Sure is, the guy's entire post history is full of youtube video titles followed by a link to a youtube video. He rarely adds anything to a discussion and is just fishing for youtube views.
To be fair, it's not just click-bait. The video contains some good arguments. Maybe none of it is new, but it contains basically all of the information anyone here has contributed in the last several days.
But it is clickbait. It might have valuable arguments in the video, but it was posted here solely for clicks and ad views. The guy's post history is loaded with low effort posts like that (mostly Legacy Merfolk match videos). This is why some forums (like reddit) have a 9:1 rule, where you have to contribute 9 non-self-promoting posts if you're going to post one self-promoting thing like this. One post out of nowhere with a link to youtube is just shameless self-promotion, regardless of whether the video is worth watching or not.
But it is clickbait. It might have valuable arguments in the video, but it was posted here solely for clicks and ad views. The guy's post history is loaded with low effort posts like that (mostly Legacy Merfolk match videos). This is why some forums (like reddit) have a 9:1 rule, where you have to contribute 9 non-self-promoting posts if you're going to post one self-promoting thing like this. One post out of nowhere with a link to youtube is just shameless self-promotion, regardless of whether the video is worth watching or not.
Fine, it's shameless self-promotion. Who cares? The link has valuable information that will help the discussion about Modern Burn far more than complaining about click bait does, right? These several posts complaining about this guy's post are content-free. His post--albeit made for selfish reasons--can actually advance the discussion.
Well, no, posting a video doesn't actually advance the discussion because fewer people here are going to watch the video and then respond to it with a comment than would have read a comment here and responded to the comment. A comment is what advances the discussion on a text based internet forum. The only thing a video does is get clicks and ad views. That original comment exists solely to benefit the person who posted it.
You're just being argumentative. You can't really be claiming that the video isn't productive because stubborn people won't watch it to gain insight. If that's the case, then any comment someone makes here that doesn't get responded to didn't advance the discussion. That's ludicrous.
I benefited from watching the video, and so would anyone who watches it. It has plenty to good content.
My point is that people can benefit from watching the video. If you're not going to add something valuable to the discussion about Modern Burn, then don't respond to me. We're derailing the thread.
You're just being argumentative. You can't really be claiming that the video isn't productive because stubborn people won't watch it to gain insight. If that's the case, then any comment someone makes here that doesn't get responded to didn't advance the discussion. That's ludicrous.
I benefited from watching the video, and so would anyone who watches it. It has plenty to good content.
My point is that people can benefit from watching the video. If you're not going to add something valuable to the discussion about Modern Burn, then don't respond to me. We're derailing the thread.
I literally refuse to watch that video because the content maker posted it here for nefarious reasons. I might have watched it if someone else had posted it along with some discussion of the thoughts expressed in it, but the content maker couldn't even be bothered to put forth that effort.
If you're going to assert that there were valuable things in the video, perhaps you could start the discussion that the content maker refused to put forth the effort to start.
"Did burn get bombs in amonkhet? What happens next will shock you"
And I personally come here to read comments and actual thoughts by burn players, not click bait YouTube videos. I go to YouTube for that.
Regarding our discussion I think I'm starting with 2 maindeck harsh mentors in both modern and legacy and will go from there. I feel the 4/2 split is better with eidolon as I do not want to draw more then one mentor but I do think the possibility of having a 60% or greater chance of having one of either on turn 2 may be worth it. The second copy may be a horrible top deck later but the odds are very low of drawing it turn 3/4 if you miss in the opening hand plus turn 2s draw. Basically live like there is no turn 5.
The user who posted did so to get views. He isn't here to help us. You have to consider that if he values shameless self promotion over having a discussion, the information therein may be compromised. How much effort does he put into trying to make his information useful to other people, or is it all for views and self gain? Not worth worrying over, therefore people like El and myself will always ignore. IF he came here to say "Hey guys I just made this video and posted it to YouTube, I think X and X and X concerning Amonkhet. What do you think we can do with X" is entirely different. Presentation and intent is everything.
Regarding Mentor, I too am going to start with 2 Main Deck and go from there in testing. That feels worth gathering info and data for. For all we know it could be awful but I agree with Six, 2 Main feels right. That's my gut instinct.
Just looking over the hypergeometric calculations I think 2 is a good place assuming you agree you don't want to draw more then 1 and would prefer to either draw it by turn 2 or not at all.
I can easily cut the 1x glm and shard volley to try this out as the upside potential is much higher.
I clicked it and check if the text of the post was identical to the video title and whether it was self-promotion and then reported it as "solicitation" as soon as I saw it. I reported it because I found it unlikely that such a post would not be against the rules.
