[Single Card and Deck Discussion] Oath of Ghouls in Fish (Update)

[brianpk80]

*See ADDENDUM at end of post*

Hello everyone,

This is my first post in the Full Member forum and I’m writing to share my experience in UW/b Fish with a card that has yielded some important results for me.  That card is the ugly twin brother of Vintage’s most insolent green enchantment.  I’m referring to the less notorious but likewise capable Oath of Ghouls.  I will describe the card, my history with it, and the thought sequence that led me to give it a shot in a customized Fish build aiming to amplify its effect.  Then, I will describe the deck I’m currently using, illustrate the interactions of the cards I’ve chosen, present the sideboard procedure for each significant match-up, and analyze my testing results.  I hope you find this a worthwhile read.



For those whose browser may have trouble loading the picture, the text is as follows:

Oath of Ghouls (Exodus)

Enchantment
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, if there are more creature cards in that player's graveyard than in any of his or her opponents' graveyards, the player may return target creature card of his or her choice from his or her graveyard to his or her hand. [Oracle 2002/03/01]

(Note that under the current errata scheme, Oath of Ghouls does not “target” any player.) 

Background

Long before Squee, Goblin Nabob entered the world with his defining mechanic of inborn immortality, Wizards of the Coast released a set hailed as its most daring in years.  If Urza’s Saga is the first thing that comes to mind, then think back a few months to its predecessor, a harbinger of unraveling power restraint.  Exodus, released in the late spring of 1998, pushed the envelope far beyond anything that could have been imagined by a generation of Magic players reared on Fallen Empires, Chronicles, and Homelands.  Recurring Nightmare emerged right alongside Survival of the Fittest and an armada of abusable Spikes.  Cataclysm stepped up as a pseudo-Balance and Oath of Druids forever changed the way we think about prohibitively priced creatures.  Coat of Arms converted Llanowar Elves into Juzám Djinns.  Months and years beyond, designers continued to mine the set for sleepers, like Mind over Matter and Sphere of Resistance.  Even its weenies, Soul Warden, Carnophage, and Skyshroud Elite, became staples in aggressive decks before the harsh realities of modern Vintage rendered them obsolete.  Then, a few months after its release, Urza’s Saga arrived and upended the entire power template of the game.  Amid the flurry of explosive new ideas and designs, many cards were inevitably lost in the fray.

At the time, I, like many other players, was using a U/G Tradewind Rider-based disruption deck.  It took a few turns to set up during which it was vulnerable to some prevalent hate.  In particular, a deck like my brother’s loathsome B/R compilation always knew how to cripple me right at the root.  “Bolt the Bird, Strip the Tropical, Dark Ritual, Hypnotic Specter...” That ruined the day over and over until I decided to get “techy.”  I experimented with Oath of Ghouls.  Like a mini-Yawgmoth’s Will for permanents that keeps on giving, everything he got rid of kept coming back.  After he ran out of gas, I’d chump block his Specter or Juzám with the same exact Birds of Paradise every turn until my more controlling deck perpetuated its own inevitability.  Life loss ceased being an issue when a recurring Spike Feeder took center stage.  Hymn to Tourach was laughable.  Then, in a last ditch effort, he’d double-Bolt my Tradewind Rider only to see it come back the very next turn.  Oath of Ghouls was my backbone of resilience to removal and fast, large creatures.  It was a card that took games I shouldn’t have had a prayer of winning and turned them around decisively.   

Of course, none of that mattered when fall came around and 4 Windfalls and 4 Tolarian Academies dethroned everything.  Then Wizards banned a lot of cards, ripped the soul out of my precious Mirror Universe, and did a lot things that they now criticize Trinisphere for; they made the game “un-fun.”  We both sold everything and barring a brief rekindling of interest during Scourge, we didn’t look back until the end of 2005. 

Now, on my way up the curve of learning how Vintage really operates these days, I built a zillion weird fledgling decks that capitalized on some of the cards printed from Mercadian Masques and onward that I found interesting.  One in particular was a throwback to the glory days of Oath of Ghouls, Survival of the Fittest, Argothian Enchantress, and Quirion Ranger.  I threw in some Spore Frogs and Voidmage Prodigies because it never hurts to have a recurring Fog or Counterspell.  Some Spike Feeders for life gain and a Nezumi Graverobber were there to imbalance the benefit yielded by the Oath (I hadn’t even heard of Withered Wretch at the time).  Naturally, from an experienced perspective, the deck was a disaster and its mana base was an embarrassment.  But it would randomly beat Tier 1 decks from time to time, most likely because Uba Stax was the deck I encountered most and Quirion Rangers, Birds of Paradise, and graveyard removal inadvertently ended up foiling that essential strategy. 

A little while ago, I brought out the deck for fun versus some Drain deck and again ended up haphazardly winning the match against all odds.  Stranger things have happened, but it made me scrutinize the central premise of the deck more closely.  Having moved on to UW Fish, Flame-Vault Gifts (R.I.P.), and Oath of Druids, it occurred to me that one of those has a fundamental weakness against heavy removal and large/evasive creatures.  Oath of Ghouls to the rescue?  That is the question presented by the remaining balance of this post.

I played around with several different configurations before settling on the one listed below.  I do not suggest that this is the “best possible” optimization of the deck, but it is however the one I have found most effective for my play-style at the moment.  It is the version I have tested most thoroughly and with the most favorable results.  Hence, I consider it “final” for the time being, but absolutely open to critique or suggestion.

Deck

Oath of Ghouls v. 2.3
by BPK

Land (17):
4 Tundra
3 Underground Sea
3 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
2 Island
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Strip Mine

Acceleration (5):
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Black Lotus
1 Lotus Petal

Enablers (6):
4 AEther Vial
2 Oath of Ghouls

Non-creature Disruption (5):
4 Force of Will
1 Tormod’s Crypt

Creatures (25):
4 Dark Confidant
4 Meddling Mage
4 Children of Korlis
3 Voidmage Prodigy
2 Jotün Grunt
2 Ninja of the Deep Hours
2 Waterfront Bouncer
2 Gilded Drake
2 Stern Proctor

Overpowered (2):
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk

Sideboard (15):
2 Serendib Efreet
1 Darkblast
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Hurkyl’s Recall
1 Rebuild
1 Copy Artifact
1 Extract
1 True Believer
1 Tormod’s Crypt
1 Magus of the Unseen
1 Yawgmoth’s Will
1 Wasteland
1 Kami of Ancient Law
1 Hibernation

Discussion

First, let me say that I believe both diversity and redundancy play important roles in designing a given deck.  Accordingly, I’ve integrated both concepts into the main list under the following principle: I will use multiples of a card where that card’s effect is generally cumulative.  For instance, if I have two Dark Confidants in play, I access two extra cards.  Likewise, two Meddling Mages prohibit two separate cards that I know or anticipate my opponent is playing.  By contrast, I would usually rather not see more than one Waterfront Bouncer or Jotün Grunt during the course of a typical game.  And I would prefer to draw one Oath and two creatures rather than three Oaths.  That said, while there may be a seemingly excess diversity of card choices in the maindeck, behind that there is actually a redundancy of purpose.  For instance, although I haven’t included four Waterfront Bouncers or four Gilded Drakes, I have included four “methods of dealing with quick/overpowered/problematic creatures” by choosing two of each.  The difference here is that while a second copy of either is conventionally useless, having one copy of each is advantageous.  To compare, if I wanted four cards to arrest my opponent’s mana base, I could either include four Crucible of Worlds or four Null Rods.  Neither of those lock pieces has an aggregate effect so drawing duplicates of either is moot.  However, by running two of each, I would augment the chance that the second lock piece drawn would benefit me by serving a unique (though still fundamentally mana-denying) function, rather than wastefully replicating the first.  Hence, I find it more effective to run units of doubles in place of four-of’s for cards whose objectives are primarily the same but whose methods are distinct. 

On the other hand, I prefer my sideboard to be as diversified as possible.  Given the wide variety of archetypes comprising the Vintage metagame, I’m aiming for cards that are effective against a multiplicity of different threat categories.  For a general Type One field, I value the flexibility of carrying several different singletons.  In a metagame with any particular flavor, indeed I would advocate adjusting both the maindeck and sideboard accordingly. 
 
Before discussing individual cards, I should stress that this is deliberately a very creature-heavy deck.  There are few things an instant or sorcery can accomplish that can’t be reproduced by a creature with or without an AEther Vial.  By running Vial and Oath, naturally I want to maximize the utility of both.  Cutting a Gilded Drake for a Swords to Plowshares or some comparable instant is contrary to that premise.  While it may be axiomatic that creatures are regarded as “slow” by Type One standards, it’s important to remember that this principle contemplates their “speed” in terms of capacity to deal damage.  However, when chosen correctly, their ability to affect the game state is largely instantaneous.  If I’m running four AEther Vials, I would expect to get more out of it than pumping out a Savannah Lions at end of turn. 

The Cards

Lands: There’s nothing particularly remarkable about the mana base, except that from playing it heavily, my opinion is that it’s at that breaking point where, if anything, it errs slightly on the side of having too much mana.  But were I to remove a single mana source, having tried running 16 lands, it would revert to erring on the side of too few.  Given this is a three-color deck and mana denial strategies are everywhere, I’ve chosen the more mana-friendly configuration.  At any rate, this deck needs very little to operate, but it is generally necessary to have two mana sources (or one and a Vial) by the second turn.  Although mana denial is not my governing strategy, I’ve included a Strip Mine because it is frankly a strong card.  Likewise, the Library of Alexandria really shines in here with nine ways of restocking my hand (4 Confidant, 2 Ninja, 2 Oath, 1 Ancestral).  And as commonly known, left unmolested, it tends to be an auto-win versus control or the Fish mirror if a Wasteland cannot be found.  While piloting this deck, I really want to draw a lot of cards. 

Acceleration:  My last dilemma here was whether to include Sol Ring, Lotus Petal, or another land.  I’ve gone with the Petal because that extra colored mana is really a boon in this three-color build and it enables more frequent relevant Turn 1 plays.
 
Enablers:  I’ll start with AEther Vial.  I wasn’t around during the release of Darksteel, but I can imagine that the Vial’s strengths and weaknesses were pretty well dissected here on The Mana Drain.  Thus I probably don’t have many unprecedented insights to share.  I use it mainly to eschew counters, to cheat mana costs, to nullify bounce, and to Vial sinister things out at instant speed.  It is useful if I’m using the Ninja’s ability, rescuing my own creatures with Waterfront Bouncer, or if Oath of Ghouls is online.  Of course, it skirts a lot of common lock pieces like Chalice of the Void, Erayo’s Essence, Counterbalance, and Sphere of Resistance.  I should add that an untapped Vial is also handy with Memory Jars showing up all over the place.  It also gives me a much stronger Stax match-up than Null Rod based Fish.  As much as I love having the Vial in play, I am not wholly reliant on resolving it, but it literally brings a lot to the table.  There’s not much more to add except that the good players will always Force of Will a turn one AEther Vial if possible and it is definitely the correct play.

Now, as for the Oath of Ghouls, it is quite possibly the strongest card in this build.  But, unlike Oath of Druids, it’s rarely something I want to see in multiples and can be completely moot in those rare openings without a single creature.  Additionally, it’s subject to the same kind of graveyard hate played against Gifts, Long, Dragon, Ichorid, and so on.  I acknowledge that there will be games where the game ends so quickly that it’s superfluous.  There’s no mistaking the fact that this is a mid to late game card that realistically comes online on the third turn at the soonest.  Nevertheless, I posit that its immense strength following the early game justifies the inclusion of two copies.     

These are factors that I consider its greatest strengths.  It is an enchantment, so it’s the permanent type least likely to encounter any maindeck answers.  It’s favorably priced at an easy .  It yields card parity after one activation and card advantage after each subsequent use.  This produces card quality as well as quantity.  When Oath of Ghouls “replaces itself” after one use, it cannot be directly compared to drawing one random card from a Library of Alexandria that has been Wasted.  If I’m recovering a creature from my graveyard, it is there for a reason.  Either my opponent deemed it threatening enough that he/she countered or destroyed it, or I chump blocked a larger creature which is probably still in play and needs to neutralized a second, third, or indefinite number of times.  Hence there’s a significant quality factor to the card advantage granted.  Notably, Oath of Ghouls offers gradual recovery from any removal outside of Swords to Plowshares, deflating menaces like Massacre, Pyroclasm, Smokestack, Diabolic Edict, Triskelion, Fire/Ice, Lava Dart, Rolling Earthquake, and Balance.  Of particular importance is the fact that the Oath interacts acutely well with any creature that generates a benefit in exchange for self-sacrifice.  Reaping that benefit every turn, whether it be a recurring Voidmage Prodigy or Children of Korlis, gives Fish a late game inevitability that it has traditionally lacked.

Next, it’s important to consider the effect Oath of Ghouls has on the opponent’s play-style.  Because it’s such an unknown right now, opponents regularly misapprehend its magnitude and misplay accordingly.  Frequently, it slips through an opponent’s counterwall because he/she underestimates the future value it endows or because he/she is unfamiliar with my deck, considers my card choices naïve, and doesn’t realize I’m holding the precise foils to his/her Tinker or Enigma based strategy.  Conversely, an opponent who has seen Oath of Ghouls executed a repeated number of times in game one will usually overreact, believing it to be far more indispensable to the deck’s victory strategy than it actually is.  As a consequence, I often find myself in the following favorable position for the remainder of the match:

My opponent just sideboarded three Tormod’s Crypts against a straight up Fish deck.

It's hard to imagine anything as bizarre as staring at a hand full of Dark Confidants and Meddling Mages and having an opponent try to bait a counterspell with a Crypt.  I’ve seen opponents overextend against the Oath by sideboarding in extra Naturalizes, Leyline of the Voids, and Ray of Revelations, cards that are generally just as pointless against this build as they would be against any other Fish deck.  While Oath of Ghouls offers to take Fish to a new level of resilience, its loss is assuredly not fatal.  The deck is still going to operate as any Fish build would, extending the game as long as possible for its slow poison to kill. 

So those are its strengths in a nutshell.  I’ll address its interactions with specific creatures below.

Non-creature Disruption:  Unfortunately, Force of Will is a necessity.  Sure, I would prefer an environment where games reliably stretched out enough to play one-for-one Mana Drains or Counterspells in every blue deck, but those days are long since buried.  The maindeck Tormod’s Crypt replaced Withered Wretch for several reasons.  Although I want to maintain a high creature count to abuse the enablers, the Wretch has a fairly prohibitive casting cost and many times, I simply want to deactivate my opponent’s graveyard as soon as possible.  Against any deck that lacks graveyard manipulation, the Crypt is at least marginally useful by ensuring Oath of Ghouls yields an asymmetrical benefit.  Then, of course, I sideboard it out.

Creatures

Dark Confidant:  Library on legs.  Arguably the best creature available.

Meddling Mage:  His exploits are well chronicled and need no further elaboration.  Rightfully earns his esteem as king of the hill, along with Dark Confidant.  He works well with Oath of Ghouls for the following basic reasons.  Opponents hate him, he’s a lightning rod for countermagic/removal, and no one wants to see him coming back every turn.   

Children of Korlis:  The best walking answer to Tendrils of Agony right now for .  A Time Walk against Colossus, Angels, and Ichorid.  Nullifies all combat damage or life loss if recurred with Oath of Ghouls.  Enables quick Ninja attacks.  Can be used in multiples to generate life gain.  Gives the option of easing the bruises when the Dark Confidants become uncomfortably bloodthirsty.  Probably the best 1/1 for creature in the metagame right now.   

Voidmage Prodigy:  I’ve never been a big fan of Voidmage until recently.  There are a few things about him that I am guilty of having overlooked in the past several months and his value to me can now be summarized as follows.  Voidmage Prodigy is more than a walking counterspell; he is a walking uncounterable counterspell.  The distinction is critical because it makes him highly effective as a defensive control measure.  Tinker is countered.  End of discussion.  If he’s returning on my upkeep via Oath of Ghouls then the game has gotten phenomenally difficult for any strategy that revolves around resolving a few copies of some crucial “bomb” like Yawgmoth’s Will, Oath of Druids, or Goblin Welder.  Further, his Morph ability is more functional than I’d initially anticipated.  It usually misleads the opponent into mistaking him for Exalted Angel, it eschews Darkblast, carries shock value, and it slithers by an otherwise constricting Chalice of the Void.  That said, four Voidmages tend to be excessive because without an AEther Vial, casting more than one usually compromises mana that should be left on reserve for his ability.  Additionally, only one is genuinely necessary because in a pinch, I can sacrifice any of the other Wizards (Dark Confidant, Meddling Mage, Stern Proctor) in lieu of losing him.  Given the very controlling nature of this Vial build, including Voidmage Prodigy is almost a no-brainer.

Jotün Grunt:  Amazing in most match-ups.  Has an even greater utility here by sweeping an opponent’s graveyard clean of creatures if the Oath resolves.  It’s hard to find a negative thing to say about the Grunt, but occasionally he can’t be played for lack of graveyard volume and having multiples in play usually pulls the plug on their combined life support.

Ninja of the Deep Hours:  While I love drawing cards, I am only running two Ninjas because I already have four Confidants and I only have four early 1/1 creatures.  Without the Ninjas, I find I’m not drawing enough consistently and I value his ability to reset Jotün Grunt, Stern Proctor, Dark Confidant (when life gets too low), and Meddling Mage.  Once in a while, post sideboard, I have taken control of an opponent’s artifact creature with Magus and added insult to injury by using Ninjutsu to return it to his/her hand.  But I never want to see two or three of them in any given opening.  Combined with four Force of Wills, the Confidants are already biting me enough, so I’ve kept the Ninja count at two.

