So I've got a U merfolk deck that I play on and off. Was wondering if UG Merfolk was the real deal and if I should get the cards that I need for it? Played it a little bit on x-mage but I've yet to be really convinced, especially before Rivals of Ixalan is released.
The UG deck is competitive with mono-Blue. I'm not convinced it is superior. Branchwalker is a great card, and Fatal Push has made Master of Waves much weaker. I suspect the superior deck is going to be a meta-dependent question: environments with lots of Burn or similar decks will be better with mono-Blue, as you'll take a lot less damage from painlands. Artifact-heavy metas will favor the options allowed by green in the SB.
Anyone who makes a blanket claim that one is clearly superior at this point is simply spouting dogma. There just isn't the evidence to lock in on one or the other yet.
So I've got a U merfolk deck that I play on and off. Was wondering if UG Merfolk was the real deal and if I should get the cards that I need for it? Played it a little bit on x-mage but I've yet to be really convinced, especially before Rivals of Ixalan is released.
Yes, Tropical Merfolk is the real deal. Only some people who I like to call "Mono-U purists" keep dissing it, mainly due to emotional reasons. However, everyone with extensive experience with the deck (and mono-U of course) can tell it's way better at this point.
I disagree with this statement on multiple levels. The implication that disagreement with Tropical Fish being the way to go is due entirely to emotional attachment is silly - a lot of us are Spikes, which means we play to win. I, for one, am getting way too much value out of slamming Master of Waves on Burn, Jeskai, Shadow, and Humans players on MTGO to consider parting from it. Others may simply be waiting to gather more evidence - 3 weeks is hardly the sample one would need to make such a determination. There's some merit to the deck, as I have admitted based on its results, but this statement is hyperbolic.
I do agree with the statement that a prospective player should cool their jets until Rivals comes out, though - the Silvergill reprint alone would make the deck a dash more affordable, and it's worth holding out to see if any potential Merfolk will tip the scales in favor of a given variant of the deck.
Has any thought gone into moving toward 12 spells (4x Vial, Seas, 2x Dismember/Vapor Snag/Spell Pierce, Chart a Course) in the maindeck to provide a better grip against sweeper effects? Additionally, has anyone tried Unsubstantiate recently after the rise in Jeskai as an out to Supreme Verdict for a turn to hopefully get a damage kill in before they can recast it?
Has any thought gone into moving toward 12 spells (4x Vial, Seas, 2x Dismember/Vapor Snag/Spell Pierce, Chart a Course) in the maindeck to provide a better grip against sweeper effects? Additionally, has anyone tried Unsubstantiate recently after the rise in Jeskai as an out to Supreme Verdict for a turn to hopefully get a damage kill in before they can recast it?
I think I tested Chart a Course in an initial version and I didn't like it. In essence I don't think the deck needs it, and it can be very clunky in most hands.
I added 2 unsubstantiate to the sideboard, precisely to fight verdict decks, but also to combat big spell/big creature decks. It has been excellent. Don't think I will remove it from the sideboard anytime soon (I also have been recommending pithing needle in the sideboard for a long time - I play 3 copies of it).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
.
Would you like to read Commander stories? Check my latest stories, coming from Lorwyn and Innistrad: Ghoulcaller Gisa and Doran, The Siege Tower! If you like my writing, ask me to write something for your commander as well!
With Silvergill, Seas and now Branchwalker we have a nice flow of cards.
Before a single Chart I would play up to 3 Copters since it deals dmg, plays around Supreme Verdict along with Mutavault, and with help from Vial and not overextending there is no need to find space for narrow cards like Unsubstantiate. Supreme is not supreme with smart play.
I disagree with unsubstantiate being a narrow card. As a matter of fact, I've explained that it is the opposite of that: a very flexible card. It can delay your opponent big play for a turn, remove a problematic creature/blocker or save your creature from death. I think 2 copies is the correct number to have in the side.
