I think you need to have proper perspective when looking at the results.
First of all, merfolk has game against all the decks that top 8'ed the event. In two games against affinity last night, I 2-0 both times. Hurkyll's recall is a nightmare for affinity, it essentially time walks them for two turns. Second, you need to keep in mind how many competent merfolk pilots were at an event in Pittsburgh. Third,
All the top pros chose to go with decks like bloom, twin, and affinity as they view those decks as sexy and powerful. I've been playing hunter Nances Greensboro list and it has been very impressive. Personally I feel merfolk is well positioned and very strong right now(Except against rending volley, lol). Don't worry about no merfolk in the top 32.
I think it's a blip on the radar, to be honest. The meta going forward (more Twin, which means less Affinity) is favorable to us overall. And we had a reasonable overall representation in Day 2 (3.9%). Chalk it up to a bad weekend and move on.
With regards to this whole U Devotion thing brought up by FANAttIC... I'm in agreement with CoBTyrannon in that it detracts from the Merfolk discussion. Additionally, in terms of raw power, I find that deck to be a tad lacking when compared to something like Merfolk, and I'm not sure that it's a "people haven't tried to do this!" issue. It's a deck that needs synergy to be potent, but would be actively skipping out on the pump synergy from Merfolk Lords, which is more powerful than anything else you could come up with in U for an aggressive strategy. The reason why U Devotion doesn't exist in Modern is because taking its best pieces (Master of Waves, maybe Thassa, God of the Sea) and jamming them into the Merfolk shell results in a stronger deck.
Speaking of twin, I'm having some trouble taking cards out in sideboarding against them; I bring in extra countermagic, tec edges, relic, vendilion clique, kira if I'm running them, but the only thing I really want to take out are Spreading Seas. I'm currently very much between builds trying out different things, but for most builds I always tend to want to board in ~8 cards whilst I only want to side out 2. I want to keep in my vials, my mainboard counterspells and removal, so all I can cut is creatures but I don't want to go too low in threat density. I tend to just lower my curve against them as a result, cutting down to two master of waves and taking the rest out of Reejereys, but I'm far from satisfied with that.
Master of Waves may be a bit slow, but they can't get rid of it, so you want to have it. And as you said, threat density is key. I think our default shell is already pretty good against Twin, so it's more about tweaks than it is wholesale changes.
Speaking of twin, I'm having some trouble taking cards out in sideboarding against them; I bring in extra countermagic, tec edges, relic, vendilion clique, kira if I'm running them, but the only thing I really want to take out are Spreading Seas. I'm currently very much between builds trying out different things, but for most builds I always tend to want to board in ~8 cards whilst I only want to side out 2. I want to keep in my vials, my mainboard counterspells and removal, so all I can cut is creatures but I don't want to go too low in threat density. I tend to just lower my curve against them as a result, cutting down to two master of waves and taking the rest out of Reejereys, but I'm far from satisfied with that.
So yeah, how do you guys side against twin?
In the past I sided out vial on the play, cursecatcher on the draw. I also sometimes sided out Merrow Reejerey.
This is experimental but right now I'm not siding out vial but not siding in lands. I always side out 4x Spreading Seas. Dunno what else to say without seeing lists.
As I said I don't have a set list right now and am more generally looking for what others cut. My lists are all very straightforward: 4 vial/seas/CC/silvergill/LoA/MotP/Harbinger, 20 lands and 3/4 reejereys and MoWs, 4/5 disruption (no vapor snags). Still debating on whether I find Kira to be necessary for the long MUs. Sideboard wise that is relevant to twin I'll always run some tec edges, 2 relics, 2-3 extra countermagic, and often 1-2 Vendilion Clique which no matter the exact configuration will leave me with 8 cards I'd want against twin versus only 4 that I want to cut
Merfolk needs to transition into a meta-game deck. We know the targets (Twin, Affinity, Jund). We know how to beat those decks or need to develop them.
First, if you are playing strictly blue, well, you're out in left field now. There is no way you have good game vs Affinity. There is no real only Blue answers (including Recall) that reliably beat Affinity.
Second, modern is a sideboard hate format. The most powerful hate cards are in white.
Third, there is zero drawback to running the U/w manabase. Only benefits. You can run fetchles white for almost 100% reliable mana for your sideboard cards without ruining your maindeck.
The meta card that I think that wrecks the whole modern environment is not Chalice of the Void anymore. I think (and know), it is;
Read the card. Think about it. It shuts off or cripples any activated ability. That means, fetches, TWIN(!), Planeswalker activations (yes, Jace's loot ability is included), most everything that Affinity is trying to do, Tron searches, etc etc. The only deck that basically is not hit by SF is, Amulet. (I suspect a ban of some sort incoming anyways).
Closing; if you are going to a big GP, consider your chances of winning or doing well. Consider your chances with a brutal maindeck hate card. It hits our Vials pretty hard as well, so maybe it's a sideboard card? I have played with it main (no Vial, more counters) and sideboard and the card is just great.
