Dies to Removal

I realize that's actually not super helpful, but expounding, both provide CA and lifegain(in a sense) but huntmaster's more immediate and proactive while also having a higher ceiling.

I've been playing a UWR variant recently and it's been pretty sweet:

[deck]Creatures:14
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Monastery Swiftspear
3 Young Pyromancer
3 Geist of Saint Traft

Spells:28
2 Burst Lightning
1 Forked Bolt
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Path to Exile
4 Serum Visions
2 Boros Charm
4 Lightning Helix
3 Treasure Cruise

Lands:18
2 Arid Mesa
4 Flooded Strand
1 Hallowed Fountain
1 Island
1 Mountain
1 Plains
1 Sacred Foundry
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Steam Vents
1 Sulfur Falls

Sideboard:15
3 Wear // Tear
1 Celestial Purge
2 Combust
4 Meddling Mage
2 Negate
1 Sword of Feast and Famine
1 Sword of War and Peace
1 Timely Reinforcements
[/deck]

For your primer zemanjaski, it looks very thorough and I can't wait to read it. Additionally, I think it would be good to discuss the merits of playing pure UR over splashing a third color. The manabase is pretty good in modern now with the new fetchlands. Some discussion over monastery swiftspear would be great as well as it is a hotly discussed topic, but I am pretty sure you will be writing about that already.

As for everyone's list, please play one sulfur falls. It sucks to lose to Choke.

Reinforcements and Meddling Mage are SO GAS.

Zem, you are too cool to be saying gas...Todd Anderson says gas.

He's bringing it back.

Like Porch Monkey.

*must refrain from chris rock black jokes*

Another great sideboard and potentially main-deckable option to fight against burn and aggressive matchups like merfolk (if you are playing white) is Seeker of the Way. Card's like a swingy young pyromancer.

He's bringing it back.

Like Porch Monkey.

*must refrain from chris rock black jokes*

Daddy gets the big piece of chicken!

I know that I have no place in this thread since I'm not playing this deck, but having played against this deck A LOT during numerous GP Orlando win-a-box events, I must say that I'm glad that you guys aren't trying to force Swiftspear. It's fucking terrible in this build. I'm only saying this as a Burn player that routinely beat up on every up-and-comer thinking that they could turn a Legacy Open deck into a potential Khans box winner.

And if you guys start discussing Mutagenic Growth as a possible card in the deck, I will find you and I will kill you.

The Swiftspear version has an even worse burn matchup than the classic build.

Mutagenic Growth is okay in a Swiftspear deck, but not great. It's basically a free Lava Spike but, again, good luck beating burn while fetching untapped shocks and playing spells with Phyrexian mana.

Off topic, but thoughts on Burn splashing for Cruise?

Off topic, but thoughts on Burn splashing for Cruise?

When I was a child, the Swiftspears ran their Treasure Cruises into my family, killing them all. From that day on, I put a jihad on them and their blue mana.


And Allah help me, if you play Treasure Cruise in a Burn build, I'll put a jihad on you too.

Jihad was a fun game.

Swiftspear is a godsend (no pun-relation to elspeth's swift spear) to delver decks that want to run cruise and no snaps. I played a lot of ur delver in modern and I am thoroughly impressed with how this card plays out. It is fine to run with or without, but it's unfair to outright dismiss it.

Mutagenic growth on the other hand... I'd rather play squire.

Swiftspear is better in the aggressive versions with Vapor Snags, Forked Bolts and the like.

I prefer the controling versions, as it has better game against the field and better late game.

Khaos, you're just wrong. The swiftspear deck is infinitely better versus burn(still not good). Just because you're better then your opponents in a favorable matchup doesn't make the card bad. It just means it's a favorable matchup for you already and they're learning to play a new card in there deck and are likely making more play errors.

Burn isn't too bad, I just have 4 dragon's claw sitting in my sideboard coincidentally.

I think that Swiftspear forces you to sequence your spells differently, and as a result, suboptimal plays are made. Plus, I don't think it's needed at all for the deck.

But that's just, like, my opinion, man. I have no horse in this race.

