I don't know how you don't run a playset of Lathnu Hellions in this deck. The pressure those things generate is real, and seems like a no-brainer over Bristling Hydra unless your meta is completely dominated by control/spot removal.
I've been playing a budget Temur version of this deck, and it's super fun. I splash Blue for Empyreal Voyager which keeps Energy in my pocket, and I have two counterspells and a couple Woodland Wanderers to make use of the mana. Attune with Aether and Thriving Turtle are great first-turn drops to not waste mana.
My experience is the exact opposite, there's enough removal in the format that Lathnu Hellion often eats up the energy I'd otherwise use for good Harnessed Lightnings or activations of my Longtusk Cubs and Bristling Hydras. The hellion is definitely a good card, but I prefer having him in the board for those narrow cases where I need him. Tireless Tracker is simply a much better use of the slot to me, the card-draw of Tracker has helped me win games where I get flooded and generally helps you keep the pressure up by ensuring you're cooking with gas.
Question : Kor firewalker is good vs mirror, but it's strong vs anything else ?
And what's the best between Rift Bolt and Lava Spike ?
Kor Firewalker isn't really too strong against any other decks except perhaps Skred Red. That's the reason I no longer run them in my sideboard.
Which one is better between Rift Bolt and Lava Spike depends heavily on the context but generally I'd give the edge to Rift Bolt for being able to hit both creatures and players. Both should be a full 4-of in your main deck. When it comes to sideboarding, if you have to be fast then you generally want to cut Rift Bolt first but when you need to have enough removal you may want to cut the Lava Spikes instead.
The trick behind sideboarding is actually understanding your deck and the matchup you're facing. Evaluate all the cards in the deck in the context of the matchup, figure out which card is the worst and replace it with the best cards in your sideboard if those sideboard cards are actually better in the matchup. Then look at the new state of the deck and make sure you've not diluted your main win condition too much. You can read as many sideboarding guides as you like but until you understand the why of it all you'll always be a step behind other players of a deck.
I am running a very similar list. It has been performing very well for me. I do agree with D90Dennis14 that 4 Geist is probably too many. I always run 3 because he is legendary and hexproof so he is really tough to kill once he is in play. In addition, with a ton of cantrips and because he is our top end play we almost always see at least one copy in a given game. I would definitely cut one.
I agree with Dennis about the spells to add too. I absolutely love Slip Through Space and Distortion Strike in this deck with Geist. Some people don't like them because they are not the best top deck. If that is a worry definitely side on the slip through space side because you can always cycle it. Emerge Unscathed is also great as a protection spell, but I haven't played it in a bit because I like the cantrip that slip through space has in a prowess build. I couldn't tell you how many times these cards have won me games. I would say cut a Geist and a Snare or Leak and add two slip through space and see how it does.
I have thought in the past about running Geist out of the sideboard and that is also definitely an option. If you do I would add two Bedlam Reveler into the main deck and run three Geist of Saint Traft out of the sideboard. The only problem is that Reveler doesn't play that well with counter magic so maybe Vendilion Clique would be a better choice. I personally think Geist fits the deck very well. Especially since you play 6 maindeck counter spells so you can side into a a more control/midrange oriented Geist deck.
Also have you ever thought about running a Vapor Snag in place of one Lightning Helix. That card is very versatile and is awesome in the tempo games. I hope some of this helps!
I was writing out my decklist off the top of my head, turns out I was wrong: I'd already cut the 4th Geist of Saint Traft for another Seachrome Coast and since I only had 2 Snapcaster Mages when I last played the deck I had 2 Vapor Snag in that spot.
In an effort to lower the mana requirements a little I've replaced the 2 Mana Leaks with Spell Pierces. I've cut a Gitaxian Probe and the 19th land I was playing for the two extra Snapcaster Mages. This leaves me with the following list:
I'd like to add another land back in but I'm not sure what I'll cut for it, perhaps a Lightning Helix to help lower the curve a little more.
