I've tried firedancer before, I never found a matchup I wanted to board him in for. He always seems too slow, and like a terrible turn 2 play. I think searing blaze and searing blood fill a similar role and are just better at it due to the immediacy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Agreed. Mono red tends to use more 2 for 3 spells than 1 for 3. There's no reason not to run Bump and Volley together. And boros charm is better than flames in most situations. It's cheaper. The only time it isnt better is if you face a lot of lifgain. I still say that mono red should run fetches. Period. End of story. Even if you only have mountains, you eliminate 2 lands from the deck with each fetch. The fetch and the land you fetch. Since you should be running fetches anyways, you should run at least a 1-of of some kind of shock to deal with leyline. If not, then run clifftop or crag. Or even pain lands. Or hell... run CoB or confluence. The life you lose due to fetches and shocks is seriously irrelevant to us so long as it's adding speed for us to kill them. Mono red str8 up doesn't have the speed that splash colors do. Again... it's proven in results. Mtgo isn't paper magic. Mono red can probably win on mtgo all day bc it's mostly a site used to test for real paper events. Which we have seen that mono red doesn't top 8 nearly as often. Not that mono red doesn't have an advantage in the mirror bc it does a little with losing less life, but it doesn't have the raw speed for other decks in the real world. If you're running mono red, you should be running lavamancer and if you're running lavamancer, you need fetches. Manger helps mono red dramatically. I hate mancer in multi color burn bc he rly isn't worth it with all the other options in my opinion but in mono red, he helps a lot.
The increased probability of drawing a spell from cracking a single fetch land is so marginal that the point of life lost is more important. The virtual card advantage of cracking multiple fetch lands is realized when the game lasts 20+ turns, which is far too long for RDW. This is why mono colored decks should never play fetch lands, unless it is taking advantage of shuffle effects, landfall triggers, or the graveyard. You are correct that mono-red should play fetch lands, but for none of the reasons you have stated. In context of mono-red, fetch lands are only good for Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze. That's it. All of the statistical analysis can be found here: http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/print.asp?ID=3096
I understand stats are stats but from personal experience, running fetches helps reduce land draws. Idc how stats prove this or prove that. Running mono colored decks without fetches and running it with fetches, it is noticeable after you've done them both for awhile that you don't top deck lands nearly as often when you have fetches.
Maths tell the truth, you cant argue against that. Your personal testing can never be extended enough to prove fetchlands are reduceing your land draws. If you belive they work for you its ok, as you could also belive in the hearth of the cards like yu-gi-oh, but that does not make any valid point.
Fetchlands are just wrong in any monocolor deck if they have no other purpose than deck thining.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Of course you should fight fire with fire. You should fight everything with fire."
-Jaya Ballard, task mage
Agreed. Mono red tends to use more 2 for 3 spells than 1 for 3. There's no reason not to run Bump and Volley together. And boros charm is better than flames in most situations. It's cheaper. The only time it isnt better is if you face a lot of lifgain. I still say that mono red should run fetches. Period. End of story. Even if you only have mountains, you eliminate 2 lands from the deck with each fetch. The fetch and the land you fetch. Since you should be running fetches anyways, you should run at least a 1-of of some kind of shock to deal with leyline. If not, then run clifftop or crag. Or even pain lands. Or hell... run CoB or confluence. The life you lose due to fetches and shocks is seriously irrelevant to us so long as it's adding speed for us to kill them. Mono red str8 up doesn't have the speed that splash colors do. Again... it's proven in results. Mtgo isn't paper magic. Mono red can probably win on mtgo all day bc it's mostly a site used to test for real paper events. Which we have seen that mono red doesn't top 8 nearly as often. Not that mono red doesn't have an advantage in the mirror bc it does a little with losing less life, but it doesn't have the raw speed for other decks in the real world. If you're running mono red, you should be running lavamancer and if you're running lavamancer, you need fetches. Manger helps mono red dramatically. I hate mancer in multi color burn bc he rly isn't worth it with all the other options in my opinion but in mono red, he helps a lot.
