[ARTICLE]Burning Desire: The Most Complex Deck In

[Smmenen]

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandnews.php?Article=5720

Article

Koen heavily uses TMD work and other people's work but gives no credit.  Hell I pointed him the deck with my good build.  Not one mention.  

Whatever.  

Steve

EDIT: I have now seen Koen apologize for leaving out some credit where it was due. I accept this apology and hope to move on to more meaningful conversation.

Peacekeeping by Zherbus™

[Thug]

Ok, this clearly needs some explanation:

I admit, I forgot about the credit note I was about to put as last paragrafh. I'm guess you can blame me for that, I'm sorry.

Quote Koen heavily uses TMD work and other people's work but gives no credit.

Smmenen, you should know how much time I have put into testing this deck, and if that leads to the same conclusions other people have made, I guess we're getting closer to the optimal list.

But you can't say I stole anything, in retrospect, I kept silent for over a week on the Long.dec thread because I didn't want to give away too much.

And yes, it is true that after I played against you I started testing the deck, so thanks again for showing me.

About the matchups:

First of all, for the ones that have tested Burning Desire, I can tell you that the inclusion of Chain of Vapor changed some matchups a lot. You don't have to scoop against against a Sphere of Resistance or a Null Rod.

I honestly believe in all numbers I mentioned, and think this deck might lead to a restriction, but if you guy's don't think so, prove me wrong. But don't just say anythings because you think it's wrong, you should test it first.

Quote Sb also seems a little questionable.

The maindeck Chain of Vapor allows you to run a lot less sorceries in your sideboard, which makes you able to run better cards in your sideboard. Having 4,4,3 in numbers of a card, with so much tutor might seems strange, but these cards are the best solutions to your hardest matchups. Seal of Cleansing helps a lot against MUD and Stacker and Pyroblast shines against the new Perfect Storm, Keeper, The Shining and Tog.

Now can we not talk about the credits I forgot (I'm honestly sorry, I was planning on them) but about the rest of the article?

Koen

[MoreFling]

oh god those matchup numbers are very very questionable. I think what I am missing, is why this deck would be better than the Tendrils build me and hero (and some others around here) play. You in general passed on the matchup, and didn't comment on how long.dec does vs rectal agony, which you cannot stop with Seal of Cleansing. I think, that in general, you oversimplify matchups.
Also, I'm wondering about the Chain of Vapor in the sideboard. That is not wishable, thus I would say that is a wasted slot. You never side it in, and you can't wish for it.
Also, I see you are siding out either: Mana or Bargain/Desire. Wouldn't that mean that those cards aren't optimal?

[Tindemans]

Koen and I did some testing on the match-up Long Vs Hero's Tendrils, and compared to Long that Tendrils deck really just fizzles in a turn too much. so after drawing the Fow's and Duresses it really has a good change, a draws better, so that suddenly it goes off.

after SB with Swarm's and a few Blast to stop your run, it's very playable match-up.

we did some testing, Koen and I, and before and after SB, both were in favor of Long.

[Thug]

Quote oh god those matchup numbers are very very questionable. I think what I am missing, is why this deck would be better than the Tendrils build me and hero (and some others around here) play. You in general passed on the matchup, and didn't comment on how long.dec does vs rectal agony, which you cannot stop with Seal of Cleansing. I think, that in general, you oversimplify matchups.
Also, I'm wondering about the Chain of Vapor in the sideboard. That is not wishable, thus I would say that is a wasted slot. You never side it in, and you can't wish for it.
Also, I see you are siding out either: Mana or Bargain/Desire. Wouldn't that mean that those cards aren't optimal?

Well, why is this better than The Perfect Storm (that's how you guys called it right?):

- I almost never stalls, where TPS does from time to time.
- It doesn't die to Jester's Cap
- It faster, dodging more hate
- It has a maindeck answer to hate
- It has a better sideboard against control

etc. etc. etc.

And I did test against TPS, it's a close call, but still somewhat in Burning Desire's Favour. The Pyroblasts help a lot here.

And the Chain in the sideboard is a typo, It is the 4th Seal of Cleansing.

Bargain and Desire do get sided out a lot, but that is because most deck run heavy denial or disruption and you won't be casting them much. They might be better off as other cards, but it's hard to find a better replacement.

