No critiques on my deck?
Printable View
No critiques on my deck?
@ Pltnmngl
Quote:
No critiques on my deck?
I'm not completely familiar with your metagame, although I just read a few posts that show you may be in an undeveloped meta, 'homebrew + goblins', where maindeck PoP is useless (odd, but interesting), but I'll offer advice if you want it. I test burn a good deal; it is one of the first decks I run against with anything new deck I brew simply because I learn a lot about a new deck by playing it against burn. Additionally, played correctly, burn has better odds against more decks than most people would be willing to give it credit--some decks in fact just suck against burn (and they take the chance they won't see burn at the top tables, which is usually the case). I hope my advice will be useful.Quote:
3 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Pyrostatic Pillar
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Flame Rift
4 Flamebreak
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Fireblast
4 Chain Lightning
4 Incinerate
4 Magma Jet
19 Mountain
4 Price of Progress
3 Pithing Needle
2 Smash to Smithereens
2 Shattering Spree
2 Pyrostatic Pillar
2 Cursed Scroll
My goal was to maximize resource advantage (both life, permanent and virtual card advantage) while minimizing player interaction and keeping on a slight budget.
I question Sulfuric Vortex and Pyrostatic Pillar. I don't think they should be maindeck, although they can be strong sideboard choices. Neither of these are maximizing resource advantage in my eyes -- they are strictly good against certain decks and strictly poor against others. Sure, you might try to call it virtual card advantage, but in an undeveloped meta, the average lifeloss incurred through these cards really can count as a loss in turns (and a loss in mana resources and cards that would have been drawn otherwise). Both of these cards still hurt you, cost a good deal (you've adjusted proportions, but that doesn't mean they are worth the mana), and I don't think they really shore up weaknesses effectively enough. Keep those in the side.
If I was maximizing resources, I would move just slightly towards the sligh-burn model (although, depending on the creatures, I'd still call it burn). It enables you to play more roles, and it is honestly more consistent and generically useful against anything and everything.
Without PoP in the main, I would suggest this shell:
Lands: 19
19 Mountain
Creatures: 8
4 Mogg Fanatic
4 Keldon Marauders
3-for-1 Spells: 16
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
Unique/Utility Burn: 8
4 Magma Jet
4 Fireblast
Open slots: 9
I'll be happy to provide further explanation for any of the cards if you want. The creature choices may seem odd, but they are never dead and both have a 1 for 1 ratio at the very bare minimum (like Magma Jet), and often even more. I actually think of them as Utility Burn, and they are especially powerful against decks that run creatures themselves.
Given that you face some creature-heavy decks, Flamebreak seems very strong. These would normally be PoP in my list.
4 Flamebreak
That would leave 5 more slots.
Incinerate (as you have in your list) isn't a bad choice at all. For these 5 slots, I have to admit that I am somewhat unorthodox, but it comes from a good deal of testing (we have dozens of burn decks that have been tested in our database).
I have to admit that Sensei's Divining Top as 1-2 in Burn has been very good for us. Limit diminishing returns by running few, but when you do draw one, it almost always amazing. It isn't scry, but it is damn good when you are pushing for the last 2-3 burn spells.
I have been very pleased with 4x Street Wraith. This isn't life conservative, but it certainly isn't as bad as some might think (nothing like Vortex or Pillar). I rarely see more than 15 cards per game (average is closer to 12 or 13). I usually pay no more than 2 life per game (the average is actually less), and I get immediate 56 cards. Street Wraith is fundamentally different from Baubles in that I get to see my cards 'now', and because it isn't really isn't very counterable (outside of stifle), and it has proven to function as a worthwhile investment to drop to 56 cards. The card quality of not filling those 4 slots with less effective burn spells has been worth the the 2 life per game (or less).
That doesn't mean you will always pay the average, but you get an average benefit of having 56 for an average cost of less than 2 life per game and whatever loss in turns that could bring about (which has been worth it). Test it. Learn how to mulligan with Street Wraiths, and you'll see they are quite extraordinary.
peace,
4eak
ŋ? Iīm confused :frown: Didnīt Type 1.5 arrive in 2004? Wasnīt Necropotence banned ?Quote:
Originally Posted by rufus
@ 4eak:
I think that Street Wraith or others like manamorphose and baubles shouldnīt be run. With these cards you should cut down your lands to keep on the rate. So, itīs more difficult to know about keeping your hand.
