IMHO, fetch less burn is the proper burn against combo heavy metagames where you don't expect to be able to use your searing blazes and grim lavamancers. When you just need to count to 20 as fast as possible it's your best bet (although still kinda sketchy).
Fetch burn is better against delver and other creature based metagames, which is basically most places since delver was released.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
IMHO, fetch less burn is the proper burn against combo heavy metagames where you don't expect to be able to use your searing blazes and grim lavamancers. When you just need to count to 20 as fast as possible it's your best bet (although still kinda sketchy).
Fetch burn is better against delver and other creature based metagames, which is basically most places since delver was released.
To be fair, if your meta is rather combo-heavy, then Burn is probably not a good choice to be playing in that meta. (Burn can be seen as a slower combo deck in those match-ups.)
I think as an overall deck choice, that it is necessary to run 8-12 fetchlands. (I like running 10, although I cut down to 19 lands.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Eternal Masters 2015 Legacy Champion. Has an unnatural love towards perfectly reasonable respect for Lightning Bolt.
I've been thinking about to include Monastery Swiftspear and Mutagenic Growth...but It seems something similar to the Vexing Devil case, because a combination of Swiftspear with Mutagenic Growth (or even Mutagenic Growth+Goblin Guide)in T1 seems very powerful, but in advanced matches it seems a bad idea. What do you think about it?
Thanks for all the feedback. I sold a Gaea's Cradle and a Mana Crypt today to my LGS so I have enough store credit to get the remaining cards I need for the deck. Comes out to about $100 for everything. Yeah, Burn is still relatively cheap to play.
I've been thinking about to include Monastery Swiftspear and Mutagenic Growth...but It seems something similar to the Vexing Devil case, because a combination of Swiftspear with Mutagenic Growth (or even Mutagenic Growth+Goblin Guide)in T1 seems very powerful, but in advanced matches it seems a bad idea. What do you think about it?
Regards!
It is theoretically impossible for Mutagenic Growth to be good in a Burn deck.
In the best cast, applied to an unblocked Swiftspear, you get 3 damage out of it. Applied to any other creature, you get 2 damage out of it, less than any bolt and highly conditional.
The only thing Growth is going to do over a bolt or a stupid shock variant is pump defense. There are very few cases where you will ever need that VS direct to the face damage.
Now, if we are going down the rabbit hole a bit here, what do people think of going down to something like 18 land and running Gitixian probes? Burn can use the information in its games to know what it's up against turn one and know if the swiftspear or goblin guide will be better, but in addition to that it also does trigger prowess for "free" and does not really affect your threat density or tempo. In match ups where it's not relevant it will get boarded out first for certain but knowing both players hands will in most cases allow you to forecast damage for the next 2-3 turns, without affecting your tempo. It can also thin your list in matches where your just drawing for hate spells.
It has virtues. It seems like a pretty bad card to rip with Eidolon already in play, but maybe that doesn't matter.
I've been going through some of the old Patrick Sullivan burn matches, and they are very instructive. I think we talked about it a year or so ago, but there is one against RUG Delver that is particularly helpful.
Patrick boarded in Vexing Shusher and Ensnaring Bridge. He aimed his first 3 bolt effects at his opponent's Delver of Secrets, dropped a Vexing Shusher, an Ensnaring Bridge, and a Grim Lavamancer.
The Delver player exhausted his countermagic trying to defend the Delver, and never got another threat on the board. The Vexing Shusher ate a Lightning Bolt, and then Ensnaring Bridge resolved. With the Bridge in play, the only way for the RUG player to win was to burn Patrick out of the game (I assume he didn't bring Ancient Grudge in). Patrick was at 12 life when the Bridge resolved, with enough land to play any card in the deck, and thus in complete control of the situation.
I'd always played the RUG Delver matchup as a race in which I was the beatdown, but I had it totally wrong. I'd resolve a few burn spells to the dome, take some hits from whatever threat was on the table, and lose as my last pieces were countered and the big green creatures connected for a lot.
We're not necessarily the beatdown. With Ensnaring Bridge, we apparently should play control.
I think that really depends on tempo and card selection. If your playing heavy creatures it may not make sense to burn out the board, unless you have searing blazes. Red races with the best of them and most all burn variants are no exception.
