Noble Fish: GUW variants here!

[punki]

Hi,

I've just picked up a fish-deck for the first time in my life after always playing shops. Noble fish seems very strong and testing proved this. However I started out testing with a pre-zendikar list (no basics, no spell pierce and 1 more land), later I build Harlequins list and tested with that one.

Now I tested against 5 c stax, oath and tezzeret. Al matches were really in favor of the fish both pre and after SB. HOwever the games I did lose, I mostly lost on not getting the right mana of enough mana. To be more preciese: drawing basic + colorless source. With meddling and pridemages requiring 2 colors, I often could not cast them in time. So I'm inclined to go back to the build without basics. Do we really need basic land? We have stifle for the first fetchlands or can always just not fetch and wait until we need the mana. Also hierarch is almost the only thing I would ever tap for in my own first mainphase. And if he hits, wasteland isn't much of a factor anymore.

Then on to spel pierce. I do not like the card. Daze and fow help you resolve early threats and can counter theirs. Spell pierce doesn't help you resolve your own threats early in the game in my experience. Also with daze ans spell pierce, you have 6 cards that are mostly good on the play. And third: it doesn't counter creatures and strong aggro is the weakest matchup.
Now on the other hand, spel pierce saved me a couple of times countering a t1 tinker or lockpieces from shopplayers. I'm just thinking I might like swords to ployshares more because it can handle welders and confidants after they have hit the board so you can just safely tap out at times to cast your own threats in stead of having to keep U up to counter something of theirs that hopefully isn't a creature. Most draindecks have adopted confidant as a drawengine. Stax is on the rise and a resolved t1 welder can make your life very difficult if you cannot remove him. People are trying to get the hexmage dark depths combo te work, oath is getting more attention. All reasons I want to play Swords to plowshares in this deck.

I'm also thinking that maindeck stp enables me to cut goyf from the deck. Why play goyf? To block theirs if they have one. I think the factor of having a 'clock' isn't that important. If I have a board of selkie, goyf and an exalted creature. I am more inclined to attack and draw two then do more damage. Of course there comes a point where you just want to get it over with and then goyf shines, but a lot of bears also get the job done.

then we get to the list I will be testing from now on:

Land (17):
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Flooded Strand
4 Tropical Island
2 Tundra
1 Island
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine

Artifacts (8):
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Pearl
4 Null Rod

Creatures (18):
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Meddling Mage
4 Qasali Pridemage
2 Tygon Predator
4 Cold-Eyed Selkie

Instants (16):
4 Force Of Will
3 Daze
3 Swords to plowshares
4 Stifle
1 Ancestral Recall
1 hurkyll's recall

Sorceries (1):
1 Time Walk


What do you guys think? I'm really trying to understand the archetype and I want to play it in an upcoming tournament in a few weeks. So I have to learn and get more information 

[Odd mutation]

Hi Peter,

From my end of the table, the Spell Pierces were great! You won several counterwars with them and succeeded in stopping various key plays (like Tinker and Ancestral after I drew out other counters with bait). I would keep the Swords in the side and bring them in for Spell Pierces in the relevant matchups. Spell Pierce looked to be really good...

Goyf wasn't really a factor except for maybe one game. I'm not sure about going under 3 main deck though.

I was really impressed with how easy it was for you to get the Selkies on the battlefield with added strength/toughness bonusses from Hierarchs and Pridemages.  

I would put at least 2 Meddling Mages in the side. First game you regularly don't know what you play against and they're not always needed in several matchups.

Stifle and Daze were amazing... I'm used to them in legacy but even in Vintage they seem to work really well together! I believe that Spell Pierce is a very interesting addition to this tag team of doom.

You're right, the mana was your worst enemy!

Robrecht.

[Stormanimagus]

@punki – I am forced to agree with Odd mutation on almost all accounts.

* Goyf is a necessary evil to this deck. Sometimes you'll live the dream and be beating face with double-exalted bears or a team of them all at once, but it is a huge boon to the deck to have a single 1 costing dude that can be a 5/6 body on his own. I think 3 is the right number, but I wouldn't run any less than that. There's just no other fatty who fits that role like Tarmogoyf. I used to hate the card myself and I'd entertain the idea of other beaters, but none of them are as consistent or as unconditional as the Llurgoyf.

