PDA

View Full Version : [Deck] Burn



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Peter_Rotten
12-03-2007, 04:15 PM
Burn has done suprising well recently in Non-American tournies. I'll not pretend to know much about the deck nor even hide the fact that I think it is a weaker deck choice, but I will provide you with this information:

The Burn thread is also a Moderator’s nightmare. Previous burn threads have followed the same pattern: they are heavily flooded with junk and then heavily modded. Next, they are flooded with more junk and moderators become frustrated and later apathetic and the thread spirals into a disaster. Be wary of making worthless posts.

In this new thread, please make posts that are well-developed and free of flames. Keep in mind that most issues about burn have been discussed to death. It will be very difficult to come to a consensus about the following issues and these issues will be heavily modded:

Browbeat
Lava Dart
# of Mountains needed to support Fireblast
Fork


Here, Zilla wants to chime in, too:


This was said at the beginning of the last Burn thread and will be reiterated in this one because it is important. This thread is for discussing Burn. It is not for the discussion of its cousins, RDW and Sligh. While similar, these two decks are idealogically different from Burn, in that one of Burn's core tenets is to avoid the use of any nonland permanents as a way of making many of the opponent's cards dead, hence providing virtual card advantage. This strategy is not inherent in Sligh or RDW, which tend to have a roughly equal balance of nonland permanents and burn spells. Therefore, in order to keep this discussion on track, do not post RDW or Sligh threads here. If you wish to discuss those archetypes, please start seperate threads for them. - Zilla

With that out of the way, I'll post the lists that have T8ed in November:

Stupid Red Burn by Arek Czubin

Instant [20]

4 Fireblast
1 Fork
4 Incinerate
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Magma Jet
3 Price of Progress

Sorcery [20]

4 Browbeat
4 Chain Lightning
4 Flame Rift
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt

Land [20]

4 Barbarian Ring
16 Mountain


"Sligh" by Ángel Algarate (Really a Burn deck because of its lack of beaters)

Creature [7]

3 Grim Lavamancer
4 Mogg Fanatic

Instant [21]

4 Fireblast
3 Fork
4 Incinerate
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Price of Progress
3 Sudden Shock

Sorcery [11]

3 Browbeat
3 Chain Lightning
2 Lava Spike
3 Rift Bolt

Artifact [2]
2 Cursed Scroll

Land [19]

4 Bloodstained Mire
13 Mountain
2 Wooded Foothills


Burn by Patrick Collinet (both critters really function as burn spells since they will NOT be sticking around)

Creature [8]

4 Keldon Marauders
4 Spark Elemental

Instant [16]

4 Fireblast
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Magma Jet
4 Price of Progress

Sorcery [17]

3 Browbeat
4 Chain Lightning
2 Flamebreak
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt

Land [19]

19 Mountain

Burn by Storaci Saverio Burn

Instant (20)

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Fireblast
4 Magma Jet
4 Incinerate
4 Price of Progress

Enchantment (4)

4 Sulfuric Vortex

Sorcery (16)

4 Rift Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Flamebreak
4 Lava Spike

Land (20)
20 Mountain


Burn by Schiano Diego

Creature (4)

4 Mogg Fanatic

Instant (4)

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Fireblast
4 Magma Jet
4 Incinerate
4 Price of Progress

Sorcery (4)

4 Rift Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Flamebreak
4 Lava Spike

Land (20)

2 Barbarian Ring
18 Mountain

Based on those 5 lists, here is a list that plays the most played cards from above:

Suggested Burn

3for1
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike

Utility
4 Magma Jet

Finishers
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress

Filler
4 Incinerate
4 ?
4 ?

Land
20 Mountains


And lastly, here is the link to the old Burn thread (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2636). Enjoy, and may I suggest that the first problem you solve is what to do about the new rash of Chalice/Trini decks.

Wallace
12-03-2007, 04:31 PM
Intresting to see Burn Replacing Goyf Sligh in the DTBF. I played burn for like 2 months @ 5 events and dod ok with it, never cracking the top 8 though. Here my latest burn build, runs great as long as you don't draw to much land. I really think this deck Needs cursed Scroll and Sulfuric Vortex to work, with out creature you have no way to deal a steady source of damage.

4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Fireblast
4 Incinerate
4 Price of Progress
4 Magma Jet
3 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Cursed Scroll
2 Flamebreak
2 Blood Moon


4 Wooded Foothills
3 Barbirian Ring
12 Mountain

DragoFireheart
12-03-2007, 04:44 PM
Wow, burn is a DTW?

Well, I would suggest Flame Rift due to th heav amount of damage it does. If you are in a combo or control heavy enviroment it works wonders and can actually let burn get a 3rd turn win.

Wallace
12-03-2007, 04:49 PM
Wow, burn is a DTW?

Well, I would suggest Flame Rift due to th heav amount of damage it does. If you are in a combo or control heavy enviroment it works wonders and can actually let burn get a 3rd turn win.

I've had a lot of bad run in's with Flame Rift, really hurts when it gets Honerable Passage cast on it. I wiil prob. look at adding it back to the main board though.

nitewolf9
12-03-2007, 05:05 PM
I fail to see how this deck can possibly do well with the prevalence of counterbalance in the format. What do you do when your opponent casts it, lose? I suppose in the right metagame it might be viable, but I would be wary about running it for the counterbalance reason alone.

Wallace
12-03-2007, 05:09 PM
I fail to see how this deck can possibly do well with the prevalence of counterbalance in the format. What do you do when your opponent casts it, lose? I suppose in the right metagame it might be viable, but I would be wary about running it for the counterbalance reason alone.

Counterbalance isn't as bad as you think, if you go turn 1, Bolt (3 damage), turn 2, Bolt, Bolt (6 Damage @ 11), you opponent goes turn 2 counterbalance. They are now tapped ou and you will force them to use a hard counter of pry that there top card has the right cc. If there to card isn't a 1cc card you can win now, if it is you just have to play around it. Let your hand fill up with burn and respond to top or draw your 2cc, 3cc or 6cc burn spell and hope to burn them out. This is another reason I think Vortex and Cursed Scroll need to be in this deck.

freakish777
12-03-2007, 05:19 PM
A well tuned (to your meta game) Burn deck can have surprisingly good results.

I'm a fan of the following list:

4 Fanatic

4 Bolts
4 Spikes
4 Chains
4 Rift Bolt
4 Fireblasts

4 Magma Jet
4 Sulfuric Vortex
4 Flamebreak
3 Price of Progress

18 Mountains
3 Barbarian Ring

SB

4 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 REBs
8 slots to split between the following cards dependant on your metagame ->
1 REB, 4 Tormod's Crypt, 3 Pyroclasm, 4 Shattering Spree, 4 Pyroblast


I'm really unsure as to what decks Burn legitimately has a good match up against, aside from 43 lands (you're basically combo and you randomly win with Price of Progress) and glacially slow control decks. I'm inclined to say that against Aluren you should be able to "get there," however friendly Phil Stolze also reports having beat 3 Burn decks with his Aluren build (non-recruiter version) at GP Columbus. I'm also inclined to say that you should be able to "get there" against Survival builds, however it will probably require on of 3 things to happen, they get a poor draw, you get a phenominal draw, or you get Vortex to prevent their life gain shenegans with Baloth/Spike Feeder/Primal Command.

It seems like the majority of other decks you'll beat with it will fall into one (or more) of the following categories:

Piloted by a bad player
Opponent gets mana screwed
Sub-optimal decks


Decks you straight up lose to:

Anything with Tendrils of Agony.
Faerie Stompy (Chalice + FoW + Jitte + huge beats, seems bad, not to mention Price of Progress doesn't shine here).


Additionally, it seems like UWb Fish decks would give you nightmares if they pack CounterTop main (they already run Jitte and Thoughtseize + Mage).

cheddercaveman
12-03-2007, 05:25 PM
I think that we need to see decklists with sideboards personally. There are a lot of very viable issues that have been brought up here (chalice, trinisphere, thorn, counterbalance). I think that a lot of these issues can probably be dealt with in the sideboard. Shatteringspree, Ingot Chewer come to mind as an answer to some of them. If we could post full sideboard lists that'd be good.

Edit: I posted this and then saw the list right above this post with a SB, the other deck lists here could also use them though.

Peter_Rotten
12-03-2007, 08:03 PM
I fail to see how this deck can possibly do well with the prevalence of counterbalance in the format. What do you do when your opponent casts it, lose? I suppose in the right metagame it might be viable, but I would be wary about running it for the counterbalance reason alone.

Well, not one of its recent T8s happened in America and seemed to happen in lesser known metas. Would it be fair to assume that those metas are less developed? Maybe, but look at one T8:

Top 8:
1. UGWB Threshold
2. Ichorid
3. Innovator Aluren
4. CRET Belcher
5. Burn
6. Burn
7. Vial Goblins with white splash
8. Deadguy

Other than Burn, none of those decks are a real suprise. But here is a very odd T8:

Top 8:
1. CounterSlivers
2. UWR Landstill
3. Berserk Stompy
4. BHWC Landstill
5. Burn
6. UGR Threshold
7. Suicide Black
8. Rec-Sur


I think that we need to see decklists with sideboards personally.

You CAN see the SBs. Search this thread (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3996) for the November tournies. Each one has a link to the T8 lists including SB.

- - -

Looking at those 5 T8 lists, I tried to make one mast list based off of the most popular card choices. Each card is ranked out of the possible total of 20 slots (four in each of the five decks).

Typical Great-to-Good Burn
Lightning Bolt - 20
Fireblast - 20
Chain Lightning - 19 (may be an availability issue)
Rift Bolt - 19
Price of Progress - 18
Lava Spike - 18
Magma Jet - 16
Incinerate - 16

Notice a significant drop in numbers here
Lamebreak - 10
Browbeat - 10
Mogg Fanatic - 8
Barbarian Ring - 6
Sulforic Vortex - 4
Keldon Mauroders - 4
Spark ELemental - 4
Fork - 4
Lame Rift - 4
Grim Lavamancer - 3
Sudden Shock - 3
Cursed Scroll - 3

If we were to make a deck based on those numbers we would have the following:

3for1
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike

Utility
4 Magma Jet

Finishers
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress

Filler
4 Incinerate
4 ?
4 ?

Land
20 Mountains

I think that those 8 slots in the filler section are really the only ones up for debate. If you want those slots to do the most possible damage with no regard to anything else, then consider Flame Rift. Do you want them to be able to kill critters, then consider Flamebreak. Do you want possible recurring damage? Consider Fanatics or Cursed Scroll. Do you want the burn to be as cheap as possible? Then consider Seal, Shock, or Tarfire. No matter waht you fill those last 8 slots with, I guarantee it will be with something weaker than the already filled 32 slots of burn. :frown: I'll edit the suggested list into the original post.

AnwarA101
12-03-2007, 10:08 PM
Counterbalance isn't as bad as you think, if you go turn 1, Bolt (3 damage), turn 2, Bolt, Bolt (6 Damage @ 11), you opponent goes turn 2 counterbalance. They are now tapped ou and you will force them to use a hard counter of pry that there top card has the right cc. If there to card isn't a 1cc card you can win now, if it is you just have to play around it. Let your hand fill up with burn and respond to top or draw your 2cc, 3cc or 6cc burn spell and hope to burn them out. This is another reason I think Vortex and Cursed Scroll need to be in this deck.

This makes it sound like Burn is a turn 3 deck. I am pretty sure it isn't since it would probably have done so much better in Legacy before now if it could consistently win on turn 3. It cannot and often doesn't even win on turn 4. Counterbalance is a beating not to mention your opponent just racing you with good threats like Tarmogoyf.

Wallace
12-03-2007, 10:27 PM
This makes it sound like Burn is a turn 3 deck. I am pretty sure it isn't since it would probably have done so much better in Legacy before now if it could consistently win on turn 3. It cannot and often doesn't even win on turn 4. Counterbalance is a beating not to mention your opponent just racing you with good threats like Tarmogoyf.

Counter balance does hurt, but I'm not gonna scoop to it. I have played through many counterbalance's, once it hits you just have to play around it, if your burn deck is playing right you shoud have your opponent @ 10 or 11 or 12 at the start of turn 3. Price of progress is the card of choice to finish off a player running counterbalance. Point you bolts at there head, make them tap out or make them use their other counter magic, then when the moment is right, Cast a lethal Price of Progress or Fireblast or both. I wasn't saying that you would win on turn 3 but you should be able to have them low enough by turn 3 to play around CB.

Tao
12-03-2007, 10:28 PM
I was going to say the same like Anwar. Countertop is usually GG when your opponent still sits on ~10 life. The problem is not only CB but that you can't resolve any spells while they draw whatever they need (Pressure, Mana or Disruption) with the Top.

However, I am not surprised to see Burn here. All decks are less prepared. Red hate got less with the decline of Goblins, Survival decks pack less Hierarch / Baloth or Darkheart Sliver, very good matchups like MUC, Loam or Landstill were in the DTB Forum and the bad matchups like Faerie Stompy did not see much play, just like Combo.

So the only matchup Burn had to fear was Thresh and lists with 4 PoP tuned against Thresh should do great in the Meta.

AnwarA101
12-03-2007, 10:38 PM
Counter balance does hurt, but I'm not gonna scoop to it. I have played through many counterbalance's, once it hits you just have to play around it, if your burn deck is playing right you shoud have your opponent @ 10 or 11 or 12 at the start of turn 3. Price of progress is the card of choice to finish off a player running counterbalance. Point you bolts at there head, make them tap out or make them use their other counter magic, then when the moment is right, Cast a lethal Price of Progress or Fireblast or both. I wasn't saying that you would win on turn 3 but you should be able to have them low enough by turn 3 to play around CB.

Force of Will, Daze, and Counterbalance all create serious problems for the Burn player when they are combined with a swift clock of Tarmogoyfs and other creatures. The draw spells make it so that they find their spells much more reliably than Burn can ever hope to. This matchup has always been poor in my experience for the Burn player. Burn plays like a combo deck that basically only plays 1 threat, the spell that would kill your opponent and they only need to counter that one provided they have enough pressure to kill you in the meantime.

Wallace
12-03-2007, 10:43 PM
Force of Will, Daze, and Counterbalance all create serious problems for the Burn player when they are combined with a swift clock of Tarmogoyfs and other creatures. The draw spells make it so that they find their spells much more reliably than Burn can ever hope to. This matchup has always been poor in my experience for the Burn player. Burn plays like a combo deck that basically only plays 1 threat, the spell that would kill your opponent and they only need to counter that one provided they have enough pressure to kill you in the meantime.

I totally agree with you, I have been looking at this from a Goyf Sligh perspective, not burn, my mistake. I have been playing Goyf Sligh, more burn than aggro, and don't have a problem with counterbalance. Burn will have a lot more trouble with the counter-top match than sligh, thats why I switched decks...my bad.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-03-2007, 10:49 PM
Its great to see this deck as a DTW. I love bauble burn, but I have to admit all the variants that were top 8ing had no baubles or wraiths:frown:. Does this instantly end the debate of to bauble or not to bauble?

Iranon
12-04-2007, 05:21 AM
A single Fetch Land in the yard and a Bolt/Brainstorm means that a Flamebreak alone won't kill Tarmogoyfs. With the green git replacing goblin hordes as the primary creature concern, how does this affect us?

Does it make variants that just go for the throat - without sweepers but with inflexible damage marvels like Price of Progress/Flame Rift - more competitive? Alternatively, in efficient rather than flexible decks Cave-In can actually speed up a win, and it's a superior tool against things like Goblin tokens.

Lemuria
12-04-2007, 07:09 AM
Force of Will, Daze, and Counterbalance all create serious problems for the Burn player when they are combined with a swift clock of Tarmogoyfs and other creatures. The draw spells make it so that they find their spells much more reliably than Burn can ever hope to. This matchup has always been poor in my experience for the Burn player. Burn plays like a combo deck that basically only plays 1 threat, the spell that would kill your opponent and they only need to counter that one provided they have enough pressure to kill you in the meantime.

I have some experience playing Burn, and I can tell that Burn can fight pretty much well through counters. Burn can race Threshold every game 1, but game 2 becomes impossible with counterbalance, yea, I never won a game with SDT+balance in play.

In a tournament, I was able to fight Scepter+counterspell though. I can't remember if was Bardo's or Mike Flore's arcticle that I read this days, but I remember something like "save yoour spells an then throw them all in his head". That's what I did to finish him. He was able to counter my first 3 spells at EOT. Then in my turn I finished him with a bolt and 2 Fireblasts. That's 3 cards = 11 dmg. Burn can easily race any aggro, aggro/control or control deck. Even through counters.

Game 2 is another history, though. Chill, chalice and counterbalance are a nightmare for you, but counter alone can't do much trouble for you.

arsenalpow
12-04-2007, 09:04 AM
My team from South Texas took a mostly burn deck to GenCon 06...Most of us didn't do so well. The guy from my team who originally played it as a pet deck did the best due to familarity with the cards and i believe top 32'ed. I know it says not to include sligh lists, but we feel its more of a burn deck than anything. In fact the people in our meta just refer to it as a burn deck. Maybe some of the thoughts from our list could be adapted to a more burn heavy deck. Our team name was Team Evil, the deck was called Evil Deck Wins.

Creatures
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Jackal Pup
4 Kird Ape
4 Grim Lavamancer

Instants
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Shock
3 Fire // Ice
3 Fireblast

Enchantments
3 Genju of the Spires

Artifacts
3 Isochron Scepter

Land
5 Mountain
3 Taiga
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Wasteland
4 Mishra Factory

A few things to note about the card choices. I'm sure people have addressed using scepter as a recurring source of damage. The card usually never came down until it could played and activated in the same turn, unless it needed to be dropped early to beat permission of some sort (for example solidarity w/ remands)

Note also that all the burn are instants that can applied to the scepter(with the exception of fireblast). Fire//Ice was also an amazing card. It killed confidants all the time for us, but it might be a bit outclassed in todays metagame. Ice off the scepter was some tastiness as well.

We also noted that genju can be a game breaker. I think the numbers we crunched were something of a 90% chance of victory when connecting with the genju at least once during the game. Realistically 6 damage is 1/3 of a player's life when they crack minimum of 2 fetch lands in a game. It's not burn per se but genju can activated at your convenience as to minimize the risks. It can also be a recurring source of damage because the genju can be recast.

The deck also had incarnations with a White splash for cats, dogs, grunts, and orim's chant (for the combo matchup).

Kronicler
12-04-2007, 07:22 PM
I don't think people are giving baubles + street wraith their fair chance. My friend has been testing a list that runs the full 12 cyclers as well as goyf, the 16 3 for 1s, incinerate, and fireblast and has had some good results. I know that we aren't supposed to talk about lists with creatures, but the deck still functions mostly as a burn deck with goyfs mostly to block other goyfs. The thing is though that if goyf ever connects the game is pretty much over. I'll let him come and talk about it when he has time, but the main point of the post is not to forget the cyclers and/or goyf as well as their ludicrous interaction.

Kronicler

TeenieBopper
12-04-2007, 07:59 PM
Why in the world would you run Street Wrath and/or Baubles over, oh, I don't know, more burn spells?

Peter_Rotten
12-04-2007, 08:31 PM
Why in the world would you run Street Wrath and/or Baubles over, oh, I don't know, more burn spells?

Well, there are about 8 slots that must be filled with subpar burn. Maybe it would be better to run the Wraiths in those slots so that you can draw into those Bolts or Blasts.

TeenieBopper
12-04-2007, 08:39 PM
Well, there are about 8 slots that must be filled with subpar burn. Maybe it would be better to run the Wraiths in those slots so that you can draw into those Bolts or Blasts.

Just off the top of my head

17 mountain
3 Barbarian Ring

4 Bolt
4 Spark Elemental
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Magma Jet
4 Incinerate
4 Rift Bolt

That's 52. So, those 8 slots could be Wriath+Bauble. But aren't Fireblast, Mogg Fanatic, PoP, Flamebreak, Scepter, Scroll all just better than those? You know, actually doing something instead of simply being placeholders?

Holy fuck... I can't believe I"m actually discussing Burn. What is this world coming to?

Tao
12-04-2007, 08:50 PM
But aren't Fireblast, Mogg Fanatic, PoP, Flamebreak, Scepter, Scroll all just better than those? You know, actually doing something instead of simply being placeholders?

Holy fuck... I can't believe I"m actually discussing Burn. What is this world coming to?

It is even worse. You are discussing it pretty bad, too ;)
Fireblast is not open for discussion. It is in the deck like Mountain or Lightning Bolt. PoP is in the current Meta at least a 3-of but most players agree that 4 should be played in the main.

Mancer and Sparky are the subpar cards that would be replaced in Bauble Burn. And 4 lands, too, because of the cycling.

However, IMO Baubles make the deck less consistent because they are slow and you don't know if a hand is a keeper or not. And on the other hand the other burn spells, like Browbeat (Hi Taco), Keldon Marauders or Mogg Fanatic are not so bad that they have to be replaced by any means.

________

To Marauders:
Aren't they just great? Magma Jet is 2 Damage with a potential upgrade of gaining card quality. Marauders are 2 Damage with the potential upgrade of a free Lightning Bolt. If not, you will gain at least some life by chumpblocking a Goyf, getting the marauders sworded or not getting the Lightning Bolt in your face.

Wallace
12-05-2007, 12:22 PM
Holy fuck... I can't believe I"m actually discussing Burn. What is this world coming to?

Who are you and what have you done with Mike?


It is even worse. You are discussing it pretty bad, too ;)
Fireblast is not open for discussion. It is in the deck like Mountain or Lightning Bolt. PoP is in the current Meta at least a 3-of but most players agree that 4 should be played in the main.

To Marauders:
Aren't they just great? Magma Jet is 2 Damage with a potential upgrade of gaining card quality. Marauders are 2 Damage with the potential upgrade of a free Lightning Bolt. If not, you will gain at least some life by chumpblocking a Goyf, getting the marauders sworded or not getting the Lightning Bolt in your face.

Totally agree on both points, Fireblast is an auto 4 of and Marauders is pretty sweet. I am testing list with 4 Marauders 4 Mogg Fanatic as the ony creatures, seems to work.

cheddercaveman
12-05-2007, 01:31 PM
I was doing some testing last night to see what I could get to speed up the game. I tried the bauble/wraith theory just to see how it'd pan out, and I don't think I care for it. I tried 8 and even 12 of them, didnt speed up the clock or change the hands I could keep and/or win with. So I put in 8 fetches and grim lavamancer and mogg fanatic, that was a little bit better honestly. I was able to get a few turn 4 wins with that build, it was still slower than I'd like though honestly, especially since i was figuring mogg fanatic to get in for damage and again an opponent that may not always be the case.

I have seen in my metagame a boros-style deck that is very similar, except in that 8-12 questionable slots they run efficient white cards (Isamaru, Goblin Legionaire, Jotun Grunt) alogn with fanatic and lavamancer. Also, that allows for lightning helix, which is amazing. Also gives sideboard options of things like seal of cleansing which is huge. I think this might be a tad more consistant personally, of course the fact that goyf sligh dropped maybe thats not true, but I want to say that this boros deck is running a lot more burn than 'ole goofy.

arsenalpow
12-05-2007, 03:07 PM
the best part of running white is getting access to chant and abeyance, the chants can act almost as a time walk against combo

LordEvilTeaCup
12-05-2007, 03:53 PM
Concerning countertop, why not have some Sb'ed Boseiju, Who Shelters All? Perhaps not the best of solutions, but its an answer at least.

