[Deck] Burn - I think it's viable

[bigbear102]

First things first,

@blacklotus: USE GRAMMAR!!!! I am on pain medication from my surgery and could barely read your post, you have been here long enough to know that proper grammar is a requirement for posting!

@white splash:

I agree with Zilla almost completely. The white splash has always been something I have considered (look at the first page of this thread) but now it seems more than worth it.

Disenchant is definately a boon to have in the board, as it does take care of almost everything this deck doesn't like, except for lifegain. With Helix the white splash is definately worth testing. One matchup that wasn't mentioned was Goblins, another race that will be easier with a life boost. That is a 6 point swing in your favor.

We all know that Zilla and i are against targetable cards, and ways to open yourself up to hate, but you have to weigh the possibilities.

Disenchant is almost worth it on its own, and now with Helix I see no reason not to at least extensively test the splash. I think the results will be very good. Helping the bad matchups while slightly weakening the good ones. It is up in the air, but I think it will help.

Obviously Disenchant is the main advantage from adding white, but Helix is basically the straw that breaks the camel's back, in my opinion. Having an awesome SB option and a new solid MD burn spell is just amazing.

[cartman34]

8 Fetchlands and 4 Fireblast ? ???

[Eldariel]

All lands are mountains, so as long as you have 2 lands, you can use Fireblast, that isn't significantly weakened (especially with Scry to find extra mountains). Actually, fetches increase your threat density by thinning land out, I'd run them even in mono-red burn

[scrumdogg]

Disenchant IS an answer to opposing lifegain, since most of that will come from opposing Jittes instead of Baloths or healing Salves...or Absorbs.... As long as it doesn't monkeyfuck the manabase.... My major concern is the the loss of Fanatic vs the aggro nature of the format. Does 3x Flamebreak provide enough control versus creature based strategies Game 1, where the opponent will still have the ability to chain hasty goblins, or play Jitte, or drop a clock-guy and have counter backup?

[midnightAce]

Against Goblins, I think if they are chaining hasty goblins to race you, they are in a losing position. The simple solution would be reserve multiple instant speed burns, (Jet prefered) and throw it at the Warchief(s). Once the haste factor is eliminated, then you can tap out on your turn without worry and Flamebreak the rest. Jet is prefered because it doesn't "waste" points of damage.

The loss of Fanatic probabaly affects first turn Lackey situations the most, but with many first turn answers to Lackey, it should be fine.

[Zilla]

My major concern is the the loss of Fanatic vs the aggro nature of the format. Does 3x Flamebreak provide enough control versus creature based strategies Game 1, where the opponent will still have the ability to chain hasty goblins, or play Jitte, or drop a clock-guy and have counter backup?
A decent concern, and one that deserves testing. In most of my games, Fanatics are always the weakest threat in terms of pure clock, which is what concerns me the most overall. You may be right that they're vital in the Goblins matchup; I wouldn't know because I've never tested that matchup without Fanatic. If it turns out that Fanatic is an MVP there, then the next card to cut would be Incinerate, which is almost strictly worse than Lightning Helix anyway.

[bigbear102]

Personally I have still not seen a need for Browbeat, granted I haven't tested it much, the results I have been getting are not showing a need for it. In light of that, my build would we almost identical to Zilla's except for the following changes:

-4 Browbeat
-1 Lightning Helix
+4 Fanatic
+1 Price of Progress

SB:
4 REB
4 Disenchant
4 Sirocco
3 Pithing Needle

The reason for 3 Helixes is that I do not want to HAVE to have a Plateau on turn 2, it seems a little too vulverable.
Adding the Fanatics and PoP back to the main opens up the board slots as you won't really need the 4th Flamebreak with the Fanatics in the board.

On to other things, I think I may actually add the white splash this weekend at Amrod's tourney. Disenchant might be necessary enough to have it.

[Zilla]

The reason for 3 Helixes is that I do not want to HAVE to have a Plateau on turn 2, it seems a little too vulverable.
This should very rarely be the case. You have 10-11 other 2cc threats in the deck, as well as 12 1cc threats that can be used on turn 2 also. You're not hurting for turn 2 drops, so your choice to bring a Plateau to the table by then should almost never be forced.

As for the Browbeat discussion, the main thing is that it a) reduces vulnerability to Chalice, b) does 5 damage as opposed to the 1-3 that Fanatic is likely to do in a given game, and c) draws you cards in the late game. Browbeat fits the mana curve quite solidly, and provides more impact and a faster clock than Fanatic. The most important issue is that Browbeat solves one of the archetype's oldest problems, which is running out of gas before the opponent is dead. It either deals a hefty 5 damage in the early game, or draws you into more threats when your opponent is nearly finished.

This isn't theory, either. Test a few games with Browbeat against a deck packing Duress. You'll find that, behind Fireblast, Browbeat is the first card they pluck every time. This isn't because of incorrect play on the part of your opponent; it's the very real notion that Browbeat is a higher impact card than nearly any other in the deck.

As for your SB, it looks decent, but you definitely want the 4th Flamebreak in there against Goblins. It is the single card which turns the tide in your favor here.

[scrumdogg]

3x Flamebreak is pretty well set maindeck, but could the sideboard support Earthquake (up to 2x) as well instead of Flamebreak #4? I realize that Wasteland has gone by the way, but Earthquake's ability to customize damage seems like it could be worth considering. Now, before random people flame me, I am NOT looking to somehow Earthquake for 5 late game as an uber-1337 win condition (although it could be a decent topdeck at times...) but rather to Quake for 1 damage to all (and me...) for R1 instead of mandating 3 damage to me for RRR. Does this make sense? And I like the ability to have 5 board sweepers + Fanatics after boarding, I feel that it improves the aggro matchups (to date & mostly against unknown opponents). In Philly there will literally be everything under the sun played, the ability to determine control of the board seems quite important.

For the advocates of Browbeat, what is the consensus on the optimal number? 3? 4? Why?

[Zilla]

@Browbeat:

Hard to say. 3 or 4 is optimal, but not necessarily one over the other. The reason that I personally run 4 is because they're always good (except when your opponent only needs to untap to win) and because they're much stronger in the early game, where your opponent will typically take the damage over giving you card draw, which is what you want. Four copies increases the likelyhood of seeing them early and in multiples, which is where they're at their best.

[t3h.sWaRm]

BTW, if your playing a Pox(or other black disruption deck), board out the browbeats. Too many game 2s+3s going:
Me: Browbeat?
Them: Draw.
End turn
Them: Persecute -> Red -> :( :( :(

Anyone else encounter this problem frequently?

[Zilla]

Not I. I don't think I've ever played against a Pox deck running Persecute. But I agree; if they are running it, definitely board out the Browbeats.

[bigbear102]

@Scrumm: Having more board sweepers is definately not a bad thing, but the board is already pretty tight, it is gonna be very hard to squeeze anything else in. I do agree with you though, I still almost want to play Earthquake over Flamebreak even MD without Wastes. What relevent threats actually require 3 damage to take care of, and the ability to take less damage in an aggro matchup is very good. I have played both and don't really see much difference. I have actually quaked for 5 for the win though, so it isn't a stupid idea.

@Pox: I have never seen Persecute in a Pox build, expecially not against burn. Fork is amazing in this match though, so I don't even worry much about it at all, no matter what the board, cuz in the Pox to screw you over, just Fork it, cuz your top decks will be better when you are both at low lifes, and they usually can't handle a taste of their own medicine. (This is also another matchup where Lightning Helix will shine even more.)

[scrumdogg]

Troll Ascetic and the ability to pick up a Jitte are still scary, as are any random 4-5 toughness critters that do drop. The fact that we cannot predict what will be played in Philly, even by the known players much less the unknown hordes, probably makes Flamebreak better main...but am I paranoid or am I the only that expects Goblins to be 25-33% of the field? I really really want, after boarding, 5 sweepers + 4 Fanatics so that my burn goes where it should go - right at their face. The SB is tight, but with sweepers being generically good versus most SotF builds as well plus our Pithing Needles, that takes care of up to 35-45% of the field. Disenchants + hate of choice for blue & combo should deal out the rest & we already have Lightning Helix & Fork for the mirror. Some people won't have the Forks (or choose not to run them....thank you very much, btw) or won't have the manabase to run Helix (or choose to go mono-red). The board is tight, this is another deck where I want a 25 card sideboard :cool: but I am expecting an overwhelming amount of goblins.

EDIT: Forking their Persecute (ummm...lemme think...Black! Right?) puts you in a topdeck war. I believe that we should win that war, every time.



Edited By scrumdogg on 1125757463

[Obfuscate Freely]

Sure, unless they're holding a Rack or two.

:(

So, if you're looking for sweepers that hurt you less, why not run Pyroclasm? It wrecks Goblins for just 1R, so you can use your other mana to wreck your opponent's face.

[FallenOmnipotent]

And if you want a little of both worlds, use Steam Blast.

[t3h.sWaRm]

I was debating the inclusion of Pyroclasm over Flamebreak, mainly since the 1 less mana cost does mean a lot most of the time. The problem, however, is that it becomes useless in the Solidarity matchup, where flamebreak can at least do 3 damage if need be. Anyone else think that Pyroclasm should replace Flamebreak, or is it just unthinkable?

BTW Steam Blast is not as good as Pyroclasm and definately not better than Flamebreak.

[bigbear102]

I don't think that Pyroclasm is a bad card, and i'm not saying which should be played, but in my opinion, Flamebreak is also a dead card against solidarity. Unless it does the last 3 damage, or comboes for the final bit with fireblast, then it is a dead card because it is too slow. The three damage done at sorcery speed on turn 3 at the earliest won't do much to solidarity, so I wouldn't worry about it in that match. Landstill is a bit different, but if you are in a point where flamebreak makes a difference, then it probably isn't looking too hot for you.

Steamblast is a bit too expensive for what it does, there is no point in not playing Flamebreak if you are gonna pay 3 anyway.

[t3h.sWaRm]

I'm going to try Pyroclasm instead of Flamebreak.
Reasons:
1. Not hitting fliers has actually been a problem sometimes
2. 1 less mana to play is very important

Why it may not be the best idea:
1. The extra 1 dmg to creatures could be important(any examples? i can't think of any important creatures with a toughness of 3)
2. Does damage to creatures AND players, instead of wasting a turn killing all the creatures, you kill all the creatures AND deal 3 damage to them

Well, the only thing to do now is test it. However, I do not get to play very often and I don't play tier 1 decks very often at all. If you guys could help test this, that would be great.

[cartman34]

Actually its an advantage that Flamebreak deals extra damage.Its never a dead card and against combo its just an extra burn card where pyroclasm is dead.It also helps against regenerating creatures which are common(Troll,Boa).Pyroclasm also wrecks goblins and you can smash face with it(without wasting a burn spell) in fact its just a turn slower.

[troopatroop]

Flamebreak is a SOLID 4 of in the main now. Pyroclasm doesn't compare, because the 2cc/3cc difference doesn't matter. Goblins will only kill you turn 3 with the nut draw, and that's the only aggro that we should worry about. Flamebreak also deals 3 to the face, and that's big by itself. Not straight up losing to Troll?? Tech.

Flamebreak > Pyroclasm

[Zilla]

Yeah, I'm inclined to say that Flamebreak is the best way to go. At the very very worst it's a 3cc Bolt that hurts you too... but at least it's still damaging your opponent. Pyroclasm will never ever be a correct MD choice because it doesn't do any damage to the dome, which will contribute to the running out of gas problem for which Burn is famous. Earthquake could theoretically be better than Flamebreak as an MD choice, but I think it's wrong to discount the threat that Troll Ascetic presents. RGSA, RG Beats, and The Rock are all at least somewhat viable, and they're bound to see play.

[GRAH]

Just going to cover what's been said while I was gone.

White splash: Lightning Helix isn't amazing, not really icing on the cake, and not better than the Fanatic. Disenchant is the only card worth splashing for (STP is unneeded in a deck with this much removal), and I don't think it's worth it. I don't see Worship and Solitary Confinement running around as much as you guys, I guess.

Browbeat: 3 is the correct number. Drawing them in multiples is rarely good. They're good for the reasons Zilla listed.

Flamebreak vs. Pyroclasm: Flamebreak. I'd rather do damage to the head and kill Ascetic than occasionally take out a Suntail Hawk. (Really, show me a good flier other than BOP that's played).

[FallenOmnipotent]

I don't think helix is needed at all... ...Burn doesn't really need life gain vs. any deck besides burn. One thing I liked about this deck is that it wasn't prone to wastelands. Burn is on a fragil enough mana base that if you lose 1-2 lalnds, you'll be feeling the pain. It hampers effects like Fireblast (not being able to sac a land cause it's been destroyed) and makes it more difficault to cast Flamebreak. IMO, Flamebreak is much better b/c it deals 3 damage to the player as well. I believe that is critqual in a burn deck, not losing tempo/cards to killing creautres. It is true that I wish my mogg fanatics were 4x more Incinerates, but I don't think it's worth splashing another color for.

Just my 2 cents.

[Obfuscate Freely]

I suppose it wasn't clear, but I was suggesting Pyroclasm for the sideboard. Scrumm had mentioned sideboarding Earthquake because it was less painful, and because having lots of sweepers is good in some matchups.

After testing the card a little bit, I strongly believe that Pyroclasm is a great sideboard card. Flamebreak is a great maindeck card. Having access to both post-board is just great.

[FallenOmnipotent]

Do you really need more than 4 bored removal effects though? I've never needed it against goblins...it doesn't do much to angel stopy...

[Zilla]

I don't think helix is needed at all... ...Burn doesn't really need life gain vs. any deck besides burn.
And Goblins, which can win a straight up damage race if you don't find an early Flamebreak. Given that Burn and Goblins make up a huge portion of the metagame right now, it deserves consideration. Further, even if Fanatic is better than Helix, Incinerate is definitely not, assuming you're already splashing white for Disenchant. As Chill makes its way into the metagame as a response to the increase in Burn decks, Disenchant becomes almost necessary to stay competitive. If you're going to splash white, Helix is an automatic include.

[FallenOmnipotent]

I don't think it's worth playing burn if every blue (based/splashed) deck starts to run Chill. It's just too tough of a match.

[bigbear102]

Even if the blue decks play chill, you still have an amazing game against everything else. And then those decks will lose to vial goblins, and then they will stop playing chill.

I think that with the white splash this deck will finally have what it needs to compete in the format at a higher level. The ability to hose almost every hate card gives you a chance to auto win game 1 and then have a very good game 2. It seems like a no-brainer to start playing Disenchant, and with the bonus of Helix I don't see a problem. If I were to play I would play 2 Plateaus and 6-8 Fetches. It will be a much more solid base and if they do try to hit your duals you can always sac them in response if you have the chance. I know it's not perfect, but I believe that being able to get out of the sticky situations that you will get into is a better asset than stopping their wastes.

[Zilla]

Even if the blue decks play chill, you still have an amazing game against everything else. And then those decks will lose to vial goblins, and then they will stop playing chill.
This is... optimistic. It should have amazing game against everything else, but it loses to itself too often for that to be accurate. If you revised the statement to say "you still have an amazing game against everything else except when you don't", it'd be accurate. With a good draw, you have a solid game against most decks in the format. The problem is that the good draw is only consistent about 60% of the time. That still bears addressing.

[GRAH]

I'd have to agree with bigbear. The Chill theory is shaky, but I still think that Burn can easily be fast enough to simply avoid hate.

The white splash just seems poor to me. It opens you up to nonbasic hate (essentially, making Landstill a potentially worse matchup), leaves you chasing for duals and does little more than give you Disenchant (I don't think Helix is a big deal).

I'm not going to do it anyway, because I'd rather not have to buy two duals and a bunch of fetchlands. =/

[Jero]

Hi, all!

I've been browsing through this (loooong) thread and it seems as though the following list is a fairly accurate template:

MAIN DECK

4 Fireblast

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Mogg Fanatic

4 Incinerate
4 Chain Lightning
4 Magma Jet
3 Fork

3 Flamebreak
3 Browbeat
3 Variable slots (preference/metagame):

- An additional Flamebreak, Fork and/or Browbeat
- Price of Progress
- Chain of Plasma
- Flame Rift
- Flames of the Blood Hand

20 Mountain
------------------------------------------------------------
SIDEBOARD

4 Red Elemental Blast
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 Sulfuric Vortex
3-4 Pithing Needle
… Flamebreak, Price of Progress, Anarchy, …

------------------------------------------------------------

=> Barbarian Ring?

PRO:
- increases threat count without weakening the manabase (significantly)
- uncounterable
- colourless (vs. pro-red, COP:Red)

CON:
- wasteland target
- anti-synergistic with Fireblast
- a potential liability in aggro match-ups (damage race)



Let me know if I missed anything! :D

Greetings,

Jero

[GRAH]

That's pretty much my build. Zilla's is -3 PoP +1 Browbeat +1 Flamebreak +1 something else.

By the way, the card agreed for your blank space is Price of Progress. I originally had it as a metagame choice, but after seeing how it blows apart Gro and Landstill and is only truly dead in the mirror and against Solidarity.

As for Barbarian Ring...the cons outweigh the pros. Counterabiliy isn't really a liability in a deck with so few must-counter spells. The argument that it bypasses COP: Red isn't sufficient, either. It doesn't do enough damage.

The cons are the kind who are going to fuck you up by Murphy's Law, also.

[FallenOmnipotent]

I think, in my meta-game, Flame Rift is just better. Not everyone owns duals over here...so 1/2 to 3/4 rounds I play are against dual-less decks. However, the decks they are good against is usually in my later rounds, against the better players... but I just don't think burn can afford dead draws.

[bigbear102]

@Fallen: I would play Flame Rift definately then. Flame Rift is best against the higher tier decks, becuase good players know it is a bad card, and for that reason it usually resolves. The only deck it is bad against is goblins.

@Jero: I have consistently done well with that list except for - browbeats. I play both Flame Rift and Price of Progress. I know everyone else agrees on Browbeat, but I'll ask you to play without it and see if you miss it. In my opinion it is too costly. The card is amazing, but it is a sorcery that costs 3, not a good thing. Having the extra damage guaranteed (Flame rift always, PoP always in my meta) is worth more to me than the Browbeat, all i ask is that you test it without browbeat and see what happens.

[TGhost]

Hey guys I'm new around here, but I have been following this topic for about a month. I threw the deck together and tested it and found a few things that concerned me. Mainly, I don't like how the deck loses to itself sometimes. I mean my stomach churns when I draw my opening hand of Mountain, Mountain, Fork, Browbeat, Mountain, Incinerate, Mountain. The chance that you will draw more land (which for some reason tends to happen) causes nearly any 4+ land hand to be unplayable. Mulliganing is almost as bad as conceding with this deck as pretty much every spell you draw is needed. I am probably making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is, but those of you who have tested or played this deck know what I mean.