Waterfront Bouncer:  An extremely versatile constituent of the deck that serves as a response to Tinker/Oath/Animate targets, a vital tool versus Fish/Aggro, and a gatekeeper for the Oath of Ghouls.  While his “drawback” of discarding a card means I usually won’t want to see more than one, it dumps creatures into my own graveyard to control who is Oathing and what’s returning.  Likewise, with an Oath in play, his drawback is negated because the discarded creature returns indefinitely.  Finally, its synergy with Gilded Drake borders on comical.  For those unfamiliar with the mechanics, it works as follows.  I play the Drake and steal an opponent’s creature.  Then I use the Bouncer to return the Drake to my own hand and rinse, wash, repeat as necessary.  The net loss is one card from hand (which may return) and the net gain is an opponent’s Darksteel Colossus, Razia, Boros Archangel, Dimir Cutpurse, Auriok Salvagers, Werebear, and so forth.  If AEther Vial reaches two counters, then the entire operation costs and is immune to countermagic.  Naturally, achieving this combo is not necessary to win, but again, it should help to illustrate why I have gone with two Bouncers and two Drakes instead of having four copies of either. 

Gilded Drake:  At the urging of a friend, Gilded Drake was the last card I added to this build and seeing it in action has made me a believer.  Almost every deck has something that makes playing this card pay off exponentially, some being more obvious than others.  With proper timing and ideally an AEther Vial, stealing something even as innocuous as a Dark Confidant could swing the dynamic of a combat standstill in my favor, very often leading to a kill the next turn.  It expands my repertoire of answers to a resolved Tinker or Oath of Druids.  It tends to be regarded as a “sideboard” card so playing it maindeck gives the advantage of surprise.  And again, its interaction with Waterfront Bouncer is sheer sadistic glee.  Gilded Drake is among the best devices I could have hoped for in this build.

Stern Proctor:  You might be wondering who on earth this guy is or what he’s doing here.  Here’s his information:



And again, for anyone who’s having difficulty displaying images:

Stern Proctor (Urza’s Saga)

Creature - Wizard
When Stern Proctor comes into play, return target artifact or enchantment to its owner's hand.
1/2

He’s not very exciting at first glance.
In the very early stages of developing this deck, I tried Stern Proctor on a liberal whim, expecting it to be faintly useful but generally substandard.  I was wrong.  He is Chain of Vapor in a Vial with a 1/2 body for good measure, but without giving any opponent a free bounce and without the ability to target non-artifact creatures.  His preferred targets are Darksteel Colossus, Oath of Druids, Chalice of the Void, Smokestack, Trinisphere, Sundering Titan, Pithing Needle, and Null Rod.  With AEther Vial, the list expands to include Animate Dead, its cousins, and anything targeted by a Goblin Welder.  What I like about him, aside from the surprise factor, is that his effect is instantaneous unlike classic Fish creature-based responses to Tinker targets, like Stormscape Apprentice and Waterfront Bouncer.  He’s nearly indispensable in the Stax match-up and I appreciate having the maindeck capability to address any unusual threats that arise, like Solitary Confinement or Moat.  I prefer using him over an instant bounce spell because almost half the time I have a Vial in play that immunizes the bounce from any countermagic.  If necessary, his ability recycles in three different ways: Waterfront Bouncer, Ninja of the Deep Hours, and Oath of Ghouls.  And then afterwards, Stern Proctor becomes the first Wizard off the plank when Voidmage Prodigy petitions for a sacrificial lamb.  Because I found myself so frequently in situations where I wanted to topdeck the Proctor, I retained him and added an additional copy without any regret. 

Overpowered: Ancestral Recall and Time Walk. No comment required. 

Sideboard:  I’ll discuss the sideboard briefly in the abstract and animate my choices further below as they relate to strategies for specific match-ups.  Serendib Efreet is an effective maneuver against the Fish mirror, decks with mid-sized creatures, or decks that will attempt to snuff me out on the premise that my creatures are small and defenseless (I’m looking at you, Granite Shard).  Further, they carry the exact power and toughness necessary to give me the perfect padding for casting a Gilded Drake if need be.  I board them in so often that they’re almost maindeck.  Darkblast is likewise primarily geared towards the Fish mirror.  The Dredge mechanic plays so well with Oath of Ghouls that I might consider maindecking it if combo abates and I run four Underground Seas.

Chain of Vapor, Hurkyl’s Recall, and Rebuild comprise a standard suite of bounce spells at varying casting costs to evade Chalice of the Void.  Copy Artifact and Magus of the Unseen allow me to reap the benefits of any attractive artifacts my opponent has invoked, either by cheating mana costs, via Mishra’s Workshop, or otherwise.  While their timing and execution are less forgiving than the above bounce suite, they offer greater rewards when resolved.  In addition to “borrowing” Crucibles, Juggernauts, and Colossi, Magus eats Loti, Petals, and untapped Mana Vaults, and plays Old Man of the Sea for versus Workshop Aggro, Affinity, and any Fish build running Mishra’s Factory.  Occasionally, copying my own Mox Sapphire or AEther Vial is the critical play in determining who emerges victorious in a Smokestack or Tangle Wire based battle of attrition. 

Tormod’s Crypt and Extract prey on decks with limited win conditions or decks that are ultra graveyard dependent.  True Believer serves an assortment of functions, like negating Tendrils of Agony, Gifts Ungiven, Mindslaver, Brain Freeze, Intuition, Disciple of the Vault, Stroke of Genius, blocking Goblin Piledriver, or quelling any “stupid black deck” whose main avenue of removal is Diabolic Edict.  Although the Believer is so useful that I’m tempted to include him in the maindeck, his casting cost combined with certain limits on his utility (including not being able to Ancestral myself while he’s in play) relegate him to the sideboard. 

Yawgmoth’s Will is a curious inclusion.  I am certainly not playing a Will deck.  With limited acceleration and so few instants and sorceries, I stand to benefit very little, if at all, by playing Yawgmoth’s Will.  If anything, I am playing an “anti-Will” deck.  But I sideboard it for a few reasons.  First, it is mainly a tool against Stax.  When I resolve it, I am not looking to win the game immediately as many other decks are.  Rather, the mere act of bringing back a Lotus Petal, a Mox, a fetchland, an AEther Vial, and a small creature are enough to counteract the Stax game plan and consequently deliver the win in due time.  Secondly, there are decks packing so much removal that I like having the opportunity to capitalize on Will’s “Ooops, now I win” factor and hence will side it in with discretion.  4-Color-Control and UR Fish with Grim Lavamancers, Gorilla Shamans, and Fire/Ice are good examples of the types of decks to which I’m referring.   

Kami of Ancient Law is here mainly for Oath of Druids and Dragon.  I might side him in versus anything running Erayo or Counterbalance as well.  Likewise, he’s a good blocker for pro-blue Goblin Piledrivers.  It’s important to note that he innately recurs with Oath of Ghouls.  Finally, Hibernation plays a number of different roles.  It is an instant for that returns all green permanents to their owner’s hand.  Hibernation is an important inclusion for the increasingly prevalent Madness/Threshold match-up which is traditionally not good for Fish, especially with the target-proof Nimble Mongoose.  I would expect to see Simic Sky Swallower from Oath post-sideboard and this answers both him and the Oath.  Then it’s also pretty handy against anything Gro, like Vinelasher Kudzu and Quirion Dryad.  It staves off anything “stompy” and goes in against any errant decks abusing Fastbond, Choke, or Elves.  So that is the sideboard in a nutshell.

Cards That Did Not Make the Cut

Wasteland:  Hard mana denial is not my objective here.  The decks where I would most want to use Wasteland (Gifts and Pitch Long) play around it anyway, so I would prefer having a smooth colored mana base rather than the increasingly diminished clout of Wasteland.  Nevertheless, I sideboard one to supplement my mana base versus other denial strategies (Fish and Stax) and for Bazaar of Baghdad.

Martyr of the Frost: Martyr of the Frost is a new Wizard from Coldsnap.  He’s a 1/1 for that sacrifices for to counter target spell unless your opponent pays X, where X is the number of blue cards you reveal from your hand.  There’s something attractive about an uncounterable Mana Leak that comes down on the first turn.  And although he has great synergy with Oath of Ghouls and Voidmage Prodigy, when I dropped Sol Ring from the main list, keeping colored mana open in the early game for Martyr of the Frost just wasn’t cutting it.  I will say however that he may have potential in other Fish builds.  Very frequently, he extinguished Ancestral Recall and he does buy some time when it matters most, the early game.  Capable opponents aren’t going to Tinker or cast any comparable bomb when an uncounterable Power Sink for an indeterminable amount of mana (anywhere between zero and seven) is sitting on the table. 

Brainstorm:  I’m not running Brainstorm.  I love Brainstorm in Gifts, Oath, Slaver, Long, or just about any other deck running blue.  However, when it comes to Fish, there are two contrary schools of thought debating its merits.  The first can be summarized simply as “OMG, it’s Brainstorm, how could you not!?”  The second considers that there’s not much value to spending precious 's to swap a Meddling Mage and a Tundra with a Voidmage Prodigy and a Flooded Strand, when Dark Confidants and Ninjas should have one’s hand well-stocked to begin with.  Without further risking the breach of any Pandora’s Box, I’ll just close by saying I adopt the latter position.   

Stormscape Apprentice:  I have a lot of respect for this guy.  He neutralizes a lot of hazards for a very minor early investment.  He’s also a Wizard for Voidmage to feast upon and a good dive board for the Ninja.  Stormscape almost made the cut but a few things kept him on the lonelier side of the velvet rope.  First, when it matters most, other cards do his job and do it better: Gilded Drake, Waterfront Bouncer, and Stern Proctor.  Secondly, with the resurgence of Darkblast and Fire/Ice, I prefer creatures with higher toughness where possible.  Finally, breaking his soft lock is too easy for the exact opponents against whom he is employed because they either win by Time Walking twice or by Wasting my Tundra. 

Null Rod:  Not in 3-Color Vial Fish.

Daze:  Anyone who’s played Daze probably has a love-hate relationship with it like I do.  There are times when it’s utterly amazing and times when you want to rip it to shreds.  It’s no fun to lose a game because your opponent resolved a Mana Crypt.  I also lack the hard assaults on my opponent’s mana base to really make it relevant.  Hence, I’d rather play something that’s very useful 85% of the time over Daze which is incredible 25%, good 25%, and useless the other half.  Although my quantitative analysis is crude, that should roughly explain why I don’t run Daze. 

Stifle:  Simply by virtue of being a Fish (or Fish-like) deck, I gain the advantage of illusory Stifles and Wastelands that I am not actually running.  I believe Stifle is a very strong card but I don’t have room for it without compromising the utility of AEther Vial and Oath of Ghouls by mitigating the high creature count. 

Demonic Tutor:  Like Brainstorm, this is a fantastic card in most decks.  But here, there simply aren’t any bombshell Tutor targets whose function can’t be replicated by one of the next cards I should be drawing from Ninja/Confidant/Library.  I don’t have the sorcery-speed to spare for an Ancestral Recall or a creature that, absent Vial, will probably be countered because I now lack the mana to both bait with a threat and then play it.  Vampiric Tutor alleviates some of these concerns but again relies too heavily on AEther Vial to ensure a viable Tutor target.  At most, I could see boarding Demonic Tutor for Library of Alexandria in a control heavy metagame.  But it seems suboptimal to be tutoring for cards that don’t singlehandedly decide the game, like Gifts Ungiven, Oath of Druids, or Future Sight.  Redundancy and draw should instead outweigh the need for tutors here. 

Icatian Javelineers:  If I kill something, I risk that my own Oath will begin operating against me. I strongly prefer Children of Korlis as my one-drop.  Javelineers may be good choice for a field crawling with Welders and Dark Confidants. 

Umezawa’s Jitte:  Removal, life gain, and a fast clock is a tempting offer.  But it requires a creature where I’d rather have two creatures than one and one Jitte.  It bows to Null Rod, is easily disrupted, and it’s too slow against Long, Gifts, or Stax to really make a difference.  It’s even slower without Sol Ring.  I’ve cut it for now but may consider reevaluating the Jitte somewhere down the line. 

The above is a non-exhaustive list of the most conspicuous cards I considered but ultimately rejected for various reasons.

Sideboard Procedure and Match-up Overview

First, let me establish that I have not yet entered this deck in a major or local tournament.  Time Spiral is not even legal at this point.  However, I am at a transitory period right now where I’m in town and fortunate enough to have had a good amount of discretionary time for the past few weeks.  Accordingly, I have tested this build online in literally dozens of games and matches, perhaps close to one hundred (including each evolutionary stage of the build).  I have saved all pertinent game logs except where a system disconnect error terminated the match and would be happy to honor any reasonable request to review some.   

I am aware that anecdotal evidence and the skewed MWS sample may distort any conclusions drawn from online testing.  I am refraining from giving match-up “percentages” or making any bold claims about the strength that Oath of Ghouls brings to this Fish build.  What I can say is that the majority of my matches have engaged players who hold themselves out as “experts” or having a connection to the TMD community.  Their play-skills have mainly supported this.  And the decks I’ve encountered have been, in my opinion, largely representative of today’s prevailing competitive Vintage decks.   

That said, rather than stirring up controversy with raw numbers, I am going to discuss the major features of each match-up, how I generally sideboard, whether I find the match to be favorable, and why. 

They are, in no particular order, as follows:

Gifts Ungiven (Meandeck)
Disposition: Favorable
Sideboard: +1 True Believer, +1 Tormod’s Crypt, +1 Extract, +1 Magus of the Unseen, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Hurkyl’s Recall, -1 Meddling Mage, -1 Waterfront Bouncer, -1 Jotün Grunt, -1 Lotus Petal, -1 Voidmage Prodigy, -1 Force of Will, on the play.  On the draw, same but +1 Force of Will, -1 Underground Sea.

Meandeck Gifts is a power-house in this field having both an enviable storm combo match-up and a respectable resilience to Stax.  Nevertheless, Fish preys on Gifts like no other deck in the format.  I expect to lose every counter-war here.  Instead, I’d rather avoid them altogether.  To that end, AEther Vial is incredible in this match-up.  Because Meandeck Gifts recites such a linear and predictable strategy, the goals here are very easy to identify and, barring limp draws, generally quite attainable.  There are two obvious things that I don’t want to happen.  I don’t want to be beaten down with Darksteel Colossus and I don’t want to feel Tendrils of Agony after a Yawgmoth’s Will or Rebuild.  Before an opponent cements a decision to choose either avenue, just about every card in this build is a must-counter.  There are over a dozen combined preemptive and reactive responses to each of their win conditions as well as a dense draw-engine.  Notably, Meddling Mages are actually not as incredible in this match-up as they are in others.  Although they draw counters, once resolved they are never safe from Chain of Vapor or having an opponent simply opt for the alternative win.  Unless I have multiple answers for either in my hand, I name “Tinker” in the early game and “Yawgmoth’s Will” any time after that. 

I try to avoid casting Ancestral Recall without double Force/Voidmage backup and I’ve learned the hard way never to put it back in their library with Jotün Grunt.  They will Scroll for it again and end up casting it three times total, post-Will.  This is a match where Gifts is the beatdown and I play control.  It’s also the one match-up where I regret having included slightly too much mana because any land or Moxen beyond the first four are horrible topdecks.  Post sideboard, Oath of Ghouls really shines vis-à-vis recurring tutorable mass removal like Pyroclasm and Massacre.  Magus steps in for a Bouncer and occasionally I’ll throw in Copy Artifact as well (which, once resolved, cannot be Pyroblasted or Red Elemental Blasted because it is every ounce as indestructible as the Colossus).  The strongest cards here are AEther Vial, Gilded Drake/Stern Proctor, Voidmage Prodigy, Oath of Ghouls, and Tormod’s Crypt.  The non-win conditions that alarm me the most on their end are Black Lotus, Mox Jet, Mana Crypt, Rebuild, Ancestral Recall, and Chain of Vapor.         

Oath of Druids
Disposition: Slightly Favorable
Sideboard: +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Kami of Ancient Law, +1 Hibernation, -1 Children of Korlis, -1 Tormod’s Crypt, -1 Jotün Grunt  (same but +1 Extract, +2 Tormod’s Crypt, and -2 Children of Korlis, -1 Oath of Ghouls for combo Oath). 

An early resolved and protected Forbidden Orchard + Oath of Druids is as problematic for me as it is for any non Tendrils or Bazaar-driven archetype.  My escape valves are Gilded Drake for the win, Stern Proctor/Children of Korlis for a Time Walk, Stern Proctor + Ninja for a double Time Walk, and Waterfront Bouncer if time permits, which it frequently won’t.  Against aggro Oath, I might be able to squeeze by if I can get the Children of Korlis recurring each turn with the black Oath, but this is a major strain on resources and shuts down fetchlands and Dark Confidants unless I topdeck another Children.  AEther Vial helps a lot here because countering them once could seal my fate.  So could Time Walk.  It’s far from ideal.     

Fortunately, Oath is its own worst enemy.  The other 70% of the time, I’m playing a more proactive role in Oath of Druids prevention.  AEther Vial ushers in the Meddling Mages and Voidmage Prodigies to ensure their enchantment never resolves.  (Maybe more Oath players should start running Show and Tell…) Gilded Drakes, Waterfront Bouncer, and Stern Proctors provide some security in case it does.  Dark Confidants and Ninjas mine for answers.  The situation is slightly different versus a Tidespout Tyrant, Academy Rector, Auriok Salvagers, or Eternal Witness build and play style will vary accordingly.  Nevertheless, the match is considerably favorable when an early Oath/Orchard hasn’t resolved and highly unfavorable in the less frequent instances where it does.  In sum, it’s slightly favorable overall. The most valuable cards here are Gilded Drake, Stern Proctor, Meddling Mage, Voidmage Prodigy, and AEther Vial.  The biggest threats are an early Duress and, naturally, Oath of Druids itself. 

Uba Stax
Disposition: Moderately Favorable
Sideboard: +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Hurkyl’s Recall, +1 Rebuild, +1 Copy Artifact, +1 Magus of the Unseen, +1 Wasteland, +1 Yawgmoth’s Will, +2 Serendib Efreet, +1 Tormod’s Crypt, -4 Children of Korlis, -2 Voidmage Prodigy, -1 Waterfront Bouncer, -1 Meddling Mage, -2 Force of Will, on the play.  On the draw, same but +2 Force of Will, an additional -1 Voidmage Prodigy, and -1 Time Walk. 

