Dies to Removal

I think you're better off running a single Stormbreath over a single Chandra; it's just another bomb to draw into as the game stalls out.

I'm with freedom, honestly if esper is your most problematic match-up and you are confident in being able to outplay other opponents at your LGS level, you'd be better off playing pyrored with mutavaults which crushes esper pretty hard.

Gentlemen, I've been brewing, and I believe this may be the next level. Comments, constructive criticism and critique appreciated.

[deck]
Creatures (30)
4 Firedrinker Satyr
4 Rakdos Cackler
4 Burning-Tree Emissary
4 Firefist Striker
2 Goblin Shortcutter
4 Boros Reckoner
4 Chandra's Phoenix
4 Fanatic of Mogis

Spells (8)
4 Lightning Strike
4 Magma Jet

Land (22)
20 Mountain
2 Mutavault

Sideboard (15)
2 Mutavault
3 Mizzium Mortars
2 Act of Treason
3 Flames of the Firebrand
2 Chandra, Pyromaster
3 Stormbreath Dragon
[/deck]

Sideboarding

VS GW: -4 Firedrinker Satyr, -4 Rakdos Cackler, -4 Magma Jet
+2 Mutavault,+3
Mizzium Mortars, +2 Act of Treason, +2 Chandra, Pyromaster, +3 Stormbreath Dragon
Plan: Falter effects, steal effects, and fucking dragons.

VS UW: -4 Firefist Striker, -2 Goblin Shortcutter, -4 Boros Reckoner
+2 Mutavault, +3 Flames of the Firebrand, +2 Chandra, Pyromaster, +3 Stormbreath Dragon
Plan: Early pressure, midgame phoenixes with recursion, later game dragons, which they can not answer, with anything other than Elspeth.

VS the Mirror: -4 Firedrinker Satyr, -4 Fanatic of Mogis
+3 Flames of the Firebrand, +3 Mizzium Mortars, +2 Chandra, Pyromaster
Plan: Aggressively trade resources and grind them out with Chandra / 2 for 1's.

VS Random Stuff: No changes.
Plan: Just stomp.

Going to 24 lands, I think 4 Mutavaults seems greedy. Especially with Reckoners.

@Narcus: Chandra is excellent in non-control matchups.

Sideboard lands can change (if need be) to 1 Vault, 1 Mountain. You aren't cutting any mountains when you bring vaults in though, they're mostly for control, where you will be siding reckoners out. It is a little greedy to use reckoners with less than 21 red sources, so it is likely correct to split them in the SB.

Wouldn't 21 mountan/1 vault main and 3 vault sideboard be correct if you're mainboarding reckoner?

Sideboard lands can change (if need be) to 1 Vault, 1 Mountain. You aren't cutting any mountains when you bring vaults in though, they're mostly for control, where you will be siding reckoners out. It is a little greedy to use reckoners with less than 21 red sources, so it is likely correct to split them in the SB.

I understand that you aren't cutting mountains, I just wouldn't want to side into 24 sources for Big Red, still need Reckoners, and not be able to hit 3 colored sources. 1 Mountain, 1 Vault is probably correct iff. you want Stormbreaths against decks where you will also want
Reckoner (which I think you do).

Probability of hitting three mountains does not change.

Probability of hitting three mountains does not change.

While this is very true it will cause moments where you feel it does. You are going to have a moment or two where you will draw vault as your third land and feel like you were screwed. This is not a reason not to put them in, it's just psychologically demoralizing.

Sideboard lands can change (if need be) to 1 Vault, 1 Mountain. You aren't cutting any mountains when you bring vaults in though, they're mostly for control, where you will be siding reckoners out. It is a little greedy to use reckoners with less than 21 red sources, so it is likely correct to split them in the SB.

1 Mountain, 1 Vault is probably correct iff. you want Stormbreaths against decks where you will also want Reckoner (which I
think you do).

Probability of hitting three mountains does not change.

Sideboard lands can change (if need be) to 1 Vault, 1 Mountain. You aren't cutting any mountains when you bring vaults in though, they're mostly for control, where you will be siding reckoners out. It is a little greedy to use reckoners with less than 21 red sources, so it is likely correct
to split them in the SB.

1 Mountain, 1 Vault is probably correct iff. you want Stormbreaths against decks where you will also want Reckoner (which I think you do).

Probability of hitting three mountains does not change.

If you have 21 mountains, 3 Vaults vs. 20 mountains, 4 Vaults?

