together and you get a deck poorly positioned to do much of anything at the moment.]
Compare Vintage to Legacy, where a fringe strategy that wins or performs well (Enchantress, White Stax, Belcher, 43 Land, Aggro Loam) at a big event will often see a burst of popularity at the next few tournaments, on the local and regional / national level. Vintage seems to be quite different – even Steel City Vault came in and out of the mid-Atlantic meta over the course of, what, a month?
[Note: You could argue that was because the deck wasn't really any better than traditional Tezzeret, but that's a conversation for a different time. The deck also seems to have caught on in some areas of the world more than in the US.]
Decks like Noble Fish, U/R Fish, G/W Beats, and Mono-Black / Neo-Black could and SHOULD make up a much larger percentage of the metagame than they do. I actually have to wonder if the lack of people playing those decks is a result of the struggle Vintage is having with player acquisition here in the states. Obviously assembling a deck like Meandeck Beats or Noble Fish is considerably easier to do in even a low-count (5 or 10) proxy environment as compared to decks like Tezzeret, TPS, or even current Oath builds (King James Oath was more friendly to proxies, now that Iona Oath includes Time Vault, Timetwister, and sometimes Library of Alexandria and/or Mana Drain).
I also wonder if the deck most inclined to player acquisition has become Dredge in the states instead of Fish.
Just some food for thought before my article Monday... curious to hear everyone's thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
M.Solymossy
Restricted Posting
Basic User
Posts: 1982
Sphinx of The Steel Wind
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2010, 10:22:39 am » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
~Team Meandeck~
Vintage will continue to be awful until Time Vault is banned from existance.
|
|
|
|
voltron00x
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2010, 10:27:40 am » |
|
As I said, there are some individuals playing these decks and having success - I'm talking more about overall meta penetration %. I'll admit it could be an issue with my perception, as I'm anchored to a meta that has become seriously devoid of these strategies. You play at a lot of these events Soly, what do you think the overall % of Fish strategies was at the tournaments you cited? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
|
personalbackfire
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2010, 10:34:58 am » |
|
I will take a stab, but probably will be off with my assumptions/reasonings...
We play Vintage because we want to do broken things. This is the only format where you can cast a turn one Necro and win on turn two. Or cast a turn one tinker that gets a big guy. I know these are both examples of plays that demonstrate Vintage as a fast format, which may or may not be true, they are the reasons I loved playing vintage. Every deck that sees play right now in our metagame does "unfair" things. Mox, Orchard, Oath, living the dream go, is not fair, its broken. What gets me about all of this is that we play vintage because we want to do broken things, then we complain about getting blown out by these unfair things.
So i Guess there are 2 reasons I have stayed away from Fish in any form.
1) You have to play tighter, as the deck is less forgiving. When you are playing a bunch of guys that do things, and disruption like Daze/Stifle you have to play correctly all of the time to get value out of these cards, and gain advantages over the course of the game to win. The power level of these are cards are substantially less then the cards that will be on the opposing players side.
2) The over powerful card that is top decked on your opponents side of the table. You could be in control of the game with your 4/5 goyf, opponents life 8, Stifle and Daze in hand, only to have them draw some threat that you cant stifle or daze then you lose because of it. This goes back to the first thing I said which was that Fish is fair and has to play the fair game against unfair opponents.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
voltron00x
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2010, 10:52:12 am » |
|
I will take a stab, but probably will be off with my assumptions/reasonings...
We play Vintage because we want to do broken things. This is the only format where you can cast a turn one Necro and win on turn two. Or cast a turn one tinker that gets a big guy. I know these are both examples of plays that demonstrate Vintage as a fast format, which may or may not be true, they are the reasons I loved playing vintage. Every deck that sees play right now in our metagame does "unfair" things. Mox, Orchard, Oath, living the dream go, is not fair, its broken. What gets me about all of this is that we play vintage because we want to do broken things, then we complain about getting blown out by these unfair things.
