Page 61 of 140 FirstFirst ... 115157585960616263646571111 ... LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,220 of 2789

Thread: [Deck] Burn

  1. #1201

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Quote Originally Posted by FoulQ View Post
    This. Ankh is bad, read the thread. Bauble Burn is bad, read the thread. Basically, everything everyone will end up posting in this thread is bad, so in essence, this thread should be stagnant.
    Mindbreak Trap isn't bad!!!

  2. #1202
    *sigh* I can't think of anything...

    Join Date

    Nov 2006
    Posts

    121

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Ichorid is a DTB in any metagame at any time. It may not consistently be a DTB due to SB choices though and it doesn't help that people run almost completely inferior choices in their builds. Ichorid will be one of the best 5 decks in Legacy until Landstill and Threshold decks stop getting new assholes stomped into them by it.

    On topic, Baubles aren't necessarily bad, they just open the venues for Stifles and Counterbalance to generate free cards. I had to give the idea up due to losing to good decks. I had to give up the idea of running a second color due to the same two cards. I had to give up the idea of stopping Counterbalance due to the fact that I had no great answer to it other than to play Vortex and try to work around it (and that doesn't work often enough)...

    And then you realize that you have to run really bad cards and that you aren't Fish, so you have to run a very inconsistent deck to make grounds. That's where my problems with Burn lie.
    WHAT? No, just no.

  3. #1203
    Mega Shark VS. Giant Octopus!
    bowvamp's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2009
    Posts

    344

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    @TheRock:
    Actually, stifle's a pretty bad example of card advantage when it comes to baubles, you'd like them to stifle baubles. That's because stifle is often the card that they pitch to FOW and if they have 1 mana open, why not let them waste it to acheive card parity with a horrible decrease in tempo (leaving 1 mana open to deal with a 0 mana that does nothing is pretty bad). But yeah, this deck = loss to counterbalance. Anything you replace those baubles with loses to it as well.

    My main problem with baubles are that they often kill the flow of the deck. Getting a turn 1 play is fine in most versions, but if your hand is 4 Deck Thinners, and 2 lands, you'll have trouble.
    feefox: each card in hand!!!!
    ridicolous
    only fortune

  4. #1204
    Member
    urdjur's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2006
    Location

    Absurdistan
    Posts

    87

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    I'm happy to announce that today's MTGS article is on Burn:
    http://mtgsalvation.com/1144-gatheri...e-of-burn.html

    Hope you like it. I tend to write about MtG in a "philosophical" style, so it's not a cutthroat article about optimizing a legacy deck list and finding The One True Decklist. Instead, it discusses the general principles of Burn and useful mindsets for creating a good list. If you have comments on it, please post in the article commentary thread.
    Kar bankooer jeg

  5. #1205

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Quote Originally Posted by urdjur View Post
    I'm happy to announce that today's MTGS article is on Burn:
    http://mtgsalvation.com/1144-gatheri...e-of-burn.html

    Hope you like it. I tend to write about MtG in a "philosophical" style, so it's not a cutthroat article about optimizing a legacy deck list and finding The One True Decklist. Instead, it discusses the general principles of Burn and useful mindsets for creating a good list. If you have comments on it, please post in the article commentary thread.


    nice to read article. good structure and some new ideas. perfect!

  6. #1206
    Site Contributor

    Join Date

    Nov 2009
    Posts

    282

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    I'm seeing a broken link.

  7. #1207
    Member
    urdjur's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2006
    Location

    Absurdistan
    Posts

    87

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Strange - it worked fine yesterday. Try this link instead. If it breaks too, just google "the essence of burn" and you'll find it at as the first hit.

    Thanks for the feedback, matamagos!
    Kar bankooer jeg

  8. #1208
    Good against CMC 2
    Sevryn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2009
    Location

    San Antonio
    Posts

    185

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Small tourney report (8 people):

    My deck:

    4 Lightning Bolt
    4 Rift Bolt
    4 Lava Spike
    4 Chain Lightning
    1 Shard Volley
    1 Needle Drop

    4 Magma Jet
    4 Keldon Marauders
    1 Price of Progress

    3 Flamebreak
    3 Browbeat
    2 Pulse of the Forge
    2 Sulfuric Vortex
    4 Fireblast

    17 Snow-Covered Mountains
    2 Barbarian Ring

    SB: 3 Price of Progress
    SB: 4 Shattering Spree
    SB: 4 Pyrostatic Pillar
    SB: 4 Pyroblast


    Round 1 is against a mill deck.