About wraith, I would only think on it, if I hoped for many Ichorid decks. It will make tarmos bigger too soon and as you said, stifles can also hurt you. If I didnīt hope for many agro decks (so, the 2 life lose is not worrying), i would prefer to run flame rift instead. Well, I think there are many options less problematic.
About sensei, I also find it bad :P In my opinion, you shouldnīt turn the deck slower and you are also losing a card (no cantrip) On the other hand, manipulation is not very important in this deck and you would need fetchs (stifle again) to take real advantage of it.
Here's my Burn deck on MWS.
// Lands
20 [UNH] Mountain
// Creatures
4 [10E] Mogg Fanatic
// Spells
4 [FD] Magma Jet
4 [CHK] Lava Spike
4 [IA] Incinerate
4 [R] Lightning Bolt
4 [BOK] Flames of the Blood Hand
4 [DS] Flamebreak
4 [VI] Fireblast
4 [TSP] Rift Bolt
4 [LG] Chain Lightning
// Sideboard
SB: 4 [SC] Pyrostatic Pillar
SB: 4 [IA] Pyroblast
SB: 3 [SC] Sulfuric Vortex
SB: 4 [GP] Shattering Spree
I know Price of Progress isn't there. I totally forgot about it. I might replace the Incinerates with those. I run 20 lands to keep the mana smooth for the 3cc spells, with Flames of the Blood Hand something I'm very fond of as it gets around Counterbalance and life gain. I'd like to fit in Sudden Shocks somewhere, I was thinking of replacing Incinerates with them, but those slots will be taken by Price of Progress...
@ Garban
You'll notice that the last sentence of my previous post shows that you have to learn how to mulligan with Street Wraiths. The lands were cut from 20 to 19. Goto 18 if you want.Quote:
I think that Street Wraith or others like manamorphose and baubles shouldnīt be run. With these cards you should cut down your lands to keep on the rate. So, itīs more difficult to know about keeping your hand.
You'll also see that I'm not advocating baubles or manamorphose. Their playability is too conditional for a general field. Street Wraith isn't really conditional. Beyond the mulligan-learning curve, it is a very clear trade.
Stifle is not a dead card against burn (although, it isn't a good one against burn either). Rift Bolt, Mogg Fanatic, Keldon Marauders, and Barbarian Ring (not in the deck, but still a common choice) are also affected, and that isn't including our sideboard options. Stifle is a poor argument against street wraith, especially as it is usually Force-fodder.Quote:
About wraith, I would only think on it, if I hoped for many Ichorid decks. It will make tarmos bigger too soon and as you said, stifles can also hurt you. If I didnīt hope for many agro decks (so, the 2 life lose is not worrying), i would prefer to run flame rift instead.
The tarmogoyf issue is certainly more relevant, but not very persuasive either. It might not matter in the first place if we have street wraith in the GY, as our opponent may already have a creature in theirs. Additionally, in this proposed deck, you'll see that we are already running Mogg Fanatic and Keldon Marauders. Goyf would get the pump no matter what usually.
The only real problem you've shown is that it makes deckbuilding and mulliganing a bit more complex. Adding that complexity to burn is honestly not very problematic: burn is so simple a deck that it can easily afford a bump in minimum player skill requirements.Quote:
Well, I think there are many options less problematic.
Test it. I didn't believe it either until I did. It is nice to have fetches, but they aren't even necessary in practice. A singleton top has zero diminishing returns, and it does a fine job of digging at a time when you already have plenty of mana available.Quote:
About sensei, I also find it bad :P
It is functionally a colorless cantrip that provides vital information advantage in the last stages of the game (which is exactly when you really need this card).
Top has been a card that we've notoriously undervalued in general magic. Don't let history repeat itself; go test it first.
I'd argue that Sensei's Divining Top and Wraith's are not slowing the deck down at all. Like Magma Jet, these cards improve the quality of your draw by a large margin, essentially making the deck just as or even more effective than without the filtering.Quote:
In my opinion, you shouldnīt turn the deck slower
I also think you've misassigned Burn's role in Legacy. Even if I did make the deck just a hair slower (which I'm not even claiming), it still might be worth it.
Pure burn is definitely a combo deck, a 4th turn combo deck on average (and I'm being generous), and that's assuming you've not been disrupted. It is easily locked out by tons of cards designed against it for years (it has been a common strategy), and its clock is not impressive in this format.