Concerning Wraith/Bauble, I felt they made my turn 4 kills more consistent than normal burn builds. A major problem in my experience though, is Wraith and Baubles making the opponent's gofy big in a hurry.

Wallace
12-05-2007, 03:58 PM
Concerning countertop, why not have some Sb'ed Boseiju, Who Shelters All? Perhaps not the best of solutions, but its an answer at least.

Concerning Wraith/Bauble, I felt they made my turn 4 kills more consistent than normal burn builds. A major problem in my experience though, is Wraith and Baubles making the opponent's gofy big in a hurry.

Already there, I run 2-3 in my board, make your POP's, magma Jet. Incinerate and Fireblast (hardcast) uncounterable. Very nice and a suprie to many people.

jamest
12-05-2007, 06:08 PM
Why in the world would you run Street Wrath and/or Baubles over, oh, I don't know, more burn spells?
12 cyclers allow you to play a 48 card deck. This basically turns all the 4ofs in your deck into 5ofs. The primary drawback of cyclers is the delayed draw (Baubles) and life loss (Wraith).


My friend has been testing a list that runs the full 12 cyclers...
Here's my current test list
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Taiga
3 Mountain
2 Barbarian Ring

4 Tarmogoyf
4 Keldon Marauders

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Incinerate
3 Fireblast

4 Mishra's Bauble
4 Urza's Bauble
4 Street Wraith

I'm not completely sold on Goyf yet. It can win games on its own, but it also opens up the deck to removal. Against the top tier decks, it doesn't feel like it impacts the matchup percentages very much. It might be a better idea to have Goyf in the SB so we can side it in G2 when our opponents are siding out their removal.

Wallace
12-05-2007, 06:10 PM
12 cyclers allow you to play a 48 card deck. This basically turns all the 4ofs in your deck into 5ofs. The primary drawback of cyclers is the delayed draw (Baubles) and life loss (Wraith).


I'm not completely sold on Goyf yet. It can win games on its own, but it also opens up the deck to removal. Against the top tier decks, it doesn't feel like it impacts the matchup percentages very much. It might be a better idea to have Goyf in the SB so we can side it in G2 when our opponents are siding out their removal.

If you're gonna play Goyf then just play Goyf Sligh and maximize the decks potencial. Burn should really only be playing 4 creatures, Mogg Fanatic or Grim Lavamancer.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-05-2007, 06:25 PM
Already there, I run 2-3 in my board, make your POP's, magma Jet. Incinerate and Fireblast (hardcast) uncounterable. Very nice and a suprie to many people.

Ahh yes, I do believe you were the first one to drop that sage advice. Did you come to any concrete opinions as to the amount one should have in the SB? Without testing, I like the idea of keeping it at 2. One they are legendary (duh), two this deck is very red hungry, three it comes into play tapped, and finally it can create problems with fire blast. I suppose you merely swap them for the rings game 2. I think that is the only answer we have to counter top really. As an answer, its not too shabby if you ask me.

Wallace
12-05-2007, 06:35 PM
Ahh yes, I do believe you were the first one to drop that sage advice. Did you come to any concrete opinions as to the amount one should have in the SB? Without testing, I like the idea of keeping it at 2. One they are legendary (duh), two this deck is very red hungry, three it comes into play tapped, and finally it can create problems with fire blast. I suppose you merely swap them for the rings game 2. I think that is the only answer we have to counter top really. As an answer, its not too shabby if you ask me.

I lkie it as a two of in the board, running three use's (duh) three spots in the SB and like you said 1) It's Legendary and 2) this deck likes :r: mana.

Shugyosha
12-05-2007, 08:04 PM
Seriously I cannot understand why nobody is discussion Blood Moon and Magus of the Moon. Non-basics are still non-basics under a Blood Moon, so it doesn't affect the brokeness of PoP.

Both are insane in this deck and sometimes even GG when you cast it. They also pass Spell Snare (which PoP sadly doesn't) and usually get around a Counterbalance, too.

I suggest to play 4 Magus main, as they are never dead and 4 Blood Moon sideboard unless you are in a random junkpile meta.

Another thing I want to point out is the sweeper slot. I think Flamebreak is too slow and not flexible enough nowadays. I run Earthquake (if you have it: Rolling Earthquake) for two reasons:

1. It can handle EtW tokens a turn faster. As you usually have no guaranteed thrid land drop early in the game you can sometimes even die with only two mountains and Flamebreak in hand.

2. During the late game you can get much more bang out of an Earthquake and thats what this deck is about: Squeezing every last drop of damage out of your spells.

I also never liked Barbarian Ring and had good results with Mishra's Factory so far. Three of them will do as it is more imporant to have red mana then the boost ability. They help you to live through that ocasional bad topdeck turns and also force the opponent to leave blockers at home or be wary of Factory + burn tricks that might kill their attackers.
The psychological effect of burn is something most people underestimate. Its quite difficult to play against a deck that might be able to kill you out of nowhere but is not combo, where you have to throw a twig between spokes at the right time to prevent the kill.

Wallace
12-05-2007, 08:18 PM
Seriously I cannot understand why nobody is discussion Blood Moon and Magus of the Moon. Non-basics are still non-basics under a Blood Moon, so it doesn't affect the brokeness of PoP.

Both are insane in this deck and sometimes even GG when you cast it. They also pass Spell Snare (which PoP sadly doesn't) and usually get around a Counterbalance, too.

I suggest to play 4 Magus main, as they are never dead and 4 Blood Moon sideboard unless you are in a random junkpile meta.

Another thing I want to point out is the sweeper slot. I think Flamebreak is too slow and not flexible enough nowadays. I run Earthquake (if you have it: Rolling Earthquake) for two reasons:

1. It can handle EtW tokens a turn faster. As you usually have no guaranteed thrid land drop early in the game you can sometimes even die with only two mountains and Flamebreak in hand.

2. During the late game you can get much more bang out of an Earthquake and thats what this deck is about: Squeezing every last drop of damage out of your spells.

I also never liked Barbarian Ring and had good results with Mishra's Factory so far. Three of them will do as it is more imporant to have red mana then the boost ability. They help you to live through that ocasional bad topdeck turns and also force the opponent to leave blockers at home or be wary of Factory + burn tricks that might kill their attackers.
The psychological effect of burn is something most people underestimate. Its quite difficult to play against a deck that might be able to kill you out of nowhere but is not combo, where you have to throw a twig between spokes at the right time to prevent the kill.

First off, I do run Blood moon and Rolling Earthquake. Mishra's factory is terrible and Barb ring is sweet in burn. I used to run it as a 4 of but have since cut the land coungt in my burn list, I now run 2 rings. Factory doesn't make :r: mana and is to mana intensive for a burn deck. The deck needs to be droping a burn spell or two every turn to win. If you play Factory that means you will have to up your land count and that means running less burn spells. Drawing land is this decks biggest problem, nothing worse than hitting more than 4 land in a game, I lose more game to mana flood with burn than I do to anything else.

jamest
12-05-2007, 08:56 PM
If you're gonna play Goyf then just play Goyf Sligh and maximize the decks potencial. Burn should really only be playing 4 creatures, Mogg Fanatic or Grim Lavamancer.
I disagree. I think two best creatures for Burn are Keldon Marauders and Tarmogoyf (if you're willing to splash green).

Keldon Marauders is basically a burn spell in disguise. 2 burn damage plus the potential to attack for 3 more. Otherwise, the 3/3 body can trade with an opposing creature or at least buy us an extra turn by chump blocking.

I use to play Fanatic in Burn, but once Keldon Marauders was printed, I replaced Fanatic with it. KM is faster and deals more guaranteed damage.

I tested Grim Lavamancer extensively in the past. Its major weakness is that it's so easy to remove. Burn wants resilient damage sources. The reason Fanatic and Marauders are two creatures commonly suggested for Burn is because they can deal "guaranteed" damage. On the other hand, Lavamancer often just eats removal and deals no damage. For example, against Goblins, I think Volcanic Hammer is better than Lavamancer.

Tarmogoyf shares the same weakness to removal as Lavamancer. But, if we are going to explore removable creatures as options for Burn, Tarmogoyf is my first choice. There's fewer removal spells that can kill Tarmogoyf than Lavamancer. Lavamancer can bypass the combat phase with direct damage, but Tarmogoyf is usually the biggest creature on board and can therefore deal damage anyway.

If I were playing Goyf Sligh, I would probably add Lavamancer. I think the other creature options seem pretty subpar. So, there really isn't too much difference between Burn and Goyf Sligh to me. The main question is, what complements those staple burn spells better? Creatures or more burn?

Wallace
12-05-2007, 09:05 PM
.....If I were playing Goyf Sligh, I would probably add Lavamancer. I think the other creature options seem pretty subpar. So, there really isn't too much difference between Burn and Goyf Sligh to me. The main question is, what complements those staple burn spells better? Creatures or more burn?

I totally dissagree with that statment, I played Burn for a long time and then switched to Goyf Sligh. I toped 8'ed TMLO III day two and top 8'ed a big tourny in Syracuse with Goyf Sligh, I never cracked the top ten with Burn in 6 events. I think the thing Burn is missing is Goyf but the problem is that if you ony run 4-8 creatures you let your opponent use all that "dead" removal in there hand to kill you 4-8 dudes. Keldon Marauders are amazing, no question there, I too run them over Mogg Fanatic in burn. Most of the time they do the same amount of damage as a fanatic and a lot of the time they will do more. Burn just runs out of gas to fast for it to be really effective by it's self, that is why I think Goyf Slight would be a better choice.

Lemuria
12-05-2007, 11:22 PM
Burn shouldn't play creatures for some reasons (apart from mogg):

If you play creatures, you're giving your opponents things to do with that plowshares in their hands(and this will will broke the deck's concept, wich is make dead the cards on your opponents hand).

If they kill your creature, you're loosing burn points, and that means you're loosing time. You just can't afford to lose time and make your opponent to stabilize. You don't want that to happen. Every one point of life is huge when you play burn.


Seriously, if you really really really want to play creatures, just listen to Sacearuse. Give up Burn and play Goyf Sligh.

Happy Gilmore
12-06-2007, 12:26 AM
I have always liked ankh Sligh myself. Especially with so many deck playing fetchlands. Its practically a must counter in the early game.

jamest
12-06-2007, 04:55 AM
Sacrease, let me explain why I said "So, there really isn't too much difference between Burn and Goyf Sligh to me". Basically, Sligh adds creatures to burn. The creatures I would add are Goyf and Lavamancer. That means the only difference between my Burn list and Sligh list is +4 Lavamancer -4 some burn spell. Not a big difference.


... if you ony run 4-8 creatures you let your opponent use all that "dead" removal in there hand to kill you 4-8 dudes.
So, this looks like your most recent suggested Goyf Sligh list (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=180551&postcount=200). The difference between your Sligh creature base and mine is 4 Kird Apes. Since I run 12 cyclers, the difference in the number of creatures you and I play is 12 (you) to 10 (me).

Shugyosha
12-06-2007, 09:30 AM
I have always liked ankh Sligh myself. Especially with so many deck playing fetchlands. Its practically a must counter in the early game.

This has been discussed to some extend, too. Ankh is good when you play it turn 2 but whenever you can't play Ankh during the first few turns (don't have it, counter) and still have 3-4 in the deck it is a horrible card that does nothing. Even Landstill doesn't need to recur its Factories against burn too often. It also has no synergy with PoP as people try to avoid landdrops unless they need them. A third reason against it is the low mana curve of the most played deck at the moment: Threshold. Its absolutely no problem to operate the deck with 2 or 3 mana only. Especially in lists without finishers (Dragon/ Enforcer) you won't need more than 3 mana and the finishers will be boarded out in game 2&3 anyways.

The only feasible list I could imagine as of now would be a build with mana acceleration (Mox or Petal), 4 Ankh + 4 Pillars so your chance to play either Ankh or Pillar in turn one is not that bad. This list could also support Shrapnel Blast. Still I don't think it will work because the extra copies of Ankh and Pillar are mostly worthless and take necessary burn spell space.

Iranon
12-06-2007, 10:17 AM
Incinerate sucks. Unless the deckbuilder has a very good reason, so do Baubles and Wraiths: their inclusion is usually a consequence of faulty reasoning. They need to be a design choice in their own right, rather than an attempt to approach something like 36 Lightning Bolts and 6 Fireblasts.

Even if we could, we shouldn't play 36 Bolts and 6 Blasts. There isn't a shortage of good burn spells, only a shortage of good generic burn spells.
The 'inefficient' stuff like Mogg Fanatic or Seal of Fire can have gamebreaking soft benefits in certain match-ups. The situational stuff like Price of Progress can outclass 2 regular spells. Sweepers or recurring spells like Pulse of the Forge can give us tactical superiority in matches that would not be favourable otherwise.

Burn is neither powerful nor particularly resilent, hence only a viable choice when we hope to abuse a specific metagame. Pretty much any relevant tech will outclass an Incinerate or a cycler with a drawback. If we don't know of enough relevant tech to fill our 60 slots, we should play a deck that's actually good in its own right.

cheddercaveman
12-06-2007, 10:24 AM
I agree, the thing about burn is as you said it can catch people off their game. Right now its even better with goblins being at a low there arent a lot of people playing red so that means less red hate in sideboards. I personally feel that the deck isnt resilient enough to keep putting numbers up because as a few people have pointed out there are about 20-28 burn spells that are solid and after that we're reaching to fill the deck. Personally, I think that going with an addition of white, green or black is what the deck needs to be resilient beyond just a metagame crush.

That said, I think I disagree with the earthquake vs flamebreak argument. How often do you have more than 4 land in play? I wouldn't think very often since with this deck we're a big non-fan of lands hitting the table. If often there are not more than 4 lands in play you are not seeing any advantage with earthquake over flamebreak because we're getting 3 damage for 3 with flamebreak, and earthquake is gonna cost us a minimum of 4 to do that same damage.

Wallace
12-06-2007, 12:38 PM
Sacrease, let me explain why I said "So, there really isn't too much difference between Burn and Goyf Sligh to me". Basically, Sligh adds creatures to burn. The creatures I would add are Goyf and Lavamancer. That means the only difference between my Burn list and Sligh list is +4 Lavamancer -4 some burn spell. Not a big difference.


So, this looks like your most recent suggested Goyf Sligh list (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=180551&postcount=200). The difference between your Sligh creature base and mine is 4 Kird Apes. Since I run 12 cyclers, the difference in the number of creatures you and I play is 12 (you) to 10 (me).

Actually looks like I run 16 creatures in my Sligh list:

4 Tarmogoyf
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Keldon Marauders
4 Kird Ape

What i'm trying to explain here is, Burn decks don't play creature, Mogg Fanatic is a burn spell, Lavamancer is a burn spell, burn has no real need fo creatures. As soon as you start adding creatures to a burn deck, it's no longer a burn deck, it's Sligh. Thats it thats all I'm trying to say here.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-06-2007, 08:14 PM
Incinerate sucks. Unless the deckbuilder has a very good reason, so do Baubles and Wraiths: their inclusion is usually a consequence of faulty reasoning. They need to be a design choice in their own right, rather than an attempt to approach something like 36 Lightning Bolts and 6 Fireblasts.

Even if we could, we shouldn't play 36 Bolts and 6 Blasts. There isn't a shortage of good burn spells, only a shortage of good generic burn spells.
The 'inefficient' stuff like Mogg Fanatic or Seal of Fire can have gamebreaking soft benefits in certain match-ups. The situational stuff like Price of Progress can outclass 2 regular spells. Sweepers or recurring spells like Pulse of the Forge can give us tactical superiority in matches that would not be favourable otherwise.

Burn is neither powerful nor particularly resilent, hence only a viable choice when we hope to abuse a specific metagame. Pretty much any relevant tech will outclass an Incinerate or a cycler with a drawback. If we don't know of enough relevant tech to fill our 60 slots, we should play a deck that's actually good in its own right.

Wow, I dont know I for some reason would have no problem playing with 36 bolts. Ok, you got me. I would play with 32 bolts, 4 pop, and 5 (6 would require more mountains prolly) fireblasts any day of the week :tongue: Chalice of the void @ 1 and all.

Not sure when Seal of Fire would be game breaking except for my opponents tarmies getting some enchantment feed. Even with some overly convoluted attempt at making Pulse of the Forge good would still leave it as crap and inefficient. I respect your knowledge of Burn and it probably surpasses mine easily. Still, these statements confuse me.

I am coming around to the marauders and feel they are a strong addition to the deck. Imo they are by no means weak filler.

RoddyVR
12-07-2007, 12:19 PM
I'm gonna build myself a burn deck because I recently decided that i need a second "good" deck so that i can play with people who dont have a deck to play against me (a few relatives/friends like magic but dont have the cards to make even semi decent decks or have no cards at all). and also i'd like to have a second deck to take with me to tournys so that i can play casual games between rounds without giving my future opponents info on my main deck.

I've been reading the burn threads (this one and the other one) and have compiled a theoretical list, but i have a few cards that i'm not sure on and would love to know why they get excluded from most lists:

Creatures: because they're like burn spells, but can block some big attackers from agro decks that go too fast, or get in for more damage then a burn spell could against non creature decks.
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Keldon Marauders

1 for 3 burn:
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike

Free burn:
4 Fireblast (i would like to run 4 barb rings, would less then 16 mountains in addition to that be a bad idea?)

That is 28 cards, which leaves me needed 3 more 4ofs (if i'm gonna do 20 lands total)
What i didnt include:
Incinerate is a bad deal at all compared to the other burn spells, I'm not gonna do the bauble thing, but if i was gonna run incinerate i would rather replace it with baubles.
Magma Jet seems like a bit of a waste too. is the scry realy that good to make the sorcery speed 2 damage for 2 mana worth it?


The cards i am currently leaving towards are:
4 Flame Rift - 1r sorc. 4 to each P. is the 4 self inflicted damage realy that important? Seems like 4 damage for 1R is a good deal.

4 Flames of the Blood Hand - I've had this thing used against my sliver deck and it realy hurts what i would think is the biggest problem for burn decks, life gain. My aproach to fighting Burn with my sliver deck was always let him burn me and grow my sliver base then just start gaining life before he can finish me off. Plus its another 4 damage spell, making that final push be able to reach further.

4 Needle Drop (R Inst - cantriping burn) i dont understand at all why this card is ignored by the Burn threads. It seems like exactly what this deck needs. I tried finding a discussion on this card somewhere to find a reason why its dismissed, but all i found in the old thread on it was one person complaining about how lowryn hadnt added anything good to Burn. I had even thought about the other cantriping burn (Flare, Zap and Orcish Cannonade) but decided that 3 mana for 1 damage was just too much. The restriction on Needle drop (target has to have been dealt damage) just doesnt seem like it would be a problem, considering all the deck does is damage the opponent.

The ofcourse there's Price of Progress and Browbeat, both of which i like, but have my doubts about. I think i'll have to actualy play the deck for a while without these two and then decide if i want either in the deck depending on what i think its lacking.

Also, some lists include Fork.... why? I mean wouldnt wouldnt another burn spell be better? or are they included for same reason baubles are?

Thanks for any advice you can offer me... I'm off to go buy my 4x Chain Lightnings. I LOVE how the most expensive card in the deck is a common.

Bovinious
12-07-2007, 12:25 PM
Price of Progress is pretty much accepted as a 4-of as well (maybe 3 MD 1 SB), so really theres only 2 more 4-of slots. Needle Drop doesnt seem bad actually, your opponent will hopefully be taking damage every turn so it shouldnt ever be dead except as a topdeck. Also all those other options proposed above just seem worse than Magma Jet and Incinerate to me...

Peter_Rotten
12-07-2007, 12:50 PM
Magma Jet seems like a bit of a waste too. is the scry realy that good to make the sorcery speed 2 damage for 2 mana worth it?

First, it's an instant. Second, the Scry IS worth it. Burn is a deck that WILL hit topdeck mode and Scry pwns topdeck mode. Personally, I classify Jet as a NECESSARY burn spell. Goodbye extra lands; hello burn!

Lemuria
12-07-2007, 12:51 PM
You should definetively run PoP. This card is freak.


Flame rift is personal. I like it a lot and run 4 of those in my deck.

Magma Jet is amazing too. It can fix your mana problems, prevents you from draw too many lands and also helps you to set up your finishing plan. Just run 4 of it and you won't regret.

Edit: About Incinerate....You should run it over Marauders. Creatures (besides mogg) don't belong in here.

suprafan386
12-07-2007, 02:32 PM
my version of burn

17x mountains
2x barbarian ring

4x mogg fanatic
4x price of progress
4x fireblast
4x magma jet
4x rift bolt
4x lava spike
4x chain lightning
4x lightning bolt
4x flame rift
4x incinerate
1x cave-in(this last spot is iffy for me and when i do draw this card i never really play it)

sb
3x dragon's claw(for the mirror which is pretty popular in my meta)
4x pyroblast
4x shattering spree
4x tormod's crypt


please tell me what you think and what changes i should make

Lemuria
12-07-2007, 02:40 PM
I would cut one land, Cave in, something else for 3-4 Flamebreak. That depends if your meta is aggro, aggro/control based.

The rest is what a Burn deck should be....

suprafan386
12-07-2007, 03:04 PM
i really didn't like playing flamebreak in the deck becuase its to mana intensive for this deck with a casting cost of 3, which stops me from playing multiple burn spells a turn

my meta is thresh variants, ichorid, angel stompy, and then burn(not too many legacy players where i am)

RoddyVR
12-07-2007, 03:10 PM
thanks for the advice guys, since flame jet is getting such unanimous endorsement, i guess i'll start the deck with it and decide later for myself if i like it (instead of doing it the other way as i'd planned).


Edit: About Incinerate....You should run it over Marauders. Creatures (besides mogg) don't belong in here.
Disclaimer: My posts always tend to sound like I think I know what i'm talking about, but this is ofcourse not the case here, as i've never actualy played a Burn deck. This is my own (purely theoretical) opinion, and if i'm wrong i'd love to know where my error is so i dont play a subpar card.

I dont understand why you think Mogg Fanatic belongs in the deck, but Marauders dont:

Against a deck that cant block your attackers:
Mogg will do an amount of damage = to number of turns he's around to opponent (cant attack first turn, but will ping for one at the end).
Marauders will do 5 damage in 3 turns. Unless you plan on attacking with Mogg more then 4 times, Marauders are better.

Against an opponent who can block (but isnt overwhelming you with huge creatures):
Mogg will do 1 damage for 1 mana and 1 card (and be blocked if you try to attack)
Marauders will do 2 damage for 2 mana and 1 card (and have a better chance at killing a blocker then the Mogg did)

Against an opponent who is attacking you (and has a chance to beat you via attacks before your burn kills him):
Mogg will do 1 damage for 1 mana and 1 card and block one attacker once.
Marauders will do 2 damage for 2 mana and 1 card and block atleast one attacker, but could block a small one first turn and the huge one second turn if it would make a difference.

Against an opponent who is attacking you with many small creatures:
Mogg will do only 1 damage but can "scare" off quite a few x/2 creatures if your opponent cares about them too much to attack into death (by block/ping). His creature kill ability can dull his burn though if you have to use the ping damage on a x/2 creature to finish it.
Marauders will do 2 damage no matter what, but will only hold the attacks of for 2 turns. In some situations marauders will do more good here too, as they will either give you a turn you arent attacked in by the weeny horde or take 2 weenies with them as opposed to the Mogg's one.