I remember from back around December when ham crunched the numbers for Ash Zealot and found that we wanted to be playing at least 21 mountains in order to reliably cast her on turn two. No matter how many Helion Crucibles you chose to add, the safe starting point was 21 mountains. Now we need to curve out to three, and people are cutting mountains. This is stupid. Granted, Mutavault is a more powerful card than Crucible, but I still feel that your starting point should be no less than 22 mountains.

@khaospawn: Your argument is dead on except for one niggling little issue: reckoner is not necessarily an auto include. If you are main decking him then you are quite right about needing to hit him on curve. If you aren't (which is a perfectly valid option if you want more speed) you can easily get by on 21 mountains +2 vaults, provided you have the 22nd mountain in your board for when reckoner come in. You can have your cake and eat it too. Reckoner is a nice 3 devotion, but a 3 drop 2 devotion card that makes you faster is worth fanatic hitting for 1 less. You can't rely on fanatic to win games for you, some games are going to come down to playing and swinging with haste dudes, that's part of why we're in this list instead of bte oriented
deck. Reckoner absolutely comes in vs. other aggressive decks, and some midrange decks. Heck he's the best play you have against gw and naya, but I feel like he really slows down your maindeck gameplan of pile-in. Some will main deck him and board him out when hems less relevant, I'm just going to do the opposite.

I remember from back around December when ham crunched the numbers for Ash Zealot and found that we wanted to be playing at least 21 mountains in order to reliably cast her on turn two. No matter how many Helion Crucibles you chose to add, the safe starting point was 21 mountains. Now we need to curve out to three, and people are cutting mountains. This is stupid. Granted, Mutavault is a more powerful card than Crucible, but I still feel that your starting point should be no less than 22 mountains.

Thank you, freedom!

Redbros,

The deck does not want a colorless
land until you get to turn 4. And at that point, that colorless may just as well come from a Nykthos.

The deck HAS to be able to cast Reckoner on turn 3.

Being consistent means making a few sacrifices every now and then to ensure the main plan happens often.

The plan for a Mogis deck is play dudes, turn them sideways, build devotion, and then win. It doesn't want to leave too many options open available for the long haul. Sure, it has cards that enable it to go long, like the Hammer and Chandra - but they also enable the main strategy.

Trying to shove more than 1 Mutavault into this deck is dumb. It wants 22 Mountains.

Honestly ask yourself this:

DO YOU WANT TO PLAY MUTAVAULT SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU HAVE IT AND THAT ANY DECK COULD JUST AFFORD TO PLAY IT BECAUSE, WELL, IT'S FUCKING MUTAVAULT?

Then play it. Lean on your crutch. Play the cards because you spent money on them. Do it because it makes you feel happy. Don't let me talk you out of it.

Still with me??? Good, because this
must mean you want to "unlearn what you have learned." Believe it or not, this deck is quite fragile. The pillar of it's strength is that it can reliably cast threats. Which is quite the opposite when compared to Young Peezy builds. P$ doesn't reliably cast threats. It casts "card advantage engines" in the form of Pyromancer, Phoenix, and Chandra, coupled with Burn. Mutavault is the perfect addition because you can reasonably play it turn 2 and cast Young P-Money to start building advantage. The cool thing is that because Mutavault hindered you the slightest bit on turn 2, you were able to stay on curve and build an eventual "nest egg" in the form of an extra creature as early as turn 3.

You can't afford that in Devotion Red. You MUST play your threats on curve. You either build an insurmountable army that wins with a Mogis and attacking or you get stuck on land and die. It's that simple.

The whole reason to play Mogis is to hit harder earlier. Think Mike Tyson for
this deck. You want to win in the 1st or 2nd round by delivering a staggeringly powerful uppercut. Young Peezy decks opt for the Muhammad Ali approach: float like a butterfly, sting like a bee. Except that the sting from this Queen Bee is enough to bring you down permanently.

So what are you? Mike or Ali? Going "Tyson" means you want eschew the fancy tricks and go right for the ear...er, throat. Being pretty means going the distance and having those fancy dance steps. It's hard to be Ali, but to win like him is to do it in style.It's all a matter of choice.

The problem with everyone and the majority of the Mogis decks is that they're trying to do some weird amalgamation of the two best decks: Z's and Bertorelli's. Anything that doesn't fit that category is a bad Turtenwald deck.

Here's a tip: stay focused.

Red is passionate, but it's consistent. Red is deadly when it can be complex. Each deck is capable of doing exactly that. Just don't confuse the two, and the deck will
build itself.