I'm definitely considering Slip through Space if I do decide to stay on the current path, though cutting a counter for it feels bad. I'm not sold on the sideboard yet. Deflecting Palm is a holdover from my Burn sideboard but I'm starting to think that I don't need it in this deck since I can catch Infect with removal and counters and with mainboard Path to Exile Tron decks are a lot less scary so I really only need it against Emrakul/Ulamog decks. I was already looking for a space to stick Anger of the Gods so I'm thinking I might drop Palm for 2 copies and something else. I'd like to make room for the [c]Slip through Space[/s]s as well.
Perhaps my approach to the sideboard is just plain wrong because I'm too hung up on what the Burn sideboard needed...could I trouble the people who play a similar list to post their sideboards so I can get some ideas?
Hey, looking for some input with my burn deck. My new LGS is looking to sponsor 4 people for GP Vegas. Would like some insight so I can get there. Currently in the lead after 2 weeks of qualifying events.
Fish (extra Seas, Chalice)
GW Taxes
U Tron (Chalice)
Jeskai Nahiri
Aggro Pox / R Burn
Infect / Affinity / Naya Burn
B Devotion / Naya Burn
Jeskai Ascendancy
Faeries / Grishoalbrand
RG Tron (Baloth)
Gen Wave (Leyline, Finks) / Jeskai Ascendancy / Bushwhacker Zoo
Abzan Coco
Affinity
Jund
Lantern
Bogles / Naya Burn
Bogles
Dredge
Pretty open field, I guess. Palm looks good against Infect and Bogles (2-3/19), maybe 1 against Jeskai Nahiri. Blood, Lavamancer, and Helix look good against Fish, Taxes, Aggro Pox, Burn, Faeries, Bushwhacker Zoo, Coco, Affinity, Infect (6-10/19). Path looks good against all of the above + Trons, Dredge, and Jund (10-14/19). Skullcrack looks good against Fish (to shave a color for Seas and Master), Trons, Jeskai Nahiri, Burn, Jund, and Bogles (7-9/19), and Revelry looks good against Trons, Fish?, Leyline decks, and Lantern? (4-5/19).
How do you think the deck should be adjusted to attack this meta?
I'm thinking that Palm looks weak, so I should cut to 1-2 copies. Path looks very good, so maybe 3-4 copies. Skullcrack and all of the anti-aggro cards are good at 1-3 copies probably. Revelry likely needs to get shaved to 2-3. I'm not sure if I need GY hate for this meta. Grishoalbrand might have been sold, so really have 1 Dredge and splash hate against Jund. Maybe I can justify 1 RIP for both, or ignore the GY against Jund and run 1 Trap?
I'd never drop Deflecting Palm, since it gives me free wins against decks that try to beat me down with fatties (Jeskai Nahiri, Tron), but I can see your reasoning. I'd drop the extra Grim Lavamancer and the Searing Blood for 2 copies of a sweeper, either Volcanic Fallout or Anger of the Gods. When facing go-wide decks like Fish or any variant of D&T a sweeper does a world of good and Anger is even good against Dredge. If you dislike the Dredge matchup like I do you could drop 1 Palm and 1 Revelry for 2 copies of Rest in Peace or alternatively [c]Grafdigger's Cage[/s] if you want to prepare for CoCo decks even though I don't think that matchup is a problem.
I'd never do it, but in an extreme case I could see dropping the Longtusk Cub if you really want to play something else, though I'd rather drop Lathnu Hellion in it's stead. I'd never even consider dropping Harnessed Lightning because it's just beastly removal in the deck and in a pinch it generates 3 extra energy for an Electrostatic Pummeler activation.
@rothgar: I think your assessment on Affinity is wrong, because hoping for their hand vomit to be T2 or T3 implies they probably kept a very weak hand. Eidolon is the first card I side out vs affinity even on the play in game 2.
Against Tron, it only has value on the play because you can get a few shocks in off of Maps/Scrying/Stirrings etc, but after that point the effect is one sided. I drop Eidolon here as well. I can see keeping it against Bant Eldrazi, but I'd probably side it out there as well.