I throw the book at Uba Stax.  The theme is answers over counters because their deck is designed to elude the latter.  Counters are primarily only necessary to keep a turn one Trinisphere, Smokestack, or Chalice of the Void from locking you out of the game on the draw.  Uba wins against arrogant decks that try to ignore it, but when you engage it head-on, often you can prevail.  It’s conventionally not a good match-up for Fish, but this build has several distinct advantages.  First, it’s Vial Fish, so “Island, AEther Vial” on the first turn begins the game with Fish at a huge advantage.  This is partly because Null Rod has fallen out of style in the latest Uba Builds.  Secondly, because I recognize how brutal of a match Uba Stax can be, I’ve dedicated a lot of space in my sideboard to cards with strong applications here.  I have more of an edge post sideboard, having many cheaply priced silver bullets like Hurkyl’s Recall and Chain of Vapor.  Copy Artifact on Crucible of Worlds is ideal.  Magus of the Unseen with Smokestack in play is as comical as the Drake/Bouncer trick outlined above.  “Borrow your Karn, kill your Chalice, sacrifice Karn to the Smokestack…”  Uba’s predictable technique of switching to heavy weenie removal or Workshop Aggro is kept in check by Serendib Efreet, Jotün Grunt, Gilded Drake, and an assortment of bounce/copy.  Oath of Ghouls enables chump blocking and offsets Smokestack and other destructive artifacts.  Note that post-sideboard, even after a net loss of five creatures, I am still running more than most Fish builds run at their maximum.  Energy Flux and Kataki are precluded by my own affinity for Vials/Moxen.  Also, Darkblast is not needed here because at least five cards sided in directly disrupt the Welder at instant speed without having to fetch an Underground, not to mention the maindeck answers.  It’s sometimes better to Drake him than to Blast him.  Finally, having a high permanent count means I can usually keep up with an Uba Mask outside of a Tangle-lock or Bazaar.  Dark Confidant, Ninja of the Deep Hours, AEther Vial, Jotün Grunt, and Stern Proctor are the MVP’s here.  Tangle Wire, Uba Mask, and anything with a casting cost (Duplicant, Triskelion) are the biggest nuisances.  This is one match where my role is predominantly aggressive.       

Fish Mirror
Disposition: Slightly Favorable
Sideboard: +2 Serendib Efreet, +1 Darkblast, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Hurkyl’s Recall, +1 Wasteland, -3 Children of Korlis, -1 Voidmage Prodigy, -1 Tormod’s Crypt, -1 Oath of Ghouls.

Given the diversity among Fish builds, it’s difficult to generalize with any reliable accuracy.  Typically, the determining factor is who gets Dark Confidant online first and post-sideboard, who gets Dark Confidant, Darkblast, both, or Jotün Grunt.  Other random factors inhere like “Did your Confidant reveal Force of Will twice?”; “Is AEther Vial or Null Rod running the show here?”; or “Why is your Meddling Mage naming Swords to Plowshares?”  Hurkyl’s Recall is included for Null Rods and the Umezawa’s Jittes that tend to come in after boarding.  Serendib Efreet circumvents the “war of the gifted weenies” and aims right for the throat.  He is a must-counter.  Wasteland augments my own mana base and shoots at theirs if necessary.  The reason I categorize this match-up as slightly favorable is simply because I run a higher creature count than any Fish build with which I am familiar.  Hence, I am more likely to bring an insurmountable swarm of guys to the table while the opponent is clumsily deciding whether to Stifle my Confidant, my Vial, or my Delta.  As mentioned previously, I’ll bring in Magus of the Unseen against any build running Mishra’s Factories.  The most important cards here are Dark Confidant, Jotün Grunt, Oath of Ghouls (pre-sideboard), and Waterfront Bouncer.  Things I hate to see most are Grim Lavamancer, opposing Confidants, Darkblast, Null Rod, Faerie Conclave, Fire/Ice, and Gorilla Shaman.

Control Slaver
Disposition: Even
Sideboard: +1 True Believer, +1 Darkblast, +1 Tormod’s Crypt, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Hurkyl’s Recall, +1 Yawgmoth’s Will, +1 Serendib Efreet, -3 Children of Korlis, -1 Meddling Mage, -1 Force of Will, -2 Waterfront Bouncer.

This is a difficult and unpredictable match-up where both decks contain a vibrant variegated mélange of aggression, countermagic, removal, and draw.  What Control Slaver gains over its other Drain kinsmen is that by deigning to acknowledge the opponent and surveying the board, it usually succeeds by conquering.  Unlike the Gifts match, there is no set-in-stone playbook to neutralize this deck.  Even my sideboard strategy is mercurial and influenced by their chosen win conditions and frankly, how the preceding games played out.  I like True Believer because he stops the almighty Mindslaver, preferably after they have invested a considerable bevy of resources into finding and activating it, only to see this inopportune creature glide out of a Vial.  I will run Darkblast against Slaver where I wouldn’t against Stax because their Welders are far more dangerous and Gorilla Shaman is a wrecking ball.  Tormod’s Crypt isn’t the golden bowl it is in the Gifts match-up, but it’s still a nontrivial nuisance for .  Meddling Mage is likewise less reliable here because of Slaver’s threat diversity.  A good rule of thumb is to call “Thirst for Knowledge.”  Countermagic is weaker because they have more and a better draw engine, as well as Goblin Welder to eschew Force of Will. 

On the other hand, Jotün Grunt is stronger here because my role is more aggressive versus Slaver than versus Gifts.  In addition to leveling Yawgmoth’s Will, he also excises Welder targets.  These games frequently extend long enough for me to likewise reap some mileage out of Yawgmoth’s Will, so I’ll board that in as well.  Gilded Drake on Goblin Welder repeatedly offers the critical escape from an impending inevitability.  Library of Alexandria borders on heroic.  Occasionally, the structure of their build will necessitate keeping the Children (Burning Slaver) or bringing in Magus of the Unseen, Rebuild, or Kami of Ancient Law (The Abyss).  Serendib Efreet goes in when, for any reason, I’m compelled to play the aggressor or diversify my threats.  Overall, this match requires a lot of concentration, contemplates more variables than any other, and can sincerely go either way.  The best tools here are Oath of Ghouls, AEther Vial, Voidmage Prodigy, Jotün Grunt, Library of Alexandria, Dark Confidant, and Gilded Drake.  Triskelion, Tinker, Thirst for Knowledge, and Mindslaver are the biggest hazards.     

Pitch Long
Disposition: Slightly Favorable
Sideboard: +1 True Believer, +1 Extract, +1 Tormod’s Crypt, +1 Wasteland, -1 Gilded Drake, -1 Stern Proctor, -1 Waterfront Bouncer, -1 Underground Sea, on the draw.  Same, but +1 Underground Sea and -1 Wasteland on the play.   

Despite the fact that my entire maindeck resembles a nonstop hate-parade against prevalent “Enigma” strategies, an experienced Long player can pilot the deck through just about any adversity.  Children of Korlis and Tormod’s Crypt are key to pulling through those first two turns.  AEther Vial is impeccable from Turn 2 onwards, especially with an opponent who Windfalls, Chain of Vapors, Timetwisters, and uses Memory Jar.  Necropotence is far less threatening than it should be because passing the turn is exactly what I covet.  Meddling Mage will always name Tendrils of Agony because it’s the only prohibition they absolutely must alleviate before winning.  With a Children of Korlis, True Believer, or another Mage in play, then there is the luxury of naming Chain of Vapor in game one and Tinker or Massacre onwards.  Creature control can be reduced but never completely sided out because Darksteel Colossus, Pentavus, or some other monstrosity are likely to make cameos in the latter two games.  There is a good chance of Fish stealing the game if it lasts any longer than two turns.  Grim Long is a much better match because Xantid Swarm only stops four Forces of Wills and the high creature count renders this build largely immune to any non-first turn Duress. 

Nevertheless, no matter how you prepare, losing the dice-roll risks an auto-loss, even with Force of Will, as your Magic: The Gathering deck scoops helplessly to an opponent’s Solitaire.  I feel very tense throughout this match because it is so volatile.  The strongest players are Children of Korlis, AEther Vial, Force of Will, Voidmage Prodigy, Tormod’s Crypt, and Meddling Mage.  The most vexing early cards to see on the other side of the table are Dark Ritual, Black Lotus, and Demonic Tutor. 

Ichorid
Disposition: Favorable
Sideboard: +1 Tormod’s Crypt, +1 True Believer, +1 Kami of Ancient Law, +2 Serendib Efreet, +1 Extract, +1 Wasteland, +1 Darkblast, +1 Chain of Vapor, -4 Force of Will, -2 Oath of Ghouls, -1 Gilded Drake, -1 Voidmage Prodigy, -1 Meddling Mage.

I rate this match as favorable because it’s evenly paired in game one and swings heavily in Fish’s favor post-sideboard.  This match can be thought of as a showdown of good v. evil.  The white cards are absolutely vital in draining that black swamp.  Meddling Mage should always name Balance, Dread Return, or Cabal Therapy, because there’s nothing else Ichorid casts beyond the first turn that is of any consequence.  Gilded Drake is at least marginally useful with Vial online, to grab an Ashen Ghoul at a key moment where three damage is the difference between losing this turn and winning the next.  But it’s the Children of Korlis and Jotün Grunt who really bring home the bacon here.  Each Children of Korlis should net anywhere between 9 and 15 life, negating an opponent’s investment of between two and four black creatures (and + a Gemstone counter or 1 City damage for the Ashen Ghoul).  Jotün Grunt banishes Ichorid back to the bottom where he won’t reappear until the Ichorid player is on the verge of drawing into his own demise.  Then, of course, he blocks everyone else.  Force of Will is completely pointless because, Balance aside, there’s nothing to counter and Force is always named with Cabal Therapy.  Stern Proctor can clean up any Chalices or Needles that slip by.  There are enough creatures in this deck that chump blocking to survive is a viable advent for the coming of Jotün Grunt.  Post-sideboard, Wasteland hits Bazaar, Darkblast and Chain of Vapor are Healing Salves, and the True Believer and Kami are unabashed chump blockers.  Their abilities are marginally more useful than the Voidmage Prodigy and Meddling Mage they replace.  The MVP’s here are Children of Korlis, Jotün Grunt, Serendib Efreet, and Tormod’s Crypt.  Biggest threats are Bazaar of Baghdad, Ashen Ghoul, Ichorid, and Balance. 

Bomberman 
Disposition: Slightly Unfavorable
Sideboard: +2 Serendib Efreet, +1 Extract, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Magus of the Unseen, -2 Children of Korlis, -1 Voidmage Prodigy, -1 Stern Proctor, -1 Oath of Ghouls.

I hate this match.  Auriok Salvagers creatures are a combat standstill, horrifically disruptive, and make any of their toolkit artifacts an auto-loss.  After Trinket Mages deliver their silver bullets, they make creature exchanges an unfair trade because they have already expended their utility while I’m still relying on mine to draw cards or counter spells.   The match improved somewhat with the addition of Gilded Drake, whose goal is to steal the Auriok Salvagers.  Serendib Efreet enhances the aggressive methods I adopt here and eschews Engineered Explosives with two counters.  I board out an Oath of Ghouls not because it isn’t strong against this deck, but because they have such easy access to their own Tormod’s Crypt.  On a similar note, I keep my singular maindeck Crypt but don’t board in an extra because the Salvagers get around it too easily.  I might bring in Kami of Ancient Law if they run Counterbalance and Darkblast if they are playing “Bob-erman” (Bomberman with Dark Confidants).  This is the one match where Null Rod would benefit me more than AEther Vial.  The most valuable cards here are Jotün Grunt, Dark Confidant, Waterfront Bouncer, Ninja of the Deep Hours, and Force of Will.  Biggest threats are Auriok Salvagers, Trinket Mage, Engineered Explosives, Pithing Needle, and Mana Drain. 

Worldgorger Dragon
Disposition: Slightly Favorable
Sideboard: +1 Tormod’s Crypt, +1 Extract, +1 True Believer, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Wasteland, -3 Children of Korlis, -2 Gilded Drake. 

The biggest advantage Dragon has is its shock value.  During game one, nothing about Polluted Deltas and Brainstorms screams “Dragon” until someone drops a Bazaar or a Deep Analysis.  I think most good Dragon players know this and use it to their advantage.  Once the cat is out of bag however, the tables turn.  After I know my opponent is playing Dragon, if I don’t see an early Bazaar, I name “Intuition” with a Meddling Mage.  It’s not realistic to try locking out each of the three enchantments, Animate Dead, Dance of the Dead, and Necromancy.  There are a lot of strong players in this match, particularly with the sideboard inclusions.  Against Dragon, I am thankful for AEther Vial, Waterfront Bouncer, Stern Proctor (with Vial), Voidmage Prodigy, Force of Will, Tormod’s Crypt, Jotün Grunt, Strip Mine and Dark Confidant.  I fear most a turn one Bazaar coupled with Black Lotus or Mox Jet, a chain of Deep Analyses, and Stifle.

Goblins
Disposition: Slightly Unfavorable
Sideboard: +1 Darkblast, +1 True Believer, +1 Kami of Ancient Law, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Serendib Efreet, -2 Voidmage Prodigy, -1 Stern Proctor, -2 Force of Will on the play.  On the draw, same but +1 Force of Will and -1 additional Voidmage Prodigy. 

This should be a worse match-up than it already is but, as in the Ichorid match, Jotün Grunt and Children of Korlis go a long way in keeping me alive.  I veer towards answers rather than card-disadvantage counters post-sideboard.  Goblin Piledriver or Goblin Warchief are the usual targets for my Mages unless they are playing Food Chain Goblins, in which case I name Goblin Ringleader.  If my opponent is approaching five mana, then Siege-Gang Commander is a must stop.  For an R/G build that I anticipate to bring in Choke, Hidden Gibbons, Artifact Mutation, or Root Maze, Hibernation is always a sideboard option.  Hurkyl’s Recall and Stern Proctor serve the same role for Chalice, Vial, or Null Rod builds.  I actually keep the Tormod’s Crypt in because one of my best chances for victory rests on mining the Oath for creatures every turn.  True Believer gives no utility aside from being non-blue and able to allay the Piledriver.  I find myself winning this match more often than not, but the manners in which it occurs lead me to believe that I have just been lucky.  In theory, this should be and has been a nightmare match for any Fish decks I’ve piloted.  My friends here are AEther Vial (for any non Null Rod based mana denial), Jotün Grunt, Children of Korlis, Oath of Ghouls, and Gilded Drake (Kiki-Jiki and Goblin Sharpshooter being the ideal targets).  The biggest pressures are handling quick Goblin Lackeys, Goblin Piledrivers, Goblin Ringleader/Food Chain, Siege-Gang Commander, and Gempalm Incinerator. 
 
Affinity/Ravager
Disposition: Favorable
Sideboard: +1 Magus of the Unseen, +1 Hurkyl’s Recall, +1 Rebuild, +1 Chain of Vapor, +1 Copy Artifact, +1 True Believer, +2 Serendib Efreet, +1 Darkblast, -1 Tormod’s Crypt, -4 Force of Will, -1 AEther Vial, -1 Voidmage Prodigy, -2 Gilded Drake

This probably doesn’t count as a “Tier One” deck.  Nevertheless, it seems to appear in every field like a plague of locusts and refuses to die.  The match is slightly favorable game one, excluding developmental difficulty or a Cranial Plated Ornithopter that I somehow can’t eradicate.  Post-sideboard, it’s extraordinarily favorable.  The reasons should be self-evident from the card list itself, except for True Believer, whose role is to nullify Disciple of the Vault. 

That concludes my summary of the most prominent competitive match-ups for the Oath of Ghouls based Fish deck.  I will close with the following questions:

1.   Is Oath of Ghouls serving an important purpose by compensating for Fish’s inherent weakness against heavy removal and large creatures, or is it merely a superfluous addition to a build whose real strength is the synergy of its other components?

2.   Would you consider piloting this deck at a local tournament?  Why or why not?  What changes would you make to optimize the list or adjust it for your local metagame?

3.   What, if any, other applications might Oath of Ghouls serve in the design of a revivable or new pseudo-archetype?  Are there better methods of exploiting it?

I invite further discussion welcome any feedback.  Thank you for reading,

-Brian Kelly (BPK)




ADDENDUM (2/5/07)

Since I'm aware that readers from around the globe view this forum for insights on deckbuilding (and there are many great minds here indeed), it's my responsibility to keep you aware that this deck is no longer current and is probably not viable in today's Vintage metagame.  Why not?

For starters, Fish exists as a deck representing the anti-strategy to the most prevalent power-fueled decks of the day.  Although the archetype does eventually deal lethal damage with creatures, its relative clock to almost every major player in the field (aside from Stax) is slow and forces Fish into a defensive position.  Building a great Fish deck requires a careful mix of proactive and reactive disruption to stall the game state long enough for a team small creatures to invoke the Grim Reaper.  In order to do this, Fish bears more responsibility than any other deck to understand the metagame and construct an optimal and flexible mix of anti-strategies.  You must know your enemy and understand that most of your enemies do not care to know you; they simply want to kill you as aggressively and quickly as possible.

At the time this list was compiled and used, the major existing threats were almost exclusively based on Tendrils of Agony, Darksteel Colossus, flying Angels, Worldgorger Dragons, opposing Fish, Ichorid, and Stax lists which were mostly not running Null Rod.  All of this was accounted for in the list presented here that used the leverage of Oath of Ghouls where necessary to even out rough edges.  Hence the modest success I saw with the build in late fall of 2006. 

