[Premium Article] So Many Insane Plays: The Return of Burning Long!

[Smmenen]

As of today, Monday, October 1st, 2012, Burning Wish is now unrestricted in Vintage.  

When the DCI restricted Burning Wish, I was devastated.  Burning Tendrils, aka Long.dec, was my favorite deck of all time.   Too few Vintage players actually knew how to play the deck, and despite my success with it, it had not exactly been tearing up Vintage tournaments.  The final dagger was the fact that Randy Buehler actually posted my list (with my name on it) in citing why it needing restriction.  

For nearly a decade, we were forced to work with poor substitutes in an increasingly hostile metagame.  What we have now is a perfect convergence of factors: A counter-intuitively ripe metagame to key tactics, a series of great printings to bolster what this deck is trying to do, and a key unrestriction.  The result is what I believe to be a top deck in the metagame.

Why, then, am I unveiling this now?   Unfortunately, there are no tournaments anywhere near me scheduled in the near future here in Cali.   Otherwise, I would have kept this deck bottled up to uncork on an unsuspecting metagame.  It's time for Rituals to return.  I believe my technology is the implement to that goal.  

If you only buy one premium article from me this year, this is the one to buy.    I have been furiously testing and tuning this decklist, and what you have here is a 25 page primer on how to play one of the most difficult decks in the format, but also the most rewarding and fun.   You won't regret it.

http://www.eternalcentral.com/?p=3164

Enjoy!

Edit: You can also get this primer and my tournament reports in one big combo platter: http://www.eternalcentral.com/?p=3681

[desolutionist]

I like the deck dude.  Those sample hands are absurd and remind me of when I used to play Grim Long...  There is very little the average opponent can do against that.  Some of the local players started sideboarding Envelop to use against me lol!  And much like Flusterstorm, it just wasn't enough.  A friend of mine has been promoting the 5c mana base (And the package that comes with it), but I wasn't sold; you make it sound very convincing!  I completely forgot about Diminishing Returns too, wow.

I think the best part about this deck is that its very cheap, which is very relevant to me since I don't own any duals, fows, or fetches anymore.  You should expect to see my name next to this deck  and "1st come November. 

[Smmenen]

I'm counting on it :p

I really hadn't noticed how relatively inexpensive the deck can be.  

I'm glad you like what I've done here.  It is very reminiscent of Grim Long, but that's only because Grim Long is derivative of original Long.  

This is, without a doubt, the closest we have ever come to original Long in terms of both brutal speed and, more importantly, I believe, metagame strength.   Remarkably, this deck has many improvements on original Long.dec (such as the newer Moxen).  This is the one combo deck that can compete with Workshops.  

As I explain, I think it is feasible to go the fetchland mana base and UBr, but the deep need for early red really pushes you towards 5c.  Burning Wish is often a turn one play.  That means you need U, B & R reliably on turn 1.  And once you adopt the tactics I've adopted maindeck (which are self-evident), then 5c is pretty much a necessity.

Stephen

[Twiedel]

Hey,

I was really excited when I saw the title of your article - I so much loved the old-fashioned ritual decks, and I always hope that we can all make it work again. Speaking of that, first and foremost: I like this article a lot, as usual. Making clear the concepts of these decks and referencing older articles is a very good style I think - the old ritual decks have not been around for a long time, and some people might not really know how they work.

But I have to say, I'm nowhere near convinced that your list could work out well in a "normal" metagame, for me that's obviously a European one. The test deck (I guess some huge card missing from the sideboard was a mistake when editing? ^^) looks like a solid list for eating up blue opponents - but weren't rituals doing that anyway? Of course, getting the burning engine shines vs blue control decks as the UBr Snapcaster decks, but I don't feel these matchups were the problem really. The real problem has - since they finally understood what they had to play - the workshop decks.

