Thunderous Wrath is bad in 60 card. Ive tried it. The risk of drawing it in our opening 7 is too high and means a mulligan. Also when on the draw, your opponent passes and u draw TW with no lands in play.
These 2 scenarios makes TW unplayable. In duelcommander, TW is amazing. In duelcommander i play Pyrokenessis and Cave-In makes TW even better. Modern has no "pitch cards"
Thanks! The other troublesome deck is UW control, the one with two Gideons and Jace. This may be my least liked deck in all of MTG. Win or lose, I don't enjoy playing this deck at all.
Do you try to go under it, or do something different?
If your having trouble with UW Control add some Exquisite Firecraft to your Side Board
Thanks pal! Apart from that, do you fire your spells at once? Or stockpile? Kill planeswalkers on sight or just continue to burn the face? So far I had been trying to go under, but then it seems to come down to who draws the best cards first, which is very random.
Every burn player should read Sullivan's "burn vs counters" article. I'm pretty sure it's linked in post 1 of this thread, if not, it's linked in my deck list on tappedout. It's all about bottlenecking their cards and mana. UW control should be an easier matchup than jeskai control.
@Hayati2013, I still think Lightning Helix should've gone to the face on his T4 end of turn. Your life total was still quite high, so you could survive easily against TKS plus a possible Reality Smasher. This would've brought your opponent down a little more to 13 (3 damage instead of 2), still pumps Shrine and gives you 3 life. In the end this says TKS does 1 damage, but you took 3 from your oppponent's life total. It would have given you lethal a turn earlier if I'm not mistaken with Boros Charm + Shrine on 9 for 13.
@elconquistador1985, why do you still play AC in Naya colors instead of Boros with SC main? Does the life loss for color fixing weigh up against the damage output for AC? I assume you hope to play AC with atleast 1 attacking creature in play to get that extra damage (or 2 with Taylor) in. Is that the main reasoning perhaps?
Because I firmly stand by AC being worth the life loss. It's skullcrack at worst and has potential to be worth more than Boros Charm. AC is stupidly powerful. I would only drop it if my goldfish model shows that a significant number of hands have color problems.
And AC has the occasional upside that it doesn't target
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard // nRG Aggro
Modern // Burn (main) and Living End (secondary) now Jund.
For fun check out my janky combo primer: Turn 3 Grixis Combo
"Can't beat em' Jund em'!"
And AC has the occasional upside that it doesn't target
Technically correct, but that doesn't factor into my decision. The non-targeted player damage on AC is similar to the "can't be prevented" on Skullcrack, as in they are both perks that almost never matter and are borderline flavor text. My gut feeling is that is that AC's perk clause is relevant more often than Skullcrack's, since Skullcrack's relies on your opponent blocking with their pro-red creature while you have 2 mana up.
And AC has the occasional upside that it doesn't target
Technically correct, but that doesn't factor into my decision. The non-targeted player damage on AC is similar to the "can't be prevented" on Skullcrack, as in they are both perks that almost never matter and are borderline flavor text. My gut feeling is that is that AC's perk clause is relevant more often than Skullcrack's, since Skullcrack's relies on your opponent blocking with their pro-red creature while you have 2 mana up.
There are also the corner cases when (1) someone decides to block with a pro-red creature, and (2) you want to use Searing Blaze at instant speed and have AC and a non-fetch land in hand. But these should be fairly rare.
And AC has the occasional upside that it doesn't target
Technically correct, but that doesn't factor into my decision. The non-targeted player damage on AC is similar to the "can't be prevented" on Skullcrack, as in they are both perks that almost never matter and are borderline flavor text. My gut feeling is that is that AC's perk clause is relevant more often than Skullcrack's, since Skullcrack's relies on your opponent blocking with their pro-red creature while you have 2 mana up.
There are also the corner cases when (1) someone decides to block with a pro-red creature, and (2) you want to use Searing Blaze at instant speed and have AC and a non-fetch land in hand. But these should be fairly rare.
Atarka's Command also grants Reach, which is nice when you cast it before blockers and then block Inkmoth and Signal Pest and hand AC to the Affinity player when they say "but flying".
The cards are different and have slightly different borderline flavor text perks. I'd argue that AC's are more relevant because you control them, while Skullcrack requires your opponent to block your creature.
Atarka's Command also grants Reach, which is nice when you cast it before blockers and then block Inkmoth and Signal Pest and hand AC to the Affinity player when they say "but flying".
The cards are different and have slightly different borderline flavor text perks. I'd argue that AC's are more relevant because you control them, while Skullcrack requires your opponent to block your creature.
Also, one probably has room for both in the stock Naya list.
Thunderous Wrath is bad in 60 card. Ive tried it. The risk of drawing it in our opening 7 is too high and means a mulligan. Also when on the draw, your opponent passes and u draw TW with no lands in play.
