In regards to Chalice. I keep finding myself losing to combo decks and I think Chalice is an effective solution. It can obviously interfere with your own 1 cmc spells - but its usually worth it. As others have said - one of the reasons E-Tron is so successful is that it can beat decks it shouldn't be able to beat because of Chalice (well that and Ballista). I played 4x Chalice during the infect era for months and months - was fantastic - then infect died and I felt I couldnt justify it - but Ive brought it back over the last few weeks and i wouldnt take it out again - its my security blanket for the collective percentage of weird decks that ppl play in addition to be very good against tiered decks like
Storm - 2 cmc is best - but 1 cmc is ok depending on what is necessary at the time
Burn - 1 or 2 cmc depending on the game state - 2 cmc is often better in game 3 as you can bet 4x D-Rev is coming in..
Control decks - hit all their 1 cmc removal and cantrips; 2 cmc if required (snaps, other removal and counters); 0 cmc if they still play AV
Affinity on the play - if you get turn 1 chalice on zero you will win 90+% of games; its also not a terrible strategy in the later game to land it for 2 cmc
Gx Tron - on the play only - too slow otherwise - hits so many of their cards plus sb nature's claim to keep your stony on the board
Other decks
Ad Nauseum - you can now confidently beat this deck - 1 cmc or 0 cmc are fantastic
Lantern - chalice really hoses them on 1 cmc - they do have answers - so landing a second Chalice on 2 cmc is advisable (after you land Stony)
8-Rack - hits their win conditions as well as pretty much all their spells - usually you will lose it to IoK or thoughtseize though
Elves - only on the play and if you sense they have 4x Cavern of Souls its prob not worth it.
Amulet Titan - good on 1 cmc and zero for pacts
Living End - zero cmc - back breaking for them
Infect - absolute house - best card to beat them - but your matchup is generally good regardless
Hollow Vine - these lists vary a lot but usually have ~16 1 cmc spells - I only bring it in on the play..
Restore Balance - zero cmc and restore balance doesnt work anymore
Bogles - you will rely on EE and Chalice to beat this deck
Matyr - great card - they have tons of 1 drops
what is your effective strategy against BW eldrazi taxes?
Ive never really had a problem with this deck - sure sometimes that can land screw you an win.. It's important to be aware of vial on 2 for Leonin land screw blowouts, vial on 3 for flickerwisp combat blowouts - once you get used to the matchup it isn't that bad. Explosives is really good against them.
Game 1: My opponent sticks an early Gideon of the Trials that we tussle over during the subsequent combat steps. As they sense they are getting behind, they decide to wipe the board and attack with Gids, only to have it succumb to a well-timed Dismember. My follow-up creatures easily finish the job.
Game 2: I start aggressively, and my opponent puts down a Wall of Omens and a Gideon of the Trials to try and slow me down. As my Lords threaten the Gideon, my opponent slaps down a Detention Sphere to try and keep the Lords at bay. Undeterred, I E-Truth away the Sphere and hold up Negate to catch it on the way down. My opponent capitulates soon after.
Sideboarding: +2 Echoing Truth, +4 Negate, +4 Relic of Progenitus; -2 Dismember, -4 Harbinger of the Tides, -4 Spreading Seas
Round 2: Mardu Tempo (2-1)
Game 1: My opponent Inquisitions away my Kopala, and is thus able to pick off my creatures one by one. I attempt to stabilize with Master of Waves, but my opponent finds running Bedlam Revelers and has too much gas.
Game 2: I open with a Relic, and control their graveyard for the first few turns. My T3 Reejerey eats a Kolaghan's Command (as does the Relic), but I slam a Master of Waves on the following Turn and ride that to victory.
Game 3: My opponent has an aggressive start with Grim Lavamancer into double Young Pyromancer, but only has 2 lands. Unfortunately for them, I have Kopala, which means that neither the Lavaman nor any of the Bolts can target my team. Combine that with a Master of Waves that followed the Kopala, and this was a very easy victory. It's notable that Kira would not have been able to serve the same purpose, as they had multiple 1-mana spells, and Kopala became a big body after some Lords hit the table.
