1) UG variant is in bad shape, yes. Our aggro game has been increasingly been less efficient than the competition's, so our ability to play defense with cards like Merfolk Trickster and Harbinger of the Tides has become more important.
So has our game plan changed? Are we holding back threats more so as to not over extend?
1) In Modern? Yeah. Standard? Nah.
2) That's unclear. Burn either tops or is close to topping the meta. And MOW has protection from Red. So, obvi it won't die to the plethora of red spells. But it's a host cost creature. If you're worried about burn, I'd wonder whether MOW is too clunky and evaluate cards based on how well they can keep the game going past turn 4 (our goal against burn is survive long enough to go wide). I'd rather have Kopala than MOW against burn. The former is cheaper and slows down the burn clock big time, which favors us.
Jund is also up there in the meta. And MOW still survives bolt/ terminate, kolaghan's command but not fatal push. Still, it survives like half the removal suit. And if your other fellas do not, MOW's can help destabilize the board. I'd have 4 MOW against Jund w/ maybe a single kopala/kira.
But I'd also prefer Kopala against MOW against UW control. A lot of their late-game instants/sorceries are expensive (e.g., cryptic command, terminus, supreme verdict) and with kopala's tax on the board they control player either (i) pays the tax and thus is prevented from doing a lot more else that turn; (ii) or cannot afford to. Either way, that's good for us. True, if they get a terminus down it's good to have MOW to get it and a token so we're not defenseless. But it's not clear that having MOW to re-stabilize after a terminus buys more time than have a koplala or Kira down early on to make an expensive board swipe more expensive such that the opponent either cannot play it or will not pay the tax at the expense of wasting an entire turn just to play one terminus.
So, against the probably top-3 decks in the modern meta I'd only really love 4 MOW against burn. Idt its going to help the game go long against UW control or Jund, but it can still help stabilize a board in either match up. But in these cases, I'd rather protect the board well for a creature that cost one less mana than MOW than have to attempt to re-stabilize it after a board wipe with MOW and get it plus a token or two.
1) UG variant is in bad shape, yes. Our aggro game has been increasingly been less efficient than the competition's, so our ability to play defense with cards like Merfolk Trickster and Harbinger of the Tides has become more important.
So has our game plan changed? Are we holding back threats more so as to not over extend?
Over-extension matters less than it did in the past - fewer decks run sweepers. It's just that interacting with the opponent early is oftentimes more important than advancing our own gameplan. Tempo is a variant of aggro-control, and right now the metagame conditions dictate we lean a bit more toward the control side.
Regarding Kopala... I don't think we're quite seeing enough BGX to justify his presence. The top 4 decks in the format right now are Grixis Shadow, UR Phoenix, Dredge, and Burn (not sure where you're getting UWX Control or BGX being that high, Shoebaccha), and Master of Waves is awesome against all of them (they all rely on red removal and/or are soft to a true go-wide strategy).
My meta game claims are from https://mtgdecks.net/Modern. I agree that MOW is good against spot red removal like seen in burn. But just because it has protection of read doesn't mean it's good against the deck in general. I'd still rather have a card that gains tempo and/or stops a burn player from emptying their hands of bolts, chainwhirlers, etc. than have red-immune MOW. After all, if all the other creatures get burned and we play MOW we won't get many tokens. So, God forbid the burn opponent toasts our board MOW will only come in late in the game and get us one token (easily removed) and MOW (not easily removed). 4 late-game creatures immune from red that more likely than not will generate few tokens seems less impressive than 4 creatures I can play a turn earlier than gain significant tempo against a deck that wants to burn us quickly.
