[Deck] Burn - I think it's viable

[bigbear102]

There are many controversies over the best way to build a red deck. Right now the popular opinion is that gobbos is the best red deck to play, I however disagree. I have recently won two tournaments with my burn deck, and would like to get some people talking and testing. I know IBA said he has been testing a variation, and I believe it would do everyone good if this were explored more.

This is the deck that I played for the Ws.

Burn:

4x Lightning Bolt
4x Chain Lightning
4x Incinerate
4x Fireblast
4x Flame Rift
3x Price of Progress
3x Fork
4x Lava Spike
3x Magma Jet
3x Flame Break/ Earthquake

4x Mogg Fanatic

4x Wooded Foothills
4x Wasteland
12x Mountain

Sideboard:
3x Red Elemental Blast
3x Crash
3x Sulfuric Vortex
3x Sirocco
3x Anarchy

The individual card choices are pretty self explanatory, there are a few that are debatable, so I will only touch on those.

Flame Rift: Some people like it, some don't. I believe that it is one of the key cards in this deck. It deals 4 damage, which is just amazing for 2 mana, usually aggro can't race this deck, so the life loss is null.

PoP: This is main because there are VERY few decks that play no nonbasics. This usually hits for at least 4 damage, which as I noted before is very good for 2 mana.

Fork: This card usually copies fireblast for the win, or sends discard/counters back at your opponent. Very important in control matchups.

Magma Jet: Most people have agreed that Incinerate is inferior to Magma Jet, but in this deck raw power is more important. Magma Jet could only be a 2 slot because it is needed, but just doesn't have the power to take up 4 seats.

The siceboard is usually personal preference, but I believe these are key cards that always have to be present to make a showing in any tourney:

Anarchy
Pyroclasm
Sulfuric Vortex

These are the only cards that absolutely need a slot. They win your bad matchups (AKA anything white 2nd and 3rd games/ goblins/ lifegain).

Pithing Needle really would shine in the board also. It would give you a chance against belcher, slow down Survival enough, stop CoP:Red for a little bit, and on top of that it can be used to stop any other card giving you problems. Normally the cards that will hurt you just need to me paused for a few turns. I know that the landstill player will drop CoP red and then disenchant your needle, but that should give you at least a turn, and that is all this deck usually needs.

This deck gives every deck problems. Many decks have several dead cards against it (creatue hate/ permanent hate). Land D (but not wasteland which is the most common) and discard are really the only disruption that hurts it, and in my experience both are needed to stop the deck.

I have serious hopes about this deck doing well, and have results to back it up. I will be playing more and giving more specific matchups and results in the future. Posting percentages against decks really won't help much, because if you notice, whichever thread you go into, that deck has a better matchup than in any other thread.

Please give this deck some serious thought, that is why I posted it in Open instead of Developmental.

[Zilla]

Looks pretty damned similar to the burn builds IBA and I were working on. Noteworthy differences:

1. Magma Jet should absolutely be a 4-of. The ability to control card quality is a rare thing for red and it should be fully taken advantage of where you can get it.

2. I don't like Lavamancer because I prefer my opponents to have dead cards. In other words, I'd rather any StP's or Wraths or Edicts or whatever my opponent has to sit in their hands doing nothing. This is one of the few types of card advantage red has and should be exploited. Fanatics are a reasonable exception to this rule because you can still ping with them if they're tergeted.

3. I used to run 4 Forks, and II absolutely love them for their super-sick combo with Fireblast. 8 damage for 2 mana is exceedingly awesome as a finishing blow. That said, I think it's likely better to drop them to a 3-of, because they're occasionally dead or simply an expensive Lightning Bolt.

4. IBA endorses the use of Barabarian Rings. I think he runs 4. I go back and forth between none and 2. I'm not certain which is the best way to go. It opens you up to Wastelands which is bad, and doesn't have great synergy with 4 Fireblasts, but it can sometimes be just the finisher you need to finish the game. I think 4 is wrong, but 2-3 might be okay. Just something to consider.

5. IBA and I both agree after extensive testing (and man, this is going to spark a stupid, age-old debate), that Browbeat is a solid inclusion in the deck. 5 damage is nothing to scoff at, and neither is 3 cards for 3 mana. Yes, your opponent gets to choose which is least bad for him, but in the end, both choices are really, really bad. Test it before you argue, if that's your initial reaction.

6. I no longer maindeck PoP. It can be really really good game 1, but when it's no longer a surprise, the vast majority of decks out there can play around it to easily.

7. I go back and forth between Flamebreak and Flames of the Blood Hand in the main. It's a definite meta call, but consider Flames of the Blood Hand in a meta with a lot of life gain. (Landstills packing MD Pulse, for example.) In a more aggro meta, Flamebreak is probably the way to go.

Aside from those suggestions, your list looks pretty damn close to optimal. I'd suggest just trying the following changes to see how they treat you:

-3 PoP, -3 Lavamancer
+2 Magma Jet, +4 Browbeat


On a different note, I still feel there are too many decks that have a naturally good game against Burn to make it a more solid choice than Vial Goblins. Namely that any deck packing lifegain can often stabilize before you land the finishing blow, or have ways of disrupting or preventing any of your damage. In essence, to win without running out of gas, you often need to resolve every threat you draw in the first 4 turns, and even then it's often not enough. Against decks packing Pulse or Ravenous Baloth, for example, your chances of running out of gas are even higher. Vial Goblins doesn't have this problem, as it has many threats to carry it over into the late game. In an unprepared meta, though, Burn can be an utterly savage choice.

[Zilla]

Moderator's Note: In order to (hopefully) circumvent problems inherent in Burn threads past, please observe the following rules when posting in this thread:

1. This discussion is about Burn. It's not about Sligh, or Goblins, or Red Deck Wins. Burn only. Do NOT discuss non-Burn builds here.

2. Do NOT post decklists. Discuss the one at the beginning of the thread, and suggest changes to it as you see fit. Everyone and their mother has a Burn list. We do not need to clutter this thread with all of them. Any decklist posted in this thread will be deleted.

[SALSA]

Because you didn't post any match results, or a definitive sideboard, it will most likely be moved to developmental anyways. Your list does look like a decent start, but I have a few problems with it. First is the lack of the other two Magma Jets. I really think you are underestimating the power of this card. The missing point of damage is irrelevant when you realize the cards ability to smooth your draws over, so as to not draw excess lands when you don't need them or a second Fork when you need to topdeck burn. another major thing I have to point out, is the lack of fetches. If for some reason you decided to not include them, I would like to know what that reason is. Maybe you were thinking of maindeck Ankh of Mishra, or maybe you want to draw excess lands if you happen to get to the late game? As for you counts on Fireblast and Price of Progress, I would reverse them, as multiple PoP'S is good to have, but drawing a second blast after saccing your lands to the first one is not. Lastly is the random Wastlends. I would recommend cutting them, as they are only netting you 2 less points of damage from PoP, and Wasteland is not going to solve your prolem matchups anyways.

I would suggest something like

4 Ankh of Mishra (Flame Rift if you want to use fetches)
4 Price of Progress
3 Fireblast
3 Fork
4 Magma Jet
4 Incinerate
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Grim Lavamancer
22 Mountain

{EDIT} there was no responses to this list when I was typing this up. Zilla beat me to the punch, and I didn't even know about Flame of the Blood Hand.

[bigbear102]

@Godzilla: I have been thinking about cutting the Lavamancers. Though having the 4 forks is working nicely, I may try -3 Mancer, -1 Fork, +2 Magma Jet, +2 Browbeat.

I don't like Flames main because most decks won't have pulse/lifegain main. Flames is 3 for 4, not very good. I like to win game 1 in under 5 turns. With this deck it usually works, and then games 2-3 are a bit slower.

I don't play Flamebreak for the same reason. It is not an explosive burn spell, and can be a dead card in some matchups, although it is 3 for 3 minimum, there are better cards to be had main in my opinion.

@Salsa: I included the reasons for not having matchup analysis and a sideboard, so please read a bit more carefully....
I'll let the mods do what they will with your decklist also....

I would also have to say that having 4 Wastelands main is imperative in this format. They are the only things that stop landstill from getting double white for pulse, and are the MVP in that matchup. I will never play the deck without 4 of them. If you do play ankh then they are that much better. The point behind playing Ankh is to make your opponent have to play lands, with wasteland that makes it easier.

As for the no fetches, I forgot to throw them in. I took Ankhs out from the last time I played it and forgot to throw fetches in. oops.

Price of Progress is not needed as a 4 of in the main. There are too many decks that can just search for basics. The only reason they are in the main is to surprise game 1 with 4-6 damage.
Replacing a Fireblast with a PoP is not a good idea either. Adding a situational card and dropping a finisher = not good times. Forking a Fireblast is always 8 damage, Forking a PoP is sometimes 4, sometimes 16, I like the always 8.


I would also like to investigate the adding of a 2nd color, is it needed and what should it be??

Obvious choices are G and W. They both offer Disenchant effects, which is what the deck needs, or does Pithing Needle suffice in that area?

I do appreciate the posts though, and hope that this deck could become something of a competitor in Legacy.

[MattH]

If you're going to focus on burn and not be a Sligh or Goblin deck*, then I don't understand two of your card choices. I get the impression that they're there more as a reflex than as a thoughful inclusion.

Why do you need Mogg Fanatic? In a deck that cares about nothing so much as the opponent's life total, it doesn't seem like you're going to get more than 2-3 damage out of this guy, in which case he might as well be another burn spell (Sulfuric Vortex maybe, or Cursed Scroll). He would be great if there were a lot of 1/1s you needed to deal with but since your plan is to just toss fire at the opponent's head you're planning on ignoring his creatures anyway.

A similar argument can be applied to Wasteland, for that matter. Sligh decks used to use Wasteland as a Time Walk to let Jackal Pup hit for a couple more damage, but your deck is not sligh. You also pack no significant mana denial theme, and there aren't any nonbasics that you absolutely must kill, so why aren't these either a) Barbarian Ring, as mentioned, or b) more mountains/fetches to ensure consistent Fireblasts?




*to any moderator: I hope you can see that I'm obviously using these decks as contrasts to put this deck in context and not actually discussing them as prohibited by Godzilla's injunction.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

re: Flame Rift

Taking 4 against aggro is bad. Has anyone tested Volcanic Hammer in this spot?

Has anyone tested Glacial Ray? Yeah, I know, it's a 2 mana shock, but with Lava Spike...

I'm just saying.

[Braves54321]

Also Zilla:

2. I don't like Lavamancer because I prefer my opponents to have dead cards. In other words, I'd rather any StP's or Wraths or Edicts or whatever my opponent has to sit in their hands doing nothing. This is one of the few types of card advantage red has and should be exploited. Fanatics are a reasonable exception to this rule because you can still ping with them if they're tergeted.

I used to be one of the biggest advocates of not running Grim for those reasons. However having been a longtime burn player I can say he's worth running.

@ Intial decklist:

Get Ankh in the deck. That card is really good.

Also, you don't run enough mountains to effectively cast fireblast imo(I run 18-19 and sometimes that isn't enough.

Also, how do you deal w/a resolved baloth? Sulfuric vortex(yes mb) can be very savage.

I prefer running Cursed Scroll also, as it can be used if you're low on burn.

Just some suggestions.

[bigbear102]

@Wastelands: The deck does need Wastelands, they own control. Landstill is the only serious control deck in the format right now, and they need white to hurt you. Every game I have played agianst Landstill I have wasted Tundra, and usually it is for the win, without it they don't play CoP or Pulse. And I know that they will eventually search/draw Plains, but usually wastes buy me the turn I need to kill them. I don't believe that taking out the Wastes will help at all. (I will however test this to see if the control matchup is good enough with burn alone.)
I also have not had a problem casting Fireblast at all. It seems to be working fine with 16 mountains. The only time I had trouble was against sinkhole, and that game I kept a one-lander.

@Mogg Fanatics: I never really tried playing without them. You may be right that they should be cut for another burn spell. Testing will show whether the deck speeds up at all or just does the same thing, because I do like having a blocker if I need one.

@Flame Rift: You guys really need to play with this card to see its true beauty. I know its bad to take 4 against aggro, but I normally kill them the same turn. It is a finisher to go with fireblast. And against control it is 2nd turn 4 damage. If I take out the Fanatics I will probably throw in either Thunderbolt (1R Instant: 3 damage to player or 4 to flying creature) or Volcanic Hammer.

@Baloth: I just keep sending burn to the dome and try to race them. Baloth comes down turn 3-4, usually they are under at about 8 then, so if my deck likes me I race them. It really is a bad card for me to see though. That is part of the reason I want Pithing Needle in the board.

[noobslayer]

If you add tangle wires and the red artifact lands, shrapnel blast is now looking good with ankhs. Also in the right metas, you can maindeck Price of Progress. DON'T CUT THE MANCERS!! Keep the count at three. They make Barbarian Ring quite obsolete, not to mention that they can still beat when they have to. If your clock is slower, Hammer of Bogarden works.

I am also an advocate of Shock over Chain Lightning. I like being able to keep my mana open, as well as having all my burn instant speed, and with the amount of burn I pack, that single point is almost irrelevent.

[bigbear102]

If the deck adds artifacts then there are less dead cards your opponent has. You also die to Disenchan AND Wasteland if you play the artifact lands, plus your fireblast is that much worse.
Part of the reason I dropped Ankh was because people kept in their Disenchants/Naturalizes/Sex Monkeys to get rid of it, and then my Vortex was useless. With no maindeck targets, my Vortex is less likely to be hated game 2. I have also found that the deck does perform well without Ankh, it usually kills a turn quicker.

I'll let the Shock v Chain Lightning be left up to you, but I will never in a million years drop Chain Lightning from any deck that calls itself burn, unless they print 9 more copies of Lightning Bolt with different names.
If you do play shock then drop the Lava Spikes, they are much worse than Chain Lightning any day of the week.

I do however have to disagree that the single point is irrelevent. This deck needs as much firepower as quickly as possible. I don't even like having to use Magma Jet, but the scrying is necessary. If this deck goes into a long game and your opponent isn't at 1, you will probably lose. That's why I play very powerful spells as quickly as possible, shock just doesn't cut it.

[GRAH]

Has anyone tested the merit of MD Red Elemental Blasts? Maybe 2 or 3? Any major deck that you have a bad matchup against is playing blue (and most decks play blue anyway). Landstill and Solidarity both play relevant blue spells to counter.

The only decks that it really is a dead card against are Vial Goblins and RGSA, which you already have good to fair matchups against, and AS, which is probably a lost cause anyway.

Solidarity and Landstill are definitely questionable matchups, and REB could possibly turn the tide.

[Zilla]

I tested the Shrapnel Blast version of Burn thoroughly and I have to say it just isn't worth it. It requires you to run a bunch of artifacts that weaken the deck otherwise (crap like artifact lands, etc.), and then such changes interfere with the effectiveness of your Fireblasts. Fuck all that. The Shrapnel Blast builds are less stable and far less consistent for no significant gain in clock. (Both builds goldfish between turns 4 and 5.)

As for Lavamancer making Barbarian Ring obsolete, the last time I checked, you can't StP a Ring. In any case, the point is moot. I feel strongly that the best course of action for Burn is to have absolutely no non-land permanents (with the possibly exception of Fanatic), in order to truly capitalize on your opponent's having dead cards.

As for Ankh, see my sentiments in the last sentence. Permanents in Burn suck ass. And frankly, having tested an Ankh burn build extensively, I have to say they're slow as balls and they can be played around. Turn 2 is the turn I want to be casting Magma Jet to set up my win on turn 4. Further, they're a terrible topdeck in the "late" game, where you so often find yourself wishing for that last direct damage spell to win the game. Getting an Ankh instead is a terrible disappointment.

With regards to Sulfuric Vortex, I agree it can be a kickass MD choice in the right metas. It's like a slightly more expensive Ankh, except that it also prevents lifegain, which is one of the deck's hugest obstacles. Personally, I'd run it over Flame Rift in Bigbear's list.

[bigbear102]

Landstill is not a questionable matchup. I have beat landstill 8-0 in tournaments. They were piloted by very good players also. Solidarity has yet to see the rath of red.... I need to do some testing. I was going to yesterday after the tourney (I wasn't planning on winning, so I didn't have time afterward). I don't believe that maindecking a non-damage spell is a good idea.
RGSA is not an easy matchup either, their baloths can single-handedly put the game out of reach for you, and having 2-3 less burn spells makes it that much harder. RB is definately a great SB card, but not for the main. At least not in this meta.

[noobslayer]

If creatures are to be cut entirely (with the exception of mogg fantastic), the we should consider pyroclasm and things like slice and dice. Starstorm is handy too.

[Zilla]

Pyroclasm and Slice and Dice are decent SB choices, but in the main you want stuff that is guaranteed to be dealing damage, even against creatureless opponents, which is why I mentioned Flamebreak earlier.

[bigbear102]

Here is the problem with situational cards in the main board (By situational cards I mean: Flames of the Bloodhand, Pyroclasm, Flamebreak, Vortex, Red Blast):

It seems to me that every time I play this I win game one, or I go 0-2. Winning the match is so much easier with game 1 on auto-pilot. With everything dealing damage, most decks won't have answers game 1.

If someone casts a Baloth (about the only lifegain in the format game 1) you just have to race them. The sideboard is for situational cards.

[Carney2k4]

Still on the Flame Rift debate, wouldn't Chain of Plasma be better than both Rift and Hammer? It's instant speed and I like instants, oh and it hits creatures and you don't take 4 damage.

[GRAH]

Chain seems pretty godawful versus aggro. Even if you manage to get it at them twice, you really don't want to cost yourself any unnecessary life versus aggro.

Is Landstill really that good a matchup? Maybe I haven't done enough testing. Of course, a lot of the LS decks I face are played by scrubs and have atypical stuff like Pulse MDed. Still, Solidarity is definitely pretty questionable. It seems difficult for you to win as fast, especially without any hand disruption. How about Chrome Mox? You're likely not tossing away anything beyond a Fork or another burn spell, and losing a spell for acceleration could be deadly here, I think.

I'd completely drop both Mancer and Fanatic. I love Mancer, but the summoning sickness hurts it. To be honest, I'd rather just play a Shock, because you're planning on winning by turn 4-5 and therefore probably won't be able to max it out anyway.

From bigbear's deck, I'd definitely do

-4 Wooded Foothills (it doesn't actually thin your deck, and you're not fetching duals)
-3 Grim Lavamancer
-4 Mogg Fanatic
-1 Fork
-3 Price of Progress

+3 Chrome Mox
+3 Mountain
+3 Browbeat (I'd say that Mox makes this significantly better)
+2 Magma Jet
+4 Volcanic Hammer

Barbarian Ring seems weak. It's vulnerable to Wasteland, hurts you when you play PoP (I'd SB this) and Threshold should usually be gotten by the time you end the game. Plus, RR (equivalently) for just 2 damage at the end of the game, much less at any time, is piss-poor.

By the way, bigbear, what was your SB for the tournament?

This deck would be so much more awesome if Lightning Bringer saw print. :(

[kirdape3]

Any deck with Pulse of the Fields just annihilates you without some way to beat it.

I'd almost, and I do mean ALMOST, run Hammer of Bogardan as a 2-of in here. Sure, it costs a fortune, but in case of emergency buying it back even once can be really ridiculous. There are other ancillary burn spells that may be just better, but burn spells that come back are really frickin' dumb.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

-4 Wooded Foothills. Why run this?
-4 Wasteland. Ditto. It doesn't compliment your strategy at all. Mishra's Factory would be almost strictly better.
-3 Grim Lavamancer
-4 Mogg Fanatic We've already covered why creatures are bad.
-3 PoP. Amazing sometimes, but probably strictly sb
-1 Fork. Agree with Godzilla.
-4 Flame Rift

+2 Magma Jet. The fourth best burn spell in my opinion.
+5 Mountain
+4 Barbarian Ring. I can't stress enough how good this card is. You need enough burn spells to add up to 20 and enough mana to cast them all. Barbarian Ring does both things. It's like you're cutting land for more burn without actually cutting the land. And it kills things like Silver Knight.
+4 Chain of Plasma. No creatures, no real drawbacks. Also has savage synergy with sideboard Guerilla Tactics against Pox.
+4 Browbeat. It is teh rowkx0r. Let me explain something about Browbeat, btw; to be optimal, you want to use it third turn. The earlier the better. The mistake a lot of people make is trying to use Browbeat as a way to draw three cards. That's not what you want. You want them to take the five damage. You're playing philosophy of fire, remember? That's why for all the burn. Use this when they're at 15 and reasoning that they can get away with losing the 5.
+4 Flames of the Blood Hand. Tops off with Fireblast as the finisher. Gets around CoP: Red and Pulse of the Fields. Even kills a Sword of Fire/Ice equipped, Pariahed Silver Knight. Solves all your problems while still doing efficent damage the rest of the time.

