BUG Fish VS GWU vs BUW Fish

[JudasKilled]

I have playtested all the vairaints of Blue fish and just wanted to see if others results weer similar.

First ill cover what the strengths/weaknesses of the variious builds.

Noble Fish/ GWU Fish:
Often has the heavyiest mana denial package with the full strip/waste package, 4 null rods, and often 2-4 stifles.
Also allows include of aven mindcensor which I consider mana denial as well.

They have access to some of the best artifact/enchantment removal and Goyf.

Honestly in my opinion the deck just seems to be lacking, not as much disruption, and witout black for draw/tutors it just seems to be lacking the oomph that bug fish has or the flexability and disruption that UBW has.

UBW:
Aven, BoB, vend clique and meddling mage tend to be the staples of this deck along with strip/waste null rod.  They run the tutors and flexability cards needed to dig for answers and can easily include d blast and edict for tinker targets.  It seems this deck generally has the most disruption.
Aven, meddling, Duress, Counteres, smetimes cannonist as well as suller.

BUG Fish:
I my opinion the strongest of the three.
U/B bring everything you need 2 utilise to disrut and the simple inclusion of goyf for power and artifact enchantment generally gives you everything you need 2 win.

I playtested all 3 and Bug Fish just seemed to have the most oomph.  UBW seemed to have as much disruption as it needed but a general inability to put a real clock on the opponent.  And noble/gwu just seemed not to have enogh disruption/tutors to dig itself out of holes. If others have diffrent opinions feel free.

[Stormanimagus]

I know I am biased on this but I disagree.

I think it goes:

1. Noble Fish/ GWU Fish:
2. BUG Fish
3. UR Fish (This deck is surprisingly good and may even be close to BUG for #2)
40. UWB fish (I really think this deck is basically obsolete right now)

The reason I believe this is because I think Duress in Fish is actually pretty terrible and BuG usually runs Duress. The whole point of Fish is card advantage and Duress is NOT card advantage. You WANT your opponent to commit their resources and then you want to punish them for it. BUG has many awkward plays and loses too much life to Confidant while not fully taking advantage of the extra cards IMO. Confidant really shines most in a Sui Strategy or in Tezz because those decks seek to do broken things or "Win Now" with extra cards. Sui doesn't exactly do BROKEN things with the extra cards but it can run Tendrils and Tendrils + Confidant have good Synergy.

The main Strength I used to see in BuG over Noble Fish was it's game 2 and 3 against Ichorid. With the printing of Ravenous Trap Noble Fish should now have an honest shot against Ichorid as now it can run a far superior SB to before (4 Ravenous Trap + 3 Pithing Needle? or perhaps + 2 Needle + 2 Crypt?) to combat Ichorid. I think in every other match-up Noble Fish is superior (expect perhaps against Combo, but even there I'd give Selkie the Slight edge now because it can run Spell Pierce and/or Mindbreak Trap and draw into it very easily with Exalted Selkies).

The bottom line on my reasoning for believing this is that Noble Hierarch is just a broken card for Fish. It pulls Triple duty as:

1. A way to smooth out the mana accel/color fixing of the deck.
2. Best answer to Wasteland I know of because it advances your game-plan and beats to boot! So, it is a card that shops HATE to see!
3. The obvious Synergy with Cold-Eyed Selkie as a super-draw engine.

I think Selkie-Strike is probably the most consistent Fish deck I've ever played, while BuG seems predictable and easy to play around. Selkie-Strike's ENTIRE deck (save perhaps Goyf) is nothing but cards that create huge lopsided advantages (either through the exalted mechanic, mana accel, locking the opponent out, mana denial, counters, or some combination of ALL of those). It is a Synergistic web of cards that is a nightmare to wade through for almost any deck out there that is NOT Big-Fatty-Beats.dec. When Vintage Zoo becomes the craze then perhaps I'll stuff away the Selkie deck for a while. Until then, I'll just keep bringing to tournaments where players don't take it seriously as a deck. . . and beat them.

-Storm

[JudasKilled]

To a point I can agree with you but the last major tourney I played in (Chicago ICBM) was won by BUG Fish and UBW Fish

[JACO]

I know I am biased on this but I disagree.

I think it goes:

1. Noble Fish/ GWU Fish:
2. BUG Fish
3. UR Fish (This deck is surprisingly good and may even be close to BUG for #2)
40. UWB fish (I really think this deck is basically obsolete right now)

The reason I believe this is because I think Duress in Fish is actually pretty terrible and BuG usually runs Duress. The whole point of Fish is card advantage and Duress is NOT card advantage. You WANT your opponent to commit their resources and then you want to punish them for it. BUG has many awkward plays and loses too much life to Confidant while not fully taking advantage of the extra cards IMO. Confidant really shines most in a Sui Strategy or in Tezz because those decks seek to do broken things or "Win Now" with extra cards.

