Magic Market Index for October 12th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for Sep 28th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for Sep 21st, 2018
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from Soldier »
    Quote from RyogAkari »
    I think I'm just going to acquiesce and try the red route for right now after further reading into the primer and based off of suggestions.

    Here will be my revised list for the time:




    I have another fetch I can run to fuel Searing Blaze and Grim Lavamancer however 12 is probably enough, right? Also would you run a single searing blaze and 2 grim or 3 grim?



    I think 12 is more than enough of fetchlands. Usually 8 is a good number too. If you think you need more fetchlands to fuel Searing Blaze than you might need to pop your fetchlands slower.


    Other stuff. Grim Lavamancer is good but I tend to think the Searing cards (Blaze and Blood) seemed to work better, at a point that we don't need to play or have room to play Grim. I do think at least 3 Searing Cards (Blaze or Blood) should be included to any burn design. I do think both cards are good and it might also be a good idea to play a mixture of both (just in case the opponent does something to take one out).



    Price of Progress is one of those awesome must have spells that seem too awesome for us not to play but it can be a dead card. I do want to say that 4 is too many! You just don't want to start the opening hand with 2 price of progress and then find out that the opponent is purposely holding back on their duals because they are expecting POP from you. The best numbers of POP is 2 to 3. Usually if your playing 2 one can be placed in the sideboard.


    1 Sensei's Divining Top - All you need is one (awesome card)... some players do play 2 Divining Tops so they can beef-up Swiftspear in late game play.


    I would honestly cut a fireblast over a price of progress. Fireblast is the worst card to have multiples of in your hand IMO. They're dead until late game and unless you're flooded out the wazoo you usually can't cast more than 2. That said, I've cut both a Fireblast and POP (per your suggestions) for 2 tops, simply because I want a better chance of drawing one. I like that card too much to simply never see it during gameplay.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    The thing about swiftspear's prowess triggers is that we were going to cast these spells anyway, but now we get an additional benefit from casting them. If our opponent decides to answer a fatass swiftspear when Eidolon is on the board, more power to them because either way they're taking tons of damage and will continue to take damage until they make the correct play and remove Eidolon.

    The reason we play Eidolon main instead of Pyrostatic pillar is because Eidolon can attack. The Pillar build you mention most likely ran Devil over Swiftspear because it was a creature heavy sligh build, and there weren't enough spells to justify including Swiftspear. I would argue for putting Lavamancer in the slot Devil occupied, but I personally felt like Devil was included as an afterthought because the player needed more cheap creatures and swiftspear didn't cut it because it ran fewer spells than the typical burn deck. Like someone else said earlier, that deck did well because it ran like 11 pillars, not because it ran Devil.

    Can you describe to me how Goblin Guide would interact with Eidolon? Because however you'd describe it, I'd replace Guide with Swiftspear in any given scenario and it would work exactly the same way. I basically treat Swiftspear like it's guides 5-8.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    No, a goyf, Tasigur, or angler will outclass both devil AND swiftspear stat wise. You want to deal damage, not just simply stop your opponent from doing so. The problem with Devil isn't even that it doesn't have haste, but that your opponent can decide what to do with the card once you play it. Yeah, they'll take 4 on turn 1... but only if they choose to. Most players will let it stick then remove it. Just because this is an argument from 2012 doesn't make it any less valid. A card isn't good when it lets your opponent make the decisions for your deck because they will choose the worst option for you every time.

    To be honest, goblin guide is such a huge staple of this deck that budget players are probably going to have to either run Grim Lavamancer in Guide's slot, or just play a completely different deck altogether. The latter option might be the most viable for most people. Hopefully eternal masters comes with Chain Lightning and goblin guide reprints too, but that does seem like it would mess with draft balancing too much.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Cards like Goyf, Tasigur, and Gurmag Angler are why Devil isn't the correct creature. If your hand is depleted and you topdeck Devil against a board with a 4/5 goyf or a Tasigur your opponent is just gonna laugh at you as they let your weaker Devil stick around. Sure guide and swiftspear have the same problem, but they also have better early game potential.