So i Guess there are 2 reasons I have stayed away from Fish in any form.
1) You have to play tighter, as the deck is less forgiving. When you are playing a bunch of guys that do things, and disruption like Daze/Stifle you have to play correctly all of the time to get value out of these cards, and gain advantages over the course of the game to win. The power level of these are cards are substantially less then the cards that will be on the opposing players side.
2) The over powerful card that is top decked on your opponents side of the table. You could be in control of the game with your 4/5 goyf, opponents life 8, Stifle and Daze in hand, only to have them draw some threat that you cant stifle or daze then you lose because of it. This goes back to the first thing I said which was that Fish is fair and has to play the fair game against unfair opponents.
No idea why I'm going through these backwards, but here goes: 2) This is my primary problem with decks like BUG Fish, because you're 100% spot-on with your assessment in the games I've seen with that deck against Tezz and Oath. I honestly think it is far less of a problem with other archetypes, which aren't modified versions of Fish decks from previous metas, but are rather built from the ground-up to attack the metagame as it exists today, now. Selkie decks have a draw engine that avoids this problem by out-drawing the Tezz / Oath player. Decks that include Pridemage also have a built-in resistance to top-deck nonsense, because no matter how many cards or counters the Tezz player is able to draw into, they still have to find and resolve an answer to that guy AND Null Rod before they can get Key/Vault going. As much as I'm not a fan, Meddling Mage is also important as an overlocking resistance piece in a deck like Noble Fish. Other builds, like the U/R Fish deck that won a few weeks ago, include different overlapping resistance such as Magus of the Moon and Gorilla Shaman in concert with a Selkie draw engine. While more in the "beats" camp, G/W and MD Beats function in much the same way. If the Beats player gets going early, the overlapping pieces of the deck - Teeg, Pridemage, Null Rod, Wasteland, Mindcensor, Jotun Grunt - set up a board state where Tezz suddenly needs not one top deck, but runner-runner-runner-runner type situations that are harder to get past. 1) I agree and disagree with this. For example, one challenge in playing G/W and Noble Fish is the lack of two things: 1 - Information, and 2 - tutor / filter effects (and draw engine to some extent depending on the inclusion or omission of Selkie). Without Duress / Thoughtseize, you're almost always playing from a position of less perfect information than your opponent, which is challenging. Without the typical card draw/filter suite of cards, you're also more reliant on top-decks and mulligans to get you what you need. This is a DIFFERENT skill set, but not necessarily a more difficult one. I suspect that for most modern Vintage players (myself included) playing these decks feels difficult b/c of these factors - but at the same time, these are linear decks with considerable overlap in the card choices, and once you get a handle on what they're doing, I think in most regards they're actually easier to play. Certainly when you're in a position of applying pressure on the opponent early, the decisions on the Tezz / Shop / TPS / Oath side are just as difficult, if not more so, as one mistake (countering the wrong card, fetching the wrong land) can effectively end the game. Your broken / unfair comments are very telling, and I don't dispute their accuracy at all. I've mentioned this effect before (whether a deck "feels" like a Vintage deck, for example in my Elves! primer article) and have felt it myself, and I'm not sure how you combat it - although I suspect that if these decks were played in numbers and starting winning tournaments, we'd get over that feeling very quickly. I'm not sure I'd be concerned how my deck "felt" as long as I enjoyed playing it and it was in a position to win a tournament. Again, I just have concerns that this mindset is in some ways detrimental to new player acquisition in Vintage, b/c we want decks like MD Beats, GW Beats, Mono-Black, Noble Fish, Selkie Strike, UR Fish, and so on to be viable. They show that Vintage isn't devoid of creatures, suggest that "fair" decks are viable options, and give players from other formats a stepping-stone into the format. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
2nd_lawl
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 357
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2010, 11:26:03 am » |
|
2) The over powerful card that is top decked on your opponents side of the table. You could be in control of the game with your 4/5 goyf, opponents life 8, Stifle and Daze in hand, only to have them draw some threat that you cant stifle or daze then you lose because of it. This goes back to the first thing I said which was that Fish is fair and has to play the fair game against unfair opponents.
