[Primer] Boros Burn

[BlakLanner]

It depends on how many cards you have to bring in for the fight. I can add my set of Toil/Trouble, Chandra, and maybe a Chain or two to remove all my YPs and Phoenixes. That blanks his Magma Sprays and makes it so that, while still annoying, Duress is not as big of a deal due to redundancy in my hand. Become a pure burn deck and watch all that removal rot in their hand.

[Jamie]

How do you play the mirror? I play the skullcrack-helix game flawlessly, my pyromasters always get more than 1card of value, but I still lose! Sometimes there is nothing I can do (In this case maybe I should mulligan more aggressively) but sometimes I die with 12 damage in my hand and he's at 12 life, which makes me think maybe I'm trying a bit too hard at the skullcrack for a helix that might not exist. I don't know how to play when they resolve a Chandra. If I were playing 4 searing bloods mainboard (which I'm not btw), how many do I keep postboard? Any advice on those points?

[magicdownunder]

1) Vs Chandra, depends on your hands (you and your opponent) and life total - if your opponent is already low or if killing chandra will cost you 3 cards its usually better just target face, otherwise just kill it.

2) You wouldn't board out Searing Blood unless you have an inkling that your opponent is trying to next level you.

3) Play more mirrors and adjust (I board different vs the random burn player or the DtR player).

[Pedros]

Ok here is a list based on lat MDU lists:

[deck]
4 Young Pyromancer
2 Raise the Alarm
4 Chandra's Phoenix

4 Shock
4 Magma Jet
4 Lightning Strike
4 Warleader's Helix
4 Stoke the Flames

4 Boros Charm
3 Skullcrack

7 Mountain
4 Mutavault
4 Temple of Triumph
4 Sacred Foundry
3 Battlefield Forge
1 Temple of Malice

Sideboard
3 Mizzium Mortars
3 Toil/Trouble
3 Chained to the Rocks
2 Chandra, Pyromaster
1 Glare of Heresy
1 Skullcrack
1 Deicide
1 Banishing Light[/deck]

I currently have 19 Red and 11 white sources with 4 mutavaults and 5 temples. Really want to fit 6th temple, however dont want to cut mutavault, and 19 red is safe for RR on turn 3, which is somehow crucial for this deck (either Phoenix or YP + Shock). I think 11 White sources is enought.

Really like the idea of Raise the Alarm, however I can see playing 2 Chain to the Rocks in this spot - it would give me better game vs mono
Blue, Monsters and GW/Naya agro, while worse vs Planeswalkers and Control, similar vs Small agro.

SB is copied from one of the MDU list, I really like his configuration. Deicide is really good addition.

I understand that Raise the Alarm is experimental card and the safest choice might be cutting them for Chained to the Rocks. That would give me 1 free sb slot, probably for something like Wear/Tear, Reprisal or Pilar of Light. Probably Pilar of Light, as it kills both Nyx Fleece Ram and Archangel of Thune.

[Valdarith]

"UW control is actually one of my best match ups" Yep, he's full of shit.

Not defending the guy or anything since I agree that UW Control will never be the "best" matchups without ruining many other matchups, but why is it that in the past when people like Zem and many others in the forums rated control as even or favorable (without running dedicated SB cards mine you) no one batted an eye-lid (this was the period when control was much more diverse in its threats (making SB'ing really hard) because the Jund decks were not huge yet so they had more walkers, more
counters and more cards which effected our gameplan).

Nowadays most controls decks are running the Planar route because its better at dealing with walkers and all the annoying underworld connections, this version runs less counters, less walkers and more cards which don't really matter to us... the SB is also more universal and predictable but even with all this somehow the MU went from even and favorable into HORRIBLE and UNWINNABLE .

Can someone explain why this happen?

Edit: Typo

Based on my limited personal experience with burn, I've found the Dsphere UW control matchup to be even and the Cleansing build to be significantly worse. I wouldn't call it unwinnable but I wouldn't come close to calling it one of burn's best matchups. It's quite unfavorable against a competent pilot.

[magicdownunder]

Based on my limited personal experience with burn, I've found the Dsphere UW control matchup to be even and the Cleansing build to be significantly worse. I wouldn't call it unwinnable but I wouldn't come close to calling it one of burn's best matchups. It's quite unfavorable against a competent pilot.

Not having a go at you, but I believe the same competent pilot will have an easier time against you with the Dpshere list simply because it has all the fun stuff (elixir and random creature package except it has more cards which matter against us such as the 4th Jace, extra counters and Dpshere (over quicken and cleansing)). The SB is also more predicable so you can next level the Cleansing build by cutting creature (making charm, flares and
breath weaker and making your own T//T Stronger) and just keep in all the chains and what not because your almost 100% sure they'll cut sweeps for the lifegain package.

