When crafting a burn sideboard, is it usually better to avoid mising because we don’t really have filtering in our deck? For reference, here is my current board that I’m thinking for the weekend:
Personally, I tend not to run singletons in decks without filtering. Aggro decks should be playing broad but powerful sideboard cards anyways, and I'd rather know exactly what my deck is capable of drawing turns ahead and play with that in mind, as opposed to hoping that I draw the slightly better card in that scenario and playing around a card that may not even show up. I suppose it rarely hurts, for example splitting between RIP or Relic. But it introduces variables to your strategies, and I feel like Burn is at its strongest eliminating as many variables as possible. Having said that, this is partly my playstyle showing; it likely doesn't matter too much one way or another.
But, for example, I don't see your Bridge showing up nearly enough to help you, even though you may play as though it's probable. I would probably cut it for a redundant effect.
I agree with elcon. I would play three of each red fetch for a 12 fetch build. 3-3-2-2 For a ten fetch build.
Having said that, it doesn't come up enough to matter for me. It is better, but I'm not willing to buy three Tarns for it. I should probably play some Snow-Covered Mountains for the Skred matchup, too, but then I couldn't honor the God Pharoh (may his return come quickly, and may we be found worthy).
Tips for the mirror? Obviosuly slamming Firewalker wins a lot of gameS.
I've always heard it's about creature damage, so kill those asap, and value your own.
In that regard, I have been siding Eidolon out play and draw for post-board matches. Do you guys typically leave them in?
Can anyone comment on how to play the dance with Lightning Helix/skullcrack/deflecting palm? I feel like there's several turns of both players holding up lands to prevent life-gain off of Helix. Do you play the game normally and send off your Boros Charms EoT? Do you refuse to tap down til you have 3-4 labds?
Any advice for the end of the game? Again, feels like andance of trying to grt the other guy to blink first.
I find that in general, whoever wins the die roll wins the match. Smart plays can change that, of course. I would keep Eidolon in. They make a good lightning rod, sparing you damage to the face. It's definitely all about creatures--I would even side in Paths if you run them and aren't expecting Firewalkers. Don't forget you can respond to a fetch crack to get Helix lifegain off. Board out third colors if you're playing them.
I do want to take the time to remind people that we need a VERY good reason not to play a full playset of any given card. This is true for most competitive Magic decks, but is especially true for Burn. Those reasons exist, I do it myself, but if you're testing a new card out you should probably play the full playset. Splits in a deck without heavy filtering are often too inconsistent, and ends up doing half of two jobs instead of one job well.
This might be a long shot, but is there anyone fluent in javascript that can get Karsten's manabase code working for them? I've been fiddling around with it since it was brought up here, but I keep getting a syntax error.
According to this, as long as you have at least 14 sources of a color, you should be pretty statistically fine. Maybe one more is ideal, because he does his calculations under the assumption of 24 lands and we use 18-20.
I wouldn't fudge Karsten's numbers when making deck-building considerations. Instead, use his methodology with your land count to see how many colored sources you need.
Also, note that 14 G and 14 W is not adequate even in a 24-land deck since his guarantees are one-at-a-time. I.e., if 14 G gives 90% to find it in your opener (or whatever % and whatever metric he used), then 14 G and 14 W does not give 90% to find W and 90% to find G. In fact, I think he has a table for double color requirements, so if you want a R/W land and a R/G land by turn 2, I think he recommends 20 total sources of those colors, which is many more than the 16 you'd have separately (assuming 12 fetches, 2 of each shock, say).
Very true. Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge required to perform his calculations or make use of his script. If anyone knew how and wanted to show it for the 18-20 lands Burn typically plays, I'm sure there would be a lot of us who would be grateful.
hi there @misterMuffin21, nice to see we share another deck
I see that adding extra colors for nice cards is very tempting, but burn is a very... "statistical deck" rather than a single-card deck (more like death shadow, tarmo decks, etc.). We rely on the redundancy of our multiple bolt-like spells. Adding complexity to this equation in terms of mana-base colors wouldn't really play in our benefit in the long term. You can get some very nice improvements, but they would all be shadowed by the loss in consistency that, to my mind, is more constraining than noticeable the improvement.
