Guys, please remind me why its ok to take a stony silence but a Kataki isn't ok.
AFAIK there is not much creature removal in decks where we want use th SS.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DnT! And I'll win the fight
DnT! I'm a power-load
DnT! Watch me Explode
Hey guys again asking for some deck tech, is tunnel ignus worth playing against some matchups like titanshift/tron or any other greedy mana base? fetch doing 4 dmg seems decent in my opinion, thoughts?
Guys, please remind me why its ok to take a stony silence but a Kataki isn't ok.
AFAIK there is not much creature removal in decks where we want use th SS.
Imagine you have kataki and they have ravager. On their upkeep, they sacrifice a bunch of stuff and pay to keep one thing alive and all kataki did was force their hand that turn. Against lantern, it can wreck them but it does to brutality and Stony doesn't.
Hey guys again asking for some deck tech, is tunnel ignus worth playing against some matchups like titanshift/tron or any other greedy mana base? fetch doing 4 dmg seems decent in my opinion, thoughts?
In a general meta, it's not worth it. If you run into scapeshift all day every day, it's ok-ish. Its not good against fetches because they can just fetch on your turn and about damage.
Well, my DnT expirience tells me that Kataki it the total wreck for an Affinity. I used to play 2 Katakis + 1 SS because Kataki are able to punch faces.
It's quite ok for me to force them sac all things for a ravager. Also I must note that we all have couple of PtE for an extremly fat robots.
I'll definetly try one kataki + couple of shattering sprees.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DnT! And I'll win the fight
DnT! I'm a power-load
DnT! Watch me Explode
PtE does deal with a fatty, but that just brings up my favorite play against Affinity: force their hand by making them use ravager and kill whatever they target with the counters. I would prefer to do this with two instants where one of them is drev or smash. I don't really like spree against them because it's expensive, not instant speed, and will never touch the manland that's going to get ravager's counters. There's also a non-zero chance that they kill it with Whipflare or Galvanic Blast.
I've played kataki in zoo before, and it's not awful but I think the play pattern of Burn means that instant speed solutions are preferred, especially when they deal damage.
I would do what you did. On your upkeep, you were faced with choosing whether to use 2 spells to kill wurmcoil, hope for one of your few outs on your draw step, or lose the game because you're a mile behind. I think your best hope for winning the game is for Wurmcoil to die, and you did the right thing. However, if I were in that situation, I'd probably view the game as effectively lost once I'm hoping to topdeck 5-ish burn spells against assembled Tron, but it's play until I've actually lost (I've won games that I thought were lost). Winning there definitely depended on an unlikely string of draw steps for you both.
Curious to see if anyone can solve this mystery. I was playing a match on MTGO and faced goblins. Lost game 1 and boarded in Kor Firewalker who single-handedly won games 2 and 3. My opponent writes as he concedes "I have 5 ways to deal with Kor Firewalker". Any ideas of what he is talking about? The lists I have seen have really no way to do this. Thanks.
Curious to see if anyone can solve this mystery. I was playing a match on MTGO and faced goblins. Lost game 1 and boarded in Kor Firewalker who single-handedly won games 2 and 3. My opponent writes as he concedes "I have 5 ways to deal with Kor Firewalker". Any ideas of what he is talking about? The lists I have seen have really no way to do this. Thanks.
Curious to see if anyone can solve this mystery. I was playing a match on MTGO and faced goblins. Lost game 1 and boarded in Kor Firewalker who single-handedly won games 2 and 3. My opponent writes as he concedes "I have 5 ways to deal with Kor Firewalker". Any ideas of what he is talking about? The lists I have seen have really no way to do this. Thanks.
Combust and Demonfire don't do it. You can never target Kor Firewalker with a red spell unless it loses protection somehow. Everlasting Torment and Skullcrack will make it for if you block their creature with it, but they still can't target it with a red spell or block it themselves. I'd assume they meant reality hemorrhage, pyrite spellbomb, or something else colorless.
Pyrite just seems better to me. It lets you separate the mana cost if you really want to and even if they try to blow it up after it's on the board, you can just cycle it in response.