Pretty much everything you have written here is incorrect. Duress and Thoughtseize are actually fantastic when coupled with Dark Confidant, because they enable to you strip away the opponent's options and lines of play while Dark Confidant and Tarmogoyf place pressure on the opponent.
Duress/Thoughtseize = more disruption and limiting opponent's options
Dark Confidant = more disruption, card advantage, and fewer turns for the opponent
Tarmogoyf = very quick clock and fewer turns for the opponent

As a Fish player you need to proactively create a vise like grip on your opponent's resources, outs, and lines of play. The options available to the BUG Fish player allow you to do this most cost effectively for in game resources. That's why BUG Fish has the best tournament peformance, while decks like UGW Fish haven't won any relevant tournaments. It's pretty simple.

That being said, BUGW Fish has some potential, because your options are nearly limitless for constructing the manabase now, as are your available lock/disruption pieces.

[Juzam_Jim]

The reason I believe this is because I think Duress in Fish is actually pretty terrible and BuG usually runs Duress. The whole point of Fish is card advantage and Duress is NOT card advantage.

This is such a misunderstood subject.

[Stormanimagus]

The reason I believe this is because I think Duress in Fish is actually pretty terrible and BuG usually runs Duress. The whole point of Fish is card advantage and Duress is NOT card advantage.

This is such a misunderstood subject.

@Juzam_Jim -- Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me? I can't really tell LOL.

Anyway, I understand this is a touchy subject and I'm open to being wrong, but let me further explain what I mean. To me, Duress is not a BAD inclusion in Fish and does have some synergy with Confidant, but I feel like there is one fundamental truth that people are missing:

Duress <<<< Counters when AND ONLY WHEN you are not intending to do something broken within the next 1-2 turns. If you are planning to win the game with a combo or to lock someone out then YES, leading with Duress is pretty much the best thing you can do because you gain valuable information about what your opponent CAN do vs. what they CAN'T do and you swipe the card that might stop you.

If you are Fish and you are not planning to win the game within a turn or 2 then I'd say that Duress <<<< Spell Pierce/Daze/FoW etc. because those cards allow you to have maximum information masked to the opponent while gaining the maximum result from their position of ignorance.

Getting an opponent to spend Mana + Card >>> simply nuking a card if you are just trying to achieve card advantage. This is why counters win out in Fish decks IMO and I think it is just mediocre deck-building that causes Fish decks to run Duress. I suppose Duress has one application for Fish in that it can really hurt Combo and hopefully your Goyf will "get there" before they can recover, but I wouldn't count on it.

If you notice the evolution of Mana Drain decks you'll see my point. Keeper decks of yore never ran Duress and even many more recent variants did not either. Starting with Slaver and on into Gifts and now Tezz drain decks have started running 2-4 Duress effects. Why is this you might ask? Because they are able to create a hard-lock or just win the turn following that Duress. Fish will never be able to do this nor should it ever try. That's not what the deck is about. Duress may still be the best option for BuG variants, but I just don't think BuG is the best, and I'll have you know that I've T8ed at every tourney I've brought Selkie to (granted that's only 2 tournaments but one was the Waterbury and was a 120+ field) so I know the deck can work quite well.

To put it another way, my team mate plays a version of Shops that's a little unconventional and doesn't run as many Win Cons as most Stax lists but I think it is the best Shop list out there and he never loses with it. Does it make it any less good because only a few folks pilot it? No. Just makes them ignorant for not piloting it.

If people don't want to jump on the Selkie bandwagon that's fine with me but I'm still gonna pilot and win with it as much as I can for as long as I can.

-Storm

P.S- I don't want this to sound like I'm completely hating on BuG. I realize there are narrow ways in which it can be better than Selkie in some match-ups (namely Ichorid), but I just think Selkie is better overall.

[LordHomerCat]

We all know you think that, but it's just not the case.  Look at the results.  BUG Fish has been extremely successful and is the only deck I see consistently beating Tezzeret in top8s (and beating me in Top 8's in particular), while GUW just doesn't have the numbers.  I agree with JACO and everything he said there, as he has seen the same things from BUG Fish as I have.

It's good that you have made the top 8 in two tournaments and somehow this make it the best fish deck, but out here all the GUW pilots miss top 8 while the BUG Fish pilots have this bad habit of winning events.

My suggestion would go BUG >> GWB > GWU.  There are just too many do-nothing cards in the GWU deck.  Also, I'm not sure what you mean by UBW, is that Pierce's Faerie deck or something with Bobs and Meddling Mages and all the UBW of old (like Feinstien style?) or what?

[Harlequin]

I think Selkie had the best chance it was going to have back when Thirst was Unrestricted.  The problem right now is that things are so compressed into those early turns.  Tezz is looking for explosiveness over consistancy.  Look at ELD's last winning list, it plays like a combo deck.  Selkie has too much "free fall" in the frist few turns, while you try and guess what lines of play are most profitable.

