Hi all back on merfolk after a long hiatus from modern. Reading through the lastest post mostly about disrupting shoal, I have to ask with only 4 1 drops 24 2 drops and 3 3 drops that can be pitched its most of the time going to be aimed at a 2 drop. Wouldnt spell snare just be better?
The advantage to disrupting shoal is that it can be played while you are tapped out and also has more flexibility. While spell snare does effectively do the same thing most of the time shoal can play around your opponent better. Both cards have advantages but shoal seems like a better fit right now.
But the debate is still on the table if shoal is even viable to use in modern at the moment.
If you are currently using Shoal, would you actually run that or would you stick to a more aggressive build?
I actually believe Shoal is *more* aggressive than non-Shoal. The difference is that Shoal focuses on keeping the stuff you already have in play, while non-Shoal plays out more dudes to replace the ones that got killed. This means that if you consider the situation where the Shoal deck keeps 2 lords in play but the non-Shoal deck replaces 1 of the lords every turn, the Shoal deck is going to attack for 6, but the non-Shoal deck can only manage 2-3 (as the new lord is summoning sick). A major issue with the non-Shoal plan is that the primary spot removal in the format is path/bolt/dismember/searingX. These are 1(ish) mana, while pretty much all of our threats are 2 mana. This means that without Vial, we're losing 1 mana of tempo every time they kill something (searingX is especially crushing as it's effectively card advantage on top of the tempo advantage). Nowadays, the non-Shoal hyper-creature build feels like a worse zoo or 8whack. They do the "removal dies to goyf" hyper-aggro thing better than us in every matchup.
Hi all back on merfolk after a long hiatus from modern. Reading through the lastest post mostly about disrupting shoal, I have to ask with only 4 1 drops 24 2 drops and 3 3 drops that can be pitched its most of the time going to be aimed at a 2 drop. Wouldnt spell snare just be better?
The fact that pitch-Shoal costs 0 mana is crucial. This lets you play a lord/silvergill T2 on the play or a cursecatcher/vial T1 on the draw while still being able to counter the opponent's T2 play, when otherwise you'd be tempted into skipping that turn to leave up Snare. Additionally, since most Shoal builds also run Chalice, 1-mana cards get a lot worse, to the point that pretty much anything besides Cursecatcher or Vial is actually unplayable. Chalice itself also does a lot to handle the problem of not having 1-drops. You could certainly swap out the Chalices for Snags to gain better coverage of 1CMC if you really want to. As I hate losing to Anger, LotV, and especially O-Stone, I run 6 3CMCs (4 reej, 2 kira). I think Nikachu should try to get more 3CMCs in his build, but from his recorded matches it sure seems he's drawn his reejs exceptionally often anyway.
I actually disagree with this point, and it seems to be a trend among the players who are Legacy enthusiasts first and Modern second.
Exactly right. As a Legacy enthusiast it's very stifling and a little nauseating to have to use the terrible counters in Modern. I believe sooner or later you'll end up embracing the Shoals too as Modern keeps getting faster and lower to the ground. Right now it's just on the edge where we're having a solid back-and-forth debate on the utility of Chalice/Shoal, but it's pretty much inevitable as Modern is definitely not immune to the same power-creep effect that's forced Legacy into being so focused on 1 and 2 mana.
I'm not so sure it will head that way, to be honest (Jund and Tron are still a thing, and both of them tend to make Shoals in hand feel bad), but I'll definitely be considering Shoals if it does.
My sideboard is almost exactly what you said only I run Swan Song over Dispel to catch Bogles and Scapeshift as well as other random cards that I cant always have 2 mana to negate. I have been playing Pierce main along with dismember, when I used to play Snag and Dismember but I can try out Snag and Spell Pierce. I'll put the Chalice back in and go from there, its nice to have a 2nd opinion on things rather than just thinking in a vacuum.
We are aggro primary. We can board into or adjust our gameplay to be midrange or tempo since we almost always bring in control cards to stall the game out against the faster aggro or combo decks. We can just as easily vomit lords onto the table and win on turn 4-5 by turning our dorks sideways. Zoo is aggro, it isn't midrange. We are just blue zoo. Bolt is an aggro, tempo, and control card but no one calls Burn a control deck. We win by attacking as fast as possible for as much as possible, that is aggro. We aren't trying to do chip damage while waiting a few turns to play our win condition or big dumb dork. We aren't trading 1 for 1 with all of our opponents threats like a real tempo deck (but shoal counts as this). The core static merfolk deck is aggro first and foremost.