These 2 scenarios makes TW unplayable. In duelcommander, TW is amazing. In duelcommander i play Pyrokenessis and Cave-In makes TW even better. Modern has no "pitch cards"
I hadn't considered the second scenario which is a heavy nail in the coffin. Thanks for the forewarning
Skullcrack is also useful against things like Burrenton Forge-Tender and Gideon of the Trials (and, much more infrequently, Runed Halo).
That being said, Command obviously has much more powerful and versatile upsides. I stubbornly held onto it for over a month after Boros became the norm, and only switched off of it after MTGO got flooded with land denial strategies and the mirror to the point where maindeck green was more of a liability than it was worth. I've been experimenting with both versions, and the difference between having Command and not having it hasn't usually felt all that significant to me in the current meta.
Skullcrack is also useful against things like Burrenton Forge-Tender and Gideon of the Trials (and, much more infrequently, Runed Halo).
I stand by my statement that the "damage can't be prevented" clause is not particularly relevant and is borderline flavor text. I've rarely seen Forge-Tender, I've never run into Gideon of the Trials, and it barely matters for Runed Halo. Runed Halo's protection prevents you from targeting them, so Skullcrack + Halo allows creatures and non-targeted damage only through. It's relevant a non-zero amount of the time, but it's not relevant enough to be a deckbuilding consideration.
I think the word "Reach" matters more often on Atarka's Command.
Skullcrack is also useful against things like Burrenton Forge-Tender and Gideon of the Trials (and, much more infrequently, Runed Halo).
That being said, Command obviously has much more powerful and versatile upsides. I stubbornly held onto it for over a month after Boros became the norm, and only switched off of it after MTGO got flooded with land denial strategies and the mirror to the point where maindeck green was more of a liability than it was worth. I've been experimenting with both versions, and the difference between having Command and not having it hasn't usually felt all that significant to me in the current meta.
There are pros and cons for both Naya and Boros, I am not gonna go into both. There has been much written already in favor of both. That said, I enjoy the versatility of being able to switch back and forth from Naya to Boros and back. This can be for a variety of reasons, 1 of which is to bring in Atarka's for extra anti life gain. I find that since I travel to 4 states often and play in different metas and play groups neither Boros or Naya is always the right answer. How does that help someone torn between the 2....here are a few tips.
1. If you are worried about losing life or getting your G mana blown up but you want to run Atarka's consider how your spending your mana and sideboardng. Wildly Fetch and shocking yourself for 9 damage is not always ideal. When I run Boros I have Inspiring Vantage and at least 1 Plains I can grab if needed like they drop Blood Moon and I Path my own creature to get the Plain to use Wear//Tear (just an example it doesnt happen every game). Im not saying you have to run a Forest but if your meta is full of Ghost Quarter and other things to hurt your land base it can be an option 1 Forest and 1 Plain isnt the most ideal (I know someone will curse me for even say run any basics) but it can and has come in handy for me. My meta has Blood Moon, Magus, GQ and Spreading Seas (yes it can hit basics but almost always they hit a dual land and dont expect me to run basics).
2. You dont have to have Revelry, you can go with some combination of Wear//Wear, Shattering Spree, Smash to Smithereens is just fine. So dont feel pressured to run Naya and Revelry but you can still go RWg with Atarka's.
3. When taking advice try to look at the benefits of what their saying and if their overly jaded one way or another. Finding someone who is too over the top and pushes their agenda/reasoning too much may (not always) signal being too/so bias towards one direction they are blind/ignorant/refuse to even consider the possibility there is a benefit to the other view and your not allowed to breathe air if you dont follow their advice. Also someone you get advice from on a forum may play in a different meta or never play in a blind meta or just throw out theories but never really play or we've been infiltrated by the anti Burn group that cant beat the deck so theyve been petitioning Wizards to ban it and giving bad advice here
4. Consider proxying up a deck say Grixis Shadow (heck I proxy multiple decks, lands, tokens and those ad cards are actually useful), play 10 games with each and find is Atarka's worth it for you in your testing.
Best of luck
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am pretty new to Burn and would guess the following:
Good:
Storm
Valakut
Tron
Lantern
Dredge
Bad:
EldraTron
Affinity
Jeskai
Hatebears
Company / Merfolk / fast creature decks
Ad Nauseam
Neutral:
Death's Shadow variants
UW Control
Grixis Control
Thunderous Wrath is also a card you can't really sandbag, which can hurt you in some matchups even if it's not in your opening hand.
People have done it. It's not worth doing it because of the risk that it's a dead card in your hand.
