Keeping above the course of the comments I'd still say it's a little early to pronounce Gonti's Machinations dead at the scene. It's true my deck's other choices might not be best as it's pure meta call, however I still say there is a possibility for inclusion of the new card.
Edit: By the way, I'm getting ridiculous single turn damage numbers that my opponents aren't learning to calculate into what I can do with the machinations on the table.
My last game, on turn 4 I have 2 Gonti's Machinations on board at 3 energy. He taps out. I have a boros charm and 2 lightning bolt in hand. I top draw a fetchland for my 4th land and play it, crack it for my 4th energy and unleash all my cards including my machinations on him for 16 damage total. His response: Holy F...!
This is awesome having so many 1CMC for 3dmg cards.
And I've done 18 on turn 3 against a Dredge player who said "gg by the way" on turn 1 after he got a Vengeful Pharaoh and a Golgari Brownscale in the grave. I'd gotten in for Swift on t1 before Pharaoh hit, suspended 2 Rifts t2, and then t3 Spike+Atarka's Command to attack with a 6/7 Swiftspear for a total of precisely lethal 18 since he'd fetched twice, shocked once, and gained 2 from GBS. It was on Cockatrice. His response was to kick me out of the room for "tutoring my deck". "gg by the way" indeed.
Sometimes the stars align, but I don't actually evaluate Atarka's Command expecting to end up with 6/7 Swiftspears all the time. Sticking to only the extreme christmasland situations is just confirmation bias and isn't faithfully evaluating the card. You're still just sugarcoating it. You've yet to report how Infect became a problem because you're very light on creature removal for a Burn deck. You've yet to report how you have zero maindeck answers for lifegain.
I've read the whole discussion about Gonti's Machinations and I have yet to see a compelling reason to play it over Atarka's Command/Revelry. The card probably can work in Burn, as can Bump in the Night, but that doesn't mean it's a strong option or that it's worth switching to. Are you consistently getting earlier kills? What sort of meta are you playing in where you don't want much on-board interaction? From what I can tell, creature removal is probably better in most matchups where the lifegain matters, so it essentially becomes just another lava spike along with Bump in the Night, making the deck far less versatile and more vulnerable to hate.
My main question at this point is, what are the reasons to not splash for Atarka's Command, a card that does just about everything our deck could want a card to do, and instead splash black for Machinations? Especially since many people here were already moving away from Command to just play Boros?
To add another counter to your 16-damage story, just today I played a game against Elves where on turn 3 I was attacking with Swiftspear, Guide, and Nacatl with 3 open mana. My opponent, at 16 life, chose not to block. I cast Atarka's Command to deal 3 to him and put a land into play, then cast another Atarka's Command to deal 3 and give all my creatures +1/+1, dealing 17 in one turn. This deck has loads of ways to deal tons of damage in a short amount of time (especially if our opponents make bad decisions). If the Machinations had been any other one-mana burn spells in your example, you'd have killed him on the same turn. What's the main argument, then, for playing it over the other tools we have available? What's the main strength of the black deck over the green or straight RW builds, and how does Machinations help that? I don't think this has been explicitly stated yet, and I think it needs to be answered in order for any further discussion about it to be fruitful.
I'm not trying to dismiss the card off the bat (though at first glance I don't like it at all for the reasons I've stated). But I can't change my mind about it until you provide either new information that I haven't thought about or a strength that I'm not seeing.
I have no idea why everyone is questioning splashing AC.
My thoughts are,
PT 1 - it might not be good to put in 4 wild nacatl due to a higher amounts of 1 drop removal
PT 2 - with the higher removal amounts, it will lessen the explosiveness of AC and because AC requires a totally different color as the basic list of Boros, it might not be good to splash 4 AC (not that good to splash 4 of AC), due to the possible dmg loss of fetching another color. If you want to argue if you are already going to splash AC might as well splash 4, well thts up to you and thats not an argument, splashing AC does not mean you have to splash 4.
Did anyone question the effectiveness of AC as a possible skullcrack?
Did anyone say AC is bad?
I think we should drop the AC debate, and start on dealing with the meta change at hand of added easy removals instead and the possible impact. Under the color pie thats 3 colors having gd 1 mana removal.