@Khaospawn: Your point is valid. However, most of the time you will be burning a blocker anyway, so swiftspears do not make you make suboptimal plays that often. It also allows you to bluff your opponent into not blocking. There is some tension with countermagic involved though, which makes swiftspear an option only for the most aggressive variants.

@Nezeru: 4 sb slots for a single matchup well done.

I'd play 4 dispel, which are also good elsewhere; but I suppose that if you ABSOLUTELY want to beat burn and only burn, then Dragon's Claw is ok.

I have white so I am trying 4 seeker of the way in the sb. They are also good in the pod, affinity, and merfolk (or any aggro such as zoo) matchup.

They make an easy swap with young pyromancer which is not a stellar card in those matchups.

Ummm YP is insane vs all those decks. I won't abide the lies!

Not as good as a growing lifelinker, and I'm not about to remove either spells or one-drops.

Not sure if serious...

zem, looks like LSV agrees that decks like Jund can't really be good with Treasure Cruise in the format.

http://youtu.be/5xNHjxhMW0M?t=4m2s

zem, looks like LSV agrees that decks like Jund can't really be good with Treasure Cruise in the format.

http://youtu.be/5xNHjxhMW0M?t=4m2s

[deck]
Lands (18)
3 Bloodstained Mire
4 Island
2 Misty Rainforest
2 Mountain
4 Scalding Tarn
3 Steam Vents

Creatures (11)
4 Delver of Secrets
1 Monastery Swiftspear
2 Snapcaster Mage
4 Young Pyromancer








Instants (20)
3 Mana Leak
2 Remand
1 Spell Pierce
1 Spell Snare

2 Electrolyze
2 Forked bolt
1 Pillar of Flame
4 Lightning Bolt
2 Vapor Snag

Sorceries (13)
4 Gitaxian Probe
1 Sleight of Hand
4 Serum Visions
4 Treasure Cruise

Sideboard (15)
1 Combust
4 Dragon's Claw
2 Eidolon of the Great Revel
3 Molten Rain
1 Pillar of Flame
2 Shattering Spree
2 Spell Pierce
[/deck]
LSV says its a hybrid of a counter-heavy and aggressive list. He also says he is just trying the Swiftspear out.

I'd play 4 dispel, which are also good elsewhere; but I suppose that if you ABSOLUTELY want to beat burn and only burn, then Dragon's Claw is ok.

BlackBurn likes this. Rain of Gore ftw and my topdecks are better that yours! Spellskite is more annoying imho.

zem, looks like LSV agrees that decks like Jund can't really be good with Treasure Cruise in the format.

http://youtu.be/5xNHjxhMW0M?t=4m2s

LSV and anyone who has played competitive magic yes.

I'm going to have to watch his series at work today. I'm interested in how the full set of Cruise works out for him.

Watching the third match now. I'm not entirely impressed by Swiftspear from the match 2 opponent.

I REALLY like the idea of Molten Rain in the board though. Seems to address problem matchups quite well (Tron, rogue ramp decks).

Not sure if serious...

Did you play those matchups? I have played UR delver a ton before Khans and this is what happens:

Vs. Affinity: Their fliers fly over your tokens' heads and you try to race poorly with 1/1 tokens.
Vs. Pod: Orzhov Pontiff.
Vs. Merfolk: 1/1 Tokens do not race effectively against instant speed unblockable 4/4 fishes.

As much as I love YP, he's actively bad against decks that have the ability to gum up the ground. The 3 decks I have listed above don't run much spot removal, which is why I am advocating a creature that swings the life totals with every hit instead of one that generates 1/1 tokens. I won't lie and say that the seeker is great vs these decks, as I only have had the opportunity to see him in two games so more games are needed. He got abrupt decay'd vs pod in one and raced the affinity player to oblivion in another. YP on the other hand I have seen doing badly in like 50 games in these matchups and more.

Last I checked this was not MTGS where ideas get shot down without any testing done.

I'd play 4 dispel, which are also good elsewhere; but I suppose that if you ABSOLUTELY want to beat burn and only burn, then Dragon's Claw is ok.

BlackBurn likes this. Rain of Gore ftw and my topdecks are better that yours! Spellskite is more annoying imho.