So realy the only time Mogg is actualy better then Marauders is when you're going for a long game because the Mogg can stick around and keep being a threat for more then 2 turns. And ofcourse Mogg can hit creatures like BoP or Dark Confidants or something, but if you care about hitting creatures that aren't attacking run a shock instead, no?
In most other situations the Marauders are like 2 mogs on one card.
There is ofcourse the first turn drop difference (ie you could drop Mogg turn 1) but with the number of 1CC burn the deck has, is this realy a concern?

suprafan386
12-07-2007, 04:10 PM
i like fanatic's because i can sac him and remove bridges from the yard when i play ichorid

and having a 1 drop creature for chump blocking isn't bad imo

Wallace
12-07-2007, 04:29 PM
@ RoddyVR

I am one of the few people that don't run Magma Jet, :1::r: for 2 damage just doesn't cut it. Price of Progress need to be in this deck, I run it as a 3 of in the MB and 1 in the SB. Sulfuric Vortes is really good in the MB, I run 2-3, its a steady source of damage and it prevents life gain. Flames of the Bloodhand is ok but I really don't like running 3cc burn spells. I really suggest running 18-19 land, Barb. Ring is really good but you don't want to run 4. I have found that a good mana base is, 2 Barb Ring, 8 Fetch lands and 8 mountains. Hope this helps.

Tao
12-07-2007, 09:51 PM
@ RoddyVR

I am one of the few people that don't run Magma Jet, :1::r: for 2 damage just doesn't cut it.

Big mistake. Jet will do more than 2 damage by scrying lands on bottom or the third land on top.

Wallace
12-07-2007, 10:04 PM
Big mistake. Jet will do more than 2 damage by scrying lands on bottom or the third land on top.

Like I said, I don't like the card, people try and justify running it all the time and I always have the same answer, I don't like it. I understand that it scys land away from the top of your deck, but I look at burn diffrently than everyone else. I look at it as if my opponents is on a very short clock, the more damage I can do, in a short period of time, the better. Jet does 2 damage for 3 mana, I don't even like incinerate and that does a point more. I like the burn spells I run to do at least 3 damage, I run the 16 bolts, Fireblast, POP, and then add in the filler. Vortex, Cursed Scroll, Ankh, Keldon Marauders, Mogg Fanatic, and Incinerate all fill in the left over burn slots. I really like running the Mishra's Bauble and Street Wraith, bauble combo's nice with the 6-8 fetch lands I run. After all that is added I throw in the land, 6-8 Fetch lands, 2-3 Barb. Ring's and the rest are basic snow-covered mountains (I'm from Syracuse, everything is Snow-covered!).

KingAlanI
12-08-2007, 12:41 PM
Lands (21)
17 * Mountain
4 * Barbarian Ring

Sorcery (19)
4 * Flame Rift
4 * Rift Bolt
4 * Lava Spike
4 * Chain Lightning
3 * Flamebreak

Instant (16)
4 * Magma Jet
4 * Lightning Bolt
4 * Incinerate
4 * Fireblast

Enchantment (4)
4 * Seal of Fire

Sideboard (15)
4 * Price of Progress
2 * Red Elemental Blast
2 * Pyroblast
4 * Tormod's Crypt
3 * Shattering Spree


(REB/Pyroblast split is for Meddling Mage/Extirpate/Cabal Therapy type reasons)

Think 21 is too many lands? I don't think so, especially with the prospect of saccing Barbarian Ring and feeding Fireblasts.

Think Fork is worth running?

LordEvilTeaCup
12-08-2007, 01:19 PM
Like I said, I don't like the card, people try and justify running it all the time and I always have the same answer, I don't like it. I understand that it scys land away from the top of your deck, but I look at burn diffrently than everyone else. I look at it as if my opponents is on a very short clock, the more damage I can do, in a short period of time, the better. Jet does 2 damage for 3 mana, I don't even like incinerate and that does a point more. I like the burn spells I run to do at least 3 damage, I run the 16 bolts, Fireblast, POP, and then add in the filler. Vortex, Cursed Scroll, Ankh, Keldon Marauders, Mogg Fanatic, and Incinerate all fill in the left over burn slots. I really like running the Mishra's Bauble and Street Wraith, bauble combo's nice with the 6-8 fetch lands I run. After all that is added I throw in the land, 6-8 Fetch lands, 2-3 Barb. Ring's and the rest are basic snow-covered mountains (I'm from Syracuse, everything is Snow-covered!).

I chose to use Baubles and Wraiths to lessen the need of Magma Jets as well. I found that my turn 4 kills, and even turn three kills were more consistent. Still, there were games in which a Magma Jet would have been nice. The reason I was thinking of switching back to more conservative burn was the Boseiju in the SB. I thought that the self-inflicted damage was getting too much. Against Thresh, do I really want to crack fetches, cycle wraiths, AND use Boseiju? Plus, Keldon Marauders are not really hot with Bauble builds. Did it all work out in practice? So far I feel more comfortable with Bauble builds myself and hope it still works out.

Soto
12-08-2007, 03:17 PM
So is anyone going to try Pyromancer's swath in the deck?. I hear with Lava Dart it can be pretty amazing.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-08-2007, 03:33 PM
So is anyone going to try Pyromancer's swath in the deck?. I hear with Lava Dart it can be pretty amazing.

I am definitely game to try to make the swath work in this deck. It would definitely no longer be normal burn anymore. You would have to really change a lot of things around. It works great with Baubles, which incidentally can also up your storm count for free helping out grape shot. I don't know how competitive it will be, but it should be fun.

Bovinious
12-08-2007, 03:47 PM
So is anyone going to try Pyromancer's swath in the deck?. I hear with Lava Dart it can be pretty amazing.

You want to be killing them around turn 4, so how is playing an enchantment (presumably on turn 3...) that makes you lose your hand good at all?

Soto
12-08-2007, 03:52 PM
If it works in T2, could work better in Legacy. But that's the thing it might not be a burn deck in the end.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-08-2007, 03:54 PM
You want to be killing them around turn 4, so how is playing an enchantment (presumably on turn 3...) that makes you lose your hand good at all?

You have a good point, but I think I would enjoy giving it a play merely for the fun factor. Well, here is a quite janky burn list with Pyromancer's Swath I put together for anyone interested (I would be surprised if anyone was:tongue: .) I am pretty sure it offers no competitive advantages over regular burn, but could be something interesting to bring to the kitchen table. Btw, what would you take out for Lava Darts? Maybe the Rite of Flames suck balls here, but it can increase storm counts and power out a swath.

Teh Baubles

4x Mishra's Bauble
4x Urza's Bauble

Teh Burn

4x Pyromancer's Swath
4x Chain Lightning
4x Fireblast
4x Grapeshot
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Rift Bolt
4x Lava Spike
3x Price of Progress
3x Rite of Flame/Lava Darts

Mana

2x Barbarian Ring
16x Mountains

Iranon
12-08-2007, 03:58 PM
@LordEvilTeacup: I actually shot myself in the foot regarding my argument for Seal of Fire; if we could run mostly 1-mana instants the benefts would be a lot smaller. As things stand, I appreciated it against Spring Tide and suspect it's even better against Breakfast (I don't think I ever played Burn against the latter).
Pulse has saved me from many unimpressive but problematic plays: Loxodon Hierarchs/Ravenous Baloths, an early Tendrils for 8 (Boy do I hate it when a bad hand of theirs beats a good hand of mine), fast Aggro starts that forced me into the defensive role etc. Maybe I love the card more than I should, but I'm fairly sure many people would be amazed if they gave it a try.

Those cards are 'light' techs, they mostly add a little flexibility without giving up much; they are 'proper' if inefficient burn spells in their own right hence I used those as examples.
Sulfuric Vortex, Keldon Marauders, Pyrostatic Pillar can all be very rewarding but there's the risk of being very sub-par topdecks. Price of Progress can fizzle entirely, although the potential rewards are the highest at the moment. Heck, even Fork can be good for something other than copying Fireblast.

The point I was trying to make is that in a properly metagamed deck, the single best spell is likely to be something other than a Bolt. Maybe the only one better at the moment IS Price of Progress... but for one thing, no Sweepers? If I can't switch to 'Mono-Red-Control' mode and struggle with discard/Chalice anyway, I'd rather play combo.

***

Regarding Magma Jet: It's a very strong spell in any deck that contains a sizable number of cards that do something other than hit for 3 damage. Digging up a high-impact card like Pillar, Vortex, Price of Progress, a sweeper or a recurring damage source at the right moment wins games. So does avoiding them if all you need is a brainless burn spell. Smoothing out land drops is also helpful... but more on that below.

In a list without tricks, smoothing out land drops alone isn't enough to justify running this. You already have 2 lands if you play it, so it doesn't really lower the risk of being screwed to the point of being screwed.
Its function of fighting mana flood is hampered by its inefficiency: even if you manage to shuffle away useless lands, you'll still be short of raw damage. If the next 2 cards are useful, it'll have been a horrible investment anyway, and scrying into another Jet is also bad.
It'll become better 2 and 3 if the sideboard contains relevant cards, but I'd run 2 at most in straightforward list: Seeing one might be good, seeing the second won't be.

For example, I think suprafan386's list contains too little tech in order to justify it.

One thing I haven't tested exhaustively (and I don't think my maths skills are up to making a judgment from conjecture alone) is their use in Bauble variants. Playing inefficient spells seems to go against the very idea, but scrying for instants at the (hopefully) penultimate turn might be worth it.

***

Pyromancer's Swath sounds unappealing. We need to play 3 spells after it to make it surpass a regular damage spell of the cost. This will rarely happen even if we have it in our opening grip, it's a terrible terrible topdeck and drawing 2 would be very very bad (the prospect of massive damage around turn 6-7 doesn't excite me much).

LordEvilTeaCup
12-08-2007, 04:11 PM
@Iranon

I think I am onboard with everything you are saying, except I think I prefer Flames of the Blood Hand over PoTF. Sulfuric Vortex overall is probably the best answer, but the others fit nicer in Bauble builds. Maybe I just got to shut up, and give PoTF a playtest. But you gotta admit, FotBH wins as far as art goes:tongue:

You right on about the Swath, but I gotta say it hurts. It could be some good times. Still, maybe there is a way to make grapeshot usable without sacrificing too much functionality. It would still be a bad top deck after you emptied your hand, but with a bit of tweaking it can have its moments. Hmmm, meh it would be tough to make it hit 4 damage with consistency. Something like suspend a rift bolt, then following turn lay down a bauble, then tap two mountains sac and play a fireblast, then grape shot with a storm count of 4.... Woah, that needs lots of things going your way to not suck.

Nihil Credo
12-08-2007, 05:07 PM
If you want to play Pyromancer's Swath, you should head in another direction - a deck that doesn't win on turn 4, but exploits the nature of its win condition in a different way.

This is a Burning Bridge evolution I had cooked up and dismissed a few weeks ago. It's too far from straight Burn to be discussed in this thread, but you may find it interesting.

// Lands
16 [UNH] Mountain
2 [FUT] Keldon Megaliths
4 [EX] City of Traitors

// Spells
4 [US] Grafted Skullcap
3 [MR] Chrome Mox
3 [P3] Rolling Earthquake
4 [PR] Fire/Ice
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [PR] Lightning Bolt
4 [FUT] Pyromancer's Swath
4 [8E] Ensnaring Bridge
4 [MR] Isochron Scepter

zander1
12-08-2007, 05:18 PM
For grapeshot: A few months ago I tested baubleburn with rite of flames and grapeshot. It was bad. If I had Grapeshot and rite of flames in the hand and played some rift bolts the turn before, it usually did 4- 6 damage. I once even managed to kill with it turn three. But if you have only grapeshot without rite of flames or rite of flames without grapeshot, what happens too often, it's just bad.

Iranon
12-08-2007, 08:57 PM
I actually like Grapeshot in Bauble Burn, without any accelerants. I think it's unfair to expect heaps of damage when it's hard to counter and allows us to spread the damage however we want.

Running 4 cards you wouldn't usually touch with a 10-inch pole to make a 'questionable' 4-of 'fairly good' doesn't seem worth it.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-08-2007, 10:00 PM
If you want to play Pyromancer's Swath, you should head in another direction - a deck that doesn't win on turn 4, but exploits the nature of its win condition in a different way.

This is a Burning Bridge evolution I had cooked up and dismissed a few weeks ago. It's too far from straight Burn to be discussed in this thread, but you may find it interesting.

// Lands
16 [UNH] Mountain
2 [FUT] Keldon Megaliths
4 [EX] City of Traitors

// Spells
4 [US] Grafted Skullcap
3 [MR] Chrome Mox
3 [P3] Rolling Earthquake
4 [PR] Fire/Ice
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [PR] Lightning Bolt
4 [FUT] Pyromancer's Swath
4 [8E] Ensnaring Bridge
4 [MR] Isochron Scepter

Hmmm, this looks interesting indeed. I suppose we would have to create another thread for it or does one already exist?

Curby
12-11-2007, 10:17 PM
Wow, burn become a DTW just as I complete the deck in real life. =)

My build and a lot of thoughts are at http://www.curby.net/pub/temp/burn.htm

Basically, I run the 3-for-1s, Fireblast, Magma Jet, Incinerate, Flame Rift, Mogg Fanatic, and 6 sweepers in the main (my meta is a little janky and critter-happy), and keep Price of Progress in the side.

I'm really curious about adding Keldon Marauders to the Moggs. Keldons are great in that they do more, but the ability of Moggs to hit utility creatures is nice (I could use it instead of a Bolt to kill a Confidant, for example) and Keldons cost more too. I'll consider taking out the Flame Rifts for them. While I like having eight 4-damage cards so it brings their "danger zone" down to 8 life, they really do hurt especially against other aggro/burn decks.

I'm curious about the use of Sulfuric Vortex in the main. There are few decks that have disenchant effects in the main though, so it's not very vulnerable during game 1. However, not a whole lot of decks are focused on gaining life, and nonland permanents are bad as a rule.

@Sacearuse and Magma Jet: Counterargument for your "always the same answer" :tongue: Even in burn, cards do not operate in a vacuum. If you say that your goal is to do the most damage in the least time, that does not translate into doing the most damage for each individual spell. A spell that does a little less damage but increases the quality of your next draws is therefore quite significant. Would you rather see your sixth Mountain on turn 5 because you couldn't Scry it away? Even Magma Jet + Shock is more damage than Bolt + Mountain. Quickly getting into topdeck mode is consistently a problem with Burn, so it's surprising that you're willing to put up with questionable topdecks at the expense of one damage.

Wallace
12-12-2007, 12:09 PM
@ Kirbysdl

I am just a long time player who is set in my ways. I understand why people run Jet, for me, Jet doesn't fit the way I like to play. I have tried putting jet back into burn and it never works for me. I lost 3 games with my opponent at 1, guess what in those games I cast Jet, in one of the games I cast it twice. What did the Scry gain me, nothing, they were at 3 I cast jet and scooped up my cards. I hate being, parden the pun, burned by a card to many times, so for me Jet is a no go, I will stick with my 8 fetch lands and 8 Baubles/Wraith's to fix my draws.

Lemuria
12-12-2007, 12:15 PM
For me is exactly the opposite. Magma Jet saved my ass many times, I can even count how often I sent 2 lands away. It's really strange that doesn't work with you. Maybe you are just as unlucky as me when I play Ichorid and got two narcomoebas in my oppening hand.

bigbear102
12-12-2007, 12:46 PM
I can even count how often I sent 2 lands away.

Really, how many times is that??? lol

Anyway, my 2cents about Magma Jet can be found about 30 pages back in this thread. In regular non-bauble burn I believe it is mandatory. I agree with Lemuria on the shuffling away lands. It is also very good at finding Fireblasts and other game-ending spells. As mentioned earlier it is also very good post-board.

If you aren't going to run 4, run 3. Two is too few to reliably find 1 in any given game. You want to cast it either turn 2 or 3, to set up for the 4th turn win. I have done it before, and again the story can be found in this thread, or the old one that should be archived somewhere.

I haven't played or tested Baubles enough to come to a conclusion in that build, but I would trust sac on that one, he has played to some success lately.

Curby
12-12-2007, 01:42 PM
I lost 3 games with my opponent at 1, guess what in those games I cast Jet, in one of the games I cast it twice. What did the Scry gain me, nothing, they were at 3 I cast jet and scooped up my cards.

The problem with the mind is that people remember what they want to. You haven't noted how many times Jet allowed you to find the game winning burn spell by Scrying away useless cards, or how many times it allowed you to find more land to cast those Fireblasts/Browbeats/Flamebreaks. Your argument is akin to saying that Force of Will is a bad card because sometimes you draw it after they already resolved the critical spell and then you lose. It's never the case that a spell will be the best topdeck in every situation, so the idea is to average the worst (which you mentioned) with the best (which you didn't).

Anyway, I'm willing to put the issue to rest and agree to disagree. After all, I don't use Jet in my Bauble version either, and you might only be talking about its usefulness in that situation.

So, is anyone running both Fanatics and Marauders in their decks? Does it dilute the power too much? The extra meat could help tie up the groundgame and allow you to run more suicide such as Flame Rift. However, the Marauders die to Flamebreak and Earthquake. On the other hand, if they actually block your guys, you can use a sweeper to finish off the blocking fattie along with their weenies.

Wallace
12-12-2007, 02:54 PM
The problem with the mind is that people remember what they want to. You haven't noted how many times Jet allowed you to find the game winning burn spell by Scrying away useless cards, or how many times it allowed you to find more land to cast those Fireblasts/Browbeats/Flamebreaks. Your argument is akin to saying that Force of Will is a bad card because sometimes you draw it after they already resolved the critical spell and then you lost. It's never the case that a spell will be the best topdeck in every situation, so the idea is to average the worst (which you mentioned) with the best (which you didn't).

Anyway, I'm willing to put the issue to rest and agree to disagree. After all, I don't use Jet in my Bauble version either, and you might only be talking about its usefulness in that situation.

So, is anyone running both Fanatics and Marauders in their decks? Does it dilute the power too much? The extra meat could help tie up the groundgame and allow you to run more suicide such as Flame Rift. However, the Marauders die to Flamebreak and Earthquake. On the other hand, if they actually block your guys, you can use a sweeper to finish off the blocking fattie along with their weenies.

I do remember how many times they helped me, once, once they move a land form the top of my deck, See I only play 16 land with 6 fetch's and the 8 Baubles/Wraiths, so in thery drawing to much lan shouldn't be a problem. So agree to disagree sounds good to me.

I only run Keldon Marauders, Mobb Fanatic is nice but if ya think about it he will almost always do 1 - 2 damage to an opponent anyway. KM always does 2 if it hits and has to potenchial to do 5. Mogg Fanatic is really good because it can kill the first turn Lacky and the turn 2 Bob without having to waste a bolt. Most of the time I let Bob sit there for a 2-3 turns anyway cuz it helps the clock and I play main board Flamebreak so Lacky is ok by me. I love letting him hit for a turn or two and then clearing the board. So I would say if your meta is full of Aggro Decks then run both, if you can deal with Bob and Lacky being active then don't run Fanatic. KM have been really good for me latly and I am going to continue to run them.

Lemuria
12-12-2007, 03:08 PM
Really, how many times is that??? lol


Not so often like getting those damn narcomoebas in my hand. :cool:


Anyway, it happens quite often. Even though I run 18 lands, it doesn't matter, I´m the luckiest guy in the friggin world to topdeck a "necessary" card, so Magma Jet is really needed IMO, since Burn hits the topdeck mode most of the times.

bigbear102
12-13-2007, 01:04 PM
Not so often like getting those damn narcomoebas in my hand. :cool:


Anyway, it happens quite often. Even though I run 18 lands, it doesn't matter, I´m the luckiest guy in the friggin world to topdeck a "necessary" card, so Magma Jet is really needed IMO, since Burn hits the topdeck mode most of the times.

I said that because you said that you CAN count the number of times. You meant to say that you can't count the number of times.

Anyway,

@kirbysdl: You mention that KM dies to flamebreak and earthquake, but that is completely irrelevent. If you cast it turn 2, then you attack with him, then you can still FB that turn. If you are worried about not being able to clear out attackers first, then are you arguing against not playing any creatures at all? Because there aren't any critters to run in burn that don't die to FB.

Lemuria
12-13-2007, 01:20 PM
I said that because you said that you CAN count the number of times. You meant to say that you can't count the number of times.

Anyway,

@kirbysdl: You mention that KM dies to flamebreak and earthquake, but that is completely irrelevent. If you cast it turn 2, then you attack with him, then you can still FB that turn. If you are worried about not being able to clear out attackers first, then are you arguing against not playing any creatures at all? Because there aren't any critters to run in burn that don't die to FB.

Damn...haven't noticed that....lol


Anyway, I'm still not sold to run creatures in this deck. I'll test those Marauders and give an opinion later.

Wallace
12-13-2007, 04:26 PM
Damn...haven't noticed that....lol


Anyway, I'm still not sold to run creatures in this deck. I'll test those Marauders and give an opinion later.


KM are more sorcery speed burn then they are creatures. :1::r: to do 2 damage and have a chance to do 5, sounds good to me. KM's work very well here, I am glad I replaced Fanatic's with them.

bigbear102
12-18-2007, 03:18 PM
Damn...haven't noticed that....lol


Anyway, I'm still not sold to run creatures in this deck. I'll test those Marauders and give an opinion later.

I'm not actually advocating any creatures other than Mogg's, I was just pointing out that he was making no sense at all. With Goblins on the decline, I can see a justification for not playing mogg Fanatic anymore, and having Marauders does help out if you do run into the deck, at least as a fog for lackey/piledriver, but it still doesn't kill lackey dead no matter what.

Wallace
12-18-2007, 05:16 PM
Glad to see the Burn thread open again, hope it can stay this way. I have been testing a new burn build the uses 15 "Bauble" effects to draw the burn needed to win. I ahve been testing on MWS for a few nights now and with the exception of the Counter/Top match I have won all but one match (10-1/ 10-4 Counter/Top)
Here is the Build:

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Fireblast
3 Price of Progress
3 Shrapnel Blast
2 Cursed Scroll

4 Mishra's Bauble
4 Urza's Bauble
3 Street Wraith

4 Chromatic Star

4 Bloodstained Mire
2 Wooded Foothills
2 Barbirian Ring
9 Mountain

The Sgrapnel Blast's make bauble's better, Bauble's are no longer a "dead" card. Chromatic Star is a little slow if played first turn, after that its a good trade off, plus sacing a Star to a blast nets you a card. I have found this build to work very well against many decks, I raced a Combo deck FTW and destroyed most of the aggro decks I ran into. If a mod thinks this needs it's own thread just lmk and I will make one in the new deck thread.

APriestOfGix
12-18-2007, 07:50 PM
i like the idea, it gives the deck basically fewer cards, and lets it run only the best burn spells this way.

However, have you ever had trouble not having enough?

Extripate, and some discard might set you back far enough you run out of burn, and are in top deck too soon?

What is your experience with this?

Wallace
12-18-2007, 08:49 PM
i like the idea, it gives the deck basically fewer cards, and lets it run only the best burn spells this way.

However, have you ever had trouble not having enough?

Extripate, and some discard might set you back far enough you run out of burn, and are in top deck too soon?

What is your experience with this?