I've read the whole discussion about Gonti's Machinations and I have yet to see a compelling reason to play it over Atarka's Command/Revelry. The card probably can work in Burn, as can Bump in the Night, but that doesn't mean it's a strong option or that it's worth switching to. Are you consistently getting earlier kills? What sort of meta are you playing in where you don't want much on-board interaction? From what I can tell, creature removal is probably better in most matchups where the lifegain matters, so it essentially becomes just another lava spike along with Bump in the Night, making the deck far less versatile and more vulnerable to hate.
My main question at this point is, what are the reasons to not splash for Atarka's Command, a card that does just about everything our deck could want a card to do, and instead splash black for Machinations? Especially since many people here were already moving away from Command to just play Boros?
To add another counter to your 16-damage story, just today I played a game against Elves where on turn 3 I was attacking with Swiftspear, Guide, and Nacatl with 3 open mana. My opponent, at 16 life, chose not to block. I cast Atarka's Command to deal 3 to him and put a land into play, then cast another Atarka's Command to deal 3 and give all my creatures +1/+1, dealing 17 in one turn. This deck has loads of ways to deal tons of damage in a short amount of time (especially if our opponents make bad decisions). If the Machinations had been any other one-mana burn spells in your example, you'd have killed him on the same turn. What's the main argument, then, for playing it over the other tools we have available? What's the main strength of the black deck over the green or straight RW builds, and how does Machinations help that? I don't think this has been explicitly stated yet, and I think it needs to be answered in order for any further discussion about it to be fruitful.
I'm not trying to dismiss the card off the bat (though at first glance I don't like it at all for the reasons I've stated). But I can't change my mind about it until you provide either new information that I haven't thought about or a strength that I'm not seeing.
I too would like a faithful evaluation of results from the card rather than anecdotes here and there that "my opponents don't know what to do" and "I dealt 16 on one turn and my opponent said wow". That's not evaluating the card. The former is basically saying nothing about the card at all. The latter is just confirmation bias.
This build is making serious concessions that are dangerous, lack of Searing Blaze and Skullcrack for instance, that will be liabilities given enough testing. There are only so many slots in a 60 card deck and this particular build is opening up glaring weaknesses solely to add a card that quite obviously isn't worth playing. Bump in the Night, ie. Lava Spike 5-8, isn't even worth playing when compared to what green and white can offer. I don't feel compelled to play more Lava Spikes considering it would probably be the first to go if a new bolt variant came along.
I have been playing RDW for 5 years. I think that many times you prefer speed removal or anti lives. I also do not like the typical deck with a lot of cost 2. 4 atarka 4 BC 4SB 4 skull. It may go well but there is a risk that a heavy hand will come out. I would opt for mardu. 4RB 4LB 4LS 4 bump 4SB 4skull 4BC 1LH 4guide 4eidolon 4monastery 19 lands
I have been playing RDW for 5 years. I think that many times you prefer speed removal or anti lives. I also do not like the typical deck with a lot of cost 2. 4 atarka 4 BC 4SB 4 skull. It may go well but there is a risk that a heavy hand will come out. I would opt for mardu. 4RB 4LB 4LS 4 bump 4SB 4skull 4BC 1LH 4guide 4eidolon 4monastery 19 lands
I agree. I'll sometimes go to 8 in the 75, but it's at most 6 maindeck. I also agree that green is the most important color because of DRev and I'd also play Jund Burn if black brought enough to the table.
Monday Night Modern Update: 2-1 Third place Deck: Boros Burn (with a splash for green)
Match 1 vs. Fish (0-2):
Game 1: I mull to 5 on the draw. Got an explosive hand but with a couple of searing blaze but didn't have enough gas in the end to catch up.
Game 2: Kept 7 on the play. Got 2 Eidolon of the Great Revels down quick after establishing the life lead. Ended up hurting me more than him because he had a Aether Vial. Probably killed myself this game.
Match 2 vs. Dredge (with Thugs instead of Trolls) (2-0):
Game 1: Kept 7 on the play. Opponent mulled to 4. Had a turn three kill.