I also tend to drop it vs Fish because Vial doesn't care about it, so it's left as a blocker and one sided effect.
I agree with most of your other assessments, and I think siding it out in 4-ish matchups of 12+ is definitely not a reason to drop the card entirely.
@lurplez: You should leave it in against Junk and Jund because nearly everything they play is 3cmc or less.
Actually, I leave it in against Fish because many pilots board out the vials in game 2. One of the rationales I heard was that they are expecting us to board in artifact hate, so they board the artifacts out hoping to blank those cards. Perhaps the Fish pilots I've spoken to are simply bad.
After playing the deck at a recent Modern FNM some of the people I play with pointed out that Geist of Saint Traft, while powerful, may not really be what the version I was playing wants to be doing. Even such a powerful card makes it hard to justify tapping out on turn 3 since it means you can't make any tempo plays that turn. I really like running the card, but I see their point...does anyone share the doubt that the Geist may not be the right card for the deck or am I overlooking an angle that makes it good enough to override this concern?
I'm not going to play him. This isn't legacy. Eidolon could be randomly good, I suppose, but maybe when control and combo make up more of the meta I will give it more considering. The current meta seems terrible for it, especially when on the draw. I would rather have something consistently good.
Eidolon of the Great Revel excels against aggressive decks because you're asking them to take 2 damage for every small creature/cantrip/removal spell they play. This gets them within lethal range really damn quickly. Sure, against Storm it's even better but that's not the baseline for the card, it's already good enough against pretty much any deck that casts spells of 3 CMC and/or under. On the draw, it can be the right choice to side it out against some decks, but it's still the one single card that took the deck from a fringe deck to a tier 1 competitor.
Not playing him is like choosing not to play Snapcaster Mage in a Delver deck...sure, you can do it and sure you may still win some games, but you're leaving behind a lot of the power that makes the deck strong in the first place.
About the same goes for Searing Blaze which was mentioned earlier. In the current meta, it's just never the right choice to not play 4 copies maindeck. Almost every deck has targets for it and if you're facing a deck that has none or not enough, it's easily sided out.
I'm not convinced the version that Jim Davis' crew ran at the SCG is the right version. It seems very all-in on the aggro plan, not really making use of the strengths of playing blue and white. It feels like they would have done better playing either Kiln-Fiend aggro or Naya Zoo or some other similar deck.
The reason I like the Jeskai Prowess / Aggro decks are that you get Serum Visions, Lightning Bolt and Path to Exile in a deck with a solid aggressive game plan. I'm still indecisive about picking the exact version and chances are I'll end up with a slightly more mid-range version than most because of my card preferences. Perhaps I'll try a hybrid of our more aggressive build and a more Jeskai Control build.
I don't see how anyone could play less than 4 copies of Blossoming Defense. It can be a counterspell, it can be a combat trick and it can push extra damage through when needed. It's never a dead card unless you have no creatures on the board, in which case you're already losing hard.
Yep, and when you're losing hard you don't want Blossoming Defense. Further, the deck is very linear and is not likely to want to hold up even one additional mana in favour of playing threats. It's good against control where you can be a bit slower, but otherwise can sometimes just end up dead in your hand.
When you're losing that hard though, you either greedily kept an unkeepable hand or overextended into a sweeper and didn't keep the G for Blossoming Defense up. I don't know if you're talking about the Electrostatic Pummeler version or not but in either version I can't imagine not playing the full set of 4 Blossoming Defense. Even when I'm losing hard I don't mind drawing it because it means that whatever creature I draw gets to survive if it's not countered. Holding up one mana is no problem except for in the very early turns when you're trying to curve out, but that's what Servant of the Conduit is there for. I remain unconvinced that playing anything less than 4 copies is correct with the current arguments.