BUG has Toughtsieze/duress for those early turns.  An ideal play in this compact, restricted-list world.  Right now Meddling Mage is suckin' wind, and he has no equal replacement.  Selkie can't leverage on the power of MMage anymore, it can't wait for the turn 4 attack step to refill, and it can't accurately predict the next card tezz is going to play... who knows they might be setting up a lethal tendrils!

[Stormanimagus]

I think Selkie had the best chance it was going to have back when Thirst was Unrestricted.  The problem right now is that things are so compressed into those early turns.  Tezz is looking for explosiveness over consistancy.  Look at ELD's last winning list, it plays like a combo deck.  Selkie has too much "free fall" in the frist few turns, while you try and guess what lines of play are most profitable.

BUG has Toughtsieze/duress for those early turns.  An ideal play in this compact, restricted-list world.  Right now Meddling Mage is suckin' wind, and he has no equal replacement.  Selkie can't leverage on the power of MMage anymore, it can't wait for the turn 4 attack step to refill, and it can't accurately predict the next card tezz is going to play... who knows they might be setting up a lethal tendrils!

To a point I agree Jeff, but I do feel like Spell Pierce and Ravenous Trap may fill some gaping holes in Selkie and make it much more viable again. I think it does a pretty good job of compressing a lot of disruption into the first 1-3 Turns and Spell Pierce would only help that strategy. Would you cut Stifle for Spell Pierce in Selkie just out of curiosity?

-Storm

[nineisnoone]

The reason I believe this is because I think Duress in Fish is actually pretty terrible and BuG usually runs Duress. The whole point of Fish is card advantage and Duress is NOT card advantage.

This is such a misunderstood subject.

@Juzam_Jim -- Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me? I can't really tell LOL.

Anyway, I understand this is a touchy subject and I'm open to being wrong, but let me further explain what I mean. To me, Duress is not a BAD inclusion in Fish and does have some synergy with Confidant, but I feel like there is one fundamental truth that people are missing:

Duress <<<< Counters when AND ONLY WHEN you are not intending to do something broken within the next 1-2 turns. If you are planning to win the game with a combo or to lock someone out then YES, leading with Duress is pretty much the best thing you can do because you gain valuable information about what your opponent CAN do vs. what they CAN'T do and you swipe the card that might stop you.

If you are Fish and you are not planning to win the game within a turn or 2 then I'd say that Duress <<<< Spell Pierce/Daze/FoW etc. because those cards allow you to have maximum information masked to the opponent while gaining the maximum result from their position of ignorance.

[rest of post not included]

I'm not exactly sure where you're going with your post.  I'll have to re-read it some more, it's just not clicking with me.  

But I do see one error in your reasoning and that is

Duress <<<< Spell Pierce/Daze/FoW

The error is that FoW != Spell Pierce/Daze.  

I mean, Duress <<<< FoW period.  No real if and or buts about it.  The narrow situations where Duress is preferrable does not amount to an argument that it is better than FoW.  BUG (as far as I know at least) runs FoW, and if it didn't (due to life loss or lack of blues) its not because of objective power.

When you compare Duress to Spell Pierce and Daze, I would say Duress < Daze ONLY IF the Daze is effective.  And it's hardly something you can assume.  Nothing about Selkie-Strike makes it a safer assumption that you'll Daze successfully then any other deck in the past.  Whereas Duress you can basically guarantee it'll be effective.  Spell Pierce vesus Duress is a little bit trickier, and I could see reasons to prefer Spell Pierce to Duress, though the consistency is hard to pass up.

And when you are playing against a deck where mistake = loss, I would prefer consistency over marginal (or at least non-gamebreaking) gains.

I think Selkie had the best chance it was going to have back when Thirst was Unrestricted.  The problem right now is that things are so compressed into those early turns.  Tezz is looking for explosiveness over consistancy.  Look at ELD's last winning list, it plays like a combo deck.  Selkie has too much "free fall" in the frist few turns, while you try and guess what lines of play are most profitable.

BUG has Toughtsieze/duress for those early turns.  An ideal play in this compact, restricted-list world.  Right now Meddling Mage is suckin' wind, and he has no equal replacement.  Selkie can't leverage on the power of MMage anymore, it can't wait for the turn 4 attack step to refill, and it can't accurately predict the next card tezz is going to play... who knows they might be setting up a lethal tendrils!

To a point I agree Jeff, but I do feel like Spell Pierce and Ravenous Trap may fill some gaping holes in Selkie and make it much more viable again. I think it does a pretty good job of compressing a lot of disruption into the first 1-3 Turns and Spell Pierce would only help that strategy. Would you cut Stifle for Spell Pierce in Selkie just out of curiosity?

-Storm

The thing is Spell Pierce can be addition to BUG fish too, so it wouldn't necessarily push Selkie over BUG because both can access the card. 

I find Ravenous Trap to be a bit extraneous as suddenly answering Ichorid.  Lack of Ichorid hate is not the reason why it's hard to adjust, it's a matter of the slots it takes to answer it.  It is certainly better for Selkie than for BUG though.

