[Primer] Boros Burn

[Elricity]

You can see my attempt to use the flamespeakers against UW sphere control go really badly here although I think I played the sequencing almost as badly as possible. Definitely was trying to jam it way too hard in that game when it would have been better to focus on removing his Jace's.

My game one vs aggro he performed great though.

I wonder if I'm just too tired for these 5 AM games which is causing me to play poorly or if I'm just making mistakes naturally.

[Rhyno]

No, I think that guy lost actually too. He had the same thought as Reid that if you focus all your burn on killing his creatures, you somehow can't win with...all your recurring damage? I'm kind of confused, the deck's win condition against creatures is kind of obvious but it seems like they have a hard time seeing it.

Too many people thinking it's Modern/Legacy Burn?

[NotARobot]

Yeah they just don't understand that you cannot ignore your opponent's board state in many matchups. I wish we could but it doesn't work that way -_-

[Elricity]

Yeah they just don't understand that you cannot ignore your opponent's board state in many matchups. I wish we could but it doesn't work that way -_-

Yeah but the deck is regularly played now and it should be readily apparent after a few games against burn that permanents can race the spells. And then when they die to phoenix poking or a flood of elementals, it really doesn't click "ooooh, this is how they beat creature decks". Seriously? It's had enough wins that the coverage is there.

[zenbitz]

I actually think you would have to play the deck more than a little to get this, not just play against it. When you play against it, it seems like "oh, of course they have the burn spell"

It's by far the most difficult part. There is an inflection point in every game where you have to "go to face now" and ignore the board (whether it be creatures or walkers). This is not just true of your burn spells but using creatures as blockers (or attacking plainswalkers). I guess the difference between it an a real control deck is that there is no inevitability (other than tempo), or really, "win con" (with the exception being something like Assemble in the board vs. MBD).

[dauntless268]

HK is also featured in:

Sam Pardee game (also on Ux Devo, in which after the game Sam provides some rather dodgy advice and tells HK that he doesn't understand the MU at all D:)

Was that the guy who said something about not understanding why he pulled out charm/crack for creature removal?

That was actually me

[Elricity]

I actually think you would have to play the deck more than a little to get this, not just play against it. When you play against it, it seems like "oh, of course they have the burn spell"

I guess. "Man, you got lucky drawing so much burn." "Actually, I think it's the 4 damage you took from this elemental and the 8 from this phoenix that really killed you but "

[magicdownunder]

HK is also featured in:

Sam Pardee game (also on Ux Devo, in which after the game Sam provides some rather dodgy advice and tells HK that he doesn't understand the MU at all D:)

Was that the guy who said something about not understanding why he pulled out charm/crack for creature removal?

That was actually me [/
quote]

Whoops (yeah), Sam was the one who said that you shouldn't board-out cracks/charms for removals (after he lost)

[LP, of the Fires]

Link?

[NotARobot]

HK is also featured in:

Sam Pardee game (also on Ux Devo, in which after the game Sam provides some rather dodgy advice and tells HK that he doesn't understand the MU at all D:)

Was that the guy who said something about not understanding why he pulled
out charm/crack for creature removal?

That was actually me

Whoops (yeah), Sam was the one who said that you shouldn't board-out cracks/charms for removals (after he lost)

Emphasis on the fact that he was talking about the burn vs mono blue matchup o_o

[zemanjaski]

When I attend events I see people playing burn like it's eternal so it doesn't surprise me that there's substantial mins understanding out there.

[Elricity]

Link?

No video sadly.

Link

@Z, ah, burn. The deck that was never truly understood.

[zemanjaski]

Only because people won't read or listen.

[magicdownunder]

Anyone get around testing Stoke the Flames?

I'm really looking forward in jamming two in the MD since it supports my reckless (gambling/card counting) play-style vs Midrange, mind you I'm not cutting WLH or anything I'm just happy too run the 9th and 10th four damage spell because at some point efficiency is less important than the number of damage written on the card (I honestly just see the convoke as sprinkles rather then the determining factor)

[Khaospawn]

(I honestly just see the convoke as tittysprinkles rather then the determining factor)

Fixed that for ya.

