Can the new Light up the Stage from Ravnica Allegiance be played? I doubt it, but a 1 mana draw 2 always seems like something worth considering. The fact that the cards can only be played the turn drawn is what makes me shy away from it.
EDIT: go to magicspoiler to find the card, it isn't on mtgsalvation yet
EDIT 2: it actually says until the end of your next turn, which gives you time to cast everything. Should be played.
So I've been wanting to get into a budget version of the Big Zoo deck since I already have a lot of the cards from playing Burn and Titanshift, which are in those colors. I'm fine with getting Voice of Resurgence and all that but is there a list out there I could use that doesn't have Noble Hierarchs and Tarmogoyfs? Thanks
When I first started playing burn it was the start of 2018 and that was when Jund was the new hotness. Played against double Jund, Grixis control and Hollow One that day. That was my first 4-0. Also I've never lost a game do Grixis Shadow, let alone a match.
I've been seeing Satyr Firedancer pop up a couple times (not just in this forum, but the commentators on the SCG tour were talking about it as well). What does everyone else think of it?
Hey guys, it's been a while. So I played Anger of the Gods in my sideboard...
Basically, I learned a lot from the two games I saw it, but I'm not sure what I learned.
Anger of the Gods started out as my budget Ensnaring Bridge. I wanted to punish Humans and Spirits (Anger of the Gods would be brought in against Dredge, but not Bridge) at my LGS, but I didn't want to get invested into Ensnaring Bridge just yet, as I was skeptical as to how good it would be. As such, every time I played the card, I asked myself, "would Ensnaring Bridge be a better card in this situation?". The answer was always "no, because I eventually saw Knight of Autumn that game. Every deck I would bring Ensnaring Bridge against would bring Knight of Autumn against me.
So I was very happy every time I played Anger of the Gods. It would kill about 3-4 creatures, and would thus buy me about that many turns. But as much as it put me in a winning position, I lost both of those games. The mistake I made was keeping bad hands (4 lands and stuff) thinking that Anger would take everything from there. I was wrong.
The question I am asking is: Is Anger of the Gods a bad card or was I the bad player (just in those games)?
I'm currently working on the UW Control section. I'm wondering if it would be prudent to split it up since UW actually underwent a considerable change between when I threw things together before and today. UW used to be the Spreading Seas/Gideon deck and now it's Jace/Teferi/Terminus.
I will do Bant Spirits next and then KCI.
I don't think there is a need to do KCI. At the time of the vote, it was slightly more relevant, but I think you should post a new vote after Spirits (which does merit an analysis). I myself have never played against it and have never even seen it at my LGS, but maybe that's just me. I'm saying this because I know you work hard on the primer and I don't want you to waste time on less important matchups. I also noticed that the mirror isn't an option for the analysis and I think it's very important, because Burn is very popular and knowing how to play the mirror is just as important as knowing any other matchup.
Burn was listed at 7.5 % or something, but yeah, I get what you're saying. Is there a less narrow hate card that works against Burn that's actually viable?
As far as the matchup spotlight, I'm working on concentrating the Humans stuff to update the primer. Did anyone have any experiences against humans the last 2 weeks?
UW control is next. It was a tie between kci and bant spirits for third, so I'll either put up a runoff between them or flip a coin and put up the next poll for whatever will be 5th.
I don't know if this will be of much help, but I find that Grim Lavamancer is the card that wins the most games. Even though it doesn't kill all their best creatures, it frees up their hatebears effects like Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, Meddling Mage and Kitesail Freebooter, so that we can kill stuff like Mantis Rider. I've won mostly by playing around these hatebears effects, which are the only things I've been really concerned about. Also, I know that some of my humans opponents have been siding out AEther Vial against me, so there's no need to bring in artifact hate or to side out Eidolon.
Everything else I can contribute I'm sure everyone else knows already knows.
Easy there, Risk Factor is there to pack more value, not to allow you to mulligan poorly. While I still think it's possible that Risk Factor gets played, it definitely isn't possible that 4-landers suddenly become keeps. Also you're going to crazy on anti-lifegain in your sideboard with Leyline of Punishment, I think you may have had a few too many bad games, but stick with Skullcrack. As for Satyr Firedancer, just play Searing Blood; the creature's too slow.
I'm not testing it because I've been playing the game for a long enough time to be able to evaluate a lot of cards. I get annoyed enough that I see searing blaze game one against Tron sometimes, but I accept that its such a house against humans. Here's the best way I can say it:
Does it improve any matchups in a significant way? No, because when I lose to midrange it tends to be very close. If they are taking four then winning on the counterattack, I was going to lose no matter what I drew. If they let me draw, it means I only need one burn spell to win. In that case, I'd rather have the redundancy of bolts anyways, especially because two and three land games are pretty common. "Oh but if they are at three and you draw swiftspear you lose." Yes, that's true. It's also a card game with variance. Sometimes you get the draw, sometimes you don't. You could cast this thing, draw three, and they are all lands. ***** happens.
