[Deck] Burn

[Curby]

Really? That looks awful black to me. Red would have you sac a mountain. =)

In any case, Red's not getting a 3-for-1 ritual until black gets a 3-for-1 bolt. Meaning... keep waiting.

[FoulQ]

I have a question about the SB: Does this deck just assume autoloss to Chalice? Or is it worth it to run 3-4 shattering sprees instead of smash to smithereens...I'm confused on the replicate ability. You could do it three times and the first would be countered by chalice and then they'd have to counter it twice. With StS they'd just have to have a force or daze or whatever. Ultimately if you must must MUST destroy chalice then I think Shattering Spree is better, but wonder if anybody has opinions on this? Also, just wondering if vexing shusher is established as sideboard auto?

Here is my list right now:

(1cc)
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Mogg Fanatic

(2cc)
4 Magma Jet
3 Price of Progress
2 Incinerate

(3cc)
3 Flamebreak
3 Sulfuric Vortex

(...cc)
4 Fireblast

(land)
19 Mountain

(sideboard)
1 Price of Progress
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
4 Shattering Spree
4 Vexing Shusher
2 Cave-In

----------------
I hate hate hate HATE getting barbarian ring wastelanded. The theory of burn is to make opponent's lose a lot of their valuable tools. Wasteland is played in a bajillion decks. Getting barbarian ring wastelanded is terrible terrible bad. That extra push is now taken care of by sulfuric vortex anyway.

Depending on metagame, if there is not much ichorid, I will play 4 marauders over 4 fanatics.

Also the sideboard clearly needs some work, I have sorted that out yet. I hate counterbalance.

[Captain Hammer]

Is Blood Moon not worth sideboarding?

If it resolves, it's an autowin against 60% of the meta.

[GGoober]

It's only auto win 70% of the time if you land it turn 1-2. Most decks pack 2-4 basics just to escape moon effects. Actually ALL Thresh decks pack 3 basics now. They'll FOW or daze a turn 1 Moon, but will ignore it when it comes into play later. Burn can't play moon that fast therefore it does nothing much for it.

TBH, I hate Barb Rings too. Especially with Wastes + Stifle, it sucks. You can't afford to lose lands in Turns 1-4 in burn. I've been contemplating playing a full basic land and running 2-4 Grim Lavamancers. They are amazing as long as your opponents don't remove them. If we think about it, the removals aren't that bad on him considering that you would have dealt at least 3 damage with him hopefully (attacked once, used ability once). Not sure. He would be great against TA knowing that their only removal is Snuff out, which benefits us anyway :P

[bowvamp]

A plan that could smooth out the late game would be to run 2 scrying sheets in burn. I just absolutely love that land! It sucks vs wasteland though (just about every non-fetch, non-basic land does)

[GGoober]

It just sucks in Burn. Period.

Barbarian Ring's only problem is that it's non-basic. It adds red which is crucial in Burn. Sheets add colorless, which proves dangerous if you start with an opening hand of 2 lands (1 sheet). You cannot use Sheet until turn 3, which is horrible in the deck since you want to be playing spells. Not to mention, burn only runs 18-19 lands, so 2 sheets mean that you only have 17 snow permanents, making it a waste of slot.

[redmage]

I can't agree with this analysis. If you see a bunch of suicide in your meta, you can reasonably expect to win after dealing 18-19 damage, but you can't choose a weak card and rationalize its inclusion by saying it actually does more damage. It does exactly what it does, and a card that does more damage would do more damage.

The issue here is that you're not actually disagreeing with my analysis; you've merely created a straw-man argument to disagree with. I never made the claim that Incinerate "actually does more damage"; so that aspect of your argument is mute from the get go.

As to Incinerate being a "weak card", that's certainly debatable. The fact that it's an Instant alone gives it a strong measure for consideration when it comes to final inclusions. Instants are a precious commodity for agressive builds (my preference), and most decks contain more than 2/3rds Sorcery speed plays (lands, a few creatures, and the actual Sorceries themselves). "Agressive build" Burn players should always be looking for ways to increase their Instant/Sorcery ratio; even if just by small increments. Also, Incinerate is a "guaranteed" 3 dmg where PoP can be quite conditional turns 2-4.

I get that you weren't actually saying that Incinerate does 4 damage, but rather that any further damage wouldn't be necessary in a particular case.