Yeah... Nikachu is my guy (he's done a lot for the Merfolk community), but I can't defend his video presentation on this one, nor do I agree with his conclusions. I think Harsh Mentor is going to be a handy sideboard card at the very least, and it might even tip a close matchup or two Burn's way.
Lol, the burn community is just burning themselves to the ground
Harsh Mentor is too niche. It will get some value sometimes on the play because of fetchlands but be pretty awful on the draw. Most critical is that if this trades for a removal spell without getting in damage, you're at a huge loss. It's like inquision, save 2-3 life. You're effectively a combo deck and these exchanges are catastrophic. It doesn't help that Fatal Push is the premiere removal spell of the format.
The only positive side I see is that it is an extra creature that you can use to hedge against Leyline of Sanctity decks to sort of zoo them out.
To side this in from the sideboard, however, sounds disgusting. Your opponents are siding in haymakers, as you know, so this "incremental value" won't cut it.
Giving your opponent the choice to deal damage to themselves or not will ALWAYS work out in their flavour. It's not like Eidolon that restricts them from casting spells which otherwise gives you a lot of tempo.
I don't know all the match ups you're hoping to improve with this thing, but Lantern is already a win, and affinity is not even worth preparing for given you may not even see it more than once in a 15 round GP, or at all. Not to mention your 75 has so much game against it anyway.
It's harder to tell if Soul-Scar Mage will do a good nacatl impersonation given Burn has moved away from the green. The Mage is likely only as positioned as Nacatl is positioned. I would be concerned that if the sorcery speed 3/3 turn 1 creature doesn't cut it, neither will the Mage. Or the turn 2 mentor!
I personally haven't played Burn in modern but I've played my fair share of RDW over my lifetime so my opinion isn't completely baseless.
Of course everyone is going to playtest both (as they should anyway). I would put my bet on the Mage though, given Nacatl has proven its worth at least once in history. It also has the potential to get value before perishing to removal.
Sorry if the vid looked clickbaity. Obviously I rarely post anything here so if I did I figured it would have been useful for you.
Nacatl is horrible right now. I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.
Regarding the Mentor... I sat down and thought about a list of decks in which I'd consider sideboarding it in (aka every deck that's light on removal), and I came away impressed with the results. Here's my list:
That's not a bad list. The big-mana ones I'm skeptical on whether I'd actually side it in or not (since Burn's matchup there is good, and it's tough to find what to take out), but overall I'm thinking it has a home.
I sincerely think half this list doesn't care. The half that does care might be a good match up for you anyway.
Abzan Company- I have no idea how this match plays out so I'm not going to guess.
Affinity- Good, but do you need it? Does it kill them to activate Plating once to equip to Vault Skirge and gain a ton of life anyway? Plus it's the type of match up you might not even see given the meta can crush them.
Bant Eldrazi- does not care about this card
Death and Taxes- Does not care about this card
Eldrazi Tron- There is some value to be gained here, still if they equip a giant creature with collar you're in trouble (otherwise they never equip). I could be wrong but somehow I see this as a winnable match up anyway.
Tron- Very good here, but isn't this a bye for burn?
Merfolk- It's nice to have extra creatures backed up with tons of removal for anything that gets in the way, but all the creatures will trade with this guy. It sounds annoying at best.
Valakut- Good here, but isn't this also favourable?
First, congrats on a super awesome GP Vancouver finish! You're all foil Japanese sushi deck is really sweet. Secondly, thank you for posting your opinion on these new cards in the thread.
You've outlined well the arguments, I personally think the fetch land aspect alone might make this worth inclusion in the few flex spots as having either this or Eidolon T2 every game seems good vs the field. However I do believe the card will be more impactful in Legacy then in Modern. But testing will tell.
Also, we were discussing Merfolk either and the question of Vial came up and how often do you side them out? Do you generally side them out on the draw or against match ups you're expecting artifact/enchantment hate game 2 & 3?
First, congrats on a super awesome GP Vancouver finish! You're all foil Japanese sushi deck is really sweet. Secondly, thank you for posting your opinion on these new cards in the thread.
You've outlined well the arguments, I personally think the fetch land aspect alone might make this worth inclusion in the few flex spots as having either this or Eidolon T2 every game seems good vs the field. However I do believe the card will be more impactful in Legacy then in Modern. But testing will tell.
Also, we were discussing Merfolk either and the question of Vial came up and how often do you side them out? Do you generally side them out on the draw or against match ups you're expecting artifact/enchantment hate game 2 & 3?
thanks!