+2

[bigbear102]

Ok, Hammer of Bogardan is shit in this deck, maybe, MAYBE, it could find a place in the board if every match in the tourney is control, but that's it.

Speaking of the board, mine was shit, that's why i didn't post it. Here it is for reference:

3x Sirocco
3x Pyroclasm
3x Sulfuric Vortex
3x Tormod's Crypt
3x Anarchy
3x let the flaming begin...

I only sideboarded against Landstill and Gobbos. Every other matchup I had nothing to use... That is why I do not like situational cards in my main. If I could guarantee a way to side them out for something better I would, but a lot of matchups are just fine with the main deck.

Wasteland is still the best card in the deck. Complimenting strategy or not it wins games. It is the only situational card I play. I couldn't imagine going agaisnt landstill without wasteland. The great thing about this deck is that their crucible doesn't matter. I waste their 1st or 2nd land and kill them by the time they drop it. EVERY game against landstill Wasteland has been huge. It has kept them off of 2nd blue first game and 2nd white second game.

This brings me to the next point: Barbarian Ring.
I would love to play this card, but it does not fit with Wasteland. There have been very few times I have been lacking damage at the end of the game. If I am lacking damage, maybe the 32-36 cards that say Cc: deal X could seal it off the top. Like I said, Ring would be amazing, but Waste is better, at least when you face 2 landstills on average in the cuse every week.

I have to say I would need to test Chrome Mox, I'm not sure if the lack of getting that card back is worth its turn boost. Possibly needing that extra draw could set you back the tempo you gain with it. Though I will test it and see what happens, good suggestion.

[xenoq]

Pulse is no big wop. Manaburn yourself, get a nice hand together, then really fucking lay into them. No big wop.

Grim does the job in those matchups where you topdeck the uber dump. At worst, he's a 1/1 that beats, at best he's 5+ dmg. I don't really understand this argument that you're all using against dead cards. The fact that he can win games on his own > opponent casting a removal spell.

Which brings me to my next point. If there's any hitch whatsoever in your gameplan, you stall out and take a huge shit all over the place. Like, for example, when I played this deck against ghetto red. Stupid 2/1 beaters out the ass + moderate burn is a faster clock than a mediocre hand in this deck. What do you do then? Scoop em up, chief. Same logic applies to other beats.

Browbeat is something I'd considered, but have yet to find room for in my list. People can argue till they're blue in the mug, but as Zilla said, 5 dmg from one spell, or 3 cards that's liable to be more than 5 dmg. Whateva mang.

Chrome Mox is dump. Shrapnel Blast is dump. Cards that have a situation requirement to be active are wicked newb. There's often times when you're sitting on a Shrap Blast and playing with your wanka waiting for the artifact to knock some screws loose with.

Whoever's playing Wasteland is a shitheal. You need your damn Mountains for Fireblast. Plus you don't give a flying fuck about slowing them down. If you wanna slow them down, play RDW.

Barbarian Ring takes a minimal amount of shit. Uncounterable damage that sits on the table and waits for the finish. Works for me.

Anhk is currently in my board to take out dead cards for. See: MB Price of Progress.

Fork can suck my two incher. As I said above, situational cards are newb. Yeah, sure, you can dupe some shit. Most of the time though, this card is dead weight in your grip.

Mogg Fanatic is good because he does on average 2-3 dmg. Yeah, that's a Shock/Bolt, but his other purpose is saving your ass. You chump some shit to give you just enough time to not die. Sure, this logic can be applied to Wasteland, but last time I checked Wasteland does 0 damage.

[noobslayer]

Ensnaring Bridge looks promising, considering the possible creatures all have a power of one, and can deal damage without attacking. I think it merits some sort of testing, MD or SB.

[bigbear102]

OK, first of all, I don't appreciate being called a shitheaL, a shitheaD maybe, but not a shitheal. And second, have you EVER played against landstill??? That is the last thing I will say on Wasteland, I guess I'm just a bad player that will never learn.

On to other things...

Chrome Mox has tested to be bad draws and card disadvantage.

The jury is still out on Browbeat, my testing hasn't really shown anything on how it performs in the deck yet.

@Xenoq: I'm sorry you only have 2 inches, that's probably why you play Magic... anyways, FORK IS AMAZING!!!! It is counterspell main, card draw main, discard main, Fireblast/PoP 5-8. At WORST it is an Incinerate/Magma Jet. I have yet to see the card and be disappointed. I guess you could consider it situational, but when a card can be useful in 99% of situations, I'll take that. I can remember one time that Fork was a bad draw, that was until he duressed me and I took his Pox. Wait, no, that won me the game, that's right... so no, I have never not liked Fork in my hand.

@Noobslayer: This deck doesn't care about opposing creatures. If it did it would be a different deck. The correct sideboard choice against aggro is Pyroclasm/Flamebreak. Granted Ensnaring Bridge is a good card, it does not fit in this style of Burn. Burning Bridges is a slower burn deck that can last into the late game, this deck doesn't want a late game.

@Barbarian Ring: I tested it out in place of Wasteland, and guess what, it got Wastelanded... Ironic huh? The card never stayed on the board long enough to be useful. When I draw Wasteland I can normally use it if i need the mana, people don't usually off it with opposing Wastelands, waiting for another target. Ring on the other hand is a prime target for them to hit, and it hurts when that is the 2nd land in your hand. In my opinion Ring is another card that gives them a target. It makes their cards that much more useful, which negates any card advantage I could have.

I believe that I have tested all of the relevant ideas that have come up. I'll edit the original decklist with the changes that I believe are needed. Some of the changes (Browbeat/Magma Jet) haven't proved themselves yet, but seem to have potential and haven't hurt the deck much in my eyes.

I would appreciate it if others would do some testing of the cards they despise before saying that they don't work (Xenoq= Fork). If you have a problem, say something, but then test it to see if you may be wrong. That leads me to Magma Jet, I have upped the count to 4, but still haven't decided if it was a good idea. The deck seems a bit slower going 2nd turn 2 damage instead of 3,4,or 6.

[Zilla]

Fork can suck my two incher. As I said above, situational cards are newb. Yeah, sure, you can dupe some shit. Most of the time though, this card is dead weight in your grip.
I agree with most of what you said, Xenoq, but you're a damn fool if you think Fork is situational. Sure, it's situational. It requires you to have at least 2 mountains in play to cast it. That's about as situational as it gets since literally every nonland card in your deck should be a viable target for it, excepting perhaps a few 1cc dorks.

"Situational" ceases to be a relevant term when said "situation" happens 95% or more of the time. Most often, it's simply used as a finisher with Fireblast. 2 mana for 8 damage is some good. REALLY some good. The fact that it can be used as a pseudo counterspell against control or can draw you some cards off your opponent's eot FoF is just icing on the cake.

[Sims]

I would appreciate it if others would do some testing of the cards they despise before saying that they don't work (Xenoq= Fork). If you have a problem, say something, but then test it to see if you may be wrong. That leads me to Magma Jet, I have upped the count to 4, but still haven't decided if it was a good idea. The deck seems a bit slower going 2nd turn 2 damage instead of 3,4,or 6.
Xenoq and I have done testing, and a lot of it, as this is probably his favorite archtype in the existence of all things Magical. I concur with him, Fork is good if you have Fireblast in your hand, outside of that it's usually deadweight as you are throwing your hand at their head and leaving yourself with solely fork in your hand. That's not legit. However, Magma Jet is 2 Legit 2 Quit. Scry gives you the card quality you need to stay in the game when your plan gets stalled or to keep yourself from drawing into more of those god forsaken lands 4-5+.

[bigbear102]

How can you cut fork from this deck?

It isn't deadweight when throwing your hand at their head. IT DOES THE SAME THING. If there is nothing important to copy, then copy a burn spell! How is it a dead card? The only time it is dead is when playing against survival in the late game with no cards in hand, at which point you have already lost!

Having the fireblast for the win is one thing, having the counterspell to push it through is amazing. Not only does it act as a finisher, it is the only MD answer that burn has to discard, counters, and Land D. It nets cards in the control matchup if need be. When they Edict you (if playing lavamancer) you edict them. The other day I forked 2 duresses. Fork was MVP vs The Game. It was MVP vs POX. It was a finisher vs Landstill twice.

I cast PoP for 8, then Fork for 8, they were at 16. That is what Fork does.

Can I ask what you would replace Fork with if you were to cut it???

[LunchBox]

Having the fireblast for the win is one thing, having the counterspell to push it through is amazing. Not only does it act as a finisher, it is the only MD answer that burn has to discard, counters, and Land D. It nets cards in the control matchup if need be. When they Edict you (if playing lavamancer) you edict them. The other day I forked 2 duresses. Fork was MVP vs The Game. It was MVP vs POX. It was a finisher vs Landstill twice.

I cast PoP for 8, then Fork for 8, they were at 16. That is what Fork does.

I don't really have an opinion either way on Fork, but I just wanted to make sure that you've read The Danger of Cool Things (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandnews.php?Article=3689). Don't fall into the trap of Fork is great "because this one time I Forked a PoP for 16."

Beware the danger of cool plays...

[Hoojo]

@Fork - My argument for Fork is based on most everything in the deck being a target. The reason it works in this deck, is because in this deck it's not situational; you use it almost immediately when you have it. Fork also works as a maindeck Counterspell when you need to deal that last 3-4 damage. Trouble is, when you begin to think of Fork as defense, you start to hold onto it, rather than use it immediately. This is why people consider it a dead card. If you can get the mindset that Fork'ing your opponents spells is Secondary to Fork'ing your own, I think you will see it shine a lot more.

@Barbarian Ring, Wasteland, Mishra's Factory - Overall, I would run Mishra's Factory's, but that may be my playstyle. More than likely, I would run Mishra's Factory main and Wasteland in the sideboard. I am opposed to Barbarian Ring because when I play burn, I am using my mana every turn. If I have two 'Rings within the first 4-5 land drops, that's a lot of pain AND it delays my Fireblasts. With Mishra's Factory, I don't get red mana, but I also don't deal myself damage. I can only lend you my opinion here, because as far as what's optimal, it's really dependant on your meta.

[Sims]

Here's the deal. On turn 3 would you rather be casting Browbeat, Ogre-dokken, or Lightning Bolt-Fork? On turn 4 would you rather be ending the game or casting Magma Jet-Fork? The point is I want the game OVER by turn 4, 5 at the absolute latest, and unless I've got the Fireblast in hand the Fork DOES NOTHING to advance that cause.

Plain and simple. Fork is not a burn spell. Fork does nothing on it's own. I'm not wasting my turn 3 to Fork a Chain Lightning (3 shocks) so I can say I'm cool and I play Fork. I'd rather cast 3 of my 12 Bolts, or Browbeat, or Jet, or Incinerate.... Get the picture?

[midnightAce]

However, Fork's application does go beyond simply copying your own deck's targets. Forking a draw spell such as FoF or a counter or even a StP just might be enough to swing the game around. While not neccesarily mainboard, it does have a variety of applications against some of the instant/socery filled decks, and at least deserves a SB spot.

[Zilla]

CA, I can't believe you're saying what you're saying. Fork ABSOULTELY benefits the cause of winning turn 4-5. You ask what I'd rather be doing turn 4, Magma Jet/Fork or winning the game? What other 2cc spell am I going to be winning the game with? Incinerate? It does one more damage than Fork in that scenario and it doesn't give me card quality.

Here's the bottom line: with 4 Magma Jet and 4 Fireblast in your deck, you're almost guaranteed to see Fireblast by turn 5ish. You're also almost guaranteed to hold it in your hand until that time because you want to keep your mana for Burn. The likelihood of having the Fork/Fireblast combo by turn 4 or 5 in this deck is extremely high. If you don't, it's not like the card is dead on its own. Perhaps you hadn't noticed, but Lightning Bolt/Fork is identical to Lightning Bolt/Incinerate on turn 3. I haven't noticed your retiscence to run Incinerate in burn.

What I'm saying is this: at worst Fork is going to be deal 3 damage in the vast majority of situations. At best it's doing 4-5, or pushing your lethal blow through a counterwall, or emptying your opponent's hand when they Hymn you, or whatever the hell else. None of these scenarios are uncommon. They happen ALL the time. Fork is situational like drawing cards is situational. If there are cards in your deck, it's happening.

@Lunch:

I'm familiar with the danger of cool things. It doesn't apply here. The only cool thing with which I'm fascinated is winning, which Fork makes me do. A LOT. If Fork were only usuable in conjunction with Fireblast, it obviously wouldn't belong in the deck, and your reference to that article would be justified. Being that Fork has synergy with nearly every card in your own deck, as well as the cards in most of your opponent's decks, I don't see that it's applicable.

[Prophet]

I really can't imagine Fork being anything other than a 4-of maindecked. The sideboard is for cards that are situational, only good for certain matchups. What matchups would you bring Fork in for? It's useful for every matchup, for reasons already explained here many times. The only reason I can think of it being a dead card is if you don't have enough mana to Fork a burn spell.

I've been looking for better burn spells, and there aren't many not included in the decklists we've seen. What do you guys think of Flame Burst or Scent Of Cinder? Flame Burst seems to fit in, and Scent Of Cinder could easily be useful with a high spell count, but the main problem with both of them is that they have to be a 4-of to be optimal. You need to draw multiple Flame Bursts for it to really shine, and you need to draw Scent Of Cinder early on so you can play it before you've already played your hand.

Anyway, what are your guys' thoughts on these cards?

[GRAH]

Fork seems like only a 3-of to me. Drawing more than one might hurt you. I'd much rather draw into more burn than Fork multiples.

As for Flame Burst and SoC, both are totally suboptimal burn spells, and you'd be dropping them for something much better.

[Prophet]

Well of course, they'd probably be the weakest burn spells in the deck, but the slots that Grim Lavamancer/Mogg Fanatic/Price Of Progress/all of the other non-burn spells take up are kind of up for grabs. I don't think we really have an optimal, agreed upon decklist yet. Do we?

[midnightAce]

@Prophet

I think you misunderstood me. I LIKE Fork maindeck. I was simply saying that even if for some reason it is not maindecked, I believe it deserves a SB slot.

@Empty slots of the deck

Other than the inclusion of what nonbasic lands to run, what are the slots that are actual in debate? I like Isochoron Scepter, I know it does not apply to the whole "give opponent many dead card" advantage, (No sarcasm here.) But it is a solid threat on its own that is almost a must counter. Mag Jet on Scepter is a consistent card quality controller on top of 2 damage per turn, and putting a Fork on Scepter is just sick. :D Over 70% of your deck can be Sceptered, and it is the answer to most burn deck's "run out of gas" symptom. Just a thought.

[Prophet]

True, Isochron Scepter is a huge threat, but all (at least most, but I believe all) Survival builds run Viridian Shaman/Sex Monkey, and many decks running white also run Disenchant maindecked on the same logic that we run Price Of Progress; it is almost never a dead card. Casting Isochron Scepter without having enough mana to activate it at least once leaves us vulnerable to lose that spell completely. The game is not supposed to go on long enough for us to look back on Isochron Scepter and think of it as an MVP.

[Zilla]

I concur. In theory, Scepter is the nuts. In reality, it's slow and potentially damaging to your ability to win. You need every burn spell you have to go straight for your opponent's skull in most cases. Giving them the opportunity to remove even one can be extremely hazardous. Worse, you're most likely to put your best spell on the stick, meaning that if it's removed you've lost not only a burn spell, but the best one to boot. I'm against it.

[bigbear102]

OK, here is a list of the cards that are agreed upon for maindeck in every burn deck:

4x Lightning Bolt
4x Chain Lightning
4x Incinerate
4x Lava Spike
4x Fireblast
3x Magma Jet (4 if you really think you are cool, 2 if you're me)
3-4x Fork (if you have a problem, then don't play it, both sides have beat this argument to death)

That is the BARE minimum that every deck is auto including.

These are the cards that may be up for grabs/debated about.
4x Flame Rift
3x Price of Progress
3x Browbeat
4x Mogg Fanatic

4x Wooded Foothills
4x Wasteland

This list is what is posted at the top of the forum. Other cards have been mentioned also, so go at it. Don't argue about cards that are on the first list because they are either staples, or personal preference and you won't be able to change anyone's mind. If you do have a NEW and relevent idea as to why something on the first list should be changed, go for it, but please don't waste everyone's time debating things that won't matter/change.

[xenoq]

You absolutely, without a doubt, no questions asked, NEED to run 4 Magma Jets. Four. Not 3. Four.

This deck loses because it draws the wrong shit at the wrong time (read: fork). You get screwed because you don't draw enough burn, you have too many lands (or not enough), or you're just short on damage for the kill. Magma Jet relieves this. So does Browbeat to an extent, but it's not as good as Jet, because they can just take the five on the chin and then you're high and dry.

Run 4 Jets. Don't be nub.

[bigbear102]

Ok, for the record I have won two tournaments with this deck. One of them without jets at all, and the other with only 2. If you are going to say that I NEED to run 4 magma jets that's all well and fine, but if my version keeps performing, I will not run what I consider to be an underpowered card.

Now, like i said, lets talk about other relevent cards in the deck. The reason for my last post was so that we could get off of this topic and start other discussions about different cards. Fork and Magma Jet have been beaten to death, and saying "Play this because its good, and don't play that because its bad" is not going to help us.


Now, I am wondering if it would be worth it to run Pithing Needle in the board. Having it stops Survival, Baloth, CoP, Fetches, Spike Feeder, Belcher (if it comes up), Bosium Strip (again if it becomes better and more popular).

I believe that it would be a great card to have, anyone else have any ideas?

[Hoojo]

I think Pithing Needle might slow you down too much. It is only one mana, but you want to win in 4-5 turns. Seems allocation would slow you down at least one turn.

On another note, I have put together a Burn build since interest has been perked, and I feel Barbarian Ring isn't performing well for me. I went back to Mishra's Factory's in that slot. Also, I have found Flame Rift to be excellent, yet, I don't think it should be a 4-of. Since Burn is one of the most popular decks to play, the 4 damage has worked against me in a few "Mirrors."

@bigbear102 - How much land do you run with only two Magma Jets? I'm mostly just curious; I agree that topic has been driven into the ground. I just wanted to know and compare.

[bigbear102]

I run 20 land, 16 mountain, 4 wasteland. I'm not sure about fetches yet.

[Zilla]

bigbear, xenoq can be a real pain in the ass, but he's right in this case. Obviously Burn can win without Jet, but seriously, the ability to control the quality of your draws WILL make you win more consistently and quickly. I've played builds both without and without extremely thoroughly. Particularly since you play Fork, the Jet can be really strong in setting up a hand with Fork and Fireblast for the finishing blow. Think how many games you go into topdeck mode, just waiting for that one burn spell to show so you can win the game. Now picture that for every Magma Jet you cast that game, it's up to 2 turns less you'd have to spend waiting. No jokes, Jet is the nuts.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

On the sideboard; I prefer to run only cards that deal damage in a burn sideboard, as drawing even one or two situational cards like REB, Pithing Needle, or Crypt can leave you with an irate opponent at 3-4 life that kicks your teeth in. To keep up the burn count while still utilizing the sideboard, I think some options are;


Earthquake
Flamebreak
Price of Progress
Blood Oath (svg vs Solidarity)
Scald
Pyrostatic Pillar
Flametongue Kavu/creatures in general (often good against control decks that might side out most of their creature removal game 2)
Sulfurix Vortex
Aura Barbs

What else is there?

[kirdape3]

Sirocco.

The alternative to them taking a billion damage from that is discarding cards. Let's see, any Tide deck in the history of mankind doesn't really deal all that well without cards in hand, and if their choice is to take 4 for each of them or discard, you really put them in a box.

[awesomeawesome]

Sirroco for Solidarity

Ball Lightning for after game 1, when creature removal has been sided out.

[bigbear102]

Ok, I know Magma Jet is an amazing card, but I have seriously not needed it. The only game that I could have used it effectively was against Pox. I will probably play with 3, but I don't think 4 is going to happen. However much people may hate me, my personal results have shown that the card is not necessarily broken in this deck. I have tested with 4 of them, but I think 3 is optimal. That's just my own opinion. If in the next few tourneys things change then I will definately up the count.