But much has changed since then.  Bomberman, an admittedly unfavorable match-up, is on the rise.  Gifts has veered away from Colossus and incorporated Empty the Warrens as its second kill.  Oath of Druids is using Tidespout Tyrant and Simic Sky Swallower more and more often.  Ichorid has gained Dread Return.  Slaver may be beginning to rebound.  Stax is flirting with Null Rods again.  Almost every Fish list is now running its own Jotun Grunts, which was not the case many months ago.  Pitch Long and Gifts are both mutating and evolving, and many decks are appearing as hybrids of the theory behind both.  This is much different than the largely homogenous lists of mid/late 2006. 

For that reason, I would not recommend playing this list today because it is no longer equipped to handle everything on the radar to the degree it was last year.  I would go even further and caution against playing any Fish list that runs Vials right now because the metagame is too fractured.  Until it settles and definite champions emerge spawning card-for-card emulators nationwide or worldwide, a predictive and reactive deck like Vial Fish is not the optimal choice.  If I had to make a personal recommendation for an anti-strategy deck, I would run a Tyrant Oath of Druids list with heavy prison elements, Merchant Scrolls, Echoing Truth, and Intuition.  For those interested in Fish, there are several active threads in the Open and Improvement Forums here that you should have no trouble finding; the archetype itself is very popular these days. 

Overall, I found the card Oath of Ghouls itself to be impressive in the utility and resilience it brought to the Ubw Vial Fish repertoire.  I'm also honored by the 1.5 Legacy adaptation in the forum and wish it success.  The card itself still has vital untapped potential and when the time is right, it will be revisited.  Identifying and addressing the latest round of threats will come in time and I'm confident Vial Fish will again enjoy another well-earned window of viability.  Until then, thanks to everyone for the dialogue and I hope you enjoyed reading.

-Brian Kelly (BPK)

[Liam-K]

I like where you've gone with the deck, I remember having a lot of discussion with you about it over MWS (I still take issue with your insistance on automatically naming tendrils with mage vs Long, but that's for somewhere else.  Read me better :p)

How often is your oath dead though, and how often is it relevant?  Much of your creature selection is relevant as soon as it hits the table, negating some of my previous analysis, but I still worry that you're going to run into relevant plays happening all at once, without giving up time to start actually benefitting from the oath.  You have to have an upkeep and a creature in the graveyard before it's anything at all, then you have to have that again before it's really good.  Are you consistantly generating enough tempo to be sure you're going to make this thing worth the delayed, situational returns?

And there's zero non-triskelion removal in the format pre sideboard.  With your vialing things out getting around counterspells, do you find the oath is more useful in games 2 and 3?  If so, is moving them to the sideboard and bringing them in to fight removal a possibility you've considered?

[ErkBek]

Pitch Long
Disposition: Slightly Favorable
Sideboard: +1 True Believer, +1 Extract, +1 Tormod’s Crypt, +1 Wasteland, -1 Gilded Drake, -1 Stern Proctor, -1 Waterfront Bouncer, -1 Underground Sea, on the draw.  Same, but +1 Underground Sea and -1 Wasteland on the play.   

Despite the fact that my entire maindeck resembles a nonstop hate-parade against prevalent “Enigma” strategies, an experienced Long player can pilot the deck through just about any adversity.  Children of Korlis and Tormod’s Crypt are key to pulling through those first two turns.  AEther Vial is impeccable from Turn 2 onwards, especially with an opponent who Windfalls, Chain of Vapors, Timetwisters, and uses Memory Jar.  Necropotence is far less threatening than it should be because passing the turn is exactly what I covet.  Meddling Mage will always name Tendrils of Agony because it’s the only prohibition they absolutely must alleviate before winning.  With a Children of Korlis, True Believer, or another Mage in play, then there is the luxury of naming Chain of Vapor in game one and Tinker or Massacre onwards.  Creature control can be reduced but never completely sided out because Darksteel Colossus, Pentavus, or some other monstrosity are likely to make cameos in the latter two games.  There is a good chance of Fish stealing the game if it lasts any longer than two turns.  Grim Long is a much better match because Xantid Swarm only stops four Forces of Wills and the high creature count renders this build largely immune to any non-first turn Duress. 

Nevertheless, no matter how you prepare, losing the dice-roll risks an auto-loss, even with Force of Will, as your Magic: The Gathering deck scoops helplessly to an opponent’s Solitaire.  I feel very tense throughout this match because it is so volatile.  The strongest players are Children of Korlis, AEther Vial, Force of Will, Voidmage Prodigy, Tormod’s Crypt, and Meddling Mage.  The most vexing early cards to see on the other side of the table are Dark Ritual, Black Lotus, and Demonic Tutor. 

I'm going to have to call bullshit on this one. I have no idea how you expect to win especially if you lose the dice roll. You cut fish's best card (Chalice) in this matchup for more men. You also don't play wasteland or stifle either......bad times. I see your ideal hand must be turn 1 Children, turn 2 Mage on tendrils, maybe you even have a Force, well big deal. If your not running Chalice, rod, or Waste you give me at least 3 or 4 turns to set up a massive mind's desire or chain a couple bombs together in one turn. I really don't think storming up to 20 or 30 is difficult when you are running so little disruption that really affects me. This neglects the turn possiblity of killing you before you get a second turn. Who are you testing this matchup with? I haven't even touched what massacre does to you.

Anyways about the oath of ghouls tech. Have you ever had a problem refueling your opponents with creatures? I feel like you play a ton of creatures, do you really need to refuel on men?

Lastly, what is with the sideboard? Why not play 2, 3, or 4 of's? I think it is important to draw certain sideboard cards, apparently you think otherwise. Please explain your choice of playing 14 different cards in your sideboard.

[brianpk80]

I like where you've gone with the deck, I remember having a lot of discussion with you about it over MWS (I still take issue with your insistance on automatically naming tendrils with mage vs Long, but that's for somewhere else.  Read me better :p)

I've tried naming engine enabler cards in the past, like Dark Ritual and Brainstorm, but found those options to be too erratic.  If I'm playing against Long and I see a Tundra and an Underground Sea on my second turn, I am going to name Tendrils of Agony if I have nothing else in play.  If I were running Duress or Cabal Therapy, my options would expand based on what their hand revealed.  Otherwise, the only definite piece to their strategy involves Tendrils of Agony.  However, if I have a Children of Korlis (or True Believer post sideboard) in play, I would opt for Chain of Vapor game one and Tinker or Massacre in a subsequent game. 

How often is your oath dead though, and how often is it relevant?  Much of your creature selection is relevant as soon as it hits the table, negating some of my previous analysis, but I still worry that you're going to run into relevant plays happening all at once, without giving up time to start actually benefitting from the oath.  You have to have an upkeep and a creature in the graveyard before it's anything at all, then you have to have that again before it's really good.  Are you consistantly generating enough tempo to be sure you're going to make this thing worth the delayed, situational returns?

This is a great question and is the impetus behind presenting the card and deck here.  The Oath is always "relevant" in the sense that if ignored, it would eventually engender a game state where I am largely immune from life loss (Children of Korlis) or where my opponent could never resolve another spell (Voidmage Prodigy every turn).  I realize that there are games where the victor is determined so quickly that early tempo investments ultimately may yield nothing.  However, contrary to some mythology about the speed of Type 1, these "blink of an eye" matches tend to occur only when facing certain deck types that do not comprise a majority of the field, nationwide.  A major event like Gencon or Waterbury is a skewed sample size because most players there tend to be prepared and powered.  And even then, the majority of games will endure for three or more turns. 

And there's zero non-triskelion removal in the format pre sideboard.  With your vialing things out getting around counterspells, do you find the oath is more useful in games 2 and 3?  If so, is moving them to the sideboard and bringing them in to fight removal a possibility you've considered?

Hmmm... that had crossed my mind but I've been running the Oath maindeck both because I'm concentrating on exploring its strengths and weaknesses and because it has very strong synergy with the build overall.  There are very few matches where it's downright moot game one.  And as much as I enjoy having both Vial and the Oath running, the Oath really comes through when I don't see a Vial and am losing creatures to counters every turn.  I would propose that the Children of Korlis interaction is probably the most compelling reason for keeping it maindeck, followed by Voidmage Prodigy, Jotün Grunt (by allowing me to play him earlier than usual), Waterfront Bouncer, Meddling Mage, and Dark Confidant.  And there is more removal out there than just Triskelion in a given game one.  Not including all forms of countermagic, some examples that come to mind are Smokestack, Diabolic Edict, chump blocking, Grim Lavamancer, Balance, Darkblast, and Burning Wish for Pyroclasm/Massacre.  I find the Oath generally a weak draw in the early game, strong in the mid, and extremely strong in the late game.  To compare, the same rings true for other popular cards like Mindslaver, Psychatog, Skeletal Scrying, Triskelion/Pentavus, Exalted Angel, and Barbarian Ring. 

I'm going to have to call bullshit on this one. I have no idea how you expect to win especially if you lose the dice roll. You cut fish's best card (Chalice) in this matchup for more men. You also don't play wasteland or stifle either......bad times. I see your ideal hand must be turn 1 Children, turn 2 Mage on tendrils, maybe you even have a Force, well big deal.

That's not correct. 
A pretty run of the mill good hand against Pitch Long would be Polluted Delta, Mox Pearl, Children of Korlis, AEther Vial, Force of Will, and any two other cards, preferably one blue.  Ninja would be great here as well.  If Long manages to Chain of Vapor the Children and  kill me on turn one through the FoW, well, I'd have to congratulate my opponent on a superlative draw.  That is, of course, the nature of Magic.  If I get another turn, then Chain of Vapor is largely negligible game one with Vial @ 1. In the meantime, I would throw down something small like a Meddling Mage, Voidmage Prodigy, Dark Confidant, Oath of Ghouls, another Children, another Vial, or a Ninja and play with reservation.  I don't find anything particularly unrealistic about this progression.  Eventually, the Long player might want to Timetwister or Tinker into Memory Jar, so I may cash in as well by using the Vial(s) to empty the goods.  I won't let it sit at 1 counter forever.  The problem with your analysis is that by failing to acknowledge any threats beyond Children of Korlis and Meddling Mage, you've mislead yourself into believing that Pitch Long is more immune to serious pressure than it actually is. 

Lastly, what is with the sideboard? Why not play 2, 3, or 4 of's? I think it is important to draw certain sideboard cards, apparently you think otherwise. Please explain your choice of playing 14 different cards in your sideboard.

That's a good question and I believe you might find some of the answers you are looking for in the set of paragraphs directly beneath the decklist and sideboard.  In particular, I note that the sideboard is chosen for a "general" Type One field that can and should be modified in congruence with any anticipated metagame.  Following that, there is a general overview of the purpose of each unit in the sideboard and how they serve multiple roles as dictated by the diversity of matches.  If you have a more specific question about one of the card choices, please feel free to ask. 

If your not running Chalice, rod, or Waste you give me at least 3 or 4 turns to set up a massive mind's desire or chain a couple bombs together in one turn. I really don't think storming up to 20 or 30 is difficult when you are running so little disruption that really affects me. This neglects the turn possiblity of killing you before you get a second turn. Who are you testing this matchup with? I haven't even touched what massacre does to you.

I've never found Chalice of the Void to be a godsend against Pitch Long.  My experience with Chalice has been that it provides a brief illusion of security until Chain of Vapor, Hurkyl's Recall, or Rebuild inevitably comes down for the win.  The latter two are especially devastating for any player who has managed to resolve more than one Chalice.  Unlike Children of Korlis and Meddling Mage for instance, Chalice doesn't afford me the duality of disruption along with a clock.  I also fail to see how I would be strengthening my position by relying on artifacts when this deck has such easy access to mass artifact bounce.  By contrast in game one, there are, at most, two Chain of Vapors to address creatures: one pre-Will and one post-Will, if it resolves.  Finally, whatever merits Chalice of the Void may appear to have against Pitch Long, it doesn't go very far against the rest of the field.  Chalice of the Void is either randomly good or randomly useless, often a dice roll being the determining factor.  Either way, it's inconsistent. 

As for Null Rod, it doesn't belong in Vial Fish. 

Next, you raise the issue of Massacre.  Massacre is the most predictable post-sideboard card a Fish player can expect to see in a given Long match.  I know it's there, Meddling Mage knows it's there, Voidmage knows it's there, the fetchlands know it's there and won't gratuitously invoke a Tundra.  Oath of Ghouls gradually undoes Massacre and I never play more creatures than necessary to stall the game state.  If I draw two cards from a Dark Confidant and then end up losing him and a Children of Korlis... so be it.  Massacre is a straight up strategy hoser.  Cards like that exist for every archetype and competent players regularly antciipate them and play accordingly.  This Fish build is no empirically less equipped to work around Massacre than Pitch Long is able to deal with Children of Korlis, Meddling Mage, Extract, True Believer, or Tormod's Crypt. 

Thanks to everyone who has responded so far.  I appreciate the input,

-Brian

[Moxlotus]

The problem with your analysis is that by failing to acknowledge any threats beyond Children of Korlis and Meddling Mage, you've mislead yourself into believing that Pitch Long is more immune to serious pressure than it actually is.

The problem is that you fail to acknowledge that you probalby won't live long enough to throw down any threats besides maybe 1 or 2.  Chalice, waste, and Rod Slow down PL enough that fish players can lay down their 3rd and if they are definitely going to win, their 4th.  You have nothing to slow down PL long enough to play your other secondary threats and build momentum.

[Purple Hat]

also the children aren't a real threat against a long player with 25 coppies of desire on the stack, which shouldn't be too hard to do given that you, by your own admission, name tendrils with mage, and only play force of will to disrupt them.  a good long player (not me) should have no problem finding that much storm.

[Anusien]

Oath of Ghouls seems like a very interesting sideboard card for aggro mirrors or versus Stax, especially if you get Jotun Grunt online to get rid of all your opponent's creatures in their sideboard.  However, it feels much too narrow to fit in the maindeck.  You only have a couple of creatures it interacts with in the maindeck; and it feels way too slow to deal with a lot of decks.  As a control/combo player, I would cheer when you play out an Oath of Ghouls, since it's only really going to matter if I kill creatures.  I mean, yes, you could sacrifice a couple of Kais to it, but that's a huge mana sink.

The deck is not disruptive enough to put up those numbers, enough that I seriously doubt your testing results.  You're basically dead to the Drain TPS (Meandeck Gifts) Tendrils plan, and I don't see how you're going to deal with any of the other Drain decks if they play smart.  Sure, you might get someone once with Stern Proctor, assuming Dark Confidant doesn't flip it over, but it feels like Triskelion or even just comboing off with a mighty Will is going to blow you over.  Most fish decks do well because they match a fast clock with strong disruption.  You have a lot of ways to remove Darksteel Colossus, but you don't have a lot of denial tools like Null Rod or Chalice of the Void.

[dicemanx]

Oath of Ghouls is a really interesting idea, and I'm happy that people on these forums are willing to examine new and potentially promising ideas even if they don't end up panning out. While the "dispositions" you outline are a little hard to swallow even with your attempt at a caveat regarding MWS testing(favorable against all major archetypes?), the deck idea has a lot of synergy and attempts to generate card advantage in a different way in T1 which is refreshing. I have two questions though:

1. Is there any particular reason why this deck doesn't run full power? You have a few important spells at the 2 mana level, and you're using a lot of cards that cost 2 with 1 colorless mana in the cost. There can be a monumental difference between getting a Confidant out on turn 2 versus getting it out turn 1. Granted, cutting colored mana sources for off color Moxes will weaken cards like Meddling Mage or Voidmage Prodigy (which are already offset somewhat by Vial already), but perhaps the fault lies in trying to stuff the deck with cool tricks like Voidmage in the first place?

2. This deck is decidedly light on disruption, and looks like it borders on trying to do too many cool things. I'm positive you can find room for at least 4 CotV (Proctors are the prime candidates for removal, followed closely by Prodigy), which can be especially potent given that you have an option of setting it to 1 without harming yourself too much in the process. Did you test this option?

[Polynomial P]

Why do you not run bazaar of baghdad? Everything in your deck costs 2 or less, so excess mana can easily be cycled with bazaar. With a single extra card a turn (Dark confidant, Ninja, Oath) you negate the card disadvantage of bazaar, not to mention the synergistic effect between bazaar and Oath of Ghouls. I do not think there is a downside to running bazaar in your list.

I would also echo previous opinions that you should be running some more disruption. As it is, I dont see you living long enough for the long term advantages of this deck to take over.

On your wish-like sideboard: Those type of sideboards are only effective if you are running tutors to support a number of 1-ofs. However, you run zero tutors andyou are going to want consistency over 1-of silver bullets. Look at the effective aggro-control decks that have top 8ed in the last few tournaments:

http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=18906
http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=18788
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/vintage06/welcome

In the decks running singletons in the SB they also have Enlightened tutor to find those singletons.

[benthetenor]

I remember when Vroman was first tinkering around with Uba Stax. The original list that he brought to SCG Chicago sported a sideboard that was full of silver bullets, and his deck ran little in the form of card selection aside from the Bazaar of Baghdads. He said that that was his greatest mistake, and that the sideboard should be stocked with a few good answers rather than a lot of random ones.

Another thing that Vroman did when first encorporating Uba Mask into a stax deck was that his first versions were very much focused on making Uba Mask the lynch-pin of the entire deck. While this certainly draws the most efficiency from the Uba Mask, it also makes you play weaker cards because they have a stronger apparent synergy with the card in question. He eventually reconciled this desire to abuse Uba Mask by integrating it into an already strong Stax deck, instead focusing more on Bazaar of Baghdad and the hundreds of interactions it creates, both with Goblin Welder as well as with Uba Mask. As a result all of the cards in the deck became synergistic with one another instead of all of the cards being synergistic with one card.

I mention this because I think that your draw engine is very similar to that of Uba Stax. You run 0 tutors and not the most robust draw-engine I've ever seen in Fish, and so you should probably heed Vroman's advice. Similarly, it feels as though you're trying to break Oath of Ghouls in half, but you may be trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to Fish. I would say that Fish's creatures are already good enough that you don't need to add in techy creatures like Stern Proctor. The definition of a good sideboard card is one that is situationally good, or just better in some matchups than others, which is a good description of Stern Proctor. And the number of times that you're going to get a Stern Proctor-Voidmage Prodigy-Oath of Ghouls loop in a real game situation is pretty close to one, at which point you've already won and you're just wasting time doing nothing.

