I just want to say that this is fantastic. Thank you for this.
Thanks!
I'm working on a way of defining the probability that your opponent can kill or render impotent a creature as a function of turn. It's not as simple as the probability that they have removal, because a 2/3 means your Goblin Guide is done dealing damage just like dying would. Even a Sakura-Tribe Elder blanks it for a turn.
I looked at the decks on the front page of mtggoldfish and they comprise about 56% of the Modern metashare. Of those decks, Burn and UWR Control have the most targeted removal at 16 and 14 respectively (and UWR can Snap some of that, too). Averaging over all of those decks, though, you get an average of about 8 removal spells per deck. Most decks only have 4-ish that can be cast on T1, though UWR has 8 (path+bolt), so it's reasonable to say the number of outs on T1 is close to 4. T2 available removal I'm setting equal to the average number of removal spells (8), but it could be higher due to creatures. After that, it's kind of up in the air. Right now, I'm estimating that on T3, they have 8 + 6 non-removal ways to invalidate a creature (I should probably increase that). T4 I'm saying 8 + 16 ways. After that, I'm just saying that half of any given deck invalidates your creatures.
And then it gets fuzzier. What about Grim Lavamancer? A creature doesn't invalidate it because the 2 damage mode is unblockable and only removal can get rid of it. So for Grim, I say there's 4 outs on T1, 6 on T2, and 8 on every subsequent turn. That's kind of straight forward because it's an activated ability that can only happen once per turn. There's a problem with that model, though. It leads you to conclude that Grim Lavamancer is worth an obscene amount of damage because even if it rarely lasts until T10, it will have dealt 20 damage by that point and that carries a lot of weight.
And then it gets even fuzzier. What about Eidolon? It can attack for 2, and that follows the invalidation model above in principle, but then it has a triggered ability that's different from the Grim Lavamancer model because it can trigger repeatedly.
Because of the Lavamancer problem, I decided to play with an importance function that serves as a measure of how relevant a a given turn is. It's 1 for early turns and then decreases for late turns.
I know in the standard Mono Red mirrors during magic origins, you should chose to draw. Is it correct to chose to draw here?
I have never chosen to draw and I don't think it's correct for an aggro deck to choose to go second. I think it's probably only correct to choose to go second when you're playing midrange vs. midrange and the extra card matters, or you're playing dredge. I want to be the aggressor as the Burn deck, especially in the mirror. I don't want to be playing catch up.
I know in the standard Mono Red mirrors during magic origins, you should chose to draw. Is it correct to chose to draw here?
I have never chosen to draw and I don't think it's correct for an aggro deck to choose to go second. I think it's probably only correct to choose to go second when you're playing midrange vs. midrange and the extra card matters, or you're playing dredge. I want to be the aggressor as the Burn deck, especially in the mirror. I don't want to be playing catch up.
I completely agree, go 1st. I will also add that when your on the draw vs a deck that runs 22-24 lands and for the most part they drop lands the first 4 or 5 turns. If you let then go first they can get to that 4th land sooner which could set then up for cards like Cryptic Command a turn earlier or if your running a creature heavy build Supreme Verdict. As a more specific example to Burn, lets say you kill their mana dork or they dont have one but still have that land every turn on their turn 4 and you just finished 3, they go Land into Obstinate Baloth (this card isnt run as often now as in the past) and you dont have Skullcrack/AC in hand.
Going first has helped me to more wins then going 2nd more times then not.
Quick question for everyone. I have exactly five slots in my sideboard for artifact hate, running Boros (no splash). Would you say it's better to play 4x Wear//Tear and 1x Shattering Spree, or 3x Wear//Tear and 2x Shattering Spree? If anyone is particularly skilled at math and has a way to objectively evaluate this, it would be much appreciated. As far as I can tell, it would be the difference between the chance that you don't see enchantment removal based on dropping a Wear//Tear, and the amount of time that destroying multiple artifacts or hitting a chalice on 2 matters.
