Simple answer: depends. I was actually pondering the expert cycle and the expertise spell cycle recently and oddly enough also relooking how RDW should be meta-gamed dependent upon matchups that a player can/should expect. I think all of the experts are fine cards and playable in their respective decks in about this order: R, U, G, B, W; but I don't think any of them are the most efficient thing you can be doing in any of their decks at this cost. The reason I mention these two completely random and separate issues (RDW meta-gaming vice Expert Cycle) is because they are actually in regards to Kari Zev somewhat connected. I think the deck tends to languish pretty empirically against midrange in general, which tends toward base green or white (but certainly not limited, green just offers allot less constraints on branching out into other colors and tends to be pretty good vs RDW); and while I fathom that this card is quite decent on the play against midrange, I think it falls very short on the draw. I measure this off the bench mark of a T3 kitchen finks for example, on the play I may get in 3 damage with it on my T3 on the play, but it's brick walled afterward. Then I have to consider how good it is vice inclusion of another critter drop at the two spot, which I tend to think the best of the best include the following in about this order (vs midrange specifically): Young Pyromancer (punches up and can go wider than midrange, although it is slower than most of the other R 2CMC cards and represents investment), Abbot of Keral Keep (not really a 2 drop, but kind of, represents card advantage and late game come back potential), Hellspark Elemental (represents 6 damage, 3 of which is generally not planned for, the other half is uncounterable but certainly blockable, this still represents card advantage in RDW which is rare), Keldon Mauraders (represents at a minimum 2 damage, at best it's 5 damage, in a way this card is investment as well for R), eidelon of the great revel (yep just a great card for this deck, stifled a bit vs midrange where 3 (finks), 4 (baloth, lox hierarch), 5 (thragtusk, batterskull), and 6 (wurm coil) drops tend to represent life gain, but a solid aggro vs aggro card and great vs control), Burning-Tree Emissary (this card is gas, it's pure mana advantage which is where you need to be against midrange), Kargan Dragonlord (if this card randomly cannot be removed it's better than most of midrange's threats, represents a decent threat the turn it comes into play, and shines as a TD late in the game), Slith Firewalker (this card is likely the most questionable, and the worst in the aggro matchup, but against midrange if this thing can get to 3 hits and you can keep it's path clear afterward it can run away with games, and often making it a 2/2 is quite simple), Ash Zealot (in the finks comparison, this represent 4 damage as opposed to 3 off the Kari, it also beats finks in a fight, first strike is a rare ability for R cards, and is sometimes undervalued, also has random utility against decks that use their gyards as a source of card advantage, rare, but not unheard of, who's done that? :P), Grenzo Havoc Raiser (depends on how many critters you're running for this one, so it's more situational, recall that it triggers for any critter hitting the opponent, I don't think this is a great TD, but if it can come down after putting a 1 drop on the board it can run away with the game if the opponent cannot favorably block), Stormblood Berserker (you need to trigger bloodlust for this card to be good, but if you can't you're not likely winning anyway on this style of deck, and as it represents the same amount of power but with evasion, I think it's stronger), Emberhauler (also deserves a nod, although I think the efficiency of this card has been surpassed, but it's flexibility is still worth a nod, but I do not run it in my build).
This assessment is based upon the pool of RDW 2 drop critters that I think are the most playable and based upon assessment vice midrange, which I believe to be the deck's worst matchup. I think comparative to all of these cards she is worse, in the midrange matchup. Because these cards all offer something she cannot, either virtual or real card advantage (pyro, hellspark, abbot, grenzo), a faster clock or mana advantage (this deck's mana utilization should always equate to damage, outside of the need for SB hate, ie moons, blasts) if played on curve and followed up appropriately (ash zealot, keldon mauraders, burning tree emissary, stormblood berserker), investment (slith firewalker, kargan dragonlord), or flexibility (emberhauler).
So when/where do I include her? If you wanted to try her the best card to remove from this pile would be emberhauler, it's just inefficient for RDW and I think that this deck needs to ride as low to the ground and be striped of any excess cost and loss of time (summoning sickness counts against the clock, what in my opinion makes Ash Zealot or Burning Tree better, because both gain time whether it's through haste or two turns worth of mana production, and ostensibly more spells cast). But, this is solely comparing the deck to midrange, where I think its critters tend to get outshone quickly and you need to rely on your 1 CMC critters to do 4-6 damage and then reach over the top of their wall of relatively fat critters. I think in a wide meta, you tend to want a very close to even split of 32/33/34 critters, other, and land all built upon a curve (sligh, etc). The reason I value non-critter sources of damage is because in a wide meta you need to game against midrange, which again will rapidly outshine your deck in the perm department, and U/W based control decks, which gain card/time advantage through *** effects generally as opposed to instant speed/point removal.
The expected meta of control is where I think this card becomes interesting: if you expect non W based control decks to be in the meta, ie you expect that an opponent will build a point/targeted removal package (along a curve) then I think your build needs to be more creature based (probably 34/32/34 for the critter, spell, land). Here's why: These sort of decks tend to play at instant speed and are less so than U/W variants card advantage engines and more so tempo, through denial, engines, because they play at instant speed you want to force them to tie up their mana with less efficient spells than your own and once you land a critter, that lives, it represents virtual card advantage and here's why: they've built a targeted removal package, but to have any sort of range against other decks they've also had to build a permission/counter magic package, a higher critter count in the RDW deck represents a significant threat to this strategy because they're more likely to draw dead than you are, ie, a daze or remove soul in hand two turns after a sin prodder or even splatter thug hits the board is far too late and does nothing to stop what has already hit the board.
However, going with a higher critter split makes you weaker vs the U/W based control decks because you will tend to draw greater densities of critters for which a single card of theirs can equate to 3-4 of your own. Not to mention, they are likely, if you're pressing them with critters, to tap out for a *** effect on T4, this is generally the turn you want to kill them at instant speed with your efficient burn, after the brunt of the work has been done by your critter package and their counter magic is mitigated by the need to use their mana to gain value through card advantage engines like ***. It also opens up your options on the passing of the turn if you're running a light critter package and want to finish them with the remainder of your burn or a lighter but higher tempo critter package with some haste clown. In this matchup you tend to want options on when you cast spells because you will never out card advantage U/W control with a deck like RDW, you need to out tempo them and playing at instant speed to a higher extent offers you the flexibility to do so.
So all that said, it kind of depends. In general, I tend to think gorehouse chainwalker doesn't make the cut (although many would disagree with me), because he's too slow and represents no flexibility, evasion, speed, card advantage, or investment. And I tend to think you want to be on a 32/33/34 mix because it's better against midrange and it's better vs the U/W control variants which most tend to be just due to the card advantage offered by both colors through permission and board control (and the depth of hate that W offers a deck). But, if you're expecting a Grixis or BUG Control heavy meta, then I think you want to jam more critters. Sure they have toxic deluge and damnation, but toxic deluge is sort of the best worst against RDW and damnation is one card as opposed to 3 very viable options available to U/W (day of judgement, literal ***, and Supreme Verdict).
I think this assessment may be contested, and could possibly be wrong on some of the 2CMC cards I think are stronger in a wide meta; but if you were going to run her I think you cut hauler or firewalker in about that order. You need to maintain efficiency with the deck and building RDW requires a rigorous eye for curve out probability...like I say it's a perfect machine deck, it needs to play out like an assembly line with very little deviation and it needs to get there quickly. I think 1 damage lost, comparing to ash zealot on curve, is enormous when you're looking to win a game by T4-5; and this card in and of itself represents no investment (firewalker, dragonlord) or card advantage, it's basically a 3/3 for 2 mana that dies to all the same things a 3/3 does but gives you a free shock (on the turn after it comes into play :()...it's close, but maybe not quite and I think it is worse in a wide meta than all of the cards I've listed. But, I'm definitely curious to hear other's thoughts on it.
I will say this though: the U expert cycle legend is getting in the Storm deck
May I ask if you support these two cards in RDW for our tournament: Vexing Devil and Browbeat. Do these two cards make the cut in your current RDW build?
