Dies to Removal

The best win I ever had was when a dude mini Fact or Fictioned with Jace before playing Verdict, which killed all my guys except for the Hound. He was pretty surprised about the undying (he must've misread the card) but passed the turn with about 6 or 7 mana up. I topdecked a Stonewright and cast it. In response he played Think Twice, huffed, flashed it back, sighed, and said that it resolves. Stoney resolves, I pair, and then move into attack step. He had two mana up and I was so sure my guy was gonna get charmed, but instead he just asks me how much was he taking. I turn the Hound sideways, and start counting my untapped Mountains.

"Let's see - 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8. I'll give +8 to the Hound for 22 damage. I guess you're dead, right?"

My only regret
was that I didn't shout "Hadouken!"

Yeah, he will do that. Two very underrated cards that pairing.

Think Im gonna dust this deck off and jam a few games to see if I can make some changes to the list or if I finally need to move on to AiR.

Anyone still riding this list?

I've changed it up a bit by more or les copying a known deck and subbing Pyreheart instead of Phoenix.

[Deck]
Creatures 31
4x Stromkirk Noble
4x Rakdos Cackler
4x Ash Zealot
4x Burning-Tree Emissary
4x Lightning Mauler
3x Firefist Striker
4x Pyreheart Wolf
4x Hellrider

Burn 7
3x Pillar of Flame
4x Searing Spear

Land 22
4x Mutavault
18x Mountain

Sideboard
3x Burning Earth
3x Skullcrack
3x Mizzium Mortars
2x Traitorous Blood
4x Volcanic Strength
[/deck]

In testing, were you fine with 18 Mountains? I know that during the October-February standard, we found that we didn't want to drop below 19 for consistency with Ash Zealot. Now we have 8 RR creatures, and I feel that we should modify the Mountain count to account for this.

It doesn't bother me all that much if I have Big Mudes out, since I can still activate it and swing while I wait to land another mountain. With that said, I still see double mountain hands quite often.

Yeah, it's just one less mountain than I'm used to playing. I haven't played the deck much, but I've goldfished for about 2 hours (that shit can seriously get addicting...you really lose track of time), and I hated that a large number (probably over 25%, in my goldfishing) couldn't cast Zealot/BTE on curve when the deck saw them. The worst is when you see 1 Mountain and 1 Mutavault. Looking back on it, I think the problem is my lazy shuffling job with a deck of newly stacked 4 card piles. Still, the numbers dictate that we should play 19.

I think that's why on one of the newer versions of the list, I've seen 3x Ash Zealot and 4x Firefist Striker.

Still, I don't want to play less than 4 Mutavaults.

I don't know if 4 Mutavaults is really necessary in this list. It's a nice card to see, but I don't necessarily want to see it every game, nor do I really ever want to see two. Because of this, maintaining 19 mountains on 22 lands still seems ideal.

I'm not thinking of messing with the Mutavault count. Still, I want that 19th Mountain. For me, the added comfort that comes from having a Mountain count that's mathematically-proven to be correct would be better than the bonus in consistency during a game. I know for (almost) certain that I don't want 61 cards. LM is probably my least favorite creature in the deck, but I like the way that having him as a 4-of makes for a very easy swap with VS, and how awesome he is with BTE. There's also the option of dropping a Wolf or Zealot, but, while they do make sense for possible cuts, I still like them both better than a 19th Mountain. IDK, I'll probably just use the same 75 as you.

'Technichally' 19 Mountain plus 3 Mutavault would be correct.

Adrian Sulivan had an article years ago on mana bases in Mono R decks that went into the issue in detail (discussing Blinkmoth Nexus actually, but the same theory applies). That deck ran Slith Firewalker and Blistering Firecat, so you can see how the theory would be applicable to Ash Zealot and Hellrider. Also, we fet to play with substantially better cards now.

Will try and dig it up.

I'm comfortable with the deck now, but I can get behind 4 mudes and 19 mountain.

Also, looking forward to that article, Z.

Hows Pyreheart treating you? I am going off that same list you found from SCG top8 but wanted Pyreheart in there myself as well. I was thinking 4 Firefist and 3 Pyreheart though because I really want to maximize BTE draws.