* Spell Pierce, though untested in battle as yet should be really solid in theory. Just because it is not free does not mean it can't be used on turn 1 or 2. On turn 1 (if you are on the play and don't have a Noble to play), it is like FoW #5-7 and on turn 2 it can easily protect a Null Rod if you played a turn 1 Noble. It is an overall powerful counterspell and should be MDed IMO because you want better Game 1 against decks like TPS that could give you trouble. I think this version of Fish already has a pretty solid match-up against other forms of Fish and even beats because it runs 8 exalted dudes and some efficient early counters to boot. Post SB against those decks you'll be siding out Null Rods and Spell Pierces to bring in 4 STP and possibly some Trygons as extra flying beaters to kill Jittes with. I think game 2 and 3 should be relatively easy with those SB changes. If my testing shows that the beatz match-up is very poor perhaps I'll include some Jitte or extra removal (Path To Exile as STP # 5 & 6 perhaps?) in my SB to shore that up.

In general I think Spell Pierce is pretty clutch early on at stopping broken plays without being a card that is TOO conditional. It also stops and early play that Fish decks have a hard time dealing with: Tinker --> Robot.

Here's my current list for your reference:

Selkie-Slam

Land (17):
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Flooded Strand
3 Tropical Island
2 Tundra
1 Island
1 Forest
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine

Artifacts (8):
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Pearl
4 Null Rod

Creatures (19):
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Meddling Mage
4 Qasali Pridemage
3 Tarmogoyf
4 Cold-Eyed Selkie

Instants (15):
4 Force Of Will
3 Daze
3 Spell Pierce
4 Stifle
1 Ancestral Recall

Sorceries (1):
1 Time Walk

SB
4 Ravenous Trap
3 Pithing Needle
2 Trygon Predator
2 Ethersworn Canonist
4 Swords To Plowshares

[CowWithHat]

Storm, have you tried wheel of sun and moon over ravenous trap?  It seems to me that the trap is only good against dredge.  The wheel is more powerful against dragon style decks, as well.  I think the wheel is better in general because fish benefits less from one turn of stall then it does from shut down spells like the wheel.

[Stormanimagus]

Storm, have you tried wheel of sun and moon over ravenous trap?  It seems to me that the trap is only good against dredge.  The wheel is more powerful against dragon style decks, as well.  I think the wheel is better in general because fish benefits less from one turn of stall then it does from shut down spells like the wheel.

To be honest, I havn't tested the Wheel, but I don't like the fact that it does nothing to actually hinder their deck-size eventual GY size if they remove/bounce it. Most Ichorid pilots run Chain Of Vapor/Emerald Charm to rid themselves of Leyline and this card doesn't even remove Win Conditions while they are looking for the bounce spell. That AND the fact that it usually doesn't come online until turn 2, thus making it susceptible to Unmask AND Cabal Therapy, are all reasons that I have a tough time thinking it's any good. It might deserve some more testing, but I think that the Trap is plenty good at getting there against Ichorid because it buys you the critical time you need to beat-down with Goyf or play out a Needle on Bazaar or a Waste on Bazaar. Against Dragon I'm not sure what you are hoping to accomplish with Wheel. They have plenty of draw engines/mana sources to just bounce on your EOT and go off the next turn. It hasn't destroyed ANY of their combo pieces and, again, comes down on turn 2 most often. I'm just not that enamored of the card.

-Storm

[Kowal]

Emerald Charm doesn't affect enchant players, only global enchantments.

If your opponent is good enough to name Wheel of the Sun and Moon with his therapy, he deserves either a prize or a DQ.

Chain of Vapor answers almost everything you'd ever want to run, so saying Chain of Vapor is relevant removal is ridiculous.  It's like saying you wouldn't want to run spells against Tezzeret because they run Force of Will.

Wheel shuts off Dragon even if Dragon is already in the bin, because the loop will try to put it back and it will go in the deck instead.  If they try to dredge from the bin, the dredge cards go to the bottom of the deck as well.  Narcomoeba doesn't even trigger because it's a replacement effect.  So the size of their graveyard is largely irrelevant.

If you're trying to remove win conditions with your hate, you're doing it wrong.  You're an aggro deck, your hate is a stall tactic, not a jester's cap.

