You can't run a 4 color burn deck and be competitive. You take too much damage from your mana base, losing to anything in the format that turns sideways.
Agree. In fact, it seems like the main argument against Command is the more difficult mana. As I believe someone further posted that they did not run Command main as it wasn't worth drastically changing the setup of an already successful deck.
Part of why I don't get the argument for RWB or RBG over RWG, as the Black splash forces a heavy reliance on the third color anyway. But loses cards like Destructive Revelry or Kor Firewalker out of the sideboard, which are arguably our most important sideboard cards.
So you guys think that not running Atarka's Command could still make Burn viable by staying with Destructive Revelry as a sideboard option and mainly splashing white for Lightning Helix and Boros Charm?
No, you really need to be R/W/b or R/W/g. You will be stretching a your mana base too far if you are R/W/b/g. If you need that effect from the board try wear/tear for R/W/b.
Why would you want a land wich can not fetch a basic mountain? Bloodstained Mire can fetch every land in your deck, Windswept Heath can not. How should your deck be any better if you switch two Mires out for two Heaths?
Why would you want a land wich can not fetch a basic mountain? Bloodstained Mire can fetch every land in your deck, Windswept Heath can not. How should your deck be any better if you switch two Mires out for two Heaths?
My bad : I forgot that Stomping Ground was red too when I posted (dumb mistake)!
So this might be a bad idea, but has anyone tested Wild Nacatl in a naya build? More attackers seems good with Atarka's Command, and a repeatable, non-targeted, non-red source of damage is good against a lot of the hate we see. Falls prey to bad topdeckability and efficient removal of course, but it puts some tension on your opponent's sideboarding choices. Might be better than lavamancer. Thoughts?
Three mana is quite a bit for this deck actually, and the fact that the 6 damage is negated by one and two mana removal leads to a really bad loss of tempo.
So this might be a bad idea, but has anyone tested Wild Nacatl in a naya build? More attackers seems good with Atarka's Command, and a repeatable, non-targeted, non-red source of damage is good against a lot of the hate we see. Falls prey to bad topdeckability and efficient removal of course, but it puts some tension on your opponent's sideboarding choices. Might be better than lavamancer. Thoughts?
I think it's a fair rival to Swiftspear here, if you run 2x Sacred Foundry and 2x Stomping Ground (plus at least 2 Atarka's Command main). I've been trying 4 Command and 4 Skullcrack main and I like it, but I also prefer Nacatl not requiring spells to attack for 3.
It's going to hurt in the mirror though, so you might want Helix mained.
I know i've mentioned Monastery siege before but i feel like this was glossed over too quickly. Its becoming more popular in my meta and this card is an absolute house against Burn (if set to Dragons). Once it comes down, i feel as if the game is already over. Revelry is too slow given that we have to pay 4 just to get rid of it and most times we dont get 4 lands into play (nor do we typically want to).
I know i've mentioned Monastery siege before but i feel like this was glossed over too quickly. Its becoming more popular in my meta and this card is an absolute house against Burn (if set to Dragons). Once it comes down, i feel as if the game is already over. Revelry is too slow given that we have to pay 4 just to get rid of it and most times we dont get 4 lands into play (nor do we typically want to).
How many Grim lavamancers are you running? Also how many land? I think if that card is common you need 2 grim, probably maindeck, and 20 lands. Also wear/tear instead of revelry is probably a better option, if the meta is affinity light.
Vexing Devil for me. If you got it in your opening hand and play it, it's mostly a 4 damage for one mana. At best, Wild Nacatl is a 3/3 without haste or anything else going on for it (and also on green mana), so vexing Devil all the way if I had to choose between the two.
Vexing Devil for me. If you got it in your opening hand and play it, it's mostly a 4 damage for one mana. At best, Wild Nacatl is a 3/3 without haste or anything else going on for it (and also on green mana), so vexing Devil all the way if I had to choose between the two.