On the sideboard v. Solidarity, I believe that Sirocco would be a better call than Blood Oath, though the Oath is definate damage, Sirocco comes out quicker (impossible for solidarity to go off on turn 2, hard to go off at all after sirocco), and the damage isn't necessarily needed, if they only take 4-8, then that is plents for me to kill them off.

[Prophet]

My original build had 22 lands, and I often found myself drawing lands when I would much rather have drawn burn spells, allowing my opponent to advance their strategy. Now I run 22 lands, and I find myself consistently having burn spells, but only having enough mana for one spell a turn, whereas with 22, I had the mana to play a few each turn, but always end up spending my hand in the first few turns without them being dead. Does anybody think we could run 22 lands but have something to refill our hand on a regular basis, such as Howling Mine? Browbeat isn't enough draw, I think, considering they have the option of taking damage. The build we have is great, I'm just talking possibilities.

[Zilla]

Draw would be great, but Howling Mine is a no-go, for a whole bunch of reasons. Mainly that it's slow, but more importantly because it gives your opponent the advantage of a draw before you get the extra draw. Howling Mine is inherent card disadvantage outside of a deck specifically built to abuse it. The unfortunate truth is that red sucks at drawing cards. The best we can do is work with card quality. The closest you're going to get to card advantage in burn is Magma Jet, Browbeat, and not having any permanents for your opponent to remove.

[scrumdogg]

On the sideboard; I prefer to run only cards that deal damage in a burn sideboard, as drawing even one or two situational cards like REB, Pithing Needle, or Crypt can leave you with an irate opponent at 3-4 life that kicks your teeth in. To keep up the burn count while still utilizing the sideboard, I think some options are;


Earthquake
Flamebreak
Price of Progress
Blood Oath (svg vs Solidarity)
Scald
Pyrostatic Pillar
Flametongue Kavu/creatures in general (often good against control decks that might side out most of their creature removal game 2)
Sulfurix Vortex
Aura Barbs

What else is there?
He's right. The deck needs to maintain pressure and momentum, although in the right environment you NEED REB or Pyroblast in the board. Chill sucks. A lot. And it cost me one match this weekend. The 1 cc burn ad Fork are more important than I thought (I ran 2x Chain, 4x Spike & 2x Fork - all I could find). Those few slots may well have contributed to 1-2 game losses over the day. Another possibility for damage & control is Breaking Point.

I ran a close approximation of the deck Saturday & went 3-4. I lost to U/W Fish, Gro (run by Ian, the tourney winner), Vial Goblins in 3 (somehow....) and the one kid running 2 Land Belcher....why me? I beat Landstill, Sorcery speed Solidarity, and R/W Astroglide (in 4 games) :cool:

I don't feel bad about Belcher, that is an autoloss unless he Spoils himself down far enough (1 more....) or has a stroke. I'm not sure what I did wrong against Brolio playing Vial Goblins, but it is possible the deck needs some more creature control elements (I ran 2x Flamebreak maindeck, did not show up consistently). Unfortunately, it seems that when they get a nuts draw, you have to be whacking critters - Turn 1 Lackey, Warchief if he brings friends (hasty Piledriver comes to mind....). I have the nagging feeling that I should beat Vial Goblins much of the time, but I am unsure of exactly what went wrong...

U/W tempo based aggro-control was a nightmare. They completely took me out of my gameplan by forcing me to wait on burn or walk into Daze, to deal with critters that would otherwise get equipped with shit that is very bad for me (if I could), counter my plans, Stifle my Wasteland (every time...sigh), and then either SoFI/Jitte something pro-red (or left....) or drop threshholded Enforcer & Werebear (damn Gro - 2 turn clock....). Ian also cast Armageddon in Game 2 & recovered faster than me. Of course I drew no land but did draw the Fireblasts...... What is the right approach to U/x - usually white, based aggro-control?

[bigbear102]

The goblin matchup is a toss-up. You need to draw Pyro/FlameBreak to keep them in check and then you should roll over them.

I have yet to test against gro or anything of the sort yet. Fish is an autowin, that is about the closest thing i have tested i guess. I believe that had you had the cards you were missing it may have made a big difference, as Chain and Fork do well over 10 damage in a game normally. I am glad to see that someone at least ran this, I soooo wish i could have been there.

[scrumdogg]

So educate me, oh wise one, because Gro was never in any danger from me and the U/W Fish matchup, while tight, was in his favor (as we played) both games. Share your techniques/approaches for dealing with Fish. Perhaps Zephyrus (my Fish opponent) will chime in on the dialogue. I have a friend going to Philly that I will be handing this deck to (hopefully long before that...) that I would like to do well. He is a good guy & this fits his play style, but he is not a complex player, ya know? Help me help him (and myself when I run it again....)

[Zephyrus]

I think the biggest thing in that match came down to two cards: Chill, and Sword of Fire and Ice. With Chill on the table, Burn becomes slowed to the point where Fish's onslaught of critters is capable of overwhelming it. Thing is, Burn has a hard time dealing with the SoFI. Pretty much the only thing burn can hope to do against that card is either burn the critter in response to the equip, or somehow out-race 5 (or 6) to the dome a turn plus a Curiosity effect. Pretty much, Scrumdogg, my entire game plan was to just chump with my life total, force of will the really scary spells like Price of Progress, drop the sword, and win with it. With the curve your deck runs at, Daze is a hard counter 90% of the time (especially with chill on the board). Basically, counters and potential sword-targets absorb enough of your burn to keep me alive until SoFI takes it. Plus, because you play no permanent sources of damage (your factories are answered by my factory-wastelands), Standstill gives me the power to completely overwhelm you with card advantage.

The problem is, though, unless I have multiple chill online while I'm doing that, Burn still can pull out the win in those situations with the retarded stuff like double fireblast or fireblast-fork (which you did do to me, Scrum, but I had the daze for your fork and you neglected to float mana from the 2 mountains fireblast ate, which left you tapped out) while I don't draw the counters.

[Anonymous]

The goblin matchup is a toss-up. You need to draw Pyro/FlameBreak to keep them in check and then you should roll over them.
I'm not so sure. I played CA a few times with my crappy(Still waiting to get Chain lightnings, Lavamancers and Forks) burn deck and lost even after dropping a flamebreak.

My problem was I burned off his creatures instead of aiming the burn at his head and breaking. My question is this:
When is the opprotune time to play a mass removal spell vs. Goblins?
The turn after they beat your face in for 16-17, or when they have Lacky, PD and maybe a smaller goblin?

[troopatroop]

If you need to, burn PDs and WCs. Those are the only exceptions. Going straight to the dome is most definetly the best option, as you can race them easily.

[Anonymous]

I think you're forgetting lackeys... or would mogg fanatic handle those?

[scrumdogg]

Lackey type critters would be one of the best arguments for keeping Fanatics in the deck. I ran zero creatures at BA II and the Mogg Crack Addicts might have made a significant difference. They are a fairly crappy burn spell (per se) but their ability to gum up the board and slow creatures makes everything else in the deck better (and better at what it does...)

[Zephyrus]

Agreed, Mogg fanatic is, IMO, just too good utility to not run in the main. It may not be 3 damage, but it knocks out lackeys, v.mage prodigy (my mind's still set on fish-mode, excuse me), Rofellos and other nasty stuff, plus it can usually beat for 1 or 2 (maybe even 3) damage if dropped 1st turn.

[bigbear102]

Ok, first things first.

Scrumm, I believe part of our testing differences may be due to the fact that Fish has probably 100 million different builds. I have yet to test the U/W build, so maybe results will change. In the GRO matchup Wasteland is the shit, for all of you who don't play it, you will probably lose. PoP is the other key card. When you can waste their lands, and still consistently PoP for 6, I don't see how you can lose, especially w/ Fork/Fireblast backup. Chill still needs to be dealt with. My current strategy is to blow them away game 1, then steal one of the next 2 (though this isn't the best strategy, Burn is the one deck that you can rely on to pull it off).

I would also tell your friend that he needs to play the deck as much as possible. Although the deck sometimes runs itself, you do need to know how to play it. Knowing what creatures to kill and when to kill them is key in the aggro matchup. Control is easy, straight to the dome every time. I believe it would be best to just tell him to go to the head as much as possible. If he plays the deck enough he will learn what he needs to kill. The only matchup where killing their creatures is necessary is goblins for the most part (a Meddling Mage can be annoying too), so testing against goblins is very important for new players (especially since I believe they will be heavily played, being staples in both extended and vintage they are very portable for those players). Sometimes if you have the nuts, just go to the dome, because there are very few surprises from goblins. 99% of the time if you have the 20 points it is going to go through unchecked. Other times you need to play a bit slower and try to kill their key cards (Lackey, PD, WC, SGC).

Fanatic is amazing against goblins. I love him in this matchup. He goes 2for1 a lot, basically giving you a timewalk which is huge in this match.


I have also edited my list, from the list on the first page, I went:

-3 Browbeat
+2 Flamebreak
+1 Fork

I don't really like Browbeat yet. I'm still testing it, but it really hasn't proven itself. I will play it this week in the tourney to see if it can shine, if my testing doesn't show that it slows me down before then.

The board now looks like this:

3 Anarchy
3 Sirocco
3 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Red Elemental Blast (Helps against Chill)
1 Flamebreak
3 Crash (Chalice ruins your day)

[Zephyrus]

Wait, why is nailing Meddling Mage important? Considering every spell in the deck goes to the dome, stopping 4 of them really shouldn't matter that much. I can't even count the number of times I'd mage for burn spell A, and my opponent would kill it with burn spell B, then throw A, C, D, E, and F at my head.

[Sims]

Wait, why is nailing Meddling Mage important? Considering every spell in the deck goes to the dome, stopping 4 of them really shouldn't matter that much. I can't even count the number of times I'd mage for burn spell A, and my opponent would kill it with burn spell B, then throw A, C, D, E, and F at my head.
Killing the mage cuts down on dead topdecks. If you leave the mage when it's on Bolt, Murphy's law says you'll draw all of your bolts and can't cast them. Using a Chain or Magma Jet on a Mage frees up your Bolts and makes them "not-dead" draws.

[Slay]

It's also _very_ important to note that killing a mage with a two damage spell means you get to throw an extra damage to the head.
-Slay

[Zephyrus]

Murphy's Laws work both ways, though. Stastically, I could see it making a difference, but I don't think it's really that significant of one.

[bigbear102]

Ok, I wasn't saying that Mage was really a problem, if your opponent is stupid and names Lightning Bolt, then just send about 30 to his dome with PoP,Fork, Fireblast (nonbasics rule in gro!). If your opponent is smart, then you bolt the mage (or any other 2-3 damage spell) and send PoP,Fork, Fireblast to the dome. Mage isn't really a huge problem, it was just an example of the few creatures you may need to kill. I'm really not too worried about it.

The main problem I am worried about now is Chill. Now if they drop a Mage naming REB with chill, then the mage is a big problem. So essentially we need to find out if chill is a big enough threat to board more spots for (I know it is a huge threat, but the question is will enough decks pack it so that we have to dedicate more slots to it), of if we can just hope to smash face game 1 and then hopefully not get chilly games 2-3.

[MasterBlaster]

I'm starting to build a burn deck and I have a few questions.

1. Why isn't Ball Lightning played? Seems like a solid turn 3 play to me.

2. Is Fork considered essential to the deck's strategy, or can it be dropped without affecting the decks speed?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Ball Lightning is generally agreed on as being bad as it opens you up to creature removal. This deck doesn't want any creatures, except possibly ones that can sac for damage (Fanatic).


Thought; Chill seems like the worst card for this deck, going online fast and preventing you from making much headway. I've been considering Mishra's Factory as a sideboard option. It's good against Chill in multiple ways; providing a repeatable source of damage under the card, and also upping your light mana count, allowing you to build up enough mana to actually get around to casting some of your spells.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Has anyone considered a color switch in board? If a few fetches are main decked you could easily get away with sticking 2 plateau and some disenchant effects/cheep critters in SB. 2 isomaru and 3-4 savanah lions make for great beaters, especially if all of your opponent's removal was sided out game 1. I also suggest this because the things that really seem to screw this deck over are enchantments (Cop red, chill, warmth). Sure, those all get nailed by sulfuric vortex, but what is the chance of getting that past a counter wall?

2 plateau
2 isomaru
3 savanah lions
4 disenchant
2 sulfuric vortex
2 crash

This SB just seems like it could give your opponent more of a smack in the face that they never expected game 2, which seems a much better idea than trying to steal one of the 2nd or 3d games.

[t3h.sWaRm]

This really isn't big but if you were to do that I would put 4x Lions and 1x Isomaru because if they sided out their removal it doesn't really matter and I'd hate drawing 2 Isomaru's in a game if they have no way of dealing with the 1st one.

[GRAH]

Isamaru and Savannah Lions are not beaters. Your burns do more damage than them in total, and they still open you up to creature removal. Plus, they take up needed spaces.

[Slay]

I'd rather open up a hand with 2 REB than one with a savannah lions. It's just not how burn plays its game.
-Slay

[bigbear102]

The only reason that you would put white in the board is for Disenchant, and even then I would go with green so that you could use Wooded Foothills and Gaea's Blessing.

Also, I don't think you understand the power of this deck when it comes to stealing games. I know it sounds like a bad strategy, but it actually does work quite well. The deck can goldfish turn 4, turn 3 against something with lots of nonbasics and the nuts. Also, with 4 Fork, any deck that casts Chill, you can copy their draw spells. It may cost more, but your cards will probably be better anyway.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

@ GRAH:

Isamaru and Savannah Lions are not beaters. Your burns do more damage than them in total, and they still open you up to creature removal. Plus, they take up needed spaces.

I think you missed the point. They are in your SB. In theory, after game 1 they side out all removal, as it is useless against you. You side in some of these cheep white critters and procede to beat face with them.

@ everyone else:

let's look at this objectively. A burn spell at pretty much most does 4 damage. A savanah lions can do much more than that with no mana invested after the initial W, letting you shoot burn at your opponent's face. Admittedly, this transitional SB won't be viable against all decks, but will add another strong dimension to your game if your up against some deck with heavy control or one that plays very few creatures.

@ BigBear,
I am very much aware of burn's ability to steal games, having been on the recieving end many-a-time. I merely suggest this as it may help to reduce the distance you are from loosing the match during the 2nd-3d games. If you don't like it, that's cool, but i think it is a real possibility and diserves a little testing (that i will be delighted to do).

[:blues:]]'>

[GRAH]

You side in some of these cheep white critters and procede to beat face with them.
Except that none of them are terribly good beatsticks, and even if they WERE better than your burn, they're not worth the mana inconsistency and vulnerability to Wasteland.

[Zilla]

If you were going to splash for weenie beaters, there'd be no reason not to do it in the maindeck, and there'd definitely be no reason not to run green over white, since Kird Ape is > both Lions and Isamaru. In the end though, you don't gain anything overly spectacular from adding beatsticks, since it just makes your opponent's creature removal good, which sucks.

[xenoq]

Adding beaters takes this deck in a whole new direction, which I'm pretty sure this thread is not about. This is about straight to the dome burn, not beatsticks.

I still advocate Grim Lavamancer. He's a badass.

[Zilla]

Agreed. Burn + Creatures = Sligh, and that's not what we're discussing here. I still dislike Lavamancer. He's slow, easy to remove, and makes your opponent's dead cards not dead. H8. In almost every circumstance I'd rather have straight up Burn. I tested him again recently, and kept coming to the same conclusion. On another note, I've been testing Ankh again recently and really liking them, despite vaguely recalling that they weren't working very well in an older build. Wierd.

[Eldariel]

How about running Sandstone Needle in the landbase? It gives you 4 mana in 3 turns and while it burns out after that, you should have enough mana to go lethal by then. It seems like it could accelerate your plays nicely, as you don't really care whether you burn for 3 turn 1 and 3 turn 2, or 6 turn 2. Not to mention, it makes Fork and the like much easier to cast. Oh, and how about a single Shivan Gorge and 4 Barbarian Rings? Shivan Gorge can steal games against slower decks (read: Landstill) as you can drop them to death with an uncounterable damage source. And Barbarian Ring is just nuts as it gives you extra burn that also operates as land.

Flamebreak seems like a natural inclusion in the main, since it burns for 3 to the head and in addition, generally clears the board in weenie match-ups. One additional nice option seems to be Glacial Chasm, which would buy you enough time to win any creature-based match-up before you die to the upkeep (which you can just stop paying anyways). Also, if cardtypes vary as suggested here, Magma Jet would of course help in finding whatever you happen to need at any given point. It would help to find those sideboarded cards, those sweepers, that extra land, whatever you happen to need. Of course, this all would somewhat weaken Fireblasts, which'd of course need to be taken into account when planning the manabase.

[scrumdogg]

Shivan Gorge, meet Wasteland...Wasteland, meet Shivan Gorge...Gorge? Where did ya go Gorge? Hmmm...could have sworn it was around here somewhere...oh well, gg.

The problem with the non-basic lands (besides Wasteland - which is huge & damage to self - which adds up quickly, including from yourself if you run Price of Progress) is that A) they do not sac to give you the Fork/Fireblast finishing move B) they often have some othe minor disadvantage - CIPT, blow up after certain amount of use, Legendary (and Wastelandable + damage to self bear repeating). Glacial Chasm is a possibility, but it would almost have to be sideboarded, since it is dead in so many matchups from either lack of need or Wasteland. Does it deserve a slot in the sideboard? Not making a judgement, I am asking that as a serious question, is it agood play against the Gro/Fish/Goblin decks that WILL be at Philly?

I'm liking Flamebreak more and more, I am going to try 3 maindeck as it is never dead, only suboptimal in some matchups (which I can live with, given the Card Quality of the rest of the deck) and seems necessary given the likelihood of seeing Vial Goblins, Sligh, etc etc at major events as the most efficient budget decks tend to revolve around small, fast, inexpensive beaters. Vial Goblins is also an easy & comfortable port for any Extended player + a DTB which = massive play in Philly, imo. Fanatics go back in (removing them from my attempt was a hideous mistake) although Lavamancer just activates otherwise dead cards my opponent drew in despair. If Lavamancer makes a difference - you were going to win that game anyway.

[bigbear102]

Ok, time to lay the smackdown:

If you are worried about the Landstill matchup, PLAY IT!!! You will win almost every time. I have yet to lost a SINGLE GAME to the deck. Adding nonbasics to improve an already amazing matchup is not what I would do. In response to other nonbasics, I refer you to Scrumdogg and agree with him wholeheartedly.

@ Ankh: I agree that Ankh is an amazing card. The question I ask is what matchups will it help you in? My testing shows that it hoses control, which is not needed. It does help against solidarity and their fetches. The other combo decks don't play enough land, and aggro doesn't need to play much. The aggro matchup is where I didn't like it. Against goblins they can already race you, and hurting yourself is not a good idea.

I feel I need to address Flame Rift now: This card damages you also, but on your own terms. If it will kill you, then don't play it, but normally you can cast it during your turn along with other spells to kill them because goblins don't do much in the way of instants. Also, you can draw an otherwise lost game.

[Zilla]

If Lavamancer makes a difference - you were going to win that game anyway.
Quoted for truth. That perfectly summates my feelings about the card. If it's an actual threat, nearly any competent opponent should have an answer to it. If they can't, you're already winning. I know that this is addressed in extremes, but in most cases, I'd rather have unconditional damage that can go straight to the dome.

@Bigbear:

I hear you on Ankh. I've been considering the same thing as well, with regards to your comments about its relative weakness in the aggro matchup. However, while I agree that control is typically a very strong matchup for you, it can become difficult after SB, when you may be facing Pulse of the Fields, Exalted Angel, CoP:Red, and the like, and recurring damage can be a boon here. It's also strong against decks like MBC or MWC, which absolutely require a land drop every turn to win. Unlike blue-based control, these decks don't necessarily scoop it up to you. MBC has Consume Spirit to keep it on its feet, and MWC has RoP:Red. Ankh is strong in both these matchups. Further, Ankh makes your Wastelands (if you're running them) not only disruption, but damaging, as they force your opponent to play more lands.