Then why misrepresent my position in order to disagree with yourself? If you see little/no fetches in your meta then by all means go with another option; however, if you're quite likely to see a fetch popped within the first three turns, then Incinerate will improve your Instant/Sorcery ratio, inflict less suicide dmg, and be just as fast as Flame Rift as far as your goldfish is concerned.

When it comes to the 2 mana slot the top choices are Flame Rift, Incinerate, PoP, and Marauders. They all have their own strengths and weaknesses; and it's up to you (your playstyle) and your meta conditions to decide what the "best" choice for your deck is.

However, to say that Incinerate hurts them just as much is just not true.

Exactly, that's why I don't understand why you keep bringing up this imaginary claim in your post.

Could I replace your Lightning Bolts with Shocks, and claim that because of fetchlands Shock is good enough?

My Lightning Bolts? Not a chance; however, I would propose that one could replace some of my "filler cards" with Shocks (in a Fetch-dense meta) in order to increase the Instant/Sorcery ratio, and get closer to that "27 bolts" ideal (for agressive builds) that I mentioned earlier.

Personally, I avoid Shock because, in my meta, I already capitalize on opponents' fetches with Incinerate, and I want to avoid multiple hands with 2+ cards that are in need of that "Fetch-assist" in the first 3 turns. If someone were to test that route, I would definitely keep the numbers to a maximum of 6 Incinerates/Shocks total.

However, a three turn kill against a live opponent is a very seldom thing.

It certainly can be; however, I still prefer agressive builds that attempt to streamline towards that ideal by optimizing their chances.

That said, I generally like your thoughts on Burn decks, and will definitely try out Cave-In in the main instead of Flamebreak. As you said, burn doesn't often see totally dead cards, but it does see wildly suboptimal cards for a given situation.

Thanks, and good luck with Cave-In. If it fits your meta it can definitely be a nice asset when it comes to resource conversion and a timely early sweep without any mana investment.

I still do like Keldon Marauders though.

LOL

If you find that it most often gets in for an unblocked attack in your meta, then you've probably made the right choice.

[Seriously]

on a side note. lightning bolt, a card that was once considered too strong, is now not that strong. but instead of printing something stronger, wizards continues to print shock. whats to come, a 1 damage spell for R ? why dont they print some solid burn spells ? because it would upset the type 2 balance too much to have some strong burn ?

R
instant
deal 3 damage to target creature or player
split second

RR
instant
deal 5 damage to target creature or player

or will lightning bolt be the ultimate 3 for R burn spell ever ?

[GUnit]

Actually ALL Thresh decks pack 3 basics now.

This is so far from the truth that I actually find it offensive. Some of the most successful threshold (and Team America, if you count it) decks in recent months have had exactly ZERO basics. Three is uncommon, and even so a blood moon is probably cutting off splash colors if it resolves early against such a deck.

The "My Deck Has The Tools To Win, So It Wins" argument is tired. In order to avoid blood moon screwing you, you need to either:

A) Counter it
B) Have the foresight to know it's coming AND draw fetchlands instead of duals, so that you can fetch out basics
C) Luck your way into drawing your basics.


Now, please bear in mind that I'm not arguing for the inclusion of Blood Moon in Burn. I couldn't care less about it.

[juventus]

on a side note. lightning bolt, a card that was once considered too strong, is now not that strong. but instead of printing something stronger, wizards continues to print shock. whats to come, a 1 damage spell for R ? why dont they print some solid burn spells ? because it would upset the type 2 balance too much to have some strong burn ?

R
instant
deal 3 damage to target creature or player
split second

RR
instant
deal 5 damage to target creature or player

or will lightning bolt be the ultimate 3 for R burn spell ever ?

Because t2 is much more important than 1.5, and both of the cards you're suggesting would be too powerful in t2.

[Omega]

Agreed with above. To print a Legacy highly playable card, they have to print it T2 first. And no way they are going to screw T2 just to make Legacy happy.

Robert

[FoulQ]

Whoa, whoa, why would you EVER consider blood moon for burn? They are already going to be fetching for basics because of PoP and because they don't necessarily need all their colors (if certain colors only function for creature removal / artifact hate / etc.). Blood Moon is terrible and will only help against Team America and some threshold (which should be a not terrible matchup in the first place).

