Aggro Loam Primer

[lorddotm]

Read Tony Deveyra's Aggro Loam primer here on West Coast Legacy

Discuss.

[Zach Tartell]

1. No mention of Tabernacle anywhere in the article.
2. Bolt over punishing fires? Doesn't even need a splash.
3. Didn't bring up the GP/SCG event winning deck?

I think your author needs to do a little more research.

[Aggro_zombies]

1. No mention of Tabernacle anywhere in the article.
2. Bolt over punishing fires? Doesn't even need a splash.
3. Didn't bring up the GP/SCG event winning deck?

I think your author needs to do a little more research.

To be fair:

1) Tabernacle is generally bad in a deck with its own creatures, and any strategy that could be hurt by Tabernacle is probably better hurt by Firespout, Damnation, or some other actual sweeper.

2) Punishing Fires is kind of bad.

3) Okay.

[PanderAlexander]

1. No mention of Tabernacle anywhere in the article.
2. Bolt over punishing fires? Doesn't even need a splash.
3. Didn't bring up the GP/SCG event winning deck?

I think your author needs to do a little more research.

1) Not many aggro loam decks run tabernacle, it's not needed like the post above says, the aggro loam player has it's own creatures. Plus if there was a concern for swarming creatures there's already answers like assault/loam, etc. Also he owns two tabernacles so it's not cost-factor.

2) I personally like the punishing fire version but Antonious has tested it extensively and doesn't like it, he has had great success with his version.

3) He's been playing the deck for 2 years and not just recently since that SCG Baltimore 1st place list. His version is obviously different.

[lorddotm]

1. No mention of Tabernacle anywhere in the article.
2. Bolt over punishing fires? Doesn't even need a splash.
3. Didn't bring up the GP/SCG event winning deck?

I think your author needs to do a little more research.

1+2 have already been answered.

3. He wrote the primer about his version of Aggro Loam. When he wrote it, the SCG list hadn't won yet. He did talk about splashing though, and stated he felt it was bad.

[Mr. Safety]

1. 2. Bolt over punishing fires? Doesn't even need a splash.

I think it has been fairly said that it's not as good, but I'd like to just say why I think Punishing Fire would be bad.

1) It doesn't offer anything to the deck that Grim Lavamancer doesn't already cover. If you wanted to use P-Fires/Grove INSTEAD, that's a different story...but that would want Kavu Predator. Deck doesn't need Kavu Predator...it has Crusher and Goyf. Fire/Grove is a lousy clock too, netting you only ONE DAMAGE A TURN if you decide to use it on your opponent's life total.

2) Grove of the Burnwillows loses a lot of value when you don't draw Punishing Fires. Most players will allow you to give them a life...then Waste it. Grim is susceptable to removal, sure...but the potential for the attention being on Bob, a 5/6 Goofy, or an 8/8 Crusher is probably more likely. Grim is the way to go, for sure.

That's my take on it anyways. Lightning Bolt is the clear winner over Grove/Fires due to efficiency, and Grim Lavamancer is better than Groves/Fires due to Wasteland and a superior damage engine.

[2Rach]

I think it has been fairly said that it's not as good, but I'd like to just say why I think Punishing Fire would be bad.

1) but that would want Kavu Predator.

2) Most players will allow you to give them a life...then Waste it.

1. This is nonsense.

2. Aggro LOAM.

I don't disagree with you about Grim Lavamancer being better in general, just how you got to your conclusion. That said, I think Seismic Assault is the much better repeatable creature kill than Punishing Fires. Though, the recent successful list is four colors and the manabase can't handle the RRR Seismic Assault as well.


EDIT:

He did talk about splashing though, and stated he felt it was bad.

Did Tony test it?

[CorpT]

1) It doesn't offer anything to the deck that Grim Lavamancer doesn't already cover. If you wanted to use P-Fires/Grove INSTEAD, that's a different story...but that would want Kavu Predator. Deck doesn't need Kavu Predator...it has Crusher and Goyf. Fire/Grove is a lousy clock too, netting you only ONE DAMAGE A TURN if you decide to use it on your opponent's life total.

