Dies to Removal

What's wrong with Mizzium Mortars / Chained/ Banishing Light against Mono Blue?

That also works for Green too.

The day khaospawn predicted has come. My computer died today

Did testing last night with Z mana base, shouta list with stoke replacing Mizzium Mortar against mono black.

SB was

[deck]3 Flamespeaker
2 Chandra
2 Pillar
2 B-Light
1 Wear
3 Mizzium Mortars
2 Assemble[/deck]

The mono B list was running NVS instead of Lifebane. -4 Skull crack -4 BC I was not a fan of, them gaining life twice (whether is 2 gary, devour fleshing or pharikas cures is pretty hard to overcome). I struggled with deciding to use 8 or 11 cards post board.

Was typically doing something like: -1 Stoke -4 BC -2 Shock -1 Jet -2 WLH -1Skullcrack +3 Flame(not sure about this card in this matchup, I have not tested it enough) +2 Pillar +2 Chandra +2 BL +2 Assemble

My opponent was doing something like: +3 Duress +2 Doom Blade +2 Cure

n
What was your opponent taking out? If your opponent is packing in more removal instead of less, flamespeaker becomes a less solid plan. Cure in particular makes YP and CP screen for him a lot worse. I prefer flamespeaker when they're on the whip plan instead because it crushes them while they durdle and digs out of very deep holes from their lifegain.

I personally haven't tested Z's kill everything plan which I kind of think is risky but in the traditional plan I don't like leaving any shocks in if they're on NVS. That card needs to die very fast.

-3 Connections -1 HDF -2 Sign in Blood -1 BB

The thing is, I think we can always expect doom blade and cure (atleast 4 between the two) to always come in against us.

ps- he played 1 whip main too

The day khaospawn predicted has come. My computer died today

I hate being right sometimes.

Ha ha. Posted in the wrong thread, but no biggie. Upgrade to a computer tgan can handle streaming modo.

Zem's m15 set article finally got posted! Good stuff as usual

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles ... n-updates/

On Z's point about mana curve, has anyone ran into serious issues with pillar's higher cost over reprisal? I had it happen once tonight but overall its power level feels a lot higher than reprisal.

[quote="Purp » Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:52 pm"]Did testing last night with Z mana base, shouta list with stoke replacing Mizzium Mortar against mono black.

SB was

[deck]3 Flamespeaker
2 Chandra
2 Pillar
2 B-Light
1 Wear
3 Mizzium Mortars
2 Assemble[/deck]

The mono B list was running NVS instead of Lifebane. -4 Skull crack -4 BC I was not a fan of, them gaining life twice (whether is 2 gary, devour fleshing or pharikas cures is pretty hard to overcome). I struggled with deciding to use 8 or 11 cards post board.

Was typically doing something like: -1 Stoke -4 BC -2 Shock -1 Jet -2 WLH -1Skullcrack +3 Flame(not sure about this card in this matchup, I have not tested it enough) +2 Pillar +2 Chandra +2 BL +2 Assemble

My opponent was doing something like: +3 Duress +2 Doom Blade +2 Cure[/quote:
u9aghol8]

I think some of the problem is that you're strategically trying to do two things with this SB plan;
- race; and
- control

These roles are about as far apart as you can be. That's a problem because it creates enormous in inconsistency in your draws. If you're trying to out ca them, you don't care about them gaining life; I don't want to be paying mana to discard a card. Thing is, they run 26 land and no card draw or deck manipulation after board (if they follow Owen's SB approach); we run 23 land with 10 scry and ~7 ca engines. At some point something will stick and you'll start to get ahead. Or They'll flood out.

Trying to cover all bases with sideboarding really makes it hard to achieve this.

I don't want then to topdeck Pack Rat and I too deck Skullcrack, that would be a bad feels.

Thing is, you need to play SO MUCH to understand this. Many "pros" don't. I'm lucky that I've played infinite mono blue control in pauper (MUC vs MBC in pauper is *almost* Burn vs
MBC in standard) and you have to play hundreds of games to see what a difference the deck manipulation and small amount of draw make.

I was thinking. We're always talking about how we board into a control deck, but would it be reasonable to have our maindeck be a control deck and board into an aggressive deck against control? Seems like it'd make our game against control significantly better because it seems that a lot of our sideboard is dedicated to killing dudes.

Anyone have experience vs the newer Mono Green decks? The inevitability they have seems intimidating.

Burn is good against us. Burn/remove/kill our devotion creatures and mana dorks and we're screwed. You're practically given a free win G1 while post sideboard we only have Disciples.

I have a little troubles figuring out the different roles of chandra and prophetic flamespeaker. Running 2 chandra and 3 flamespeaker in sideboard, when do you side in both and when do you leave out chandra/flamespeaker?

Vs Small Aggro : both are great, since chandra kills every x/1 and flamespeaker blocks everything profitably.