    Game 1 he hits me with tome scour, a really weak mind funeral, counters keldon marauders, extirpates lightning bolt hitting 1 in my hand, and then dies to burn through another counterspell. He says after the game that he kept a hand with 2 archive trap!

    Game 2 (-3 Flamebreak, +3 Price of Progress) I keep a hand with only one barbarian ring for land but lots of 1 mana spells. I play a bolt a turn until he mind funerals and only flips only 6 cards! I draw into more land and burn him out, with him countering marauders again.


    Round 2 is against a budget deck, both games he plays bad creatures out slowly, which I completely ignore and throw all of my burn at his face.


    Round 3 is against Zoo, running a fairly burn heavy version (seal of fire and tarfire to make goyf's bigger). I was actually happy to see this deck because the past two tourneys he has won with a tendrils deck.

    Game 1: I play first, mountain Rift Bolt go. He plays taiga Kird Ape. Turn 2 I make another land drop and play Lava Spike, Chain Lightning. He plays a Tarmogoyf and swings with the Ape. I play a mountain and Flamebreak, only sorcery and his fetchlands in graveyard so Goyf and Ape both die! This game goes to the wire though, with us both drawing into burn. I kill him by drawing into fireblasts while he draws into seal of fires.

    Game 2: (+3 Price of Progress, -1 Browbeat, -1 Pulse of the Forge, -1 Magma Jet) I mulligan'd due to 5 lands, then again due to 0. He plays Taiga, Nactl. I play land and Chain Lightning the Nactl. He plays out 3 Kird Apes, I don't have the Flamebreak, then he beats me to 8 and plays Chain Lightning, Chain Lightning, Tarfire. Dead.

    Game 3: I land, go. He plays Nactl, which I EoT bolt. I play a land. He plays out Goyf, I EoT Magma Jet to clear 2 mountains off the top. I play out Marauders and bolt him. He swings with the Goyf (I take it), then plays out 2 seal of fire. I swing with the Marauders (he takes it), putting him at 11 with his fetchlands. then I browbeat him and he takes the damage. He swings with the goyf and plays out a creature. Next turn I burn him out with Lava Spike, Fireblast.



    The other decks that I saw were a counter/top deck, agro Elves with Garruk, a mostly T2 mono black deck (with Tombstalkers ^^), and Raffinity. The counter/top player plays a different deck every week and brought his deck specifically to counter the tendrils deck that won the past two times. He got his loss from the mono-black agro list. The mill player also said he picked his deck because it let him play blue for force of will and other counters, while the archive traps would always be useful, and Mind Funeral actually DESTROYS the tendrils deck in question because he only run 2 bayous for his land grant/Belcher alternate win. Of course the Tendrils player used his Zoo deck :P

    At the end of three rounds I am the only person without a loss, so 4 people played another round for second place while I go home with a Force of Will.


    EDIT: two things i wanted to highlight:
    -not running fetchlands being golden against random mill deck
    -against Zoo, burning turn 1 threats is some good. considering game will go to turn 4 at least, nactl will swing for at least 9 by the time i can win with burn. amending the philosophy of fire a bit, if one card can prevent 9 damage, it's probably worth it! bolting creatures drops off quickly as the turns progress, as a topdecked turn 4 nactl is going to swing maybe 1 time.
    Last edited by Sevryn; 11-22-2009 at 05:53 PM.

  9. #1209
    Member
    urdjur's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2006
    Location

    Absurdistan
    Posts

    87

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Quote Originally Posted by Sevryn View Post
    -against Zoo, burning turn 1 threats is some good. considering game will go to turn 4 at least, nactl will swing for at least 9 by the time i can win with burn. amending the philosophy of fire a bit, if one card can prevent 9 damage, it's probably worth it! bolting creatures drops off quickly as the turns progress, as a topdecked turn 4 nactl is going to swing maybe 1 time.
    I also adopt this strategy, especially since I run Volcanic Fallout over Flamebreak. I usually only bolt the Nacatl though - I wouldn't bother with t1 Kird Ape. The reason is you risk prolonging your win, so if you waste a turn to kill the t1 threat, the t2-t4 threats may get an extra swing. If you don't have a sweeper, you want to kill t1 Goblin Guide too, but that's hard since it has haste and killing it after it gets damage in is a bad trade (so you need Lightning Bolt with mana open etc. - pretty unusual situation).