Burn is a 2nd or 3rd tier deck (we just have to face that fact), and it is often the underdog (even if isn't as awful as some think). Unleashing your hand is not how this deck can win anymore; because you are often in a losing position, then you must play a moderate and even controlled approach.
Burn is not fast a deck, and successful pilots and deckbuilders will not be gunning for 3rd turn suicide speeds unless they are forced to do it. For burn to be viable, you have sit, sandbag, and even control the board in some cases, and very carefully chip away at your opponent. Speed is no longer a strength of Burn; Burn's strengths include its raw internal consistency, virtual CA production in certain forms, and most importantly its reach.
Sligh, in fact, is the natural evolution of the deck (and there are several reasons why it has been more effective than burn in tournaments). Burn with Sligh-like cards of Fanatic/Marauders keeps its near immunity to board control, deadly topdecks, and its strength of reach, but adds another dimension to the deck, enabling more lines of play and flexible ways to win.
Adding card filtering improves the odds we see the best card of a given function. A card like Top improves consistency, and it sticks to the strengths of burn.
I'd sacrifice speed at this point, moving from 4th turn to 5th turn, for resilience, better options, and versatile threats. Burn's fundamental turn is already too slow for Legacy. Slowing it down might be worth the rewards we'd gain. We really do have to approach this deck differently if we want to win with it.
peace,
4eak
Very well said. Those are exactly my thoughts when I fleshed out my Burn build. Why try to go for an average Turn 3 kill when Turn 4 or 5 is good enough. The deck won't be racing faster decks anyway, and Turn 4 or 5 is still pretty quick against most decks.
Hi magic-hollics,
I saw the original "=^_^= Kawaii =^_^= Burn =^_^=" by Vladimir Mishustin, here http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=24375 , and I think i can make it better.
I habe been played last week with this deck, and i never have felt so winner like now.
This is the result, its competitive cause is really fast:
(20)
9 Mountain
4 Wooded Foothills (those are for Barbarian Ring Threshold)
4 Bloodstained Mire
3 Barbarian Ring
(4)
4 Keldon Marauders (5 damage for 2. Mogg Fanatic its cheap, but it deals 3 damage or less most of the time)
(18)
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Shard Volley (I was skeptic about this card, but it works very well. 4 is bad when you might draw 3 of them)
3 Price of Progress (I don't like when this is not useful. Some deck dont use lands eather. I have 1 on SB).
4 Magma Jet
4 Fireblast
(18)
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Flame Rift (This replaces Mogg Fanatic, but its fast).
2 Browbeat (This maybe would be changed by Flames of the Blood Hand, cause 4 its a god aount of damage, and saves the lack of gain life cards).
SB
1 Price of Progress
4 Ensnaring Bridge (Flamebreak don`t hurt tarmos and stalkers, and this stops progenitus).
4 Scald
4 Smash to Smithereens (Challice, Trinisphere and other are bad experiences)
2 Shattering Spree
Average Casting Cost =1,37 (2,7)
(Real) mana curve
0 x 4
1 x 19
2 x 15
3 x 2
The Deck hits oneself i think 6 damage in a game, but is fast an stable. I'll be thanful for your comments and advices.
I dont try more sligh like Hellspark cause its not eficient (6 x 4 mana), and reckless abandon its slow and dependient of context.
Edson.
Lol, this again?
First off, why 1 PoP in the board? Most decks use lands, and your board is for improving your hard matches, not increasing consistency.
Next, the deck needs to ditch shard volley in favor of 1 PoP, and 2 Mogg fanatics. Otherwise, your deck loses to chalice (not that 1 change in CA's gonna do anything, it just doubly stinks to have lost a land for a lightning bolt).
I'd take out your little lands-fueling-lands hoax. It'll decrease your consistency due to shuffling away the rewards of your magma jets. Chances are, if you put a card on the bottom, you want it there.
From there, I'd experiment with everything from ankh of mishra to winter orb in the flame rift spot.
EDIT:
Also, from the title, he himself probably entered the deck, and wanted it to be looked at so he titled it as such. It really isn't very original.
If you have all those fetchlands, might I suggest 1-2 taigas to power Krosan Grip from the board? You never have to fetch one if you don't need it, and then you have an easy out to spheres and chalices.