[zenbitz]

From Adam Yurchick on tcgplayer.com (talking about Aggressive Mining)

When Boros Burn draws a high-concentration of spells, it nearly always wins, but in practice it must always deal with the issues of mana flood

Clearly spoken like someone who has never actually played the deck.

[Tyrael]

Everyone here knows that burn is highly skill intensive but the problem is that it doesn't seem that way for people that have little experience with the archetype

I regularely beat boros burn players at my LGS simply because they make rookie mistakes (for example: immediately slamming a phoenix on the board on turn three when I've clearly left a mana open to deal with it and then casting Magma Spray on it, leaving them flustered)

Sequencing is incredibly important with this deck which is why it's foolish to say well if you just draw enough burn you win. Ehh, no.

[rage_jl]

@MDU I picked up Stoke the Flames to use this coming weekend (SCG SuperIQ) in the case I use them. I will bring them to the event and scout before hand. I'm not sure what everyone is on and they tend to know what I'm on as I've stuck with this since March when I started playing again. Against UW they are better than the single MM main but the MM is probably better against MonoU, Bx, and aggressive and monster decks are probably situational on when MM or Stoke is better. I have to ask myself if adding another 4cc spell wouldn't Chandra be a better choice? The 4 Shocks and 1 MM approach has been great even with the minor shifts back and forth in the metagame the past couple months and I'm asking myself is does Stoke bring more value than the MM, a Shock, a Chains or any other spell in a Main Deck which is pretty tight without a super spell we have to jam in. I really wish I could play
it on MTGO this week to at least develop a little bit of an opinion about it. Tittysprinkles (is this obligatory on Tuesdays?).

[zenbitz]

Hardcasting stoke seems pretty much worse than everything normally played. I think the allure is that you can deal 4 for 2 or even zero. I actually think it's good against monoU or non-black monsters or constellation or dredge where you may be assembling some kind of board state. You may even be holding guys back to block! They may even misplay into your lack of open mana! But you could bring it in for charms/skullcracks against decks with limited removal and lots of dudes. Assuming you can make room in the board for it.

[rage_jl]

I agree it could be good against a lot of decks in a lot of situations I can think of but is it better than a MM or a Shock in the main? Or MM/something else in the SB at the moment? I'm not convinced either way. Like MDU, I'm curious if anyone has ran any games with it yet. I would love to be sold on it. Tittysprinkles.

[Rhyno]

Why would you bring in Stoke the Flames against anything? I think it's a main deck card or nothing.

It's not dead against any matchup and it's not particularly amazing against any matchup, makes for a terrible side deck card. I'll be starting with 2 in the main like MDU and cutting it completely if I don't like it.

The most relevant issue with it compared to mortars is that you'll be harder pressed to kill a T2 or T3 courser. Killing an early courser with 3 lands and a Pyromancer seems reasonable though.

[BrainsickHater]

I agree with Rhyno. The card is flexible but overall less powerful than other options. We board in the powerful narrow cards and play the flexible ones in the maindeck.

[BrainsickHater]

Here's what I'm thinking about Stoke the Flames right now, and why it might not be that good.

The card is just straight worse than MM every time we use it on a creature.

If we hardcast it to the face, then it's worse than Helix.

So the first question for me is, "When we cast Stoke with convoke, targeting our opponent, is tapping our creatures worth tapping less mana?"

I feel like the general opinion is that tapping creatures to cast Stoke is pretty much free, but I don't think that's the case. The only creature we don't want to be attacking with every turn is YP$ and tokens, and that's usually because there are creatures in the way. 90% of the time I play against creatures, I want Warleader's Helix and MM, so why would I play a worse version of them? If there are no creatures, then why would I sacrifice the 2+ free damage YP$ gives me to deal less damage and discard a card?

I think the
only way Stoke is viable is if the flexibility is extremely valuable or the 4 damage is extremely valuable, regardless of the cost. As of now, it seems doubtful that's the case.

[Pedros]

I think point of running Stoke the Flames is to not have dead cards game 1. Didnt MDU said it already? Isnt it obvious?

