[Deck] UWb Fish

[Citrus-God]

Hey everyone,

@Counterbalance

Isn't that a little win more? The Combo matchup is nowhere near to loosable (at least in my experience) and the Fish/Grow mirror is good too because of Bob and Jitte (to some extent).
I personally love the card and am trying it mainboard in ***** (which hasn't nearly as a good combo MU as HanniFish) but I don't think it belongs here.

Not really. I mean, it does help with your match ups against decks like Life from the Loam. It's also not meant to be Maindecked. As I said before, it's too situational against decks like Goblins, and Faerie Stompy. Angel Stompy is another deck that goes 50/50 against this deck. With Counterbalance, it's probably 70/30 in your favor. It's actually there for your bad match-ups. It fights things Post-Board too... of course, if you expect hate from the other player. It can fight Pyroclasms, and Needles if they try and shut down your Jitte. To make things better, you dont have to your Meddling Magi on Swords... Counterbalance does that for you. It also also be boarded in against a deck like The Truffle Shuffle which is a bad match up for you. Look at Counterbalance/Top now... Heres are 1-2 CCs of Truffle Shuffle;

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Duress
4 Hymn to Tourach
2 Gaea's Blessing

You can now Protect your counters from discard. Swords cant touch anything, so now your free to set your Mage on WoG effects now. Same goes for Rifter and Wombat; it can stop Orim's Chant and Abeyance. I seriously encourage it.

[Tao]

Heres are 1-2 CCs of Truffle Shuffle;

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Duress
4 Hymn to Tourach
2 Gaea's Blessing

Not to forget that they will never resolve a
- Haunting Echoes
- Grave-Shell Scarab
- Gigapede
again with Top and a Force on it.

[Citrus-God]

Not to forget that they will never resolve a
- Haunting Echoes
- Grave-Shell Scarab
- Gigapede
again with Top and a Force on it.

Gigapede and Grave Shell can keep coming back, but Top and Counterbalance is there for you.

I did some playtesting against Red Death and Deadguy today. It's defintely in your favor, and it is very hard for your opponent to recover.

[Tosh]

Not really. I mean, it does help with your match ups against decks like Life from the Loam. It's also not meant to be Maindecked.

A resolved Counterbalance in game 1 is very good, especially early game. I usually side them out against gobs as well as bobs. I really like counterbalance MD and I've been running top w/ bob for a long time so it seemed like a good addition to the MD. Even against Goblins and Faerie Stompy, counterbalance is never bad. The thing to remember is that this deck shouldn't turn into counterbalance.dec, it should remain as fish and use counterbalance instead of counterspell (counterbalance is a free counterspell against many spells) and, in some situations, be a drop-"I Win" card. It also improves some match ups that aren't as favorable to us (it helps a lot against burn, which I recently played against and I'm not sure how the game would've gone w/o counterbalance; I've also tested quite a few times against pox and it isn't bad either seeing how their spells cost 2 and ours mainly cost 2 so counterbalance counters almost all of their important spells, cept pox itself which is what FoW is for).

[diffy]

Sinthesis of the following:

All in all, I think you people misunderstood my point as it was no critique towards Fish which I think as a great deck against the trinity but all of my points were made regarding nothing but the aggro matchup.
Meddling Mage, Bob and all of those cards... I do understand their functions and they are amazing but not so as I found when facing opposing avengers, Grunts, SilverKnights, Carnophages & co (accompanied by burn to stop confis cA).

Have you been drinking? I don't even like this deck, but I can see it's virtues better than you. Meddling mage just a 2/2? Are you serious dude? Confidant sucks? Force is bad because it's card disadvantage? Stiflesucks?!? And the only threats are grunt and avenger? I don't even know where to start tearing this apart.

Fish' only bad matchup in the "big 3" is goblins, which is vastly improved by dropping 4 dead cards (Duress, if they're main boarded) for 4 EP's, which is a pretty good answer. Their slightly smaller counter package doesn't hurt against gro, but grunt + Mom = no were bear beats. Similarly, Avenger + mom = no enforcer/dragon/dragonauts beats.

