[Article] Frying Fish

[Vegeta2711]

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/16194.html

The article is actually is split into a section about Vintage and a part on block. The first half is the relevant portion on U/W Fish.

[AmbivalentDuck]

One thing not addressed is Figure of Destiny vs. the vanilla 2/x's.  It ends up looking like a 2/2 for W with echo, but the option of making it a 4/4 is somewhat attractive against workshop aggro.  I'm curious as to your thoughts on the card?

[Sean Ryan]

Interesting blurb, but I wish you would have addressed the role of Cursecatcher more directly rather than just dismiss him with the utility creature argument, which does not have to be an either/or.  For instance, are Javelineers really better than Cursecatcher?  It seems like you would need even more Slaver than the current metagame has to justify Javelineers.

The other point I wish was addressed was how much value Standstill offers.  There has been much debate over this card in years past and the interviewee even criticized the misplay of drawing to many cards rather than just beating down.

Anyway, perhaps this will generate more discussion.

Thanks

[Harlequin]

I think for WU fish the Figure is a great card.  Definately superior to any Cat or Dog in basically all real situations.

In the early game he's a 1/1 for 1.  So obviously not impressive when it comes to being compared to Cats, Dogs, and wizards of the same cost.  Sometimes all you need is a dude, like for chumpblocking or ninjas.  When you have extra mana at your opponent's EOT you can make him a 2/2 for basically nothing.  Now he's probably 2 or 3 damage behind a Cat or Dog, but that probably not going to be the differance in winning or losing. 
After a few turns, you have the option to pump him to a 4/4 at the end of an opponent's turn... or inresponse to attacker or in response to pyrocasm.  Now hes a draw-back-less Grunt. 
At this point, your really only a Lotus away from getting an 8/8.  I mean if your in on the beats, a topdeck lotus could straight win you the game!

I was never a fan of Vanilla Cats and Dogs in fish.  I always prefered Flying Man as a more reliable source of damage.  But I could get behind the Figgure.

[FadeToBlack]

Any comment on the possibility of playing black for Dark Confidant/Duress (other disruption as well)? I realize this is about UW Fish, but maybe address the issue of why UW is superior to UWb?

[xycsoscyx]

I'm curious why you didn't at least comment on not including Brainstorm/Ponder?  Even as singletons, it can help smooth things out a bit.  As it is, you're primarily just relying on Standstill/Recall (and potentially your Ninjas), but is that enough?  It seems like even adding in those single BS/P, you can still help smooth out the draws.  The other thing is that BS/P are definite, while Standstill/Ninjas are optional; you can't always assume you're going to be able to draw cards off them (though usually you will at least draw some).

[Vegeta2711]

Big problem with Figure of Destiny is you aren't likely to pump him even the first time until the 4th turn if you have a reasonable start. I was actually the first one to suggest it to Jeff and from there on after I tried it, just too much effort to even get it to a 2/2 to justify. Getting 3 white mana in a single turn is also a big deal if you run the Wastes + Factory like most Fish decks. It leaves you with only 8-10 white sources in the end.

Problem with Cursecatcher is the fact that it's known information, cards like Daze work much better when the opponent has to guess if you have it or not. It causes misplays even when it isn't in your hand. Cursecatcher on the other hand sits out there and at it's very best forces the opponent to wait a turn, that'd be great if it could do that consistently, but often it just gets an opponent to switch it to a worse line of play. And considering the low power level of Fish, even a worse line of play is probably much better than anything you can do.

How can you smooth out draws with singleton cards? That seems like the anti-'I'm going to draw the same hand every game' logic Fish decks use. Like yeah Brainstorm does say draw 3 on there, but with only 4 fetches, the odds of the ol shuffle and roll goes down quite a bit. I have no idea why Ponder would be good in a Fish deck though.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Isn't the point of Cursecatcher to destroy Ichorid game 1 instead of scooping?

Sure I'd board them out against control slaver...but that's not a good enough reason to not run them.

[Moxlotus]

Isn't the point of Cursecatcher to destroy Ichorid game 1 instead of scooping?

Sure I'd board them out against control slaver...but that's not a good enough reason to not run them.