I ran 3 and 2, and when splashing for D. Rev, kept those numbers. The worst artifact against us is Chalice on 2. It stops Wear//Tear and Revelry. We can bring in all 5 of our artifact hate, and all of it hits Chalice on 1. But we can save the 2 Shattering Spree for Chalice on 2, or, if need be and we don't draw our other hate, hit it on 1. A one of Shattering Spree is much wmharder to draw, and when we need it, we NEED it. It is also a bomb against Affinity. Of course, we lose some enchantment hate. But typically, we only need to blow up one Leyline. If they have multiples in the opening hand, it was bad luck, anyway.
Quick question for everyone. I have exactly five slots in my sideboard for artifact hate, running Boros (no splash). Would you say it's better to play 4x Wear//Tear and 1x Shattering Spree, or 3x Wear//Tear and 2x Shattering Spree? If anyone is particularly skilled at math and has a way to objectively evaluate this, it would be much appreciated. As far as I can tell, it would be the difference between the chance that you don't see enchantment removal based on dropping a Wear//Tear, and the amount of time that destroying multiple artifacts or hitting a chalice on 2 matters.
I ran 3 and 2, and when splashing for D. Rev, kept those numbers. The worst artifact against us is Chalice on 2. It stops Wear//Tear and Revelry. We can bring in all 5 of our artifact hate, and all of it hits Chalice on 1. But we can save the 2 Shattering Spree for Chalice on 2, or, if need be and we don't draw our other hate, hit it on 1. A one of Shattering Spree is much wmharder to draw, and when we need it, we NEED it. It is also a bomb against Affinity. Of course, we lose some enchantment hate. But typically, we only need to blow up one Leyline. If they have multiples in the opening hand, it was bad luck, anyway.
I'm currently running a Boros build with 5 fastlands, to minimize life loss from the mana base. I am debating running Atarka's Command in the mainboard. To do this, I would probably move my 4th Lightning Helix from the side to the main, to help negate some of the life loss. I'd put a third Firewalker in the side, which would give me a clean swap for the mirror (-4 Atarka's Command, -4 Eidolon, +3 Path, +3 Firewalker, +2 Deflecting Palm) and I'd remove a Lavamancer from the mainboard, and go down to 1. I like the explosiveness of Atarka's Command over Skullcrack, and the versatility. I am not a fan of the 3 color mana base, particulary if I don't have a fastland in hand, and need to fetch for both. I also like to abuse Lavamancer. So this is a tough call. My current Boros list, and what it would be if I went Naya, are posted below. Which list is better?
I've been very satisfied with my Naya build. The link is in my signature.
I play 3 Mountains, 2 Foundry, 2 Stomping Ground, 1 Vantage, 11 fetches for 19 total lands. If I played 20, I'd add a Vantage or Gorge and move 1 Searing Blaze to the side. I don't think anyone here would be surprised that I prefer Naya because of how powerful AC can be.
I think you should always play 2 fetchable lands of each maindeck color so that you can weather 1 instance of land destruction and not be essentially locked out of a color unless you naturally draw a fastland. I think your Naya manabase is too heavy on fastlands. I also don't think you should play any Copperline Gorge in your Boros list, since the only time it would ever be better than a Mountain is if you've sided in DRev. You'd rather draw a Mountain as land #4 so that it's not ETBT.
I've been very satisfied with my Naya build. The link is in my signature.
I play 3 Mountains, 2 Foundry, 2 Stomping Ground, 1 Vantage, 11 fetches for 19 total lands. If I played 20, I'd add a Vantage or Gorge and move 1 Searing Blaze to the side. I don't think anyone here would be surprised that I prefer Naya because of how powerful AC can be.
I think you should always play 2 fetchable lands of each maindeck color so that you can weather 1 instance of land destruction and not be essentially locked out of a color unless you naturally draw a fastland. I think your Naya manabase is too heavy on fastlands. I also don't think you should play any Copperline Gorge in your Boros list, since the only time it would ever be better than a Mountain is if you've sided in DRev. You'd rather draw a Mountain as land #4 so that it's not ETBT.
I really doubt only one Stomping Ground would hurt the base. I know that it does make the deck more vunerable to land destruction, but at the same time, I'd imagine they'd go after the white lands before the green, when facing burn. Personally, if I was across the table, knowing my opponent has Boros Charm and Lightning Helix, and more white post-board, and only Command in the main, I think I'd bloe up a Foundry or Vantage before aiming for a Stomping Ground. That being said, if I built the Naya list and ran 2 Stomping, 1 Gorge instead of the way it was in my post, would that be better than Boros?
