Dies to Removal

I've never gone above 22 lands in any of my testing and I've been perfectly happy. Personally, I like the 4th mutavault as I like seeing 2 in the longer games, but I don't think it's strictly better than the 19th mountain by any means.

Also, Chandra seems terribad vs. Jund in sideboarded games, particularly on the draw.

I also think you would rather have young pyro in the mirror on the draw over brimstone volley.

I expect enemy Flames of the Firebrand.

I'd considered that, but they have to see it and it's reasonable to play pyro off curve to get value out of it with a burn spell. In the case where they still burn the pyro+token and dome you for 1, it's the exact same as if they burn an ash zealout and dome you for one. If you still get 2-for-1'd by them killing an actual card+pyromancer, you still aren't that far behind as you have a 1/1 which is worth about half a card and gives hellrider extra value.

I completely get boarding around their cards, but I think pyro provides enough value in the mirror that if they don't have specifically flames, that you can incrementally pull ahead making the upside bigger then the downside. But that's me. I haven't tested the actual mono-red mirror match which may make my opinion invalid, but my accumulated knowledge tells me card advantage is king and pyro provides plenty of card advantage unanswered.

Flames can be a 2-for-1.
Pyro can be a 2/4 for 1. And they're running 2 flames to your 4 pyros.

Ham said it in a post a little while ago, but I forget which thread. The number of 4-drops don't dictate whether you should go up a land or not. You still have the same mathematical probability of hitting 4 land by turn 4. Increasing the count of 4-drops simply increases the likelihood of also having a 4-drop by turn 4, but does nothing about the likelihood for your land drops, unless you're going above 60 cards.

It's when you increase your curve, by adding 5-drops etc., that extra land becomes a requirement.

That said, a larger number of 4-drops means you want to hit them on time, so increasing land isn't necessarily a bad thing. Just not a requirement if you already have the necessary number.

Consider the following decks: 22 land, 4 4-drops, 34 1- to 3-drops; 22 land, 38 4-drops. I think it's necessary to add more lands to the second deck.

^ yep.

Consider the following decks: 22 land, 4 4-drops, 34 1- to 3-drops; 22 land, 38 4-drops. I think it's necessary to add more lands to the second deck.

Very true, and covered with my last paragraph in the post.

But going from 8 to 10, or 6 to 8, whatever the case was, post-board, may not necessitate the extra land.

I think 22 lands can support six 4-drops on the play and seven 4-drops on the draw.

To be fair, my deck of 5 4-drops 21 lands is a very borderline decision, but I'm not really concerned with casting Chandra on curve, especially in the matches where she's good ironically because they're the matches that are either going long(control) or they're the decks with a lot x/1's where your oodles of removal buy you time to hit the land drops and relatively slowly take over the game.

I think on six four drops, I'd have to play 23 lands with the note that 4 of my lands would HAVE to do something to mitigate flood assuming low curve agro deck.

22 with 6 4 drops is probably fine. Personally I would play 23 land, but I have a real fixation with playing extra land.

To be fair, my deck of 5 4-drops 21 lands is a very borderline decision, but I'm not really concerned with casting Chandra on curve, especially in the matches where she's good ironically because they're the matches that are either going long(control) or they're the decks with a lot x/1's where your oodles of removal buy you time to hit the land drops and relatively slowly take over the game.

I think on six four drops, I'd have to play 23 lands with the note that 4 of my lands would HAVE to do something to mitigate flood assuming low curve agro deck.

19 mountains + 3 Mutavault + 1 Mutavault out of the board seems wonderful for these Hellrider + Burning Earth decks.

Still can't figure out what that one maindeck mortars should be. Traitorous blood for lols it is.

Also, my general rule is if I'm comfortable with a deck, if it's aggressive, I can usually cut a land and if it's midrangey or control, I can usually add land. There was an esper deck in scars block that I played a couple times that was 27 land 2 pristine talismans(half your deck is mana) because I just wanted to cast my spells on curve every single game and manascrew was unacceptable as opposed to flood being fine because you had things like alchemy+talismans gaining life.

In aggressive decks, I just want to apply pressure every turn and it's usually easy to do this with a reasonable curve and 3 lands in play. Plus I like virtual card advantage a LOT.

What's wrong with that Mortars?