Secondly, I have a problem with a couple cards. I have a major love/hate relationship with Browbeat, some games it rocks and some games the 3 mana sorcery just doesn't fit right. The other card is Incinerate, I know most of you probably agree here, the puddle of drool that I slipped on while reading about Helix gave it away. A vanilla 3 damage for 2 mana seems very mediocre in this deck.

Anyway, today I got to thinking. Perhaps I could solve the land issue and the card issue at the same time by taking the deck a step in a new direction. Sensei's Divining Top should help smooth land drops and also allow the deck to sustain its momentum a bit longer. It is also immune to most forms of artifact destruction since it has a built in defense mechanism and can dig an extra card later in the game to get that last burn spell. When I thought of the Top, the next card that came to my mind was Shrapnel Blast. It just has an amazing synergy with Top, sacing the Top in response to its tap ability to do 5 damage and draw a card is undeniably good(forking it is just gross). At this point I thought to myself, well thats all fine and dandy, but 4 artifacts aren't enough to warrant playing shrapnel blast. So why not play a couple copies of Pithing Needle maindeck? An earlier poster played with 2 maindeck and claimed it was not a bad choice at all. Another option is to go with Cursed Scroll, however it seems a bit too mana intensive and subpar for this deck.

Anyway, a few changes later and burn has a new look:

4 Fireblast
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Magma Jet
4 Flamebreak
3 Shrapnel Blast
3 Price of Progress
3 Fork

4 Mogg Fanatic

4 Sensei's Divining Top
3 Pithing Needle

17 Mountain

I think that dropping to 17 land is good with the lower mana curve and the ability to find land with either top or jet if needed. I was thinking of inculding some fetch lands to help out the tops, but giving landstill (or any deck packing stifle) a good stifle target might allow them to get some random lucky wins from a matchup that should be favorable for the burn deck. Another bonus to including the needles in the maindeck is some open space in the sideboard. I'm not the best at developing sideboards, but I'm thinking of something like this:

6 REB/Pyroblast (Chill is the devil and with Solidarity SBing in 8 BEBs...)
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 Sulfuric Vortex
1 Price of Progress (4 PoP can make your life very easy sometimes)
1 Pithing Needle

Well, what do you guys think? *Braces for impact*

[bigbear102]

@TGhost: Ok, first of all I'm not sure if you really read the rest of this thread, because I'm pretty sure that a "vanilla" 2for3 is actually an autoinclude, being the 4-5th card in the deck in ANY current decklist.

Second, your list is 61 cards....???

@top: The card slows the deck down way too much, lessening the threat density and taking up your mana. Using the 1 mana a turn looking for the extra land seems quite counterproductive.

@Shrapnel Blast: Assuming you have read the rest of this thread (you haven't) you will know all of the arguments that should go here:.
Plus the fact that Pithing Needle is a huge target on its own, meaning that it will get destroyed ASAP, making it not a solid artifact to bank on for blast. And the fact that if you name their win condition, then play blast, and they counter it, you then just lost the game to yourself.

I have actually thrown this together and playtested it, and have not had a GOLDFISH before turn 6. The deck now draws Tops instead of lands. having a 2 top hand is worse than having a 4 land hand in my opinion, considering 4 land is the top of the curve most of the time.

[GRAH]

bigbear pretty much covered the bases there.

Dropping the land count, though, is something I've considered. On occasion, I draw too many lands when I want to draw burn. -2 Mountain +2 Chain of Plasma/Flame Rift is what I'm considering.

[t3h.sWaRm]

Hmmm...18 lands MD? I guess it would be fine as long as you take the Browbeat number down. I doubt you'll be able to cast it turn 3 consistently. 3 Borwbeats sound right for the land cuts?

[TGhost]

Ok I understand where you are coming from, I must admit I haven't really tested the build I proposed but the basic idea was to lower the land density since after a couple turns lands are completely dead draws. Top helps you get land if you need it and avoid it if you don't need it, and of course you don't have to spin your top every turn if you have something better to do. As you said a 2 top hand is pretty bad, although a magma jet to send one to the bottom of your library or a shrapnel blast both solve the problem if you are able to find either. Also top should not be a first turn drop if you can help it. Burn spells are usually much more important, but if you have 4 land or so dropping the top can help improve your draws.

As far as the 61 card thing, I'm not sure what I was thinking. Maybe 4 tops is too many. I was really just trying to point out a few things I noticed while testing the deck. Incinerate seems to be the worst spell in the deck most of the time, replacing it with a 5 damage spell for the same cost (although somewhat conditional) seemed to be worth considering. My solution is probably not the best one and I know that, I was just throwing it out there as something to consider and perhaps improve upon.

Edit: I did a little testing with the deck and noticed that the artifacts do indeed clog the deck up a bit too much. It does not seem to make the deck more consistent as I had hoped it would. Sometimes top is useful sometimes it mucks things up. I did manage to goldfish a decent amount of 5th turn wins in my preliminary testing though, I'm not sure what the problem was for you. I will agree that my idea needs some serious work. Anyway, I still think that dropping some land and in turn lowering the mana curve a tad is a good idea. Drawing into land costs this deck the game much of the time.

[DOODLEBIRD]

I have been a burn player for a long time and have been in this topic before, and have several pages of burn on another forum would like to put in my latest list and see what folks here think about :
4 lightning bolt
4 chain lightning
4 seal of fire
4 fireblast
4 incinerate
4 chain of plasma
4 flamebreak
3 volcanic hammer
3 magma jet
3 fire//ice
1 fork
15 mountains
4 wooded foothills
3 lotus petal

side:
3 anarchy
4 red elemental blast
4 pyroblast
4 pyrostatic pillar

I know the petal are not going to go over well, but they can be a great help to get it all in by turn four, it can also be used for the ice (of fire/ice) and for a turn 2 flamebreak. I also figure the lone fork will get trouble, but I don't feel comfortable running more as I don't want to topdeck it and it's situational anyway; maybe could boost it to 2 but that would be it.
thanks and enjoy

[GRAH]

Wow, you finally listened to me and dropped the crappy Mages' Contests.

22 mana sources is way too much for this deck. Your version's still playing sub-par cards for no real reason, as well.


Back on-topic, I'd propose this:

-2 Mountain
-1 Browbeat
+3 Chain of Plasma

2 Browbeat is more suitable with less lands.

[Zilla]

Enough with the decklists. They clutter the thread. If you want to discuss specific cards as potential inclusions that's fine, but further decklists will be deleted outright. - Zilla

[GRAH]

Using averages, I've calculated that Browbeat draws you an average of 6.0249 damage in cards (giving Fanatic a value of 2, PoP a value of 4, Fork a value of 3, and Browbeat itself a value of 2.5). Is this not a good enough argument for it? I don't see why people hate it.

[MattH]

The reason people don't like it is because not every game comes down to how many cards you can play. In games where you have to race the opponent (all combo, most aggro), it's mana, not cards, which is the scarce resource. In other words, it's only really good against slower decks like landstill - which you already have a good matchup against.

Also, even against decks which aren't that fast, spending a turn to draw some cards might very well lose you the game. An example: say I'm playing an Enchantress deck. If you go Boltx7, I'm going to lose, but if you have to spend a turn drawing into those last bolts, that gives me time to find and play a Confinement. Or maybe a Survival deck only needed that one turn to get Genesis+Feeder/Baloth going. Even though those decks aren't that "fast," you still have to race their pseudo-lock.

The bottom line is that against any deck where you win fast or die (and that is an uncomfortable number and variety of decks), Browbeat is slow. If you get them to 3 and then Browbeat, and then they drop Sphere of Law...

Remember, when deciding whether you like Browbeat or not, you have to take the number of games where you played Browbeat and won - and then subtract off the games which you would have won had the Browbeat been something else (Chain of Plasma, Flame Rift, Insert-burn-card-of-your-choice-here, etc.).

It's also randomly disappointing in other, less important ways, such as being a sorcery vs. High Tide, and unlike an actual draw3, it can be shut down by CoP:Red and other damage prevention.

Lastly, 6 damage for 3 mana? I've seen that before, when it was called Ball Lightning. To be fair, Browbeat lacks most of Ball's bad points (making opponent's StPs and Walls relevant) but it does share that one.

That about sums it up.

[T is for TOOL]

Using averages, I've calculated that Browbeat draws you an average of 6.0249 damage in cards (giving Fanatic a value of 2, PoP a value of 4, Fork a value of 3, and Browbeat itself a value of 2.5).
??? How exactly did you arrive at this number?

[Meester Roboto]

Where i play, My meta seems to have a rather large number of chalice of the void. That doesnt seem to be the best thing i could go up against. SB artifact removal seems to be my only option at the moment, and even thats not good as the decks that tend to run the chalice are BBS or some form of MUC which in turn tend to counter the artifact removal.

is there any good solution for my meta problem?

perhaps im just blind but i didnt seem to find anything specific in the thread.

[Zilla]

The bottom line is that against any deck where you win fast or die (and that is an uncomfortable number and variety of decks), Browbeat is slow. If you get them to 3 and then Browbeat, and then they drop Sphere of Law...
matt, your arguments are both true and false. In the late game, you're absolutely correct; Browbeat is slow. It costs you a turn and that sucks ass. On turn 3, though, Browbeat is 5 damage, and that is relatively fast. Truth be told, if Browbeat just read: "2R, Sorcery, Draw 3 cards", I'd actually have to think hard about whether I wanted to play it in a Burn deck. The card gets the nod because it's the only burn card I'm aware of that does 5 damage for 3 or less mana that doesn't cost you other resources (i.e., Fireblast, Shrapnel Blast). The fact that it can dig you out of a hole in the late game is still decent.

[GRAH]

Where i play, My meta seems to have a rather large number of chalice of the void. That doesnt seem to be the best thing i could go up against. SB artifact removal seems to be my only option at the moment, and even thats not good as the decks that tend to run the chalice are BBS or some form of MUC which in turn tend to counter the artifact removal.

is there any good solution for my meta problem?

perhaps im just blind but i didnt seem to find anything specific in the thread.
Don't play this deck. If Chalice of the Void is running rampant, this deck isn't good.

Actually, from what I've seen, this deck's weaknesses are almost exactly like Solidarity's. Decks with counterspells and clocks like Fish and Gro can be problematic, while decks missing one aren't.

[blacklotus3636]

I completely agree with you grah I have noticed that a deck without a fast clock has no chance and decks with a fast clock still have a hard time effectively racing your clock and you still have flamebreak. The problematic matchups are the decks that can mess with your clock and you have a hard time disrupting thiers(even if it is somewhat slow compared to goblins). So the obvious question becomes what can we or should we do about these problematic matchups?

[Meester Roboto]

Don't play this deck. If Chalice of the Void is running rampant, this deck isn't good.
I realize that's true.

My only problem is that I have neither the resources nor the money to build another legacy deck just because of my meta. Chalice is not every other mach up, but I think it's in a good 15%-20% including MD and SB. That's enough to make me want an answer of some sort.

If there is any relevant solution not mentioned here (or something i just missed in the depth of the thread), I would really appreciate your insight.

[GRAH]

We discussed it a while ago.

The best solution is 4x Crash in the SB.

[t3h.sWaRm]

How does Detonate work on Chalice? If we only have to pay 1R to destroy a Chalice for 1, then I think it might be better than Crash because it does damage and saves your mountains for Fireblast. However, if we have to pay 2R to kill a Chalice for 1, then its much worse.

[GRAH]

No, you have to pay R for Chalice no matter what, and since Chalice is usually set to 1, that won't work.

Remember it doesn't say "X or less."

[MattH]

The card gets the nod because it's the only burn card I'm aware of that does 5 damage for 3 or less mana that doesn't cost you other resources (i.e., Fireblast, Shrapnel Blast).
Well technically there's Price of Progress, but that's less impressive than it looks on the surface.

If I wanted to be REAL anal about it, I'd toss in Mana Clash. :P

[bigbear102]

Crash is definately the best choice for Chalice hate. Setting it at 3 is both hard and dumb against this deck. Crash is a little-known card that can pull you out of bad spots.

[Zilla]

The card gets the nod because it's the only burn card I'm aware of that does 5 damage for 3 or less mana that doesn't cost you other resources (i.e., Fireblast, Shrapnel Blast).
Well technically there's Price of Progress, but that's less impressive than it looks on the surface.
Agreed. And to be fair, most builds that are running Browbeat are also running PoP, so they're not exactly competing for space.


If I wanted to be REAL anal about it, I'd toss in Mana Clash. :P
Ha. [glare]

Don't get me wrong; if they print another card that does 5 damage for 3 or less mana and doesn't cost me card advantage, I'll strongly consider replacing Browbeat with it. Browbeat isn't in here for the draw... it's in here for the damage. The fact that it happens do draw you into more threats if your opponent opts not to be killed by it is unfortunate, but by and large, acceptable.

[blacklotus3636]

I used to hate browbeat but in testing even against goblins browbeat was extremely effective. I found that it doesn't really matter which one they choose they are going to be taking 5 either by just taking the browbeat's five or having you draw into 2 burn spells which is usually 5 or more damage.

[MattH]

I used to hate browbeat but in testing even against goblins browbeat was extremely effective. I found that it doesn't really matter which one they choose they are going to be taking 5 either by just taking the browbeat's five or having you draw into 2 burn spells which is usually 5 or more damage.
Thank you, that's exactly what I was trying to say - you've put your finger right on why I don't like Browbeat. It's similar damage, but the opponent has the option of delaying that damage by a turn by letting you draw. Browbeat is bad in a race, whether you're trying to race a Worship/Sphere of Law, Baloth recursion, a combo deck, Exhume'd Akroma, or just a racing aggro deck, that one-turn delay is going to cost you games.

Not coincidentally, those matches are the ones which are hard for burn. The matchups where you have all the time in the world - Landstill comes to mind - are the ones you're already doing well against.

Browbeat would, I think, be a lot better in a deck where the cards it draws for you are going to do much MORE than 5 damage. If I had to use Browbeat I'd try it in a RG Beats/Zoo type deck, where you can draw creatures - creatures which are going to do much more than 5 damage in the course of the game. If it draws you Bolt, Bolt, Mountain, then you got 6 damage for 2RRR. Eh. If it draws you Wild Mongrel, Basking Rootwalla, and a land, that's going to be a lot more damage - or force your opponent to spend cards defending him/herself, which is much better than just hitting his or her life total.

I could also see it in "big red"-style decks, modeled after the T2 decks with Pulse of the Forge and Arc-Slogger; these would also be able to draw 8-12 points of damage off a Browbeat, so there I would take the 5 more than I would here.

[Zilla]

The thing is, I have never seen an opponent choose for me to draw unless the Browbeat would kill them right then and there. That being the case, in most situations, Browbeat costs you a turn only when the damage you're drawing is going to be lethal anyway. Under those circumstances, I could care less if I'm drawing into fat beats or large damage. The only time Browbeat doesn't do 5 is when 5 is lethal.

It's also not altogether uncommon to draw right into a Fireblast off of Browbeat which wins you the game on the same turn anyway.

[PTBNL]

I'm trying to figure out the proper post board strategy vs Landstill. Assuming that they will board in both COP:Red and Pulse of the Fields, what is our sideboard strategy? I've read on this thread that COP:Red is not much of problem but I'm not sure how to play against it. Let's say on game 2, Landstill goes first and on the second turn drops COP:Red which should happen roughly 40% of the time. What's our game plan?

[MattH]

Pithing Needle is pretty good against CoP. If you can't afford needles, you could try Flaring Pain and two huge "burn'em" turns. Failing that, Culling Scales will knock that CoP off.

[GRAH]

I board in 3 of Sulfuric Vortex and Pithing Needle (which I might have to replace, can't afford them. :() over 4 Flamebreaks (yeah, I changed to it), a Fanatic, and an Incinerate.

[bigbear102]

Against Landstill you side in whatever anti-blue you have or pithing needle, and vortex. They you take out mass removal and fanatics. If you have anarchy in your board, it goes in. Same with Disenchant if you do the splash. I usually just race the CoP: Red, but that's why I play Wastelands.

[GRAH]

Meh. I don't board in REBs. You simply don't need them. All the dangerous spells are white. Landstill doesn't play Chill.

[blacklotus3636]

Even if landstill did play chill(which grah pointed out that it doesn't)it can't put a fast enough clock together to actually stop burn unless they get something really stupid like turn 2 and turn 3 chill on the play.
On a side note cop red is almost exclusively better than chill against goblins which is the real threat in people's mind's. For example, a control deck (like landstill) has alot more uses for something like cop red because it forces the goblin player to overextend into a wrath. The only decks where chill is better than cop red is in blue based aggro-control decks which don't want a fuck ton of mana commitment but want to slow them down. From what I hear thier matchup against burn is so positive they don't think it's effecient use of sideboard slots.

[Zilla]

On a side note cop red is almost exclusively better than chill against goblins which is the real threat in people's mind's.
Realistically, for a control deck like Landstill, Sphere of Law is the best anti-Goblins/Burn card. It requires no mana investment beyond the initial casting cost, nullifies or severely weakens most threats in both decks, and doesn't get shut down with Pithing Needle. A resolved Sphere of Law means that they must only counter a) removal for Sphere, b) cards which ignore Sphere. These cards are rather sparse in both decks.

Anarchy is, of course, an answer, but it's slow enough that your Landstill opponent is likely to have the means to counter it when you're ready to cast it. I'd say that either Disenchant or Flaring Pain are the likeliest candidates as answers to Sphere of Law. Flaring Pain is on-color and is the most likely to succeed in this specific endevor, but is obviously more narrow than Disenchant, so the call, I should think, would be a metagame one.

[Anonymous]

The one problem is that by turn four vs. Goblins, Burn or Sligh the Landstill player will be at the point where preventing two damage from getting through will not be that big of a deal.

As for taking care of hate, Flaring Pain should be used in a heavy Cop:Red, Frog Lock, Turboland meta. Anarchy is more suited for a meta with a heavy white content (AS, Wombat, Landstill, WW). As Zilla said, it's a metagame choice.

[GRAH]

Yeah. I'm going to end up going with Flaring Pain over Pithing Needle, myself. Sphere of Law is a pain.

Though most people seem to go with COP over Sphere.

