Bc there's no better alternative in the decks that do run it. Other decks don't need them like the decks that do run them. And those that run them won't be running enough of them for it to make that significant of a difference in how fast we can count to 20. If all the decks ran them as a 4 of along side fetches and what not then I'd agree but I see most decks that will use them using them as a 2 of or at best a 3 of. The only decks I see running them as a set are alrdy running a set of canopy and then possibly b/x/x shadow decks to help drop their life total. Otherwise Phoenix doesn't rly need them due to the fact that their deck is cantrips. Storm won't for same reason. Tron won't most likely. Humans might but they need the rainbow lands more. Control decks might but they've got better options to spend resources on to dig/manipulate/etc. Hardened scales probably won't bc they don't rly need it. I don't see infect needing them when they can now win on turn 2 thanks to scale up. B/g/x probably will as a 4 of. But pls feel free to enlighten me bc I don't know everything. This is just my thoughts on it.
So which is it? Do only 3 decks run Canopy or were you just completely wrong? The numbers show you were wrong.
People run Canopy bc they want card draw and have access to white or green mana. Now everyone can get access to these lands and you think they won’t see much play? That’s a dream.
Humans play Horizon Canopy because 1) it can cast Vial, Hierarch and Champion on turn 1 and 2) because it can be traded for a card later in the the game. I play this deck myself (paper, I have all the cards), and I doubt I will ever replace Horizon Canopy for any other land. It’s that good.
In fact, I’m working on the manabase of my Burn deck to make room for 4 Boros Horizon lands (can’t remember the name). I won’t settle for 2 or 3 copies, because I really want full playset.
My guess is that the other decks will try to squeeze 4 Horizon Lands in their 60. I see no reason they wouldn’t do this, unless they’re allied colors (like UW Control, Gruul Zoo and Rakdos Burn). Hatebears, Phoenix, Death’s Shadow, Dredge, BGx Midrange and Abzan CoCo are all contenders for the Horizon Lands.
I haven't posted here in a while (and I guess I almost can't anymore), so in regard to the current discussion I'd just like to add that 'they' used to say that Horizon Canopy is the only 'safe' version of the card because something like Burn would play 12 if it could. Well, now we can run 8 and I preordered 2 playsets because I will sure as hell play at least 4 and will try very hard to put in all 8 in straight Boros.
I've recently played only Mardu Burn with 18 lands, first leaning more on black with Gonti's Machinations (laugh, if you will, but it won me a PPTQ :P. You could even argue that it became better with a consistent source of self-damage in the new canopies), then leaning more on white since Skewer the Critics got printed. Obviously, I can't fit in 8 canopies in Mardu and perhaps even in Boros 8 is too much when considering landfall for Searing Blaze, but if you don't start with at least the 4 R/W lands, I'm not sure you understand what one of the major issues with Burn is.. (flooding)
If straight boros just can't work with 8 of those lands due to awkward mana or being low on landfall, it may well be a reason for mono red to be viable, with fetches just to fuel landfall (and Grim Lavamancer, if you run it).
For now I'm just going to try to build Mardu with 4, though. I really like the low curve and sideboard cards like Crackling Doom. At first I thought I'd go up to 19 lands because I can sac a few for cards but screwing is rarely a problem with so many 1-drops and flooding always is, so might as well stay at 18. As calculated by someone in this topic before, the difference in % to get keepable hands between 18 en 20 lands is negligible and in that case I'd always choose to be on the screwy side with Burn.
Three mana is asking a decent amount, but recasting your best spell in your graveyard is a hell of a reward. Even if it dies after one use, which is likely, at worst it could be a functional hardcasted Rift Bolt or Skewer. I don't think a one-two of is a bad idea.
M20 Chandra might have been worth it if it said you cast without paying (probably would have played 2, honestly). I don't want to pay 4 mana to recur a bolt and then 5 total for 2 of them. You have to be flooding to even play it (need 4 lands in play), otherwise you pay 3 mana to roll it up and do nothing, hope it lives a turn, and then get some use out of it. Cool card, but not good enough.
M20 Chandra is not for me. At the very best, it’s « draw 1 Burn spell this turn, then flip 2 coins ; if both are heads, draw another Burn spell next turn ». I much more prefer Light up the Stage, as we’re very likely to cast it for 1. It should reveal 1.4 spells on average (creatures will do), which is probably better than Chandra. Does she really have more than 40% chance of surviving long enough to get a second activation? With LUTS, we should still have the mana to cast the extra cards this turn. And if we don’t, we’ll have it next turn (Chandra can’t provide this certainty), or a revealed land can be played right away.
Also, our creatures are bad defending her, and she’s bad defending herself. Playing her could very well warp our play away from the aggressivity we need to win games.