I don't see how anyone could play less than 4 copies of Blossoming Defense. It can be a counterspell, it can be a combat trick and it can push extra damage through when needed. It's never a dead card unless you have no creatures on the board, in which case you're already losing hard. Similarly, I'd never play the deck without 4 copies of Bristling Hydra, that guy is just so hard for opponents to deal with. The combination of having those two cards means that opponents tend to side out some of their creature removal after g1 because they feel they can't push it through anyways, which in turn makes it easier for our other creatures to stick.
I'm also a definite supporter of a singleton Hanweir Battlements, randomly giving things haste when your opponent's tapped out has won me a good number of games.
but haven't you played into my argument even further by making one of the criteria that the card has to do damage. where we think each card has to do damage because we miss understand the philosophy of fire not because that is actually burns true identity. burn was built on the theoretical conception that each card must do two damage. but in the affinity match up we are not really the aggressor. sure we are racing but after board we turn into the removal deck. so at that point the theoretical conception of ourselves seems to become moot. also when i was talking about the cards mana cost I was referring to the fact that you needed green mana to play the spell rather than the fact that it was 2cmc
But why play a card like disenchant if you can have the same effect + 2dmg for the same cmc. Just so that you save 2 dmg for not splashing green a colour that also provides atarkas command (and nacatl)?
That just makes no sense unless you play in a very narrow meta
because you can splash a different color instead of green which can offer you more flexibility or it strengthens your overall strategy. an example of this would be black because it gives you a better curve. or you get more flexibility from the ability to destroy an artifact and an enchantment at the same time.
Your argument really makes no sense to me at all. The philosophy of Fire still applies even when we're the 'control' deck in an infect or affinity matchup. We're not suddenly changing over completely into a control [i]deck[/i] we're assuming a controlling [/i]role[/i]. Our goal is still to win by getting our opponent from 20 to 0 as quick as we can but in the control role, we worry more about not getting killed than we usually do so we're killing more creatures. Affinity especially gives us a more difficult time since they don't deal any damage to themselves through their manabase. Against them, Destructive Revelry is basically a Searing Blaze that is guaranteed to be removal and doesn't need to be turned on through landfall. Atarka's helps us trade with a Vault Skirge or Inkmoth Nexus while still either dealing damage or preventing lifegain. Black offers Bump in the Night for the main deck and that's it. For the sideboard, it gets you Rakdos Charm and Rain of Gore. Rakdos charm destroys only artifacts even if the toolbox-effect is useful and it has game against more decks. Rain of Gore does nothing in the Affinity or infect matchups where we are the controlling deck. Unless I'm missing something there's no mardu list that plays cards that would make it better than naya in the control role.
The philosophy behind the Burn deck is a very simple one: our aim is to deal our opponent enough damage to kill them as quickly as we can. This means every card must deal damage. Cards that don't deal damage need to be so much better at solving a problem than the alternative is that it justifies them not dealing damage to our opponent. Unless playing black gives access to a 1-mana way to destroy artifacts and enchantments it's really not better than green.
Others have already responded to your comment about Atarka's Command but you're really underestimating the card if you think it's 'just harder to cast a skullcrack'. Even the mode that lets you drop another land can be relevant. One of my favourite lines I've had was playing Atarka's in my opponent's turn in response to a lifegain effect while I was on 3 land, dropping an extra land from my hand and when he tried to respond to the atarka's by gaining life another way casting skullcrack with the extra land drop. That opponent was dead a turn or two later.
The idea is not bad but I think it is basically used to its full potential in the "Thing Ascension" deck so making a weaker version of it isn't the way to go imho.
haha i deffinatley agree, I wasn't going to post it as i had come to the same conclusion that ideally we want our opponent dead before we can truly go off with the Ascension... I just wanted to keep the conversation flowing.