While I was on the side of Risk Factor, I must say this is the smartest assessment of the card thus far. However, you are not considering the Jump-Start side of the card, so I guess what I'm saying is sure, Risk Factor is worse than a regular burn spell when played from hand, but is it worth playing that card just to have castable copy in the graveyard?
In my opinion, this card is similar to Shrine of Burning Rage. It worked for a GP winner, it worked for a lot of people, and it was a pretty good card, but it just wasn't optimal, which then made it bad. I've tested The Flame of Keld (don't judge), and I was happy with its results, but I was happier with the stock Burn list. The same thing happened with Vexing Devil, which is also good, but not good enough.
I'm sorry, but I'm changing my vote to against Risk Factor. I'm still going to give it the benefit of the doubt and test it though.
I think it's safe to say that everyone has many mixed feelings over Risk Factor. I will test it (and so will others I'm sure), and then we'll see if it worked well or not, because we're not going to settle this argument any other way. For now, I would rather discuss other things. I don't think it's as amazing as some people think, but I believe it may be able to replace Exquisite Firecraft, but we will see!
I am again toying with cards for Burn, back to Nocatl version then Nacatl ....there is a question that turlupine me : why Wild Nacatl is so strong on your eyes compared to Vexing devil ?
Don't answer me removals, I don't care for now. Just to compare those two cards while playing Atarka's command. Nacatl is a 3/3 with setups. Devil is a 4/3 or 4 damages face.
I have seen in Boros Burn the downside of devil at giving a choice to your opponent that may be bad for you especially when the game does long - not this new Risk factor that his choice is ALWAYS good for you, ndrl - however in "Nacatl Burn" version, Devil's given choices feel good. Take 4 for 1 mana, or attack with 5/4 + X creatures.
Then, you can troll me on removals and the future new meta full on green/white decks, control and black/green decks that may be wrong for that
Honestly, I don't know why (or if) Wild Nacatl is better than Vexing Devil, but I don't think either card is good right now, and I really like Inspiring Vantage, which is pretty close to unplayable in any list reliant on green cards, like the two you just mentioned. Most of the aggro matchups are pretty close, so we need all the percentage points we can get, which means having a smooth manabase. I am for a smooth RW list with a single Stomping Ground, but I will not go further than that, because I win most of my games against Humans, Spirits, Affinity, Elves, etc... and I would like to keep it that way.
PS: I did not mention Burn as a matchup I win a lot because you usually beat me when we meet at FNMs.
I think the jump-start effect from Risk Factor makes it an excellent sideboard card for control matchups. I would play 2-3 copies in the sideboard myself, seeing as it is basically a 3-mana 4 damage spell with flashback, since our opponent will never let us draw 3. I understand that jump-start is not the same as flashback, but given that we're a deck that's happy to discard excess lands, not to mention that we surely will draw excess lands in long games, the discard effect is nothing to worry about. Obviously this card cannot be played in fast matchups though.
So if we follow through with this matchup analysis every week, can we all agree that we should start with humans first? It seems to me like that's a matchup that's pretty close to even, and we should know how to swing it in our favor. I'll get in contact with the humans primer tomorrow for some information exchange unless other people would rather review a different matchup.
Yeah that's what I thought about Firewalker too.
There's also this idea I had that could possibly help all Burn players. Basically every week on the primer we have a matchup spotlight (for example, Burn vs Humans). We gather as many resources as we can to find out how to best beat the deck. Someone will go to their primer and ask some questions, while the rest of us give feedback on how matches went, what lines worked, which lines didn't, which cards to play around, and how to sideboard. By the end of the week, we all have a great understanding of how to play against the deck, and this valuable information is put into the matchup guide on the first page of the primer.
These would be the questions we have to answer:
-What cards to look for in the mulligan stage
-Which creatures need to be killed vs which ones can be ignored
-When to drop Eidolon of the Great Revel (many people have a lot of trouble with this one).
-Which Burn spells to lead with (saving Skullcrack against lifegain vs saving Lightning Helix to kill a creature)
-Which cards to play around (playing around everything is just unrealistic)
-Tricky plays/interactions most people don't know about
-Sideboarding guide
By taking this approach rather than what we've been doing, we can focus everyone's skills and knowledge to have a more complete understanding of the matchup. When we feel like the information is outdated, we revisit the matchup.
Every week (or 2 weeks), there could be a vote as to which deck we want to learn how to counter.
Could someone renew the invite for the discord please?
Also, since we're at the point where many people are having success with Rakdos Burn, isn't it time that the deck deserves its own primer? I think it would be more convenient for everyone at this point so we don't have to scroll through posts looking for messages concerning only RW burn or Rakdos burn.
I also see that sideboards are cutting Kor Firewalker altogether. Is this a decision that everyone can stand by?
EDIT: go to magicspoiler to find the card, it isn't on mtgsalvation yet
EDIT 2: it actually says until the end of your next turn, which gives you time to cast everything. Should be played.
