Yeah I saw that. Too bad I don't own premium anymore otherwise I'd be all over it.
Could you give some of what he was talking about? I'd be interested in how he said to tackle reanimator.
Half of his advice was "if they're on a bad draw you have a better chance" which was pretty dumb, but he opts for high-impact cards like Ground Seal and Slaughter Games over Tormod's or DRS. He sides in SG, Cage and a few bonfires. The plan is to keep them from reanimating. That piece of advice was less impressive than his whole article, but still not bad advice.
Reid just posted a "Why you should still play Jund article" recently and it was a good read. Gives solid points as to why still play the deck, and how to tackle reanimator.
Funny, I was playing just that tonight and while my mid-range and Junk match-ups were solid, Naya Blitz was killing me. I won 1 out of 5 games (no board). Small sample, but still. . .
Also, the rise of the internet has a huge effect on MtG.
Haha, sorry, "rise of the internet". That comment made me laugh very hard. The internet has certainly "risen" and will be here till the end of man.
Honestly, Jund is in the same position as last format. The only gatecrash cards Jund added was Stomping Grounds, and it still ended up being a smattering of removal with an OK creature suite, despite Primal Hunter and Lili now able to be cast side-by-side.
Junk being the deck to beat really isn't revolutionary. It died at the end of RTR / beginning of GTC due to new decks being tested. Reanimating Thragtusk/AoS a bunch of times was always their gameplan, and just remains an extremely powerful play in type 2, especially with all the dig and synergy in their deck.
Jund is far from dead, but some of the aggressive decks emerging, or even ones splashing white for Assemble the Legion, might be the right way. My advice would be to innovate and test some different cards outside the Reid Duke list.
I'm at work so I can't go as in depth as I'd like, but from playing in a number of tournaments and from watching a good number more, removal is more than key. We're in a meta where aggro decks can win by t3 and render Thragtusk pretty useless. You absolutely have to remove their creatures as they hit the board early on, expecting to block them to death isn't viable.
I also said "in my mind" those cards are staples. From my experience with the deck, I would not run Naya without them. I preference most of my statements like this with IMO, or something else relevant to my playing experience. I don't make staple assumptions for other players.
Running 4 Domri's means you want to run as many creatures as an aggro deck. If you're trying to pioneer a build that runs 4 Domri's in our midrange shell, I'm not sure you'll need to do much work. Drop a Relentless and a removal spell, and you've freed up spots for 2 more Domri's. At this point in the meta I don't see the point, though.
t3 "maybe" removal, t4 flash blocking and bonfire/fury from hand is not removal.
The reason a build focused heavy on creatures and Domri "needs" BTE and Flinthoof is because these cards allow you to not only nut out your opponent, but allow you to make full use of Domri. With these cards online t2, you have free reign to fight or peek. The only other way you can do this is if you open t1 dork, t2 smiter/reckoner. Without either dorks, or BTE, running Gyre Sage and Thalia isn't a good enough shell to make full use of Domri t3. And if your plan is to not drop Domri t3, that's playing the card wrong IMO. As one of the strongest PW's in the colors, you want him online ASAP.
There's a difference b/w innovation and running cards that don't foster synergy. In a competitive environment we need to be realistic about what our decks do and what we're going to be facing.
Saito needed it more I think. His build needs to get in some early beats from Boar/Sage/BTE, so removing a creature, particularly road blocks with big butts like Smiter and Resto is more crucial to his tempo. I'm not sure Domri builds with more heft in the ranks need this.
"Going over the top" essentially means, "I don't care what you cast out on the battlefield, I'm coming for lethal."
These builds go bigger. The slapping fat onto the table every turn and saying "answer me now or die" approach is in lieu of wipes/removal.
I disagree here. Fury and Bonfire are meant to be late game finishers, so naturally they are not relevant in the early game any more than Aurelia or Thundermaw is. As for "out value", while value is a central theme here I think that's more Jund than us. Domri -> Thundermaw -> Aurelia style builds want to out power. The exodus from value into power explains why Huntmaster is being dropped from some of the newer Naya lists. As for fearing aggro, I just don't. An opening Smiter or Reckoner is fine, especially when accelerating into a turn 4 Thragtusk. If that opening isn't possible, the alternative is Thalia which has been great too. Her first strike and prison on Spears and Growth is extremely relevant.