    Keldon Marauders is extremely good in this MU though. They probably don't want to trade, but can't attack into it after you play it either (except perhaps with goyf). So the net gain can be an 8 point life swing - 5 from KM and 3 from keeping nacatl in check for a turn. Pretty good deal for 2 mana. If they waste a bolt on it, that's one less bolt in your face and they still take 2 and loose tempo. Ensnaring Bridge from the board helps a lot in this MU too.
    Kar bankooer jeg

  10. #1210
    Bear Cub > Tarmogoyf

    Join Date

    Jul 2007
    Posts

    775

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    What's the use case for Volcanic Fallout? Instant-speed sweepers are something we're always looking for, but the damage/mana doesn't seem to be there.

    Let's say you've made your third land drop, a prereq for both spells. At this point, you either keep three mana open to sweep for 2 before your upkeep next, or use the three now to sweep for 3.

    Certainly there are times when you might kill a 2/2 at instant speed before a pump spell or equipment can attach, but so early in the game it's probably on an existing creature that would have died to Flamebreak to begin with. They might save the critter with Giant Growth et. al., but you'll have gotten more reach from the spell and killed any */3s, which is certainly relevant against Elf/Merf lords, Kird Apes, Nacatls, etc.

    Do you prefer it mostly for fliers? For the stack tricks mentioned above (sweep in response to pump)? Burn keeping three mana open on turn three is suspicious, to say the least. They might just play conservatively to draw the sweeper out, or Timewalk you if you do nothing.

    If you need something fast, I believe that Cave-In is perfectly usable. Everyone bitches about pitching the red spell, but to be honest we know there's always a least useful spell (multiples of Fireblast, etc.), and to be honest there's no faster option than sweeping for 2 on your first turn.
    Most people blindly suggest new cards for decks. True contributors also suggest what to remove. It's not about what's good, but rather what's better than the current selections.

  11. #1211
    Lets be freaks...
    NecroYawgmoth's Avatar
    Join Date

    Dec 2007
    Location

    Mettmann
    Posts

    339

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    What makes Hellspark Elemental good, and Spark Elemental bad???

    ...sure, Hellspark returns, and does 2*3 damage, but 3+3 for 2+2 Mana, while Spark Elemental does 3 for 1...

    Hellspark can be easily blocked, or killed like Spark, so I see no reason, that Hellspark should be much better than Spark...

    ...is it only, because of the "run out of gas"-turns???


    YawG
    Quote Originally Posted by Tacosnape View Post
    Kenjawn, Mutator of Cells
    :16: - (See, now Erratic Explosion's a deck)
    Legendary Creature - Horror
    Haste, Hexproof, Double Strike, Trample
    Kenjawn, Mutator of Cells is indestructible.
    Permanents you control can't be sacrificed or copied.
    Whenever Kenjawn, Mutator of Cells attacks, defending player gets liver cancer (This effect doesn't end at end of turn.)
    13/13

  12. #1212

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Quote Originally Posted by Yawgmoth'sWill View Post
    What makes Hellspark Elemental good, and Spark Elemental bad???

    ...sure, Hellspark returns, and does 2*3 damage, but 3+3 for 2+2 Mana, while Spark Elemental does 3 for 1...

    Hellspark can be easily blocked, or killed like Spark, so I see no reason, that Hellspark should be much better than Spark...

    ...is it only, because of the "run out of gas"-turns???


    YawG
    Hellspark elemental is a very conditional 6 damage for 4 mana that can be split up over turns. He is virtual card advantage if they can't block him. Unearth also allows you to do damage with counterbalance or chalice at 2 on the table. And, I wouldn't go so far as to say hes good , just playable. Spark Elemental is even less reliable as a damage source and doesn't have any built in anti control elements that hellspark does.

  13. #1213
    Bear Cub > Tarmogoyf

    Join Date

    Jul 2007
    Posts

    775

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Yeah I guess it's the difference between Goyf Sligh and Zoo: one blows its load and rolls over, the other keeps on pumping ... so to speak. That said, I wouldn't run any of them without first running Keldon Marauders. There's a reason we don't run Ball Lightning (6 damage for THREE mana), you know.