[Harlequin]

To a point I agree Jeff, but I do feel like Spell Pierce and Ravenous Trap may fill some gaping holes in Selkie and make it much more viable again. I think it does a pretty good job of compressing a lot of disruption into the first 1-3 Turns and Spell Pierce would only help that strategy. Would you cut Stifle for Spell Pierce in Selkie just out of curiosity?
-Storm

No.  Stifle is an amazing card.  Infact I'm not sure running less than 4 in any fish deck running wasteland is the right idea.  So much so, that I think Spell Pierce along side Stifle could be very effective.  As it gives you something to do with your no matter what they do.  Every deck will give you the chance to do something amazing with stifle in the first 3 turns... be it: Fetch, Wasteland, Bazaar, Storm, or try to win via Timevault or Oath.  To me there is just so much natural synergy between Waste, Null Rod, and Stifle - its silly not to make room for all 3 in a fish deck.  Considering those 3 cards, if I had to cut one of them back to a 3-of; I almost always go with cutting back Wasteland in favor of keeping 4 stifles.

[Stormanimagus]

To a point I agree Jeff, but I do feel like Spell Pierce and Ravenous Trap may fill some gaping holes in Selkie and make it much more viable again. I think it does a pretty good job of compressing a lot of disruption into the first 1-3 Turns and Spell Pierce would only help that strategy. Would you cut Stifle for Spell Pierce in Selkie just out of curiosity?
-Storm

No.  Stifle is an amazing card.  Infact I'm not sure running less than 4 in any fish deck running wasteland is the right idea.  So much so, that I think Spell Pierce along side Stifle could be very effective.  As it gives you something to do with your no matter what they do.  Every deck will give you the chance to do something amazing with stifle in the first 3 turns... be it: Fetch, Wasteland, Bazaar, Storm, or try to win via Timevault or Oath.  To me there is just so much natural synergy between Waste, Null Rod, and Stifle - its silly not to make room for all 3 in a fish deck.  Considering those 3 cards, if I had to cut one of them back to a 3-of; I almost always go with cutting back Wasteland in favor of keeping 4 stifles.

Agreed actually. And I do like the fact that Stifle is another delay to Bazaar. That seems pretty clutch. Hmmmm. . . Could we Drop MM for Spell Pierce? Would the deck really miss MM? If so we'd now have 4 Pride-Mage MD as White cards, but I suppose SB STP also keeps White as a solid choice.

I dunno, perhaps it's just my meta, but MM still seems very relevant. Game 1 it names Welder before you Side in STP for that and it also names Dread Return game 1 (though you'll still probably lose) and other key cards. It still names Ritual, and it still names BoB. It can name Jitte post board if you see that card and it could even name Magus Of The Moon in a tight spot. I dunno. It IS narrow and I hate to cut it, but could we do the insane move of:

-4 MM
+4 Spell Pierce?

[JACO]

Duress <<<< Counters when AND ONLY WHEN you are not intending to do something broken within the next 1-2 turns. If you are planning to win the game with a combo or to lock someone out then YES, leading with Duress is pretty much the best thing you can do because you gain valuable information about what your opponent CAN do vs. what they CAN'T do and you swipe the card that might stop you.

If you are Fish and you are not planning to win the game within a turn or 2 then I'd say that Duress <<<< Spell Pierce/Daze/FoW etc. because those cards allow you to have maximum information masked to the opponent while gaining the maximum result from their position of ignorance.

Getting an opponent to spend Mana + Card >>> simply nuking a card if you are just trying to achieve card advantage. This is why counters win out in Fish decks IMO and I think it is just mediocre deck-building that causes Fish decks to run Duress. I suppose Duress has one application for Fish in that it can really hurt Combo and hopefully your Goyf will "get there" before they can recover, but I wouldn't count on it.

If you notice the evolution of Mana Drain decks you'll see my point. Keeper decks of yore never ran Duress and even many more recent variants did not either. Starting with Slaver and on into Gifts and now Tezz drain decks have started running 2-4 Duress effects. Why is this you might ask? Because they are able to create a hard-lock or just win the turn following that Duress. Fish will never be able to do this nor should it ever try. That's not what the deck is about. Duress may still be the best option for BuG variants, but I just don't think BuG is the best, and I'll have you know that I've T8ed at every tourney I've brought Selkie to (granted that's only 2 tournaments but one was the Waterbury and was a 120+ field) so I know the deck can work quite well.

Forcing through spells is one thing that is important, but that is not why everyone is playing Duress/Thoughtseize now. The main reason is because of the speed of Vintage, and as Jeff alluded to, the fact that the first few turns are so compressed. If you do not have relevant first and second turns plays in Vintage right now, you probably aren't going to win tournaments. This is the reality of the format.