I've been very satisfied with my Naya build. The link is in my signature.
I play 3 Mountains, 2 Foundry, 2 Stomping Ground, 1 Vantage, 11 fetches for 19 total lands. If I played 20, I'd add a Vantage or Gorge and move 1 Searing Blaze to the side. I don't think anyone here would be surprised that I prefer Naya because of how powerful AC can be.
I think you should always play 2 fetchable lands of each maindeck color so that you can weather 1 instance of land destruction and not be essentially locked out of a color unless you naturally draw a fastland. I think your Naya manabase is too heavy on fastlands. I also don't think you should play any Copperline Gorge in your Boros list, since the only time it would ever be better than a Mountain is if you've sided in DRev. You'd rather draw a Mountain as land #4 so that it's not ETBT.
I really doubt only one Stomping Ground would hurt the base. I know that it does make the deck more vunerable to land destruction, but at the same time, I'd imagine they'd go after the white lands before the green, when facing burn. Personally, if I was across the table, knowing my opponent has Boros Charm and Lightning Helix, and more white post-board, and only Command in the main, I think I'd bloe up a Foundry or Vantage before aiming for a Stomping Ground. That being said, if I built the Naya list and ran 2 Stomping, 1 Gorge instead of the way it was in my post, would that be better than Boros?
If they know your hand, they'll blow up the one that matters. If you're playing against Fish or UW control and they Spreading Seas your lands, then taking out the green one means that you can't blow it up without another green source. This means that if they hold 2 Seas, they should take out your green first and then royally screw you out of white later.
I think Naya is better than Boros in general, but I also think that you've gone way too heavy on fastlands in the Naya build. I'd play 4 Shocks, 3 Mountains, 10-12 fetches and fill out the rest with fastlands. Fastlands are an effect you're happy to see in an opener but unhappy to see late because they enter tapped. I also maintain that you should have zero Copperline Gorge in the Boros build, because it's usually just tapping for R and it has a non-zero chance of entering tapped for no reason.
I've been very satisfied with my Naya build. The link is in my signature.
I play 3 Mountains, 2 Foundry, 2 Stomping Ground, 1 Vantage, 11 fetches for 19 total lands. If I played 20, I'd add a Vantage or Gorge and move 1 Searing Blaze to the side. I don't think anyone here would be surprised that I prefer Naya because of how powerful AC can be.
I think you should always play 2 fetchable lands of each maindeck color so that you can weather 1 instance of land destruction and not be essentially locked out of a color unless you naturally draw a fastland. I think your Naya manabase is too heavy on fastlands. I also don't think you should play any Copperline Gorge in your Boros list, since the only time it would ever be better than a Mountain is if you've sided in DRev. You'd rather draw a Mountain as land #4 so that it's not ETBT.
I really doubt only one Stomping Ground would hurt the base. I know that it does make the deck more vunerable to land destruction, but at the same time, I'd imagine they'd go after the white lands before the green, when facing burn. Personally, if I was across the table, knowing my opponent has Boros Charm and Lightning Helix, and more white post-board, and only Command in the main, I think I'd bloe up a Foundry or Vantage before aiming for a Stomping Ground. That being said, if I built the Naya list and ran 2 Stomping, 1 Gorge instead of the way it was in my post, would that be better than Boros?
Often times when people try to put themselves into the "if I were the opponent what I would do" its often skewed into your favor. Lets say its game 3 and in game 2 I saw you run Revelry, so in game 3 if playing a deck that can I need to blow up your G because I have Chalice or another Artifact/Enchantment that hurt your game plan badly then Id blow up the G first. We can what if situations all day this is just an example.