    Btw, I wouldn't call Hellspark Elemental virtual card advantage. It's just splitting its effect: that doesn't in itself imply VCA, does it?
    Most people blindly suggest new cards for decks. True contributors also suggest what to remove. It's not about what's good, but rather what's better than the current selections.

  14. #1214
    Lets be freaks...
    NecroYawgmoth's Avatar
    Join Date

    Dec 2007
    Location

    Mettmann
    Posts

    339

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    IMO we have 12 free slots...

    "the core"

    ~20 Lands
    16 Bolts
    4 Magma Jet
    ~4 Price of Progress
    ~4 Fireblast
    maybe 2-3 Sweeper (Fallout/Flamebreak)

    for the other 12 slots, would you run

    Keldon Marauders
    Hellspark Elemental
    Spark Elemental

    or

    Keldon Marauders
    Hellspark Elemental
    Mogg Fanatic

    Fanatic and Spark, are imo both much better, like the other options like: Flame Rift, Incinerate, Shard Volley or crazy stuff like Browbeat, Fork etc.


    YawG
    Quote Originally Posted by Tacosnape View Post
    Kenjawn, Mutator of Cells
    :16: - (See, now Erratic Explosion's a deck)
    Legendary Creature - Horror
    Haste, Hexproof, Double Strike, Trample
    Kenjawn, Mutator of Cells is indestructible.
    Permanents you control can't be sacrificed or copied.
    Whenever Kenjawn, Mutator of Cells attacks, defending player gets liver cancer (This effect doesn't end at end of turn.)
    13/13

  15. #1215
    Good against CMC 2
    Sevryn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2009
    Location

    San Antonio
    Posts

    185

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    I don't agree with upping the creature count. If there was anything better at the 2cc slot than marauders I would run it, but there's not. At worst maruaders is 2 damage and a blocker, at best it's 5 damage at the weakest converted mana cost for burn.

    The more creatures you run, the more valuable you make your opponent's removal. If agro wasn't so prevalent I would substitute flame rift for keldon maruaders and be completely creatureless.

  16. #1216
    Bear Cub > Tarmogoyf

    Join Date

    Jul 2007
    Posts

    775

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Exactly agreed. Mogg Fanatic used to almost be usable due to combat trickery: you could take out two Llanowar Elves, or Isamaru, or keep on swinging for one across an open field. Now that you can't stack combat damage then sac, he's even less usable. Keep in mind that he still guarantees at least one damage dealt to something (barring Split Second effects, blah blah blah).

    The elementals do not offer this guarantee of damage, and therefore, just like Ball Lightning or Genju of the Spires, they are not usable. Do not be fooled into using it just because it comes back once. The fundamental problem is still there, and the increased use of PtE means it will NOT come back. Welcome to your 5th Mountain, burn deck. You're topdecking anyway and can't make use of it.
    Last edited by Curby; 11-24-2009 at 12:57 PM.
    Most people blindly suggest new cards for decks. True contributors also suggest what to remove. It's not about what's good, but rather what's better than the current selections.

  17. #1217
    Member
    urdjur's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2006
    Location

    Absurdistan
    Posts

    87

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Quote Originally Posted by kirbysdl View Post
    What's the use case for Volcanic Fallout? Instant-speed sweepers are something we're always looking for, but the damage/mana doesn't seem to be there.

    Let's say you've made your third land drop, a prereq for both spells. At this point, you either keep three mana open to sweep for 2 before your upkeep next, or use the three now to sweep for 3.

    Certainly there are times when you might kill a 2/2 at instant speed before a pump spell or equipment can attach, but so early in the game it's probably on an existing creature that would have died to Flamebreak to begin with. They might save the critter with Giant Growth et. al., but you'll have gotten more reach from the spell and killed any */3s, which is certainly relevant against Elf/Merf lords, Kird Apes, Nacatls, etc.

    Do you prefer it mostly for fliers? For the stack tricks mentioned above (sweep in response to pump)? Burn keeping three mana open on turn three is suspicious, to say the least. They might just play conservatively to draw the sweeper out, or Timewalk you if you do nothing.