The increased probability of drawing a spell from cracking a single fetch land is so marginal that the point of life lost is more important. The virtual card advantage of cracking multiple fetch lands is realized when the game lasts 20+ turns, which is far too long for RDW. This is why mono colored decks should never play fetch lands, unless it is taking advantage of shuffle effects, landfall triggers, or the graveyard. You are correct that mono-red should play fetch lands, but for none of the reasons you have stated. In context of mono-red, fetch lands are only good for Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze. That's it. All of the statistical analysis can be found here: http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/print.asp?ID=3096
I understand stats are stats but from personal experience, running fetches helps reduce land draws. Idc how stats prove this or prove that. Running mono colored decks without fetches and running it with fetches, it is noticeable after you've done them both for awhile that you don't top deck lands nearly as often when you have fetches.
Maths tell the truth, you cant argue against that. Your personal testing can never be extended enough to prove fetchlands are reduceing your land draws. If you belive they work for you its ok, as you could also belive in the hearth of the cards like yu-gi-oh, but that does not make any valid point.
Fetchlands are just wrong in any monocolor deck if they have no other purpose than deck thining.
There isn't rly heart of the cards but I do believe in luck. Which is a big portion of this game. Point is, math does prove it and you said it yourself, it does reduce your chance. Just at a rly small fraction.
DOLZero, I didn't see Pyrite Spellbomb in your primer SB cards. It's one of the only answers we have to kill Kor Firewalker.
Guerrilla Tactics is another great SB card for heavy discard decks and 8Rack.
Cryoclasm is my new SB baby and wrecks many control decks.
I knew I was forgetting some cards. Spellbomb will go in with Ghostfire and Engineered Explosives. I still feel like there was a 2 drop spell I was forgetting.
Guerilla Tactics will probably never see play. It's basically a bad Magma Jet.
I don't think anyone was suggesting running fetch lands just for deck thinning. I never read that anywhere. It is worth pointing out that each fetch you make will decrease the chances of you drawing a land, and the more you fetch the less likely you are to draw a land. It might be only reducing your odds of drawing a land by ~0.8% per fetch, but this is an upside, however minor it may be.
While it's true that the fetch lands are mostly to power Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze, the deck typically runs 10-12. Fetching once doesn't make much of an impact on the % chance of drawing a land. However, you will often fetch 3+ times during a game, and having 13 lands left in a deck can make a significant impact on your chances of drawing a land than having 16 lands remaining. It's a minor upside to running a lot of fetches, but something that should still be considered.
Did you even read the article? The author even uses the 8/12 case (8 'true' lands/12 fetch lands) as a model for his simulations. On average, your chances of drawing a spell on turn 3 only increases by 1.28%. Explain to me how this is 'significant?' Just in case that isn't enough for you, here's another article written by the same person: http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/article.asp?ID=3121 He explains all the math behind his simulations, and he also calculates the increased chances of drawing a spell on turn x as the game goes on. It's also where I got the 1.28%.
Maths tell the truth, you cant argue against that. Your personal testing can never be extended enough to prove fetchlands are reduceing your land draws. If you belive they work for you its ok, as you could also belive in the hearth of the cards like yu-gi-oh, but that does not make any valid point.
Fetchlands are just wrong in any monocolor deck if they have no other purpose than deck thining.
Thank you! at least somebody here understands the fetch land deck thinning fallacy.
I will try Engineered Explosives. It seems like a great answer to Hatebears with Kor Firewalker. Ghostfire is neet too. They will go in my sb for sure.
I played a 6 man modern tourny a while back and there were 2 mono black discard decks. My Guerilla Tactics did great work. But I can see why it would be an obsolete card, especially since we have a good matchup vs mono black and Liliana.
Same with Cryoclasm. Molten Rain is better but in a meta full of Delver and Twin decks, Cryoclasm can still play a role.
While it's true that the fetch lands are mostly to power Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze, the deck typically runs 10-12. Fetching once doesn't make much of an impact on the % chance of drawing a land. However, you will often fetch 3+ times during a game, and having 13 lands left in a deck can make a significant impact on your chances of drawing a land than having 16 lands remaining. It's a minor upside to running a lot of fetches, but something that should still be considered.