The point of cursecatcher is the same reason Spiketail hatchling was run in u/r fish.  Delay your opponent 1 turn so you can play null rod.  Or play waste.  Or standstill then ninja him out.  Get incremental advantages until they just pile up.  It's going to take longer to kill your opponent, but he shouldn't be able to break out of your soft lock with your mana control and disruption while you outdraw him.  Slaver or Long is not going to care about a pair of 2/x's on the table. 

[Sean Ryan]

The point of cursecatcher is the same reason Spiketail hatchling was run in u/r fish.  Delay your opponent 1 turn so you can play null rod.  Or play waste.  Or standstill then ninja him out.  Get incremental advantages until they just pile up.  It's going to take longer to kill your opponent, but he shouldn't be able to break out of your soft lock with your mana control and disruption while you outdraw him.  Slaver or Long is not going to care about a pair of 2/x's on the table.

That is EXACTLY the line of reasoning I was hoping the article would address.  How does this example weigh against other options. 

Why not run something like this?

4 Curse Catchers
4 Cats/Dogs
4 Mage
2 Kataki
2 Grunt
3 Ninja

Ditch the Javelinners as you have StP for Welders/Confidants.

[Vegeta2711]

sn't the point of Cursecatcher to destroy Ichorid game 1 instead of scooping?

Uh, no. And if you were running them for that reason, you've been building the deck wrong.

That is EXACTLY the line of reasoning I was hoping the article would address.  How does this example weigh against other options.

Problem with Cursecatcher is the fact that it's known information, cards like Daze work much better when the opponent has to guess if you have it or not. It causes misplays even when it isn't in your hand. Cursecatcher on the other hand sits out there and at it's very best forces the opponent to wait a turn, that'd be great if it could do that consistently, but often it just gets an opponent to switch it to a worse line of play. And considering the low power level of Fish, even a worse line of play is probably much better than anything you can do.

No really, I'm pretty sure I answered it.

It's going to take longer to kill your opponent, but he shouldn't be able to break out of your soft lock with your mana control and disruption while you outdraw him.

Wait, what? When did Fish ever have a soft lock in the deck? It has mana denial sure, but Null Rod is the closest thing it's ever had to a lock card and that still only hits 8-11 relevant cards in most matches. Also I've always thought it was fundamentally established that killing the opponent is just a superior option than soft-locking someone and then hoping they die before they topdeck something useful.

[Moxlotus]

Wait, what? When did Fish ever have a soft lock in the deck? It has mana denial sure, but Null Rod is the closest thing it's ever had to a lock card and that still only hits 8-11 relevant cards in most matches. Also I've always thought it was fundamentally established that killing the opponent is just a superior option than soft-locking someone and then hoping they die before they topdeck something useful.

Establishing the kill with 2/x?  Are you serious?  Establishing the kill against Long or Slaver with vanilla 2/x.  As a combo player I'd seriously laugh my ass off if my opponent played a turn 1 savannah lions. 

Cursecatcher (possibly multiples in play), 3-4 rod, 5 strips, X stifles, X dazes, 4 forces can make a soft lock.  My last tournament cursecatcher won me all 4 rounds that I won.  Every round.  I wasn't sure about the card so I asked my oponents how it affected them.  They all agreed that they would have won the game without cursecatcher.  Its because The Curse gave me the turn (or several if they needed to draw a mana) to lay the Rod or Duress (if playing black) their bomb or waste their land.   A 2/x wasn't going to do anything.  Killing your opponent instead of playing cursecatcher is nice and all--but only if the card you are replacing him with will actually kill someone before you're dead 4 times over.  I guess the Lions are better in the mirror.  But when the opponent's deck has better cards than you, you want to stop them from playing those better cards.  You talk about how their worse line of play is better than your plays--do you think that's worse than them having their best line of play while you have a 2/1?

Rod hits way more than 8-11 cards in the deck.  It can affect all of them.  If they have Island+2 moxen, it affects their thirst in hand.  Which is why the card is the best card in the deck.  Which is why you want it to resolve every time you cast it.

[Vegeta2711]

As a combo player I'd seriously laugh my ass off if my opponent played a turn 1 savannah lions. 

Good for you, use more hyperbole.You've played Fish. You know how few relevant options you have against a competent combo player turn 1. The fact that there are other decks in the metagame make this statement even more self-serving.