@Pedros: Thanks for helping us test (though this dauntless268 brainchild not mine ) I'll keep testing it on my end (when I get a chance) for now I still believe chains is the safer option (the only innovation (can I really call it that?) I can confirm is that Stoke belongs in the 60 (at least 2 imo)).

[dauntless268]

2 CTTR + 2 RTA might be an option, too, I think.

[LP, of the Fires]

Mdu is of course right. Cleansing control is .uch more favorable then dsphere control. One deck has a bunch od do nothing, the other has much more interaction.

And the matchup isnt that bad. Its probably harder now with the deck having a higher curve, but it cant be worse then fifty fifty.

[Pedros]

2 CTTR + 2 RTA might be an option, too, I think.

Problem is I can only manage to have 2, maybe 3 slots (if I cut stoke/helix) free. I dont want to cut magma jets, as I always thought it was one of the best cards in a deck. How would a deck look like with 2 RTA and 2 CTTR? 2 skullcracks?

[Jamie]

Maybe cut a helix and a shock for 2 more of either RtA or Chained. They are all cards you want vs aggro so they do the same thing in that regard, and against u/w control or walker lists it cuts 2 of your lesser cards (helix and shock).
Seems to me EV+ or EV= in every matchup to cut some amount of shocks or helixs for more RTA and Chained.

[dauntless268]

I will try to cut Shock.

[Crims0n]

Okay guys i play in a very weird metagame, we usually get about 40 people but there's usually only 1-2 control players and 1-2 mono black/bw midrange players. the rest are mono blue, mono green devotion, jund walkers, red aggro, gw aggro, black aggro, and assorted brews. Given that knowledge i like to play more creature hate than the average burn build. tomorrow is the 200 dollar monthly fnm and i want to cash this time, so you burn pros should help me shore up my list at the last minute!

[deck]4 Young Pyromancer
4 Chandra's Phoenix
4 Warleader's Helix
4 Lightning Strike
4 Boros Charm
3 Shock
3 Skullcrack
3 Searing Blood
3 Magma Jet
3 Chained to the Rocks
2 Stoke the Flames
9 Mountain
4 Sacred Foundry
4 Temple of Triumph
3 Mutavault
2 Battlefield Forge
1 Temple of Silence

SB: 3 Toil // Trouble
SB: 2 Chandra, Pyromaster
SB: 1 Hushwing Gryff
SB: 1 Skullcrack
SB: 3 Satyr Firedancer
SB: 1 Pillar of
Light
SB: 1 Banishing Light
SB: 1 Chained to the Rocks
SB: 1 Wear // Tear
SB: 1 Searing Blood[/deck]

[Jamie]

Without MizziumMortars on sideboard and only 2 Stokes I fear for your anti-bloodbaron game against b/w midrange.

[Crims0n]

is it okay to side firedancers and mortars? or should i just cut the dancers for 3 mortars

[pikachufan2164]

is it okay to side firedancers and mortars? or should i just cut the dancers for 3 mortars

I like Mortars better as a general solution to aggro and midrange. Firedancers are very polarizing in their performance -- they're either amazing (vs. aggro with little removal) or horrible (vs. aggro with more removal).

[Purp]

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

[BrainsickHater]

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

Yeah at some point you have to realize the last 2 cards you play don't really matter that much and theorizing will only get you so far.

[Khaospawn]

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

Bingo.

[dauntless268]

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

Lol, yes, there MIGHT be a also a slightly repetitive element in the issues we're discussing here (Mortars versus Firedancer? now THAT's a question!!)

Guess it's just life before rotation. I'm happy I could actually play halfway the same deck for some months without having to re-learn MTG. For someone with a family life next to Magic this is a great achievement

[Elricity]

Same. I play rarely enough that due to cost and learning, I try to stick to one deck. For example, I know Z is moving away from burn due to the meta but I'm going to stick it out because it's what I know.

[magicdownunder]

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

I don't agree - on this forum I'm most likely the most consistence player producing results (online at least, but I figured online its the most even playing field since we can't hide behind our local metagames) - the only reason why I can stay on top is because I'm constantly adapting my build and approach*{1} with the rapidly changing meta.

Things like discussions about Dancer vs Morters are valid when the game shifts from G and U into R or upping Stokes if midrange and control is gaining steam - imo if you don't keep up your just going to fall behind and end up believing its
impossible to beat all three archetypes or that UW control, Jund Walker or Rabble Red are auto-losses.

