UW Fish v Grim Long Play Situation

[Gabethebabe]

Meddling Mage on Tendrils slows them down.
A second Meddling Mage that resolves is gg.

if you name Brainstorm or Dark Ritual or Will or Aysen Highway with your first Mage, you can´t kill them with the second mage.

Post-board this becomes different, of course, when they have Massacre/CoV to deal with Mages.


But how much everyone says that Mage on tendrils is good, it doesn´t stop the fact that when your mage is about to resolve, to think if it is also the best call for that particular game. I.e. never stop thinking.

Bobby Fisher once said (something like this): You have found a good move? Excellent! Now let´s see if there is a better move.

[Methuselahn]

If you choose #2, what do you name with the mage? For background, I have 4xforce, 2xdaze, 3x chant still in the deck, and game 2 he played a massacre.

Hmm.

In theory, you should name whatever is best in the current context.  But the reality is that the context is often Turn 1 or Turn 2 (If you get one).  If there is a turn 2, you wont see much anyway to go off Turn 1 because they'll be saving their spells for storm.  It just so happens that the best usual choice IS Tendrils.

[Dominik]

Meddling Mage on Tendrils slows them down.
A second Meddling Mage that resolves is gg.

if you name Brainstorm or Dark Ritual or Will or Aysen Highway with your first Mage, you can´t kill them with the second mage.

Post-board this becomes different, of course, when they have Massacre/CoV to deal with Mages.


But how much everyone says that Mage on tendrils is good, it doesn´t stop the fact that when your mage is about to resolve, to think if it is also the best call for that particular game. I.e. never stop thinking.

Bobby Fisher once said (something like this): You have found a good move? Excellent! Now let´s see if there is a better move.

We were arguing against the fact that one should ALWAYS name mage on tendrils, even post-board. I think you're right on with that quote!

[Harlequin]

What card is at the center of ALL these Paths? .... Tendrils of Agony.  Nameing Tendrils of Agony Isolates all the "short" paths to victory.  Now, the downside is that all 3 highways are still up and running, by no means do we have gridlock  ... but you can only travil on the Threads that include Bounce or Removal. 

You still didn't explain why an early mage on Ritual (or another 4-of like Brainstorm) isn't as good as Mage on Tendrils. Yes, Tendrils may be a better option than Will, etc in GAME 1 but why not cut off the Ritual engine? That way, they can't get a big desire up easily (and you'll have Chalice@0 or NullRod anyways), they probably won't be able to play their Bargain, not to mention the fact that the three-mana investment they put into Will doesn't get them any mana anymore, save for the possible Cabal Ritual(s).

Just curious, why is it mostly Canadians that are arguing against naming tendrils blindly?

EDIT: Tendrils may be the destination, but Dark Ritual is the gas 

nameing Dark Ritual, or Brainstorm both don't require your opponent to do anything other than find a new path.  This play is esspecially weak if they run Rebuild.  Nameing Rit or BS, means you have to focus the rest of your efforts on somewhat abigious paths, if you no your opponent's deck list for sure, then this might be a better choice.  However, If you name Tendrils then you know what your trying to stop for sure.  Bounce and removal. and outside of that you have potentially: Tinker DSC on the main, or Cunning wish for Brainfreeze.  Your opponent's options are highly limited.  It doesn't really matter how broken thier hand is, you just need to stop 1 or 2 key spells. 
Back on Rit, thier clearest path to winning is Tolarian, artifact, artifact, artifact ... Desire, and pray.  If you've got Chalice out there then sure, go ahead and name rit.  But most decks that I have experiance with don't run chalice and Meddling mage.  that doesn't say you cant, its just definately outside of my expertise.

[LordHomerCat]

I think Shockwave's point is that, if you let them do everything they want EXCEPT cast tendrils, well, finding chain of vapor becomes a trivial matter.  If you allow your opponent to cast Will or a huge desire or draw their deck with bargain, it is going to be academic for them to find a duress/force and their chain, and then bounce your mage and kill you.  However, if you stop them from resolving these bombs, if you prevent will from resolving or them getting the mana to cast desire, it doesn't matter that their endgame is still active, because they can't build up the resources to get there.  Who cares if they can cast the tendrils in hand if the rest of their cards do nothing?  I am of the opinion that mage on tendrils is almost always thr wrong play, unless you already have mages out on massacre and chain of vapor (in which case he becomes a total lock against most Grim decks).  Otherwise, you are much better off naming things like dark ritual and other setup spells that get the player to the endgame (or will, if you have no other protection against it like Crypt and they appear to have a lethal one set up).  Seriously, if you play a mage naming tendrils and expect that to protect you, it is true that it will have to be bounced, but if you let them draw and play every card in the deck, they will find their chain and will have a lot more protection for it than you have for your mage.  Fish wins by stopping the broken, not stopping the actual tendrils.



Edit:

It doesn't really matter how broken thier hand is, you just need to stop 1 or 2 key spells. 

This is one of the ideas that I strongly disagree with.  YOU CAN'T STOP THE CHAIN IF THEY HAVE CAST YAWGWILL AND SEEN 30 CARDS.  You honestly cannot expect to be able to find more protection drawing your one card a turn to protect your mage than they will see drawing infinite cards resolving will or bargain or desire.  Its similar to the stifle issue (esp. against 5CGrim): If you are hoping to just sit back and counter the tendrils, most players will dig out a duress (or force in Pitch) before they go for the game ender.  There is NO WAY you are going to stop their chain if you let them go nuts and storm out.  You have to stop that from ever happening, you can't try to hang on and stop their last spell or something.  I've played against a lot of fish, and Mage on tendrils is like the least scary name in the deck.  Run True Believer if that's all you want to name.