It's also not clear to me that MOW is great against Grixis Deathshadow at least insofar as it has protection from red. As far as I know, most decks run fewer than 4 bolts and far fewer than that for Kolighan's Command and (some run Anger of the Gods, Terminate and it is true that they'll get more than that many uses if they get Snapcasters out...) Now that I say it, that's a lot. Even though MOW's protection is moot against Fatal Push or Dismember it does seem like it'd survive a lot than can appear. So I take it back: I'll concede that MOW is good against Death Shadow insofar as it can stay on the board. But again: I'm always trying to make any game go longer in Modern, and it seems like a reason that MOW makes the game go longer later in the game is if it *****s out a lot of tokens. But if we cannot develop a board and built up devotion s.t. MOW keeps the game going past turn 5 I'd rather have a creature (e.g., Kira, Kopala) that either protects the board or gains a hell of a lot of tempo or some other card with a similar tempo-gaining affect (e.g., Monastery Siege)
...Are you new to Merfolk or something? We have had years of success against Burn decks by buying time with counters/Harbingers/what have you, then slamming the Master to turn the corner. We are not short on ways to buy time against Burn, and having a finisher they can basically do nothing about is how you slam the door shut. Ditto for Shadow - the number of cards they play that actually kill it are limited and they have to answer it immediately, or they just die. There's a lot of value to having a haymaker-type card that overwhelms the opponent, which is why Merfolk players make the manabase concessions to play it, and have for years. All of us have dabbled in Master-less lists in the past; they're not as effective. The only metagame hostile to him is one in which combo and big mana dominate, so tapping out for a 4-drop is untenable. That's not where we are right now.
That site you quoted is also most definitely inaccurate; there's no mention of Phoenix decks, which until last week were the consensus most popular deck in the format (they arguably still are now, it's just that it's not obviously the case).
I sold my merfolk even if it was my second Favorit deck. I tryed in the past games with no master of waves because of the reasons above and it was bad... Really bad... I underestimate the power of Master and after I realized it, I was successful again. We need Master of waves was my conclusion after
Ive been following the MTG scene the last year or so, but only recently updated my MTGO deck and started playing a few games again.
In my first MTGO Friendly League this week I ran into not one, but two lantern control decks.
Without the sideboard Hurkyls it was painful, very painful... The my 6 maindeck counters ( 2x Spell Pierce and 4x Deprive) was not even good enough.
I feel very confident against Burn at the moment, Ive won my last 6 matches against them comfortably. Like Rothgar said, MoW is beast in the matchup. Im also running 2x spellskite in the side which normally just breaks the Burn's back completely.
I had some trouble against the black control deck playing with Bitterblossom, mostly because I did not know what to expect.
Hi Rothgar,
It seems part of your reply involves reasoning like this:
Premise: What I say with respect to (wrt) is false (suppose that this is true; I said false things).
Conclusion: So, I must be new to Merfolk.
That's neither a valid nor sound inference.
Now, enough about your comments that seemingly are meant to disparage me.
About MOW: What I claimed is that it's not clear that "MOW great against Grixis Deathshadow at least insofar as it has protection from red.(my emphasis." Then I recanted that, as you can see in my original post (where I was thinking out loud). So, we seem to agree about the utility of MOW with respect to Deathshadow. So, you telling me that MOW is good against Deathshadow is not inconsistent with what I say. It is inconsistent only with a view that I later came to reject. So, we agree about MOW's utility in that matchup.
About MOW wrt Burn, my reasoning was roughly this (I'll even skip a few steps to make the argument shorter):
Assumption 1: Burn is a quick deck in a quick format.
Assumption 2: Merfolk gets better the later in the game it goes.
Assumption 3: Kirra/Kopala and MOW are high cost and both help with tempo against burn.
Assumption 4: Against a quick deck in a quick format, gaining tempo is a good thing.
---
Premise 1: It's good for Merfolk to have creature cards that help with tempo.
Premise 2: If two cards provide tempo boosts, it's not necessarily true that choosing one in lieu of the other is best.
Conclusion 2: So, it's not necessarily true that choosing MOW over a Kopala/Kirra is best.
Your response is roughly this:
Premise 1: There's ways to buy time against burn (implicit: that are independent of Kopala/Kirra).
Premise 2: It's good to have a finisher against burn that "slams the door shut".