I’m pretty sure people trying her will be disappointed. Goal of Burn decks is to cast 6 spells in 3 turns that will each deal 3 damage (total 18 + 2 from fetch lands or shock lands = win). Failing that (either because you missed 3rd land because you don’t play 20, or because you played Boros Charm on turn 2 instead of 2 Burn spells for 6 ; BTW, Swiftspear can deal 3 if played on turn 1, and Guide will deal 4 if played on turn 2), Burn will try to close the deal on turn 4. Say what you want, but in the very best scenario, Chandra can only help us win on turn 5 : assuming you’ve dealt 9 damage by the end of turn 2, if you cast her on turn 3 and attack for 2 with her tokens, and follow up on turn 4 with 3 Burn spells, you would have won anyway on turn 3 if you’ve cast these 3 spells on turn 3 instead of Chandra. If by the end of turn 3 Burn hasn’t won yet, it’s most likely because we’re either mana short (in which case Chandra is a dead card) or because we flooded (in which case our graveyard isn’t that much likely to have 2 suitable targets for her ultimate).
All in all, if she’s supposed to be card advantage, she’s bad (for us) in this role... IMHO.
How about a recurring 2 damage for three mana? Specifically against control?
Control isn't generally a problem for Burn unless they build in a lot of life gain, so I don't feel compelled to play bad cards to solve an issue that doesn't exist. If I'm going to pay 3 mana for a card against control, it's Exquisite Firecraft.
3cmc cards have to be exceptional to play in Burn. This Chandra isn't good though for Burn.
I don’t play Burn anymore, but when I played if I had 5 lands in play I had probably already scooped. In the 10% of games where I didn’t, I was probably up against a fringe deck I had on the ropes
M20 Chandra might have been worth it if it said you cast without paying (probably would have played 2, honestly). I don't want to pay 4 mana to recur a bolt and then 5 total for 2 of them. You have to be flooding to even play it (need 4 lands in play), otherwise you pay 3 mana to roll it up and do nothing, hope it lives a turn, and then get some use out of it. Cool card, but not good enough.
Wop wop, that's what I get for not knowing how to read. I thought you could cast it for free. Ah well.
As is almost always the case when someone says "this more expensive card gives us reach" my answer is that I would rather just draw another bolt. Redundancy is one of burn's biggest strengths, diluting it is just...just bad.
Has Cindervines been considered in our SB? I know it’s total 3 mana to destroy an artifact or enchantment, but instead of sometimes having our SB card dead in our hand because we’re waiting for our opponent to play the hated card, we can play this right away and start getting dividends from it...
(All it takes is a single Stomping Ground to reliably splash green, thanks to our numerous fetch lands... but that was before Sunbaked Canyon... is that still true now?)
I do want to test cindervines, though not as enchantment removal. I like having that weaker, yet asymmetrical eidolon effect on board. SB probably looking like this for now, as I prepare for SCG Pittsburgh:
Those cindervines slots used to be exquisite firecraft, which I liked against UW and blue Shadow variants. Considering that the plan against counterspell decks often consists of just enough early pressure to force responses while waiting to overload with countermagic in one big turn, the idea of cindervines doing 3-4 damage in the face of counters, paths, and cantrips could do well. The fact that it hits detention sphere is a nice bonus.
You have strong arguments... but I think there’s more to Cindervines than just artifacts and enchantments hate. Good SB cards are useful in more than one matchup. I believe that, against Control, it would be super good to bring that in. Having a card that serves both purposes is something to consider. And the odds of Cindervines only doing 2 damage to the opponent are slim. We can actively cast it on turn 2, get some dividends, and crack for a colorless mana when it’s necessary, thus allowing us to go full Aggro and not save so many ressources in case opponent plays the hated card. I can see it doing 4+ damage in many scenarios.
And like you said, there’s not much enchantments in Modern. Chances are VERY high opponent can’t deal with Cindervines if it resolves.
So which is it? Do only 3 decks run Canopy or were you just completely wrong? The numbers show you were wrong.
People run Canopy bc they want card draw and have access to white or green mana. Now everyone can get access to these lands and you think they won’t see much play? That’s a dream.
In fact, I’m working on the manabase of my Burn deck to make room for 4 Boros Horizon lands (can’t remember the name). I won’t settle for 2 or 3 copies, because I really want full playset.
My guess is that the other decks will try to squeeze 4 Horizon Lands in their 60. I see no reason they wouldn’t do this, unless they’re allied colors (like UW Control, Gruul Zoo and Rakdos Burn). Hatebears, Phoenix, Death’s Shadow, Dredge, BGx Midrange and Abzan CoCo are all contenders for the Horizon Lands.
1st, GP Toronto Sunday Super Series 2016 : Ally Company RWBG
Top 8, PPTQ Shadows over Innistrad : Boros Humans WR.
Use a hypergeometric calculator for your deckbuilding maths,
and use TopDecked to manage your decks and collection on your Apple or Android device.
I've recently played only Mardu Burn with 18 lands, first leaning more on black with Gonti's Machinations (laugh, if you will, but it won me a PPTQ :P. You could even argue that it became better with a consistent source of self-damage in the new canopies), then leaning more on white since Skewer the Critics got printed. Obviously, I can't fit in 8 canopies in Mardu and perhaps even in Boros 8 is too much when considering landfall for Searing Blaze, but if you don't start with at least the 4 R/W lands, I'm not sure you understand what one of the major issues with Burn is.. (flooding)
If straight boros just can't work with 8 of those lands due to awkward mana or being low on landfall, it may well be a reason for mono red to be viable, with fetches just to fuel landfall (and Grim Lavamancer, if you run it).