    You might think Devil is a better turn 1 play than Swiftspear because it has the potential to deal more damage, but I think Swiftspear is better because it has haste. If your opponent lets a Turn 1 devil stick it means that removal is coming and your devil will have dealt 0 damage. If Devil had haste or was even a 3/2 with haste that had the same punisher mechanic the turn 1-2 argument would be viable, but that's not the case here.

    If you're really that budget oriented (bauble is like 7-10 bucks a pop still), you might as well play Belcher or Oops all spells because they're faster decks with arguably the same consistency and roughly the same budget as the deck you're trying to build.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from Soldier »
    Quote from SadderRobot »
    Speaking of Primers: I just finished mine, which I have hosted on reddit's r/mtglegacy subreddit. It is a comprehensive and up to date primer on where burn is in today's metagame, and it looks at the history and philosophy of burn as well as looking at matchups. Here's a link if you guys want to check it out!


    It's a really good job for such a short time. I do think it needs to mention cards like Vexing Devil.

    I've also been experimenting with a swiftspear/bauble build with fair results. I'm not sure if baubles are worth writing about but I do think if players are looking for combo speed this might be the build for them.


    Unless you want him to put a section in for "Unplayable cards you shouldn't run" like this primer has, there's no point in talking about Vexing Devil. It's been talked to death and it's time to move on.

    If all you're trying to get is a prowess trigger with a cantrip attached to it, you might be better served running Gitaxian Probe, just for the fact that you get to look at your opponent's hand and you get the card immediately as opposed to next turn. However, going back to unplayables, I don't believe cantrips are playable as well (the author of this primer seems to think so too if you read the unplayables section), but for more subtle deck math reasons, since you have to either cut burn spells (and risk getting flooded more often because you're running a 56 card deck with 19 land as opposed to 60) or cut lands (which is also risky for obvious reasons). Cantrips will also mess with your mulligans because they essentially become wildcards that make it extremely difficult to determine whether your hand is keepable or not, especially if you only have a one-lander. Probe isn't as bad because you get to look at your opponent's hand, but it's just a word of caution regardless. The decks that do play Probe also use it as Force fodder.

    Furthermore, I may tend to play the deck like it's fast combo sometimes but honestly looking at burn like it is a combo deck seems incorrect, as there are combo decks that are both faster and more consistent through disruption than burn is. I think it's more correct to look at burn as a fair strategy that utilizes some tempo as well. I honestly believe we're closer to a deck like RUG delver than we are to a deck like Storm if you were to plot this deck on a wheel that was divided into Aggro, Midrange, Control, and Combo. Even if you don't agree with this, the fact that there are combo decks that are both faster and more consistent than us means we should probably slow down and try to favor consistency over speed anyway. We're not going to win any races against faster decks by trying to be faster, and we're most likely going to lose win percentage points against slower fair decks because of the reduced consistency that comes from this mindset.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on [Primer] Restore Balance
    What would your recommended 75 be at the moment? Budget is somewhat of a concern because I don't have a lot of money right now but I do have a decent amount of tradestock. I'll probably proxy up whatever list you give me and see how that goes while I learn the ins and outs of the deck. I just don't want to be playing something that's dated and won't stand a chance in the new meta.
    Posted in: Combo
  • posted a message on [Primer] Restore Balance
    Hey guys, I'm looking to build a new modern deck (was playing elves but the deck is really bad in my local meta at the moment so I've just kind of quit playing for a little bit until I can acquire a new deck to play), I saw an older primer from about last year on this deck and I think the idea and combo is very cool, plus it's inexpensive.

    However, I want to see what kind of list you guys would recommend in the new meta to prepare against Eldrazi. The primer I did watch was about a year old, and I just want something more up to date before I decide to invest in this deck. I think with the proper build I could totally blindside the local modern league for the next season.