Implicit: If one can buy time without Kopala/Kirra with card that "slams the door shut", then there is reason to play it against burn.
Conclusion: So, there's reason to play it against burn.
(you also think that (Conclusion) above explains why players traditionally keep MOW in the deck against burn).
Again: I can grant you everything that you say. I'll even tell you explicitly: You said all true things. But this is not to show that I have any false premises or a conclusion that does not validity or soundly follow from its premises.
I'm merely trying to convince you that it's non-crazy to prefer certain creatures over MOW against BURN. I'm not arguing that MOW is completely useless in the matchup. I'm also not arguing that MOW ought not ever be played in the matchup. I'm not arguing that MOW has not historically been played in the matchup, not arguing that both cannot be played simultaneously, etc. My view is this: looking at Burn lists and building a Merfolk deck, if I have MOW in one hand and either Kopala or Kirra in the other (and I can only pick one) it's not necessarily correct to pick MOW.
So, we seem to agree.
You might object: Maybe your view is this. MOW makes the game go longer than a Kopala or a Kirra. Why is that? MOW makes tokens. And it has protection from red. And having multiple things come out onto the board gains tempo. Those are all true. I grant you that. But as I said before, that MOW late in the game makes the game go much longer assumes that there's some non-trivial amount of devotion on the board to make some. But that's not necessarily going to be the case with burn. For given burn's removal aspect it's plausible that the Merfolk player's board is relatively clear by Turn 4-5.
So, against Burn on turn 4 or 5 I'd rather pull a Kopala than MOW.
You might object that by turn 4 or 5 the Burn player has enough mana to, say, pay Kopala's tax. This is because their removal suite is low-cost. So, having Kopala that late doesn't help. But as I said previously, that's not obvious to me. Why is that? Making a burn player's whole turn consist in only playing one piece of removal at that stage of the game (to kill Kopala) is still a tempo boost.
You might respond that by that turn my Kopala is gone, though. Yet if I had MOW instead on that turn the Burn player spent a turn killing Kopala, even without any other devotion on the board the Merfolk player would only have lost one token to a burn spell.
That, to me, is the best case for preferring MOW over Kopala on turn 4-5. But it's not clear to me that that's your avowed view.
What I'm citing is years of well-tested lines of play in which Master of Waves is one of the best, if not the absolute best card to see against Burn. It's not just my evidence - there are thousands of Merfolk players out there, and the collective wisdom over years of play experience and tons of players is that Master helps you stabilize and close the game out simultaneously. If it's not one of the best cards in the matchup, something is off. Your questioning this leads me to believe that you are newer to the deck, because every veteran pilot of the deck that I know of knows this, and leverages it accordingly. This is conventional wisdom.
How is Merfolk in this meta? Going to GP LA, my first major Magic event, and currently bringing Spirits, but I know that the three most popular decks right now (UR Phoenix, Dredge, Tron) are terrible matchups for it. I'm tempted to give Mono-U folk a spin.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Modern Decks BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends." BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved." RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros." BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?" C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
Feeling good about it. Those 3 matchups you mentioned are all in our favor, as are Burn and Shadow (two other major players). Various Merfolk pilots have been crushing it on Magic Online.
MoW is essential against Burn because we need to turn the game around quickly, give them less topdecks, Kopala is just a 2/2 for three that has trouble blocking Swiftspear (or even Guide and Eidolon since then it is only Grey Ogre which haven't leveraged the tax ability) and we get dmg casting it vs Eidolon. If there is low amount of devotion on turn 4/5 that might mean our life total is higher because we chumped to survive or they used burn spells to clear the way, Master will still Moat the ground and be ready to turn the corner. Burn is usually 3-colored deck with low land count, so our Seas help devotion even if they Searing-ed everything else, then you need Mow for cleaning duty.
Feeling good about it. Those 3 matchups you mentioned are all in our favor, as are Burn and Shadow (two other major players). Various Merfolk pilots have been crushing it on Magic Online.