You can run 2 Stomping Grounds or 2 and 1 Gorge thats totally fine In my Naya version I like to run 2 sources of G. However, a few (not all) disadvantages people have seen but not all mind between Boros and Naya is
1. The life loss Naya/RWg takes is bigger especially in the mirror.
2. If your in a meta where RW Prison, Blue Moon, Zoo builds that run Blood Moon in conjunction with Chalice/Leyline/etc your in a tough spot because all most all Naya players dont run a basic Forest or Plains and few Boros players run a Plains. Running 3 different basics is tough, 2 not as bad lik3 2 Mountains 1 Plains. Now you dont have to run Forest or Plains basics, Im in a meta that it helps to have one Plains when I run Boros.
on the flip side (some not all) advantages like
1. Getting that extra 2 damage from Reverly.
2. Being able to run Atarka's as extra anti life gain plus giving more punch to creatures.
At the end of the day its neither right or wrong as a whole to have Stomping Ground or not. Too many times "it depends" dictates it. Things like play style, experience, meta, situations, etc are all unique to ourselves. I have run both Naya and Boros heck Ive run Jund, Mardu, Rakdos, Mono Red splash G, Mono Red as well and so far for me Boros has worked out the best so my prefernece is there but Id be fine running Naya with Reverly/Stomping Grounds as well.
With the amount of land destruction seeing play in Modern right now, I agree that you need at least two fetchable sources of each color in order to effectively bet on your deck.
With the amount of land destruction seeing play in Modern right now, I agree that you need at least two fetchable sources of each color in order to effectively bet on your deck.
Quick question: Why is it the consensus that Inspiring Vantage is better than Clifftop Retreat? It stands to reason that with our current land base, we are always going to have a mountain so it's always going to come in untapped. The only reason I can muster is for the one land hand where Inspiring Vantage comes in untapped but I'll be honest, I have played over 300 games IRL with burn and the times I've received a one land hand worth keeping is less than 10% of all hands drawn. My win percentage of keeping a one land hand is even worse.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern - Pyro Prison
Modern - GW Tron
Modern - Mono G Tron
Modern - RWg Burn
Commander - Yisan, The Wanderer Bard cEDH build
Commander - Edric, Spymaster of Trest - Budget/Casual list - complete
Commander - Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis - $35 Budget upgrade
Commander - Edgar Markov - $150 upgrade
You've only kept 10% of your 1-landers as Burn? I find that hard to believe. I keep 1-landers with Burn on the regular - it's one of the deck's strengths.
Rothgar13 - The simple fact is that I've lost more one land hands than I've won. Taking a one land hand without the perfect amount of gas doesn't help. I also have a lot of land destruction in my meta so taking a one lander is usually suicide.
Thanks for the scenario on the off chance you get a double clifftop Renaud. Tap lands on our first two turns will kill us quick.
Modern - Pyro Prison
Modern - GW Tron
Modern - Mono G Tron
Modern - RWg Burn
Commander - Yisan, The Wanderer Bard cEDH build
Commander - Edric, Spymaster of Trest - Budget/Casual list - complete
Commander - Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis - $35 Budget upgrade
Commander - Edgar Markov - $150 upgrade
Rothgar13 - The simple fact is that I've lost more one land hands than I've won. Taking a one land hand without the perfect amount of gas doesn't help. I also have a lot of land destruction in my meta so taking a one lander is usually suicide.
Thanks for the scenario on the off chance you get a double clifftop Renaud. Tap lands on our first two turns will kill us quick.
1 landers are hands that already have gas but need to draw a few lands before they just win. If you can ride a Goblin Guide + Spike/Rift for a few turns, it's worth keeping. Of course you mulligan if the rest of the hand is bad, but the point is that you're forcing yourself to mulligan otherwise keepable hands by playing Clifftop Retreat. That 1 land hand that you're forced to drop (or double Clifftop hand) could have been stronger than whatever 6 (or 5) you end up with, and the only reason you had for dropping that 7 was that you made a deckbuilding choice that introduced risk. There are other situations where Clifftop isn't great. Imagine you draw Clifftop + fetch + Searing Blaze. You're forced to play that Searing Blaze as if its a sorcery on turn 2 because you're forced to fetch on T1, rather than allowing you to pass with the open fetch on T2 to see what your opponent does.
I would much prefer to play a land that might be tapped as my 4th land than a land that might be tapped as my first one or one that will force me to play differently in order to have it untapped. Inspiring Vantage is always untapped at a point in the game when you can't afford a tapped land. Only in situations where you need Boros Charm+Rift Bolt to win on 5 lands does Inspiring Vantage become bad, but you'll generally be able to handle your 4th or 5th land being tapped.