Certainly Purify the Grave is better out of board, but I was suggesting Spear mainboard over Mortars to have a leg up in game 1 against Humanimator while simultaneouly having a tool against hyper aggro and opposing Reckoners at instant speed. Buying one turn against combo is sometimes all you'll need.
I think Mortars over Bonfire is the right call. I find Bonfire clunky as well and dislike it. It was great during that time frame when birds were legal and we also needed those last points of damage to close games. Now, x8 dorks + Gavony isn't viable and we have Aurelia at the top end to close.
I wouldn't recommend running Naya Midrange w/o Thundermaw, Aurelia or KWR, so they really aren't relevant in a Mizzium vs other spells conversation. In my mind they are staples. They finish the game, and Mizzium is really more about getting us there. Def agree they are the cards that give us our real power.
The deck in general needs removal. If a person prefers Spears over Mizzium, that's fine. If someone is leaning towards running Bonfire, I'd advise mizzium at this point. But running no removal is just asking for a bad time.
A "Domri build" needs cards like BTE and Flinthoof to give it that punch it needs. Thalia doesn't do this...and then hurts you from playing Domri. If one wants to build a deck around Domri, I would recommend focusing on getting as many creatures as I possibly could on the battlefield before t3. As soon as you start adding heft, there's no reason to keep domri at 4, when Relentless and PH are arguably more impactful on the board. The amount of resources they need to get around the first Domri should be enough to close out the game...needing a second or third just isn't the reality. Once you starting running a bigger Naya build, I think Domri at 2 is appropriate.
I keep mentioning Saito only because he was so impactful on the meta when GTC first dropped. I actually don't agree with his early build, nor Keibler's, but they are great starting points and have gotten the deck to where it's at now.
I'm not a fan of Fury really. I've had it played against me to little effect, and I've played it and never thought "THIS will win me the game". It's nice out of the board against control, maybe, but even then a cavern naming human has been about all I've need to beat blue at this point.
Not fearing aggro is your prerogative, but aggro decks have placed consistently higher than Naya Midrange in every tournament. I don't "fear" any deck, but I am certainly prepared to face the meta, which at this point is Reanimator and Aggro. If your build is not running removal (not saying "your" as any one person, just a player in general) you're going to get smashed on. There are times you'll get smashed on just due to their draws, so why increase your chance of pain. The only reason I prefer Mizzium at this point is it serves as early removal, which we need, and takes over for Bonfire late game, in my mind "saving me spots." I can run 3-4 Mizzium and know exactly what I'm getting every game.
I was wondering why I was seeing Mortars in Naya lists.
Thundermaw, Aurelia, and Wolf Run go over the top, so it just felt like win more, especially when Bonfire and Fury are at our disposal to help end games.
A spear however is instant speed, and has the added benefit of stopping humaninator combo.
I'm still not a fan of removal spells in a Domri build mainboard. The only deck it's vital for is Humans, and that's only if they get their God hand and they're on the play. Too niche.
Mizzium has the benefit of being incredibly versatile. Saito ran it as a 4-of in his midrange builds, and since it's been floating b/w 2 and 4. I personally am not a fan on Bonfire in Naya Midrange, it's too finicky, and we have too many things to cast from the hand. It's better in Jund Midrange.
Neither Thundermaw, Aurelia nor Kessig Wolf Run are single-target removal spells OR board wipes, so I don't see how they compare.
Aurelia's Fury is also not going to be a spell that's relevant early game, and is more "Win More" than Mizzium or any of our creatures. The name of the game in Naya is to continually out value our opponents, and being able to pick off their small creatures early game, and wipe the entire board late game makes for a very powerful card with our creature suite. If we have a t2 loxodon or smiter, we get to save it to blow them out. If we don't, we save our ass from being destroyed in 3 turns by aggro. It's not just Humans where it's valuable, against Expirement Jund or Zombies it can buy us the turn we need to stabilize.