With all these questions I wouldn't be surprised if you intended on running some RDW (don't show your hand too soon). On these cards, Vexing Devil is okay...ostensibly it's one mana for 4 damage, and if it's in your opener, then it's all that it's cracked up to be--unfortunately this card loses a lot of value down the road in the game--it's often a wretched top deck outside of the first 3-4 turns of the game--which arguably if you're not winning by that point then you may not be ever, or you're hunting for that last burn spell to go over the top of the opponent's much better team. So, there's risk associated with the card--however, I do run Vexing Devil and here is why: I'm more likely to pull it one of my top seven plus draw it in the first two turns (where it's still generally relevant); so I say yes on this one due to the fact that the probability that I draw it T3-5 is very low in relation to when I want to have it (the first 9 cards) or I just never see it which is the highest probability which is just fine because if I don't get it in the first 9 I don't really want it period. So, I think it's worth the include for its raw efficiency during the timeframe you needed it, compared to the probability of getting it when you don't want it. However, I don't think a wide range of conditional cards like vexing devil should litter your deck because then you truly increase your probability of drawing nonsense when you don't want it. (for instance smash to smithereens, card's great when it's great, but it can just be a brick most of the time).
In regards to Browbeat: No, I do not personally run this card; it is also highly situational much like the devil--however, I know I have to be on turn three (outside of running cards like mox diamond, chrome mox, lotus petal, or ancient tomb in RDW [ie prob not very good]) to cast this spell in RDW, which is not a timeframe that I personally think that this deck needs to generate value (investment) it needs to be winning. It is most certainly card advantage if the opponent allows you to draw off of it, but think about this: how likely is it that they will. Sure brow beat (outside of goblin grenade (5 dam for one mana and a goblin card), fireblast (five finger discount + 2 irrelevant lands), and flame rift (4 damage for 2 mana), plus rift bolt/LB/CL/and Shard Volley [you could argue guerilla tactics off of a discard heavy opponent :P, but this is loose, so is thunderous wrath, RDW would never run this but it is efficient given the right circumstances {the probability of having this in your first 7-8 cards is higher, than keeping a hand without it and hoping to draw it in the first 5 turns in a deck that hopes to win within 5 turns]) is the most efficient 3 mana damage spell outside of very conditional cards, the other 3CMC burn that I believe playable being staggershock, char, flames of the blood hand, and exquisite firecraft. Note that three of these four all play at instant speed, a very important capability for RDW, to enable sequencing and choice of when the pilot most needs to gain tempo, or when they want to accrue virtual tempo by forcing players to play around ghosts that might not even be in their hand. The other, exquisite firecraft is not instant speed but the proviso that it cannot be countered in my opinion allows it to be a very powerful last spell in any game after the RDW pilot has exhausted his or her resources against a permission or control opponent who has seemingly "turned the corner". Also note, that three of these cards can kill creatures, the 4 damage benchmark is important in the critter world (outside of some silly cards like siege rhino and doran) as it allows you great range against most of the midgame threats folks will be playing, the other Flames of the Bloodhand, does not do this for you, but it's effect (stopping the lifegain for a turn) is a highly relevant one stapled to one of the most efficient 3 mana burn spells.
So, going back to Browbeat, I think this card is a false savior. One it does not play at instant speed (if it did it would take this card from a dud to an auto include, because choice is king in this deck, if your opponent even expects that you cannot play at instant speed it opens up so many lines for them and closes so many more for you). Secondly, while there are gamestates that may require exactly 5 damage to win these are few and far between; the analogous, but much more flexible 4 damage, 3 CMC burn cards are just as likely to win in most of the spots that this does on damage, but also provide the pilot with greater flexibility in choice of targets and timing. The second part is, let's say you're on RDW and you've gone hell bent, against a midrange opponent the game state is one of two things at this point: you're winning by a landslide, or you're up against the ropes and they've got a decent to sizable board--is this what you want to topdeck from this position--unless they're on 5 or less life you're never going to draw 3 cards, and even if you do, outside of one mana burn spells, or FB, are you going to be able to proactively engage their life total on the turn you play this--probably not, which means they're attacking at least one more time on an open board.
This card doesn't look like it, but it is essentially a functional reprint in red of the U card meditate by my assessment theoretically and through fishing the card and play testing it. Meditate is one of the better draw cards ever printed, but it's a negative tempo engine, literally, it gives your opponent a timewalk after you pass the turn and it's virtually (but not quite :P, my storm deck does run this because it's a great card if you can win the turn you cast it, ie Doomsday/Labman or Tendrils) unplayable in any format. While I do think Meditate has a home in a deck like the storm build I run this is due chiefly to the deck's ability to generate vast mana advantage, RDW does not do this, matter of fact after your 4-5 land drop you'd be glad if you could cast mana severance (countryside crusher in RDW :P) to get rid of your land. Where a card like this shines to a greater extent is in a big red deck (which we don't see a lot of) maybe a wildfire build or something like that, where the 5 damage is good incremental value for an efficient price and there's a greater chance on the turn you cast it, if your opponent let's you draw, you'll be able to cast additional threats, etc.
Simple answer: depends. I was actually pondering the expert cycle and the expertise spell cycle recently and oddly enough also relooking how RDW should be meta-gamed dependent upon matchups that a player can/should expect. I think all of the experts are fine cards and playable in their respective decks in about this order: R, U, G, B, W; but I don't think any of them are the most efficient thing you can be doing in any of their decks at this cost. The reason I mention these two completely random and separate issues (RDW meta-gaming vice Expert Cycle) is because they are actually in regards to Kari Zev somewhat connected. I think the deck tends to languish pretty empirically against midrange in general, which tends toward base green or white (but certainly not limited, green just offers allot less constraints on branching out into other colors and tends to be pretty good vs RDW); and while I fathom that this card is quite decent on the play against midrange, I think it falls very short on the draw. I measure this off the bench mark of a T3 kitchen finks for example, on the play I may get in 3 damage with it on my T3 on the play, but it's brick walled afterward. Then I have to consider how good it is vice inclusion of another critter drop at the two spot, which I tend to think the best of the best include the following in about this order (vs midrange specifically): Young Pyromancer (punches up and can go wider than midrange, although it is slower than most of the other R 2CMC cards and represents investment), Abbot of Keral Keep (not really a 2 drop, but kind of, represents card advantage and late game come back potential), Hellspark Elemental (represents 6 damage, 3 of which is generally not planned for, the other half is uncounterable but certainly blockable, this still represents card advantage in RDW which is rare), Keldon Mauraders (represents at a minimum 2 damage, at best it's 5 damage, in a way this card is investment as well for R), eidelon of the great revel (yep just a great card for this deck, stifled a bit vs midrange where 3 (finks), 4 (baloth, lox hierarch), 5 (thragtusk, batterskull), and 6 (wurm coil) drops tend to represent life gain, but a solid aggro vs aggro card and great vs control), Burning-Tree Emissary (this card is gas, it's pure mana advantage which is where you need to be against midrange), Kargan Dragonlord (if this card randomly cannot be removed it's better than most of midrange's threats, represents a decent threat the turn it comes into play, and shines as a TD late in the game), Slith Firewalker (this card is likely the most questionable, and the worst in the aggro matchup, but against midrange if this thing can get to 3 hits and you can keep it's path clear afterward it can run away with games, and often making it a 2/2 is quite simple), Ash Zealot (in the finks comparison, this represent 4 damage as opposed to 3 off the Kari, it also beats finks in a fight, first strike is a rare ability for R cards, and is sometimes undervalued, also has random utility against decks that use their gyards as a source of card advantage, rare, but not unheard of, who's done that? :P), Grenzo Havoc Raiser (depends on how many critters you're running for this one, so it's more situational, recall that it triggers for any critter hitting the opponent, I don't think this is a great TD, but if it can come down after putting a 1 drop on the board it can run away with the game if the opponent cannot favorably block), Stormblood Berserker (you need to trigger bloodlust for this card to be good, but if you can't you're not likely winning anyway on this style of deck, and as it represents the same amount of power but with evasion, I think it's stronger), Emberhauler (also deserves a nod, although I think the efficiency of this card has been surpassed, but it's flexibility is still worth a nod, but I do not run it in my build).