Did you even read the article? The author even uses the 8/12 case (8 'true' lands/12 fetch lands) as a model for his simulations. On average, your chances of drawing a spell on turn 3 only increases by 1.28%. Explain to me how this is 'significant?' Just in case that isn't enough for you, here's another article written by the same person: http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/article.asp?ID=3121 He explains all the math behind his simulations, and he also calculates the increased chances of drawing a spell on turn x as the game goes on. It's also where I got the 1.28%.
Here is the math on my deck. I run 19 lands in my deck. My opening hand has 3 fetches, and I am on the draw. That leaves 53 cards in my deck, 16 of which are lands. That is a 30.2% chance of drawing a land. On my second turn I have 51 cards in my library, and 15 land left in the deck. That is a 29.4% chance of drawing a land (0.8% difference). On my third turn, there are 49 cards left in my library, 14 of which are lands. 28.6% chance of drawing a land on this turn (-1.6% difference). On the 4th turn, there are 47 cards left in the library, 13 of which are lands. That is a 27.7% chance of drawing a land (-2.5% difference).
Okay, so maybe it's not a significant difference, but fetching still decreases your chance of drawing a land. Why are we even debating this? I read someone making a point about mono red running fetches. I assume this is for Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze. Anyway, it was a minor part of his entire post, but it's been the focus of several posts today. We get it. Fetching only reduces the chances of drawing a land by a minor amount. I will take every advantage I can get, no matter how insignificant it may seem. It's not the reason why I run fetch lands by any means, but it is an additional benefit. Especially when you top deck that last copy of Sacred Foundry which you should have fetched out last turn (this has actually happened to me).
I've tried firedancer before, I never found a matchup I wanted to board him in for. He always seems too slow, and like a terrible turn 2 play. I think searing blaze and searing blood fill a similar role and are just better at it due to the immediacy.
That's kind of a shame because his effect seems decent.
Edit: I was able to get Tuesday off, so I am definitely attending the event. I will post the results as they come in.
While it's true that the fetch lands are mostly to power Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze, the deck typically runs 10-12. Fetching once doesn't make much of an impact on the % chance of drawing a land. However, you will often fetch 3+ times during a game, and having 13 lands left in a deck can make a significant impact on your chances of drawing a land than having 16 lands remaining. It's a minor upside to running a lot of fetches, but something that should still be considered.
Did you even read the article? The author even uses the 8/12 case (8 'true' lands/12 fetch lands) as a model for his simulations. On average, your chances of drawing a spell on turn 3 only increases by 1.28%. Explain to me how this is 'significant?' Just in case that isn't enough for you, here's another article written by the same person: http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/article.asp?ID=3121 He explains all the math behind his simulations, and he also calculates the increased chances of drawing a spell on turn x as the game goes on. It's also where I got the 1.28%.
Here is the math on my deck. I run 19 lands in my deck. My opening hand has 3 fetches, and I am on the draw. That leaves 53 cards in my deck, 16 of which are lands. That is a 30.2% chance of drawing a land. On my second turn I have 51 cards in my library, and 15 land left in the deck. That is a 29.4% chance of drawing a land (0.8% difference). On my third turn, there are 49 cards left in my library, 14 of which are lands. 28.6% chance of drawing a land on this turn (-1.6% difference). On the 4th turn, there are 47 cards left in the library, 13 of which are lands. That is a 27.7% chance of drawing a land (-2.5% difference).
Okay, so maybe it's not a significant difference, but fetching still decreases your chance of drawing a land. Why are we even debating this? I read someone making a point about mono red running fetches. I assume this is for Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze. Anyway, it was a minor part of his entire post, but it's been the focus of several posts today. We get it. Fetching only reduces the chances of drawing a land by a minor amount. I will take every advantage I can get, no matter how insignificant it may seem. It's not the reason why I run fetch lands by any means, but it is an additional benefit. Especially when you top deck that last copy of Sacred Foundry which you should have fetched out last turn (this has actually happened to me).
We should make a separate thread for the small minority of people who want to play mono red without fetchlands.
