Dies to Removal

If I maindeck Young Pyromancer, I can try running a funkier manabase. Like this:

9 Mountain
3 Mutavault
1 Boros Guildgate
4 Sacred Foundry
1 Temple of Malice
1 Temple of Silence
4 Temple of Triumph

= 19 red sources, 10 white sources, 6 scrylands

Not saying this is correct, but trying to get EVERY last piece of value. Thoughts?

Sorry, mana base courtesy of Ariel Nagy.

Hall of famer Huey Jensen got worked over 0-2, 0-2 by two bad Burn players in his latest video series; but yeah, whatever you say MTGS, Burn has a bad Esper matchup...

I love hearing people say that.

It means they wont prepare for it and I crush people

Z has been talking about cutting some/all searing blood I believe. I'm iffy on that but I know where he's coming from.

It's been a lot worse the last few days; it's really only good against Mono U and bad MBC players (who play into it). Lifebane is maindecked less; control is on the rise, GR only have four natural targets.

Nothing is sacred; I can see cutting some number. The flex spells in the main are: Chained to the Rocks, Searing Blood, Shock.

Based on this quote and the move to YP, do you guys think Searing Blood should just
be moved to the SB for these specific match-ups and replaced by additional Shocks or something?

I'm sure I'll be destroyed for this, but regarding the earlier talk of getting around BlOb, what are people's thoughts on Awaken the Ancient? Hi CMC I know, especially since it's essentially 5.

Fuck me, maybe Awaken for GR Monsters? Just going WAYYYYY over the top of them?

RE: Searing Blood, it just isn't a card I would ever sideboard. If I want to sideboard an anti-aggro removal spell, its always going to be Shock or, if well positioned, Flames of the Firebrand. Cheaper or value > extra damage; the damage is worth much less than the pros of those other two cards. I am at 3 Searing Blood / 3 Chained, which feels OK now, but yeah, nothing is sacred.

Obviously if you do that, you're back to 3 guildgate. To actually attack with it, you'd need 4 red sources and a mutavault? Urhg.

The 4th Mutavault was cut in the first place to make T2 Ash Zealots more consistent. If YP$ is in the deck over Ash, and we are cutting back on Searing Blood, why not...

[deck]Rw Burn Manabase[/deck]
Full circle much?

Mutavault > Scry lands?

Zem, how is the testing of your new sideboard been going?

I still feel that if we want 6 one drops we should have 4 firedrinkers 2 cacklers and not the other way around, firedrinker being, in my experience, a good mana sink and trump for blockers, but I might be completely wrong.


EDIT: Awaken suffers HORRIBLY from golgari charm, doesn't it?

The amount of "lols", "fuckyous" and "yourdecksucks" I got while toying with it yesterday definitely convinced me to hop on this train.

The amount of "lols", "fuckyous" and "yourdecksucks" I got while toying with it yesterday definitely convinced me to hop on this train.

that was why I playing Hexproof for awhile

Fuck me, maybe Awaken for GR Monsters? Just going WAYYYYY over the top of them?

On average, on what turn do you have 5 land on the board? (4 to play Awaken and 1 to swing with.) Maybe turn 6 or 7 at best?

The amount of "lols", "fuckyous" and "yourdecksucks" I got while toying with it yesterday definitely convinced me to hop on this train.

Check the screenshots I posted on the MODO photo thread if you've not seen them, they'll make you smile

The 4th Mutavault was cut in the first place to make T2 Ash Zealots more consistent. If YP$ is in the deck over Ash, and we are cutting back on Searing Blood, why not...

[deck]Rw Burn Manabase[/deck]
Full circle much?

Mutavault > Scry lands?

I'm convinced.

Hall of famer Huey Jensen got worked over 0-2, 0-2 by two bad Burn players in his latest video series; but yeah, whatever you say MTGS, Burn has a bad Esper matchup...