The only argument I have against it is that having multiples on deck does nothing in the face of Echoing Truth or Reverent Silence.  But then, you shouldn't really ever have multiples in play.  Diversity in your hate is how you handle Ichorid, because you force them to find multiple answers simultaneously which the deck just can't realistically do.

[CowWithHat]

Although I don't think the chain of vapor analogy serves, I think that Kowal makes some strong points for Wheel.  

The main reason I see wheel being better though is that fish isn't as explosive as ichorid.

I think when you are playing fish you are always about to lose (ignore the fact that I'm using my signature to make a point please).  Give them a turn undisrupted and they kill you.  Ravenous trap is a very strong disruption tool while wheel changes the game completely.  With wheel in play you are going to win unless they deal with it.  It's like a leyline for white/green.  I know its slower but it isn't as obnoxious to draw later in the game.

edit:

Against Dragon it does a similar thing.  If you let them play their game they are going to kill you too fast.  If you play disruption good things happen but dragon only needs 2 mana to end you.  It is really hard to keep a deck from two mana.  When you cast a Wheel suddenly they need to get to two mana and assemble a combo that is a full card bigger (removal for the wheel).  

I think wheel is better against dragon because it does its job better then all your maindeck cards.  Ravenous trap is not as good as force of will because you can't counter other things; nor is it better than stifle because it doesn't remove all their permanents from the game.  Wheel is better then Meddling Mage, in play, because it stops all their enchantments at once.  It is better than pridemage because you don't need to keep mana up.

[Stormanimagus]

Hey all you Noble Fish folks out there. I just thought I'd let you all know that I've modified the opening post to this thread to include some background on the deck as well as my most updated list. I think it is well-organized and easy to read and gives you an idea of how the deck was conceived. I think it's probably worth the read, and I'll get more into the deck's strategy and card choices soon and add it to that post.

Does anyone know how to hide portions of text so that you can include it, but allow the reader to "shrink" it so they don't have to scroll a ton if they don't want to read a particular section? I was able to do that on the Wizards boards, but perhaps it's just not possible here. Would I just basically have to do a link? If anyone with knowledge in this area could help me I'd like to make that first post as useful as possible to the readers. Thanks,

-Stormanimagus

[Stormanimagus]

I'm curious to know what people think of using Ravenous Trap AND Wheel of Sun and Moon together in the same SB. It seems really anti-synergistic because, if you have wheel out then Trap becomes useless. Would something like THIS config work?

3 Wheel
2 Trap
3 Needle

I dunno. I'm pretty sure I want to bring in 8 cards to really help shore up what is a BAD match-up for Noble Fish, but I'm just not sure which 8 cards those should be. I know diversity can be really good, but I'd also like to know what people think about which cards are simply really tough to answer. Wheel seems like it falls into this category as Emerald Charm whiffs on it and really the only commonly played spell that nabs it is Chain Of Vapor. I'm pretty sure most Ichorid pilots worth their salt WILL be siding in 4 Chain Of Vapor, but that's another reason I'd keep in all my countermagic and probably be siding out:

4 Null Rod
3 Goyf
1 Selkie

For whatever hate I find most useful.

Heck, if I could nuke 4 more spots I'd try to find a way to side in 4 STP. Could siding out all the Selkies work? Or would that be shooting myself in the foot for finding answers when I need em?

I'm really a bit lost on how to shore up this match-up best and could use some input. Ichorid is the bane of my existence with Noble Fish and I'm sick of losing to it.

-Storm

[dawgie]

For Spell Pierce, it has made the deck stronger. You can just leave one land untapped and it makes the other player hesitate. A combination of Daze and Spell Pierce is actually powerful and I love it a lot.

During the second game, I SB two goys and just put in one Goyf (except for the aggro matchup). Yes. I have a love-hate relationship with Goyf. Sometimes Goyf is irrelevant because it does nothing unless you can get a 4/5 Goyf on the second turn and do early beatdown. Its an exalted dude who does the killing. I have tried to look for a card to replace Goyf but there are not a whole lot of good creatures that can replace Goyf because it has that random power.

[Juzam_Jim]

The French Vintage Cup saw Selkie-based decks dominate the tournament, and 3 of 4 top 4 finishes were Selkie decks.
I think it's fair to say that atm, Selkie-based decks are the best Fish decks out there.

Interestingly, the winner had a few new ideas, which I think are worth mentioning.