Spear will *barely* answer the Reanimator combo, at best stalling for a turn. The one mana exile w/ flashback does a better job than spear, and it's also at instant speed. It's a fine answer to aggro's early creature, but lacks the ability to blow them out late game. I keep my spears in the side for aggro, but wouldn't be caught dead without Mizzium MB.
It's sad because I do love bonfire, but I have been more disappointed with that card this format than I ever have. I cast it 90% from my hand, and have had to not miracle on more than one occasion, either because of an opposing Reckoner, or because I just needed to make a different play. It would show up t2, or in my opening hand, and it just dawned on me that the card should be Mizzium.
Based on input. Angel was occasionally cast MD, but usually, when you can surprise an opponent with one out of the board, it's pretty excellent. Flames of the Firebrand was just Bonfire originally, but this seemed MUCH more reliable. The SB is really where my questions lie, as I feel like it's quite thin, but at the same time, there's lots of things to cast against everyone.
Also, Thalias are generally the first thing I board out, if I know they aren't doing much more than being a 2/1 First Striker. That said, I did just play a match where I had to cast a 3 mana Farseek, and a 4 mana Domri (twice, with Domri). Won both of those games, though it was due more to my opponent mulling to 5 than out playing him. (Remember, being honest about the testing makes it more credible.)
I still think you need to do more against aggro g1. If your opponent is on a burning tree draw you have nothing against that.
I would
-1 Domri
-2 Acidic Slime
+3 Mizzium Mortars
I wouldn't MB Thalia, but that's your preference. You absolutely need some removal, though, and mizzium has the benefit of being a board wipe late game. You need to be able to answer Champion -> Burning Tree -> another human -> front line medic, and Domri's fight won't do that. Boros & loxodon also do nothing against bigger Jund & B/R aggro lists that will be flying over you after t3.
IMO, domri becomes incredibly strong when you can drop Loxodon and Boros t2, but if you're not running dorks you can't do that. I also think smaller Garruk is a better MB card, particularly since you are weaker to aggro's opening draws. Serves as pseudo removal and provides chumps.
Domri is awesome, but it's hardly Domri-centric. The deck just happens to have hardly any spells. In the current creature oriented meta you want to deploy a threat first anyway.
I think his list is drifting more towards a Naya midrange deck.
4 Domri's, 4 Farseek and a bunch of creatures SHOULD be Domri centric. If it's not, you're doing it wrong.
Saito's Naya build was a midrange deck, just a weaker version of Naya Midrange. I don't see how dropping a land, dropping some 2 drops, adding in Farseek and a bunch of big finishers helped out the build. 2 Aurelia, 2 Thundermaw, 2 Angel of Serenity with 23 land is just bad. Especially the two AoS, those will never be hard casted.
Aggro just runs that list over, and it did nothing to shore up the match against Junk (outside of two pipe-dream AoS). If this truly is competitive deck building, then we should be honest about the potential of the deck.
Best case scenario: T2 Gyre Sage, T3 Thalia, attack 2 (or block 2/x's), T4 Reckoner + Smiter, T5 Aurelia
Average scenario: T2 Sage, T3 anything, attack for 2, T4 Thrag/Resto/Hellkite.
I've had a bit of a snag trying to cast 2 spells on T3 with Thalia, due to the "tax" she enforces. Ideally, we'd like to go T2 Sage, T3 Thalia + Farseek, but that's not possible. T2 Farseek, T3 Sage + Thalia is VERY strong, however, so be aware that *that* is the correct sequencing.
As I said before, I love that guy. He does things that very few cards can simulate, let alone do all three. SO glad I paid $40 for 3 (one foil, two regular) at the prerelease.
As far as these lands go: I don't think I want anything other than 2 Wolf Run in the MD, though I would appreciate Cavern/Township/Ghost Quarter in situations. I had Township for a while in an aggro variant I had, then I switched over to Mikaeus, the Lunarch and it was much more effective at that effect. (I hope I didn't overuse "effect" there...) Ghost Quarter's effect I got from Acidic Slime in the board, so I no longer want those. This leaves Cavern to be relegated to the board, but I'm not sure I want them.