The reason Tezzeret (as well as BUG Fish) decks play Duress/Thoughtseize is simply to prevent their opponent from going broken in the first couple of turns before they can interact. UGW Fish decks are doing what on the first turn, playing Noble Hiearch? That does absolutely nothing to prevent your opponent from advancing their gameplan. BUG and BWx variants can all disrupt their opponent more, and earlier, and this matters more in Vintage now than it ever has. That's why you might see UGW making a few Top 8's here and there, but it just doesn't have the staying power or disruption to run the table once pitted against the best of the best, and this has to do with the old saying, "there are no incorrect threats, only incorrect answers." Duress is not an answer in the same ilk as all of the blue counterspells that just sit in your hand.

[JudasKilled]

I agree with alot of peoples points so I wanna run a sample excercise of BUG and Noble vs a solid tezz hand.
( i apologise if u disagree with the play order)

Tezz's hand opening.
Fow, Gifts Ungiven, sol ring, undergrond, fetch, Tinker, mana drain

Noble opener:  Hierarch, land x2, selkie, Fow, goyf, stifle

Assume fish on the play to be nice

Noble opens: land + hierarch
Tezz: draws voltaic key, plays fetch + sol ring.
Noble: draws null rod , plays land selkie and passes.
Tezz: plays land and could either bait or just go for the tinker,  plays tinker, selkie forces, tezz forces pitching gifts IMO gets fatty.
Noble: pretty much scoops, no tutors for outs (maybe 2 outs in deck and a mystical tutor) GG

Bug Fish vs Tezz with similar hand:
Tezz: Fow, Gifts Ungiven, sol ring, undergrond, fetch, Tinker, mana drain

BUG Fish opener (trying to keep hands and draws similar)
Land x2, fow, goyf, daze( often ran in place of stifle), spell stutter sprite, Duress

Bug: opens land duress Tezz Fow's pitching drain IMO
Tezz: opens land +sol ring after drawing volt key
Bug: draws null rod plays land and plays null rod
Tezz: plays land etc, but

granted the excersise may not be a fair comparison but I think daze + duresses's make a whole world of diffrence

[pierce]

Bug fish is awesome. I am completely in love with 5c stax atm. If I can quit her, I'll be playing more BUG fish at tournaments.

UBW is pretty meh. I rocked a solid list at worlds, but failed to crack the t8. Demars stuffed me, and unless Steel City Vault goes away, I can't see myself playing UBW again.

selkie strike has always been, and will always be, tier two at best. it was designed for the new england metagame, why play it anywhere else? also, no bob. kinda a deal breaker.

and don't get me started on these janky u/r european fish decks with 3 null rod standard, sage of ephither, misrha's factory instead of mutavault (despite spell stutter sprites!), and grim lavamancer. you couldn't pay me to play that. maybe in 2003.

[Stormanimagus]

I agree with alot of peoples points so I wanna run a sample excercise of BUG and Noble vs a solid tezz hand.
( i apologise if u disagree with the play order)

Tezz's hand opening.
Fow, Gifts Ungiven, sol ring, undergrond, fetch, Tinker, mana drain

Noble opener:  Hierarch, land x2, selkie, Fow, goyf, stifle

Assume fish on the play to be nice

Noble opens: land + hierarch
Tezz: draws voltaic key, plays fetch + sol ring.
Noble: draws null rod , plays land selkie and passes.
Tezz: plays land and could either bait or just go for the tinker,  plays tinker, selkie forces, tezz forces pitching gifts IMO gets fatty.
Noble: pretty much scoops, no tutors for outs (maybe 2 outs in deck and a mystical tutor) GG

Bug Fish vs Tezz with similar hand:
Tezz: Fow, Gifts Ungiven, sol ring, undergrond, fetch, Tinker, mana drain

BUG Fish opener (trying to keep hands and draws similar)
Land x2, fow, goyf, daze( often ran in place of stifle), spell stutter sprite, Duress

Bug: opens land duress Tezz Fow's pitching drain IMO
Tezz: opens land +sol ring after drawing volt key
Bug: draws null rod plays land and plays null rod
Tezz: plays land etc, but

granted the excersise may not be a fair comparison but I think daze + duresses's make a whole world of diffrence

I think Selkie goes for Null Rod on Turn 2 over Selkie if they see that a Sol Ring is out. This would prevent Tinker on the next turn and that may be the critical turn in finding a daze/spell pierce to counter the Tinker. I'm not saying that your comparison is NOT illustrating your point, only that those are not the plays I'd make with the deck.

-Storm

[JudasKilled]

Ya your correct it became alot harder to compare then I origionally thought lol, but I think it made my point

As far as duress: Either they burn 2 cards.....IE force

or you take there crazy bomb.....
WIN!

[Guli]

Playing Selkie instead of null rod was a huge mistake.

[JudasKilled]

2 a point yes, but on the other hand you have FoW in the wadthey may not, and you need 2 get yer draw engine online asap.

[Harlequin]

Noble opens: land + hierarch
Tezz: draws voltaic key, plays fetch + sol ring.