Discard can be a problem, extirpate is a bitch but really comes in from the board, so game one I should be ok. A lot of discard is one of the biggest problems this deck faces, next to counter-top or course. As far as running out of burn, not a problem, I had a starting hand with 3 baubles and a wriath the other day, it was sweet, drew 4 cards and they were all burn spells! The Star's have been so good for me, 1 mana to draw a card or Sac to shrap. blast and draw a card. I am thinking about dropping the Scroll's for another Artifact, just not sure what one.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-18-2007, 10:18 PM
@Sacearuse: Very interesting build. I think it is at the very least a strong start towards real innovation, something that hasn't happened with Burn for a long time... Wouldn't you want a 4th Shrapnel Blast to increase the chances of being able to sac the Star for some burn and draw? Perhaps then the artifact ratio would have to change which is probably not desirable. Another problem is I usually want to sac the bauble to get some more burn in my hands. With Shrapnel Blast, yeah I am getting 5 dmg but it seems inefficient to use two cards. That puts us in top deck mode ever faster, although perhaps 5 dmg is truly worth it.

Wallace
12-18-2007, 10:25 PM
@Sacearuse: Very interesting build. I think it is at the very least a strong start towards real innovation, something that hasn't happened with Burn for a long time... Wouldn't you want a 4th Shrapnel Blast to increase the chances of being able to sac the Star for some burn and draw? Perhaps then the artifact ratio would have to change which is probably not desirable.


The first build I made for this deck ran 4 Blasts, it was to much. You can't always count on having an artifact on the table, you will be sacing the Baubles to draw, the stars will somethimes fall victome to this too. It sucks sitting there with 2-3 blasts in your hand waiting on an artifact. I really want to find a viable replacement fo Cursed Scroll, I looked at lodestone bauble but it doesn't fit. So if anyone has any sugestions on what to add, please LMK.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-18-2007, 10:35 PM
I really want to find a viable replacement fo Cursed Scroll, I looked at lodestone bauble but it doesn't fit. So if anyone has any sugestions on what to add, please LMK.

Yeah I can't really think of anything except perhaps Epochrasite? I don't we will survive long enough to see it unsuspended, nor will it be that great when it does hit the table. Still just saying.

Wallace
12-18-2007, 10:56 PM
Yeah I can't really think of anything except perhaps Epochrasite? I don't we will survive long enough to see it unsuspended, nor will it be that great when it does it the table. Still just saying.


Plus STP is a bitch when it comes to Epocracite, matter of fact I don't ever see it getting any legacy play for this reason.

Here are the artifacts I found to replace Cursed Scroll:
Chalice of the Void - Great against combo and its free. (Drop it for 0)
Pyrite Spellbomb - Burn Spell if I need it, or draw a card.
Pithing Needle - Stops a lot of decks and helps against Counter - Top
Meekstone - Anti aggro/Goyf, aggro not really a bad match to start though.
Phyrexian Furnace - Great aginst Breakfest and Icorid, draws a card in a pinch.
Scrabbing Claws - Great aginst Breakfest and Icorid, draws a card in a pinch.
Sensei's Divining Top - Good w/ fetch lands, might be to mana intensive though.

and of course thay all cost 1 or less to play and activate and all sac to Blast. LMK what you would use...

Nihil Credo
12-18-2007, 11:13 PM
You can just play some more burn spells in Scroll's place and switch two mountains to Great Furnaces to keep the artifact count the same.

Tacosnape
12-19-2007, 12:20 AM
Just stick the Scrolls in sideboard. Scrolls are fantastic in certain matchups and trash in others, and the fact that they sneak in before a Counterbalance can win you a tight matchup on occasion.

That said, that's a freaking solid Burn list (I'm not sure I'm sold on Chromatic Star, but the rest is good.) It's nice to see people not playing garbage like Browbeat and Magma Jet. Why not the fourth Price of Progress, though?

Anyhow, I'm working on an Ankh-packing version which I'll post after some testing.

TheMightyQuinn
12-19-2007, 12:59 AM
Chalice of the Void - Great against combo and its free. (Drop it for 0)
That seems really bad to me since it stops your Baubles.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-19-2007, 12:59 AM
That said, that's a freaking solid Burn list (I'm not sure I'm sold on Chromatic Star, but the rest is good.)


The Chromatic Star with Shrapnel Blast combo is just too hot. 5 damage and draw.... just sick. Worst case scenario, its a crappy bauble. I think the benefits outweigh the cons.

Wallace
12-19-2007, 04:06 PM
You can just play some more burn spells in Scroll's place and switch two mountains to Great Furnaces to keep the artifact count the same.

I really don't want to play Great Furnaces, they make my non-basic count higher than I need it to be, don't want to die to my POP's. I need to keep the artifact count up without adding non-basic's.


Just stick the Scrolls in sideboard. Scrolls are fantastic in certain matchups and trash in others, and the fact that they sneak in before a Counterbalance can win you a tight matchup on occasion.

That said, that's a freaking solid Burn list (I'm not sure I'm sold on Chromatic Star, but the rest is good.) It's nice to see people not playing garbage like Browbeat and Magma Jet. Why not the fourth Price of Progress, though?

Anyhow, I'm working on an Ankh-packing version which I'll post after some testing.

I used to run the 4th POP but there are a few match's that I don't need them/they are not as good. I run the 4th in the board if it's needed.

Curby
12-20-2007, 03:22 AM
If they get out a couple of Pro-Red creatures and a Worship, how do you win? Are there Burn spells that can get around it? Worship uses a replacement effect instead of preventing or redirecting damage, so it doesn't look like Flames of the Blood Hand or Demonfire can get around it. I could splash a color for Disenchant/Krosan Grip or loss of life effects, but I'd like to keep it pure red burn. Is Anarchy the only solution? At :2::R::R:, it can be a bit difficult to cast. Powder Keg to 4 isn't feasible, and Explosives can't get that high. I guess running some Nevy's Disks would be funny, but honestly...

Using a fifth of my sideboard for a card that's unlikely to be played doesn't seem like a good idea. Maybe I should just use Flames of the Blood Hand or similar cards to get around damage prevention tricks, which should be more common.

Edit: Yeay, 100 posts :tongue:

Tacosnape
12-20-2007, 04:32 AM
If they get out a couple of Pro-Red creatures and a Worship, how do you win?

The best solution to this is to win your first match of the tournament. This virtually ensures that you will in no circumstances be paired with a deck running Pro-Red creatures and Worship, as your win column will remain one greater than theirs for the duration of the tournament regardless of how you do in any other match.

And if you get paired against them round one? Just win before they get Worship out.

Nihil Credo
12-20-2007, 05:59 AM
Even in that case, Barbarian Ring kills Silver Knight and Soltari Priest for good.

slyfer
12-20-2007, 06:27 AM
Mono white aggro cannot win
Anarchy FTW + burn all in the dome

If you have 3 anarchy in the board you cannot fear mono white aggro (or UW aggro, whatever but aggro), even if you lose round1

Maveric78f
12-20-2007, 06:31 AM
As a great fan of the baublestalker's deck, I wonder if such a deck would work :

Burn : 20
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Fireblast

Fatties : 7
4 Tarmogoyf
3 Tombstalker

Draw + feed yard : 16
4 Mishra's Bauble
4 Urza's Bauble
4 Street Wraith
4 Chromatic Star

Lands 17
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Wooded Foothills
3 Badlands
2 Taiga
4 Mountain

SB :
3 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 Magus of the Moon
3 Planar Void
3 Pyroclasm
3 Shattering Spree

Tacosnape
12-20-2007, 03:46 PM
Despite that they're both awesome, Tombstalker and Tarmogoyf in the same deck is a fairly dyssynergistic idea. Stalker doesn't generally play nice with others.

Plus, one of the top strengths of burn is that your opponent's creature removal is dead.

Wallace
12-20-2007, 04:03 PM
As a great fan of the baublestalker's deck, I.....

Yeah, this would require it's own thread. While I don't like the idea of adding creatures to the deck, I really don't like having Tombstalker and Tarmogoyf as my only creatures. Stalker by it's self would be ok though...try and keep this thread open by posting burn lists and staying on topic...

LordEvilTeaCup
12-20-2007, 10:29 PM
Any new developments as far as which artifact to use instead of Cursed Scroll? Ankh seems like an interesting suggestion, but it does cost 2 to throw down and is a horrible top deck for the most part. Still, I suppose if dropped early on its a beating... I believe if we figure out all the artifact slots, this build could present tangible advantages over normal burn builds.

Tacosnape
12-21-2007, 12:49 AM
Any new developments as far as which artifact to use instead of Cursed Scroll? Ankh seems like an interesting suggestion, but it does cost 2 to throw down and is a horrible top deck for the most part. Still, I suppose if dropped early on its a beating... I believe if we figure out all the artifact slots, this build could present tangible advantages over normal burn builds.

This problem is easily solved by running Chrome Mox. (Which is exactly what my build is doing.) Leading turn one Mountain, Mox, Ankh might be one of the sickest plays in Legacy, as then several of their lands will cost them 5 damage a shot. Chrome Mox also makes power cards like Flamebreak and Price of Progress much more maindeckable, as they're Mox fodder in matches where they're useless.

Additionally, when Ankh limits your opponent's total number of land drops, they will go for the lands that fix their manabase the quickest: Duals. This allows you to punish them with Price of Progress.

For the record, here's said Ankh list. The sideboard is still in the works, though.

14 Mountain
2 Barbarian Ring
4 Chrome Mox
4 Ankh of Mishra
4 Price of Progress
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Incinerate
4 Flamebreak
4 Fireblast

LordEvilTeaCup
12-21-2007, 01:40 AM
This problem is easily solved by running Chrome Mox. (Which is exactly what my build is doing.) Leading turn one Mountain, Mox, Ankh might be one of the sickest plays in Legacy, as then several of their lands will cost them 5 damage a shot. Chrome Mox also makes power cards like Flamebreak and Price of Progress much more maindeckable, as they're Mox fodder in matches where they're useless.

Additionally, when Ankh limits your opponent's total number of land drops, they will go for the lands that fix their manabase the quickest: Duals. This allows you to punish them with Price of Progress.

For the record, here's said Ankh list. The sideboard is still in the works, though.

14 Mountain
2 Barbarian Ring
4 Chrome Mox
4 Ankh of Mishra
4 Price of Progress
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Incinerate
4 Flamebreak
4 Fireblast

Its also cute how chrome mox and the ankh interact. How has Chrome Mox been working as a 4 of? It seems a bit high, and having to pitch too much business can really suck. I suppose that is a worthy sacrifice to increase chances of turn one ankh....

I kinda of like Cursed Scroll in that it gives you a reusable damage source. Its quite inefficient compared to your burn spells, but I find myself drawing a mountain and having nothing to do anyway.... Now my dead top deck became 2 damage!

Shrapnel Blast and the artifact crew, seem to cause this deck to feel a little less reliable to me. When I need an artifact to sac to blast, it never seems to show up. Plus, I am never sure if I should wait to see if I draw into a shrapnel blast to sac the star or just go ahead and draw my much needed card. Ditto with the Baubles. Even as a 3 of, I am surprised of the many times Shrapnel Blast a dead card in my hands. You were very right Sacearuse when you said 4 was too many. Meh, I really want it to work out because Shrapnel + Chromatic= happy times.

Maveric78f
12-21-2007, 04:49 AM
About the list, I'm sorry for being off-topic, but you could read between the lines: the list I proposed could be made a transformationnal SB, when your opponent has sided out all the permanent removals... If double black of Stalker comes out to be a problem, you may consider confidant too.
I know it's not improving your combo MU, but is your combo MU really defendable? Wouldn't you prefer to focus on MUs that can really be improved?

By the way, Tacosnape, Stalker and Tarmogoyf work well together, even better than grunt and tarmogoyf. And you know what? You are never forced to play Stalker if it would damage too much your tarmogoyf... Playing 4 moxen in burn with no scrying is plain stupid. The main problem of burn is card advantage.

Tao
12-21-2007, 05:59 AM
Meh, I really want it to work out because Shrapnel + Chromatic= happy times.

3 Mana for 5 damage is ok. Browbeat or Flames of the Blood hand do similar damage for the same Mana while being more consistent.
And lol at Tacosnape for randomly hating Magma Jet. Jet is one of the best Burn spells in the deck.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-21-2007, 11:34 AM
3 Mana for 5 damage is ok. Browbeat or Flames of the Blood hand do similar damage for the same Mana while being more consistent.
And lol at Tacosnape for randomly hating Magma Jet. Jet is one of the best Burn spells in the deck.

Actually its 3 mana for 5 damage AND you draw a card. That is just sick, but yeah it is not consistent enough. I think Flames of the Blood Hand is a solid card period, and is probably better MB material than Vortex.

A Magma Jet hate club would be fun! Its a solid card, but I find its a 50/50 whether the scry is useful or not. With such a low land count, you will have plenty of times that you will just see business cards on the top instead. So it feels randomly amazing, and randomly crappy.

Nihil Credo
12-21-2007, 11:47 AM
Actually its 3 mana for 5 damage AND you draw a card. That is just sick
No, it isn't. You're putting in two cards (Blast + Star), so it's actually -1 CA, not card parity.

Though it should also be considered that 1+2 mana is not the same as 3 mana (otherwise Exalted Angel would suck bollocks).

LordEvilTeaCup
12-21-2007, 11:58 AM
No, it isn't. You're putting in two cards (Blast + Star), so it's actually -1 CA, not card parity.

Yeah oops, my mistake. With Baubles its 2 mana for 5 dmg and card disadvantage! Shrapnel Blast is definitely an interesting card, but it looks difficult to make it worth while.

Curby
12-21-2007, 12:16 PM
A Magma Jet hate club would be fun! Its a solid card, but I find its a 50/50 whether the scry is useful or not. With such a low land count, you will have plenty of times that you will just see business cards on the top instead. So it feels randomly amazing, and randomly crappy.

Devil's advocate: with such a low land count, sometimes I'm searching for that 3rd or 4th land to play my 3-drops and Fireblasts. Other times, knowing what's coming up helps me plan how to divide my burn between life and creatures. Even if you merely confirm the best possible situation, information is important even in a simple deck as this. That said, a lot of builds are going towards Baubles now, where I realize Jet is generally bad.

Wallace
12-21-2007, 12:22 PM
I have added Phyrexian Purnace in place of Cursed Scroll, I want the artifacts I play to draw a card. This way they are not a "dead" card, if you need a burn spell then just sac the artifact to draw one. Shrap Blast is really only two mana, you generaly drop the star one turn and sac it on the next.

As far as ankh is concerned, its good, def. has a spot in this deck. I really think you need to run 4 though, its kind of a must draw card. With Shrap Blasty in the deck Ankh becomes even better, turns into 5 damage.

Chrome Mox doesn't seem good here, you have to discard a card to play it and tap it for mana. Burn is on such a short clock as it is, I really wouldn't want to discard a burn spell to play a mox. I will test it with the Ankh's in the deck though, let everyone know how it goes.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-21-2007, 12:51 PM
I have added Phyrexian Purnace in place of Cursed Scroll, I want the artifacts I play to draw a card. This way they are not a "dead" card, if you need a burn spell then just sac the artifact to draw one. Shrap Blast is really only two mana, you generaly drop the star one turn and sac it on the next.

As far as ankh is concerned, its good, def. has a spot in this deck. I really think you need to run 4 though, its kind of a must draw card. With Shrap Blasty in the deck Ankh becomes even better, turns into 5 damage.



Ankh and Shrapnel blast are pretty sweet together, but has Shrapnel Blast really been working out for you? I was goldfishing your list and the Blast seemed a little inconsistent. Maybe I am not playing it right?

Sims
12-21-2007, 01:37 PM
These builds are taking me way back.... They're reminding me of GAS builds back when the Albany meta still existed (i.e., before our store closed... so back in '05.) in a lot of ways, the primary differences being that we didn't have baubles and wraith we were just using moxes, ankhs, furnaces, scrolls, shrap, and a lot of burn....

Interesting to see how things come full circle.

Tacosnape
12-21-2007, 03:58 PM
One day I'm going to learn that posting in the Burn thread is like arguing with a tree stump.

@Mox: Chrome Mox is good in burn. Somewhere in this thread or an older burn thread I did a complete mathematical dissertation on why it's good. Burn's problem isn't card advantage. Burn's problem is speed. Chrome Mox not only allows turn one Ankhs, it allows the deck to hit turn three kills with much more frequency. Four might be excessive, so run three if you like.

@Magma Jet: Don't make me laugh. Magma Jet completely blows. 2 Mana for 2 damage is pathetic, Scry or not. Magma Jet will lose you more games by losing the damage race than it will win you by fixing your hand. Inflicting 2 on turn 2 versus your opponent dropping a Tarmogoyf on turn 2 is not an acceptable way to get ahead.

@Maveric: Do you even understand what 'synergy' is? At all? Tarmogoyf and Grunt don't play well together either, and Jotun Grunt's a completely crappy card anyway. Just because they're both strong on their own doesn't mean they synergize. Grunt has no synergy with Tarmogoyf, Tombstalker has no synergy with Tarmogoyf, and Grunt has no synergy with Tombstalker. Either one shrinks Tarmogoyf, and Tombstalker shortens Grunt's lifespan while Grunt makes it harder to play Stalker.

Now that we've covered two godawful cards in this thread (Jet*, Grunt), anyone want to go on a tangent and remind us how awesome Browbeat is? Please?

*For what it's worth, Jet's just godawful in burn. It's okay in other decks.

ParkerLewis
12-21-2007, 06:27 PM
@taco : simple question about the build you posted on top of this page. don't you have some troubles paying for the fireblasts ?

a simple prob analysis shows that if you're holding one fireblast in hand, you won't find two mountains to sacrifice by your fifth draw (meaning either t5 or t6) around 21 % of the time (ie more than 1 out of 5 times). And if you want it by your fourth draw (ie either t4 or t5), then you'll miss it ~26 % of the time (more than 1 out of 4 times).

would'nt it be a good idea to cut one mox (keeping 3 of them) for an additional mountain ?

Also, what's your opinion of keldon marauders ?

syssc9
12-21-2007, 07:02 PM
Has anyone considered Copper Tablet in a deck with Shrapnel blast? I know it costs 2, doesn't replace itself, and only does a single damage, but it does so every turn till the Shrap shows up. Shrap fodder that does damage - could it be made to work?

burkey_boy
12-21-2007, 08:12 PM
so you cast tablet turn 2.

turn 3 1 damage
turn 4 1 damage
turn 5 1 damage

only if it is there turn 5 its is semi decent. burn shouldnt get to turn 5

Illissius
12-21-2007, 08:18 PM
Hmm. What about Searing Flesh? I mean, you know how it sometimes happens: you get your opponent down to seven, then proceed to draw nothing but Mountains for something like five turns while while your opponent refuses to kill you. In these situations, you could topdeck the Flesh, and windmill slam it down on the table -- for the win! Now wouldn't that be awesome?

I think it's worth considering.

EDIT -- Also, I just thought of this: what about splashing white for Loxodon Peacekeeper (and Lightning Helix)? It's a 4/4 for only two mana, which is pretty awesome (maybe even better than Tarmogoyf for a faster deck like this one), and goes well with your aggressive theme; throw burn at them, swing a few times, and the game is pretty much yours. It also diverts removal away from your Mogg Fanatics. What do you think?

rsaunder
12-21-2007, 10:27 PM
@Loxodon: I think playing something in a burn deck that requires your life total to be lower than your opponent's at any given time is a bad idea. Or at least unlikely to be effective.

Tao
12-22-2007, 04:06 AM
@Magma Jet: Don't make me laugh. Magma Jet completely blows. 2 Mana for 2 damage is pathetic, Scry or not. Magma Jet will lose you more games by losing the damage race than it will win you by fixing your hand. Inflicting 2 on turn 2 versus your opponent dropping a Tarmogoyf on turn 2 is not an acceptable way to get ahead.]

Magma Jet has been used in EVERY!!! successful burn list (Top 8 lists that I've seen) over the last half year and in more than 90% of them as a 4-of. Every time I talk to a Burn player who brings the deck to tournaments about their deck they say just how good Jet is (happened 3 times so far).

So just saying that Magma Jet "makes you laugh" like it was a weird rogue choice is the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. Especially when you present a list with the almighty Chrome Mox - turn 1 double Bolt you HAHAHAHAHAHA (too bad you didn't have your Mox/Ankh Combo in your starting hand).

The reasons for Jet become clear in in testing. Everyone who seriously tests the deck won't play less than 4.

Jet is better than Incinerate. When playing against Burn with a deck I would always let Incinerate resolve, but from time to time counter Jet, especially after boarding. I don't say that you can't play both, but Jet will statistically deal more than 3 dmg to the opponent. And if fired on a creature that has to die (usually Lackey, Warchief or Hypnotic Specter) the difference becomes even bigger.

LordEvilTeaCup
12-22-2007, 04:13 AM
Magma Jet has been used in EVERY!!! successful burn list (Top 8 lists that I've seen) over the last half year and in more than 90% of them as a 4-of.

Thats because no one wants to try Baubles and Wraiths! Or maybe all the people who play Bauble/Wraith burn lose... Either way I will continue to delude myself, because Baubles and Wraiths give me more to do than just throw bolts at my opponent's face. And who knows, maybe a Bauble.dec will actually outperform its counterpart. On that note, its kinda funny how sac lands, baubles, and wraiths all make opponents' gofys happy. Perhaps that is one of the biggest problems with Baubles. Bauble Stalker FTW!

burkey_boy
12-22-2007, 04:53 AM
i am actually thinking of dding 4 wraiths... still not sure... im quite burn orthodox

Kundalini
12-22-2007, 09:45 AM
For the artifact list, did you consider Isochron Scepter and/or Sensei's Divining Top? Note that Top can draw a card AND be sacrificed to blast in response.

Nevertheless, my list is not artifact-based; I have tried several, but none has resulted more profitful than actual bauble burn! In my testing this outperforms traditional burn by only running quality burn spells and draw, a minimal land count and more consistency.

The list:

// Lands (16)
2 [OD] Barbarian Ring
3 [ON] Bloodstained Mire
3 [ON] Wooded Foothills
8 [TSP] Mountain (1)

// Cantrips (16)
4 [FUT] Street Wraith
4 [IA] Urza's Bauble
4 [CS] Mishra's Bauble
4 [LOR] Needle Drop

// Burn Spells (28)
4 [R] Lightning Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [CHK] Lava Spike
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [EX] Price of Progress
4 [VI] Fireblast
4 [NE] Flame Rift

// Sideboard (15)
SB: 2 [SC] Sulfuric Vortex

SB: 2 [10E] Pyroclasm
SB: 1 [MM] Cave-In

SB: 2 [DS] Dragon's Claw

SB: 1 [R] Red Elemental Blast
SB: 1 [IA] Pyroblast

SB: 3 [10E] Guerrilla Tactics
SB: 3 [10E] Smash

(The sideboard is still partially work in progress, most due to metagame)

Card Choices:
Only 16 lands: by running 12-16 cantrips, these are enough! Also, cantrips and fetchlands make barbarian rings stronger

Needle drop: cantrips 13-16; the drawback is irrelevant in a burn deck, and 1 red mana for 1 dmg and 1 card just makes this an instant-speed, overcosted and damaging bauble / wraith.

Other slots: best-efficient burn suite. PoP is a must in the format, and can be sided out vs basics; 4xfireblast with only 8 mountains seem too much, but actually aren't: in a 16-cantrips, 6-fetchlands, 60-card deck 8 mountains have the occurency frequence of 19 mountains in a 0-cantrip, no-fetchlands, 60-card deck.

Not included:
Mogg Fanatic: this can be substituted for needle drop; but he never deals more than 1-2 dmg so is subpar. Only useful for defence; but I want to go to the dome, pure attack - no defence.
Incinerate: there are better options: flame rift costs the same and deals 4 instead of 3 (and is the worst burn spell of the deck).
Magma jet: subpar burn, and the scrying just improves card quality, not quantity; with 16 cantrips, I have sufficient draw, and all cards drawn are useful; it is very rare, in this build, being mana flooded.