Notes:
{1} some people only grind, while others only go all-in, I'm not sure why people don't just switch it up when the need arrives - approach or play-style is more important then some people think because its not always about looking for that sliver bullet since some matches are only winnable if you play it better (or differently).

[dauntless268]

I find myself going much less the control route post-board lately. And am moving off Firedancer, because with the better Mana it has become all too easy to splash Black for Green Devo.

[LaZerBurn]

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

I want to like this post several times! This is fucking SPOT ON! Thank you Purp!!!!

[dauntless268]

Yeah, but I guess part of this process is what MDU describes, so I do see his point there

[HK1997]

I think the miniscule changes are both. Big impact and sometimes nothing at all. Problem is that the online meta learns our deck too... quite slowly but they learn it. Black decks keeping in heroes downfall vs us for instance is partly because they have learned that most play chandra. Making small changes can next-level them. Thats why bringing in old or new favorites is something positive in my opinion. It keeps the meta on its toes. Firedancers in the side usually have a success rate of as long as the meta is favorable for them. It shifts, so my sideboard and maindeck shift as well. I keep bringing in Searing Blood into my main deck and then a week later its not even in the 75. Awaken makes an appearance every now and then when Im bored. The firealarm build made for some great and fun games, just on the merrit of being something people havent seen yet, beyond the cute synergy and ambush options. Hell, I still screw up when
tapping my mana and calculating for convoke on stokes when I have a YP on board. I dont expect our opponents to do much better when they see a YP, a token and two open mana.

I agree also somewhat with "becoming better players", like purp said. But I do believe it goes hand in hand. By tackling this meta from multiple angles, small changes - or big, we become better players. We dont just play T1 thoughtseize and then T2 packrat. A huge advantage that we get on Modo, is that the other decks are quite static. We know their decks and how they sideboard a hell of a lot better than them guessing what flavor of burn you are on. Because we have so many things we have run in the past and what other non-dtr members are still playing, they expect so many cards that we just might not be playing. For example: Firedancer, Firedrinker, Eidolon, Flamespeaker, Searing Blood, Chains, Reprisal, Hushwing Gryff, Pillar, Banishing Light, Wear Tear, Toil Trouble, Spark Trooper, Glare of herecy, deicide, boros reckoner,
rams, assemble the legion, Chandra, Pyromaster. Try sideboarding against THAT

Now dauntless has added raise the alarm to that long list - I thank him for that! It is an insipred deck, altho it doesnt work as well for me

[HK1997]

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

I don't agree - on this forum I'm most likely the most consistence player producing results (online at least, but I figured online its the most even playing field since we can't hide behind our local metagames) - the only reason why I can stay on top is because I'm constantly adapting my build and approach*{1} with the rapidly changing meta.

Things like discussions about Dancer vs Morters are valid when the game shifts
from G and U into R or upping Stokes if midrange and control is gaining steam - imo if you don't keep up your just going to fall behind and end up believing its impossible to beat all three archetypes or that UW control, Jund Walker or Rabble Red are auto-losses.

Notes:
{1} some people only grind, while others only go all-in, I'm not sure why people don't just switch it up when the need arrives - approach or play-style is more important then some people think because its not always about looking for that sliver bullet since some matches are only winnable if you play it better (or differently).

Thanks for this post buddy!

On the dancers vs. mortars thing: For me it is a simple question. Are blood barons in BW midrange heavily represented? If the answer is yes, forget the dancers, no matter how good they are vs mono G or U devotion decks. If not, start dancing
Just right
now Im seeing way way way too many BW midrange matchups and BBV is a MUST answer in more than half the cases where you dont have skullcrack and the kill in hand when he hits the board. And Firedancers.... well they die to removal

[NotARobot]

I think an eidolon burn build just won the tokyo WMCQ - trying to find his decklist atm.

[LaZerBurn]

I wrote this as a response to MDU and on reading it back it reads like a PM in places, simply ignore this as I can't be bothered to edit it

I think at this point, we could play any variation posted within the last 15 pages and focus on becoming better players rather than supa-analyze miniscule tweaks.

I don't agree - on this forum I'm most likely the most consistence player producing results (online at least, but I figured online its the most even playing field since we
can't hide behind our local metagames) - the only reason why I can stay on top is because I'm constantly adapting my build and approach*{1} with the rapidly changing meta.