--KB
Here are my 2 drops before I read your post:
1 Abbot of Keral Keep
1 Boros Guildmage (Pet card- I'm RW. Obviously terrible in mono red)
1 Burning-Tree Emissary
1 Dwarven Blastminer (Can win game all by itself on T2)
1 Eidolon of the Great Revel
1 Gore-House Chainwalker
1 Keldon Marauders
1 Lightning Mauler (Decent to speed up your 3 drop, great to attack with itself and another haster on T4)
1 Porcelain Legionnaire
1 Slith Firewalker (Cutting this for Dragonlord as a direct result of reading your post)
Thanks for posting in regards to the 2CMC RDW clowns I would urge you to consider keeping firewalker over gore-house chainwalker. Think of it this way: GHCW will accrue you 3 points of damage by T3 (you're likely never "leashing" this thing, and if you're blocking with it you're living on a prayer for TD miracles :)), Slith firewalker will also do 3 damage by T3s (if played on curve) and has the possibility to grow well beyond gorehouse in the long run, gorehouse only stays on damage parity with firewalker through T4, afterward the firewalker ascends well beyond the GHCW's ability to damage opponents. Not to mention GHCW does not favorably exchange with alot of the midrange threats when it becomes available to attack on T3. You could argue that neither does Slith Firewalker, however, here is the salient point: If, as a RDW pilot, I have to burn out my opponent's creatures, do I want a threat that I can expect to continually grow (ie investment) or do I want a threat that is initially larger, but will only outclass an opponent's T1-2 plays and there after is relegated to "garbo". Not to mention the firewalker is a better TD, because of haste you have flexibility in choosing time and place to allow it to at least reach 2/2 status. I think on initial glance the gorehouse chainwalker seems better, but the firewalker provides punchup capability around the decks that RDW and other aggressive decks have a tough time beating. The one issue I could see for a deck like your own is that it runs 2 colors which makes the firewalker a bit more risky because when you want it T2 you really want it on T2.
Lightning Mauler, I run this guy as well just totally forgot him when I was running down the list off the top of my head, he's pretty much Peanut Butter to Burning Tree Shaman's jelly, and although that combo doesn't come up that often and most of the critters I run in the 3 spot have haste, I do enjoy hasting out a goblin rabblemaster or sin prodder and haste or really gaining time advantage is great in decks like this.
I think in our meta, you tend to be fine with running the miner package main, but I also don't think in a wide meta that would be a wise call. If you happen to run into another RDW, D&T, or MonoG Stompy, this is a laughable T2 play (or morph T3).
Porcelean Legionnaire is probably fine, I don't run him in RDW, because I'm not a fan of 1 toughness critters that don't have haste in the 2 spot (in D&T I do however, because the protection package is much larger, mother, 8.5 tails, selfless spirit, swords, absolute law, etc)...arctrail, fire//ice, and forked bolt tend to scare me with these sort of cards although they do tend to do well against midrange for about 2 turns. NTM he's an artifact which randomly means that it can die to two types of removal.
I won't tell you your pet card isn't good enough anymore, because the point of pet cards is that we tend to know that but just like and want to play the card anyway (and I still love azorious guildmage, although it too has been relegated to a less efficient past, but stifle on a body, plus a tapper, you of all people know I love this card as somehow I always manage to use stifle in some obnoxious way against you :P)
I think you'll be glad with dragonlord, that duder either needs to be answered, or he'll just win you the game, 8/8 trample, flyer, with firebreathing is not a joke. And often times what I'll see happen with him, is people on 1 for 1 removal packages will remove your more (at the time) threatening stuff, run out, and this thing goes large to win the game. Same reason I stand behind Student of Warfare, the card is great, and most WW decks will not run it, but it too can run away with games out of nowhere because people don't respect it as early in the game as they need to.
Take it easy guys
--KB
P.S. I vacillate on running this card main or board: Stigmalasher. This card generally get's removed the turn it comes into play because it is so threatening, and at the end of the day it's just a bear, but the unique effect it has on the game, ie if it hits the opponent can never heal again, is quite powerful, not to mention wither is a strong ability. I think if I were to hedge, I'd play this guy over the Miner, because most decks will find ways to gain life, because they have to be ready for RDW, not all decks play crazy mana bases though. Just an idea though.
I never thought about the breakdown of fire walker vs GHC. Sometimes you can grow SF to 2/2 in the mid game but sometimes he's a permanent 1/1. GHC can be leashed to block FTK or Rabblemaster. You're right SF may be better in mono but I like GHC better in Boros.
Grenzo seems like might get you a creature on occasion turn 6 or later. Or he can hit land or a counter and just be a bear. Ash zealot certainly has its merits. I'm used to playing turn 1 elf or turn 2 Natures Lore to be honest.
I believe he's talking about a boros deck he's running, the best RDW 2CMC cards tend toward RR casting cost. He may be trying to pair down how many double mana symbols he's running in the 2CMC spot for consistency.
Regarding the topic of 4CMC red creatures in the RDW decks, I think that Hellrider and Goblin Heelcutter take slots 1 and 2 for this converted mana cost.
For the third and final slot at this mana cost, does anyone have any feedback about whether Giant Solifuge is better than Keldon Champion or Thunderbreak Regent? Which do you most fear of these 3 cards (the human, the insect or the dragon)?
A few notes on RDW 4CMC critters: I don't think you want more than 2 total; I only run 1 4CMC critter in my deck but I vacillate on which one it should be: I think specifically in the critter department at 4 mana nothing is better than Hellrider or Hero of Oxidridge. Battlecry is a heck of an ability and the ability to get around 1 power critters is often more relevant than you'd think when folks are playing timely reinforcements and lingering souls against you, or eslpeth tokens, etc. However, I tend towrd the Hellrider, because it impacts the stack before combat math is done, which has often been the determinant of many games for me while running this deck due to a resolved card that has lifelink and it tends to compliment burn spells better this way. I tend to agree with stsung, I don't think heelcutter is good enough and I tend to avoid running more than one critter at the 4CMC spot, because I think RDW needs to be the best at what it's supposed to be the best at: efficiency. The 2nd place version I ran of it had an average CMC of 1.83 (the Gatherling math is wrong FB is not a 6 drop, and riftbolt is not a 3 drop, realistically). I think in the four spot you want one of the two critters I mentioned (but if you're running hero, you may also want to look at running a higher critter count than I do, I eventually cut this one because my build was only about 33% critters, and frankly I wasn't finding that by the point I could have cast either of these cards they were actually hitting the opponent, which just made the hellrider better, because he and my team could suicide in there, and I could burn over the top of them).
In regards to PW's I still think Koth is king, I only run one in the deck; however, I slightly disagree with stsung's suggestion/evaluation of Chandra, Defiant Torch. And not because I don't think the card is great, but it's kind of funny because the problem here is a microcosm of a larger problem the card has had overall, it can't find a home in any format eventhough no one will say it's not a great card :). I've fished this deck alot like probabley over 10K times under varied builds over 4-5 years (and as silly and possibly maniacal as it would sound, before I ran it in the CSM I fished it about 1K times to get the build to do exactly what I wanted it to do, luckily it only takes 3 minutes to fish this deck :P); I tried the new Chandra in this and just found that it doesn't do enough the turn it comes into play (alright it does 2 damage, but is that where I want to be on 4CMC in a deck like this); I actually think Chandra Pyromaster is the best Chandra for this style of deck, because it often equates to 4 damage the turn it comes into play (1 damage off of activation, 1 opponent threat cannot block, 1x3 power critter get's through), and if it survives the passing of the turn, it can either continue to screw up combat math for the opponent or it provides card advantage. This second part may give you pause, because so does Chandra Defiant Torch, however, CDT only allows you to cast it during resolution, you have the choice then and only then, Chandra Pyromaster gives you the flexibility to cast the spell whenever you'd like, albeit on that turn. This flexibility is very powerful and necessary for RDW to be played well. I'm definately not saying Chandra Pyromaster is a better card, she is most certainly not, but in this deck I firmly believe she is.