Sideboard: this is most metagame choices: smash is a last-second addition because of the presence of CoTV in my meta (anything better?); in case of need, I usually side out needles, flame rifts and/or PoPs (depending on my opp's nonbasics count).

DalkonCledwin
12-24-2007, 01:52 PM
The below is my build. I am unfortunately unable to buy the higher priced card for a burn deck so no suggestions that I add Chain Lightning in place of the Shock please, I know I need it, but I can't afford it. so I have designed a budget version of the deck.

Lands
3 x Barbarian Ring
17 x Snow-Covered Mountains
...
Creatures
4 x Keldon Marauders
4 x Mogg Fanatic
...
Instants
4 x Fireblast
3 x Flames of the Blood Hand
4 x Incinerate
4 x Magma Jet
1 x Fork
4 x Lightning Bolt
4 x Shock
...
Sorceries
4 x Rift Bolt
4 x Lava Spike
...
Sideboard
3 x Anarchy
3 x Flamebreak
3 x Shattering Spree
3 x Red Elemental Blast
3 x Sulfuric Vortex

I played 3 games at my local legacy tournament, unfortunately the deck wasn't complete at the time, but it gave me an idea of what to expect for when the deck was complete. The decks that gave me trouble were an Angel-Stax deck, I think I can handle that if I use Shattering Spree and Anarchy though. And also a Black Braids deck. The black braids deck was the harder of the two to gage because it was kind of a rogue deck. The only deck of the three that I was able to defeat was an Elf-combo deck.

I have been hmm-ing and hawing about whether or not to take the Keldon Marauders out for Sulfuric Vortexes... but I did some gold fishing and Sulfuric Vortex netted me around 4 damage for :1::r::r: casting cost where as Marauders can net me around 2 - 5 damage for :1::r: casting cost. The only real advantage I see for Sulfuric Vortex is that it effectively shuts down life gain decks, which I have yet to actually encounter at my meta. So I have to ask, is Sulfuric Vortex really worth spending a slot on?

Nihil Credo
12-24-2007, 02:06 PM
If you don't have Chain Lightnings (incidentally, a sorcery), then all the more reason for running a Sacearuse-style build, with 12-15 free cyclers (Street Wraith, Baubles, Stars).

LordEvilTeaCup
12-24-2007, 02:07 PM
Needle drop: cantrips 13-16; the drawback is irrelevant in a burn deck, and 1 red mana for 1 dmg and 1 card just makes this an instant-speed, overcosted and damaging bauble / wraith.


You make good points, but I don't feel comfortable running Needle Drop myself. One, it is a horrible top deck after you played out your hand. Two, one mana one dmg no matter how you cut it is slow. Mogg at least can remove bridges. Maybe if you had four lands out it would be great because you could use that card you drew that turn. However, turns 2-3 it just ties up your mana.

@Shrapnel Burn: What about Ensnaring brigade? It can stop angry men from attacking you, and later sac it for the win. Yeah it sucks against storm combo but even against Ichorid it could be useful.

DalkonCledwin
12-24-2007, 03:10 PM
If you don't have Chain Lightnings (incidentally, a sorcery), then all the more reason for running a Sacearuse-style build, with 12-15 free cyclers (Street Wraith, Baubles, Stars).

I am not really interested in totally redesigning my deck.....

Lemuria
12-24-2007, 04:46 PM
I am not really interested in totally redesigning my deck.....

Then don't bother placing your list here and asking for people's oppinion about how to build or deck, if Vortex belongs there or not....just do whatever you want......

Sims
12-24-2007, 06:00 PM
I learned a few lessons when we played these versions of the deck, the artifact oriented ones, back in '05.... I mostly tend to stay away from them because it makes a lot of cards situational.

-Ankh is great when you have it down Turn 1/2 (which leads to...)

-Mox is good if you're running ankh and shrap blast...(which leads to..)

-Shrap being good if you have a high enough artifact count, which requires scroll/great furnace/random artifact_01.... This may be alleviated by Chromatic Star though. I don't really count baubles here as I can't think of how many times I'm going to use them for shrap fodder as opposed to using them a.s.a.p for slow-tripping.

-Great Furnace and an already low land count (especially with mox) means that you probably aren't running fireblast.. This is bad because now instead of costing 2 perms, your finisher is costing :1::r: ontop of an artifact.

-Scroll makes good fodder for Shrap blast that isn't dead on it's own, but i'd steer clear of top. Without the Scry effect off Jet, if you choose not to run it, you'll lack enough shuffle effects to really abuse it. This will make it a mana-sink filter that you'd rather have being mana-sink damage or almost anything else.

These are only a few things that I can think of off the top of my head. When I can I'll get in touch with a few of the old teammembers from albany that played GAS/Burn/Slig/Sligh/TTD on a regular basis and see if they have anything else to add.

Kundalini
12-24-2007, 06:20 PM
You make good points, but I don't feel comfortable running Needle Drop myself. One, it is a horrible top deck after you played out your hand. Two, one mana one dmg no matter how you cut it is slow. Mogg at least can remove bridges. Maybe if you had four lands out it would be great because you could use that card you drew that turn. However, turns 2-3 it just ties up your mana.

Indeed, although played in the mogg slot for metagame purposes (I face practically no bridge combo), that is a cantrip, so could be run in some of the baubles' spot. Sure, it is not a great card; but it is not supposed to be! It is a "transparent" ("ghost") card, a "non-card". If there was a 0-casting cost instant which reads "draw a card", I would play that. I think the way to go to abuse burn is to build a deck as close as possible to a 40-card deck. In a 40-card deck the threat density of our presently available quality burn spells can be competitive. In a 60-card deck it is not.

DalkonCledwin
12-25-2007, 06:04 AM
Then don't bother placing your list here and asking for people's oppinion about how to build or deck, if Vortex belongs there or not....just do whatever you want......

I wanted help with the deck design... I just didn't want to totally revamp the entire deck list... I have already invested much into the deck list, and I am not really interested in having to totally start from scratch. especially since I am on a budget. If you can understand where I am coming from?

DalkonCledwin
12-25-2007, 06:08 AM
Oh and I have decided to take the 4 Keldon Marauders out, in favor of another Fork, another Flames of the Blood Hand, and 2 Sulfuric Vortexes.

P.S. sorry, forgot this had an edit button, so used to myspazz which doesn't have edit buttons....

burkey_boy
12-25-2007, 07:31 AM
ive been testing the bauble lists... and i really hate them.

feels a lot slower.

the only thing im going to change, is out fanatic, and replace with waith

Please use your shift key to make your posts easier to read.

Verbal Warning

-PR

Lemuria
12-25-2007, 11:34 AM
I wanted help with the deck design... I just didn't want to totally revamp the entire deck list... I have already invested much into the deck list, and I am not really interested in having to totally start from scratch. especially since I am on a budget. If you can understand where I am coming from?

I understand your point. There's a thread in the Format Discussion Forum that talks about budget decks and how expensive hobby Magic is.
Unfortunaly, there's no way you can spend almost no money and make a competitive deck. You do have to invest a little, I mean, REALLY invest. As Peter Rotten said: You can build a Red Death without Sinkhole, but isn't the deck just better with them? Or you can put Werebear in Threshold, but isn't just better with Tarmogoyf? Sooner or later, you will find yourself tired of been behind other magic players and will embrace the format. Unless you play just for fun.

Anyway, Sacearuse's version of the deck with baubles and wraiths is really cheap, while is a goddamn solid list. I've been testing that and I like it a LOT. You should consider it.:smile:

DalkonCledwin
12-25-2007, 06:42 PM
I understand your point. There's a thread in the Format Discussion Forum that talks about budget decks and how expensive hobby Magic is.
Unfortunaly, there's no way you can spend almost no money and make a competitive deck. You do have to invest a little, I mean, REALLY invest. As Peter Rotten said: You can build a Red Death without Sinkhole, but isn't the deck just better with them? Or you can put Werebear in Threshold, but isn't just better with Tarmogoyf? Sooner or later, you will find yourself tired of been behind other magic players and will embrace the format. Unless you play just for fun.

Anyway, Sacearuse's version of the deck with baubles and wraiths is really cheap, while is a goddamn solid list. I've been testing that and I like it a LOT. You should consider it.:smile:

I am definitely considering making the investment to purchase the Chain Lightnings. However it is going to have to wait until February, as that is when my birthday comes around. I will at that time be getting a birthday check, and hopefully it will be enough to purchase 4 Chain Lightnings. If it is, then I will make said purchase at that time.

As for Sacearuse's version of the deck, I am really unfamiliar with this. However I was really under the impression that a good burn deck really wants to optimize the amount of burn it has in it. Relying on cards that don't burn to allow you to draw into more burn, lands, or more card drawing stuff, when you could instead be drawing either lands or burn only, seems a bit questionable to me.

Wallace
12-25-2007, 09:07 PM
ive been testing the bauble lists... and i really hate them.

feels a lot slower.

the only thing im going to change, is out fanatic, and replace with waith


So on the Bauble lists, DON'T PLAY them, they suck. I played in a local legacy event thi last weekend and went 0-4. I played Nightmare rd. 1 and he was not happy to be playing against burn. The on turn 2, with NO cards in his grave yard he droped a 4/5 Tarmogoyf!! Did it again game 2, was no fun. The list is a lot slower than a reg burn list, running 4-8 baubles is fine, you really don't need any more than that. I have a new list I am testing this week, I will post the results after the event.

dontbiteitholmes
12-25-2007, 09:47 PM
I understand your point. There's a thread in the Format Discussion Forum that talks about budget decks and how expensive hobby Magic is.
Unfortunaly, there's no way you can spend almost no money and make a competitive deck. You do have to invest a little, I mean, REALLY invest. As Peter Rotten said: You can build a Red Death without Sinkhole, but isn't the deck just better with them? Or you can put Werebear in Threshold, but isn't just better with Tarmogoyf? Sooner or later, you will find yourself tired of been behind other magic players and will embrace the format. Unless you play just for fun.

Anyway, Sacearuse's version of the deck with baubles and wraiths is really cheap, while is a goddamn solid list. I've been testing that and I like it a LOT. You should consider it.:smile:

Yeah and seriously Burn is one of the cheapest decks to build ever. If you can swing the 70$ or so max to build a competitive burn deck you can't play Legacy or for that matter any serious Magic.

suprafan386
12-25-2007, 11:21 PM
Also its not really that hard to trade into getting the cards you need for the deck.

I traded a garruk for italian chain lightnings because he is hard to get at my store and most players that play type 2 don't like their old cards.

DalkonCledwin
12-26-2007, 02:41 AM
Yeah and seriously Burn is one of the cheapest decks to build ever. If you can swing the 70$ or so max to build a competitive burn deck you can't play Legacy or for that matter any serious Magic.

Look, I can probably afford the cards, just not this month. It is as simple as priorities. And you are right, it would be 70 dollars to purchase all the cards I still need (assuming I can get some of those cards in trade like I plan to, instead of having to purchase them... shouldn't be to much of a problem...).

DalkonCledwin
12-26-2007, 02:42 AM
Also its not really that hard to trade into getting the cards you need for the deck.

I traded a garruk for italian chain lightnings because he is hard to get at my store and most players that play type 2 don't like their old cards.

LOL, if I had a garruk, I would do that in a heartbeat... unfortunately I don't have a Garruk... best I have is a single thoughtseize. And that is going to someone else at the moment (unless I can convince him to take a different card instead).

P.S. Doh, I did it again... I hate getting used to one forum and then switching to another...

rsaunder
12-26-2007, 10:25 AM
Yeah and seriously Burn is one of the cheapest decks to build ever. If you can swing the 70$ or so max to build a competitive burn deck you can't play Legacy or for that matter any serious Magic.The nice thing about magic is that you can look at it as somewhat of an investment, which always takes the sting out of a big pricetag. As soon as you decide you don't want the cards anymore, you can fairly easily turn them around and at least get some money back.

DalkonCledwin
12-29-2007, 12:09 PM
LOL, if I had a garruk, I would do that in a heartbeat... unfortunately I don't have a Garruk... best I have is a single thoughtseize. And that is going to someone else at the moment (unless I can convince him to take a different card instead).

Well I wasn't able to get him to take anything but the Thoughtseize... so I am down one thoughtseize....

Hayden01230
01-02-2008, 03:19 AM
i have a 3-1, 4-0 burn deck. had it for ever don't be dissin till you try it.

16 mountains
2 dmg
4 magma jets
3 dmg
4 lava spike
4 bolts
4 chain lightning
4 rift bolts
4 incinerate
4 dmg
4 flamerift
4 fireblast
4 sonic burst
creatures and opinion
4 mogg fanatic
4 flamebreak/ goblin grenade, yes it works

relativley cheap. JUST REMEMBER the amount of damage you are dealing 99% of the time exceeds the amount of damage taken.

burkey_boy
01-02-2008, 06:55 AM
let the critical assessment fly.

sonic burst is bad bad bad... discarding a card will kill you.

also grenade is bad and too situational with only 4 goblins in deck.

Iranon
01-03-2008, 06:59 AM
Goblin Grenade has no place in Burn, ever (and even as a finisher in Goblin Sligh I'd be reluctant to play it as a 4-of).

Sonic Burst is essentially a Bolt that turns a random card into a Shock (slightly worse as you can't split the damage). It's generally not efficent or reliable enough to warrant a spot.
You could make a case for it in a Burn deck with a comparatively high land count and mana curve, where converting surplus lands/uncastable spells into shocks might be good. In your mana-starved build, I don't see a reason to play it.

Personally, I consider Incinerate as a clue that you shouldn't be playing Burn. After the 1-for-3s and Fireblasts, the remaining slots should be hate or utility keyed to your metagame (Price of Progress, Sulfuric Vortex, Sweepers, whatever). If my metagame isn't defined enough that I can fill the rest of the slots that way, I'd rather play a deck with a little more raw power.
Better players than me disagree though.

Lemuria
01-03-2008, 07:53 AM
Look at this new morningtide release:

Shard Volley :r:
Instant
As an additional cost to play Shard Volley, sacrifice a land.
Shard Volley deals 3 damage to target creature or player.


Maybe it can find a room in this deck as a new 1 for 3?

I think it's good enough and I'll run it.

Dissolution
01-03-2008, 11:38 AM
My only concern is that it fights with Fireblast for available lands to sacrifice.
Have to do some testing to see how much of an impact it makes.
-T

Wallace
01-03-2008, 11:47 AM
Look at this new morningtide release:

Shard Volley :r:
Instant
As an additional cost to play Shard Volley, sacrifice a land.
Shard Volley deals 3 damage to target creature or player.


Maybe it can find a room in this deck as a new 1 for 3?

I think it's good enough and I'll run it.

I have been talking about this card for the last month, saying how it would be nice to have another :r: for 3 damage spell. I said they would prob. make it sac. a mountain to do 3, and what do ya know here it is!!! I think this will put Burn/Goyf Sligh over the top, sacing a mountain is nbd and shouldn't hurt to much, even if you are running Fireblast.

Iranon
01-03-2008, 12:55 PM
Shard Volley shouldn't compete with Fireblast... if you can have 2 Blasts, you can probably afford having a blank. If you're stuck on 2 lands, you should other relevant Burn so you can hold it back until it's time to go for the kil


Having said that, the card is horrible.
Fireblast is useful because, as a finisher, it's a 4-for-0. 4 additional damage makes turn-3 wins possible, allows overpowering counterwalls and serves other invaluable strategic goals.
Being Yet Another Bolt is nowhere enough to justify the drawback. You don't want to cast this early, and later on you want spells that deal more than 3 damage or those with other benefits. Garbage.

Peter_Rotten
01-03-2008, 01:02 PM
Here's a c&p from the spoiler thread:

But will the Sligh and Burn decks be able to support the land sacrifice for the new card and Fireblast? Look at the list of burn spells that this new spell must compete with:

Lighting Bolt: Instant 3 for :r:
Chain Lightning: Sorcery 3 for :r: (with a usually negligible drawback)
Fireblast: 4 for two Mountains

Magma Jet: 2 for :1::r: and draw quality

Price of Progress: Scaled damage for :1::r:

Rift Bolt: a delayed 3 for :r: (with the bonus of dodging Chalice/Trinisphere)

It could be standard viable, but I don't think I like it much for Legacy.

In a current Sligh or Burn builds, on what turn would I want to cast this spell? Not turn 1. Not turn 2 (when I'd be playing my Goyf). I'd have to wait to turn 3 to cast it. (Rift Bolt can be cast earlier with no board disadvantage).

I also fail to see it as a necessary Goyf pump. Will my opponent or I not have a land in the yard by turn 3? Goyf-Sligh has had no problems getting lands into the yard.

It doesn't dodge the most hurtful cards to Sligh/Burn. Chalice for one - the most common setting against burn - shuts this card down. Trini pwns it as badly as it does Bolt and Chain. CoP shuts it down just like any red burn spell.

redmage
01-03-2008, 04:50 PM
Hey PR, you forgot to mention...


Lava Spike: Sorcery 3 for :r: (Targets players only)


That's the bottom of the barrel for "Bolts" in burn; however, I still think it's a better fit for the deck than Shard Volley would be.

Mountains are best saved for Fireblasts, especially in a deck that runs so little mana to begin with.

What I really would have liked to see printed is an unconditional 4-for-2 without any drawbacks, or at worst a "target Player" clause like Lava Spike.

The "standard" now is 2-for-1 (Shock); so a 4-for-2 isn't that unreasonable. Just take away Incinerate's regeneration clause, and maybe its status as an Instant, then add an extra point of dmg.

Illissius
01-03-2008, 06:00 PM
As a "target player" sorcery, I could see it (yeah, Flame Rift, but they've obsoleted terrible cards before), but not anything else. Volcanic Hammer saw play, and just left for Incinerate, which is considered top of the curve.

Sanguine Voyeur
01-03-2008, 06:37 PM
The "standard" now is 2-for-1 (Shock); so a 4-for-2 isn't that unreasonable.Char disagrees with you. That was a four for three with a draw back, and that made a huge splash.

But, this isn't really the place to discuss what the current standard for burn spells is.

Shtriga
01-03-2008, 06:54 PM
I have a pet hate for this deck. it just pisses me off when some kid shows up with a 100% burn deck and there's not much I can do against damage to the dome, and he can just autopilot it :(

Wallace
01-03-2008, 07:27 PM
Char disagrees with you. That was a four for three with a draw back, and that made a huge splash.

But, this isn't really the place to discuss what the current standard for burn spells is.

It is the burn Thread, so yeah it is...

I love playing burn and goyf sligh, I have tried many diffrent combo's of spells and have found, at least I think, what is the best package for me...

To me the deck is simple to build, You Just throw in your 16xLightning Bolts (Rift Bolt,Chain Lightning,Lava Spike,Lightning Bolt) add 4xFireblast, and 3-4xPrice of progress. That, to me, is the base for any Burn deck, after that you have to lok at your meta. You have to think about what works for you, I for instance don't like Magma Jet but love Baubles so I run 8xBauble's. My current burn list looks something like this...

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress
4 Incinerate
2 Flames of the Bloodhand
2 Flamebreak
3 Flame Rift
4 Urza's Bauble
4 Mishra's Bauble

3 Bloodstained Mire
3 Wooded Foothills
2 Barbirian Ring
9 Mountain


I have a pet hate for this deck. it just pisses me off when some kid shows up with a 100% burn deck and there's not much I can do against damage to the dome, and he can just autopilot it :(

Is it much diffrent than so "regular" showing up with a combo deck and winning on turn 1?

redmage
01-03-2008, 10:47 PM
Char disagrees with you. That was a four for three with a draw back, and that made a huge splash.

Yeah, a "huge splash" in a weak (read: Standard) format. Char was a cute card, shifting Psionic where it should have always been, but it's by no means a great card, and it isn't a good litmus test for what burn spells should/could be. Hell, Flames of the Blood Hand is strictly better, and it's only an uncommon. It took quite awhile for people to realize that Char & Psionic are only mediocre spells. Nostalgia, and a severe lack of anything "better" were the main reasons that shifted Psionics reached $25-$30, and Char hit $10-$15 during their peaks.

Red has had, and will continue to have better burn spells than Char; it's a $2-$3 dollar rare at best. The only reason Psionic (TS) is still worth $5-$9 is that it's "black bordered nostalgia" for those who can't find/afford Alpha/Beta, it's the best "burn" available in Blue, and it gives Blue something it never should have had (burn).

Take Flames of the Blood Hand (an Instant) and remove the "The damage can't be prevented." and the "If that plyer would gain life this turn, that player gains no life instead.", then drop its CC by one colorless mana. Seems like a fair trade to me.

Sanguine Voyeur
01-03-2008, 11:05 PM
Char demonstrates what modern versatile burn for four would be. In fact, the only burn for four that's cheaper than it are Flame Rift and Fireblast.
Hell, Flames of the Blood Hand is strictly better, and it's only an uncommon.Not it's not. The inability to target creatures is huge and is one of the reasons that Char was so widely played.

redmage
01-03-2008, 11:10 PM
Char demonstrates what modern versatile burn for four would be.

Modern?

Hardly.

It's Psionic Blast (from ALPHA) that's been color shifted. It doesn't get any more "old school" than that.



Not it's not. The inability to target creatures is huge and is one of the reasons that Char was so widely played.

We're talking Legacy Burn here. Opposing creatures don't matter (in this case), and when it comes to Legacy Burn FotBH is "strictly better" (yet often still doesn't make the cut).

Sanguine Voyeur
01-03-2008, 11:23 PM
The original dispute comes from the misconception that a four for two is as good as a two for one. That isn't and hasn't matched the efficiency of burn spells.
We're talking Legacy Burn here.No, we're not. We're talking about burn spells in general. That's why it why it isn't entirely relevant to this particular thread.

redmage
01-03-2008, 11:52 PM
The original dispute comes from the misconception that a four for two is as good as a two for one.

Then that's your misconception, and you can take your straw man fallacy elsewhere. What I said was "The "standard" now is 2-for-1 (Shock); so a 4-for-2 isn't that unreasonable." There is a difference between "as good as" and "not that unreasonable".




No, we're not. We're talking about burn spells in general.

Maybe you're not, but some of us are trying to.

I don't think that Shard Volley will make the cut in Legacy, and I feel that a decent 4-for-2 would. I also feel that somewhere between Lava Spike, Shock, and FotBH is a reasonable 4-for-2 that would be able to see print.

Shtriga
01-04-2008, 08:32 AM
Is it much diffrent than so "regular" showing up with a combo deck and winning on turn 1?

not really :) since some combo decks can also be autopiloted

Shugyosha
01-06-2008, 07:15 PM
But will the Sligh and Burn decks be able to support the land sacrifice for the new card and Fireblast? Look at the list of burn spells that this new spell must compete with:

Lighting Bolt: Instant 3 for :r:
Chain Lightning: Sorcery 3 for :r: (with a usually negligible drawback)
Fireblast: 4 for two Mountains

Magma Jet: 2 for :1::r: and draw quality

Price of Progress: Scaled damage for :1::r:

Rift Bolt: a delayed 3 for :r: (with the bonus of dodging Chalice/Trinisphere)


I think this approach is wrong. Every new 3 for 1 has to compete with the filler cards burn usually plays. When Rift Bolt was printed it wasn't compared to the "must play" burn spells and considered shitty (which it would be then).
Every Burn deck has to run 16 bolts, 4 Magma Jet and 4 Blasts. After that comes a meta dependend number of PoP and sweepers. The rest are "sub-par " or meta cards. When Rift Bolt was printed people found it to be better than Incinerate & friends and ran it.