I did think Pheonix was decent because it helped enable Firefist, but you do have 4 Lightning Mauler and 4 Ash Zealot . Phoenix is nice because the haste is good against Jund and UWx. Flying is pretty helpful here too.

If you expect a lot of Jund, Pyreheart is the card that you want.

I think ill be playing with the dogs until the day he rotates. He such a huge part of my playstyle.

Bottom line : if you run Hellrider, run the Wolf. There's nothing sweeter than being able to ignore your opponents boardstate while you set up the killing swing with your rider and company. As the Joker would say, "Let's put a smile on that face. "

I can see an arguement for both, Phoenix is certainly faster and has better synergy with a T2 FireFist Striker. In longer games against control and such, you have a chance of getting the Phoenix back.

Wolf is nice because Jund and UWx both usually don't have many creatures out, and gives you protection vs surprise Resto angel if they have an empty board early. He also obviously awesome when followed up by Hellrider

I think that, in order to use it well, Phoenix makes you commit to lines of play that this deck doesn't wan to make. Wolf also plays really nicely with Mudes late game.

Big Mudes+Wolf+Hellrider = Joygasm

without venturing over the the hypergeo table i'm thinking if you cut 1 zealot for an additional mountain you'll a) have more consistent creature draw that can cast off bte and b)gives you a mana base that will cast rider/burning earth on curve more often. just a thought.

Been jamming this on cockatrice trying to work out SB plans. Let me know what you guys think and also let me know if there are any MU I missed as I havent played since early May.

Jund: +3 Burning Earth +4 VStrength (+2 Blood +3 Mortar?) -4 Cackler -4 Noble
UW: -4 Cackler -4 Noble +3 Burning Earth +3 Skull Crack +2 Blood (+3 Mortar for resto?)
Bant Pants: Race? -3 Pillar -3 Cackler +3 Burning Earth +3 Skull crack ? Does that speed up race? Will mortars ever be good enough here?
MonoRed: -4 Cackler -4 Noble +4 Vstrength +3 Mortar +1 blood?
Naya: -4 Cackler -4 Noble -1 Wolf -1 pillar +4 Vstrength +3 Mortar +3 Burning Earth -- Is this even right? I pull the one drops because of the pound for pound, but is this even the correct board?
Junk: -4 Cackler -4 Noble +3 Burning Earth +3 Mortar +2 Blood -- Is crack needed here?
UWR Control: -4 Cackler -4 Noble +3 Burning Earth ?? Vstrength plays into the 2for 1s Cracks and bloods
for final 4 spots?

Is this headed along the right lines or horribly off?

In this deck and in this meta, remember that you should sideboard differently depending on play/draw. For example, I wouldn't pull your Nobles out during aggro matchups when you're on the play. If they're playing red, a VStrenght'd Noble on turn 2 will almost always mean a free win.
I also don't normally pull any of my 1-drops in control matchups either, especially the Nobles. In your UW/UWR matchup, staying closer to your original gameplan postboard will (in my experience) lead to more wins than trying to pull off a neat trick with Skullcrack. For that one, I'd just do - Strikers + Earths.

don't side out 1drops for mortars r crack against UWr

I think in regards to sideboarding, you'll want to keep your Nobles and Cacklers in most of the time.

There are a few flex slot in the main that allow for straight swaps from the board. For example, in the Control Match, you can get away with taking out your 3 Pillars for 3 Burning Earth and swapping out a number of Spears for Skullcrack.

Thing is, being on the play or the draw is a bigger part of sideboarding with this newer build. For example, when boarding in V-Strength, you want to make sure you're not taking out too many creatures to stick the enchantment on. This strategy favors a more all-in approach, so if you're in the aggro mirror, you may only want to do this on the play. On the draw, you would board in the Mortars to play as the "control" player.

Though weirdly enough, I think against Jund, I would take out 4 Cacklers for the V-Strengths and the 3 Pillars for Burning Earth.

2-1 for 12 of 26 with 1 vault 3 cruc. Traded for two more. Report tomorrow when alive

I've learned from Gruul that you also really want VS on the draw. On the draw in a mirror match, I'd do -4 Cacklers -3 Maulers +3 Mortars +4 VS.

What do you guys think of the SB Z posted a few pages back in the clan thread?