I love the idea of Oath of Ghouls. It gives Fish a solid way to stay in the game, a way to trump counterspells, and the option of a lot of tricks, but I feel like it might be too slow for the latter option. As a matter of fact, a simple Duress can keep you in the game and can certainly trump counterspells, and it costs much less. If you do keep Oath in the deck as more than merely a 2 mana raise dead, then Bazaar of Baghdad would be very good, as Jacob said. Or Zombie Infestation. But the main thing you need is some rigorious testing, as a hundred games spread over several versions of your deck is not statistically significant. When you get to a thousand, you might have more of an idea as to how good the deck truly is.

[brianpk80]

The problem is that you fail to acknowledge that you probalby won't live long enough to throw down any threats besides maybe 1 or 2.  Chalice, waste, and Rod Slow down PL enough that fish players can lay down their 3rd and if they are definitely going to win, their 4th.  You have nothing to slow down PL long enough to play your other secondary threats and build momentum.

The following cards should be a primary concern for any PL player:
4 Children of Korlis
4 Meddling Mage
3 Voidmage Prodigy
4 Force of Will
4 AEther Vial
1 Tormod's Crypt
(33.3%)

The next set are secondarily disruptive:
4 Dark Confidant
2 Ninja of the Deep Hours
2 Oath of Ghouls
2 Jotün Grunt
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Strip Mine
(25%)

In game one, Pitch Long can largely ignore the following:
2 Gilded Drake
2 Waterfront Bouncer
2 Stern Proctor
(10%)

The rest of the deck is mana.

Let's compare this with Dave Feinstein's excellent U/W Fish build that took 3rd place at Boston:

Primary threats:
4 Meddling Mage
3 True Believer
4 Force of Will
3 Stifle
2 Misdirection
3 Null Rod
(31.6%)

Secondary threats:
4 Wasteland
3 Kataki, War's Wage
3 Jotün Grunt
1 Time Walk
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Strip Mine
(21.7%)

Tertiary threat:
4 Brainstorm
(6.6%)

Negligble game one:
4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Isamaru, Hound of Konda
3 Savannah Lions
(16.7%)

And the rest of the deck is non-Wasteland mana.  
Post sideboard, he adds 3 Orim's Chants and I add another Crypt, Extract, a True Believer, and occasionally a Wasteland.  
I fail to see how there is any significant difference in threat density between the two builds.  Where he opts for mana denial and beats, I opt for card draw and Vials to exploit those draws.  That said, any Long or Gifts player who blatantly ignores an AEther Vial with any number of counters on it does so at their own peril.  

also the children aren't a real threat against a long player with 25 coppies of desire on the stack, which shouldn't be too hard to do given that you, by your own admission, name tendrils with mage, and only play force of will to disrupt them.  a good long player (not me) should have no problem finding that much storm.

With all due respect, Mind's Desire with 24 extra copies is an indulgent Pitch Long fantasy that doesn't plausibly happen within the first four turns of a game.  

You're basically dead to the Drain TPS (Meandeck Gifts) Tendrils plan, and I don't see how you're going to deal with any of the other Drain decks if they play smart. Sure, you might get someone once with Stern Proctor, assuming Dark Confidant doesn't flip it over, but it feels like Triskelion or even just comboing off with a mighty Will is going to blow you over.  Most fish decks do well because they match a fast clock with strong disruption.  

On the contrary, Meandeck Gifts is a generally strong match-up here.  There really isn't much Meandeck Gifts can realistically do without compromising their own tempo against a turn one resolved AEther Vial, Tormod's Crypt (1 pre-sb, 2 post-sb), or Extract to narrow my game plan exclusively on their singular remaining win condition.  The Yawgmoth's Will/Tendrils plan is jeopardized by Children of Korlis, Meddling Mage, Tormod's Crypt, Strip Mine, AEther Vial, Voidmage Prodigy, Force of Will, Jotün Grunt, and the Confidants/Ninjas (even Library of Alexandria) that unearth the above answers.  Vial and Oath of Ghouls negate the countermagic (approx. 17% percent of their deck pre-sb) that would keep any of these guys off the table.  The need for a "fast clock" (how fast is "fast" for Fish anyway?) is an afterthought when your essential objective is to lock your opponent's predictable win conditions out of the game.  A transformational Oath sideboard would be Gifts' best chance here.  

1. Is there any particular reason why this deck doesn't run full power? You have a few important spells at the 2 mana level, and you're using a lot of cards that cost 2 with 1 colorless mana in the cost. There can be a monumental difference between getting a Confidant out on turn 2 versus getting it out turn 1. Granted, cutting colored mana sources for off color Moxes will weaken cards like Meddling Mage or Voidmage Prodigy (which are already offset somewhat by Vial already), but perhaps the fault lies in trying to stuff the deck with cool tricks like Voidmage in the first place?

Good question.  The reason for no off-color Moxen is, as you already touched upon, the greater need for colored mana sources not only for cards like Meddling Mage, Voidmage Prodigy (including ability), and Stern Proctor, but by virtue of the fact that this is a three-color build.  Assume the following hand: Jotün Grunt, Waterfront Bouncer, Dark Confidant, Gilded Drake, Mox Ruby, Children of Korlis, Flooded Strand.  None of the above are prohibitively priced but what do you do with that Strand game one against an undetermined opponent?  The best play would probably be Strand -> Underground, Ruby, Dark Confidant.  However, if I am playing a Long opponent, I'm at the mercy of my Confidant to turn over a white mana source ASAP or risk a game loss.  If I'm playing the Fish mirror, FoW on the Confidant and Wasteland on the Underground has sealed my fate.  By and large, I think a fetch-land, Tundra, or Island would be preferable to the Ruby here.  This would be especially true in any opening with Meddling Mage, Voidmage Prodigy, and Stern Proctor.

2. This deck is decidedly light on disruption, and looks like it borders on trying to do too many cool things. I'm positive you can find room for at least 4 CotV (Proctors are the prime candidates for removal, followed closely by Prodigy), which can be especially potent given that you have an option of setting it to 1 without harming yourself too much in the process. Did you test this option?

I tested Chalices in the very early stages and declined to run it for the same reasons I removed it from my previous Fish builds.  It's inconsistent.  Chalice of the Void, like Daze, is either randomly great or randomly useless and hence any way one looks at it, it's unreliable.  It's also generally weak against other mana denial strategies, like Fish and Stax, for which I would hope to have a better than average match-up.  

Your points on the Voidmage Prodigy and Stern Proctor are well-noted, but I retain them for a few reasons.  They are versatile, generally strong (the uncounterability of VP's ability being his greatest asset), and "fit" well with the essential goals of the deck.  Those goals are foiling Tinker/Enigma type strategies with "silver bullet" creatures who are more resilient due to Vial/Oath, weathering the Stax match with a high permanent count and Vialing around lock pieces, and similarly imbalancing the aggro match-up with a high creature count.  

That said, I appreciate your input which by and large has been particularly thoughtful and constructive.  

Why do you not run bazaar of baghdad? Everything in your deck costs 2 or less, so excess mana can easily be cycled with bazaar. With a single extra card a turn (Dark confidant, Ninja, Oath) you negate the card disadvantage of bazaar, not to mention the synergistic effect between bazaar and Oath of Ghouls. I do not think there is a downside to running bazaar in your list.

A few weeks ago, I toyed with the idea of Bazaar but shied away from it.  However, I think you are right.  This is worth exploring.  Thanks for the suggestion.  

While the "dispositions" you outline are a little hard to swallow even with your attempt at a caveat regarding MWS testing(favorable against all major archetypes?)
...
The deck is not disruptive enough to put up those numbers, enough that I seriously doubt your testing results.

I'm not sure whether comments echoing the above are meant to imply dishonesty, poor methods, or both, but the fact of the matter is that this build has been consistently performing well against a full cross-section of the field, except where noted (Bomberman/Slaver).  Whether I have been blessed by a four-week long luck-streak doomed to eventually extinguish remains to be seen.  If appropriate, I would be glad to upload the text of some match-logs, particularly of the Pitch Long and Meandeck Gifts sort that seem to have drawn an excess of attention here.  

Again, do keep in mind that the focus here is on raising discussion on individual cards and strategies that edify Vintage as a whole.  I am not here saying "I am so brilliant, worship my creation," but rather am inviting some constructive discussion.  Having presented what I believe to be a pretty thorough and earnestly packaged quantity of content, I would appreciate commentary that avoids impugning my character.  Thanks.

On your wish-like sideboard: Those type of sideboards are only effective if you are running tutors to support a number of 1-ofs. However, you run zero tutors andyou are going to want consistency over 1-of silver bullets

I can see how one could reach that conclusion on my sideboard.  However, despite the diversity of methods used in the sideboard, there is a great redundancy of purpose.  For instance, Hurkyl's Recall, Rebuild, and Copy Artifact may as well be three Hurkyl's Recalls, but I've gone with the above suite both to eschew Chalice and provide alternate options of performing the same basic need: addressing problematic artifacts.  Tormod's Crypt becomes a 2-of when sideboarded in and I consider Extract to be almost identical to Crypt in its function and target archetype.  A singleton Wasteland provides a minor alteration to the mana base where that would likely be beneficial.  Yawgmoth's Will is restricted.  True Believer is really just Meddling Mage # 5 with a more demanding casting cost.  Darkblast, via its recurring nature, is generally not optimal in duplicates and its prime targets are the same decks for which I board in Serendib Efreets.  Given all that, I do stress that the sideboard should be modified for any anticipated metagame.  Further, it bears noting that diversity of answers will elude situations where you find yourself "4-for1"-ed every time by a Meddling Mage, Chalice, or Pithing Needle.  The redundancy of purpose justifies the diversity of flavor in my opinion.

Thank you to all who have responded thus far,

-Brian (BPK)

[Moxlotus]

The following cards should be a primary concern for any PL player:
4 Children of Korlis
4 Meddling Mage
3 Voidmage Prodigy
4 Force of Will
4 AEther Vial
1 Tormod's Crypt
(33.3%)

The next set are secondarily disruptive:
4 Dark Confidant
2 Ninja of the Deep Hours
2 Oath of Ghouls
2 Jotün Grunt
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Strip Mine
(25%)

Aether Vial is not a threat.  It is useless without other guys.  Besides, it is active on turn 3 at the earliest.  Big deal--arcane lab is a turn 3 play too and that's not scaring infinite combo players.

Voidmage is a threat on turn 3.  I don't care.  He's showing up to the party too late.

Confidant, ninja, and Oath are not threats at all.

You have 4 Forces, 4 Children, and 4 Mages.  Children are easily deal with by Desire, or lots of storm--easy to do when you have no Rods or Chalices.  Forces are good.  Mages are a pain in the ass because they can name accelerants for a 1-2 punch when combined with Rod/Chalice.  You don't have either of those.  Especially since you name Tendrils, you do nothing to stop a massive storm up and finding the bounce spell FTW.  Essentially, Mages and Children are both dealt with the same way--with a ton of storm that is undisrupted with the exception of your 4 forces.

I think you, and people in general, think too much of hate cards against combo.  Here's the thing about them.  First you need to draw them.  Second, you need to cast them.  Third, you need them to resolve.  And fourth, they need to actually be relevant to that particular game (ex: turn 1 Rod is useless against a 3 ritual hand.  Chalice @1 is useless against a mox, mox, crypt, academy hand).  Hate cards need to have a lot of things going for them to be effective.  Too many people forget this and overvalue (and in the case of the combo player, overfear) them.

[brianpk80]

Aether Vial is not a threat.  It is useless without other guys.  Besides, it is active on turn 3 at the earliest.  Big deal--arcane lab is a turn 3 play too and that's not scaring infinite combo players.

How is AEther Vial not a threat when it nullifies your 6/7 counters, negates your bounce, and comes online on turn two, not turn three, at the earliest?  Assuming you were playing Pitch Long against this deck, let's analyze the risks in comboing out on turn two vis-a-vis the following board:

AEther Vial @ 1 counter
Island and Underground Sea and Dark Confidant in play, Pollluted Delta in graveyard
Four cards in hand
19 Life

If you blindly go off, you risk dumping every egg into one basket only to be foiled by a Children of Korlis and your one (maybe two?) maindeck Tendrils removed from the game following Yawgmoth's Will.  If you want to chain together a lot of fireworks for some storm, keep in mind that Timetwister, Memory Jar, and Tinker into Memory Jar are probably not ideal here because they give me so much latitude to draw into a Children and Vial it out.  Your chances of proceeding unmolested are those same familiar probabilities of an opponent's FoW + blue card, but now with the added threat of an opponent randomly drawing into or having drawn a Children of Korlis, which only increases for every draw-7 you indulge.  One option is to take the fairly blind risk and go for it (assuming you can).  It's impossible to derive whether I have the Children in hand from the board state.  I don't know you're playing Pitch Long and I fetched out an Underground for DC; if I had the Children, I know I don't need to hard cast them because of Vial.  Another option is to tutor up Chain of Vapor and go off with that extra constraint, which should (though won't definitely) buy me another turn.     

Maybe you would cast Necropotence and pass the turn, inching the Vial up to 2 counters and having an opponent with as many as six cards in hand?  How would you respond to an EoT Vial -> Children of Korlis, and next turn Mage on Chain of Vapor?  What kind of clock do I have now that you've effectively fireballed yourself for ten?

For starters, the correct answer is not Mind's Desire with 75 storm next turn culminated by a miraculous Tendrils of Agony at 87 storm, for 174 life. 

Voidmage is a threat on turn 3.  I don't care.  He's showing up to the party too late.

You speak as though you've never had a game endure longer than two turns.  What's your secret?

Confidant, ninja, and Oath are not threats at all.

I listed them as "secondary" threats, equating them with Jotün Grunt, Ancestral Recall, Time Walk, and Kataki, War's Wage.  This category contemplates cards that acquire primary threats or cards that represent attenuated or mid-game threats.  Do you dispute this categorization?

You have 4 Forces, 4 Children, and 4 Mages.  Children are easily deal with by Desire, or lots of storm--easy to do when you have no Rods or Chalices.  Forces are good.  Mages are a pain in the ass because they can name accelerants for a 1-2 punch when combined with Rod/Chalice.  You don't have either of those.  Especially since you name Tendrils, you do nothing to stop a massive storm up and finding the bounce spell FTW.  Essentially, Mages and Children are both dealt with the same way--with a ton of storm that is undisrupted with the exception of your 4 forces.

This disingenuously misconstrues what I've said about Meddling Mage since my initial post.  I said I will always name "Tendrils of Agony" if I have nothing else on the table.  Coupled with any other threat either in play or in hand w. a Vial, my alternatives expand to encompassing Chain of Vapor, Massacre/Tinker post-sideboard, Yawgmoth's Will, and occasionally Ancestral Recall when I know or believe it has been tutored. 

I think you, and people in general, think too much of hate cards against combo.  Here's the thing about them.  First you need to draw them.  Second, you need to cast them.  Third, you need them to resolve.  And fourth, they need to actually be relevant to that particular game (ex: turn 1 Rod is useless against a 3 ritual hand.  Chalice @1 is useless against a mox, mox, crypt, academy hand).  Hate cards need to have a lot of things going for them to be effective.  Too many people forget this and overvalue (and in the case of the combo player, overfear) them.

I find it strange that you conclude your argument that "lacking Chalice/Null Rod weakens this build" with a lecture on how situational and useless those cards often are.  What can I say except that I... agree with you here.  Meddling Mage, Children of Korlis, True Believer, Tormod's Crypt, and Voidmage Prodigies are much more consistent in their functionality against storm combo decks.  That is exactly why I am running them maindeck and (in Believer's and the extra Crypt's case) in the sideboard over the less resilient and less predictable artifact duo.

-BPK

[Moxlotus]

The only things that Long cares about are cards that directly stop me from winning.  Vial does not do that.  It nullifies ways from me combating your hate IF you have other cards.  But does nothing on its own.  Vial is not a threat the same way Crucible from stax is not a threat.

You speak as though you've never had a game endure longer than two turns.  What's your secret?
 

Against fish I've either won or fizzled out by then.  If its going longer, I'm probalby going to lose.  And I'm probably going to lose because of the cards that were active during the first 2 turns.

I find it strange that you conclude your argument that "lacking Chalice/Null Rod weakens this build" with a lecture on how situational and useless those cards often are.  What can I say except that I... agree with you here.  Meddling Mage, Children of Korlis, True Believer, Tormod's Crypt, and Voidmage Prodigies are much more consistent in their functionality against storm combo decks.  That is exactly why I am running them maindeck and (in Believer's and the extra Crypt's case) in the sideboard over the less resilient and less predictable artifact duo.

 

I said lacking Chalice and Rod hurts the build because while they are situational, they are still more disruptive than other stuff like Child and come active before Voidmage.  Child also gets hurt by the printing of Grapeshot (for 5c Long). I completely agree with Believers in the board.  Those things can't be solved with large amounts of storm.  They are a huge pain in the ass.

Maybe you would cast Necropotence and pass the turn, inching the Vial up to 2 counters and having an opponent with as many as six cards in hand?  How would you respond to an EoT Vial -> Children of Korlis, and next turn Mage on Chain of Vapor?  What kind of clock do I have now that you've effectively fireballed yourself for ten?

Congratulations, you drew a good 7 cards to back up your first turn Vial.  This stuff happens.  It also happens that I could just kill you or if you don't draw a Child I'm still probably going to kill you if I pass the turn.  This game could go any way.

[brianpk80]

The only things that Long cares about are cards that directly stop me from winning.  Vial does not do that.  It nullifies ways from me combating your hate IF you have other cards.  But does nothing on its own.  Vial is not a threat the same way Crucible from stax is not a threat.