This is a case in point of why stifle is amazing.  The stifle here is not only a timewalk, but also cuts them off drain mana.  Almost kills thier entire hand.

Playing Hierarch was a huge mistake.  This is the perfect "slow roll the Stifle" hand.  You have 2 lands, Force with Selkie as a pitch.

The general plan with that opener would be
Land - pass
Land 2 - Hierarch
Turn 3 you've probably used the stifle and hopefully have a blue card to protect Selkie on turn 3.

However given the draw, you would probably drop that null rod on turn 2 with force backer.  Hierarch doesn't do much for this hand.  It ramps you up from 2 mana to 3 to cast selkie, but you need to have those early turns on lockdown before that happens.  If this hand only had one land, it could be different...

[Campee]

I think the OP had the rankings correct. Noble fish is definitely the weakest of the three. You need black for duress and dark confidant. BUG is probably the strongest of the three, only because it has Tarmogoyf.

[the_lord_shaper]

   I have played all the fish decks mentioned (even the U/R ones) and I agree with Pierce, BUG fish is the best fish deck currently being played. The only match up that I felt I couldn't win is the Zoo match up; Oath, Tezz, Stacks, and other fish builds have all be cake to beat with BUG. Also this fish build is the only one that I can think of that can surive without a Null Rod in play for the longest span of time.

[zeus-online]

Aside from power cards, the cards i fear most from fish are:

Null rod (Unlike you americans i only find the rod to be a minor speed bump, they still need a way to capitalize on the advantage it gives, and that's where i step in and try to keep them from getting anything out of it.)
Canonist (Just for control and combo)
Mindcensor (Again, control and combo)
Dark confidant
Qasali pridemage (Mostly when playing Tez)
Selkie - Online selkie with a just a few exalted dudes out is probably GG against any major type1 deck, (un)fortunetly it costs 3 mana.

Tarmogoyf dosn't even come close....I'm only concerned about it when i'm loosing or playing aggro/control.

As for duress effects....I'm not a fan of them either....Too many times it's just take 1 card and he plays another one....No gain mana wise. I'm much more afraid of walking lock-pieces, mana denial and tempo gain. I find it's easier to recuperate a lost card then to search franticly after a bounce spell (or sometimes two) In my opinion the countermagic in fish is there to protect the fish players board, not actively stop the opponents cards....That's what the creatures, null rod, wastelands etc. are for....Obviously there are situations where fow is needed in order to survive (Like the tinker example)

This is mostly based on me being the opponent and not the fish player.

[Stormanimagus]

Aside from power cards, the cards i fear most from fish are:

Null rod (Unlike you americans i only find the rod to be a minor speed bump, they still need a way to capitalize on the advantage it gives, and that's where i step in and try to keep them from getting anything out of it.)
Canonist (Just for control and combo)
Mindcensor (Again, control and combo)
Dark confidant
Qasali pridemage (Mostly when playing Tez)
Selkie - Online selkie with a just a few exalted dudes out is probably GG against any major type1 deck, (un)fortunetly it costs 3 mana.

Tarmogoyf dosn't even come close....I'm only concerned about it when i'm loosing or playing aggro/control.

As for duress effects....I'm not a fan of them either....Too many times it's just take 1 card and he plays another one....No gain mana wise. I'm much more afraid of walking lock-pieces, mana denial and tempo gain. I find it's easier to recuperate a lost card then to search franticly after a bounce spell (or sometimes two) In my opinion the countermagic in fish is there to protect the fish players board, not actively stop the opponents cards....That's what the creatures, null rod, wastelands etc. are for....Obviously there are situations where fow is needed in order to survive (Like the tinker example)

This is mostly based on me being the opponent and not the fish player.

Thank you. You made the points I wanted to make, but I guess was unclear at.

Let me be frank. There IS no perfect Fish deck. Even if we assume that BUG fish is the best of the 3 it gets absolutely crushed by Selkie-Fish. 8 Exalted dudes makes sure of that (+4 STP from the SB). So it's not a perfect deck nor is it necessarily the most powerful. I realize it has the best tournament results to back it, but I think that those results are because it is easiest to pilot well. To me, it's like the difference between 5c Stax and streamlined 9-ball, 4-Bazaar Stax. 5c lists are often easier to pilot, but Bazaar lists are actually better most of the time in the hands of a competent pilot. Unfortunately there are not that many competent pilots out there so 5c lists tend to show up more.

I think this might be true of Selkie-Fish vs. BUG fish as well. The real comparison of top-tier decks is here.

aside: Please do not assert that UWb fish belongs in this conversation folks. It doesn't. Any fish deck NOT running Tarmogoyf better have a good reason not to do so and UWb does not IMO. Tarmogoyf is the evolution of Fish decks that has allowed them to "keep up" with the evolution of other decks. Tarmogoyf says "you are on a 3 Turn clock with lock-pieces out" where before you could only say "you are on a 5-6 turn clock with lock-pieces out." Would anyone argue that triple time walk is ever something you want to concede to a player when they could go broken on any turn? I don't think so. Hence I really think UWb is off the table as a top-tier Fish deck.