-1 Pillar, +1 Ash Zealot
-1 Mutavault, +1 Mountain

Sideboard
2 Pillar of Flame
2 Flames of the Firebrand / Electrickery
2 Mizzium Mortars
2 Skullcrack
2 Traitorous Blood / Mark of Mutiny
1 Mutavault
4 Burning Earth

It drops VS, but it allows us to take on a more controlling role in the aggro matchups via FotF (along with letting me play my foils). I also really like having 4 Burning Earths in the board, along with an extra land to make them easier to cast. I think I'd keep 3 Pillars MB, though, and none SB, using the slots for an extra Mortars and Skullcrack.

The sideboard seems good. I prefer to stick with 3 Burning Earth though.

Flames is such a good card. I may have to try to find room for it.

IIITTTTSS Friday!

After trying AiR last week I'm going back to what I've been playing, KDW is itching for a fight.

I keep looking at Flames in the deck with all the token strats popping up, debating over pillar, but is resurgence a big enough boogeyman to stop from swapping pillars for flames? SB card?

Taking Ash Zealot out for loyalist for those tokens but not sure if I want to run 4 loyalist. Maybe +3 Loyalist +1 Firefist for skirting blocks?

depends on your meta. If its anything like general meta, bant hexproof was the #2 archetype at the GP and you want pillars because they play voice AND need their early dorks to keep their greedy hands a lot. Tokens/Elves are kinda fringe at the moment going from statistics

Taking Ash Zealot out for loyalist for those tokens but not sure if I want to run 4 loyalist. Maybe +3 Loyalist +1 Firefist for skirting blocks?

I did that and I'm loving it. It really reinforces the theme of can't block/ won't block.

I pulled this from the original post:

Volcanic Strength: I don’t like this card for a couple of reasons. One, if your guy gets killed, then you just got 2-for-1’d. Two, it’s very easy to kill a guy enchanted with this card – Mizzium Mortars, Ultimate Price, Brimstone Volley, Dreadbore, etc. Besides, I feel very strong in the mirror match (or against any deck with Mountains in it) to begin with, and even better post board. Simply put, this card is not needed in my deck.


Does this still hold true? I feel just as confident in red deck mirrors as ever, and the idea of bringing in Flames of the Firebrand in its place and making the mirror matches much more grindy is very appealing. I don't worry too much about getting 2-for-1'd because of this card, but removing it allows our sideboard to be more versatile, as this is a card that is only brought in (by my personal preference) in one type of match up: the red-based aggro
mirror (Khaos, you said you bring this in against Jund. You'll have to explain the reasoning behind that, as Jund is a deck I expect to face often, and maybe I've been playing it wrong). The card is very good, allowing us to create blowouts whenever we land it, but I'm not sure if we need to play it.

VS is much more in theme with the "can't block? lol ur mountains r belong to me"


Red mages shouldn't fear getting 2-1d. VCA is VCA. Make em dead, then who gives a shit?

VS isnt JUST for the mirror. Naya, hell I brought it in all the time against Act 2 with their reckoner walls, and when 4-color rites was dicking around for awhile? You bet your ass I grinded them down with VS Nobles too.

You also haven't lived till you sandbag a VS against jund the whole game and slap it on a hellrider while they try to hide behind garruk beasts.

I pulled this from the original post:

Volcanic Strength: I don’t like this card for a couple of reasons. One, if your guy gets killed, then you just got 2-for-1’d. Two, it’s very easy to kill a guy enchanted with this card – Mizzium Mortars, Ultimate Price, Brimstone Volley, Dreadbore, etc. Besides, I feel very strong in the mirror match (or against any deck with Mountains in it) to begin with, and even better post board. Simply put, this card is not needed in my deck.


Does this still hold true? I feel just as confident in red deck mirrors as ever, and the idea of bringing in Flames of the Firebrand in its place and making the mirror matches much more grindy is very appealing. I don't worry too much about getting 2-for-1'd because of this card, but
removing it allows our sideboard to be more versatile, as this is a card that is only brought in (by my personal preference) in one type of match up: the red-based aggro mirror (Khaos, you said you bring this in against Jund. You'll have to explain the reasoning behind that, as Jund is a deck I expect to face often, and maybe I've been playing it wrong). The card is very good, allowing us to create blowouts whenever we land it, but I'm not sure if we need to play it.

Not true any more. I should probably find time to update this.

