I'm reminded of Rhystic Studies' "Red Deck Wins" video where he references the "Perfect" 40 Bolts/20 Mountains deck and I can't help feel that we're getting really close to this.
40 bolts is not even enough right now, you need 7 bolts to kill, and assuming the perfects that is still t4 at the earliest, you are dying to combo T1 or t2, and functionally dying to midrange or control stabilizing T3. Even if your opponent fetches twice or ancient tomb’s, you still need to exactly open+draw 6 bolts and 3 mountains and be on the play to have a reasonable chance of winning, getting stuck on 2 mountains or drawing the 4th one means you still lose the T3 kill.
some day i want to convince a playgroup to try out these "platonic ideal" decks. 40 bolt, 40 counterspell, 40 bear, 40 healing salve, 40 doom blade, etc. i don't think bolt wins. it might. but i doubt it. it definitely doesn't win against real legacy decks.
@@arachnophilia427 I think it would be more fun to play those platonic ideal decks against actual decks in actual formats, just playing them against each other is more of a thought experiment than a game. The question of which formats are more powerful than 20 mountain 40 bolt is kinda interesting though and would require real gameplay.
As legacy burn enjoyer like you said the issues with list was lack of tools to deal with free spells (roiling vortex) or any blasts to deal specifically with blue permanents. This is me thing personally but I do enjoy playing a playset of red canopy lands just to feel little bit better if the "land draw" happens since you can have a chance to turn excess 3rd or 4th land into a draw which hopefully is that fireblast you were praying your top deck to be. Edit: just to clarify that for me the canopylands are just a feel good (read cope) cards to play. A play set of them doesn't math side do that much but sometimes just ripping that last bit of burn from top with sacking islet/canyon just feels nice.
It's a consideration that I can understand, it just also feels bad to play on 2 canopylands with 2 fireblasts in hand... I can see running red fetchlands instead as fancypants deck thinning, though with harbinger in the format it is a bit complicated
I know that basic mountain has a bunch of cool benefits to it (wasteland avoiding, price of progress, etc) but this league really showed how much the deck could use some canopy lands.
every. time. burn dies to its own lack of card selection. my win rate jumped way up when i stopped playing GG and started playing DRC, and it's largely down to binning dead draw lands.
i agree, it means have the key around in that case but it only lets them find lifegain to use in their upkeep in response to the ring trigger so it’s definitely still worth it to burn them out imo
I made my self a legacy budget burn (basically just upgraded a pauper burn deck) to have for legacy in my LGS. Personally I have 2 Harsh Mentor in the side instead of extra Price of Progress. It does funny things against breakfast/nadu players, while also being a punish for fetch lands. It's honestly over-preformed for me so far, but MTGo sidebording is a lot different than LGS
this feels like the perfect deck to include Ramunap Ruins for some additional burn. maybe a single one of the ping-lands. feels also like this deck should include at least a few fetches and canopy-lands in order to filter out as many lands as possible out of the deck.
Wasteland and to a lesser extent stifle is the reason people do not run these cards in legacy, because of how frequent and backbreaking they are. Brian cook had that conversation come up in his streams as well. Given that burn is essentially a "3 lands + 7 bolts" type deck, you can't afford to go down a card. Plus canopy lands are kind of slow in legacy, cracking one is timewalking yourself and a lot of decks just win in that turn. They actually see 0 play as far as I know, including decks that can recur lands from the gy. They are also not mountains for fireblast concerns.
one of these days i'll jam vise and see what happens. i took burn back to the drawing board a while back, and experimented with stuff. and my list is pretty different now. no rift bolts, no GG.
I jammed a quite different approach to burn a month or two ago. I opted for Grim Lavamancer to guarantee damage through the numerous blockers thesedays, as well as being able to block and kill itself to dodge lifelink. I also ran razorkin who was fine and dodged the blockers issue. I ran a singleton Thunderous wrath that was excellent and I liked searing blaze a lot at the time as forge wasn't around as much so removing creatures was a more reliable plan.