I'll definitely give Merfolk a try at the side event I'm going to on Friday. If things go well (I've got a good feeling), I'm gonna go back to the Fish for the main event on Saturday. I've seen some recent lists not run the full four Spreading Seas in main because of all the island based decks.
Current Modern Decks BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends." BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved." RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros." BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?" C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
Maindeck looks rock solid. I've been favoring Spell Pierce over Chalice in the sideboard of late, but that's more a matter of taste.
Yeah it was a bit of a toss-up for me, but I felt that annoying Phoenix and Shadow with a Chalice on one is worthwhile.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Modern Decks BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends." BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved." RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros." BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?" C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
Are you still preferring all 4 Harbingers in the main? I saw so much Phoenix at my LGS the other day I’m debating it.
I personally have experimented with 2 / 2 , 2 / 1 and I'm currently back on a 3 / 0 split. Someone also posted results where they had all 4 Harbingers in the side.
At a minimum you probably still need at least 2 Harbingers in your 75 - they are just to good in some match ups to leave out and would depend on your meta.
I'm still on the full 4, yes. I like bringing my Pierces out from the side in matchups where they are good (Burn/control/combo, mostly).
Mind sharing your list? I'd love to see your build for this meta. D:
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Modern Decks BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends." BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved." RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros." BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?" C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
So after discovering some cards I didn't realize I had while also discovering I lacked play sets of others, here's my updated list that I'm bringing to a side event tomorrow at GP LA.
Current Modern Decks BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends." BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved." RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros." BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?" C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So has our game plan changed? Are we holding back threats more so as to not over extend?
2) That's unclear. Burn either tops or is close to topping the meta. And MOW has protection from Red. So, obvi it won't die to the plethora of red spells. But it's a host cost creature. If you're worried about burn, I'd wonder whether MOW is too clunky and evaluate cards based on how well they can keep the game going past turn 4 (our goal against burn is survive long enough to go wide). I'd rather have Kopala than MOW against burn. The former is cheaper and slows down the burn clock big time, which favors us.
Jund is also up there in the meta. And MOW still survives bolt/ terminate, kolaghan's command but not fatal push. Still, it survives like half the removal suit. And if your other fellas do not, MOW's can help destabilize the board. I'd have 4 MOW against Jund w/ maybe a single kopala/kira.
But I'd also prefer Kopala against MOW against UW control. A lot of their late-game instants/sorceries are expensive (e.g., cryptic command, terminus, supreme verdict) and with kopala's tax on the board they control player either (i) pays the tax and thus is prevented from doing a lot more else that turn; (ii) or cannot afford to. Either way, that's good for us. True, if they get a terminus down it's good to have MOW to get it and a token so we're not defenseless. But it's not clear that having MOW to re-stabilize after a terminus buys more time than have a koplala or Kira down early on to make an expensive board swipe more expensive such that the opponent either cannot play it or will not pay the tax at the expense of wasting an entire turn just to play one terminus.
So, against the probably top-3 decks in the modern meta I'd only really love 4 MOW against burn. Idt its going to help the game go long against UW control or Jund, but it can still help stabilize a board in either match up. But in these cases, I'd rather protect the board well for a creature that cost one less mana than MOW than have to attempt to re-stabilize it after a board wipe with MOW and get it plus a token or two.
Over-extension matters less than it did in the past - fewer decks run sweepers. It's just that interacting with the opponent early is oftentimes more important than advancing our own gameplan. Tempo is a variant of aggro-control, and right now the metagame conditions dictate we lean a bit more toward the control side.
Regarding Kopala... I don't think we're quite seeing enough BGX to justify his presence. The top 4 decks in the format right now are Grixis Shadow, UR Phoenix, Dredge, and Burn (not sure where you're getting UWX Control or BGX being that high, Shoebaccha), and Master of Waves is awesome against all of them (they all rely on red removal and/or are soft to a true go-wide strategy).