There's nothing wrong with it in the traditional sense, but I feel like I can do better. Every time I draw it, it's fine, but I'm always thinking of millions of other cards that would be better AND I haven't had to deal with Smiters in a while so I'm searching the wilderness for something more. A maindeck threaten most like isn't that something, but it sounds fun and it's not QUITE dead in any matchup.

So, maybe a Shock, Volley or FotF? They might be dead as well, but at least you can burn the opponent with them.

Yeah those are all fine inclusion as the 60th card and I think personal preference should dictate what you should play if you where to run this list, but for me nothing feels right currently. The 4th mutavault is the safest choice but I think I'd be selling myself short if I went that route.

Okay. During next week I will probably start my adventure with MODO. I'll slowly collect cards, so I want to start with something small and cheap.

[deck]Creatures:
4 Rakdos Cackler
4 Stromkirk Noble
3 Legion Loyalist
4 Ash Zealot
4 Burning-Tree Emissary
4 Lightning Mauler
4 Pyrewild Shaman
4 Rubblebelt Raiders

Other Spells:
4 Pillar of Flame
4 Searing Spear

Lands:
21 Mountain
2 Mutavault

Sideboard:
4 Skullcrack
4 Thunderbolt
4 Flames of the Firebrand
3 Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded[/deck]

- Skullcrack against lifegain
- Thunderbolt against angels
- Flames of the Firebrand against aggro/dorks
- Tibalt against control

How this deck works. Lots of strong, early, aggresive drops (Nobles, Cacklers, Zealots, BTE-LM) as you expect from fast-paced aggro. Pyrewild Shaman and Rubblebelt Raiders are my way of staying in game even during mid/late game.

Opinions?

I think I'd replace those Pyrewild Shamans with Dynacharges.

I'd also drop 2 mountains and add Firefist Strikers. I also wouldn't even touch Rumblebelt Raiders if you're looking to keep strong late game, because it will only do damage if they have no untapped creatures, and they won't leave themselves open after they see you drop it.

I think I'd replace those Pyrewild Shamans with Dynacharges.

I'd also drop 2 mountains and add Firefist Strikers. I also wouldn't even touch Rumblebelt Raiders if you're looking to keep strong late game, because it will only do damage if they have no untapped creatures, and they won't leave themselves open after they see you drop it.

These cards are the ones intended to give me a chance during grindy midrange matchups. Pyrewild Shaman allows me to generate damage through mana just like Stonewright allows me to with additional flexxibility of being 3/1 creature. I can put a lot of pressure with for example T1 Cackler and him.
T1 Cackler
T2 Cackler, bloodrushed Shaman deal 5
T3 Cackler, swing for 2, return Shaman

I've generated 7 damage without actually loosing a card. If I need tempo, I'll just cast other dudes - if not, I can slowly grind my
opponent like that.

Rubblebelt Raiders can fight a lot of creatures in the format. Even while attacking alone, he becomes 4/4 - he can't die to Resto Angel. Legion Loyalist and Lightning Mauler are both decent enablers for him, providing all the keywords he craves for (Haste, First Strike, Trample).

I was thinking about swapping Ash Zealot for Firefist Striker tho.

I think I'd replace those Pyrewild Shamans with Dynacharges.

I'd also drop 2 mountains and add Firefist Strikers. I also wouldn't even touch Rumblebelt Raiders if you're looking to keep strong late game, because it will only do damage if they have no untapped creatures, and they won't leave themselves open after they see you drop it.

These cards are the ones intended to give me a chance during grindy midrange matchups. Pyrewild Shaman allows me to generate damage through mana just like Stonewright allows me to with additional flexxibility of being 3/1 creature. I can put a lot of pressure with for example T1 Cackler and him.
T1 Cackler
T2 Cackler, bloodrushed Shaman deal 5
T3 Cackler,
swing for 2, return Shaman

I've generated 7 damage without actually loosing a card. If I need tempo, I'll just cast other dudes - if not, I can slowly grind my opponent like that.

Rubblebelt Raiders can fight a lot of creatures in the format. Even while attacking alone, he becomes 4/4 - he can't die to Resto Angel. Legion Loyalist and Lightning Mauler are both decent enablers for him, providing all the keywords he craves for (Haste, First Strike, Trample).

I was thinking about swapping Ash Zealot for Firefist Striker tho.

Good idea. BTE and AZ don't really work together.

RBR should just be hellrider. The two cards are not close.