I don't say that Fish has a bad MU against the tier 1 (trinity)... I usually love to play against either one of them (because they are Matchups which are fairly simple to play against in my opinion) and I do know the merits of Meddling Mage, Bob & Co outside of the aggro matchup

But, my post was related towards the matchup against random aggro... go and play against RG Beatz (aka ZillaStompy), Angel Stompy, Boros, BGR Aggro and all that Stuff... those Matchups are really not fin...
and well, stifle ROCKS against Solidarity and Gobs but does nothing against the above named matchups.

Have you ever played this deck? It looks alot worse on paper, but let me tell you, it's a solid deck in today's meta. If you've overlooked enchantress.

Overall, you completely misunderstand the deck... I can see why you lost 3-2. Maybe you should playtest with the deck a bit to get a feel for it, playskill is a huge factor when piloting this deck. Unfortunately, this deck isn't as mindless as something like Goblins (which I do realize isn't mindless).

I've played this deck since Laurent Fleury's top 8 on PT Kobe side event, thank you. I might not be the most decent player, but I'm still young and working on it.

I know it is a solid choice against Goblins, Solidarity and ***** and an amazing deck against combo (like Tao said), but well, I live in Germany and in a Meta in which absolutely no one plays conventional Decks (look at that top 8 I posted a link to please, or only look at the 5th place deck)...

I do also understand the function of duress as a sort of cantrip because it generates card quality by creating a negative card quality for your opponent.

Stifle sucks? Stifle was added after I realized I needed more for my Goblins matchup? How in the hell does Stifle suck? On it's own, it makes your Grunts swing for an extra 4 a turn. Against opposing stratgies, it protects vs Wasteland or steals tempo by popping fetchlands. It saves your guys from Fanatics and Incinerators (huge here since it's the only answer to Incinerator besides pro red from Mom). It also prevents the Goblins player from out-resourcing you with Matron/Ringleader. Against Solidarity, it slows them down by screwing over their land production and against TES is counters the storm triggers. It answers Deed after the opponent invests 5 mana into it, Engineered Explosives after they invest 4 mana, so on and so forth. I don't really feel as though this needs explained that much more.

As said above, I absolutely love stifle and do know its merits... but in the Matchups against random aggro it does for me nothing more than stop fetchies... which is kinda irrelevant because of the opposing low mana curve.

I realize that Dark Confidant and Meddling Mage are small guys... that's why the deck has Jitte and Mother of Runes. These are both essential ingredients of synergy... the reason why the deck can actually do well with them as aggro. Mom turns them into psueo Silver Knights (sorta), and Jitte turns them into 6/5's and 6/6's. The reason why they work so well though is because of their additional utility... the ability to prevent your opponent from playing something and the ability to draw extra cards is huge.

Well yes. Meddling Mage, Bob and Co do all have their merits, but in the aggro matchup they are only a real threat or stoping the opponent from running over you if you get jitte (or a connecting mom without burn from the opposing side) to connect, at least in my experience. Or did I miss something there?

Stuff regarding Force

I said that force is Meh against opposing aggro because a single countered thread isn't really a loss to them.

Stuff regarding cantrips

Again, I did these statements regarding nothing but the aggro matchup because I found myself far to often cantriping into cantrips or spending too much time seeking solutions instead of stoping the beatdown.


But well, anyways, I'll drop those MB Duresses and see how it works.
I hope to have made my point a little clearer though.

Thanks for reading and maybe for sharing your experience in the Aggro Matchups (outside Gobs which I know how to play against) with me.

[Citrus-God]

A resolved Counterbalance in game 1 is very good, especially early game. I usually side them out against gobs as well as bobs. I really like counterbalance MD and I've been running top w/ bob for a long time so it seemed like a good addition to the MD. Even against Goblins and Faerie Stompy, counterbalance is never bad. The thing to remember is that this deck shouldn't turn into counterbalance.dec, it should remain as fish and use counterbalance instead of counterspell (counterbalance is a free counterspell against many spells) and, in some situations, be a drop-"I Win" card. It also improves some match ups that aren't as favorable to us (it helps a lot against burn, which I recently played against and I'm not sure how the game would've gone w/o counterbalance; I've also tested quite a few times against pox and it isn't bad either seeing how their spells cost 2 and ours mainly cost 2 so counterbalance counters almost all of their important spells, cept pox itself which is what FoW is for).