In any case, the Ankh may be a meta choice. In an all-aggro meta, it may not be worth it. Then again, lots of aggro (like RGSA and The Rock) require tons of mana to operate, and I suspect the Ankh will likely be strong here as well. It's possible that they'd be better as Flamebreak or Sulfuric Vortex, but it will take more testing to know for sure.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Meh. Tried out the transformational SB today and was not impressed. Not that it didn't work, but that it wasn't all that I expected. Just trying out a new idea, they're allowed to not work out, right?

On another note, i also tried out flamebreak today and believe that it was the reason i won the tournament. It was beautiful, it wiped the board clean of all little beaters and did damage(at one point a piledriver, matron, seige gang commander,3 counters, and a king. The 3 damage took him into fireblast range, it was beautiful).

that's my 2 cents worth, see you all next post,

C.

[bigbear102]

KWR: How many Breaks did you run main? What was your board like, and what decks did you play against. Playtesting cards is a must for this deck, and the more information we have about how and why they worked the better. I'm glad to see that you have had success with this, it seems to be on fire (get it.... on fire.... oh I crack myself up). Anyways, post some more details about the tournament, not necessarily a report, just what decks you did well against and anything you thought could be adjusted in the deck to make some matchups better.

[Zilla]

I've been running Flamebreak in the main is well. It flat-out wins games against goblins. I keep going back and forth between 3 and 4 maindeck. Because Magma Jet can "draw" you into them, and you don't typically want to see them in multiples, 3 is probably the correct number. However, it is an absolutely vital tool in beating goblins. If you don't have one by turn 3 or 4, you're likely not going to beat them. Because of that, 4 may be the right number. I'd be inclined to say 3 in main, and possibly 1 in the side will work fine.

Note, however, that I've been running 20 Mountains straight up, which makes for consistent RRR by turn 3 in conjunction with Magma Jet. Without a consistent way to get RRR by turn 3, Flamebreak may be subpar. In other words, if you're running Wastes or Factories or even Rings (because of their vulnerability to Waste), Flamebreak may not be as solid an answer. Earthquake might be a better choice in builds running non-basics or less than 20 red sources. Against goblins, it's as fast as Flamebreak, since you only really need to be dealing 2 damage. Earthquake is theoretically weaker than Flamebreak against decks packing regenerating threats like Troll Ascetic, but then again, it might be stronger in the late game, since it can remove their bigger threats as well.

[bigbear102]

Earthquake could be an interesting addition to the deck. I don't think I could take out the Wastes, at least not in the Cuse meta. I am playing the deck tomorrow, so I should have some more info on how it works and what cards in the SB are useful.

[scrumdogg]

Earthquake has the advantage of doing variable amounts of damage & using colorless (Wasteland) mana. It doesn't hit fliers, but neither does Flamebreak. My only concern about Earthquake (and Jet can place it on the bottom in matchups where you don't need/want it) is the matchups with Troll. I realize that we are faster than most SotF builds, but if Troll ever picks up a Jitte, it needs to die, asap. My other concern, for both cards, is their inability to A) hit fliers B) do anything to pro-red guys. Would Breaking Point be worth having as a dead draw vs. combo instead as this is exactly the type of deck in which it's 'either-or' condition would shine? Even in the decks with lifegain potential, losing 6 immediately is a huge percentage of their life total.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Sorry about the lack of info, it was late and i just wanted to toss that out there before i forgot entirely. In any case, i ran 3 flamebreaks, but looking through the retrospect-a-scope, it almost certanly should have been 4. Most of my meta is heavy creature based aggro mixed in with landstills. Last night was no exception as i played one landstill, 1 goblins, 1 enchantress, 2 random R/G aggro decks, and a sliver deck(?).

In past experience, goblins just run over this deck. Such was not the case with the inclusion of flamebreak. By clearing the board turn 3, i bought enough time to finish off thier measly life total.
Against the landstill, you were right, i had no problems, but the SB switch made him look at me really funny and it was almost worth the slots.
The enchantress deck i played was geared more tword stopping critters with things like propoganda. It was run over easily, and the transformational SB also worked like a charm in this match.
Flamebreak was also the star of the show in the 2 R/G aggro matches i had to play, taking out ascetics, kird apes, and many other scary things. SB disenchant was surprisingly awesome in these matches, as the both played winter orb, SOfI, and Jittes.
Slivers...scrub match. No one really wants to read this do they?

C.

[t3h.sWaRm]

I've also been trying out the Breaking Point over Flamebreak and I like it better. They either lose all their creatures or take 6 damage. If all their creatures die then yay, no threats. If they take the 6 they will most probably be killed since it quite a bit of damage. Here's my list so far:

18x Mountain
2x Barbarian Ring

4x Lava Spike
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Chain Lightning
4x Magama Jet
4x Incinerate
3x Flame Rift
3x Chain of Plasma
3x Fork
3x Breaking Point
4x Fireblast
4x Browbeat

Also, do you guys think that:
-3 Chain of Plasma
-1 Incinerate or Flame Rift

+4 Glacial Ray

Could benefit the deck a little? The ability to splice onto a Lava Spike or another Glacial Ray seems pretty good but it could also slow the deck down a little, something you definately don't want to do to this deck. Has anyone tried this before? If so, was the splicing ability worth the minor(?) setback? I'll test it out and get back to you guys later.

[WiLdFiRe]

Glacial Ray is a no-no. In this deck, it's strictly worse than a shock because at any stage of the game its almost always better to throw burn at an opponents head. Just my 2c. Plus it's no good to fork if you're running that awful ;) card.

[scrumdogg]

I was running Glacial Ray and Lava Spike in my T2 G/R deck for a long time and the amount of time you can actually do 'neat splice tricks' is so minimal that having to run 2 damage for 2 mana spells that do not scry is NOT worth it. I would drop Chain of Plasma (which I tested & found uncastable too much of the time - they could throw it back & put me in danger, they didn't mind the discard or needed it, I was too low on life....to be fair I only had 2x Flamebreak & zero Fanatics while testing it...still). I would go
-3 Chain of Plasma
-1 Browbeat

+4 Fanatics

How has the lack of Wasteland been affecting the deck? Is the increased availability of red overcoming the inability to slow their tempo/screw with their manabase?

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Breaking point is nice, but it's dead against control. One of the reasons i like flamebreak so much is that it is at worst a horribly overpriced lava spike and at best a pyroclasm on steroids combined with a lava spike.

Glacial ray sucks. Don't play it.

I really like the idea of fanatics in this deck, mostly because they'll always be at least a shock, possibly more if your opponent doesn't do anything about him. Also the ability to have that one point of targeted damage could be nice to-for instance-take out an opposing whelder, activated conclave (this might be enough to make them not activate it giving you a few turns), or block and sac to kill an opposing piledriver. I like.

Scrumdogg wrote:

How has the lack of Wasteland been affecting the deck? Is the increased availability of red overcoming the inability to slow their tempo/screw with their manabase?

This is a point that i feel needs to be adressed. TO ME, wasteland seems as though it is as much of an obsticle to you in this deck as it is to the opposing player due to this deck's red hungry spells. If you were to run wastes, that means more mountains to compensate, that means lower threat density, and when this deck goes into topdeck mode, (which it almost always does) you don't want to be drawing lands. Wastelands also lack synergy with fireblast and if you're playing flamebreak, greatly decreace the chance that you will be able to play it by some reasonable point in the game. I think a solid manabase of 20-21 mountains is perfect for this deck, as it minimizes your ability to get wasted (with a manabase this light, it could be a real problem), and allows for almost 2/1 straight burn. Similar point with barbarian ring, it opens you up to wastes, damages you making you easier to race, and is unsynergistic with fireblast. The fact that it is colorless damage will be applicable very rarely, as most times you will be shooting face with it anyway.

Oh yeah, flame rift 0WnS0rS! Just don't forget to board them out for gobbos.

C.

[t3h.sWaRm]

I agree with KillerRabit about the lands in this deck. I'm thinking of removing 1 of the Barbarian Rings because they make opposing Wastelands useful more times than I would think. Ideally, you would want to play and sac it on the same turn and there is nothing you can do about it but I've seen 1 or even 2 in way too many starting hands(bad luck?).

About Fanatic, I don't think he belongs in this deck. First of all, most if not all of the burn is hitting the player, not their creatures. Attacking with the Fanatic would almost never do any damage. Can't attack? We can always chump block! He will surely kill a creature with his nifty ability! This, however, is why I believe Fanatic is useless in the deck. If the only thing you can do is block and hope to kill a valuable creature, why not just add another burn? You could argue that it could get 2 for 1 if your opponent is stupid, but then still I think Fire//Ice would be better. Lastly, the original point of making an opponents would-be dead card useful is never a good idea. In my eyes, Fanatic is suboptimal.

scrumdogg, you also removed a browbeat. Do you not like the card? I think its amazing since they almost always take the damage and 3 mana for 5 dmg isnt that bad. If they let you draw its either only because they would die if they took it. I think Browbeat is definately a clear 4 of in this deck.

Now the question is do the Chain of Plasmas need replacing? I believe that they are the best we have right now. Them throwing it back at you is a slight problem on more difficult matchups, but you can always throw it again since most of you burn would do the same thing anyway.

Now for Breaking Point. I love the card mostly since in my meta there are very few control decks. Breaking Point helps tremendously in almost every game I play. If your meta has more control than aggro then Flamebreak might be a better option for you.

[Anonymous]

The reason people play Mogg Fanatic is the same reason why some people play Lava Dart, it's damage that doubles as removal. I'm not starting a Lava Dart discussion, I'm just saying.
Fanatic is damage that can be spread out over many turns and if you tap out for a flurry of burn spells leaving them on life-support and you in top-deck mode, you would wan't Fanatic's ability to stop any threats that might screw up your game plan (lackeys and whatnot). As an attacker, Fanatics are not blocked because your opponent will not want to lose the blocking creature.
Also, do not doubt Fanatic's ability to block. If you are racing Goblins, and lethal damage is coming at you, you'd be regretting not playing Fanatics, trust me.

[scrumdogg]

Fanatic often screws up your opponent's combat math something fierce, and allows all of your actual burn to go to the dome. Flamebreak + Fanatic should allow you to keep your opponent from activating their game plan (they have one too, remember?) while getting some hits in. The fact that they can run for a while against combo or control (often getting in 3-4 on their own) is fine, but the ability to wipe out Birds, Elves, Lackeys, Disciples, Welders, small annoying blue Fishy critters or just chump insanely large Piledrivers, certain Reanimator targets, cantripped Steroid Dryads, or anything else putting your life total in jeopardy makes them insanely valuable.

I still think Wasteland is the right call in a vacuum, although it might not be a good call for Philly (depending upon how much of the field is expected to be Vial Goblins, mono G aggro beatz, bad G/R without Taigas cuz fetches don't count..., and Sui Black...or Belcher, in which the lands don't matter & they goldfish us at the moment....). 2x Barbarian Rings seems like the right number because you don't want it early. You want to drop it last, use it as soon as you need to because you have threshold, and finish - because topdecking a mountain Turn 4-5 is almost always disappointing, while the Ring is almost guaranteed damage. I wouldn't run both Rings and Wastes, it is a 1 or the other situation.

Browbeat is fine, don't get me wrong, but you want to keep the curve down in this deck. Browbeat is a card that can be played around (in a Daze heavy environent it costs R3 and sucks up your entire turn irregardless). You lose a lot of tempo playing Browbeat. Ideally you get it back if they give you the cards, next turn. A lot of decks do some silly things in 1 turn...... I think with the inclusions of the Flamebreaks/Breaking Points that 3x is the right number to not clog the 3cc spot in the deck.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

About Fanatic, I don't think he belongs in this deck.

Okay, this seems to be an area of some debate, so let's look at reasons people gave for hating fanatic (and ruthlesly make fun of those who end up disagreeing with me). If i missed anything here, tell me and i will rectify it.

Hates:
1.Opens you up to removal
2.Burn shoots face, not creatures so it can attack
3.slots would be better spent with more burn

Rebuttle:
1.What idiot tries to burn/swords/wrath a fanatic? In that matchup, your opponent is obviously so feeble of mind that he can not remember to breathe and you will therfore win when he is put on a stretcher and taken to the hospital.
2.True, but as has already been said, he makes an excellent chump blocker and acts as a fire and ice in that situation, dealing points to either one, two, or some combination of creatures and players. If he does get a few points in, he becomes a very valueable asset, and a threat that might be removal worthy.
3.True, but only if he is at his absolute worst. 2 attacks put him into the range of lightning bolt and more just make him even deadlier.

So i thik it boils down to personal preference, but for me, fanatic all the way.

C.

[t3h.sWaRm]

Ok, we'll leave Fanatic for personal preference.

Back to sideboards, mine looks like this right now:
4x Sirocco
4x Red Elemental Blast
4x Jackal Pup (for game 3 maybe :D )
2x Flamebreak(I run Breaking Point)
1x ??

What do your sideboards look like? I'm not sure what else to add.

[scrumdogg]

Jackal Pup? Interesting....against whom? Wouldn't this slot be better off as Anarchy (oops, may be I don't lose to Turn 2 CoP: Red....) and Sulfuric (damn I wish Baloth worked right why doesn't my Jitte or Exalted Angel function properly?) Vortex? The splash into G or W would also give you Naturalize/Disenchant instead of Anarchy...although Anarchy also answers Angels & Silver Knights & Worships & stuff (like Mom + True Believer...although Fanatic should have popped mom in the ass long long ago....).

[bigbear102]

Ok, so I said I was taking this to a tournament. I get there and was about to add Flamebreak when I heard that there would be an abundance of landstill, meaning that I wanted Wastes in the deck. At that point I remembered someone suggesting Earthquake, so I got some and used Earthquake instead of Flamebreak. This actually worked out quite well. I really like the card as it allows me to play anti-control and anti-aggro together (both maindeck).

On to the tourney.
Round one I lose to Jander playing u/w control (not landstill)
Game 1 I smash his face in. He tells me he expected that, and doesn't hope to win the match. Game 2 I am sitting in front of: Arcane Lab, CoP:Red, and lifeburst on a scepter.
Game 3: Turn 1 CoP:Red is very hard to race, especially when he goes for the damn stick burst thing again.

Round 2: Kadishack w/ gobbos:

Game 1 i beat him, Game 2 i lose ( i should have cast flame rift for the draw). Game 3 I lose to a bad hand and play errors. Earthquake was amazing in this matchup, but my multiple errors made up for that to give me my second loss.

Round 3 saw me draw 11 land against little kid land d, and in game 2 i topdecked magma jet to kill him, he showed me his hand, next turn he was gonna go triple seething song into dragon tyrant.

Round 4 I smashed control game 1, game 2 i beat him after he dropped double chill and an HONORABLE PASSAGE on an ISOCHRON SCEPTER!!!

Ok, so I crapped out, but I do highly endorse Wasteland/Earthquake in the deck.

My board consisted of:
3x Sulfuric Vortex
3x Sirocco
2x Tormod's Crypt (should have been REB)
3x Crash
3x Anarchy
and something I can't remember right now....

[scrumdogg]

How the hell did you win Round 4 Game 2??? Unless he dropped those cards Turns 4,5,6 and tapped out to do it...how? Wastelands are obviously needed in the Quse - home of the non-basic land & control, glad Earthquake worked although I don't see how it is any better against Landstill than Flamebreak in all honesty. Sounds like the environment is now prepared for you, which should be a great test of how good this deck really is. Any decent red deck can storm through an unprepared field. To win in an environment full of hate...let's see.

[GRAH]

I prefer Earthquake over Flamebreak, mostly because you can play it for 2 mana effectively. The lack of regeneration doesn't seem important. Troll Ascetic is the only playable creature with regeneration.

The thing is, I'm not sure if I'd want to play Wasteland anyway. P_R made a good point in his article about Big Arse when he wondered why less than 50% of people were playing them when 95% had Wasteable lands. The only argument I can see against it is that this deck can have a high red mana requirement.

Could it go in the SB, though? Perhaps.

[bigbear102]

@Scrum: I may have made it unclear in my explanation. What I meant was that I was going to take out the Wastes so that I could play Flamebreak, but when I found out there would be 3 landstills, I wanted to keep them in, so I switched to Earthquake. The quakes were not for against landstill, they were just playable w/ wastes.

@round 4 game 2: The control deck was VERY slow, and had no clock at the time. I had a Fanatic on board, and he was at about 7 when the Honorable Passage Stick came on. He got to 3 before he stopped my Fanatic beats, and then when he cast Parallax Tide, I responded to the removal of my lands with paying 4, saccing 1 to crash his stick. Then proceeded to pay 5 for bolt, then 5 for fanatic.

I didn't play Browbeat either. I still don't really like it. I have tested it a lot, and it just seems sub-par to me. My third turn is spent using the burn that I didn't use turn 2 while I was casting Magma Jet. With as much hate as there is around here though, maybe I should play it.

I also played my Source Tourney IV match yesterday. This deck packs it to turboland games 2-3. He had 2x Lifegift and 2x Zuran Orb/Crucible. I baited a counter w/ fireblast before I laid my Vortex, then he countered it. Then he countered another the next turn. I think I may add Ankh back in the deck. There were 2 turboland and 3 control in the tourney sunday, so it may not be a bad choice.


On another note, I think this deck may have as high of a G1 win percentage as Dragon did last year. I don't believe I have lost G1 yet, at all. I may be wrong, but if I am, I haven't lost it more than once.

[Nightmare]

Ankh is definately at least a strong SB consideration, especially against Turboland and Landstill. If nothing else, its another Must Counter, in a deck where for the most part, they can just let cards fly by their heads until theyre low on life.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

I agree, ankh does not seem strong enough against enough decks to warrant a MB slot, but it definately has it's purpous in this deck. To the SB it goes!

I went down to our local store for a whil yesterday and got to playtest against an odd deck, Kobolds! This was a funny matchup, as his win condition was a fireball. He caught me tapped out game 1, but games 2 and 3 i managed to simply fork it back at his face. This has sealed the deal for me fork wise, as it has proven it's worth so many times it's not even funny.

[Drkdstryer]

About the Ankh: If you run Ankh, there is almost NO REASON not to run Shrapnel Blast at that point. I run Ankh almost because of Shrap at this point (and because it's still damn good). Seriously though, they have such good synergy- in a vacuum, they are both subpar, but when you have 4 Ankhs and 6 artifact lands (4 Furnace 2 Citadel or 3/3 if you fear Wasteland that much) Shrap is rarely dead. I think it's just one of the best burn spells ever - seriously guys, 5 for 1R is so good I'm really suprised that noone considers it anymore.

And besides... if you manage to Fork a Shrap, there is no way you should lose :D

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Shrap is not considered simply because it is a conditional.

Incinerate is the same mana cost, but for 3 damage and is played as a 4-of in all of our builds. This is because it is always useful (doesn't need another card to work well) and doesn't in the best case scenareo, eat land. (4 fireblasts are hard to fuel with such a light manabase and are much better than schrap simply because they can be cast w/o mana.) Also, the inclusion of artifact lands both make us more vulnerable to wastes and getting color screwed (the reason I stopped running waste). As for blasting an ankh, sure as a finisher, but there are so many other spells that do similar amounts of damage that the counter-risk is just not worth it.

[frogboy]

Re: Shrapnel Blast

See: Fireblast.

[bigbear102]

We have had the shrap blast discussion before, and have decided that is is a situational spell that opens you up to A LOT of hate. It takes disenchant, waste, disk, naturalize, and then some. Not only does it open you up to the hate, it messes with your mana base, and then can stop you from casting it by destroying your artifacts (assuming you are not running a completely useless bad card...).

The real discussion should be on whether or not ankh is good enough for the maindeck or whether it is a board card, or even worth it at all. Control is already good, turboland is bad. Those are the matchups it will shine in. What would we change to make the deck compatible with it?

[Zilla]

I wouldn't necessarily call Turboland bad. It's raceable pre-board, and consistently so after board if you bring in REB. In any case, I think it's safe to say that in most metas (read: aggro-heavy ones) Flamebreak or Earthquake should be played in the main over Ankh. In certain metas (read: more control/combo oriented), Ankh would be better in the main. In a meta with a lot of aggro, but also a lot of varying kinds of control (patricularly MWC, MBC, Turboland) Ankh is a solid SB choice, because those decks absolutely require constant land drops to function properly.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

For my meta, i've decided on 3 flamebreak MB, with 3 ankh SB for my always annoying control matchups. Admittedly, ankh is one of my most frequently swapped in cards, but i do think it's place is in the SB.
I also believe that the 2 can pretty much be switched back and forth, depending on what you expect to see at any given tournament. (For me, that means Ankh in clifton, Flamebreak in Glens Falls :D )

Has anyone had any other playtest results with fanatic? I always find that it is a great first turn play, but at any later time, he is useless. I'm thinking of switching him down to 3 and upping the flamebreaks to 4.