We already have amazing game against twin. If you want to beat Affinity in U you can do it - without massacaring your manabase to play white. 4x Harbinger, some number of dismember/snags and 3-4 Recall in the board will take Affinity to 50-50. White splash has been shown to be suboptimal time and time again.
Hi everyone! I was one of the fish who made Day 2 of GP Pitt, and I've written up a report and some thoughts on the matchups. I've been following modern merfolk through Nikachu's videos, the Salvation threads and what little official coverage there's been for a couple years now, though just started playing the deck outside of cockatrice about four months ago. I've been have good success with the deck at my store in Cincinnati and was excited to bring this to my first modern GP.
Round 1 vs Ronnie on Amulet Bloom (Won 2-0, 1-0 Overall)
Unfortunately I started the day playing against someone from my area that I had played before - never fun to beat someone you know at these huge events. I think fish is favored against bloom but it always feels awful to play them just because of the chance of them going off on turn 2 or 3 and blowing us away. At least the Hive Mind strategy is not someting we really need to be too concerned about, with being able to sac cursecatcher to our copy of whatever pact is played. Dismember was huge in the first game, neutering a prime time and allowing me kill it with blocks, then swing back for the win. In game 2 I played a chalice on 0 on turn 1 and he basically did nothing the rest of the game.
Round 2 vs Dalton on Jund (Won 2-0, 2-0 Overall)
This match was crazy easy and not representative of this matchup, which I think is about even. In both games I played 2 or 3 spreading seas and he could barely do anything with his mana. In game 2 I kept a hand with no fish in it but had 2 seas and a tec edge.
Round 3 vs Brandon on Skred Big Red (Lost 0-2, 2-1 Overall)
This game was so dumb. Maybe it's my local meta or lack of research, but I had no idea what I was up against, which caused me to misplay hugely in both games. For example, I walked into an anger of the gods when I could have played a lord to get everyone to 4 toughness, just because I had no idea it was maindecked. Please note, I am not saying this deck is bad, though I'm not sure it's great, but I feel like we have a good matchup against it as its essentially a midrange deck that wants to block creatures.
Round 4 vs Christopher on Jund (Lost 0-2, 2-2 Overall)
This felt like the opposite of my Jund match in Round 2. He successfully one-for-oned all my dudes and used Liliana to keep my hand and board clear. In game 2 I felt good because I had 2 spreading seas, but he inquistioned both out of my hand before I could play them.
Round 5 vs Chase on BW Tokens (Won 2-0, 3-2 Overall)
One day we might lose to this deck, but it was not this day. I think this is one of our easiest matchups against decks that don't play islands. They want to chump, we don't let them chump, and they don't have enough removal to keep us down. Dude was salty, complaining about why couldn't he be matched up agaisnt tier 1 decks. Didn't feel bad about beating him. He never got me below 14 in either game.
Round 6 vs Anton on RUG Twin (Won 2-0, 4-2 Overall)
I feel like we're favored in this, like against all twin, but that might just be my perception. They play islands, we have cavern and vials to have uncounterable harbingers to stop the combo. Add in dismembers in the main and negates in the board and this feels pretty good. I will say that I think this version is scarier than UR, as tarmogoyfs can get there. For example, in game 1 he got me down to 8 life from a big tarmo swinging a few times, but without that big tarmo body being able to block our dudes, we swing harder.
Round 7 vs Kevin on UR Twin (Won 2-0, 5-2 Overall)
See above, but without the tarmogoyfs to pressure us to win. That said, if they chain cryptics together it can of course be scary, but that is not super common. Never took a point of damage in either game.
Round 8 vs Joseph on UW Titan Control (Won 2-0, 6-2 Overall)
I am assuming he was on UW Titan because he played things like Wall of Omens and counterspells, but both games were over extremely quickly. I think this is a good matchup if we have a strong start. Be very careful of board wipes, as they run several mainboard, and I think it could be a tough game if it goes past 6 turns or so. However, this is essentially a goldfished game until then.
Round 9 vs Casey on Infect (Won 2-1, 7-2 Overall)
I was so nervous for this win-and-in to day 2 that when I saw turn 1 glistener elf I assumed I was just dead and wouldn't make it. Infect tends to be horrible for us, especially game 1. I tested heavily against this matchup before the event, which helped a lot, but in testing I won maybe 30% of the time. Game 1 went as expected and I lose after getting him down to 8. Thankfully, Chalice is an amazing card and I got a chalice on one in Game 2 and he had a hand full of 1 mana cost pump. He tried to get there with creatures hitting for 1 on the ground but we can easily outrace that. In Game 3 he mulled his hand because it was nothing but 1-drops, even though I didn't have chalice, the threat of it was enough to force the mull. Game 3 felt amazing, I had all the answers besides chalice - I pierced a pump spell, dismembered an inkmoth in response to a pump, and was sitting on a vial at 2 with both a harbinger and negate in hand. When I realized there was nothing he could do to win, I cannot tell you how fast my heart was beating, it felt amazing.