Game 1: My opponent has a hot ramp start, but a perfect curve of Cursecatcher into Lord into Kopala into double Master of Waves puts too many bodies on the table for a Kitchen Finks and a Wurmcoil Engine to deal with.
Game 2: Both of us start slowly, which is to my opponent's advantage as they are able to slam back-to-back Huntmaster of the Fells as I am left staring at some useless Negates. A Master of Waves helps me hang in there, but Inferno Titan eventually arrives to finish me off.
Game 3: My opponent keeps a 1-lander off a mull to 5 with Utopia Sprawl and 2 Arbor Elves, which I systematically destroy by slapping a Seas on their land, then bouncing their Elves with Echoing Truth. The latter prompted a rapid concession.
Game 1: I start fast and knock my opponent's life total low before they are able to gum up the ground with Bob and Thought-Knot Seer. After a couple of painful flips on my opponent's part, I am able to gather up enough creatures to alpha strike them for lethal while countering their maindeck Settle the Wreckage.
Game 2: A total non-game, I never find a Vial or a blue source and get run over.
Game 3: I start strong with Vial into Silvergill (which eats a Collective Brutality), then follow it with Reejerey and an islandwalk Lord. My opponent's Thought-Knot Seer is faced with a no-win choice between a Master of Waves and a Harbinger of the Tides - they choose the former, and the latter lets me get ahead enough on tempo to win.
Sideboarding: +2 Echoing Truth; -2 Harbinger of the Tides
Round 5: RG Ponza (2-1)
Game 1: I begin this game very aggressively. My opponent attempts to stabilize behind a Stormbreath Dragon and a Bonfire of the Damned, but double Master of Waves (with the second being Vialed in after the Bonfire) finishes them off.
Game 2: I foolishly neglect to hold up a T2 Negate in favor of playing a Lord (after I had played a T1 Vial), and am harshly punished by a Mwonvuli Acid-Moss which enables a cavalcade of fatties to hit the table. I beat the first Inferno Titan and a Stormbreath Dragon with Dismembers, but the second Titan and a Thragtusk finish me off.
Game 3: My opponent opens with a Utopia Sprawl, which I promptly Seas out of existence. I develop a bit of a board state, only to have it Miracle-Bonfired away. However, my Mutavaults are busy hacking away at their life total, and that combined with a well-timed Echoing Truth for their Wurmcoil Engine seals the deal.
Thoughts and Impressions:
The list runs well, as usual, so not much new to report there. In terms of the new addition, Kopala won me a game that Kira would have been subpar in by taxing my opponent out of being able to interact with my board, and was a beefier attacker/blocker overall. That said, this was very preliminary testing, so more of it needs to be done before any conclusive statements can be offered. However, it was a good start. Keep swimming!
Congrats - however as you say this is super preliminary - also those decks you faced wouldnt exactly be at the top tables of a comp tournament - what a hodge-podge of fringe decks
Id say that cutting Drowners vs Valakut should be avoided - keep all 4 of them in - they are vital to tapping down Titan. path is still ok - just remember to Path Titan in response to the ETB trigger - cutting some may be ok..
I really dont like PWs in Bant Eldrazi. If for some reason you have a really grindy meta - then perhaps - but I think id still go for more Reshapers. For me the biggest issue is deck going under us - like and combo - id rather sure up those areas before worrying about grinding ppl out..
My thing at the moment is goin back to playing Chalice in the SB - it helps with so many difficult matchups and can also help against decks with heavy amounts of removal - chalice on 1 - stop paths, pushes, bolts etc..
Ive been speaking to some standard grinders and they are pretty doubtful that Merfolk will even be a deck in Standard - ppl have been testing on free online software and are not impressed..
"Wow... I came to see discussions about the viability of a green splash and I see terms like "hodgepodge of laughable cards" and "go 5-0".
I guess that's how you improve an archetype."