I want to elaborate on this, because its really what convinced me to switch from a creature beatdown plan to the more successful "combo" plan in mono black. The problem I was experiencing was simple: I was frequently losing games from what appeared to be "unlosable" situations: opponents with no spells in hand, and nothing but moxes/lands on the board, vs my hand of duress effects and a board of 2 swamps null rod and a nantuko shade or negator. Losing to the topdecked Tinker, or mystical or vamp for tinker. The most efficent creatures (goyf, negator) don't disrupt, and the disruption creatures don't win fast enough, and give too much time for your opponents to draw out of your favorable position. Because these kinds of decks don't really have the tutoring or card drawing power to deploy the "right" threat for the right situation, what you end up with is a mismatch: your pridemage and goyf vs their tinker, or your mindcensor and selkie vs their oath. I find that tutoring is probably the most powerful thing you can be doing, but it lends itself to assembling combos or finding answers, and NOT deploying proactive disruption, even for a deck with only 2 real paths to victory: vault/key and tinker, without duress effects (or sometimes even WITH them) sometimes its actually just impossible to tell what your opponent is assembling, putting you in a position to either guess and hope you get the right creature or wait and apply no pressure, Which is a losing game against the draw power of blue decks. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
voltron00x
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 15, 2010, 11:59:38 am » |
|
2) The over powerful card that is top decked on your opponents side of the table. You could be in control of the game with your 4/5 goyf, opponents life 8, Stifle and Daze in hand, only to have them draw some threat that you cant stifle or daze then you lose because of it. This goes back to the first thing I said which was that Fish is fair and has to play the fair game against unfair opponents.
I want to elaborate on this, because its really what convinced me to switch from a creature beatdown plan to the more successful "combo" plan in mono black. The problem I was experiencing was simple: I was frequently losing games from what appeared to be "unlosable" situations: opponents with no spells in hand, and nothing but moxes/lands on the board, vs my hand of duress effects and a board of 2 swamps null rod and a nantuko shade or negator. Losing to the topdecked Tinker, or mystical or vamp for tinker. The most efficent creatures (goyf, negator) don't disrupt, and the disruption creatures don't win fast enough, and give too much time for your opponents to draw out of your favorable position. Because these kinds of decks don't really have the tutoring or card drawing power to deploy the "right" threat for the right situation, what you end up with is a mismatch: your pridemage and goyf vs their tinker, or your mindcensor and selkie vs their oath. I find that tutoring is probably the most powerful thing you can be doing, but it lends itself to assembling combos or finding answers, and NOT deploying proactive disruption, even for a deck with only 2 real paths to victory: vault/key and tinker, without duress effects (or sometimes even WITH them) sometimes its actually just impossible to tell what your opponent is assembling, putting you in a position to either guess and hope you get the right creature or wait and apply no pressure, Which is a losing game against the draw power of blue decks. Mono-black is particularly vulnerable to this problem (historically), as it banks on Duress / Thoughtseize. Your use of Helm-line and Depths definitely addresses it to some extent because you're able to execute game-enders instead of bashing for 2 a turn with Confidant for 10 turns. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
|
Smmenen
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2010, 12:11:32 pm » |
|
Nov-December metagame report is almost finished, but Fish is by far the deck with the most top 8s in that time period. It's just that it seems mostly in europe.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
voltron00x
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 15, 2010, 12:27:52 pm » |
|
The disparity between the metagames is striking, not unlike ANT's ability to win massive Legacy events in Europe while being a non-factor in large Legacy events in the US post-GP Chicago.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
Prospero
Aequitas
Administrator
Basic User
Posts: 4854
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2010, 01:41:28 pm » |
|
Don't forget Vinnie Forino.