Yep, I'm debating this at the moment, but I need to figure out the MD definitively before tuning the board, I feel.
I used to play Jund pre-GTC. I'm VERY familiar with that feeling ;).
This is after about 10 games today with the previous list. Having less Thalias feels better, and despite being 23 lands with 10 spells that cost 5+, it is pretty reliable. The one caution is to only keep a 2 lander if you have at least 2 spells to cast for 2 mana. After 3 draw phases, if you haven't drawn a land or a Farseek (which should be in the opener) off of two lands, you've probably lost, but that's true of pretty much any deck.
I just don't like Thalia in a Domri-centric build. It's literally anti-synergy...you really really want to have Domri online ASAP, and Thalia stops that cold. I understand it "de-ramps" your opponents, but there's no reason to MB thalia, especially when you're so close to the Saito Naya build. Flinthoof & Burning tree just serve Gyre Sage so much better than Thalia.
I understand the hands that you don't have Domri, or don't have ramp, it's not a bad card, but it's not that stellar against aggro, especially naya blitz (and no ramp or no domri is a terrible hand anyway). I'd prefer the consistency of Saito's build if I were looking to abuse Domri. I find a more traditional Naya Midrange build to be stronger, though.
There's no dorks, no farseeks for a reason: his name is Domri Rade. I hate topdecking a useless mana dork late, and Farseek is no better. And a "buncha 4-6 drops" in a 23 land deck is completely reasonable. How about doing some independent testing of a list before critiquing?
It just seems janky. You have the potential for some okay aggro openings with burning tree, but you follow it up with mb Trostani? Why not go all out aggro, or all out midrange. And why would you play lightening mauler over flinthoof boar? You're not going to kill by t3 or 4 so the haste seems like a waste. There haven't been any top domri-centric decks lately, so the concept is a little finicky competitively.
Main boarding selesnya charm is always good. It answers another annoyance - obzedat, and randomly stops olivias and hellkites. I recommend 1 main 1 side, in addition to o-ring effects.
Mmm, good call. I forgot about Selesyna Charm, I haven't been siding it. For sure will find spots for it with all this Junk running around
I agree with half of bollskis criticism. I shaved a domri and a smiter for 2 farseeks, which seems to have sorted the mana better. I am running a lot more high-end than Kibler, though this mostly reflects the fact that decks like Junk Rites (very popular online) don't kill your dorks at all.
I started with this and kept flooding, so gradually cut huntmasters for higher CMC cards. As I said above, I may have overdone it. I'll keep testing.
The reckoner thing though really is fine in my experience, and it hasn't yet been uncastable in dozens of matches; worst case scenario seems to be that it only comes down when you have 4 mana in play (which is normally on turn 3).
What stinks is junk doesn't have to kill out creatures one AoS is a one sided board wipe, and we normally don't run cards that can answer AoS mb...oring would be the closest thing we have, and that's a sideboard card at the moment. We can have the hottest start our deck can muster, and t5 or 4 AoS just beats us.
Thanks for the report Kamotz. Good stuff. I'm thinking those Smiters might as well be mainboard next time, eh?
And as for Thalia, while she does tax Domri, if I'm casting Thalia turn 2 it's because I'm off my Pilgrim/Farseek fast start anyways. In this line of play:
1) I don't have any fat on the board to -2 with.
2) My hand is likelier heavier than if I had accelerated, so +1 for more creatures isn't great.
3) I'm looking to drop a Reckoner or Smiter turn 3 anyways, not Domri.
4) Since I didn't accelerate, I'm looking to stall for a sec.
So while true that Thalia makes casting Domri harder, she is a creature to draw with his -2 and I just always like seeing her opening hand if I don't have Pilgrim/Farseek. It's a different start, one that's decent and not, "dammit".