Btw I like idea of Hushwing Gryffin in sideboard MDU. I think this will be my backup deck for events if I dont find anything more interesting.

[BrainsickHater]

I'm totally on the Hushwing Gryff plan. It stops the most powerful plans of MB and MU; the two most popular decks.

[zemanjaski]

Gryff is extra Skullcrack against MBC, that's gas.

[magicdownunder]

I think point of running Stoke the Flames is to not have dead cards game 1. Didnt MDU said it already? Isnt it obvious?

Btw I like idea of Hushwing Gryffin in sideboard MDU. I think this will be my backup deck for events if I dont find anything more interesting.

Cheers, I'm not sure if the generally public would find this Obv. if you read the spike thread which Z put up we have people worshiping the SB plan to cut BC/SC for removals and Speakers vs Ux Devotion as if it was a revelation or something.

Why would you bring in Stoke the Flames against anything? I think
it's a main deck card or nothing.

It's not dead against any matchup and it's not particularly amazing against any matchup, makes for a terrible side deck card. I'll be starting with 2 in the main like MDU and cutting it completely if I don't like it.

The most relevant issue with it compared to mortars is that you'll be harder pressed to kill a T2 or T3 courser. Killing an early courser with 3 lands and a Pyromancer seems reasonable though.

An excellent post

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Some musing about Stoke the Flames:

1) MM is better vs Creatures
2) WLH is better vs Face

Stoke the Flames is the flexible in-between, which can help you race better then MM and can kill creatures like SBD while having great #tittysprinkles vs Midrange and aggro.

This card is better as the game drags on at least compared with stuff like Shock, Lighting
Strike and depending on the MUs SC + BC as well - if you enjoy that type of flexibility then StF is for you

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Thread Musing:

What I like about the current state of this thread is the lack of Hivemind which we see here (unlike the other major sites) - we have people debating and discussing which is a welcome change from just accepting/worshiping or submitting, keep it up guys esp. the creativity players like Zem, HK and Dauntless who are willing to bend the mold a little

[Whole]

Hey guys, looking for a little help fine tuning my sideboard. My maindeck is the stock "1 Mortars, 4 Chained" main deck (except 1 Banishing Light, 3 Chained). But my sideboard is a little outdated. I'm going to a playset tournament this weekend, and I expect the field to be tons of Sphinx Rev decks (U/W & Esper), a fair amount of mono blue devotion, and a good bit of mono black (but less than mono blue). But I can't rule out the odd Monsters list hanging around either.

[deck]
Sideboard
2 x Chandra, Pyromaster
4 x Toil // Trouble
1 x Mutavault
1 x Banishing Light
2 x Mizzium Mortars
1 x Chained to the Rocks
3 x Boros Reckoner
1 x Reprisal
[/deck]

Basically I think I think Reckoners and possibly the 1 Mutavault being my weakest links in the board. I'm considering 1 Hushwing Griff, 2 Prophetic Flamespeakers, and 1 Mizzium Mortars in its place. My reasoning is that 4 Toil // Trouble is enough hate
vs control and good vs burn mirror that the 4th Mutavault (which is only brought in vs some aggro decks, burn, and mirror) in the board isn't needed and isn't pulling much weight anyway. Replacing this with Hushwing Griff would give me good game vs Mono Blue, Mono Black, and not even be bad vs Monsters (Nylea's disciple & repeatable flying damage). And even though Reckoner is decent against Mono Blue, it was really there for monsters, so replacing it with 1 Mizzium Mortars and 2 Prophetic Flamespeakers is probably much better vs mono blue and only nets me -1 card I bring in vs monsters (because Hushwing will come in). It might seem like obvious changes to y'all, but I have no testing with Hushwing Gryff & Prophetic Flamespeakers, I'm usually pretty stubborn about changing my sideboard, and you guys are the only burn players I can talk to (all the local ones are bad). So what do y'all think?

Also, I really want Assemble the Legion, but having dedicated control hate (in Toil//Trouble) is much
more worth it in my meta, and I'm actually really comfortable vs mono black. Also, these sideboard changes gives +2 cards to bring in vs them.

