Well, it's not exactly haste, but vialing him in end of turn is almost the same thing, assuming your opponent doesn't have spot removal available.Originally Posted by Tru3z3rox
Yes, but my point is that you cannot use him THAT TURN (which you may need to).
New list-
4 catchers
4 adepts
4 LoA
3 Coralhelm
4 Reejerey
2 Kira
2 Wake Thresher
3 Standstill
4 Vail
4 Daze
4 FoW
2 ET
12 Islands
4 wasteland
4 mutavault
sidebaord-
2 Hydroblast
2 BEB
3 Crpyt
2 Threads
2 Jitte
3 Spell Pierce
1 Wake Thresher
I put wake back in because most U matchups are starting to focus on long game and having ways to deal with our fishies. Wake has the ability to win the game with one swing. It may be a win more, but sometimes that extra turn you give them is all they need to top deck something and win.
Link?
Will test Kira + Sower combo today. Kira by itself is sick now if you steal with Sower and Kira is in play then there is no F way that that critter goes back to your opponent!
Wake Thrasher without Merfolk Sovereign? That is just asking to be chump blocked. You cannot have one without the other. I don't really like thrasher anyway. No combat tricks (this can be argued for coralhelm too) and no benefit to the team.
Seriously no standstill?! Where will the card advantage come from?! And please don't say brainstorm.
Its its no blocked your looking at at least 7 damage though
(PS- I heard it has island walk too sometimes)
If you're in a situation where Wake Thrasher has islandwalk and the opponent has islands, the Thrasher is probably overkill, since you've most likely had quite a while to beat their face in. And Lord of Atlantis kinda has a giant target on his head from the moment he hits the field in any matchup where the islandwalk is relevant.
If your creatures aren't getting blocked, you have enough permanents to really make Thrasher hit hard, and the opponent doesn't have removal to keep himself from taking that much to the face: again, it's overkill, since he's probably more or less screwed anyway.
I'm really not a fan of Thrasher, I tried him out and it seemed like he was always either completely ineffective or just taking a completely beaten opponent out a turn earlier. While it's nice to give them one less turn to draw an answer, there's an opportunity cost for that. Personally, I'd rather take the chance on that one extra topdeck being a problematic card, and use those slots to help create the position where my opponent only has one topdeck before he loses.
That's not true at all. Test Wake Thrasher before saying it only good later on. I swing with it as a 7/7 along with a couple of 2/2s on the fourth turn very consistently, where as without a Wake Thrasher, by best move that turn would be to swing with a a couple of 2/2s. Thrasher is awesome. Yes he can be chumped if you don't have islandwalk, but very few decks these days play a ton of creatures. If they're chumpblocking it, odds are, they are chumping with something like a Tarmogoyf or a Tombstalker in the current metagame.
You don't need Soverign for Wake Thrasher to be good. So what if Thrasher gets chumped once? Your opponent is out a creature so you netted card advantage regardless and all your other creatures probably got through fine thanks to your opponent having to chump Thrasher rather than block and kill something else. Thrasher and Soverign compete for the same slot, and I've found Thrasher to be the far better finisher in that slot.
I understand that Zoo and Goblins are bad matchups on paper, but sometimes you'll have to face them. The plan against Zoo seems easy in priniciple, although execution is harder: hope for manascrew, especially if you're packing Stifles, and hope for a bunch of lords to get out of removal range. Possibly board in blue blasts and graveyard hate after sideboard?
Goblins seems more difficult to me. They can play the aggro role better than you, and they can play the control role better than you with their long-term card advantage and superiority in creatures. But it seems from SCG5k data that Merfolk pilots are actually doing respectably against Goblins. What's the strategy for this matchup? Get an active Jitte or die? How do you board? Just Jittes and blue blasts?
Maybe try Propaganda/Ghostly Prison? I know I hate being across from either of those when I'm playing Gobs. If you're playing white, you could try CoP:Red or Sphere of Law. I'm not a Merfolk player, but I know Goblins have trouble killing enchantments, and SB Anarchy doesn't kill Propaganda.
Serious question:
I found out that a while back someone said that the best way to play coralhelm commander was as a 3/3 flying for UU then 1 then 1.
But some people, most notably in the UWT thread are freaking out that merfolk now magically has "16 lords."
1.) How common (rough % of merfolk decks) are actually the full "16" lords?
2.) How inhibitting is the overall cost of 6 to get a lord out of coralhelm commander?