First of, I'd like to say hi to all here at the source.
I've been lurking around without a user account for some time now, gathering information about all kind of decks, and thought it would be about time to start posting myself.
Yesterday I played in my first tournament (legacy of course) since about 3 years (I've been playing magic since 1998). I thought I'd drop in a quick report about my matches and experiences while playing my burn deck through 6 rounds of Swiss.
First a little build up on how I came to playing a straightforward burn deck.
As stated before, I have little to no experience with the current decks or tournament scene. Reading up on things here was about my only source of information. Before the tournament, 5 decks where in the running: Dredge Ichorid, BUG Landstill, Armageddon Stax, Pox and Burn.
In testing, it soon became apparent that I should not be playing Ichorid or Landstill (simply because my lack of experience with the decks and lack of knowledge of the field). Pox looked strong, but too often I found myself emptying the opponents hand, clearing away his lands and not finding a kill condition quickly enough to finish the game before he could recover. Out was Pox.
The day of the tournament I still had 2 contenders. I played a testing game with my Stax deck, had a godly Ancient Tomb + Mox Diamond into Trinisphere opening, dropped City of Traitors and Crucible of Worlds on the second turn and was looking strong... only to loose the game by only drawing lands, a secondary Trinisphere and secondary Crucible for the next 7 or so turns... needless to say I lost horrible (to Trinket Mage beatdown, how bad can it get!). After that, playing Stax just didn't seem right, so Burn it was.
Here's the pile I ended up playing:
main deck:
3 Browbeat
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
4 Flame Javelin
3 Flamebreak
4 Incinerate
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Magma Jet
3 Price of Progress
4 Rift Bolt
2 Barbarian Ring
17 Mountain
sideboard:
3 Ensnaring Bridge
1 Flamebreak
1 Price of Progress
4 Scald
3 Shattering Spree
3 Smash to Smithereens
I chose not to play any creatures to give my opponent as much dead cards as possible.
The tournament turned out to be rather successful because when it began, 51 players sat down to give it a shot at top 8. That's 6 rounds of play. I figured I'd be happy with a 3-3 finish. Here's how it went for me:
Round 1: BGW Rock with Sensei's Divining Top
Game 1: Not much to say here. Despite his turn 1 Top and Kitchen Finks that slowed it down a little, I burned enough to finish it.
(sideboard: +3 Smash to Smithereens, +3 Shattering Spree, -3 Flamebreak, -3 Price of Progress)
The sideboarding here was a big mistake. I didn't see any non-basic land this game (game 2 showed him having a lot of non-basics in there) and some artifacts... I overboarded artifact hate badly
Game 2: This game is really close, I have sufficient tempo with my burn, but a Kitchen Finks found via another turn 1 Top slowed the game down enough for him to find a CoP: Red with 3 open mana... Needless to say that it just went downhill from there.
(sideboard: +3 Price of Progress, -3 Shattering Spree)
Game 3: Sadly, this last game was a blowout. He gets a first turn Top yet again and uses it to find a turn 3 CoP: Red. The Top keeps finding mana for the next couple of turns and soon a Kitchen Finks is added with 4 mana open. Beatdown starts and he always leaves at least 5 mana open for the CoP.
0-1-0 (1-2 in games)
Not the start I hoped for, next round will be better!
Round 2: 4c Landstill
Game 1: I get a good fast draw and burn him down quickly to 4 life (with some help from his fetchlands). He has 3 Force of Wills to counter some burn, but sees no other countermagic. He gets 8 life when Swordsing his own Nantuko Monasteries, but cannot find answers quickly enough and dies to even more burn.
(sideboard: +4 Scald, +1 Price of Progress, -3 Flamebreak, -1 Magma Jet, -1 Flame Javelin)
Game 2: I keep a nice up tempo hand with one Scald in it. On turn 2, I manage to resolve Scald despite him digging for a Force of Will with Brainstorm. I draw a second Scald and manage to resolve it on turn 3 (after a Chain Lightning I baited got countered). He plays another Mishra's Factory next turn (he has Factory x 2 and Tundra x 2 now) and passes the turn. I draw, burn him down to 12 and pass the turn with 2 mana open. He tries Fact or Fiction (taking 4 damage from Scalds) at end of my turn, I respond with a Price of Progress for 8, sealing the game.