Unironically rather worrying seeing so many people suggest fetchlands to thin the deck when simply the math says the improvement is negligible. Yes it looks and feels like it would matter but especially in case of burn what you are observing is the fault of "traditional burn list" being so feast or famine strategy that any amount of extra lands can bugger your plan up way way harder than in any U/X deck shell you end up comparing the viability of the deck with.
i run 8 fetches, but not for thinning. it's a card type in the graveyard for DRC. replacing GG with DRC is such a huge difference that even though it's "wrong" every other burn player at my LGS followed suit. fetches don't really thin a deck, but DRC does.
I played a turbo budget mono red 12-whack goblins deck in modern for a bit and my immediate thought when I saw the deck list was "this feels like too many lands with no utility"
I played RDW in standard for a bit from spark to kaldheim and a little around the beginning period of pioneer so my experience is dated and from lower power but what about light up the stage to smooth "draws"? You'll pretty reliably be casing for 1 and digging 2 deep can help get into or out of lands. I specifically say LUTS because you get the cards for 2 end steps and while you lose some surprise you can better plan a head similar to having cantrips.
There is a small percentage to be gained off of playing fetches in the mana base. It wouldn’t impact openers and it should slightly increase the live draw percentage. All be it small, but min maxing should be better
I like BURN very, very much. So I have some experiments with it. I think old-school list dosn't work well: 1.) Creatures are too weak 2.) Lands are dead draws 3.) Some control solutions are needed. I tested few weeks this build on Xmage with some good results. Maybe it will be helpful :) 4 Goblin Guide // Boltwave 4 Eidolon of the Great Revel 4 Razorkin Needlehead 1 Grim Lavamancer 4 Lightning Bolt 4 Chain Lightning 4 Lava Spike 4 Rift Bolt 4 Price of Progress 1 Flame Rift 4 Roiling Vortex 2 Smash to Smithereens 3 Fireblast 4 Arid Mesa 8 Mountain 4 Wooded Foothills 2 Prismatic Vista SB: 2 Searing Blood 2 Smash to Smithereens 4 Faerie Macabre 2 Magebane Lizard 3 Slagstorm 2 Searing Blaze
How about Ramunap Ruins? It can shock those last few points when you're flooding out. A Sundering Eruption or 2 could get your critters past blockers, and be a (painful) untapped red source as well.
i think this deck definitely wants Roiling Vortex. between turning off life gain against something like Barrowgoyf in round 4 and being very strong against free spells like Force, Force, Daze and fast mana, i think it's really worthwhile to have
my fastest win was a T1 concession by creative technique, when i went mountain, lotus petal, vortex. vortex is a house. it is almost always a must-counter spell unless you're in the mirror.
Your bad luck with drawing lands is actually astounding. I know it's probably not something you should respect with the deckbuilding (the odds are really on your side), but I've liked Light Up the Stage when I was last playing burn(-ish) in standard. Sad topdeck when you have no gas and just need a burn spell though...
Another creature worthy of consideration in Burn deck is Slickshot Show-Off imo. Roiling Vortex is so good vs not only life gain, but free spells (versatility). Vexing Bauble is such a thing nowadays, I think maybe Rift Bolt is not good any more. For my sideboard I use 4x Dead // Gone for Marit Lage type of decks, can also bounce Murktide. 4x Smash to Smithereen to kill troublesome artifacts while dealing damage, 2x Roiling Vortex for blue / artifact decks, and the rest for graveyard removal. I also put in 4x fetch lands, and 2x Barbarian Ring mainboard, so I can thin out lands in the deck, or if you have a big graveyard, you can deal uncounterable damage with the activated ability of Barbarian Ring (you don't care about your own hp so much, so it's just a resource to use).
@@arachnophilia427 so my problem with DRC in Burn is that it is less useful because Burn has no cantrips, it also helps in building up the graveyard. You don’t utilize graveyard much if at all for Burn, therefore it’s not as good. If the opponent slams a Barrowgoyf on the field, you will be essentially helping him gain more life. Life gain is a big bane for Burn, so you NEED to dedicate some cards to stop that.
@@cwu1 DRC is more useful in burn BECAUSE you don't have cantrips. there's no filtering or card selection. DRC is it, and she absolutely does make a difference. lifegain was always a problem for burn, you should run 4x vortex effects main, and probably roiling vortex. i tested roiling and sulfuric, and getting it down a turn earlier and absolutely breaking free spells seemed like a good trade off for the one time it got needled. but, i'll say this for DRC. i never won turn 2 with a guide.