3.) How is it threatening to have an overall cost of 4 for a merfolk 3/3 flying?
Also, I should note that silvergill adept is actually one of the few creatures that would be played outside of merfolk if it dropped all its tribal affiliations (no merfolky additional cost, etc.)
Why would anybody (as I've seen people say they do) ever run less than 4?
I see justifications of this based on "feeling" that they're bad. I want real reasons, either analytical or based on data is fine.
Absolute Law is just 100 times better against Gob!
Merfolk has become unfavored against ANT? How do we improve this?
@ pi4meterftw
Are you agreeing this is the best way to play it?I found out that a while back someone said that the best way to play coralhelm commander was as a 3/3 flying for UU then 1 then 1.
I think it is a more complicated card; when to play and curve out CCommander is fairly context specific. I will agree that you want to try (when possible) to curve out by jumping 2 levels at a time. You still have to take into consideration how you might spend your mana in the following turns, the removal you expect, blocking requirements, etc. Cards like Spell pierce and Stifle also change how you curve it out.
Very uncommon, imho. Will that change? I don't know. Even if it was best to move to the full 16 lords, I highly doubt it would be recognized given the social inertia behind the traditional approach to this deck (as far as a Legacy archetype can have a tradition). I would not metagame assuming Merfolk would be built with 16 lords for now.1.) How common (rough % of merfolk decks) are actually the full "16" lords?
Of the 13 tournament placing Merfolk decks since the release of CCommander, only 4 ran him. Only 1 played 16 lords.
It isn't difficult. Vial and Reejery provide very real shortcuts. You'll find CCommander efficiently soaks up unused mana. And, past turn 4, he's usually the best topdeck available. Generally, I have CComander at Lord status 2 turns after I've hardcasted him and 1 turn after I've Vialed him into play. Circumstances can easily dictate otherwise though. He doesn't really slow the gameplan down, imho -- he does increase the threat density nicely though.2.) How inhibitting is the overall cost of 6 to get a lord out of coralhelm commander?
The strength of the deck has very little to do with stand-alone threat value. Part of CCommander's value to the deck is that he is actually a great stand-alone threat.3.) How is it threatening to have an overall cost of 4 for a merfolk 3/3 flying?
With just 2 level counters on him, he is immediately the largest creature in the deck for defense. Offensively, he's only outclassed by Wake Thrasher, but he's got evasion that is really useful against decks where we can't Islandwalk (and opponents are rarely capable of chumpblocking him like Wake Thrasher).
My opponents seem to find them very threatening. While against blue decks, only Lord of Atlantis sees more removal. Against non-blue, he is the number one target of removal. I certainly think he's up there in threat value with Lord of Atlantis and Cursecatcher.
Few would seriously consider running less. And, as related to the previous set of questions, CCommander is one of the other Merfolk cards that I would possibly play outside a merfolk deck.Also, I should note that silvergill adept is actually one of the few creatures that would be played outside of merfolk if it dropped all its tribal affiliations (no merfolky additional cost, etc.)
Why would anybody (as I've seen people say they do) ever run less than 4?
peace,
4eak
I've just heard of the 16 lords build, but I'm going to test it out this weekend a bit. I've actually been liking the Coralhelm Commander a lot more than I originally thought; the 4/4 body makes him the best topdeck available and I'm sure after enough testing, most of us will say that a single topdecked Commander won several games. It's really easy to get him to level 4+, and even levels 2-3 is good because of flying.
@ Tru3z3rox
I don't think the decks have changed all that much. Perhaps ANT players are becoming better at piloting against Merfolk. In my experience, even against great pilots, if ANT is an unfavorable matchup, it is only by a slight margin.Merfolk has become unfavored against ANT? How do we improve this
If you want to metagame further against ANT, I suggest maindecking Spellstutter Sprite or Spell Pierce (which should be in your sideboard otherwise). Obviously, you invoke opportunity costs to strengthen your ANT matchup.
peace,
4eak
Don't forget thorn of amethyst.
Jeff is right. Thorn is amazing. Pierce is also fantastic. Spellstutter sprite is meh comparitively.
What about just cursecatcher, daze, force of will and a fast clock? I haven't tested thorn but reading the card it seems that it makes daze and force cost 1 more. Pitching a blue card or returning a land then paying one seems really bad.
There are not better cards vs combo that don't take away our best weapons?
edit even spell pierce for 1u seems pretty terrible with the thorn out
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote