[Deck] Dryad Sligh

[ACE]

Another thing about the player mentality against a rancor= if you have a rancored creature, and a fatty dryad- they will often times not block/kill the rancored creature in fear of the dryad being the next rancor target and trampling over their chumps for massive ammounts. so it is damage they will be willing to take in most cases.

Also, the slith is not the best creature you could have in that slot. there are better creatures. hell, (and i don't believe i am even saying this) war elemental would be better in his slot, because he gets a lot bigger, a lot faster, and he is not damage specific. he does cost 3 red, but that isnt hard for you get get seeing as how most of the deck is red. it would be one extra mana, but he would be better than the dryad. the dryad gets bigger for each spell you play, he gets bigger for each damage your spells inflict, plus the damage dealt by your creatures.

i believe he MAY be worth looking into.

[kicks_422]

Yeah... But what if you don't have a creature, or all your creatures get killed?... That's the point I'm trying to get across with Rancor... It's not a threat on its own. And this deck, unlike R/G Beatdown, does not rely on solely creatures, hence only 20.

I played with War Elemental waaaaaay back when my deck was still mono-red. Yes, it gets huge really fast, but like I said, if I'm going to put in a 3cc spell here, it's a game-winning spell, not another beater. And no, it is not better than Dryad because that one turn is crucial. I love the synergy between War Elemental and Seal of Fire, though because it makes your War Elemental come into play as a 3/3.

Anyway, I'm also going to try it out just to prove my point.

regarding the Slith vs. Blood Knight vs. SCM issue (and now probably vs. War Elemental too), I have jumbled notes written right in front of me about it. I'll post them when I have enough info.

All I can say so far is this - in the deck, haste>first strike>trample.

[noobslayer]

Saying flame on anywhere outside of mish-mash is a great way to get banned here. You need to calm down a bit.

The reason SCM works god for me is because I'm playing 22 cereatures. I've always got a solid threat.

[Eldariel]

I was playing around with the deck a little bit and was just wondering if you really find 18 lands to be enough? I played a dozen games with it and often ended up mulling low due to 1-landers and no-landers (it's hard to keep 1-landers with just 2-CC stuff, or with just Taiga, and no-landers in general). Do you think there'd be any way to fit few more lands into the deck? Am I the only one experiencing low landcount issues? Because the curve of the deck is such that you usually need to reach two mana to win, preferably on the first two turns of the game.

[kicks_422]

I was playing around with the deck a little bit and was just wondering if you really find 18 lands to be enough? I played a dozen games with it and often ended up mulling low due to 1-landers and no-landers (it's hard to keep 1-landers with just 2-CC stuff, or with just Taiga, and no-landers in general). Do you think there'd be any way to fit few more lands into the deck? Am I the only one experiencing low landcount issues? Because the curve of the deck is such that you usually need to reach two mana to win, preferably on the first two turns of the game.

The deck works fine with the low-land count - well, at least in real life. The MWS shuffler sucks, yada yada yada, but you can still get some good draws with it. Just shuffle like a madman before you draw 7.

[jamest]

Probability question: if you run 18 lands, how often will your opening hand (seven cards) have zero or one land? What's an acceptable percentage for you?

I'd run at least 20 lands. There's not a lot of decks out there that this deck can beat if it's stuck on one land. (Eldariel, I was a proponent for running more lands in Faerie Stompy too.)

Anyways, the whole RG Aggro archetype is one of my favorites. I'm glad people are still working on it. In my past testing, the main problem was that the deck had a tough time against aggro control specifically Threshold. They have the ability to counter or plow anything threatening (ie Dryad) and their Threshold creatures outclass ours. Their cantrips ensure that they draw more relevent spells than we do. I remember messaging Feinstein about this matchup and he also felt it was not positive.

We already get hosed by combo so, for me, this deck needs a positive or even matchup against aggro control (along with the Goblins) to be competitive.

Other comments:
- Why not straight Burn? Burn also beats Goblins, and aggro in general, including this deck. What does playing creatures give us?
- I highly doubt this deck has a positive or even matchup against Faerie Stompy. They run so many problem cards for us including Chalice, Trinket for Chalice, Jitte, pro-red, etc with the necessary acceleration.
- Slith Firewalker - I don't like this card. It takes a lot of babying to get him going and even then he's still slow and fragile.
- Scab Clan Mauler - If you're going to play this, I recommend playing Seal of Fire and Rift Bolt. Both cards nicely set up a turn 2 SCM.
- Rancor - So strong when it works and a liability when it doesn't. It's the most Hot/Cold card. To me, this card should be judged how whether it can improve the aggro control matchup (since we beat Goblins with or without it). On one hand, it puts all our creatures on par with Werebear and Mongoose. On the other hand, it's a 2-for-1 loss with Plowshares and it's not a threat on its own (important observation by kicks), which has many tactical implications.
- Mogg Fanatic - Mediocre 1st turn play. Crappy topdeck. Just weak.
- Blood Knight - Sucks. Pro white doesn't mean crap when Threshold wouldn't even bother plowing it if they could. Sure, it's decent with Rancor, but that means it's only conditionally useful. Then we have more cards that aren't good on their own. And what if Thresh is playing red removal?

Answer: 31.4%

[kicks_422]

Interesing post jamest, I'll try to go over your points one by one.

Probability question: if you run 18 lands, how often will your opening hand (seven cards) have zero or one land? What's an acceptable percentage for you?

I'd run at least 20 lands. There's not a lot of decks out there that this deck can beat if it's stuck on one land. (Eldariel, I was a proponent for running more lands in Faerie Stompy too.)

It's been working pretty well for me, but there has always been those times when it felt too low. I would however take the risk of a mulligan than drawing too many lands in the course of a game. And besides, the deck can still win while stuck on one land for a number of turns.

In my past testing, the main problem was that the deck had a tough time against aggro control specifically Threshold. They have the ability to counter or plow anything threatening (ie Dryad) and their Threshold creatures outclass ours. Their cantrips ensure that they draw more relevent spells than we do. I remember messaging Feinstein about this matchup and he also felt it was not positive.

That's exactly why I keep non-threats out of the deck (e.g. Rancor). I want to keep every card in the deck a must-counter and every creature a must-plow. They have cantrips to draw into relevant spells, but every non-land card in Dryad Sligh is relevant (hence the low land count).

Why not straight Burn? Burn also beats Goblins, and aggro in general, including this deck. What does playing creatures give us?

As mentioned in the opening post, Burn is susceptible to running out of gas. Unless they print red card-drawing, Burn will not be able to rise from the lower-mid tiers. Creatures allow for repeatable (=lots more) damage. And no, Burn doesn't beat this.

I highly doubt this deck has a positive or even matchup against Faerie Stompy. They run so many problem cards for us including Chalice, Trinket for Chalice, Jitte, pro-red, etc with the necessary acceleration.

Pre-board it's tough, but after siding in Grips, the deck can handle every hate the deck has. When I talk about match-ups, I take into consideration the whole match, not just game 1.

Slith Firewalker - I don't like this card. It takes a lot of babying to get him going and even then he's still slow and fragile.

How so? Getting the way clear for him is easy, and he's in no way slow and fragile because of haste - he'll become a 2/2 the turn he comes into play barring removal/counters.

Scab Clan Mauler - If you're going to play this, I recommend playing Seal of Fire and Rift Bolt. Both cards nicely set up a turn 2 SCM.

I was just thinking that, but that's going through a lot of trouble just to fit in SCM, which doesn't outright improve any match-ups significantly. Rift Bolt is also pretty poor at taking down blockers and has worse synergy with Dryad.

Rancor - So strong when it works and a liability when it doesn't. It's the most Hot/Cold card. To me, this card should be judged how whether it can improve the aggro control matchup (since we beat Goblins with or without it). On one hand, it puts all our creatures on par with Werebear and Mongoose. On the other hand, it's a 2-for-1 loss with Plowshares and it's not a threat on its own (important observation by kicks), which has many tactical implications.

So, so true.

Mogg Fanatic - Mediocre 1st turn play. Crappy topdeck. Just weak.

It looks like one, honestly... But as of right now, there are no better R creatures. It's not useless as a topdeck though, as that 1 damage is sometimes the final one.

Blood Knight - Sucks. Pro white doesn't mean crap when Threshold wouldn't even bother plowing it if they could. Sure, it's decent with Rancor, but that means it's only conditionally useful. Then we have more cards that aren't good on their own. And what if Thresh is playing red removal?

True. It's only a threat against Thresh anyway if it's Rancor'd, and running Rancor takes this to R/G Beatdown, not Sligh.

[jamest]

I would however take the risk of a mulligan than drawing too many lands in the course of a game.

What's the probability of drawing one or zero lands after taking a mulligan? You could easily seal your fate on turn 0.

And besides, the deck can still win while stuck on one land for a number of turns.

Do you really expect to beat any competent deck in this situation?

As mentioned in the opening post, Burn is susceptible to running out of gas. Unless they print red card-drawing, Burn will not be able to rise from the lower-mid tiers. Creatures allow for repeatable (=lots more) damage. And no, Burn doesn't beat this.

The easiest way for Burn to beat this deck is Flamebreak. Seriously, my guess is at least 60/40 advantage for Burn. Goblins has a negative matchup to Burn. RG Beats, when I tested, lost to Burn. What makes you think this deck will fare any better?

Pre-board it's tough, but after siding in Grips, the deck can handle every hate the deck has.

It's your 4 Grips versus their 4 Chalices 4 Trinket Mage 4 Jitte ... I know which side I'd bet on.

How so? Getting the way clear for him is easy, and he's in no way slow and fragile because of haste - he'll become a 2/2 the turn he comes into play barring removal/counters.

Well, if you look at the prominent aggro control decks out there, your burn won't be able to remove a lot of the commonly played creatures - Mongoose, Crystalline, Silver Knight, Weatherseed, etc. Second, you can't burn and cast Slith on the same turn until turn 3. This is really slow. And Slith is really easy to kill. Think of all the commonly played removal and pretty much every single one can deal with Slith - Plow, burn, Funeral Charm, Darkblast, Flamebreak, Jitte, etc.

[Volt]

The easiest way for Burn to beat this deck is Flamebreak. Seriously, my guess is at least 60/40 advantage for Burn. Goblins has a negative matchup to Burn. RG Beats, when I tested, lost to Burn. What makes you think this deck will fare any better?

Your "guess" is just that. Kicks happens to have quite a bit of experience playing this deck. I have a fair amount myself. I used to think Burn would be favored against this deck, too, until I actually played the matchup a few times. Cheap, efficient creatures > burn spells. Yes, Flamebreak gives Burn a chance, but they typically have only 3 in the deck, and they won't always have it when they need it.

Well, if you look at the prominent aggro control decks out there, your burn won't be able to remove a lot of the commonly played creatures - Mongoose, Crystalline, Silver Knight, Weatherseed, etc. Second, you can't burn and cast Slith on the same turn until turn 3. This is really slow. And Slith is really easy to kill. Think of all the commonly played removal and pretty much every single one can deal with Slith - Plow, burn, Funeral Charm, Darkblast, Flamebreak, Jitte, etc.

Some of those "commonly played removal" spells aren't really all that common. Outside of Burn (which does not generally want to 'waste' its burn spells on creatures), not very many decks run burn spells. Funeral Charm? Darkblast? Seriously? Jitte is pretty common, but you typically deal with that simply by burning their creatures before they can equip. Of course, prot:red creatures + Jitte are a problem. That point has already been conceded. StP is omnipresent, but when you run Dryads, Firewalkers, and Lavamancers, there aren't enough Swords to go around.


Having said all that, I think you may have a point about the deck needing more land. 19 is probably better than 18. 20 might be overkill, though.

[noobslayer]

Jamest, you have a very extensive post there. I would've posted last night, but I was in a foul mood, and it would have likely resulted in warnings on my part or the potential locking of this thread. First off, let me say, anyone who has any sort of experience with this deck for more than six months, should have no doubt in their mind, that this deck will never be tier 1. However, the deck is a blast to play, is kind of janky, and can still be competitive with the right pilot. I'll handle your post in pieces.

Probability question: if you run 18 lands, how often will your opening hand (seven cards) have zero or one land? What's an acceptable percentage for you?
I'd run at least 20 lands. There's not a lot of decks out there that this deck can beat if it's stuck on one land. (Eldariel, I was a proponent for running more lands in Faerie Stompy too.)

Yea, sometimes you draw mana light hands. It does happen. When I first played the deck oh so many years ago (this was my first tournament deck, granted at the time it was mono red), I was playing with 21 lands. As time progressed I added fetchlands, and eventually dual lands. All the while my draws and mana curve was smooth and strong. When I began to retest the deck for some reason I went to 18 lands, and I can say the change hasn't really affected me a whole lot. I still draw lands at the most inopportune times like before. I'd say if anything, 19 or 20 is likely the magic number, but 18 has been working just fine for now. However, this is for the NON-CURSED SCROLL builds. Those run differently, and need upwards to 21 lands to support the card.

Anyways, the whole RG Aggro archetype is one of my favorites. I'm glad people are still working on it. In my past testing, the main problem was that the deck had a tough time against aggro-control specifically Threshold. They have the ability to counter or plow anything threatening (ie Dryad) and their Threshold creatures outclass ours. Their cantrips ensure that they draw more relevent spells than we do. I remember messaging Feinstein about this matchup and he also felt it was not positive.

This is my logic for the inclusion for SCM and Blood Knight, which everyone seems so fucking adamant about not including, excluding Anarky87. SCM requires less set-up than any of you are giving it credit for. Thresh really isn't too key on pitching mongeese often to a fanatic. Like, pre-thresh, they have to play so defensively, as none of their threats really are. Even post thresh you can just drop stupid hands and burn them out. Granted it's an ideal situation. And yes, the deck is not an easy match-up, but it is winnable if you play smart. You say they have the ability. It's just that. Every deck has the ability to do something. It's just, they won't always have a hand full of counter and plow for the early game.

We already get hosed by combo so, for me, this deck needs a positive or even matchup against aggro control (along with the Goblins) to be competitive.

At Kadi Dual Land Draft II I beat Gearharts Solidarity with Zilla. Granted my hands played out Sligh with the addition of Elvish Spirit Guide. My point is, you bring in 8 cards, and mulligan into at least one of them, ideally two or three.

Other comments:
- Why not straight Burn? Burn also beats Goblins, and aggro in general, including this deck. What does playing creatures give us?
- I highly doubt this deck has a positive or even matchup against Faerie Stompy. They run so many problem cards for us including Chalice, Trinket for Chalice, Jitte, pro-red, etc with the necessary acceleration.
- Slith Firewalker - I don't like this card. It takes a lot of babying to get him going and even then he's still slow and fragile.

Straight burn lacks consistency. Creatures greatly bolster that. No, I don't think the Faerie Stompy match is all that spectacular. However, you've got the means to win. Bolting a Drake is a nice tempo boost. I'd bring in REB's and Grips post board. This is one of the first things I agree with. Hence, my non-inclusion of slith.

- Scab Clan Mauler - If you're going to play this, I recommend playing Seal of Fire and Rift Bolt. Both cards nicely set up a turn 2 SCM.
- Rancor - So strong when it works and a liability when it doesn't. It's the most Hot/Cold card. To me, this card should be judged how whether it can improve the aggro control matchup (since we beat Goblins with or without it). On one hand, it puts all our creatures on par with Werebear and Mongoose. On the other hand, it's a 2-for-1 loss with Plowshares and it's not a threat on its own (important observation by kicks), which has many tactical implications.

Point one: No. On to the next. In my experience with Rancor it's been something like: "Oh look, everything is now a much larger threat." If they drop some piece of removal or counter it means that I forced them to waste a resource on my terms. This is important, because I'm still controlling the tempo of the game.

- Mogg Fanatic - Mediocre 1st turn play. Crappy topdeck. Just weak.
- Blood Knight - Sucks. Pro white doesn't mean crap when Threshold wouldn't even bother plowing it if they could. Sure, it's decent with Rancor, but that means it's only conditionally useful. Then we have more cards that aren't good on their own. And what if Thresh is playing red removal?

I'm sorry, but if you are suggesting the removal of mogg fanatic from the deck, I have to call into question your experience with the deck. When I make any sort of sligh list, he's one of the first four play sets (along with Lavamancer, Lightning Bolt, and Magma Jet) that gets scrawled onto the list. Like, it's just awsome. I'd like to tell you every time he's been useful, but it be no stretch saying it would be longer than this thread currently is. And onto Blood Knight. If I were thresh I'd want to Plow a 2/2 First Striker. Why? Because it represents a rather large threat just on its own. Even without a rancor, if a werebear blocks it, I fling a piece of burn, and the problem is solved. Against Angel Stompy he can go the whole distance with enough burn supporting him. Mind you, the build I encounter is packing 8 pro red guys, and I think it's two or three MD SoFI. I don't think there is many other creature that is easy as hell to cast, cheap, dodges Plow, and doesn't trade with a large majority of creatures in this format. Short of Nimble Mongoose.

For reference when I refer to boarding for matches, this is the Board I am currently using:

Side Board
4 Tormod's Crypt
4 Red Elemental Blast
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
3 Krosan Grip

[kicks_422]

What's the probability of drawing one or zero lands after taking a mulligan? You could easily seal your fate on turn 0.

Do you really expect to beat any competent deck in this situation?

It really hasn't been a problem for me. I guess I'm a great shuffler... If you want to run more, then go ahead. As for me, I stand by what I said that I'd rather stay on one land than draw too much.

And I opted to keep a one-land hand against 43land.dec, staying at one land until Turn 5 or so and still won... It's rare, but it happens...

The easiest way for Burn to beat this deck is Flamebreak. Seriously, my guess is at least 60/40 advantage for Burn. Goblins has a negative matchup to Burn. RG Beats, when I tested, lost to Burn. What makes you think this deck will fare any better?

I have rarely lost matches to Burn. A game yes, but almost never 2 out of 3. Burn has been such a mainstay among the people I play with that I know how much it hurts them to have to waste a burn spell on a creature (a growing Slith or Dryad, most often). And yes, they play competitive versions.

It's your 4 Grips versus their 4 Chalices 4 Trinket Mage 4 Jitte ... I know which side I'd bet on.

The only card that outright beats me is Jitte, and only when attached to a pro-red creature, and then possibly a Chalice for 1, 2, and 3. Everything else is manageable, even their prized Sea Drakes.

Well, if you look at the prominent aggro control decks out there, your burn won't be able to remove a lot of the commonly played creatures - Mongoose, Crystalline, Silver Knight, Weatherseed, etc. Second, you can't burn and cast Slith on the same turn until turn 3. This is really slow. And Slith is really easy to kill. Think of all the commonly played removal and pretty much every single one can deal with Slith - Plow, burn, Funeral Charm, Darkblast, Flamebreak, Jitte, etc.

That's why I wouldn't take out Fanatics, as they can be sacrificed to clear the way for Slith Turn 2. And Turn 1 Kird Ape, Turn 2 Dryad, Turn 3 Burn+Slith isn't slow, is it?

I guess you haven't seen the tail-end of a growing Slith, have you?

However, if there are cards that could be replaced in the deck, it would be 4 Slith, 2 Seal of Fire, and 1 Fireblast, but not until any of the match-ups significantly increase while not hurting the others too much.


Slith Firewalker

Advantages: He keeps with the growing creatures theme of the deck, along with Dryad. He's golden against Goblins, getting out of Gempalm range quickly. A lot of decks succumb to a 5/5 beater backed up by burn. I heard haste is pretty good, too. Damage from the turn it comes into play is 1+2+3+4 = 10 after 4 turns.

Disadvantages: X/1 when it comes into play, which is when it is at its weakest.

Blood Knight

Advantages: Pro-white and first strike are good against decks relying on StP. Damage from the turn it comes into play is 0+2+2+2 = 6 after 4 turns.

Disadvantages: Goblins can knock it out easily. Pretty slow and small compared to the other two.

Scab-Clan Mauler

Advantages: Trampling 3/3 for 2 is a powerhouse. Damage from the turn it comes into play is 0+3+3+3 = 9 after 4 turns.

Disadvantages: Bloodthirst required for it to be any form of threat. Also puts a bigger strain on the manabase - the deck is red splash green, so more green cards might require a major facelift, not just for the manabase but for the whole deck, turning this into Feinstein aggro.

Another change I'm going to try: out 2 Seal of Fire and 1 Slith, add 3 Blood Knight. I think that those two are the best of the above mentioned three, so let's see how they get along.

[jamest]

OK I played 14 test games, Burn vs RG, preboard - alternating going first.
Burn ahead 11-3 (!) so far. I don't think the matchup is that bad for RG, but this is what happened.