Well that is exactly what it is - a mess of cards. Some ppl on here (usually ppl new to the deck and new to modern) don't understand what it costs the deck to splash and what you need to get back to make it worth it.
There is a long history of failed attempts of splashing different colours in the deck. Arguably the best splash is white splash as you get some strong sideboard cards. However, even that splash has never put up any results.
The green splash provides much worse options and indeed the U merfolk you are taking out for the green ones are far better to begin with. Thus you end up with a worse manabase and a worse spell suite. UG merfolk makes no sense - thus you get the reactions that you get from ppl experienced with the archetype.
If you feel you can innovate the deck with objectively worse cards - go ahead - but as others have stated the burden of proof is on you. If - and this has an infinitesimally small chance of happening - WOTC prints additional highly powerful cards on the level of TNN - then maybe you have something but right now there is nothing in the new set that improves the merfolk archetype in non-rotating formats.
That's just not how Turbo Xerox theory works. The more ways you have to find lands, the fewer actual lands you need, especially when you have little to no ways to use them efficiently once you're hellbent (and you don't - none of us do). I'll take Frank Karsten's math over SaffronOlive's any day, and according to him 20 lands is just right for this deck (you might even be able to get away with 19, thanks to the cantrips). As a Merfolk pilot with thousands of matches of sanctioned competitive matches on MTGO (and God-only-knows how many on paper), I can tell you that going over 20 lands will almost certainly result in having more lands than you can actually do productive things with in the midgame, which is how Merfolk loses.
First, that turbo xerox theory is talking about decks with mainly cantrips and way to find lands. All our cards that search other cards cost TWO mana, not ONE. That is a huge difference from a deck with brainstorms, ponders and gitaxian probes, even if the xerox rule also applies to two-mana cards. I agree that with vial we might get away with playing fewer lands, but you're missing my point. If we have more lands we increase the chance of having lands on top of our deck and having Branchwalker be actual card advantage (and not merely card selection). That land that you would draw and 'flood' you is now on your hand, and you will draw a real card the next time. Not only that, but regarding Frank Karsten's article, I will just quote this part:
20 1.12-1.44 Low-curve deck – You need 2 lands on turn 2 (98.3%) but would like 3 lands on turn 3 (79.6%) for some 3-drops
21 1.44-1.76 Aggro deck – You need 2 lands on turn 2 every game (98.8%) but would like 3 lands on turn 3 (82.3%) for several 3-drops
22 1.76-2.08 Aggro deck – You need 2 lands on turn 2 every game (99.2%) but would like 3 lands on turn 3 (84.7%) for several 3-drop
First, notice how his math is not different from the article I sent you. Our deck was in the 1.8 range of CMC, so we SHOULD be playing 22 lands according to this. Now, notice also the difference between needing 2 lands EVERY game and just 'needing' two lands. We need every game. Now, you might say the difference between hitting 2 lands by turn 2 with 20 and 22 is small. I agree. The difference between hitting 3 lands on turn 3, however, is not small at all. Why we might need 3 lands though? Playing only 6 3-mana spells? Simple, we have more one drops now, and we can double spell more often. Hitting 3 lands helps our tempo plan. Hitting 4 is also not bad because we can double lord or lord + merfolk cantrip or any variation of stuff. The difference of hitting 4 lands on turn 4 with 20 (65.8% / 55.2% - draw/play) and 22 (73.9% / 63.7% - draw/play) lands in your deck is gigantic. Playing more than one spell a turn is essential for tempo decks. Yes, you played thousands of matchups. How many did you play with branchwalker and speaker? Zero, I assume.
Dismember is bad against Burn, certainly, but thanks to cards like Harbinger of the Tides (which bottlenecks their mana if cast at sorcery speed, or erases attacks if Vialed/flashed in) and Master of Waves (which often wins the game on the spot), our Game 1 against the deck is good enough to get away with a dead card, which you will obviously side out. These are the dangers of cutting the cards you did - you have fundamentally changed how the deck functions, and not for the better. Against Affinity, Dismember is painful, but it beats taking lethal infect damage or 10+ regular damage from a loaded-up flyer, and it certainly beats letting your opponent untap Steel Overseer or Master of Etherium. Harbinger is important against Affinity because it provides a body to pressure the opponent with in addition to buying you time. These are all well-established things that have borne out by the testing of hundreds of Merfolk players. You can try to race those decks if you want. You will lose.