The new 3 for 1 is definately playable as 2-of at least because you often draw more than two mountains or don't draw fireblast in a game.

An early Trinisphere and Chalice @ 1 is usually GG anyways, so it doesn't matter.

Kundalini
01-06-2008, 09:15 PM
Yes, that new Shard Volley is bad.
BUT it has a better damage/cost ratio than most fillers, so I am seriously considering it for inclusion.

Think of it as a finisher: of course you cannot probably afford to run a full playset of those AND fireblasts but my idea is to go

-4/-3 inferior "fillers" (mine are mogg fanatics and/or needle drops)
-1 fireblast

+3/4 shard volley
+1 mountain (!)

My build is very light on land to keep threat density high, so upping the land count for a bonus instant cheap finisher could be a good idea. Anyone tested yet?

Duddelutten
01-08-2008, 10:44 PM
Goodmornin'...

I will play a burn-deck on a invitational Top8 tournament on saturday, and I want comments and feedback (+ as well as -) on the list I'm runnin'.

Before commenting or reading decklist I can tell about my meta matchup, it's probably like this:
*Kobe-Loam* >> (+): I can deal a lot of damage with Ankh's (gg to exploration and fetch deals 5 damage), and after SB Blood Moon will disturb him even more. I can also kill all threats he have in play (Bob, Braids and Witness). (-): Devastating Dreams can litterly kill all my dreams of having very much mana left and I must draw Chrome Moxes or more mountains very quick. I think I have a kind of favourable matchup against this deck.

*GAT-Without Tarmogoyf :^)* (+): Also here the Ankh deals a lot of damage to him 'cause he's runnin 8 fetch 8 nonbasics and 2 basics and therefore Blood Moon will be sideboarded in and also 4 Pyroblast. Also his Pernicious Deeds is useless against my deck, it can only destroy chrome mox and Ankh. (-): Alot of Cantrips and therefore he have counterspells. I think he's running 4x Fow, 3x Daze and 2x Counterspell.

*TimeVaultKombo* - A deck based on Time Vault and Mizzet Transquillant, including Angels and some other crap. (+): I can gain a fast victory with turn 4 as finishing round. He's running BW and confidant, vindicate, Morphguys (Exalted Angel and Zoetic Caverns) will be crap. (-): He plays 4x Hymn and 2xDuress and 2x Thoughtseize wich makes his distruption against me very evil. How i will get around this i dunno :(

*Ichoird* - (+): Flamebreak can be usefull, I have two choices here, 1) Go for throat and just hope for a turn 4 kill and his deck to be slow, wich i will notice quick. 2) Save quite a lot burns for takin out some ichorids or tokens when he needs them. The deck is runing 4 lands so i will SB out Ankh's and sideboarding in... hrm.. something. (-): Can be faster than me, unfortunatly for me. And I need GY Hate against it i suppose.

---

Well over to the decklist then:

Burn (20):
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Chain Lightning
4x Rift Bolt
4x Lava Spike
3x Flamebreak
4x Flame Rift

Utility (4):
4x Magma Jet

Finisher (10):
4x Fireblast
(1x Fork)
4x Price of Progress

Landhate (8):
4x Ankh of Mishra
and therefore:
4x Chrome mox for speed and turn 1 cast for Ankh against the fastest decks.

Lands (18):
16 Mountian
2 Keldon Megaliths (I choose this over Barb Ring because my hand will empty faster with chrome mox.)

Total 62 cards.

SB:
4x Pyroblast (Against Gat and some other random blue stuff like chill.)
3x Blood Moon (Even more landhate against at least 4 other 3-or-more-color decks.)
3x Tormod's Crypt (Against Ichorid I need some kind of defense. Even if theese are kind of easy for Ichorid to remove.)
3x Browbeat (SB in against decks im fast against, or against a random noob i know will make me draw 3 cards ^.^)
2x Open slots (And md is 62 so 2 cards out here...)

-----

Cards i prefer, but not over something else in the deck:
*Incinerate - ofc good but it went out while I was cutting for my Ankh version of the deck.
*Sulfuric Vortex - Don't find why I should play 1. Well, it is great against Time Vault tough :)~ Maybe I'll play theese in sb and 1 in main, based on if i get the cards i still not have got (1 Ankh, 1 Fork, 1 Tormod's Crypt).
*Pyrokinesis - Intresting card, but i can't find place for those.
*Red Elemental Blast - I think 4 Pyroblast will be enough in my metamatchup.
*Cursed Scroll - I prefer to have as few permanents as possible, chrome mox and ankh is enough already.
*Mogg Fanatic - Good against Ichorid, maybe I'll play those instead of crypts if i cant get 3 crypts.
*Scirocco - Solidarity is not played so i'll not play it.
*Anarchy - I guess I'll never SB it in if I'll run it. And personally i think the manacost is to high, even while playin moxes.

----

So What do you guys think of this Burn-Ankh version of this deck, will it be good enough?

Best greetings // David :smile:

Lemuria
01-09-2008, 06:51 AM
If you expect Ichorid, it's better to run Mogg Fanatic on your list to remove their Bridges

Duddelutten
01-09-2008, 09:44 AM
If you expect Ichorid, it's better to run Mogg Fanatic on your list to remove their Bridges

Well I will not run it in md, cause i want no creatures at all in it, or does 4 Mogg make any diffrence?

Duddelutten
01-09-2008, 09:47 AM
Another Idea i have with this Ankhburn is that instead of playin chrome moxes that removes one burn you could play lotus petal (or even Mox Diamond)..

Iranon
01-09-2008, 10:35 AM
I would run no acceleration at all given how Burn runs out of all resources at equal speed. If you really really want it, I'd use Simian Spirit Guide since that can beat down if needed.

ParkerLewis
01-09-2008, 12:15 PM
Another Idea i have with this Ankhburn is that instead of playin chrome moxes that removes one burn you could play lotus petal (or even Mox Diamond)..

You're right, but the Chrome Moxes allow you to reduce your land count accordingly - something you can't really do if you're playing Petals instead.

So, you may be removing one spell to play the Mox, but you've also got 4 less useless mountains in the deck. I know it doesn't make up for it, but this still is something important.

And speeding up the deck is also something important. I've personnally found the Moxes builds very promising.

Bovinious
01-09-2008, 12:20 PM
Chrome Mox or Lotus Petal are both terrible in Burn. Mox forces you to pitch a business spell, and once its in play it doesnt even sac to Fireblast or deal damage like Barbarian Ring. It doesnt even help to ensure youll draw less land over the course of a game either, same goes with Petal, except its even worse because it doesnt even stick around. I have no idea why anyone would suggest if theyve played the deck even once, if you scared of Ankh damaging you, you shouldnt be because you will most likely be ahead in damage playing less lands and burn spells, or better yet, dont play Ankh at all...in my opinion its to slow and awful.

zulander
01-09-2008, 12:36 PM
There are two major problems I see with burn.

1. You empty your hand very very quickly.

2. Your opponent can race you from turns 3-6 by the time you are able to draw the kill.

My answer to these problems? +4 Howling mine, +3 ensnaring bridge. Decks rarely have answers to artifacts in the maindeck.

Curby
01-09-2008, 01:25 PM
There are two major problems I see with burn.

1. You empty your hand very very quickly.

2. Your opponent can race you from turns 3-6 by the time you are able to draw the kill.

My answer to these problems? +4 Howling mine, +3 ensnaring bridge. Decks rarely have answers to artifacts in the maindeck.

Hmm, Howling Mine seems interesting, but I still don't get why it would be better than in any other deck. You're merely speeding up the race, not changing the nature of it, and your opponent starts out with a +2 card advantage once they take their first turn with a Mine. How is this different than an imaginary card game where each player plays magic but takes two turns in a row? Same race, different speed. Are you assuming that while you're able to make use of the extra cards, your opponent will see a mana bottleneck and be unable to cast everything? I agree it's difficult for burn to race, but I think we should try to "cheat" rather than using asymmetric solutions that favor the opponent.

By the way, for those considering Bridge, you might want to consider Meekstone. They're both situational, but Meekstone can be dropped early and takes effect instantly. Serra Avenger is unaffected, and it will never prevent a swarm of 1/1s from swinging, but we've sweepers for the weenies, just not for Goyf, Tombstalker, et. al.

ParkerLewis
01-09-2008, 02:08 PM
Chrome Mox or Lotus Petal are both terrible in Burn. Mox forces you to pitch a business spell, and once its in play it doesnt even sac to Fireblast or deal damage like Barbarian Ring. It doesnt even help to ensure youll draw less land over the course of a game either, same goes with Petal, except its even worse because it doesnt even stick around.

Including Chrome Moxes allows you to cut that many lands from the MD, so you won't be more flooded than before. Plus, you only pitch your worst business spell : that Flamebreak when you're not facing aggro, or that Price of Progress against combo, or whatever your worst thing in hand is.


I have no idea why anyone would suggest if theyve played the deck even once, if you scared of Ankh damaging you, you shouldnt be because you will most likely be ahead in damage playing less lands and burn spells, or better yet, dont play Ankh at all...in my opinion its to slow and awful.

You're completely missing the point of running the Moxes. They're not here to evade some ankh damage, they're here to give you the possibility of actually goldfishing on T4 or before - ie NOT losing to any other viable deck around. And also, being able to T1 Ankh (a very, very strong play against anything but combo, be it on the play or on the draw) is a very nice additional bonus.

zulander
01-09-2008, 02:12 PM
Hmm, Howling Mine seems interesting, but I still don't get why it would be better than in any other deck. You're merely speeding up the race, not changing the nature of it, and your opponent starts out with a +2 card advantage once they take their first turn with a Mine. How is this different than an imaginary card game where each player plays magic but takes two turns in a row?
Usually I've found that if burn losses it's because they've run out of gas with the opponent at ~3-6 life. Sure your opponent can draw extra creatures/equipment etc... but their cards are as good as dead if they don't have haste. While they'll be playing that creature/whatever they draw off the mine you'll be playing the last burn spells you've needed to win the game.

Wallace
01-09-2008, 03:52 PM
Howling mine in burn is a terrible idea, sure it will net you an extra card every turn, but you opponent will also get to draw. You should have your opponent in lethal range by the end of turn 4, playing off the top at this point is ok, you opponent will have to find some life gain or win before you kill them. IDK about your deck but unless my opponent has Counter Balance out the will run out of counters eventually. There are much better ways to draw cards with Burn; browbeat, Street Wraith, Baubles and Needle Drop to name a few, all better than Howling mine.

Chrome Mox just hinders you ability to win, pitch a burn spell to produce more mana?

Bridge costs 3 mana to cast; you should have your opponent dead or damn close to it by the time turn 3 rolls around. Spending on an artifact instead of I don't know, WINNING on turn 3 seems bad.

LordEvilTeaCup
01-09-2008, 04:25 PM
I second the call for Meekstone to be tested. Its great against Goyfs, and gigantic sutured ghouls or grave trolls as well.

Wallace
01-09-2008, 04:50 PM
I second the call for Meekstone to be tested. Its great against Goyfs, and gigantic sutured ghouls or grave trolls as well.

I think meekstone is intresting, but just so ya know it does nothing against gigantic sutured ghouls, seeing as you die the first time it swings so not untaping is really nbd...:smile:

mujadaddy
01-09-2008, 05:00 PM
I think meekstone is intresting, but just so ya know it does nothing against gigantic sutured ghouls, seeing as you die the first time it swings so not untaping is really nbd...:smile:This.

Play with Glacial Chasms + lots of cantrips instead :laugh:

Duddelutten
01-09-2008, 06:42 PM
@the Ankh deck and its comments:

Well, I will run 4 chrome moxes, as the more skilled ppl here says it does help more than it hurts, a turn 1 Ankh is so stron that its game to some decks if they're facing this burn. And Chrome moxes are artifacts, so is true for ankh, and that make Sharpnel Blast a good finisher or just 5-burn into something evil.

If I play theese 8 artifacts: 4x Ankh, 4x Chrome mox - I prefer playing only two sharpnel blast, because i dont want it in a hand where it doesnt help me any furthur - and I do want it in a hand where you can toss it to chrome mox or thorw the mox into your opponent at turn 3 or even your ankh at that time.

So my deck will go for those 10 cards. Intressting here is to also run 4x Howling mine - Bur i am afraid it will help less, because it is not really as good as dropping t1 ankh. The mine will let your opponent draw one more card for a response to the mine, while ankh will not - and it maybe also hurts your opponent if he needs to fetch for the right mana with 5.

Wallace
01-09-2008, 06:49 PM
@the Ankh deck and its comments:

Well, I will run 4 chrome moxes, as the more skilled ppl here says it does help more than it hurts, a turn 1 Ankh is so stron that its game to some decks if they're facing this burn. And Chrome moxes are artifacts, so is true for ankh, and that make Sharpnel Blast a good finisher or just 5-burn into something evil.

If I play theese 8 artifacts: 4x Ankh, 4x Chrome mox - I prefer playing only two sharpnel blast, because i dont want it in a hand where it doesnt help me any furthur - and I do want it in a hand where you can toss it to chrome mox or thorw the mox into your opponent at turn 3 or even your ankh at that time.

So my deck will go for those 10 cards. Intressting here is to also run 4x Howling mine - Bur i am afraid it will help less, because it is not really as good as dropping t1 ankh. The mine will let your opponent draw one more card for a response to the mine, while ankh will not - and it maybe also hurts your opponent if he needs to fetch for the right mana with 5.

Thats sounds great, now go to the Ankh Slight thread (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7593&highlight=ankh)and post your thoughts there, as P R states on the first page (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7811), this is the Burn thread, discuss burn decks...

LordEvilTeaCup
01-09-2008, 10:54 PM
I think meekstone is intresting, but just so ya know it does nothing against gigantic sutured ghouls, seeing as you die the first time it swings so not untaping is really nbd...:smile:

Silly details. Well, it sacs to shrapnel blast...

Bovinious
01-09-2008, 11:26 PM
Including Chrome Moxes allows you to cut that many lands from the MD, so you won't be more flooded than before. Plus, you only pitch your worst business spell : that Flamebreak when you're not facing aggro, or that Price of Progress against combo, or whatever your worst thing in hand is.



You're completely missing the point of running the Moxes. They're not here to evade some ankh damage, they're here to give you the possibility of actually goldfishing on T4 or before - ie NOT losing to any other viable deck around. And also, being able to T1 Ankh (a very, very strong play against anything but combo, be it on the play or on the draw) is a very nice additional bonus.

You will be just as flooded, because instead of drawing a land youll draw Chrome Mox, 15 Land 4 Mox is the same as 19 land for mana source drawing purposes, this is pretty elementary. Pitching a business spell is still not good, and you need mountains in the deck for Fireblast, there is no point of Mox unless MAYBE you were going to run Shrapnel Blast but that wouldnt be good either.

Again, Moxes dont really help you goldfish because they cost you a business spell. Getting Ankh on first turn via Mox is also irrelevent because while the opponent may lose 2 more life because Ankh saw 1 more land come in, they would have lost 2 OR MORE from the spell you wasted on Mox.

JDunkin00
01-10-2008, 07:08 PM
I don't really like shard volley cause your lands are precious until your finish with fireblast. Mox I dislike also because as others said your main reasing for losing is running out of gas. I do like the idea of Simian SG falls in line with Dragon Stompy idea of mana/threat slot. Oh and futher up the post there was a debate on flamebreak you need a sweep spell that also damages the opponent. Which pyro doesn't, and is more effective than e.quake variants. Next debate howling mine isn't the answer you want, I'd rather run baubles, or browbeat honestly. Mogg fanatic is a fine spell cause it still sacs to removal and combat damage on stack, but most importantly it gets rid of the bridges you were worried about taking down an ichorid or narcomoeba while going out.

ParkerLewis
01-11-2008, 05:50 AM
Including Chrome Moxes allows you to cut that many lands from the MD, so you won't be more flooded than before.


You will be just as flooded, because instead of drawing a land youll draw Chrome Mox, 15 Land 4 Mox is the same as 19 land for mana source drawing purposes, this is pretty elementary.

That's why I said you won't be more flooded than before.


Pitching a business spell is still not good, and you need mountains in the deck for Fireblast, there is no point of Mox unless MAYBE you were going to run Shrapnel Blast but that wouldnt be good either.

Again, Moxes dont really help you goldfish because they cost you a business spell.

You're still ignoring the fact that the business spell you're pitching is always the worst you have at your disposal. It's not like you're pitching a fireblast.

Concerning the number of mountains to sacrifice, I did the math a few pages ago, and that's why I'm using 3 Chromes Moxes (replacing 3 Mountains) instead of 4.


Getting Ankh on first turn via Mox is also irrelevent because while the opponent may lose 2 more life because Ankh saw 1 more land come in, they would have lost 2 OR MORE from the spell you wasted on Mox.

Then you also missed the point of Ankh :) Ankh make any fetchland cost FIVE (5) life. So YES, if you can play it T1, it is worth it.

Duddelutten
01-11-2008, 08:53 AM
...and if you says it does only 2 extra damage if you drop it t1 - well, how many decks wins when they have 2 lands? Each time i drop ankh t1 (draw or first, doesnt matter) It allways does 4 or more damage. And how many deck aren't running fetches today? Well, a lot of them is running fetches, and 1 fetch would deal 5 damage - wich is a kind of good value for the card you dropped to chrome mox.
And when your tired of the ankh (seeing it doesnt deal any damage) you can just shrapnel blast it or somehting. Often after sb, i meet my opponents to disenchant it but in response you can blast it, that will make 5 additional damage and also replace the card you tossed to the mox if you count the card advantage.
And:
i would say, Ankh > Tarmogoyf, yes.

Bovinious
01-11-2008, 10:03 AM
That's why I said you won't be more flooded than before.



You're still ignoring the fact that the business spell you're pitching is always the worst you have at your disposal. It's not like you're pitching a fireblast.

Concerning the number of mountains to sacrifice, I did the math a few pages ago, and that's why I'm using 3 Chromes Moxes (replacing 3 Mountains) instead of 4.



Then you also missed the point of Ankh :) Ankh make any fetchland cost FIVE (5) life. So YES, if you can play it T1, it is worth it.

Yeah thats what I was saying too, you seemed to imply before that Mox thinned you deck of land somehow which is true, you run less land with Mox in the deck but the same amount of mana sources overall.

If pitching your worst burn spell really doesnt slow you down a turn or 2 then all power to you for running Mox, but Ive very often seen Burn decks win with the last card in hand, the extra mana from Mox may make up for it but Im not sure, Ill take your word for it if you say it does because I never play Burn.

mujadaddy
01-11-2008, 12:49 PM
Ill take your word for it if you say it does because I never play Burn.Then why should anyone listen to your opinion in this thread? You're just filling up the page with uninformed opinion.

To keep this post on-topic, I think Chrome Mox is a Dangerous Cool Thing for Burn. Keep it Simple, straight forward, and above all, FAST. Good luck to you though.

Sims
01-11-2008, 02:05 PM
Then why should anyone listen to your opinion in this thread? You're just filling up the page with uninformed opinion.

To keep this post on-topic, I think Chrome Mox is a Dangerous Cool Thing for Burn. Keep it Simple, straight forward, and above all, FAST. Good luck to you though.


In this case I'll actually stand up for the Bovine. He probably didn't need to test because he could look at the card, understand what it does and what the costs mean, and dismiss it as not being worth it. For reference he seemed to be saying:

-It doesn't thin land it just replaces it
-It requires the investment of a spell to produce mana, thus reducing your potential for quick lethality
-It opens you up to two-for-one's as any artifact destruction that is played main just became a sinkhole.
-It tends to be dangerous in causing you to want to run cards that would otherwise be subpar and not included in your deck (Shrapnel Blast, Ankh, etc.)


Sometimes not playing a deck regularly (or at all) doesn't make you uninformed to post on it, because you can understand the concepts of what makes the deck tick. This doesn't make you ignorant, trolling, or uninformed. It just means that you can wrap your mind around a concept well, in this case, the concept of what makes burn work.

mujadaddy
01-11-2008, 02:30 PM
I don't like Chrome Mox for Burn either -- I agree with his conclusions, and said so in my post.

I just don't think that "I never play Burn" is an "expert" opinion.

Didn't mean to directly flame. I make comments about Magic Theory in threads about decks I never play, too. :laugh:

Wallace
01-11-2008, 04:06 PM
So has everyone seen the new "RED" card in morningtide, it's going to bust this deck wide open, Slithermuse is sick!!!

Slithermuse

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/images/smilies/mana2.gifhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/images/smilies/manau.gifhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/images/smilies/manau.gifCreature - Elementalhttp://mtgsalvation.com/images/spoiler/morningtide-rare.gifWhen Slithermuse leaves play, choose an opponent. If that player has more cards in hand than you, draw cards equal to the difference.
Evoke http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/images/smilies/mana2.gifhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/images/smilies/manau.gif

SICK!!!!!!

I was thinking something like this:

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress
4 Incinerate
3 Magma Jet
2 Flames of the Bloodhand
2 Flamebreak
3 Flame Rift
4 Slithermuse

4 Bloodstained Mire
3 Wooded Foothills
7 Mountain
4 Volcanic Island

Bovinious
01-11-2008, 06:01 PM
Then why should anyone listen to your opinion in this thread? You're just filling up the page with uninformed opinion.

To keep this post on-topic, I think Chrome Mox is a Dangerous Cool Thing for Burn. Keep it Simple, straight forward, and above all, FAST. Good luck to you though.

Yeah...I dont need to play Burn to realize pitching a threat is bad and such, sorry Im not an expert on every rogue deck out there, plus you agree with me anyways apparently so I dont know why you would make such a comment.

@ Sacearuse:

I dont think that card is as good as you seem to think, in TES that card has major potential because they can cast it on turn 1-2 to ensure the opponent has many cards, but in Burn the earliest you could cast that is turn 3 and you may not even want to then, opting to actually affect the game state in some way. Basically by the time you cast that a lot of the time the opponent will not have many cards, and if they are holding a hand-full chances are they are playing blue and can counter it.

JDunkin00
01-12-2008, 12:32 PM
I don't really care for slithermuse in burn. The matchups that it would matter most thresh sui black and gobs they can run out of a hand just as easily as you so youd draw nothing. Stick to straight burn no cute tricks just scortch face and be done go eat and be back in time for the next round.

DalkonCledwin
01-13-2008, 07:24 PM
BUDGET BURN
LAND:
3 Barbarian Ring
17 Mountain

CREATURES:
4 Keldon Marauders
4 Mogg Fanatic

INSTANTS:
4 Fireblasts
2 Flames of the Blood Hand
2 Hammer of Bogardan
4 Incinerate
2 Magma Jet
2 Fork
4 Lightning Bolt

SORCERIES:
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike

ENCHANTMENTS:
4 Seal of Fire

SIDEBOARD:
3 Flamebreak
2 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Blood Moon
4 Tormod's Crypt
3 Shattering Spree

The deck listed above is the deck as it currently is built. I will be adding modifications to the list as I get different cards for the list. Currently I am looking for the following cards:

4 Price of Progress
4 Chain Lightning - itallian if necessary
2 Magma Jet

Fortunately I think I have the Price of Progress (or most of them) located and will be purchasing them this Saturday if everything goes as planned.

I will be taking the 2 Flames of the Blood Hand and 2 Hammer of Bogardan out for the 4 Price of Progress. When I finally get them, I will take the Seal of Fire out for the Chain Lightning. And if I can locate them I will take 2 of the Keldon Marauders out for the 2 Magma Jet's.