Game 2: Sided in my additional Skullcracks to combat Gnaw to the Bone. Kept 7 on the draw. Didn't draw into a Skullcrack until it was too late. Opponent used Gnaw and gained 10 life. My draws were still giving me enough gas to keep up. Last turn I needed a top deck and I got it so I could push through the final 6 damage. I burned a Dredge player for 30. Felt good.
Match 3 vs. Fish (2-1):
Game 1: I mull to 6 on the play. Kept a one lander (which was a fetch) why my scry was a land on top. Kept because I had 3 Monastery Swiftspears in my 6 card hand. Played fetch and took off my first turn. Second turn grabbed the mountain, fetch shocked and got my two lands. Proceeded to drop my Swiftspears and overwhelm my opponent in the proceeding turns with more creatures.
Game 2: Kept 7 on the draw. Started off the ground game with a couple of Goblin Guides but the opponent was able to get his lords down while hitting my lands with 3 Spreading Seas effects (he had 3 Sea's Claims in the sideboard for a total of 7 island enchanting effects). Found a Destructive Revelry which freed up a Sacred Foundry. Got more damage in but behind. Needed a top deck which I got but I didn't have enough mana to hard cast Rift Bolt as well as a Boros Charm because he had a Cursecatcher on board.
Game 3: Kept 7 on the play. Blitzed him with 2 Goblin Guides which made him hesitant to use a Spreading Seas turn 2. He got a lord down with two Mutavaults to put me under the gun. I had 2 Eidlons down to make him think about it but had to trade one for one of his Mutavaults. Needed a top deck to win and I got while he had a Cursecatcher on board. Felt great because I never beat Fish.
My thoughts on the games: Burn vs. Fish is just a race. Interacting with Fish seems like a mistake unless you can use a Searing Blaze. With multiple Fish players at my LGS, I might board in another Stomping Grounds because of Spreading Seas (if he takes out my first one, can't use DRev unless it is in my hand). Learned some better sequencing with Fish that might help out my match up in the future. The new Dredge seems like it might have the same power level as Bant Eldrazi. It's good dredges are going to seem unfair but I would expect the deck to a whiff a little bit more because of the GGT ban. Again as Burn, you are racing against Dredge. Sideboard you want to pack in anti-life gain to stop Gnaw to the Bone. At this point though I don't know if there needs to be dedicated graveyard hate for Dredge. But I would assume its all person preference in the end.
I like Boros a lot. Match 3 game 2 against Fish I took 0 damage off of my mana base with the Inspiring Vantage and basic mountain. Being able to save life instead of having to have to fetchshock at least once most of the time with Naya Burn feels like it give me an extra turn to try and top deck a winning spell in tough matchups. I understand peoples opinions about Naya vs. Boros but Boros has felt better and put up better results for me than Naya was. The increased probability of taking less damage off of the land base is worth it to me more than the +1/+1 mode on Atarka's Command.
I think that's where the comparison should be when comparing Naya to Boros. Is the probably of taking extra damage off of the mana base with Naya worth having the option of choosing the +1/+1 mode on Atarka's Command (because Skullcrack is almost the same as the first two modes of AC). With Naya, you have a greater probability of taking 2-3 more damage off of your mana base than Boros Burn. So, if we are strictly looking at the +1/+1 mode on AC, you would need to attack with 3 or more unblocked damage solely with the +1/+1 counters added from AC to make Naya worth it (which to me, on the surface seems unlikely). However, if you already have a hand with so many creatures from the get go that can make use of the +1/+1 counters, you are already probably going to have T3 or T4 kill as those types of draws tend to be the most explosive for burn with or without AC. Hopefully this helps contribute to the discussion. I will keep playing Boros with a splash for green and might consider an additional Stomping Grounds in the main or side for the Fish matchup strictly for my LGS
Why would you keep Eidolon of the Great Revel in against Merfolk? It's decent if they don't have a Vial, but horrendous if they do. I don't think you can take that chance knowing that you're up against a bad matchup. You'd basically have to pray for a Revelry and hope they don't Seas-block your manabase.