1-1-0 (3-2 in games)
Round 3: Counter Top
Game 1: This is blowout. He can't get his Counterbalance on the table in time and I just draw my burn too fast.
(sideboard: +4 Scald, +1 Price of Progress, -3 Flamebreak, -2 Magma Jet)
Game 2: This game saw my oppenents wet dreams come true. He opened with land, Mox, Counterbalance. Followed this up with Top next turn, making al my quick 1 mana burn spells useless. Turn 3 saw a Tinker Mage fetching another Top. I couldn't kill the mage because I only had 1 mana burn on Sorcery speed and let it be. His turn 3 saw a Jitte + equiping and hitting me for 2... The 2 Jitte counters quickly grew to about 8 and that was too much life for me to handle. The Mage went all the way.
(sideboard: -3 Browbeat, +3 Smash to Smithereens)
Game 3: I had a good start here again, with an early Scald, but Counter/Top was on the table quickly too. It was a race then. He played a Dark Confidant to gain card advantage with his Top. This allowed me to force him in taking damage some way or another, either by getting a spell with some cost on top of his deck to draw with the Confidant, taking Scald damage with Top activations or just taking my burn spells. He was at 2 life when I reacted to his draw with a Price of Progress (for about 8 then, knowing he just put a land on top of his deck to draw with the Confidant). He reacted by activating Top with a Wasteland, I reacted to the Top activation with a Fireblast to the dome. He calculated a little (he had a Swords in hand to play with his Mox Diamond to gain some life and get rid of the Confidant) and saw it was enough to get hime to 0 and that was it.
2-1-0 (5-3 in games)
Round 4: UG ThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh
Game 1: This game is close, with me being able to burn him to 2 the turn he can attack me for lethal damage with his 2 Nimble Mongoose and Tarmogoyf. If only I had a Flamebreak, it would have been a different story.
(sideboard: +4 Scald, +1 Flamebreak, +3 Ensnaring Bridge, -3 Browbeat, -3 Price of Progress, -2 Flame Javelin)
Game 2: Here I made a big mistake. I did not mulligan. My opening hand was Scald, Rift Bolt, Lightning Bolt and 4 Mountains. I figured I couldn't draw that much more land... the next 3 draws were Mountain, Incinerate, Mountain, Barbarian Ring. Game over.
2-2-0 (5-5 in games)
Though this seems to be a hard matchup, with Daze and Spellsnare countering early and a quick clock from him, I feel a bit bad about the mulligan call. I wonder how it would've ended if I mulliganed.
Round 5: random BG beats
This was my opponents first tournament and his deck was some sort of BG extended/type2 beats (Birds of Paradise, Call of the Herd, Tombstalker, some new green Hydra creature), supported by some equipement (1 Jitte and 2 Swords of Fire and Ice). He managed to get a 2-2-0 record with it.
Game 1: I start with the standard suspended Rift Bolt on turn 1. He plays a Jitte turn 2, Call of the Herd on 3. I burn the token. He flashes it back and I burn it again. No other creature follows quickly and I burn him down to 0.
(sideboard: +3 Smash to Smithereens, +3 Ensnaring Bridge, +1 Flamebreak, -3 Price of Progress, -4 Magma Jet)
Game 2: He starts quickly with a Birds, followed by Kitchen Finks. He plays a second Birds and I Flamebreak to clear (except for the smaller Finks now). I get an Ensnaring Bridge down. I kill the Finks and another creature with a second Flamebreak and bring my hand down to 2 cards. He plays another Finks, Tombstalker and Yavimaya Elder and they all stare at me from behind my Bridge. My handsize stays down to maximum 1 card and I burn it out from there.
3-2-0 (7-5 in games)
Mission accomplished, 3 wins made. Now I wanted that 4th one.
Round 6: Landstill
Game 1: This one was over in a hurry. I just drew too much burn for him to stabilize.
(sideboard: +4 Scald, +1 Price of Progress, -3 Flamebreak, -1 Flame Javelin)
Game 2: Even more amazing. I had a hand with 1 Mountain, 1 Scald and 5 one mana burn spells (1 Chain Lighting, 2 Rift Bolt, 1 Lightning Bolt and 1 Lava Spike). My first draw netted me another Mountain and away I went. I drew another Lightning bolt, Mountain and Price of Progress to seal the deal on turn 4. Just amazing draws both games here. I think the match lasted 10 minutes.