The meta in my LGS is heavily varied, but the constants (and have been since I've been playing in that store) are a couple Burn and Tron decks. I ocassionally run into a combo deck where I wish I was playing Naya and could run faster against, but also run into control and aggro. I'm looking for a balanced build, that while not great in any matchup, isn't bad in any, and doesn't take alot of life. I dropped down to 3 Blaze in the 75, all main. It makes me less likely to draw it against decks where it is dead, such as Tron, Deaths Shadow, and certain control/combo matchups. I run 4 Helix in the main, which is good against all aggro decks, and great in the mirror, and ay worst, a lightning strike, even when lifegain doesn't matter. I've tried 0 and 2 on lavamancer, and realize he's good enough in some matchups to justify him, but slow enough that you never want yo draw both in the wrong matchup, so I went to 1. The side is meant to be a toolbox, but also hit Chalice on 1 and 2, Kor Firewalker, and Leyline. Basically, I wanted to be ready for any hate brought in, while still being useful in non-specific matchups. This is the list I made under the "I don't know what I'm sitting across the table from, and it may jusy be a mirror" assumption. I've been debating Naya for more consistent Turn 3 against Combo, before they combo off, but doubt Naya is the best for a wide meta, and run into maybe 1 combo matchup every week. Is this a good list, when you don't know what you're up against?
It's fine except that the Copperline Gorge should be a Mountain. Copperline Gorge has no place in Boros and should really only be played in Nacatl builds.
It's fine except that the Copperline Gorge should be a Mountain. Copperline Gorge has no place in Boros and should really only be played in Nacatl builds.
Yeah, I copied my older list and edited it, and forgot to change that. The correct lands are shown now. 3x Foundry instead of 2, no Gorge. I'm also gonna drop to 3 Helix and try 2 Lavamancers again tonight. Hopefully that doesn't backfire.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: BWTokensBW RWBurnRW UFaeriesU
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Thanks!
I'm working on a way of defining the probability that your opponent can kill or render impotent a creature as a function of turn. It's not as simple as the probability that they have removal, because a 2/3 means your Goblin Guide is done dealing damage just like dying would. Even a Sakura-Tribe Elder blanks it for a turn.
I looked at the decks on the front page of mtggoldfish and they comprise about 56% of the Modern metashare. Of those decks, Burn and UWR Control have the most targeted removal at 16 and 14 respectively (and UWR can Snap some of that, too). Averaging over all of those decks, though, you get an average of about 8 removal spells per deck. Most decks only have 4-ish that can be cast on T1, though UWR has 8 (path+bolt), so it's reasonable to say the number of outs on T1 is close to 4. T2 available removal I'm setting equal to the average number of removal spells (8), but it could be higher due to creatures. After that, it's kind of up in the air. Right now, I'm estimating that on T3, they have 8 + 6 non-removal ways to invalidate a creature (I should probably increase that). T4 I'm saying 8 + 16 ways. After that, I'm just saying that half of any given deck invalidates your creatures.
And then it gets fuzzier. What about Grim Lavamancer? A creature doesn't invalidate it because the 2 damage mode is unblockable and only removal can get rid of it. So for Grim, I say there's 4 outs on T1, 6 on T2, and 8 on every subsequent turn. That's kind of straight forward because it's an activated ability that can only happen once per turn. There's a problem with that model, though. It leads you to conclude that Grim Lavamancer is worth an obscene amount of damage because even if it rarely lasts until T10, it will have dealt 20 damage by that point and that carries a lot of weight.
And then it gets even fuzzier. What about Eidolon? It can attack for 2, and that follows the invalidation model above in principle, but then it has a triggered ability that's different from the Grim Lavamancer model because it can trigger repeatedly.
Because of the Lavamancer problem, I decided to play with an importance function that serves as a measure of how relevant a a given turn is. It's 1 for early turns and then decreases for late turns.
I have never chosen to draw and I don't think it's correct for an aggro deck to choose to go second. I think it's probably only correct to choose to go second when you're playing midrange vs. midrange and the extra card matters, or you're playing dredge. I want to be the aggressor as the Burn deck, especially in the mirror. I don't want to be playing catch up.