C.

[Eldariel]

I prefer Earthquake over Flamebreak, mostly because you can play it for 2 mana effectively. The lack of regeneration doesn't seem important. Troll Ascetic is the only playable creature with regeneration.
I'd make a bold claim that River Boa is quite playable too. As for Troll itself, scooping to an active troll might not exactly be the best plan either. The fact that you can't target him means that Flamebreak is your only weapon against it, better make that weapon count. Earthquake can't be counted on to wipe it out, Flamebreak can.

[bigbear102]

Eldariel: First of all, River Boa does not see play in any competitive deck at the moment, and even if it did, they play it on turn 2 and Earthquake (or any other card in the deck) can kill it. It can also be targeted in response to an attack so that they have to tap it.

Also: Please read the rest of the topic before you post opinions on cards. Scooping to Troll doesn't normally happen. We kill on turn 4-5. The only race that really needs to be worried about is Goblins, or if you have a subpar hand. Flamebreak is normally a better call if you have all mountains, but with Wastes it can't be played.


On to other things: Where could Ankh fit in the board?

Crash is the most cuttable card in my board, but I don't like losing to a Chalice set at 1. Any ideas?

I am also going to try something that I did in my OLD burn deck a couple of years ago. I am going to try a white splash for CoP:Red and disenchant in the board. It used to work a long time ago when the burn mirror was prevalent, and I want to see how it pans out with goblins, I'll post results later.

[GRAH]

Do you really see Chalice enough to warrant 3 spaces dedicated against it alone? I know I don't.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

To be perfectly honest, i've seen chalice once outside of vintage. That was when i played it in landstill's SB expecting to see a LOT of burn decks. I don't think it warrents SB slots, especially 3 unitaskers.


I am also going to try something that I did in my OLD burn deck a couple of years ago. I am going to try a white splash for CoP:Red and disenchant in the board. It used to work a long time ago when the burn mirror was prevalent, and I want to see how it pans out with goblins, I'll post results later.

Having tried that about a week ago, i reccomend it heavily. I don't know about the COP, but disenchant is certainly awesome. Adding white allows you a disgusting amount of SB options, absolutely none of which pop into mind right now, but i'm sure i will edit them in if i think of them...is that right? My brain hurts...

C.

[scrumdogg]

Disenchant is good vs Chill (especially if you can't REB it on the stack...), vs SotF, vs Solitary Confinement, vs that damn Jitte or SoFI and it also kills CoTV set to anything other than 2 (which would be the wrong call for the CoTV player anyway....). CoP: Red is a finisher in the mirror (assuming they didn't go with the same plan) ??? and should be good versus Goblins.

Would that make the manabase
-4 Wasteland (with Flamebreak added)
or
-4 mountain (with Earthquake added)
+4 Plateau?
would there be fetches involved now?

As for the Troll debate, Troll sees a decent amount of play. It is negligible by himslef but as soon as he licks up a Jitte, this deck puts whimpering on the stack. Since any competent green deck can cast troll on Turn 2 & cast plus equip Jitte & swing Turn 3, THAT is a concern. That is a 2 turn window to play Flamebreak (if they know you have earthquake they wait an extra turn to equip and you have to Quake for 2 on Turn 2-3 because otherwise they always have regen mana).

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

I dunno if i would screa with my MB mana base too much. I would probably play 3 plateau SB and incorporate 6-7 fetches main and simply sub out mountains.

Manabase (for me at least)
14 mountain
4 bloodstained mire'
3 wooded foothills

SB
4 disenchant
3 plateau
3 sulfuric vortex
3 scoricco
2 REB

I don't expect to see much in the way of gobbos or mirror, but if i did, -2 REB, -1 scoricco +3 COP:red

C.

[Anonymous]

Problem is Ankh now reams you, while otherwise it would be a tool against decks packing tons of land and lots of fetches.

[Zilla]

@ River Boa:

No one plays it. If they do, it's still killable turn 2, and always killable with an Incinerate. More importantly, against nearly every aggro matchup in the format (with the exception of Goblins and some decks packing Jitte), each and every burn spell should be going to the dome. You will be able to race nearly every other aggro deck in this fashion.

@ The white splash:

It makes Ankh unplayable main or board, and Pithing Needle does nearly everything white does for you. It shuts down CoP:Red, it shuts down Survival, it shuts down Jitte, and it even shuts down Troll regeneration. One of the few things Scrumm mentioned that white does for you is CoP:Red in the mirror, which a smart opponent can shut down with a Needle of their own. It will also make it easier to remove Chill, but Chill only tends to appear in a metagame which has faced and has hence prepared itself for the Burn matchup. In my experience, once this has occurred, it's a good time to stop playing Burn until the hate goes away. Trying to out-control prepared control decks with a purely aggro deck nearly always fails, because you must significantly dilute your threatbase to do so successfully and with any degree of consistency. In so doing, you force yourself into the dreaded long game, where, despite your ability to have controlled the early game, control will catch up to you.

In short, Burn in an unprepared meta is savage beats. As soon as people are accustomed enough to your presence to be running Chill in the side, you are likely to start losing a lot of your otherwise positive matchups.

@Chalice:

No one plays it. Even when they do, it's nearly always for 1, which, while it can be a minor setback, really isn't that bad for you. Chalice at 2 can be crippling, but most decks which play Chalice can't afford to set it at 2, as the majority of their own spells tend to be at that cc as well. It's a threat to Goblin Sligh (not Vial, but actual Sligh), but not really at all to Burn. I wouldn't waste SB slots for it.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

@Godzilla:
You were right about the prepared meta thing.

That was probably the most miserable thursday night tournament i've ever played (0-3!). Everyone was packing burn hate in some form. Time to switch back to landstill for a while. :angry:

This doesn't diserve a report. I loose to chill and COP:red something hardcore.

C.

[GRAH]

I tested against WildFire playing UW Landstill for a couple games with this deck. The matchup is absolutely great (even though he was rather tired). The fact that they maindeck at least 10 cards which are totally dead is quite a helpful factor. Even after sideboarding, the Ankhs came in, I had two by turn 3, and he was smoked.

This deck's good matchups against Landstill and Goblins seem to make it a viable contender.

[boom]

In regards to the splashing colors, has anyone thought about Black? Preemptively pick off a Chill with Duress or Therapy, having 8 means you get to almost always open up with one of the two. Also, having allied colors means that fetching for basics wont be too hard. Adding black also opens up to hand refillers such as Skeletal Scrying.

[bigbear102]

A black splash would not help this deck AT ALL. The splash would completely change the deck. Taking out 8 burn spells for 8 discard spells would decrease the threat base was too much. There are almost no sideboard cards in black that will help the bad matchups, except for plague against goblins, and in that matchup you now have 8 dead cards maindeck. The point of this deck is complete redundancy. If they stop one spell, then take another. Having 8 cards that are not redundant is not going to help the deck much.

If you want to splash an allied color, green is 100 times better, because it has naturalize. Naturalize is the card that can solve almost all of the decks problems. Also, if you are using fetches, you don't want basics of the splash color anyway, because they can not be fireblasted for the win, and they limit your ability to cast Fork and multiple red spells in one turn (usually how I end the game).

[GRAH]

Alright, I took this:


20 Mountain
4 Mogg Fanatic
3 Flamebreak
3 Browbeat
3 Fork
3 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Magma Jet
4 Chain Lightning
4 Incinerate

SB:
3 Sulfuric Vortex
4 Red Elemental Blast
4 Ankh of Mishra
3 Anarchy
1 Flamebreak

to a Magic-League master and got 4-1 (my only loss was from a severe misplay) before I dropped because I had to go. I won vs. 2 Goblins, Dryad Sligh, and Aluren. I wouldn't splash anything.

[Zilla]

Excepting the SB, that list is identical to my current build, Grah, except that I run the 4th Flamebreak and 4th Broawbeat, and a single Chain of Plasma over the 3 PoPs, simply because there are too many mono-colored decks in my meta to make it consistent enough to be worthwhile.

In any case, it's my opinion that that's goddamn close to an ideal Burn list, and I say this from having been tinkering with the goddamned archetype in this format for over two years.

[GRAH]

Yeah. The dominant deck at M-L is R/w Vial Gobbos with Wastelands and Plateaus, making PoP good MDed. That space is meta-dependent tho. I don't like having more than 3 Browbeat. I don't like drawing multiples.

Fanatic is a great card here, though. I said to drop it before, but I've found it to be just plain excellent.

[FallenOmnipotent]

What do you guys think of Flame Rift. It's like a bad lava spike...however, it's alota damage.

[Zilla]

What do you guys think of Flame Rift. It's like a bad lava spike...however, it's alota damage.
If you're really interested in the archetype, I recommend you read this thread in its entirety. Flame Rift is discussed quite a bit a few pages back.

[FallenOmnipotent]

OK, i went back and read the pages. (To be honest, not word for word.)

According to what I hear, flamerift is quite favored. I just didn't see it on GRAH's deck list, so I was a bit confused. I guess he's runing PoP over them

[Zilla]

It's really sort of undecided. I'm personally not a fan. As I said, I'd be running the 4th Flamebreak and Browbeat in GRAH's list, leaving only one open slot. That could be PoP, Chain of Plasma, Flame Rift, or even Sulfuric Vortex. My preference would actually be Chain of Plasma, simply because it's an instant, and it's not likely to hurt me along with my opponent. Contrary to popular belief, a lot of other decks are as fast and aggressive as you are; the four damage from Rift can often give your opponent the boost they need to win the race, from my experience.

[Lord of the Pit]

I've mentioned Chain of Plasma and Guerrilla Tactics in a Sligh thread before. It has the potential to do 10 damage for two mana (and -1 card advantage, your opponent discarding one).

Of course, this is far from optimal, as neither card is very powerful on its own, and it is completely predicated by the actions of your opponent. For this reason, I rejected runing Chain/Tactics in Sligh. However, several factors might warrant its inclusion in burn.

1) A critical threshhold of burn. In a sense, burn is highly synergistic--the individual burn cards throughout the deck themselves might be weak (card disadvantage) by themselves, but the life resource becomes increasingly important the more damage one takes. That is to say, seven Lightning Bolts (or other variants) form the ultimate combo. For that reason, once one includes the strong burn cards (Lightning Bolt, Chain Lightning, Incinerate, Magma Jet, Fireblast, Lava Spike, etc.), it becomes increasingly worth it to dig into the second-tier of burn cards.
2) Because of the high concentration of burns, there are relatively few creatures in the deck. No need to worry about your Chain Plasma getting sent back on your Jackal Pup.
3) What second-tier cards would one consider? Price of Progress is godly in some metagames, but not in others. Flame Rift is highly inflexible, and is 4 damage to you even if your opponent doesn't discard.
4) In Sligh, the "combo" usually does not materialize in the course of the game. You might draw into either the Chains or the Tactics, but since the strategy is to unload as quickly as possible, you might rarely have both cards in the hand together. Couple that with the relatively quick nature of the games, you rarely get far enough into your library. However, with the inclusion of four Browbeats and four Magma Jets, this "combo" might actually be reasonable.

In any case, if one does run Chain of Plasma (which I consider the stronger card by itself), it certainly does help the case of including Guerrilla Tactics in the sideboard. Perhaps one can bring it in from time to time, even against decks with no discard threat. Often times in Magic, as in chess, the threat is stronger than the execution, and adding the Tactics is a way to change up the game and introduce uncertainty for your opponent.

[scrumdogg]

Guerilla Tactics is simply not strong enough to be included on it's own merit (unless you are in an extremely high discard-deck area...in which case you are playing the wrong deck....). It is funny with Chain of Plasma...but that assumes that A) you have both cards B) your opponent chooses to throw Chain back at you, although to be fair, they will certainly consider it, since they are almost certain to have more cards in hand than you...one of the problems I found when I ran Chain.

To be fair, I was running both Flame Rift and Chain of Plasma, which was probably a bad idea, it should be one or the other. I personally like Flame Rift for several reasons. It is 4 damage for 2 mana - only one of which is red. I don't care that it is sorcery, I don't remember the last time I played against Chant-Stick IRL. In fact, getting my opponent used to me playing items in my phase, the mediocre ones tend to get lulled & forget the awesome ability of this deck to respond later in the game - on the stack, at EOT, just when they think they've won.... Many opponents have also been lulled by me taking 4 damage as well, they don't counter the Rift despite it being one of the most damaging (in terms of amount dealt) cards in the deck. It is a deceptive card, the Rift. That being said, it is often one of the cards I will side out, in any match up. It is the last card in my list (in terms of looking for replacements, like running Price of Progress in Quse - Home of the Non-Basic Land.....) but overall, it is stronger for what it does (generally) than the replacements. Imo.

[FallenOmnipotent]

idk, I think having the flame breaks to back up your Flame rifts are pretty nice.

But in my testing, a new question arouses. I appolagize in advance if the subject was previously mentioned in this thread.

I can't beat Solidarity (sp?)... ...is it my playing? Do i need Pyroblast + REB in SB? (Currently, I'm runnning 2 and 2).

[GRAH]

I'll address all the mentioned topics:

Flame Rift was originally in the PoP slot, but I switched it out for two reasons:

1. It's an instant, and averages the same damage without hurting you.
2. Virtually every deck except this one and Solidarity is running nonbasics. P_R noted this in his BAII wrap-up, and it's true. Even Vial Goblins is running 4-8 nonbasics, and I've PoPed for 4 against them. Not to mention the huge damage you get against Landstill and decks running 3 playsets of duals like Gro and SDZ.

As for being an "overcosted Lava Spike," you're rather wrong. Lava Spike is not only another 1 for 3, but also gives you good life advantage and is also a solid turn 1 play. Rift is none of these.

Guerilla Tactics is an awful card. It's not cost-effective (and, unlike Magma Jet, doesn't provide a gamebreaking effect). The only reason I'd EVER play it is if you are seeing large amounts of Pox/Sui Black/Control Black.

Chain of Plasma isn't necessarily a bad card, but it's a poor meta choice, usually. It's not good versus aggro. You always want all your burn spells (except Flamebreak, for obvious reasons) to give you life advantage. Chain of Plasma rarely does this. This is also why I don't play Flame Rift. As for playing Chain/Tactics, I wouldn't play two bad cards just for a silly synergy move.

Solidarity is a bad matchup. I used to have Siroccos, but it's such a narrow card (and I don't see much of Solidarity) that I replaced them with 4 REBs. Typically, you want to REB the High Tide. I listed the matchups and how to deal with them here (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=15374) in my topic on MTGS.

[scrumdogg]

I'll address all the mentioned topics:

Flame Rift was originally in the PoP slot, but I switched it out for two reasons:

1. It's an instant, and averages the same damage without hurting you.
2. Virtually every deck except this one and Solidarity is running nonbasics. P_R noted this in his BAII wrap-up, and it's true. Even Vial Goblins is running 4-8 nonbasics, and I've PoPed for 4 against them. Not to mention the huge damage you get against Landstill and decks running 3 playsets of duals like Gro and SDZ.

As for being an "overcosted Lava Spike," you're rather wrong. Lava Spike is not only another 1 for 3, but also gives you good life advantage and is also a solid turn 1 play. Rift is none of these.

Guerilla Tactics is an awful card. It's not cost-effective (and, unlike Magma Jet, doesn't provide a gamebreaking effect). The only reason I'd EVER play it is if you are seeing large amounts of Pox/Sui Black/Control Black.

Chain of Plasma isn't necessarily a bad card, but it's a poor meta choice, usually. It's not good versus aggro. You always want all your burn spells (except Flamebreak, for obvious reasons) to give you life advantage. Chain of Plasma rarely does this. This is also why I don't play Flame Rift. As for playing Chain/Tactics, I wouldn't play two bad cards just for a silly synergy move.

Solidarity is a bad matchup. I used to have Siroccos, but it's such a narrow card (and I don't see much of Solidarity) that I replaced them with 4 REBs. Typically, you want to REB the High Tide. I listed the matchups and how to deal with them here (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=15374) in my topic on MTGS.
Indeed, if you can be sure that your environment is heavy on the non-basics, PoP is a much better call (all things being equal instant > sorcery). However, my concern is Philadelphia, where there will be a metric fuckton of players new to Legacy. How many are going to have duals & non-basics & how many are going to be playing mono-colored decks? There should be a ton of Affinity (point for PoP) but a lot of Sligh & Burn & Goblins (of all stripes) many of which will be running minimal non-basic (and those fetches - does the non-damaging nature of PoP make it worth being essentially a dead spell in a mono-colored matchup?).

No one is suggesting replacing Spike with Rift, Spike is solidly in the deck. There are similarities between the cards, though, as they are both narrow sorceries that have an impressive cc:damage ratio.

Agreed on Tactics (I'm betting pretty much everyone is agreed on Tactics....too situational, otherwise not enough bang for your buck).

Chain isn't horrible, and I agree that too many own-deck effects that decrease your life total are dangerous. However, Earthquake/Flamebreak are vital to the deck's success...the question becomes, how much is too much?

Solidarity should not be a bad matchup since you can goldfish them/race them Game 1 (toss up...) and should have 6-8 pieces of sideboard hate for games 2 & 3. 4x REB/Pyroblast is a must in any red deck, and there should be 2-4 other slots aimed squarely at blue/combo/control. Whether they be Sirocco, Scald (which also has application against aggro-control - Gro, Fish, etc), Pyroblast, Pillar, w/e...4 slots by themselves are simply not enough and especially against combo, you have the cards to side out. Vs Solidarity both Earthquake/Flamebreak & PoP are suboptimal or dead, the slots are available.

[bigbear102]

Sadly I have had to give this deck a little break, too many chilly days in the Cuse have forced it out of contention. I do however strongly endorse (as I always have) the Rift. I have to disagree with Zilla that other decks are as fast, the only ones i've seen is goblins. That matchup is about 50/50 right now. I agree with Scrum about Philly too. PoP deserves a 3-of board slot there, but rift is getting my nod in the main.

[GRAH]

Solidarity should not be a bad matchup since you can goldfish them/race them Game 1 (toss up...) and should have 6-8 pieces of sideboard hate for games 2 & 3. 4x REB/Pyroblast is a must in any red deck, and there should be 2-4 other slots aimed squarely at blue/combo/control. Whether they be Sirocco, Scald (which also has application against aggro-control - Gro, Fish, etc), Pyroblast, Pillar, w/e...4 slots by themselves are simply not enough and especially against combo, you have the cards to side out. Vs Solidarity both Earthquake/Flamebreak & PoP are suboptimal or dead, the slots are available.
Eh. I think I made it out to be a worse matchup than it is, but the fact that I do play 6 MD dead cards tends to hurt. I happen to like PoP in the MD, though, because that's really the only deck is does nothing to.

Note, of course, that I rarely see Solidarity at all, and the few times I've played it, I've lost.

[FallenOmnipotent]

has anyone tested scald? Is it better than pillar?

EDIT:
What have we figgured out for the SB? Obviously the REB/Pryoblast/Sicoos (sp?). What about pillars and anhks though? I did read through this disscution btw. People said they like it vs. Control (ie. landstill). But perhaps PoP would be better for that in a burn deck? Finish things off fast?

Is sullferic vortex needed? It doesn't seem critiqual in any match up...but Angel stompy getting a jitted pro-red creature hurts.

As of now, one probably has 6-8 Anti-blue cards in SB. What else?

[GRAH]

I had Ankh, but replaced it with Pithing Needle. Ankh really only improves the already-good Landstill matchup.

Scald seems kinda crappy, but I wouldn't play Pillar, either. Especially since Pillar has been boarded in against me.

Sulfuric Vortex is critical in the AS and RGSA matchups.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Wouldn't pillar work pretty well vs. Solidarity though? (Still having lotz of trouble in the match-up...getting better though..,I wish Browbeat was an instant.)

In my meta-game, there is a pretty wide verity of decks and deck tiers. So about half the people there have the duels to run, and the other half play wierd/budgeted decks without duel lands. So should i still Main deck Price of Progress?

It'll help me against the higher level players, but hamper me in the earlier rounds. And it's not like I can just out play them...I'm playing burn. So the PoP vs. Flamerift battle still goes on for me.