I think that against Abzan Company, you're looking at Path and as many creatures as you can carry. Your goal is to get rid of Kitchen Finks, and to make sure they don't combo-kill you - don't even worry about their incidental lifegain, it's not worth holding up a Skullcrack effect for. Be fast and proactive, and hopefully they won't have answers to your pressure.
On the play do not remove eidolon against merfolks. On the draw yes. What changes would you make vs abzan company?
You're on creature control duty in that matchup. Bring in Paths and the full set of Blazes, drop Lava Spikes. I'd argue that Anafenza/Melira are the most important to kill. It's about being smart, too. If they have one combo piece on the board and they CoCo or Chord, kill that piece in response. If they start to combo, kill Anafenza/Melira/Seer in response to the first Seer activation. It's also a matchup where you want to kill Noble early, since they'll just get ahead on T2 if you don't.
It's kind of similar to Infect to me, where you're keeping them off the combo while applying pressure.
That would almost be reasonable if Harnessed Lightning was an energy Lightning Strike, but it's creature only. Straight up energy Lightning Strike would be broken, though. It would be like a fireball you could charge all game without taking away from your game plan.
I have no idea why everyone is questioning splashing AC.
My thoughts are,
PT 1 - it might not be good to put in 4 wild nacatl due to a higher amounts of 1 drop removal
PT 2 - with the higher removal amounts, it will lessen the explosiveness of AC and because AC requires a totally different color as the basic list of Boros, it might not be good to splash 4 AC (not that good to splash 4 of AC), due to the possible dmg loss of fetching another color. If you want to argue if you are already going to splash AC might as well splash 4, well thts up to you and thats not an argument, splashing AC does not mean you have to splash 4.
Did anyone question the effectiveness of AC as a possible skullcrack?
Did anyone say AC is bad?
I think we should drop the AC debate, and start on dealing with the meta change at hand of added easy removals instead and the possible impact. Under the color pie thats 3 colors having gd 1 mana removal.
Who's debating it? I haven't seen any real discussion about running AC vs not running it for several pages now. Unless you're talking about my last post, where I was just saying that I think the green splash is still stronger than black if you are going to run a third colour.
Also, how's everyone finding the Grixis Delver matchup? (I know someone else asked this a little while ago, but they were never answered.) I'm about even in the matchup so far since I started recording my results, but I'm finding it one of the more difficult matchups to play. Baiting counters only goes so far when they draw 5 or more of them over the course of a game.
I have no idea why everyone is questioning splashing AC.
My thoughts are,
PT 1 - it might not be good to put in 4 wild nacatl due to a higher amounts of 1 drop removal
PT 2 - with the higher removal amounts, it will lessen the explosiveness of AC and because AC requires a totally different color as the basic list of Boros, it might not be good to splash 4 AC (not that good to splash 4 of AC), due to the possible dmg loss of fetching another color. If you want to argue if you are already going to splash AC might as well splash 4, well thts up to you and thats not an argument, splashing AC does not mean you have to splash 4.
Did anyone question the effectiveness of AC as a possible skullcrack?
Did anyone say AC is bad?
I think we should drop the AC debate, and start on dealing with the meta change at hand of added easy removals instead and the possible impact. Under the color pie thats 3 colors having gd 1 mana removal.
Who's debating it? I haven't seen any real discussion about running AC vs not running it for several pages now. Unless you're talking about my last post, where I was just saying that I think the green splash is still stronger than black if you are going to run a third colour.
Also, how's everyone finding the Grixis Delver matchup? (I know someone else asked this a little while ago, but they were never answered.) I'm about even in the matchup so far since I started recording my results, but I'm finding it one of the more difficult matchups to play. Baiting counters only goes so far when they draw 5 or more of them over the course of a game.
Go back a few pages and you'll see several comments by me refuting the idea that splashing AC is a bad decision and that it makes the deck less consistent. Just as in the past we had "we're playing maindeck AC, so why not Nacatl" people are overcorrecting with "environment looks bad for Nacatl, must drop AC". Boros maindeck with green splash is a valid build and it's what people were playing before DTK. I believe that AC is powerful enough to maindeck even as the only green spell in the 60, others think the self pain is too much. When the self pain is relevant, I sideboard into RW Burn. In the mirror, for instance, Naya without Nacatls can easily do that while Naya with Nacatls has a lot more trouble dropping 8 cards. I always sideboard into RW in the burn mirror.