So, all that said, I currently only run 2x4drops in the deck, and they're the curve toppers, Hellrider and Koth. I could see going with Chandra Pyromaster over Hellrider, but in and of itself Hellrider ostensibly does more the turn it comes into play. But I play this deck very much as a high tempo, minimal investment deck, I don't run hate main (moons, miners, burning earths, etc), outside of lifegain hate, because I want my plan (put the opponent to 0) to be highly coherent and resiliant to anything that stops that. I think all of the other non-4CMC cards that stsung has mentioned are great; I'm not sold over on running the Scab-Clan Berserker main, but it's definately found a place in my board as another pyrostatic pillar (I removed black vise for this card in the SB) on legs card and it's great when you want it...I just don't think it tends to shine in the matchup that you need to most fear with this deck which is G/x midrange. In this matchup you just need to be faster than them, there's no long game against G/x midrange for RDW--only death :/
I think if I were to rebuild the deck a bit though, I'd add fiery confluence, one it's a 6 damage burnspell when you just need to win, 2 it's a very flexible card and can answer alot of problem artifact cards (batterskull, WCE, swords, dragon's claw, sun droplet, etc) and its potential to comeback from behind against a large board is very nice as well because it's rare to find a card that can allow you this while still providing focus to your primary plan of getting them to 0.
Completely unrelated, but you also want/need to have cursed scroll, dismember, and/or fire spellbomb in the SB, these cards give you so much range against the WW/D&T critters that end games against you (i.e. korfirewalker, silverknight, BFT, etc); otherwise you're likely banking on the opponent screwing up and attacking into a mutavault or a mishra's factory. These two cards plus the 2 damage threshold land were the only answers I had to these sorts of cards main, but I felt they were so good against me (firewalker specifically) that I needed board answers to the problem they presented.
The greatest weakness of the build I ran was it's inability to consistently answer artifacts, I ran shattering spree in the SB, but no main deck answers...this could be wrong, but I also think it helped support my primary plan to a larger extent; but if I ran the deck back again, which I most certainly plan on doing one day, then I'd run confluence main due to its flexibility afforded the pilot.
PS--Rob, I think Hanweir Garrison is also a strong consideration for a Boros build, it's not as quick, but when you're comfortable using more of your burn to keep the board clear cards like this become a lot more viable, plus the ability to play all of the battlecry (mechanic) cards ever printed makes this duder a lot better--I wouldn't try to run its combo land; that combo is just woefully inefficient and loses to so much.
Also just threw up some live commentary on a G3 (of a 3 game match) between ML_Berlin and dawts, as well as 2.5 games live between myself and ML_Berlin...let's just say in one match helm of obedience becomes Sands of Delirium The videos are here: Live Matches
A few notes on RDW 4CMC critters: I don't think you want more than 2 total; I only run 1 4CMC critter in my deck but I vacillate on which one it should be: I think specifically in the critter department at 4 mana nothing is better than Hellrider or Hero of Oxidridge. Battlecry is a heck of an ability and the ability to get around 1 power critters is often more relevant than you'd think when folks are playing timely reinforcements and lingering souls against you, or eslpeth tokens, etc. However, I tend towrd the Hellrider, because it impacts the stack before combat math is done, which has often been the determinant of many games for me while running this deck due to a resolved card that has lifelink and it tends to compliment burn spells better this way. I tend to agree with stsung, I don't think heelcutter is good enough and I tend to avoid running more than one critter at the 4CMC spot, because I think RDW needs to be the best at what it's supposed to be the best at: efficiency. The 2nd place version I ran of it had an average CMC of 1.83 (the Gatherling math is wrong FB is not a 6 drop, and riftbolt is not a 3 drop, realistically). I think in the four spot you want one of the two critters I mentioned (but if you're running hero, you may also want to look at running a higher critter count than I do, I eventually cut this one because my build was only about 33% critters, and frankly I wasn't finding that by the point I could have cast either of these cards they were actually hitting the opponent, which just made the hellrider better, because he and my team could suicide in there, and I could burn over the top of them).
PS--Rob, I think Hanweir Garrison is also a strong consideration for a Boros build, it's not as quick, but when you're comfortable using more of your burn to keep the board clear cards like this become a lot more viable, plus the ability to play all of the battlecry (mechanic) cards ever printed makes this duder a lot better--I wouldn't try to run its combo land; that combo is just woefully inefficient and loses to so much.
Here's what I was running:
Hellrider - what lowman said
Murderous Redcap - rare source of card advantage
Flametongue Kavu - would cut if metagame changes
Avalanche Riders - fine even if you don't pay the echo
Hero of Oxid Ridge - Was not running but will. Undecided if I'm cutting FTK, AR or a different card altogether
Also just threw up some live commentary on a G3 (of a 3 game match) between ML_Berlin and dawts, as well as 2.5 games live between myself and ML_Berlin...let's just say in one match helm of obedience becomes Sands of Delirium The videos are here: Live Matches
Enjoy and take it easy
--KB
I watched G3 a bit and I gotta agree with lowman... ML_berlin, dust bowl the land! Haha. Good stuff though, always enjoy watching some 100cs. Lowman I've enjoyed your content (the few vids I've had time to watch) and appreciate the time you spend on the format. Now when I play you I'm afraid if I screw up it'll be immortalized in a video for all to see!
No man it's not like that; I can definitely be a bad backseat driver when watching a game, but at the end of the day it's learning and possibly teaching that's the most important thing to me and I don't mean per se others, because I'm an alright player, but I'd never deign to say I'm better than any other player out there because I make mistakes a plenty and have found that making content generally helps me to develop a deeper understanding of the game based upon the forced self reflection of creation. Either way it's easy to judge the proverbial (wo)man in the arena (however you say this in a politically correct manner, and I highly doubt T. Roosevelt gave a crap about that sort of thing anyway, ascended to the VP to keep him out of the P seat, and look how that worked out), but it's a lot harder to get in there and do it yourself; but I think both can be enlightening. Watching other games more so tends to build my ability to preordain what both players tend to be on or rather what lines they will pursue based upon assumed holdings (due to the high volume of hidden information, you're forced to build a deeper understanding of where each player is trying to take the game and what their possible holdings are based upon the past and present of the gamestate only), whereas, I personally tend to be very focused on playing my cards optimally when I have full information of my own holdings in a game I'm playing in, which can lead to one being myopic and focused more so on the information known as opposed to playing with a mind to favorably (for you the player hopefully) interact with what you could readily understand, be it opaque, of the hidden information at stake (an opponent's hand and likely employment of those cards/effects). True masters of this sort of objective understanding are said to "next level" opponents by forcing them to fight ghosts as opposed to realities and sometimes I catch a glimpse and get this opportunity, but I'm always seeking to see the game more clearly and in a lot of ways it translates to real life logical thought process and interaction in the human domain, because what is MTG other than a social interaction, namely contention and resolution.
Anyway, it kind of harkens back to an article I read along time ago written by PVD on cabal therapy (should still be up on CFB it's one of their best articles), in my opinion a true master's card (one that I think we both share an affinity for if I'm not mistaken). The cool thing about this is there are cards aplenty like this, FoF is another and decently well known as a skill intensive card, and I think we've just gotten another in the card Sanctum Prelate. It's already found it's way into legacy and actually Stsung and I were talking about it today, she claimed she was writing an article on it and her experience with D&T in legacy. I hope she'll share it with all of us in the forum as I tend to think cards like Sanctum Prelate tend to get underrated, and then once they do very well, tend to be played very widely but to little effect for some pilots because they fail to understand that the reason the card is great is not due to the card in and of itself, but due to the player's ability to understand hidden knowledge clearly as opposed to known knowledge. As a random side note, that's sort of why I dislike the current design trend toward powerful critters; if you give me a card like Siege Rhino or Thoughtknot Seer, I'm going to play it, but cards like this in alot of ways devalue the skill required by a player to succeed in the game. This is not wholly a bad thing, as any game or community needs to expand to maintain, in this case, a player base, and newer players will tend to understand the game the least and luck is important to this end, but in my opinion this design trend has not been adequately complimented by powerful instants and sorceries, the printing of a 2 mana counterspell is heresy these days, but I'd argue that the effective use of countermagic and/or stifle effects etc, require a far greater understanding of the game within the game to play beyond good enough.