[torgar]

I've been following this thread and testing this deck for a couple weeks now. I really like it and having been having good sucess with the build. [ I use 4x Flame Rift/3x PoP & no Fork .. but not because I don't have them but because they need another card to be useful. :-) ] It seems to me as far as other people's sideboarding options, in white, the options that don't trouble me too much are:

Pulse of the Fields - mana-burn solves this. I don't see them gaining more than 4-8 life usually.. depending on how far into the game it is.
COP: Red - unless it comes down turn 2, I can usually outrace it. Both require mana investment and will how fast this deck is that means that my opponent won't be applying much pressure because they won't lay threats for fear of tapping out. So if they do stabilize with a COP: Red, then it slows down the game enough for me to accumulated a hand full of instants to burn them out with when they do make a move.

These board cards seem most troublesome.

Warmth - ugh... My L-bolts turn into Lava Darts. Anarchy is the best solution, but I usually end up holding all my spells in hopes of drawing Anarchy before I start playing spells, which completely stops this deck's clock. This is the reason (along with Ravenous Baloth) that I think Sulfuric Vortex is is necessary in the board.
Solitary Confinement / Ivory Mask - luckily, I haven't seen these around except once. Anarchy is the only solution.
Sphere of Law - I haven't tested again this yet, but it definitely looks problematic. Anarchy, again, is the only solution. I don't think Flaring Pain is the right solution. It seems better in Goblins where they can easily be doing 20+ dmg in a turn, but I don't think a one-shot (excuse me, two..) is what this deck needs cause unless it's the turn going for the kill it seems like a dead card otherwise. This is why I board in the Pyroblasts along with the Anarchys vs landstill. It's not necessary because of Chill but so that I can back an Anarchy or a Fireblast with a Pyrolast.

Chill - I've noticed the same thing. Versus Landstill, it's very possible to work through a Chill or two, since there clock is much slower than UG madness or AngelStompy. Against those aggro blue, resolved Chill pretty much kills this deck.

For reference, this is the SB I'm using:

3x Anarchy
1x Flamebreak
3x Pithing Needle
4x Pyroblast
2x Rolling Earthquake / Fault Line
2x Sulfuric Vortex

[Lord of the Pit]

Why not Flames of the Blood Hand? Flaring Pain seems kind of awkward, and the only case it's better is when you can Flaring Pain for two huge turns, which would require a boatload of mana. You can often get around CoP by throwing more burn than your opponent can prevent (i.e., burn instants at the end of his turn, and then burn him on your turn). By turn two, you likely have your opponent at 14, hopefully 11, so it's not too tall an order. Flames of the Blood Hand, or better, two of them, will give you the win without having to rely on Flaring Pain. It seems a more feasible solution than paying two for the Flaring Pain and then throwing like three or four burns on the same turn.

It also gets around Worship very easily and is somewhat of an answer to Exalted Angel and Warmth (not completely, but it does give you the chance to race). Better yet, it deals damage on its own, and considering how many people would prefer to drop Browbeat, fits perfectly in the 2R slot.

Consider this comparison with Browbeat:
Pros
- Consistent: always guarantees 4 damage
- Instant
- Gets around prevention and stops life gain
Cons
- Browbeat will sometimes get you 5
- With Browbeat, you might luck into 6-10 damage. Note that this really isn't good because at best, assuming your opponent plays correctly, you can deal 5 damage. (Of course, your opponent can delay the damage, which would sometimes be the correct call, but 10 damage a turn later is often not the best scenario for you). I don't think the extra inconsistency and extra turn of unloading burns justify giving your opponent an option.

But this has already been debated earlier, so I'll refrain from adding more for now.

[GRAH]

Flames of the Blood Hand stops lifegain, not damage prevention...and doesn't get around Worship. It's not better.

[torgar]

Cons
- Browbeat will sometimes get you 5
- With Browbeat, you might luck into 6-10 damage. Note that this really isn't good because at best, assuming your opponent plays correctly, you can deal 5 damage. (Of course, your opponent can delay the damage, which would sometimes be the correct call, but 10 damage a turn later is often not the best scenario for you). I don't think the extra inconsistency and extra turn of unloading burns justify giving your opponent an option.

Honestly, I've never had someone (who I test with) not take 5 unless they were at 5. With how fast this deck is, "10 damage a turn later" is often more punishment than 5 damage a turn earlier. Everytime some random opponent lets me draw, I smile because it's evitably ends up being worse for them. Then I politely tell them it's a mistake to let me draw.

3 for 5 dmg is better than 3 for 4 dmg.

Flames of the Blood Hand is also just frustating because it doesn't even get around Warmth.

[bigbear102]

I just figured I would chime in with my most recent list, I went 3-1-2 at Amrod's yesterday. My matches were as follows:

Round 1: Rifter, 2-0-1 ( I had to quake for a draw game 1)
Round 2: Turboland, 2-0
Round 3: 3deuce (eventual winner) 2-0
Round 4: Draw
Round 5: Draw

Top 8: I lost to Turboland because he got chill on turn 2. Then got it early in game 3.

My build looked almost exactly like it did for Gencon,

4x L. Bolt
4x Incin
4x Chain
4x Spike
4x M. Jet
4x Fireblast
4x Mogg Fanatic
3x PoP
3x Earthquake
3x Fork
2x Pithing Needle
1x Sulfuric Vortex
16x Mountain
4x Wasteland

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

I played the Wastelands because they are still very good in my meta, and with them I have to play Earthquake. I actually like Earthquake more than any of the other options because I do commonly cast it for 4-6 in the longer games.

I highly endorse the 2 Pithing Needle 1 Vortex main. They are very useful in so many matchups. I'm thinking of having 3 Vortex main in the future, as it is better due to the damage aspect.

[scarface]

If you are going to mainboard nonland permanents, I would recommend Ankh of Mishra over vortex, as it has great synergy with wasteland and sometimes causes your oppenent to skip land drops. Of course, one of the major points of this deck is to make all of your opponent's removal dead, at least in game one, so it's usually better to keep all of your artifacts/enchantments in the sb and bring them in game 2 after they've boarded out all their disenchants, etc. Also, pithing needle main is just unnecessary and slows you down; one of its main purposes in the sb is to answer COP: Red, and you're obviously not going to see that game 1.

[bigbear102]

Having Pithing Needle in the main is actually very very good. People don't expect it at all. I cannot think of a matchup where it is not detrimental to my opponent.

I agree having it in the board would be optimal, but fitting it there wasn't possible.

And I do understand the argument for no maindeck permanents, I was a major part of that and agreed with it, but this is needed.

Vortex is a lot better than Ankh for main deck permanents. It is one of my most sb'ed cards, so why not put it main? Ankh makes the good matchups better, which is not needed. Vortex makes the harder matchups easier. The only match in which it is dead is Goblins, and even there you can play it for the win, as long as you are careful.

I know that I do not want to have my opponents cards be useful, but I need more room in my board. Having an 18 card sideboard is looked down upon, so instead of running a card i do not like (browbeat, and i do not want to get into this discussion, it is personal preference) I run cards that i need.

Having access to Vortex in the main also gives me more room to SB in other matches, instead of taking out Fanatics I can take these out. The fact that they can be destroyed is not as important as being able to play my entire sideboard as needed.

[scarface]

Then how about at least switching the two mainboard pithing needles for your two sb vortexes? I can think of plenty of matches where the pithing needle is mediocre (at least game 1): solidarity, landstill, goblins, and the mirror are just a few.

[GRAH]

Alright. I've been testing this for months, and this is my proposed final build.

Burn v2.0:

20 Mountain
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Flamebreak
3 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Magma Jet
4 Chain Lightning
4 Incinerate
4 Chain of Plasma
1 Sulfuric Vortex

// SB:
2 Sulfuric Vortex
4 Red Elemental Blast
3 Pyroblast
3 Flaring Pain
3 Sirocco

Goodbye, Fork, good riddance. I've been dissatisfied with it as a whole, and I'm tired of defending it. It's not good enough, and it's an awful topdeck. Same with Browbeat. It's cute, but I completely cut down on the amount of 3cc spells in this deck. You'll not I'm not playing Anarchy in the board, either. Browbeat's a poor topdeck at times, and simply too costly at others.

1 MD Sulfuric Vortex is really nice, especially if Angel Stompy and Trix are going to be popular. Yes, I have 10 Solidarity hate cards.

I added Chain of Plasma, too. It really ends up being an Incinerate against most decks.

What I expect people to play:
-Solidarity: The GPT that David won was the first to be posted. This makes a huge difference.
-Goblins: No worries.
-Landstill: People listen to Zvi. Not a problem, but 8 dedicated red hate cards could theoretically make their matchup better.
-Angel Stompy: WW is a popular deck. Yes, I didn't include Anarchy, but I don't think this will end up as a problem matchup.
-Trix: No, I don't think it's a good deck. People DO listen to Steve, though. Sulfuric Vortex is actually pretty damn good in this matchup.
-Sligh: Laughable. Sligh is just Burn with more targets and less awesomeness.

[t3h.sWaRm]

Hey, since you took out the Browbeats and the Fork, do you feel that you could also take out 1-2 lands? You deck is mainly 1cc and 2cc spells(1 Sulfuric Vortex and 4 Flamebreaks). I know its really essential to get a T3 Flamebreak vs. Gobs but would taking out a couple of lands really wreck your chances of that(keep in mind you have 4 Magma Jets to help)?
Also, you probably tested Flame Rift in the Chain of Plasma slot, why did you choose to run the Chain? Is the damage to you that important?

[GRAH]

I didn't test Flame Rift. Chain is strictly superior. It doesn't necessarily deal damage to you, and it acts as an Incinerate at the very least. The extra 1 dmg Rift does is negligible.

I've had 1-2 times where I wished I had Browbeat, but meh.

As for dropping lands...I probably will. I hate topdecking lands. But for what? Flame Rift isn't good. PoP is dead enough times to make me not want 4. There are no solid spells left.

[Slay]

Lightning Helix.
-Slay

[GRAH]

Lightning Helix.
-Slay
Ooh! Or, maybe, I could try not raping my manabase for a mediocre card!

[bigbear102]

Grah, how can you say that Flame Rift is a bad card? Especially if you haven't tested it. Now I don't expect you to test it, because I know you won't, but I just want you to know it is 4 damage for 2 mana, 4 for 2, let me say it again, 4 for 2. It is the only spell I have ever had countered on turn 2.

[Slay]

Decks that counter spells don't pose a threat to you, and this card blows vs. basic mountains. In the current meta, I'd have to not run the card.
-Slay

[GRAH]

Grah, how can you say that Flame Rift is a bad card? Especially if you haven't tested it. Now I don't expect you to test it, because I know you won't, but I just want you to know it is 4 damage for 2 mana, 4 for 2, let me say it again, 4 for 2. It is the only spell I have ever had countered on turn 2.
I had it in an old build. 4 for 2 is good. It's not better than Chain of Plasma.

Slay pretty much covered it.

[Lord of the Pit]

Chain is strictly superior.
No, it's not. Whether or not Chain is better than Flame Rift is up to debate, but it certainly is not strictly superior.

[Zilla]

Slay pretty much covered it.
Yes, he did. But of course by that exact same argument, Helix is superior to Chain for the same reason. As far is it "raping" your manabase, that's preposterous. You're spewing rhetoric now. A deck with 20 basic lands can ABSOLUTLEY afford to splash and maintain a stable manabase. Hell, Goblins can do it and it's running 7-8 colorless lands too. Enough with this, "3 non-basics makes you lose games to Wastelands" bullshit. Ideally, you wouldn't open yourself up to non-basic hate, but if a minor vulnerability to it improves your game against 50% of the field, it should at least be given consideration.

[scrumdogg]

Furthermore, there are times where Chain is a dead draw, either against an aggro deck or an aggro control deck. If you do not see (and resolve) a Flamebreak against Goblins (or Fish/Gro) there are far too many times you cannot afford to use Chain - between relative hand size and life total. This exactly the spot (and reason) that Fork should be in the deck. It will do 3 damage for 2 mana (see also Chain...) with the possibility of doing more, the possibility of copying a crucial spell cast by your opponent, and never hitting you in the face. Bad lategame topdeck? I disagree, the best strategy against anything that stalls burn (except Pulse...) has been to chip away where possible & build up cards to go on periodic explosions of damage, to overwhelm them, when they have to tap out.

[fuzzybearpup]

Besides Bottle Gnomes what is the best defense that Sligh has against a Burn deck?

[GRAH]

Slay pretty much covered it.
Yes, he did. But of course by that exact same argument, Helix is superior to Chain for the same reason. As far is it "raping" your manabase, that's preposterous. You're spewing rhetoric now. A deck with 20 basic lands can ABSOLUTLEY afford to splash and maintain a stable manabase. Hell, Goblins can do it and it's running 7-8 colorless lands too. Enough with this, "3 non-basics makes you lose games to Wastelands" bullshit. Ideally, you wouldn't open yourself up to non-basic hate, but if a minor vulnerability to it improves your game against 50% of the field, it should at least be given consideration.
I don't like Helix because I don't like my own PoPs hurting me, and I don't want to have to occasionally weaken myself to Wastelands for a negligible bonus.

Yeah. Disenchant is negligible. The only cards that Flaring Pain cannot stop that Disenchant can are Solitary Confinement and Pariah. Maybe it is just me, but I never see either.

Goblins can splash with more ease because it has Vial to let it play crap without having lands.

It also has to do with the fact that I'm too cheap to get duals.

scrum: So far, I haven't come across any times where it's a dead draw. I might drop it down to 2, and not for Flame Rift.

For Seal of fucking Fire. It's never a bad topdeck, and it fills out the 1cc curve nicely.

As for Fork, it was becoming a dead card constantly. I frequently keep 2-land hands where I never hit another land. Fork is bad in these situations. I don't like having to count on finding Fireblast for it to be effective.

[PTBNL]

Grah,
Flaring Pain, have you found this to be better than Pithing Needle or is this a budget replacement?

For me, Browbeat is a must. No other card can match the extra damage potential it provides. It is the card that my opponents most often counter, duress, and just groan at. That tells me something.

[GRAH]

It's mostly for budget reasons. That and it can be better against Landstill at times. If it's countered, you can still use it again ftw.

As for the white splash...I tested it a little. The Disenchant can balance it out, and it's not a completely self-fucking change, but I'm not going to use it because of budget constraints.

I'm pretty sure I'm going to go -2 Mountain, -2 Chain of Plasma, +4 Seal of Fire from the last build I posted. Seal of Fire is really good. I'm missing Fork and Browbeat less and less as I drop the lands, too, since they usually need 3.

Inevitably, Chain of Plasma is never worse than Flame Rift, and can be better.

[torgar]

Ideally, you wouldn't open yourself up to non-basic hate, but if a minor vulnerability to it improves your game against 50% of the field, it should at least be given consideration.

Lightning Helix should improve your game against Goblins and the mirror for the most part- but wouldn't COP: Red be a better option as long as you are splashing white? I know it doesn't deal any damage and the mana base is pretty tight when it comes to casting burn and protecting oneself with a COP at the same time, however, it seems it would completely shut them down. Unless of course, they are splashing white as well, but I doubt Goblins will think it side in Disenchant/Flaring Pain games 2-3 unless they see a plateau game 1 and/or are very intuitive.

The problem with Helix over Chain/Incinerate is not being able to cast Helix if you don't draw one of the 4 fetches/2-3 plateaus in the deck. This strategy is already intended vs Goblins, I assume, which we know runs Wastelands. Then you have to worry about casting Helix turn 2 and getting then wasteland-ed and not having three lands for Flamebreak next turn. That, or using your fetches for mountains to protect your land till you Flamebreak and then run the risk of not finding any white mana later and holding dead cards. Either way, it seems like to much of a liability when COP:Red would be a better solution. Haven't tested w/ Helix yet, but just D/L-ed the Ravnica patch and going to try it out.

Another option (braces for impact) is Aether Flash vs Goblins. I know its 4 mana vs a deck with a quick clock, but assuming you draw it in your opening hand, you can go the route of burning out all their Goblins until Aether Flash comes down and then you can sit back and leisurely burn them out as there entire deck is rendered useless. Just a thought. I haven't tested it myself, partially, because it seems alittle too specific and ineffective if a goblin swarm is already on the table.

COP: Red anyone?

[GRAH]

Since when do I need any tech versus Goblins? It's a great matchup and boards in absolutely no hate.

Ironically, of course, the next thing I was about to suggest is SB Cuilling Scales. A person over at TMD suggested it. It's a house vs. Goblins and can destroy COP: Red.

[Zilla]

I don't like Helix because I don't like my own PoPs hurting me
How is this same argument not also applicable to Chain?


and I don't want to have to occasionally weaken myself to Wastelands for a negligible bonus.
Spoken like someone who hasn't tested Helix. I triple dog dare you to test it as a 4-of in the Goblins and Burn matchup. It's not negligable. The Wasteland threat is, however.


Yeah. Disenchant is negligible. The only cards that Flaring Pain cannot stop that Disenchant can are Solitary Confinement and Pariah. Maybe it is just me, but I never see either.
You forgot Worship, Chill, and Umezawa's Jitte. Don't see them now? Enjoy your rude awakening at GP: Philly.


Goblins can splash with more ease because it has Vial to let it play crap without having lands.
That was one example. If you really want me to, I can list 50 decks in the format that splash a second color and don't lose to Wasteland. Again, this is rhetoric and nothing more.


It also has to do with the fact that I'm too cheap to get duals.
Fair enough, but then come out and say so. The other arguments don't hold water.

--------------------------------------------------------


Lightning Helix should improve your game against Goblins and the mirror for the most part- but wouldn't COP: Red be a better option as long as you are splashing white?
No. CoP:Red a) isn't very good against Goblins, even in Landstill; they're prepared for it and they can absolutely play around it, and b) is far to resource intensive, as you already pointed out.


The problem with Helix over Chain/Incinerate is not being able to cast Helix if you don't draw one of the 4 fetches/2-3 plateaus in the deck.
8 Fetches, 3 Plateaus. And I know what you're thinking; "doesn't 8 fetches negate the benefit of Helix's lifegain?" No. With 8 fetches, you will use 2-3 of them in an average game. A single Helix eliminates this drawback.


COP: Red anyone?
Not a chance. You are the beatdown in this matchup. Even your board control element (Flamebreak) is absolutely aggressive. If you try to play control, you will lose.