    Thanks for your help guys!
    Posted in: Combo
  • posted a message on Burn
    I did some playtesting with 2 Sensei's Divining top against Death and Taxes and I have to say so far I'm liking the card. I got blown out the first game, but thanks to top at least it was a turn 7 blowout when without it it would have been a turn 3 blowout. The card performed well every time I played it. I noticed it actually becomes a better card after sideboarding, since it felt like I could find my sideboard cards more often with top than without top. The last tournament I was in I drew 0 sideboard cards against both DNT and Dredge, which cost me both matchups.

    The biggest reason I like it, however, is that the card actually forces me to change my playstyle and play more conservatively, which, at least against DNT, forces me to actually make correct plays in order to maximize the value out of top. Previously I'd be more combo oriented and play out as much of my hand as possible. Yes, top might trade off speed, but that might not necessarily be a bad thing if it forces me to make the correct plays instead of just dumping my hand ASAP like a noob.

    Edit: I thought about Splashing for Revelry some more, and I realized that it would be really bad to play Revelry against DNT even though I'll probably gain against decks that run enchantments for the sole reason that DNT runs wasteland. I need artifact removal to stay competitive against DNT after game 1, so not being able to cast Revelry due to wasteland is just backbreaking. Same goes for the MUD matchup, and I feel like I'll encounter both decks more often than Enchantress, or even the U/W RIP Helm deck that's been doing well locally.

    Quote from RyogAkari »
    Thought it would be fun to throw my hat into the ring with a Legacy Deck.





    Our local place doesn't do Legacy however at their casual event most bring a legacy deck. My sideboard is more about what I would see from a casual enviroment and is the reason why I'm running access to white for Path. Other than that, thoughts?



    You don't need 4 paths (you have plenty of removal main deck), nor do you need a white splash. If anything, if you care about removing enchantments, you're better off splashing green and replacing the Wear/Tears with Destructive Revelry. I don't know your meta, but generally sweepers like Volcanic fallout are unnecessary and probably counterintuitive unless your meta is full of creature decks, in which case you're probably better off running Pyroclasm since most of these creature decks don't run blue.

    Assuming you lose the Paths and you have 3 Revelry instead of 2 Wears and 2 Smash, and you don't need sweepers, I've just freed up 7 sideboard slots for you to put in more grave hate and possibly combo hate.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from Nevelo »
    Someone on Reddit posted the link to a former Canadian pro's website. Last update around about 2000

    It had a small gem of a decklist hidden on one of its pages. An Extended Mono Red list from January of that year.


    Quote, "Good Lord, every Season a new incarnation of this thing rears its ugly head. What can I say? It still wins."

    Buahahaha


    Do you guys think Wasteland is still playable in burn? I know when I first started getting into the deck a few years ago there were some lists that ran wasteland but that seems to be less and less common now. I imagine if it is though, it wouldn't be as a 4 of.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from Nevelo »
    Enchantress is practically impossible without a green splash and it is not Leyline that is the problem. It's Solitary Confinement which makes them hexproof and immune to damage. I played one at a GP side event last year and managed to steal one game because they somehow bricked off after drawing 15 cards and ended up having to sacrifice Confinement. Otherwise, unless they keep badly or mulligan into oblivion and don't manage to get Confinement out on time, we basically lose.

    That being said. A green splash is likely more detrimintal to the rest of our matchups than beneficial. One of the best things about playing Burn is making Wasteland useless against us.


    Yeah Enchantress does seem like a lost cause, but maybe SDT might actually work in our favor to help prevent us from getting taiga. nhan's suggested sideboarding taiga so we don't have a splash when we don't need it but I don't know if the consistency increase that SDT could potentially give us is worth freeing up a sideboard slot.