For now I'm just going to try to build Mardu with 4, though. I really like the low curve and sideboard cards like Crackling Doom. At first I thought I'd go up to 19 lands because I can sac a few for cards but screwing is rarely a problem with so many 1-drops and flooding always is, so might as well stay at 18. As calculated by someone in this topic before, the difference in % to get keepable hands between 18 en 20 lands is negligible and in that case I'd always choose to be on the screwy side with Burn.
It’s a snapcaster for red. Flashback Boros charm then a bolt effect for 7 damage? I’d say that’s worth three mana.
BGElvesBG and BUGNissa ElvesBUG Faithful Elfer since May 1st, 2015
Results: SCG IQ Top 8, Monthly Modern Masters Top 4
BGElvesBG and BUGNissa ElvesBUG Faithful Elfer since May 1st, 2015
Results: SCG IQ Top 8, Monthly Modern Masters Top 4
BGElvesBG and BUGNissa ElvesBUG Faithful Elfer since May 1st, 2015
Results: SCG IQ Top 8, Monthly Modern Masters Top 4
Also, our creatures are bad defending her, and she’s bad defending herself. Playing her could very well warp our play away from the aggressivity we need to win games.
I’m pretty sure people trying her will be disappointed. Goal of Burn decks is to cast 6 spells in 3 turns that will each deal 3 damage (total 18 + 2 from fetch lands or shock lands = win). Failing that (either because you missed 3rd land because you don’t play 20, or because you played Boros Charm on turn 2 instead of 2 Burn spells for 6 ; BTW, Swiftspear can deal 3 if played on turn 1, and Guide will deal 4 if played on turn 2), Burn will try to close the deal on turn 4. Say what you want, but in the very best scenario, Chandra can only help us win on turn 5 : assuming you’ve dealt 9 damage by the end of turn 2, if you cast her on turn 3 and attack for 2 with her tokens, and follow up on turn 4 with 3 Burn spells, you would have won anyway on turn 3 if you’ve cast these 3 spells on turn 3 instead of Chandra. If by the end of turn 3 Burn hasn’t won yet, it’s most likely because we’re either mana short (in which case Chandra is a dead card) or because we flooded (in which case our graveyard isn’t that much likely to have 2 suitable targets for her ultimate).
All in all, if she’s supposed to be card advantage, she’s bad (for us) in this role... IMHO.
1st, GP Toronto Sunday Super Series 2016 : Ally Company RWBG
Top 8, PPTQ Shadows over Innistrad : Boros Humans WR.
Use a hypergeometric calculator for your deckbuilding maths,
and use TopDecked to manage your decks and collection on your Apple or Android device.
Control isn't generally a problem for Burn unless they build in a lot of life gain, so I don't feel compelled to play bad cards to solve an issue that doesn't exist. If I'm going to pay 3 mana for a card against control, it's Exquisite Firecraft.
3cmc cards have to be exceptional to play in Burn. This Chandra isn't good though for Burn.
Wop wop, that's what I get for not knowing how to read. I thought you could cast it for free. Ah well.
(All it takes is a single Stomping Ground to reliably splash green, thanks to our numerous fetch lands... but that was before Sunbaked Canyon... is that still true now?)
1st, GP Toronto Sunday Super Series 2016 : Ally Company RWBG
Top 8, PPTQ Shadows over Innistrad : Boros Humans WR.
Use a hypergeometric calculator for your deckbuilding maths,
and use TopDecked to manage your decks and collection on your Apple or Android device.
Do we NEED enchantment removal right now ?
The most played decks right now are : humans, phoenix, burn, tron, UW control, dredge/bridgevine, amulet titan, infect, affinity...
Is there an enchantment that we are afraid of ?
Maybe a 1-2 of leyline in human ? ...
I prefer keeping a boros manabase and play smash to smithereens for artifact hate (and 3 damage)
2 Ravenous Trap
2 RiP
1 Relic
3 Path
2 Searing Blood
2 cindervines
2 smash
1 Stony Silence
Those cindervines slots used to be exquisite firecraft, which I liked against UW and blue Shadow variants. Considering that the plan against counterspell decks often consists of just enough early pressure to force responses while waiting to overload with countermagic in one big turn, the idea of cindervines doing 3-4 damage in the face of counters, paths, and cantrips could do well. The fact that it hits detention sphere is a nice bonus.
And like you said, there’s not much enchantments in Modern. Chances are VERY high opponent can’t deal with Cindervines if it resolves.
1st, GP Toronto Sunday Super Series 2016 : Ally Company RWBG
Top 8, PPTQ Shadows over Innistrad : Boros Humans WR.
Use a hypergeometric calculator for your deckbuilding maths,
and use TopDecked to manage your decks and collection on your Apple or Android device.