Mentor will look okay on the play because of fetchlands, but that's why it will be catastrophic on the draw. Knowing the existence of Mentor will force people to play their fetchlands first and play their non-fetch lands later in the game. If the opponent has removal, then what they do on the play/draw doesn't matter.
Against burn I cannot afford to ever take out Aether Vial because Eidolon would just ruin me. I also want to be able to deploy creatures and hold up counter magic. I understand I run into Smash to Smitherines or Destructive Revelry, but that's a risk I have to take. Even if you don't play Eidolon, if I take out Vial it's highly likely I'll get tempo'd out more often than not by just 1-2 creatures backed up by a bunch of burn.
Otherwise, I almost never think about vial destruction. Most decks don't care about my vial Sometimes I'll side it out if a UWx control deck sided in Stony Silence. I do side out Vial often though, but for the purposes of keeping the threat density of my deck high.
I'm certain Burn is a 50-50 match up vs Merfolk even though the Merfolk forum thinks it's favourable and the Burn forum thinks their a dog. 90% of my burn wins come from my opponent making blunders. If I had their hands I would beat myself. Certainly there are some Merfolk lists that are favourable vs burn, but I think you should still have a lot of game.
Fine, it's shameless self-promotion. Who cares? The link has valuable information that will help the discussion about Modern Burn far more than complaining about click bait does, right? These several posts complaining about this guy's post are content-free. His post--albeit made for selfish reasons--can actually advance the discussion.
I benefited from watching the video, and so would anyone who watches it. It has plenty to good content.
My point is that people can benefit from watching the video. If you're not going to add something valuable to the discussion about Modern Burn, then don't respond to me. We're derailing the thread.
I literally refuse to watch that video because the content maker posted it here for nefarious reasons. I might have watched it if someone else had posted it along with some discussion of the thoughts expressed in it, but the content maker couldn't even be bothered to put forth that effort.
If you're going to assert that there were valuable things in the video, perhaps you could start the discussion that the content maker refused to put forth the effort to start.
And I personally come here to read comments and actual thoughts by burn players, not click bait YouTube videos. I go to YouTube for that.
Regarding our discussion I think I'm starting with 2 maindeck harsh mentors in both modern and legacy and will go from there. I feel the 4/2 split is better with eidolon as I do not want to draw more then one mentor but I do think the possibility of having a 60% or greater chance of having one of either on turn 2 may be worth it. The second copy may be a horrible top deck later but the odds are very low of drawing it turn 3/4 if you miss in the opening hand plus turn 2s draw. Basically live like there is no turn 5.
GRWNaya BurnGRW
GRWJundGRW
CAffinityC
UGUG EldraziUG
GRWBushwhacker ZooGRW
UBWRAd NauseamUBWR
Legacy
RBurnR
UBSneak & ShowUB
CEldrazi AggroC
The user who posted did so to get views. He isn't here to help us. You have to consider that if he values shameless self promotion over having a discussion, the information therein may be compromised. How much effort does he put into trying to make his information useful to other people, or is it all for views and self gain? Not worth worrying over, therefore people like El and myself will always ignore. IF he came here to say "Hey guys I just made this video and posted it to YouTube, I think X and X and X concerning Amonkhet. What do you think we can do with X" is entirely different. Presentation and intent is everything.
Regarding Mentor, I too am going to start with 2 Main Deck and go from there in testing. That feels worth gathering info and data for. For all we know it could be awful but I agree with Six, 2 Main feels right. That's my gut instinct.
I can easily cut the 1x glm and shard volley to try this out as the upside potential is much higher.
GRWNaya BurnGRW
GRWJundGRW
CAffinityC
UGUG EldraziUG
GRWBushwhacker ZooGRW
UBWRAd NauseamUBWR
Legacy
RBurnR
UBSneak & ShowUB
CEldrazi AggroC
So if you feel its click bait do you
A. Report it as spam
B. Ignore and not click on the link
C. Click on it and watch any way
D. Just do nothing
E. ?
Whats the protocol or is there one?
I reported it as spam but you can do whatever you feel is right.
GRWNaya BurnGRW
GRWJundGRW
CAffinityC
UGUG EldraziUG
GRWBushwhacker ZooGRW
UBWRAd NauseamUBWR
Legacy
RBurnR
UBSneak & ShowUB
CEldrazi AggroC
I play Merfolk as a second deck, and enjoy Nikachu's stuff in regards to that.