If you want to talk about a guy that will play anything (in fact, he seems to play the decks in Vintage that people specifically think are bad/dead just to prove his point) you have to consider him. I'll never make fun of Parfait around him again...
Vinnie top 8'd Travis Con II running B/W Beats, and he's top 8'd multiple events in the last year running G/W Beats. He made the finals of a Brooklyn tourney running the deck, and top 4'd a Blue Bell with it, beating AJ Grasso, who was running Landstill, in the quarterfinals.
At some level, I agree with Tiger. I enjoy doing the most busted thing possible on any given turn, or in any given game. It's a big reason why I play Vintage. My potential busted-ness on turn one with creatures is nowhere near my best possible play with 5CStax, Tezzeret, Dredge, or even Oath. The creature based deck, especially the Beats deck will ideally drop two threats on turn 1 that affect you somehow. I recall one game in particular with 5C in which I went "Lotus, Shop, 3Sphere, Crucible" and then showed my opponent Strip Mine.
Beats just can't do that.
I think creatures in Vintage also suffer the potentially arbitrary judgment of just being universally bad because many of the most popular/successful decks in the format run so few. You don't see a lot of Gaddock Teeg's in the top 8 bracket.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 15, 2010, 01:54:04 pm by Prospero »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
M.Solymossy
Restricted Posting
Basic User
Posts: 1982
Sphinx of The Steel Wind
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2010, 02:00:04 pm » |
|
In the events posted I would roughly guess the fish or aggro percentage would be at least 15%. this has gone down since 3 or more people now play Vromans oath deck, but you still get 2-4 people at events that pull 16-20.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
~Team Meandeck~
Vintage will continue to be awful until Time Vault is banned from existance.
|
|
|
|
voltron00x
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 15, 2010, 02:07:29 pm » |
|
Don't forget Vinnie Forino.
If you want to talk about a guy that will play anything (in fact, he seems to play the decks in Vintage that people specifically think are bad/dead just to prove his point) you have to consider him. I'll never make fun of Parfait around him again...
Vinnie top 8'd Travis Con II running B/W Beats, and he's top 8'd multiple events in the last year running G/W Beats. He made the finals of a Brooklyn tourney running the deck, and top 4'd a Blue Bell with it, beating AJ Grasso, who was running Landstill, in the quarterfinals.
At some level, I agree with Tiger. I enjoy doing the most busted thing possible on any given turn, or in any given game. It's a big reason why I play Vintage. My potential busted-ness on turn one with creatures is nowhere near my best possible play with 5CStax, Tezzeret, Dredge, or even Oath. The creature based deck, especially the Beats deck will ideally drop two threats on turn 1 that affect you somehow. I recall one game in particular with 5C in which I went "Lotus, Shop, 3Sphere, Crucible" and then showed my opponent Strip Mine.
Beats just can't do that.
I think creatures in Vintage also suffer the potentially arbitrary judgment of just being universally bad because many of the most popular/successful decks in the format run so few. You don't see a lot of Gaddock Teeg's in the top 8 bracket.
I remember Vinnie Forino, trust me  In my opinion, the concept of a "broken" opening turn needs to be fluid. A lot of Fish decks can power out a "broken" opener with Lotus, it just looks different than what "broken" means to other Vintage decks, but any hand that locks up a game in 1-2 turns needs to be considered "broken" IMO. For example, last night testing with Noble Fish against Oath and Tezz, any time I drew Lotus in my opener I won. The ability to open up on, say, Lotus, Mox, Wasteland, Pridemage, Null Rod, pass is kind of ridiculous against those decks. Even something like Lotus, land, Trygon Predator or Lotus, land, Null Rod with Spell Pierce mana up to power it through Force of Will is pretty broken against a lot of the first-tier decks. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
Twaun007
Adepts
Basic User
Posts: 1527
For eight hundred years have I trained Jedi.