Vs G/W aggro / Mono Green : these matchups feel a bit tricky to me, because they have small creatures but also a lot of big guys. How good are prophetic flamespeakers and chandra when you are facing wurm tokens or arbor colossus ? Sure, you need card advantage to play the control role, but would you side in the full 5 chandra /flamespeaker?

Vs Mono Blue Devotion: I read last Zem's post on spikes where he gave a "rare sideboarding advice" and he didn't side in chandra's. Are they really not
good enough? i guess this is because the only target is an 0/1 cloudfin raptor which is insignificant. On the other hand, card advantage is always good when playing control and chandra can help killing weirds together with lightning strike or shoot down master of waves tokens when we don't have chains/banishing light. So i'm a bit confused about this.

Vs mono black control: My instinct would be to side in only chandra since she dies only to heroe's downfall while flamespeaker dies to everything, but i read some of you having good experiences with flamespeaker in the matchup. Would you side him in even if you already had 2 chandra and 2 assemble the legion for inevitability?

Vs U/W/x control : Both are good, Chandra for her 0 ability, flamespeaker because he is a threat on board and gives card advantage. Although i would honestly have firedrinker satyrs rather than flamespeakers.... because 3 mana is a lot to ask in a matchup where you always want to put pressure.

Vs Monsters : I would
for sure leave out flamespeaker against both R/G and Jund because it gets blocked by everything. Against R/G, i think it is fine to play the control role and board in chandra only for card advantage... you need to draw the right answers at the right moments (for example if you waste a mortar on a courser than you might get destroyed by a dragon.... but this may get better if you run some stoke the flames), but overall you should be ok. Things get trickier against jund, because they run rakdo's return. I know it is only a 2 of so probably i should board the same i do against R/G, but a timely rakdos return can single handedly win if you have a hand full of removal spells. So i am tempted to just try racing against jund, given that they have more taplands and shocklands i think that it is a reasonable approach.

Any advice would be appreciated, and don't mind offending me if i wrote idiot things

I guess that the little problem Chandra has against monoU consists in all those pesky flying guys that doesn't let her be.

Chandra is fine vs Ux Devotion your in the control role here (I run her in this MU), Flame Speaker is just is better though so if your running him you should play him...

Guys keep in mind if your uncomfortable with a play-style, it doesn't mean you should force yourself into it!

Just play what suit you, I go with an extremely proactive style (#YOLO) which has netting me many wins while Zem prefers incremental grindy games which works for him.

Caryatids and tramplers are what make Chandra and flamespeaker bad vs g based decks. I mean she is fine to run if you just want to draw extra cards a turn, but I'd rather keep in higher impact cards.

Flamespeaker is called a pet card, you don't have to run it, there are better options

Just make sure you feed it, bathe it, and give it flea treatments.

Don't feed it after midnight or get it wet.

My pet Flamespeakers feed on what's left of my defeated opponents.

Anyone have experience vs the newer Mono Green decks? The inevitability they have seems intimidating.

Burn is good against us. Burn/remove/kill our devotion creatures and mana dorks and we're screwed. You're practically given a free win G1 while post sideboard we only have Disciples.

Yeah, I tested a number of games last night. They do also have reclamaition sage though to take out chains which is quite powerful. Talking to the guy, Hushwing was the scariest sideboard card for him since it turns of BTE, Disciple, and Sage in one swoop.

It doesn't seem like they run
Carytid which makes flamespeaker obliteratingly powerful. The number of flamespeaker + helix that took out Poly's was impressive or just 2 for 1's with flamespeaker and backup burn.

I ended up boarding in 12-14 cards against green, was crazy.

About the other topics:

I still don't like Chandra vs U devotion because there is too much evasion to protect her. I guess others have different success.

If you're running assemble, you probably don't need flamespeaker unless you notice they're light on removal.

Eye test tells me I don't want to play Flamespeaker vs Green.


Pillar vs Reprisal. How has everyone's testing/numbers been?

Pillar vs Reprisal. How has everyone's testing/numbers been?

It kills all the things that I want to kill.

There is nothing that I want to hit with Reprisal that I cannot hit with Pillar. The reverse is not true. The extra point of mana is a bit rough at times but since we are using it to stop "deal with this or die" level threats, I would keep Pillar.

KeIth and Justin are are slam dunk on best posts of the day.

I appreciate the work and dedication. Bravo gents.

"deal with this or die" level threats

The only two I can think of is Gary and Courser (I am excluding FBW and Thassa because I think its very narrow to side in Pillar vs Mono U), both of which are not deal with this or die. You have chains and BL for courser, so reprisal is a 2 mana answer all other threats you'd want to hit with pillar.

KeIth and Justin are are slam dunk on best posts of the day.

I appreciate the work and dedication. Bravo gents.

You're such a stud.

Pillar has been great for me. Definitely won me a game at scg baltimore - sided it in for a junk matchup, guy was running multiple exile angels, palisade giant, coursers, bbov, ect.