What I need the most help with is the sideboard. I am not sure if the sideboard as it stands is going to work. So I would greatly appreciate any and all advice geared towards the sideboard. I do know that I want to keep the 4 Tormod's Crypt in the sideboard, and I probably want to keep the 3 Flamebreak's in the sideboard. I also probably want to up the Flamebreak's to 4. Then I will probably want to put the Sulfuric Vortex's up to 4 as well. What I am debating is if I want to take the Shattering Spree's out, or the Blood Moon's. That is the dilema that I am currently working with. So if someone could help me out with it I would appreciate it.

And yes, there are people who play Chalice of the Void in my current meta.

burkey_boy
01-13-2008, 08:24 PM
im using something like this

4 street wraith

4 lightning bolt
4 rift bolt
4 chain lightning
4 lava spike

4 magma jet
4 incinerate
4 flame rift

4 flame break

4 fireblast

2 barbarian ring
18 mountain

it works very well, and has a good shot i meta which is anti everything. pretty resillient

DalkonCledwin
01-14-2008, 01:52 AM
im using something like this

4 street wraith

4 lightning bolt
4 rift bolt
4 chain lightning
4 lava spike

4 magma jet
4 incinerate
4 flame rift

4 flame break

4 fireblast

2 barbarian ring
18 mountain

it works very well, and has a good shot i meta which is anti everything. pretty resillient

I would run Price of Progress over Flame Rift, only because you have a mana base that protects you from Price of Progress, while at the same time totally ripping most other people's decks apart with Price of Progress (on average you are going to net between 4 to 8 damage with Price of Progress for 2 mana).

Also I would take 1 mountain out, and replace it with 1 more Barbarian Ring.

And question, are you running Street Wraith just for the cycling effect? If so, there are better cards. I would almost even suggest running one of the two Baubles, Mishra's Bauble, or Urza's Bauble (depending on if you like looking at the top of Libraries, or cards in people's hands) as opposed to Street Wraith, it amounts to practically the same thing, only difference is you don't have to pay 2 life, and you get a beneficial effect! You could also try Sensei's Divining Top, a card that I am toying around with possibly including in my deck.

DalkonCledwin
01-14-2008, 01:54 PM
So you can help me fix the deck more effectively, I have decided to show you what my deck will look like when it is finished (at least what it will look like when it is finished at the moment). So here it is:


LANDS:
3 Barbarian Ring
17 Snow-Covered Mountain

CREATURES:
2 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Mogg Fanatic

INSTANTS
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress
4 Magma Jet
4 Incinerate
2 Fork
4 Lightning Bolt

SORCERIES:
4 Rift Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike

SIDEBOARD:
4 Flamebreak
4 Shattering Spree
4 Tormod's Crypt
3 Sulfuric Vortex

Of these, the cards I still need, are as follows:

2 Magma Jet
4 Price of Progress
4 Chain Lightning
1 Flamebreak
1 Shattering Spree
1 Sulfuric Vortex
1 Simian Spirit Guide

Wallace
01-14-2008, 04:12 PM
Since everyone else is posting there lists, I will post my new list. I have been testing this build on MWS for a week now and it seems to work well:

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Rift Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress
4 Magma Jet
4 Flame Rift
3 Flamebreak
3 Flames of the Bloodhand
4 Street Wraith

2 Barbirian Ring
4 Wooded Foothills
2 Bloodstained Mire
10 Mountain

redmage
01-14-2008, 11:12 PM
Re: Magma Jet

I still see a lot of decks running 4x Magma Jet, and I think it's definitely a mistake for non-"control builds". There was an old theory that went something like this:

Run 4x if you want to see it in multiples, and/or you need it in your opener.

Run 3x if you want one early on.

Run 2x for mid/late-game spells, or to support another card.

Run 1x if it's restricted, a part of a "tutor suite", or just playing the role of card "X" #5.

'Jet is a part of Burn's control suite.

Turn 1: Fanatic
Turn 2: Jet, often to "guarantee" a third land, or to dig for...
Turn 3: A Sweeper

Is a far cry from...

Turn 1: Bolt
Turn 2: Double Bolt
Turn 3: Bolt, PoP, Fireblast... GG.

When it comes to 'Jets, I don't ever want to see them in multiples. 2-for-2 is too slow, scrying once in a game should be enough, and I don't want/need one in most of my opening hands. Unless a build is heavily slanted towards the control role, 3x Magma Jets should be the upper limit. I'd run a better threat, a meta choice, or a Street Wraith (if you're not running them already) in the 4th slot.



And question, are you running Street Wraith just for the cycling effect? If so, there are better cards. I would almost even suggest running one of the two Baubles, Mishra's Bauble, or Urza's Bauble (depending on if you like looking at the top of Libraries, or cards in people's hands) as opposed to Street Wraith, it amounts to practically the same thing, only difference is you don't have to pay 2 life, and you get a beneficial effect!

Actually, Street Wraith has quite a few benefits over other options:

1) It can't be countered.
Counterspell variants are much more played than their Stifle equivalents. Depending on your meta, Chalice@0 can also give a bauble player headaches.

2) It cantrips now; so that someone can play the card drawn, that turn, far more often.
This is quite a significant benefit over the Baubles (which "slo-trip"). Between Lands, Sorceries, Creatures (Fanatics / Marauders), and sometimes Artifacts; roughly 2/3rds of any decent burn deck is comprised of "sorcery speed" plays. This means that bauble draws only give you about a 1-in-3 chance for an immediately playable card. Because of that, Wraiths become far superior topdecks, which strengthen your game turns 3-5, when you're trying to end things quickly.

3) It's "free" (no mana needed to cast, and/or activate it).
We only run 16-20 lands; so we usually don't have the spare mana available to really abuse a 'Top.

Wallace
01-14-2008, 11:27 PM
@ Redmage:

I used to say the same thing about Magma Jet, I have come to realize that it is needed in burn. Yes it only does 2 damage for :1::r:, the Scry is is what make this card good. Setting up your draw FTW or getting rid of excess land is what makes Jet good.

The other way to look at it is, what would you run in it's place? Incinerate is ok, does 3 damage for the same CC (:1::r:). Baubles are ok, but not great, shocks/Tarfire are terrible and Mogg Fanatic has lost its luster imo. The only other card I would run here is Keldon Marauders, if the're blocked, they do the same damage as Magma Jet, with no Scry. So until a suitable replacement comes along I will run jet...

O yeah; Shard Volly has a chance here but needs testing.

DalkonCledwin
01-14-2008, 11:31 PM
[b]
Actually, Street Wraith has quite a few benefits over other options:

1) It can't be countered.
Counterspell variants are much more played than their Stifle equivalents. Depending on your meta, Chalice@0 can also give a bauble player headaches.

2) It cantrips now; so that someone can play the card drawn, that turn, far more often.
This is quite a significant benefit over the Baubles (which "slo-trip"). Between Lands, Sorceries, Creatures (Fanatics / Marauders), and sometimes Artifacts; roughly 2/3rds of any decent burn deck is comprised of "sorcery speed" plays. This means that bauble draws only give you about a 1-in-3 chance for an immediately playable card. Because of that, Wraiths become far superior topdecks, which strengthen your game turns 3-5, when you're trying to end things quickly.

3) It's "free" (no mana needed to cast, and/or activate it).
We only run 16-20 lands; so we usually don't have the spare mana available to really abuse a 'Top.


Yeah, I really have noticed that the 'Top is probably not the best option, and was wondering why Street Wraith was seeing play over other options... guess now I know. I will keep that in mind when working to improve my deck, thanks.

redmage
01-15-2008, 02:27 AM
@ Redmage:
I used to say the same thing about Magma Jet, I have come to realize that it is needed in burn. Yes it only does 2 damage for :1::r:, the Scry is is what make this card good. Setting up your draw FTW or getting rid of excess land is what makes Jet good.

I'm certainly not disputing whether or not it's needed. Currently I view it as a bit of a "necessary evil", and I'm well aware that the Scry is what makes it good; however, I do think that 4x Jet is not the optimal configuration for many of the more aggressive builds that I've seen posted. For those that want the effect (myself included), yet want to streamline the deck with an aggressive slant; 3x Jet still grants an early scry often enough, and offers a good slot for personalization. My build's ideal goldfish doesn't include a Magma Jet at all; so why would I want to maximize the chances that I'll see 2 of them in a game?



The other way to look at it is, what would you run in it's place?

Well, since we're only discussing 1-2 slots here:

Incinerate is a good choice (for those not running a playset already), I'm not a fan of the Baubles, and who said Shock is terrible? ;)

While I wouldn't run Tarfire (there's no way for us to benefit from the additional nuances of the card), Shock is actually an interesting, and horribly underrated, option. Burn works in two main forms of currency: 3-for-1's, and 4-for-2's. Four of the first and two of the second equal 20 points of damage... "GG". If there's a heavy dose of fetch lands in your meta, you can effectively run a set of Shocks as instant "Bolt" clones, or Incinerates as if they were 4-for-2's. For each fetch-land your opponent pops, in the first 3 turns, you can play one Shock, or Incinerate, as if it's a copy of the larger 3-for-1/4-for-2 equivalent. It's all the same as far as your goldfish is concerned, and both increase the number of Instants in your deck; however, a playset of each would be pushing it. I'd stick with no more than 4x total (between the two).

Fanatics are a meta/style choice. They're great for more controlling builds, can 2-for-1 weenies, block & sac to prevent Jitte counters, and get rid of Bridges. The main issue here is that Fanatics are not a 1-2 of "splash card". If you're going to run them you want at least 3-4 in the deck because they're best when played the first turn.

I can't say much regarding the Marauders (they don't fit my play-style, and I havn't tested them yet); however, Street Wraith, Browbeat, Vortex, Fork, or FotBH may be worth giving a shot as well (depending on one's deck/meta).



O yeah; Shard Volly has a chance here but needs testing.
True, this would grant 1-2 slots where someone could test out Shard Volley. It looks like an extremely bad turn 1-2 play; so people probably aren't going to want/need to run 3-4 of them. Personally, I'd run a Shock over a Shard Volley though.

burkey_boy
01-15-2008, 08:52 AM
im interested in the shard... its like a mini fireblast... but costs 1 to play, as opposed to hte alt cost.

i think that (pending testing) they could replace the incinerates. again, i havent tested them... i will now!

Maveric78f
01-15-2008, 09:17 AM
Lugh's Rage - Burn Deck
3 Wins / 11 Losses / 0 Draws

Vial-less Affinity - Deck
0 Wins / 0 Losses / 0 Draws

Good times.

RoddyVR
01-15-2008, 12:49 PM
now that i have most of the cards i need for my burn deck, i've started goldfishing it, and i have a couple questions that i would like to ask those that have played/tested burn decks more then me.

1. what do you "usualy" run out of, spells, mana or land?
(mana and land is different: mana= you have the lands to be able to cast ANY of your spells but not ALL of them as fast as you'd like. Land=you have 2 lands in play and one or more 3 cost spells in your hand. spells ofcourse = you have more then enough mana/land, but nothing in hand to cast)

2. how many lands do you run?
(i would have no baubles or wraiths, so i'm asking how many lands in a 60 card deck... then again i am running Needle Drops, but lets ignore that for now)

3. what cards should i try to get for my sideboard?
(i have 8 ReBs, but i'm not sure i realy need all 8 and dont know what other sideboard cards make sense) i know that sideboard depends on the decks being played against me most, but frankly i dont even know what to side against say threshold or goblins or landstill.

4. is Mogg Fanatic a good idea?
(i'm trying to lean my deck away from controlish things like magma jet, and more into the agressive burn things, but the creatures i'm still having a tough time letting go of the creatures. So far in my testing and playing i like the marauders MUCH more then the fanatic even though i'm running both, but i think a big reason for that is that i have done more goldfishing then actualy playing against decks, so i dont realy know how much damage fanatic will tend to do.)

just for reference, i'll put what i'm planning to make my list before i actualy start playing it in tournys (that's my only real testing ground). as of now i've got MOST of the cards i need for this.

land:
16 Mountain (should i replace some with fetches?)
2 Barbarian Ring

3 for 1s:
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Chain Lightning
4x Lava Spike
4x Rift Bolt

bigger damage spells:
4x FireBlast
2-4x Flames of the Blood Hand (only 2 in deck for now)
2-4x Price of Progress (dont have these, they're 4 seals of fire for now)

Draw/Damage spells:
4x Needle Drop
4x Browbeat (right now 2 of them are a Flamebreak and a Pulse of the Forge, but the other Browbeats are on the way already)

Creatures:
4x Mogg Fanatic
4x Keldon Marauders

right now my biggest problems is replacing the 4 seal of fires that are place holders for the Price of Progresses i still dont have (or the last 2 Flames of Blood hands). but once i have those, its starts being a question of what to replace. Flame Rift is a spell i want to include, but the only thing i can realy think to remove is the Mogg Fanatic and that's not realy a very natural substitution.

LordEvilTeaCup
01-15-2008, 02:38 PM
now that i have most of the cards i need for my burn deck, i've started goldfishing it, and i have a couple questions that i would like to ask those that have played/tested burn decks more then me.

1. what do you "usualy" run out of, spells, mana or land?
(mana and land is different: mana= you have the lands to be able to cast ANY of your spells but not ALL of them as fast as you'd like. Land=you have 2 lands in play and one or more 3 cost spells in your hand. spells ofcourse = you have more then enough mana/land, but nothing in hand to cast)

2. how many lands do you run?
(i would have no baubles or wraiths, so i'm asking how many lands in a 60 card deck... then again i am running Needle Drops, but lets ignore that for now)

3. what cards should i try to get for my sideboard?
(i have 8 ReBs, but i'm not sure i realy need all 8 and dont know what other sideboard cards make sense) i know that sideboard depends on the decks being played against me most, but frankly i dont even know what to side against say threshold or goblins or landstill.

4. is Mogg Fanatic a good idea?
(i'm trying to lean my deck away from controlish things like magma jet, and more into the agressive burn things, but the creatures i'm still having a tough time letting go of the creatures. So far in my testing and playing i like the marauders MUCH more then the fanatic even though i'm running both, but i think a big reason for that is that i have done more goldfishing then actualy playing against decks, so i dont realy know how much damage fanatic will tend to do.)

just for reference, i'll put what i'm planning to make my list before i actualy start playing it in tournys (that's my only real testing ground). as of now i've got MOST of the cards i need for this.

land:
16 Mountain (should i replace some with fetches?)
2 Barbarian Ring

3 for 1s:
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Chain Lightning
4x Lava Spike
4x Rift Bolt

bigger damage spells:
4x FireBlast
2-4x Flames of the Blood Hand (only 2 in deck for now)
2-4x Price of Progress (dont have these, they're 4 seals of fire for now)

Draw/Damage spells:
4x Needle Drop
4x Browbeat (right now 2 of them are a Flamebreak and a Pulse of the Forge, but the other Browbeats are on the way already)

Creatures:
4x Mogg Fanatic
4x Keldon Marauders

right now my biggest problems is replacing the 4 seal of fires that are place holders for the Price of Progresses i still dont have (or the last 2 Flames of Blood hands). but once i have those, its starts being a question of what to replace. Flame Rift is a spell i want to include, but the only thing i can realy think to remove is the Mogg Fanatic and that's not realy a very natural substitution.

To answer some of your questions, you will usually run out of spells. That is the main concern. Your land count is only a tad low. With all of those 3cc spells you would want 19. Still, it probably won't be the end of the world.

For your SB, you will probably want something to answer Chalice @ 1. I suggest Shatter Spree as I find its the best solution. It gets past just about anything. If you don't run 4 MB Price of Progress well you are going to want the rest in your SB at least. Same with Flamebreak. Boseiju, Who Shelters All is nice to have as a 2 of in your SB.

I am not a big fan of Browbeat, as its gives your opponent the choice. That is usually a bad thing, and here it undermines this card greatly. Anyway, I only like Mogg Fanatic in metagames where there is some Ichorid decks roaming around.

Wallace
01-15-2008, 03:54 PM
im interested in the shard... its like a mini fireblast... but costs 1 to play, as opposed to hte alt cost.

i think that (pending testing) they could replace the incinerates. again, i havent tested them... i will now!


Not rally a "mini" Fireblast (FB), you still have to pay :r: to cast it, FB is good cuz it's "free" and requires you to have two mountains in play, tapped or un-tapped...

@ Roddvr


Your build looks ok to start, you might want to lower the number of 3 CC spells. Flames of the Blood Hand (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=74625) and Browbeat (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=36038) are both good cards but play one or the other. I also suggest Flamebreak (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=50539), its a board sweeper the also does 3 damage to an opponent. I run 18-19 land depending on the build I am running, 19 looks good for your build w/ 2 Barb. Rings. Fetch's are good, but running 19 land you should not run more than 4.

I really don't like running 8 creatures in Burn, 4 is fine, I prefer the Keldon Marauders but it depends on your meta.

Your board is also dependant on your meta, you have to make your SB fit the decks you will face. If there are a lot of Blue control type decks then 6 to 8 Blasts would work. If combo is big then I suggest Pyrostatic Pillar (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=44290)and Pyroclasm. I have started running Pithing Needle to combat the large number of Survival decks in my meta, it also helps against Vial (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=48146) based decks. Shattering Spree is a must, CoTV is a bitch and you usually scoop to it. Try something like this to start out:

4 Pyroblast (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?id=159243)
3 Shattering Spree (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=97233)
3 Pyroclasm (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=129801)
3 Pithing Needle (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=129526)
2 Sulfuric Vortex (http://ww2.wizards.com/gatherer/CardDetails.aspx?&id=47461)

burkey_boy
01-15-2008, 08:04 PM
Not rally a "mini" Fireblast (FB), you still have to pay :r: to cast it, FB is good cuz it's "free" and requires you to have two mountains in play, tapped or un-tapped...[/COLOR]

god i wish you read what i said... i already said that...

anyway, on a less bitter note. i tried with them instead of many different cards... worked 50% of the time. somethimes i wished it was the original card. sometimes i wished it was teh new one.

im going to do soime more testing.

yawg07
01-17-2008, 02:41 AM
My current list is ...

Mana
18 Mountain
4 Simian Spirit Guide

Staples
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Magma Jet
4 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast

Removal
2 Rolling Earthquake
2 Flamebreak

Open Slots
4 Incinerate
2 Flame Rift


Sideboard
3 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Ankh of Mishra
3 Shattering Spree
4 Pyroblast
2 Red Elemental Blast



I played that build tonight at the local shop.
After tonight, I'm removing 2 Flame Rifts and 2 Incinerates for an additional Flamebreak and the 3x Sulfuric Vortex from the SB.
I'll replace the 3 Vortex in the SB With a Flamebreak and either 2x Pyroclasm, Fault Line, or Cave-In.

Gotta say though, Ankh may find its way into the main, it is very good. Fetch and take 5??? Be my guest!

I really like Simian Spirit Guide, he's the best "extra mana" card for Burn, really.
He doesn't make you lose a spell or land (the moxen) and doesnt feed goyf (petal)
Also he fuels turn one Ankh which is SO GOOD, especially against players who fetch a lot.

I went 2-2, beating G/W Slide (Ankh and Vortex FTW), losing to Goblins (weird gobs list, they had bolt and fireblast)
losing to G/B Sui (really close, extirpate and hymn is shit haha), and beating a UWB Control deck (Price of Progress rules)

I needed more creature + player damage spells overall.
I love this deck, its so much fun and its a great break from combo.

Also, I will DEFINITELY be testing Countryside Crusher from Morningtide.
Not drawing land is really good, and he gets bigger if my deck tries to make me draw it.

ParkerLewis
01-17-2008, 07:51 AM
Gotta say though, Ankh may find its way into the main, it is very good. Fetch and take 5??? Be my guest!

I really like Simian Spirit Guide, he's the best "extra mana" card for Burn, really.
He doesn't make you lose a spell or land (the moxen) and doesnt feed goyf (petal)
Also he fuels turn one Ankh which is SO GOOD, especially against players who fetch a lot.

I totally agree on the Ankh points. Yet, I think there's a drawback to SSG compared to moxen : as an non-reusable mana source, you can't really put them in land slots, can you ? so you might not have to lose a spell, but you're upping the mana count in the deck. Also, keep in mind the spell you'll be using on a Mox is less than your average burn spell, it will always be the worst you have at your disposal given your hand/the matchup).

Curby
01-17-2008, 12:19 PM
Has anyone tested Shard Volley? I play a Bauble-less burn deck with 18 mountains and no non-basics (still need to get some nonbasics), and I often find myself strapped for land. While I can often cast things for several turns with a 1-land hand, it's much slower than burn would like to play. It seems that finding and playing 3 land early and drawing nothing but gas from then on is the perfect amount (though sometimes I like 4 for double Fireblast).

Along the lines of what Parker said above, Shard Volley seems to be unplayable for similar reasons. If we can all agree that it will never replace Fireblast, then it will only further increase our hunger for land, as we're already losing 8 mountains to cast our deck. If we put it up to 12 for a set of Bolts #17-20, we're looking at increasing our land count and diluting our draws.

Also, the math says two cards for 3 damage instead of two mana and 1 card for 3 damage (for Incinerate). With people playing Flames of the Blood Hand, Browbeat, Pulse of the Forge, etc., it's clear that most players are willing to pay more mana per spell, yet everyone hates Incinerate. Keep in mind that Flames and Pulse are 1.33 damage per mana, actually worse than Incinerate's 1.5. Some people say that you only have so many cards, so even if they are inefficient in terms of mana, you want them to do the most damage possible per spell. Why then would you run Shard Volley, which ends up being 1.5 damage per card (compared to Incinerate's 3 damage per card)?

I'm not saying Incinerate's good, but Shard Volley seems worse. If I know I'll have extra land, I'd rather use Sonic Burst!

yawg07
01-17-2008, 01:54 PM
I totally agree on the Ankh points. Yet, I think there's a drawback to SSG compared to moxen : as an non-reusable mana source, you can't really put them in land slots, can you ? so you might not have to lose a spell, but you're upping the mana count in the deck. Also, keep in mind the spell you'll be using on a Mox is less than your average burn spell, it will always be the worst you have at your disposal given your hand/the matchup).

I understand where you're going with the Mox point, and I mean if it's in your hand nobody is forcing you to use it.
It also circumvents land destruction, but not things like PDeed and E.Explosives.
Hmm it is interesting. I only have 3 at the moment, but I'm willing to test them.

Wallace
01-17-2008, 05:08 PM
Wow, since when does burn need mana excel? This deck runs on 2-3 mana and really doesn't need any more. Shard Volley will be ok in Burn as a 2 - 3 of, playing four will hurt the deck more than help. Ankh is fine here to, dropping it turn two is fine, running 4 Moxen or SSG's will hurt the deck production more than help. If you look at Burn there is really only a few spots open for discussion. The deck will always run:

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt

Most people also include 4 Fireblast; some only run 3, IDK why...Price of Progress is a 3-4 of depending on your meta. Fow the sake of this discussion we will make both of them a 4 of. Now we have this:

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast

Let’s talk Land for a bit, I believe 18-19 land is a good number. I like to run 2-3 Barb. Rings and 4 fetch Lands; I seem to be the only one running the fetches so I will leave them out. This leaves us with:

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast

16 Mountain
2 Barbarian Ring

Now this is where the debate begins. Almost everyone agrees than Magma Jet belongs here some say 3 or, other as a 4 of, I think 3 is the right number. Flame Rift is another one of those cards that some people like and others don't. I personally like it as a 3-4 of, I see it as a 4 of in a lot of lists. I think 3 is the right number, :1::r: for 4 damage is nice, but killing yourself in the process is not. Flamebreak needs to be at least a 2 of; depending on your meta the 3rd and 4th can be added. Flamebreak provides a main deck board sweeper; the fact that it does 3 damage to your opponent is a bonus. Now we come to what I believe are the debatable slots in Burn:

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast
3 Magma Jet
3 Flame Rift
2 Flamebreak

16 Mountain
2 Barbarian Ring

This leaves us 10 slots to fill in the MB: Baubles, Street Wraith, Incinerate, Shard Volley, Sulfuric Vortex, Flames of the blood Hand, Browbeat, Fork, Mogg Fanatic, Keldon Marauders, Needle Drop, and Ankh of Mishra are all used here. I have personally moved away for using Baubles, Street Wraith is ok but I really don’t like it. So my question is; what spells would you run in the 10 open slots and why?

