Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: a litle bit of burn

  1. #1
    the answer is 3

    Join Date

    Feb 2011
    Posts

    46

    a litle bit of burn

    I know burn cards tend to be lightning bolt, lava spike, magma jet, and fireblast. I wonder if hellspark elemental, ball lightning, spark elemental, and cards of that nature (have haste, and must be sacraficed at the end of the turn) are considered burn? They surve almost the same purpose, dealing direct damage to the other player, but I don't see it in burn deck lists.

    If this is so, would it be viable to include this in a "burn deck" or would it be something else, like red deck wins? I know that was standard, but would it be out of the question to use something with those "burn creatures" in a legacy burn deck?

    Beyond that question, i want to know the deffinition of what burn is within magic. I can show you burn cards, play burn, but I can't define burn. So, in magic, what is burn? Dirrect damage from a non-permanent source?

  2. #2
    the answer is 3

    Join Date

    Feb 2011
    Posts

    46

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    Ok it wouldn't be burn, it would be slight, but still, what about the other questions?

  3. #3

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    One-shot, targeted damage that does not involve the combat zone, almost always from an instant/sorcery. In before lock?
    Bless your heart, we must consider Blue/White Tempo's strategy and win percentages in an entirely different deck thread. -4eak

  4. #4
    Tap 2, Standstill. Good?
    kiblast's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2010
    Location

    Somewhere in Europe.
    Posts

    1,233

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    Targeted damage through instants and sorceries, as less creatures and permanents possible. ----> Burn.

    Targeted damage and Removals + Low cost creatures with the best cc/power ratio.-------> Sligh.

    Bunch of random best red cards available in standard card pool.--------> RDW.
    Are you into Jazz? Have a look at the Lp's I have for sale on Discogs!

  5. #5
    the answer is 3

    Join Date

    Feb 2011
    Posts

    46

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    Thank you for that help.

  6. #6

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    To go into a little more detail on the aspects of your question involving why these spells are not seen in Legacy burn lists:

    One of the few advantages of a Burn deck is that is makes your opponent's creature removal dead, creating virtual card advantage. Using these creatures negates that advantage.

    There's a fairly ubiquitous guy running around called Tarmogoyf. With the exception of Ball Lightning, most of these creatures can't get through him, nor can they force him to block and combine with another spell to take him out when he's theatening Lethal next turn.

    These creatures suck HARD to Maze of Ith, which sees more than a little play.

    Very few of them hit the damage to mana ratio of (2.X where x > 0) - 1 that burn is looking for, and none of them offer the utility that something like Magma Jet offers which excuses the lower damage ratio.

    I'm sure there are other reasons. Heck, imagine running 12+ of these and your opponent bring in Engineered Plague (elementals) from the Sideboard. Ouch.

  7. #7
    Member

    Join Date

    Jul 2009
    Location

    Spain
    Posts

    5

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    IMO the border between Burn, Sligh and Boros is currently unclear. So, I'd like to use this thread to know your opinion about that.

    Some time ago, Grim Lavamancer wasn't accepted in Burn builds. Now, decks with Grim Lavamancer and Goblin Guide are very popular and I think that they are usually named as Burn.

    It isn't really an important issue but I just want to know what's the most common way of naming one of my favourite decks. I also have some doubts when I have to choose one of the three threads when I want to discuss a list…


    So, I'd appreciate that you answer the following questions:


    1. What should be the name/thread for this build?: http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/dec...4&iddeck=11729 (Burn/Sligh/Other)

    2. What should be the name/thread for this build?: http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/dec...1&iddeck=40116 (Burn/Boros/Other)

    3. Should there be only a thread for Burn/Sligh builds?


    IMO the first and second list could be discussed in the same thread because it's basically the same build with Sulfuric Vortex or Steppe Lynx. Last question is because if there's no difference between the second list and Boros, I would neither know the difference between Burn and Sligh.

    Well, I'd like to know your answers or opinions

  8. #8

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    Quote Originally Posted by Azel Orfat View Post
    So, I'd appreciate that you answer the following questions:

    1. What should be the name/thread for this build?: http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/dec...4&iddeck=11729 (Burn/Sligh/Other)
    2. What should be the name/thread for this build?: http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/dec...1&iddeck=40116 (Burn/Boros/Other)
    I've had exactly this discussion on another forum. The answer is: both decks are hybrids. The first deck is a burn build that added a sligh creature for lategame utility.
    The second deck is a sligh build that added burn cards for less interaction with the opponent.
    A big difference is splashing. When you start splashing you just can't call it burn anymore. Burn is a deck that lives on virtual card advantage and the second deck you linked to misses many of the VCA's that burn has; creatures that are built around, splash.
    3. Should there be only a thread for Burn/Sligh builds?
    They are in nature very similar, but due to the powerlevel of creature cards right now; or the underpoweredness of instants printed (lightning bolt won't see a functional reprint) burn needs to anchor to other archetypes to keep up.

    Also another significant difference is that a sligh strategy uses burn to clear the path for its creatures, burn uses burnspells to kill an opponent.

  9. #9
    the answer is 3

    Join Date

    Feb 2011
    Posts

    46

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    This is one of the most educational things i have read here. I wish there were more posts of this nature, just because i like the mechanical aspect of it all, but usually don't get it (im not the bringhtest crayon in the box).

    I do see the point behind burn now, and not using the creatures, so from this i can say that true "burn decks" will have lesst than four creatures if any at all.
    On the other hand, what makes slight, red deck wins, and such different is unclear to me aswell. The last time i check, boros ran white, I may be one million percent wrong, but who knows.

  10. #10

    Re: a litle bit of burn

    Quote Originally Posted by thatoneguy View Post
    I do see the point behind burn now, and not using the creatures, so from this i can say that true "burn decks" will have lesst than four creatures if any at all.
    You can understand burn like this. The ideal burn deck is 42 Lightning bolts 18 mountains (maybe 4 fireblasts..) killing turn 3/4 everytime consistently, they want guaranteed damage and with the minimum amount of interaction. When you look at burn decks the creature base comes as close to guaranteed damage as possible.
    The reason burn decks aren't like this is because sometimes it's not a good metacall to do this, so burn gets mixed with other decks to decrease consistency but add more lasting power. And quite simply because it needs more good burn spells to fill 60 cards. So don't think of burn as a deck without creatures, if there's creatures printed that guarantee 4 damage for 1 mana then Burn will play it as well.

    Sligh decks don't aim for guaranteed damage they aim for explosiveness and a little more lasting power; they can kill turn 3/4 as well, but when hindered they still have some power left because their damage is more permanent based.

    On the other hand, what makes slight, red deck wins, and such different is unclear to me aswell. The last time i check, boros ran white, I may be one million percent wrong, but who knows.
    Boros does run white, a relic from Ravnica. Sligh used to be mono red, then ventured into green for goyf and no it goes in boros colors, sligh can be in boros colors, but that doesn't mean that a sligh deck is always in boros colors. RDW is usually a fast agressive decks consisting of the best red cards in the format. RDW is usually not used in legacy as a term, as the "best cards" is a bit broad in Legacy... RDW doesn't say all that much about the strategy its using; it's usually very aggressive but that's because it red. When a card like Koth gets printed it can also go for more lategame..

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)