Printable View
i have a 3-1, 4-0 burn deck. had it for ever don't be dissin till you try it.
16 mountains
2 dmg
4 magma jets
3 dmg
4 lava spike
4 bolts
4 chain lightning
4 rift bolts
4 incinerate
4 dmg
4 flamerift
4 fireblast
4 sonic burst
creatures and opinion
4 mogg fanatic
4 flamebreak/ goblin grenade, yes it works
relativley cheap. JUST REMEMBER the amount of damage you are dealing 99% of the time exceeds the amount of damage taken.
let the critical assessment fly.
sonic burst is bad bad bad... discarding a card will kill you.
also grenade is bad and too situational with only 4 goblins in deck.
Goblin Grenade has no place in Burn, ever (and even as a finisher in Goblin Sligh I'd be reluctant to play it as a 4-of).
Sonic Burst is essentially a Bolt that turns a random card into a Shock (slightly worse as you can't split the damage). It's generally not efficent or reliable enough to warrant a spot.
You could make a case for it in a Burn deck with a comparatively high land count and mana curve, where converting surplus lands/uncastable spells into shocks might be good. In your mana-starved build, I don't see a reason to play it.
Personally, I consider Incinerate as a clue that you shouldn't be playing Burn. After the 1-for-3s and Fireblasts, the remaining slots should be hate or utility keyed to your metagame (Price of Progress, Sulfuric Vortex, Sweepers, whatever). If my metagame isn't defined enough that I can fill the rest of the slots that way, I'd rather play a deck with a little more raw power.
Better players than me disagree though.
Look at this new morningtide release:
Shard Volley :r:
Instant
As an additional cost to play Shard Volley, sacrifice a land.
Shard Volley deals 3 damage to target creature or player.
Maybe it can find a room in this deck as a new 1 for 3?
I think it's good enough and I'll run it.
My only concern is that it fights with Fireblast for available lands to sacrifice.
Have to do some testing to see how much of an impact it makes.
-T
I have been talking about this card for the last month, saying how it would be nice to have another :r: for 3 damage spell. I said they would prob. make it sac. a mountain to do 3, and what do ya know here it is!!! I think this will put Burn/Goyf Sligh over the top, sacing a mountain is nbd and shouldn't hurt to much, even if you are running Fireblast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemuria
Shard Volley shouldn't compete with Fireblast... if you can have 2 Blasts, you can probably afford having a blank. If you're stuck on 2 lands, you should other relevant Burn so you can hold it back until it's time to go for the kil
Having said that, the card is horrible.
Fireblast is useful because, as a finisher, it's a 4-for-0. 4 additional damage makes turn-3 wins possible, allows overpowering counterwalls and serves other invaluable strategic goals.
Being Yet Another Bolt is nowhere enough to justify the drawback. You don't want to cast this early, and later on you want spells that deal more than 3 damage or those with other benefits. Garbage.
Here's a c&p from the spoiler thread:
But will the Sligh and Burn decks be able to support the land sacrifice for the new card and Fireblast? Look at the list of burn spells that this new spell must compete with:
- Lighting Bolt: Instant 3 for :r:
- Chain Lightning: Sorcery 3 for :r: (with a usually negligible drawback)
- Fireblast: 4 for two Mountains
- Magma Jet: 2 for :1::r: and draw quality
- Price of Progress: Scaled damage for :1::r:
- Rift Bolt: a delayed 3 for :r: (with the bonus of dodging Chalice/Trinisphere)
It could be standard viable, but I don't think I like it much for Legacy.
In a current Sligh or Burn builds, on what turn would I want to cast this spell? Not turn 1. Not turn 2 (when I'd be playing my Goyf). I'd have to wait to turn 3 to cast it. (Rift Bolt can be cast earlier with no board disadvantage).
I also fail to see it as a necessary Goyf pump. Will my opponent or I not have a land in the yard by turn 3? Goyf-Sligh has had no problems getting lands into the yard.
It doesn't dodge the most hurtful cards to Sligh/Burn. Chalice for one - the most common setting against burn - shuts this card down. Trini pwns it as badly as it does Bolt and Chain. CoP shuts it down just like any red burn spell.
Hey PR, you forgot to mention...
- Lava Spike: Sorcery 3 for :r: (Targets players only)
That's the bottom of the barrel for "Bolts" in burn; however, I still think it's a better fit for the deck than Shard Volley would be.
Mountains are best saved for Fireblasts, especially in a deck that runs so little mana to begin with.
What I really would have liked to see printed is an unconditional 4-for-2 without any drawbacks, or at worst a "target Player" clause like Lava Spike.
The "standard" now is 2-for-1 (Shock); so a 4-for-2 isn't that unreasonable. Just take away Incinerate's regeneration clause, and maybe its status as an Instant, then add an extra point of dmg.