4-2-0 (9-5 in games)
So, at the end of the day I'm very happy to finish 11th of the field with the best tie-breakers of the 4-2-0 bunch. But mostly, I had a blast playing an almost no thinking deck ;-)
In retrospect, I would chance a couple of things though:
- Price of Progress would go into the main as a 4-off, just too good.
- Flamebreak would be reduced to 2 maindeck, but 2 sideboard slots go to it.
- The 6 artifact removal spells in the board go and will be replaced by 3 Krosan Grip and 3 Tormod's Crypt.
- I'll play some (3/4) fetchland in the main along with 2 Taiga to support the Grips.
So I think this would be the deck I'd try it out with now:
main deck:
3 Browbeat
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
4 Flame Javelin
2 Flamebreak
4 Incinerate
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Magma Jet
4 Price of Progress
4 Rift Bolt
2 Barbarian Ring
11 Mountain
2 Taiga
4 Wooded Foothills
sideboard:
3 Ensnaring Bridge
3 Tormod's Crypt
3 Krosan Grip
2 Flamebreak
4 Scald
That's about it, comments on my build or other suggestion to improve my playing are of course greatly appreciated.
Props:
- to all my opponents who where more than great
- Bert for helping me decide on which deck to play
- David for helping me with some playtesting at home
- Outpost Antwerp for hosting the event
- everyone of the organizing staff for running a smooth tournament
Greetz and thanks for reading
@ caenel
Thanks for the report.
Wow. I've never seen this card before. It looks pretty freaking sweet, and your report certainly made it sound pretty good too. What do you think a turn 2 Scald nets you in an average game against CB/Top.dec?Quote:
Scald
I'll be testing it.
Haven't you found these a bit difficult to cast at 3cc? 2x would look like the max I'd wanna run.Quote:
Flame Javelin
peace,
4eak
Nobody would ever take out swords if they're running creatures themselves, cause they can swords their own guys. Against red, the correct strategy is to give up cards for life. Incidentally, if you lose to red, you probably feel like giving up cards for life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garban
@4eak
On average a Scald on turn 2 would net you between 4-6 damage against a blue based deck (like Landstill/CounterTop). With Scald in play, most activations of the Top would cause 1 damage too, a great added benefit. These figures are far from stellar, but the added bonus when dropping a turn 2 Scald is that the opponent has to think with every play she makes to avoid taking extra damage. This becomes crucial when they hit below 10 lives, because they know that one barrage of your spells could finish them (and a simple counterspell would do 2 damage as well).Quote:
Wow. I've never seen this card before. It looks pretty freaking sweet, and your report certainly made it sound pretty good too. What do you think a turn 2 Scald nets you in an average game against CB/Top.dec?Quote:
Scald
I think running 3 Javelins main deck are enough, but I really like them. They are great combined with Fireblast at end of turn to generate a quick win when the opponent is at 11 or so. (Bolt, Javelin and Blast, that's 11 damage right there). I usually sideboard some of them out against decks that pack too many counters, but against CounterTop they really help, by providing some diversity to the mana curve to help play around Counterbalance.Quote:
Haven't you found these a bit difficult to cast at 3cc? 2x would look like the max I'd wanna run.Quote:
Flame Javelin
Why not Flames of the Blood Hand over Flame Javelin? It hits only players, but I imagine you wouldn't want to hit creatures with a 4 damage spell. It also has a very relevant anti-life gain clause.
The 3cc slot is harder to counter with the countertop engine than most of our spells, but they will never flip over a 6cc card to counter Flame Javelin. I think that alone might give Flame Javelin the edge.Quote:
Originally Posted by kicks_422
@4eak:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4eak
That hasn’t to do with player skills… With street wraith in hand, you have less information than if it were the “real card”. It’s not a problem of “learning about mulligan”, it’s simply a worse situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4eak
“Pure burn is definitely a combo deck” ??? I find this really inappropriate. Anyway I think I can guess what you mean in general. As you said, with magma jet for example you are worrying about deck consistency, not for the fastest kill. Well, inspite of that, magma is very popular, even considered a basic card in burn. I also like it and play with it, but I wouldn't compare it with sensei or nothing similar…
@ pi4mterftw:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pi4meterftw
A User suggested to play with Jotun in side (RW Burn). In similar cases, people usually argue that your opponent will take out the removal in next game, so it’s a nice option to surprise. Therefore, I only wanted to comment that they shouldn’t forget about STP. Surely we all know about how STP can hurt us. That’s one of the reason cause I like Keldon in this deck. We can only gain 2 damages of it (STP) but as you have said, anyway (with no creatures in deck), STP wouldn’t be really a dead card.