With regards to the Aggro / Tempo debate, I agree with others that we are primarily an Aggro build in Modern. Goldfishing, Merfolk wins on turn 4 or turn 5; that's pretty Aggro. Sure, we trade some raw speed compared to decks like Affinity, Infect, and Burn with some more Tempo / Midrange elements (a handful of permission, bounce, removal, mana denial, and closers like MOW), but at our heart, we want to quickly establish a board presence and kill our enemies. Legacy definitely feels like the inverse: a tempo build with the potential to close out the game early if unchecked.
Anyway, AV strikes me as bad for a couple reasons:
-It's bad turn 1. We'd almost always prefer to play Aether Vial or Cursecatcher. So really you're only happy playing it turn 1 if you don't have a vial or Cursecatcher.
-It's way too slow any other time. For a deck that wants to win on Turn 4-5, drawing cards on turn 6 or later just isn't good enough. Sure, it will sometimes be useful, but a lot of other times you'll already have effectively lost by the time you draw them.
-It's a terrible top deck. Aether Vial is already a miserable top deck, so adding 4 more cruddy top decks is rough.
-With all that said, I SUPPOSE I could see using it as a SB card for really grindy match ups, but it may be too narrow and/or too slow even then. For example, Jund can still apply early pressure with an unchecked Tarmogoyf backed up by plenty of removal.
Shoal is a fun card, but still strikes me as a rather poor choice for the following reasons:
-Merfolk depends on a critical mass of creatures. Trading 2 cards to save one card is usually not worth it. We win a lot of games by narrow margins and in my experience we tend to empty our hands around the time we're swinging for lethal, so I don't think we can afford to throw away card advantage. A deck with Tarmogoyf or Delver on the other hand can take a lot more advantage of shoal since those creatures can close out a game on their own.
-Our deck is predominately 2-drops, which makes shoal kind of an awkward play. Most targeted removal costs 1 mana, and wipes tend to cost 3 or 4 mana, and we don't have a ton of those either. Spell Pierce or Negate just seem a lot more effective.
-Aether Vial is designed to support permission. Obviously, we only get out Aether Vial Turn 1 40% of games or so, but when we do, it allows us to keep up mana for permission while still applying pressure if we think it's needed. So in some ways it's just not as crucial to have Shoal as it would be in another deck like Delver (and I'll note it doesn't see much play in Modern in general).
IMO, shoal is nasty because it allows us to use all mana towards building a board state, which is what we want. It sucked SO BAD leaving mana open when playing twin, as they can just win out of the blue at any time...just the BLUFF of going infinite was enough to slow down our tempo, which is why even though some said twin was a good match up for us, I strongly disagreed.
However, shoal is "conditional" removal, which is usually a no no...same thing for stubborn denial...it's great when it works, but it can also be dead in hand...which so many great counter cards in blue, it just seems like, why take the chance? I used to play two shoals sideboard, ended up never using it. But hey, maybe it can work. I'm agnostic on it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I hope to have such a death—lying in triumph upon the broken bodies of those who slew me."
—Radha, Keldon warlord
Uh, pitching two cards to stop a 2-for-1 on your opponent's side is not and will never be card advantage. You're still losing 2 cards to deal with 1 of your opponent's. The only way Disrupting Shoal could ever be card advantage is if your opponent sacrifices/discards 2 cards to play a spell and then you counter it with a Shoal. It is purely a tempo card.
My sideboard is almost exactly what you said only I run Swan Song over Dispel to catch Bogles and Scapeshift as well as other random cards that I cant always have 2 mana to negate. I have been playing Pierce main along with dismember, when I used to play Snag and Dismember but I can try out Snag and Spell Pierce. I'll put the Chalice back in and go from there, its nice to have a 2nd opinion on things rather than just thinking in a vacuum.
Yeah, try out Snag and Pierce and see how you do. Good luck!
Ok guys, now i have to ask, what exactly do you counter with shoal???