Here is the decklist for reference:

1: Camille Fenet (Selkie Ninjas)

// Lands
    4  Tropical Island
    2  Tundra
    3  Wasteland
    1  Strip Mine
    2  Windswept Heath
    2  Polluted Delta
    2  Flooded Strand

// Creatures
    4 [ARB] Qasali Pridemage
    4  Cold-Eyed Selkie
    4  Noble Hierarch
    4  Ninja of the Deep Hours
    3  Cursecatcher

// Spells
    1  Black Lotus
    1  Hurkyl's Recall
    3  Spell Snare
    4  Force of Will
    4  Daze
    1  Misdirection
    1  Mystical Tutor
    1  Regrowth
    1  Mox Emerald
    1  Mox Sapphire
    1  Mox Pearl
    3  Null Rod
    1  Ancestral Recall
    1  Time Walk
    1  Brainstorm

// Sideboard
SB: 3  Relic of Progenitus
SB: 4  Tarmogoyf
SB: 2  Kataki, War's Wage
SB: 1  Seal of Primordium
SB: 1  Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 1  Energy Flux
SB: 3  Swords to Plowshares

Ninja of the Deep Hours and Cursecatcher maindecked are quite interesting.
I've tested a bit with this build, and Ninja is a pretty decent card allowing for even more card advantage. Cursecatcher has also been great in the earlier phases of the game.

What do you think of this build? I must admit that I've never been a huge fan of Trygon Predator as it just seems too slow.

[Deathknight]

Interestingly with regard to your discussion on Ichorid side strategy, all other Selkie decks in the French Vintage Cup had Wheel of Sun and Moon in their side.
Our test and tournament experience since May in Europe shows that it is a solid choice that most Ichorid players find really difficult to answer (especially when you also run Wasteland, Stifle and StoP).
For the French Vintage Cup, we also played with an idea that is subject to critics : Enlightened Tutor as a one-off for Jitte, Energy Flux and Wheel (not counting Rod). Card disadvantage on one side, allowing to find a game-breaking card on the other.

Regarding the Selkie version that won the tournament, it was more designed for an aggro environment, especially with Selkie-like decks (this tournament metagame is traditionnally quite specific). It was less designed to fight Shop and Stax decks. In the end it was the appropriate choice to do. All over the day, Trygon was not as useful as it was for previous tournaments. However, it still didn't understand the impact of Regrowth.

[CowWithHat]

@Deathknight

To be clear on the enlighened tutor comment.  Do you suggest running it maindeck as additional null rods or do you suggest running it in the board to come in with other tutorable hate cards?  If you are suggesting the later I think you could play a psuedo-wishboard and run 4 sideboard tutors and one or two copies of your sideboard shut down spells.  That way you have basically 5 of your specific hate card game two with only 1 slot really devoted to the opposing deck.  I think the tutor is lack luster maindeck as you run only null rod as a tutor target (I guess you can get Lotus but blowing a tutor and a draw step on fast mana doesn't seem like a good fish strategy), but I like the potential of a 4 in the board idea.

[RecklessEmbermage]

@Deathknight

To be clear on the enlighened tutor comment.  Do you suggest running it maindeck as additional null rods or do you suggest running it in the board to come in with other tutorable hate cards?  If you are suggesting the later I think you could play a psuedo-wishboard and run 4 sideboard tutors and one or two copies of your sideboard shut down spells.  That way you have basically 5 of your specific hate card game two with only 1 slot really devoted to the opposing deck.  I think the tutor is lack luster maindeck as you run only null rod as a tutor target (I guess you can get Lotus but blowing a tutor and a draw step on fast mana doesn't seem like a good fish strategy), but I like the potential of a 4 in the board idea.

Siding in 4 e-tutors seems very unappealing. It's both bad tempo and CA loss and drawing more than one in any game with a deck that needs to establish an early tempo advantage to win is not good.

Playing 2 tutors and a select few enchantments and artifacts main gives the deck flexibility. Then poast-board, it can side out the tutors and the targets it doesn't need for more copies of the hate-cards it does need. This clearly demands strict priorization when it comes to sideboard slots and an intimate knowledge of metagame and match-ups, but is the approach I'd choose if I was to play e-tutor in such a deck.