I completely agree, go 1st. I will also add that when your on the draw vs a deck that runs 22-24 lands and for the most part they drop lands the first 4 or 5 turns. If you let then go first they can get to that 4th land sooner which could set then up for cards like Cryptic Command a turn earlier or if your running a creature heavy build Supreme Verdict. As a more specific example to Burn, lets say you kill their mana dork or they dont have one but still have that land every turn on their turn 4 and you just finished 3, they go Land into Obstinate Baloth (this card isnt run as often now as in the past) and you dont have Skullcrack/AC in hand.
Going first has helped me to more wins then going 2nd more times then not.
BWTokensBW
RWBurnRW
UFaeriesU
I believe I agree with you. Thanks for the reply!
Mardu Burn
Monogreen Stompy
Legacy
Burn
Pauper
Dimir Flicker
Monowhite Tokens
Boros:
Land (20)
2x Arid Mesa
4x Bloodstained Mire
1x Copperline Gorge
4x Inspiring Vantage
2x Mountain
2x Sacred Foundry
1x Stomping Ground
4x Wooded Foothills
Instant (18)
4x Boros Charm
4x Lightning Bolt
3x Lightning Helix
3x Searing Blaze
4x Skullcrack
Creature (14)
4x Eidolon of the Great Revel
4x Goblin Guide
2x Grim Lavamancer
4x Monastery Swiftspear
Sorcery (8)
4x Lava Spike
4x Rift Bolt
Sideboard (15)
2x Deflecting Palm
3x Destructive Revelry
2x Kor Firewalker
1x Lightning Helix
3x Path to Exile
2x Relic of Progenitus
2x Shattering Spree
Naya:
Land (20)
2x Arid Mesa
4x Bloodstained Mire
2x Copperline Gorge
3x Inspiring Vantage
2x Mountain
2x Sacred Foundry
1x Stomping Ground
4x Wooded Foothills
Instant (18)
4x Boros Charm
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Lightning Helix
3x Searing Blaze
4x Atarka's Command
Creature (14)
4x Eidolon of the Great Revel
4x Goblin Guide
1x Grim Lavamancer
4x Monastery Swiftspear
Sorcery (8)
4x Lava Spike
4x Rift Bolt
Sideboard (15)
2x Deflecting Palm
3x Destructive Revelry
3x Kor Firewalker
3x Path to Exile
2x Relic of Progenitus
2x Shattering Spree
BWTokensBW
RWBurnRW
UFaeriesU
I play 3 Mountains, 2 Foundry, 2 Stomping Ground, 1 Vantage, 11 fetches for 19 total lands. If I played 20, I'd add a Vantage or Gorge and move 1 Searing Blaze to the side. I don't think anyone here would be surprised that I prefer Naya because of how powerful AC can be.
I think you should always play 2 fetchable lands of each maindeck color so that you can weather 1 instance of land destruction and not be essentially locked out of a color unless you naturally draw a fastland. I think your Naya manabase is too heavy on fastlands. I also don't think you should play any Copperline Gorge in your Boros list, since the only time it would ever be better than a Mountain is if you've sided in DRev. You'd rather draw a Mountain as land #4 so that it's not ETBT.
BWTokensBW
RWBurnRW
UFaeriesU
If they know your hand, they'll blow up the one that matters. If you're playing against Fish or UW control and they Spreading Seas your lands, then taking out the green one means that you can't blow it up without another green source. This means that if they hold 2 Seas, they should take out your green first and then royally screw you out of white later.
I think Naya is better than Boros in general, but I also think that you've gone way too heavy on fastlands in the Naya build. I'd play 4 Shocks, 3 Mountains, 10-12 fetches and fill out the rest with fastlands. Fastlands are an effect you're happy to see in an opener but unhappy to see late because they enter tapped. I also maintain that you should have zero Copperline Gorge in the Boros build, because it's usually just tapping for R and it has a non-zero chance of entering tapped for no reason.
Often times when people try to put themselves into the "if I were the opponent what I would do" its often skewed into your favor. Lets say its game 3 and in game 2 I saw you run Revelry, so in game 3 if playing a deck that can I need to blow up your G because I have Chalice or another Artifact/Enchantment that hurt your game plan badly then Id blow up the G first. We can what if situations all day this is just an example.