I used the RG list from page 1. Here's the Burn list I used:
16 bolts
4 keldon maurauder
4 flamebreak
4 fireblast
4 incinerate
3 volcanic hammer
8 baubles
17 land

Here are the game notes I took:
1. burn - rg stuck on one land for 4 turns
2. burn - killed slith and dryad, the rest of burn to the dome. do you block mauraders? take dmg from stomping ground?
3. burn - rg mulls. double flamebreak.
4. burn - do you kill mauraders with burn? burned ape and slith. burn wins with double fireblast
5. rg - flamebreak kills slith and ape but double fireblast
6. burn - rg stuck on one land
7. burn - rg with 4 land opener, do you mull? close one, but burn outraces
8. burn - do you attack into mauraders or just let it fade out? rg stuck on one land again
9. rg - burn stuck on one land
10. rg - cant find 3rd land to cast flamebreak in time
11. burn - burn kills turn 4
12. burn - burn kills turn 4 again
13. burn - flamebreak kills slith and fanatic.
14. burn - do you cast turn 2 dryad with rift bolt suspended? really close, burn wins by one dmg

EDIT:
6 more games for an even 20
15. rg - burns stalls on land.
16. rg - outburns burn
17. rg - mauraders get burned. not a great card vs rg. ape and dryad win.
18. rg - wins despite flamebreak
19. burn - outraces creatures
20. burn - flamebreak with double blast

13-7 for Burn.

[Volt]

Whatever to your MWS results. I've played actual tournament matches, and I know sligh is favored against burn.

OK I played 14 test games, Burn vs RG, preboard - alternating going first.
Burn ahead 11-3 (!) so far. I don't think the matchup is that bad for RG, but this is what happened.

I used the RG list from page 1. Here's the Burn list I used:
16 bolts
4 keldon maurauder
4 flamebreak
4 fireblast
4 incinerate
3 volcanic hammer
8 baubles
17 land

Here are the game notes I took:
1. burn - rg stuck on one land for 4 turns
2. burn - killed slith and dryad, the rest of burn to the dome. do you block mauraders? take dmg from stomping ground?
3. burn - rg mulls. double flamebreak.
4. burn - do you kill mauraders with burn? burned ape and slith. burn wins with double fireblast
5. rg - flamebreak kills slith and ape but double fireblast
6. burn - rg stuck on one land
7. burn - rg with 4 land opener, do you mull? close one, but burn outraces
8. burn - do you attack into mauraders or just let it fade out? rg stuck on one land again
9. rg - burn stuck on one land
10. rg - cant find 3rd land to cast flamebreak in time
11. burn - burn kills turn 4
12. burn - burn kills turn 4 again
13. burn - flamebreak kills slith and fanatic.
14. burn - do you cast turn 2 dryad with rift bolt suspended? really close, burn wins by one dmg

EDIT:
6 more games for an even 20
15. rg - burns stalls on land.
16. rg - outburns burn
17. rg - mauraders get burned. not a great card vs rg. ape and dryad win.
18. rg - wins despite flamebreak
19. burn - outraces creatures
20. burn - flamebreak with double blast

13-7 for Burn.

[noobslayer]

You're also what, testing versus yourself? If so, that's hardly reliable. Match is 60-40 in Sligh's favor.

[Sek'Kuar]

The first test I tried out was with Rancors, where I took out 1 Fireblast and 2 Seal of Fire. It didn't work out too well at first, and most times I just wanted it to be burn. When it worked, it worked great though, but having only 12 nice tragets for it (Slith, Dryad, Ape) is hampering, as a Rancor'd up Lavamancer won't use it if it starts chucking Shocks, while a Rancor'd up Fanatic will sometimes be a waste of mana in case you need to sacrifice it right away after just one attack with Rancor.

i may be missing something, but how is a rancor a waste of mana? The card returns itself from the graveyard should the creature die. I actually think this is a benefit. So your fanatic charges in for 3. It goes through? Great! If not then you have an option of either 1 to the dome or killing the X/4 or less creature that just blocked you. not only that, but you get to pump ANOTHER creature after you are done. I really can't see a downside to the card.

[jamest]

Whatever to your MWS results. I've played actual tournament matches, and I know sligh is favored against burn.

You're also what, testing versus yourself? If so, that's hardly reliable. Match is 60-40 in Sligh's favor.

You criticize my matchup analysis (assessment, testing, etc) and then offer nothing to back up your own. Why do I bother?

[noobslayer]

Because it's been tested over and over because of this timeless debate.

[kicks_422]

i may be missing something, but how is a rancor a waste of mana? The card returns itself from the graveyard should the creature die. I actually think this is a benefit. So your fanatic charges in for 3. It goes through? Great! If not then you have an option of either 1 to the dome or killing the X/4 or less creature that just blocked you. not only that, but you get to pump ANOTHER creature after you are done. I really can't see a downside to the card.