I agree that Spellskite is more feasible a card to bring in vs burn, as it also single-handedly deals with Bogles and Infect, while being annoying in the mirror, vs. UWR control, and vs. BG/x decks.

Not sure if serious...

Did you play those matchups? I have played UR delver a ton before Khans and this is what happens:

Vs. Affinity: Their fliers fly over your tokens' heads and you try to race poorly with 1/1 tokens.
Vs. Pod: Orzhov Pontiff.
Vs. Merfolk: 1/1 Tokens do not race effectively against instant speed unblockable 4/4 fishes.

As much as I love YP, he's actively bad against decks that have the ability to gum up the ground. The 3 decks I have listed above don't run much spot removal, which is why I am advocating a creature that swings the life totals with every hit instead of one that generates 1/1 tokens. I won't lie and say that the seeker is great vs these decks, as I only have had the opportunity to see him in two games so more games are needed. He got abrupt decay'd vs pod in one and raced the affinity player to oblivion in another. YP on the other hand I have seen doing badly in like 50 games in these matchups and more.

Last I checked this was not MTGS where ideas get shot down without any testing done.

It seems like a marginal improvement (if any), and a waste of sideboard slots. It's also not a Blue or Red card, which is a problem in UR Delver.

I would like to build this deck because at the moment it seems the best in the format to me, but i'm afraid that next bans could give U/R delver bad surprises. If they ban treasure cruises, would dig through time be a fine replacement or is cruise a lot better in this deck ?

Dig would be a manageable substitution, but would be best in a more controlling build. Even in a build with lese than 20 land, there's not a huge difference between drawing three and drawing the best two of seven, but it's significant enough for Cruise to get the edge (that and one mana).

Is Burn really bringing in Rain of Gore on the off chance their opponent plays Dragon's Claw? I could see that happening g3, but g2?

Molten Rain is an obvious card that has pretty much always been in and out of Delver sideboards. It's good against Tron and Celestial Colonnade decks.

I think Dragon's Claw is also fine in red mirror matches and against Storm. I lost a game to it (one of very few games I've lost in a Delver mirror) to an opponent's Dragon's Claw, and it seems reasonable to bring in in the mirror, but I haven't tested it myself.

Having tested the deck much more and taken it through a few tournaments, I've noticed the following (of my Swiftspear list):
-We can't beat Chalice of the Void game 1. It did happen to me a few times when testing against mono-U Tron.
-We have very good matchups with Merfolk, BGx, Affinity, Pod, and non-Swiftspear Delver lists. Remand and Spell Snare are terrible against one-drop Delver. Remand is ONLY good at hitting Treasure Cruise, and then only if you're ahead. We both run 4 Pyromancers, so those are even. Snapcaster isn't fantastic against us or for us, and I'm down to 2 and might drop lower.
-RG Tron is a fine matchup.
-I haven't lost to Burn since adding Dragon's Claw.

zemanjaski - I agree that Dragon's Claw is pretty much only for Burn (despite having made claims about its playability in other matchups that may or may not hold water). However, if Burn is the only truly bad matchup, isn't it worth dedicating some sideboard space to? I have a friend testing UWR Delver with 4 Leyline of Sanctity on his board for the same reason (though the card has greater usability in other matchups). What other matchups are bad? (U Tron isn't prevalent enough to be really worth worrying about, obviously, but Molten Rain is great against them, so there's that)

RE: Dragons Claw

Depends entirely on your meta. If you're online for example, play Dragons Claw! In general, it's better to sideboard for the decks you expect to face, rather than decks that are your bad matchups ~ Boggles is horrendous but very unpopular so we shouldn't dedicate 4 slots to it. In a similar vein, Burn is not popular enough in paper (for me) to really focus on it.

I'm not weighing in on YP v Seeker. I disagree with everything I've read so strongly that I don't want to reduce the thread to "Zem's favourite swears and insults". Reasonable minds can differ.

I'm not weighing in on YP v Seeker. I disagree with everything I've read so strongly that I don't want to reduce the thread to "Zem's favourite swears and insults". Reasonable minds can differ.

+1. I refuse to devote energy to something I feel is so obvious. I may come across as a dick by saying that, but at least I'm in good company.