Comments on: Dropping Destructive Revelry: Why to Keep Your Burn Board Boros https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/ Play More, Win More, Pay Less Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:00:06 +0000 hourly 1 By: u13erfitz https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129671 Tue, 25 Sep 2018 11:00:06 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129671 In reply to Philip Müller.

I think the issue is the real issue of why you run destructive revelry or not, isn’t discussed. It has to do with how many lavamancers in main, and searing bloods in sb you want. If you expect an aggro heavy meta you go with more searing blood in sb and more lavamancers. If you expect a combo or control meta you go naya and try to get under it with shard volley and command. It really has to do with what the meta is. As the format has gained more decks that flood the ground with dudes lavamancer became better, and so does searing blood. Also command becomes worse because it is just another shock you take, and you would rather have a helix. The choice of how heavy to go green or if to go it at all is meta call.

]]>
By: David Hassell https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129670 Fri, 21 Sep 2018 10:42:49 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129670 Hi,
I play A LOT of modern, but the article was tricky to understand because I haven’t played a lot of burn, and have played none in the last 12 months. 2 bits of (hopefully) constructive feedback.

1. Your first example hand with the stomping ground is awkward, but you then say “if the stomping ground was x,y or z”… But at no point in the article did you state what the stomping ground replaces. Its all well and good saying “if it was a fetch”, but what does stomping ground replace? Is it a basic mountain? If so, this hand would still have been a risk if the stomping ground was just a 2nd basic. In order to understand the example, I went to mtgtop8 to scour burn lists to work out what the Stomping Ground normally replaces (appears to be Inspiring Vantage, which backs up your argument). It shouldn’t be necessary for me to have to do research to understand the discussion here.

2. You also state quite early on something along hte lines of “do you try to fix your terrible match-ups with revelry or ignore them”. But, I have to wait a long time to know what those terrible match-ups are. Im reading the early statements and I’m trying to work out where I stand on Revelry (does it fix bad MUs or not), but I dont know what the MUs are. Therefore, I’m reading the statement but it doesn’t actually mean anything. You mention Bogles and Ad Nauseum as bad MUs, but no others. You mention other decks where you want “shatter”, but for all I know, those are favourable/even MUs already.

Whether you can fit this all into 1 article or not, I don’t know. But for me, it’d have been interesting to know which MUs are close AND want Revelry. Those scenario’s likely want Revelry to get those extra couple of points of damage across the line. At present, I know that Revelry affects your manabase, and doesn’t fix your 2 terrible MUs. I don’t know anything else.

]]>
By: Philip Müller https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129669 Thu, 20 Sep 2018 19:26:53 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129669 Thanks for the article. Just a few things and please don’t take it personal.

I dislike the article a bit, because you’re only discussing why Revelry is bad. I haven’t been playing Burn for a long time, but enought to at least say that this doesn’t convince me in any way to switch to Boros. There are downsides and I don’t think they are as significant as the article makes you think. Additionally there is a big big upside in playing Revelry: You’re not stone cold dead to Leyline. If you go to a GP and you’re playing against Leyline 3 times you will hate yourself so so much. And at a GP that can be the case 100%. Of course you can take a meta into account, but for the most part that doesn’t matter too much, because you will play 10-13 different decks. I know you can kill the Leyline opponent with creatures, but that doesn’t come up very often.

Again I agree with the downsides, but it just doesn’t convince me. Stomping Ground is the worst maindeck card, but how often does it actually matter? Revelry is not a stone cold hoser, but the best way to fight Leyline. It’s not mediocre against Artifact strategies, it’s very good, but obviously not as good as Smash. It’s a very small sample size, but I won 7 out of 8 with Revelry against Affinity in the last month, did the 2 life matter or the 1 point of dmg? I don’t know, but it didn’t feel like it. If my Affinity opponent boards in Blood Moon I’m actually happy. Are you sometimes in an awkward position to fetch? Yes you are, but it’s rarely the case and you can anticipate it.

Last but not lesst, you will obviously find Boros lists which did great if you want to find some and underline your points. If I go to mtggoldfish of the last 3 burn decks (1x GP Top8, 2x SCG Open Top8) you got 2x with Revelry, 1x without.

What does that leave us with? It just doesn’t matter what you play right now. You can play Revelry or you just don’t. Either way you can win with burn. Revelry gives you some edges and takes away some and so does Boros.

As already said, thanks for the article, it’s a good discussion topic.

]]>
By: Jérémy Cros https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129668 Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:38:51 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129668 I don’t particularly play burn but it was still a nice, in depth article to read.

]]>
By: Andreas Breuer https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129667 Thu, 20 Sep 2018 06:02:54 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129667 In reply to Alex Bonin.

Hi Alex,
thanks for your feedback. As headlines are often not complete sentences, it should be fine to have “why” followed by “to” (as part of an infinitive verb). Probably you are familiar with headlines beginning with “how-to”, or similar ones:

How to write an essay
What to do when you have a cold
Who to go to for help

“Why to” is a statement that implies you already know the answer and it is just as valid as “how to” etc.

]]>
By: Alex Bonin https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129666 Thu, 20 Sep 2018 01:41:59 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129666 …”Why to Keep[…]” isn’t in the English language’s playbook…it even sounds wrong.

]]>
By: Noah Bruner https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129665 Wed, 19 Sep 2018 23:26:50 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129665 In reply to Lochlann Niddrie.

I have to contest that Atarka’s Command does 4-5 damage on average. I would guess the average is closer to 3.5. I think maindeck Command is a meta call. The slower your meta, the better Command becomes.

]]>
By: Lochlann Niddrie https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129664 Wed, 19 Sep 2018 21:18:45 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129664 My Experiences playing burn is that atarka’s command is the most powerful 2 drop to a burn player doing at 4-5 damage on average and holding incidental hosing versus lifegain cards is the instability not worth it??

]]>
By: Noah Bruner https://www.quietspeculation.com/2018/09/dropping-destructive-revelry-why-keep-burn-board-boros/#comment-2129663 Wed, 19 Sep 2018 18:23:07 +0000 http://quietspeculation.com/?p=18727#comment-2129663 As someone who plays Modern Burn only slightly less often than I breathe, I couldn’t agree more with this. Revelry in the board with no other green spells is not where Burn wants to be.

]]>