I really cannot see your Sideboard working on the test deck... when I look at the land count, I shiver in fear... and only 4/5 real boardcards to MUD? Call me pessimistic, but that is not going to work at all. Even for the final list you suggested, I feel this has still the same problem. I like the 15th sideboard card you put up, but that's only one card that is really helping. Sure, when there is "just" the shop-mox-golem-go start, you might do fine. But what about the sequence: [chalice 0, go - thorn, go - sphere, go] ? I cannot see this deck beating a weak (!) start like that from workshop decks reliably.

I'd really want to have your opinion on this - will be testing this deck a lot tomorrow with some friends, to see how it actually pans out - but in theory it seems if you are playing a tournament and facing 2-3 workshop opponents, you can't reliably win when you're loosing the coinflip. That for me is just not acceptable. It might be that you maybe had a different meta in your head when you designed this, so please let me know That's the kind of feedback I always wanted to give you actually, as I have read your articles for some years now. I always felt unsure what actual metagame you have in mind when designing your respective decks. As some of your readers might be from all over the world, it would be great if you could include a tad bit of this information in future articles.

Anyway, thanks for writing all those years, can't really tell how much entertaining evenings of reading reports and tuning/testing decks I have to give you credit for, but it's a lot
best regards from Germany,

Marc

[desolutionist]

I don't think his list was metagamed for Shops but its important to note that Shops isn't clearly favored either since you're going to win every game you're on the play.  With that logic you're beating dredge, fish, and everything else being played while having a 50/50 matchup against Shops.  So going into a tournament, you actually have a better chance at winning than any Shops deck. (Assuming the Shops deck has a 50/50 against itself)  If you add a few more lands and some Shattering Sprees, you suddenly have a positive matchup against Shops.  Seems bad.    

[Grand Inquisitor]

you're going to win every game you're on the play

Another first turn kill deck?!?  Surely this will have the same success and lasting metagame impact...

Especially now that Mental Misstep, Spell Pierce, Flusterstorm and Mindbreak Trap exist.

[Smmenen]

Long lists have always been soft to Workshop strategies.   That's why its so fortuitous that a natural tactic, such as the one I'm suggesting now, that is already naturally supported by the mana base and allows the deck to do what it already wants to do, is available to it now -- and is eminently playable against Shops.  

As Heiner Litz - one of my test partners -- pointed out:

"-  I think this might be one of the few combo decs that actually have a chance against stax."

I came to the same conclusion.  I did a bunch of Workshop testing, and found that there are sufficient lines of play on average for you to win - especially if the Workshop pilot has minimal knowledge of your deck (likely going into a first tournament).   That's because, for example, not knowing your deck, the Shop pilot will likely go for Chalice 1, rather than 2.   Yet, it's quite easy to add more Spree to the board and more of the 15th SB card you liked to help.

Even for the final list you suggested, I feel this has still the same problem. I like the 15th sideboard card you put up, but that's only one card that is really helping. Sure, when there is "just" the shop-mox-golem-go start, you might do fine. But what about the sequence: [chalice 0, go - thorn, go - sphere, go] ? I cannot see this deck beating a weak (!) start like that from workshop decks reliably.

Yes, Heiner added, and it's obvious

"However, I did some more testing and CotV zero is a BIG problem that needs to be addressed. I think there needs to be a single tutorable solution MD
- THe good news: Stax pilots will play chalice at 0 or 2 so the cc1 slot is open which makes nature's claim/steel sabotage/repeal an option."

Yes, Chalice 0 is probably the most painful play.  But anything barring that leaves you up to play all of your Moxen and other power accelerants.   If they just have Golem, you go nuts.  If they just have a Sphere and no Chalice, you go nuts.   If they have Chalice, things get much dicer, but you can still pack plenty of tactics to win.  Please bear in mind that you only have to resolve a 2 mana tactic to win the game against Shop.  That makes the Shop matchup eminently winnable.   That said, depending on the quantity of Shops in your metagame, you probably want to pack more of the tactics I suggested.

If there is a power Ritual combo deck in the format that can hang with Shops, it's obviously this one for all of the reasons covered.   If they don't have a Chalice, you can go hog wild.  If they do, there are still plenty of lines of play -- even on the draw -- that can easily lead to game victories.  