Round 10 vs Daniel on Ad Nauseam (Lost 0-2, 7-3 Overall)
This was a crushing way to fall out of top 8 contention. In game one I got through his phyrexian unlife, getting him to 0, and was going to kill him next turn. I cast a cursecatcher which would have been enough to counter an ad nauseum, but he pacted it, then responded to his pact trigger with ad nauseum to win the game. In game 2 he started with double suspended lotus bloom, which felt awful. On turn 4 he had 10 mana and played phrexian unlife, which I negated, then played angel's grace and ad nauseum. I should have held negate for the ad nauseum, but I felt like if I let him have unlife, it would have taken too long to kill him, and if he didn't have angels grace, he could have only drawn 11 cards. Meh. To hell with this combo!
Round 11 vs Michael on Burn (Won 2-1, 8-3 Overall)
I actually don't mind being matched up against Burn because I think harbingers are just fantastic against burn. I've playtested a ton versus burn and probablly have a 70% match win rate against it. The only time I feel like a game is truly bad for us is when they drop Eidolons before we have a strong board or a vial. Of course, sometimes they have a nuts hand and blow us away, but I think we often have the right answers for them. Though to be fair, if they turn 1 a grim lavamancer, we are pretty screwed.
Round 12 vs Matthew on Affinity (Won 2-0, 9-3 Overall)
By now you all must be thinking - wtf man, how did you dodge affinity for 11 rounds, you lucksack? Fair enough, I did see it all around me and was very lucky dodging it and getting to play against a bunch of decks that played islands. In this match though, I did not get my comeuppance. I had answers for everything game 1, including landing a Kira after he played Aether Grid, then playing a master that created 9 tokens. In game 2, a chalice on 0 caused him lots of problems, especially after I dismembered his steel overseer the turn he played him. Ended up being a very clean victory after that.
Round 13 vs Arthur on Mono-U Delver (Lost 1-2, 9-4 Overall)
I ended up playing against someone from my shop who runs this list. I'm not going to lie, when I saw who I was up against I thought I had already won, so this might have been some karma working against me. Game 1 he dropped a shackles on turn 3, but I responded with a kira, then ran him over with fish that he couldn't steal - eventually he did take kira though with shackles, but had to blow a vapor snag to bring down her shields. In game 2 I super punted. He played a clique, targeting me, and I didn't responded by dismembering the clique. So he then took the dismember and I couldn't kill the clique. I still almost won, dropping him down to 2, but he had the sickest topdeck I saw all tournament. He had the clique and two unflipped delvers on his side of the field, and I was at 10 life. He flips the top card for the delver trigger to reveal vapor snag. Delvers flips, he swings for 9 in the air, then he snags one of my dudes for lethal. Rough.
But not as rough as game 3. I did not have vial or cavern, and he went t2 remand, t3 remand, t4 cryptic, t5 cryptic, t6 snap cryptic. Rough times. This is the game where karma killed me for thinking this was an easy win. He acknowledged that merfolk is favored here, and he just had a god hand in game 3.
Round 14 vs Nicholas on Jund (Won 2-0, 10-4 Overall)
This was a good matchup for me, where I was able to chain 3 adepts together in game 1, forcing him to waste removal on them, and just got ahead of him because of that. In game 2, I was helped by his poor sideboarding choices, as he brought in choke and blood moon against me. Seeing as he wasted his entire third turn playing blood moon, it wasn't that hard to keep chipping away at him. He also fetched basics before playing blood moon, so a spreading seas was able to lock him out of one of his colors. He seemed super unhappy after the game, so I very politely and gently tried to explain why blood moon and choke aren't great ideas against us, but he blew me off and went to go complain to his friend. Whatever, hopefully some other fish player benefits from his bad sideboarding choices in the future.
Round 15 vs Richard on Burn (Lost 0-2, 10-5 Overall)
Game one he played lavamancer on turn 1, game two he played two eidolons before I could play a vial or establish a board. Both games went very badly. Slightly salty about this match because I wanted to draw so we could both be in the money but people around me said that we wouldn't. I ended up as 187th and money was paid to 150th. Everyone who went 10-4-1 was paid. Meh, whatever, it is what it is.
I am very pleased with the overall performance of the deck. All losses felt winable and quite a few wins felt like blowouts. I have been thinking hard about the sideboard, and I am not sure I would change anything. Chalice and Negate were my best cards out of it from this weekend, and I rarely used relic and never used hibernation, but that was just as a result of the matchups I got. Relic does so much work in many matches, and there were tons of zoo decks all around me that hibernation would have been a superstar in.
Thanks for reading all of this! While I don't hold myself out as a fish expert, I'd be happy to answer any questions people have.
Thanks for the detailed report. Do you think Hibernation is serving you better than Tidebinder Mage would? Because in my experience, Zoo gets busted harder by a Tidebinder than by the mass bounce in terms of tempo (since it doesn't require you to have 3 mana open). It also basically removes Grim Lavamancer, which you mentioned as a problem card in the Burn matchup. I waffle between these 2 cards all the time, so any data points one way or the other would be helpful.