If you're concerned about pro-red, just play Path to Exile. We're already playing it, so there's no point in adding additional sideboard cards just for something we can already handle. There are plenty more important cards that are more urgent to add than this.
If you read back several comments, the discussion is about precisely how a mono-R goblins deck had 5 answers to Kor Firewalker, not what card to play to beat KF with RW or RWg Burn.
Blood Sun deals no damage, so it doesn't help our game plan. It costs 3 mana, so we'll likely be taking an entire turn off just trying to cast it instead of potentially playing 2 burn spells. It's an interesting card that needs to be tested more, and it could become a good modern card, but Burn just isn't the right deck for it. If you want to punish your opponent's greedy manabase, I would suggest that you use Molten Rain as a card, as it deals damage to your opponent and it actually destroys your opponent's land, so you can bring it in against Tron decks as well.
Changing the topic, what are the kinds of plays that distinguish a great Burn player from a mediocre one? I know that Burn can be a very skill intensive deck to play, and it's these subtle plays that make a huge difference in the outcome of these games. When I see these plays, I understand what's going on and why the decision was made, but I would never have thought to make these plays myself. I'm interested in understanding the thought process behind expert players. Here are a few more questions for those who feel like they are experts with the deck:
-What do you play first when sequencing your spells, Boros Charm or Lightning Helix? In what situations?
-When should you hold lands back or choose not to fetch in case you topdeck a Searing Blaze? Is it even worth doing on turn 2 or 3?
-Would you ever side out a land, such as a Stomping Ground against decks like the mirror?
-Do you ALWAYS drop Eidolon of the Great Revel on turn 2?
These are just a few questions, but I'm more interested in learning the thought process behind an experienced Burn players.
-What do you play first when sequencing your spells, Boros Charm or Lightning Helix? In what situations?
I'll prioritize getting 4 damage through when I believe I can, since I'd rather have Lightning Helix countered than Charm. If I want to bait a Spell Snare, I'd offer up Helix to get countered so I can follow it with Charm. That will change if lifegain is more important (say in the mirror). I'll also think about keeping back Charm if indestructible is important (say Storm or Lantern where keeping Eidolon basically just wins the game.)
-When should you hold lands back or choose not to fetch in case you topdeck a Searing Blaze? Is it even worth doing on turn 2 or 3?
I won't hold up a fetch on T2 if I have a creature play on my T2. If my opponent has something for me to kill, I might hold a fetch until their turn. However, I'd prefer a situation where I can either kill something or fire off a Lightning Helix if they don't do anything I care about.
-Would you ever side out a land, such as a Stomping Ground against decks like the mirror?
There's been some talk of siding out a land on the draw if you're playing 20. That's a reasonable play, but I like playing 19 regardless and I wouldn't go down to 18. If you're on 20, it doesn't hurt to side out the Stomping Ground in the mirror
If it's a matchup where Eidolon is good, then I'm often playing it. My favorite T2 is to swing with Guide and offer it up to die and then play a land and Eidolon on second main. I like that play because it gives your opponent the least information before they have to make a decision on your Guide. In such a situation, I'd prefer to lose Guide if I'm going to lose anything because Guide is blockable and Eidolon isn't. I don't care that this play possibly gives them a land (which also gives them about 20% of a spell if they reveal a land), because I want to maximize the chance of a live Eidolon.
In situations where I suspect my opponent could be holding up a counter, it's a dilemma. If I have a Swiftspear+Spike play to make, I might make that one instead because it shows that I might not have Eidolon and might open up Eidolon to land on T3. It also might disrupt their plan if they're only interaction was to counter a 2 cost spell. If I have two Eidolons in hand, I'd probably just play one here. If I don't have a strong combat play on T2, I'd probably play Eidolon. It might be that they kept up an open land for Opt at the end step, and Eidolon just forces them to do that in response instead.
In situations where Eidolon isn't great (say, Affinity after they vomit their hand), I won't play it. If I'm playing against Affinity and they haven't vomited their hand yet, then I'll play it.
AFAIK there is not much creature removal in decks where we want use th SS.