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
It's also not clear to me that MOW is great against Grixis Deathshadow at least insofar as it has protection from red. As far as I know, most decks run fewer than 4 bolts and far fewer than that for Kolighan's Command and (some run Anger of the Gods, Terminate and it is true that they'll get more than that many uses if they get Snapcasters out...) Now that I say it, that's a lot. Even though MOW's protection is moot against Fatal Push or Dismember it does seem like it'd survive a lot than can appear. So I take it back: I'll concede that MOW is good against Death Shadow insofar as it can stay on the board. But again: I'm always trying to make any game go longer in Modern, and it seems like a reason that MOW makes the game go longer later in the game is if it *****s out a lot of tokens. But if we cannot develop a board and built up devotion s.t. MOW keeps the game going past turn 5 I'd rather have a creature (e.g., Kira, Kopala) that either protects the board or gains a hell of a lot of tempo or some other card with a similar tempo-gaining affect (e.g., Monastery Siege)
That site you quoted is also most definitely inaccurate; there's no mention of Phoenix decks, which until last week were the consensus most popular deck in the format (they arguably still are now, it's just that it's not obviously the case).
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
In my first MTGO Friendly League this week I ran into not one, but two lantern control decks.
Without the sideboard Hurkyls it was painful, very painful... The my 6 maindeck counters ( 2x Spell Pierce and 4x Deprive) was not even good enough.
I feel very confident against Burn at the moment, Ive won my last 6 matches against them comfortably. Like Rothgar said, MoW is beast in the matchup. Im also running 2x spellskite in the side which normally just breaks the Burn's back completely.
I had some trouble against the black control deck playing with Bitterblossom, mostly because I did not know what to expect.
It seems part of your reply involves reasoning like this:
Premise: What I say with respect to (wrt) is false (suppose that this is true; I said false things).
Conclusion: So, I must be new to Merfolk.
That's neither a valid nor sound inference.
Now, enough about your comments that seemingly are meant to disparage me.
About MOW: What I claimed is that it's not clear that "MOW great against Grixis Deathshadow at least insofar as it has protection from red.(my emphasis." Then I recanted that, as you can see in my original post (where I was thinking out loud). So, we seem to agree about the utility of MOW with respect to Deathshadow. So, you telling me that MOW is good against Deathshadow is not inconsistent with what I say. It is inconsistent only with a view that I later came to reject. So, we agree about MOW's utility in that matchup.
About MOW wrt Burn, my reasoning was roughly this (I'll even skip a few steps to make the argument shorter):
Assumption 1: Burn is a quick deck in a quick format.
Assumption 2: Merfolk gets better the later in the game it goes.
Assumption 3: Kirra/Kopala and MOW are high cost and both help with tempo against burn.
Assumption 4: Against a quick deck in a quick format, gaining tempo is a good thing.
---
Premise 1: It's good for Merfolk to have creature cards that help with tempo.
Premise 2: If two cards provide tempo boosts, it's not necessarily true that choosing one in lieu of the other is best.
Conclusion 2: So, it's not necessarily true that choosing MOW over a Kopala/Kirra is best.
Your response is roughly this:
Premise 1: There's ways to buy time against burn (implicit: that are independent of Kopala/Kirra).
Premise 2: It's good to have a finisher against burn that "slams the door shut".
Implicit: If one can buy time without Kopala/Kirra with card that "slams the door shut", then there is reason to play it against burn.
Conclusion: So, there's reason to play it against burn.
(you also think that (Conclusion) above explains why players traditionally keep MOW in the deck against burn).
Again: I can grant you everything that you say. I'll even tell you explicitly: You said all true things. But this is not to show that I have any false premises or a conclusion that does not validity or soundly follow from its premises.
I'm merely trying to convince you that it's non-crazy to prefer certain creatures over MOW against BURN. I'm not arguing that MOW is completely useless in the matchup. I'm also not arguing that MOW ought not ever be played in the matchup. I'm not arguing that MOW has not historically been played in the matchup, not arguing that both cannot be played simultaneously, etc. My view is this: looking at Burn lists and building a Merfolk deck, if I have MOW in one hand and either Kopala or Kirra in the other (and I can only pick one) it's not necessarily correct to pick MOW.