Secondly, did the Tectonic Edges do a lot for you? I had been dabbling with land hate of my own, but I cut it because I found it to be a bit low-impact. I know you mentioned it doing work against Jund, but I'd like to hear an overall assessment on how it did.
Thanks for the detailed report. Do you think Hibernation is serving you better than Tidebinder Mage would? Because in my experience, Zoo gets busted harder by a Tidebinder than by the mass bounce in terms of tempo (since it doesn't require you to have 3 mana open). It also basically removes Grim Lavamancer, which you mentioned as a problem card in the Burn matchup. I waffle between these 2 cards all the time, so any data points one way or the other would be helpful.
Secondly, did the Tectonic Edges do a lot for you? I had been dabbling with land hate of my own, but I cut it because I found it to be a bit low-impact. I know you mentioned it doing work against Jund, but I'd like to hear an overall assessment on how it did.
Tidebinder is totally a fine choice, they just serve different roles. The tidebinder is better early game, on curve, for sure. For example if you go first and they play a mana dork and you get to tap that down on turn 2, it's fantastic. That said, I use Hibernation for a few reasons: 1) It is really the only way we have a chance vs elves, 2) I think it's far better against CoCo builds where tapping one creature isn't the biggest deal for them, and 3) I have found that often both sides end up in a situation where the crackback will kill the other. Hibernation allows me to swing in fully and then hibernation them on their turn to prevent the lethal crackback. You don't even really need that much fish out to win vs them, as they tend to take a fair amount of damage from fetches and shocks. Also, if you don't have spreading seas, or if they have a pridemage out threatening to kill it if you swing in, hibernation just allows you to bounce their board and win. That said, I do miss tidebinder in situations where you just need more dudes, like in the mirror. But I think the big play potential makes hibernation worth it.
As far as tec edge, I think it's a must include, if for nothing else but the tron matchup. If you seas one land of theirs, and they play a grove or non-tron land, tec edge allows you to delay tron one turn longer, which is enormous, especially on the draw. In addition, I really like it against 3 color decks when you really don't want to stumble on mana and you want to only let them play with 2 mana colors, or kill manlands. It also does work against bloom.
One more newb question (haven't had ones for too long here ): has anyone tried Ensnaring Bridge against Ulamog/Emrakul decks? Or are there better choices in our monoU deck to deal with them?
If anyone is willing to prove that UW is playable at all, go for it. Come back when there are ANY results.
Anyone is welcome to debate it for forever but results are results. Mono blue is a consistent tier 1 deck, UW has absolutely no consistent results. The land is clunky and painful.
I honestly think that UW is playable but my own playtesting doesn't make me believe it is better at all than mono U. The power of the white cards only compensate for what you lose in lands that shock you or come into play tapped.
I'm a sworn MonoU-Folk player myself, but here i have to intervene, because it's your go-tp phrase and its just plain wrong.
The fact you are stating is NOT correct.
UW had a top4 GP finish at the same time we won the GP with MonoU. In addition to that we also had some good placements of UW in your decklist reviews.
MonoU is by far more popular and therefore should post more results than UW, but saying UW doesn't show results is wrong.
If UWs ratio is 1 out of 6. Then having a good result to six good results is totally fine.
Out of 4! top GP finsihes in 2015, three were MonoU one was UW. I will argue, that UW does not have a share of 25% of Merfolk lists overall, making their Topfinish-rate better than MonoU. But that is just a guess.
Fact however is, there ARE results!
To be more specific, I want to see statistically significant results. For example, while a UW list will occasionally spike a daily, mtgtop8 is simply filled with winning MonoU lists. Yeah a UW squeaks in there once in a while, and yeah there was a top 8 finish. However, these are not consistent replicated results. If we talk about splashing green in UR Twin, it is very successful and proven. It's called Tarmotwin for a reason. The Grixis version of Twin enjoys equal success as much as the plain UR version. So when I talk about results, I mean results on par with the current Mono U results. 8-rack once made top 8 at a SCG IQ, that does't mean anything to me. It didn't mean 8-rack was suddenly playable, some guy just spiked an event. There are a lot of Merfolk players, many trying a splash, and it is expected that some will spike events as well. But when we look back at the results as a whole, mono U is dominantly the more consistently winning deck. There might be more successful splashes if the decks were designed and played properly (splashes make the deck clunky and more difficult to play), but that itself adds to the disadvantage of the splash.
One more newb question (haven't had ones for too long here ): has anyone tried Ensnaring Bridge against Ulamog/Emrakul decks? Or are there better choices in our monoU deck to deal with them?
16 cards sideboard because as of now I simply don't know what to cut; everything seems required. I've been trying out running one tec edge main over a wanderwine hub but I feel like I want 23 lands when I'm not running vial. I'm leaning towards cutting Chalice entirely as I feel it's 3-4 or not at all, but if I'd do that I'd probably replace them with 2 Spellskite as skite fills the role Chalice currently has the best, but that'd give me EVEN MORE cards I'd want to side against twin
my current sideboard plan is +2 tectonic edge, +2 Negate, +2 Vendilion Clique, -4 Spreading Seas, -1 Master of Waves, -1 Merrow Reejerey. Not bringing in Relic at all since I don't have room, so I'm not satisfied at all with such a shaky game plan against arguably the #1 deck to beat.