--------------------------------------------------------


Since when do I need any tech versus Goblins? It's a great matchup and boards in absolutely no hate.
I've seen more than one build splashing white and running Absolute Law for the Burn matchup. I disagree that the matchup is great to begin with. If you're running 4 MD Flamebreaks, it's a positive one, but not overwhelmingly so by any means. If you don't draw and resolve at least one Flamebreak, there's a good chance you're going to lose that game. If they're running Absolute Law, your favorable matchup becomes decidedly less so. Incidentally, this is another threat which Disenchant answers that Flaring Pain does not.

[t3h.sWaRm]

Culling Scales seems to be an effective disenchant replacement for a mono red build(I too don't want to go out and get 4 duals). The only thing it doesn't answer is Sphere of Law and Worship(I think), which aren't THAT played(at least in my meta). Would you replace Flaring Pain with it Grah? Another problem I found is that Flaring Pain can be countered once and still be effective, whereas Culling Scales just dies.

[scrumdogg]

This may very well be a case where if you want to play the best version of the deck, you need to fork the cash for the best cards. Fortunately, Plateaus are wicked cheap (for duals), there is a functional reprint coming out that you can pick up in drafts, and you always have the option to either A) save B)convert junk to cash with a dealer at a major tourney & get the cards that way (what I plan to do in Philly to get Needles - pay $20 a piece for them? Fuck that! Need them, though? Yes I do...go go magic junk rare conversion!

[GRAH]

Since when do I need any tech versus Goblins? It's a great matchup and boards in absolutely no hate.
I've seen more than one build splashing white and running Absolute Law for the Burn matchup. I disagree that the matchup is great to begin with. If you're running 4 MD Flamebreaks, it's a positive one, but not overwhelmingly so by any means. If you don't draw and resolve at least one Flamebreak, there's a good chance you're going to lose that game. If they're running Absolute Law, your favorable matchup becomes decidedly less so. Incidentally, this is another threat which Disenchant answers that Flaring Pain does not.
Really? To be honest, I've never seen or heard of people playing Absolute Law. Plus, none of the builds posted on Wizards had it (I think), and that's where most people will be copying from.

Flaring Pain doesn't stop protection's prevention? You sure?

Also, that's why I put in the 4th Flamebreak.

I don't think the white splash is completely necessary unless Burn is expected (and therefore specifically boarded against). I'll concede that it can be good. I don't, however, feel that I'm going to need it. Mono-red has been functioning for long enoguh without the splash. I don't think that'll change.

[TsumiBand]

They reprinted Psionic Blast as a Red card. It's called Char now and it's exactly the same.. if you're still playing Flame Rift, wouldn't you rather play this card?

[Slay]

No. 3cc spells are bad. That's the general mode of thinking around here.
-Slay

[scrumdogg]

Goblins, Burn, Goblins, Sligh, Goblins, RDW, and Goblins being on EVERYBODY'S radar means lots of hate whether they expect your particular deck or not. It matters not why they have Chill/Sphere/CoP/whatever if it does hit you. Does it? Being unprepared is always a metagame option, but it seems suboptimal to me..... Disenchant IS necessary in an environment like Philly will be, so we might as well take the best options regardless & play Helix as well.

[MattH]

Minor rules clarification: Flaring Pain will indeed let your Flamebreak kill a pro:red creature, because protection includes a damage prevention ability (it used to be damage reduction - "all damage dealt to this by red sources is reduced to zero" - which is slightly different, but has since been changed).

Of course you still can't Bolt a pro:red guy, because even with Flaring Pain in effect it's still untargetable by red cards.

[GRAH]

Alright, after some testing, it's evolved into this:

19 Mountain
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Incinerate
4 Chain Lightning
4 Magma Jet
4 Lava Spike
4 Fireblast
2 Browbeat
3 Price of Progress
4 Flamebreak
1 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Volcanic Hammer

//Sideboard
3 Sirocco
3 Flaring Pain
3 Pyroblast
4 Red Elemental Blast
2 Sulfuric Vortex

Browbeat going back in. It's usually just an undercosted Lava Axe, which is fine. 3 is too many. I left land #20 out, though, because even with 8 3ccs now, I still consistently draw enough lands with only 19. Upped Sulfuric Vortex to 2, also. It's an MVP versus most decks. It can hurt even Goblins.

Flame Rift over Chain of Plasma was just a desire to do 4 instead of 3. It seems like a liability against Goblins (whereas Chain of Plasma is less so), but time will tell.

[Zilla]

Flaring Pain doesn't stop protection's prevention? You sure?
It does for a single turn, assuming you have 4-5 mana to cast both it and Flamebreak on the same turn. Chances are decent that by the time you've hit your 5th land drop, Goblins will already be shuffling for next game. Disenchant has the added benefit of hitting Vials and Jittes, which Flaring Pain does not. Vortex answers Jitte to a degree, but in my testing experience, Vortex is a massive liability against them. The damage you're doing to yourself there speeds up their clock and helps them race Flamebreak if you don't have it in your opening grip.

Honestly, now might be a good time to get over your reticence to shell out some cash and buy Plateaus. They're cheap relative to the other duals in this format, and if anything, their price is going to go up as the format becomes more popular. They're a rock solid investment.

[bigbear102]

@Cop Red: I have actually done this before, a few years ago when burn and sligh were very popular. I used 4 Plateaus main and 3 cops in the board. It actually worked very well, having never lost to a deck packing mountains. I have to say that right now it does not seem needed, but as this thread is one of the longest in the open forum, eventually it may be good tech. I have not tested it at all, but in the future it may be viable.

[DOODLEBIRD]

Alright, after some testing, it's evolved into this:

19 Mountain
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Incinerate
4 Chain Lightning
4 Magma Jet
4 Lava Spike
4 Fireblast
2 Browbeat
3 Price of Progress
4 Flamebreak
2 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Flame Rift

//Sideboard
3 Sirocco
3 Flaring Pain
3 Pyroblast
4 Red Elemental Blast
1 Sulfuric Vortex
1 Price of Progress

Browbeat going back in. It's usually just an undercosted Lava Axe, which is fine. 3 is too many. I left land #20 out, though, because even with 8 3ccs now, I still consistently draw enough lands with only 19. Upped Sulfuric Vortex to 2, also. It's an MVP versus most decks. It can hurt even Goblins.

Flame Rift over Chain of Plasma was just a desire to do 4 instead of 3. It seems like a liability against Goblins (whereas Chain of Plasma is less so), but time will tell.
You seem to flipping back and forth on few cards almost as much I have. I'm still opting not to use browbeat again yet, but have included two forks. And I put in two spellbomb, and two scroll (again). I'm going with the hammer over either rift or plasma as it has no potential drawbacks. It is prepaired for gobbos, landstill, counter, high tide, and more.
Here's my latest list :
4 lightning bolt
4 chain lightning
4 fireblast
4 incinerate
4 volcanic hammer
4 magma jet
3 lava spike
3 seal of fire
3 flamebreak
2 earthquake
2 cursed scroll
2 fork
18 mountain
3 forgotten cave

side:
4 anarchy
4 red elemental blast
3 pyroblast
4 pyrostatic pillar

thanks and enjoy

edit-

DOODLEBIRD, why do you play pyrite spellbomb? Shock or Seal of Fire are much better choices in most situations.
Yeah, I switched back to seal.

[GRAH]

Honestly, now might be a good time to get over your reticence to shell out some cash and buy Plateaus. They're cheap relative to the other duals in this format, and if anything, their price is going to go up as the format becomes more popular. They're a rock solid investment.
Factor in the cost of fetchlands, and that's roughly $70 (according to Sibyl) altogether. It's a bit much for a high school student without a serious job.

I know how Vortex can be a liability against Goblins. It could go down to 1 again with fair ease. Again, time will tell.

[t3h.sWaRm]

DOODLEBIRD, why do you play pyrite spellbomb? Shock or Seal of Fire are much better choices in most situations.

I'm also unsure if MD is the best place for Vortex. Mainly because with Flamebreak/Rift in the deck, you may do quite a bit of damage to yourself. I hate having 1 copy of a card in the deck, so I'd take them both out. The replace them, we have:
Volcanic Hammer
Chain of Plasma
Flame Rift
Browbeat
Fork
Land
Just gotta choose which one is optimal. Another hard part would be fitting them into your SB, I'm thinking:
-2 REB
-1 Pyroblast
+2 Sulfuric Vortex
+1 Sirocco

I didn't like have more than 4 REB effects in my board because they didn't do damage and I was stuck with only 2 in my hand way too often. Sirocco is amazing and the earlier you see them the better they tend to be.

[GRAH]

The MD is definitely the place for a single Vortex. It's fairly good against pretty much every matchup except Goblins.

I've been using Volcanic Hammer in my empty space.

[bigbear102]

How have you done with Volcanic Hammer?

[GRAH]

How have you done with Volcanic Hammer?
Not badly at all. It's a solid card, does almost as much dmg as Flame Rift without the weakness, and can target creatures. It's not outstanding, but it gets the job done as a sorcery-speed Incinerate.

[Rastadon]

There's better choices for white than just disenchant. A single disenchant won't win you the game, big threats like SOFI, Jitte and Vial are all played in multiples. Serenity seems to be a big reason to splash for white.

Burn's probably gonna take 2 forms, a W/R build offering versatility over vulnerability, or a Mono Red build packing wastelands capitalizing on W/R's dependecy on fetches and duals. W/R will probably have better control/combo matchups, but suffer from the goblins + Wasteland, while mono red just hopes to predict the metagame really well.

On a sidenote, will wasteland become more popular with the new Ravlands?

[scrumdogg]

Wasteland is already a decent choice, especially with the primary mono-color matchup (Goblins) now splashing white or running Wastes/Ports. The neo-duals are icing on the cake in terms of playing Wastelands. Serenity is a cool card & a house against a number of different problematic things (weird combo, Ravager, multiple equipment, Enchantress...) but it needs to survive a full turn. My experience playing Serenity in red, green, and white (where you cannot protect it) is that far too often that turn allows the opponent a way to get rid of Serenity. They probably won't even side out the Disenchant type cards against you since they will suspect Vortex/Needle/Pillar type permanents from you out of the board (those blasted smart opponents anyway...). The poor interaction with your own sideboard artifacts & enchantments is another concern. Do you use it as an overload card with the Needles to stop equipment? Forcing them to Disenchant/Naturalize the Needle, then dropping the Serenity? If so, what does your sideboard look like? What exactly do you bring out to add this plan (that is a lot of cards which don't do damage). I'm looking forward to hearing about your playtesting with this & welcome to The Source.

[cheesespecter]

How about Blazing Salvo? It makes oppo choose, which is not good, and if he hasn't got any creatures around it's a dead card. Then again, it is an instant, 3 for 1 or even 5 for 1 damage card. Maybe it's worth testing.

ps: first post, and I think more will follow... I think legacy is the format for me, a poor vintage player not willing to go much further than duals :P

[bigbear102]

Blazing Salvo is not a good idea for this deck, and I mean that in a nice way. Browbeat has been debated because of the choice factor, this card isn't nearly as good as browbeat. About the only situation where I could see them taking the damage is if you target a first turn lackey, and if you have to target a first turn lackey and it doesn't die, you're screwed anyway.

I would like to welcome you to the Source though, and keep throwing those ideas out there, some of them may work, but I really don't consider Blazing Salvo even close to being good enough for this deck.

@Serenity: I don't believe it is a good choice for all of the reasons Scrum listed. Disenchant is so much better, in part because you can cast it on their turn. Being able to threaten damage is big with this deck, tapping out on your turn is never good, unless it's for the purpose of lowering their life total significantly (why I play Flame Rift) or to kill their team.

I do believe that Disenchant is enough to win games also. How many times are you going to have to worry about a 2 Jittes within the first 5 turns of the game. Turn 3 at its fastest, and then another before they are dead? I think not. And against Survival you shouldn't even need Disenchant, you have no dead cards main and a decent matchup. Everything in your deck is very good against Survival, as Fanatics normally go 1 for 2, and all your board sweepers are amazing. The only Survival you should have problems with is ATS, and people don't play that much anymore. Vial shouldn't even be a concern. If Goblins drops Vial on turn 1 you race them, because then they are a turn behind.

I do believe that the new duals will greatly help this decks win percentage, as now a Fetch for a neo dual, plus if they pay the 2 life is an extra bolt:) Who can complain about that? I hope that the Philly meta is filled with Fetches and Neos, my clock will be like a half turn faster.

On another note, college sucks for playtesting, I haven't been able to reliably test a white splash yet, and I want to so badly....



Edited By braves54321 on 1127167148

[Rastadon]

Thank you scrumm. I feel welcome already.

I've been reading up on this page for a while now, and I'm a little hesitant to splash white until it's been confirmed that a splash in white is 100% needed. It might actually be bad for the deck. A reliance on both dual lands and fetchlands gives this deck far more hosers. Blood Moon, Back to Basics, Wasteland...all of these things can turn an amazing, gut-busting, 'you don't even know how dead you are', kinda of deck into a sluggish turd muncher. In reality, which is worse? Chill or Blood Moon, B2B, Wasteland, PoP and more? Until a white splash is 100% guarenteed, I'll continue to spout out unfounded theories.

I think Seal of Cleansing is far better than disenchant for this deck. You do not want to keep 2 mana open that could be used for a PoP or double Spike. Taking 2 mana out of your early game to add protection later can't hurt.

If you really want to go white heavy, Abolish seems really strong too. The ability to take care of opposing enchantments while still keeping your tempo is really important here, what do you think?

[NoGameShow]

I don't think the white splash will ever be 100% necessary. I think most people are considering it for comfort reasons, answers are always helpful. Even though Chill, CoP RED, and the like can be played around doesn't take away from the comfort in knowing in your deck you have cards that can destroy said threatening cards with minimal strategic planning. With the amount of talk red decks are receiving as of late the white splash may be a good security blanket especially at GP Philly.

[strathe]

Abolish will be strictly worse than Disenchant here, primarily becasue you have no way to consistantly get a plains in your hand. Without the alternate cost, Abolish is just a Disenchant you can't cast.

[Zilla]

Welcome to The Source, strathe, and you as well Rastadon.

Agreed about Abolish. Though Rastadon did preface the suggestion with "if you ever want to go white heavy", I can't think of an occasion that Burn would ever want to do so. Sligh might go deeper than a light splash for things like Boros Swiftwblade, Goblin Legionnaire, etc., but straight Burn doesn't want anything in white besides Lightning Helix, Disenchant effects, and possibly StP. Until white starts offering direct damage spells, this isn't likely to change. Because of this, Abolish is going to be worse than Disenchant.

Seal of Cleansing might get the nod over Disenchant, but more because it can remove Standstill without breaking it than because it doesn't tie up resources. Since most of Burn's threats are instants, there's very little difference between Seal and Disenchant in that regard. In fact, Disenchant is probably the better choice because of this factor; you choose at opponent's EOT what Burn you're playing. If you need to cast Disenchant instead, you have that option. With Seal, you're forced to make that kind of decision during your mainphase, which gives you less flexibility overall.

[Kundalini]

I'm a great fan of white splash: it is not only disenchant from sideboard but - with Ravnica - more good stuff to throw in for profit (suppression field and lightning helix).
Not so sure this is the right topic, but this is my list (updated to Ravnica)

--Helix Burn--

-Land (18)
6 Mountain
8 Fetchlands
4 Plateau

-1cc (16)
4 Lightning bolt
4 Chain lightning
4 Lava spike
4 Mogg fanatic

-2cc (22)
4 Flame rift
4 Fork
4 Lightning Helix
4 Magma jet
4 Incinerate
2 Pyroclasm

-6cc(4)
4 Fireblast

-Sideboard
2 Pyroclasm
2 Anarchy
3 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Suppression Field
3 Sirocco
3 Disenchant

(Card Choice)
Pyroclasm MD: save burn spells, board in more if needed, board out if not;
Lightning Helix: amazing spell (why don't run these over volcanic hammer?), it could justify white splash alone to me; but remember to side some of them out in case of sulfuric vortex;
Flame Rift: greater sinergy with lightning helix;
Fork as a 4-of: helix, fireblast and flame rift are all good target for it, this is your usual finisher;
Suppression Field: the other very good card for splashing white! siding them in for fanatics for anti-hate.

My biggest doubts are around pyroclasms MD and the high number of fetchlands... i think this is a very good list overall, helix adds a lot of efficiency, disenchant and suppression seem profitable.

[noobslayer]

Agreed, Supression Field is quite good. Considering game two they'd have no reason to board in enchantment hate.

[Rastadon]

Suppression Field + Fetchlands = Self-imposed prison. Though Suppression Field looks very, very strong for...erm...W/R builds not using fetchlands...

Woah, on second thoughts...that card's really good! It's like what Null Rod does for Vintage! Execept we can't run it cause we'll get screwed by it.

Nothing to add right now. Yeah, white's involvement in burn is going to be very minimalistic in terms of card choices. Though WR for Deal 3 gain 3 is nothing to scoff at.

Just wondering, how popular is Chill? I can't help but feel we're trying to fix problems that aren't there.

Burn is still unknown enough that people won't dedicate sb cards to specifically take burn down. But if those same sb cards can also take down Sligh/Gobs, and decks that people board for, then I think an investment in some Plateaus is a must.

[GRAH]

Just wondering, how popular is Chill?
Not as much as you'd think. Really, only Gro plays it.

I still don't care for the white splash. Suppression Field hurts you and is worse than Pithing Needle and Flaring Pain against COP: Red.

Also, MD Clasms are worse than Flamebreak because Flamebreak actually hits the head.

[bigbear102]

There are not many competitive decks that play chill right now. There are also not many competitive decks that this deck can't beat right now. That being said, chill is the worst card you could ever see across the table from you. At a tourney like GP Philly Chill is going to be played a lot. If you are lucky enough to have 3 byes, then you probably need not worry too much.


(What does suppression field do?)

[Zilla]

Supression Field is 1W Enchantment that reads "Activated abilites cost an extra 2 to play". It's basically a Sphere of Resistance for all activated abilities. This includes Fetches and Wastelands, which is pretty solid. That said, it doesn't really do much of anything against your problem matchups, with the possible exception of CoP:Red.

[Kundalini]

Yes, probably suppression fields is not needed in this deck. Also it hurts fetchland, and running 8 is very good.
About Pyroclasm vs Flamebreak... pyroclasms are 1 turn faster and remove BoPs, flamebreaks burn players, only hit land creatures but harder... mmmm I'm going to test both alternatively in the R/W build.

[Eldariel]

I'm just considering, does the white splash really require Fetches? Sure, they make it easier, but with Plateau, Battlefield Forge and the new dual, you'd have a total of 12 decent sources of double-color mana. Of course, the damage dealt to you might occasionally be problematic and make Helix seem less-than-ideal. Still, it appears an option.