You are talking like Shoal is always carddisadvantage and not a tempoplay. But countering the right spells at the right time FOR NO MANA, wins a LOT of Tempo and might even go equal on cardadvantage.
A lot of 3mana spells are 2for1s like (KCommand, SnapBolt, Electrolyze) Countering those puts us ahead approximately 6 mana while spending two cards for them to not get two cards worth out of their spell. This probably also means extra damage for us!
The day before yesterday i played shoal for a bit, and it bought me the time i needed to win against an incredibly good start against bushwacker. It countered the Blighted Agent of an Infectplayer while deploying Cursecatcher+Adept at the same time and therefore killing him a turn faster.
I Countered a KCommand that would have killed my Lord, so i couldn't attack anymore. In this case i not only prevented getting back their Ooze, but also generated 7 damage by countering the Command.
I still disagree with it being a always a good card. I also disagree with playing no Kiras and with Dismember when sporting this list. You want as many creatures as you can get.
I ran 4 Shoal/3Chalice(4Caverns) , 4 seas, 4 vials and 25 creatures.
I think this is a bit of a false equivalency. Catching a Kolaghan's Command with a Disrupting Shoal doesn't prevent the 2-for-1, really; it just gives you card selection as to what gets affected, which in turn usually gives you tempo (which makes it still worth playing in many cases). That's really what Shoal is - a conditionally great opportunity to rack up positive tempo. It conflicts a tad with our snowball effect of Lords + more Lords = win, but perhaps we have enough redundancy built in to overcome it.
any merit to running a Threads of Disloyalty in the main? Seems like most decks have targets for it now and the card is huge when it works.
In the main? I don't think so, no. Too many matchups (control/Tron/Scapeshift/Ad Nauseam/Elves/Kiki Chord) where it either completely whiffs or doesn't pick up anything important. It can be a backbreaker coming in off the sideboard, though, so I would not let that dissuade you from trying it out.
any merit to running a Threads of Disloyalty in the main? Seems like most decks have targets for it now and the card is huge when it works.
In the main? I don't think so, no. Too many matchups (control/Tron/Scapeshift/Ad Nauseam/Elves/Kiki Chord) where it either completely whiffs or doesn't pick up anything important. It can be a backbreaker coming in off the sideboard, though, so I would not let that dissuade you from trying it out.
What's our real target here? I feel like when I'd actually want it, I'd rather it just be a sower of temptation. At least that can vial in against emrakul, ulamog, wurmcoil, kalitas, scooze, etc.
Don't get me wrong, an early goyf can sometimes stink, but if we draw more lords, go wide, spreading seas, whatever, it's usually a non-issue. It seems like we already have enough outs for most of the stuff threads deals with.
Now if westvale abbey becomes a thing, that's something to worry about.
This is the list I plan on playing at the GP.
Any suggestions or comments about the list?
4 Cursecatcher
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
4 Silvergill Adept
3 Harbinger of the Tides
3 Master of Waves
3 Merrow Reejerey
3 Phantasmal Image
1 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
4 Æther Vial
4 Spreading Seas
2 Dismember
1 Echoing Truth
10 Island
4 Mutavault
3 Cavern of Souls
1 Wanderwine Hub
1 Minamo, School at Water's Edge
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
Sideboard
3 Chalice of the Void
3 Negate
3 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Tidebinder Mage
2 Relic of Progenitus
1 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
1 Master of Waves
Sower of Temptation is a card that the Modern meta has passed by. Too fragile, too expensive.
Going back to Threads of Disloyalty, though... Jund is a so-so matchup to bring it in against, because Abrupt Decay and Maelstrom Pulse can pop it. I think it's good against the likes of Gruul Zoo or Affinity, where it can strip a crucial attacker, then force your opponent to 2-for-1 himself. It's also decent against Abzan Company, because it can strip a combo piece (though cards like Qasali Pridemage and Reclamation Sage can pop it). It can also have some game against Infect, since it's effectively a removal spell. Depends on your meta overall.