I see where you are coming from, and acknowledge that AEther Vial is, without a doubt, moot with no creatures in hand.  However, I respectfully disagree with your Crucible comparison.  AEther Vial solidifies the stature, evasiveness, and resolution of cards that genuinely are silver-bullet strategy hosers against Pitch Long: Children of Korlis, True Believer, or Meddling Mage in response to a Tutor.  Secondly, I run 25 creatures, and more post sideboard, 19 of which are primary and secondary threats, contrasted with Stax's considerably fewer and much less intrusive 4 Wastelands and 1 Strip Mine.  Additionally, when you refill my hand with Jar, Twister, (or Wheel in a rogue 5C build or Grim Long) you are fueling the Vial that may become your undoing.  Finally, in game one at least, there is no realistic out from Voidmage Prodigy, Meddling Mage on Tendrils, and untapped Vial @ 2 in play.  Chain on Mage resolves, Mage bounces back out naming Tendrils, Voidmage counters Yawgmoth's Will.  You would have had to find and resolve Hurkyl's Recall/Rebuild, find and resolve Chain of Vapor, find and resolve Yawgmoth's Will all in one (relatively early) turn.  Not likely.       

Against fish I've either won or fizzled out by then.  If its going longer, I'm probalby going to lose.  And I'm probably going to lose because of the cards that were active during the first 2 turns.

That's a very bold claim for Pitch Long.  While it can goldfish on turn one and turn two, my experience with it has been that given any disruption, turn three is usually its "fundamental" turn. 

I said lacking Chalice and Rod hurts the build because while they are situational, they are still more disruptive than other stuff like Child and come active before Voidmage.  Child also gets hurt by the printing of Grapeshot (for 5c Long). I completely agree with Believers in the board.  Those things can't be solved with large amounts of storm.  They are a huge pain in the ass. 

There's only so much I can do to allay the Pitch Long threat without diluting the build against the rest of the field.  As mentioned before, Null Rod is mutually exclusive with AEther Vial and Chalice of the Void is as inconsistent as Daze.  I am curious how True Believer is any significantly more a threat than Meddling Mage on Tendrils of Agony in this match-up, but perhaps that was an oversight. 

That said, there are a few other factors to consider.  First, Pitch Long is one player in a field with a greater viable amalgam of archetypes than any other format.  Secondly, it is only threatening in the hands of a truly superb pilot who is drawn to this deck, which means... maybe one or two hundred players (?) nationwide.   By superb, I mean to say "the best of the best" because we Magic players are all human, stumble into mistakes, and Pitch Long is decidedly not very forgiving.  Third, at a major event where I would anticipate a lot of capably driven Pitch Long, I would be maindecking True Believers, more acceleration, an extra Tormod's Crypt, and probably sideboarding some combination of extra Crypts, Leyline of the Void, Duress, Misdirection, Orim's Chant, Trickbind, and Glowriders. 

The reason I play the deck as is is because while it demonstrably has a focused and solid base of disruption against Tinker/Enigma strategies, it fortifes against random game losses to "Stupid Red Burn," "Suicide Black," and the other mountains of "jank" likely to show up in Swiss or at small to mid-sized tournaments.  In particular, Oath of Ghouls itself is hideously effective at making sure "Dark Ritual, Duress, Nantuko Shade" doesn't relegate you to an early 0-2 drop as it easily can for other aggro-prone Fish builds. 

Congratulations, you drew a good 7 cards to back up your first turn Vial.  This stuff happens.  It also happens that I could just kill you or if you don't draw a Child I'm still probably going to kill you if I pass the turn.  This game could go any way.

Of course... but doesn't this just illustrate the relevance of the AEther Vial that you summarily dismissed a few paragraphs ago?

Thanks for the feedback,

-Brian

[Moxlotus]

There's only so much I can do to allay the Pitch Long threat without diluting the build against the rest of the field.  As mentioned before, Null Rod is mutually exclusive with AEther Vial and Chalice of the Void is as 

I'm not saying at all that the deck should be changed.  Hell, I'm not suggesting Chalices or Rods should even be in the deck.  I would need to test the deck to see if they are best against the field.  This may very well be an amazing deck against the overall field (although I doubt your claim of favorable against the entire field).  What I'm questioning is the deck's ability to handle combo.  On True Believer, I cut myself off short for some reason.  He is a huge pain in the ass when combined with Mages.  He also takes out possible Duress's or Chants at the same time as Tendrils.

Finally, in game one at least, there is no realistic out from Voidmage Prodigy, Meddling Mage on Tendrils, and untapped Vial @ 2 in play

Generally, when giving an example and you need 3 cards to make a point its best to just let it go.  Also, in this situation it would be turn 4 at the earliest (assuming you are holding 2 mana open for Kai to be useful).  You would need lotus or Sapphire & Pearl to be earlier.

That's a very bold claim for Pitch Long.  While it can goldfish on turn one and turn two, my experience with it has been that given any disruption, turn three is usually its "fundamental" turn. 
 

Eh, that's what I've found.  I think 2.5 is the high end of the fundamental turn for PL.  Maybe I'm too ballsy or you're too timid.  I categorize Gifts as having a FT of 3, and PL is faster.  Which is also why I don't consider Vial a threat because it doesn't do anything substantial (besides the possible Child) until YOUR turn 3.  So even if PL takes another turn to set up, if PL was on the play it still doesn't count as a threat.

Of course... but doesn't this just illustrate the relevance of the AEther Vial that you summarily dismissed a few paragraphs ago?

It illustrates that draw 7s are inherently random and any opposing deck could draw the FING NUTZ just as I could.

I think Vial correlates closely with Crucible.  Both aren't useful on their own.  Both take a few turns/set up to work.  While you may have more dudes than Stax can have wastes, Stax has a Crop Rotation, Vamp, Imp, and DT to find their Strip for Crucible to be useful--so there are roughly equal amounts of cards that they combine with to provide some disruption.

[brianpk80]

I'm not saying at all that the deck should be changed.  Hell, I'm not suggesting Chalices or Rods should even be in the deck.  I would need to test the deck to see if they are best against the field.  This may very well be an amazing deck against the overall field (although I doubt your claim of favorable against the entire field).  What I'm questioning is the deck's ability to handle combo.  On True Believer, I cut myself off short for some reason.  He is a huge pain in the ass when combined with Mages.  He also takes out possible Duress's or Chants at the same time as Tendrils.

Point taken on the Believer; he also has (marginally) better timing flexibility with AEther Vial because you can use him after the Tendrils unlike the Mage, where it's necessary to anticipate the exact moment Tendrils will be cast and Vialing him out right before it's on the brink of happening but after the window for Chain of Vapor (blue mana, another tutor, etc.) has closed.  As for this deck being favorable against the majority of the field, let me qualify that.  Because it offers the user so much flexibility and utility, like Slaver, its strength will vary in proportion to the user's skill, knowledge of the field, and understanding of his/her own deck.  An expert piloting this deck will find a favorable match-up against a field comprised of many different decks against players at skill levels ranging from average to expert.  In essence, this isn't Oath of Druids where, irrespective of skill, you usually win when you get that Orchard/Oath opening and tend to lose otherwise.  There are mistakes to be made around every corner, knowing when/what to fetch, what order to lay the creatures and when... some being more forgiving than others.   

Finally, in game one at least, there is no realistic out from Voidmage Prodigy, Meddling Mage on Tendrils, and untapped Vial @ 2 in play

Generally, when giving an example and you need 3 cards to make a point its best to just let it go.  Also, in this situation it would be turn 4 at the earliest (assuming you are holding 2 mana open for Kai to be useful).  You would need lotus or Sapphire & Pearl to be earlier.

What you say would be correct were I aiming to glorify that three card set-up in its entirety.  However, my aim was much less ambitious: merely to illustrate the multiplicity of roles in which AEther Vial compromises Pitch Long's strategy.  That said, Jet, Petal, Time Walk, and as you mentioned, Lotus, Sapphire, and Pearl are all capable of acclerating this not-quite-unusual set-up. 

Eh, that's what I've found.  I think 2.5 is the high end of the fundamental turn for PL.  Maybe I'm too ballsy or you're too timid.  I categorize Gifts as having a FT of 3, and PL is faster.  Which is also why I don't consider Vial a threat because it doesn't do anything substantial (besides the possible Child) until YOUR turn 3.  So even if PL takes another turn to set up, if PL was on the play it still doesn't count as a threat.

Fair enough.  I won't quibble with you over whether (disruption notwithstanding?) Pitch Long has a fundamental turn of 2.5 or 3. 

It illustrates that draw 7s are inherently random and any opposing deck could draw the FING NUTZ just as I could.

Right, and by running Draw-7's you should be concerned by any contingencies, in addition to filling opponent's hand with FoW's and bombs, that siphon leverage out of your own spells.  Again, ignoring an AEther Vial is huge blind risk.   

I think Vial correlates closely with Crucible.  Both aren't useful on their own.  Both take a few turns/set up to work.  While you may have more dudes than Stax can have wastes, Stax has a Crop Rotation, Vamp, Imp, and DT to find their Strip for Crucible to be useful--so there are roughly equal amounts of cards that they combine with to provide some disruption.

I think you're correct that AEther Vial and Crucible of Worlds share a lot of common features.  They sacrifice immediacy in exchange for the hope of a later pay-off.  My argument however is that AEther Vial with Meddling Mages, Children of Korlis, Voidmage Prodigies, and True Believers should be a lot more alarming for a Pitch Long player than a Crucible on the other side of the table which is inoperative during your turn, carries much smaller threats (Wasteland?), and may or may not be incorporated into a 5-Color build (so no tutors). 

Anyway, Vial is strong against Pitch Long and it's even stronger against Meandeck Gifts.  If Vials become popular (w. Children/Believer/Mage) and you continue playing Pitch Long, you should give closer consideration to how heavily they can interfere with your strategy. 

Take care,

-Brian

[brianpk80]

I remember when Vroman was first tinkering around with Uba Stax. The original list that he brought to SCG Chicago sported a sideboard that was full of silver bullets, and his deck ran little in the form of card selection aside from the Bazaar of Baghdads. He said that that was his greatest mistake, and that the sideboard should be stocked with a few good answers rather than a lot of random ones.

Good point.  However, if you check out some of the things I've said about the sideboard both in the initial post and in some responses here, it's not as "random" as it initially appears.  The reason for this is largely that despite the diversity of methods used to address specific threats, there is a redundancy of purpose.  For instance, 2 Serendib Efreet + 1 Darkblast comprise one "unit" that will be boarded against Fish and Ichorid.  3 Darkblasts would be ridiculous.  3 Serendib Efreets might  work but the Darkblast doubles as sideboard material for Slaver (which packs the most dangerous Welders), where I usually wouldn't want 3 Efreets.  Likewise, Chain of Vapor, Hurkyl's Recall, and Rebuild comprise a "unit" of answers to Stax.  Three Hurkyl's Recalls, while appearing more "redundant/consistent" on the surface would actually be a significantly weaker unit because of its poor reaction to Chalice of the Void.  Also, Chain of Vapor has a greater latitude of utility outside of that match.  Tormod's Crypt and Extract are a "unit" that prey on graveyard-dependent decks that tend to have limited win conditions (Gifts/Long).  Notably, the Crypt becomes a 2-of post-sideboard.  Wasteland is a minor alteration to the mana base where preferable.  Compare it to a Swamp or Island in a combo sideboard v. Stax, except that Wasteland doubles as an anti-Bazaar card.  Yawgmoth's Will is restricted.  Kami serves multiple purpses.  The only possible random singleton in there is Hibernation which is the last card and a catch-all for Oath, Simic Sky Swallower, Gro-creatures, and the potentially weak Madness/Threshold match-up.  Further, the sideboard would be modified in anticipation of any given meta, but is kept as is for a "general" cross-field.  That given, I fail to see the benefit of exchanging it outright for "3 Hurkyl's Recalls, 3 Seal of Cleansings, 4 Leyline of the Voids, 2 Umezawa's Jittes, and 3 Energy Fluxes." 

Another thing that Vroman did when first encorporating Uba Mask into a stax deck was that his first versions were very much focused on making Uba Mask the lynch-pin of the entire deck. While this certainly draws the most efficiency from the Uba Mask, it also makes you play weaker cards because they have a stronger apparent synergy with the card in question. He eventually reconciled this desire to abuse Uba Mask by integrating it into an already strong Stax deck, instead focusing more on Bazaar of Baghdad and the hundreds of interactions it creates, both with Goblin Welder as well as with Uba Mask. As a result all of the cards in the deck became synergistic with one another instead of all of the cards being synergistic with one card.

This is another good point.  You bring up the fact that being driven to abuse Oath of Ghouls may weaken the build as a whole.  However the cards that interact most strongly with the Oath (Children of Korlis and Voidmage Prodigy) are among the strongest constituents against a general field.  Secondly, I'm not running four Oaths and incorporating it as an indispensible centerpiece of the deck, but rather as an icing on the cake, capable of yielding significant and unusual bonuses for a Fish deck.

I mention this because I think that your draw engine is very similar to that of Uba Stax. You run 0 tutors and not the most robust draw-engine I've ever seen in Fish, and so you should probably heed Vroman's advice. Similarly, it feels as though you're trying to break Oath of Ghouls in half, but you may be trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to Fish. I would say that Fish's creatures are already good enough that you don't need to add in techy creatures like Stern Proctor. The definition of a good sideboard card is one that is situationally good, or just better in some matchups than others, which is a good description of Stern Proctor. And the number of times that you're going to get a Stern Proctor-Voidmage Prodigy-Oath of Ghouls loop in a real game situation is pretty close to one, at which point you've already won and you're just wasting time doing nothing.

The draw engine is actually fairly robust with over 25% of the non-mana portion of the deck dedicated to card advantage: 4 Confidants, 2 Ninjas, 1 Ancestral, 1 Library, and 2 Oath of Ghouls.  I'm not sure how any Fish deck could hope to top that aside from maxing out on Ninjas and playing Curiosity.  That would be, in my opinion, overkill.

On the Proctor... Stern Proctor is useful, if not critical, in just about every major match I can think of.  I appreciate him v. Oath, I appreciate him v. Stax, I usually need him v. Gifts and Dragon.  He purges Null Rods and Pithing Needles in Fish-like matches.  He bounces back untapped Memory Jars (this does happen).  Unlike a card in the vein of Kami of Ancient Law, which has some uses against a bunch of different deck types, but is flat overall, the Proctor is essentially useful against 80-90% of the field.  That to me rings more true of a maindeck card than a sideboard member.  Finally, recurring him in the manner you outline is over-the-top and, while possible to execute those gymnastics, it's not ever necessary and certainly not a compelling reason to include him.  He doesn't need  to be recycled, but he can  be.  Mentioning those recyclables could be thought of as the analogue of a Gifts player explaining that Yawgmoth's Will could be Burning Wished and recast: a potential benefit if required, but largely bombastic and unnecessary to win.       

I love the idea of Oath of Ghouls. It gives Fish a solid way to stay in the game, a way to trump counterspells, and the option of a lot of tricks, but I feel like it might be too slow for the latter option. As a matter of fact, a simple Duress can keep you in the game and can certainly trump counterspells, and it costs much less. If you do keep Oath in the deck as more than merely a 2 mana raise dead, then Bazaar of Baghdad would be very good, as Jacob said. Or Zombie Infestation. But the main thing you need is some rigorious testing, as a hundred games spread over several versions of your deck is not statistically significant. When you get to a thousand, you might have more of an idea as to how good the deck truly is.

Wise words.  However, you learn a lot about a deck by piloting it once.  Even more by piloting it twice, and a third time.  Each subsequent play yields diminishing returns.  There's not going to be as significant a distinction on the pilot's own subjective assessment of his/her deck after playing 800 games compared with playing 200-250 (which is where I am at now). 
 
Thanks for the input.

-Brian

[Liam-K]

When I'm running pitch long, when I look at my opening hand, if I don't see myself going off on turn 2 through force I VERY seriously consider sending the hand back.  Vial is awful in this match unless you have it first turn with a children, that's the only way it's fast enough and relevant enough for me to care.  If you vial out the children and pop them in response to the 10th copy of tendrils I will swear at you in a good natured fashion.

On meddling mage, while you are correct that I *always* have to bounce him when you name tendrils, you are incorrect in assuming I *always* care.  Mage = tendrils often slows me down for a turn, and it's not uncommon for it not to slow me down at all.  A more cleverly played mage usually buys more than one turn. 

Mage = tendrils doesn't force me to go into contortions, it forces me to go off in a slightly splashier fashion.  This is a hard thing to get through to non-storm players.  Each spell in a chain is not equally important.  Once you hit escape velocity you can make your deck do whatever you want, including cast chain of vapor.  It is MUCH easier to go broken, then find chain of vapor, then find tendrils than it is to find and resolve chain of vapor, then go broken, then find tendrils.  You want to stop someone from achieving that state of fluid resource conversion from which it's ridiculously easy to do stuff.

Of course, like you said, it can be hard to spoke someone's wheel pre-emptively.  Like I said, the better you learn to read your combo opponent, the more you'll pick up on what sort of card they need to resolve.  Naming Yawgwill is sometimes strong as it presents a frustrating conundrum: resolve bounce without escape velocity, go off with a draw7 vs FoW, try one of your costly outs (bargain, desire, necro/timewalk), or pass the turn.  When someone is low on reusable mana and has a stocked yard, this is better than tendrils.  Give serious consideration to naming Grim Tutor, it's the only high density threat in the deck and often gets used even after "going off" to find the tendrils and the most likely to leave someone out of gas- a much shitter situation to be in than having a gassy hand that needs to be squeezed for a little extra in order to bounce a mage.  Pay attention to when naming Dark Ritual is likely to shut someone off or just generally cause mana problems.  Pay attention to what's in the graveyard, it lets you know what's still in their deck.  Pay attention to tells.  Brainstorm, shuffle effect, mox in the midgame contains a lot of information.