The point about being supposed to be faster than other creature decks simply isn't true - we're a medium-speed, high-power, high-resilience creature deck. We can't match up to the raw velocity of Affinity, Elves, Goblins, or Zoo, and we likely never will. What we have is the ability to interact, and the ability to defend ourselves against interaction. That's our competitive advantage.
I don't get your point about dismember. It is bad against burn. We already have 5 sideboard slots for affinity, 6 if you want to include echoing truth. Why do you need dismember again? You should be able to counter all of affinity's payoff spells with a ceremonius rejection on 1, even on the draw, unless they have a crazy opening involving mox opals. Regarding Harbinger: what does it do against Tron? Storm? Living End? Dredge? Control decks? I can see it being good against eldrazi and death's shadow, and situationally good against affinity. It is definitely mediocre against burn. By the time it hits the board on 2 you already got hit by a hasty creature at least once, and the cost to replay the creature is very small, smaller than harbinger himself. He is neat with vial, sure, but that's about it. I think harbinger is a clear metacall. Sure, if you want, you can cut the Kopalas and 2 lands and have a list with Harbingers, no problem. I'm willing to see how that goes. But I think you are grossly overestimating the value of such a situational card. You have no idea if I will lose or win because the cards in my deck simply never existed before lol. The fact that you so confidently say that is astonishing.
Yes, I think it's bad, because tempo is important for this deck, and unreliable mana is the quickest way to fall behind on tempo. Speaker's effectiveness in particular wanes the longer you wait to cast it (Branchwalker, on the other hand, holds steady value more or less throughout the game). However, if your goal is to curve out and kill on Turn 4 (and if you don't, you are strictly worse than the classic Merfolk list), your mana needs to be as smooth and efficient as possible.
Okay, I will add the sanctuns then, problem solved.
Everything you said about Hibernation can be done better by Echoing Truth - costs less mana to hold up, has 0 friendly fire issues, buys you the turn you need against the threat in question, and is better against the field. The proposal to take out green creatures to make Hibernation work is particularly bewildering, given that most non-dork green creatures in CoCo decks have useful ETB effects that you don't want to give them a redo on, and that you're going to need to pressure them in order to win (and all of your green creatures are early drops meant to pressure the opponent). You combat CoCo decks by disrupting early then aggroing hard - those Spell Pierces need to be Negates (because their ability to ramp makes "tax" counterspells bad), and Ceremonious Rejection needs to be prominently involved in your sideboard for Affinity/Eldrazi/Tron.
Sure, so we play echoing truth instead of hibernation, problem solved for CoCo decks, maybe against elves too. I absolutely disagree with spell pierce vs negate. We are a tempodeck, you said yourself, the difference between two mana for a hard counter and one for a soft one is enourmous. If the opponent wants to wait until having SIX mana sources to cast CoCo around spell pierce, then be my guest. By that time we should have pressured him enough that he won't have such a chance. Negate is muuuch clunkier than pierce in our deck, just seems like a bad card overall, I would only consider for the tron matchup, but we now have rejections for that.
As for your comments on the splash... please see Nikachu's video series on splashing colors in Merfolk (I'm specifically linking the one for G, but he did one for every color). If that's not enough for you, check out Corbin Hosler's stab at it. This is well-trod ground, and we know that all of the splashes are sub-optimal from the testimonials of players who have tried it and found wanting. Also, adding a couple of 1-drops does not inherently make the deck significantly faster - Merfolk's T4 kills come from double/triple Lord and 1-2 other attackers. That can be anything from a Cursecatcher to a Silvergill Adept to a Harbinger of the Tides. Your deck looks more like a Zoo deck than theirs, and I don't mean that as a compliment - Zoo is gone from the competitive meta, in part because vanilla beaters are something this metagame is well-tuned to beat.