Here is the math on my deck. I run 19 lands in my deck. My opening hand has 3 fetches, and I am on the draw. That leaves 53 cards in my deck, 16 of which are lands. That is a 30.2% chance of drawing a land. On my second turn I have 51 cards in my library, and 15 land left in the deck. That is a 29.4% chance of drawing a land (0.8% difference). On my third turn, there are 49 cards left in my library, 14 of which are lands. 28.6% chance of drawing a land on this turn (-1.6% difference). On the 4th turn, there are 47 cards left in the library, 13 of which are lands. That is a 27.7% chance of drawing a land (-2.5% difference).
Okay, so maybe it's not a significant difference, but fetching still decreases your chance of drawing a land. Why are we even debating this? I read someone making a point about mono red running fetches. I assume this is for Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze. Anyway, it was a minor part of his entire post, but it's been the focus of several posts today. We get it. Fetching only reduces the chances of drawing a land by a minor amount. I will take every advantage I can get, no matter how insignificant it may seem. It's not the reason why I run fetch lands by any means, but it is an additional benefit. Especially when you top deck that last copy of Sacred Foundry which you should have fetched out last turn (this has actually happened to me).
You're math is still flawed because, you're basing it off only one event. The chances of drawing a hand that contains 3 fetch lands (assuming there are no mulligans, and you play 12 fetch lands), is 13.55%.
I was just giving an example. Yes, fetching reduces the number of lands in your deck. No, you should not run fetch lands for the sole purpose of thinning your deck. Losing one life is more important than having a -.8% chance of drawing a land. Can we move past this? Do you want to keep beating a dead horse?
Vs American Control: 1-2
G2 left him in 2lp and drew 3 lands straight. G3 he laid Leyline and I didn't see Revelry until I was already dead.
Vs Living End: 2-0
He was too slow.
Vs BW Midrange 1-2
Ran out of gas again G2, and G3 I just couldn't beat Kor Firewalker equipped by Sword of Light and Shadow. Both lost games Rain of Gore was discarded turn 1.
Vs MUTron 0-2
This one made me mad, I break a Chalice at 1 for him to draw another and set it at 2, then another at 1, then next game Chalice at 2 followed by an infinite Spell Burst.
I just wouldn't finish my opponents, letting them beat me at 1-3 life each time and being blown the **** out.
Today I played at a local SCG modern night with the following list and got 1st! My record was 5-1. I was quite pleased with this 75 and will likely stick with the same list at future events.
Round 1: Jund Dredge (2-0)
My opponent was playing a cool list that had lotleth troll, some dredgers, lavamancer, a reanimation package. It was a powerful list, but my deck was just slightly faster and more consistent than his.
Round 2: G/B Infect (2-1)
I sided in volcanic fallout and searing blood. I stuck to burning out his threats and keeping his board clear before switching to throwing spells at the dome.
Round 3: Eggs (2-0)
Not much to say here. I played Eidolon on turn two both games and my opponent scooped in response..
Round 4: Mardu Burn (0-2)
I lost the dice roll in both this round and the finals which is rough. Dragon's claw was great here, especially since he didn't have any in his sideboard. I was nearly able to claw my way back out of lethal range the second game. However, he was able to stick two GG's and a swiftspear that I couldn't remove quick enough before the damage piled on.
Top 4: Jund Dredge (2-0)
Same opponent as round one. He made some very fat lotleth trolls, but was one turn too slow from killing me each game. Eidolon was great here.
Finals: Mardu Burn (2-1)
These games were all super close and a ton of fun. The final game I had an Eidolon on board along with a dragon's claw and his board is empty. We're both at 4 life and I swing with the eidolon. He casts a lightning helix targeting the eidolon which drops him to 2. I cast my last burn spell in hand, a skullcrack, for the win.
I didn't actually draw treasure cruise more than a few times the whole night, but when I did it seemed to win the game. This deck is just insanely consistent and powerful. Cheers!
Vs American Control: 1-2
G2 left him in 2lp and drew 3 lands straight. G3 he laid Leyline and I didn't see Revelry until I was already dead.
Vs Living End: 2-0
He was too slow.