@ caenel:
I haven’t tested Scald, but I guess sulfuric vortex would be better cause it’s also nice against counterbalance and in other problematic situations.
About Javelin, I’m actually playing with 3 of them. As you have said, it’s a nice card against counterbalance, and i would say the opposite about Browbeat. In my opinion, you should only run these cards (high cost) to prevent chalice or counterbalance and you canīt make good use of Browbeat in these situations.
@ kicks 422:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kicks_422
Also it could be nice to kill rhox war monk.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEvilTeaCup
@ Garban
Yes, Street Wraith makes mulliganing more difficult, but that isn't necessarily a "worse situation"--your argument is a non sequitur. Sure, if all other things are equal in the deck, making mulligans more complicated is a "worse situation" than having it easier. But, the card quality to be gained by using street wraith is hardly just equal to decks that don't use it, and thus it really isn't a "simply worse situation"; you've just failed to acknowledge what is actually happening.Quote:
That hasn’t to do with player skills… With street wraith in hand, you have less information than if it were the “real card”. It’s not a problem of “learning about mulligan”, it’s simply a worse situation.
The point is that putting yourself at a slight information disadvantage in such a hugely redundant deck is very much worth the benefit of card quality gained when you move from a 60 to a 56 card deck.
Go on... I'm listening. What was so inappropriate?Quote:
“Pure burn is definitely a combo deck” ??? I find this really inappropriate.
Why wouldn't you compare Magma Jet to SDT or Street Wraith?Quote:
As you said, with magma jet for example you are worrying about deck consistency, not for the fastest kill. Well, inspite of that, magma is very popular, even considered a basic card in burn. I also like it and play with it, but I wouldn't compare it with sensei or nothing similar…
Magma Jet is about the fastest kill; often, in part, because it enables you to win in situations that you would not have won otherwise.
My point is that Magma Jet's improvement in the overall card quality and consistency of the deck means you kill faster on average than you would without the card. Magma Jet improves the stability and resilience of the deck to control and disruption, but it also let's you run only the most effective burn cards available. You will win more games on average with the card than without, and I've certainly found the same to be true with a singleton SDT and a set of Street Wraiths.
Burn is the most redundant deck in the game of magic. Seriously. Filtering exists not to fill in the gaps between cards of disparate functions (as Cantrips would for other decks), but it exists in burn to fill in the gaps between the most effective burn spells so that you don't have to run inferior versions. SDT and SW both play the same role that Magma Jet plays, and they've certainly improved our average kill turn in testing.
For the record: Magma Jet has been one of the more debated cards in the deck. I think Magma Jet has proven itself, and I would easily call it a base card in burn, but the benefits of its card quality mechanic was not immediately recognized by all. With enough testing, eventually everyone started running it--but this wasn't always the case. Many people have doubted the value of filtering and card quality improvements provided by Magma Jet.
Likewise, I think you've made the same mistake about Top and Wraith that others have made by rejecting Magma Jet. It doesn't sound at all like you've even tested the cards, nor have you understood that the same reasons we would run Magma Jet can easily be applied to SDT and SW.
What I've offered is far from being "simply worse". Go read, study the math behind the deck, test what I've said, and then offer real criticism. If you don't like street wraith or SDT, no problem; but, your unsubstantiated disagreement certainly isn't a good argument about why others should or shouldn't use the cards.
peace,
4eak
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4eak
I only meant about the point of mulligan. I don't know where is my non sequitur. Also, finding a street with the "scry" of magma jet would be like if you saw one less card. Sorry, but i haven't understood well the last part. May be, because i have some problems about the languague. Of course, it's my problem ^^ i only wanted to apologize for that. (Also if i write a little strange :frown: )
I really don't undersand why you said that sentence. For me, Burn is a nice example of an aggro deck. I don't think we should turn the debate talking about differences between aggro, combo or something similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4eak
That's the point. In my opinion, manipulation is not very important in this deck. For that reason i find my magma jets better after introducing my side. Well, as you wanted, i will finally compare :smile: Street hasn't to do too much with magma jet. In this way, one of the main functions of magma jet is about hiding the lands. Street wraith doesn't give manipulation, about sensei, it's true it would have a similar role (like magma), but there are many obvious differences between these 2 cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4eak
Returning about street, i don't think there are many differences between a lightning, a chain or a lava spike. You also must run Fireblast, magma, POP, etc So, i don't think there are so many garbage slots, even none.