Since that was written, Gatecrash came out and gave us Stomping Ground, Sacred Foundry, Burning-Tree Emissary, Ghor-Clan Rampager. Mana bases improved and now it's widely known that Mountain is the best card. The power level of BTE and GCR was so good that R/g decks were running rampant disguised as Mono Red decks. Not to mention, over time, people have just been flat-out greedy - for example, 4 color Bant decks???

We're in a time now where Mountain (or
"Mountain-type") is pretty much omnipresent. Playing Volcanic Strength now can really give us a better means at punishing greedy land bases and opponents who don't run instant speed removal or Spear/Mortars. When playing with Burning-Tree Emissary, it becomes that much sweeter since even if they kill our guy, they still have to deal with another guy. The original KDW didn't play BTE and therefore couldn't exploit the utility of our favorite little Gruul shaman.


As for Flames, I say go for it! I really love this card and it's a shame that I can't find room for it in my current build. I played it up until M14 released and then changed over to the Mutavault build. The original KDW was definitely more poised to play the long game. The updated version that I use now is like the bastard child of All-In Red and old KDW. Its faster, but it can't play as much of a long game as before (No Hounds, Conscripts, higher land count, etc).

As for the Jund matchup, we're going to beat this deck by
going underneath it. We need to play guys and lots of them. We need to grant them evasion with Firefist Striker, Pyreheart Wolf, and even Volcanic Strength. I'd even board in Skullcrack to keep them from gaining life. On the other hand, if you wanted to prepare for a long game, then Burning Earth is your best bet. But as it is, over the course of the match, Jund's card quality will get better and ours will get worse so we need to be quick. With that said, it's still probably perfectly acceptable to put 1-2 of the Burning Earth in the deck, but not at the risk of cutting our threat density down. Maybe a 3/1 or 2/2 split on VS and BE?

Khaos, what's your deck at this very moment? I'm interested to see where you're at, compared to where I've went with your deck with all the new cards.

Right now it's this:.

[deck]Creatures (31)
4 Stromkirk Noble
4 Rakdos Cackler
3 Legion Loyalist
4 Burning-Tree Emissary
4 Lightning Mauler
4 Firefist Striker
4 Chandra's Phoenix
4 Hellrider

Burn (7)
3 Pillar of Flame
4 Searing Spear

Land (22)
4 Mutavault
18 Mountain

Sideboard
3 Skullcrack
3 Mizzium Mortars
3 Burning Earth
2 Traitorous Blood
4 Volcanic Strength[/deck]

I've been seeing more Control type decks in my local meta so I've been trying out the Phoenix. I still don't know if I like it better than the Wolf.

Also thought I'd give the Loyalist a shot a shot over Ash Zealot , since I didn't want to add any more Mountains which would force me to take out Mutavault.

I'm also thinking the deck needs a 3-power creature besides Hellrider. I really miss Gore-House Chainwalker since he could've traded with just about anything, especially things like Auger of Bolas. I want a workhorse
that I can just send in there. I thought about taking a tip from PSully and going with Mogg Flunkies, since it doesn't die to Pillar and Shock, but it's.....it's fucking Mogg Flunkies, y'know?

I really wish we could go back to December/January, when the general player base didn't consider us a strong/real deck, didn't know the cards we played, and acted surprised when we wiped the floor with their asses. I want to go back to winning off of an earthbending Stonewright and his trusty Hound (of Griselbrand). I liked it when people saw a mono red deck and immediately assumed we were hyper aggro, and then we'd beat them in the long game. Those were the best of times I ever had as a red mage, so it's weird for me to change to something not built for the long game.

Yeah, I miss the more midrange oriented shell as well :'(

Still, rotation is coming and most of our tools will still be available

mogg flunkies with mutavault isn't as bad as it sounds. Just run him out there and see the beauty a 3/3 for 2 is. he's no damn stonewright but he still punches the faces in

I'll probably take out the Lightning Maulers to try the Flunkies.

Yeah, LM just always feels so fragile, to the point where it is often a dead card on the field (loss of vca), but it really does help with our nut draw. Is GHC still better than Flunkies, though?

Also, you should all check out Zem's RDW primer, both for the knowledge and for the laughably incorrect card choices section (I recommend at least reading the ones on Firefist and Foundry Street Denizen).