The mistake that was made in that match up was that the delver player should never have tossed counters out to prevent 1 for 1 trades against burn. Delver has a MUCH stronger long game and card draw which will put it over the top even with bridge in play and the burn player can never hold on to a single card less an army of 1/1s come at him from pyromancer or just repeated snapcaster bolts. Delver will win pretty much any bridge faceoff it it lands jace or starts resolving card draw of any kind because it can stand still and react instead of having to play out its hand ever single turn, and bolting a susher should not be a problem for that deck to accomplish.
I don't really like the gitaxian prove approach, nor the monastery swift spear. What would we pull for them, eidolons and lavamancers? The deck Is already pretty much as threat sense as we can reliably make it and neither option really cuts it for me.
With the probe, the best case is when the swift spear is out but even then it's still a free shock to potentially draw a live card (when we should have had a live card anyways).
I'm still on the fence with the swift spear.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even if the author is silenced, the performance is stopped, the story will not end.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
isn't there a budget forum for that? i'm answering only you, mtg_noob2 but also the guy a couple of pages ago. i don't wanna be rude, but i mean guys in the budget forum knows their stuff better.
I'm not sure what the budget forum supposed to do besides insert hope (there is only a few that are naturally cheap on the Established side). If your building a competitive deck and looking for budget suggestions it would make sense to asked these questions over here.
and still, burn is one of the cheapest competitive decks in legacy. if you don't own fetches, you can find some fetchless buuild here, but if you don't have guide, chain and eilodon, you definitely should save some money for those cards
That is true.
btw eidolon can be keldon marauders, chain lightning can be skullcrack, guide can be spark elemental. price of progress can be flame rift and thats all the more expensive cards i think
I've been thinking about to include Monastery Swiftspear and Mutagenic Growth...but It seems something similar to the Vexing Devil case, because a combination of Swiftspear with Mutagenic Growth (or even Mutagenic Growth+Goblin Guide)in T1 seems very powerful, but in advanced matches it seems a bad idea. What do you think about it?
Regards!
I think the reason why I have a little hard time in digesting Swiftspear because I love Vexing Devil as much as I love Goblin Guide. I know everybody think the devil sucks because the opponent gets to choose, but I see the guy as a 4/3 creature for one mana and I cannot see how the player sucking in 4 damage when "I need a creature - would suck for me" out of all the choice cards this one is a win/win...
So I'm trying to picture a different burn deck for Swiftspear (then playing with the Devil or Lavamancer)
Last time on SCG the burn player on camera got flooded and lost. This weekend the burn player on camera get screwed. This really hurts my heart to watch. Burn needs deck filtering, and don't point at Magma Jet.
What were the lists? Getting flooded on a deck that traditionally runs only 19 lands does not seem like a need to call for filtering, it just seems like bad luck to me. Likewise getting mana screwed stinks but running a higher creature count can help mitigate that in some cases, but honestly what you seem to be describing is more aberrant than the norm.
Indeed. We've all had those games where we draw 5+ lands and lose. It doesn't feel great, but there's nothing that can be done about it. There's also no reason to feel bad about it. Those losses do not occur to errors in construction, nor in execution, and those are the losses that demand attention. Not random flooding, even if it is on camera and even if it is for Top 8 or what have you.
Filtration would actually be a worse idea in Burn than in any other deck in Legacy, and would actually make the deck worse (as odd as it sounds). I got this idea from one of the Everyday Eternal podcasts. Bear with me.
Burn's cards all do pretty much exactly the same thing, more so than any other deck. The business cards are all Lightning Bolts. The rest of it is just basic land. Rarely, we need a different sort of Lightning Bolt and it would be cool if we could draw this: maybe we really need an Eidolon or a Sulfuric Vortex or something, but the principle of the deck, forty Lightning Bolts, remains. Filtration in this deck would be filtering among only two basic elements: lands and Bolts.
Take another example Legacy deck that could run Brainstorm, but doesn't. Merfolk. Merfolk also has two basic elements: lands and Lord of Atlantis. Every creature in the deck strives to be Lord of Atlantis. One notices, however, that there is another major element in the deck: countermagic. There are three elements in Merfolk: lands, lords, and counterspells. Still not enough for any Merfolk player to play Brainstorm.