@Rothgar13
It is hard to take in consideration the opinion of the players who are still playing Mono U if they didn't test U/G. Despite the fact that I dislike counterspells, harbinger of the tides and dismember, I playtested all of those cards to see how they go. I confirmed that I dislike most counterspells, I'm thinking about testing vapor snag in the place of dismember and I decided to keep harbinger because it is good in some specific cases and one of the few real pieces of interaction we have on a creature. Meanwhile, people who keep playing mono U despite NEVER touching U/G can't expect to make correct assessments of which deck is better. If you don't play with it yourself, how are you going to know? You may bury your head in the sand and wait until enough tournaments have been played and overwhelming evidence has been acumulated, but in this transition phase you can't realistically defend mono U as being better or equal to U/G without having played the latter.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
.
Would you like to read Commander stories? Check my latest stories, coming from Lorwyn and Innistrad: Ghoulcaller Gisa and Doran, The Siege Tower! If you like my writing, ask me to write something for your commander as well!
I think Fan's point is that the card is unnecessary rather than "narrow". You are essentially using the card to compensate for a lack of tight play. Unsub is pretty good in my opinion (tried it in UU folk and Storm) if you can close the game quickly, but I still would not play it unless the field was heavily in favor of the decks it is good against, and even then it would be as a singleton. If it works for you in a competitive setting then keep doing it though.
Also, all this which is better stuff is ridiculous. Stop theory crafting and play the game. Everyone keeps attributing the success of UG to the meta, but the success of all decks is relative to the context of the meta at that point in time. Mono blue went through a period where it was (falsely) not considered competitive because of the meta, and we all know that was B.S., so why attack a variant of our own deck that puts up numbers?
Figuring out the trade-offs with respect to the meta is the more constructive discussion. Magic is a game with a strong community, so play what you know, play what you like, and collab with others to make it competitive while maintaining the fun of the game.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - Tropical Fish isn't different enough from mono-U Merfolk to not be subject to many of the same lessons. I said you would need creature interaction, and you have. I said you would need countermagic, and you have. I might do some testing of Tropical Fish at some point to examine some observations that are a bit more subjective (like curving out at Reejerey and the presence/absence of Phantasmal Image or Kopala, Warden of Waves).
It seems like people are playing into a false dichotomy that UG HAS to be the aggressive zoo version and mono U HAS to be the midrange version. It seems to me the best new card is Merfolk Branchwalker. Why not play a UG version geared more towards midrange? This allows us the selection/filtering of Branchwalker along with the “I win” of Master of Waves. Obviously we’d have to drop Kumena Speaker or Cursecatcher but it’s worth consideration; especially if rivals of Ixalan brings us more midrangy Merfolk.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cunning Spark Mage? $0.10
Basilisk Collar? $5.00
Shooting down a baneslayer angel? Priceless
I think Fan's point is that the card is unnecessary rather than "narrow". You are essentially using the card to compensate for a lack of tight play. Unsub is pretty good in my opinion (tried it in UU folk and Storm) if you can close the game quickly, but I still would not play it unless the field was heavily in favor of the decks it is good against, and even then it would be as a singleton. If it works for you in a competitive setting then keep doing it though.
Also, all this which is better stuff is ridiculous. Stop theory crafting and play the game. Everyone keeps attributing the success of UG to the meta, but the success of all decks is relative to the context of the meta at that point in time. Mono blue went through a period where it was (falsely) not considered competitive because of the meta, and we all know that was B.S., so why attack a variant of our own deck that puts up numbers?
Figuring out the trade-offs with respect to the meta is the more constructive discussion. Magic is a game with a strong community, so play what you know, play what you like, and collab with others to make it competitive while maintaining the fun of the game.
I disagree about the statement of 'using unsubstantiate to compensate lack of tight play'. You will still have to play correctly against control to win, you can't just lean on the unsubstantiate to carry you all the way there. This 'correct' play pattern may involve overextending and hoping your opponent doesnt have anything, it may involve measuring your threats, it may involve holding mutavaults back until the last minute. However, the sideboard is supposed to give you an edge, and that is what this card does. It is not supposed to be used thinking "now I can play sloppy".
To your second point: the issue is that someone came asking which version of the deck to play. We could try and say that they're meta dependent, but we are not sure of that. It is quite possible that one of the versions is the best regardless of meta changes, or throughout most meta changes. That is why there is disagreement.