Once the jumpstart cards are available any thoughts on the viability of Neerdiv, Devious Diver? Seems like surly it can do something... well other then the fact its a merfolk
Round 2 match 2 they were at 12 with a ring on 3. You had 2 lava spikes and a skewer. Couldnt use have just put them to 3 and let them die to the trigger over smashing their key
I think Red Stompy is just the better "red aggro deck" in legacy on all fronts. It's cards are simply more efficient and versatile with the likes of Fable. If I was to try something "novel" it would be to see if you could lower the curve on a Stompy list to add some of this red burn to act as both removal and finisher damage. But I'm not sure if that would actually help? Sol lands are just SO GOOD at powering out early 3 drops I don't know what the point is of playing so many 1 drops.
Rather then shaving lands, i would consider the sac => draw lands or maybe just fetchlands so you are less likely to draw more not sure with how much you can get away tough as it deals damage to you + makes fire blast/price of progress worse
Unfortunate game 1, I was thinking in game 2 that double spike into skewer and let them die to their ring trigger would have been best but who knows if there is any instant speed lifegain.
perhaps a couple non-basics could be useful we don't want to go under 18 lands but we need to fix the flooding problem but perhaps giving targets for opposing wastelands is bad
I feel like red burn decks would be fine if they just evolved past cramming 34 one drops and ran a few wren's resolve type effects to see games through to the end.
honestly i think we need to leave the philosophy of fire behind. measuring everything against bolt is not good enough anymore. actual factual lightning bolt isn't even the best card in the deck.
I’ve been a RDW player for a long time and don’t listen to the people that say it’s easy, it’s easy to win a game but to string together 5-10 rounds and win 80% plus of the time is very hard. The line are not easy to see it takes a lot of practice. The deck can absolutely just turn 3-4 against some decks and there’s nothing then can do and the line can feel brain dead and bad players can stumble in to easy wins and it feels bad. But those players aren’t going 5-0 at fmns with it. Don’t play burn unless you like 3-2 cause 90% of them time that’s what will happen 5% you get a trophy and the other 5% you’ll get stomped. RDW is typical either you stomp them or you get stomped. Magic has become pretty much that these days the long grind midrange days are over power creep is really decks snowball too much. You don’t get back and fourth games for more then a few turns then it’s over I miss the back and fourth 25 minute games. I wanna see less combo and aggro and more control and midrange
Drawing mountains after mountains suck big time. Can we not add 8 red fetches to thin out the deck to improve our odds drawing gas? I understand burn's appeal is the all mountain manabase but the flooding problem is real.
Fetch lands help with that game one issue just can be a nonbo with multiple blast but.. treating those new survail lands as like a half spell migjt be ok ?? Also den of the bugbear could not be total butt?
unless you have another reason for running fetches (like DRC, lavaman, or searing blaze) the damage is not worth the thinning. the thinning makes a difference on average on your 17th turn.
So I would run like 2 canopy lands and a good amount of fetches. I know that you want to run budget but you really want to have 2 lands maybe 3 for the whole game. I know that everyone reading this prolly knows this but you really want to get your lands curve and thin out your deck that you do not get anymore lands. If you ever draw land number 4 you might as well scoop it up, the chances of winning are so low.
@@arachnophilia427 DRC would definitely make the deck play differently, and the Eidolon tax becomes much more relevant with fetches. That said, it's probably worth it to run ~50% fetches just to help remove bad draws
I see that it conflicts with Price of Progress, but what about Barbarian Ring, Ramunap Ruins, Den of the Bugbear, Sokenzan, Crucible of Defiance and Sunbaked Canyon? Mountains are clean, but after having 3 they are the worst draw in your deck, making it such that you have 15 bad draws in any game.
Honestly, you're not going that much over the budget with a playset or two of fetchlands, at 18 lands you'd be deck thinning in a significant way every time you draw one, and you can reliably keep 2-3 lands and be confident you'd draw a sufficient amount of gas.