If people run Swords to Plowshares, does that mean they need to run Kavu Predator as well? It's a non-sensical argument to say that you shouldn't run card X because if you run card X, you have to run card Y when card Y is clearly suboptimal. Especially when no one arguing for card X has argued for card Y. But it is a cool strawman.

Your second argument is that Grove can be Wastelanded? In a deck that runs 4-7 copies of Life from the Loam. Right.

I don't see anyone arguing that Fires is better than Grim or should be run instead of him. You then dismiss the Fires v Lightning Bolt by claiming efficiency. So what is it that Bolt kills that Fires does not? Especially when backed up by Grim.

[Mr. Safety]

Just responding, seems like a good opportunity for discussion.

@2Rach:

...,but I'd like to just say why I think Punishing Fire would be bad.

I wouldn't call it NON-sense...maybe you don't agree with the statement, but it isn't nonsense. This is all simple discussion, and I'm sharing an opinion as discussion. I'm not making a factual claim or a logical premise by saying 'that wants Kavu Predator'...I'm stating an opinion. I would play Kavu Predator with that particular combo. That isn't logical or illogical...it's an opinion. In all seriousness, opinions don't really have to make sense...they are subjective (I am not saying that my opinion is nonsense, simply saying whether it's nonsense or not doesn't matter)

I also didn't elaborate as much as I should have.

1) What I'm trying to say (and probably didn't say it well) is this: I don't like the comparison of Punishing Fire vs. Lightning Bolt. I was assuming (maybe incorrectly) that with the addition of Punishing Fire, Grove of the Burnwillows would follow. I haven't seen any lists that used one but not the other. *shrug* I felt that the Punishing/Grove combo was comparable to Grim Lavamancer, but not Lightning Bolt, as they both accomplish similar tasks (repeatable 2 damage to creatures) in the matchups that count (fish, gobbos, bant). Lightning Bolt isn't repeatable...so I don't see the comparison (unless using Eternal Witness...maybe I missed it, but Eternal Witness isn't in the list is it?)

@CorpT: ahhh...another discussion with you. Can't help but feel that you like picking on me...but that's ok, I have thick skin and I enjoy learning.

1) In regards to StP: Absolutely not...and I didn't claim that. As I said above, I was simply stating an opinion. I then stated that the deck didn't need Kavu Predator, so the point is moot. Again, it is my opinion that if I wanted to use Grove/Fires as a repeatable damage source (in lieu of Grim Lavamancer) then I would use Kavu Predator. Is it nonsense to use Swords to Plowshares with Kavu Predator? No. Would you want to? I don't know...you hold your own opinions on it I'm sure, but it isn't nonsense.

2) Most decks that I am familiar with (you probably have a larger pool of knowledge than me) use Wasteland for tempo stifling, not as a permanent solution. They are trying to halt your setup in order to create a superior clock and board position. In Aggro Loam it's a repeatable weapon, sure. All I meant to say was that it is a non-basic land that can be targeted by Wasteland (therefore possibly stifling early development) that doesn't have any value (at least not more than Taiga which does not provide lifegain) without Punishing Fire to use with it. It seems unneccessarily risky to me when you can simply play a Taiga or basic Mountain and play Grim Lavamancer instead. Sure Life from the Loam gets it back, but the problem is most likely not the land denial so much as the TIME denial. Loam will get it back, sure. In enough time to count? Possibly not.

3) I don't see anyone arguing that Fires is better than Grim...I'm simply saying comparing the two is akin to comparing apples to apples, where comparing Punishing Fire to Lightning Bolt is comparing apples to oranges. (It's a minor note, but Lightning Bolt kills Vampire Nighthawk and Wild Nacatl without Grim Lavamancer support.) I would humbly suggest that if you're looking for efficient damage for 1R (and you aren't automatically including Grove with Fires) I would say Arc Trail and Incinerate would be superior, as strictly speaking they both do more than Punishing Fires without Grove.

Hope to hear back and discuss this more.

[Aggro_zombies]

Punishing Fires competes with Seismic Assault for space. They are both red-intensive, mostly late-game finishers that don't require the combat step but which can also be used to control the board prior to winning. Fires is bad because Assault is just better except in the specific cases where getting RRR at once is hard (i.e., you're four colors with a weak manabase), or you expect Extirpate-type effects to remove Loam. The rest of the time, Assault does way more damage for way less mana.