Edit: My meta

Decks expected to be there every week:
Goblins
Belcher
Sui
Rock
Landstill[/standstill]
Ravager
Random Tribal Biulds
[Angel Stompy]
[Trix]
[U/G WTF]

Decks that I have seen there:
R/W Rift
G/W Slide
Tooth and Nail
R/B Land Destruction
U/G Madness
Hulk Smash
Burn
Sligh
Solidarity
Enchantress

Decks that I have never seen:
Any Gro variant
The Game
Survival Variants

[Sims]

Wouldn't pillar work pretty well vs. Solidarity though? (Still having lotz of trouble in the match-up...getting better though..,I wish Browbeat was an instant.)
Yea, Pillar is pretty damn good vs. Solidarity. Especially if you have REBs to back it up... However, if you look at the deck you are playing, every spell in it costs 3 or less. Unlike Vial Goblins, you don't have ways to cheat around your pillar and not kill yourself... Thus you have no way of putting pressure on the Tide player, allowing them to sit back and build up resources until they go "Tide, Wish, Bounce spell, I'll take 6..... Blow my load all up in your grill."

[bigbear102]

Ok, here's the major thing you are missing, Solidarity does not deal damage to you! If you are seeing a lot of solidarity Pillar is amazing. You don't need to cast 10 spells to win the game, they do.

[GRAH]

The only problem I have with Pillar is making room for it. My SB is, of current:

3 Anarchy
1 Flamebreak
4 Pithing Needle
4 REB
3 Sulfuric Vortex

I don't know what to drop. Anarchy, Sulfuric Vortex and Pithing Needle both help against RGSA and AS, which are fairly bad matchups. I really want to get rid of one of them, but all of them seem rather important.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Thus you have no way of putting pressure on the Tide player, allowing them to sit back and build up resources like bigbear said, they don't deal damage to you. And you would continue your burn as normal. You deal an average of 3 damage per spell. So you should have more than enough life to deal 20...and that's saying they're not playing any spells either.

EDIT: What does survival get that wrecks burn (besides ravenous baloth)? (n00b)

[GRAH]

Baloth is the only thing...but when it's Baloth with Genesis, it gets a little crazy. Plus, they beat me in if they set themselves up quickly.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Well seeing as survival usally does not make a show at my meta-game, I think i'll go and switch out the 4 Pithing Needles for Pillars/REB/Pryoblasts.


Decks that I have never seen:
Any Gro variant
The Game
Survival Variants

I'm assuming all pithing needle is really good for is against Survival?...I'm not afraid of losing my Mogg Fanatic to The Rock...

[Revert_To_Saved]

I'm assuming all pithing needle is really good for is against Survival?
I've scooped to CoP: Red a number of times, which seems to be a more and more common sideboard card for Landstill due to all the Goblins running around.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Does Landstill acctually need it though? it has 5-8 MD board sweed effects.

Ie. 4x Wrath of God, 3x Akroma's Vengance

[Zilla]

Does Landstill acctually need it though? it has 5-8 MD board sweed effects.
It does if people start playing Burn. And actually, in my experience, Goblins isn't as easy a matchup for Landstill as some people profess. The board-sweepers are an obvious pain, but they're sometimes too slow to deal with broken starts involving Lackey and/or Vial. With that in mind, I might consider CoP:Red in a very Goblins heavy meta. On the other hand, I might also consider Chill instead. Hard to say.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Quick off-subjet n00b question:
Vial Gobs vs Landstill. You have Piledriver, mogg fanatic, Aether Vial, Land, Land, wastesland, Goblin Matron. (Or something along those lines.) And then what if you didn't have wastesland in your hand? And then what if you didn't know what deck it is?

What would you play first, the Fanatic or the Vial. I have always chosen the creautre first regardless of my hand/their deck...but everyone says vial is just to broken.

[awesomeawesome]

Quick off-subjet n00b question:
Vial Gobs vs Landstill. You have Piledriver, mogg fanatic, Aether Vial, Land, Land, wastesland, Goblin Matron. (Or something along those lines.) And then what if you didn't have wastesland in your hand? And then what if you didn't know what deck it is?

What would you play first, the Fanatic or the Vial. I have always chosen the creautre first regardless of my hand/their deck...but everyone says vial is just to broken.

Get started on your vial counters. That fanatic's not going to win you the game, the vial is. You'll get to play the Fanatic for free on your next turn and play a Piledriver with your lands. That's far better than the 1 point of damage you got through with the first turn Fanatic.

If you have a Lackey in hand on your first turn that's another story. Unless of course they went first with mountain, lackey. It all depends on the situation.

[FallenOmnipotent]

If you have a Lackey in hand on your first turn that's another story. Unless of course they went first with mountain, lackey. It all depends on the situation.
...I've been told differntly on this...idk though...don't want to get too off subject though.

[bigbear102]

Ok, fyi, there are other threads for these conversations, in the future if your post starts as "this is off topic" then don't post it here.

Also, CoP: Red isn't really a problem with landstill because you just kill them before it gets online, or just slap down an anarchy and when they tap out just kill them. There is also the patented holding until you have 8 spells and they tap out a bit. I have not had a problem with CoP:Red except when Jander dropped it turn 1 with chrome mox.

[GRAH]

I don't have problems with COP:Red. Usually, you have enough early burn density (when Landstill is tapping out) to not care. They can't prevent anything.

It's coming down to me either dropping Pithing Needle or Anarchy from the SB. I'm leading towards Needle.

[Zilla]

Depends what there's more of in your meta. Bear in mind that Needle shuts down Jitte, which is important, becuse an active Jitte will wreck your ass, Anarchy or no. Also, if there's a lot of Survival in your meta, the Needle may be better, both for shutting down Survival as well as shutting down Baloths.

Anarchy is a decent catch-all answer to white hate, including shit like CoP:Red, Solitary Confinement, Aegis of Honor, Worship, Pariah, etc., so it may be prudent to run it over Needle in a meta with some or all of these cards.

The thing is... Needle is good for a meta unprepared for Burn, because it's dead agaisnt almost nothing, and can be an excellent "crap, I didn't think about that card and how bad it screws me, good thing I have Needles", but in a prepared meta where people might be packing specific anti-Burn cards (CoP:Red and Worship, most notably), then Anarchy may be the better choice.

Then again, if you're playing in a meta that's prepared for Burn, you probably shouldn't be playing Burn anymore.

[Nancy Boy]

What would you think about Burning Wish? We could reduce the Anarchy in the SB to one or two and could play Ruination, Boiling Seas (from the 9th yeehaa :p ) and some other evil Sorcerys.. Flamebreak or sth..
It could be a little slow, that's the problem I have with it..

[scrumdogg]

What would you think about Burning Wish? We could reduce the Anarchy in the SB to one or two and could play Ruination, Boiling Seas (from the 9th yeehaa :p ) and some other evil Sorcerys.. Flamebreak or sth..
It could be a little slow, that's the problem I have with it..
Are you proposing Burning Wish as a maindeck card or sideboard card? How many? 3? 4? It could be interesting to experiment with a sideboard of 3-4 Burning Wish and a host of silver bullets...except that Wish does not fetch Pithing Needle or Pyrostatic Pillar (which is also excellent against odd combo decks other than Solidarity). It CAN, however, get boarded out sorceries like Flame Rift or Browbeat or Flamebreak/Earthquake if necessary. Pillar is probably strictly better than Scald, unless you were in a blue heavy environment like I was. I also did not have Pithing Needles (still don't have a full set) which limits how much I can use them...). I wouldn't take Scald to Philly, but I would seriously consider it in Quse again...

cards for a Burning Wish sideboard.....hmmmm....
Flashfires
Boiling Seas
Anarchy
Recoup
extra Flamebreak/Earthquake
Ruination
Meltdown (or Shatterstorm or any mass artifact removal...)

what else?
Not that I am endorsing the idea...but what harm does it do to explore the idea?

[GRAH]

Burning Wish is not playable in this deck, as it costs 2 mana and doesn't do any damage. Also, the general Wishboard is going to end up full of expensive cards which you really can't pay the mana for. Plus, if you face a deck which you have nothing boarded for, it's a completely dead card.

[Slay]

What matchups does Wish improve that don't already rock?
-Slay

[scrumdogg]

Burning Wish is not playable in this deck, as it costs 2 mana and doesn't do any damage. Also, the general Wishboard is going to end up full of expensive cards which you really can't pay the mana for. Plus, if you face a deck which you have nothing boarded for, it's a completely dead card.
I'm hoping that it was a SB proposal, which would allow you to run 3-4 in place of whatever dead cards you have Games 2 & 3. Is the versatility worth waiting a turn to get exactly the hoser you need versus the deck you are playing? Open your minds, gentlemen, and explore the possibilities before you open your mouths. No one is interested in dogmatic spewing, if the idea has merit - great. If the idea turns out to be suboptimal - great. But let that be determined by intelligent discussion and testing and possibly logic, but not by prejudice & dogma.

[bigbear102]

I actually kind of like the idea of playing Wishes in the board. I could see a board of this doing well:

3x Burning Wish
1x Anarchy
1x ruination
1x meltdown
1x boiling seas
3x Sulfuric Vortex
3x REB/Sirocco/Pillar
2x Pithing Needle

I don't think much more is needed if you have a board like this. In the goblins matchup you could possible side out 1 Flamebreak and whatever else for Burning Wishes as a way to have a better chance of getting it on turn 3. Most of the time the only dead cards are sorceries anyway, except for PoP. I think this idea is actually pretty interesting. I'll try to test it out and see what happens with it.

[FallenOmnipotent]

I would help testing it, but I don't have time ATM, srry. Keep me updated though =D

Edit:
the 3x REB and 2x Pithing needle count seems a bit off...

[GRAH]

It seems like a waste. It doesn't seem worth it to dedicate 7 SB slots to a minimally-effective Wishboard, with cards that don't really go with the whole "burn the hell out of the opponent" strategy.


But let that be determined by intelligent discussion and testing and possibly logic, but not by prejudice & dogma.
I don't think religion has anything to do with MTG. Yet.

[FallenOmnipotent]

OK, so I brought Grah's burn deck to the tournement (-3 PoP, +3 Falme Rift, in SB, -4 Pithing Needle, +4 Pillars.)

I went 4-0, 8-1 overall. My only lost was to a black deck...it wasn't the hand disruption that hurt, it was a sinkhole that got him the game... couldn't draw another one.

They don't have top 8 there, they just tuse tie breakers...so I got 2nd. Not bad I guess.

Anyways, first was 2-land belcher. I was pretty surpirsed...What do I SB in against him? Are pillars good against him? I would assume so...but it wouldn't be leathal to him...prehaps Pithing needle needs to come back in?

PS. There was alot more black than I expected...

[GRAH]

If that's the only Belcher in your meta, don't bother putting Needle in. Just board in Pillars for the Flamebreaks.

[bigbear102]

Personally I use crash on my board. It helps a lot against belcher. You also win a lot of games because of spoils, they put themselves low and then you win in response to them going off.

Black is usually a good matchup (as far as my experiences go). Fork is the shit agaisnt everything black. It sends almost every spell back at them so they can have a taste. Using the last card in your hand to duress them is always fun, it has won me 2 games.

[scrumdogg]

Belcher is an absolutely horrible matchup for you - unless they Spoils themselves down low enough or get the slow-assdraw, they just goldfish you. Pillars (in Grah's build) are the only option and you better hope you get Game 1 because they are too slow in the Game (2 or 3) where you go second. Crash is a better option and I am experimenting with Meltdown in my version of the sideboard (to improve the Ravager matchup, which I expect to be everywhere in Philly....). The question becomes, which artifact hate & how much?

[bigbear102]

I played 3 crash originally. If Affinity makes a huge showing then meltdown would be the way to go, clearing their board for probably 3 or less. Meltdown can be quite pricey and is not as flexible when it comes to artifact hate, but can be the shit at times.

[Zilla]

Meh. I disagree with Grah. Pithing Needle's where it's at for anti-Belcher tech, because it comes down turn one, and is rock solid in other matchups as well, as previously discussed in this thread. Turn 1 Needle puts the Belcher player on the defensive rather than offensive; they are forced to dig for Oxidize before they can go off on you. This often buys you the time you need to get them down to the point where Spoils is an exceedingly risky play for them, which weakens their strategy a great deal.

[scrumdogg]

Pithing Needle seems fine...and it should be some good against Ravager as well, being able to hit Ravager, Atog, Plating, and Nexus. Hmmm, apparently I have to suck it up and plunk down some cash for chase Type 2 rares. I hate doing that....

[GRAH]

Zilla: I meant not to put in the Needle JUST for that one deck. He said his meta was filled with Goblins and black decks--neither of which are too fazed by the Needle.

If Belcher is popular enough, Crash is a good option, and so is Meltdown, I guess. I'd prefer Pulverize to Meltdown, myself, though...

[Zilla]

Zilla: I meant not to put in the Needle JUST for that one deck. He said his meta was filled with Goblins and black decks--neither of which are too fazed by the Needle.
Nearly every deck I play against Goblins I board in Needles. It shuts down Vial, Mire, Waste, Port, Jitte, Jeek, Sharpshooter, SGC, Fanatic, etc. The deck is fazed by Needle. It may be that Burn in particular doesn't really need Needle to win this matchup, but it's wrong to suggest that Needle is anything other than a house against Vial Goblins.

Furthermore, if your sole argument against Needle is that it's not good against Goblins, I'll point out that Crash and Meltdown are both worse against Goblins than Needle is. Also, with the exception of Crucible of Worlds, Needle is just as good, if not better than Crash or Meltdown against essentially every problem artifact in the format for Burn.

[FallenOmnipotent]

ZillA makes a compelling argument... ...but I do need the pillars vs. Solidarity...

[Zilla]

ZillA makes a compelling argument... ...but I do need the pillars vs. Solidarity...
If you see Solidarity in your meta then I agree wholeheartedly. There's just not a huge reason not to run both. Hell, if you want to beat Belcher, I'd bring in both Needle and Pillar. I guess the most important question is, what are your biggest problem matchups?

If you're maindecking Flamebreak then you shouldn't need an SB for Vial Goblins. If you see Belcher, then Needle and Pillar are strong. If you see Solidarity, then REB and Pillar are strong. If you see Landstill, then REB, Needle, and/or Sulfuric Vortex are strong, depending very heavily on their SB strategy against you. If you see RGSA or Angel Stompy then Needle and Sulfuric Vortex are strong. If mono-black is a problem for you, there's not much that's truly going to improve this matchup for you, but Pillar and/or Vortex aren't going to hurt the matchup any, and will likely improve it. Pillar is also very strong against the Enchantress matchup.

I don't know what, if anything, I've missed that you see in your meta that might cause you problems, but it seems to me like a SB of:

4 Pithing Needle
4 REB
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 Sulfuric Vortex

is likely to answer the vast majority of problems you may encounter. The only thing that completely screws you with this SB strategy are cards like Worship, Pariah, and Solitary Confinement. If you see any of these cards in significant numbers, then swap the Vortices (or whatever is least useful) out for Anarchies and call it good.

[GRAH]

Zilla, he's playing my build, which only has 3 Flamebreaks MD, so he should probably be dropping a Needle or Pillar for the 4th there. Otherwise, that looks like mine.

[My Name Is Scott]

Pillars go in against stuff like gro and pox too, it's not just in every sb for solidarity. Pillar is a solid card, and it should stay a 4 of.

[Zilla]

Meh. Like I said, Grah, I advocate cutting at least one PoP for the 4th MD Flamebreak in a Goblins heavy meta.

As far as Pillars are concerned, I never suggested you shouldn't run a full 4 in the SB, so we're agreed there.

[GRAH]

I've seriously debated dropping Fork. The only use I'm really finding for it is copying Fireblasts and beating mono-black, and neither seems needed enough. I'm starting to think that I'd rather have another burn spell.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Like somoeone said, I believe it was you zilla, that burn drawing 2x or more Flamebreaks is just not good. I feel that this occurs too often while running 4x MD. However, I'm also aware of the point you made that against Gobs, I'll need to draw one within the first 3-4 turns. In my meta-game, goblins probably hold as the mode (most reocurring deck from player to player within the tournement.) However, my meta-game is also fairly erratic. Note that thre's about 46 people in my meta. And last time there were 6 goblins, that leaves alota other decks that I might be playing. So I really dislike drawing those 2 flamebreaks in the non-gobs match up.

Quick note: My bilud is GRAH's biuld -3 PoP, +3 Flame rift. I guessed right and not many people have playsets of duel lands availible to them... So it's only helpful in the later matches...hwowever, I can't afford to draw a deck card 3/4's of the time. Also there's little, if any Landstill in my meta-game due to the 30 time limit (last week they gave us 35-40 mins per round.)

I never even thought of taking out the anarchys...they just seemed soo powerful...but there's only 1 AS in my meta-game (that I know of.) So I guess I will take my chances there and take them out of the bored. Unfortunatly, other people may not be able to make this disicition as easily as I given there meta-game isn't soo srub-ish.

And as for cutting 1 pithing needle for a flame break...that's another easy choice for me...as I only have 2 pithing needles at the moment. So I'm -2 pithing needles, +1 Flamebreak, +1 PoP...maybe...or anarchy...or REB???

PS. <3 ZillA...thanx 4 all the help btw...you too grah...and everyone else :laugh:

[FallenOmnipotent]

About the fork...I find that 4x Firebalst with 3x Forks is simply amazing...it just steals wins...8 damage...

If it was cut though, Flamerift probably goes in...or main deck pithing needles?

...idk...I'm the newb in this thread.

[Zilla]

@FallenOmnipotent:

I've never been a real fan of the maindecked PoPs myself, and I totally get where you're coming from on the 4 MD Flamebreaks. In a meta not overrun by weenie hordes (Goblinss in particular), I think 3 is probably the right number.

That said, my build runs the 4th Browbeat. I'm not ever unhappy to see them in multiples, and in fact I want to see them early early. The thing is, you don't want to be waiting to play these bad boys. You want to play them as early as possible, every game you can. They're at their very best when your opponent doesn't have to think about which option he's going to take. When he's at 20 or 14 or whatever, the good player is always going to take the 5 rather than give you 3 cards, and that is what you want. This helps you get him into the red zone more quickly, and makes him dead before you run out of gas. Browbeat is at its weakest when your opponent is at 5 or less life, and he only needs one more turn to steal the win. Because you want the Browbeats as early as possible, and further because they draw you into more gas in the late game, I advocate running 4. The other two open cards can be PoP or Chain of Plasma or Flame Rift. It's essentially meta dependent/personal preference.

@Dropping Fork:

Fuck all that. At the very worst it's RR: Copy a Lightning Bolt. It's essentially no different than an Incinerate at that point. At its best, it's comboing with Fireblast for the win, which happens all the time. Is Fork somewhat conditional and a pretty crappy topdeck in the lategame? Yes it is. Is that enough of a reason to drop it in light of its advantages? Nope. If there were some totally awesome burn cards to replace it with it might be a different story, but when your alternatives are Chain of Plasma and Flame Rift? Why bother.

[pater]

Fuck all that. At the very worst it's RR: Copy a Lightning Bolt.
So at least its 3 mana for 6 damage (read Ball Lightning).

Throwing in my 2 cents i say Fork is a good choice for the deck but I would keep it as a 3-of to avoid that late game dead draw.

[FallenOmnipotent]

@FallenOmnipotent:


my build runs the 4th Browbeat [...] The other two open cards can be PoP or Chain of Plasma or Flame Rift. It's essentially meta dependent/personal preference.
I'm acctually quite saddened when I draw browbeats in multipuls...it's soo passive... ... ...But it deffinatly deserves it's spot in the deck. To be honest, I much prefer to draw 3 cards (but it's just a psychological thing.) It let me play my ext few turns without feeling I need to topdeck much at all. And it usally gives me 2 oter burns spells for an average of 6 damage.

As for the other 2 slots that are open, I ment in my SB. They are open because I don't have any pithing needle. So I'm thinking of Filling them back up with anarchy...

[Zilla]

So at least its 3 mana for 6 damage (read Ball Lightning).
Yeah, except you can't counterspell a Fork with a Lava Dart.


@FallenOmnipotent:
Browbeat is a bad card if you're playing it passively. Like I said, play it fast, play it early. You don't want your opponent to even think about it. The early damage is what wins you the game fast, and that's what you want. Draw in the late game is decent, but only when you're in topdeck mode and digging for answers, which is a place you often won't be if they took 5 from Browbeat in the early game.