Koen

EDIT:

Rectal Agony I choose not to include, because rectortrix is a harder matchup because of the FoW's\n\n

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote EDIT:

Rectal Agony I choose not to include, because rectortrix is a harder matchup because of the FoW's.

Whatever.

Rectal Agony

Quote History
As far as I know, Mike Krzywicki was the one who first introduced the this deck to the community, under the name "Best Deck Ever." However, at that time Mind's Desire was not restricted yet, and he was using the full four Mind's Desires. But very shortly after Wizards made known that Mind's Desire would be restricted, Mike Long posted a new article about this deck, but this time with only one Mind's Desire, he also renamed the deck "Burning Desire."

Again, innacurate.  Long called the deck "Type 1 Desire" (Mike Krzywicki's name for the deck, also).  I am the one who named it Burning Desire on May 29.

I do appreciate the quote, though.

Nice article.\n\n

[Thug]

I see, I played against another deck, also called Rectal Agony, but far more black based.

If you're interested I would like to test against your Build. Maybe we can play over apprentice some time?

Quote Again, innacurate.  Long called the deck "Type 1 Desire" (Mike Krzywicki's name for the deck, also).  I am the one who named it Burning Desire on May 29.

I'm sorry (yet again...) Well, if you're really the first who named the deck Burning Desire, all credits to you. Great name!

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote (Thug @ Sep. 05 2003,08:27)I see, I played against another deck, also called Rectal Agony, but far more black based.

If you're interested I would like to test against your Build. Maybe we can play over apprentice some time?

Quote Again, innacurate.  Long called the deck "Type 1 Desire" (Mike Krzywicki's name for the deck, also).  I am the one who named it Burning Desire on May 29.

I'm sorry (yet again...) Well, if you're really the first who named the deck Burning Desire, all credits to you. Great name!

Heh, I also named Rectal Agony, too.  I have a knack for that sort of thing, I guess .  You can click on my sig for further proof of who named the decks, if you like.  Edit - actually, in that link I call it both Burning Academy and Burning Desire - Burning Desire was my original name for the deck, but Burning Academy became a little more apt after Desire's restriction.

My ISP at home is flaking; I dial up to my University (SIUE) and their modem pool has been hit by viruses, so I don't think Apprentice is a possibility for now (I am currently at work).  In any case, you could probably ask MoreFling, hulk3rules, or Rico to test with you.

That Rectal Agony build I link is just a compilation of the best ideas of hulk3rules, Rico Suave, and I - so it isn't necessarily just my deck, but hopefully rather the optimal build.\n\n

[Rakso]

Quote (MoreFling @ Sep. 05 2003,02:25)oh god those matchup numbers are very very questionable. I think what I am missing, is why this deck would be better than the Tendrils build me and hero (and some others around here) play.

I think I mentioned in a past article that the Desire deck generally muscles past a Rector-based deck in that matchup.

[Rico Suave]

Quote (Rakso @ Sep. 05 2003,14:16)I think I mentioned in a past article that the Desire deck generally muscles past a Rector-based deck in that matchup.

That's nice.  He doesn't play Rectors in his Tendrils deck, in fact he's been the most vocal person on these boards about not using Rector in combo.

[Thug]

Quote That's nice.  He doesn't play Rectors in his Tendrils deck, in fact he's been the most vocal person on these boards about not using Rector in combo.

Rico is right,

This is the deck he is talking about

Koen

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote (Rico Suave @ Sep. 05 2003,11:29)

Quote (Rakso @ Sep. 05 2003,14:16)I think I mentioned in a past article that the Desire deck generally muscles past a Rector-based deck in that matchup.

That's nice.  He doesn't play Rectors in his Tendrils deck, in fact he's been the most vocal person on these boards about not using Rector in combo.

He's right, too, simply because there is too much grave hate right now; about the only grave reliant combo that can still win in the current environment is Dragon.

Rector will still sneak up on unsuspecting metas, though.

[MoreFling]

Quote (VideoGameBoy @ Sep. 05 2003,21:07)Rector will still sneak up on unsuspecting metas, though.

Ofcourse it will. It's not a bad deck, I just think the ISP tendrils is a lot more resiliant in the metagame, and in general a bit faster because it doesn't need to resolve the clunkyness that is the rector combo. Ofcourse, missing Therapy is huge, but FoW is more usefull in my opinion.