I agree with you. I should change my statement about Counterbalance; Maindeck it only if your meta isnt Goblin crazy like my meta. :)

Thanks for your insight on Counterbalance. IMO, will not Maindeck it if I go to Columbus (although Goblins wouldnt be rampant due to the insane amounts of IGGy Pop, it honestly seems like a win-more card here due to the fact that this deck crushes delicate Combo decks already), but it should still be considered as a strong option depenidng on metagame.

[Nihil Credo]

I tried building a Fish deck that focused much more on the Counterbalance/Top engine. The results have not been awesome, but still interesting

UB TrinketFish

4 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
4 Underground Sea
5 Island
1 Swamp
4 Mishra's Factory

4 Dark Confidant
3 Rotting Giant
4 Trinket Mage
2 Phyrexian Negator

2 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Engineered Explosives
1 Pithing Needle

3 Counterbalance
4 Brainstorm
1 Serum Visions
2 Counterspell
4 Force of Will
3 Daze
3 Ghastly Demise
2 Umezawa's Jitte

SB: Duress, extra removal, Blue Elemental Blasts, extra Trinket Mage targets


I cut White partly because UU for Counterbalance was a stretch on the manabase, and after cutting the double-white cards I found Mage and Mother not worth the colour trouble, since Counterbalance emulates them both pretty well. Going down to two colors allowed me to add Mishra's Factories, which have proved to be very useful.

As one can expect, this Fish version is better at fighting 1) Combo 2) Randomness and 3) Control, with the more important one being Randomness: Counterbalance is much more reliable in those matchups than Meddling Mage, for obvious reasons. Goblins isn't that bad, since *if* you stop their initial rush you can quickly Needle Vial, drop CounterTop and lock them out of the game. However, other aggro decks are much, much worse than regular UBW Fish: if you can't keep Jitte on the table, you lose fairly quickly.

[Adan]

And why exactly is yout Fish better in fightning Combo, Control and Randomdecks?

I don't see anything that's better than UWb Fish. I think you are relying too much on the Countertop engine, since it's not that insane.

Plus, you Play Rotting Giant and Phyrexian Negators. 2 Creature which are DEFINETLY inferior to Jotun Grunt and Serra Avenger, since Negator is dead against Aggro or any Decks running Burn.

And Meddling Mage disturbs Combo a lot more than Counterbalance i think, as he's also a 2/2 bear that can wear a Jitte.

I really don't know... your build lookes more like you tried to cut white, finding some substitutes and add the Counterbalance-Engine.

[Nihil Credo]

And why exactly is yout Fish better in fightning Combo, Control and Randomdecks?

Because...

And Meddling Mage disturbs Combo a lot more than Counterbalance i think, as he's also a 2/2 bear that can wear a Jitte.

...this statement is wrong. Just try going off with Solidarity (or TES, or any storm combo) while Counterbalance/Top is on the table.

I really don't know... your build lookes more like you tried to cut white, finding some substitutes and add the Counterbalance-Engine.

Well, it went the other way around... I added the Counterbalance engine and then ended up cutting white.

Honestly, if I were to play tomorrow I'd play UBW Fish, surely not my version. It's just a secondary deck I'm fooling around with.

[Adan]

Aight, but Solidarity can't take of either with Meddling Mage on the board set on High Tide

But I really don't like UB, since Black is one of the weakest colors in Legacy as it leaks of good spotremoval, enchantment and artifact removal and some serious manpower.

[Tosh]

I cut White partly because UU for Counterbalance was a stretch on the manabase, and after cutting the double-white cards I found Mage and Mother not worth the colour trouble, since Counterbalance emulates them both pretty well. Going down to two colors allowed me to add Mishra's Factories, which have proved to be very useful.