I personally splash green for D.Rev. That decision is already delicate, but we can deal with it very robustly, and the power clearly compensates. Consistency is ruler in this kingdom, and adding complexity to the deck spoils it a bit. Just my opinion
According to this, as long as you have at least 14 sources of a color, you should be pretty statistically fine. Maybe one more is ideal, because he does his calculations under the assumption of 24 lands and we use 18-20.
It would work late in the game, but not early in the game. I agree with Creevy's suggestion of Terminate. It answers everything, though there are incidental perks of exile that it doesn't have, and it does it from T2 on.
If you rarely have to deal with early creatures and usually just have to deal with bigger ones later on, Murderous Cut might work. Each additional copy is worse, though, because you'll have to refill your graveyard or it will get expensive.
Do you think it's worth putting Terminate in the sideboard sections as an alternative to Path?
If I was gonna play four colors, that's absolutely the manabase I would use. I might even cut a basic for a thirteenth fetch, because drawing a basic in a four color deck where we only wanna see 2-3 lands seems really bad. Just leave one for Path/Ghost Quarter/etc.
Honestly, I wouldn't bother with Murderous Cut. Terminate costs two, so you need Cut to cost exactly one in order for it to be advantageous. If the game is early, you can't really count on that. If the game is late, you probably have the mana to cast either card when you need it. In addition, it messes with using Lavamancers if that's something you wanna do. All for a one-of, making the deck more inconsistent when it comes to decision paths. I would pack 3x Terminate and know what your deck is and is not capable of. Having said that, you're catching a glimpse of my playstyle here, as I tend to skew towards 4-ofs and not splitting slots between similar cards. So this might be more my signature in action, and wouldn't work as well for you.
If you're not playing white, I might even consider Terminate. It's one more mana, but it hits most things you want to be hitting.
Having said that, I would highly advocate playing white and just running Path. I feel like playing Burn without white is like playing Infect without blue.
I'm going to try out the light green splash for Drev. The plan is to board out Boros Charm for Drevs, so we won't need to fetch for 3 colours. Still not sure about the Collective Brutality for the mirror and AdNaus, it seems a stretch to find WW for Firewalker with this manabase. Collective acts as an answer to firewalker and can mitigate flood and at least plays on par with the life drain with potential for more. Other ideas are welcome, I played rest for the weary at one point to fine success, but answering KF seems really important in the mirror. Thoughts? The cracks are just generic upgrades of either blaze or boros charm against decks with lifegain and/or few to zero creatures.
I like that you're never playing more than three colors at once, by switching the Charms for the Revelries. I might recommend dropping a basic Mountain for either a second Foundry or another fetch, depending on the level of land destruction in your meta. Really you want about fifteen sources for each color in your deck--I would try to hit that.
Hey all, I like the updated Primer. Some of the data before was getting a bit outdated.
I am hoping to start a discussion on ensnaring bridge:
1) Worth putting in SB?
2) If so, how many copies? (typically I hear 2, as noted in the SB section of the primer)
I have debated this for some time. I went 6-3 on day 1 of the Louisville open last weekend, and I think it would've definitely been helpful against some of my match-ups. What are your thoughts?
I think if you're gonna be running Bridge, you need to see it early enough for it to come down before you're dead, and you really don't wanna see more than one. I would say three is the right number. This could go down if you're supplanting it with other answers to large creatures.
I don't think it's a bad card for the sideboard. I stick to Path because I don't want any cards that cost three, but that's more of a personal preference. If you need a pseudo board wipe against midrange decks, you could do far worse.
The thing about splashing green for D. Rev over Wear//Tear is that the decks where the two damage really matters are either Ad Nauseum, our worst matchup, or some sort of aggressive deck where you want to disrupt and increase your clock at the same time (Affinity, DNT, Merfolk, EldraziTron). But, in those cases you're often shocking for two to deal two, making it a wash but your manabase less consistent. If you already play green for Atarka's Command, then it just makes sense to play Revelry, but if you're in Boros or Mardu I personally doubt the card is worth it. Especially with a Mardu+green build, it's not even certain we'll be seeing three lands in the first place to find all our colors.