I think gyre sage and flinthoof have more synergy in a domri heavy build as two drops. There's no real reason to run Thalia in a pw centric build, her only plus would be her first strike. Any mizzium/farseek/bonfire/pw becomes awkward with her in play, it's asking for bad hands. I think she's better out of the board when you know for a fact she'll hurt your opponent more than you. It's probably best to avoid awkward hands at all costs.
I see your answer to my post kind of aggressive. But OK. I'm here just for discuss, so well.
What i mean about "amazing kibler" is not just about his not embarrassing but yes poor performance in Pro Tour, i mean he is an amazin deck builder during the years.
and yes, does he maby make some mistakes? yeah sure, but I do not see this one as a bad build.
I tested a lot this deck for WMCQ. I need to win a WMCQ, im not the top pro this year and I also tested "traditional" naya lists with aurelias, and that stuff... but well, what i founded out is that I prefer having a mana dork in hand on turn 20 than a farseek just because this deck plays GAVONY TOWNSHIP.
Please I would love to see The "traditional " naya list you think is better than kibler's on this format.
I would check out magic.tcgplayer.com or SCG for recent lists.
With such a top heavy creature line-up, Farseeks make them easier to hit. Dorks might not stay around, but outside of Acidic Slime, your land will. If he posted a list not running 8 5+ drops, and MB'd huntmaster, I probably wouldn't have suggested running Farseek's.
Your responses are kind of all over the place. Mana dorks and Gavony townships are a cool interaction, but t20 I would hate for that to be my play. Sorry if you felt my last response was aggressive, I was trying to point out that you might need to stray from the "brilliant kibler"'s first GC brew to stay competitive. Here is a great example of a build that does just that.
Sub out the Garruk's for Domri's and you're close to what Kibler was trying to do. I wouldn't MB Assemble's but that's just one example. There are tons on those sites I mentioned.
If you're looking to not run Farseek, run cards like Flinthoof Boar and Gyre Sage so you have more early game options.
Half of his advice was "if they're on a bad draw you have a better chance" which was pretty dumb, but he opts for high-impact cards like Ground Seal and Slaughter Games over Tormod's or DRS. He sides in SG, Cage and a few bonfires. The plan is to keep them from reanimating. That piece of advice was less impressive than his whole article, but still not bad advice.
Haha, sorry, "rise of the internet". That comment made me laugh very hard. The internet has certainly "risen" and will be here till the end of man.
Honestly, Jund is in the same position as last format. The only gatecrash cards Jund added was Stomping Grounds, and it still ended up being a smattering of removal with an OK creature suite, despite Primal Hunter and Lili now able to be cast side-by-side.
Junk being the deck to beat really isn't revolutionary. It died at the end of RTR / beginning of GTC due to new decks being tested. Reanimating Thragtusk/AoS a bunch of times was always their gameplan, and just remains an extremely powerful play in type 2, especially with all the dig and synergy in their deck.
Jund is far from dead, but some of the aggressive decks emerging, or even ones splashing white for Assemble the Legion, might be the right way. My advice would be to innovate and test some different cards outside the Reid Duke list.
Check it out for all interested.
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=54760
I also said "in my mind" those cards are staples. From my experience with the deck, I would not run Naya without them. I preference most of my statements like this with IMO, or something else relevant to my playing experience. I don't make staple assumptions for other players.
Running 4 Domri's means you want to run as many creatures as an aggro deck. If you're trying to pioneer a build that runs 4 Domri's in our midrange shell, I'm not sure you'll need to do much work. Drop a Relentless and a removal spell, and you've freed up spots for 2 more Domri's. At this point in the meta I don't see the point, though.
t3 "maybe" removal, t4 flash blocking and bonfire/fury from hand is not removal.
The reason a build focused heavy on creatures and Domri "needs" BTE and Flinthoof is because these cards allow you to not only nut out your opponent, but allow you to make full use of Domri. With these cards online t2, you have free reign to fight or peek. The only other way you can do this is if you open t1 dork, t2 smiter/reckoner. Without either dorks, or BTE, running Gyre Sage and Thalia isn't a good enough shell to make full use of Domri t3. And if your plan is to not drop Domri t3, that's playing the card wrong IMO. As one of the strongest PW's in the colors, you want him online ASAP.