  You talk about how their worse line of play is better than your plays--do you think that's worse than them having their best line of play while you have a 2/1?

You've clearly read what I've been writing. So the answer is obviously YES. Yes, I want my opponent dead before they rip something relevant I can't stop and they crush me. You laugh at how long it takes a couple of two power guys to kill your opponent, but you say nothing of how long it takes with one power dorks? Even a single extra point of damage a turn can drop the clock significantly.

Rod hits way more than 8-11 cards in the deck.  It can affect all of them.  If they have Island+2 moxen, it affects their thirst in hand.  Which is why the card is the best card in the deck.  Which is why you want it to resolve every time you cast it.

Fine, whatever. It's a semantics point, I consider something like Stax a lock deck, you have a broader term.

[jeffthefob]

Regarding Figure of Destiny; getting to 3 white mana is just pretty difficult with the deck.  This isn't the U/W Fish during the Gifts era where there are like 6 to 7 fetchlands; instead I got 4 man lands.  It is good in Fish mirrors (and similar match ups) because it is an war of attrition.  It doesn't apply enough pressure to your opponent. 

Regarding Cursecatcher... I would like to tackle it from a different angle.  URBana Fish and U/W Fish are different decks.  Similar in strategy, but there is a difference.  U/W Fish is like an elementary kids' white weenie deck; it got men and it turn them sideways. (Yes, I make fun of my deck) URBana is much more disruptive than U/W.  URBana's match up against combo is probably better than U/W but U/W is a more balanced out deck.

Cursecatcher is a good card in URBana because it fits that decks' role a lot better.  Duress = information.  Mox Monkey = More mana denial which make Cursecatcher a lot better.  But U/W fish is different.  It plays cheap "aggro drain," Dazes, it is a really aggressive deck; for god's sake its lands are also dorks.  Cursecatcher or other 1-powered creatures are just not very impressive in the deck unless you got another source of pressure.  And Cat and Dogs fit that role.

Yes, again.  Of all cards in Vintage, I am playing with Dog and Cats.  Sometime people just got to think, of all the cards, I have to play with 2/2 and 2/1 no ability dorks and there got to be a better answer.  Well, there really isn't... I have been consistently play U/W Fish and put decent results with it, I haven't find another good replacement.  I am not going to get into another "there got to be a better choice" debate, read my and Feinstein's U/W Fish thread for that.  For the sake of this discussion, we really should consider that U/W and URBana are both viable Fish decks, and yet different. 

Anyways, I am just really surprised on how heated the discussion got.  Just want to put my thoughts out, I can see the other side of the debate, but like to throw out mine too.

[Sean Ryan]

You guys are so sensitive!

I find it amusing that the argument has solidified into an either/or between Beaters and Cursecatcher.  Why not run them both and cut the inferior Javelineers?

The other Fish debate that has yet to emerge is whether UW with Standstill/Ninjas/ect. is better than Ubw with Confidant and Duress.  Last time I seriously played Fish I used the version with black and found it far superior.  You do lose some of the aggressiveness, my build had 15/16 creatures with no Factories.  One can make an argument that Confidant is a better choice than Standstill which is more situational.  I think Feinstein came to the same conclusion last I remember.

[Ufactor]

As a combo player I'd seriously laugh my ass off if my opponent played a turn 1 savannah lions. 

Good for you, use more hyperbole.You've played Fish. You know how few relevant options you have against a competent combo player turn 1. The fact that there are other decks in the metagame make this statement even more self-serving.

oreelies?!?! ARE there other decks in the meta game?  Becker, Shay, Smmenen are all playing combo like it's going out of style.  Sure there are other decks in the meta, but if you can't beat Long, then you need to go home

[jeffthefob]

You guys are so sensitive!

I find it amusing that the argument has solidified into an either/or between Beaters and Cursecatcher.  Why not run them both and cut the inferior Javelineers?

The other Fish debate that has yet to emerge is whether UW with Standstill/Ninjas/ect. is better than Ubw with Confidant and Duress.  Last time I seriously played Fish I used the version with black and found it far superior.  You do lose some of the aggressiveness, my build had 15/16 creatures with no Factories.  One can make an argument that Confidant is a better choice than Standstill which is more situational.  I think Feinstein came to the same conclusion last I remember.