Fires isn't comparable to Bolt or Lavamancer because they aren't good in the same time frames. Bolt is strictly for controlling early-game creature rushes, and Lavamancer is there to do the same in the midgame. Fires does less damage for more mana than Bolt and is harder to reuse than Lavamancer, making it worse than both as an early control element.

[Litorers]

The main argument for the grove/fire combo vs. seismic assault is that if they get dredged in your yard, you can use loam to start it up, whereas you can not do so with seismic assault. Seismic assault for its part, does have more power, but is also harder to run in decks that splash for other colors. both dodge creature removal, which is a good thing.

Did I miss something?

[Koby]

The main argument for the grove/fire combo vs. seismic assault is that if they get dredged in your yard, you can use loam to start it up, whereas you can not do so with seismic assault. Seismic assault for its part, does have more power, but is also harder to run in decks that splash for other colors. both dodge creature removal, which is a good thing.

Did I miss something?

Wait, so you're suggesting to run bad cards in the event that you dredge them away? You're going to inevitability dredge away cards no matter what in this deck. You can either play good cards, and occasionally dredge them away, or play bad cards, and still occasionally dredge them away.

You can also build the deck such that dredging away important pieces is not going to effect you whatsoever. Eternal Witness + Volrath's Stronghold achieves this result.

[Mr. Safety]

You can also build the deck such that dredging away important pieces is not going to effect you whatsoever. Eternal Witness + Volrath's Stronghold achieves this result.

I'm pretty sure Volrath's Stronghold was in the primer...I think he played 1 in the maindeck.

Regarding Punishing Fires, ultimately it comes down to this: redundancy is already worked into the deck with Seismic Assault and Grim Lavamancer both providing creature removal and direct damage. Why would another engine be needed to do their job, but not do it nearly as well? Lightning Bolt gets the nod for early removal due to mana efficiency. Aggro_zombies worded his post rather nicely.

[Aggro_zombies]

Wait, so you're suggesting to run bad cards in the event that you dredge them away? You're going to inevitability dredge away cards no matter what in this deck. You can either play good cards, and occasionally dredge them away, or play bad cards, and still occasionally dredge them away.

You can also build the deck such that dredging away important pieces is not going to effect you whatsoever. Eternal Witness + Volrath's Stronghold achieves this result.

He mentioned Witness as not being good enough, and I tend to agree; random 1-of Witnesses are good, but probably not optimal. That said, between Dark Confidant and the fact that you'll be cycling a bunch of lands every turn, it's highly unlikely that you'll whiff on drawing an Assault but end up dredging them all.

[Richard Cheese]

Just want to note that some people run a singleton Eternal Witness to fix the "oh no I dredged all my Assaults" issue. In testing though, I've found that situation almost never comes up. I'm still getting the hang of the deck, but it seems to mostly be a matter of using Crusher/Bob/cyclers effectively and dredging sparingly if you're really looking for Assault, or any specific card.

[Koby]

For what it's worth, I ran the Witness sideboard against control decks. I also agree it's not needed maindeck with the streamlined list. I merely spelled out the tactic that would answer questions regarding "dredged away" threats.

[sdematt]

Regarding this deck, I think you can run both Fires and Assault. I'll be doing that tonight. I was running it last night against Stoneblade and Merfolk, and it did quite well, to say the least.

-Matt

[Richard Cheese]

Damnit I'm posting it again!

[Admiral_Arzar]

Damnit I'm posting it again!

Quoted for truth. Fires/Grove does NOT compete with Assault for space. One of them competes with Knight of the Reliquary or whatever other shenanigans you're thinking about including. I run both, in addition to bolts and Burning Wish in Jund colors, and it's been working quite well. It's rather difficult to lose to most aggro or control in this configuration, unless they get the nuts.

[Richard Cheese]

Quoted for truth. Fires/Grove does NOT compete with Assault for space. One of them competes with Knight of the Reliquary or whatever other shenanigans you're thinking about including. I run both, in addition to bolts and Burning Wish in Jund colors, and it's been working quite well. It's rather difficult to lose to most aggro or control in this configuration, unless they get the nuts.

Care to post a list? I'm interested to see if people are putting Fires more in the Lavamancer slot or Pulse or what?