    The only reason I'm actually seriously contemplating the splash is because the local meta is pretty diverse, but there's also been an RIP/Helm combo/control deck running around that as of now I also have to write off as unwinnable, and it's been putting up good results such as consistent top 8's. The guy playing the deck is the only person I can regularly play with and it's no fun playing burn against his deck because it's so unwinnable, so I usually end up playing Death and Taxes against him because that's the only other deck I have. I'm more than willing to test out these changes if it means my burn deck becomes playable against him again lmao

    Quote from Munchyman81 »
    Make sure to start adding pithing needle to sideboard if you in DC metro area. Seems like COP:Red is popping up a lot. Especially since D&T is large part of meta here.


    It's a sideboarded one-of (unless for some reason people in your area are deciding to board in more copies which doesn't make a lot of sense) in a deck with no library manipulation or card draw in a matchup that's otherwise even, and might even favor us after boarding. I think I'd rather just take my chances tbh. Absolute Law is worse btw.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    I'm fairly sure we'll lose to Leyline no matter what - thankfully its not as common in legacy as it is in modern.


    Really? I've NEVER lost a match to a deck playing Leyline (to be fair it's only been 3 matches and 2 of them were Leyline combo). As it is, burn has enough creatures and non-targeted burn to where we can ignore the leyline and win anyway, especially after we side out 4 Lava Spike and a Fireblast for 2 Lavamancer and 3 Shusher. If you go in with a plan it is very much winnable.

    No I haven't played the enchantress matchup yet (and I don't expect to given how rarely played the deck is) but even without leyline I'd write off the matchup as extremely unfavorable for us anyway. They really don't need Leyline to beat us lmao.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Hmmmmm... I'm trying to decide if I prefer Swiftspear to extra lands, blaze and vortex MD or not.

    I wouldn't dream of cutting them in Modern but in legacy we have so many good spells.


    We do need a certain creature density in our main/side so we don't just auto-lose to Leyline of Sanctity. Aside from this the biggest strength of the creatures we run is that their damage is repeatable every turn if it's not removed/blocked by a bigger dude.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from Soldier »
    lots of talk about adding Sensei's Divining Top to the burn deck to help it being consistent. I've tested it and I do advocate the use of Top in burn more as a staple to bolt!
    When I read a comment like the comment above - it make me think that the player shouldn't really be playing burn... (it more like comment for a blue x list).

    Ideally all burns want is 2-3 lands and 7 bolt effects (because seven times three equals twenty one) - the only time burn wants something like Sensei's Divining Top is during the durdle like games (even then they would still prefer 7 bolt effects and 2-3 lands first) which is why most list with finishes running the card only has 1 max.


    I haven't tested this yet but in theory top should solve all the problems burn faces late game where it loses to its own bad topdecks. 90% of the games I lose are to my own draw step. There's just a ton of games where I will fail to draw anything relevant and lose because of this.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from nhan »
    Quote from BasedFuster »

    I feel like Price has too much value to cut a copy out though. There are just some matchups where that card becomes a complete blowout and you end up wanting every card you draw to be a price, goyf decks being one of them. Heck, even if your opponent plays around it by using wasteland/fetching basics, I feel like they're still getting the shaft anyway, especially if they're using wasteland to play around your prices. There's also way more matchups where price is good (literally any tricolor deck in the format, lands, 12post and MUD)than matches where price is bad or at least needs to be cut when it comes to sideboarding (so far I can only think of Burn, Belcher, oops all spells, high tide and possibly Merfolk and DNT off top).

    I debated running pillars instead of Mindbreak trap, but after going over the pros and cons of each, I decided I'd rather have the card that lets me interact with combo on turn 1. Both can be duressed, and I've lost to turn 1 storm one too many times to not want the turn 0 interaction.