Ensnaring Bridge effects your creatures too thus I don't like it in Merfolk. Against Tron (most common deck with these creatures) the best thing to do is to go for mana denial plan. We have Spreading Seas and you also have Tectonic Edge, Ghost Quarters and similar stuff.
One more newb question (haven't had ones for too long here ): has anyone tried Ensnaring Bridge against Ulamog/Emrakul decks? Or are there better choices in our monoU deck to deal with them?
Try to win before they play those creatures
Thank you, guys!
In fact, these are not necessarily Tron decks.
As homebrew decks are popular at our LGS, Emrakul/Ulamog often turn up in some sorts of green ramp eldrazi or monoblack eldrazi types of decks. It's especially challenging for me to beat them since I can't figure out what I'm up against for a few turns.
Anyway, if I get it right, we don't have enough ways to deal with them once they've hit the board (bouncing Ulamog back is not the best thing to do unless I swing for lethal the same turn... maybe dismembering twice in a row... but don't like it either), so I'll possibly try to race them siding out interaction except dismembers (for mana dorks), seas and other mana denial cards.
16 cards sideboard because as of now I simply don't know what to cut; everything seems required. I've been trying out running one tec edge main over a wanderwine hub but I feel like I want 23 lands when I'm not running vial. I'm leaning towards cutting Chalice entirely as I feel it's 3-4 or not at all, but if I'd do that I'd probably replace them with 2 Spellskite as skite fills the role Chalice currently has the best, but that'd give me EVEN MORE cards I'd want to side against twin
my current sideboard plan is +2 tectonic edge, +2 Negate, +2 Vendilion Clique, -4 Spreading Seas, -1 Master of Waves, -1 Merrow Reejerey. Not bringing in Relic at all since I don't have room, so I'm not satisfied at all with such a shaky game plan against arguably the #1 deck to beat.
Vendillion is a great card in general, it rules in Legacy but luckluster in Modern (no one plays it). You could ditch both Clique and replace one with third Recall.
This way you have well rounded sideboard and all solutions to beat Twin are present.
I would +2 Relic, +2 Negate, -4 Seas. This configuration have all pieces to win whether he left his combo in or trying to grind you out. You will win with Waves either way.
Also wondering how you side both this and your non Sea's Claim lists vs Affinity. You're not packing the typical hate others run. Are you just thinking the matchup is so poor that it's not worth sideboard slots? Or do you have a decent plan against them?
Is tectonic edge necessary when you already have 8 land disruption in the main? Could those slots be Hurkyl's or Chalice instead?
I top 8'd an SCG 5k w/ Legacy Merfolk years back. Recently I only play Limited but made Merfolk in Modern. Unbelievable to find your videos. Very much appreciated!
Thanks for the advice. I've been doodling around since I posted that list, cutting the chalices for 2 spellskites coming to the conclusion that now I have too few pieces against burn (need to take out 4 seas and 3 dismember but only got 6 cards to bring in) and although clique has been a complete all star for me in testing it might be not that much better than just straight up extra countermagic. I think I'm gonna try out 2x skite for a while and replace 2 cliques for an extra hurkyl's recall and spell pierce. That way I still have nothing against the mirror though.. sideboard micromanaging is hard
That still leaves 16 cards in the side.
I think you have enough for a mirror (3 Hub, 2 Cavern are plenty of nonislands for manabase and Dismembers are going to help, when Snags are not available).
-3 Seas, -2 Pierce, +2 Tidebinder, +3 Edge is adequate plan, any more slots would be wasted (we are tier1 but not present in numbers).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
First of all, merfolk has game against all the decks that top 8'ed the event. In two games against affinity last night, I 2-0 both times. Hurkyll's recall is a nightmare for affinity, it essentially time walks them for two turns. Second, you need to keep in mind how many competent merfolk pilots were at an event in Pittsburgh. Third,
All the top pros chose to go with decks like bloom, twin, and affinity as they view those decks as sexy and powerful. I've been playing hunter Nances Greensboro list and it has been very impressive. Personally I feel merfolk is well positioned and very strong right now(Except against rending volley, lol). Don't worry about no merfolk in the top 32.
With regards to this whole U Devotion thing brought up by FANAttIC... I'm in agreement with CoBTyrannon in that it detracts from the Merfolk discussion. Additionally, in terms of raw power, I find that deck to be a tad lacking when compared to something like Merfolk, and I'm not sure that it's a "people haven't tried to do this!" issue. It's a deck that needs synergy to be potent, but would be actively skipping out on the pump synergy from Merfolk Lords, which is more powerful than anything else you could come up with in U for an aggressive strategy. The reason why U Devotion doesn't exist in Modern is because taking its best pieces (Master of Waves, maybe Thassa, God of the Sea) and jamming them into the Merfolk shell results in a stronger deck.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
So yeah, how do you guys side against twin?