I think a problem you're experiencing is with tendrils, you always see the mage do something, even when it sucks, whereas frequently a cleverly played mage will still be on the table when you lose, even though he bought you 3 turns.  His effect is hard to gauge that way.  I can only recommend getting to know long better, or playtesting against someone who takes extensive notes and going over his effect in restrospect.

[LotusHead]

The only things that Long cares about are cards that directly stop me from winning.  Vial does not do that.  It nullifies ways from me combating your hate IF you have other cards.  But does nothing on its own.  Vial is not a threat the same way Crucible from stax is not a threat.

I agree with this point, and this from a long time Salvagers player (Trinket, Oath and Bob varieties) and Shop player (Well, The Gilded Claw mostly. Thanks Dan!)

Chalice I can handle, Null Rod I can't, usually.

With a deck using neither Chalice NOR Null Rod, I fear almost nothing if I am playing Combo.

That being said, I like the tech of 2 Oath of Ghouls as an engine/enabler.  Your deck DOES seem to be more of a Vial Build, but Bazaar sounds fun.  Maybe even 4 Oath, 4 Bazaar crazyness.



I look forward to actually testing your build now that I have TS on MWS!

[benthetenor]

Good point.  However, if you check out some of the things I've said about the sideboard both in the initial post and in some responses here, it's not as "random" as it initially appears.  The reason for this is largely that despite the diversity of methods used to address specific threats, there is a redundancy of purpose.  For instance, 2 Serendib Efreet + 1 Darkblast comprise one "unit" that will be boarded against Fish and Ichorid.  3 Darkblasts would be ridiculous.  3 Serendib Efreets might  work but the Darkblast doubles as sideboard material for Slaver (which packs the most dangerous Welders), where I usually wouldn't want 3 Efreets.  Likewise, Chain of Vapor, Hurkyl's Recall, and Rebuild comprise a "unit" of answers to Stax.  Three Hurkyl's Recalls, while appearing more "redundant/consistent" on the surface would actually be a significantly weaker unit because of its poor reaction to Chalice of the Void.  Also, Chain of Vapor has a greater latitude of utility outside of that match.  Tormod's Crypt and Extract are a "unit" that prey on graveyard-dependent decks that tend to have limited win conditions (Gifts/Long).  Notably, the Crypt becomes a 2-of post-sideboard.  Wasteland is a minor alteration to the mana base where preferable.  Compare it to a Swamp or Island in a combo sideboard v. Stax, except that Wasteland doubles as an anti-Bazaar card.  Yawgmoth's Will is restricted.  Kami serves multiple purpses.  The only possible random singleton in there is Hibernation which is the last card and a catch-all for Oath, Simic Sky Swallower, Gro-creatures, and the potentially weak Madness/Threshold match-up.  Further, the sideboard would be modified in anticipation of any given meta, but is kept as is for a "general" cross-field.  That given, I fail to see the benefit of exchanging it outright for "3 Hurkyl's Recalls, 3 Seal of Cleansings, 4 Leyline of the Voids, 2 Umezawa's Jittes, and 3 Energy Fluxes." 

I can certainly see what you are saying, but at the same time, this is precisely what Vroman's sideboard was built to do. It was a ton of singletons that worked efficiently and as "units" when boarded in together, but you run the risk of overboarding, as there's no strong objective measure of a card's worth in a particular matchup. You end up saying things like "This card could be good" or "This card could combat one sideboard card that they may bring in". More often than not, that leaves you with dead cards and a weaker deck post-board. What you do (and this comes with more testing) is find the problem matchups and dedicate the board to handling them sufficiently. Then if you can't board in cards for an already positive matchup because there's no room in the board, it's not a big deal, but you've used your sideboard most efficiently.

On the Proctor... Stern Proctor is useful, if not critical, in just about every major match I can think of.  I appreciate him v. Oath, I appreciate him v. Stax, I usually need him v. Gifts and Dragon.  He purges Null Rods and Pithing Needles in Fish-like matches.  He bounces back untapped Memory Jars (this does happen).  Unlike a card in the vein of Kami of Ancient Law, which has some uses against a bunch of different deck types, but is flat overall, the Proctor is essentially useful against 80-90% of the field.  That to me rings more true of a maindeck card than a sideboard member.  Finally, recurring him in the manner you outline is over-the-top and, while possible to execute those gymnastics, it's not ever necessary and certainly not a compelling reason to include him.  He doesn't need  to be recycled, but he can  be.  Mentioning those recyclables could be thought of as the analogue of a Gifts player explaining that Yawgmoth's Will could be Burning Wished and recast: a potential benefit if required, but largely bombastic and unnecessary to win. 

This goes back to what I was saying earlier. Sure, the Proctor does something every match. It's very rare that you will have a card in Vintage that doesn't do something every match. But that doesn't mean it's useful for the main deck, especially when there are other potential cards. Not that there are necessarily better cards, but 250 games can't fully shape a main deck.

Wise words.  However, you learn a lot about a deck by piloting it once.  Even more by piloting it twice, and a third time.  Each subsequent play yields diminishing returns.  There's not going to be as significant a distinction on the pilot's own subjective assessment of his/her deck after playing 800 games compared with playing 200-250 (which is where I am at now). 

Before you can speak intelligently on a deck's performance in a matchup, I'd expect at least 150-200 games per-matchup. That means you've got at least 800 games to go, if not 4 times that. You're doing good work, but you need to accept that a top-tier deck goes through hundreds of hours of testing before it is considered top-tier.

[Elric]

Wise words.  However, you learn a lot about a deck by piloting it once.  Even more by piloting it twice, and a third time.  Each subsequent play yields diminishing returns.  There's not going to be as significant a distinction on the pilot's own subjective assessment of his/her deck after playing 800 games compared with playing 200-250 (which is where I am at now). 

Before you can speak intelligently on a deck's performance in a matchup, I'd expect at least 150-200 games per-matchup. That means you've got at least 800 games to go, if not 4 times that. You're doing good work, but you need to accept that a top-tier deck goes through hundreds of hours of testing before it is considered top-tier.

I'll go out on a limb and say that since 95% confidence margin of error win percentage= your observed win percentage +- 0.98/sqrt(number of games played), you're almost never going to know about a deck's matchups based on your own playtesting if you want a statistically rigorous standard.  So 100 sideboarded and 100 unsideboarded games in a matchup is still not very good from a margin of error perspective, and almost no one will have played that many matches against, say, the 8-10 most popular other decks at any given time (and this doesn't even count deck variations and/or playskill differences).  If you imagine trying to do a round-robin with the 10 most popular decks, you'd have 45 matchups and at 200 games per matchup, you'd be playing 9000 games to get a good idea of what's going on in the metagame (and hope it doesn't shift before you finish your 2500 hours of testing!). 

This means that no one has a good idea about the entire metagame from a statistical perspective, although a very small number of exceedingly dedicated players of particular decks will know that deck's matchups well.  You should play a deck long enough to get familiar with it (and learn if it's any good- if a deck is really bad, you'll know it), but don't think that you're going to get any kind of statistical proof one way or the other.

[brianpk80]

When I'm running pitch long, when I look at my opening hand, if I don't see myself going off on turn 2 through force I VERY seriously consider sending the hand back.  Vial is awful in this match unless you have it first turn with a children, that's the only way it's fast enough and relevant enough for me to care.  If you vial out the children and pop them in response to the 10th copy of tendrils I will swear at you in a good natured fashion.

Liam, you bring a lot of insight to the table.  I'm going to address your specific points in turn.  I'll start with AEther Vial, which I think you too quickly disregard in this match.  There are countless different ways that Vial is relevant here.  With any form of acceleration (Moxen, Lotus, Time Walk, etc.), if I open with Children of Korlis and AEther Vial, you've got a lot of work on your hands if you want to kill me pre-sideboard.  While it's conceivable you may topdeck Lotus, Ancestral, Chain of Vapor, and Yawgmoth's Will, it's more likely going to be just enough of a nuisance that comboing out would be a hasty option, leaving you either a , some black mana, or a Tutor short of fetching up Will, resolving it, fetching Chain of Vapor, resolving it, and fetching up Tendrils for the kill so early in the game.  Passing the turn inches the Vial up to 1 counter which means you either have to resolve Chain of Vapor twice or resolve it after a Rebuild/Hurkyl's Recall, and using the latter on me then forfeits its utility as a storm-builder for you.  Meddling Mage on Chain of Vapor then means you're looking at winning only once you can muster up 18 or 19 storm, and that's only if the specter of Force of Will (and a few nuisance singletons like Tormod's Crypt and Strip Mine) coupled with an active Vial pumping Mages, Grunts, Voidmages, draw-creatures, and Children affords you that luxury.  I realize Pitch Long is more than capable of doing exactly that (making 18 storm), but never with any consistency in the first three turns of the game.  Your essential goal is to kill with 10-12 storm by or before Turn 3.  If you can't do that, then with every passing turn Pitch Long's chances of victory continually diminish as time is never on its side. 

Now let's assume I have a more mundane opening of Underground Sea and an AEther Vial, then I pass the turn.  There's a good chance that if I kept this hand, I'm holding FoW so that gives you one turn to kill me through it before that gruesome Vial @ 1 hits the table and another before uncounterable Meddling Mages, Voidmage Prodigies, Jotun Grunts, Dark Confidants, (and post-sb) True Believers come online.  (The lack of a fetchland here suggests a creature-heavy/land-light opening).  Note that once the Vial reaches 1 counter, your "bombs" are pretty much narrowed down to Yawgmoth's Will, and the slower Rebuild/CoV, Bargain, and Mind's Desire because you shouldn't want to risk filling my hand with Childen via Twister, Tinker, or a hardcast Jar.  Similarly, playing Necropotence and passing the turn into a potential EoT Children, another draw, another land drop, another creature, and then Vial @ 2 is a gamble.  Having played Vial Fish for most of this year (in an earlier build with 4 maindeck Believers), I can tell you that when I would beat combo (and yes the earlier incarnations like Grim Long were much easier to prey on than Pitch Long), more than half of those victories came out of an AEther Vial at an inopportune moment for the opponent.  Now with Children of Korlis, scoffing at the threat of Vial @ 1 by "swear[ing]" it off as random luck overlooks the fact that this play is exactly the sort of maneuver the Fish build is designed to execute.  In terms of probability, it's about as likely to show up as Crucible-Wasteland in a 4-Crucible 4-Wasteland Uba Stax build, which is to say that it's not particularly unusual at all.           

Next, the Vial is relevant in any situation where your deck is performing less than optimally.  This might be because of a fizzled Mind's Desire, an opponent having double-FoW, a bum Memory Jar, or a series of ugly mulligans among other reasons.  Generally, Pitch Long is capable of overcoming a slow start, holding back, and shooting out fireworks for the win a few turns down the road.  While the deck aims to kill as quickly as possible, it's difficult to contain it indefinitely.  Hence, it's certainly not impossible for Long to steal victory on the fourth, fifth, sixth turn, etc.  This is where the combo player should least like to see an AEther Vial pumping out creatures that seal its otherwise open fate.   

And finally, post-sideboard you'll probably be cluttering up an otherwise fluent storm build with Massacre, Darksteel Colossus, and perhaps a few other alternatives to broil the Fish (scallops anyone?).  A smart Fish player will keep a considerable amount of creature control packaged for games 2 and 3, and Vial runs circles around any "Tinker-DSC with FoW/MisD backup" strategy. 

Now, I'm not saying AEther Vial is as threatening a turn 1 play as Workshop-Trinisphere (then again, what is?), but it's not something that a prudent player can callously disregard.  Sure, I get horrible draws and lose murderously to storm combo from time to time but from experience I can say that, win or lose, AEther Vial is always a major focal point in any Fish v. Combo match when it is drawn and resolved.   

On meddling mage, while you are correct that I *always* have to bounce him when you name tendrils, you are incorrect in assuming I *always* care.  Mage = tendrils often slows me down for a turn, and it's not uncommon for it not to slow me down at all.  A more cleverly played mage usually buys more than one turn. 

I find I've been misread on my earlier comments regarding Meddling Mage.  What I have said is that in the primitive stages of the game (Turn 1 or 2), where I know I'm playing Pitch Long, I have nothing on the table, and I see nothing on their end but an untapped Polluted Delta, if I can resolve a Meddling Mage, I am going to name Tendrils of Agony in that limited circumstance.  Why?  Because absent Duress/Cabal Therapy, I have no idea what is percolating in their hand and any uneducated guess risks a high chance of having a completely negligible Mage, whereas the Mage on Tendrils always does something even if it doesn't singlehandedly win the game (which I never suggested it would).  I would think given the fairly tight and precise nature of Long's calculations, and the game in general, that such a Mage stands a good chance of buying me that one or two additional turns needed to inch up a Vial, draw into FoW, Tormod's, Children, Voidmage, etc.  Another good instance for Mage on Tendrils is when the Long player resolves Yawgmoth's Will on turn three/four and I have a Vial @ 2 and a Mage in hand.  In that case, I would wait for him/her to climb up to seven or eight storm, have maybe BBBU2 available, no Chain of Vapor in sight, and Vial out Mage on Tendrils in response to a tutor (presumably the tutor for Tendrils of Agony).     

Now, I'm certainly not so monolithic in naming my Mages v. Pitch Long.  As you mention above, consideration of the game state plays a large role in determining what to name.  If I've got the Children or another Mage in play, Chain of Vapor is a good call game one.  Likewise, if my opponent has fizzled something, has 2 cards in hand, a spent Lotus in the graveyard, and only 1 land on the table then casts Vampiric Tutor, Mage on Ancestral Recall is probably the best call there.  I've named Misdirection when I've been at a critical point in the game that required me to cast my own Ancestral.  Massacre and Tinker are likewise good options post-sideboard.  And of course, later in the game, with a robust opponent's graveyard, Mage on Yawgmoth's Will is a much better call than Tendrils of Agony (unless I have a Crypt).  If the Will has been spent and my opponent has tried unsuccessfully to go off more than one time, I think Timetwister is a strong call to avert bringing it all back, subject to some other fact-sensitive knowledge.   

In sum, after the second/third turn, when I resolve or Vial a Meddling Mage into play, I'm going to scout out the game state and my opponent's cues in determining what to name.  But in the most undeveloped turns, when I have no plausible basis of accurately reading my opponent, Mage on Tendrils is an overall good call in my opinion, especially if I have one or more Forces of Will.  Hopefully this has clarified my position on naming Mages v. Pitch Long.       

Once you hit escape velocity you can make your deck do whatever you want, including cast chain of vapor.  It is MUCH easier to go broken, then find chain of vapor, then find tendrils than it is to find and resolve chain of vapor, then go broken, then find tendrils.  You want to stop someone from achieving that state of fluid resource conversion from which it's ridiculously easy to do stuff.

Well put.  By going "broken," it seems that you're most likely referring to a sequence of plays involving Yawgmoth's Will (which allows you to duplicate tutors, bounces, and everything else).  If I'm reading you correctly, I agree with you here.  If I were playing Pitch Long, I wouldn't hesitate to combo out with Will vis-a-vis a problematic Mage but I might be less cavalier about throwing all my eggs into a Memory Jar, Yawgmoth's Bargain, Necropotence, or Mind's Desire.  In either scenario, failing to acquire both Chain of Vapor and Tendrils of Agony (or tutors for both), the mana to finance them (or, more plausibly, them and their attendant tutors), and the pitch counters that may be needed to protect them invites a wastefully blown load and a probable game loss.   

That being said, I like the tech of 2 Oath of Ghouls as an engine/enabler.  Your deck DOES seem to be more of a Vial Build, but Bazaar sounds fun.  Maybe even 4 Oath, 4 Bazaar crazyness.
I look forward to actually testing your build now that I have TS on MWS!

Thanks, LotusHead.  Your Gilded Claw build has always been absurdly vicious on me. 
For those who have suggested Bazaar of Baghdad, any thoughts on complementing that with Weathered Wayfarer?  He fetches the Bazaar, alleviates color-screw that might otherwise enjoin a player who's spending land drops on it, and his land-fetch ability actually fills the hand to support the Bazaar, absent an Oath of Ghouls.  I could see branching out to more off color Moxen, a maindeck Academy, and perhaps some Spheres of Resistance or a Crucible if I adopted that route. 

I can certainly see what you are saying, but at the same time, this is precisely what Vroman's sideboard was built to do. It was a ton of singletons that worked efficiently and as "units" when boarded in together, but you run the risk of overboarding, as there's no strong objective measure of a card's worth in a particular matchup. You end up saying things like "This card could be good" or "This card could combat one sideboard card that they may bring in". More often than not, that leaves you with dead cards and a weaker deck post-board.

Actually, I've found this to be largely untrue in this case.  I don't know exactly what Vroman was sideboarding at the time so I can't comment directly.  But when I put in 1 Darkblast, 1 Tormod's Crypt, and 2 Serendib Efreets in place of four Force of Wills against Ichord for instance, I'm not finding myself bearing any regrets.  If I had opted instread for 3 Crypts, I'd be bested by Chalices and Pithing Needles.  Similarly, when I'm playing Gifts post-sideboard and I see my opening hand, I'm not prone to looking at Chain of Vapor and wishing desperately that it were Hurkyl's Recall, or vice versa. 

Secondly, the techniques Vroman has adopted for Uba Stax are a lot more effective there because that deck tends to have much more rigid and clear-cut strengths and weaknesses.  For instance, (aside from 4-Color-Control which nobody plays) there aren't any popular matches that bother this Fish build to the same degree as the Ichorid match would for Stax.  A block of Caltrops or Crypts in the sideboard go a lot further there than they would here.  Conversely, I don't have the extremely favorable matches of the sort that Stax enjoyed vs. pre-Ravnica Fish.  The matches that are "favorable" for me are generally good in subtle and small ways, such that I couldn't simply ignore them post-sideboard and expect to continue winning.  Additionally, those matches tend to change dramatically after sideboarding and would in fact require me to make allowances to keep pace with those competitors.  While certain quantities and choices in my sideboard are subject to change and certainly up for debate, I am not fully convinced that the "strict redundancy" approach is inherently better here than the "redundancy of purpose, diversity of methods" approach I've incorporated.  That said, I acknowledge the points you've made and appreciate your input.   