Selkie is a slightly higher risk/high reward deck with a lot of consistency and BUG is a sort of "good stuff.dec" with mediocre synergy IMO. The fact that Selkie can tap out almost every turn for a curve of threats and still have Daze/FoW/Spell Pierce back-up is a nice quality of the deck. Noble Hierarch helps to assist this plan and is only a problem when NOT played on turn 1 IMO. Duress is by no means a bad card in Fish, but I'd rather play a lock-piece than it any day. Duress does nothing to stop a broken top-deck tutor for Vault/Key is about as efficient and broken as you can get and it's all over the place. Duress is a better card on the offense I find and not as good on the defense.

The synergy in the Selkie deck is that you not only run a lot of free pitch counters (possible Mindbreak Traps in the SB) and possibly 3-4 Spell Pierce but you also run a creature that should be drawing you at LEAST 2 cards a turn when unanswered and not costing you a single life. Sure Selkie is a bit more narrow than Confidant, but it greatly increases your likelihood to overwhelm Tezz if it gets to swing with Exalted even ONCE. Selkie makes your pitch counters better and is fine in multiples as you can:

a.) pitch excess copies to FoW if you already have an exalted one on the board.
b.) play a second Selkie if you have no exalted guys to try and draw more cards.

To me, Selkie's only weakness that BUG is not as weak to is Darkblast and Fire//Ice. BUG is still susceptible to these cards as it runs Confidants, but it is less hurt by them than Selkie. Selkie does have a lot of countermagic though so Fire//Ice shouldn't be too hard to find an answer to. Darkblast is really annoying and is really only answerable by Ravenous Trap. Do you WANT to be siding that in if you see Darkblast? Hmmmm. . . not too sure on that one.

In any case, I fully acknowledge that my opinion is not popular belief but it is my opinion and experience when piloting the deck. The match-ups you all say are hard for Selkie are really not in my experience and I'm SURE that Selkie beats BUG fish in that match-up so why NOT play the deck that I believe has better match-ups overall? And, more importantly, the one that has better match-ups vs. Fish/Stax when a lot of my metagame IS those 2 archetype?

-Storm

[nineisnoone]

Noble opens: land + hierarch
Tezz: draws voltaic key, plays fetch + sol ring.

This is a case in point of why stifle is amazing.  The stifle here is not only a timewalk, but also cuts them off drain mana.  Almost kills thier entire hand.

Playing Hierarch was a huge mistake.  This is the perfect "slow roll the Stifle" hand.  You have 2 lands, Force with Selkie as a pitch.

The general plan with that opener would be
Land - pass
Land 2 - Hierarch
Turn 3 you've probably used the stifle and hopefully have a blue card to protect Selkie on turn 3.

However given the draw, you would probably drop that null rod on turn 2 with force backer.  Hierarch doesn't do much for this hand.  It ramps you up from 2 mana to 3 to cast selkie, but you need to have those early turns on lockdown before that happens.  If this hand only had one land, it could be different...

Yeah, I agree here. 

Stifle > Noble.

Not a pro here, but I would only be looking to play Noble over Stifle:

1) One land hands with something strong to follow (most notably Null Rod).

2) On the draw when they don't necessarily need a 2nd land. 

Like if they go Land, Mox, Dark Confidant, I'll probably just be looking to Noble->Selkie to power them out long term.  Sometimes it might even be a decent move if they go land+mox because they can operate decently enough with that. 

In this hand for instance, on the draw they don't care if you Stifle their 2nd land (assuming they went Underground first allowing you to) because they can turn 2 Tinker with FoW back-up. Noble+Selkie to draw for whatever answers you have is better than stopping the 2nd land from dropping which would be kind of moot at that point. 

Duress is by no means a bad card in Fish, but I'd rather play a lock-piece than it any day. Duress does nothing to stop a broken top-deck tutor for Vault/Key is about as efficient and broken as you can get and it's all over the place. Duress is a better card on the offense I find and not as good on the defense.

You keep harping on Duress, but I think this quote here shows why that's misguided.  You aren't playing a lock piece over Duress, you are playing Noble Hierarch.  This seems in direct contradiction (or at least a disconnected comment) from your acknowledgment of Selkie as being a "high risk/high reward" deck.  It's the decision to run combo pieces over Duress that makes Selkie high risk/reward as opposed to the more streamlined BUG decks.

As for why not running it when it does better against Fish/Stax (taking your word on that), neither of the match-ups imo are so bad so as to sacrifice BUG's consistency. I find BUG to be much more flexible as well with more slots to run disruption to address Ichorid and whatever else you anticipate.