I have already touched some of this before in the U/W Fish thread and perhaps the long tourney report I made.  (Eudemonia: Sapphire).  The first post-BAN (sue me) Fish type of deck I made was U/B/W.  I too, played a fair share of Bob's in the Fish.  Duress and Bobs are just too good to not try.   There were a couple problems, the lack of brainstorm make that deck's mana harder to run.  It is just not as smooth as I wanted it to be.  Another problem is that it isn't aggressive enough.  Again, each U/W, URBana, and UWB are viable Fish lists.  Keep in mind, it isn't Flash-era anymore.

Javlineer is the weakest link, but the ability to handle Bobs and Welders are huge.  I guess you can cut them and up the StP count and include some cursecatcher at the same time, I am highly likely going to try something like that; seems great

As a combo player I'd seriously laugh my ass off if my opponent played a turn 1 savannah lions. 

Good for you, use more hyperbole.You've played Fish. You know how few relevant options you have against a competent combo player turn 1. The fact that there are other decks in the metagame make this statement even more self-serving.

oreelies?!?! ARE there other decks in the meta game?  Becker, Shay, Smmenen are all playing combo like it's going out of style.  Sure there are other decks in the meta, but if you can't beat Long, then you need to go home

Some time people need to learn how to play magic, and to have logic as well.  You still own me an explanation on why Null Rod sucks.  And trust me, if the "best" players are playing combo, people will eventually realize they will have to have something against them.  Because in the course of the tourney if you want to win, most likely you will encounter those players; you will need SOMETHING in your board.  Welcome to NorCal magic scene.

Seriously speaking, Fish a flexible deck, fixing it to have SB options against Long isn't hard.  Besides you have Null Rod...

[Sean Ryan]

Jeff,

The first post-BAN (sue me) Fish type of deck I made was U/B/W.  I too, played a fair share of Bob's in the Fish.  Duress and Bobs are just too good to not try.   There were a couple problems, the lack of brainstorm make that deck's mana harder to run.  It is just not as smooth as I wanted it to be.

I haven't played enough games against other mana denial strategies, but it hasn't been an issue against Drains or Storm.  In fact, when you compare a U/w Factory list like yours to my 3 color list you might be surprised.  Including Moxen/Lotus, your list has 13 ways to generate blue, mine has 15, both lists have 12 ways to generate white, and I have 13 ways of hitting black.  Granted you have to balance the 3 colors which could be a liability against Stax or the mirror, but its not as simple as one might think.  For reference:
Mana:23
4 Lotus/Sapphire/Jet/Pearl
6 Fetch
3 Sea
3 Tundra
1 Scrubland
1 Island
1 Swamp
4 Strip/Waste

Another problem is that it isn't aggressive enough.

Yes, you usually lose some aggressiveness in the Cats/Dogs and the Factories, but then things play out differently.  Instead of leading with a mini clock (Cats) you lead with disruption, Duress/Stiffle/Cursecatrcher.  Then you follow up with a 2 casting creatures that all offer some utility: Confidant/Mage/Kataki/Grunt.  The list you posted is actually a bit less aggressive than I like  U/W Fish to be with only 14 creatures before you count Factories, compared with the 15/16 in most lists that splash black.  I think this reflects the fact that this metagame begs for heavy disruption, where Duress shines.  I also find it strange you opted not to main deck Grunts.  How come?         

Javlineer is the weakest link, but the ability to handle Bobs and Welders are huge.

Dont forget black also gives you access to the superior Darkblast for killing Welders and Confidants in place of one StP. 

Again, each U/W, URBana, and UWB are viable Fish lists.

For sure.  People get so hung up on their pet decks.  There really are a ton of options for Fish, I just happen to think the black splash is better in this metagame where Storm is on the rise.  At one point I even ran Negators ...don't laugh they actually helped the Slaver and Long match considerably.  U/w is good against Slaver, but its edge lies in the mirror and against Stax...and we haven't even begun to discuss the merits of green    

Anyway, good discussion.

[Ufactor]

As a combo player I'd seriously laugh my ass off if my opponent played a turn 1 savannah lions. 