Would you like to read Commander stories? Check my latest stories, coming from Lorwyn and Innistrad: Ghoulcaller Gisa and Doran, The Siege Tower! If you like my writing, ask me to write something for your commander as well!
I've tested UG with mixed results so far. I'm not convinced it's noticeably better, and in any case it really isn't that different from mono-blue. From a metagame perspective you can almost just look at mtgtop and count how many decks you'd keep MoW in against vs ones you'd take it out to get a good sense of what is better at any given time.
Also, I disagree that the mono-blue folks have to test it to have an opinion. Personal testing is just one aspect of deck analysis, and if someone like Rothgar is indeed maintaining a 60% win rate or so with mono-blue (as I believe he has mentioned in the past) I can 100% buy a "if it ain't broke don't fix it" attitude while they wait for more results.
I've tested the UG build, and I've been impressed...not COMPLETELY, TOTALLY impressed, but impressed nonetheless. Speaker is fast, and that helps the aggro race, but branchwalker is not another adept, no matter how bad we want it to be. The game issues that stall the mono blue build stall the UG build: wraths, hand disruption, cheap removal. Green doesn't necessarily make those issues go away.
That being said, when rivals comes out, we only need one or two relevant green merfolk cards to really push that build. I think both builds have merits, and I would be patient before "declaring" one build superior.
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
I think Fan's point is that the card is unnecessary rather than "narrow". You are essentially using the card to compensate for a lack of tight play. Unsub is pretty good in my opinion (tried it in UU folk and Storm) if you can close the game quickly, but I still would not play it unless the field was heavily in favor of the decks it is good against, and even then it would be as a singleton. If it works for you in a competitive setting then keep doing it though.
Also, all this which is better stuff is ridiculous. Stop theory crafting and play the game. Everyone keeps attributing the success of UG to the meta, but the success of all decks is relative to the context of the meta at that point in time. Mono blue went through a period where it was (falsely) not considered competitive because of the meta, and we all know that was B.S., so why attack a variant of our own deck that puts up numbers?
Figuring out the trade-offs with respect to the meta is the more constructive discussion. Magic is a game with a strong community, so play what you know, play what you like, and collab with others to make it competitive while maintaining the fun of the game.
I disagree about the statement of 'using unsubstantiate to compensate lack of tight play'. You will still have to play correctly against control to win, you can't just lean on the unsubstantiate to carry you all the way there. This 'correct' play pattern may involve overextending and hoping your opponent doesnt have anything, it may involve measuring your threats, it may involve holding mutavaults back until the last minute. However, the sideboard is supposed to give you an edge, and that is what this card does. It is not supposed to be used it thinking "now I can play sloppy".
To your second point: the issue is that someone came asking which version of the deck to play. We could try and say that they're meta dependent, but we are not sure of that. It is quite possible that one of the versions is the best regardless of meta changes, or throughout most meta changes. That is why there is disagreement.
I get what you're saying, and I completely agree. I was just trying to keep it rather general. The use of the card def still requires tight play, but my point was just that it isn't exclusively necessary, but can be powerful enough to include if there are enough decks to use it against effectively.
I am aware that the deck's role in context has yet to be determined, but my point was that we need less theory and more practice. You can buy into mono blue, buy the green cards for $5, and proxy the mana base with a competitive playgroup before investing. I know this isn't an option for everyone, but it encourages developing your own informed opinion before relying on theory and interpretation that may no longer be relevant.
Pretty much I'm saying let's keep things objective, flexible, and encouraging of experimentation. Indicating what each version does well and not so well independently is better than qualifying better or worse. I just don't want newer players to shy away from the community because of the sometimes pretentious behavior that goes on in forums It's actually one of the reasons why I creep and only on occassion post - on some threads you see the same argument going back and forth for years lol.
- Another playable green fish, possibly doing something blue fish can't do.
- Another lord. However, it's probably going to be green, or maybe even UG.
Merfolk are found in Dominaria right? If they are it's possible that they are releasing more fish in it and the Core set after.
Its better then the fb group - the posts on there seem to come from ppl that have played merfolk for three weeks
To be fair, Facebook is full of "great" players who say they dominate with soldier decks playing Captain of the Watch or their BW lifegain deck beats storm every time. It's not saying much but at least people here know what they're talking about... most of the time.