Let's look at a few of the more usual Brainstorm decks to contrast. Miracles has a whole pile of powerful cards that are very specialized and only useful at certain points of the game. It's quite a lot of work to manage the cards in hand and on top of the library so that the deck can take the necessary actions at any point in the game. A combo deck like Sneak and Show has 5 elements to manage: accelerants, cantrips, monsters, mana, and countermagic.
These decks need filtration to function in a way that Burn and Merfolk definitely do not.
Indeed. We've all had those games where we draw 5+ lands and lose. It doesn't feel great, but there's nothing that can be done about it. There's also no reason to feel bad about it. Those losses do not occur to errors in construction, nor in execution, and those are the losses that demand attention. Not random flooding, even if it is on camera and even if it is for Top 8 or what have you.
Filtration would actually be a worse idea in Burn than in any other deck in Legacy, and would actually make the deck worse (as odd as it sounds). I got this idea from one of the Everyday Eternal podcasts. Bear with me.
Burn's cards all do pretty much exactly the same thing, more so than any other deck. The business cards are all Lightning Bolts. The rest of it is just basic land. Rarely, we need a different sort of Lightning Bolt and it would be cool if we could draw this: maybe we really need an Eidolon or a Sulfuric Vortex or something, but the principle of the deck, forty Lightning Bolts, remains. Filtration in this deck would be filtering among only two basic elements: lands and Bolts.
Take another example Legacy deck that could run Brainstorm, but doesn't. Merfolk. Merfolk also has two basic elements: lands and Lord of Atlantis. Every creature in the deck strives to be Lord of Atlantis. One notices, however, that there is another major element in the deck: countermagic. There are three elements in Merfolk: lands, lords, and counterspells. Still not enough for any Merfolk player to play Brainstorm.
Let's look at a few of the more usual Brainstorm decks to contrast. Miracles has a whole pile of powerful cards that are very specialized and only useful at certain points of the game. It's quite a lot of work to manage the cards in hand and on top of the library so that the deck can take the necessary actions at any point in the game. A combo deck like Sneak and Show has 5 elements to manage: accelerants, cantrips, monsters, mana, and countermagic.
These decks need filtration to function in a way that Burn and Merfolk definitely do not.
When I mean filtration, I dont mean a pure cantrip, like Brainstorm or Ponder, but if we could get a good bolt with scry or something. Lava spike is already very bad relative to Lightning Bolt, so I dont see why Lava Spike couldn't have scry 1 or maybe 2.
I have tested a list like that a bit and it works fine but I haven't played it in a tournament as I don't have Volcanic Islands. I would want to test a 1-of Treasure Cruise if I tried again.
Edit to comment on the posts that went up as I wrote this: I agree generally and personally have played monored in tournaments but I think 40 bolts 20 land is an oversimplification. Having more consistent access to, and a way to shuffle away extra copies of especially Price of Progress and Fireblast is useful. There are many times where we need a certain type of card such as creature removal, un-targeted damage, Eidolon, Vortex, and sideboard cards. Not that 4 brainstorm fixes everything, it's just something to test to keep an open mind I think.
This seems totally unnecessary. For all it's worth in an average game with burn you want to draw all of your cards, with the exception of fireblast of which you typically only want to see one of a game, and if that were the case that your constantly getting fireblasts in your hand, you would be better to cut them down to 3.
By adding blue you're making your eidolons do more damage to you, making your turns cost more mana, making your price of progress do damage to you, making you super vulnerable to wastelands, and more for what gain? to make your brainstorms active when the game should be over already and having 2 unreliable counter spells that may not do anything and can be hated on?
What match ups does this above list help out over traditional burn? I'll tell you off the bat the one it probably hurts the most is the mirror. While your spending your mana searching for more burn with fetches and brainstorms, your opponent is just hitting you over the head with damage.
HiHi I'm MDU a Standard and Modern MTGO Grinder I'm currently 6th in the 2014 Magic Online Player of the Year Standings (source) and my average rating ranges from 1850-1900.
That said I'm rather new at Legacy so if possible I'll like you guys to watch my HORRIBLE BLIND videos (geez I make so many mistakes) and give me some pointers (esp. tell me if I got the deck name wrong or if you you believe my SB choices are outright wrong).
For those who don't know MOCS means Magic Online Championship Series which is arguably one of the most competitive scenes in magic (its not often that you get LSV, Owen, Anssi, Eastern pros all in the same room) and how here is my first set of videos:
@Lormador: UR Delver is all over the online scene right now, I think its good MU for burn though.
I've played both decks at SCG Opens, and it's an insanely good matchup for the burn deck; you're just always faster. I assume Eidolon makes it even better. RUG Delver seems to get a boost from having Tarmogoyfs, but it's still a plus matchup. UWR Delver has access to Stoneforge and Batterskull/Jitte which can be a problem. I don't remember ever cutting Fireblast, but I don't think I ever even thought about it really.
Haven't played Legacy online, but I would guess Burn is a more common deck there than it is in the SCG meta. I'm guessing that's the reason for the Dragon's Claw in the SB?
I'm not sure so far I've only faced the mirror once and since I'm new at Legacy I didn't really want to change anything from the list.
That said I highly recommend Burn Legacy online since I'm mainly took a shot in the dark for most of my games yet I've still pretty much 4-0 most of my events...
It used to be that the expected card and mana to damage ratio was that 1 card and 1 mana was worth 3 damage (bolts), which is why burn was always looking for ways to resolve 7 spells. With recent sets, it is really starting to feel like the card and mana to damage ratio is trending more towards 4, which is a HUGE difference. If that is the ratio your deck has, you only need to resolve 5 spells. Huge difference. Now realistically in an average game with a meta that relies on fetches, you are looking probably at now having to resolve an average of 6 spells.
Which brings me to EotGR. I'll never say this card does not have a place in the 75, but the more I play it the more I think it may be a better card to board in. We all know a resolve EotGR is a death sentence to any sort of storm list, but in any deck that has removal it's going to be target number 1, which in a lot of cases is going to mean you spent a card and 2 mana on 2 damage, which is terrible. While that is typically the trade off if goblin guide eats removal as well, GG is simply better because it costs half which means it can get in more reliably. and haste can make it more relevant in more situations.
So the reason Swiftspear bring this up is because I feel like the 2 cards are in competition with each other. Swiftspear requires you not to load up on creatures so EotGR reduces it's efficiency, and it wants you to cast a lot of little spells, which EotGR punishes you for, which can become very relevant if you do it enough.
In my testing recently, my goal always seems to be to get the most potential damage out of my cards that have potential to do more damage. Goblin guide will always be best turn one because it gives him the best odds of doing 4 or even 6 damage before the game is over. Swiftspear however I have noticed more often than not I want turn 2, because it lets my other cards (GG and Vexing devil) have the highest potential to do 4 while still doing 3+ itself. Typically the type of goldfishes I want to see are
T1 - Guide
T2 - Devil or bolt and Swiftspear
T3 - Bolts and fireblast
The other reason I am liking Swiftspear is because it is not reliant on my opponent. The damage EotGR does is contingent on what my opponent is playing and what he does, while swiftspear is far less variable to meta and variance.
So am I crazy to want to move some number of EotGR to my sideboard? I have always seen it as a closer style card anyways, one where you gun their life total down as much as possible early on and then stick this and prevent them from doing anything without dying. Would this card not perhaps be better suited as a 2 or 3 of main deck?
It used to be that the expected card and mana to damage ratio was that 1 card and 1 mana was worth 3 damage (bolts), which is why burn was always looking for ways to resolve 7 spells. With recent sets, it is really starting to feel like the card and mana to damage ratio is trending more towards 4, which is a HUGE difference. If that is the ratio your deck has, you only need to resolve 5 spells. Huge difference. Now realistically in an average game with a meta that relies on fetches, you are looking probably at now having to resolve an average of 6 spells.
Which brings me to EotGR. I'll never say this card does not have a place in the 75, but the more I play it the more I think it may be a better card to board in. We all know a resolve EotGR is a death sentence to any sort of storm list, but in any deck that has removal it's going to be target number 1, which in a lot of cases is going to mean you spent a card and 2 mana on 2 damage, which is terrible. While that is typically the trade off if goblin guide eats removal as well, GG is simply better because it costs half which means it can get in more reliably. and haste can make it more relevant in more situations.
So the reason Swiftspear bring this up is because I feel like the 2 cards are in competition with each other. Swiftspear requires you not to load up on creatures so EotGR reduces it's efficiency, and it wants you to cast a lot of little spells, which EotGR punishes you for, which can become very relevant if you do it enough.
In my testing recently, my goal always seems to be to get the most potential damage out of my cards that have potential to do more damage. Goblin guide will always be best turn one because it gives him the best odds of doing 4 or even 6 damage before the game is over. Swiftspear however I have noticed more often than not I want turn 2, because it lets my other cards (GG and Vexing devil) have the highest potential to do 4 while still doing 3+ itself. Typically the type of goldfishes I want to see are
T1 - Guide
T2 - Devil or bolt and Swiftspear
T3 - Bolts and fireblast
The other reason I am liking Swiftspear is because it is not reliant on my opponent. The damage EotGR does is contingent on what my opponent is playing and what he does, while swiftspear is far less variable to meta and variance.
So am I crazy to want to move some number of EotGR to my sideboard? I have always seen it as a closer style card anyways, one where you gun their life total down as much as possible early on and then stick this and prevent them from doing anything without dying. Would this card not perhaps be better suited as a 2 or 3 of main deck?
I'm going to call you crazy. Decks that are willing to spend mana to remove a creature, possibly their entire mana for the turn, is great. You are still neck and neck in CA, ahead in life, and now a turn. The two probably don't belong in the main though, and should probably be considered what to run what in your meta. I would say that in an unknown meta, or a delver dominant one, Eidolon is the first and foremost kept in the deck.
What I'm curious about, is why is Monastary even talked about in Legacy Burn? We have enough spells to the face to forego running more creatures.
lol I kind of figured the two cards don't work well together. Also what makes Eidolon so awesome is that you force the opponent to deal with the creature or make them play slower then normal. This is why I'm willing to play Eidolon on turn 2 if able.
I do believe Swiftspear would be awesome in a Eidolon-less build (or like you suggest Eidolon sitting in the sideboard; although I believe Eidolon-less would be better and less wasted card space)
Fetch burn is better against delver and other creature based metagames, which is basically most places since delver was released.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
I think as an overall deck choice, that it is necessary to run 8-12 fetchlands. (I like running 10, although I cut down to 19 lands.)
an unnatural love towardsperfectly reasonable respect for Lightning Bolt.The Kiwi third of The Salt Mine Podcast: An Australian Legacy Podcast
I've been thinking about to include Monastery Swiftspear and Mutagenic Growth...but It seems something similar to the Vexing Devil case, because a combination of Swiftspear with Mutagenic Growth (or even Mutagenic Growth+Goblin Guide)in T1 seems very powerful, but in advanced matches it seems a bad idea. What do you think about it?
Regards!
It is theoretically impossible for Mutagenic Growth to be good in a Burn deck.
In the best cast, applied to an unblocked Swiftspear, you get 3 damage out of it. Applied to any other creature, you get 2 damage out of it, less than any bolt and highly conditional.
Overall record: 139-98-15
Total number of matches: 252
Win percentage ignoring draws: 58.649789
Win percentage including draws: 55.158730
Now, if we are going down the rabbit hole a bit here, what do people think of going down to something like 18 land and running Gitixian probes? Burn can use the information in its games to know what it's up against turn one and know if the swiftspear or goblin guide will be better, but in addition to that it also does trigger prowess for "free" and does not really affect your threat density or tempo. In match ups where it's not relevant it will get boarded out first for certain but knowing both players hands will in most cases allow you to forecast damage for the next 2-3 turns, without affecting your tempo. It can also thin your list in matches where your just drawing for hate spells.
Http://www.fantasticneighborhood.com/
Comedy gaming podcast. Listening to it makes you cool.
I've been going through some of the old Patrick Sullivan burn matches, and they are very instructive. I think we talked about it a year or so ago, but there is one against RUG Delver that is particularly helpful.
Patrick boarded in Vexing Shusher and Ensnaring Bridge. He aimed his first 3 bolt effects at his opponent's Delver of Secrets, dropped a Vexing Shusher, an Ensnaring Bridge, and a Grim Lavamancer.
The Delver player exhausted his countermagic trying to defend the Delver, and never got another threat on the board. The Vexing Shusher ate a Lightning Bolt, and then Ensnaring Bridge resolved. With the Bridge in play, the only way for the RUG player to win was to burn Patrick out of the game (I assume he didn't bring Ancient Grudge in). Patrick was at 12 life when the Bridge resolved, with enough land to play any card in the deck, and thus in complete control of the situation.