[etakspeelstae]

I'm just considering, does the white splash really require Fetches? Sure, they make it easier, but with Plateau, Battlefield Forge and the new dual, you'd have a total of 12 decent sources of double-color mana. Of course, the damage dealt to you might occasionally be problematic and make Helix seem less-than-ideal. Still, it appears an option.
Yes, it REALLY does require Fetchies. It isn't about how you produce your mana, it's about Wasteland. Also there is NO reason to ever run those over Fetchlands in the first place. They deal you more damage, leave you open to losing to Wasteland, and don't thin your deck.

[cheesespecter]

Hi all,
As seen from my last post, I like trying mad ideas, even when I think they're, well, mad. Blazing Salvo sucks.
Ok, here's a new chance of flaming me.
I thought it could be good to try and take advantage of the fact that you don't have any permanents. After looking around a bit, I found the following cards:

Apocalypse (too expensive)
Cataclysm (maybe an option, nasty ww casting cost)
Balancing Act (ok if you can cast it this card rocks, also because you'll be topdecking a lot)
Culling Scales (meantioned before in this thread)

Are these cards options?

[Drkdstryer]

For the sideboard, yes. Not Cataclysm or Balancing Act (WW doesn't work in a splash) nor Apocalypse, but Culling Scales is a very viable SB solution. The reason that Apoc doesn't work is because of Anarchy, which nukes everything that you really care about anyway, while you get to keep your lands and hand. That's a little important.

[etakspeelstae]

Hi all,
As seen from my last post, I like trying mad ideas, even when I think they're, well, mad. Blazing Salvo sucks.
Ok, here's a new chance of flaming me.
I thought it could be good to try and take advantage of the fact that you don't have any permanents. After looking around a bit, I found the following cards:

Apocalypse (too expensive)
Cataclysm (maybe an option, nasty ww casting cost)
Balancing Act (ok if you can cast it this card rocks, also because you'll be topdecking a lot)
Culling Scales (meantioned before in this thread)

Are these cards options?
I don't think Apocalypse is very good. If your build is meant to go late-game, or you can't beat Aggro already with Pyroclasm and Flamebreak, I suppose you could play this.

I fail to see what Cataclysm does at all for you. Maybe you misread or misunderstood it... It means against a deck with a Jitte, a Isamaru, and a Plains, you would end up facing that with 1 Mountain, this card would truly be crazy :D

Balancing Act, WW in casting cost. That alone makes it bad, but it would be great for clearing hands and the board against Aggro.

Culling Scales would be good, if it cost one less IMHO. The 3cc is a bit much against Aggro, although I can see it against COP Red in mono red builds.

Of course there options, there just not the bad ones :;):

EDIT: Drkdstryer pretty much cleared it up, he posted when I was posting.

[cheesespecter]

hmmm..

I understood cataclysm, but didn't realise what it would do practicly

balancing act would be ok but the casting cost sucks

culling scales could work but was suggested allready

oh man I'm gonna visit my shrink

ps: he, I never said apocalypse would work :D

Welcome to The Source. Please make an effort to follow this rule (http://mtgthesource.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2590). Your compliance is appreciated. - Zilla

[etakspeelstae]

hmmm..

I understood cataclysm, but didn't realise what it would do practicly

balancing act would be ok but the casting cost sucks

culling scales could work but was suggested allready

oh man I'm gonna visit my shrink

ps: he, I never said apocalypse would work :D
Agreed :)

And I forgot this before, Welcome to The Source!

[GRAH]

Yes, probably suppression fields is not needed in this deck. Also it hurts fetchland, and running 8 is very good.
About Pyroclasm vs Flamebreak... pyroclasms are 1 turn faster and remove BoPs, flamebreaks burn players, only hit land creatures but harder... mmmm I'm going to test both alternatively in the R/W build.
You should never have a problem removing BoPs...and you should never really need to. Flamebreak is better because it kills Trolls and hits creatures.

There are VERY few flying creatures that are actually played competitively. I can count them by hand.

BoP
Suntail Hawk
Exalted Angel
Eternal Dragon
Tradewind Rider (and not really.)
Mystic Enforcer (only on Tuesdays)

Pyroclasm can't kill most of those anyway.

[Rastadon]

Welcome Cheese to The Source. The One Source. The one source to rule them all...Sorry just saw LotR again. I'll never see Frodo in the same way after I saw Sin City. *Shudder*

Anyway, seeing as Flamebreak isn't gonna work in W/R, I got another suggestion. Earthquake was suggested before to compliment the Wasteland/Factory strategy. But there's a portal version of that card that instead of not hitting flyers, doesn't hit horsemen instead. Seeing as no one will play horsehood, I think this could be superior to Flamebreak. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what threats does a Flamebreak take out that a Pyroclasm doesn't? Either than players, obviously.

[TGhost]

What makes Flamebreak not work in W/R? With 8 fetches and 4 duals, you have no need to run any non-red producing lands.

Earthquake, and silly earthquake from portal for that matter, are much less efficient than Flamebreak. You need 5 mana in order to make quake an improvement. By the time you hit 5 mana you should be winning, not worrying about the board.

[etakspeelstae]

By the time you hit 5 mana you should be winning, not worrying about the board.

I think last time I hit 5 mana I was losing... You always win before that anyway.

I would also love to know why W/R can't support Flamebreak even though all it's mana is red...

[bigbear102]

Suppression Field will not work in this deck, mainly because you need the Fetches. If you try to use the other lands then your base becomes very wastable, and makes for inconsistent fireblasts.

@ Culling Scales: Noone has mentioned how awesome this card is against Chill. In a mono-red version I think that this might beat out the Pithing Needle, as Scales destroys almost every important Needle target, and more (Jitte, CoP:Red, Chill, SotF, goblins).

@Earthquake: Has anyone who posted on Earthquake actually played it? Being able to hit it for 5 or 6 late game can win you those games. Topdecking an x-spell in the late game is GREAT. Before that you just have to play smart. Troll is not that important in this format. SD Zoo and RGSA are the only competitive decks that play it. And if they drop it early they have no regen mana, if they drop it late, you have already won or lost anyway.

[DOODLEBIRD]

Suppression Field will not work in this deck, mainly because you need the Fetches. If you try to use the other lands then your base becomes very wastable, and makes for inconsistent fireblasts.

@ Culling Scales: Noone has mentioned how awesome this card is against Chill. In a mono-red version I think that this might beat out the Pithing Needle, as Scales destroys almost every important Needle target, and more (Jitte, CoP:Red, Chill, SotF, goblins).

@Earthquake: Has anyone who posted on Earthquake actually played it? Being able to hit it for 5 or 6 late game can win you those games. Topdecking an x-spell in the late game is GREAT. Before that you just have to play smart. Troll is not that important in this format. SD Zoo and RGSA are the only competitive decks that play it. And if they drop it early they have no regen mana, if they drop it late, you have already won or lost anyway.
Culling scales is not solid as it may not get rid of what you when you need too, plus three to cast is often when blue is at a time with plenty of counters waiting for something like this. It doesn't suck, but I'm not sure it's a better choice.
I do play 2 earthquake (and 3 flamebreak) for reason you mention, plus it can be used for a 1 point sweeper on turn two.
it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[GRAH]

@ Culling Scales: Noone has mentioned how awesome this card is against Chill. In a mono-red version I think that this might beat out the Pithing Needle, as Scales destroys almost every important Needle target, and more (Jitte, CoP:Red, Chill, SotF, goblins).
I did. The problem is that it ends up being REALLY slow for this deck and it doesn't get rid of Worship or Sphere of Law.

Against Goblins, there really isn't a point where they have any creatures on the field and you can play this safely, unless they're doing badly, in which it shouldn't be hard to win anyway.

[PTBNL]

I've been testing Burn vs postboard Landstill with 4xPulse 4xCOP and it seems like Landstill is a big favorite here. For Burn, I board out Flamebreaks and Fanatics and board in 4xVortex and 4xPithing Needle, but it's not enough. If I can't draw a Needle for their COP, it's often a autoloss plus the Needles usually get countered or disenchanted anyway. The SB cards lack synergy as Vortex is a dead card vs COP and Needle is a dead card vs Pulse. Also, there is the question of how to properly implement a self-mana-burn strategy versus a possible Pulse. Do you assume that your opponent is holding Pulse and mana burn pre-emptively or do you mana burn in reaction to your opponent casting Pulse first? When I go with the reactive strategy, my opponent gets at least 8 life from Pulse which is a big set back. If I use the pre-emptive strategy, I find that it slows me down enough that my opponent will eventually draw Pulse anyway. What do you guys think?

[Rastadon]

I haven't done testing with the W/R build yet. I figured it would have trouble getting RRR. My bad.

[Slay]

If you're staring down Wasteland and need a white mana, getting to RRR is fairly tricky.

The good news is that the only decks that play Wasteland and crippling enchantments also play 10-turn clocks.
-Slay

[GRAH]

I've been testing Burn vs postboard Landstill with 4xPulse 4xCOP and it seems like Landstill is a big favorite here. For Burn, I board out Flamebreaks and Fanatics and board in 4xVortex and 4xPithing Needle, but it's not enough. If I can't draw a Needle for their COP, it's often a autoloss plus the Needles usually get countered or disenchanted anyway. The SB cards lack synergy as Vortex is a dead card vs COP and Needle is a dead card vs Pulse. Also, there is the question of how to properly implement a self-mana-burn strategy versus a possible Pulse. Do you assume that your opponent is holding Pulse and mana burn pre-emptively or do you mana burn in reaction to your opponent casting Pulse first? When I go with the reactive strategy, my opponent gets at least 8 life from Pulse which is a big set back. If I use the pre-emptive strategy, I find that it slows me down enough that my opponent will eventually draw Pulse anyway. What do you guys think?
You don't mana burn yourself...you hit yourself with a spell. That takes the Pulse out after the first try.

Even with COP and Pulse, you can still win. Vortex is a house against Landstill, and you can blitz them with ease.

PoP is an MVP, also. :)

Even post-board, I rarely have trouble with Landstill.

By the way, after Oct. 20, Flamebreak is going to become the Rolling Earthquake. That thing is going to be great.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Is rolling earthquake really that preferable to flamebreak? You said it yourself, that most fliers either aren't worth taking out, or are too big to be done so economicly. By the time you have 6 mana to rolling earthquake over an exhalted angel, it will already have done it's harm. Playing a huge earthquake for 6 lategame as a finisher is also sort of meh. If they survived that long, odds are, they had some sort of countermagic, and the odds of a 6 damage burn spell resolving are pretty slim.


If you're staring down Wasteland and need a white mana, getting to RRR is fairly tricky.

The good news is that the only decks that play Wasteland and crippling enchantments also play 10-turn clocks.
-Slay
I've been running a single basic plains in place of my 4th foundry proxy to help remedy situations such as these. It has yet to come back and bite me in the arse. Playing heaths over wither foothills or mire is a pain, but odds are that they'd be going for a plateau anyway, and it really doesn't matter in that case.

[PTBNL]

I don't know, even with 4xPrice of Progress, 4xPithing Needle, and 4xSulfuric Vortex, I still lose to Landstill. I tried the Bolt-myself defense vs Pulse but it still slows me down since I have to hold back a burn spell and I still have to mana burn myself since I have to be within 7 life points instead of 4.

For example, say Burn is at 20 life, Landstill is at 14 life. Landstill has 3 untapped lands with 2 white sources available. Burn has 3 untapped lands and your hand is 2x Lightning Bolt and 2x Incinerate. It is Lanstill's end of turn phase. What does Burn do? If Landstill has Pulse, they are not going to use it till your turn or after you've casted a burn spell, so you have to figure out what to do with the mana now.
A) Mana burn yourself to 17
B) Cast Bolt and Incinerate and hope they don't have Pulse
(if Landstill doesn't have Pulse, this has been a fortunate draw for Burn since it is unlikely ~20% that Landstill doesn't have at least one Pulse or COP after seeing 10 cards.)

Anyways, I'll be glad to test this online with anyone who has a Burn list that's a favorite vs postboard Landstill.

Here's the postboard Landstill I'm testing against
4 Circle of Protection: Red
4 Pulse of the Fields
4 Force of Will
4 Counterspell
2 Mana Leak
2 Disenchant
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Standstill
4 Brainstorm
2 Nevinyrral's Disk
2 Crucible of Worlds
4 Wasteland
4 Mishra's Factory
4 Faerie Conclave
4 Flooded Strand
4 Tundra
2 Island
2 Plains

[GRAH]

You shouldn't actively mana burn yourself. You just assume they don't have Pulse and keep aiming for the head, or else they drop COP and you lose.

[Vimes]

I'm new to the source, but I've been reading the thread for a while. I have two questions: (A) What should I use for a red/white mana base, and (B) Why should Flamebreak be replaced with Rolling Thunder? It doesn't seem like there should be a problem with getting RRR unless somebody is running basic plains for the white splash, which is pretty clearly a bad idea. Unless I've missed something?

[strathe]

You shouldn't actively mana burn yourself. You just assume they don't have Pulse and keep aiming for the head, or else they drop COP and you lose.
Very true. You need to understand your role in all games of course, but to do that you need to understand you own deck.

We've been talking about techy SB strategies in this thread for so long its easy to forget that Burn is a very simple deck.

Every card in this deck equates to at least -2 to your opponents life total. Thats how you play the game. Just burn them. If they have a counter, well, nothing you can do about it it.

If Landstill has Pulse, they can recover 4 life for 3 mana (in their second color). The mean effect of a card in your deck is one mana for 3 damage. so unless you have the oppertunity to take the pulse out of their hand using only one card, its not worth it, just go to the dome and hope neither deck draws land.

As for using the Rolling Earthquake, many players have swithced to that because the deck needs some sort of sweeper that still goes to the dome. The benefit of an x spell is that it allows Burn to use all its late mana, as well as getting around mana problems caused by a splash or wastelands. The Rolling Earthquake hits fliers. May as well go with the superior card.

[Vimes]

Flamebreak is a sweeper that goes to the dome. The benefit of an x spell is outweighted by burn's low land count and fetchlands. No one uses wastelands, and the white splash is 4 plateau and some fetchlands, in my experience. At any rate, you should be playing no lands that don't produce red. Fliers are not a big deal in legacy.

Now why are people talking about playing Rolling Thunder again? Being able to cast where x=1 doesn't seem like a big deal to me, and you have to have 5 mana before it's really any better than Flamebreak.

[cheesespecter]

Fliers are not a big deal in legacy.
BoP, Faerie Conclave, Exalted Angel...

[t3h.sWaRm]

"To the dome" means it does damage to the player, not to creatures with flying. Also, you can't create an infinate combo unless you have 2 Forks because a spell cannot target itself.

[Vimes]

Fliers are not a big deal in legacy.
BoP, Faerie Conclave, Exalted Angel...
1. BOP: Why do we even care about killing this?
2. Faerie Conclave: see above
3. Exalted Angel: If it flips, it will take a 6 mana Rolling Thunder to kill it anyways. If you have 6 mana and they have a flipped Exalted Angel, you have probably already lost.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Well... fliers are a big deal in legacy. Just has already been said before, they have toughnesses of 4 or 5 for the most part and will probably have killed you by the time you get that much mana for a big earthquake-that-hits-fliers. I wish anyone who wants to kill a faerie conclaive with a sorcery the best of luck.

The only creature I'd find (with flying) worth killing in this deck is a suntail hawk with a jitte(if exhalted hits play, it's gg). Or a SoFI, but killing them then doesn't work that well. And honestly, who plays angel stompy now?

I think flamebreak is still the way to go, as the number of games I hit 4+ mana are rare, and the games I hit 4+ mana and want to kill fliers even rarer.

[Vimes]

I mispoke when I said that fliers aren't a big deal. It's just that any time you care about a flier playing this deck, you probably can't hit it with a Rolling Thunder anyways.

[DOODLEBIRD]

The only real benefit of Rolling if that on turn two it can go of for one (like I mentioned with reg earthquake earlier), it does hits fliears which make it better than reg quake. Sure it can be better late game as well, but as we have said, late usually doean't happen, and when it does you often lose. Rolling is fine if for a couple, but 4 would be to much. and good luck at getting them if don't already, as price is going up alot and availability is going down.
it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[Vimes]

To deal more damage than flamebreak, you have to spend 5 mana on it. That's not good. And if you pop it for one, you don't hit warchief or piledriver. That's not exactly a star play either.

[bigbear102]

Personally I believe that Flamebreak should be played over either Earthquake. The reason I advocate Earthquakes is because I play Wastelands. The fliers that you can hit, as stated earlier, are not worth it, or is just not feasible to kill and still win the game. The only deck I can think of that fliers will hurt you a lot is Fish.

Personally I will be playing the new card if I can get them. That's because I have Wastelands though. So basically I'd say Flamebreak is the better card in general.

[Rastadon]

What makes Flamebreak good is that it kills all of the important 2 toughness creatures like Goblin Warchief and Meddling Mage. For the same converted mana cost of 2R, you have added mana flexibility and the ability to take out BoP's to hinder mana bases, something that this deck lacks, AND NEEDS.

I think that people are getting sidetracked by the whole X concept. Sure, it 'can' blow up for 5, but as it was stated a thousand times before, if you have those resources to spare, you're dead anyway. If you blow it for 1 dmg, you have the ability to pwn certain decks, but it best works at 2 dmg.

If you consistenly use 2R to pay for Rolling Earthquake, the only disadvantage is the inability to stop regeneration. If troll astetic becomes bigger, this may validate a change back.

It's not a stellar change from Flamebreak, but something that should be considered as viable as Flamebreak.

[frogboy]

*scratches head*

In a deck that plays like, eight bolts, four to eight 2cc bolts, you're having problems killing Birds of Paradise? It's pretty basic to murder mana dorks in matchups where your opponent is relying on them heavily i.e. any Survival matchup. Flamebreak is good because it's Wrath plus three to the dome instead of Wrath plus two to the dome except sometimes you don't kill like, a Suntail Hawk. Plus it kills Troll Ascetic so good.

[Rastadon]

Oh no, I'm not saying BoP's are a problem. They aren't. But you sure as hell wouldn't want to waste a burn spell on 'em either. But recovering from a nuked board requires mana, and the more mana we can kill in the process of nuking, the better.

Flamebreak:
Pros:
3 damage for 3 mana.
At worst, it's a Spike.
Effectively clears board of weenies.
Kills regenerators

Cons:
RRR maybe tough to pull off, counting on opponent wastelands/stifle
Doesn't hit fliers. (Not crucial)

Rolling Thunder (for 2R)
Pros:
Hits fliers. (Important because Burn doesn't do mana hindering. I highly suggest taking advantage of this.)
Effectively clears board of weenies.
Has the ability to nuke armies of 1/1's for 1R.
Easily splashable.