I have not had any trouble hitting UU (Counterbalance) or WW (Avenger). I use black as a splash where it looks like you use black as more of a main color. Heres my list for reference:

// Lands
    1 [7E] Swamp (4)
    1 [MI] Plains (1)
    3 [R] Tundra
    4 [ON] Polluted Delta
    4 [ON] Flooded Strand
    3 [B] Underground Sea
    1 [MI] Island (1)

// Creatures
    4 [PS] Meddling Mage
    3 [CS] Jotun Grunt
    2 [TSP] Serra Avenger
    2 [RAV] Dark Confidant
    3 [FD] Trinket Mage
    2 [PLC] Stonecloaker

// Spells
    2 [BOK] Umezawa's Jitte
    4 [FD] Serum Visions
    4 [5E] Brainstorm
    4 [AL] Force of Will
    4 [IA] Swords to Plowshares
    3 [CS] Counterbalance
    3 [CHK] Sensei's Divining Top
    1 [SOK] Pithing Needle
    1 [FD] Engineered Explosives
    1 [MR] AEther Spellbomb

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [SOK] Pithing Needle
SB: 1 [FD] Engineered Explosives
SB: 3 [PLC] Extirpate
SB: 3 [GP] Leyline of the Void
SB: 3 [UL] Engineered Plague
SB: 3 [7E] Duress
SB: 1 [CH] Tormod's Crypt

I'm still testing the effectiveness of the Stonecloaker and the Aether Spellbomb. Stonecloaker has helped gain card advantage by preventing the death of a creature. AEther Spellbomb is there to be fetched for, it can return a problem creature (such as an opposing Meddling Mage) or draw me a card.

[scrumdogg]

Spellbomb can also return a Stonecloaker which can then save a guy, lots of screwy tricks. Or Spellbomb can bounce a Jotun Grunt or a guy that just traed lethal in combat. How has the deck been running with no Counterspell (the card) and only 2 Bob? Seems wrong somehow...also, why a 14 card sideboard? Was there another 1x supposed to be there or was one the 3x supposed to be 4x?

[Lukas Preuss]

Aight, but Solidarity can't take of either with Meddling Mage on the board set on High Tide

I really hope that smiley was meant to imply irony. Meddling Mage set on High Tide is really not such a great problem for Solidarity if it is not backed up by a decend clock (or insane amounts of counterspells). I have won tons of games through Meddling Mage and multiple counters (UGw Threshold, UW Landstill post sideboard, etc.). Twincast and Reset create more than enough mana if you have 5 or more lands.

[Tosh]

How has the deck been running with no Counterspell (the card) and only 2 Bob? Seems wrong somehow...also, why a 14 card sideboard? Was there another 1x supposed to be there or was one the 3x supposed to be 4x?

Counterspell: This card has time and time again been underwhelming to me. For UU there are better things to play (such as Counterbalance). I also do not like holding back and slowing my clock in order to keep counterspell mana open.

Dark Confidant: Dark Confidant can help in some situations and in some, it can hurt. Multiple Dark Confidants are obviously bad and so drawing a 2nd is not a good draw and I'd like to keep drawing good spells. Another reason I don't run many Bobs is because I do not like depending on a 1 toughness creature that can come down turn 2 at max. I like to compare Confidant in Fish to Lackey in Goblins (Their functions are similar). Lackey comes down turn 1; Confidant comes down turn 2. Lackey attacks, (assuming it's unblocked) does 1 damage and you get to drop a creature; Confidant attacks, (assuming it's unblocked) does 2 damage and you got a card during your upkeep (average cost in the deck is 2) which did 2 damage to you. The card advantage is virtually the same (Goblins getting their advantage on the board and Fish getting their advantage in their hand) but the damage is way different, Confidant doesn't bring you ahead in the life race while Lackey does. Now before you start criticizing this analysis and comparison understand that I did not intend for this to take into account any other cards in either deck besides the average casting cost in Fish which is similar in every UWb variant.

Sideboard: There are 15 cards...