I don't like Vexing Devil as there are many situations in which is does absolutely nothing. For example, it's our only creature, so we play it Turn 1, opponent chooses creature and then kills it with their otherwise dead removal their next turn when they untap (or play their land if we were on the play). As a top deck, is has to be the worst, as it will unlikely be able to get through in a developed board. Similarly with Nacatl, not having haste makes it a do nothing in the same situations. Guide and Swiftspear will get in at least once on the play, and require the opponent to potentially fetch:shock to deal with it on the draw.
Concerning command itself, it seems like a card that R&D made with the express purpose of making Zoo a thing again in Modern (given Nacatl didn't do very much post unbanning) but without making Burn that much better (as it might prove not worth the extra liability of a difficult manabase). TL;DR I could see Command working very well with Nacatl but in a more creature heavy aggressive deck (Zoo). Otherwise I wouldn't want fighty cat (or devil) in Burn over another Burn spell or haste creature.
I haven't seen in the past two weeks on MTGO or at the latest SCG Atarka's Command being mainboard. Is the green splash too much for a card that does just a bit more than what Skullcrack does? Thoughts?
So this might be a bad idea, but has anyone tested Wild Nacatl in a naya build? More attackers seems good with Atarka's Command, and a repeatable, non-targeted, non-red source of damage is good against a lot of the hate we see. Falls prey to bad topdeckability and efficient removal of course, but it puts some tension on your opponent's sideboarding choices. Might be better than lavamancer. Thoughts?
I think it's a fair rival to Swiftspear here, if you run 2x Sacred Foundry and 2x Stomping Ground (plus at least 2 Atarka's Command main). I've been trying 4 Command and 4 Skullcrack main and I like it, but I also prefer Nacatl not requiring spells to attack for 3.
It's going to hurt in the mirror though, so you might want Helix mained.
I'm not so sure Wild Nacatl is great here, or better than Swiftspear. Before I go on though, everyone should check out these videos Ari posted yesterday:
This is the deck that uses Nacatl best, but one thing I noticed in his videos was that Nacatl was still pretty often a 2/2 for a turn of attacking before he found a white source. But more importantly, his deck has 25 creatures and will almost always start on a turn 1 guy. We are not set up the same way.
Our spells need to deal at least 1-3 damage each in order for our linear plan to come together. Swiftspear might only attack for 1 and then die sometimes, but she still got in some damage. If she sticks a turn, just like Nacatl she will have gotten in 2-3 damage, sometimes more. But getting in that 1-2 damage the turn you play her is key.
Also, Nacatl makes the mana really painful. Instead of fetching your two splashes at leisure, you need to have them both in play by turn 2 most games. Most notable is that you need a green source in play on turn 1. That's a big hurdle to jump through, and makes maxing out your damage output via spells much more costly.
In short, I think picking up Nacatl swings the balance too far towards Zoo anyway, and you might as well commit to it at that point, rather than playing a relatively awkward off-color 1-drop that doesn't make our Nut Draws any better. However, Ari's deck looks pretty cool, and I might give it a shot. I always did love Zoo decks, and his is particularly fast. But in Burn, I think we are better off with Little Red Men only.
I know i've mentioned Monastery siege before but i feel like this was glossed over too quickly. Its becoming more popular in my meta and this card is an absolute house against Burn (if set to Dragons). Once it comes down, i feel as if the game is already over. Revelry is too slow given that we have to pay 4 just to get rid of it and most times we dont get 4 lands into play (nor do we typically want to).
If Monastery Siege is giving you issues, than your best options against it are going to be Wear/Tear or Destructive Revelry, and racing them before it comes down. You also have the 14 creatures (assuming you run Lavaman) to get around it, as well as Atarka's Command. Beyond that, you're just going to have to pay 2 more for your spells.
Wear/Tear is better here obviously, since it costs 1 less, but I still think it's much worse against the rest of the field. Also, while paying 3 is better than 4, when you do cast Revelry successfully on their Siege it's going to be worth the extra mana to get that damage through. So I don't really think it's worth switching from Revelry to Wear/Tear at all, even if your meta was infested with Monastery Sieges.