That said though in the fact we want our opponent dead before that time frame I have yet again gone back to my deck (I am terrible, cannot remain happy with it). Young Pyromancer and Monastery Swiftspear 2 cards on opposite sides of the spectrum, both used for different situations, both have been tried and tested in my deck... Both have been a disappointment :(. We all know we need another 1 drop or 2 drop for our deck to compliment Delver and eventually lead into a Geist that kill you (or Mantis Rider if thats your game plan) but WOTC has not given us anything. There are many people on here who truly enjoy the swiftspear and it is working for them so i say keep it going, for me however she did not, Pyromancer.. she is good in the later game or if i need to play a bit more defensive but im not sure she is truly my style. Would dropping down creature count to 11 or 12 creatures be enough for us? For me that would be 4 Delver, 2 Snapcaster, 3 Geist, 2 Reveler and im not sure on another creature to hit 12. From this point I would be upping my spell count from 26 to now be 28 or 29. I know we have touched based on the most optimal creature counts before but I dont know, we do not have much options in the way of that unless we add more late game 3CMC spells but now we need to up our mana count. Thing in the Ice This card is a neat creature for us but we want to win before T6 where he is almost certain to flip without removal.
I'm not sure if it matters but my other modern deck that i have lots of fun playing is GB Elves.. Now i know this is a linear deck, it does 1 thing and it does it well. I like the Jeskai colors, i like what they give us for options, I love playing Delver and Geist and thats why i feel like the deck can still be strong if it basically runs Delver for T1, T2 is used for protection / removal etc, and T3 is followed by a Geist, or with luck a Reveler or something. What is everyones thoughts here? Is dropping my creature count down good? is it worth it? Are there any other creatures I haven't explored yet that might get the deck where i want it? Unlike elves i want this deck to have enough answers for the opponent while still maintaining enough of a threat to represent lethal.
Any suggestions?
I really don't understand how Monastery Swiftspear is lacking in any way. It's a card that has enough damage potential to be played in Burn after all...in an aggressive Jeskai deck, which will have plenty of 1-mana spells and some counterspells to protect her, she's just a house. If you want to go a more controlling route, she becomes slightly worse but then you're not playing an aggressive tempo deck anymore which is the title of this thread. It could very well be that this version is not the version for you, maybe Jeskai Control suits your playstyle better?
The general consensus is that Naya builds are strictly more powerful than Mardu or Boros even if you're only getting Atarka's Command and Destructive Revelry. The versions that run Wild Nacatl trade some consistency for explosiveness which seems to be a better choice in the current meta.
Bedlam Reveler has been playtested for several weeks from the moment it was spoiled and it's simply not good enough to be included. If you want to know why, search the thread.
My experience is the exact opposite, there's enough removal in the format that Lathnu Hellion often eats up the energy I'd otherwise use for good Harnessed Lightnings or activations of my Longtusk Cubs and Bristling Hydras. The hellion is definitely a good card, but I prefer having him in the board for those narrow cases where I need him. Tireless Tracker is simply a much better use of the slot to me, the card-draw of Tracker has helped me win games where I get flooded and generally helps you keep the pressure up by ensuring you're cooking with gas.
Kor Firewalker isn't really too strong against any other decks except perhaps Skred Red. That's the reason I no longer run them in my sideboard.
Which one is better between Rift Bolt and Lava Spike depends heavily on the context but generally I'd give the edge to Rift Bolt for being able to hit both creatures and players. Both should be a full 4-of in your main deck. When it comes to sideboarding, if you have to be fast then you generally want to cut Rift Bolt first but when you need to have enough removal you may want to cut the Lava Spikes instead.
The trick behind sideboarding is actually understanding your deck and the matchup you're facing. Evaluate all the cards in the deck in the context of the matchup, figure out which card is the worst and replace it with the best cards in your sideboard if those sideboard cards are actually better in the matchup. Then look at the new state of the deck and make sure you've not diluted your main win condition too much. You can read as many sideboarding guides as you like but until you understand the why of it all you'll always be a step behind other players of a deck.
I was writing out my decklist off the top of my head, turns out I was wrong: I'd already cut the 4th Geist of Saint Traft for another Seachrome Coast and since I only had 2 Snapcaster Mages when I last played the deck I had 2 Vapor Snag in that spot.