Things like discussions about Dancer vs Morters are valid when the game shifts from G and U into R or upping Stokes if midrange and control is gaining steam - imo if you don't keep up your just going to fall behind and end up believing its impossible to beat all three archetypes or that UW control, Jund Walker or Rabble Red are auto-losses.

Notes:
{1} some people only grind, while others only go all-in, I'm not sure why people don't just switch it up when the need arrives - approach or play-style is more important then some people think because its not always about looking for that sliver bullet since some matches are only winnable if you play it better (or differently).

You are indeed the most consistent player producing results online I think that your willingness to constantly reassess the meta and adapt both your build and your playstyle (all in/YOLO Vs grindy/control) have a large part to play in this, along with the fact that IMHO you are an excellent player (based on your results, having played against you a number of times and having worked with you on multiple decks in several formats and discussed match ups in depth).

HOWEVER! I think that Purp is making a point that is VERY relevant based on the simple fact that many of our (yours, mine and everyone elses) conclusions/questions are simply based on too little data to be of any relevance and put simply the majority of us would be better off playing your latest list on MTGO (FNM or most R/L is simply NO SUBSTITUTE and if your goal is to get good you should stay home on MTGO. If it isn'
t why are you posting in the Burn thread at all?) and becoming better players rather than posting things that are simply a waste of time better spent practicing

I'm talking about posts along the lines of - " I had to mulligan in 4 out of 8 games so I'm adding an extra land OR X (insert random card) wasn't very good tonight so I'm dropping it, despite only playing 2 SE and never drawing it OR X (insert random card) was amazing tonight so I'm running another copy, despite only playing 2 SE and drawing it twice OR Flamespeaker was terrible, I have no idea how Shouta's list works, despite having only played it 4 times? These posts are quite simply based on TOO LITTLE DATA! At the deck's peak we were making tweaks based on 100's of results, now they are based on a very small number, often only a handful of games, sometimes by one
player!

Another example - despite Red Devotion being a strong deck at the time we (MDU and I) both decided that it was bad/we couldn't play it based on under 50 games. IMHO that is simple not enough testing to be of any relevance! A more accurate statement would be "I have not practiced with the deck enough to master it yet and I am not enjoying myself enough to practice enough to achieve this."

This is a recognised physchological phenomena; there is an entire chapter "The Law of Small Numbers" devoted to it in "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kaufman - a fantastic read IMHO This also explains the 'Hivemnd' and a host of other phenomena that occur both on here and IRL.

Zem posted something regarding the need to play a lot of games before drawing any conclusions but I can't find the damn post! L.P.
posted about starting to test games with relevant cards in hand to se if they work rather than counting the results of 5000 games in which you didn't draw the card you are considering! A disadvantage of MTGO is that you can't do this (though obviously it should have a test option so you can!). Things seem to have come full circle here as it was my desire to do this that lead to my chatting with you about it and subsequently posting about an MTGO testing group which then lead to Kaits proposing the online clan we all so much

So to put it bluntly; in case I hadn't already - IMHO the vast maority of recent posts (questions and answers) are simply irrelevant as they are posted by people who are playing in an irrelevant meta (ANY FNM, most R/L
games) or people who are bad and would be better off watching your vids and becoming better players or they are based on insufficient data to be of any relevance, hence my agreement with Purp's FANTASTIC post which has lead to this debate - it may be somewhat off topic but it is of far more interest than ANOTHER discussion on Dancer Vs MM

[NotARobot]

Ah I was mistaken the eidelon was sideboard

Heres the list, first place Tokyo WMCQ

[deck]

Creatures 8

4 Young Pyromancer
4 Chandra's Phoenix

Spells 29
4 Lightning Strike
4 Searing Blood
4 Skullcrack
4 Boros Charm
3 Magma Jet
4 Warleader's Helix
3 Stoke the Flames
3 Chained to the Rocks

Lands 23

9 Mountain
3 Sacred Foundry
4 Battlefield Forge
4 Temple of triumph
3 Mutavault

Sideboard

3 Burning Earth
2 Nyx-Fleece Ram
2 Eidolon of the great revel
2 Satyr Firedancer
2 Wear // Tear
2 Anger of the gods
2 Chandra, Pyromaster[/deck]

[HK1997]

@lazerburn I think I prefer yet another discussion about mizziums than yet another discussion about who's opinions are valuable and who is just a waste of forum space.

[magicdownunder]

Thoughts on 2 Firedancing Satyr from the Tokyo WMCQ? It seems like a 4 or nothing card.