Thing is, I don't think the Siege is that good against us. Sure, on turn 3, it's going to be a pain to fight through. But it's not actually gaining them any life, just a little more time. If you have 3 lands in play, you can still generally operate against it, and if they don't land it on turn 3 it's very likely going to be too late. I can't imagine the decks that are playing this (Twin?) want more than like 2-3 copies, so the chances of them having it all the time are pretty low. There are plenty of other hate cards that hose us worse than this, so I wouldn't get too stressed. It's good, but not amazing. Unlike lifegain, it doesn't save them when they are 1 spell away from death, assuming you have enough mana. Unlike Leyline, it doesn't stop us cold. And unlike Feed the Clan, it doesn't actually get them out of a jam when you have lethal on board or in hand, especially when there is an Eidolon on your side.
Point is, side in Revelries and try and unload your spells early against the Siege decks. It could be worse.
What are the decks bringing this in against you anyway? Twin seems obvious, but maybe it's also stuff like Bloom or Infect? Please expand on the issue if you want more advice. I'm curious.
So you guys think that not running Atarka's Command could still make Burn viable by staying with Destructive Revelry as a sideboard option and mainly splashing white for Lightning Helix and Boros Charm?
Is 2 Atarka's Command and 2 Skullcrack a good balance?
Also, not sure about 4 Bloodstained Mire (could it be better with 2 Bloodstained Mire and 2 Windswept Heath)?
4 Goblin Guide
2 Grim Lavamancer
4 Monastery Swiftspear
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
Instant [18]
2 Skullcrack
3 Searing Blaze
4 Lightning Bolt
2 Atarka's Command
3 Lightning Helix
4 Boros Charm
4 Lava Spike
Land [20]
4 Mountain
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Arid Mesa
4 Bloodstained Mire
1 Stomping Ground
3 Sacred Foundry
Why would you want a land wich can not fetch a basic mountain? Bloodstained Mire can fetch every land in your deck, Windswept Heath can not. How should your deck be any better if you switch two Mires out for two Heaths?
My bad : I forgot that Stomping Ground was red too when I posted (dumb mistake)!
Yea. So long as you can fetch for red, you should be golden as long as your shocks have red, which they should..
I think it's a fair rival to Swiftspear here, if you run 2x Sacred Foundry and 2x Stomping Ground (plus at least 2 Atarka's Command main). I've been trying 4 Command and 4 Skullcrack main and I like it, but I also prefer Nacatl not requiring spells to attack for 3.
It's going to hurt in the mirror though, so you might want Helix mained.
RWG Burn
GW Abzan Company
How many Grim lavamancers are you running? Also how many land? I think if that card is common you need 2 grim, probably maindeck, and 20 lands. Also wear/tear instead of revelry is probably a better option, if the meta is affinity light.
Vexing Devil for me. If you got it in your opening hand and play it, it's mostly a 4 damage for one mana. At best, Wild Nacatl is a 3/3 without haste or anything else going on for it (and also on green mana), so vexing Devil all the way if I had to choose between the two.
-MH
Modern
BUGLantern ControlBUG
What's your list?
I don't like Vexing Devil as there are many situations in which is does absolutely nothing. For example, it's our only creature, so we play it Turn 1, opponent chooses creature and then kills it with their otherwise dead removal their next turn when they untap (or play their land if we were on the play). As a top deck, is has to be the worst, as it will unlikely be able to get through in a developed board. Similarly with Nacatl, not having haste makes it a do nothing in the same situations. Guide and Swiftspear will get in at least once on the play, and require the opponent to potentially fetch:shock to deal with it on the draw.
Concerning command itself, it seems like a card that R&D made with the express purpose of making Zoo a thing again in Modern (given Nacatl didn't do very much post unbanning) but without making Burn that much better (as it might prove not worth the extra liability of a difficult manabase). TL;DR I could see Command working very well with Nacatl but in a more creature heavy aggressive deck (Zoo). Otherwise I wouldn't want fighty cat (or devil) in Burn over another Burn spell or haste creature.