My God. You know that the splashes and links that you sent are from fundamentally different decks, right? Having green mana symbols on your cards don't make all the splashes the same. Nikachu is playing with CoCos and noble hierarchs, nowhere to be seen on my list. NOBODY has EVER played with Ixalan merfolks, do you realize how crazy it is to call this splash bad without testing it first? What's worse, calling it bad on the grounds that a fundamentally different deck did worse than the 'classical' version of the list. How many merfolk players can give you testimonials of their matches using kumena speaker and branchwalker? I will tell you - zero. Because the cards weren't released yet. There NEVER was a one-drop two-power merfolk ever printed, and branchwalker can work as pseudo-4-extra copies of our best card - silvergill adept. How can you say that the splash will be bad? You have no way to know.
I also think you massively underestimate Master of Waves - it's very difficult for many decks to remove, especially with a Kira, Great Glass-Spinner on the battlefield. It usually wins the game on the spot against Burn, and the likes of Shadow need to basically find a Revolted Fatal Push on the spot or die (spoiler: they usually don't, because otherwise they would have died to your other creatures earlier in the game).
My conclusison is that you're inexperienced in the format, and that is leading you to draw erroneous conclusions as to what the deck does and does not need. Commander experience in particular translates poorly over to 60-card constructed. You can test your deck if you like, but I think you'll find that you won't be any faster, and thus your deck will be strictly worse than the classic shell (which is classic for a reason).
I've been playing magic since Onslaugh, not only commander. Merfolk is the modern deck I have played the most with, I merely pointed out that modern isn't my primary format of choice. You are now sketching specific scenarios where master of waves is good. I don't disagree it is a good card. AS SOON as it came out on Theros I tested a list with 4 copies of it, and I did like it, but the format is not only faster, but the answers are different. Master of Waves, no matter how you try to slice it, still is a 4-mana spell that can be clunky in our hand. I much rather test a list without it than with it and see how it goes.
All that said, here is a list that adapted to some of your criticism (not always constructive):
Mate - the white splash is better then this hodgepodge of laughable cards and UW merfolk is still woeful - not sure how you get off bashing rothgar for providing you with critique. Anyway dude - if you think your pile is so great go out and prove it and get some 5-0's on MTGO then we can talk..
I wouldnt play either of those merfolk if they were U - let alone massacring your mana base to incorporate them - just because WOTC prints new cards doesnt mean you have to play them in modern..
Maybe thats because UW control is fundamentally different - less snaps, less fetches, we tap out for walls, walkers and then clean up with verdict. Opt is def less great in uw control vs other u decks
As I said, every Ux forum is saying the same thing. Esper is saying "Suprisingly, its better in tap-out control decks than ours.". Storm is saying "GDS benefits more than us" GDS is saying "Storm benefits the most".
It's cognitive dissonance, protecting tribalistic tendencies for in-groups (the tier 1 decks) to avoid outside influence. These forums get very echo chamber-esque and no one wants to see their beloved deck devolve. Truth is, the card is fantastic and most of us just don't like change.
Hmm - ok mate - I really couldnt be bothered having a beef with a random on the internet today - tread your own path
Maybe thats because UW control is fundamentally different - less snaps, less fetches, we tap out for walls, walkers and then clean up with verdict. Opt is def less great in uw control vs other u decks
Tuesday Night Modern Report. I played the below list. I'm going to take Merfolk to a PPTQ this weekend - so I thought I'd run this list by the Merfolk crew.
Round 1 vs RG Ponza (2-1)
G1 - I got punished as he ramped into big threats quickly. I couldnt find dismember for arbor elf or a spreading seas to disrupt his enchantment ramp card and he mooned my 2 mutavaults
G2 - I dismembered, seas'd and my lords just got out of control - quick game
G3 - Was a lot grindier. I managed to Tidebinder some of his big threats and while he had a ton of mana available he just couldnt draw any gas - I faded like three of his draw steps in a row chipping in each time with a few dmg to get the win.