I'd always played the RUG Delver matchup as a race in which I was the beatdown, but I had it totally wrong. I'd resolve a few burn spells to the dome, take some hits from whatever threat was on the table, and lose as my last pieces were countered and the big green creatures connected for a lot.
We're not necessarily the beatdown. With Ensnaring Bridge, we apparently should play control.
Overall record: 139-98-15
Total number of matches: 252
Win percentage ignoring draws: 58.649789
Win percentage including draws: 55.158730
The mistake that was made in that match up was that the delver player should never have tossed counters out to prevent 1 for 1 trades against burn. Delver has a MUCH stronger long game and card draw which will put it over the top even with bridge in play and the burn player can never hold on to a single card less an army of 1/1s come at him from pyromancer or just repeated snapcaster bolts. Delver will win pretty much any bridge faceoff it it lands jace or starts resolving card draw of any kind because it can stand still and react instead of having to play out its hand ever single turn, and bolting a susher should not be a problem for that deck to accomplish.
Http://www.fantasticneighborhood.com/
Comedy gaming podcast. Listening to it makes you cool.
With the probe, the best case is when the swift spear is out but even then it's still a free shock to potentially draw a live card (when we should have had a live card anyways).
I'm still on the fence with the swift spear.
Whether it's a comedy or a tragedy, if there is cheering, the story will continue on.
Just like the many lives.
For the us who are still in it and still in the journey, send warm blessings.
- We will continue to walk down this path until eternity.
I'm not sure what the budget forum supposed to do besides insert hope (there is only a few that are naturally cheap on the Established side). If your building a competitive deck and looking for budget suggestions it would make sense to asked these questions over here.
That is true.
That's a good budget suggestion
I think the reason why I have a little hard time in digesting Swiftspear because I love Vexing Devil as much as I love Goblin Guide. I know everybody think the devil sucks because the opponent gets to choose, but I see the guy as a 4/3 creature for one mana and I cannot see how the player sucking in 4 damage when "I need a creature - would suck for me" out of all the choice cards this one is a win/win...
So I'm trying to picture a different burn deck for Swiftspear (then playing with the Devil or Lavamancer)
In his Second 100 days - Yawgmoth's Bargain is unrestricted in Vintage.
What is going to happen in the Next 100 days!!!
Http://www.fantasticneighborhood.com/
Comedy gaming podcast. Listening to it makes you cool.
Filtration would actually be a worse idea in Burn than in any other deck in Legacy, and would actually make the deck worse (as odd as it sounds). I got this idea from one of the Everyday Eternal podcasts. Bear with me.
Burn's cards all do pretty much exactly the same thing, more so than any other deck. The business cards are all Lightning Bolts. The rest of it is just basic land. Rarely, we need a different sort of Lightning Bolt and it would be cool if we could draw this: maybe we really need an Eidolon or a Sulfuric Vortex or something, but the principle of the deck, forty Lightning Bolts, remains. Filtration in this deck would be filtering among only two basic elements: lands and Bolts.
Take another example Legacy deck that could run Brainstorm, but doesn't. Merfolk. Merfolk also has two basic elements: lands and Lord of Atlantis. Every creature in the deck strives to be Lord of Atlantis. One notices, however, that there is another major element in the deck: countermagic. There are three elements in Merfolk: lands, lords, and counterspells. Still not enough for any Merfolk player to play Brainstorm.
Let's look at a few of the more usual Brainstorm decks to contrast. Miracles has a whole pile of powerful cards that are very specialized and only useful at certain points of the game. It's quite a lot of work to manage the cards in hand and on top of the library so that the deck can take the necessary actions at any point in the game. A combo deck like Sneak and Show has 5 elements to manage: accelerants, cantrips, monsters, mana, and countermagic.
These decks need filtration to function in a way that Burn and Merfolk definitely do not.
Overall record: 139-98-15
Total number of matches: 252
Win percentage ignoring draws: 58.649789
Win percentage including draws: 55.158730
When I mean filtration, I dont mean a pure cantrip, like Brainstorm or Ponder, but if we could get a good bolt with scry or something. Lava spike is already very bad relative to Lightning Bolt, so I dont see why Lava Spike couldn't have scry 1 or maybe 2.