Anyway that's a far cry from even tangential to your original post; I'm glad you enjoy the content and hopefully I can keep on putting some decent stuff up on the format.
But u should really REALLY buy a headset! Even if it's just one for 10 buck's. Or at least get closer to the PC but I doubt that this is enough. There are permanently distortions, with the slightest movement of your head, sounds sometimes like a walkie-talkie. But the biggest problem is the recording volume , I think. It's exhausting after 30 min or so to listen so focussedly to a 'whispering' man, especially with the long size of most recordings. It's also natural, that after 30 min of recording you speak in a lower voice than at start, which increase the effect. Native speakers have less problems, I guess, but still I beg for a better audio recording with an increased recording volume.
Congrats to Sensei (Bow to your Sensei :P) for the win. I've uploaded the matches I played to YT, unfortunately it's not a live replay, I started doing that, but after I picked up a bye round 2, I played 2 matches in cube league (D&T there as well, go figure right, guess no one likes white cards, and well when you see MOR and Espeth Knight Errant P1P3 together and wheel MOR you know you read the signals correctly) and didn't want to be too all over the place. However, and ML you'll be happy to hear this, I did invest in a headset, so you can hopefully hear me better.
Had one more the recording got screwed up on with a big red deck; must have done something right because our three creations today managed to go 3-0 a piece. Enjoy and apologies for any of my poor explanations ("What I'm really looking for here is Thragtusk", definitely meaning Craterhoof B.)
Undefeated: dawts -4
Lost once:
CHAOSBLACKDOOM -2
The_Sensei -2
Michelle_Wong -2
Door Prize: lowman02 -1
Event 3.13 7th of January
Undefeated: CHAOSBLACKDOOM -6
Lost once:
totalhate -2
lowman02 -0 (!)
dawts -2
Door Prize: Michelle_Wong -1
3 power for 2 mana + evasion + 2 bodies + one of those bodies keeps coming back each turn. This seems a very good deal to me.
Simple answer: depends. I was actually pondering the expert cycle and the expertise spell cycle recently and oddly enough also relooking how RDW should be meta-gamed dependent upon matchups that a player can/should expect. I think all of the experts are fine cards and playable in their respective decks in about this order: R, U, G, B, W; but I don't think any of them are the most efficient thing you can be doing in any of their decks at this cost. The reason I mention these two completely random and separate issues (RDW meta-gaming vice Expert Cycle) is because they are actually in regards to Kari Zev somewhat connected. I think the deck tends to languish pretty empirically against midrange in general, which tends toward base green or white (but certainly not limited, green just offers allot less constraints on branching out into other colors and tends to be pretty good vs RDW); and while I fathom that this card is quite decent on the play against midrange, I think it falls very short on the draw. I measure this off the bench mark of a T3 kitchen finks for example, on the play I may get in 3 damage with it on my T3 on the play, but it's brick walled afterward. Then I have to consider how good it is vice inclusion of another critter drop at the two spot, which I tend to think the best of the best include the following in about this order (vs midrange specifically): Young Pyromancer (punches up and can go wider than midrange, although it is slower than most of the other R 2CMC cards and represents investment), Abbot of Keral Keep (not really a 2 drop, but kind of, represents card advantage and late game come back potential), Hellspark Elemental (represents 6 damage, 3 of which is generally not planned for, the other half is uncounterable but certainly blockable, this still represents card advantage in RDW which is rare), Keldon Mauraders (represents at a minimum 2 damage, at best it's 5 damage, in a way this card is investment as well for R), eidelon of the great revel (yep just a great card for this deck, stifled a bit vs midrange where 3 (finks), 4 (baloth, lox hierarch), 5 (thragtusk, batterskull), and 6 (wurm coil) drops tend to represent life gain, but a solid aggro vs aggro card and great vs control), Burning-Tree Emissary (this card is gas, it's pure mana advantage which is where you need to be against midrange), Kargan Dragonlord (if this card randomly cannot be removed it's better than most of midrange's threats, represents a decent threat the turn it comes into play, and shines as a TD late in the game), Slith Firewalker (this card is likely the most questionable, and the worst in the aggro matchup, but against midrange if this thing can get to 3 hits and you can keep it's path clear afterward it can run away with games, and often making it a 2/2 is quite simple), Ash Zealot (in the finks comparison, this represent 4 damage as opposed to 3 off the Kari, it also beats finks in a fight, first strike is a rare ability for R cards, and is sometimes undervalued, also has random utility against decks that use their gyards as a source of card advantage, rare, but not unheard of, who's done that? :P), Grenzo Havoc Raiser (depends on how many critters you're running for this one, so it's more situational, recall that it triggers for any critter hitting the opponent, I don't think this is a great TD, but if it can come down after putting a 1 drop on the board it can run away with the game if the opponent cannot favorably block), Stormblood Berserker (you need to trigger bloodlust for this card to be good, but if you can't you're not likely winning anyway on this style of deck, and as it represents the same amount of power but with evasion, I think it's stronger), Emberhauler (also deserves a nod, although I think the efficiency of this card has been surpassed, but it's flexibility is still worth a nod, but I do not run it in my build).
This assessment is based upon the pool of RDW 2 drop critters that I think are the most playable and based upon assessment vice midrange, which I believe to be the deck's worst matchup. I think comparative to all of these cards she is worse, in the midrange matchup. Because these cards all offer something she cannot, either virtual or real card advantage (pyro, hellspark, abbot, grenzo), a faster clock or mana advantage (this deck's mana utilization should always equate to damage, outside of the need for SB hate, ie moons, blasts) if played on curve and followed up appropriately (ash zealot, keldon mauraders, burning tree emissary, stormblood berserker), investment (slith firewalker, kargan dragonlord), or flexibility (emberhauler).
So when/where do I include her? If you wanted to try her the best card to remove from this pile would be emberhauler, it's just inefficient for RDW and I think that this deck needs to ride as low to the ground and be striped of any excess cost and loss of time (summoning sickness counts against the clock, what in my opinion makes Ash Zealot or Burning Tree better, because both gain time whether it's through haste or two turns worth of mana production, and ostensibly more spells cast). But, this is solely comparing the deck to midrange, where I think its critters tend to get outshone quickly and you need to rely on your 1 CMC critters to do 4-6 damage and then reach over the top of their wall of relatively fat critters. I think in a wide meta, you tend to want a very close to even split of 32/33/34 critters, other, and land all built upon a curve (sligh, etc). The reason I value non-critter sources of damage is because in a wide meta you need to game against midrange, which again will rapidly outshine your deck in the perm department, and U/W based control decks, which gain card/time advantage through *** effects generally as opposed to instant speed/point removal.
The expected meta of control is where I think this card becomes interesting: if you expect non W based control decks to be in the meta, ie you expect that an opponent will build a point/targeted removal package (along a curve) then I think your build needs to be more creature based (probably 34/32/34 for the critter, spell, land). Here's why: These sort of decks tend to play at instant speed and are less so than U/W variants card advantage engines and more so tempo, through denial, engines, because they play at instant speed you want to force them to tie up their mana with less efficient spells than your own and once you land a critter, that lives, it represents virtual card advantage and here's why: they've built a targeted removal package, but to have any sort of range against other decks they've also had to build a permission/counter magic package, a higher critter count in the RDW deck represents a significant threat to this strategy because they're more likely to draw dead than you are, ie, a daze or remove soul in hand two turns after a sin prodder or even splatter thug hits the board is far too late and does nothing to stop what has already hit the board.
However, going with a higher critter split makes you weaker vs the U/W based control decks because you will tend to draw greater densities of critters for which a single card of theirs can equate to 3-4 of your own. Not to mention, they are likely, if you're pressing them with critters, to tap out for a *** effect on T4, this is generally the turn you want to kill them at instant speed with your efficient burn, after the brunt of the work has been done by your critter package and their counter magic is mitigated by the need to use their mana to gain value through card advantage engines like ***. It also opens up your options on the passing of the turn if you're running a light critter package and want to finish them with the remainder of your burn or a lighter but higher tempo critter package with some haste clown. In this matchup you tend to want options on when you cast spells because you will never out card advantage U/W control with a deck like RDW, you need to out tempo them and playing at instant speed to a higher extent offers you the flexibility to do so.
So all that said, it kind of depends. In general, I tend to think gorehouse chainwalker doesn't make the cut (although many would disagree with me), because he's too slow and represents no flexibility, evasion, speed, card advantage, or investment. And I tend to think you want to be on a 32/33/34 mix because it's better against midrange and it's better vs the U/W control variants which most tend to be just due to the card advantage offered by both colors through permission and board control (and the depth of hate that W offers a deck). But, if you're expecting a Grixis or BUG Control heavy meta, then I think you want to jam more critters. Sure they have toxic deluge and damnation, but toxic deluge is sort of the best worst against RDW and damnation is one card as opposed to 3 very viable options available to U/W (day of judgement, literal ***, and Supreme Verdict).
I think this assessment may be contested, and could possibly be wrong on some of the 2CMC cards I think are stronger in a wide meta; but if you were going to run her I think you cut hauler or firewalker in about that order. You need to maintain efficiency with the deck and building RDW requires a rigorous eye for curve out probability...like I say it's a perfect machine deck, it needs to play out like an assembly line with very little deviation and it needs to get there quickly. I think 1 damage lost, comparing to ash zealot on curve, is enormous when you're looking to win a game by T4-5; and this card in and of itself represents no investment (firewalker, dragonlord) or card advantage, it's basically a 3/3 for 2 mana that dies to all the same things a 3/3 does but gives you a free shock (on the turn after it comes into play :()...it's close, but maybe not quite and I think it is worse in a wide meta than all of the cards I've listed. But, I'm definitely curious to hear other's thoughts on it.
I will say this though: the U expert cycle legend is getting in the Storm deck
Take it easy all
--KB
May I ask if you support these two cards in RDW for our tournament: Vexing Devil and Browbeat. Do these two cards make the cut in your current RDW build?
With all these questions I wouldn't be surprised if you intended on running some RDW (don't show your hand too soon). On these cards, Vexing Devil is okay...ostensibly it's one mana for 4 damage, and if it's in your opener, then it's all that it's cracked up to be--unfortunately this card loses a lot of value down the road in the game--it's often a wretched top deck outside of the first 3-4 turns of the game--which arguably if you're not winning by that point then you may not be ever, or you're hunting for that last burn spell to go over the top of the opponent's much better team. So, there's risk associated with the card--however, I do run Vexing Devil and here is why: I'm more likely to pull it one of my top seven plus draw it in the first two turns (where it's still generally relevant); so I say yes on this one due to the fact that the probability that I draw it T3-5 is very low in relation to when I want to have it (the first 9 cards) or I just never see it which is the highest probability which is just fine because if I don't get it in the first 9 I don't really want it period. So, I think it's worth the include for its raw efficiency during the timeframe you needed it, compared to the probability of getting it when you don't want it. However, I don't think a wide range of conditional cards like vexing devil should litter your deck because then you truly increase your probability of drawing nonsense when you don't want it. (for instance smash to smithereens, card's great when it's great, but it can just be a brick most of the time).
In regards to Browbeat: No, I do not personally run this card; it is also highly situational much like the devil--however, I know I have to be on turn three (outside of running cards like mox diamond, chrome mox, lotus petal, or ancient tomb in RDW [ie prob not very good]) to cast this spell in RDW, which is not a timeframe that I personally think that this deck needs to generate value (investment) it needs to be winning. It is most certainly card advantage if the opponent allows you to draw off of it, but think about this: how likely is it that they will. Sure brow beat (outside of goblin grenade (5 dam for one mana and a goblin card), fireblast (five finger discount + 2 irrelevant lands), and flame rift (4 damage for 2 mana), plus rift bolt/LB/CL/and Shard Volley [you could argue guerilla tactics off of a discard heavy opponent :P, but this is loose, so is thunderous wrath, RDW would never run this but it is efficient given the right circumstances {the probability of having this in your first 7-8 cards is higher, than keeping a hand without it and hoping to draw it in the first 5 turns in a deck that hopes to win within 5 turns]) is the most efficient 3 mana damage spell outside of very conditional cards, the other 3CMC burn that I believe playable being staggershock, char, flames of the blood hand, and exquisite firecraft. Note that three of these four all play at instant speed, a very important capability for RDW, to enable sequencing and choice of when the pilot most needs to gain tempo, or when they want to accrue virtual tempo by forcing players to play around ghosts that might not even be in their hand. The other, exquisite firecraft is not instant speed but the proviso that it cannot be countered in my opinion allows it to be a very powerful last spell in any game after the RDW pilot has exhausted his or her resources against a permission or control opponent who has seemingly "turned the corner". Also note, that three of these cards can kill creatures, the 4 damage benchmark is important in the critter world (outside of some silly cards like siege rhino and doran) as it allows you great range against most of the midgame threats folks will be playing, the other Flames of the Bloodhand, does not do this for you, but it's effect (stopping the lifegain for a turn) is a highly relevant one stapled to one of the most efficient 3 mana burn spells.
So, going back to Browbeat, I think this card is a false savior. One it does not play at instant speed (if it did it would take this card from a dud to an auto include, because choice is king in this deck, if your opponent even expects that you cannot play at instant speed it opens up so many lines for them and closes so many more for you). Secondly, while there are gamestates that may require exactly 5 damage to win these are few and far between; the analogous, but much more flexible 4 damage, 3 CMC burn cards are just as likely to win in most of the spots that this does on damage, but also provide the pilot with greater flexibility in choice of targets and timing. The second part is, let's say you're on RDW and you've gone hell bent, against a midrange opponent the game state is one of two things at this point: you're winning by a landslide, or you're up against the ropes and they've got a decent to sizable board--is this what you want to topdeck from this position--unless they're on 5 or less life you're never going to draw 3 cards, and even if you do, outside of one mana burn spells, or FB, are you going to be able to proactively engage their life total on the turn you play this--probably not, which means they're attacking at least one more time on an open board.
This card doesn't look like it, but it is essentially a functional reprint in red of the U card meditate by my assessment theoretically and through fishing the card and play testing it. Meditate is one of the better draw cards ever printed, but it's a negative tempo engine, literally, it gives your opponent a timewalk after you pass the turn and it's virtually (but not quite :P, my storm deck does run this because it's a great card if you can win the turn you cast it, ie Doomsday/Labman or Tendrils) unplayable in any format. While I do think Meditate has a home in a deck like the storm build I run this is due chiefly to the deck's ability to generate vast mana advantage, RDW does not do this, matter of fact after your 4-5 land drop you'd be glad if you could cast mana severance (countryside crusher in RDW :P) to get rid of your land. Where a card like this shines to a greater extent is in a big red deck (which we don't see a lot of) maybe a wildfire build or something like that, where the 5 damage is good incremental value for an efficient price and there's a greater chance on the turn you cast it, if your opponent let's you draw, you'll be able to cast additional threats, etc.
Hope this helps and makes sense.
Take it easy.
--KB
I have decided that I fear Shard Volley or Lava Spike more than I fear Vexing Devil. And I fear Char or Brimstone Volley more than Browbeat.
I would, however, like to attend a seminar by you where you present the pros and cons of each playable card in RDW!
Here are my 2 drops before I read your post:
1 Abbot of Keral Keep
1 Boros Guildmage (Pet card- I'm RW. Obviously terrible in mono red)
1 Burning-Tree Emissary
1 Dwarven Blastminer (Can win game all by itself on T2)
1 Eidolon of the Great Revel
1 Gore-House Chainwalker
1 Keldon Marauders
1 Lightning Mauler (Decent to speed up your 3 drop, great to attack with itself and another haster on T4)
1 Porcelain Legionnaire
1 Slith Firewalker (Cutting this for Dragonlord as a direct result of reading your post)
Thanks for posting in regards to the 2CMC RDW clowns I would urge you to consider keeping firewalker over gore-house chainwalker. Think of it this way: GHCW will accrue you 3 points of damage by T3 (you're likely never "leashing" this thing, and if you're blocking with it you're living on a prayer for TD miracles :)), Slith firewalker will also do 3 damage by T3s (if played on curve) and has the possibility to grow well beyond gorehouse in the long run, gorehouse only stays on damage parity with firewalker through T4, afterward the firewalker ascends well beyond the GHCW's ability to damage opponents. Not to mention GHCW does not favorably exchange with alot of the midrange threats when it becomes available to attack on T3. You could argue that neither does Slith Firewalker, however, here is the salient point: If, as a RDW pilot, I have to burn out my opponent's creatures, do I want a threat that I can expect to continually grow (ie investment) or do I want a threat that is initially larger, but will only outclass an opponent's T1-2 plays and there after is relegated to "garbo". Not to mention the firewalker is a better TD, because of haste you have flexibility in choosing time and place to allow it to at least reach 2/2 status. I think on initial glance the gorehouse chainwalker seems better, but the firewalker provides punchup capability around the decks that RDW and other aggressive decks have a tough time beating. The one issue I could see for a deck like your own is that it runs 2 colors which makes the firewalker a bit more risky because when you want it T2 you really want it on T2.
Lightning Mauler, I run this guy as well just totally forgot him when I was running down the list off the top of my head, he's pretty much Peanut Butter to Burning Tree Shaman's jelly, and although that combo doesn't come up that often and most of the critters I run in the 3 spot have haste, I do enjoy hasting out a goblin rabblemaster or sin prodder and haste or really gaining time advantage is great in decks like this.
I think in our meta, you tend to be fine with running the miner package main, but I also don't think in a wide meta that would be a wise call. If you happen to run into another RDW, D&T, or MonoG Stompy, this is a laughable T2 play (or morph T3).
Porcelean Legionnaire is probably fine, I don't run him in RDW, because I'm not a fan of 1 toughness critters that don't have haste in the 2 spot (in D&T I do however, because the protection package is much larger, mother, 8.5 tails, selfless spirit, swords, absolute law, etc)...arctrail, fire//ice, and forked bolt tend to scare me with these sort of cards although they do tend to do well against midrange for about 2 turns. NTM he's an artifact which randomly means that it can die to two types of removal.
I won't tell you your pet card isn't good enough anymore, because the point of pet cards is that we tend to know that but just like and want to play the card anyway (and I still love azorious guildmage, although it too has been relegated to a less efficient past, but stifle on a body, plus a tapper, you of all people know I love this card as somehow I always manage to use stifle in some obnoxious way against you :P)
I think you'll be glad with dragonlord, that duder either needs to be answered, or he'll just win you the game, 8/8 trample, flyer, with firebreathing is not a joke. And often times what I'll see happen with him, is people on 1 for 1 removal packages will remove your more (at the time) threatening stuff, run out, and this thing goes large to win the game. Same reason I stand behind Student of Warfare, the card is great, and most WW decks will not run it, but it too can run away with games out of nowhere because people don't respect it as early in the game as they need to.
Take it easy guys
--KB
P.S. I vacillate on running this card main or board: Stigmalasher. This card generally get's removed the turn it comes into play because it is so threatening, and at the end of the day it's just a bear, but the unique effect it has on the game, ie if it hits the opponent can never heal again, is quite powerful, not to mention wither is a strong ability. I think if I were to hedge, I'd play this guy over the Miner, because most decks will find ways to gain life, because they have to be ready for RDW, not all decks play crazy mana bases though. Just an idea though.
Grenzo seems like might get you a creature on occasion turn 6 or later. Or he can hit land or a counter and just be a bear. Ash zealot certainly has its merits. I'm used to playing turn 1 elf or turn 2 Natures Lore to be honest.
I believe he's talking about a boros deck he's running, the best RDW 2CMC cards tend toward RR casting cost. He may be trying to pair down how many double mana symbols he's running in the 2CMC spot for consistency.
Take it easy
--KB
For the third and final slot at this mana cost, does anyone have any feedback about whether Giant Solifuge is better than Keldon Champion or Thunderbreak Regent? Which do you most fear of these 3 cards (the human, the insect or the dragon)?
A few notes on RDW 4CMC critters: I don't think you want more than 2 total; I only run 1 4CMC critter in my deck but I vacillate on which one it should be: I think specifically in the critter department at 4 mana nothing is better than Hellrider or Hero of Oxidridge. Battlecry is a heck of an ability and the ability to get around 1 power critters is often more relevant than you'd think when folks are playing timely reinforcements and lingering souls against you, or eslpeth tokens, etc. However, I tend towrd the Hellrider, because it impacts the stack before combat math is done, which has often been the determinant of many games for me while running this deck due to a resolved card that has lifelink and it tends to compliment burn spells better this way. I tend to agree with stsung, I don't think heelcutter is good enough and I tend to avoid running more than one critter at the 4CMC spot, because I think RDW needs to be the best at what it's supposed to be the best at: efficiency. The 2nd place version I ran of it had an average CMC of 1.83 (the Gatherling math is wrong FB is not a 6 drop, and riftbolt is not a 3 drop, realistically). I think in the four spot you want one of the two critters I mentioned (but if you're running hero, you may also want to look at running a higher critter count than I do, I eventually cut this one because my build was only about 33% critters, and frankly I wasn't finding that by the point I could have cast either of these cards they were actually hitting the opponent, which just made the hellrider better, because he and my team could suicide in there, and I could burn over the top of them).
In regards to PW's I still think Koth is king, I only run one in the deck; however, I slightly disagree with stsung's suggestion/evaluation of Chandra, Defiant Torch. And not because I don't think the card is great, but it's kind of funny because the problem here is a microcosm of a larger problem the card has had overall, it can't find a home in any format eventhough no one will say it's not a great card :). I've fished this deck alot like probabley over 10K times under varied builds over 4-5 years (and as silly and possibly maniacal as it would sound, before I ran it in the CSM I fished it about 1K times to get the build to do exactly what I wanted it to do, luckily it only takes 3 minutes to fish this deck :P); I tried the new Chandra in this and just found that it doesn't do enough the turn it comes into play (alright it does 2 damage, but is that where I want to be on 4CMC in a deck like this); I actually think Chandra Pyromaster is the best Chandra for this style of deck, because it often equates to 4 damage the turn it comes into play (1 damage off of activation, 1 opponent threat cannot block, 1x3 power critter get's through), and if it survives the passing of the turn, it can either continue to screw up combat math for the opponent or it provides card advantage. This second part may give you pause, because so does Chandra Defiant Torch, however, CDT only allows you to cast it during resolution, you have the choice then and only then, Chandra Pyromaster gives you the flexibility to cast the spell whenever you'd like, albeit on that turn. This flexibility is very powerful and necessary for RDW to be played well. I'm definately not saying Chandra Pyromaster is a better card, she is most certainly not, but in this deck I firmly believe she is.