In an effort to lower the mana requirements a little I've replaced the 2 Mana Leaks with Spell Pierces. I've cut a Gitaxian Probe and the 19th land I was playing for the two extra Snapcaster Mages. This leaves me with the following list:
4x Delver of Secrets
4x Monastery Swiftspear
4x Snapcaster Mage
3x Geist of Saint Traft
Cantrips(7):
4x Serum Visions
3x Gitaxian Probe
Removal(14):
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Lightning Helix
4x Path to Exile
2x Vapor Snag
Counters(6):
2x Spell Snare
2x Remand
2x Spell Pierce
4x Flooded Strand
4x Spirebluff Canals
3x Arid Mesa
1x Seachrome Coast
1x Hallowed Fountain
1x Sacred Foundry
1x Steam Vents
1x Mountain
1x Island
1x Plains
3x Deflecting Palm
2x Rest in Peace
2x Skullcrack
2x Wear // Tear
2x Dispel
2x Electrolyze
2x Negate
I'd like to add another land back in but I'm not sure what I'll cut for it, perhaps a Lightning Helix to help lower the curve a little more.
I'm definitely considering Slip through Space if I do decide to stay on the current path, though cutting a counter for it feels bad. I'm not sold on the sideboard yet. Deflecting Palm is a holdover from my Burn sideboard but I'm starting to think that I don't need it in this deck since I can catch Infect with removal and counters and with mainboard Path to Exile Tron decks are a lot less scary so I really only need it against Emrakul/Ulamog decks. I was already looking for a space to stick Anger of the Gods so I'm thinking I might drop Palm for 2 copies and something else. I'd like to make room for the [c]Slip through Space[/s]s as well.
Perhaps my approach to the sideboard is just plain wrong because I'm too hung up on what the Burn sideboard needed...could I trouble the people who play a similar list to post their sideboards so I can get some ideas?
I'd never drop Deflecting Palm, since it gives me free wins against decks that try to beat me down with fatties (Jeskai Nahiri, Tron), but I can see your reasoning. I'd drop the extra Grim Lavamancer and the Searing Blood for 2 copies of a sweeper, either Volcanic Fallout or Anger of the Gods. When facing go-wide decks like Fish or any variant of D&T a sweeper does a world of good and Anger is even good against Dredge. If you dislike the Dredge matchup like I do you could drop 1 Palm and 1 Revelry for 2 copies of Rest in Peace or alternatively [c]Grafdigger's Cage[/s] if you want to prepare for CoCo decks even though I don't think that matchup is a problem.
I'd never do it, but in an extreme case I could see dropping the Longtusk Cub if you really want to play something else, though I'd rather drop Lathnu Hellion in it's stead. I'd never even consider dropping Harnessed Lightning because it's just beastly removal in the deck and in a pinch it generates 3 extra energy for an Electrostatic Pummeler activation.
4x Delver of Secrets
4x Monastery Swiftspear
4x Snapcaster Mage
4x Geist of Saint Traft
Cantrips(8):
4x Serum Visions
4x Gitaxian Probe
Removal(12):
4x Lightning Bolt
4x Lightning Helix
4x Path to Exile
2x Spell Snare
2x Remand
2x Mana Leak
Manabase(18):
4x Flooded Strand
4x Spirebluff Canals
3x Arid Mesa
1x Seachrome Coast
1x Hallowed Fountain
1x Sacred Foundry
1x Steam Vents
1x Mountain
1x Island
1x Plains
Thats the version I'm running.
Actually, I leave it in against Fish because many pilots board out the vials in game 2. One of the rationales I heard was that they are expecting us to board in artifact hate, so they board the artifacts out hoping to blank those cards. Perhaps the Fish pilots I've spoken to are simply bad.
Eidolon of the Great Revel excels against aggressive decks because you're asking them to take 2 damage for every small creature/cantrip/removal spell they play. This gets them within lethal range really damn quickly. Sure, against Storm it's even better but that's not the baseline for the card, it's already good enough against pretty much any deck that casts spells of 3 CMC and/or under. On the draw, it can be the right choice to side it out against some decks, but it's still the one single card that took the deck from a fringe deck to a tier 1 competitor.