+2 Echoing Truth, +2 Unified Will
-4 Spreading Seas
Master of Waves may be a bit slow, but they can't get rid of it, so you want to have it. And as you said, threat density is key. I think our default shell is already pretty good against Twin, so it's more about tweaks than it is wholesale changes.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
In the past I sided out vial on the play, cursecatcher on the draw. I also sometimes sided out Merrow Reejerey.
This is experimental but right now I'm not siding out vial but not siding in lands. I always side out 4x Spreading Seas. Dunno what else to say without seeing lists.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
We already have amazing game against twin. If you want to beat Affinity in U you can do it - without massacaring your manabase to play white. 4x Harbinger, some number of dismember/snags and 3-4 Recall in the board will take Affinity to 50-50. White splash has been shown to be suboptimal time and time again.
Bant Eldrazi
UW Control
U Merfolk
Legacy
Merfolk
UR Delver
4 Harbinger of the Tides
1 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
3 Master of Waves
4 Merrow Reejerey
4 Silvergill Adept
2 Dismember
2 Spell Pierce
4 Spreading Seas
4 AEther Vial
10 Island
1 Minamo, School at Water's Edge
4 Mutavault
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
3 Wanderwine Hub
2 Hibernation
3 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Negate
2 Relic of Progenitus
3 Tectonic Edge
Round 1 vs Ronnie on Amulet Bloom (Won 2-0, 1-0 Overall)
Unfortunately I started the day playing against someone from my area that I had played before - never fun to beat someone you know at these huge events. I think fish is favored against bloom but it always feels awful to play them just because of the chance of them going off on turn 2 or 3 and blowing us away. At least the Hive Mind strategy is not someting we really need to be too concerned about, with being able to sac cursecatcher to our copy of whatever pact is played. Dismember was huge in the first game, neutering a prime time and allowing me kill it with blocks, then swing back for the win. In game 2 I played a chalice on 0 on turn 1 and he basically did nothing the rest of the game.
Round 2 vs Dalton on Jund (Won 2-0, 2-0 Overall)
This match was crazy easy and not representative of this matchup, which I think is about even. In both games I played 2 or 3 spreading seas and he could barely do anything with his mana. In game 2 I kept a hand with no fish in it but had 2 seas and a tec edge.
Round 3 vs Brandon on Skred Big Red (Lost 0-2, 2-1 Overall)
This game was so dumb. Maybe it's my local meta or lack of research, but I had no idea what I was up against, which caused me to misplay hugely in both games. For example, I walked into an anger of the gods when I could have played a lord to get everyone to 4 toughness, just because I had no idea it was maindecked. Please note, I am not saying this deck is bad, though I'm not sure it's great, but I feel like we have a good matchup against it as its essentially a midrange deck that wants to block creatures.
Round 4 vs Christopher on Jund (Lost 0-2, 2-2 Overall)
This felt like the opposite of my Jund match in Round 2. He successfully one-for-oned all my dudes and used Liliana to keep my hand and board clear. In game 2 I felt good because I had 2 spreading seas, but he inquistioned both out of my hand before I could play them.
Round 5 vs Chase on BW Tokens (Won 2-0, 3-2 Overall)
One day we might lose to this deck, but it was not this day. I think this is one of our easiest matchups against decks that don't play islands. They want to chump, we don't let them chump, and they don't have enough removal to keep us down. Dude was salty, complaining about why couldn't he be matched up agaisnt tier 1 decks. Didn't feel bad about beating him. He never got me below 14 in either game.
Round 6 vs Anton on RUG Twin (Won 2-0, 4-2 Overall)
I feel like we're favored in this, like against all twin, but that might just be my perception. They play islands, we have cavern and vials to have uncounterable harbingers to stop the combo. Add in dismembers in the main and negates in the board and this feels pretty good. I will say that I think this version is scarier than UR, as tarmogoyfs can get there. For example, in game 1 he got me down to 8 life from a big tarmo swinging a few times, but without that big tarmo body being able to block our dudes, we swing harder.
Round 7 vs Kevin on UR Twin (Won 2-0, 5-2 Overall)
See above, but without the tarmogoyfs to pressure us to win. That said, if they chain cryptics together it can of course be scary, but that is not super common. Never took a point of damage in either game.
Round 8 vs Joseph on UW Titan Control (Won 2-0, 6-2 Overall)
I am assuming he was on UW Titan because he played things like Wall of Omens and counterspells, but both games were over extremely quickly. I think this is a good matchup if we have a strong start. Be very careful of board wipes, as they run several mainboard, and I think it could be a tough game if it goes past 6 turns or so. However, this is essentially a goldfished game until then.