Huey has a long history of tilting and not caring/giving up against a deck he doesn't respect, especially when there isn't much on the line. When I was playing in the '90s he and I had the same LGS. I very much doubt he'd remember me but I remember him. A LOT of "wtf is THIS card - why would you be playing that? this is f'ing ridiculous!" and figurative table flips.

That said, I have no idea whether or not he respects Burn in standard right now.

Was speaking to Purp, I want to try this variation, it makes a LOT of sense to me:

[deck]Purp and Zem Burn on 27-March-14[/deck]
Creatures
4 Ash Zealot
4 Chandra's Phoenix
3 Young Pyromancer

Enchantments
3 Chained to the Rocks

Instants
4 Boros Charm
4 Lightning Strike
4 Magma Jet
4 Shock
4 Skullcrack
3 Warleader's Helix

Lands
2 Boros Guildgate
10 Mountain
3 Muavault
4 Sacred Foundry
4 Temple of Triumph

Sideboard
1 Assemble the Legion
1 Blind Obedience
1 Burning Earth
1 Chained to the Rocks
2 Mizzium Mortars
1 Mutavault
4 Rakdos Cackler
1 Spark Trooper
1 Warleader's Helix
1 Wear//Tear
1 Young Pyromancer
[/deck]

OK, I won't blame Purp for the SB, its obviously a Zem sideboard.

The idea was that we were finding Searing Blood getting worse and worse, and that
we kept wanting to bring in Young Pyromancer...so the switch was kind of obvious. I personally like the 4th Pyromancer more than the 4th Helix; having a 2 drop is very strong in this deck; the draws where you have a creature are typically the ones you win kinda easily.

So, we CUT Searing Blood. Shock got promoted to 4 - they kill most of the same things and Shock is ALWAYS just fine; it got a lot better with YP$ being back in the deck and its much better vs. control or aggro than Searing Blood. Ironically, these changes boost both the control and GR Monsters matchup, so I expect this version to perform quite well.

I should write on article on sideboarding.

EDIT: Awaken suffers HORRIBLY from golgari charm, doesn't it?

The same can be said for Satyr Firedancer (2 different ways!), Young Pyromancer & all the tokens it makes.

Fuck me, maybe Awaken for GR Monsters? Just going WAYYYYY over the top of them?

On average, on what turn do you have 5 land on the board? (4 to play Awaken and 1 to swing
with.) Maybe turn 6 or 7 at best?

That may be true, but we're not running a 20-land Sligh deck & we're usually trying to get to 4-6 lands here anyway. Maybe it's me, but I don't usually slam Satyr Firedancer or Young Pyromancer on turn 2 anyway (unless I have some redundant copies.)

Would you rather 3 Searing Blood or 3 Young Pyromancer vs Aggro?

What about vs Control?

Welcome back to the maindeck Zem's invitational card.

Golgari Charm doesn't blow out Young Pyromancer, it trades equally with it 1-for-1.

Fuck me, maybe Awaken for GR Monsters? Just going WAYYYYY over the top of them?

RE: Searing Blood, it just isn't a card I would ever sideboard. If I want to sideboard an anti-aggro removal spell, its always going to be Shock or, if well positioned, Flames of the Firebrand. Cheaper or value > extra damage; the damage is worth much less than the pros of those other two cards. I am at 3 Searing Blood / 3 Chained, which feels OK now, but yeah, nothing is sacred.

Agreed.

Golgari Charm doesn't blow out Young Pyromancer, it trades equally with it 1-for-1.

I mostly meant that charm is an answer for it and can make YP$ look bad. If I drop a T3/4 YP$ and some burn spell, they charm EOT & wipe my board. You're right though, it is only a 1-for-1.

I should write on article on sideboarding.

Yes. Yes you should.

There's actually a lot of method to the madness and there are real sideboard plans there, don't be lazy and actually consider them.

This will be my Invi list.