So, all that said, I currently only run 2x4drops in the deck, and they're the curve toppers, Hellrider and Koth. I could see going with Chandra Pyromaster over Hellrider, but in and of itself Hellrider ostensibly does more the turn it comes into play. But I play this deck very much as a high tempo, minimal investment deck, I don't run hate main (moons, miners, burning earths, etc), outside of lifegain hate, because I want my plan (put the opponent to 0) to be highly coherent and resiliant to anything that stops that. I think all of the other non-4CMC cards that stsung has mentioned are great; I'm not sold over on running the Scab-Clan Berserker main, but it's definately found a place in my board as another pyrostatic pillar (I removed black vise for this card in the SB) on legs card and it's great when you want it...I just don't think it tends to shine in the matchup that you need to most fear with this deck which is G/x midrange. In this matchup you just need to be faster than them, there's no long game against G/x midrange for RDW--only death :/
I think if I were to rebuild the deck a bit though, I'd add fiery confluence, one it's a 6 damage burnspell when you just need to win, 2 it's a very flexible card and can answer alot of problem artifact cards (batterskull, WCE, swords, dragon's claw, sun droplet, etc) and its potential to comeback from behind against a large board is very nice as well because it's rare to find a card that can allow you this while still providing focus to your primary plan of getting them to 0.
Completely unrelated, but you also want/need to have cursed scroll, dismember, and/or fire spellbomb in the SB, these cards give you so much range against the WW/D&T critters that end games against you (i.e. korfirewalker, silverknight, BFT, etc); otherwise you're likely banking on the opponent screwing up and attacking into a mutavault or a mishra's factory. These two cards plus the 2 damage threshold land were the only answers I had to these sorts of cards main, but I felt they were so good against me (firewalker specifically) that I needed board answers to the problem they presented.
The greatest weakness of the build I ran was it's inability to consistently answer artifacts, I ran shattering spree in the SB, but no main deck answers...this could be wrong, but I also think it helped support my primary plan to a larger extent; but if I ran the deck back again, which I most certainly plan on doing one day, then I'd run confluence main due to its flexibility afforded the pilot.
PS--Rob, I think Hanweir Garrison is also a strong consideration for a Boros build, it's not as quick, but when you're comfortable using more of your burn to keep the board clear cards like this become a lot more viable, plus the ability to play all of the battlecry (mechanic) cards ever printed makes this duder a lot better--I wouldn't try to run its combo land; that combo is just woefully inefficient and loses to so much.
Also just threw up some live commentary on a G3 (of a 3 game match) between ML_Berlin and dawts, as well as 2.5 games live between myself and ML_Berlin...let's just say in one match helm of obedience becomes Sands of Delirium The videos are here: Live Matches
Enjoy and take it easy
--KB
Here's what I was running:
Hellrider - what lowman said
Murderous Redcap - rare source of card advantage
Flametongue Kavu - would cut if metagame changes
Avalanche Riders - fine even if you don't pay the echo
Hero of Oxid Ridge - Was not running but will. Undecided if I'm cutting FTK, AR or a different card altogether
Hanweir Garrison is certainly worth consideration
I watched G3 a bit and I gotta agree with lowman... ML_berlin, dust bowl the land! Haha. Good stuff though, always enjoy watching some 100cs. Lowman I've enjoyed your content (the few vids I've had time to watch) and appreciate the time you spend on the format. Now when I play you I'm afraid if I screw up it'll be immortalized in a video for all to see!
No man it's not like that; I can definitely be a bad backseat driver when watching a game, but at the end of the day it's learning and possibly teaching that's the most important thing to me and I don't mean per se others, because I'm an alright player, but I'd never deign to say I'm better than any other player out there because I make mistakes a plenty and have found that making content generally helps me to develop a deeper understanding of the game based upon the forced self reflection of creation. Either way it's easy to judge the proverbial (wo)man in the arena (however you say this in a politically correct manner, and I highly doubt T. Roosevelt gave a crap about that sort of thing anyway, ascended to the VP to keep him out of the P seat, and look how that worked out), but it's a lot harder to get in there and do it yourself; but I think both can be enlightening. Watching other games more so tends to build my ability to preordain what both players tend to be on or rather what lines they will pursue based upon assumed holdings (due to the high volume of hidden information, you're forced to build a deeper understanding of where each player is trying to take the game and what their possible holdings are based upon the past and present of the gamestate only), whereas, I personally tend to be very focused on playing my cards optimally when I have full information of my own holdings in a game I'm playing in, which can lead to one being myopic and focused more so on the information known as opposed to playing with a mind to favorably (for you the player hopefully) interact with what you could readily understand, be it opaque, of the hidden information at stake (an opponent's hand and likely employment of those cards/effects). True masters of this sort of objective understanding are said to "next level" opponents by forcing them to fight ghosts as opposed to realities and sometimes I catch a glimpse and get this opportunity, but I'm always seeking to see the game more clearly and in a lot of ways it translates to real life logical thought process and interaction in the human domain, because what is MTG other than a social interaction, namely contention and resolution.
Anyway, it kind of harkens back to an article I read along time ago written by PVD on cabal therapy (should still be up on CFB it's one of their best articles), in my opinion a true master's card (one that I think we both share an affinity for if I'm not mistaken). The cool thing about this is there are cards aplenty like this, FoF is another and decently well known as a skill intensive card, and I think we've just gotten another in the card Sanctum Prelate. It's already found it's way into legacy and actually Stsung and I were talking about it today, she claimed she was writing an article on it and her experience with D&T in legacy. I hope she'll share it with all of us in the forum as I tend to think cards like Sanctum Prelate tend to get underrated, and then once they do very well, tend to be played very widely but to little effect for some pilots because they fail to understand that the reason the card is great is not due to the card in and of itself, but due to the player's ability to understand hidden knowledge clearly as opposed to known knowledge. As a random side note, that's sort of why I dislike the current design trend toward powerful critters; if you give me a card like Siege Rhino or Thoughtknot Seer, I'm going to play it, but cards like this in alot of ways devalue the skill required by a player to succeed in the game. This is not wholly a bad thing, as any game or community needs to expand to maintain, in this case, a player base, and newer players will tend to understand the game the least and luck is important to this end, but in my opinion this design trend has not been adequately complimented by powerful instants and sorceries, the printing of a 2 mana counterspell is heresy these days, but I'd argue that the effective use of countermagic and/or stifle effects etc, require a far greater understanding of the game within the game to play beyond good enough.
Anyway that's a far cry from even tangential to your original post; I'm glad you enjoy the content and hopefully I can keep on putting some decent stuff up on the format.
Take it easy everyone
--KB
Lol, I know every time I put them up, I lament the sound quality, it's pretty poor. I'll work on it/get a headset in the near future.
Take it easy
--KB
Congrats to Sensei (Bow to your Sensei :P) for the win. I've uploaded the matches I played to YT, unfortunately it's not a live replay, I started doing that, but after I picked up a bye round 2, I played 2 matches in cube league (D&T there as well, go figure right, guess no one likes white cards, and well when you see MOR and Espeth Knight Errant P1P3 together and wheel MOR you know you read the signals correctly) and didn't want to be too all over the place. However, and ML you'll be happy to hear this, I did invest in a headset, so you can hopefully hear me better.
Included in the video are my two tourney matches as well as a bunch of random battles: 100CS CSM 14 JAN and Random Battles.
Enjoy and take it easy
It's not quite 100CS but I've been cubing quite a bit, and because it plays out a lot like 100CS I figured I'd share:
Grixis Combo Control Video
U/G PW Ramp Video
Had one more the recording got screwed up on with a big red deck; must have done something right because our three creations today managed to go 3-0 a piece. Enjoy and apologies for any of my poor explanations ("What I'm really looking for here is Thragtusk", definitely meaning Craterhoof B.)
Enjoy and take it easy
--KB
One of the topics was Magic Online. I challenge you to watch the Professor's comments on the Magic Online client and try not to smile...
Just put up a dual cube video of our first real trainwreck cube draft and then one which we draft properly and win with: Trainwreck to Victory
Enjoy and take it easy!
--KB
lowman02 donated his 1.333 tix to newcomer Bandit Keith.
Undefeated and final winner: The_Sensei -4
Undefeated: RobertZdar -3
Lost once:
Michelle_Wong 1.333
lowman02 -0 (!)
Bandit Keith -1.333
dawts -1.333
Door Prize: Golden_Lin -1