Game one I just burned him out pretty easily, but he brought in the giant for game two. It was ridiculous, I would chain it, he'd blow up the chains, I'd two for one myself to kill it only to have him obzedat aid it right back into play multiple times... he ground me down with the angels after that.

Game three I shut off his Angel with hushwing and was racing him with burn when he lands the giant, at two life, followed by a bbov. I managed to skull crack the bbov swing, top deck the pillar and hit him for exactly lethal with a Phoenix and the hushwing.

Anyways point is that I'd have totally lost if that pillar had been reprisal, exile saved my ass

"deal with this or die" level threats

The only two I can think of is Gary and Courser (I am excluding FBW and Thassa because I think its very narrow to side in Pillar vs Mono U), both of which are not deal with this or die. You have chains and BL for courser, so reprisal is a 2 mana answer all other threats you'd want to hit with pillar.

I have lost a lot of games due to Courser. Also add Archangel of Thune and Brimaz to the list.

"deal with this or die" level threats

The only two I can think of is Gary and Courser (I am excluding FBW and Thassa because I think its very narrow to side in Pillar vs Mono U), both of which are not deal with this or die. You have chains and BL for courser, so reprisal is a 2 mana answer all other threats you'd want to hit with pillar.

I have lost a lot of games due to Courser. Also add Archangel of
Thune and Brimaz to the list.

Mortar/chains deal with those. I don't think I would be boarding in Pillar vs control. I get losing games to courser, but that could easily be attributed to not drawing chains/BLight/Mortars.

Just not sure if the extra mana requirement is actually worth it.

edit: how popular do expect giant to really be though? Could of easily top deckd a chain.

Eh it was just an example. I feel like it's a good replacement for reprisal, exile really matters against many decks and its only one mana more

Eye test tells me I don't want to play Flamespeaker vs Green.

Enough with the eye tests. DTR's success rate with it lately is frankly so bad that I'm surprised anyone still tries it for actual evaluation.

Flamespeaker is horrible vs Carytid, amazing against anything else in Green if you're playing the control role appropriately. I specifically ran about 20 games last night against the green devotion deck with elf/satyr mana dorks just to confirm. Try it before you knock it.

Pillar vs Reprisal. How has everyone's testing/numbers been?

Been running 2 pillar. Reprisal always struck me as narrow and I'd cut it down to 1 when I was using it against 3-4 targets after testing. I disagree with you that pillar
hitting courser/gary/angel/etc is irrelevant just because you have other cards . You cast the spells that are in your hand, not the ones in your deck. How often have you had to mortar or chain a nightveil specter because you didn't have lightning strike?

In Z's kangaroo meta ( ) where the only major thing he needs to kill is Demon, I can see being [mana]1[/mana] more isn't worth hitting a card that he's already decided to largely ignore with his all removal sideboard plan. In an open meta, I think the decision is questionable.

I'm a bit reluctant using pillar against blue myself but Khaos has had good results against it so I'm going to apply the eye test rule against myself here and try it before I open my mouth.

I'm leaning back towards Searing Blood in the board again, there are so many juicy targets for it, including the new Mono Green devotion lists.
Having 3 or 6 damage banked really does make a difference when you go on the beatdown against decks that can rebuild pretty quickly, especially if you didn't have the right answer to some piece of their board.


[deck]
2 Chandra, Pyromaster
3 Searing Blood
3 Mizzium Mortars
3 Wear/Tear
3 Boros Reckoner
1 Hushwing Gryff
[/deck]

The Reckoners and Gryff are also sometimes Pillars or Rams.

Rhyno, how many enchantments do you expect to see right now?

More than I currently see, which is already a lot.
Wear/Tear is one of my favorite cards in the board.

RE: Pillar in against Mono Blue

To be fair, I only sideboarded in 1 since it only hits 8 cards and half the time, it's only going to hit the Weird. It's almost like Chains #5.

Sex Pillar: 60% of the time, it works every time.

Hmm I'm not a fan of searing blood in the sideboard. We're already well positioned against the decks that searing blood is good against, I'd rather throw in stuff that gives me better game against my weaker match ups.

We're already well positioned against the decks that searing blood is good against

The only matchup I don't like Searing Blood in right now is MonoB and Control and we don't need every slot dedicated to those decks. It still savages mana dorks, mutavaults, MonoU, and the worse but popular version of burn. It really just depends on where the meta goes.

What do you perceive your weak match-ups to be?

Basically my biggest deciding factor will be which green decks emerge as the most popular and how many mana dorks they run. If they're running the full sets of Mystics and Voyaging Satyrs as well as BTEs, I'll be happy to have Searing Bloods.

Given how explosive the green decks can be, killing a mana dork while clocking them faster is one of the best things we can do.

Knowing Green devo will plays Discples (which they can cast for free sometimes), are you guys choosing to leave in skullcracks?