Example:

Main: 2 e-tutor, 1 jitte, 1 energy flux, 1 wheel (like Deathknight proposes, plus one tutor)

Side: 1 jitte, 2 kataki (not more energy fluxes, rather a non-tutorable card to fill the same role. You don't want to play e-tutor against stax, for instance), 1 crypt, 2 samurai of pale curtain, 4th wasteland (to replace dead cards in the ichorid match-up -probably not the 2 tutors in this specific case, since you really need the virtual extra pieces of hate).

Or something in the same vein.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Why would you bring in Jittes when you could bring in Vault-Key?

[CowWithHat]

Why would you bring in Jittes when you could bring in Vault-Key?

Key vault needs two cards where Jitte needs only one.  That sideboard slot is reserved for decks that pack a heavy creature contingency and they usually have almost as hard a time dealing with an active Jitte as an active time vault.

@RecklessEmbermage
If you run a board with these 10 slots
4 e-tutor
2 wheel of sun and moon
2 energy flux
2 umezawa's jitte

You allow yourself to have 6 bombs in the Stax, Fish, and Ichorid matchups.  I would only truly be worried about the case of drawing the third e-tutor/hate card, as then you have to blow the tutor on something dumb (like null rod or lotus against fish).  The tempo and CA loss of e-tutor in post board games can be outweighed by the heavy impact of the hate cards, in my opinion.  You don't need an early tempo advantage against stax if they are trying to play out from under a flux to win, same with wheel against ichorid or an active jitte against mirror strategies.

Playing 2 tutors and a select few enchantments and artifacts main gives the deck flexibility. Then poast-board, it can side out the tutors and the targets it doesn't need for more copies of the hate-cards it does need. This clearly demands strict priorization when it comes to sideboard slots and an intimate knowledge of metagame and match-ups, but is the approach I'd choose if I was to play e-tutor in such a deck.

Which artifact and enchantments would you want to maindeck and which slots are you willing to yield?  My thoughts towards Jitte, Flux, and Wheel in an e-tutor board seem like terrible cards to bring maindeck.  Even if they are one-ofs they are still awful every time you draw them during game 1 against most decks.  If you are only running Null Rod as a tutor target E-tutor main seems truly lackluster.  I could imagine cards like seal of cleansing and ethersworn canonists as maindeck one-ofs but then there is the problem you were talking about, those cards lack the board smashing impact to make up for the CA and tempo loss of the tutor a lot of the time.

edit:
What you suggested of having wheel, flux, and jitte main seems like alot of slots that are bad in multiple matchups.  When you play against oath and see any of those cards it is very ugly.  The same is true for the wheel against Tez and jitte against an opponent that you need to land null rod against.

[Phele]

I actually like the idea of combining the toolbox of Enlightened Tutor with a combo kill after boarding. What about?

3 Enlightended Tutor
3 Painters Servant
2 Grindstone
2 Wheel of Sun and Moon
2 Ethersworn Canonist
1 Umezawas Jitte
1 Relic of Progenitus
1 Aura of Silence


I prefer Painter over Vault-Key for this idea as you don't have too much additional draw and search beside Enlightened Tutor, so you need a consistant approach. I could see the combo coming in against Aggro, Staxx and Ichorid, matchups you would gain benefits of having a fast kill and matchups where you don't get too many profits from Null Rod (ok Staxx is maybe the exception) so you can side him out. Just and idea ...

[RecklessEmbermage]

Cowwithhat:

Depending on the meta, wheel, flux and jitte could do a fine job as maindeck one-ofs. Maybe not in yours. Then you choose other ones. Or you drop e-tutor alltogether and be happy with it.

The main point I wanted to get across was this: Fish does not want or like to play enlightened tutor. So, in games 2 and 3 I would prefer siding them out for cards with real impact and less downside. The flexibility 1-2 tutors provide should no longer be needed (provided you have relevant cards to side in of course).

Phele:

Incorporating more than 2 e-tutor and an artifact win in the side seems like a horrible idea. The whole maindeck is built to disrupt the opponent. Why would you choose to half-ass your strategy after sideboarding?

[Phele]

Incorporating more than 2 e-tutor and an artifact win in the side seems like a horrible idea. The whole maindeck is built to disrupt the opponent. Why would you choose to half-ass your strategy after sideboarding?