May be the worst card in my build is incinerate. Also, Is there many difference between an incinerate and a lighting bolt? Really i find no problem about running incinerate, it also gives me a balance between cards of cost 1 and 2 that can be good against COTV. Actually i have found Flame Javelin also nice to go against counterbalance. Really, i don't feel like having bad/fill cards in my build.
Well, if you want to know it, true, i have't tested sensei ^^ But i think ,that doesn't mean i can have my argumments against it. For example if i told you to run lava axe, you would surely find it like a bad option without testing it. Only an example, don't get angry with me :cry: (you know sensei is even worse :laugh: :laugh:) Of course, it's better if you test the card :wink: In general, it sounds me like if you would play sensei in any deck cause the card cuality you gain.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4eak
:tongue:
@ Garban
If you don't want to debate it, then there isn't a point to telling me that you find my description of burn's role as a combo deck as being "really inappropriate".Quote:
I really don't undersand why you said that sentence. For me, Burn is a nice example of an aggro deck. I don't think we should turn the debate talking about differences between aggro, combo or something similar.
I am certainly not the only other person to categorize Burn as a combo deck either. Check the opening posts for Burn; several have viewed this deck in the same way, and for good reason.
The deck does its best to not interact with the opponent (nearly definitional of combo), and only does so on two occasions:
a.) The tempo gained for knocking out a creature is worth the loss of damage straight to an opponent's head (very rarely the case)
b.) Burn's vulnerability to several control strategies sometimes requires it to slow role, sandbag, and hold back before it can alpha strike, and thus it interacts with control decks by carefully aiming and shooting.
Card quality is card quality. You are pointing at a difference in the mechanics by which you increase card quality, but this does not show how Street Wraith and Magma Jet aren't playing the same role. Both cards improve the card quality of the deck.Quote:
In this way, one of the main functions of magma jet is about hiding the lands. Street wraith doesn't give manipulation
[Scry] and [moving from 60 to 56 card decks] are both about card quality. They are both playing the same role.
Now, you might want to argue that Magma jet is more effective (and I certainly haven't said otherwise) at improving card quality that Street Wraith, but that is fundamentally different than saying the cards aren't working towards the same basic goal of improving card quality.
Street Wraith's way of "Hiding lands", so to speak, is that it enables you to play less of them in the first place. Street Wraith "hides extraneous lands and less effective burn spells". Street Wraith lets you see sideboard cards much earlier as well.
Lastly, given the diversity of decklists, I highly doubt that all the burn spells you're playing are obviously equal in card value to each other. You said it yourself, Incinerate probably might actually be less valuable, and that seems like a prime candidate to try replacing with SW.
These are the only obvious choices:
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Magma Jet
3 Fireblast
18 Land
We can add more land, filler cards like Incinerate, board control, PoP, or cards that play around CB more effectively. This is somewhat more metagame dependent. I wouldn't be against filling that list in more, but the truth is this: burn is still playing filler, inferior spells in certain slots. Improving card quality hardly seems unnecessary or somehow not worth testing.
Again, go test. I'm not just looking at Street Wraith and SDT and just plain guessing how they affect the deck, unlike you it sounds. I'm only reporting what I've actually tested, and I'm giving a theory as to why it has produced those results (which you aren't comprehending, sadly).Quote:
Well, if you want to know it, true, i have't tested sensei
More and more decks have been playing SDT. I'll say it again:Quote:
In general, it sounds me like if you would play sensei in any deck cause the card cuality you gain.
Top has been a card that we've notoriously undervalued in general magic. Don't let history repeat itself; go test it first.
peace,
4eak
If we play Top shouldn't we play also fetchlands?
Other decks that play Top have lots of cards with great sinergy with it. I can't see many card in burn with sinergy with Top. Maybe shrapnel blast if we introduce also great furnace, but I think it's not the good path in burn to introduce nonbasic lands. We become vulnarable to wasteland, stifle and back to basics. And of course ankh of mishra has been discussed a lot and it has been discarted in the end.