Tbh even though on avarage its clearly wrong i would have boarded out mountains out of rage :D Like that was 3 or more times getting 50% or more lands in a deck where only 30% of the cards are lands. That physically infuriating even while watching xD
1. DRS has no haste and deals no damage and all R costing spells and creatures have to be able to do bolts worth of damage. 2. You'd have to alter the deck quite a bit to ensure delirium and it's not worth it
@@josehaya6362 Got curious and did the math, sure enough you are correct. Even in the best case scenarios it changes the odds by 2%. I guess I thought the lower the land count the more impactful it would be. The more you know! 😅
Fireblast really wants Mountains, and Eidolon means you don't really want to lower your own life total unnecessarily. I do like a few Barbarian Rings for more damage, and some people like the MH1 Canopy lands, but just Mountains is standard for Legacy.
![Twenty One Pilots - “The Line” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E2Rj2gQAyPA/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm reminded of Rhystic Studies' "Red Deck Wins" video where he references the "Perfect" 40 Bolts/20 Mountains deck and I can't help feel that we're getting really close to this.
sadly that may not be fast enough nowadays
@josehaya6362 that's when you sac 2 mountains for Fireblast
40 bolts is not even enough right now, you need 7 bolts to kill, and assuming the perfects that is still t4 at the earliest, you are dying to combo T1 or t2, and functionally dying to midrange or control stabilizing T3.
Even if your opponent fetches twice or ancient tomb’s, you still need to exactly open+draw 6 bolts and 3 mountains and be on the play to have a reasonable chance of winning, getting stuck on 2 mountains or drawing the 4th one means you still lose the T3 kill.
20 mountains, 36 bolts, 4 fireblast.
@@impendiomy current record with burn, excluding a T1 concession, is T2 on the draw against initiative.
Alternate title: is 18 mountains too much land?
remember arena's 13 mountain sweet spot?
my legacy burn deck plays 8 mountains
I like how over time we only get closer to the mythical 20 mountains 40 lightning bolt pile.
some day i want to convince a playgroup to try out these "platonic ideal" decks. 40 bolt, 40 counterspell, 40 bear, 40 healing salve, 40 doom blade, etc.
i don't think bolt wins. it might. but i doubt it. it definitely doesn't win against real legacy decks.
@@arachnophilia427 I think it would be more fun to play those platonic ideal decks against actual decks in actual formats, just playing them against each other is more of a thought experiment than a game. The question of which formats are more powerful than 20 mountain 40 bolt is kinda interesting though and would require real gameplay.
As legacy burn enjoyer like you said the issues with list was lack of tools to deal with free spells (roiling vortex) or any blasts to deal specifically with blue permanents.
This is me thing personally but I do enjoy playing a playset of red canopy lands just to feel little bit better if the "land draw" happens since you can have a chance to turn excess 3rd or 4th land into a draw which hopefully is that fireblast you were praying your top deck to be.
Edit: just to clarify that for me the canopylands are just a feel good (read cope) cards to play. A play set of them doesn't math side do that much but sometimes just ripping that last bit of burn from top with sacking islet/canyon just feels nice.
Was coming here to suggest this.
It's a consideration that I can understand, it just also feels bad to play on 2 canopylands with 2 fireblasts in hand... I can see running red fetchlands instead as fancypants deck thinning, though with harbinger in the format it is a bit complicated
2:51 "Folks, this is a budget deck" Not what i put 18 Arabian Nights mountains into it.
I know that basic mountain has a bunch of cool benefits to it (wasteland avoiding, price of progress, etc) but this league really showed how much the deck could use some canopy lands.
Burn 🤝 getting flooded
every.
time.
burn dies to its own lack of card selection. my win rate jumped way up when i stopped playing GG and started playing DRC, and it's largely down to binning dead draw lands.
18:50 you could just bolt bolt bolt and your opponent dies to the one ring
i agree, it means have the key around in that case but it only lets them find lifegain to use in their upkeep in response to the ring trigger so it’s definitely still worth it to burn them out imo
Thought the same thing
Was wondering whether this will be in the comment or not during my view 😂
this should be a top comment..