    I felt the same way about price for a long time, but the issue here is that against wasteland decks, especially RUG, Price becomes a pseudo Vexing devil/Brow beat that reads : You may destroy two lands instead of taking 4 damage. In the words of Curby "It will always manifest itself in the weakest option" This has caused me many games while racing RUG/ any decks running wastelands. This is why I've changed my Price of progress timing, and numbers, if I can sneak it through for 4 damage I'll take that, cause if I get greedy it'll end up being 2 while the enemy has 2 less lands, unless this is the first few turns, their tempo loss has never helped me win. Don't get the wrong idea I'm not dissing Price, by far it has the most damage potential in burn, and the reason why you can sit back and play control, thats why there is still three in my deck, I'm just saying if you go up against a good opponent who knows to stop dropping lands, and keep an untapped wasteland, it can really mess up your damage count. Also reanimator, totally negates price, they can play their whole combo on two lands, so they just fetch for island and swamp. Again I agree that when price is good its wonderful, but like fireblast, I'm happy if I see 1 per game, cause thats usually all I need. If I see two price against decks that are soft to it, its usually overkill, cause the rest of may hand could have cleaned up any ways. This is why I feel we can afford to cut 1.

    On Pillar/mindbreak. This is totally personal, I used to feel the same as you. I just changed my mind after noticing that pillars hit many more decks than just storm, land a pillar against miracles and watch them sweat, I find its great against elves as well since it stops their combo side, and you can usually beat their agro game.

    I've come to realize that there are two types of burn players, those who play control, and those who play combo. Control burn gears their card choices towards consistency, combo burn only cares about explosiveness and ending the game as quick as possible. You can see the difference of these two play styles clash in the last page and a half or when ever Soilder talks about vexing devil. I'm a control kind of guy, I wonder which side of the fence you fall on BasedFuster? I choose not to play mindbreak because I accept that I will lose to combo's god hand. I accept that burn is a bad control deck(having no interaction with storm except for mindbreak), so I don't take the control route against combo, and I'd rather just embrace the bad combo deck that burn is, and try to race them instead, where I feel like I have a better chance. Which is also where pillar shines.

    I don't want to change your mind, I just want to share my reasoning with you.


    Honestly, I lean towards the combo side because I feel like games get worse for me the longer they go. You're probably right in replacing a copy of POP with top and hoping top will find you one of the 2 cards you cut though.

    The thing with miracles and elves though is that while Pillar probably does put in work against both decks, both matchups are at least manageable game 1. I feel like Eidolon usually is enough in both cases. I guess my need to interact with a turn 1 combo comes from just losing to turn 1 combo with 2cmc hate cards in my hand too often, and not just with burn. I used to play DNT as my main deck for a while, and while playtesting against storm I'd find myself losing turn 1 much too often, which would piss me off because in most of those turn 1 losses, I'd have Thalia or Canonist in my hand as well. Plus last time I went to a Legacy IQ I got paired up against the only belcher player in the room first round and even though I won the match I just kinda freaked out lol.

    I'll definitely test a 3x blast 3x pop list with 2x top for sure though!
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from nhan »
    I hate Goyf. Its the worse creature in every deck that plays it, and its usually the most expensive non land card. But lets not get into that.

    I would cut 1 fireblast, and 1 price. Both are really powerful but you don't want to see more than 1 fb per game, and price can be played around. Top will increase your chances of seeing both of these cards, I would up the fetch count by two. I've been really happy with 3/3 fireblast/price of progress. Just food for thought.
    I like your sideboard, I run pillars for combo hate, and exquisite firecraft over vexing shusher.


    I feel like Price has too much value to cut a copy out though. There are just some matchups where that card becomes a complete blowout and you end up wanting every card you draw to be a price, goyf decks being one of them. Heck, even if your opponent plays around it by using wasteland/fetching basics, I feel like they're still getting the shaft anyway, especially if they're using wasteland to play around your prices. There's also way more matchups where price is good (literally any tricolor deck in the format, lands, 12post and MUD)than matches where price is bad or at least needs to be cut when it comes to sideboarding (so far I can only think of Burn, Belcher, oops all spells, high tide and possibly Merfolk and DNT off top).

    I debated running pillars instead of Mindbreak trap, but after going over the pros and cons of each, I decided I'd rather have the card that lets me interact with combo on turn 1. Both can be duressed, and I've lost to turn 1 storm one too many times to not want the turn 0 interaction.
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.