Vs BW Midrange 1-2
Ran out of gas again G2, and G3 I just couldn't beat Kor Firewalker equipped by Sword of Light and Shadow. Both lost games Rain of Gore was discarded turn 1.
Vs MUTron 0-2
This one made me mad, I break a Chalice at 1 for him to draw another and set it at 2, then another at 1, then next game Chalice at 2 followed by an infinite Spell Burst.
I just wouldn't finish my opponents, letting them beat me at 1-3 life each time and being blown the **** out.
I'm kind of tired of running out of gas. I may just call it quits on Mardu and play Treasure Cruise. There is nothing worse than having your opponent at 4 life and having no answers. I almost never have the opportunity to flashback Bump in the Night. We will have to see.
has anyone considered Izzet Charm? it is colors a lot of us are playing already, it can make a bad hand good, it increases our Delve count and in bad scenarios, it is a bad Shock. Im gonna see if i can find a few sitting around to try. also, I never thought about it before, but as long as we are splashing Blue, Goblin Electromancer could lead to a turn 2 win
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Maths tell the truth, you cant argue against that. Your personal testing can never be extended enough to prove fetchlands are reduceing your land draws. If you belive they work for you its ok, as you could also belive in the hearth of the cards like yu-gi-oh, but that does not make any valid point.
Fetchlands are just wrong in any monocolor deck if they have no other purpose than deck thining.
-Jaya Ballard, task mage
There isn't rly heart of the cards but I do believe in luck. Which is a big portion of this game. Point is, math does prove it and you said it yourself, it does reduce your chance. Just at a rly small fraction.
I knew I was forgetting some cards. Spellbomb will go in with Ghostfire and Engineered Explosives. I still feel like there was a 2 drop spell I was forgetting.
Guerilla Tactics will probably never see play. It's basically a bad Magma Jet.
Cryoclasm is outclassed by Molten Rain.
I don't think anyone was suggesting running fetch lands just for deck thinning. I never read that anywhere. It is worth pointing out that each fetch you make will decrease the chances of you drawing a land, and the more you fetch the less likely you are to draw a land. It might be only reducing your odds of drawing a land by ~0.8% per fetch, but this is an upside, however minor it may be.
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
Thank you! at least somebody here understands the fetch land deck thinning fallacy.
I played a 6 man modern tourny a while back and there were 2 mono black discard decks. My Guerilla Tactics did great work. But I can see why it would be an obsolete card, especially since we have a good matchup vs mono black and Liliana.
Same with Cryoclasm. Molten Rain is better but in a meta full of Delver and Twin decks, Cryoclasm can still play a role.
Here is the math on my deck. I run 19 lands in my deck. My opening hand has 3 fetches, and I am on the draw. That leaves 53 cards in my deck, 16 of which are lands. That is a 30.2% chance of drawing a land. On my second turn I have 51 cards in my library, and 15 land left in the deck. That is a 29.4% chance of drawing a land (0.8% difference). On my third turn, there are 49 cards left in my library, 14 of which are lands. 28.6% chance of drawing a land on this turn (-1.6% difference). On the 4th turn, there are 47 cards left in the library, 13 of which are lands. That is a 27.7% chance of drawing a land (-2.5% difference).
Okay, so maybe it's not a significant difference, but fetching still decreases your chance of drawing a land. Why are we even debating this? I read someone making a point about mono red running fetches. I assume this is for Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze. Anyway, it was a minor part of his entire post, but it's been the focus of several posts today. We get it. Fetching only reduces the chances of drawing a land by a minor amount. I will take every advantage I can get, no matter how insignificant it may seem. It's not the reason why I run fetch lands by any means, but it is an additional benefit. Especially when you top deck that last copy of Sacred Foundry which you should have fetched out last turn (this has actually happened to me).
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
That's kind of a shame because his effect seems decent.
Edit: I was able to get Tuesday off, so I am definitely attending the event. I will post the results as they come in.
We should make a separate thread for the small minority of people who want to play mono red without fetchlands.
You're math is still flawed because, you're basing it off only one event. The chances of drawing a hand that contains 3 fetch lands (assuming there are no mulligans, and you play 12 fetch lands), is 13.55%.