DnT! I'm a power-load
DnT! Watch me Explode
Imagine you have kataki and they have ravager. On their upkeep, they sacrifice a bunch of stuff and pay to keep one thing alive and all kataki did was force their hand that turn. Against lantern, it can wreck them but it does to brutality and Stony doesn't.
In a general meta, it's not worth it. If you run into scapeshift all day every day, it's ok-ish. Its not good against fetches because they can just fetch on your turn and about damage.
It's quite ok for me to force them sac all things for a ravager. Also I must note that we all have couple of PtE for an extremly fat robots.
I'll definetly try one kataki + couple of shattering sprees.
DnT! I'm a power-load
DnT! Watch me Explode
I've played kataki in zoo before, and it's not awful but I think the play pattern of Burn means that instant speed solutions are preferred, especially when they deal damage.
I would do what you did. On your upkeep, you were faced with choosing whether to use 2 spells to kill wurmcoil, hope for one of your few outs on your draw step, or lose the game because you're a mile behind. I think your best hope for winning the game is for Wurmcoil to die, and you did the right thing. However, if I were in that situation, I'd probably view the game as effectively lost once I'm hoping to topdeck 5-ish burn spells against assembled Tron, but it's play until I've actually lost (I've won games that I thought were lost). Winning there definitely depended on an unlikely string of draw steps for you both.
EDIT: Nevermind, I figured it out. In case it helps anyone, probably it was a Pyrite Spellbomb and Ratchet Bomb
Pyrite Spellbomb or Reality Hemorrhage seem the most likely for Goblins. I guess they could side in something like Skullcrack, Everlasting Torment, Combust or Demonfire too but that seems less likely.
Thanks for the info!
(W/B)BW Tokens(W/B) | (B/R)Rakdos Burn(B/R) | (U/R)Gift Storm(U/R)
-What do you play first when sequencing your spells, Boros Charm or Lightning Helix? In what situations?
-When should you hold lands back or choose not to fetch in case you topdeck a Searing Blaze? Is it even worth doing on turn 2 or 3?
-Would you ever side out a land, such as a Stomping Ground against decks like the mirror?
-Do you ALWAYS drop Eidolon of the Great Revel on turn 2?
These are just a few questions, but I'm more interested in learning the thought process behind an experienced Burn players.
I'll prioritize getting 4 damage through when I believe I can, since I'd rather have Lightning Helix countered than Charm. If I want to bait a Spell Snare, I'd offer up Helix to get countered so I can follow it with Charm. That will change if lifegain is more important (say in the mirror). I'll also think about keeping back Charm if indestructible is important (say Storm or Lantern where keeping Eidolon basically just wins the game.)
I won't hold up a fetch on T2 if I have a creature play on my T2. If my opponent has something for me to kill, I might hold a fetch until their turn. However, I'd prefer a situation where I can either kill something or fire off a Lightning Helix if they don't do anything I care about.
There's been some talk of siding out a land on the draw if you're playing 20. That's a reasonable play, but I like playing 19 regardless and I wouldn't go down to 18. If you're on 20, it doesn't hurt to side out the Stomping Ground in the mirror
If it's a matchup where Eidolon is good, then I'm often playing it. My favorite T2 is to swing with Guide and offer it up to die and then play a land and Eidolon on second main. I like that play because it gives your opponent the least information before they have to make a decision on your Guide. In such a situation, I'd prefer to lose Guide if I'm going to lose anything because Guide is blockable and Eidolon isn't. I don't care that this play possibly gives them a land (which also gives them about 20% of a spell if they reveal a land), because I want to maximize the chance of a live Eidolon.
In situations where I suspect my opponent could be holding up a counter, it's a dilemma. If I have a Swiftspear+Spike play to make, I might make that one instead because it shows that I might not have Eidolon and might open up Eidolon to land on T3. It also might disrupt their plan if they're only interaction was to counter a 2 cost spell. If I have two Eidolons in hand, I'd probably just play one here. If I don't have a strong combat play on T2, I'd probably play Eidolon. It might be that they kept up an open land for Opt at the end step, and Eidolon just forces them to do that in response instead.
In situations where Eidolon isn't great (say, Affinity after they vomit their hand), I won't play it. If I'm playing against Affinity and they haven't vomited their hand yet, then I'll play it.