Grixis Delver should be much better than a coin flip. You shouldn't let them have 5 counters and the ability to cast them against you throughout the game. They don't really play that many counters in the maindeck and half or more of them only hit 2CMC spells. Bottleneck those counters. I like to sit back and draw cards when a control deck isn't applying pressure. I cast creatures as I draw them, and then wait to go off with instants followed by more instants plus sorceries.
Bant Eldrazi
UW Control
U Merfolk
Legacy
Merfolk
UR Delver
It's definitely not a good sign when your opponents want you to play a certain card.
Edit: By the way, I'm getting ridiculous single turn damage numbers that my opponents aren't learning to calculate into what I can do with the machinations on the table.
My last game, on turn 4 I have 2 Gonti's Machinations on board at 3 energy. He taps out. I have a boros charm and 2 lightning bolt in hand. I top draw a fetchland for my 4th land and play it, crack it for my 4th energy and unleash all my cards including my machinations on him for 16 damage total. His response: Holy F...!
This is awesome having so many 1CMC for 3dmg cards.
RGWNaya BurnRGW+++RGWKiki ComboRGW
UGInfectUG+++++++++.++++++++UGMerfolkUG
GGNykthos WaveGG++++++++++GGStompyGG
BRVampiresBR+++++++.+++++++BRGoblinsBR
WGBogglesWG+++++++++++++CRSkred RedCR
UBRGDredgeUBRG++++++++++BB8 RackBB
URWJeskaiURW+++.++UBRGrixis DelverUBR
URStormUR++++++++UWGBant CompanyUWG
WUBRGHumansWUBRG+CCEldrazi TronCC
Sometimes the stars align, but I don't actually evaluate Atarka's Command expecting to end up with 6/7 Swiftspears all the time. Sticking to only the extreme christmasland situations is just confirmation bias and isn't faithfully evaluating the card. You're still just sugarcoating it. You've yet to report how Infect became a problem because you're very light on creature removal for a Burn deck. You've yet to report how you have zero maindeck answers for lifegain.
My main question at this point is, what are the reasons to not splash for Atarka's Command, a card that does just about everything our deck could want a card to do, and instead splash black for Machinations? Especially since many people here were already moving away from Command to just play Boros?
To add another counter to your 16-damage story, just today I played a game against Elves where on turn 3 I was attacking with Swiftspear, Guide, and Nacatl with 3 open mana. My opponent, at 16 life, chose not to block. I cast Atarka's Command to deal 3 to him and put a land into play, then cast another Atarka's Command to deal 3 and give all my creatures +1/+1, dealing 17 in one turn. This deck has loads of ways to deal tons of damage in a short amount of time (especially if our opponents make bad decisions). If the Machinations had been any other one-mana burn spells in your example, you'd have killed him on the same turn. What's the main argument, then, for playing it over the other tools we have available? What's the main strength of the black deck over the green or straight RW builds, and how does Machinations help that? I don't think this has been explicitly stated yet, and I think it needs to be answered in order for any further discussion about it to be fruitful.
I'm not trying to dismiss the card off the bat (though at first glance I don't like it at all for the reasons I've stated). But I can't change my mind about it until you provide either new information that I haven't thought about or a strength that I'm not seeing.
My thoughts are,
PT 1 - it might not be good to put in 4 wild nacatl due to a higher amounts of 1 drop removal
PT 2 - with the higher removal amounts, it will lessen the explosiveness of AC and because AC requires a totally different color as the basic list of Boros, it might not be good to splash 4 AC (not that good to splash 4 of AC), due to the possible dmg loss of fetching another color. If you want to argue if you are already going to splash AC might as well splash 4, well thts up to you and thats not an argument, splashing AC does not mean you have to splash 4.
Did anyone question the effectiveness of AC as a possible skullcrack?
Did anyone say AC is bad?
I think we should drop the AC debate, and start on dealing with the meta change at hand of added easy removals instead and the possible impact. Under the color pie thats 3 colors having gd 1 mana removal.