There's a difference b/w innovation and running cards that don't foster synergy. In a competitive environment we need to be realistic about what our decks do and what we're going to be facing.
I wouldn't recommend running Naya Midrange w/o Thundermaw, Aurelia or KWR, so they really aren't relevant in a Mizzium vs other spells conversation. In my mind they are staples. They finish the game, and Mizzium is really more about getting us there. Def agree they are the cards that give us our real power.
The deck in general needs removal. If a person prefers Spears over Mizzium, that's fine. If someone is leaning towards running Bonfire, I'd advise mizzium at this point. But running no removal is just asking for a bad time.
A "Domri build" needs cards like BTE and Flinthoof to give it that punch it needs. Thalia doesn't do this...and then hurts you from playing Domri. If one wants to build a deck around Domri, I would recommend focusing on getting as many creatures as I possibly could on the battlefield before t3. As soon as you start adding heft, there's no reason to keep domri at 4, when Relentless and PH are arguably more impactful on the board. The amount of resources they need to get around the first Domri should be enough to close out the game...needing a second or third just isn't the reality. Once you starting running a bigger Naya build, I think Domri at 2 is appropriate.
I keep mentioning Saito only because he was so impactful on the meta when GTC first dropped. I actually don't agree with his early build, nor Keibler's, but they are great starting points and have gotten the deck to where it's at now.
I'm not a fan of Fury really. I've had it played against me to little effect, and I've played it and never thought "THIS will win me the game". It's nice out of the board against control, maybe, but even then a cavern naming human has been about all I've need to beat blue at this point.
Not fearing aggro is your prerogative, but aggro decks have placed consistently higher than Naya Midrange in every tournament. I don't "fear" any deck, but I am certainly prepared to face the meta, which at this point is Reanimator and Aggro. If your build is not running removal (not saying "your" as any one person, just a player in general) you're going to get smashed on. There are times you'll get smashed on just due to their draws, so why increase your chance of pain. The only reason I prefer Mizzium at this point is it serves as early removal, which we need, and takes over for Bonfire late game, in my mind "saving me spots." I can run 3-4 Mizzium and know exactly what I'm getting every game.
Mizzium has the benefit of being incredibly versatile. Saito ran it as a 4-of in his midrange builds, and since it's been floating b/w 2 and 4. I personally am not a fan on Bonfire in Naya Midrange, it's too finicky, and we have too many things to cast from the hand. It's better in Jund Midrange.
Neither Thundermaw, Aurelia nor Kessig Wolf Run are single-target removal spells OR board wipes, so I don't see how they compare.
Aurelia's Fury is also not going to be a spell that's relevant early game, and is more "Win More" than Mizzium or any of our creatures. The name of the game in Naya is to continually out value our opponents, and being able to pick off their small creatures early game, and wipe the entire board late game makes for a very powerful card with our creature suite. If we have a t2 loxodon or smiter, we get to save it to blow them out. If we don't, we save our ass from being destroyed in 3 turns by aggro. It's not just Humans where it's valuable, against Expirement Jund or Zombies it can buy us the turn we need to stabilize.
Spear will *barely* answer the Reanimator combo, at best stalling for a turn. The one mana exile w/ flashback does a better job than spear, and it's also at instant speed. It's a fine answer to aggro's early creature, but lacks the ability to blow them out late game. I keep my spears in the side for aggro, but wouldn't be caught dead without Mizzium MB.
It's sad because I do love bonfire, but I have been more disappointed with that card this format than I ever have. I cast it 90% from my hand, and have had to not miracle on more than one occasion, either because of an opposing Reckoner, or because I just needed to make a different play. It would show up t2, or in my opening hand, and it just dawned on me that the card should be Mizzium.
I still think you need to do more against aggro g1. If your opponent is on a burning tree draw you have nothing against that.
I would
-1 Domri
-2 Acidic Slime
+3 Mizzium Mortars
I wouldn't MB Thalia, but that's your preference. You absolutely need some removal, though, and mizzium has the benefit of being a board wipe late game. You need to be able to answer Champion -> Burning Tree -> another human -> front line medic, and Domri's fight won't do that. Boros & loxodon also do nothing against bigger Jund & B/R aggro lists that will be flying over you after t3.