Modern: R Skred -- WBG Melira Co -- URW Nahiri Control
Legacy: R Mono Red Burn -- UWB Stoneblade
Commander: R Krenko, Mob Boss -- WUBRG Scion of the Ur-Dragon -- WUBRG Maze’s End
Other: R No Rares Red (Standard) -- URC Izzet Tron (Pauper)
my list for states
Modern
BUGLantern ControlBUG
I'm not so sure Wild Nacatl is great here, or better than Swiftspear. Before I go on though, everyone should check out these videos Ari posted yesterday:
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/30572_Video-Zoo-In-Modern.html
4 Goblin Guide
4 Kird Ape
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Wild Nacatl
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
1 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
1 Forest
1 Mountain
1 Breeding Pool
2 Copperline Gorge
2 Sacred Foundry
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Stomping Ground
4 Windswept Heath
4 Wooded Foothills
3 Boros Charm
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Path to Exile
2 Chained to the Rocks
2 Phyrexian Unlife
2 Stony Silence
3 Destructive Revelry
3 Geist of Saint Traft
1 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
2 Molten Rain
This is the deck that uses Nacatl best, but one thing I noticed in his videos was that Nacatl was still pretty often a 2/2 for a turn of attacking before he found a white source. But more importantly, his deck has 25 creatures and will almost always start on a turn 1 guy. We are not set up the same way.
Our spells need to deal at least 1-3 damage each in order for our linear plan to come together. Swiftspear might only attack for 1 and then die sometimes, but she still got in some damage. If she sticks a turn, just like Nacatl she will have gotten in 2-3 damage, sometimes more. But getting in that 1-2 damage the turn you play her is key.
Also, Nacatl makes the mana really painful. Instead of fetching your two splashes at leisure, you need to have them both in play by turn 2 most games. Most notable is that you need a green source in play on turn 1. That's a big hurdle to jump through, and makes maxing out your damage output via spells much more costly.
In short, I think picking up Nacatl swings the balance too far towards Zoo anyway, and you might as well commit to it at that point, rather than playing a relatively awkward off-color 1-drop that doesn't make our Nut Draws any better. However, Ari's deck looks pretty cool, and I might give it a shot. I always did love Zoo decks, and his is particularly fast. But in Burn, I think we are better off with Little Red Men only.
If Monastery Siege is giving you issues, than your best options against it are going to be Wear/Tear or Destructive Revelry, and racing them before it comes down. You also have the 14 creatures (assuming you run Lavaman) to get around it, as well as Atarka's Command. Beyond that, you're just going to have to pay 2 more for your spells.
Wear/Tear is better here obviously, since it costs 1 less, but I still think it's much worse against the rest of the field. Also, while paying 3 is better than 4, when you do cast Revelry successfully on their Siege it's going to be worth the extra mana to get that damage through. So I don't really think it's worth switching from Revelry to Wear/Tear at all, even if your meta was infested with Monastery Sieges.
Thing is, I don't think the Siege is that good against us. Sure, on turn 3, it's going to be a pain to fight through. But it's not actually gaining them any life, just a little more time. If you have 3 lands in play, you can still generally operate against it, and if they don't land it on turn 3 it's very likely going to be too late. I can't imagine the decks that are playing this (Twin?) want more than like 2-3 copies, so the chances of them having it all the time are pretty low. There are plenty of other hate cards that hose us worse than this, so I wouldn't get too stressed. It's good, but not amazing. Unlike lifegain, it doesn't save them when they are 1 spell away from death, assuming you have enough mana. Unlike Leyline, it doesn't stop us cold. And unlike Feed the Clan, it doesn't actually get them out of a jam when you have lethal on board or in hand, especially when there is an Eidolon on your side.
Point is, side in Revelries and try and unload your spells early against the Siege decks. It could be worse.
What are the decks bringing this in against you anyway? Twin seems obvious, but maybe it's also stuff like Bloom or Infect? Please expand on the issue if you want more advice. I'm curious.
RGB Jund BGR
WGB Junk/Abzan Company WGB
LEGACY
RUGB Delver GURB
EDH
UW Geist of Saint Traft Aggro-Control WU
RUG Riku of Two Reflections Combo GUR
BBB Skithiryx Control BB