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Brainstorm
4 Fireblast
2 Price of Progress
2 Grim Lavamancer
2 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Daze
20 Land
I have tested a list like that a bit and it works fine but I haven't played it in a tournament as I don't have Volcanic Islands. I would want to test a 1-of Treasure Cruise if I tried again.
Edit to comment on the posts that went up as I wrote this: I agree generally and personally have played monored in tournaments but I think 40 bolts 20 land is an oversimplification. Having more consistent access to, and a way to shuffle away extra copies of especially Price of Progress and Fireblast is useful. There are many times where we need a certain type of card such as creature removal, un-targeted damage, Eidolon, Vortex, and sideboard cards. Not that 4 brainstorm fixes everything, it's just something to test to keep an open mind I think.
By adding blue you're making your eidolons do more damage to you, making your turns cost more mana, making your price of progress do damage to you, making you super vulnerable to wastelands, and more for what gain? to make your brainstorms active when the game should be over already and having 2 unreliable counter spells that may not do anything and can be hated on?
What match ups does this above list help out over traditional burn? I'll tell you off the bat the one it probably hurts the most is the mirror. While your spending your mana searching for more burn with fetches and brainstorms, your opponent is just hitting you over the head with damage.
Http://www.fantasticneighborhood.com/
Comedy gaming podcast. Listening to it makes you cool.
That might be good, and it just won the SCG thanks to Bob Huang.
I hear something... can it be.... a bandwagon!
Overall record: 139-98-15
Total number of matches: 252
Win percentage ignoring draws: 58.649789
Win percentage including draws: 55.158730
That said I'm rather new at Legacy so if possible I'll like you guys to watch my HORRIBLE BLIND videos (geez I make so many mistakes) and give me some pointers (esp. tell me if I got the deck name wrong or if you you believe my SB choices are outright wrong).
Here is the list I played:
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Goblin Guide
4 Grim Lavamancer
1 Vexing Devil
Spells 28
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Fireblast
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Searing Blaze
11 Mountain
4 Arid Mesa
4 Scalding Tarn
3 Red Elemental Blast
3 Relic of Progenitus
2 Smash to Smithereens
2 Dragon's Claw
2 Ashen Rider
2 Pithing Needle
1 Forked Bolt
For those who don't know MOCS means Magic Online Championship Series which is arguably one of the most competitive scenes in magic (its not often that you get LSV, Owen, Anssi, Eastern pros all in the same room) and how here is my first set of videos:
Legacy DE Report 7500270
G1 Legacy Burn vs Infect
G2 Legacy Burn vs UWr Delver
G3 Legacy Burn vs Elves
G4 Legacy Burn vs Pod
Note: I'm sorry about the white noise (humming) I removed them from Wednesdays videos onward.
Question for you lot:
Vs blue do you cut or keep Fireblast
@Lormador: UR Delver is all over the online scene right now, I think its good MU for burn though.
Enjoy Standard, Modern and Music (also some Pauper, Momir, Gaming, Animations and Legacy)? Then visit my channel:Here
I've played both decks at SCG Opens, and it's an insanely good matchup for the burn deck; you're just always faster. I assume Eidolon makes it even better. RUG Delver seems to get a boost from having Tarmogoyfs, but it's still a plus matchup. UWR Delver has access to Stoneforge and Batterskull/Jitte which can be a problem. I don't remember ever cutting Fireblast, but I don't think I ever even thought about it really.
Haven't played Legacy online, but I would guess Burn is a more common deck there than it is in the SCG meta. I'm guessing that's the reason for the Dragon's Claw in the SB?
That said I highly recommend Burn Legacy online since I'm mainly took a shot in the dark for most of my games yet I've still pretty much 4-0 most of my events...
- - - - -
The key changes I'm thinking about are:
Cutting
1x Devil MD
1x Forked Bolt SB
2x Needles SB
2x Ashen Rider SB
Adding
1x Forked Bolt MD
1x Smash to Smithereens SB
2x Pyrostatic Pillar SB
2x Ensnaring Bridge SB
Basically I've moved the Fork Bolt into the MD over Vexing Devil because I wanted more outs vs Aggro.