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2010, 09:09:36 pm » |
|
Why would I bother playing dude.dec with Null Rods when I can proxy up a uberbroken.dec deck?
On a quick note, how many of those tournaments in Europe allowed proxies?
Also, why would anybody over here test Fish decks when we can play anything we want due to the use of proxies?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 15, 2010, 09:26:30 pm by Twaun007 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
JACO
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 1215
Don't be a meatball.
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 15, 2010, 11:22:43 pm » |
|
For all of the recent USA tournament results I'm seeing there are random Fish spottings here and there, but there's a lot of Oath, which is a natural predator of Fish strategies. So if I'm going to play in a mid-size tourney in the USA the next month, what are my options right now?
1) Oath of some sort
2) Tezzeret of some sort
3) Tendrils of some sort
4) Dredge
5) Workshops
6) Fish of some sort
7) some other option not defined here
Why on earth would you play Fish if you expected a few Oath decks in a tournament that day, coupled with all of the other decks you have to beat?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Want to write about Vintage, Legacy, Modern, Type 4, or Commander/EDH? Eternal Central is looking for writers! Contact me. Follow me on Twitter @JMJACO. Follow Eternal Central on Twitter @EternalCentral. |
|
|
|
voltron00x
|
|
« Reply #14 on: January 16, 2010, 08:06:47 pm » |
|
Why would I bother playing dude.dec with Null Rods when I can proxy up a uberbroken.dec deck?
On a quick note, how many of those tournaments in Europe allowed proxies?
Also, why would anybody over here test Fish decks when we can play anything we want due to the use of proxies?
The answers to your first and third question are really one and the same. People choose decks for one of a few main reasons: 1 - They play the deck they think has the best chance to win the tournament (or, I suppose, gives *them* their best chance of winning) 2 - They're playing for fun and choose a deck they enjoy playing 3 - They play the best deck available given their available card pool There are times when the answer to #1 is "uberbroken.dec" and there are plenty of times when it isn't. For instance, you play B/R Stax, presumably because of some combination of the 3 things I listed above. Do you believe that deck is uberbroken? I definitely wouldn't classify it as such. Why do you play it, since it isn't busted and you can play anything you want given proxies? Also, for some players, proxies make the full format an option, but for a lot of others this isn't true at all. Again, at my first Vintage tournament, I wanted to play King James Oath but I didn't even own Force of Will, Oath of Druids, or duals, let alone power. Still, most Fish decks are an option for people invested in Legacy (at least, if they play Blue decks). [As a side note, it also shows how important it is for Vintage players to pull people into Vintage when they're interested and to support their early stabs into the format by testing and loaning cards to make proxy limits. I wouldn't be playing Vintage if not for Brian Legrow and Brian Durkin, in particular.] As far as your second question, its hard to say. This would be one of my criticisms with the way Stephen's metagame reports blend the US and Europe (and the rest of the world) all together based simply on tournament size, as the "metagame" that ends up being described doesn't actually exist anywhere. It's a blend of very different regional metagames. EDIT: To be clear, those metagame report articles are extremely valuable; I didn't mean for that comment to be a shot at them or the author. I just wonder if some type of breakdown (such as a seperate US vs European breakdown in addition to the full report) might have some value. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 16, 2010, 08:51:33 pm by voltron00x »
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
|
voltron00x
|
|
« Reply #15 on: January 16, 2010, 08:10:37 pm » |
|
For all of the recent USA tournament results I'm seeing there are random Fish spottings here and there, but there's a lot of Oath, which is a natural predator of Fish strategies. So if I'm going to play in a mid-size tourney in the USA the next month, what are my options right now?
1) Oath of some sort
2) Tezzeret of some sort
3) Tendrils of some sort
4) Dredge
5) Workshops
6) Fish of some sort
7) some other option not defined here
Why on earth would you play Fish if you expected a few Oath decks in a tournament that day, coupled with all of the other decks you have to beat?