    If you need something fast, I believe that Cave-In is perfectly usable. Everyone bitches about pitching the red spell, but to be honest we know there's always a least useful spell (multiples of Fireblast, etc.), and to be honest there's no faster option than sweeping for 2 on your first turn.
    Cave-In is an OK spell, but I think the CD makes it a lot worse than Flamebreak and Volcanic Fallout. The best way to compare Flamebreak and Fallout is to look at their differences and see when they are relevant.

    +1 more damage to both players: Is this good or bad? Both Flame Rift and Pyroclasm are considered bad cards in burn, the latter because it doesn't further our game plan and the former because it furthers the opponent's too much. It's probably an advantage though, but it's hardly like comparing Lightning Bolt and Shock.

    +1 more damage to all creatures: All played, non-flying creatures with toughness 3 are in Zoo. "Lord" (+1/+1) effects are played in Elves and Merfolk, but they need to have 2 in play. The odds of seeing 2+ out of 12 Lords in the first 10 cards are 65%. And that's assuming you run all 12 lords.

    Hitting flyers: Played affected creatures include Hypnotic Specter and Flickerwisp. Probably less relevant that doing 1 more damage to all non-flying creatures, but not by much.

    Hitting manlands: It's not very relevant to be able to hit manlands, but OTOH, it's not very relevant to be able to kill Kird Ape either. If you're loosing against Kird Ape or Mishra's Factory, something else has probably gone wrong and you would most likely have lost against Grizzly Bears as well.

    Uncounterable sweeping: This alone trumps the "Lord" argument against Merfolk. The odds of them having a Daze, FoW or Cursecatcher for your sweeper is almost 100%, whereas having double lords when it matters is less than 65% likely. The same argument applies to CounterSlivers.

    Uncounterable player damage: While it's not clear if +1 symmetrical player damage is good or not, uncounterable damage is always good. It's not relevant in every game though.

    Instant speed sweeping: This is highly relevant against Ichorid - not against much else. AFAIK, it's the only deck that suddenly produces many hasty beats.

    When you compare the differences, I think Fallout has more things in favor of it. Some of the differences are not relevant that often though.
    Kar bankooer jeg

  18. #1218

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    Ok here is the list for burn i would run its not very techy tbh but i think its fairly stable.

    Lightning bolt x4.
    Chain Lightning x4.
    lava Spike x4.
    Rift Bolt x4.
    Price Of Progress/Incinerate x4.
    Magma Jet x4.
    Flame Rift x4.
    Browbeat x4.
    flame break x4.
    Fireblast x4.

    Taiga x4.
    Wooded Foothills x4.
    Mountain x12.

    Sideboard

    Krosan Grip x4.
    Tormods Crypt x4.
    Sulfuric Vortex x4.
    Incinerate/Price of progress x3.

    The only thing i run that is contestable are the taiga's and foothills these are only for the grips in the board which i consider to be fairly essential considering the amount of red hate that is arround atm to hose goblins and zoo and grip answers almost every threat the deck fears including the hated chalice set at 1 or 2 and countertop both of which are bad matchups for this deck.

    The sulfuric springs i must admit i never considered but i like it enough to run in the board against those annoying control decks that can bog you down when your opponent is 3/4 dead but just will not die. The rest of the board ie the crypts is prettymuch the a must have so you wont autoloss against certain decks with the incinerates/price of progress there to swap out in the main deck incase i draw against basic land heavy decks or vice versa.
    Last edited by uanlayen; 12-16-2009 at 09:12 AM.

  19. #1219

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    I would not play the green splash... why do you need KG? If you have chalice
    (or any other artifact) it is the same as running Smash to smitherens or Shattering spree, and if you are afraid of counterbalance is better just running REB.

    Still, if you are confortable running the splash, 24 lands are not too many?

  20. #1220
    Bear Cub > Tarmogoyf

    Join Date

    Jul 2007
    Posts

    775

    Re: [Deck] Burn

    24 are too many. I run around 19-20 with 4 Fireblasts and two Shard Volleys. Of course, he's running 8 3-drops, which is a problem in itself. The problems of Browbeat are well documented, so I'll not repeat them again.
    Most people blindly suggest new cards for decks. True contributors also suggest what to remove. It's not about what's good, but rather what's better than the current selections.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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