[Lightning_Dolt]

Ah I was mistaken the eidelon was sideboard

Heres the list, first place Tokyo WMCQ

[deck]

Creatures 8

4 Young Pyromancer
4 Chandra's Phoenix

Spells 29
4 Lightning Strike
4 Searing Blood
4 Skullcrack
4 Boros Charm
3 Magma Jet
4 Warleader's Helix
3 Stoke the Flames
3 Chained to the Rocks

Lands 23

9 Mountain
3 Sacred Foundry
4 Battlefield Forge
4 Temple of triumph
3 Mutavault

Sideboard

3 Burning Earth
2 Nix Fleece Ram
2 Eidolon of the great revel
2 Firedancing Satyr
2 Wear//Tear
2 Anger of the gods
2 Chandra, Pyromaster[/deck]

This list is to my liking. Thank you for posting it.

[NotARobot]

Burn also got 4th place, this list looks like sperlings with a few changes.. Not a huge fan of the no chains/jets, but idk I havent tested that version

[deck]
Creatures 9
4 Young Pyromancer
4 Chandra's Phoenix
1 Eidolon of the Great Revel

Spells 27
4 Lightning Strike
4 Shock
4 Boros Charm
4 Skullcrack
4 Searing Blood
4 Stoke the Flames
3 Warleader's Helix

Lands 24
9 Mountain
4 Sacred Foundry
4 Temple of Triumph
4 Battlefield Forge
3 Mutavault

Sideboard 15

4 Satyr Firedancer
2 Glare of Heresy
2 Toil // Trouble
2 Chained to the Rocks
2 Chandra, Pyromaster
1 Wear // Tear
1 Anger of the Gods
1 Warleader's Helix

[/deck]

[LP, of the Fires]

Is there a link that someone who doesn't read Japanese could find useful?

[LP, of the Fires]

I also really like the winning deck. Cutting shock hurts, but it allows you to play both chain and searing blood which is what I've always wanted. While I don't know how good the board is, I love the range of it. Literally covers everything with his an choices and he's not ducking around with the power level of his cards.

[NotARobot]

It just finished a couple hours ago so theres not much yet

Heres the link to the coverage, includes quite a few videos of the matches... google page translate makes it readable I guess

http://www.happymtg.com/coverage/21848/

[LP, of the Fires]

Lol, I can actually tell what most of the Decks are lands ratios.

[magicdownunder]

I also really like the winning deck. Cutting shock hurts, but it allows you to play both chain and searing blood which is what I've always wanted. While I don't know how good the board is, I love the range of it. Literally covers everything with his an choices and he's not ducking around with the power level of his cards.

Agreed, I can also see why he is playing Sheep and Anger in his SB because without shock his small aggro MU will be hurting - the 2x dancers really boggle my mind though.

Burning Earth makes a return, seems better now that everyone is so greedy.

[maramusa]

Burn also got 4th place, this list looks like sperlings with a few changes.. Not a huge fan of the no chains/jets, but idk I havent tested that version

[deck]
Creatures 9
4 Young Pyromancer
4 Chandra's Phoenix
1 Eidolon of the Great Revel

Spells 27
4 Lightning Strike
4 Shock
4 Boros Charm
4 Skullcrack
4 Searing Blood
4 Stoke the Flames
3 Warleader's Helix

Lands 24
9 Mountain
4 Sacred Foundry
4 Temple of Triumph
4 Battlefield Forge
3 Mutavault

Sideboard 15

4 Satyr Firedancer
2 Glare of Heresy
2 Toil // Trouble
2 Chained to the Rocks
2 Chandra, Pyromaster
1 Wear // Tear
1 Anger of the Gods
1 Warleader's Helix

[/deck]

Might want to correct that this is the list that won the wcmq. This is the 4th placing
list going into top 8 while the other burn list placed 1st but lost to this one in a mirror match during top 4.

[twigelo]

I have been staying up to sate and reading what people post on this forum for awhile and I have never posted anything. This is my version I am currently running and would like some input from you guys.
3x Shock
4x Lightning Strike
4x Seering Blood
4x Magma Jet
4x Boros Charm
4x Warleader's Helix
2x Chained to the Rocks
4x Ashe Zealot
4x Eidolon of the Great Revel
4x Goblin Rabblemaster
Lands
4x Sacred Foundry 4x Temple of Triumph 1x Temple of Silence 1x Temple of Malice 2x Battlefield Forge 11x Mountains
This is not a burn them out game one then go to a more control type feel. This is a race race race. You want to beat them before they beat you. So far my only problem has been Bant Super friends. I won at game day and came in 2nd place at my last FMN with this. I know most of you do not like Eidolon but he is one reason you can race faster then your opponent. Let me know what you guys think.