I too would like a faithful evaluation of results from the card rather than anecdotes here and there that "my opponents don't know what to do" and "I dealt 16 on one turn and my opponent said wow". That's not evaluating the card. The former is basically saying nothing about the card at all. The latter is just confirmation bias.
This build is making serious concessions that are dangerous, lack of Searing Blaze and Skullcrack for instance, that will be liabilities given enough testing. There are only so many slots in a 60 card deck and this particular build is opening up glaring weaknesses solely to add a card that quite obviously isn't worth playing. Bump in the Night, ie. Lava Spike 5-8, isn't even worth playing when compared to what green and white can offer. I don't feel compelled to play more Lava Spikes considering it would probably be the first to go if a new bolt variant came along.
No one runs 4 Atarka's Command and 4 Skullcrack in the 60. At most, you'll see 2 Skullcrack. Atarka's Command is by and large the better card, and then there's Destructive Revelry in the side. I would give up W and run Jund Burn before I gave up G.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
I agree. I'll sometimes go to 8 in the 75, but it's at most 6 maindeck. I also agree that green is the most important color because of DRev and I'd also play Jund Burn if black brought enough to the table.
Match 1 vs. Fish (0-2):
Game 1: I mull to 5 on the draw. Got an explosive hand but with a couple of searing blaze but didn't have enough gas in the end to catch up.
Game 2: Kept 7 on the play. Got 2 Eidolon of the Great Revels down quick after establishing the life lead. Ended up hurting me more than him because he had a Aether Vial. Probably killed myself this game.
Match 2 vs. Dredge (with Thugs instead of Trolls) (2-0):
Game 1: Kept 7 on the play. Opponent mulled to 4. Had a turn three kill.
Game 2: Sided in my additional Skullcracks to combat Gnaw to the Bone. Kept 7 on the draw. Didn't draw into a Skullcrack until it was too late. Opponent used Gnaw and gained 10 life. My draws were still giving me enough gas to keep up. Last turn I needed a top deck and I got it so I could push through the final 6 damage. I burned a Dredge player for 30. Felt good.
Match 3 vs. Fish (2-1):
Game 1: I mull to 6 on the play. Kept a one lander (which was a fetch) why my scry was a land on top. Kept because I had 3 Monastery Swiftspears in my 6 card hand. Played fetch and took off my first turn. Second turn grabbed the mountain, fetch shocked and got my two lands. Proceeded to drop my Swiftspears and overwhelm my opponent in the proceeding turns with more creatures.
Game 2: Kept 7 on the draw. Started off the ground game with a couple of Goblin Guides but the opponent was able to get his lords down while hitting my lands with 3 Spreading Seas effects (he had 3 Sea's Claims in the sideboard for a total of 7 island enchanting effects). Found a Destructive Revelry which freed up a Sacred Foundry. Got more damage in but behind. Needed a top deck which I got but I didn't have enough mana to hard cast Rift Bolt as well as a Boros Charm because he had a Cursecatcher on board.
Game 3: Kept 7 on the play. Blitzed him with 2 Goblin Guides which made him hesitant to use a Spreading Seas turn 2. He got a lord down with two Mutavaults to put me under the gun. I had 2 Eidlons down to make him think about it but had to trade one for one of his Mutavaults. Needed a top deck to win and I got while he had a Cursecatcher on board. Felt great because I never beat Fish.
My thoughts on the games: Burn vs. Fish is just a race. Interacting with Fish seems like a mistake unless you can use a Searing Blaze. With multiple Fish players at my LGS, I might board in another Stomping Grounds because of Spreading Seas (if he takes out my first one, can't use DRev unless it is in my hand). Learned some better sequencing with Fish that might help out my match up in the future. The new Dredge seems like it might have the same power level as Bant Eldrazi. It's good dredges are going to seem unfair but I would expect the deck to a whiff a little bit more because of the GGT ban. Again as Burn, you are racing against Dredge. Sideboard you want to pack in anti-life gain to stop Gnaw to the Bone. At this point though I don't know if there needs to be dedicated graveyard hate for Dredge. But I would assume its all person preference in the end.