Cons:
At it's worst it's a shock for 3 mana. Flamebreak wins this one.
Doesn't kill regens. Flamebreak takes this one.


The way I see it, Rolling Thunder has every tactical advantage over it that Flamebreak has, except for it's potentially high cash costs.

[Eldariel]

Umm, a deck with only R sources never has trouble producing RRR, because there's no way to colorscrew a mono-color deck without colorless lands. That's the beauty of the deck, it can run even RRRR cards if it feels like it (and runs high enough manacurve), because no card, a competent opponent runs, that could actually deny you a color.

And, Rolling Thunder, I'm not sure if we play with the same cards, because the Rolling Thunder I know costs XRR, and says 'deals X damage, divided among any number of creatures and players', so Rolling Thundering for RR deals 0 damage, Rolling Thundering for 1RR=Lava Dart without Flashback. No, not the most impressive card, since it doesn't hit all targets, only one. Even if it hit all, Flamebreak brings the opponent closer to a burn range by dealing damage to the head too, and acting as a 3-mana bolt at the worst.

[Zilla]

And, Rolling Thunder, I'm not sure if we play with the same cards, because the Rolling Thunder I know costs XRR...
He said Rolling Earthquake, not Rolling Thunder. Rolling Earthquake is a Portals card identical to Earthquake except it also hits fliers, which makes it pretty much strictly superior... unless you're running creatures with Horsemanship. (Ha.)

[awesomeawesome]

Umm, a deck with only R sources never has trouble producing RRR, because there's no way to colorscrew a mono-color deck without colorless lands. That's the beauty of the deck, it can run even RRRR cards if it feels like it (and runs high enough manacurve), because no card, a competent opponent runs, that could actually deny you a color.
He's right. He's absolutely right. On a completely different note, what if the discussion has been about using Wasteland and getting to RRR for the last ten pages?

Honestly, I like the thought of using Earthquake because it can be cast second turn, possibly taking out a Lackey if you had gone first.

And, the card is Rolling Earthquake. Everyone is getting it confused with Rolling Thunder, possibly the worst card ever printed.

On another note, there's drunk kids fighting outside my window right now.

[Eldariel]

And, Rolling Thunder, I'm not sure if we play with the same cards, because the Rolling Thunder I know costs XRR...
He said Rolling Earthquake, not Rolling Thunder. Rolling Earthquake is a Portals card identical to Earthquake except it also hits fliers, which makes it pretty much strictly superior... unless you're running creatures with Horsemanship. (Ha.)
That explains. I was responding to Rastadon, who spoke of Rolling Thunder, hence the confusion. Rolling Earthquake, well that's a mighty fine card. It beats Starstorm to a bloody bulp and then dances on the corpse (ok, ok, instant-speed has some merit). I'd rather run it in the main than Flamebreak, if just because occasionally one is going to stall at 2 land, and then it's nice to be able to cast the spell. Not to mention, decks like Fish appear to always be around and running some fliers, shutting them down is a nice bonus.

[Morphling_89]

What about Skullscorch?

It's either a nice Hymn to tourach for red or 4 D direct - for two mana.

It seems worth considering, as it's on par - if not better than - Browbeat, in my opinion. I'd rather be doing 4 damage for 2 than 5 for 3, and Hymning for two than Recalling for three.

But that's just my opinion.

[GRAH]

What about Skullscorch?

It's either a nice Hymn to tourach for red or 4 D direct - for two mana.

It seems worth considering, as it's on par - if not better than - Browbeat, in my opinion. I'd rather be doing 4 damage for 2 than 5 for 3, and Hymning for two than Recalling for three.

But that's just my opinion.
Please, PLEASE, read the whole thread (yes, it's long, but do it) before posting stuff like this.

Skullscorch is a poor choice because they can simply choose to discard two to avoid the burn (which they'll do when they really need to.). The reason this doesn't apply as much to Browbeat is because Browbeat gives you card advantage by drawing you into even more points of damage from burn spells.

[Zilla]

This isn't actually a compelling argument against the card, GRAH. As you pointed out, your opponent gets the same choice with Browbeat. You followed it up by pointing out that Browbeat is an exception because it provides card advantage, which is not untrue of Skullscorch. It also provides card advantage if your opponent chooses not to take the damage. I'm not necessarily saying I support the card, just pointing out that your argument against has little foundation.

[GRAH]

I misstated a little.

Browbeat is guaranteed to eventually deal damage. Either it deals 5, or it draws you into an average of 6.XX points of damage in burn. That means that, no matter what, it's going to end with damage at the head in some way, because all the cards in this deck (except lands) deal damage.

Skullscorch will not always do damage to the head. Discard is often useless, and if a spell can't guarantee damage, it really doesn't belong here.

[Slay]

Making them discard already dead cards != card advantage. You automatically get card advantage in that any anti-permanent spells are useless against you.
-Slay

[Zilla]

That's a better argument Slay, but isn't really applicable against, say, Solidarity, which never had any dead cards against you to begin with. The same is mostly true of Goblins as well, with the exception of Gempalms.

[GRAH]

That's a better argument Slay, but isn't really applicable against, say, Solidarity, which never had any dead cards against you to begin with.
Against Solidarity, it's the opposite. Life is irrelevant to them as long as it doesn't go below 20 before they resolve High Tide. Which Skullscorch doesn't help with, since it's no better than 2x 1-for-3s...and it's not an instant...

Meh, not the point. Skullscorch is not a good fit.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Browbeat= +2 CA that is almost guaranteed to be useful (say you draw into 3 mountains...even then, your topdecks will probably help more)/5 damage (damage probable)

Skullscorch= +1 CA that may or may not help your current situation/4 damage (they'll probably take the discard)

The damage/mana difference isn't all that big, and definately doesn't make up for the fact that browbeat will end up doing damage most of the time while skullscorch will (in most matchups) have the opponent discard 2. I must say that browbeat is superior, although at the moment, I choose to play neither (lightning helix and all that).

Here's to comparing apples and oranges *raises coffee mug*.

[Vimes]

Browbeat is debatable itself because it can be slow. It's redeeming point is that it deals damage either through drawn cards or it's own quarter life total of damage. Skullscorch will not deal damage if your opponent discards unless your opponent discards counterspells.

[DOODLEBIRD]

Scorch is nice against combo, as if they only have couple cards they lose their combo, but I still avoid any situational cards. Also scorch can do nothing to the cardless. I would pick browbeat over scorch, but I'd prefer to have neither. The only situational card I allow a couple of is fork, because it can be very rewarding sometimes, and can be counterspell in a counter war.
it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[Vimes]

@DOODLEBIRD: Fork has been deemed too situational to play by most of us, whereas some of us still run browbeat. hmmm.....

[calosso]

Would char from Ravnica be playable

Rcc
instant

deal 4 damage to creature or player and you take 2
It is a psionic blast.

[etakspeelstae]

Would char from Ravnica be playable

Rcc
instant

deal 4 damage to creature or player and you take 2
It is a psionic blast.
Char isn't really good. Flame Rift > Char anyday. The 3cc makes it worse then most of your other removal of creatures, and IMHO Pulse of the Forge would be better. I find just playing all my 3 damage 1cc cards, and then my 2cc, and curve out at Flamebreak and Browbeat, and just finish with Fireblast, while Char isn't enough damage for the cost. That's just my 0.02$ though...

[bigbear102]

I have to ask, who isn't playing Fork anymore? I still play 3 in my build, and I haven't ever not liked them.

As for Char, etak is correct, Flame Rift is better due to the casting cost. The reason Psi Blast is so good is because it is blue, red already has enough direct damage that Char is not necessary, especially not in this deck, although I have a feeling it will be popular in T2.

As for the Browbeat v Skullscorch debate, I think it is completely wrong to assume your opponent will discard 2 automatically. If you cast it on turn 2 they will probably take the 4, that's what I would do. On the other hand I personally don't like either card, and play Flame Rift, as that is a guaranteed 4 damage on turn 2, every time.

[etakspeelstae]

I have to ask, who isn't playing Fork anymore? I still play 3 in my build, and I haven't ever not liked them.

As for Char, etak is correct, Flame Rift is better due to the casting cost. The reason Psi Blast is so good is because it is blue, red already has enough direct damage that Char is not necessary, especially not in this deck, although I have a feeling it will be popular in T2.

As for the Browbeat v Skullscorch debate, I think it is completely wrong to assume your opponent will discard 2 automatically. If you cast it on turn 2 they will probably take the 4, that's what I would do. On the other hand I personally don't like either card, and play Flame Rift, as that is a guaranteed 4 damage on turn 2, every time.
I don't play Fork anymore because it sucks when your looosing and is win more when your winning, at least in my experience.

[Vimes]

I have to ask, who isn't playing Fork anymore? I still play 3 in my build, and I haven't ever not liked them.

As for Char, etak is correct, Flame Rift is better due to the casting cost. The reason Psi Blast is so good is because it is blue, red already has enough direct damage that Char is not necessary, especially not in this deck, although I have a feeling it will be popular in T2.

As for the Browbeat v Skullscorch debate, I think it is completely wrong to assume your opponent will discard 2 automatically. If you cast it on turn 2 they will probably take the 4, that's what I would do. On the other hand I personally don't like either card, and play Flame Rift, as that is a guaranteed 4 damage on turn 2, every time.
Maybe I was wrong, but I didn't think many people played Fork more. The only time when Fork is really good is when you fork a Fireblast. Forking a counterspell doesn't count because instead of helping a burn spell get through, you could instead be casting another burn spell if you were playing another burn spell over Fork. Not to mention it's a terrible topdeck.

On Browbeat vs. Skullscorch: Even when your opponent elects for you to draw, Browbeat is furthering burn's game plan of dealing twenty damage as fast as possible by drawing into more burn. If your opponent discards for Skullscorch, unless they discard counters or lifegain, that's not helping the game plan.

On Char: Definitely not. We have both Flames of the Blood Hand and Pulse of the Forge to consider before Char, and we aren't playing either one right now. Hint Hint.

[Zilla]

I don't play Fork anymore because it sucks when your looosing and is win more when your winning, at least in my experience.
There's no such thing as "win more" in Burn. Your opponent has either taken 20 damage or they haven't. Fork, most particularly in conjunction with Fireblast, makes this happen more quickly and more often than when it is not included.


The only time when Fork is really good is when you fork a Fireblast. Forking a counterspell doesn't count because instead of helping a burn spell get through, you could instead be casting another burn spell if you were playing another burn spell over Fork.
Translation:

The only time Fork is really good is when you use it with a card that you have 4 of in your deck. The rest of the time Fork is not significantly better or worse than another burn spell.

[etakspeelstae]

I don't play Fork anymore because it sucks when your looosing and is win more when your winning, at least in my experience.
There's no such thing as "win more" in Burn. Your opponent has either taken 20 damage or they haven't. Fork, most particularly in conjunction with Fireblast, makes this happen more quickly and more often than when it is not included.
Sorry about bad wording, what I meant was, it basicly was another burn spell, only worse. I either run out of burn or have enough burn. If I run out and TD a Fork, it really sucks.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

I have to ask, who isn't playing Fork anymore? I still play 3 in my build, and I haven't ever not liked them.


I for one am maindecking 2 fork in my latest build. I love it's ability to use your opponent's draw spells/fork a giant win condition on the stack. It made the cut over browbeat and seal of fire.

So...I have 3 slots taken up by mogg fanatics that I would like to...not have taken up by 3 mogg fanatics. Any thoughts on replacements? With a 1cc hopefully...

[Zilla]

Sorry about bad wording, what I meant was, it basicly was another burn spell, only worse. I either run out of burn or have enough burn. If I run out and TD a Fork, it really sucks.
I'll tell you what, try the following:

1. Goldfish 40 games with Burn. Run 4 Magma Jet, 4 Fireblast, and 3 Forks.

2. Count the number of games where you do 8 damage by Forking Fireblast.

3. Count the number of games you're unable to win by turn 5 specifically because the card you drew on turn 5 was a Fork.

Get back to me with your results.

[Vimes]

First of all, this is YOUR argument, not ours. You want us to fetch you data, at least give us a list. Second, the deck is so consistent anyway that the data from goldfishing just doesn't matter. What data would matter is data from testing against decks with counters: Gro, Fish, and Landstill.

[Zilla]

First of all, this is YOUR argument, not ours. You want us to fetch you data, at least give us a list. Second, the deck is so consistent anyway that the data from goldfishing just doesn't matter. What data would matter is data from testing against decks with counters: Gro, Fish, and Landstill.
1. I have provided a list. Feel free to read the thread you're posting in.

2. I only suggest goldfishing because people seem disinclined to test against real opponents. I've tested Fork extensively in the matchups you suggested. In the Landstill matchup? You know what's awesome? Forking an EOT FoF. For the win.

Against Gro and Fish, Fork is essentially just another burn spell as you previously suggested, in that it tends to counter a counter and force through a burn spell. I'm curious why you believe testing against phenomenal matchups is an important gauge for the card's value?

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Think about it, in pretty much worst case scenareo, fork is another incinerate. In the best case, which happens more often than one might think, it's a FOF or fireblast for the win.

Also, what burn spells are better? I think we have the nice, consistant, good ones tapped right now, and I don't know about everyone else, but I still have 2 sub-par slots in my deck! That's including 3 forks. (cut one fanatic for a fork, and the others for shock) Makes fork look pretty good, me thinks.

[bigbear102]

What burn spell are you going to play that does 4 damage for 2? What burn spell are you going to play that ensures your PoP is going to deal 8? What burn spell are you going to play that can copy any instant or sorcery that an opponent plays?

There is no burn spell that you can replace Fork with that is better than it. If you give me one then I will gladly argue why Fork is better, or at least why another card should be cut for its inclusion.

[Vimes]

@Zilla: In my experience Fish is not phenomenal. Maybe I should test your build instead. Would you be kind enough to tell me what page it's on?

[GRAH]

I have to ask, who isn't playing Fork anymore? I still play 3 in my build, and I haven't ever not liked them.
Me. I decided to drop it so that I could also drop some lands. The problem with Fork is that it really requires 3-4 lands to be good outside of hitting Fireblasts...and I don't really like having 3 lands out with this deck.


@Zilla: In my experience Fish is not phenomenal. Maybe I should test your build instead. Would you be kind enough to tell me what page it's on?
As I've previously said, this deck actually has the same matchup problems as Solidarity. You beat Goblins and Landstill, but you can scoop pretty badly to aggro-control decks like Fish and especially Gro. Gro is quite possibly the worst popular matchup I've found so far.

[PTBNL]

I dropped Fork as well. For being 2cc spell, Fork really sits on the 3-4cc mana curve. I found myself with un-used mana more often. It's also vulnerable to countermagic. If they counter the fireblast you are forking, then Fork is countered too. This drawback limits my usage of the spell. It's also a bad topdeck which can hurt when I'm racing. The benefit of Fork is not all that, as it gets to copy Fireblast (about half the time) for an extra point of damage over Volcanic Hammer.

In my experience, Burn has a favorable matchup over Gro. Their creatures are easily burnable. Better yet, just race them, since threshold doesn't hit till turn 4-5 which is when you should be near lethal.

I think Burn's bad matchups are combo decks and decks that pack enough hate ie COP, Sphere, Chill, Pulse.



Edited By frogboy on 1127861924

[etakspeelstae]

What burn spell are you going to play that does 4 damage for 2?

Flame Rift.


What burn spell are you going to play that ensures your PoP is going to deal 8?

Wish there was one...


What burn spell are you going to play that can copy any instant or sorcery that an opponent plays?

To bad there isn't one of these either.


There is no burn spell that you can replace Fork with that is better than it. If you give me one then I will gladly argue why Fork is better, or at least why another card should be cut for its inclusion.

Fork doesn't burn. With no burn it sucks. Without Fireblast it basicly is another burn spell that requires +2 mana. It is often an expensive Volanic Hammer stuck to a Bolt. It is bad against counters.

[GRAH]

In my experience, Burn has a favorable matchup over Gro. Their creatures are easily burnable. Better yet, just race them, since threshold doesn't hit till turn 4-5 which is when you should be near lethal.
The problem is that they play a medium-speed clock, Chill, and enough countermagic to back it up.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

If they counter the fireblast you are forking, then Fork is countered too.

Really? I didn't think it worked that way. Doesn't the fork still take effect because it was just a copy of said spell?

[frogboy]

Taken from #mtgjudge, Fork is countered on resolution if the spell it is targeting is countered, since it's not there to copy when Fork resolves.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Hm, thanks for the clarification. Really makes me think about how I'll play fork.

[etakspeelstae]

Hm, thanks for the clarification. Really makes me think about how I'll play fork.
Hm, really makes me think you wouldn't want to play Fork at all.

Makes me think your posts better start having some substance if you want to avoid a spam warning. - Zilla

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

That too, I'm considering cutting them and putting flame rifts back in.

I still think it's viable, though, as you can fork the counter instead. :D

[DOODLEBIRD]

Maybe I was wrong, but I didn't think many people played Fork more. The only time when Fork is really good is when you fork a Fireblast. Forking a counterspell doesn't count because instead of helping a burn spell get through, you could instead be casting another burn spell if you were playing another burn spell over Fork.
Fork is on the fringe (like browbeat and few others). I do just play two as they are lousy topdeck. But as for the counter war thing - it's not countering the counter that was I was aiming at, it's more like th situation in the second game when they cast say donate and you fork the donate and back it up the red blasts, or forking the red blasts themselves. It adds more to the SB than the MD, but it does sometime come up nice MD as well, if was good topdeck I'd run more but alas...


It's also vulnerable to countermagic. If they counter the fireblast you are forking, then Fork is countered too. This drawback limits my usage of the spell.
True.

it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[etakspeelstae]

...it's more like th situation in the second game when they cast say donate and you fork the donate and back it up the red blasts...

I don't understand wtf you just sayed... Could you elaborate?

Warned for spam. - Zilla

[Slay]

When you fork the Donate you don't have a Illusions yet, so you end up giving them a Mountain.

I find Fork to be rather sucky. It's only in comparatively rare circumstances that it's really better than Flame Rift.
-Slay

[DOODLEBIRD]

When you fork the Donate you don't have a Illusions yet, so you end up giving them a Mountain.