He's so good right now that you want 3-4 in your deck no matter what. In Pyro Red, he's SB material. In Mogis, he auto-include maindeck because he synergizes so well with then deck's namesake card. Devotion kills, brah.

I remember from back around December when ham crunched the numbers for Ash Zealot and found that we wanted to be playing at least 21 mountains in order to reliably cast her on turn two. No matter how many Helion Crucibles you chose to add, the safe starting point was 21 mountains. Now we need to curve out to three, and people are cutting mountains. This is stupid. Granted, Mutavault is a more powerful card than
Crucible, but I still feel that your starting point should be no less than 22 mountains.

Thank you, freedom!

Redbros,

The deck does not want a colorless land until you get to turn 4. And at that point, that colorless may just as well come from a Nykthos.

The deck HAS to be able to cast Reckoner on turn 3.

Being consistent means making a few sacrifices every now and then to ensure the main plan happens often.

The plan for a Mogis deck is play dudes, turn them sideways, build devotion, and then win. It doesn't want to leave too many options open available for the long haul. Sure, it has cards that enable it to go long, like the Hammer and Chandra - but they also enable the main strategy.

Trying to shove more than 1 Mutavault into this deck is dumb. It wants 22 Mountains.

Honestly ask yourself this:

DO YOU WANT TO PLAY MUTAVAULT SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU HAVE IT AND THAT ANY DECK COULD JUST AFFORD TO PLAY IT BECAUSE, WELL, IT'S FUCKING MUTAVAULT?

Then play it. Lean on
your crutch. Play the cards because you spent money on them. Do it because it makes you feel happy. Don't let me talk you out of it.

Still with me??? Good, because this must mean you want to "unlearn what you have learned." Believe it or not, this deck is quite fragile. The pillar of it's strength is that it can reliably cast threats. Which is quite the opposite when compared to Young Peezy builds. P$ doesn't reliably cast threats. It casts "card advantage engines" in the form of Pyromancer, Phoenix, and Chandra, coupled with Burn. Mutavault is the perfect addition because you can reasonably play it turn 2 and cast Young P-Money to start building advantage. The cool thing is that because Mutavault hindered you the slightest bit on turn 2, you were able to stay on curve and build an eventual "nest egg" in the form of an extra creature as early as turn 3.

You can't afford that in Devotion Red. You MUST play your threats on curve. You either build an insurmountable army
that wins with a Mogis and attacking or you get stuck on land and die. It's that simple.

The whole reason to play Mogis is to hit harder earlier. Think Mike Tyson for this deck. You want to win in the 1st or 2nd round by delivering a staggeringly powerful uppercut. Young Peezy decks opt for the Muhammad Ali approach: float like a butterfly, sting like a bee. Except that the sting from this Queen Bee is enough to bring you down permanently.

So what are you? Mike or Ali? Going "Tyson" means you want eschew the fancy tricks and go right for the ear...er, throat. Being pretty means going the distance and having those fancy dance steps. It's hard to be Ali, but to win like him is to do it in style.It's all a matter of choice.

The problem with everyone and the majority of the Mogis decks is that they're trying to do some weird amalgamation of the two best decks: Z's and Bertorelli's. Anything that doesn't fit that category is a bad Turtenwald deck.

Here's a tip: stay focused.

nRed is passionate, but it's consistent. Red is deadly when it can be complex. Each deck is capable of doing exactly that. Just don't confuse the two, and the deck will build itself.

No. I do not just want to play mutavault because I have them.

I want to play them because:

A) They are strictly better than your 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th mountain in play.

B) My list is preboarded for midrange / aggro mirrors. The deck has serious problems with sweepers. We need to improve our control m/u

C) When going big and siding in more land, I'd like them to do something more than tap for R

D) Other people are able to make it work (scgo, both top 16 lists with mv). If they can get away with it, why can't we?

E) We can't run hammer in a deck with Dragons. MV is flood insurance.

F) Nykthos was terrible in testing.

G) Makes FFS a lot better.

If I after testing it becomes a problem I will run 22 mountains in the MB and two vaults in the SB.

You're also neglecting that most of the removal for Reckoner will hit your opponent back/kill a creature/stonewall attacks.

Reckoner, Phoenix, and Hammer all serve completely different purposes. You're also neglecting that most of the removal for Reckoner will hit your opponent back/kill a creature/stonewall attacks.

I truly believe, with the most conviction that I can muster, more than 1 Mutavault in this deck is going to FUCK anybody.