I made my self a legacy budget burn (basically just upgraded a pauper burn deck) to have for legacy in my LGS. Personally I have 2 Harsh Mentor in the side instead of extra Price of Progress. It does funny things against breakfast/nadu players, while also being a punish for fetch lands. It's honestly over-preformed for me so far, but MTGo sidebording is a lot different than LGS
this feels like the perfect deck to include Ramunap Ruins for some additional burn. maybe a single one of the ping-lands. feels also like this deck should include at least a few fetches and canopy-lands in order to filter out as many lands as possible out of the deck.
Wasteland and to a lesser extent stifle is the reason people do not run these cards in legacy, because of how frequent and backbreaking they are. Brian cook had that conversation come up in his streams as well. Given that burn is essentially a "3 lands + 7 bolts" type deck, you can't afford to go down a card. Plus canopy lands are kind of slow in legacy, cracking one is timewalking yourself and a lot of decks just win in that turn. They actually see 0 play as far as I know, including decks that can recur lands from the gy. They are also not mountains for fireblast concerns.
Barbarian Ring is so much more efficient than Ramunap
@@natejablonski fair
deathtouch counter on a bowmaster is nasty. Harkening back to the old days, maybe some black vises and a valakut or two could really spicy things up.
one of these days i'll jam vise and see what happens.
i took burn back to the drawing board a while back, and experimented with stuff. and my list is pretty different now. no rift bolts, no GG.
I jammed a quite different approach to burn a month or two ago. I opted for Grim Lavamancer to guarantee damage through the numerous blockers thesedays, as well as being able to block and kill itself to dodge lifelink. I also ran razorkin who was fine and dodged the blockers issue. I ran a singleton Thunderous wrath that was excellent and I liked searing blaze a lot at the time as forge wasn't around as much so removing creatures was a more reliable plan.
I feel for you with the mana flooding in this video, there's so many land draws for an 18 mountain deck
18 mountains - limited mana base or Limited mana base?
I enjoyed this one, Phil.
Love me some burn, been watching all your vids for the past 2-3 months. Tysm for the daily legacy content thraben!
Unironically rather worrying seeing so many people suggest fetchlands to thin the deck when simply the math says the improvement is negligible. Yes it looks and feels like it would matter but especially in case of burn what you are observing is the fault of "traditional burn list" being so feast or famine strategy that any amount of extra lands can bugger your plan up way way harder than in any U/X deck shell you end up comparing the viability of the deck with.
Negligible ≠ none 😎
The answer actually is one red cycling land, like pauper always ran
i run 8 fetches, but not for thinning. it's a card type in the graveyard for DRC. replacing GG with DRC is such a huge difference that even though it's "wrong" every other burn player at my LGS followed suit.
fetches don't really thin a deck, but DRC does.
I played a turbo budget mono red 12-whack goblins deck in modern for a bit and my immediate thought when I saw the deck list was "this feels like too many lands with no utility"
Burn, the intro player friendly deck style. Just saying, Razorkin Needlehead might be a good support piece here to deal with Nadu draws.
Pretty sure Nadu just puts into hand instead of draws. Which is some BS.
@the_enamelator blah, your right.
Harsh Mentor is the tech for that matchup
I played RDW in standard for a bit from spark to kaldheim and a little around the beginning period of pioneer so my experience is dated and from lower power but what about light up the stage to smooth "draws"? You'll pretty reliably be casing for 1 and digging 2 deep can help get into or out of lands. I specifically say LUTS because you get the cards for 2 end steps and while you lose some surprise you can better plan a head similar to having cantrips.
Notable mentions; spikefield hazzard(cut/add land count), play with fire(scry 1 at the cost of 1 dmg), bomat courier(1 drop card selection + haste)
There is a small percentage to be gained off of playing fetches in the mana base. It wouldn’t impact openers and it should slightly increase the live draw percentage. All be it small, but min maxing should be better
With bolt wave in the mix you can basically play burn like one would in Alpha. 15 mountains and 45 bolts.
14:01 did you mean we could get "Phil"osophical?