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [SOK] Pithing Needle (1)
SB: 1 [FD] Engineered Explosives (2)
SB: 3 [PLC] Extirpate (5)
SB: 3 [GP] Leyline of the Void (8)
SB: 3 [UL] Engineered Plague (11)
SB: 3 [7E] Duress (14)
SB: 1 [CH] Tormod's Crypt (15)

[Hanni]

That was the most rediculous comparison I ever heard Klaan. There is absolutely no way to compare Lackey to Dark Confidant because the functions they are provide are completely different to their coresponding decks.

I run 4 Confidant because I want to see Confidant every game and because I know that it's going to be the main target for my opponent's removal. If you run 2 Confidant, chances are that you're only going to actually get to draw cards from him once in a blue moon.

In response to the whole Counterbalance/Top thing, I think that's a different deck altogether. However, this is my feelings towards it:

Why? What difficult matchups does it actually improve for you?

Counterbalance helps the matchups this deck already smashes: Threshold and Combo. What's the point then? If you're worried about it helping stop Loam... run some Extirpates in the board rather than change the design of the deck to support Counterbalance.

Counterbalance is bad because it doesn't do anything to change the game state when you initially cast it. So you pay UU for something that does nothing immediately. You do realize that this deck wins by using fundamental "tempo" concepts, right?

I agree that Counterbalance/Top can be effective. At what cost? Spending all of you're mana sources to try and find the right card to be able to trigger Counterblanace? This deck doesn't need to create a lock. All it needs to do is keep the opponent off balance early game and beat face. The deck has cantrip to fuel it through into the late game and control options like Jitte and Confidant to maintain strength in the late game. Again I ask the question, why run Counterbalance?

Top itself sucks in this deck and is greatly inferior to simply running 8 cantrip. This deck cannot afford to play and use Top in the early game, seeing multiples in a given game is extremely retarded, and the deck doesn't need extra late-game strengthening cards.

If you're going to try and make radical changes to the way the deck is currently built, make sure the changes make the g1 Goblins matchup stronger and not Threshold and Combo. Alot of people seem to want to play with Counterbalance though, so whatever floats your boats.

[Tosh]

That was the most rediculous comparison I ever heard Klaan. There is absolutely no way to compare Lackey to Dark Confidant because the functions they are provide are completely different to their coresponding decks.

Can you shed light on how they function differently then? Both of the cards' purpose is to accelerate; however, I admit that how they accelerate is slightly different: the board or cards in hand

I run 4 Confidant because I want to see Confidant every game and because I know that it's going to be the main target for my opponent's removal. If you run 2 Confidant, chances are that you're only going to actually get to draw cards from him once in a blue moon.

Running 2x Confidant allows me to still draw confidant regularly but also limits the amount that I get in a game. Drawing 1 Confidant with 2 in the deck: Turn0=22% Turn1=25% Turn2=28% Turn3=31% Turn4=34% Turn5=36%. These chances are good enough for me for a 4/5 star card. Oh yeah, and if they're using removal on Confidant that means they aren't using removal on Grunt and Avenger which is good.

In response to the whole Counterbalance/Top thing, I think that's a different deck altogether. However, this is my feelings towards it:
Why? What difficult matchups does it actually improve for you?
Counterbalance helps the matchups this deck already smashes

Counterbalance is good against aggro decks, which is our hardest matchup. Aggro decks win with creatures, and Counterbalance can counter the majority of creatures an aggro deck will play. Top is not necessary with Counterbalance, it is just a plus.

Top itself sucks in this deck and is greatly inferior to simply running 8 cantrip. This deck cannot afford to play and use Top in the early game, seeing multiples in a given game is extremely retarded, and the deck doesn't need extra late-game strengthening cards.

Top is not a necessary card and getting multiples is bad which is why I only run 3 and am considering cutting it to 2. Notice that I did not cut any cantrips to make room for Top, I still run 4x Serum Visions and 4x Brainstorm. Top not only helps with Counterbalance but also with Confidant, minimizing damage.

I admit that my deck is morphing into something a little different than the standard UWb Fish so, I have decided to put a Primer together for my version of UWb Fish (I like to call it New Age UWb Fish, or NAF).

[Anarky87]

That was the most rediculous comparison I ever heard Klaan. There is absolutely no way to compare Lackey to Dark Confidant because the functions they are provide are completely different to their coresponding decks.