I was waiting for someone to make this point, and the answer is that some Fish decks, especially U/G/W varieties, actually have very good match-ups against Oath. In game 1 situations in particular, Noble Fish has a 75%+ win percentage based on the 40+ games I've played. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”
Team East Coast Wins
|
|
|
MirariKnight
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 428
Lotus, YawgWill, Lotus, Go
|
|
« Reply #16 on: January 16, 2010, 11:46:08 pm » |
|
While Oath has traditionally done well vs. Fish, it has a hard time against Fish with Pridemage. Bant Fish can also play Meddling Mage main or side and True Believer in the board, all of which are not fun for Oath.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sassfactor4
|
|
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2010, 10:51:16 am » |
|
In my personal experience with BUG fish vs oath, I have never had a problem, I think ~20 games i'm around a 60% win on the draw and 75% on the play. After sideboarding, even better.
With trygon predator you are keeping oath down if you get him out the turn before oath.
with 5 land destruction between waste\strip, you can keep the man generator out of commision
with a diabolic edict main decked, even if oath kicks off, you probably aren't in the worst shape with 2 tutors fetching. And post oath, creature being dropped your tarmogoyf is going to be sitting pretty at 5/6 most likely.
With a leyline of the void in play (or other traditional dredge hate), they won't yag win.
Its taken me a lot of testing to understand how to play the deck tight and efficiently but there are plenty of answers to oath sitting main deck, and in the sideboard.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Brainstorm. Draw with bob take 5 from force of will draw lotus for turn. ...  |
|
|
MirariKnight
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 428
Lotus, YawgWill, Lotus, Go
|
|
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2010, 11:59:53 am » |
|
All of the above points are fairly true, but I don't understand why people insist that Leyline is good against Oath. It does nothing to stop the game plan at all. Would you bring in Leyline vs. Tezz just for Yawg? Same concept. You beat Oath by stopping them from Oathing in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sassfactor4
|
|
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2010, 01:29:02 pm » |
|
I've moved to maindecking leylines, with dredge and stax sharing enough of the meta. Its not meant as a strategy against oath\tezz but it also isnt a completely dead play when dealing with krosan and yagmoth
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Brainstorm. Draw with bob take 5 from force of will draw lotus for turn. ... |
|
|
|
sorcutt
|
|
« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2010, 03:14:04 pm » |
|
I've been tempted to run fish decks before. It seems like a pretty poor metagame call right now. The reemergence of Oath as a tier one deck has a direct correlation to fish dropping off the East Coast map. My real fundamental problem with fish, and any other 'hate' deck, is that the power/broken level is sooooo low. By that I mean pounding someone's face in with a 2/2 over 10 turns is just lame. Winning on turn 2-3, or locking someone out of a game is way more fun for me. Realistically, Fish, and most other metagame hate decks, get stomped on by nearly every type 2 deck. That just feels so wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Current EDH decks:
Ghost Council, Karn, Omnath, Azami
|
|
|
|
vassago
|
|
« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2010, 03:29:12 pm » |
|
Fish is still a serious contender. Noble fish happens to be running rampant through alot of metagmes. The rwb list of fish that happens to show up our tournaments is extremely good and I am surprized it doesnt show up in other metagames.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
.... "OMGWTFElephantOnMyFace".
|
|
|
pierce
Basic User
Posts: 325
Part Time Vintage Guru for Hire
|
|
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2010, 10:44:29 pm » |
|
Some fish players simply don't like attacking for two all the time. It gets old.
Also, oath is pretty good, and that's always a nightmare for the guy with a turn one noble hierarch
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
More like Yangwill!
|
|
|
|
Neonico
|
|
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2010, 03:30:46 am » |
|
Some fish players simply don't like attacking for two all the time. It gets old.
Also, oath is pretty good, and that's always a nightmare for the guy with a turn one noble hierarch
From the performing french Noble fish players, It seems that oath is a favorable matchup with the deck. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