[deck]
4 Chandra Phoenix
4 Ash Zealot
3 YP$

4 Magma Jet
4 Lightning Strike
4 Boros Charm
4 Skullcrack
3 Warleader's Helix
4 Shock
3 Chained to the Rocks

2 Guildgates
8 RW Lands
10 Mountain
3 Mutavault

SB
1 Assemble
1 Mutavault
1 Burning Earth
4 Rakdos Crackler
2 Mortars
2 Blind Obediance
1 Spark Trooper
1 WLH
1 Glare of Heresy
[/deck]

think about packages of cards. X, Y, and Z are good in matchup 1, so I want 1 of each and will be happy to draw any of them. That kind of thing.

I'd probably shove 1 more Mortars and 1 more BlOb in there, cutting the 4th YP$ and something else. At first I thought the cut should be Burning Earth but if Esper and Jund are the two top-dogs that card makes sense.

This may be my favorite version of the deck so far, including s/b.

I already like -1 Wear//Tear for +1 Mortars, but I like 1 BO after playing with the card extensively. Its not THAT good.

For example, I want two lifegain effects in my sideboard, so I can go up to 5 lifegain effects vs Mono U and GR; after extensive testing, that's the right number. However, if I go with a 1 Spark Trooper, 1 Warleader's Helix split, then I can bring in the Helix again the Mirror, whereas I couldn't bring in Spark Trooper.

In other cases, you have the 4th Chained to the Rocks, to complete the full playset (also, 4th Young Pyromancer).

It's actually pretty simple if you take more than a moment to consider how additions and subtractions reshape the deck after sideboarding - inconsistency isn't an issue.

If you're expecting Esper to be the most popular deck in your field, switch Wear//Tear for Glare of Heresy.

Sideboard looks great to me, but I like onesy-twosy looking sideboards that have clear applications. Sideboard diversity is underrated.

Im sure that you psychopaths can find a 1-of to cut so that you can play your Wild Ricochet.

I should write on article on sideboarding.

I was originally going to try to figure out with the non Ash build what the hell to board out and concluded it was probably searing blood so that makes that a bit easier.

This seems like it'll be a hard article to write because what is good to board out or in has been changing so much in just the last couple weeks. I know it's your style anyway but I recommend keeping it vague.

Since you're still going cackler over drinker, I'm assuming that tested well for you in the mirror? Is your goal to actually cause them to do more damage than boros charm (which seems to be the next weakest card) or are you just forcing them to discard to stall BO? The latter implies you pretty much always want to be on
the draw since although they have a chance to land the 4th land sooner, they likely can't afford to helix right away by setting tempo by forcing them to kill cackler and YP on sight. Am I missing something?

I'm still officially against wear/tear because it rots in hand so often. What are you honestly hoping to nuke with it? I know what it can hit but what do you actually want to discard a card for to remove?

I can't get behind ricochet. It only counters helix as a relevant spell and no wise opponent will let you do that.

I am extremely excited to have young pyro back. He is a boss.

I was being facetious about the sideboarding article, no one would read it even if I wrote it.

I am pretty sure that I am 100% in the mirror since switching to the aggressive creature plan. Why does it work? Skullcrack, Boros Charm and Warleader's Helix draws are super awkward against creatures; Chained to the Rocks is problematic early as it forces you to tap low. When you're aggressive with creatures, you can then start activating your Mutavaults to overload them; any time they cannot immediately kill a creature, you're getting way ahead ~ every spell does 2-4, a creature will do 2+ until they kill it; so if a creature hits once, its probably going to keep hitting for a while.

Year Wear//Tear sucks, run a 3rd Mortars for creature decks.

Oh fuck me, you're boarding into 95% of the old walter white anti red build.

so i have a question on wild ricochet, if i were to cast it in response to rev i know i get a copy of rev but to i get the original rev aswell?

That is quite possibly the most ridiculous and inconsistent sideboard I have ever seen. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Not sure if trolling or just stupid.

so i have a question on wild ricochet, if i were to cast it in response to rev i know i get a copy of rev but to i get the original rev aswell?

The original has no targets to change, so the end result is you would both get a copy of the same spell.
TL;DR: don't side this in vs. UW.