Hey all, long time lurker and long time Merfolk enthusiast. After scrubbing out at the main event of GPNY I took the deck to some modern side event. During the entire weekend, out of 111 rounds I was 8-1-2. I beat 2 Jeskai control decks, a Grixis Delver Deck, Grixis Thing in The Ice, 4c Gifts, Abzan Company, Jund, and one other that I don't remember. I lost to Grixis control (only drawing land is rough) split with one of the Jeskai decks I beat (we decided to split before the game but I count it) and Elves. Overall pretty successful weekend for my first GP!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The advantage to disrupting shoal is that it can be played while you are tapped out and also has more flexibility. While spell snare does effectively do the same thing most of the time shoal can play around your opponent better. Both cards have advantages but shoal seems like a better fit right now.
But the debate is still on the table if shoal is even viable to use in modern at the moment.
I actually believe Shoal is *more* aggressive than non-Shoal. The difference is that Shoal focuses on keeping the stuff you already have in play, while non-Shoal plays out more dudes to replace the ones that got killed. This means that if you consider the situation where the Shoal deck keeps 2 lords in play but the non-Shoal deck replaces 1 of the lords every turn, the Shoal deck is going to attack for 6, but the non-Shoal deck can only manage 2-3 (as the new lord is summoning sick). A major issue with the non-Shoal plan is that the primary spot removal in the format is path/bolt/dismember/searingX. These are 1(ish) mana, while pretty much all of our threats are 2 mana. This means that without Vial, we're losing 1 mana of tempo every time they kill something (searingX is especially crushing as it's effectively card advantage on top of the tempo advantage). Nowadays, the non-Shoal hyper-creature build feels like a worse zoo or 8whack. They do the "removal dies to goyf" hyper-aggro thing better than us in every matchup.
The fact that pitch-Shoal costs 0 mana is crucial. This lets you play a lord/silvergill T2 on the play or a cursecatcher/vial T1 on the draw while still being able to counter the opponent's T2 play, when otherwise you'd be tempted into skipping that turn to leave up Snare. Additionally, since most Shoal builds also run Chalice, 1-mana cards get a lot worse, to the point that pretty much anything besides Cursecatcher or Vial is actually unplayable. Chalice itself also does a lot to handle the problem of not having 1-drops. You could certainly swap out the Chalices for Snags to gain better coverage of 1CMC if you really want to. As I hate losing to Anger, LotV, and especially O-Stone, I run 6 3CMCs (4 reej, 2 kira). I think Nikachu should try to get more 3CMCs in his build, but from his recorded matches it sure seems he's drawn his reejs exceptionally often anyway.
Exactly right. As a Legacy enthusiast it's very stifling and a little nauseating to have to use the terrible counters in Modern. I believe sooner or later you'll end up embracing the Shoals too as Modern keeps getting faster and lower to the ground. Right now it's just on the edge where we're having a solid back-and-forth debate on the utility of Chalice/Shoal, but it's pretty much inevitable as Modern is definitely not immune to the same power-creep effect that's forced Legacy into being so focused on 1 and 2 mana.
Twitch channel
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
UMerfolkU
Legacy
UMerfolkU
Commander
RWBAlesha, Who Smiles At DeathRWB
We are aggro primary. We can board into or adjust our gameplay to be midrange or tempo since we almost always bring in control cards to stall the game out against the faster aggro or combo decks. We can just as easily vomit lords onto the table and win on turn 4-5 by turning our dorks sideways. Zoo is aggro, it isn't midrange. We are just blue zoo. Bolt is an aggro, tempo, and control card but no one calls Burn a control deck. We win by attacking as fast as possible for as much as possible, that is aggro. We aren't trying to do chip damage while waiting a few turns to play our win condition or big dumb dork. We aren't trading 1 for 1 with all of our opponents threats like a real tempo deck (but shoal counts as this). The core static merfolk deck is aggro first and foremost.
UMerfolkU
Legacy
UMerfolkU
Commander
RWBAlesha, Who Smiles At DeathRWB
Anyway, AV strikes me as bad for a couple reasons:
-It's bad turn 1. We'd almost always prefer to play Aether Vial or Cursecatcher. So really you're only happy playing it turn 1 if you don't have a vial or Cursecatcher.
-It's way too slow any other time. For a deck that wants to win on Turn 4-5, drawing cards on turn 6 or later just isn't good enough. Sure, it will sometimes be useful, but a lot of other times you'll already have effectively lost by the time you draw them.
-It's a terrible top deck. Aether Vial is already a miserable top deck, so adding 4 more cruddy top decks is rough.