I don't know if I'd say one is better than the other, but I will say that it's been proven that people are risk-averse.  So if you acknowledge that Selkie is a higher risk option, then you've answered why it's not run as often as BUG ignoring all other things.  Personally, if I'm going to play a risky deck, it'll be some combo deck rather than a fish deck so I look for fish decks to be low-risk with high consistency, sacrificing high-end power.

[jewfro]

aside: Please do not assert that UWb fish belongs in this conversation folks. It doesn't. Any fish deck NOT running Tarmogoyf better have a good reason not to do so and UWb does not IMO. Tarmogoyf is the evolution of Fish decks that has allowed them to "keep up" with the evolution of other decks. Tarmogoyf says "you are on a 3 Turn clock with lock-pieces out" where before you could only say "you are on a 5-6 turn clock with lock-pieces out." Would anyone argue that triple time walk is ever something you want to concede to a player when they could go broken on any turn? I don't think so. Hence I really think UWb is off the table as a top-tier Fish deck.

So i feel like this seems wrong. I don't have as much expirience with fish in general, but tarmogoyf is just that, its a win con. UWB fish's idea is that all of its creatures double as win cons and disruption. Tarmogoyf is good, of course, i'm not saying it isn't, but is simply isn't disruptive to a say tez deck as much as a sculler, Med Mage, v clique or anything else like that. I'd say that BUG is the best, and the other two (UWB and GWU) are both tier two decks. I won't argue that one is better or not. But to say that UWB doesn't even deserve to be on the table, well it should be.

[urweak]

I think the argument of which fish build is better is rather misguided. The archetype itself is a meta game deck, and thus when you consider which deck is better you have to consider the metagame. So the discussion should really be about what match ups said deck accels at and which ones it doesn't. Also you have to consider the variation between the generic labels like GUW or BUG, for example my GUW build is very different from Selkie deck and thus has different weaknesses and strengths.

In an attempt to refocus this topic in a productive manner rather then everyone telling each other whos penis is bigger. I suggest the various players to outline their feelings on different match ups so that outsiders may gain some knowledge from your views rather then reading about whos got the cooler deck and why.

[merfolkOTPT]

I know the original topic here is U-based fish decks but really we are drawing almost entirely from the same pool with GWb "Fish" or whatever you want to call it.  This Deck gets to play a lot of the same cards and in my opinion is in the top tier of fish decks losing out only to BUG fish being able to run FoW.  The advantage however is that you get to run all the best Creatures: Goyf, Qasali Pridemage, Bob, and Aven Mindcensor.  None of the other decks get to run all these guys and they are currently the best guys in Fish.  BUG passes by because because it has suitable replacements for Mindcensor (FoW to stop Tinker, the best plan against Fish) and Qasali Pridemage (Trygon Predator which is basically the nuts if a little worse against Tezz then Qasi).  All the other decks have to rely too heavily on slow card draw engines and on FoW because they don't have answers to everything.

[urweak]

I know the original topic here is U-based fish decks but really we are drawing almost entirely from the same pool with GWb "Fish" or whatever you want to call it.  This Deck gets to play a lot of the same cards and in my opinion is in the top tier of fish decks losing out only to BUG fish being able to run FoW.  The advantage however is that you get to run all the best Creatures: Goyf, Qasali Pridemage, Bob, and Aven Mindcensor.  None of the other decks get to run all these guys and they are currently the best guys in Fish.  BUG passes by because because it has suitable replacements for Mindcensor (FoW to stop Tinker, the best plan against Fish) and Qasali Pridemage (Trygon Predator which is basically the nuts if a little worse against Tezz then Qasi).  All the other decks have to rely too heavily on slow card draw engines and on FoW because they don't have answers to everything.

GWb is not a fish deck, its Beats like RG Beats, or GW Beats.

[CowWithHat]

urweak, actually I would put forth the argument that SelkieStrike isn't a fish deck either, regardless of its inexpensive blue creature structure.  Fish, in my mind, is a control deck through and through. 

BUG fish fits this standard because it is playing entirely disruptive cards, the exceptions being Confidant which it plays to not get behind in card advantage and to find solutions to specific problems, and Goyf to end the game before the opponent can break through the mana and discard based hold that the fish decks is constantly building.

SelkieStrike is a deck with a real definable synergistic attack that it is trying to put together with which to dominate the game.  As Tezzeret wants to assemble artifact combo's or develop massive advantage with restricted card advantage and fast mana so does SelkieStrike try to assemble exalted creatures with Selkie to put its opponent on a short clock behind a big cluster of cards.  Both of these decks play elements to keep their opponent from doing degenerate things in the mean time, mana drain and duress effects from tez compared to the mana denial and pridemages of selkie.

If we are painting with a wide enough brush to consider both UWb fish which plays 4 cards which do not produce normal speed mana, ie lands, or act to directly stop the opponent from winning, and UGW which has been known to play jitte, goyf, selkie, and hierarch as aggressive spells I don't see why we cannot include the heavily disruptive and cheap creature based GWb as well.