You can run 2 Stomping Grounds or 2 and 1 Gorge thats totally fine In my Naya version I like to run 2 sources of G. However, a few (not all) disadvantages people have seen but not all mind between Boros and Naya is
1. The life loss Naya/RWg takes is bigger especially in the mirror.
2. If your in a meta where RW Prison, Blue Moon, Zoo builds that run Blood Moon in conjunction with Chalice/Leyline/etc your in a tough spot because all most all Naya players dont run a basic Forest or Plains and few Boros players run a Plains. Running 3 different basics is tough, 2 not as bad lik3 2 Mountains 1 Plains. Now you dont have to run Forest or Plains basics, Im in a meta that it helps to have one Plains when I run Boros.
on the flip side (some not all) advantages like
1. Getting that extra 2 damage from Reverly.
2. Being able to run Atarka's as extra anti life gain plus giving more punch to creatures.
At the end of the day its neither right or wrong as a whole to have Stomping Ground or not. Too many times "it depends" dictates it. Things like play style, experience, meta, situations, etc are all unique to ourselves. I have run both Naya and Boros heck Ive run Jund, Mardu, Rakdos, Mono Red splash G, Mono Red as well and so far for me Boros has worked out the best so my prefernece is there but Id be fine running Naya with Reverly/Stomping Grounds as well.
Mardu Burn
Monogreen Stompy
Legacy
Burn
Pauper
Dimir Flicker
Monowhite Tokens
Modern - GW Tron
Modern - Mono G Tron
Modern - RWg Burn
Commander - Yisan, The Wanderer Bard cEDH build
Commander - Edric, Spymaster of Trest - Budget/Casual list - complete
Commander - Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis - $35 Budget upgrade
Commander - Edgar Markov - $150 upgrade
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
or what if you played your mountain first, but then it got turned into an island
"Are you serious?" Chandra replied.
Thanks for the scenario on the off chance you get a double clifftop Renaud. Tap lands on our first two turns will kill us quick.
Modern - GW Tron
Modern - Mono G Tron
Modern - RWg Burn
Commander - Yisan, The Wanderer Bard cEDH build
Commander - Edric, Spymaster of Trest - Budget/Casual list - complete
Commander - Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis - $35 Budget upgrade
Commander - Edgar Markov - $150 upgrade
1 landers are hands that already have gas but need to draw a few lands before they just win. If you can ride a Goblin Guide + Spike/Rift for a few turns, it's worth keeping. Of course you mulligan if the rest of the hand is bad, but the point is that you're forcing yourself to mulligan otherwise keepable hands by playing Clifftop Retreat. That 1 land hand that you're forced to drop (or double Clifftop hand) could have been stronger than whatever 6 (or 5) you end up with, and the only reason you had for dropping that 7 was that you made a deckbuilding choice that introduced risk. There are other situations where Clifftop isn't great. Imagine you draw Clifftop + fetch + Searing Blaze. You're forced to play that Searing Blaze as if its a sorcery on turn 2 because you're forced to fetch on T1, rather than allowing you to pass with the open fetch on T2 to see what your opponent does.
I would much prefer to play a land that might be tapped as my 4th land than a land that might be tapped as my first one or one that will force me to play differently in order to have it untapped. Inspiring Vantage is always untapped at a point in the game when you can't afford a tapped land. Only in situations where you need Boros Charm+Rift Bolt to win on 5 lands does Inspiring Vantage become bad, but you'll generally be able to handle your 4th or 5th land being tapped.
Land (20)
2x Arid Mesa
4x Bloodstained Mire
4x Inspiring Vantage
2x Mountain
3x Sacred Foundry
1x Stomping Ground
4x Wooded Foothills
Instant (19)
4x Boros Charm
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Lightning Helix
3x Searing Blaze
4x Skullcrack
Creature (13)
4x Eidolon of the Great Revel
4x Goblin Guide
1x Grim Lavamancer
4x Monastery Swiftspear
Sorcery (8)
4x Lava Spike
4x Rift Bolt
Sideboard (15)
2x Deflecting Palm
3x Destructive Revelry
3x Kor Firewalker
3x Path to Exile
2x Relic of Progenitus
2x Shattering Spree
BWTokensBW
RWBurnRW
UFaeriesU
BWTokensBW
RWBurnRW
UFaeriesU