But someone that is sort of a public figure for merfolk posting a video about burn in a burn thread seems an awful lot like self promotion.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Harsh Mentor is too niche. It will get some value sometimes on the play because of fetchlands but be pretty awful on the draw. Most critical is that if this trades for a removal spell without getting in damage, you're at a huge loss. It's like inquision, save 2-3 life. You're effectively a combo deck and these exchanges are catastrophic. It doesn't help that Fatal Push is the premiere removal spell of the format.
The only positive side I see is that it is an extra creature that you can use to hedge against Leyline of Sanctity decks to sort of zoo them out.
To side this in from the sideboard, however, sounds disgusting. Your opponents are siding in haymakers, as you know, so this "incremental value" won't cut it.
Giving your opponent the choice to deal damage to themselves or not will ALWAYS work out in their flavour. It's not like Eidolon that restricts them from casting spells which otherwise gives you a lot of tempo.
I don't know all the match ups you're hoping to improve with this thing, but Lantern is already a win, and affinity is not even worth preparing for given you may not even see it more than once in a 15 round GP, or at all. Not to mention your 75 has so much game against it anyway.
It's harder to tell if Soul-Scar Mage will do a good nacatl impersonation given Burn has moved away from the green. The Mage is likely only as positioned as Nacatl is positioned. I would be concerned that if the sorcery speed 3/3 turn 1 creature doesn't cut it, neither will the Mage. Or the turn 2 mentor!
I personally haven't played Burn in modern but I've played my fair share of RDW over my lifetime so my opinion isn't completely baseless.
Of course everyone is going to playtest both (as they should anyway). I would put my bet on the Mage though, given Nacatl has proven its worth at least once in history. It also has the potential to get value before perishing to removal.
Sorry if the vid looked clickbaity. Obviously I rarely post anything here so if I did I figured it would have been useful for you.
But I totally get why you're all upset.
I would hate losing to lifegain too
I sincerely think half this list doesn't care. The half that does care might be a good match up for you anyway.
Abzan Company- I have no idea how this match plays out so I'm not going to guess.
Affinity- Good, but do you need it? Does it kill them to activate Plating once to equip to Vault Skirge and gain a ton of life anyway? Plus it's the type of match up you might not even see given the meta can crush them.
Bant Eldrazi- does not care about this card
Death and Taxes- Does not care about this card
Eldrazi Tron- There is some value to be gained here, still if they equip a giant creature with collar you're in trouble (otherwise they never equip). I could be wrong but somehow I see this as a winnable match up anyway.
Tron- Very good here, but isn't this a bye for burn?
Merfolk- It's nice to have extra creatures backed up with tons of removal for anything that gets in the way, but all the creatures will trade with this guy. It sounds annoying at best.
Valakut- Good here, but isn't this also favourable?
First, congrats on a super awesome GP Vancouver finish! You're all foil Japanese sushi deck is really sweet. Secondly, thank you for posting your opinion on these new cards in the thread.
You've outlined well the arguments, I personally think the fetch land aspect alone might make this worth inclusion in the few flex spots as having either this or Eidolon T2 every game seems good vs the field. However I do believe the card will be more impactful in Legacy then in Modern. But testing will tell.
Also, we were discussing Merfolk either and the question of Vial came up and how often do you side them out? Do you generally side them out on the draw or against match ups you're expecting artifact/enchantment hate game 2 & 3?
GRWNaya BurnGRW
GRWJundGRW
CAffinityC
UGUG EldraziUG
GRWBushwhacker ZooGRW
UBWRAd NauseamUBWR
Legacy
RBurnR
UBSneak & ShowUB
CEldrazi AggroC
Mentor will look okay on the play because of fetchlands, but that's why it will be catastrophic on the draw. Knowing the existence of Mentor will force people to play their fetchlands first and play their non-fetch lands later in the game. If the opponent has removal, then what they do on the play/draw doesn't matter.
Against burn I cannot afford to ever take out Aether Vial because Eidolon would just ruin me. I also want to be able to deploy creatures and hold up counter magic. I understand I run into Smash to Smitherines or Destructive Revelry, but that's a risk I have to take. Even if you don't play Eidolon, if I take out Vial it's highly likely I'll get tempo'd out more often than not by just 1-2 creatures backed up by a bunch of burn.
Otherwise, I almost never think about vial destruction. Most decks don't care about my vial Sometimes I'll side it out if a UWx control deck sided in Stony Silence. I do side out Vial often though, but for the purposes of keeping the threat density of my deck high.
I'm certain Burn is a 50-50 match up vs Merfolk even though the Merfolk forum thinks it's favourable and the Burn forum thinks their a dog. 90% of my burn wins come from my opponent making blunders. If I had their hands I would beat myself. Certainly there are some Merfolk lists that are favourable vs burn, but I think you should still have a lot of game.