My choices would be 2 Shard Volley, 3 Flames of the Blood Hand, +1 Flamebreak, +1 Flame Rift, 3 Sulfuric Vortex.

suprafan386
01-17-2008, 08:27 PM
my new list
going to play test the deck with the ankh's in it

17x mountains
2x barbarian ring

4x mogg fanatic

4x lightning bolt
4x chain lightning
4x price of progress
4x fireblast
4x magma jet
4x rift bolt
4x flame rift
4x ankh of mishra
4x chain lightning
1x incinerate

sb
2x pyroblast
2x red elemental blast
4x shattering spree
4x tormod's crypt
3x flamebreak

yawg07
01-17-2008, 11:08 PM
Don't forget Rolling Earthquake, it is an awesome choice as well.
It has definitely won its share of games for me.
R.Quake does it's job of getting rid of ALL creatures very well (sometimes you'll have Hypnotic Spectre and Shade staring you down)
Its also incredible in the games against discard-style where you'll be topdecking land and you'll have enough steam to shoot it for 4 or 5.

I personally think that Shard Volley is just a poor choice for Burn.
It DOES 3-for-1 but at the expense of mana AND land. :(

Just doesn't make my cut.

BUT with some testing, I do agree partially that Burn doesn't need mana accel.
Only partially, because if you are running Ankh, it is ridiculous first turn.
Getting down first turn Ankh puts your opponent in an early grave, ESPECIALLY the fetch-users (read: 70% of legacy)

Also, Keldon Marauders seems to be an interesting choice.
Also, how about running some fetches and Sensei's Divining Top?

These are things I haven't tested yet, how about you guys?

LordEvilTeaCup
01-17-2008, 11:33 PM
I would play Rolling Earthquake in a heartbeat if I had them. I definitely give them the nod over Flamebreak.

yawg07
01-17-2008, 11:45 PM
I would play Rolling Earthquake in a heartbeat if I had them. I definitely give them the nod over Flamebreak.

I'd honestly play the full complement if I had two more.
They are a really really good card. I much prefer it over Flamebreak.

Dilettante
01-18-2008, 12:12 AM
I'd honestly play the full complement if I had two more.
They are a really really good card. I much prefer it over Flamebreak.

I like how Rolling Earthquake can be quick enough to cope with TES/Belcher Empties while being able to be scaled to get around Mongeese and completely slaughter goblins at the same speed as Flamebreak... and it is a board clear that usually circumvents Counterbalance. Unfortunately, I haven't seen any for sale for a while... I still need an English one so that players don't keep questioning what it does... Mine are all Chinese.

LordEvilTeaCup
01-18-2008, 12:34 AM
Is price the main reason Rolling Earthquake isn't being played? If this is the case, this card should be in front of Flamebreak as far as the playable goes. Against goblins, both will do the job at the same mana cost. Gobs usually come in the toughness of 2 or less variety anyway. Against Thresh, yeah you can cook their gooses a turn earlier but neither option is really that good. Plus land floods happen, and Rolling takes better advantage. Against Belcher and TES.... well its not looking good either way but Rolling answers ETW tokens a turn earlier. Meh, I wants me some Rolling Earthquakes:frown:

yawg07
01-18-2008, 12:39 AM
Price an availability, really. But they aren't hard to find if you just look around enough.
You wont see em cheap on eBay, look into MOTL or other forums and such.

Wallace
01-18-2008, 12:41 AM
Is price the main reason Rolling Earthquake isn't being played? If this is the case, this card should be in front of Flamebreak as far as the playable goes. Against goblins, both will do the job at the same mana cost. Gobs usually come in the toughness of 2 or less variety anyway. Against Thresh, yeah you can cook their gooses a turn earlier but neither option is really that good. Plus land floods happen, and Rolling takes better advantage. Against Belcher and TES.... well its not looking good either way but Rolling answers ETW tokens a turn earlier. Meh, I wants me some Rolling Earthquakes:frown:

Bingo...if you don't foil out your burn deck then 1 Rolling Earthquake will cost more than the whole deck. I agree, if I owned soem I would play them, right now Flamebreak will have to do.

Nihil Credo
01-18-2008, 12:53 AM
Assuming Flamebreak is clearly inferior to Rolling Earthquake, then if budget is a problem you might as well just play Earthquake - there aren't many low-toughness fliers in the format, and Flamebreak doesn't hit them anyway.

yawg07
01-18-2008, 12:58 AM
Assuming Flamebreak is clearly inferior to Rolling Earthquake, then if budget is a problem you might as well just play Earthquake - there aren't many low-toughness fliers in the format, and Flamebreak doesn't hit them anyway.

The ones that DO fly are bad for us though. Hypnotic Spectre is a BEAST.
Also Sea Drake/Serendib Efreet. Drake eats a bolt, but why waste when you can kill both and they chalice at one anyhow.

Nihil Credo
01-18-2008, 01:17 AM
The ones that DO fly are bad for us though. Hypnotic Spectre is a BEAST.
Also Sea Drake/Serendib Efreet. Drake eats a bolt, but why waste when you can kill both and they chalice at one anyhow.
Irrelevant. My claim is the following:

IF (Rolling Earthquake > Flamebreak)
THEN (Earthquake > Flamebreak)

yawg07
01-18-2008, 01:20 AM
Irrelevant. My claim is the following:

IF (Rolling Earthquake > Flamebreak)
THEN (Earthquake > Flamebreak)

Okay, that I can hop on board with :)
But the chart still has to be ...

Rolling Earthquake > Earthquake > Flamebreak

lol

$35.00 > $0.50 > $1

Wallace
01-18-2008, 01:23 AM
Assuming Flamebreak is clearly inferior to Rolling Earthquake, then if budget is a problem you might as well just play Earthquake - there aren't many low-toughness fliers in the format, and Flamebreak doesn't hit them anyway.

Plus Eartquake is more expensive, mana wise, them Flamebreak. It would cost you 4 mana to do 3 dame with EQ. Pluse Flamebreak will kill flyers like BOP, Hippie and Sea Drake.

yawg07
01-18-2008, 01:29 AM
Actually Flamebreak doesn't kill any fliers.

"Flamebreak deals 3 damage to each creature without flying and each player. Creatures dealt damage this way can't be regenerated this turn."

Earthquake is superior because you can kill EtW tokens faster, keep gobs in check better, and if you get flooded it grows.
Then, Rolling Earthquake is superior to Earthquake because it hits fliers :)

Dilettante
01-18-2008, 01:29 AM
There are... very few cases where Flamebreak is better than an Earthquake in my opinion... Where does that 1 extra damage come into play? Threshed Mongeese can be killed a turn faster. It can be used if your opponents play Gaddock Teeg, but you have loads of spot removal for that. Otherwise, they both cut on the clock (which Pyroclasm does not do) while clearing the board, making it rarely a completely dead card except somewhat against the mirror match.

yawg07
01-18-2008, 01:35 AM
I just wish that Pyroclasm hit players too :/
But what I wish more is that we had a solid 2 or 3 mana instant speed board sweep. :(

Dilettante
01-18-2008, 01:43 AM
Some of your other options for fast board clears:
Cycling Slice and Dice
Cave-In
Engineered Explosives
Powder Keg

Powder Keg and Engineered Explosives = As good as Pyroclasm against TES/Belcher.

redmage
01-18-2008, 02:00 AM
Is price the main reason Rolling Earthquake isn't being played?

No. It's just not as efficient as the other options available.

Flamebreak kills 'geese, stops regeneration, and deals more damage to players when you only have 3 mana available. Alternatively, Cave-In comes on line faster (vs. ETW), still kills Hippy & Gobs, and is "immune" to Port, counterbalance, and chalice.

As to land floods: Sure, Roll'quake can take advantage of them; however, land floods are not very common in a deck running <20 lands; so you're not likely to reap much benefit from that aspect.

Usually, for me, a Specter just has Cave-In/Magma Jet written all over it.

Maveric78f
01-18-2008, 05:28 AM
Then, Rolling Earthquake is superior to Earthquake because it hits fliers :)

Yes but it doesn't hit creatures with horsemanship.

This last page is full of paraphrasing of the texts of the spells (even sometimes with errors, for instance, flamebreak hits only non-flyers). Instead of debating on what do the cards (most of us can read the gatherer's site), you could debate on there utility in the metagame. For instance, from what has been said, I think it's irrelevant to want to kill mongoose with 3CC for 2 reasons:
- burn should never wait until the thresh player has threshold and in this case you could as well pay 4CC for your rolling earthquake
- if mongoose has threshold, anyway tarmogoyf will make your day and putting mongoose to grave results in boosting tarmogoyf too.

DalkonCledwin
01-18-2008, 02:15 PM
I have updated the design of the deck again... now it looks like the following:

// Burn Deck
// Lands
3 [OD] Barbarian Ring
17 [CS] Snow-Covered Mountain

// Creatures
2 [PLC] Simian Spirit Guide
4 [10E] Mogg Fanatic

// Spells
4 [VI] Fireblast
2 [R] Fork
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [EX] Price of Progress
4 [4E] Lightning Bolt
4 [DS] Flamebreak
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [CHK] Lava Spike
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [4E] Red Elemental Blast
SB: 4 [GP] Shattering Spree
SB: 4 [CH] Tormod's Crypt
SB: 3 [SC] Sulfuric Vortex

I moded it this way because Blue and Enchantress have been giving me the most troubles.

With this build I can at the very least slow down an Enchantress deck (if not defeat it) by destroying their Argothian Enchantresses by playing Flamebreak. Then if I have slowed them down enough, they may be forced to give up their Solitary Confinement allowing me to bring on the burn, including Price of Progress for the win. But odds of that happening with Enchantresses Presences still available to the deck are pretty slim.

Then against a Blue decks I have added Red Elemental Blast to allow me to take out things like Chill, Counterbalance, Mist of Stagnation, etc.... it also allows me to counter counerspells like Counterspell, Force of Will, Rune Snag, etc... in order to allow me to play my Win Conditions more effectively. The same is true of Fork when it comes to countering counterspells.

I put the Shattering Spree into the sideboard to deal with Chalice of the Void, Trinisphere, Thorn of Amethyst, and other threats of that nature. I put the Tormod's Crypt in the sideboard to deal with Dredge, Delve, and Seismic Assault / Loam / Crucible decks. I put the Sulfuric Vortex in the sideboard to deal with any decks that have Life Gain of any sort... this includes but is not limited to Angel Stax and Elves.

Other than that the deck is still designed to deal as much damage as fast as possible.

Cards I still need for the deck are as follows:

4 Price of Progress - my local store owner might have these
4 Chain Lightning

burkey_boy
01-18-2008, 08:29 PM
I HAVE TESTED EARTHQUAKE (capslock) and flamebreak, and found flamebreak better the majority of hte time.
in my testing.

DalkonCledwin
01-18-2008, 09:10 PM
A friend of mine suggested Starstorm for Burn decks... particularly when dealing with Enchantress and Aluren type decks. The reason he suggests this is because it is instant speed. Yes it doesn't deal damage to the opposing player... but it does deal damage to the creatures at the speed of an instant, something that as far as I know, no other board clearer is capable of doing. So I was wondering, what is everyones opinion on Starstorm? Is it viable in a Burn deck, or do we absolutely need to have Board Clearers that also deal damage to the opposing player?

Sanguine Voyeur
01-18-2008, 09:40 PM
A friend of mine suggested Starstorm for Burn decks...No. It's slower then Earthquake, which is already to slow for this decks, and it doesn't hurt players. Starstorm for one deals less damage for the same mana as Flamebrake. The instant speed is irrelivant.

DalkonCledwin
01-18-2008, 09:51 PM
No. It's slower then Earthquake, which is already to slow for this decks, and it doesn't hurt players. Starstorm for one deals less damage for the same mana as Flamebrake. The instant speed is irrelivant.

thanks... that helps in my decision making alot.

LordEvilTeaCup
01-19-2008, 03:29 AM
Yeah, I quickly found out why playing Flamebreak is better than pretty much everything else when I played the deck after a short hiatus. Even if you have 4 mountains out, wouldn't you rather do something else with the extra 1 mana than have to pump more into the Earthquake? Efficiency is king in Burn.

DalkonCledwin
01-20-2008, 08:18 AM
// Burn Deck
// Lands
3 [OD] Barbarian Ring
17 [CS] Snow-Covered Mountain

// Creatures
4 [10E] Mogg Fanatic

// Spells
4 [VI] Fireblast
1 [A] Fork
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [EX] Price of Progress
4 [4E] Lightning Bolt
4 [DS] Flamebreak
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
4 [CHK] Lava Spike
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
3 [SC] Sulfuric Vortex

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [4E] Red Elemental Blast
SB: 4 [GP] Shattering Spree
SB: 4 [GP] Leyline of the Void
SB: 3 [SC] Pyrostatic Pillar

cards I still need for the Burn deck are as follows:

4 Chain Lightning
3 Pyrostatic Pillar
4 Leyline of the Void

After my tournament last night I have modified the deck list a little further. I have included Sulfuric Vortex in the main deck (in place of the Simian Spirit Guide) as some people have suggested that I really don't need the Simian Spirit Guide. I have decided to modify the sideboard so that it is better against combo. So it now is going to have Pyrostatic Pillar (I just need to get some Pyrostatic Pillar's). I have decided to run 4 Leyline of the Void for match ups against Ichorid decks. Finally, I am debating on whether I want 1 fork, or 2... if I run 1 fork, I will be running a third Sulfuric Vortex, but if I run 2 fork's I will only be running 2 Sulfuric Vortex. So I am not sure which is better.

Androstanolone
01-20-2008, 11:26 AM
What about Fault Line? As far as gobs is concerned it's an instant speed WoG. It's the least mana efficient option available but it's instant and growable. It doesn't hit fliers though, which probably just pushes it down the tier of board sweepers. WotC just hasn't deigned to print a red board sweeper capable of doing everything you want it to do :P.

Curby
01-21-2008, 01:50 AM
What about Fault Line? As far as gobs is concerned it's an instant speed WoG. It's the least mana efficient option available but it's instant and growable. It doesn't hit fliers though, which probably just pushes it down the tier of board sweepers. WotC just hasn't deigned to print a red board sweeper capable of doing everything you want it to do :P.

Think of it this way: You're waiting an extra turn anyway to kill any given threat with Fault Line because you need an extra land. Meaning that except for the extreme late game, the Instant speed isn't going to matter anyway. Sure you have 3 Mountains and need to wait till your main phase to kill that fresh pair of Bears with Earthquake/Flamebreak, but you wouldn't be able to kill those bears in that situation with Fault Line either... you'd have to wait till your next turn to get land #4 (and some would say that making your first four land drops means you're mana flooded). I agree there aren't any perfect sweepers, but these aren't the droids you're looking for (http://sales.starcitygames.com/cardsearch.php?singlesearch=fault+line).

n00per
01-21-2008, 08:07 AM
my current list:

2 barbarian ring
16 mountain

4 mog fanatic

4 Lightning bolt
4 chain Lightning
4 lava spike
4 rift bolt
4 proce of progress
4 flamebreak
4 fireblast
4 magma jet
4 incinerate
2 fork

Board:

4 shattering spree
4 blood moon
4 chalice of the void
3 anarchy

DalkonCledwin
01-21-2008, 01:14 PM
Board:

4 shattering spree
4 blood moon
4 chalice of the void
3 anarchy

I would be very careful with Chalice of the Void (in fact I would recommend NOT running it)... the card can be just as devastating to you as it is to your opponent.

Androstanolone
01-21-2008, 01:18 PM
Think of it this way: You're waiting an extra turn anyway to kill any given threat with Fault Line because you need an extra land. Meaning that except for the extreme late game, the Instant speed isn't going to matter anyway. Sure you have 3 Mountains and need to wait till your main phase to kill that fresh pair of Bears with Earthquake/Flamebreak, but you wouldn't be able to kill those bears in that situation with Fault Line either... you'd have to wait till your next turn to get land #4 (and some would say that making your first four land drops means you're mana flooded). I agree there aren't any perfect sweepers, but these aren't the droids you're looking for (http://sales.starcitygames.com/cardsearch.php?singlesearch=fault+line).

Right, fault line's not strictly better than any of the options that have been mentioned, but it's at least worth mentioning. Instant speed has the chance of netting you extra CA. It can also bait out a counter on turn 3 trying to kill a non-threshed mongoose? Seems pretty bad. Burn usually just wants the most mana-efficient option available, which usually means flamebreak.

Curby
01-21-2008, 02:07 PM
Any further thoughts on Boseiju? I really like the idea of being counter-proof, but a lot of our spells are colorless-less, including Flamebreak, Fireblast, and our 16 bolts. Being able to force through Price of Progress and Sulfuric Vortex would be extremely relevant against control/Landstill/etc. though, and we've still got a fair amount of power in our remaining spells (Flame Rift, FotBH, Browbeat, etc. all hit hard). I'm thinking 2-3 in the side might be good, but it's still a heavily metagame-dependent decision at best.

Wallace
01-21-2008, 04:50 PM
Any further thoughts on Boseiju? I really like the idea of being counter-proof, but a lot of our spells are colorless-less, including Flamebreak, Fireblast, and our 16 bolts. Being able to force through Price of Progress and Sulfuric Vortex would be extremely relevant against control/Landstill/etc. though, and we've still got a fair amount of power in our remaining spells (Flame Rift, FotBH, Browbeat, etc. all hit hard). I'm thinking 2-3 in the side might be good, but it's still a heavily metagame-dependent decision at best.

Well your half right, Boseiju only works on instant and Sorcery spells. It nice to have but only helps with POP and Magma Jet in my build. I play it as a 1 of in the Main, it ups my land count to 19 but comes can come in handy if you draw it. I may add a second to the side board but would need to make room for it.

As far as board sweepers go, I will stick with Flamebreak and Pyroclasm. Clasm is a turn faster and comes in handy against ETW combo and Goblins.

LordEvilTeaCup
01-22-2008, 01:56 AM
I think Boseju is a bit build dependent. I run FotBH instead of Sulfuric Vortex and I would say that makes a big difference in the decision making process. Still, even without that it makes Incinerate, Magma Jet, PoP, and Flame Rift through counters. Add FotBH, and it becomes a no-brainer. I was even contemplating running Earthquake due to it being able to take advantage, but it is not worth it. I just run two in SB, and side out Barbarian Rings when Boseju is relevant.

Fork is starting to appear in peoples list's again. I realize we are not encouraged to discuss Fork, but I feel its only really useful in certain situations. This card screams situational in a deck that needs every piece to pull its own weight and do its business. Every now and again, you will do fun fireblast tricks. However, overall there are better spells to use. Plus it really sucks that control gets a two for one when they counter your fireblast in response to forking it. Fireblast is countered, Fork has no targets and just fizzles... That blows.

DalkonCledwin
01-22-2008, 02:33 AM
Fork is starting to appear in peoples list's again. I realize we are not encouraged to discuss Fork, but I feel its only really useful in certain situations. This card screams situational in a deck that needs every piece to pull its own weight and do its business. Every now and again, you will do fun fireblast tricks. However, overall there are better spells to use. Plus it really sucks that control gets a two for one when they counter your fireblast in response to forking it. Fireblast is countered, Fork has no targets and just fizzles... That blows.

Which is why when faced with control (read anything with blue in it), I would never use the Fork to copy the Fireblast. I instead would use the Fork to copy the counterspell they use to counter the Fireblast. Thereby allowing Fireblast to get through, or forcing the opponent to use a second counterspell to counter either the fork, or the Fireblast. In otherwords, I would force the opponent to either let me get the Fireblast through, or force them to 2 for 2 me... possibly even 3 for 2 me if they used FoW in there at any point!

Xenocide
01-22-2008, 04:32 AM
I think Boseju is a bit build dependent. I run FotBH instead of Sulfuric Vortex...

FotBH!? Seriously, what does this mean, I checked the last page and didn't find anything that resembled this card. FotBH = Fact of the Bad Headache? Please use the card name at least once before abbreviating it so I (and presumably everybody else) can understand your posts.

EDIT: I found it 2 pages back. FotBH = Flames of the Blood Hand. My point still remains.

n00per
01-22-2008, 11:54 AM
I would be very careful with Chalice of the Void (in fact I would recommend NOT running it)... the card can be just as devastating to you as it is to your opponent.
in a normal situation i play chalice=0 only versus high tide chalice 1 but this mu imostly won under chalice 1

Please use your shift key. Your posts will be easier to read. Verbal warning issued.

-PR

matelml
01-22-2008, 12:11 PM
in a normal situation i play chalice=0 only versus high tide chalice 1 but this mu imostly won under chalice 1

Isn't Burn the deck in Legacy that is hosed most by Chalice=1? I would not against any deck put it on 1.

Edit: Maybe in the mirror, but then still I wouldn't board it in.

LordEvilTeaCup
01-22-2008, 12:14 PM
FotBH!? Seriously, what does this mean, I checked the last page and didn't find anything that resembled this card. FotBH = Fact of the Bad Headache? Please use the card name at least once before abbreviating it so I (and presumably everybody else) can understand your posts.

EDIT: I found it 2 pages back. FotBH = Flames of the Blood Hand. My point still remains.

Oh sorry about that. Yeah FotBh is Flames of the Blood Hand. In the future I will use the card name first.

Back to Fork, yeah you can fork counters but I generally don't find it worth it myself. Thats why we have 4 Red elemental Blasts in the board. If you have too many red "counters" you will still find yourself behind in damage. Still, like you said Fork is versatile so its a tough decision.

Curby
01-23-2008, 12:55 AM
What's the general consensus for land distribution for a non-bauble deck? I started at 18 Mountains for:

4x 0-cost (Fireblast)
20x 1-cost (Rift Bolt)
12x 2-cost
4x 3-cost
2x X-spells (Earthquake)

I'm thinking of switching out one Mountain for two Barbarian Rings, replacing the 2 Earthquakes with one Shard Volley/FotBH/etc., and switching out the Mogg Fanatics for Keldon Marauders.

4x 0-cost (Fireblast)
16x 1-cost (Rift Bolt)
16x 2-cost
5x 3-cost

I really hope Barbarian Ring doesn't kick me in the ass too hard, since I'm not going to get Threshold easily in a non-bauble build. Does anyone play Rings without cantrips? How many, and how is it working for you? Thanks!

EDIT: The first post mentions that this sort of thing can cause endless debates while never reaching a conclusion, but it seems that burn runs a surprisingly delicate mana base for all its simplicity, so some discussion is probably justified.

Aside: If I use Boseiju to cast Incinerate while Chalice of the Void at 2 is in play, my Incinerate goes through, right? Or does it depend on the order in which Boseiju and Chalice enter play?