Fish without Stifle?

[Bongo]

With the rise of MUD, I feel Stifle has lost some of its appeal. Sure, it can still destroy some fetches from time to time, but I've found it to be rather ineffective against MUD and good players who know how to play around it.

What do you think about a Fish build that eschews Stifle completely?

Such a build would focus more on countering the actual spells instead of attacking mana. I would probably replace Stifle with Spell Snare, which I like very much in this MUD/Oath/Fish heavy metagame. Snare is also quite effective against Tez running Mana Drain and Dark Confidant.

[mikekilljoy]

Since Stifle tends to be a sideboard card at best, I don't see why it shouldn't be run. It's still very, very good against any version of Storm and Oath. If anything, I think Dredge sideboard cards are becoming more and more like watsed spots, where you need more spots against MUD/Stax.

[Delha]

Since Stifle tends to be a sideboard card at best, I don't see why it shouldn't be run. It's still very, very good against any version of Storm and Oath. If anything, I think Dredge sideboard cards are becoming more and more like watsed spots, where you need more spots against MUD/Stax.

Are you trying to use Stifle against their resolved Tendrils or Oaths?

[xouman]

It depends heavily on the kind of fish you are playing. In a deck with 4 null rods, 5 strip lands, daze and spell pierce, stifle is better than in aggresive decks with less mana denial. But in general it has become worse since Fish and Mud have become more popular, and there are few storm decks now.

Avoiding 1 oath activation is not great unless you already have some beaters in play (excuse me, in the battlefield :p), having 1 counter for oath or 1 bouncer seems better. You can similarly avoid one Time vault activation or tezzeret, but it is not great since rod decks haven't explosive wins.

IMHO now is better to have spell pierce/snare maindeck in front of Stifle, and Annul in the SB for Mud/Oath, usually the worst pairings besides Ichorid.

[Bongo]

I'm playing a standard version of Noble Fish - Rod, Pierce, Daze and Wastes. I feel like the matchup against blue-based control is favorable even without Stifle. Am I correct or is Stifle absolutely needed?
I know Stifle is better against Dredge, but I feel like game 1 is a lost cause anyway.

This is what I have in mind:

1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire

4 Force of Will
4 Null Rod
3 Daze
3 Swords to Plowshares
2 Spell Pierce
2 Spell Snare
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk

4 Noble Hierarch
4 Qasali Pridemage
4 Tarmogoyf
3 Meddling Mage
3 Trygon Predator

2 Flooded Strand
2 Misty Rainforest
2 Polluted Delta
4 Tropical Island
3 Tundra
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine


This version should have a better matchup against MUD, as you don't have dead cards in the main anymore. I've upped the Swords count to three to reliably get rid of Lodestone Golem, Tarmogoyf, Dark Confidant and Sphinx of the Steel Wind.

What do you think of this approach?

[policehq]

It depends heavily on the kind of fish you are playing. In a deck with 4 null rods, 5 strip lands, daze and spell pierce, stifle is better than in aggresive decks with less mana denial. But in general it has become worse since Fish and Mud have become more popular, and there are few storm decks now.

Avoiding 1 oath activation is not great unless you already have some beaters in play (excuse me, in the battlefield :p), having 1 counter for oath or 1 bouncer seems better. You can similarly avoid one Time vault activation or tezzeret, but it is not great since rod decks haven't explosive wins.

IMHO now is better to have spell pierce/snare maindeck in front of Stifle, and Annul in the SB for Mud/Oath, usually the worst pairings besides Ichorid.

To nitpick, I would disagree that a bouncer is better than Stifle. Terastodon and Iona cause a lot of damage upon entering the battlefield, and the graveyard is a valuable resource that potentially builds a lot upon Oath's resolution.