I run 4 Confidant because I want to see Confidant every game and because I know that it's going to be the main target for my opponent's removal. If you run 2 Confidant, chances are that you're only going to actually get to draw cards from him once in a blue moon.

In response to the whole Counterbalance/Top thing, I think that's a different deck altogether. However, this is my feelings towards it:

Why? What difficult matchups does it actually improve for you?

Counterbalance helps the matchups this deck already smashes: Threshold and Combo. What's the point then? If you're worried about it helping stop Loam... run some Extirpates in the board rather than change the design of the deck to support Counterbalance.

Counterbalance is bad because it doesn't do anything to change the game state when you initially cast it. So you pay UU for something that does nothing immediately. You do realize that this deck wins by using fundamental "tempo" concepts, right?

I agree that Counterbalance/Top can be effective. At what cost? Spending all of you're mana sources to try and find the right card to be able to trigger Counterblanace? This deck doesn't need to create a lock. All it needs to do is keep the opponent off balance early game and beat face. The deck has cantrip to fuel it through into the late game and control options like Jitte and Confidant to maintain strength in the late game. Again I ask the question, why run Counterbalance?

Top itself sucks in this deck and is greatly inferior to simply running 8 cantrip. This deck cannot afford to play and use Top in the early game, seeing multiples in a given game is extremely retarded, and the deck doesn't need extra late-game strengthening cards.

If you're going to try and make radical changes to the way the deck is currently built, make sure the changes make the g1 Goblins matchup stronger and not Threshold and Combo. Alot of people seem to want to play with Counterbalance though, so whatever floats your boats.

I'm pretty much in agreement with Hanni here. The way he built the deck to begin with was fine and I don't see why people are feeling the need to change it. The only changes my group has done was adding 2 Lose Hopes MD to fight Lackey, and I think they alternated -1 Grunt to +1 Avenger, because she's insane and I've added 1 EE in my build. Balance/Top have no place in this deck, of course if you want to do your own spin off, go right ahead, in another thread. The deck already handles what Balance/Top try to accomplish and I've won with this deck late game simply by dropping Avenger and Jitte and going to town.

Either run 4 Confidants or don't run them at all; running only 2 Confidants is completely asinine. You do realize that if unanswered he provides an endless stream of extra cards every turn on top of beating for 2 or carrying a Jitte?

Oh yeah, and if they're using removal on Confidant that means they aren't using removal on Grunt and Avenger which is good.

Except in your case their removal will be hitting your Grunts and Avengers because you have Confidant as a 2-of. They hit Confidant because letting him stay means you're putting more creatures and more answers into your hand. What does it matter if you nail a 3/3, but let them draw 2 cards a turn to replace it?

Counterbalance is good against aggro decks, which is our hardest matchup. Aggro decks win with creatures, and Counterbalance can counter the majority of creatures an aggro deck will play. Top is not necessary with Counterbalance, it is just a plus.

What aggro decks are you having trouble with? I've had a pretty good game against aggro so far and I've watched others smash aggro as well. I don't see how Counterbalance helps your aggro match since when you cast it, it has no immediate effect on the game. And without Top, there's no way to control what they play with Counterbalance save for Brainstorm and Visions stacking.

Hanni had this deck down nigh perfectly and there was never any reason to do savage overhauls to his list.

[Tosh]

Except in your case their removal will be hitting your Grunts and Avengers because you have Confidant as a 2-of.
[...]
What aggro decks are you having trouble with? I've had a pretty good game against aggro so far and I've watched others smash aggro as well. I don't see how Counterbalance helps your aggro match since when you cast it, it has no immediate effect on the game. And without Top, there's no way to control what they play with Counterbalance save for Brainstorm and Visions stacking.

I disagree on several points here:

Almost the entire format is tuned to destroy a 1 toughness creature (because of Lackey). Grunt and Avenger are significantly harder to get rid of than confidant. I'm not putting down Confidant because he is a good card; I have been thinking about -1 Top +1 Confidant.