Round 9 vs Casey on Infect (Won 2-1, 7-2 Overall)
I was so nervous for this win-and-in to day 2 that when I saw turn 1 glistener elf I assumed I was just dead and wouldn't make it. Infect tends to be horrible for us, especially game 1. I tested heavily against this matchup before the event, which helped a lot, but in testing I won maybe 30% of the time. Game 1 went as expected and I lose after getting him down to 8. Thankfully, Chalice is an amazing card and I got a chalice on one in Game 2 and he had a hand full of 1 mana cost pump. He tried to get there with creatures hitting for 1 on the ground but we can easily outrace that. In Game 3 he mulled his hand because it was nothing but 1-drops, even though I didn't have chalice, the threat of it was enough to force the mull. Game 3 felt amazing, I had all the answers besides chalice - I pierced a pump spell, dismembered an inkmoth in response to a pump, and was sitting on a vial at 2 with both a harbinger and negate in hand. When I realized there was nothing he could do to win, I cannot tell you how fast my heart was beating, it felt amazing.
Round 10 vs Daniel on Ad Nauseam (Lost 0-2, 7-3 Overall)
This was a crushing way to fall out of top 8 contention. In game one I got through his phyrexian unlife, getting him to 0, and was going to kill him next turn. I cast a cursecatcher which would have been enough to counter an ad nauseum, but he pacted it, then responded to his pact trigger with ad nauseum to win the game. In game 2 he started with double suspended lotus bloom, which felt awful. On turn 4 he had 10 mana and played phrexian unlife, which I negated, then played angel's grace and ad nauseum. I should have held negate for the ad nauseum, but I felt like if I let him have unlife, it would have taken too long to kill him, and if he didn't have angels grace, he could have only drawn 11 cards. Meh. To hell with this combo!
Round 11 vs Michael on Burn (Won 2-1, 8-3 Overall)
I actually don't mind being matched up against Burn because I think harbingers are just fantastic against burn. I've playtested a ton versus burn and probablly have a 70% match win rate against it. The only time I feel like a game is truly bad for us is when they drop Eidolons before we have a strong board or a vial. Of course, sometimes they have a nuts hand and blow us away, but I think we often have the right answers for them. Though to be fair, if they turn 1 a grim lavamancer, we are pretty screwed.
Round 12 vs Matthew on Affinity (Won 2-0, 9-3 Overall)
By now you all must be thinking - wtf man, how did you dodge affinity for 11 rounds, you lucksack? Fair enough, I did see it all around me and was very lucky dodging it and getting to play against a bunch of decks that played islands. In this match though, I did not get my comeuppance. I had answers for everything game 1, including landing a Kira after he played Aether Grid, then playing a master that created 9 tokens. In game 2, a chalice on 0 caused him lots of problems, especially after I dismembered his steel overseer the turn he played him. Ended up being a very clean victory after that.
Round 13 vs Arthur on Mono-U Delver (Lost 1-2, 9-4 Overall)
I ended up playing against someone from my shop who runs this list. I'm not going to lie, when I saw who I was up against I thought I had already won, so this might have been some karma working against me. Game 1 he dropped a shackles on turn 3, but I responded with a kira, then ran him over with fish that he couldn't steal - eventually he did take kira though with shackles, but had to blow a vapor snag to bring down her shields. In game 2 I super punted. He played a clique, targeting me, and I didn't responded by dismembering the clique. So he then took the dismember and I couldn't kill the clique. I still almost won, dropping him down to 2, but he had the sickest topdeck I saw all tournament. He had the clique and two unflipped delvers on his side of the field, and I was at 10 life. He flips the top card for the delver trigger to reveal vapor snag. Delvers flips, he swings for 9 in the air, then he snags one of my dudes for lethal. Rough.
But not as rough as game 3. I did not have vial or cavern, and he went t2 remand, t3 remand, t4 cryptic, t5 cryptic, t6 snap cryptic. Rough times. This is the game where karma killed me for thinking this was an easy win. He acknowledged that merfolk is favored here, and he just had a god hand in game 3.
Round 14 vs Nicholas on Jund (Won 2-0, 10-4 Overall)
This was a good matchup for me, where I was able to chain 3 adepts together in game 1, forcing him to waste removal on them, and just got ahead of him because of that. In game 2, I was helped by his poor sideboarding choices, as he brought in choke and blood moon against me. Seeing as he wasted his entire third turn playing blood moon, it wasn't that hard to keep chipping away at him. He also fetched basics before playing blood moon, so a spreading seas was able to lock him out of one of his colors. He seemed super unhappy after the game, so I very politely and gently tried to explain why blood moon and choke aren't great ideas against us, but he blew me off and went to go complain to his friend. Whatever, hopefully some other fish player benefits from his bad sideboarding choices in the future.
Round 15 vs Richard on Burn (Lost 0-2, 10-5 Overall)
Game one he played lavamancer on turn 1, game two he played two eidolons before I could play a vial or establish a board. Both games went very badly. Slightly salty about this match because I wanted to draw so we could both be in the money but people around me said that we wouldn't. I ended up as 187th and money was paid to 150th. Everyone who went 10-4-1 was paid. Meh, whatever, it is what it is.