Good for you, use more hyperbole.You've played Fish. You know how few relevant options you have against a competent combo player turn 1. The fact that there are other decks in the metagame make this statement even more self-serving.

oreelies?!?! ARE there other decks in the meta game?  Becker, Shay, Smmenen are all playing combo like it's going out of style.  Sure there are other decks in the meta, but if you can't beat Long, then you need to go home

Some time people need to learn how to play magic, and to have logic as well.  You still own me an explanation on why Null Rod sucks.  And trust me, if the "best" players are playing combo, people will eventually realize they will have to have something against them.  Because in the course of the tourney if you want to win, most likely you will encounter those players; you will need SOMETHING in your board.  Welcome to NorCal magic scene.

Seriously speaking, Fish a flexible deck, fixing it to have SB options against Long isn't hard.  Besides you have Null Rod...

The suggestion that I made was completely based on the article that Zherbus put forth.  Basically, I interpreted it to mean that graveyard hate was the new foil to the metagame.  Tormod's Crypt was almost as good against Slaver as Null Rod, and didn't get ignored by Ichorid.  All of this, *at the time*, was completely plausible.  Now, with more than a month of hindsight, the metagame is very different than what I (and probably most people) could have predicted.  Seeing as how Control Slaver and Long variants make up the bulk of the quarter finalists at any given tournament, Null Rod is probably better than it's ever been.  So, the only regret that I have is that my crystal ball was cloudy.

As for my response to Josh's comments, I'm not suggesting that Fish doesn't have to worry about any other decks.  There is a delicate balance, however, that needs to be maintained.  The more you prep the deck against Oath, Ichorid, Shop-Aggro and the mirror, the more you muddle the important matches.  You can, recklessly, go into a tournament without any preparation for anything except Long and Slaver, lucksack on match pairings, and tie breakers, and sail into top 8 without a sweat.  So those decks (what you'll face during finals), are the ones that need to be worried about.

[Zherbus]

You still own me an explanation on why Null Rod sucks.

It doesn't "suck" to me, it just doesn't fit well into what I'd want to do with Aggro control. Call it whatever you want, but it's more of a life experience/metagame uncertainty to me. If you're running a Vintage deck sans the acceleration and effects (and probably by relation, "I win" effects of Tinker and Yawgmoth's Will), then you're running severely underpowered comparitively unless you get Null Rod (except against some Workshop decks and Ichorid). You'll be at a disadvantage without drawing into Null Rod (which in the first turns is less than half the time), since you can't have dazzling openings (by all admission, it's not a powerful deck) or someone nukes it post-haste (bounce, Welder, removal, counter) before you can capitalize on the tempo. And to me, that's more of a liability to me that outweighs hosing my opponent Null Rod. I like aggro-control, but I just don't like the blanket sledgehammer approach of Vintage hate cards unless it's reliable and with a low cost. I think if it tested better against me, my opinion would change.

Stuff along the same lines as Null Rod, such as Magus of the Moon, tend to function better across the board since it's run in decks that don't care if they have Mountains instead for example.

That said, it's all a calculated risk. If you know a high percentage of the players will be running Long variants and Slaver, you got a likely candidate in Null Rod. If you misjudge or play against two rounds of Ichorid and a round of Workshop Aggro and a round of Oath, then good luck I guess. NorCal seems fairly easy to predict in that manner, so I couldn't fault anyone for packing the phallic superstar there. A "1-2 of everything" metagame like in the South or a really large many-round event are much more of a gamble for the card.

My two cents, anyway.

[jeffthefob]

From the article Zherbus wrote, I didn't interpret it as why Null Rod is not a good card.  In fact, it didn't really discuss a lot about Null Rod from what I read.  Which is the reason why I was "curious" on how one can find Null Rod not being good from it.  I have absolutely nothing against the article. 

I main 2 Grunts, they are one of the reasons to run white.  I may had screwed up the list that you saw.  White = Grunts and StP, Meddling Mages are a side bonus.  The sideboard = Chants.  Everytime the black splash in Fish seems so impressive on paper; additional Duresses and Bobs are just really great.  But everytime when I run it is just not as impressive.  It can also be that my manabase is a little bit off, but when I ran it it was similar to yours too.  I am just probably too used to U/W Fish >_<\\\