Round 2 vs UW control (2-1)
G1 - kept a sketchy 5 card hand but didnt want to mull lower - got my threats pathed and placed under a gideon of Trials, drew a million lands then Jace came down - conceded to make sure I had time to win in 3.
G2 - My opponent was land screwed and mana screwed (only 1 white source) - then I tec edged and just clocked her.
G3 - I was just too fast getting her to a low life total and then had some clutch counterspells to hold off for the win.
Round 3 vs UR Delver with Cryptic Serpent and Bedlam Reveler
Not much to say here - Merfolk just stomps these kinds of decks.
//Mana
12 Island
4 Mutavault
1 Cavern of Souls
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
1 Minamo, School at Water's Edge
1 Tectonic Edge
//Creatures
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
4 Cursecatcher
4 Silvergill Adept
4 Harbinger of the Tides
2 Master of Waves
2 Vendilion Clique
2 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
1 Tidebinder Mage
Well I dont play think twice at all (I prefer going up on Wall of Omens) - I was just spit balling. What would you take out to add Opt to UW control?
I can't see how Opt is better then SV (in UW control - other decks I absolutely see it eg. DS, 4x snapcaster UWR lists and more) - but im willing to be proven wrong - I guess we will see how things pan out in the next months..
In regards to Opt. Shaheen Soorani is playing it up big time saying we should cut SV and play 4x Opt.
As Shaheen is supported by a 343rd finish at his last GP event playing possibly the worst version of UW control I've ever seen (with easily the worst SB I've ever seen) - Im not too sure about cutting Opt for SV.
Opt is def better then Think Twice but Im going to say that after the dust settles Opt will be a 1-2x of in UW control. In faster UWx decks like Geist it might be higher as there are 4x snaps in those decks..
Storm - 2 cmc is best - but 1 cmc is ok depending on what is necessary at the time
Burn - 1 or 2 cmc depending on the game state - 2 cmc is often better in game 3 as you can bet 4x D-Rev is coming in..
Control decks - hit all their 1 cmc removal and cantrips; 2 cmc if required (snaps, other removal and counters); 0 cmc if they still play AV
Affinity on the play - if you get turn 1 chalice on zero you will win 90+% of games; its also not a terrible strategy in the later game to land it for 2 cmc
Gx Tron - on the play only - too slow otherwise - hits so many of their cards plus sb nature's claim to keep your stony on the board
Other decks
Ad Nauseum - you can now confidently beat this deck - 1 cmc or 0 cmc are fantastic
Lantern - chalice really hoses them on 1 cmc - they do have answers - so landing a second Chalice on 2 cmc is advisable (after you land Stony)
8-Rack - hits their win conditions as well as pretty much all their spells - usually you will lose it to IoK or thoughtseize though
Elves - only on the play and if you sense they have 4x Cavern of Souls its prob not worth it.
Amulet Titan - good on 1 cmc and zero for pacts
Living End - zero cmc - back breaking for them
Infect - absolute house - best card to beat them - but your matchup is generally good regardless
Hollow Vine - these lists vary a lot but usually have ~16 1 cmc spells - I only bring it in on the play..
Restore Balance - zero cmc and restore balance doesnt work anymore
Bogles - you will rely on EE and Chalice to beat this deck
Matyr - great card - they have tons of 1 drops
Ive never really had a problem with this deck - sure sometimes that can land screw you an win.. It's important to be aware of vial on 2 for Leonin land screw blowouts, vial on 3 for flickerwisp combat blowouts - once you get used to the matchup it isn't that bad. Explosives is really good against them.
Congrats - however as you say this is super preliminary - also those decks you faced wouldnt exactly be at the top tables of a comp tournament - what a hodge-podge of fringe decks
I really dont like PWs in Bant Eldrazi. If for some reason you have a really grindy meta - then perhaps - but I think id still go for more Reshapers. For me the biggest issue is deck going under us - like and combo - id rather sure up those areas before worrying about grinding ppl out..