I am very pleased with the overall performance of the deck. All losses felt winable and quite a few wins felt like blowouts. I have been thinking hard about the sideboard, and I am not sure I would change anything. Chalice and Negate were my best cards out of it from this weekend, and I rarely used relic and never used hibernation, but that was just as a result of the matchups I got. Relic does so much work in many matches, and there were tons of zoo decks all around me that hibernation would have been a superstar in.
Thanks for reading all of this! While I don't hold myself out as a fish expert, I'd be happy to answer any questions people have.
Secondly, did the Tectonic Edges do a lot for you? I had been dabbling with land hate of my own, but I cut it because I found it to be a bit low-impact. I know you mentioned it doing work against Jund, but I'd like to hear an overall assessment on how it did.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Tidebinder is totally a fine choice, they just serve different roles. The tidebinder is better early game, on curve, for sure. For example if you go first and they play a mana dork and you get to tap that down on turn 2, it's fantastic. That said, I use Hibernation for a few reasons: 1) It is really the only way we have a chance vs elves, 2) I think it's far better against CoCo builds where tapping one creature isn't the biggest deal for them, and 3) I have found that often both sides end up in a situation where the crackback will kill the other. Hibernation allows me to swing in fully and then hibernation them on their turn to prevent the lethal crackback. You don't even really need that much fish out to win vs them, as they tend to take a fair amount of damage from fetches and shocks. Also, if you don't have spreading seas, or if they have a pridemage out threatening to kill it if you swing in, hibernation just allows you to bounce their board and win. That said, I do miss tidebinder in situations where you just need more dudes, like in the mirror. But I think the big play potential makes hibernation worth it.
As far as tec edge, I think it's a must include, if for nothing else but the tron matchup. If you seas one land of theirs, and they play a grove or non-tron land, tec edge allows you to delay tron one turn longer, which is enormous, especially on the draw. In addition, I really like it against 3 color decks when you really don't want to stumble on mana and you want to only let them play with 2 mana colors, or kill manlands. It also does work against bloom.
4 Silvergill Adept
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
4 Harbinger of the Tides
3 Merrow Reejerey
3 Master of Waves
1 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
4 Aether Vial
4 Spreading Seas
3 Dismember
2 Spell Pierce
4 mutavault
3 Wanderwine Hub
2 Cavern of Souls
1 oboro, palace in the clouds
1 minamo, school at water's edge
3 tectonic edge
3 chalice of the void
2 hurkyl's recall
2 negate
2 tidebinder mage
2 vendilion clique
2 relic of progenitus
16 cards sideboard because as of now I simply don't know what to cut; everything seems required. I've been trying out running one tec edge main over a wanderwine hub but I feel like I want 23 lands when I'm not running vial. I'm leaning towards cutting Chalice entirely as I feel it's 3-4 or not at all, but if I'd do that I'd probably replace them with 2 Spellskite as skite fills the role Chalice currently has the best, but that'd give me EVEN MORE cards I'd want to side against twin
my current sideboard plan is +2 tectonic edge, +2 Negate, +2 Vendilion Clique, -4 Spreading Seas, -1 Master of Waves, -1 Merrow Reejerey. Not bringing in Relic at all since I don't have room, so I'm not satisfied at all with such a shaky game plan against arguably the #1 deck to beat.
Thank you, guys!
In fact, these are not necessarily Tron decks.
As homebrew decks are popular at our LGS, Emrakul/Ulamog often turn up in some sorts of green ramp eldrazi or monoblack eldrazi types of decks. It's especially challenging for me to beat them since I can't figure out what I'm up against for a few turns.
Anyway, if I get it right, we don't have enough ways to deal with them once they've hit the board (bouncing Ulamog back is not the best thing to do unless I swing for lethal the same turn... maybe dismembering twice in a row... but don't like it either), so I'll possibly try to race them siding out interaction except dismembers (for mana dorks), seas and other mana denial cards.
Vendillion is a great card in general, it rules in Legacy but luckluster in Modern (no one plays it). You could ditch both Clique and replace one with third Recall.
This way you have well rounded sideboard and all solutions to beat Twin are present.
I would +2 Relic, +2 Negate, -4 Seas. This configuration have all pieces to win whether he left his combo in or trying to grind you out. You will win with Waves either way.
Why did you leave one Harbinger in?
Also wondering how you side both this and your non Sea's Claim lists vs Affinity. You're not packing the typical hate others run. Are you just thinking the matchup is so poor that it's not worth sideboard slots? Or do you have a decent plan against them?
Is tectonic edge necessary when you already have 8 land disruption in the main? Could those slots be Hurkyl's or Chalice instead?
I top 8'd an SCG 5k w/ Legacy Merfolk years back. Recently I only play Limited but made Merfolk in Modern. Unbelievable to find your videos. Very much appreciated!
I think you have enough for a mirror (3 Hub, 2 Cavern are plenty of nonislands for manabase and Dismembers are going to help, when Snags are not available).
-3 Seas, -2 Pierce, +2 Tidebinder, +3 Edge is adequate plan, any more slots would be wasted (we are tier1 but not present in numbers).