So, we seem to agree.
You might object: Maybe your view is this. MOW makes the game go longer than a Kopala or a Kirra. Why is that? MOW makes tokens. And it has protection from red. And having multiple things come out onto the board gains tempo. Those are all true. I grant you that. But as I said before, that MOW late in the game makes the game go much longer assumes that there's some non-trivial amount of devotion on the board to make some. But that's not necessarily going to be the case with burn. For given burn's removal aspect it's plausible that the Merfolk player's board is relatively clear by Turn 4-5.
So, against Burn on turn 4 or 5 I'd rather pull a Kopala than MOW.
You might object that by turn 4 or 5 the Burn player has enough mana to, say, pay Kopala's tax. This is because their removal suite is low-cost. So, having Kopala that late doesn't help. But as I said previously, that's not obvious to me. Why is that? Making a burn player's whole turn consist in only playing one piece of removal at that stage of the game (to kill Kopala) is still a tempo boost.
You might respond that by that turn my Kopala is gone, though. Yet if I had MOW instead on that turn the Burn player spent a turn killing Kopala, even without any other devotion on the board the Merfolk player would only have lost one token to a burn spell.
That, to me, is the best case for preferring MOW over Kopala on turn 4-5. But it's not clear to me that that's your avowed view.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends."
BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved."
RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros."
BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?"
C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
I'll definitely give Merfolk a try at the side event I'm going to on Friday. If things go well (I've got a good feeling), I'm gonna go back to the Fish for the main event on Saturday. I've seen some recent lists not run the full four Spreading Seas in main because of all the island based decks.
This is the list I've tentatively decided on:
4 Benthic Biomancer
2 Harbinger of the Tides
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of Waves
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
4 Merfolk Trickster
4 Silvergill Adept
1 Cavern of Souls
14 Island
4 Mutavault
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
Other
4 Aether Vial
4 Deprive
4 Spreading Seas
2 Vapor Snag
3 Chalice of the Void
2 Dismember
2 Echoing Truth
1 Grafdigger's Cage
2 Hurkyl's Recall
3 Relic of Progenitus
2 Unified Will
BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends."
BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved."
RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros."
BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?"
C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Yeah it was a bit of a toss-up for me, but I felt that annoying Phoenix and Shadow with a Chalice on one is worthwhile.
BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends."
BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved."
RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros."
BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?"
C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
Are you still preferring all 4 Harbingers in the main? I saw so much Phoenix at my LGS the other day I’m debating it.
I personally have experimented with 2 / 2 , 2 / 1 and I'm currently back on a 3 / 0 split. Someone also posted results where they had all 4 Harbingers in the side.
At a minimum you probably still need at least 2 Harbingers in your 75 - they are just to good in some match ups to leave out and would depend on your meta.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Mind sharing your list? I'd love to see your build for this meta. D:
BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends."
BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved."
RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros."
BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?"
C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."
4 Benthic Biomancer
2 Harbinger of the Tides
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of Waves
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
4 Merfolk Trickster
4 Silvergill Adept
Lands
1 Cavern of Souls
12 Island
4 Mutavault
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
2 Wanderwine Hub
4 Aether Vial
2 Deprive
2 Spell Pierce
4 Spreading Seas
2 Vapor Snag
3 Chalice of the Void
2 Dismember
2 Echoing Truth
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Harbinger of the Tides
2 Hurkyl's Recall
3 Relic of Progenitus
1 Unified Will
Will try and report back my results!
BG Elves // "He's back. And he brought his friends. And their friends."
BG The Rock // "Dwayne Johnson approved."
RU Izzet Phoenix // "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
UGW Bant Spirits // "Super Ghost Bros."
BUG Sultai Wildnerness Teachings // "How many turns did I just take again?"
C Colorless Eldrazi // "Smash you."