[HK1997]

@Whole: I like what you have said so far. Not much to add on my part except that I dont like Mutavault in the side, been color screwed too many times since I'm running 2 temple of silence. 4th mizziums is fine, especially if you are expecting more Mono U. About the flamespeakers. Id be anxious about running them at a tourney for the first time, since it is apparant that flamespeaker changes the way you play your deck quite drastically. Id leave out the assemble since it seems too narrow for your meta. Rather another hushwing griffin .
Also, I would like to ask everyone why not replace the reprisal with pillar? The only thing reprisal hits, which pillar wont, is a wheenie with 2x titan strength on it or something similar... I prefer the exile as it has happened too often that I kill the Ghost dad with reprisal, YAY!!!!, and then comes the
friggin whip...

[Rhyno]

Hushwing Gryff is also another skullcrack against Nylea's Diciple which is nice because flyers are great against those decks and they'll be hard pressed to remove it. Hosing MoW has me excited too.

I'll be boarding it in against MonoB, MonoU, Big Green decks, and the less common constellation builds.
I'll also probably just run it out against all of those decks except MonoB.

I don't know if I care about it's interaction with Obzedat.

[BrainsickHater]

@HK I switched to Pillar of Light. It could be that 3 mana is too much, but I'll find out by playing.

@Whole Sounds like you have a good plan. I think if you did what you mentioned, you'll be fine. That being said, I would probably play FDS over Toil//Trouble since I find the Satyr much more consistent. You do need to be running a certain number of untapped red sources tho.

[mutantcrock]

Since Gryff is good against a large portion of the meta, is it wrong to think that maybe it deserves a slot or two in the main?

[BrainsickHater]

I think so. Every match where the static ability is irrelevant the card is pretty much unplayable.

[rage_jl]

@mutantcrock Gryff is worse than Phoenix or YP$ and I don't know what else you would replace with it. It also offers a free target to Lifebane and I'm not 100% but I think some number of these are usually sided out against us making that less relevant game 2/3.

Thanks to everyone else for the discourse on Stoke that's what I was hoping for asking those questions. My feeble brain is only capable of developing so many pros cons on my own and I know there are several different play styles here which consider different factors.

I like Pillar a lot I grabbed it this past weekend to have as a possible. Exiling works against most targets of Reprisal and actually opens it up to include Thassa and in a pinch it hits Frostburn.

[Elricity]

While Pillar might have a couple of targets against blue devotion, I think it's a bit too narrow to use there. Mortars/chain/banish are more versatile and/or cheaper with more upside. Plus, the cards it kills there are cards you don't necessarily want to focus on killing.

Pillar is a solid upgrade against Gx decks (which is probably why Z isn't running it in Australia), decent against Bx but arguable whether the extra cost is worth hitting Gary, great vs whip, and retardedly powerful against Junk.

[Whole]

@Whole: I like what you have said so far. Not much to add on my part except that I dont like Mutavault in the side, been color screwed too many times since I'm running 2 temple of silence. 4th mizziums is fine, especially if you are expecting more Mono U. About the flamespeakers. Id be anxious about running them at a tourney for the first time, since it is apparant that flamespeaker changes the way you play your deck quite drastically. Id leave out the assemble since it seems too narrow for your meta. Rather another hushwing griffin .

I could be wrong, but I dont think Flamespeaker changes how I'd play the deck. With the original sideboard that I posted, I think
Reckoner and Flamespeaker serve the same purpose (Reckoner is virtual card advantage, Flamespeaker is actual card advantage), it's just that Reckoner was also good against monsters. Even with Reckoner, I still played "Red White Control" against decks like Mono Blue and aggro.

[LP, of the Fires]

Should we board out Chandra's Phoenix against mono-black on the draw?

This is mostly directed at MDU and people on the hushwing griff plan. Looks like the top end of the deck is getting a little crowded.

[BrainsickHater]

I don't think we can just because the card is so good against them.

[Whole]

Chandra's Phoenix might be your best card against them (barring Assemble). If you're on the Assemble, Hushwing, and Chandra, Pyromaster plan, I'd consider boarding out Helixes first.

[zenbitz]

Can't really run more than 2 Hushwings in the board though... can you?