These 2 scenarios makes TW unplayable. In duelcommander, TW is amazing. In duelcommander i play Pyrokenessis and Cave-In makes TW even better. Modern has no "pitch cards"
Thanks pal! Apart from that, do you fire your spells at once? Or stockpile? Kill planeswalkers on sight or just continue to burn the face? So far I had been trying to go under, but then it seems to come down to who draws the best cards first, which is very random.
@elconquistador1985, why do you still play AC in Naya colors instead of Boros with SC main? Does the life loss for color fixing weigh up against the damage output for AC? I assume you hope to play AC with atleast 1 attacking creature in play to get that extra damage (or 2 with Taylor) in. Is that the main reasoning perhaps?
Cheers
Modern // Burn (main) and Living End (secondary) now Jund.
For fun check out my janky combo primer: Turn 3 Grixis Combo
"Can't beat em' Jund em'!"
Technically correct, but that doesn't factor into my decision. The non-targeted player damage on AC is similar to the "can't be prevented" on Skullcrack, as in they are both perks that almost never matter and are borderline flavor text. My gut feeling is that is that AC's perk clause is relevant more often than Skullcrack's, since Skullcrack's relies on your opponent blocking with their pro-red creature while you have 2 mana up.
There are also the corner cases when (1) someone decides to block with a pro-red creature, and (2) you want to use Searing Blaze at instant speed and have AC and a non-fetch land in hand. But these should be fairly rare.
Atarka's Command also grants Reach, which is nice when you cast it before blockers and then block Inkmoth and Signal Pest and hand AC to the Affinity player when they say "but flying".
The cards are different and have slightly different borderline flavor text perks. I'd argue that AC's are more relevant because you control them, while Skullcrack requires your opponent to block your creature.
Also, one probably has room for both in the stock Naya list.
I hadn't considered the second scenario which is a heavy nail in the coffin. Thanks for the forewarning
Thanks man, I picked one up but something instinctively prevented me from using it. Needed the clarification.
That being said, Command obviously has much more powerful and versatile upsides. I stubbornly held onto it for over a month after Boros became the norm, and only switched off of it after MTGO got flooded with land denial strategies and the mirror to the point where maindeck green was more of a liability than it was worth. I've been experimenting with both versions, and the difference between having Command and not having it hasn't usually felt all that significant to me in the current meta.
I stand by my statement that the "damage can't be prevented" clause is not particularly relevant and is borderline flavor text. I've rarely seen Forge-Tender, I've never run into Gideon of the Trials, and it barely matters for Runed Halo. Runed Halo's protection prevents you from targeting them, so Skullcrack + Halo allows creatures and non-targeted damage only through. It's relevant a non-zero amount of the time, but it's not relevant enough to be a deckbuilding consideration.
I think the word "Reach" matters more often on Atarka's Command.
Yep - UW Control is a nightmare + Skullcrack getting around Deflecting Palm is great as well.
I also like how Skullcrack can help you bluff through protection creatures since it has won me many games in mirror and affinity.
Enjoy Standard, Modern and Music (also some Pauper, Momir, Gaming, Animations and Legacy)? Then visit my channel:Here
1. If you are worried about losing life or getting your G mana blown up but you want to run Atarka's consider how your spending your mana and sideboardng. Wildly Fetch and shocking yourself for 9 damage is not always ideal. When I run Boros I have Inspiring Vantage and at least 1 Plains I can grab if needed like they drop Blood Moon and I Path my own creature to get the Plain to use Wear//Tear (just an example it doesnt happen every game). Im not saying you have to run a Forest but if your meta is full of Ghost Quarter and other things to hurt your land base it can be an option 1 Forest and 1 Plain isnt the most ideal (I know someone will curse me for even say run any basics) but it can and has come in handy for me. My meta has Blood Moon, Magus, GQ and Spreading Seas (yes it can hit basics but almost always they hit a dual land and dont expect me to run basics).
2. You dont have to have Revelry, you can go with some combination of Wear//Wear, Shattering Spree, Smash to Smithereens is just fine. So dont feel pressured to run Naya and Revelry but you can still go RWg with Atarka's.
3. When taking advice try to look at the benefits of what their saying and if their overly jaded one way or another. Finding someone who is too over the top and pushes their agenda/reasoning too much may (not always) signal being too/so bias towards one direction they are blind/ignorant/refuse to even consider the possibility there is a benefit to the other view and your not allowed to breathe air if you dont follow their advice. Also someone you get advice from on a forum may play in a different meta or never play in a blind meta or just throw out theories but never really play or we've been infiltrated by the anti Burn group that cant beat the deck so theyve been petitioning Wizards to ban it and giving bad advice here
4. Consider proxying up a deck say Grixis Shadow (heck I proxy multiple decks, lands, tokens and those ad cards are actually useful), play 10 games with each and find is Atarka's worth it for you in your testing.
Best of luck