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
Modern
BUGLantern ControlBUG
[center][color=Blue]
Edric Spy and die
Azami the lady of the draw
Naya Zoo
Past decks
Orloro
sharuum the hegemond
Mono black control
splinter twin
4x Scalding Tarn
4x Bloodstained Mire
2x Wooded Foothills
2x Sacred Foundry
2x Blood Crypt
1x Stomping Ground
4x Goblin Guide
4x Monastery Swiftspear
4x Eidolon of the Great Revel
4x Bump in the Night
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Lava Spike
4x Skullcrack
4x Rift Bolt
3x Searing Blaze
4x Boros Charm
2x Lightning Helix
3x Volcanic Fallout
3x Rakdos Charm
3x Destructive Revelry
3x Dragon's Claw
2x Lightning Helix
1x Rain of Gore
Vs American Control: 1-2
G2 left him in 2lp and drew 3 lands straight. G3 he laid Leyline and I didn't see Revelry until I was already dead.
Vs Living End: 2-0
He was too slow.
Vs BW Midrange 1-2
Ran out of gas again G2, and G3 I just couldn't beat Kor Firewalker equipped by Sword of Light and Shadow. Both lost games Rain of Gore was discarded turn 1.
Vs MUTron 0-2
This one made me mad, I break a Chalice at 1 for him to draw another and set it at 2, then another at 1, then next game Chalice at 2 followed by an infinite Spell Burst.
I just wouldn't finish my opponents, letting them beat me at 1-3 life each time and being blown the **** out.
It doesn't hit a player, so it's pretty much useless.
FREE BLOODBRAID ELF
2x Arid Mesa
4x Bloodstained Mire
4x Mountain
2x Sacred Foundry
2x Steam Vents
1x Stomping Ground
4x Wooded Foothills
Spells (29)
4x Boros Charm
4x Lightning Bolt
2x Lightning Helix
2x Searing Blaze
2x Shard Volley
4x Skullcrack
4x Lava Spike
4x Rift Bolt
3x Treasure Cruise
4x Eidolon of the Great Revel
4x Goblin Guide
4x Monastery Swiftspear
3x Destructive Revelry
4x Dragon's Claw
2x Molten Rain
2x Searing Blood
2x Smash to Smithereens
2x Volcanic Fallout
Round 1: Jund Dredge (2-0)
My opponent was playing a cool list that had lotleth troll, some dredgers, lavamancer, a reanimation package. It was a powerful list, but my deck was just slightly faster and more consistent than his.
Round 2: G/B Infect (2-1)
I sided in volcanic fallout and searing blood. I stuck to burning out his threats and keeping his board clear before switching to throwing spells at the dome.
Round 3: Eggs (2-0)
Not much to say here. I played Eidolon on turn two both games and my opponent scooped in response..
Round 4: Mardu Burn (0-2)
I lost the dice roll in both this round and the finals which is rough. Dragon's claw was great here, especially since he didn't have any in his sideboard. I was nearly able to claw my way back out of lethal range the second game. However, he was able to stick two GG's and a swiftspear that I couldn't remove quick enough before the damage piled on.
Top 4: Jund Dredge (2-0)
Same opponent as round one. He made some very fat lotleth trolls, but was one turn too slow from killing me each game. Eidolon was great here.
Finals: Mardu Burn (2-1)
These games were all super close and a ton of fun. The final game I had an Eidolon on board along with a dragon's claw and his board is empty. We're both at 4 life and I swing with the eidolon. He casts a lightning helix targeting the eidolon which drops him to 2. I cast my last burn spell in hand, a skullcrack, for the win.
I didn't actually draw treasure cruise more than a few times the whole night, but when I did it seemed to win the game. This deck is just insanely consistent and powerful. Cheers!
I'm kind of tired of running out of gas. I may just call it quits on Mardu and play Treasure Cruise. There is nothing worse than having your opponent at 4 life and having no answers. I almost never have the opportunity to flashback Bump in the Night. We will have to see.
-MH
Modern
BUGLantern ControlBUG