Surprise. Them boarding wrong. Going around strong hate against you ... there are plenty of the always pointed out reasons, why people advocate transformational sideboards.

And its not the whole maindeck, that is build to disrupt the opponent. Some dedicated slots (which in parts can be boarded out) just disrupt the opponent, like Null Rod or Wasteland. Most of the rest can easily be used to protect your combo (Meddlings, the whole counter suite ...) or make the way free for it (Pridemage). So there is no half-assing, whatever this means. Its about how you use your card material. Selkie is by far one of the most broken Fish decks ever. It plays plenty of acceleration and has a damn broken draw engine, why no use it to outrace oppenents with an easy combo after boarding.

And hey, it was just and idea.

[RecklessEmbermage]

Incorporating more than 2 e-tutor and an artifact win in the side seems like a horrible idea. The whole maindeck is built to disrupt the opponent. Why would you choose to half-ass your strategy after sideboarding?

Surprise. Them boarding wrong. Going around strong hate against you ... there are plenty of the always pointed out reasons, why people advocate transformational sideboards.

And its not the whole maindeck, that is build to disrupt the opponent. Some dedicated slots (which in parts can be boarded out) just disrupt the opponent, like Null Rod or Wasteland. Most of the rest can easily be used to protect your combo (Meddlings, the whole counter suite ...) or make the way free for it (Pridemage). So there is no half-assing, whatever this means. Its about how you use your card material. Selkie is by far one of the most broken Fish decks ever. It plays plenty of acceleration and has a damn broken draw engine, why no use it to outrace oppenents with an easy combo after boarding.

And hey, it was just and idea.

Of course it was. And I guess half-assing doesn't really mean anything.

It doesn't seem to me like the deck needs more win-cons. If only the disruption-suit holds water, those selkies or whatever else is attacking should go the distance. That's why it seems counter-intuitive to me to side in alternative/extra win-cons instead of making sure that you're playing a solid package of disruption for the match-up.

[CowWithHat]

The main point I wanted to get across was this: Fish does not want or like to play enlightened tutor. So, in games 2 and 3 I would prefer siding them out for cards with real impact and less downside. The flexibility 1-2 tutors provide should no longer be needed (provided you have relevant cards to side in of course).

I agree with your first point, fish does not want to play enlightened tutor.  My reasoning for why is that the cards in fish maindecks, on average, have less impact upon resolution than do cards in other decks (like key/vault, oath, tinker, dread return, triskellion).  The strength of the maindeck of Selkie lists, in my opinion, comes from playing many easy to resolve disruption pieces and keeping the opponent from resolving their high impact spells.  Because of the loss in CA and tempo that comes from casting enlightened tutor, I don't like it as a maindeck card in a deck with this strategy.  In every metagame, there will be matchups where either flux, jitte, or wheel will be blanks.  Because of the strategy of this deck I think it is especially hard for it to recover from drawing these blanks.

I believe I see your point, that maindeck tutors and super disruptive cards like the three we both keep mentioning add flexibility to the deck.  I personally believe that the marginal value of this flexibility as compared to the weakness of having maindeck dead draws is not as high as the marginal value of running more cards that are less good in every matchup.  Well that sentence was a minefield, my point is I don't think the flexibility of e-tutor outweighs the drawback heavily enough to warrant its inclusion over other cards.

My argument for having enlightened tutor in the sideboard is that if you are sideboarding in wheel of sun and moon, umezawa's jitte, or energy flux, you are playing with cards that do have high impact after game one.  The advantage of the tutors and the "bomb" level hate cards in the sideboard, as opposed to the main, is that you never have to see them in the matchups where they are blanks.  As with maindeck tutor packages, running an enlightened tutor board allows you to see your high power level specific cards more often than you would if you ran a board without the tutors at the cost of fewer slots.

The line "So, in games 2 and 3 I would prefer siding them out for cards with real impact and less downside." is very strange to me.  It is my understanding that in games 2 and 3 enlightened tutor has more real impact than it does in the first game, because now it has access to more niche and higher impact sideboard cards.  Based on the impact that I see the card gaining, I am okay with the downsides that it represents.

[Deathknight]

I totally agree with CWH. THe theoritical reasons for running ET in the side were exactly the same. Having more copies of your "bombs" against specific match-ups after side : Flux, Jitte, Wheel, Relic. By having one ET you can run one less copy of each and thus you can have more SB cards against different MUs.