[Seriously]

Because t2 is much more important than 1.5, and both of the cards you're suggesting would be too powerful in t2.

yeah, thats what I meant by:

because it would upset the type 2 balance too much to have some strong burn ?

ancestral recall - last in unlimited
lightning bolt - last in 4th
dark ritual - last in masques
healing salve - last in 8th
giant growth - still around

so giant growth is the only thing weak enough to reprint ? the only thing left that wouldnt completely wreak havoc in standard ? thats sad.


how about:

R
instant
deal 2 damage to target creature or player. If you played this spell during your main phase, it deals 4 damage instead.

[matamagos]

what about the debate shattering spree vs. smash to smithereens?

I think shattering is better if you have 3 lands in play, otherwise I would prefer to have smash in hand. Chalice of the void will be set in play with only one counter, so smash can deal with it. However, if our opponent has fow or daze in hand our smash will be countered, but they will not counter a spree played with 3 mana.

In the other hand playing a spree always slows us a turn, since you are not dealing any kind of damage and you are spendig 2 or 3 mana to cast it. Smash doesn't slow us so much.

[kensook]

If you know you are not going to play against multiple artifacts or control decks with problematic artifacts, play Smash to Smithereens. If not, then play Shattering Spree. It's generally safer to play with Spree because it is easier to resolve than StS, but StS brings you closer to your goal while removing the artifact.

[Pltnmngl]

So let me get this straight...Burn hasn't gotten anything worth running for the last couple sets?

[Dark_Cynic87]

You kids have lost sight of what the main goal really is:

Make as few of their cards pro-active cards relevant as possible. This means no non-basics to make both their wastes and their stifles irrelevant. No permanents other than Mogg Fanatics//Keldon Marauders and Mountains. And the final and most important rule: Make as many of your cards have the capability of being lethal as possible. No blood Moons. No Barbarian Rings. No mana accel. None of that crap.

It's believed that Shattering Spree is the best to rid yourself of chalices, 3spheres, and other pesky artifacts. There is no such thing as an auto-loss to Chalice @ 1. You have a solid enough curve that in no way is it an auto-loss. They have to chalice @ 1, 2, 3, and have out Teeg before you can consider it an auto-loss.

This Incinerate argument is stupid and pointless because no matter which card you run, they will still either pop a fetch or won't. It adds nothing to either card, nor does it take away. Incinerate is for those who aren't willing to take the risk of an extra 4 damage a turn. It's a more conservative choice than Flame Rift. Nothing wrong with that, and there is nothing wrong with Flame Rift either. It really is, as it's been stated, a meta choice.

I believe this list so far has been as tailored as it's going to be. There shouldn't be too much discussion needed as no good burn has been printed recently. There are slots that are up to personal choice, but it's easy enough to pick those according to your meta that it's largely insipid to discuss.

I think that a lot of losses given to this list are based more on poor playing decisions and a lack of searching (which shouldn't be considered anyway as it would take from the focus of the list) for the most important cards (i.e. mass creature removal, combo hate, CB removal and an overall lacking of answers that don't read "X to the dome").

Pce,

--DC

[ScatmanX]

Pltnmngl: Rift Bolt comes to mind...

[Dark_Cynic87]

Rift Bolt should be considered a staple as it's got two casting costs, and therefore gives itself a bit of versatility through Chalice and Counterbalance. Barring a turn one Trinisphere, it's Lightning Bolts//Chain Lightnings 9-12.

Also in relation to my post above, Ancient Grudge is also a decent choice, although its Flashback cost is a moot point and therefore loses a lot of it's alure as it can't handle more than one artifact. I would say that Spree is your best bet. Gets around Chalice and can take out many artifacts at once.

Pce,

--DC

[Seriously]

Pltnmngl: Rift Bolt comes to mind...

yes, rift bolt is good for dealing 3 damage in the long run. but suspend or the alternate 2R cost make it weak for instant speed targetting.

rift bolt was released October 6, 2006 in the time spirial set. since then theres been planar chaos, future sight, lorwyn, morningtide, shadowmoor, eventide, shards of alara and now conflux.

what good burn has there been ?

shard volley ? thats doo doo with fireblast.

flame javelin ? 6/RRR for 4 damage ? thats doo doo too.

am I missing something ? wheres the good solid burn ?