To clarify my thought process, here is how it went:
Dark Confidant -> Sensei's Divining Top -> Counterbalance -> Trinket Mage -> Trinket Mage Toolbox

I do not understand you: according to what you just said and what has been said previously, there are not any bad match ups for this deck and I find that hard to believe. If you can prove that Fish has a good MU against Aggro I'll believe you, but in the 3-type format (Aggro, Combo, and Control) it is my understanding that the Aggro is the weakest match up.

On CB w/o Top: Counterbalance can counter some spells (mainly 2 costs) without library manipulation due to the pretty low land count. Counterbalance also turns your Brainstorms into Counterspells and, if you kind of know what they're going to play, turn your serum visions into them as well.

If you guys believe that my list is too different from Hanni's Fish to belong this thread then once I complete my primer, I will start a new thread on it. I apologize for any comments that may have detracted from the development of this version of fish.

[sammiel]

I disagree on several points here:

Almost the entire format is tuned to destroy a 1 toughness creature (because of Lackey). Grunt and Avenger are significantly harder to get rid of than confidant. I'm not putting down Confidant because he is a good card; I have been thinking about -1 Top +1 Confidant.


I do not understand you: according to what you just said and what has been said previously, there are not any bad match ups for this deck and I find that hard to believe. If you can prove that Fish has a good MU against Aggro I'll believe you, but in the 3-type format (Aggro, Combo, and Control) it is my understanding that the Aggro is the weakest match up.

On CB w/o Top: Counterbalance can counter some spells (mainly 2 costs) without library manipulation due to the pretty low land count. Counterbalance also turns your Brainstorms into Counterspells and, if you kind of know what they're going to play, turn your serum visions into them as well.

If you guys believe that my list is too different from Hanni's Fish to belong in Hanni's thread then once I complete my primer, I will start a new thread on it. I apologize, in this case, for dirtying your thread of gloating your perfect Fish decklist.

wow, what a smug little prick.

The format doesn't revolve around destroying x/1 creatures, and you clearly haven't actually tested the deck if you think less than 4 confidants is good.

[Hanni]

Goblins isn't really aggro though, it's aggro/combo/control. Normal aggro decks don't run Fact or Fictions, etc. Goblins is quite a bit different in design from normal aggro decks in that it has overwhelming amounts of card advantage.

What aggro matchups are we talking about, specifically? Faerie Stompy? Angel Stompy? Zoo? Affinity? It would be nice if you specified it more than simply "aggro" because there are different matchup percentages pre and post board for each deck.

Counterbalance is crap vs aggro... let's suppose you do cast it on turn 2. That means that instead of playing a creature, you played a worthless enchantment. What happens if they drop a guy on turn 1? What happens if Counterbalance doesn't counter the guy they drop on turn 2? I'm not quite sure how you figure, exactly, that Counterbalance is going to help you beat aggro. Aggro (aside from Goblins) doesn't beat you by playing a ton of threats and finally pushing through in the mid-late. They beat you by applying pressure that you can't deal with fast enough early on. The reason why the aggro matchup isn't nearly as bad as it seems many people think is because the deck utilizes tempo... you're going to Force/Daze/StP their first few early beats while applying a bit of you're own. During the late game, you have the advantage of card quality via cantrip, card draw via Confidant, and the other virtual card advantages the deck has.

You want a better aggro matchup? Add the 3rd Jitte. Jitte is great vs aggro... Fish has ways of keeping it's guys protected, it has ways of keeping it's Jitte protected, and it has ways of making sure Jitte gets the job done.

I also realize that the format is equipped to handle a 1st turn Lackey. What does it use? StP effects Dark Confidant all the same as it does Grunt. Lightning Bolt effects it the same as it does Avenger. Maybe you're referring to Fanatic? Yes, Fanatic kills Confidant. It also kills Mother of Runes if she hasn't survived long enough. Maybe I shouldn't run Mother of Runes because it's a 1/1?

At any rate, be my guest and run 2 Confidant and 3 Counterbalance. All I'm saying is that I think that is a terrible idea and I want to let people know that I think that is a terrible idea... so if they actually decide to pilot this thing at GP Columbus, it's a good list they are piloting. Why? Well, I wouldn't mind if someone else placed 1st or Top 8'd with it.