In Kitakyushu now. Trying to catch some Zzzs before the event in the morning. I registered early, so I got the play mat, which is kind of sweet.

Updates from the event between matches tomorrow.

Good idea. BTE and AZ don't really work together.

Deck works much better now. Thanks!

RBR should just be hellrider. The two cards are not close.

I'm always a sucker for underdogs. In addition, yeah, cards are not close but Raiders actually have some advantages in current meta full of midranges. It's really good when you need to handle bigger guys, and he's decent on his own.

Btw. How many lands should I run on this curve? I've tried 21 but had some no-lander hands, and I believe 23 is fine... but not greedy enough. Obvious choice would be 22.

One of the biggest reasons I love Pyrewild Shaman in this deck.

T1 Stromkirk Noble
T2 BTE into LM, swing for 5. Stromkirk becomes 2/2.
T3 Legion Loyalist. Swing for 7. They want to block something - Bloodrush Pyrewild Shaman to kill it and get through with Trample. Stromkirk becomes 3/3.

T1 Rakdos
Cackler
T2 Swing for 2. Opponent doesn't block, Bloodrush Pyrewild Shaman and get additional 3 damage.
T3 Swing for 2. Return Shaman from GY into your hand.

These kind of plays remind me of Stonewright. But BP is far more explosive and can come back from GY.

In decks topping out at 4 I like 22.

I would argue that hellrider is much better in this, or any meta.

RBR does nothing the turn it enters. Think about how often you get to swing with hellrider twice. If it wasn't for haste, the card would be bad. If you give your opponent a whole turn to deal with the card, they more often than not will.

In a midrange, sorcery speed removal heavy meta, haste is important.

I think I'd replace those Pyrewild Shamans with Dynacharges.

I'd also drop 2 mountains and add Firefist Strikers. I also wouldn't even touch Rumblebelt Raiders if you're looking to keep strong late game, because it will only do damage if they have no untapped creatures, and they won't leave themselves open after they see you drop it.

These cards are the ones intended to give me a chance during grindy midrange matchups.

I somehow read Rubblebelt Raiders as Rubblebelt Maaka and thought you were going for a more all-in deck, which is why I suggested Dynacharges instead of Pyrewild Shamans. I understand what you're trying to do with this deck, and Pyrewild Shaman is ok. I'm not
sure about those Rubblebelt Raiders though.

I nearly forgot about Hound of Grislebrand. This guy fits the deck really well.
You can actually do T4 HoG, T5 Swing with Bloodrushed Shaman then pay 3 to return him from GY. Hella sweet.
Just like the name of this deck: "Meat Grinder".

1100 and change players today. First round buy, got my Chandras signed now waiting for round two.

kill them with fire, Johnny!

1-1. Got matched against Bant flash. Why do people bring nonsense to a GP? Trostani>advent> snap advent is impossible.

It's actually been making waves on modo. Focus on playing the best magic each turn and don't worry about rounds. YOU GOT THIS SON.

Round 3 was B/R zombies. Close games. 2-1-0.

Round 4 was jund. Mull to 6, win. Mull to 5, impossible. Mull to 6, then got beat down by 3x scavenging ooze. That card is more tgan a bit too good for standard. Quickly becoming my least favourite.

2-2.

Round 5 is over and I have scrubbed out. 2-3. Lost to R/G blitz. He didn't get the memo that mono-red is the new gruul. I also let him off on a misplay and it cost me a game. That's what I get for not being an asshole.

So what did we learn from this, Johnny? That's right. Always be an asshole.

I'm very frustrated. Lot of preperation and nothing to show for it. My testing partner (Solemn10) is 5-0 though! That's something.

Saito seems to be at 5-0 as well, is he running a similar deck as you, Johnny?

Saito seems to be at 5-0 as well, is he running a similar deck as you, Johnny?

He's 5-1 with a more midrange build. I'm having a smoke with him now.

I'm 3-3. Beat Kibler gruul 2-0.

3-4 after losing to a close match vs jund zombies. Solemn10 is 6-1.

Oh no! They say he's got to go! Go, go Solemn10!

Oh no! There goes Tokyo! Go, go Solemn10!

what's solemns name so I can follow him through the standings on the mothership through the night.

Also, rough beats. And you're never an assehole for making people stick with there choices. No takebacks in life!

6-2 now. Praying for a miracle... Of the bonfire variation