I find Fork to be rather sucky. It's only in comparatively rare circumstances that it's really better than Flame Rift.
-Slay
I see, looks like your right (glad it hasn't come up in any of the games yet) as timing does seem to say that last in first out on the stack, so I would have to donate first. Anyway it does still give an extra red blast like I mentioned and can copy some other usefull spells from the opponent. I feel it warrants two, but no more, as I still consider it more of an SB helper; if wasn't for it's potential as a crappy topdeck I'd run more MD. Though browbeat could easily fit as well (though some don't want 3 casters MD), as long as the other slots are filled with solid burn cards. I feel rift is not worth the 1 extra point to opponent with 4 personal damage when so many 2 mana for 3 damage cards exist with no drawbacks.
it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[bigbear102]

If you guys are having problems with Fork and Counterspells you need to play a tighter game. When you know your opponent runs counters, and there is a good chance they will counter the spell, you wait until they do, then you respond to the counter by Forking your original spell, or their counterspell. Fork will resolve before Counterspell, meaning that it goes through, or their counter is nulled.

As for the burn spell that everyone is comparing Fork to, I already play Flame Rift. The only spell that everyone is talking abou that i don't play is Volcanic Hammer, and I don't believe that Volcanic Hammer is even close to the power level that Fork is.

@etakspeele: FORK IS THERE FOR COUNTERSPELL. I don't know how you play the game, but when I play against aggrocontrol Fork is the number 1 card I like to see. It is there to protect your big damage spells. If you try to Fork before they counterspell then they will get a 2 for 1, that's why you have to play smart. I don't play Browbeat, so the 3-4 mana slot is not filled at all, therefore it is a perfect fit for rounding out the curve.

[etakspeelstae]

If you guys are having problems with Fork and Counterspells you need to play a tighter game. When you know your opponent runs counters, and there is a good chance they will counter the spell, you wait until they do, then you respond to the counter by Forking your original spell, or their counterspell. Fork will resolve before Counterspell, meaning that it goes through, or their counter is nulled.

As for the burn spell that everyone is comparing Fork to, I already play Flame Rift. The only spell that everyone is talking abou that i don't play is Volcanic Hammer, and I don't believe that Volcanic Hammer is even close to the power level that Fork is.

@etakspeele: FORK IS THERE FOR COUNTERSPELL. I don't know how you play the game, but when I play against aggrocontrol Fork is the number 1 card I like to see. It is there to protect your big damage spells. If you try to Fork before they counterspell then they will get a 2 for 1, that's why you have to play smart. I don't play Browbeat, so the 3-4 mana slot is not filled at all, therefore it is a perfect fit for rounding out the curve.
Your not really succeding in giving a valid arguement for Fork yet. REB and/or Pyroblast are easily better against counters. Adding 2 to any spells cost, not being good when your not already about to WIN, and sucks when your opponent is not playing blue? Seems bad to me. Browbeat is pricey, I know, and it isn't a burn spell, and I contradict myself by playing it, but it will get to your burn, gaurenteed. Because one of 3 things happens...

1. You either draw burn or lands, and if you draw lands it's better because otherwise you just spend draw phases getting 'em.

2. This is where you get the nut-high and draw 3 burn spells. And it becomes inf better then Fork.

3. This is most often. Just from the mathmatical statistics... I should have a burn-to-land ratio of 2:1. And it's what usually happens.

Do what you will. I wish you the best of luck, wether you run Fork or not. But I have tested Fork, BB, Flame Rift, in all different assorted combinations (since they are the most debatable spots, undoubtably). And my preference goes with reliability and flexibility.

[Vimes]

Or your opponent takes 5 from browbeat. That happens sometimes too.

[PTBNL]

For those of you considering a color splash for Disenchant etc, here's another tech idea:

Alter Reality 1U Instant - Change the text of target permanent or spell by replacing all instances of one color word with another. (This effect doesn't end at end of turn.) Flashback 1U

It hits most of the major hate out there, twice. COP, Sphere of Law, Chill (all BLUE spells cost two more, sweet). It can hit Pariah indirectly by removing ProRed from the creature. It can counter BEB and it can't be countered by BEB. It's unaffected by Chill, and Flashback allows it to fight through countermagic. What do you think?

[etakspeelstae]

Or your opponent takes 5 from browbeat. That happens sometimes too.

Yeah, that to, and I'll take that anyday for 3 mana.


For those of you considering a color splash for Disenchant etc, here's another tech idea:

Alter Reality 1U Instant - Change the text of target permanent or spell by replacing all instances of one color word with another. (This effect doesn't end at end of turn.) Flashback 1U

It hits most of the major hate out there, twice. COP, Sphere of Law, Chill (all BLUE spells cost two more, sweet). It can hit Pariah indirectly by removing ProRed from the creature. It can counter BEB and it can't be countered by BEB. It's unaffected by Chill, and Flashback allows it to fight through countermagic. What do you think?

Very interesting concept. It seems to trump everything we have discussed before. Any testing yet? I think I will test this a whole lot, because this really does destroy everything we need to deal with.

But what would a possible Sideboard? Any thoughts? This should help me to, I don't have a current sideboard that is really good
:D .

[bigbear102]

@Etak: How can you say that Fork is not good against any deck that's not blue? When you Fireblast for the win, it speeds you up a full turn against ANY deck. Personally I use Fireblast for the win a lot, which makes Fork worthwhile right there. Against Goblins Browbeat is not a good card, Fork is. Browbeat is a wasted turn against anything with a fast clock. It is dead against Solidarity, because they will either take the 5 if it keeps them out of Fireblast range, and kill you the next turn, or they will let you draw the 3 cards, and still kill you. It's not good against aggro control because they play enough counters and smash your face in. Fork is good in both of the latter 2 matchups. Personally I like to keep my iffy matchups good, not the ones I already win. As for your argument that REB does this better, it does. But REB can't be played MD. That is the true beauty of Fork. I don't know about you, but Forking their Disenchant to trade your Vortex for their Jitte in game 1 just makes me smile. Until you play with Fork in many tournaments you will not realize how amazingly versatile the card is. If you don't play it, then I honestly believe you are playing a suboptimal build.

@Alter Reality: I really love that idea, it really does deal with all of the things we couldn't deal well with before. As for a SB:

4x REB
3x Alter Reality
3x Anarchy
3x Pyrostatic Pillar
2x Sulfuric Vortex (I have at least 1 main)

Between Vortex and Alter Reality I don't think that Pithing Needle is as essential as it was before. That's what I'm gonna try out for a while, hopefully it works.

@PTBNL: Awesome idea :) These are the kinds of things I was looking for when I opened this thread, I never would have thought of that on my own.

[Vimes]

I play on magic-league.com, and a trix deck won the trial last night. I tested it vs. burn a little and it seemed to win every time. It will become a netdeck now. Should I be worried?

[GRAH]

If you're playing my deck, which has 7 REBs in the board AND Vortexes, you should have no problem against Trix. I would've beaten him if MWS wasn't such crap and made me have to drop.

[Vimes]

GRAH, what are your reasons for running flaring pain over all the other cards you could run in the sideboard? It's always seemed suboptimal to me, when compared to pithing needle, disenchant, and now alter reality.

[GRAH]

It's for budget reasons almost entirely.

Also, I don't like the splash, for reasons I've previously mentioned.

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

I play on magic-league.com, and a trix deck won the trial last night. I tested it vs. burn a little and it seemed to win every time. It will become a netdeck now. Should I be worried?
Meh, soricco and REBs from the board combined with our nice clock should be able to handle it.

[etakspeelstae]

@Etak: How can you say that Fork is not good against any deck that's not blue?

Actually it was YOU who said that.

Right here,


@etakspeele: FORK IS THERE FOR COUNTERSPELL.

Yeah, owned.


I play on magic-league.com, and a trix deck won the trial last night. I tested it vs. burn a little and it seemed to win every time. It will become a netdeck now. Should I be worried?

Basicly GRAH is correct. REB and Pyroblasts own this match, as does a white splash, and Vortex.

Dude. More content. This is not the first time---Frogboy



Edited By frogboy on 1128033444

[bigbear102]

Etak: I did say that Fork was for counterspell, and it is. I also said that it was for Price of Progress, and Fireblast. I also said it can be used to copy Disenchants post board, and that it screws over black decks sending Discard back at them. Saying that Fork is for counterspell doesn't mean that counterspell is it's only purpose, counterspells just happen to be the most commonly played spells that Fork deals with. If black suddenly becomes the new blue, then Fork will be even cooler, because sending a hymn at an unexpecting opponent can really mess with their plans.

To quote you:

"Your not really succeding in giving a valid arguement for Fork yet. REB and/or Pyroblast are easily better against counters. Adding 2 to any spells cost, not being good when your not already about to WIN, and sucks when your opponent is not playing blue? Seems bad to me. "

So I'm pretty sure that you are the one who said that Fork isn't good against anything not playing blue. The only decks where Fork is not amazing is Survival, Goblins, and Angel Stompy to some extent. Last I checked Survival doesn't see much play at all, and even if it does we roll them. Goblins is a race, and Fork only speeds you up a turn, as Fireblast and PoP are both very effective in that game, and Forking them usually gives you the W. Angel Stompy is the same as goblins, but PoP isn't as good. That is the only matchup that I can say that Fork is bad. And when I say bad, I mean it doesn't have the option of using their own stuff against them, so it's still amazing.


@Trix: Personally, if more people play Trix, the happier I'll be. Having MD Vortex is going to kick ass. Plus 4-6 REB's. Like I said when Menendian originally wrote about Trix, if people start playing it more, we'll start winning more. No worries from this guy.

[darkmindtone]

Hello everyone. This is my first post here, but I've been lurking around this discussion and others like it on other forums. I personally think this deck is by far one of the top contenders in the format from the testing I've put in for GP: Philly. I played this deck at a GP: Trial a few weeks ago, and sadly went 3-3 (Solitary Confinement was a house). I intended to simply switch decks after that depressing tourney, but seeing Ravnica gave me new hope in Lightning Helix. I've been testing the deck with a White splash for a while, and it has been amazing (I love blowing up enchantments post-board). Here is what my current testing has me at (not legal till after October 20th):

4 Mogg Fanatic

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Magma Jet
4 Incinerate
4 Lightning Helix
4 Fireblast
4 Flamebreak
4 Sulfuric Vortex

4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Plateau
8 Mountain

S/B:
4 Red Elemental Blast
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
4 Seal Of Cleansing
3 Price Of Progress

This deck chooses none of the "iffy" cards like Browbeat (always hated it), Fork (love the card, but it barely doesn't make the cut), and Flame Rift (can definetly hurt in the Goblin matchup, and Helix has taken it's/Volcanic Hammer's slot).

I'm trying Seal of Cleansing right now so that they don't simply drop the bomb (be it Chill/Sphere/COP/Jitte/etc) w/counterbackup. Play Seal, and get on with your game (it is admittedly vunerable to removal, but helps not having to keep 1W open constantly).

Helix has been great as well. Six point life swings do really make a difference, and considering Vortex (not really synergetic here) and fetches, the life gain can definetly help in some matches.

The blue splash mentioned shortly ago seems like a definete possibility, although I would definetly miss Helix with the white removed.

[strathe]

The decks in this thread seem to be slowly moving towards a slightly more reactive stance. Things like Pithing Needle and Votex MD are not tradional choices for a burn build. Flamebreak is another good example.

Now I don't wish to say that these things are not neccesary. Flamebreak (or similar) in particular certainly is. But the way this decks wants to win is by playing a game that nobody else can. No other format can really boast a deck like this, totally non-interactive unless it chooses to interact with you (by burnining your creatures).

That said, I want to revisit Suppresion field. I am including it primarily for its fetchland interaction, but their are plenty of other things it will stop as well. In this deck its probably best to think of it the same way its used in stax, a sphere of resistance that only affects your opponent. It will buy you time, and time is always on your side. Particularly if Cop:Red has taken a holiday.

4x Lightning Bolt
4x Lightning Helix
4x Chain Lightning
4x Lava Spike
4x Magma Jet
4x Fireblast
4x Chain of Plasma
4x Incinerate
4x Flamebreak
4x Suppression Field
8x Mountain
4x Sacred Foundry
4x Plateau
4x Battlefield Forge

The issues of this build.

1. Wasteland.
Is Wasteland an issue against burn? Yes and no.

No in that mana ammount will never be an issue. Any opponent will also have to lose a land to kill a dual. This deck lives on two mana, can function on one and has a faster clock either way. It would take an exceptional draw from goblins to stall out your land totally and still put any relevant presure one the board. Particularly since you can just kill it.

Color may be an issue. Both wasteland and Port will prevent you from casting your field. However I think that screwing with a burn decks mana will always be counterproductive for the person trying it, so this does not worry me a lot.

2. Painful mana base.
You will always have to take the shock from the Rav duals, its that simple. Battlefield Forge will hurt you to. Basically you will take an average of 4 damage from you lands over the average game. Thats only an issue vs aggro, and most people advocated fetches before, so I dont think its a large issue.

3. Chain of Plasma.
This isn't an issue with the splash, but I like chain for its ability to be incinerate at worst and a method of turning extra land into burn/casting spells for free at best. Any game where it comes back should be one you win.

4. No Price of Progress.
Thats a real hit as POP goes for 4 on average, regardless of how ready your opponent is for it.

[DOODLEBIRD]

The issues of this build.
I liked you first observational comments about this thread, but then I encountered something odd. Did I miss something ? How are you running 4 fireblast with only 12 total mountains (and 4 are non-basic) ?

it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[GRAH]

It's 16, because Foundry is, after its ability, a dual.

That said, I don't think Suppression Field is a good MD choice. It doesn't actually improve any bad matchups. Sure, it can be a house versus Goblins and Landstill. But this deck already goes 65/35 or better against both of those. It's a good card, but it's completely unnecessary.

The same goes with darkmindtome's 4x MD Vortexes. They're fun to play, but I don't even play 4 in the MD and SB combined. They're not particularly useful versus Goblins.

EDIT: Another note. I've replaced the Volcanic Hammers with Chain of Plasma again.

This is how I see it:

Chain of Plasma:
Pros:
-Instant
-Can hit creatures.
-At best, it'll do about 6 damage. At worst, it's an instant Flame Rift for 1 less damage.
Cons:
-A little less reliable because of the fact that it can be copied back. That never stops me from playing Chain Lightning vs. Goblins, though. They never copy it back.

Volcanic Hammer:
Pros:
-Can hit creatures.
-Always a solid 2 mana for 3 damage.
Cons:
-Sorcery.

Flame Rift:
Pros:
-Deals 4 damage.
Cons:
-Sorcery.
-Always deals damage to you. This isn't as much of a liability against, say, Solidarity, but it's a lot moreso of it versus any red deck.

I'm going with Chain of Plasma.

[darkmindtone]

I play 4 Vortex and 4 Flamebreak, because from deckbuilding perspective, I want to see these cards turn 3 almost every game against their respective targets (granted Vortex isn't steller versus other aggressive decks, but it's very much not dead either, and you better be happy for it when a Jitte comes around). Running 3 of these cards means it's much less likely for us to see them within our first 10 cards, which often will mean win or lose with this deck as it's not prepared to make the long haul generally.

[DOODLEBIRD]

It's 16, because Foundry is, after its ability, a dual.



EDIT: Another note. I've replaced the Volcanic Hammers with Chain of Plasma again.

This is how I see it:

Chain of Plasma:
Pros:
-Instant
-Can hit creatures.
-At best, it'll do about 6 damage. At worst, it's an instant Flame Rift for 1 less damage.
Cons:
-A little less reliable because of the fact that it can be copied back. That never stops me from playing Chain Lightning vs. Goblins, though. They never copy it back.

Volcanic Hammer:
Pros:
-Can hit creatures.
-Always a solid 2 mana for 3 damage.
Cons:
-Sorcery.

Flame Rift:
Pros:
-Deals 4 damage.
Cons:
-Sorcery.
-Always deals damage to you. This isn't as much of a liability against, say, Solidarity, but it's a lot moreso of it versus any red deck.

I'm going with Chain of Plasma.
Ah, yes the new duals. So 16 (4 more non-basic) is still on the low side for running 4 blast. But doesn't much matter as you took the time to explain many of other weaknesses of the deck.

So you went back to chain ? I still like hammer as I don't want to run the risk of them firing back, as many decks will have dead cards in hand just waiting to be tossed away, whereas I may have no other cards. And yes chain lightning is a problem as most can't or won't spend the man to bounce it back.

it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[Vimes]

The decks in this thread seem to be slowly moving towards a slightly more reactive stance. Things like Pithing Needle and Votex MD are not tradional choices for a burn build. Flamebreak is another good example.
Where do you see Pithing Needle? I'd agree with you if anyone actually played it MD. Vortex usually does 4-6 damage, so I don't see what your beef with that is. And as for Flamebreak, if it wasn't traditional in burn already, it sure is now.

I just realized that I can side in 14 of my 15 sideboard cards vs. Trix. My testing results have changed, obv.

[bigbear102]

I have played two Pithing Needle MD since GENCON. It is a reactive card, but I have yet to draw it and not have a good use for it. I agree that it is a reactive card, and that it should be in the SB though. The reason I play it main is because I have an 18 card SB, so since that's not quite legal, I threw 2 Needles and a Vortex main, and have loved it ever since.
I may try a more aggressive balls to the wall type style the next time I play, with nothing but damage spells, and everything reactive in the board. I have wanted to do that for a while, but it seemed kind of risky.

My build would probably look like this:

4x Lightning Bolt
4x Chain Lightning
4x Lava Spike
4x Incinerate
4x Fireblast
4x Flame Rift
4x Magma Jet
4x Chain of Plasma
4x Volcanic Hammer
4x Thunderbolt
2x Seal of Fire

18x Mountain

SB:
3x Vortex
4xx Flamebreak
3x Anarchy
5x REB/Pyroblast


I don't know how this will do, but I do know that it is blazingly fast, and has almost no dead topdecks, except for land, which is cut down a bit.

I have wanted to play a deck with straight burn for a long time, and believe that it may actually be able to do well. It has enough threats that it should have no problem killing on turn very consistently. Pre-board the curve stops at 2, with 3 land being optimal so that you can constistently do 6 damage on turn 3. I cut Fork purely because of the land drop, and no PoP. I don't know if it will work out (i have very little playtesting ability being at college).

What do you guys think of this strategy? And if you could playtest it a bit, I would appreciate it.

[Solaris]

As soon as i read the Alter Reality idea from PTBNL i thought "Wow, that guy really hit the nail on the head there!". Way to go.