I've tossed in 2x Pyrostatic Pillar so that I'll have Eidolon of the Great Revel 5 and 6 for the annoying Storm decks.
I've replaced Ashen Rider with Bridge since it less narrow and I added the 3rd Smash to Smithereens to compensate for the needles
I'm keeping the claws for now because fetch-less burn is really rough
Enjoy Standard, Modern and Music (also some Pauper, Momir, Gaming, Animations and Legacy)? Then visit my channel:Here
It used to be that the expected card and mana to damage ratio was that 1 card and 1 mana was worth 3 damage (bolts), which is why burn was always looking for ways to resolve 7 spells. With recent sets, it is really starting to feel like the card and mana to damage ratio is trending more towards 4, which is a HUGE difference. If that is the ratio your deck has, you only need to resolve 5 spells. Huge difference. Now realistically in an average game with a meta that relies on fetches, you are looking probably at now having to resolve an average of 6 spells.
Which brings me to EotGR. I'll never say this card does not have a place in the 75, but the more I play it the more I think it may be a better card to board in. We all know a resolve EotGR is a death sentence to any sort of storm list, but in any deck that has removal it's going to be target number 1, which in a lot of cases is going to mean you spent a card and 2 mana on 2 damage, which is terrible. While that is typically the trade off if goblin guide eats removal as well, GG is simply better because it costs half which means it can get in more reliably. and haste can make it more relevant in more situations.
So the reason Swiftspear bring this up is because I feel like the 2 cards are in competition with each other. Swiftspear requires you not to load up on creatures so EotGR reduces it's efficiency, and it wants you to cast a lot of little spells, which EotGR punishes you for, which can become very relevant if you do it enough.
In my testing recently, my goal always seems to be to get the most potential damage out of my cards that have potential to do more damage. Goblin guide will always be best turn one because it gives him the best odds of doing 4 or even 6 damage before the game is over. Swiftspear however I have noticed more often than not I want turn 2, because it lets my other cards (GG and Vexing devil) have the highest potential to do 4 while still doing 3+ itself. Typically the type of goldfishes I want to see are
T1 - Guide
T2 - Devil or bolt and Swiftspear
T3 - Bolts and fireblast
The other reason I am liking Swiftspear is because it is not reliant on my opponent. The damage EotGR does is contingent on what my opponent is playing and what he does, while swiftspear is far less variable to meta and variance.
So am I crazy to want to move some number of EotGR to my sideboard? I have always seen it as a closer style card anyways, one where you gun their life total down as much as possible early on and then stick this and prevent them from doing anything without dying. Would this card not perhaps be better suited as a 2 or 3 of main deck?
Http://www.fantasticneighborhood.com/
Comedy gaming podcast. Listening to it makes you cool.
4 Goblin Guide
4 Monastery Swiftspear
3 Vexing Devil
2 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
3 Price of Progress
3 Searing Blood
2 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Eidolon of the Great Revel
3 Faerie Macabre
4 Red Elemental Blast
3 Skullcrack
3 Smash to Smithereens
Something like that?
I'm going to call you crazy. Decks that are willing to spend mana to remove a creature, possibly their entire mana for the turn, is great. You are still neck and neck in CA, ahead in life, and now a turn. The two probably don't belong in the main though, and should probably be considered what to run what in your meta. I would say that in an unknown meta, or a delver dominant one, Eidolon is the first and foremost kept in the deck.
What I'm curious about, is why is Monastary even talked about in Legacy Burn? We have enough spells to the face to forego running more creatures.
Some people think Monastery Swiftspear is on par with the Guide.
lol I kind of figured the two cards don't work well together. Also what makes Eidolon so awesome is that you force the opponent to deal with the creature or make them play slower then normal. This is why I'm willing to play Eidolon on turn 2 if able.
I do believe Swiftspear would be awesome in a Eidolon-less build (or like you suggest Eidolon sitting in the sideboard; although I believe Eidolon-less would be better and less wasted card space)
I think Vexing Devil, Goblin Guide and Eidolon is an awesome creature lineup in fetchless burn.
Swiftspear might be better in a Delver style deck when your draw cards can make Swiftspear bigger then Goblin Guide.
In his Second 100 days - Yawgmoth's Bargain is unrestricted in Vintage.
What is going to happen in the Next 100 days!!!