I like BURN very, very much. So I have some experiments with it. I think old-school list dosn't work well: 1.) Creatures are too weak 2.) Lands are dead draws 3.) Some control solutions are needed. I tested few weeks this build on Xmage with some good results. Maybe it will be helpful :)
4 Goblin Guide // Boltwave
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Razorkin Needlehead
1 Grim Lavamancer
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Price of Progress
1 Flame Rift
4 Roiling Vortex
2 Smash to Smithereens
3 Fireblast
4 Arid Mesa
8 Mountain
4 Wooded Foothills
2 Prismatic Vista
SB:
2 Searing Blood
2 Smash to Smithereens
4 Faerie Macabre
2 Magebane Lizard
3 Slagstorm
2 Searing Blaze
I really liked the one part where you flooded. 😂
How about Ramunap Ruins? It can shock those last few points when you're flooding out. A Sundering Eruption or 2 could get your critters past blockers, and be a (painful) untapped red source as well.
Round 3 game 2, was a 98th percentile flood.
i think this deck definitely wants Roiling Vortex. between turning off life gain against something like Barrowgoyf in round 4 and being very strong against free spells like Force, Force, Daze and fast mana, i think it's really worthwhile to have
my fastest win was a T1 concession by creative technique, when i went mountain, lotus petal, vortex.
vortex is a house. it is almost always a must-counter spell unless you're in the mirror.
Your bad luck with drawing lands is actually astounding. I know it's probably not something you should respect with the deckbuilding (the odds are really on your side), but I've liked Light Up the Stage when I was last playing burn(-ish) in standard. Sad topdeck when you have no gas and just need a burn spell though...
Small sample set, obvi... but drawing all those Lands in a row (across multiple games) is maddening.
yayyy burn! my one and only. i'm interested to see both skewer and boltwave; i was thinking of replacing the skewers
my list is so tight i'm probably replacing lava spike.
already not running skewer and rift bolt.
28:13 drawing 8 or more out of 18 lands in 17 cards is 0.836% likely. Absolutely insane
Another creature worthy of consideration in Burn deck is Slickshot Show-Off imo. Roiling Vortex is so good vs not only life gain, but free spells (versatility). Vexing Bauble is such a thing nowadays, I think maybe Rift Bolt is not good any more. For my sideboard I use 4x Dead // Gone for Marit Lage type of decks, can also bounce Murktide. 4x Smash to Smithereen to kill troublesome artifacts while dealing damage, 2x Roiling Vortex for blue / artifact decks, and the rest for graveyard removal. I also put in 4x fetch lands, and 2x Barbarian Ring mainboard, so I can thin out lands in the deck, or if you have a big graveyard, you can deal uncounterable damage with the activated ability of Barbarian Ring (you don't care about your own hp so much, so it's just a resource to use).
DRC needs to be considered for burn.
GG gives your opponent card advantage. DRC gives you card selection.
@@arachnophilia427 so my problem with DRC in Burn is that it is less useful because Burn has no cantrips, it also helps in building up the graveyard. You don’t utilize graveyard much if at all for Burn, therefore it’s not as good. If the opponent slams a Barrowgoyf on the field, you will be essentially helping him gain more life. Life gain is a big bane for Burn, so you NEED to dedicate some cards to stop that.
@@cwu1 DRC is more useful in burn BECAUSE you don't have cantrips. there's no filtering or card selection. DRC is it, and she absolutely does make a difference.
lifegain was always a problem for burn, you should run 4x vortex effects main, and probably roiling vortex. i tested roiling and sulfuric, and getting it down a turn earlier and absolutely breaking free spells seemed like a good trade off for the one time it got needled.
but, i'll say this for DRC. i never won turn 2 with a guide.
Once the jumpstart cards are available any thoughts on the viability of Neerdiv, Devious Diver? Seems like surly it can do something... well other then the fact its a merfolk
Round 2 match 2 they were at 12 with a ring on 3. You had 2 lava spikes and a skewer. Couldnt use have just put them to 3 and let them die to the trigger over smashing their key
I think Red Stompy is just the better "red aggro deck" in legacy on all fronts. It's cards are simply more efficient and versatile with the likes of Fable. If I was to try something "novel" it would be to see if you could lower the curve on a Stompy list to add some of this red burn to act as both removal and finisher damage. But I'm not sure if that would actually help? Sol lands are just SO GOOD at powering out early 3 drops I don't know what the point is of playing so many 1 drops.
Rather then shaving lands, i would consider the sac => draw lands or maybe just fetchlands so you are less likely to draw more
not sure with how much you can get away tough as it deals damage to you + makes fire blast/price of progress worse
Unfortunate game 1, I was thinking in game 2 that double spike into skewer and let them die to their ring trigger would have been best but who knows if there is any instant speed lifegain.
This deck looks like it could use a harsh mentor for nadu and mystic forge matchups
I miss Roiling Vortex
Really feels like some number of mountains should be petal/simian
I play burn a lot in legacy and flooding is the decks biggest problem haha i feel your pain
perhaps a couple non-basics could be useful
we don't want to go under 18 lands but we need to fix the flooding problem
but perhaps giving targets for opposing wastelands is bad
why do red decks rarely play pyroblast in the frog meta?
no idea, i was running 3-ish in the SB before.
sometimes you just have to stop blue.
Wow that allergic reaction is not doing you favors! I’m glad none of my allergies are that bad
I did the math, you had a 6.4% chance to draw that many lands in game one match one.
What about Amped Raptor and Unstable Amulet that works with Rift Bolt?
How much could have help having land searchers and maybe 1 surveil land?
This deck often either draws too many lands or gets stuck on one
If that didn't happen this deck might be viable
this is a lesson in why card selection is such an important part of magic.
@@arachnophilia427 Maybe bolt decks need to start playing Magma Jet och Playing with Fire
@@ArsonBjork i play DRC
37:23 Pretty sure they are trying to not die to PoP and they ran out if basics
49:50 Needs more Barbarian Ring
I used to play ensnaring bridge ja blasts in the sideboard, but I haven't played legacy for 10 years so my guide migth be slightly outdated :D
I feel like red burn decks would be fine if they just evolved past cramming 34 one drops and ran a few wren's resolve type effects to see games through to the end.
honestly i think we need to leave the philosophy of fire behind. measuring everything against bolt is not good enough anymore. actual factual lightning bolt isn't even the best card in the deck.
I feel like this deck probably wants something like Valakut Exploration to get over the finish line.
Maybe a one-of Nahiri’s Lithoforming as well.
I’ve been a RDW player for a long time and don’t listen to the people that say it’s easy, it’s easy to win a game but to string together 5-10 rounds and win 80% plus of the time is very hard. The line are not easy to see it takes a lot of practice. The deck can absolutely just turn 3-4 against some decks and there’s nothing then can do and the line can feel brain dead and bad players can stumble in to easy wins and it feels bad. But those players aren’t going 5-0 at fmns with it. Don’t play burn unless you like 3-2 cause 90% of them time that’s what will happen 5% you get a trophy and the other 5% you’ll get stomped. RDW is typical either you stomp them or you get stomped. Magic has become pretty much that these days the long grind midrange days are over power creep is really decks snowball too much. You don’t get back and fourth games for more then a few turns then it’s over I miss the back and fourth 25 minute games. I wanna see less combo and aggro and more control and midrange
Why are we running zero fetches? At least 4 Prismatic Vistas. I know its a Fireblast deck and fetches hurt but, they should help against flooding.
Drawing mountains after mountains suck big time. Can we not add 8 red fetches to thin out the deck to improve our odds drawing gas? I understand burn's appeal is the all mountain manabase but the flooding problem is real.
I understand the appeal of having all one-mana bolts, but the deck really needs Searing Blaze.
Fetch lands help with that game one issue just can be a nonbo with multiple blast but.. treating those new survail lands as like a half spell migjt be ok ?? Also den of the bugbear could not be total butt?
Why no fetch lands? Would help somewhat with flood...
43:25 If they daze, don’t they die to Eidolon trigger?
Throw in fetch lands to potentially thin the deck as you go
unless you have another reason for running fetches (like DRC, lavaman, or searing blaze) the damage is not worth the thinning. the thinning makes a difference on average on your 17th turn.
Surpeiaed not looking at ghostfire slice atleast side board option against decks with multicolored like frog decks
Would we be able to play some copies of the horizon lands? Might be bad for your fireblasts though, but we just flooded so much
Even if it was daze in at about 42 minutes, casting daze wouldve done the last 2 damage anyway so attacking wasmt necessary
So I would run like 2 canopy lands and a good amount of fetches. I know that you want to run budget but you really want to have 2 lands maybe 3 for the whole game. I know that everyone reading this prolly knows this but you really want to get your lands curve and thin out your deck that you do not get anymore lands. If you ever draw land number 4 you might as well scoop it up, the chances of winning are so low.
Roiling Vortex would have been great. I also prefer 15 Mountains and 2 Barbarian Rings as my lands. YMMV, but I do think 17 lands is correct.
i run 8 mountains, 8 fetches, 4 lotus petals.
Just curious. I’m sure it’s because of wasteland and maybe the price of progress but why not try mdfc lands for flooding issues
?
To help solve the flooding problem does spirit guide have any place in the deck?
i almost tested it for a while, but i landed on fetches+DRC+petal instead. the selection is gamechanging.
@@arachnophilia427 DRC would definitely make the deck play differently, and the Eidolon tax becomes much more relevant with fetches. That said, it's probably worth it to run ~50% fetches just to help remove bad draws
I see that it conflicts with Price of Progress, but what about Barbarian Ring, Ramunap Ruins, Den of the Bugbear, Sokenzan, Crucible of Defiance and Sunbaked Canyon? Mountains are clean, but after having 3 they are the worst draw in your deck, making it such that you have 15 bad draws in any game.
one step closer to 40 lava spikes and 20 mountains
Honestly, you're not going that much over the budget with a playset or two of fetchlands, at 18 lands you'd be deck thinning in a significant way every time you draw one, and you can reliably keep 2-3 lands and be confident you'd draw a sufficient amount of gas.
43:20 even if the final card would be dayz eidolon would finish the job
You have the leeway to cut atleast 3 lands , so why when siding would you get rid of damage ?
Tbh even though on avarage its clearly wrong i would have boarded out mountains out of rage :D
Like that was 3 or more times getting 50% or more lands in a deck where only 30% of the cards are lands. That physically infuriating even while watching xD
is it worth it to just run a bunch of fetch lands to help with flooding?
I would wholeheartedly 18 mountains 4 price of progress no fetchlands yolo.
Anhk of mishera might be a good out to nadu
With this many lands every game you're better off playing expensive cards lmao
I really wonder why this list isn't playing Dragon's Rage Channeler, as a cheap threat that also gives card selection
1. DRS has no haste and deals no damage and all R costing spells and creatures have to be able to do bolts worth of damage.
2. You'd have to alter the deck quite a bit to ensure delirium and it's not worth it
Why not play fetches? Or did i miss that part
That game against contol you drew 10 lands out of 18 cards. Probabillity 0.663%
that first match was painful, game 1 you kept drawing lands and game 3 you didn't draw any lands. the magic gods hate you lol
Needs a bit of spice! 1 or 2 of chandras incinerator😅😊
Gotta be better to have nonbasics that sac like fetches, the draw painlands and that threshold one that shocks
Is Eidolon good in modern?
Price of progress might get some wins against a Nadu side combo
The deck needs to be 16 lands 8 Fetch 8 mountains
I dont know thee optimal number of fiery islets but that number is surely not zeeo
I could be wrong here, but would fetches help with flooding on land? Also, great video, always enjoy some burn!
It has been shown that "deck thinning" with fetchlands is not statistically significant enough to be considered.
@@josehaya6362 Got curious and did the math, sure enough you are correct. Even in the best case scenarios it changes the odds by 2%. I guess I thought the lower the land count the more impactful it would be. The more you know! 😅
Fireblast really wants Mountains, and Eidolon means you don't really want to lower your own life total unnecessarily. I do like a few Barbarian Rings for more damage, and some people like the MH1 Canopy lands, but just Mountains is standard for Legacy.
There are three cards in the burn toolbox that fetches enable
- barbarian ring
- searing blaze
- grim lavamancer
None are in this 75
You missed an opportunity with the title. Should’ve been “Brings the BOOM” imo.
deck needs drcs to solve flood/screw problems, theyre cheap too
Seems like fetches and surveil lands would be great in burn to help with mid/late game draws
Return to 40 bolts
What happened to your lip?
call of the death dweller??????
Phil reminder to please take care of yourself! Those lips look rough but take care!