As for sideboarding options splashing blue:
Sideboard
3 Pyrostatic Pillar
4 Pyroblast
4 Hydroblast
1 Flamebreak
3 Alter Reality

This is just a fast adaptation of my current sideboard, i'm sure there are many other options.

Three Alter Reality should be enough, considering they have flashback and REB support if needed.
As for Hydroblast, they can replace StP in the Goblin matchup, without giving life to the opponent.

[Chongz]

I don't see how you can play this deck without Mogg effing Fanatic, he 2 for 1's against Goblins...the most played deck, focusing your burn to their dome before they do amazing things with Ringleaders.

[ElvenTitz]

Im currently building my own burn. I will post a decklist, can you suggest anything for me.
ok here it goez
16 Mountains
4 Wasteland
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Fireblast
3 Fork
3 Ankh of Mishra
3 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Flame Rift
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Incinerate
Some tinny explanation :
3Sulfuric Vortex - All coz my maximalizm, simply like playing with it.
3Flame Rift - Look 3Sulfuric Vortex.
No fetches/4wasteland - Look 3Ank of Mishra.
Have some doubts : My metagame = 7 goblin decks, so i quickly realizing all lavamancer's useless against mogg fanatics. I thinking about moving on something like magma jet, chain of plasma or lava dart (maybe).

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

@ Bigbear, your lack of sweeper scares me. Flamebreak is the biggest reason we have a good match VS gobbos.

My sideboard is looking something like:

4 disenchant
3 POP
3 Pyroclasm
3 REB
2 Soricco

I've found that this looks really rather good against most of the expected field, and even lets me side out my flame rifts against gobbos! The addition of disenchant is really nice (very origional on my part, too), as it consolidates 8 SB slots into 4. (4 needle, 4 anarchy).

I'm not sure I like chain, I think I'm going to run thunderbolt over it in the list I'm working on for GP, as there's almost no drawback.

[Vimes]

@Solaris: I don't think anyone runs StP in Rw burn. I know I don't. And Sirocco is generally a better choice than Pyrostatic Pillar, as it doesn't hit you and there are more decks it's effective against.

@KillerWhiteRabbit: Do you really need all of those Pyroclasms? And if you're going Rw, you can use Lightning Helix over Thunderbolt or Chain of Plasma.

Flame deleted. Warning issued---Frogboy



Edited By frogboy on 1128116960

[ElvenTitz]

Flames deleted. While reading the entire thread may be excessive, you should read back at least a few pages, and if you're going to post a new build, you should indeed make sure you're not saying anything that hasn't already been said. Warning for flaming issued---Frogboy



Edited By frogboy on 1128116921

[Ridiculous Hat]

a message board is about mutual respect, and if you don't respect our ideas we won't respect your request for assistance. you came to us for help-- maybe you should look at the resources already in front of you, as they could be beneficial with a very small amount of time invested. if the people in this thread have already posted extensive logical discussion on particular card choices and you just choose to ignore it in favor of asking people to restate your thoughts for your convenience, don't expect too much of a good response.

Quoted flame edited out. Left the post since it's a good reminder. Come on, people, play nice---Frogboy



Edited By frogboy on 1128117082

[Fryed]

Hi, I've just recently gotten interested in the Legacy format, and I really appreciate the level of ideas here!

I really like the idea of the Blue splash for Alter Reality. Not having played much Legacy, if I am only splashing 3-4 of those for my SB, would just 4 Volcanic Islands and 4 mountain fetchlands in the main be enough, or would it be better to go 6-8 fetches?

[Vimes]

Fryed, if that's all you're splashing for, that mana base can definitely support it. I play the same mana base with 4 maindeck Lightning Helix and 4 sideboard Disenchant, and I rarely get screwed with that.

[Slay]

Alter Reality is a REALLY interesting idea, since it is essentially uncounterable. However, there isn't much that it does that Disenchant doesn't do, and the white splash allows for Lightning Helix, which kicks ass.

It's worth testing.
-Slay

[ElvenTitz]

Ridiculous Hat
I refuse to read most part of the forum and idiocy like in style of Hey guys, how about playing lava spike + glacial ray combo ! OMG ITS SO COOL!... And i wont, but i rade few 23-25 pages and found nothing convicing, only chattering in stlye - I like teh flamebreak, I dislike teh flamebreak, Flamebreak makes gobbos our best MU. Sorry but its not convicing me, post a few reasons if you think so, coz me dont think so. I posting this without offense, but mod's agression on newcomer (my 1st four post - get a warning) is outrageous. Go get some mannners. :(

You got a warning for flaming. We hand those out regardless of how new you are, because anyone should realize that it's going to be against the site rules. Further discussion about moderation should be discussed with a mod in Private Message.

You're also not going to get a whole lot of help if you don't read discussion that's gone before and then bring up old topics again---Frogboy

Double post merged. Please use the edit function---Frogboy

Oh and i apologize for pervious offtopical post. So i suppose i must to stay on discussion then. Todays topic : Alter Reality in burn.dec...
Theres a fewer things more dumber than lets play a blue card in a red deck without any action in all xpect given situations. Guys, stop listen to voices from trashcan !
Okay, to discussion :
@Fryed
1st : Tell me the reason why you play Alter Reality in a burn deck, change text on pyroblast ? cool, i like counter target spell for 3 mana in a burn deck.
2nd : Tell me, a grass or mushroms and where you get it ? I want same condition and i want to play Alter Reality and Absoult Law, but i dont like absoult law giving protection from red so id like to make it giving all creatures protection from green. OH YES, now they cant use rancors. YAY, sorry for offtop again. So explain plz why you think Alter Reality is good.

My opinion on the given information :
Okay, enought sarcasm, mods will do their job regardless and i dont want to look stupid, so herez my thoughts.
I think Alter Reality is bad idea. Why ? Disenchant is much better, white also gives you options to use Lightning Helix (personally i consider this card A-CARD-THAT-DO-NOTHING in a burn, but its just my personal).
I even think that a green splash may suffice (i play mono-red burn that considered suboptimal by some dude without proper explanation on perv page) it gives you naturalize and another sideboard options that yet must be explored.



Edited By frogboy on 1128280643

[KillerWhiteRabbit]

Ridiculous Hat
I refuse to read most part of the forum and idiocy like in style of Hey guys, how about playing lava spike + glacial ray combo ! OMG ITS SO COOL!... And i wont, but i rade few 23-25 pages and found nothing convicing, only chattering in stlye - I like teh flamebreak, I dislike teh flamebreak, Flamebreak makes gobbos our best MU. Sorry but its not convicing me, post a few reasons if you think so, coz me dont think so. I posting this without offense, but mod's agression on newcomer (my 1st four post - get a warning) is outrageous. Go get some mannners. :(

It's probably a good idea to be nice to the mods, as they probably know something about the forum that you may not. Reading the forum is pretty essential to understanding the topic, and although you might think an idea is stupid, it may be the next big thing. Being the guy known for flaming gobbos in thier early stages would kind of suck now, wouldn't it?

I realize that english is not your first language (I hope to god it isn't), but it would still be appreciated if you ran your post through a spell checker.

Cheers!

EDIT: Sorry guys, frogboy and Elventitz beat me to the punch.

[ElvenTitz]

@KillerWhiteRabbit
You mean, if i disagree with some idea i shouldnt post my opinion coz i must fear becoming guy that flaming gobbos at the begining. I simply told you my opinion, sorry if it looks offensive. sorry for offtopics wich actually not offtopic. Okay, lets stop this or we will never end.

[GRAH]

I want to address something Zilla said in the GP Philly thread.


The main problem here is that Burn just isn't consistent enough. It smashes Goblins and Landstill, except when it doesn't. The "except when it doesn't" happens too often because the deck has no reach in the lategame. Don't get me wrong; you know I've done a metric fuckton of development and testing with the archetype. The problem I run into time and time again is that deck plays very much more like combo and less like true aggro. Because of this, it is a) prone to hate, and b) moreso prone to "fizzling". I think these shortcomings would be fine, if the deck also had the clock that true combo does; in other words, a consistent turn 2-4 kill. It does not, however, and because of this the deck is unlikely to prove itself consistent enough in a two day tourney like GP: Philly.

I've been saying this for a while: Burn plays almost EXACTLY like Solidarity. It has the same general favored/unfavored matchups. That said, I don't know if I can agree with Zilla's idea of a slow finisher. There's not much I can think of to fill that slot, other than Grim Lavamancer, which is not a good choice for reasons we've covered repeatedly.

[DOODLEBIRD]

I even think that a green splash may suffice (i play mono-red burn that considered suboptimal by some dude without proper explanation on perv page) it gives you naturalize and another sideboard options that yet must be explored.
The dude who responded about your deck on the prev page must have been flamming and deleted as I don't see much.
But your deck is on the questionable side, it going to be rough against gobbos especailly. The ankh, vortex, and rift are all hurting you as well and may not therefore be you best option; aslo the mancer are to vulnerable, they won't last enough to be worth it. I have tried soem similar designs, but hey fare no better than the more safe and solid approaches (there are some of my others thoughout here).
As for splashing any other color, it's fun to entertain, but I don't believe it's needed, and more often than not it just weakens the Burn design. But by no means have me disuade you from trying a splash, it may yield just what it needs to get into another genre.
it's all good
thanks and enjoy

Edited. Please use proper grammar. -Di

[ElvenTitz]

My metagame is seven gobbos deck, one english breakfast, few scepter chants ported from extended ones, some burn decks (one playing almost evry tourney) an affinity deck, charbelcher and some random landstills. I understand you point of view and partially agree. Ankh dont hurts me that much, Sulfuric Vortex deals much more damage to opponent first (i tried to play choker but stick with the vortex) and flame rift that deals the damage but only when i want it. Yes, the last one is questionable enought, but deck is no slower than more fast analohgs. If you have any solutions on the ways of improvment the deck share them with me please.

[DOODLEBIRD]

My metagame is seven gobbos deck, one english breakfast, few scepter chants ported from extended ones, some burn decks (one playing almost evry tourney) an affinity deck, charbelcher and some random landstills. I understand you point of view and partially agree. Ankh dont hurts me that much, Sulfuric Vortex deals much more damage to opponent first (i tried to play choker but stick with the vortex) and flame rift that deals the damage but only when i want it. Yes, the last one is questionable enought, but deck is no slower than more fast analohgs. If you have any solutions on the ways of improvment the deck share them with me please.
Well, I should probably see your SB before making suggestions. But here : I'd drop the rift and mancer for 4 earthquake (or flamebreak, but with wasteland I'd be wary) and 3 volcanic hammer or chain of plasma (I'd pick chain in you current design). This should help great if you facing all those gobbos. Since you pointed out your local meta, I'm not why you want 3 vortex MD ?
Let's see the SB, but for now that's the mods I'd make to keep it as close to your list as possible.
it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[ElvenTitz]

Vortex = many damage.
I still fail to understnad the athmoshpere the mods creating over here like you make some minor violation = you get warning or ban, a mod must be a friend for user, not punisher, ok ok i dont discussing the mod policy (not that i care that much)
I moved my list here from perv page :
16 Mountains
4 Wasteland
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Fireblast
3 Fork
3 Ankh of Mishra
3 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Flame Rift
4 Grim Lavamancer - ok, i think now its 4 Magma Jet, tested today -- helped alot
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Incinerate
sb :
3 Cave-In - gobbos smasher
4 Pyroclasm - gobbos smash
2 Phyrexian Furnace
3 Crash
3 Pitching Needle

[DOODLEBIRD]

Vortex = many damage.
I still fail to understnad the athmoshpere the mods creating over here like you make some minor violation = you get warning or ban, a mod must be a friend for user, not punisher, ok ok i dont discussing the mod policy (not that i care that much)
I moved my list here from perv page :
16 Mountains
4 Wasteland
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Fireblast
3 Fork
3 Ankh of Mishra
3 Sulfuric Vortex
3 Flame Rift
4 Grim Lavamancer - ok, i think now its 4 Magma Jet, tested today -- helped alot
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Incinerate
sb :
3 Cave-In - gobbos smasher
4 Pyroclasm - gobbos smash
2 Phyrexian Furnace
3 Crash
3 Pitching Needle
Yeah, this site is a little tight. I got a warning for posting decklist where I shouldn't, double posted, or started a less than original thread, or sum such; I not a flamer and have taken many aimed my way, but yeah you can get warned for most any infraction here. I left for a while, but came back as I wanted to discuss burn here some more (though I used an existing thread and kept my post gathered and pointful).
Anyway, I think the jets are solid choice for your deck (probablr better than what I suggested, I just didn't want to lower your damage ratio any more between my two suggestions). I'm suprised you use no sweepers MD with all the gobbos you face. I'm not a fan of rift and since you have other cards that do you damage I was avoiding that card.
Also do the wastes help you often ? Why phyrexian furnace ?
And not many prefer cave-in, but another has advocated it a bit. Do you face blue control/combo ever ?
it's all good
thanks and enjoy

[midnightAce]

Ridiculous Hat
I refuse to read most part of the forum and idiocy like in style of Hey guys, how about playing lava spike + glacial ray combo ! OMG ITS SO COOL!... And i wont, but i rade few 23-25 pages and found nothing convicing, only chattering in stlye - I like teh flamebreak, I dislike teh flamebreak, Flamebreak makes gobbos our best MU. Sorry but its not convicing me, post a few reasons if you think so, coz me dont think so. I posting this without offense, but mod's agression on newcomer (my 1st four post - get a warning) is outrageous. Go get some mannners. :(

You got a warning for flaming. We hand those out regardless of how new you are, because anyone should realize that it's going to be against the site rules. Further discussion about moderation should be discussed with a mod in Private Message.

You're also not going to get a whole lot of help if you don't read discussion that's gone before and then bring up old topics again---Frogboy

Double post merged. Please use the edit function---Frogboy

Oh and i apologize for pervious offtopical post. So i suppose i must to stay on discussion then. Todays topic : Alter Reality in burn.dec...
Theres a fewer things more dumber than lets play a blue card in a red deck without any action in all xpect given situations. Guys, stop listen to voices from trashcan !
Okay, to discussion :
@Fryed
1st : Tell me the reason why you play Alter Reality in a burn deck, change text on pyroblast ? cool, i like counter target spell for 3 mana in a burn deck.
2nd : Tell me, a grass or mushroms and where you get it ? I want same condition and i want to play Alter Reality and Absoult Law, but i dont like absoult law giving protection from red so id like to make it giving all creatures protection from green. OH YES, now they cant use rancors. YAY, sorry for offtop again. So explain plz why you think Alter Reality is good.

My opinion on the given information :
Okay, enought sarcasm, mods will do their job regardless and i dont want to look stupid, so herez my thoughts.
I think Alter Reality is bad idea. Why ? Disenchant is much better, white also gives you options to use Lightning Helix (personally i consider this card A-CARD-THAT-DO-NOTHING in a burn, but its just my personal).
I even think that a green splash may suffice (i play mono-red burn that considered suboptimal by some dude without proper explanation on perv page) it gives you naturalize and another sideboard options that yet must be explored.
The reason why Alter Reality is discussed are much more than what you have covered here. Let's start with the meta game.

While you have an established meta to work with, Legacy GPs and GPTs are virtually impossible to predict. This thread is about creating the most generalized Burn deck, so that it may thrive under any condition/meta.

While Disenchant handles a great deal of hate thrown at this deck, Alter Reality has the valuable Flashback ability working for it. Changing Chill to "All blue spells cost 2 more to play." spells win. It can act as a two mana counterspell, and can deal with CoP Red, Absolute Law (The example you mentioned is only half baked, you forgot to mention that after the text is change, you can now Flamebreak the living day light out of them." That is very important to Goblins splashing white as well for Absolute Law.) etc. Since it's also blue, very few decks will bring in REB against a Burn deck, with say 3 in the SB, you can essentially deal with 6 peice of hate, and is immune to hand distruction.

The forum's casual atmosphere is what's neat about it, you complain that the posts on this forum is too casual, yet you complain about the moderations done by Mods on this forum. So strict is bad, casual is bad, well, I'm sorry that the perfect balance is hard to find, but I KNOW that the Mods are trying and doing their job. While it's may or may not be true that English is not your primary language, guess what, it's not mine either. However, I make my best effort, flip through online dictionary and such to make sure that my posts are well constructed, well spelled, and grammarically correct. You want manner? Here it is. The least you could do is the same. Honestly it's not that hard to put some periods and commas on the right place, and it's not that hard to spell please, and it cerntainly isn't hard to use the Shift key.


EDIT: There are some people out there who thinks strict moderation is bad, and that sentence such as "me thinks gob no problem easy matchup just flame break" is entirely acceptable. Well, it's not. Look, the thing is, check out the size of this thread, if somebody enters this thread with the hope that his/her burn deck can benefit from the discussion here, and what he/she sees are junk like that, does it encourage them to stay with this thread? Does it encourage YOU to stay in this thread? For those of you who doesn't know, I keep track of the AngelStompy thread in Open, a whopping 30 some page of heavy content and multiple deck lists. After a long day, it's actually very difficult to make sense of what people are saying if they all typed like that. As far as I can see, most of the warnings were given out after the users have repeatly chose not to follow the site rules, that's very fair in my point of view. No Mod will jump at you for using lol in your post, or say F/I instead of Fire/Ice, but when you start constructing posts that are bearly coherent and contains more spelling mistakes than a Grade 6 kid, then of course the Mods have to let you know about it through a warning. This applies to everybody, I'm not flaming anyone here. I apologize for the off-topic-ness of this Edit part.

[martyr]

I really like the idea of Alter Reality in burn, but I also really like the idea of Lightning Helix...is there any reason you can't play both? I realize that adding more non-basics increases your vulnerability to hate, as well as your own PoPs, but would it be possible to reduce the deck's reliance on red mana to the extent you can have a single basic plains or island in play (or both) and not screw yourself?

A mana base like this:

4x Flooded Strand
2x Wooded Foothills
1x Island
1x Plains
1x Tundra
2x Volcanic Island
2x Plateau
7x Mountain

Could work out pretty well for splashing both. It's just an idea, anyway.

[GRAH]

You don't need to splash both. Lightning Helix does NOT merit the white splash. Disenchant does. Playing Alter Reality and Disenchant is not only redundant, but also actively screws you over.

[Peter_Rotten]

This thing is bad. It has become really bad.

First, it's too long to be of much use.
Second, it is filled with worthless posts, undeveloped posts, and redundant posts.
Third, it is more trouble than it's worth. It really has become a mod nightmare. It seems like every other post, frogboy must mod.

We are done here. Maybe a burn aficionado can PM a new starting post to a mod and we can try again.