I think if you're playing a build without fetchlands, or with a low number of fetchlands (possibly to favor cavern of souls), you will hav a really bad time against blood moon decks. If not, use your fetchlands to get islands early. Between that, drawing islands naturally and having aether vial, I don't think blood moon decks will be that problematic (though I agree that they will always be more troublesome than they were for monoblue).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
.
Would you like to read Commander stories? Check my latest stories, coming from Lorwyn and Innistrad: Ghoulcaller Gisa and Doran, The Siege Tower! If you like my writing, ask me to write something for your commander as well!
The UG deck is competitive with mono-Blue. I'm not convinced it is superior. Branchwalker is a great card, and Fatal Push has made Master of Waves much weaker. I suspect the superior deck is going to be a meta-dependent question: environments with lots of Burn or similar decks will be better with mono-Blue, as you'll take a lot less damage from painlands. Artifact-heavy metas will favor the options allowed by green in the SB.
Anyone who makes a blanket claim that one is clearly superior at this point is simply spouting dogma. There just isn't the evidence to lock in on one or the other yet.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
https://www.reddit.com/r/FishMTG/comments/79p7pm/october_metagame_analysis_scg_events/
If you don't get your information from more than one school of fish already, I highly suggest you do so.
BLiliana, Heretical HealerB| |GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
GWBDoom Plane EnchantressBWG
A very handy set of data, and actually supports my conclusion that the metagame is just more friendly to UG right now.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
I disagree with this statement on multiple levels. The implication that disagreement with Tropical Fish being the way to go is due entirely to emotional attachment is silly - a lot of us are Spikes, which means we play to win. I, for one, am getting way too much value out of slamming Master of Waves on Burn, Jeskai, Shadow, and Humans players on MTGO to consider parting from it. Others may simply be waiting to gather more evidence - 3 weeks is hardly the sample one would need to make such a determination. There's some merit to the deck, as I have admitted based on its results, but this statement is hyperbolic.
I do agree with the statement that a prospective player should cool their jets until Rivals comes out, though - the Silvergill reprint alone would make the deck a dash more affordable, and it's worth holding out to see if any potential Merfolk will tip the scales in favor of a given variant of the deck.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
I added 2 unsubstantiate to the sideboard, precisely to fight verdict decks, but also to combat big spell/big creature decks. It has been excellent. Don't think I will remove it from the sideboard anytime soon (I also have been recommending pithing needle in the sideboard for a long time - I play 3 copies of it).
Read my other stories as well (some ongoing):
Reaper King (a horror story), Kaalia of the Vast (an origin story), Sequels for Innistrad (Alternative sequels for Inn), Grey Areas (Odric's fanfic), Royal Succession (goblins),The Tracker's Message (eldrazi on Innistrad) and Ugin and his Eye (the end of OGW).
Before a single Chart I would play up to 3 Copters since it deals dmg, plays around Supreme Verdict along with Mutavault, and with help from Vial and not overextending there is no need to find space for narrow cards like Unsubstantiate. Supreme is not supreme with smart play.
@FANAttIC
I disagree with unsubstantiate being a narrow card. As a matter of fact, I've explained that it is the opposite of that: a very flexible card. It can delay your opponent big play for a turn, remove a problematic creature/blocker or save your creature from death. I think 2 copies is the correct number to have in the side.
@Rothgar13
It is hard to take in consideration the opinion of the players who are still playing Mono U if they didn't test U/G. Despite the fact that I dislike counterspells, harbinger of the tides and dismember, I playtested all of those cards to see how they go. I confirmed that I dislike most counterspells, I'm thinking about testing vapor snag in the place of dismember and I decided to keep harbinger because it is good in some specific cases and one of the few real pieces of interaction we have on a creature. Meanwhile, people who keep playing mono U despite NEVER touching U/G can't expect to make correct assessments of which deck is better. If you don't play with it yourself, how are you going to know? You may bury your head in the sand and wait until enough tournaments have been played and overwhelming evidence has been acumulated, but in this transition phase you can't realistically defend mono U as being better or equal to U/G without having played the latter.