With regards to chain to the rocks in Boros Burn that should be a nope. I like Flores but it makes every one lander, that land being Inspiring Vantage, as a dead card not to mention a hand with 2 lands both being IV, which would honestly be ideal in every other situation, also a dead card hoping to draw a different land to turn the card on.
Oh yeah, I forgot about Inpsiring Vantage, because my build isn't running it. You're totally right on that.
Personally, I tend not to run singletons in decks without filtering. Aggro decks should be playing broad but powerful sideboard cards anyways, and I'd rather know exactly what my deck is capable of drawing turns ahead and play with that in mind, as opposed to hoping that I draw the slightly better card in that scenario and playing around a card that may not even show up. I suppose it rarely hurts, for example splitting between RIP or Relic. But it introduces variables to your strategies, and I feel like Burn is at its strongest eliminating as many variables as possible. Having said that, this is partly my playstyle showing; it likely doesn't matter too much one way or another.
But, for example, I don't see your Bridge showing up nearly enough to help you, even though you may play as though it's probable. I would probably cut it for a redundant effect.
Having said that, it doesn't come up enough to matter for me. It is better, but I'm not willing to buy three Tarns for it. I should probably play some Snow-Covered Mountains for the Skred matchup, too, but then I couldn't honor the God Pharoh (may his return come quickly, and may we be found worthy).
I find that in general, whoever wins the die roll wins the match. Smart plays can change that, of course. I would keep Eidolon in. They make a good lightning rod, sparing you damage to the face. It's definitely all about creatures--I would even side in Paths if you run them and aren't expecting Firewalkers. Don't forget you can respond to a fetch crack to get Helix lifegain off. Board out third colors if you're playing them.
Very true. Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge required to perform his calculations or make use of his script. If anyone knew how and wanted to show it for the 18-20 lands Burn typically plays, I'm sure there would be a lot of us who would be grateful.
I definitely agree with you that the deck needs to be consistent and statistical in order to properly function. As an alternative thought, I use this article by Frank Karsten when it comes to hitting my colors: https://www.channelfireball.com/articles/frank-analysis-how-many-colored-mana-sources-do-you-need-to-consistently-cast-your-spells/
According to this, as long as you have at least 14 sources of a color, you should be pretty statistically fine. Maybe one more is ideal, because he does his calculations under the assumption of 24 lands and we use 18-20.
Do you think it's worth putting Terminate in the sideboard sections as an alternative to Path?
Honestly, I wouldn't bother with Murderous Cut. Terminate costs two, so you need Cut to cost exactly one in order for it to be advantageous. If the game is early, you can't really count on that. If the game is late, you probably have the mana to cast either card when you need it. In addition, it messes with using Lavamancers if that's something you wanna do. All for a one-of, making the deck more inconsistent when it comes to decision paths. I would pack 3x Terminate and know what your deck is and is not capable of. Having said that, you're catching a glimpse of my playstyle here, as I tend to skew towards 4-ofs and not splitting slots between similar cards. So this might be more my signature in action, and wouldn't work as well for you.
Having said that, I would highly advocate playing white and just running Path. I feel like playing Burn without white is like playing Infect without blue.
I like that you're never playing more than three colors at once, by switching the Charms for the Revelries. I might recommend dropping a basic Mountain for either a second Foundry or another fetch, depending on the level of land destruction in your meta. Really you want about fifteen sources for each color in your deck--I would try to hit that.
I think if you're gonna be running Bridge, you need to see it early enough for it to come down before you're dead, and you really don't wanna see more than one. I would say three is the right number. This could go down if you're supplanting it with other answers to large creatures.
I don't think it's a bad card for the sideboard. I stick to Path because I don't want any cards that cost three, but that's more of a personal preference. If you need a pseudo board wipe against midrange decks, you could do far worse.
Oh yeah, I forgot about Inpsiring Vantage, because my build isn't running it. You're totally right on that.