-With all that said, I SUPPOSE I could see using it as a SB card for really grindy match ups, but it may be too narrow and/or too slow even then. For example, Jund can still apply early pressure with an unchecked Tarmogoyf backed up by plenty of removal.
Shoal is a fun card, but still strikes me as a rather poor choice for the following reasons:
-Merfolk depends on a critical mass of creatures. Trading 2 cards to save one card is usually not worth it. We win a lot of games by narrow margins and in my experience we tend to empty our hands around the time we're swinging for lethal, so I don't think we can afford to throw away card advantage. A deck with Tarmogoyf or Delver on the other hand can take a lot more advantage of shoal since those creatures can close out a game on their own.
-Our deck is predominately 2-drops, which makes shoal kind of an awkward play. Most targeted removal costs 1 mana, and wipes tend to cost 3 or 4 mana, and we don't have a ton of those either. Spell Pierce or Negate just seem a lot more effective.
-Aether Vial is designed to support permission. Obviously, we only get out Aether Vial Turn 1 40% of games or so, but when we do, it allows us to keep up mana for permission while still applying pressure if we think it's needed. So in some ways it's just not as crucial to have Shoal as it would be in another deck like Delver (and I'll note it doesn't see much play in Modern in general).
However, shoal is "conditional" removal, which is usually a no no...same thing for stubborn denial...it's great when it works, but it can also be dead in hand...which so many great counter cards in blue, it just seems like, why take the chance? I used to play two shoals sideboard, ended up never using it. But hey, maybe it can work. I'm agnostic on it.
—Radha, Keldon warlord
Test cards. I do not think a standard list + Shoal is a good idea.
AV, Shoal or both?
Bant Eldrazi
UW Control
U Merfolk
Legacy
Merfolk
UR Delver
How many copies did you run and what kind of decks were you playing against?
Yeah, try out Snag and Pierce and see how you do. Good luck!
I think this is a bit of a false equivalency. Catching a Kolaghan's Command with a Disrupting Shoal doesn't prevent the 2-for-1, really; it just gives you card selection as to what gets affected, which in turn usually gives you tempo (which makes it still worth playing in many cases). That's really what Shoal is - a conditionally great opportunity to rack up positive tempo. It conflicts a tad with our snowball effect of Lords + more Lords = win, but perhaps we have enough redundancy built in to overcome it.
In the main? I don't think so, no. Too many matchups (control/Tron/Scapeshift/Ad Nauseam/Elves/Kiki Chord) where it either completely whiffs or doesn't pick up anything important. It can be a backbreaker coming in off the sideboard, though, so I would not let that dissuade you from trying it out.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
What's our real target here? I feel like when I'd actually want it, I'd rather it just be a sower of temptation. At least that can vial in against emrakul, ulamog, wurmcoil, kalitas, scooze, etc.
Don't get me wrong, an early goyf can sometimes stink, but if we draw more lords, go wide, spreading seas, whatever, it's usually a non-issue. It seems like we already have enough outs for most of the stuff threads deals with.
Now if westvale abbey becomes a thing, that's something to worry about.
Any suggestions or comments about the list?
4 Cursecatcher
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
4 Silvergill Adept
3 Harbinger of the Tides
3 Master of Waves
3 Merrow Reejerey
3 Phantasmal Image
1 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
4 Æther Vial
4 Spreading Seas
2 Dismember
1 Echoing Truth
10 Island
4 Mutavault
3 Cavern of Souls
1 Wanderwine Hub
1 Minamo, School at Water's Edge
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
Sideboard
3 Chalice of the Void
3 Negate
3 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Tidebinder Mage
2 Relic of Progenitus
1 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
1 Master of Waves
Going back to Threads of Disloyalty, though... Jund is a so-so matchup to bring it in against, because Abrupt Decay and Maelstrom Pulse can pop it. I think it's good against the likes of Gruul Zoo or Affinity, where it can strip a crucial attacker, then force your opponent to 2-for-1 himself. It's also decent against Abzan Company, because it can strip a combo piece (though cards like Qasali Pridemage and Reclamation Sage can pop it). It can also have some game against Infect, since it's effectively a removal spell. Depends on your meta overall.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers: