U/W Fish- An "Old" Face on the New Block

[The Duressed]

The problem, as I see it, is that this guy just doesn't have the power to help out your win in addition to drawing you cards. I really hate playing one-power guys in this deck as it is; meanwhile, Ninja will do the job that needs to be done: if he gets through, he will draw you a card. He also does double the damage of Sygg. Meanwhile, the merfolk doing his combat damage is not guaranteeing anything, and also the fact that he has a measly 1 power makes him even worse. I'm really having a hard time justifying a one-power creature in this deck that costs 2 mana.

Also, spots in this deck are extremely tight as it is. You proposed 2 cards to be cut, of which one I don't agree with very much in the first place (You'd really cut a Meddling Mage?). Add to the problem this idea: the ideal fish deck is based on consistency. You want to play essentially the same hand every game. So how can you say that this is your goal when you want to run a 2-of? It just doesn't fit with the basic fish principles. So, you could get closer to the core ideas of fish by cutting more things, but what? Is it really worth it?

[hauntedechos]

Greetings Vintage community,

I have not dropped a post in a long time.  I've been trying to keep up to the changes that occure so fast with the adaptations that have been runing rampant since the b/r list.

Firstly, as we can all see and feel, things have run back to the 2005 days with the lack of Gifts.dec and the loss of Brainstorm (a huge factor to say the least),  this should drop the coin that we should be looking at optimal deck lists from that time and then crossing them over to what we are dealing with now.  As I recall at that time, the talk was that Fish needed to be U/W/B to be competitive (via talks from Mr. Feinstein and myself as well as open Fish threads).  At that time, I belive the only B added was 4 Bobs, 4 Duress (or less if you feel it ) the possible addition of a Demonic and the U.Seas.  Looking over things as they have changed and meandered (the closer look at the case for Strategic Planning both in Slaver and now the proposed control Combo list as well as the grind lists)  I really don't see how things have changed to much and why we are all in a debate here.

Bob beats for 2 and flips a card every turn regardless as well as allowing you to play cards:  check as the better draw engine
Duress is pro active and doesnt roll over to your opponent having that extra mana for Daze:  check as the better wepon (who taps out these days? dont we all know better?)

the only thing I like better about the propsed list is the javeneers for welder and the factories for beats, which of course work better with standstills, however seems situational.

just my 2 c

Haunted.

[The Duressed]

I feel like the  build is better right now because, mostly, of the interactions it has with Standstill. It starts off every game with a good beater or tempo dude (I'm using Cursecatchers instead of Javelineers). It then drops an amazing 2-drop the next turn, either Null Rod or Standstill (and if Standstill is still on the table when you want to plop down a Ninja, there's no trouble). In either case, the tempo, gained by the first turn creature and also the Mishra's Factories, becomes really important. I really like that the  mana base is able to support a full set of Strips and Wastes in addition to a full set of Factories. A build that splashes black simply is not going to be able to support the Factories.

Regarding Duress vs. Daze: You're right in that Duress is really, really good. However, Daze is still powerful. It acts as yet another tempo card, slowing your opponent down enough to let you win the game. By itself, it's awfully weak. However, 3-4 Daze in addition to Null Rod, Wastelands, Strips, Stifles, Cursecatchers, and whatever else, becomes strong. Also, Duress is simply abysmal when your opponent is in top-deck mode. Daze still has potential in that scenario, if only as a pitch card for Force of Will.

Nice to have you back, Haunted 

[nineisnoone]

But Ninja doesn't accelerate your clock at all.  You trade a 2 power guy, for another 2 power guy. Sygg is +1 power for 2 mana.  Ninja is neutral to +1 power (if you bounce a Javelineer). I mean yes you can replay the bounced creature, but stictly speaking Ninja is not a Tempo-Creature.  And personally, I'm not fan.  I'd rather go for a hard counter, like Mana Leak.  This works well with Standstill, because if it's something worth breaking Standstill for, it's probably worth countering after you draw the cards.  And it also works perfectly fine at any board state.

I'm not really sure where it "goes against" fish principles.  It's not disruptive to the flow of the deck.  So drawing it or not drawing it is rarely an issue.  It's not the number it's run in that matters, it's the narrowness of the card.  For example, the basic U/W fish-standstill idea is to drop creatures and then drop a lock piece.  Sygg, fits into either area.  Granted, not as good as a Savanah Lions nor a Standstill, but it fits into either.  It can attack, and/or it can draw cards.  Ninja on the other hand is a narrow card.  It works when you have Lions + Standstill.  Sygg on the hand works with either, trading power for cohesive and consistent draws.

As for Meddling Mage, that's really a personal preference. I'm not that huge on him, so cutting to three feels fine.  I understand people like him as a 4 and there are plenty of good reasons for that.  I like 3 because I usually am not really that interested in multiples.  I'd rather want 2 Kataki's in main deck.  Probably cut Ninja's.  Sure, I guess that goes to deck randomness, but both cards are inherently random.  They both require your opponents to play certain cards to be useful.  So I personally prefer to have a broader range of annoyance than a narrower one.

[The Duressed]

Alright then, go ahead and test it. But please bring us back some detailed reports and results 

[Soon-Man]

I am testing out a list right now that runs black and doesn't play standstill. Keeping that in mind, how do you all weigh in on Jotun Grunt? My experience with the card isn't exactly great. Personally I think that his upkeep makes him hard to use because only a couple decks play enough cards to keep him going. I pretty much never was able to use my own yard with him. Still, he is a 4/4 for 2 that will most likely get at least 2 swings in. Do that potential 8 damage mean enough to run him?

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

you also have to keep in mind the potential disruptive power grunt has against deck like slaver, and cards like yawgs will, crucible, and goyf.

[Soon-Man]

As it turns out I was right and wrong about Grunt. After a lot of testing and a pretty successful tourny I think it belongs in the deck. I was right that most of the time he only gets in one swing, if your luck two. The cards that he gets rid of normally mean next to nothing. However the 4 to 8 damage that he could potentially be can actually be important. I ended up running 2 of him and it worked out just fine.

[Webster]

Barring odd scenerios, grunt should always get in at least 2 swings. Otherwise you've most likely played him at the wrong time.

[The Duressed]

I agree. I don't think he's a guy that you want to churn out A.S.A.P. I play him as the deck's late-game gas, and a way to help negate topdecks that might be or search up bombtastic cards like Will.