I've been seeing Satyr Firedancer pop up a couple times (not just in this forum, but the commentators on the SCG tour were talking about it as well). What does everyone else think of it?
Basically, I learned a lot from the two games I saw it, but I'm not sure what I learned.
Anger of the Gods started out as my budget Ensnaring Bridge. I wanted to punish Humans and Spirits (Anger of the Gods would be brought in against Dredge, but not Bridge) at my LGS, but I didn't want to get invested into Ensnaring Bridge just yet, as I was skeptical as to how good it would be. As such, every time I played the card, I asked myself, "would Ensnaring Bridge be a better card in this situation?". The answer was always "no, because I eventually saw Knight of Autumn that game. Every deck I would bring Ensnaring Bridge against would bring Knight of Autumn against me.
So I was very happy every time I played Anger of the Gods. It would kill about 3-4 creatures, and would thus buy me about that many turns. But as much as it put me in a winning position, I lost both of those games. The mistake I made was keeping bad hands (4 lands and stuff) thinking that Anger would take everything from there. I was wrong.
The question I am asking is: Is Anger of the Gods a bad card or was I the bad player (just in those games)?
I don't think there is a need to do KCI. At the time of the vote, it was slightly more relevant, but I think you should post a new vote after Spirits (which does merit an analysis). I myself have never played against it and have never even seen it at my LGS, but maybe that's just me. I'm saying this because I know you work hard on the primer and I don't want you to waste time on less important matchups. I also noticed that the mirror isn't an option for the analysis and I think it's very important, because Burn is very popular and knowing how to play the mirror is just as important as knowing any other matchup.
I don't know if this will be of much help, but I find that Grim Lavamancer is the card that wins the most games. Even though it doesn't kill all their best creatures, it frees up their hatebears effects like Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, Meddling Mage and Kitesail Freebooter, so that we can kill stuff like Mantis Rider. I've won mostly by playing around these hatebears effects, which are the only things I've been really concerned about. Also, I know that some of my humans opponents have been siding out AEther Vial against me, so there's no need to bring in artifact hate or to side out Eidolon.
Everything else I can contribute I'm sure everyone else knows already knows.
While I was on the side of Risk Factor, I must say this is the smartest assessment of the card thus far. However, you are not considering the Jump-Start side of the card, so I guess what I'm saying is sure, Risk Factor is worse than a regular burn spell when played from hand, but is it worth playing that card just to have castable copy in the graveyard?
In my opinion, this card is similar to Shrine of Burning Rage. It worked for a GP winner, it worked for a lot of people, and it was a pretty good card, but it just wasn't optimal, which then made it bad. I've tested The Flame of Keld (don't judge), and I was happy with its results, but I was happier with the stock Burn list. The same thing happened with Vexing Devil, which is also good, but not good enough.
I'm sorry, but I'm changing my vote to against Risk Factor. I'm still going to give it the benefit of the doubt and test it though.
Honestly, I don't know why (or if) Wild Nacatl is better than Vexing Devil, but I don't think either card is good right now, and I really like Inspiring Vantage, which is pretty close to unplayable in any list reliant on green cards, like the two you just mentioned. Most of the aggro matchups are pretty close, so we need all the percentage points we can get, which means having a smooth manabase. I am for a smooth RW list with a single Stomping Ground, but I will not go further than that, because I win most of my games against Humans, Spirits, Affinity, Elves, etc... and I would like to keep it that way.
PS: I did not mention Burn as a matchup I win a lot because you usually beat me when we meet at FNMs.
There's also this idea I had that could possibly help all Burn players. Basically every week on the primer we have a matchup spotlight (for example, Burn vs Humans). We gather as many resources as we can to find out how to best beat the deck. Someone will go to their primer and ask some questions, while the rest of us give feedback on how matches went, what lines worked, which lines didn't, which cards to play around, and how to sideboard. By the end of the week, we all have a great understanding of how to play against the deck, and this valuable information is put into the matchup guide on the first page of the primer.
These would be the questions we have to answer:
-What cards to look for in the mulligan stage
-Which creatures need to be killed vs which ones can be ignored
-When to drop Eidolon of the Great Revel (many people have a lot of trouble with this one).
-Which Burn spells to lead with (saving Skullcrack against lifegain vs saving Lightning Helix to kill a creature)
-Which cards to play around (playing around everything is just unrealistic)
-Tricky plays/interactions most people don't know about
-Sideboarding guide
By taking this approach rather than what we've been doing, we can focus everyone's skills and knowledge to have a more complete understanding of the matchup. When we feel like the information is outdated, we revisit the matchup.
Every week (or 2 weeks), there could be a vote as to which deck we want to learn how to counter.
Also, since we're at the point where many people are having success with Rakdos Burn, isn't it time that the deck deserves its own primer? I think it would be more convenient for everyone at this point so we don't have to scroll through posts looking for messages concerning only RW burn or Rakdos burn.
I also see that sideboards are cutting Kor Firewalker altogether. Is this a decision that everyone can stand by?