With regards to your SB, it's entirely up to you. It depends heavily on what kind of hate you see. For example, if you see a lot of Chills, you might consider running a couple of Pyroblasts to back up your REBs. If there's a lot of WW, then Anarchy couldn't hurt. If there's a lot of lifegain, get the 4th Vortex in there. If there's any MWC, MBC, or Turboland, you might want to make room for some Ankhs, since their strategies rely on dropping a land every single turn.

[Eldariel]

Hmm, how about it, do you think Scent of Cinder could have any promise? I picture a scenario of turn 1 Lava Spike, turn 2 Cinder revealing 5 cards, putting opponent to 12 and ready to be cooked next turn. Then again, it's a bad draw later in the game, and it's weak with landheavy draws, as well as gives away strategic information. Thoughts?

[Slay]

Scent of Cinder might be consistently better than Volcanic Hammer only on turn 2. After turn 2, it sucks. I don't think making the deck a tad bit more explosive(see: Shrapnel Blast) is worth the loss in longterm strategy.
-Slay

[GRAH]

Scent of Cinder giving away your hand isn't necessarily a bad thing. The problem is that it's a bad card. It's really ONLY good on the second turn, and is unreliable otherwise. Also, it's worse than all the other burn spells already in the deck.

[scrumdogg]

Agreed about Scent of Cinder....for it to be useful you must have cards in hand. Which means that it either Turn 2 or you are monkeyfucked anyway.

Something I have discovered, that bothers me, is the increasing use of Umezawa's Jitte. Once it hits once, we have real difficulty as we then have to kill every critter cast, before it can be equipped. God help us if the critter is pro-red, because then they are gaining 4 life a turn, about which we can do nothing. More and more decks are packing Jittes, what does this do to this deck?

[B is for Big Job]

Thats why there could be some inclusion of some artifact hate just to take care of the badass Jitte. Possibly shatter, but thats just gay. Id say to go with Crash, just becuase you can still cast it, or even sac the mountain, but that kinda rails you with fireblast.

[GRAH]

Both Pithing Needle and Sulfuric Vortex are in the SB. What more do you really need?

[FallenOmnipotent]

If it's that devestating, one might deside to try out main decking a few Pithing needles? It's rarly a dead card...drawing in your begining hand doesn't hurt too much as you have plenty of other low cc spells to play until you figgure out what you'll need. Biggest probablem I see is the lessening of burn within the deck.

[B is for Big Job]

Both Pithing Needle and Sulfuric Vortex are in the SB. What more do you really need?
Because most decks that are playing Jitte have either some sort of enchantment/ artifact hate in their boards so instead of tapping out turn 3 for vortex or if youre lucky turn 1 for needle, you can just wait for them to play Jitte and own it

[GRAH]

Except that, unless they KNOW what you're boarding in, they have no reason to board in arty/enchantment hate.

Plus, Jitte isn't that big a problem. I can usually win before it comes seriously online. Burning out creatures before they can use it helps. That's a bigger deal vs. Angel Stompy, but I haven't run into that as a problem yet.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Generaly, they shouldn't be able to go online untill 2-3 attemps after. Cause you, obviously, don't need to burn the equiped creature until the attack phase (unless the jitte already has counters on it...but it shouldn't). Also, usally, Flamebreak is sitting in your hand while your playing other burn spells (unless it's goblins) so then you have an answer for 2 turns...unless the creautre has haste.

Angel Stompy, IMO, is a match-up in your favor, unless they got pulse in SB. Anarchy is pretty nasty and usally will hamper them enough for you to have enough time to burn for the win. It is, however, pretty nasty when they get Jitte + Silver Knight...:( but even then, you hope to draw into another anarchy or Sulferic Vortex...if you played the vortex, it's a real race and you might fall behind (the pump). At this time all u can usally hope for is fork + Fireblast.

[Zilla]

In any case, Grah is right on this one. Both Needle and Vortex answer Jitte. Using the fact that people pack Disenchant effects as an argument against this strategy is akin to saying that people shouldn't play creatures because people run creature removal. Most decks don't pack more than 3-4 Disenchant effects, and Burn has 7-8 SB ways to shut down Jitte's lifegain ability, not to mention that the entire deck is creature removal, which Jitte requires to function properly.

So, long story short:

Jitte is very very bad if it comes online. Luckily you have lots and lots of ways to keep that from happening.

[bigbear102]

Ok, I am playing this at GenCon on Thursday. Everyone is expecting tons of Aggro to be there, which we just destroy, so i'm thinking about my board. I need Blasts to stop chill. I was thinking of a board of:

4x Pithing Needle
3x Red Elemental Blast
3x Pyroblast
5x?

I am thinking either Vortex/Anarchy/Crypt. There will be a lot of jank.dec there also, so i want very broad answers. What do you guys think about this choice for a very aggro-based undeveloped meta?

[GRAH]

My current SB is

3 Vortex
3 Needle
1 Flamebreak (I only play 3 MD. Play a Needle over this if you play 4 MD)
4 Pillar
4 REB

I would take that for an aggro horde. Vortex helps nicely vs. Angel, Baloth, and Jitte, Pillar is nice versus decks with just a bunch of 1-2ccs, and Needle takes out equipment and everything random.

You really don't need 6x REB. Especially if there's a lot of aggro.

[FallenOmnipotent]

In an aggro heavy meta-game, one should be expecting Angel Stompy. In which case, Burn NEEDS Sulferic Vortex to stop the life gain from Jitte and Exalted Angel. Obviously one tries to kill the angel when it's morphed, but you can't always get it. And sometimes they draw into enough accel to drop him faced up. So I would deffinatly add 3 vortex to your SB. If you expect Soldarity, you NEED pillars too. Or else it's usally a lost match.

[Zilla]

GRAH's SB is identical to the one I posted a page back (excepting the single Flamebreak over the 4th Needle). I explained my reasoning behind that SB against a number of the prominent archetypes in the format, so check it out if you missed it. In any case, the one and only thing you might run into problems with using this SB is crap like Solitary Confinement and Worship, which Anarchy will answer. The number of decks playing these cards should be very very low, however, so you're probably best off in a generic field using the one GRAH and I are using.

Side Note: Pillar fucks up Gro something fierce.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Y'know, the sooner you people learn to play Ogre-Dokken, the sooner you'll be able to stop worrying about Pariah and Jitte and Angel.

[bigbear102]

What is Orge-Dokken (that is not the name because I can't find it anywhere, or else i'm retarded). I can't seem to find it when I look it up, so if you could enlighten me as to the ubergreatness of said card, I would appreciate it greatly.

[Zilla]

Ogre-Dokken is IBA's pet name for Flames of the Blood Hand.

I haven't been that pleased with Flames. The reason is that if they know you're playing it, they can simply use their Jitte/Baloth/Whatever lifegain in response to your playing Flames. If you choose to wait to cast it until after they attempt to gain life, the smart opponent will just not use their lifegain until you either a) don't have 3 mana untapped, or b) are dead because you never had a chance to deal lethal damage, since that Flames just sat there in your hand while you waited for them to overextend.

This issue came up a lot when I was testing Flames in my Burn build against RGSA. I'm sitting there with only Flames in my hand, and my opponent is beating my face in with a Baloth. I'm in topdeck mode and I only have 3 lands in play. If I topdeck a Bolt, I can cast it, but my opponent can sac his Baloth to keep from dying, and I don't have the mana to cast Flames in response. If I cast the Flames itself, he just responds by saccing the Baloth. That's just one example. The point is, the intelligent player can play around Flames far more often than you'd like. They cannot play around Vortex in such a way.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

And Vortex does damage slower, hits you too when you're being bashed in the face by Baloths, and can be dealt with via Disenchants.

[Zilla]

Which is why it's a sideboard card. If Flames were good on its own, the point might be arguable. It's not significantly better than the other cards in the deck as a standalone burn card, and it's not as effective an answer as Vortex is against lifegain strategies.

Another issue is that, at 3cc, it's very bad for your curve if it's included in the maindeck. It's safe to assume that you want 3-4 Flamebreaks in the main for the aggro matchup, and you want 3-4 Browbeats in any matchup. That leaves you 6-8 cards in the 3cc slot. Assuming you're not replacing any of these cards (which I'm pretty sure you'd agree would be foolish), that would leave you with 9-12 cards in the 3cc slot, which is simply bad math with the deck's manabase.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Flames is one of those cards where, IMO, it must stay a surprise. In one of my JSS for example, my friend ran 4x Flames. Many people, not knowing the card, just took 4 and assumed nothing more of it. They waited to remove Jitte counters until there would be leathal damage, but with the resolution of Flames, he followed up with a shrapnel blast for the win. Obv this means it won' work against careful, heavy play-testers, and/or smart people. But Flames is simply one of those cards, IMO, that can seccessfuly see play every now and then.

[Zilla]

Many people, not knowing the card, just took 4 and assumed nothing more of it.
Personally, I prefer to play cards that don't require my opponents to be bad players. That may just be me, though.

[FallenOmnipotent]

=D I live in minnesota...there's only a handful of good players...but JSS = 15 or under... :laugh: gg

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Which is why it's a sideboard card. If Flames were good on its own, the point might be arguable. It's not significantly better than the other cards in the deck as a standalone burn card, and it's not as effective an answer as Vortex is against lifegain strategies.

Another issue is that, at 3cc, it's very bad for your curve if it's included in the maindeck. It's safe to assume that you want 3-4 Flamebreaks in the main for the aggro matchup, and you want 3-4 Browbeats in any matchup. That leaves you 6-8 cards in the 3cc slot. Assuming you're not replacing any of these cards (which I'm pretty sure you'd agree would be foolish), that would leave you with 9-12 cards in the 3cc slot, which is simply bad math with the deck's manabase.
I wouldn't agree, actually, as I don't maindeck Flamebreak. I think it's very clearly one or the other, I just find Ogre-Dokken more generally useful. That might be different depending on the presence of Goblins, but that's really the only matchup where I care about seeing it, and so is fairly narrow.

[Zilla]

Fairly narrow in the sense that Vial Goblins is likely the most widely played deck in nearly every meta right now? Seems decent to me. It's also rock solid against random aggro like Sui, Fish, Thresh, RG Beats, White Weenie and RGSA. I know I'm going out on a limb by suggesting that mass creature removal may someday be useful in Legacy, but I predict that it might eventually happen.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

This from the guy that's played Magic with real, honest-to-God cardboard what, once in the past six months? Gro and Solidarity are more dominant in Northern Virginia, which is, as everyone knows, the only Meta worth considering from a deckbuilding perspective. So no, three mana for three damage and maybe hitting a creature against shitty aggro decks doesn't seem more worthwhile to me than an efficent, Instant speed burn spell that can combat a potentially game-wrecking life swing.

[Zilla]

Regardless of how many tournaments I've played at in the last few months, I know that the metagame is full of aggro. Suggesting that mass creature removal is narrow in Legacy is like suggesting that Null Rod is narrow in Vintage.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

r4b1df3rr37: Legacy is the format of good decks getting beaten by bad decks they didn't prepare for. Suggesting that it's not worth preparing for the huge amounts of aggro in the format because they're bad decks is stupid.
Doomska: No it's not. And consider the top two aggro decks. Goblins Flamebreak is good against. Gro? It hits Nimble Mongoose or Mage if they play those. If. If it can't hit one of those, it was a 3cc 3 damage Flame Rift that puts you faster on their clock.
Doomska: Flames of the Bloodhand is always good and always efficent.
Doomska: Flamebreak is sideboard material.
r4b1df3rr37: If we're talking about NQG, Nimble Mongoose and Meddling Mage account for over half the threats in the deck. It kills the other half of the threats in the deck pre-thresh. And it'll kill threshed Werebears in conjunction with a sacced Fanatic.
Doomska: They don't maindeck Mongoose. They're running 4x Mage, 4x Werebear, and 3x Enforcerer
r4b1df3rr37: Flamebreak is solid against gro. And it's solid against "shitty" aggro, which is everywhere, whether or not you choose to accept it.
r4b1df3rr37: I know they're not
r4b1df3rr37: Mongoose is a 3 of in the board.
Doomska: "It's everywhere, even though you play much more actual Magic than I do."
r4b1df3rr37: though I've seen builds that maindeck the goose.
Doomska: Is that what you meant to say?
r4b1df3rr37: Even if that's what I meant o say, it doesn't make it any less true.
r4b1df3rr37: It's not difficult to look at the top 8 thread and get an idea of what's going on.
r4b1df3rr37: I don't need tickets to know who won the superbowl.
Doomska: No, it's not. At the GPT, there were exactly four relevant aggro decks played at all. Against Mono-Black, you auto win either way. Against Goblins, Flamebreak is good. Against Gro, it's not. Against RGSA type builds? It's not.
r4b1df3rr37: I disagree.
Doomska: Those are shitty metas. They're irrelevant to advancing the format.
r4b1df3rr37: Honestly, how much have you tested the RGSA matchup with maindecked Flamebreaks?
r4b1df3rr37: I KNOW I've tested Ogre Dokken in the RGSA matchup and it didn't do what it was supposed to.
r4b1df3rr37: you know what beats burn in RGSA? Recurring Baloths. Flames maybe stops one of them. But they come back. And they come back because my opponent can afford to pay for Genesis. Because of Elves and Birds. Flamebreak stunts their mana development and prevents the recursion problem before it actually is one.
Doomska: Flamebreak only hits Elves.
r4b1df3rr37: Oh, on a side note, I noticed that Wayfarer WW was in the top 8. But I suppose that's not a relevant aggro deck. And certainly Flamebreak does nothing against it at all.
Doomska: It doesn't hit the scary creatures, no.
Doomska: Catching a Javelineer or Wayfarer isn't amazing.
r4b1df3rr37: yeah, 2 for 1's suck ass.
Doomska: If they have two Javelineers out.
r4b1df3rr37: or two wayfarers. or a javelineer and a wayfarer.
Doomska: Killing them faster than they kill you also sucks.
r4b1df3rr37: If Burn kills WWW faster, then why are the two Burn decks in the top 8 below WWW?
r4b1df3rr37: Did Alix not have to face them in the Top 8?
Doomska: Alix didn't, no. He played Goblins and Solidarity twice.
Doomska: Also, that's not as relevant as the Burn builds in the T8 were very far off from our optimal lists.
Doomska: One was running Green, Werebear, and creatures, and another was running Scent of Cinder and other jankiness.
r4b1df3rr37: terrible.
Doomska: He was running Browbeat, at least.
Doomska: I agree on Scent. I think it's terrible.
Doomska: I hate making the same argument twice. I'm just going to post the relevant part of this conversation on the Source.
r4b1df3rr37: in any case, the point is moot. Flamebreak is a metagame choice, certainly. But there are lots and lots and lots of metagames where it's a rock solid choice.
Doomska: Yeah, okay. Not in advanced ones where Goblins isn't a top deck
Doomska: I already said that.
r4b1df3rr37: Most importantly, Goblins is a definitively bad matchup without Flamebreak. It's actually positive with.
r4b1df3rr37: And it's almost never actually narrow, because if a deck is packing any creatures with an ass end of 3 or less at all, you're still making a 1 for 1 trade AND dealing 3 to the dome.
r4b1df3rr37: At the very very worst it's 3 damage for 3 mana, which is rare. In those instances, you side them out.

[swishandamiss]

well i would say that flames is pretty unplayable in an intelligent meta, maybe if u are in a meta full of 8 yr olds. I won a jss without it, with jitte running rampant. Also shatters also work or shattering pulse?

OBEY. (http://mtgthesource.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2590) - Zilla

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

well i would say that flames is pretty unplayable in an intelligent meta, maybe if u are in a meta full of 8 yr olds.
Irony, you are a cruel and whimsical mistress.

[bigbear102]

wow. How about you two get the giant sticks out of your asses and grow up.

They are both meta choices, I personally agree with Zilla that Flamebreak is the better call. In a meta that Jack refers to maybe it's not, but at Gencon I believe it will be mostly aggro. At the GP it will be aggro with some control builds specifically built to counter the gencon meta. Right now i agree with zilla.

I still have to find room in my own build for browbeats (and test it extensively, as i have not yet) and flamebreaks. If anyone has any last minute suggestions about what i should do post them now, as i am leaving tomorrow at 8 am to win the legacy championships with our little baby. wish me luck.

[FallenOmnipotent]

well i would say that flames is pretty unplayable in an intelligent meta, maybe if u are in a meta full of 8 yr olds. Also shatters also work or shattering pulse?
Irony, you are a cruel and whimsical mistress.
lol... had to read it 2x :D.

@ Shatters + Pulses, it's too non-synergetic with the deck. Also it's too narrow of a card(s). The SB is as tight as it can get due to the fairly wide Legacey Meta-game. And it doesn't seem like it'd be something you MD. Your not too afriad of Aether Vial..it hurts, yes, expecially when you flamebreak - then they bring out a warchief EoT. But it's not too bad. Being a burn deck, you need every burn card you can get. That's why "Burn" (not to be confused with sligh), has been seeing more play ever senice lava spike was printed, its another efficent and nessasery burn card. So in the end, it has no place in the MD, nor is it valuble enough/needed in the SB. Sulferic Vortec, Pithing Needle essentually (Not exactly) does the same thing, however, they also help against meny other match-ups.

PS. meny is being used flexibly.

[Zilla]

If anyone has any last minute suggestions about what i should do post them now.
PLAY THIS:

//Mana
20 Mountain

//Things That Make Other Things Dead
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Magma Jet
4 Incinerate
3 Fork
3 XXX*
3 Browbeat
3 Flamebreak
4 Fireblast

//Sideboard
3-4 Pithing Needle**
4 Red Elemental Blast
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 Sulfuric Vortex
0-1 Flamebreak***

* X = Some combination of Flamebreak, Browbeat, Price of Progress, Chain of Plasma, and/or Flames of the Blood Hand.

** 3 Pithing Needle if you have 1 Flamebreak in the board.

*** 1 Flamebreak in the board if you only have 3 in the maindeck.

It's a fine science at this point. Play this build. YOU CANNOT FAIL!

[boom]

Has anyone seen the lists from GP philly, I think it was. But it has werebears. This deck can reach threshold pretty fast, werebears can help produce mana if they arent beating, they get around COP:red, Wooded Foothills can fetch basic forests if need be. What do most people think about it?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

No, play this;

// Lands
4 [OD] Barbarian Ring
17 [IN] Mountain (3)

// Spells
4 [CHK] Lava Spike
4 [ON] Chain of Plasma
4 [PR] Incinerate
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [4E] Lightning Bolt
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [R] Fork
4 [VI] Fireblast
3 [BOK] Flames of the Blood Hand
4 [JU] Browbeat

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [EX] Price of Progress
SB: 4 [DS] Flamebreak
SB: 4 [SC] Pyrostatic Pillar
SB: 3 [SC] Sulfuric Vortex


Important things; Note how every card in the sideboard does damage. That's because you can't afford Blasts or Needles. You need to deal 20, and you can't reuse your damage sources like they were creatures.


Note: If you really expect Goblins, yes, switch the Flamebreaks and Ogre-Dokkens between the sideboard and main.

[Zilla]

Here's the problem with it: Even though the deck is packed full of instants, it will rarely gain Threshold before turn 5. That's the turn Burn should be winning the game. Before turn 5, Werebear is just a crappy 1/1 for 2 that should be direct damage. Furthermore, it opens up your deck to creature hate as well as non-basic hate, where the mono-red build is impervious to both. As far as I can tell, the potential benefits don't outweigh the disadvantages.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Agreed. I'd much rather have Hearth Kami in that slot, if you really want to run creatures.

[psychat0g]

i would play 4 pop and 2 anhk of mishra :)

[GRAH]

i would play 4 pop and 2 anhk of mishra :)
Nice reading skills.

IBA: 4 Fork is too many. I know that I don't like drawing them in multiples.

I don't see the point of running Barbarian Ring, either. It can't be tossed to Fireblast, and like Zilla said, by the time you have threshold, you're going to win. I know I'd rather play a burn than waste R and a land on a measly Shock.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

i would play 4 pop and 2 anhk of mishra :)
Nice reading skills.

IBA: 4 Fork is too many. I know that I don't like drawing them in multiples.

I don't see the point of running Barbarian Ring, either. It can't be tossed to Fireblast, and like Zilla said, by the time you have threshold, you're going to win. I know I'd rather play a burn than waste R and a land on a measly Shock.
As I think I've explained about half a dozen times on this thread, the point behind Barbarian Ring is that, assuming 17 mountains is enough to support Fireblast (hint; it is), it lets you up your burn count without actually cutting land. Saying that by the time you have Threshold, they're already dead is lethally optimistic thinking. It also gives the deck more maindeck answers to random Red hosers. If you could somehow sacrifice your Mountains for Shocks, you would. This approximates that. Hell, if not for Fireblast, I'd want to run Mishra's Factory, too. You want as high a count of damage spells in each hand as possible and still be able to cast your 3cc spells.