I like Boros a lot. Match 3 game 2 against Fish I took 0 damage off of my mana base with the Inspiring Vantage and basic mountain. Being able to save life instead of having to have to fetchshock at least once most of the time with Naya Burn feels like it give me an extra turn to try and top deck a winning spell in tough matchups. I understand peoples opinions about Naya vs. Boros but Boros has felt better and put up better results for me than Naya was. The increased probability of taking less damage off of the land base is worth it to me more than the +1/+1 mode on Atarka's Command.
I think that's where the comparison should be when comparing Naya to Boros. Is the probably of taking extra damage off of the mana base with Naya worth having the option of choosing the +1/+1 mode on Atarka's Command (because Skullcrack is almost the same as the first two modes of AC). With Naya, you have a greater probability of taking 2-3 more damage off of your mana base than Boros Burn. So, if we are strictly looking at the +1/+1 mode on AC, you would need to attack with 3 or more unblocked damage solely with the +1/+1 counters added from AC to make Naya worth it (which to me, on the surface seems unlikely). However, if you already have a hand with so many creatures from the get go that can make use of the +1/+1 counters, you are already probably going to have T3 or T4 kill as those types of draws tend to be the most explosive for burn with or without AC. Hopefully this helps contribute to the discussion. I will keep playing Boros with a splash for green and might consider an additional Stomping Grounds in the main or side for the Fish matchup strictly for my LGS
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
You're on creature control duty in that matchup. Bring in Paths and the full set of Blazes, drop Lava Spikes. I'd argue that Anafenza/Melira are the most important to kill. It's about being smart, too. If they have one combo piece on the board and they CoCo or Chord, kill that piece in response. If they start to combo, kill Anafenza/Melira/Seer in response to the first Seer activation. It's also a matchup where you want to kill Noble early, since they'll just get ahead on T2 if you don't.
It's kind of similar to Infect to me, where you're keeping them off the combo while applying pressure.
(I'm not advocating either of them)
That would almost be reasonable if Harnessed Lightning was an energy Lightning Strike, but it's creature only. Straight up energy Lightning Strike would be broken, though. It would be like a fireball you could charge all game without taking away from your game plan.
There are a lot of spots where it's good. But If you don't see any until late game, and top deck 1---how are you losing the life?
Sure there are times I can leave lands open, there are also times I see 2-3 lands the whole game.
Who's debating it? I haven't seen any real discussion about running AC vs not running it for several pages now. Unless you're talking about my last post, where I was just saying that I think the green splash is still stronger than black if you are going to run a third colour.
Also, how's everyone finding the Grixis Delver matchup? (I know someone else asked this a little while ago, but they were never answered.) I'm about even in the matchup so far since I started recording my results, but I'm finding it one of the more difficult matchups to play. Baiting counters only goes so far when they draw 5 or more of them over the course of a game.
Go back a few pages and you'll see several comments by me refuting the idea that splashing AC is a bad decision and that it makes the deck less consistent. Just as in the past we had "we're playing maindeck AC, so why not Nacatl" people are overcorrecting with "environment looks bad for Nacatl, must drop AC". Boros maindeck with green splash is a valid build and it's what people were playing before DTK. I believe that AC is powerful enough to maindeck even as the only green spell in the 60, others think the self pain is too much. When the self pain is relevant, I sideboard into RW Burn. In the mirror, for instance, Naya without Nacatls can easily do that while Naya with Nacatls has a lot more trouble dropping 8 cards. I always sideboard into RW in the burn mirror.
Grixis Delver should be much better than a coin flip. You shouldn't let them have 5 counters and the ability to cast them against you throughout the game. They don't really play that many counters in the maindeck and half or more of them only hit 2CMC spells. Bottleneck those counters. I like to sit back and draw cards when a control deck isn't applying pressure. I cast creatures as I draw them, and then wait to go off with instants followed by more instants plus sorceries.
once they draw their entire library they usually have access to Pact of Negation, so I would not recommend Palm
Usually the best plan is to just attack/burn and hope to be faster
Bring in revelry to either destroy the acceleration or the phyrexian unlife
"Are you serious?" Chandra replied.