The Rancor thing just keeps on coming up, huh?

Please understand the deck's principles and read my other arguments against Rancor - basically that every card HAS to be a threat on its own.

For all those who envision Rancor'd up big creatures that power themselves through with burn as additional removal and reach, play Zilla Stompy instead. That is NOT what the deck is all about, as I outlined in the first post.

You criticize my matchup analysis (assessment, testing, etc) and then offer nothing to back up your own. Why do I bother?

I don't think you'd expect us to have a log of every single match that we played against Burn using this deck - because if we did, then we'd have more than enough information to back up our claims.

As for your notes, here is what I'd do on some situations:

2. burn - killed slith and dryad, the rest of burn to the dome. do you block mauraders? take dmg from stomping ground?

No, you don't block Marauders. Take damage from Stomping Ground only if you have something relevant to cast.

4. burn - do you kill mauraders with burn? burned ape and slith. burn wins with double fireblast

If it's in the way of attacking creatures, yes you do.

7. burn - rg with 4 land opener, do you mull? close one, but burn outraces

Depends on what the other cards are.

14. burn - do you cast turn 2 dryad with rift bolt suspended? really close, burn wins by one dmg

If there's any other creature you can cast, cast them. Otherwise, 3 damage to a 1/1 Dryad is better than 3 to you.

It seems you drew Dryad too few times... She doesn't like you? And who were you playing against?

[jamest]

I don't think you'd expect us to have a log of every single match that we played against Burn using this deck - because if we did, then we'd have more than enough information to back up our claims.

I'd like to see some testing info. At least, it'd show someone else on this thread was putting in some effort to back up their claims.

rg with 4 land opener, do you mull? ... Depends on what the other cards are.

Give some guidelines for keep/mull hands here.

And who were you playing against?

I tested against myself. It's how I arrive at a lot of my assessments i.e. RG beats Goblins, Tendrils beats RG, Burn beats Goblins, etc.

[kicks_422]

I'd like to see some testing info. At least, it'd show someone else on this thread was putting in some effort to back up their claims.

I tested against myself. It's how I arrive at a lot of my assessments i.e. RG beats Goblins, Tendrils beats RG, Burn beats Goblins, etc.

Like the way you did, with 20 games? Sure, if I have the time. It's just that nobody in our playing group has burn built, and I don't think that testing against yourself is such a reliable way... I used to do that, but knowing what's in your opponent's hand and what they're going to do next is too huge a deviation over real games that the results get twisted.

rg with 4 land opener, do you mull? ... Depends on what the other cards are.

Give some guidelines for keep/mull hands here.

The strength of your hand, of course. Is there really a way to explain it, if you knew how to play the deck? I guess you want those 3 cards to be 2 burn-directing creatures (i.e. Lavamancer and Dryad) and a burn spell, or 1 creature and 2 spells.

EDIT:
Back to the Slith/Knight/SCM debate, here are my findings:

Slith Firewalker is best of the three against:
Goblins - gets out of Gempalm range quickly, even with Vial Ringleader shenanigans
White Thresh - it can get too huge even for Bears to block; can also force Thresh to block with unthreshed creatures
Red Thresh - they'd have to burn it right away
Solidarity - along with Dryad, gives a hope of racing
Stax Prison - One big beater for low cc (along with Dryad) hurts them along with their Tombs
Burn - Huge burn spell target
Red Death - gets out of burn range; if burned right away, prevents disruption for the turn
Landstill - can become too huge for their manlands
Pox - same reasoning as with Stax Prison
Random Aggro - Lots of big low cc creatures backed up by burn is usually too much to handle

Blood Knight is best of the three against:
Fish w/ StP - they can't kill it, especially when every Jitte-wielder they have can be burned
Angel Stompy - To get through, though can still be killed with Jitte/SoFI
Deadguy - Stronger than every creature they have, and dodges against all their removal
MeatHooks - Only 7 creatures in their deck can block it (4 Muscle, 3 Winged)
*basically every deck that relies on StP for removal

Scab-Clan Mauler is best of the three against:
Faerie Stompy - Can trample through their early dropped fatties

For the above claims, I tested 4 of each in the Slith Firewalker slot. SCM and Blood Knight has their uses, but I think Slith is more valuable to a bigger part of the metagame that it warrants the slot.

Thoughts?