[FallenOmnipotent]

But then, you draw into your second Fireblast...and that sux when you can't sac another 2 mountains. Just my opinion.

[Slay]

If I'm playing Landstill, I'm goign to be ecstatic when you drop a Barbarian Ring. Wastelandable lands make a bad matchup so much easier. It's like countering half a Fireblast.
-Slay

[Zilla]

Yeah, Slay said what I was thinking too. Not being able to cast the second Fireblast is a pain, but the real issue is trying to support several 3cc spells (sometimes with REB backup) with a vulnerable manabase. I no likey.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Ok, so I went to a free tournement at a local store (1st and 2nd get's $20 store credit each...basicly you can look at it as playing for a non-blue duel land. Yeah, they're kinda expensive.)

I was playing GRAH's exact biuld except I only had 2 pithing needles. (I went there and was able to trade 1 for an underground sea...so I did it.) I filled the empty slot with 1 random Anarchy...just in case.

Turns out no one plays White aggro (WW, AS, Rebels...) In fact, I was only afraid of one match-up, NQG. He was running Mental Notes over Predicts though. He went 0-3 luckily for me. I win my first match. It was a mirror match only he ran Ball Lightning. Everytime, he gets me to 1 (or potentialy 1 b/c he had a Mogg Fanatic on the board) but I sneak out with Forks and Fireblasts... (I got 2x Fork, 2x Fireblast, and 4 lands... T3h H/\Kz)
1-0, 2-0

2nd match was against Neo-sui (Plauge Spitters...) We go 1-1 after both mulliganing. Then I lose game three due to reasonably poor luck. I had 2-3 Turns to draw any of 12 cards in my remaining library...but couldn't do it... :'(
1-1, 3-2

3rd Match was against G/B Rock. Pretty classical biuld. He gets pretty pissed off when I beat him 2-1 though. He believes it to be an easy match-up for him...and his arguments would make it seem so... 4x Baloth, 4x Living wish for Spike Feeder, Genisis. He was highly saddened(sp?) when I drop Sulferic Vortex turn 3 games 2 + 3.
2-1, 5-3

With only 13 people there, I easily made T8. 4th Match (T8) was against a short tempered and, what seems to be, a life-less Tog player. After crushing him 2-0 (game 2 with 2 Price of Progress for 6 damage each and some combination of fork.) he just completly snaps on me... "Everyone knows burn is such a bad deck (ect.)" He's an adult (I'm 15) so I take it respectfuly and belittle his comments.
3-1, 7-3

Top 4 Match, match 5 was against another Neo-Sui Black deck. He ends up rapping me with hymns turn 2 and 3 1st game. Hymns took lands and cheap burns... ...i got owned...
Game 2, he hymns me turn 2, I kept a 1 land hand with Lava Spike, Lightning bolt, Incinerate(s), Fireblast, Brow beat. Hymn took Lightning bolt...didn't draw land until 3 turns later. By that time, he had an active Jitte.. ...pwnd 2x...
I guess keeping that hand in the 2nd match when knowing my opponent is playing hand disruption spells was a poor choice...but I've never had problems before with a 1 land hand... o well, you learn as you play right?
3-2, 7-5.

I lost and walked away with nothing (except for trades).

After a couple of tournies with this deck, I realized that there are ALOT of Neo-black and Rock in my meta-game. And I've won every match (before today). I noticed that after the matches that I won, they always say, "grr..there's nothing I can do to further improve this match-up." On the spot, I was unable to think of any anti burn cards in Green and Black either...today Chalise of the void poped into my mind and I started laughing to myself... ...I ended up telling someone that played Neo-Black that I had beaten 2x before in a tourney...Figgured, helping someone is always a good thing.

After today, I don't plan on playing my burn deck again for a while...I'm thinking enough people are pissed off enough to make sure it doesn't happen again. But I was just wondering, is there any cards I could bring in to improve the Neo-Black match-up? Hymns and Duresses are usally too fast for me to Fork. (I've never been given the option to fork a hymn). Yet everyone says that they don't have much trouble against Neo-black... w/e i guess...I'm probably just a bad player...it's pretty hard to mess up with burn though.

Props: My 2 other decks that my friends were playing, Survival and Gobs (and me) all won are first match holding seeds 1-3. :)...gobs went on to T8 while survival went 1-1 then lost to gobs (keeping a 1 land hand with 3 birds/elves. But gobs play 4x Mogg fantastic, 4x Gempalm, 4x StP ~after SB~)

[kirdape3]

Black may not have anything but Drain Life, but in the distant past Natural Spring or the like was used from Green to effectively counter burn spells.

[bigbear102]

Ok, just got back from GenCon. Too many days of gaming to remember everything, but I have some interesting results. First of all burn did excellent for me, at least the first tourney I played.

I was 4-1 going into the matchup against vial goblins round 6. I rolled him game 1, I don't remember details, just that I had life points left and he didn't.

Game 2 He starts out with Port Vial turn 1. I look at my hand and mentally jump for joy, seeing Pithing Needle, and I was pretty sure he had no red source, as there was no reason to walk into wasteland if he did. He missed 2 land drops, and I have the game won. Now comes into play the 6 hours of magic and the 10.5 hour drive I made alone because Syracuse players are lame (GO VA!!!). I made the worst play mistake ever. His turn he was at 8, I had Vortex on the table. Bolt is on the top of my library (i know because of scrying) Fork is in my hand. I have Fanatic on board. All I need to do is block lackey, draw a card, cast bolt/fork, say go and he dies. That would have made me 6-1. What do I do? He declares all goblins attacking. I say "No blocks" (?!?!?!). He drops siege gang and I lose. Why didn't I block with Fanatic??? Your guess is as good as mine. Instead I take game 2 as a loss, and then game 3 he rolls me over.

I will write a better report later, I just wanted to tell all of burn's loyal followers that it is a good choice for big tourneys.

Here is my deck list and the rest of my matchups:

Burn @ GenCon Indy 2005 Legacy Championships:

4x Lightning Bolt
4x Incinerate
4x Lava Spike
4x Chain Lightning
4x Magma Jet
4x Fireblast
4x Mogg Fanatic
3x Fork
3x Flamebreak
3x Flame Rift
2x Pithing Needle*
1x Sulfuric Vortex*

20x Mountain

SB:
3x Anarchy
3x Red Elemental Blast
3x Pyrostatic Pillar
2x Pyroblast
2x Sulfuric Vortex
2x Pithing Needle

*These slots were going to be Browbeats, but I couldn't get them, and ironically I had 3 more cards in my board than were legally allowed, so the three went main. It actually worked out quite well, and I plan to leave them in the deck.

Round 1:
U/R Trix: Game 1 I roll over control.
Game 2 he goes turn 2 medallion, turn 3 medallion, turn 4 win.
Game 3 he drops Illusions early to stay alive, but forgets to notice the Vortex already in play, so he gains no life and I Blast him out.

Round 2: Solitaire
Game 1: I roll him over.
Game 2: I am Solitary Confinement's bitch, misplay the Anarchy, and die to lots of bears.
Game 3: He doesn't realize that being at 14 he is in the red zone. EOT Jet/bolt, my turn bolt/fireblast/fork for the win.

Round 3: ATS
Game 1: Any guesses? I roll him over.
Game 2: He boards chill, ??? ATS boards Chill??? since when? I lose savagely
Game 3: Remember earlier when I said this deck dies to chill? Well it still does, even with 5 blasts

Round 4: KCI combo ( Krark Clan Ironworks)
Game 1: Any guesses? Wrong!!! He comboes turn 3 making me his bitch.
Game 2: PITHING NEEDLE!!!!! YAY!!!
Game 3: Chill hits turn 2, I drop some land while he does the same. I pass my fourth turn (4 mountains in play) He goes EOT Enlightened Tutor, I respond with Fork, I get PITHING NEEDLE!!!!! YAY!!! He gets chill, plays it during his turn. I drop my 5th land and Pithing Needle for Incubator, and then kill him slowly over the course of several turns (I am pretty sure he was drawing dead with no way to get rid of Needle).

Round 5: Sorcery Speed Solidarity
Game 1: He drops and Island and casts Serum Visions. GG That was the extent of game 1, all he did was that, and discard cards because he couldn't find land #2.
Game 2: I drop turn 2 Pyrostatic Pillar. 2 turns later he casts high tide, dropping himself to 7, then scoops realizing he will kill himself before Pillar is bounced (I also had Fireblast/Fork in hand).

Round 6: Vial Goblins (See above)

Rond 7: R/G sligh
I lose this match 0-2 becuase I am so distracted by my misplay from last round. I am then out of contention for any prize, so I drop.


Like I said, there will be a more detailed report later, but that is all for now. I do think this deck is viable to win the Grand Prix, although with the strong showing of red already, it will be severely hated out becuase it plays Basic Mountains.

[MattH]

Black: Drain Life, Corrupt.
Artifact: Sun Droplet, Zuran Orb, Ivory Tower are all huge pains in the ass. Chalice of the Void.
Green: Nourish, Spike Feeder, Ravenous Baloth.

[GRAH]

Black: Drain Life, Corrupt.
Artifact: Sun Droplet, Zuran Orb, Ivory Tower are all huge pains in the ass. Chalice of the Void.
Green: Nourish, Spike Feeder, Ravenous Baloth.
Out of those, the only ones I've seen are Baloth, Feeder, and Sun Droplet.

Drain Life, Corrupt, and Nourish will not see play.

Zuran Orb might see play in Turboland, I guess? Doubt it. Di plays Lifegift.

Ivory Tower is outdated tech. :(

The problem with Chalice is that it's really only good versus this deck and Solidarity. That seems too narrow to me.

I've seen Sun Droplet in the SBs of a couple Pox decks on Magic-League. It seems like a really good anti-burn card, though I was able to play around it, even in topdeck mode.

By the way, for those who don't know, I'm trying to build this deck for the GP.

[FallenOmnipotent]

I was talking to this guy today at the tourney, and he said he's seen LOTZA burn decks, but the best one in his opinion ran Scald in SB...whish might make sense...cause we're playing burn... It'll help vs. a handful of decks.

[GRAH]

Scald was discussed a while ago. It's inferior to REB and Pyrostatic Pillar vs. Solidarity, and not worth SBing.

[colsmack]

If burn has good matchups with Landstill and Goblins like it appears to, it seems like a pretty solid choice. Plus it can board in hate for solidarity...

[Zilla]

The problem is that these decks (Landstill and Solidarity in particular) can board hate that makes life hell for Burn. Moreso Landstill with its options of CoP:Red, Pulse, and the hated Chill. Solidarity has started running the 8 Blast plan to dodge allt he red hate its been seeing, and as I understand it that strategy has been rather effective.

The other problem is that Burn sometimes simply loses to itself, which bears addressing. It's definitely getting there, but it could really use more card manipulation along the lines of Magma Jet to keep it from running out of gas in the late game.

[GRAH]

I haven't been having trouble with Landstill. Pulse of the Fields isn't a big deal, and you can win before COP: Red becomes a problem. I never see Chill boarded for Landstill, though. I do see it boarded in Gro. Gro is easily this deck's worst matchup of popular decks (since RGSA isn't played).

As for Solidarity, I've done little testing against it (no competent players who use it to play here), but the matchup is 45/55 anyway. They have 8 cards SBed in? So do you.

[Zilla]

As for Solidarity, I've done little testing against it (no competent players who use it to play here), but the matchup is 45/55 anyway. They have 8 cards SBed in? So do you.
Yeah but they're favored if you can't resolve your hate. If you're both bringing in an equal amount of cards from the SB, they should logically remain favored. And as far as I've heard from hard-core Solidarity players, they do.

Chill is the deck's biggest problem by far. It's not run in Landstill now, but if Burn becomes "Tier 1", as it were, then Landstill would be wise to start running it, and then you've got problems galore.

[GRAH]

Chill is the deck's biggest problem by far. It's not run in Landstill now, but if Burn becomes "Tier 1", as it were, then Landstill would be wise to start running it, and then you've got problems galore.
Agreed.

Sadly, there's little way to take care of it. REB is the only thing you have, and I don't think putting in 4 Pyroblasts AND 4 REBs is a good idea.

[bigbear102]

The solidarity matchup seems about right, but I wouldn't say that they are heavily favored. You can race them rather nicely. All you have to do is get them down to burn range, then interrupt their stack with several lethal spells, and that isn't as hard as it seems. If Solidarity does catch on, like it should, then Sirocco becomes a 4of in the board, and the matchup is almost always ours. Sirocco is a kill card on turn 2, in the essence that if they don't discard their hand, it will kill them, and if they do discard their hand, you will win. If Solidarity is a problem play 3-4 sirocco backed up with Pillar. I have tested the Solidarity match enough to know that it isn't that horrible for you.

I don't really see what all the fuss about R/G survival is either, even if it was played it isn't a horrible matchup. All you have to do is resolve Pithing Needle/Vortex, and that slows them down enough to crush them. You do have 3x board sweepers to slow their first 3 turns down too. I have not had a problem with this deck yet, although if you don't kill them quickly they will crush you, but that happens with every tier 1-2 deck anyway.

On the REB discussion, I played 5 at GenCon, and still lost to Chill. Sadly I believe that if Chill gets more popular, then we are done for as an effective archetype. The one thing we have going for us is that Chill is not that good against Goblins, so people don't play it as much. My advice is to advocate the playing of Goblins so much that people forget about burn, and then noone is ready for it, lol.

Hopefully someone piloting this deck (me) will take home the big prize at Philly.

[t3h.sWaRm]

What do you guys take out to SB in certain matches? I can never figure out what to take out, rarely want to take the burn out. I've got 5 REB effects in my SB + Pillar but find myself not wanting to take anything out vs. Solidarity. Flamebreaks and Price of Progress = obvious, but what else? At first I took out Fanatics, but if dropped on turn 1 they can do 4+ damage(unless they have a God hand). Do you guys think the possibility Fanatics to do some good damage is worth the slots in the deck(since they're pretty bad turns 2+)?

[scrumdogg]

If I had 8-9 cards to remove for sideboard hate (and I should vs. combo/blue...) Fanatics would definitely be on the list since if it doesn't hit Turn 1 (as you mentioned) it will do less damage than all other cards in the deck (other than Jet, which let's you stack draws...). Against blue decks with creatures, obviously the Fanatic stays as he gets to fulfill his primary purpose in the deck, critter removal. At that point, the Flame Rifts can come out since I am not so happy about whacking my own life total vs blue based aggro control.

[GRAH]

Swarm: Don't worry about SBing out Fanatic. It's alright. In fact, after the situational PoP and Flamebreak, Fanatic and Fork are the first things I SB out.

[bigbear102]

Siding out Fanatic is fine against combo, but i disagree with fork. If playing against solidarity, never take out fork. It lets you draw cards, untap lands to kill them, counter their counters for the win. Taking out Flamebreaks, pop's, and fanatics should be plenty that fork should not even be on the list. Obviously against other decks fork may come out, but agaisnt a deck that you can target every one of their spells, it is amazing.

[GRAH]

Well obviously you don't board out Fork for Solidarity...I do -3 Flamebreak -3 PoP -2 Fanatic to board in my hate.

I board out Fork for different matchups (sometimes Landstill).

[Slay]

Browbeats should also be going vs. Solidarity, if you run them. It's a Sorcery and will tap you out so you can't burn them in response to their going off.
-Slay

[GRAH]

Browbeats should also be going vs. Solidarity, if you run them. It's a Sorcery and will tap you out so you can't burn them in response to their going off.
-Slay
Probably, yeah. I just get wary of dropping too many Browbeats because they're your only real card advantage card.

[bigbear102]

I don't even play browbeat, and i have the same % against solidarity as you guys, so i don't see how dropping them could hurt you that much. Although I do play Flame Rift, which is amazing against Solidarity, so maybe that is why my matchup stays on par.

I also disagree with siding out Fork against Landstill, that is another one of the matches that it works wonders in. It can copy 12 spells in their deck very effectively (8 counters + Brainstorm) and still every one in your deck, I don't see how that is bad, especially when PoP is at its best in this matchup, protection against counters/double damage is priceless. I personally take out 3x Flamebreak 4x Fanatic, as their lands can block, and it gives their mass removal (they can't possibly take it all out) a target.

[Zilla]

Discuss. (http://mtgthesource.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=779)

[blacklotus3636]

While I would love to use cards like lightning helix and disenchant I'm afraid it goes against the original logic put forth by zilla in that to run non-basics(plateau's for the white splash)you make thier wastelands good and you open yourself up to alot more B.S that randomly screws you

Personally I like the way it is now with a very narrow range of cards that screw you like cop red,pulse and the dreaded chill with cop red I have needle and for pulse I have ankh but chill is one of those cards that is very hard to work around in this deck but chill to me isn't good enough to be better than cop red in most control decks for the goblin matchup because of vial and lackey and that's really the only red deck people are concerned with and as long as that remains true the mono red burn build will be superior to the one with the white splash it's alot like it was in type two around regoinals where most people were only concerned with one red deck(little red) when big red which had alot more burn and less creature oriented would steal match wins because people were only prepared for the more known red deck

The period is our friend. (http://www.bytesoflearning.com/UltraKey/Lessons/Punct.html) Please use it where appropriate; without it, your post is difficult to read.

Peter_Rotten

[Zilla]

A couple things to consider. While Pithing Needle does answer a lot of hate, it doesn't answer cards like Worship, Solitary Confinement, Pariah, or Sphere of Law. It also doesn't answer Chill, which is by far one of the most devastating hate cards can you can run into. It could be argued that Anarchy answers the first batch, and that REB answers Chill, but Disenchant answers ALL of them, including the ones that Needle does like Jitte and CoP:Red. The ability to answer nearly all the deck's problems with a single card is appealling in the extreme.

Anarchy is slow and wastes SB slots. You don't really need it to beat decks like Angel Stompy because their threats are mostly irrellevant, since you can get around them with direct damage. And Disenchant is much, MUCH more effective at answering Chill.

Some have argued that the necessary inclusion of Fetchlands offesets the lifegain from Helix, but this is sort of absurd. On average, you'll be using 2 Fetches per game, possibly 3. This means that at worst, you break even, and that's assuming you never play another Helix past the first.

As for potential dissynergy with PoP and vulnerability to Wasteland, this is actually quite trivial. If you run 8 Fetches and 2-3 Plateaus, you will typically have control over when you bring a non-basic to the table. It should be rather easy to dodge your own PoPs and your opponent's Wastelands when it matters.

The only drawback that could impact your strategy with any degree of significance is that you can't run Ankh with Fetches, but most Burn builds don't run Ankhs. Ankhs are good in strong matchups and bad in your weak ones. The only metagames where you'd want to run them would be in a heavy MWC or Turboland meta, and as far as I'm aware, those don't exist.

The place where the white splash really shines is in the mirror match. Lifegain against other Burn is very, very desireable.

Lastly, StP can be an important SB option in certain metagames, where one might run into super-fast decks with a vulnerability to it, like Reanimator or The Game.

It's mostly rhetorical to suggest that a splash is outright bad simply because it opens you up to Wastelands. Always, these things have to be weighed by pros and cons. In this case, Disenchant can effectively answer nearly all hate brought to bear against the deck, and Helix is golden (no pun intended) in the mirror. The question that needs answering is whether or not these benefits outweigh the drawback of minor vulnerability to Wasteland. My guess is that they do, but the only way to know for certain is to do serious testing against a full gauntlet.

EDIT:

I'd propose this decklist for preliminary testing:

//Mana
9 Mountain
3 Plateau
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire

//Burn
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Magma Jet
4 Lightning Helix
4 Incinerate
2 Price of Progress
3 Fork
4 Browbeat
3 Flamebreak
4 Fireblast

//Sideboard
4 Disenchant
4 Red Elemental Blast
4 Sirocco/Pithing Needle*
2 Price of Progress
1 Flamebreak

* Depends how much Solidarity is in your meta. Needle is better against stuff like Salvagers, Belcher, and RGSA, but if Solidarity is present you'll want answers to it.

This list simply alters the manabase to accomodate the white spash and replaces Fanatic for Helix, since Fanatic is likely the weakest card in my old list.