As a "target player" sorcery, I could see it (yeah, Flame Rift, but they've obsoleted terrible cards before), but not anything else. Volcanic Hammer saw play, and just left for Incinerate, which is considered top of the curve.
Char disagrees with you. That was a four for three with a draw back, and that made a huge splash.Quote:
Originally Posted by redmage
But, this isn't really the place to discuss what the current standard for burn spells is.
I have a pet hate for this deck. it just pisses me off when some kid shows up with a 100% burn deck and there's not much I can do against damage to the dome, and he can just autopilot it :(
It is the burn Thread, so yeah it is...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Voyeur
I love playing burn and goyf sligh, I have tried many diffrent combo's of spells and have found, at least I think, what is the best package for me...
To me the deck is simple to build, You Just throw in your 16xLightning Bolts (Rift Bolt,Chain Lightning,Lava Spike,Lightning Bolt) add 4xFireblast, and 3-4xPrice of progress. That, to me, is the base for any Burn deck, after that you have to lok at your meta. You have to think about what works for you, I for instance don't like Magma Jet but love Baubles so I run 8xBauble's. My current burn list looks something like this...
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress
4 Incinerate
2 Flames of the Bloodhand
2 Flamebreak
3 Flame Rift
4 Urza's Bauble
4 Mishra's Bauble
3 Bloodstained Mire
3 Wooded Foothills
2 Barbirian Ring
9 Mountain
Is it much diffrent than so "regular" showing up with a combo deck and winning on turn 1?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shtriga
Yeah, a "huge splash" in a weak (read: Standard) format. Char was a cute card, shifting Psionic where it should have always been, but it's by no means a great card, and it isn't a good litmus test for what burn spells should/could be. Hell, Flames of the Blood Hand is strictly better, and it's only an uncommon. It took quite awhile for people to realize that Char & Psionic are only mediocre spells. Nostalgia, and a severe lack of anything "better" were the main reasons that shifted Psionics reached $25-$30, and Char hit $10-$15 during their peaks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Voyeur
Red has had, and will continue to have better burn spells than Char; it's a $2-$3 dollar rare at best. The only reason Psionic (TS) is still worth $5-$9 is that it's "black bordered nostalgia" for those who can't find/afford Alpha/Beta, it's the best "burn" available in Blue, and it gives Blue something it never should have had (burn).
Take Flames of the Blood Hand (an Instant) and remove the "The damage can't be prevented." and the "If that plyer would gain life this turn, that player gains no life instead.", then drop its CC by one colorless mana. Seems like a fair trade to me.
Char demonstrates what modern versatile burn for four would be. In fact, the only burn for four that's cheaper than it are Flame Rift and Fireblast.Not it's not. The inability to target creatures is huge and is one of the reasons that Char was so widely played.Quote:
Originally Posted by redmage
Modern?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Voyeur
Hardly.
It's Psionic Blast (from ALPHA) that's been color shifted. It doesn't get any more "old school" than that.
We're talking Legacy Burn here. Opposing creatures don't matter (in this case), and when it comes to Legacy Burn FotBH is "strictly better" (yet often still doesn't make the cut).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Voyeur
The original dispute comes from the misconception that a four for two is as good as a two for one. That isn't and hasn't matched the efficiency of burn spells.No, we're not. We're talking about burn spells in general. That's why it why it isn't entirely relevant to this particular thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by redmage
Then that's your misconception, and you can take your straw man fallacy elsewhere. What I said was "The "standard" now is 2-for-1 (Shock); so a 4-for-2 isn't that unreasonable." There is a difference between "as good as" and "not that unreasonable".Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Voyeur
Maybe you're not, but some of us are trying to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Voyeur
I don't think that Shard Volley will make the cut in Legacy, and I feel that a decent 4-for-2 would. I also feel that somewhere between Lava Spike, Shock, and FotBH is a reasonable 4-for-2 that would be able to see print.
not really :) since some combo decks can also be autopilotedQuote:
Originally Posted by Sacearuse
I think this approach is wrong. Every new 3 for 1 has to compete with the filler cards burn usually plays. When Rift Bolt was printed it wasn't compared to the "must play" burn spells and considered shitty (which it would be then).Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Rotten (Quote)
Every Burn deck has to run 16 bolts, 4 Magma Jet and 4 Blasts. After that comes a meta dependend number of PoP and sweepers. The rest are "sub-par " or meta cards. When Rift Bolt was printed people found it to be better than Incinerate & friends and ran it.
The new 3 for 1 is definately playable as 2-of at least because you often draw more than two mountains or don't draw fireblast in a game.
An early Trinisphere and Chalice @ 1 is usually GG anyways, so it doesn't matter.