This goes back to what I was saying earlier. Sure, the Proctor does something every match. It's very rare that you will have a card in Vintage that doesn't do something every match. But that doesn't mean it's useful for the main deck, especially when there are other potential cards. Not that there are necessarily better cards, but 250 games can't fully shape a main deck.

Actually, if any archetype is known for having moot maindeck cards v. some given match, it would be Fish (and to a lesser extent, Stax).  By its very nature, Fish includes creatures that may be extraordinarily strong in some matches but dead weight in others.  I'm thinking of cards like True Believer, Kataki, War's Wage, Grim Lavamancer, and so forth.  The Proctor is balanced enough that I have no current reservations keeping him maindeck.  In addition to his obvious uses, there is a lot to be said for having maindeck Vial-able escape valves for unusual permanents like Pyrostatic Pillar, Cursed Scroll, The Abyss, Land Tax, and Goblin Charbelchers.  A serious change in strategy (like mana denial or Bazaars) would however probably relegate him to the sideboard or the electric chair. 

Before you can speak intelligently on a deck's performance in a matchup, I'd expect at least 150-200 games per-matchup. That means you've got at least 800 games to go, if not 4 times that. You're doing good work, but you need to accept that a top-tier deck goes through hundreds of hours of testing before it is considered top-tier.

I disagree for a few reasons, many of which are echoed in Elric's response above.  Cementing a build and refusing to change it throughout thousands of match-ups neglects the reality that Magic is evolving by the second.  This is especially true for a Fish deck which harbors no innate broken strategy of its own but instead reflects and responds to the metagame at any particular moment or place.  Further, testing the same build over and over, like a woodpecker, yields diminishing returns and as Elric proffered above, is incapable of reaching any genuine stature of statistical certainty.  If it takes 1,200 games for a player to realize that Gilded Drake is strong against Tinker.dec, that player direly needs to expedite his/her learning curve. 

Secondly, I do accept that a deck should undergo many hours of testing before it is acknowledged as top tier.  However, stating that seems to misconstrue my objectives in posting the list here.  I'm not so ambitious or presumptuous to suggest that this is a consummate Tier One deck.  Rather, I've written to share some of the experiences I've collected and information I've gathered that I find worth discussing, optimizing, and paving the path for other subsequent innovation. 

Finally, I've received a lot of feedback both here and elsewhere stressing that the Fish archetype faces an uphill battle in a field of unmitigated brokenness and other Enigmatic monstrosities.  While I agree with that point, I don't see these difficulties as defeating enough that anyone should abandon the archetype altogether or surrender the quest to keep it current and competitive.  Accordingly, I would hope to continue exploring avenues of sustaining and improving Fish now and in the future. 

Thanks to everyone who has responded,

-Brian (BPK) 

[Moxlotus]

  Note that once the Vial reaches 1 counter, your "bombs" are pretty much narrowed down to Yawgmoth's Will, and the slower Rebuild/CoV, Bargain, and Mind's Desire because you shouldn't want to risk filling my hand with Childen via Twister, Tinker, or a hardcast Jar

You're forgetting a 4 very important bombs--Demonic Tutor and 3 Grim Tutors.

Before you can speak intelligently on a deck's performance in a matchup, I'd expect at least 150-200 games per-matchup. That means you've got at least 800 games to go, if not 4 times that. You're doing good work, but you need to accept that a top-tier deck goes through hundreds of hours of testing before it is considered top-tier.
 

I heavily disagree.  If in the early stages of the deck, when you aren't adept at it, and you are beating the shit out of other decks--you know its good.  As you get better and more experienced with the deck, you're only going to get better matchups.  Not all top-tier decks go through ridiculous amounts of testing.  I'm willing to guess that between Becker, Endress, and me, PitchLong had under 40 hours of good testing when he took it to Richmond and took 10th and 3rd for the weekend.  I could probably be pretty confident if I say under 20 hours.  When a deck beats the shit out of things right off the bat when you are still inexperienced--its a good match.

[Purple Hat]

can someone please explain why dark confidant is scary to storm combo or combo in general.  they plan to win on turn 1, 2 or 3.  if confidant hits play turn 1 you draw 2 extra cards that the combo player gets to see and cost yourself ~3 life (most decks average mana cost is about 1.5).  this makes it less scary than nights whispers and I don't see combo players shaking in their boots about the concept of turn 1 tap out and play night's whispers.  at any point after that confidant becomes less relevant as the game goes on.  to me this suggests that it's generally irrelevant.  why are you considering it a threat?  You've listed it as a threat not only to storm combo but also to dragon.  the presence of dark confidant on the board will have literally no effect on how I play dragon.  now if I see a card like swords off your confidant draw, then I just know what I need to set up in advance.  this seems to be an advantage to the dragon player.

[brianpk80]

can someone please explain why dark confidant is scary to storm combo or combo in general.  they plan to win on turn 1, 2 or 3.  if confidant hits play turn 1 you draw 2 extra cards that the combo player gets to see and cost yourself ~3 life (most decks average mana cost is about 1.5).  this makes it less scary than nights whispers and I don't see combo players shaking in their boots about the concept of turn 1 tap out and play night's whispers.  ... You've listed it as a threat not only to storm combo but also to dragon.  the presence of dark confidant on the board will have literally no effect on how I play dragon. 

Dark Confidant is not "scary" to storm combo and I have not seen that suggested here.  If you're referring to the threat density comparison between UW/b Vial Fish and UW Null Rod Fish that I posted above, you'll notice the Confidant is categorized as a "secondary" threat.  This encompasses cards that acquire primary threats or represent smaller or later-game threats which are not an immediate concern for a storm player.  If you're referring to cards that I listed as strong in a given match-up in the initial post, you'll notice that the Confidant is absent from the Pitch Long analysis.  On the other hand, it's not a dead draw either because it fills the hands with Children, acceleration, Meddling Mage, Force of Will, Tormod's Crypt, and others that force Pitch Long to interact.  Similarly, it's strong in the Dragon match-up because winning that match tends to pivot on resolving a few select cards when or before they combo out.  Filling your hand with those options is a pretty self-evidently effective way to stay in the game. 

at any point after that confidant becomes less relevant as the game goes on.  to me this suggests that it's generally irrelevant.  why are you considering it a threat? 

By contrast, the more cards you have drawn from a Confidant throughout the course of a game, the more relevant his impact has been.

[referring to Dragon] now if I see a card like swords off your confidant draw, then I just know what I need to set up in advance.  this seems to be an advantage to the dragon player.

That's incorrect.  A Dragon player is in a better position when that Swords to Plowshares is still in the Fish player's library.  Its exposure is well worth the draw.  There's not much more I can say to highlight the merits of Dark Confidant except to remind you that drawing cards in Magic (or "placing" them into your hand) is generally a positive thing. 

You're forgetting a 4 very important bombs--Demonic Tutor and 3 Grim Tutors.

I think of them as bomb-fetchers, with the bombs themselves being the cards generating the storm and facile resource conversion that enable you to win so abruptly: Yawgmoth's Will, Mind's Desire, Necropotence, Yawgmoth's Bargain, Chain of Vapor/Rebuild, Timetwister, Tinker, Memory Jar, and (if included) Windfall. 

-BPK

[Purple Hat]

obviously I meant that playing dark confidant later than turn 1 made it less relevant the conditional was "IF you play dark confidant on turn 1 then..." so the after that clearly refers to a confidant played after turn 1 and I stand by my statement that a confidant played after turn 1 draws less cards in the relevant period vs a combo deck.  I think your deck has some cool ideas behind it, and some VERY neat tricks, but suggesting that like 90% of your deck is scary to combo is rediculuous, and to me your claim that dark confidant is in any way threatening to a combo player is insane.  I don't think I've ever even considered countering dark confidant while playing a combo deck.  I'd much rather take the odds that the 1 or 2 extra cards you see will be the wrong cards and save my counters for things that matter.  he doesn't stop me from going off and he doesn't stop me from winning once I'm off so why should I care?  obviously drawing cards is good, but letting me know what I have to play around in advance is bad.  Obviously bob is a good card, but combo matchups aren't really his strong suit.

[brianpk80]

obviously I meant that playing dark confidant later than turn 1 made it less relevant the conditional was "IF you play dark confidant on turn 1 then..." so the after that clearly refers to a confidant played after turn 1 and I stand by my statement that a confidant played after turn 1 draws less cards in the relevant period vs a combo deck.  I think your deck has some cool ideas behind it, and some VERY neat tricks, but suggesting that like 90% of your deck is scary to combo is rediculuous, and to me your claim that dark confidant is in any way threatening to a combo player is insane.  I don't think I've ever even considered countering dark confidant while playing a combo deck.  I'd much rather take the odds that the 1 or 2 extra cards you see will be the wrong cards and save my counters for things that matter.  he doesn't stop me from going off and he doesn't stop me from winning once I'm off so why should I care?  obviously drawing cards is good, but letting me know what I have to play around in advance is bad.  Obviously bob is a good card, but combo matchups aren't really his strong suit.

Purple Hat,

Thanks for the feedback.

Unfortunately, what you intended to say regarding Dark Confidant's late game relevance was neither clear nor obvious.  Had it been so apparent, I would have responded accordingly.  Now that you've clarified your position on the matter, I agree with what it appears you are saying.  Putting a Confidant into play on the fourth turn is nowhere near as effective as playing one on the first turn.  No disagreement there.

Next, most of the ideas that you oppose stem from things that I never actually stated.  Some examples:

90% of this Fish build is "scary" to combo.
Dark Confidant is a major threat to combo.
Combo players should counter Dark Confidants.
Dark Confidant is highly relevant in the storm match-up.

At this stage, it is unclear whether you are misinterpreting me or if you are deliberately exaggerating my statements to burn a straw-man.  At any rate, I've never said or implied any of the above.  If you have some counterpoints that reflect a more accurate understanding of my views and statements, I'd be glad to address them.

-Brian

[Purple Hat]

obviously I meant that playing dark confidant later than turn 1 made it less relevant the conditional was "IF you play dark confidant on turn 1 then..." so the after that clearly refers to a confidant played after turn 1 and I stand by my statement that a confidant played after turn 1 draws less cards in the relevant period vs a combo deck.  I think your deck has some cool ideas behind it, and some VERY neat tricks, but suggesting that like 90% of your deck is scary to combo is rediculuous, and to me your claim that dark confidant is in any way threatening to a combo player is insane.  I don't think I've ever even considered countering dark confidant while playing a combo deck.  I'd much rather take the odds that the 1 or 2 extra cards you see will be the wrong cards and save my counters for things that matter.  he doesn't stop me from going off and he doesn't stop me from winning once I'm off so why should I care?  obviously drawing cards is good, but letting me know what I have to play around in advance is bad.  Obviously bob is a good card, but combo matchups aren't really his strong suit.

Purple Hat,

Thanks for the feedback.

Unfortunately, what you intended to say regarding Dark Confidant's late game relevance was neither clear nor obvious.  Had it been so apparent, I would have responded accordingly.  Now that you've clarified your position on the matter, I agree with what it appears you are saying.  Putting a Confidant into play on the fourth turn is nowhere near as effective as playing one on the first turn.  No disagreement there.

Next, most of the ideas that you oppose stem from things that I never actually stated.  Some examples:

90% of this Fish build is "scary" to combo.
Dark Confidant is a major threat to combo.
Combo players should counter Dark Confidants.
Dark Confidant is highly relevant in the storm match-up.

At this stage, it is unclear whether you are misinterpreting me or if you are deliberately exaggerating my statements to burn a straw-man.  At any rate, I've never said or implied any of the above.  If you have some counterpoints that reflect a more accurate understanding of my views and statements, I'd be glad to address them.

-Brian

if confidant hits play turn 1 you draw 2 extra cards that the combo player gets to see and cost yourself ~3 life (most decks average mana cost is about 1.5).  this makes it less scary than nights whispers and I don't see combo players shaking in their boots about the concept of turn 1 tap out and play night's whispers.  at any point after that confidant becomes less relevant as the game goes on.  to me this suggests that it's generally irrelevant.

this could also be read as:
if confidant hits play turn 1, then you draw two extra cards, which the combo player gets to see, at the cost of ~3 life and is thus worse than turn 1 nights whispers, otherwise it is less relevant as the game goes on.

Note how the only reference to time here concerning dark confidant are the statements "if confidant hits play on turn 1" and "at any time after that confidant becomes less relevant as the game goes on"

You took my post as a whole, replaced the middle section with "..." despite the fact that there was a conditional statement preceeding it that gave it context, then responded to the middle section seperately to make me look like I was making a trivially stupid point (the more cards you draw off dark confidant the less relevant it is) that I wasn't and you say I'm setting up straw-men?  I suppose that's one interpretation.  Perhaps if you have to seperate a paragraph into a "begining...end" and a "middle" in order to get it to say what you want it doesn't say what you want.  Perhaps.  I suppose other things could be going on there.

as to your point about exagerating claims to burn straw-men, find a place where I claim you made the point "dark confidant is a major threat to combo."  I'll wait.  Find anything?  You didn't?  oh, I see, that's cus I never said that.  What about "Dark Confidant is highly relevant in the storm match-up" see where I put that on you either?  I've simply disputed the fact that it's relevant enough to list as a threat.  Yet I'm the one setting up straw-men.  The more I go back and look at my posts and your responses the more I find me saying something, you finding a conveniently uninteligent thing I might have said but didn't and responding to it, and then you claiming that I've somehow treated you unfairly.  Clearly you think I'm stupid if you think that I made statements like "drawing more cards is less good than drawing less cards," and that's all well and good, but I honestly don't have the time for a debate in which you make up stupid things, claim I said them, then refute these trivially false statements.  When you're ready to respond to what I've actually said shoot me a pm or something to let me know.

back on topic:

I guess I just don't understand what you mean by Primary, Secondary and Tertiary threats if you don't mean that cards listed under any of those groups are threatening or that combo should be conserned about them resolving.  You've cassified 58.3% of your deck as "disruptive" to storm combo (previously I thought: 100%-10%=90% not realizing your percentages didn't sum to 100%) yet many of the cards are cards that combo players will literally just ignore.  If I'm just gonna ignore it then it's not disruptive.  You don't list dark confidant as a card that combo can largely ignore, despite the fact that you admit combo is going to largely ignore it in most cases when played correctly.  To me there is a logical disconnect between the statements "dark confidant is disruptive to storm combo" and "I expect combo to largely ignore dark confidant." Are you saying that combo players are playing incorrectly when playing against dark confidant?

EDIT: I see where my mistake on the 90% thing was, you appear to have classified ~60% of your deck as threats, I have corrected this point.

I'm not saying that your deck is bad, in fact I think it's pretty good, but it seems to be short on relevant disruption in the early game and rather than admit that you're jumping through hoops to describe non-disruptive cards as disruptive.

[brianpk80]

they plan to win on turn 1, 2 or 3. if confidant hits play turn 1 you draw 2 extra cards that the combo player gets to see and cost yourself ~3 life (most decks average mana cost is about 1.5).  this makes it less scary than nights whispers and I don't see combo players shaking in their boots about the concept of turn 1 tap out and play night's whispers.  at any point after that confidant becomes less relevant as the game goes on. 

  [emphasis added]

As you might see, a plausible way of reading your original words would be to interpret it as your suggesting that if Confidant hits play turn 1, then because Pitch Long aims to kill you in the first three turns, he is thereby irrelevant any time afterwards.  I initially responded to this take on your post.  Since you've clarified the ambiguity and I agreed with your underlying viewpoint, there shouldn't be any further need to discuss the grammatical minutiae. 

as to your point about exagerating claims to burn straw-men, find a place where I claim you made the point "dark confidant is a major threat to combo."  I'll wait.  Find anything?  You didn't?  oh, I see, that's cus I never said that. 

I know you never said that.  Those four examples were introduced as ideas you have been arguing against (beliving me to hold them), not as statements you have made or viewpoints you have been advancing.   

I guess I just don't understand what you mean by Primary, Secondary and Tertiary threats if you don't mean that cards listed under any of those groups are threatening or that combo should be conserned about them resolving.  You've cassified 58.3% of your deck as "disruptive" to storm combo (previously I thought: 100%-10%=90% not realizing your percentages didn't sum to 100%) yet many of the cards are cards that combo players will literally just ignore. 

I've subsequently illuminated the concept of a secondary threat as a one that acquires a primary threat or represents a mid-late game or attenuated threat.  Dark Confidant acquires primary threats.  Combo doesn't need to pay direct attention to him and certainly shouldn't be "afraid of" him.  But the fact remains that left unmolested, he will turn over cards that represent a primary threat (Tormod's Crypt, Force of Will, True Believer, etc).  If I were playing Pitch Long (or just about any deck), I would much rather my opponent had a Stormscape Apprentice, Grim Lavamancer, or Isamaru on the other side of the table than a Dark Confidant.  Hopefully, this should alleviate any confusion regarding my earlier categorization. 

If I'm just gonna ignore it then it's not disruptive.  You don't list dark confidant as a card that combo can largely ignore, despite the fact that you admit combo is going to largely ignore it in most cases when played correctly.  To me there is a logical disconnect between the statements "dark confidant is disruptive to storm combo" and "I expect combo to largely ignore dark confidant." Are you saying that combo players are playing incorrectly when playing against dark confidant?

Not at all.  Combo should ignore him because if it chooses to engage me, I have threats that a lot more disturbing than Dark Confidant.  Any disruption he offers stems from his role as a threat-fetcher, not a threat himself. 

I'm not saying that your deck is bad, in fact I think it's pretty good, but it seems to be short on relevant disruption in the early game and rather than admit that you're jumping through hoops to describe non-disruptive cards as disruptive.

Well thank you, and that last note is a fair criticism.  The interplay between broken combo decks and Vial Fish hasn't gotten much attention in the past year.  Accordingly, I am discussing a lot of subtleties of the match that aren't apparent at first glance. 

-Brian