My thing at the moment is goin back to playing Chalice in the SB - it helps with so many difficult matchups and can also help against decks with heavy amounts of removal - chalice on 1 - stop paths, pushes, bolts etc..
I guess that's how you improve an archetype."
Well that is exactly what it is - a mess of cards. Some ppl on here (usually ppl new to the deck and new to modern) don't understand what it costs the deck to splash and what you need to get back to make it worth it.
There is a long history of failed attempts of splashing different colours in the deck. Arguably the best splash is white splash as you get some strong sideboard cards. However, even that splash has never put up any results.
The green splash provides much worse options and indeed the U merfolk you are taking out for the green ones are far better to begin with. Thus you end up with a worse manabase and a worse spell suite. UG merfolk makes no sense - thus you get the reactions that you get from ppl experienced with the archetype.
If you feel you can innovate the deck with objectively worse cards - go ahead - but as others have stated the burden of proof is on you. If - and this has an infinitesimally small chance of happening - WOTC prints additional highly powerful cards on the level of TNN - then maybe you have something but right now there is nothing in the new set that improves the merfolk archetype in non-rotating formats.
Mate - the white splash is better then this hodgepodge of laughable cards and UW merfolk is still woeful - not sure how you get off bashing rothgar for providing you with critique. Anyway dude - if you think your pile is so great go out and prove it and get some 5-0's on MTGO then we can talk..
Hmm - ok mate - I really couldnt be bothered having a beef with a random on the internet today - tread your own path
Round 1 vs RG Ponza (2-1)
G1 - I got punished as he ramped into big threats quickly. I couldnt find dismember for arbor elf or a spreading seas to disrupt his enchantment ramp card and he mooned my 2 mutavaults
G2 - I dismembered, seas'd and my lords just got out of control - quick game
G3 - Was a lot grindier. I managed to Tidebinder some of his big threats and while he had a ton of mana available he just couldnt draw any gas - I faded like three of his draw steps in a row chipping in each time with a few dmg to get the win.
Round 2 vs UW control (2-1)
G1 - kept a sketchy 5 card hand but didnt want to mull lower - got my threats pathed and placed under a gideon of Trials, drew a million lands then Jace came down - conceded to make sure I had time to win in 3.
G2 - My opponent was land screwed and mana screwed (only 1 white source) - then I tec edged and just clocked her.
G3 - I was just too fast getting her to a low life total and then had some clutch counterspells to hold off for the win.
Round 3 vs UR Delver with Cryptic Serpent and Bedlam Reveler
Not much to say here - Merfolk just stomps these kinds of decks.
//Mana
12 Island
4 Mutavault
1 Cavern of Souls
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
1 Minamo, School at Water's Edge
1 Tectonic Edge
//Creatures
4 Lord of Atlantis
4 Master of the Pearl Trident
4 Cursecatcher
4 Silvergill Adept
4 Harbinger of the Tides
2 Master of Waves
2 Vendilion Clique
2 Kira, Great Glass-Spinner
1 Tidebinder Mage
//Non-creature spells
4 Æther Vial
4 Spreading Seas
3 Dismember
2 Smuggler's Copter
//Sideboard
SB: 3 Ceremonious Rejection
SB: 2 Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 Echoing Truth
SB: 2 Dispel
SB: 2 Negate
SB: 1 Flashfreeze
SB: 1 Unified Will
SB: 1 Tidebinder Mage
SB: 1 Tectonic Edge
I can't see how Opt is better then SV (in UW control - other decks I absolutely see it eg. DS, 4x snapcaster UWR lists and more) - but im willing to be proven wrong - I guess we will see how things pan out in the next months..
As Shaheen is supported by a 343rd finish at his last GP event playing possibly the worst version of UW control I've ever seen (with easily the worst SB I've ever seen) - Im not too sure about cutting Opt for SV.
Opt is def better then Think Twice but Im going to say that after the dust settles Opt will be a 1-2x of in UW control. In faster UWx decks like Geist it might be higher as there are 4x snaps in those decks..