Read my other stories as well (some ongoing):
Reaper King (a horror story), Kaalia of the Vast (an origin story), Sequels for Innistrad (Alternative sequels for Inn), Grey Areas (Odric's fanfic), Royal Succession (goblins),The Tracker's Message (eldrazi on Innistrad) and Ugin and his Eye (the end of OGW).
Also, all this which is better stuff is ridiculous. Stop theory crafting and play the game. Everyone keeps attributing the success of UG to the meta, but the success of all decks is relative to the context of the meta at that point in time. Mono blue went through a period where it was (falsely) not considered competitive because of the meta, and we all know that was B.S., so why attack a variant of our own deck that puts up numbers?
Figuring out the trade-offs with respect to the meta is the more constructive discussion. Magic is a game with a strong community, so play what you know, play what you like, and collab with others to make it competitive while maintaining the fun of the game.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Basilisk Collar? $5.00
Shooting down a baneslayer angel? Priceless
To your second point: the issue is that someone came asking which version of the deck to play. We could try and say that they're meta dependent, but we are not sure of that. It is quite possible that one of the versions is the best regardless of meta changes, or throughout most meta changes. That is why there is disagreement.
Read my other stories as well (some ongoing):
Reaper King (a horror story), Kaalia of the Vast (an origin story), Sequels for Innistrad (Alternative sequels for Inn), Grey Areas (Odric's fanfic), Royal Succession (goblins),The Tracker's Message (eldrazi on Innistrad) and Ugin and his Eye (the end of OGW).
Also, I disagree that the mono-blue folks have to test it to have an opinion. Personal testing is just one aspect of deck analysis, and if someone like Rothgar is indeed maintaining a 60% win rate or so with mono-blue (as I believe he has mentioned in the past) I can 100% buy a "if it ain't broke don't fix it" attitude while they wait for more results.
That being said, when rivals comes out, we only need one or two relevant green merfolk cards to really push that build. I think both builds have merits, and I would be patient before "declaring" one build superior.
—Radha, Keldon warlord
I get what you're saying, and I completely agree. I was just trying to keep it rather general. The use of the card def still requires tight play, but my point was just that it isn't exclusively necessary, but can be powerful enough to include if there are enough decks to use it against effectively.
I am aware that the deck's role in context has yet to be determined, but my point was that we need less theory and more practice. You can buy into mono blue, buy the green cards for $5, and proxy the mana base with a competitive playgroup before investing. I know this isn't an option for everyone, but it encourages developing your own informed opinion before relying on theory and interpretation that may no longer be relevant.
Pretty much I'm saying let's keep things objective, flexible, and encouraging of experimentation. Indicating what each version does well and not so well independently is better than qualifying better or worse. I just don't want newer players to shy away from the community because of the sometimes pretentious behavior that goes on in forums It's actually one of the reasons why I creep and only on occassion post - on some threads you see the same argument going back and forth for years lol.
Edit: Free Nikachu!
Nikachu is free. He only got banned for like a week. He just doesn't post here anymore because this place sucks.
U Merfolk U
WUBRGPeopleGRBUW
U Turbo Turns U
UB Fae BU
WBG Aristocrats GBW
UWx control/midrange
Bant Eldrazi
- Another playable green fish, possibly doing something blue fish can't do.
- Another lord. However, it's probably going to be green, or maybe even UG.
Merfolk are found in Dominaria right? If they are it's possible that they are releasing more fish in it and the Core set after.
To be fair, Facebook is full of "great" players who say they dominate with soldier decks playing Captain of the Watch or their BW lifegain deck beats storm every time. It's not saying much but at least people here know what they're talking about... most of the time.
Standard: BG Golgari Midrange
Modern: U Merfolk GWUBR 5 Color Humans UBW Esper Gifts GW Bogles
Read my other stories as well (some ongoing):
Reaper King (a horror story), Kaalia of the Vast (an origin story), Sequels for Innistrad (Alternative sequels for Inn), Grey Areas (Odric's fanfic), Royal Succession (goblins),The Tracker's Message (eldrazi on Innistrad) and Ugin and his Eye (the end of OGW).