IMO, domri becomes incredibly strong when you can drop Loxodon and Boros t2, but if you're not running dorks you can't do that. I also think smaller Garruk is a better MB card, particularly since you are weaker to aggro's opening draws. Serves as pseudo removal and provides chumps.
4 Domri's, 4 Farseek and a bunch of creatures SHOULD be Domri centric. If it's not, you're doing it wrong.
Saito's Naya build was a midrange deck, just a weaker version of Naya Midrange. I don't see how dropping a land, dropping some 2 drops, adding in Farseek and a bunch of big finishers helped out the build. 2 Aurelia, 2 Thundermaw, 2 Angel of Serenity with 23 land is just bad. Especially the two AoS, those will never be hard casted.
Aggro just runs that list over, and it did nothing to shore up the match against Junk (outside of two pipe-dream AoS). If this truly is competitive deck building, then we should be honest about the potential of the deck.
I just don't like Thalia in a Domri-centric build. It's literally anti-synergy...you really really want to have Domri online ASAP, and Thalia stops that cold. I understand it "de-ramps" your opponents, but there's no reason to MB thalia, especially when you're so close to the Saito Naya build. Flinthoof & Burning tree just serve Gyre Sage so much better than Thalia.
I understand the hands that you don't have Domri, or don't have ramp, it's not a bad card, but it's not that stellar against aggro, especially naya blitz (and no ramp or no domri is a terrible hand anyway). I'd prefer the consistency of Saito's build if I were looking to abuse Domri. I find a more traditional Naya Midrange build to be stronger, though.
It just seems janky. You have the potential for some okay aggro openings with burning tree, but you follow it up with mb Trostani? Why not go all out aggro, or all out midrange. And why would you play lightening mauler over flinthoof boar? You're not going to kill by t3 or 4 so the haste seems like a waste. There haven't been any top domri-centric decks lately, so the concept is a little finicky competitively.
Mmm, good call. I forgot about Selesyna Charm, I haven't been siding it. For sure will find spots for it with all this Junk running around
What stinks is junk doesn't have to kill out creatures
I think gyre sage and flinthoof have more synergy in a domri heavy build as two drops. There's no real reason to run Thalia in a pw centric build, her only plus would be her first strike. Any mizzium/farseek/bonfire/pw becomes awkward with her in play, it's asking for bad hands. I think she's better out of the board when you know for a fact she'll hurt your opponent more than you. It's probably best to avoid awkward hands at all costs.
I would check out magic.tcgplayer.com or SCG for recent lists.
With such a top heavy creature line-up, Farseeks make them easier to hit. Dorks might not stay around, but outside of Acidic Slime, your land will. If he posted a list not running 8 5+ drops, and MB'd huntmaster, I probably wouldn't have suggested running Farseek's.
Your responses are kind of all over the place. Mana dorks and Gavony townships are a cool interaction, but t20 I would hate for that to be my play. Sorry if you felt my last response was aggressive, I was trying to point out that you might need to stray from the "brilliant kibler"'s first GC brew to stay competitive. Here is a great example of a build that does just that.
4 Avacyn's Pilgrim
4 Huntmaster of the Fells
4 Loxodon Smiter
4 Restoration Angel
4 Thragtusk
2 Thundermaw Hellkite
1 Garruk, Primal Hunter
2 Assemble the Legion
4 Farseek
2 Mizzium Mortars
1 Cavern of Souls
2 Clifftop Retreat
3 Forest
3 Gavony Township
4 Rootbound Crag
1 Sacred Foundry
4 Stomping Ground
2 Sunpetal Grove
4 Temple Garden
Sub out the Garruk's for Domri's and you're close to what Kibler was trying to do. I wouldn't MB Assemble's but that's just one example. There are tons on those sites I mentioned.
If you're looking to not run Farseek, run cards like Flinthoof Boar and Gyre Sage so you have more early game options.