[dicemanx]

Perhaps True Believer should be an auto include then from now on in UW Fish, seeing as how Pitchlong is apparently the "best deck" in T1 and how it apparently struggles vs Mage on Tendrils?

[LordHomerCat]

Agreed.  True Believer + Mage together is almost an auto-win (preboard it basically is, and post board it is very close).  True Believer is really strong against Gifts as well (shutting down their namesake), and seems to me, he should definitely be considered maindeck worthy in UW fish.  Although, I have never actually done any development of a fish deck, he is just one of the creatures I hate seeing when I am with combo (Believer and Mage are the worst by far).

[Binary]

Perhaps True Believer should be an auto include then from now on in UW Fish, seeing as how Pitchlong is apparently the "best deck" in T1 and how it apparently struggles vs Mage on Tendrils?

Yes, in my opinion it should be. I've been playing True Believer in U/W Fish for months now and it's always been spectacular... even in matches where all it does is turn away Duress/Therapy.

The only problem with it is that you have to make sure you don't try to Ancestral yourself while it's in play. I did that once at an REL3 tournament...

[Dxfiler]

This past weekend, I played UW Fish at the Sports Zone in Cary, NC. During a match against Grim Long, the following play situation arose in game 3.
He had:
In play: some lands, artifacts including mana crypt and jar, necro, and swarm.
In hand: 7 cards, one of which he had I. Sealed for.
In yard: some acceleration, and seal
9 life
I had:
In play: mage on Will, stormscape apprentice, plains, and tundra
In hand: magex2, daze, beb
20 life

what is the correct play on my turn? As I see it, I have two options.
1. Beat with mage, on his turn tap down the swarm in order for draw sevens to be useful for me too.
2. Beat with both, and play mage #2.

If you choose #2, what do you name with the mage? For background, I have 4xforce, 2xdaze, 3x chant still in the deck, and game 2 he played a massacre.

I ended up choosing to play mage #2 on massacre figuring that for his Isealed card(also because I got burned not playing a mage on pyroclasm against Machinus earlier), and lost to several draw 7's, CoV on the Will mage, and desire. I drew an active force in a jar hand, which may have won me the game (I also found out afterwards that he had sided out massacres :/, so a mage on tendrils or Will would have certainly won it)

Man I wish I noticed this thread earlier :p 

Alright, where to begin.  Well, I personally think you named the right card with mage number one.  Mage number two probably names chain of vapor or tendrils.  If you didn't have stormscape out, I would have said tinker for the record, since this is post board.  With mage #1 on will, #2's best case scenario seems like chain of vapor. The majority of long players bring in multiple chains, and only one massacre.  So it's a numbers game.  Despite the imperial seal, the odds are greater that chain is in his hand than massacre.  I can totally see naming the massacre though, since he did just seal.  You're in a rough spot either way, but chain can help him alot more than massacre.  By naming massacre, you're potentially setting him back but not actually disrupting his game.  Massacre doesn't help him further his game state, chain does.  Chain is both offensive and defensive, being able to build up a storm count before bouncing a mage.  That is very key.  So while I probably would have named Chain, Massacre is certainly understandable (I can't believe he sided it out :p). 

As for this fairly ridiculous discussion on what to definitively name on mage #1, there's just no definitive answer.  I regularly argue with Brassman daily on what to lead out naming.  I lean towards Yawg Will, he leans towards Tendrils.  We both agree that neither is definitive and it really depends on where you're at in the game.  To defend why I usually lead out naming Yawg Will, the short answer is that the number of games I've won where Will has resolved I can count on one hand.  The number of games I've won where tendrils has resolved is significantly more.  More often than not, I find that the long player will die before being able to cast a tendrils without Will power.  Between rods, strip/wastes and FOW, you usually have enough time to beat with little guys.  With the advent of Jotun Grunt, naming Will becomes even easier for me.  The clock usually gets cut in half. 

Now Grunt on his own often is a great way to combat Will, but I fear and respect will enough that I'm not gonna rely on a Grunt hanging around to rip apart their graveyard.  Chances are, if the long opponent seems Grunt coming, their just going to wait to unload on you and then cast Yawg Will.  If you lead out with mage on Will and then cast Grunt, they are a deer in the headlights.

So yeah, I'm in the camp of leading out naming Will... but that's in an early game state (usually game one) with little to no information.  It is NOT definitive, and I have named other things with mage #1 plenty of times against Long.  As said by others in this thread, mostly of Canadian origin, what to name with meddler #1 depends entirely on the game state and what both players have.

- Dave Feinstein

[BreathWeapon]

As a general rule of thumb with Meddling Mage, if it is the first Meddling Mage cast on the first or second turn the defacto setting is Tendrils of Agony; you usually don't have enough information at hand to know whether or not naming anything else with have any affect at that time. Naming any single bomb is almost always wrong, if you name Yawgmoth's Will you have at best earned yourself a Time Walk when they tutor for Necropotence instead etc.

Simply put, I always know Medding Mage on Tendrils of Agony will have an affect on my opponent, Meddling Mage on anything else not so much. Am I saying that it is always the best play? No. But are you ever going to have the perfect information necessary to determine the best play against a deck with so much redundancy as opposed to the most consistant play? Probably not.