I clearly won't advocate to run this tutor MD as it would often be a dead card or such a loss of tempo. After side, the loss of tempo is the cost to get your best answers against a MU. It is worth running a tutor to get cards that could be game breaker against a specific opponent.

The strength of this deck is to have a high level of synergy, cheap disruption cards a very good level of redundancy. By putting dedicated answers in your MD you will certainly ruin the general strength of the maindeck.

The question of how multiples of ET could be run is difficult. Without testing I won't go above 2. More than 2, and you will lose some slots for SB cards that can't rely on ET : creatures, Trap, StoP...

[Phele]

Just came back from the November Horden tournament in Darmstadt. 28 players, 5 from them playing Selkie, 4 of these 5 going top 8 – so did I.

In Swiss I lost no match ending first. This streak then finally ended and I lost. It was for sure the mirror When I left one Selkie was still contending in the half final while one already was in the final.

To me it is no question that Selkie is not as I further said one of the three best decks in the actual meta: It is THE best deck.

[scifiantihero]

That's in Germany?

What is the meta like there that makes Selkie decks such a powerful choice?

[CowWithHat]

Phele, did you try out that painter board you pitched earlier?  If so, how did it treat you?

[Phele]

Yes, Darmstadt is in Germany. And it is usually a very challenging meta with very good players. This time it was a proxie event, but the last time we also had far over 20 Players and just 3 of them were not full powerd

The meta this time beside Selkie had lots of Workshops and Drain-Controls as usual, a few Dredges, some Beats/NonSelkie-Fish builds. I don't have a complete overview but there also have at least also been one TPS and one Oath build.

I actually couldn't imagine a meta in the moment, where Selkie wouldn't be a perfect choice. It has no clear weak matchup. Ichorid and Grim Long Variants maybe are on the weaker side, but still definately beatable. And for sure it is very easy to adjust the deck easily if the meta would fill up with Storm and Dredge. Like in Italy where you traditionally have lots of Storm decks, where the Selkie variants all play Cursecatcher main and Ethersworn in the side.

I didn't play the Painter board, there was not enough time to test that before the tournament.

As I see so many US Top8 with six or more Tezzeret variants I really ask myself, why don't give more people this monster a try. It won tournaments in France, Switzerland, Spain and as I have confirmed now in Germany as well while additionally taking overy many Top8 spots. Like in France recently Darmstadt had a Selkie-Mirror in the final. Do I have to say more?

[Zieby]

Yesterday in Holland (Breda) 2 Selki decks made Top4 in a 39 Player Tournament.

One toke 4th and one toke 2nd both losing from ANT.

We had 3 Selki's in Total.

Just to inform you guys.

Greetz Arjan

[dawgie]

Just to add.

Here in Manila, Philippines, a lot of people are now picking up the deck and a whole lot of other players are now experimenting with Selkie as a draw engine. I guess I can be the one to be blamed for this in our part of the world since I used the deck for 3 straight tournies and I had finished top 8 in all of them. (and my only power is a Mox Emerald. We play sanctioned tournies by the way).

[Mulligan]

I was Phele's first opponent and we played a mirror. As this is going to become a usual matchup, i guess we should discuss approaches to mirror MUs. In my eyes, it's the mirror that makes Jitte a must in the sideboard, cause it easily removes Hierarchs and Selkies. On the other hand it's vulnerable to you opps Pridemages ... Befor exalted, a Goyf could be used to block the opponent's Goyf, but now it's different, 'cause you loose your Goyf to an attacking exalted one. In this case, Swords seems the best solution to me. So, my "opitmal" approach would look like: Get down Goyf, equipt it with Jitte and ride for the win! Use your counterspells only to protect Goyf and Jitte. If Goyf is equipped and Jitte has at least one counter you can also use it to block your opps Goyf. Don't use up Jitte counters too early, they might be helpful in removing an opp's Predator befor it can attack and destroy Jitte.
What about your solutions?

[Deathknight]

Indeed, a Selkie mirror comes down to two things :
- who has Jitte on the table first
- who has an exalted Tarmo
Swords is a must in the mirror.

However, if you are anticipating a meta with a lot of Selkie, playing a version with Ninja/Cursecatcher is certainly a good choice (this deck won the French Championship).