Not playing him is like choosing not to play Snapcaster Mage in a Delver deck...sure, you can do it and sure you may still win some games, but you're leaving behind a lot of the power that makes the deck strong in the first place.
About the same goes for Searing Blaze which was mentioned earlier. In the current meta, it's just never the right choice to not play 4 copies maindeck. Almost every deck has targets for it and if you're facing a deck that has none or not enough, it's easily sided out.
The reason I like the Jeskai Prowess / Aggro decks are that you get Serum Visions, Lightning Bolt and Path to Exile in a deck with a solid aggressive game plan. I'm still indecisive about picking the exact version and chances are I'll end up with a slightly more mid-range version than most because of my card preferences. Perhaps I'll try a hybrid of our more aggressive build and a more Jeskai Control build.
When you're losing that hard though, you either greedily kept an unkeepable hand or overextended into a sweeper and didn't keep the G for Blossoming Defense up. I don't know if you're talking about the Electrostatic Pummeler version or not but in either version I can't imagine not playing the full set of 4 Blossoming Defense. Even when I'm losing hard I don't mind drawing it because it means that whatever creature I draw gets to survive if it's not countered. Holding up one mana is no problem except for in the very early turns when you're trying to curve out, but that's what Servant of the Conduit is there for. I remain unconvinced that playing anything less than 4 copies is correct with the current arguments.
I'm also a definite supporter of a singleton Hanweir Battlements, randomly giving things haste when your opponent's tapped out has won me a good number of games.
Your argument really makes no sense to me at all. The philosophy of Fire still applies even when we're the 'control' deck in an infect or affinity matchup. We're not suddenly changing over completely into a control [i]deck[/i] we're assuming a controlling [/i]role[/i]. Our goal is still to win by getting our opponent from 20 to 0 as quick as we can but in the control role, we worry more about not getting killed than we usually do so we're killing more creatures. Affinity especially gives us a more difficult time since they don't deal any damage to themselves through their manabase. Against them, Destructive Revelry is basically a Searing Blaze that is guaranteed to be removal and doesn't need to be turned on through landfall. Atarka's helps us trade with a Vault Skirge or Inkmoth Nexus while still either dealing damage or preventing lifegain. Black offers Bump in the Night for the main deck and that's it. For the sideboard, it gets you Rakdos Charm and Rain of Gore. Rakdos charm destroys only artifacts even if the toolbox-effect is useful and it has game against more decks. Rain of Gore does nothing in the Affinity or infect matchups where we are the controlling deck. Unless I'm missing something there's no mardu list that plays cards that would make it better than naya in the control role.
The philosophy behind the Burn deck is a very simple one: our aim is to deal our opponent enough damage to kill them as quickly as we can. This means every card must deal damage. Cards that don't deal damage need to be so much better at solving a problem than the alternative is that it justifies them not dealing damage to our opponent. Unless playing black gives access to a 1-mana way to destroy artifacts and enchantments it's really not better than green.
Others have already responded to your comment about Atarka's Command but you're really underestimating the card if you think it's 'just harder to cast a skullcrack'. Even the mode that lets you drop another land can be relevant. One of my favourite lines I've had was playing Atarka's in my opponent's turn in response to a lifegain effect while I was on 3 land, dropping an extra land from my hand and when he tried to respond to the atarka's by gaining life another way casting skullcrack with the extra land drop. That opponent was dead a turn or two later.
I really don't understand how Monastery Swiftspear is lacking in any way. It's a card that has enough damage potential to be played in Burn after all...in an aggressive Jeskai deck, which will have plenty of 1-mana spells and some counterspells to protect her, she's just a house. If you want to go a more controlling route, she becomes slightly worse but then you're not playing an aggressive tempo deck anymore which is the title of this thread. It could very well be that this version is not the version for you, maybe Jeskai Control suits your playstyle better?
Bedlam Reveler has been playtested for several weeks from the moment it was spoiled and it's simply not good enough to be included. If you want to know why, search the thread.