This is Long list has the best Workshop matchup of any Long deck in history -- and it's not really close.  Yes, you probably want to reconfigure the SB slightly with more tactics for Shops if Shops are a heavier part of your metagame AND/OR if the Shop players have a better sense of what you are doing.

[Lemnear]

you're going to win every game you're on the play

These are the kind of statements that leave no more room for serious discussion. We had the same bold sentences in your (now locked) thread before and I don't want to reroll it here since Grand Inquisitor already mentioned the cards we discussed in the other thread

If there's one thing we definitely want to happen when we lock a thread, it's for people to go and try to continue the offending conversation in another thread.  If you can't post without sniping at another member, don't post at all.  Consider this a warning.

-Klep

[emidln]

The list can be adjusted to play more lands over a few of the moxen to allow for more 5c lands. More 5c lands (specifically, you want 13-14 postboard vs workshop decks) allow you to sideboard more Shattering Spree to bring in instead of junk like Ancient Grudge/H.Recall. This goes a long way towards increasing your ability to beat workshops on the draw. The list I've been playing has something like 5 traditional anti-stax cards in the maindeck as well as being able to side up to 14 land and add in 3 shattering sprees to be drawn. I haven't noticed an issue with beating workshop's more average draws (hint: you're still unlikely to beat them if they open turn 1 chalice + lodestone into anything else; we call this a "nut draw" and reboard for being on the play in the next game).

[heiner]

This deck plays less rituals, a huge amount of moxen which are great vs. spheres and enough I win vs. stax bombs which makes its stax matchup better as any other previous long variant. However, that still doesn't mean too much as stax has been improved over the last years at least at the same rate. With this deck, CotV zero is the worst that can happen to you, and if followed up with 1 or 2 spheres probably means game as you don't play enough lands. However, if you go first or the opponent doesn't land chalice your chances to win increase dramatically. You can power out so many permanent mana sources, Golem interestingly is really weak against this dec, and you have enough wincons that don't require storm. Most of the games you just, drop land and 2/3moxen in your first turn which gives you the mana to win even against double sphere.

Lets compare it with URB control:
-You play less lands which you easily make up with all the moxen.
-You exchange flusterstorm/MM crap against bombs - great!
-You exchange Confidant for Oath - sign me up!
-You loose FoW, ok this sucks

[desolutionist]

you're going to win every game you're on the play

These are the kind of statements that leave no more room for serious discussion. We had the same bold sentences in your (now locked) thread before and I don't want to reroll it here since Grand Inquisitor already mentioned the cards we discussed in the other thread

Yeah you're taking me out of context.  Please just stop trolling me.

Here's the full quote:

its important to note that Shops isn't clearly favored either since you're going to win every game you're on the play

While I admit it isn't every single game, it is a vast majority of them and no one cares about what is unlikely to happen.  Mindbreak Trap, Flusterstorm, and Spell Pierce aren't played in Shops.

[vaughnbros]

The eternal central website doesnt want to load on my computer or phone so I can't read your article.  This statement certainly makes me want to though:

For nearly a decade, we were forced to work with poor substitutes in an increasingly hostile metagame.  What we have now is a perfect convergence of factors: A counter-intuitively ripe metagame to key tactics, a series of great printings to bolster what this deck is trying to do, and a key unrestriction.  The result is what I believe to be a top deck in the metagame.

If you only buy one premium article from me this year, this is the one to buy.    I have been furiously testing and tuning this decklist, and what you have here is a 25 page primer on how to play one of the most difficult decks in the format, but also the most rewarding and fun.   You won't regret it.

However after following the comments in this forum especially this one:

I did a bunch of Workshop testing, and found that there are sufficient lines of play on average for you to win - especially if the Workshop pilot has minimal knowledge of your deck (likely going into a first tournament).   That's because, for example, not knowing your deck, the Shop pilot will likely go for Chalice 1, rather than 2.

I am not quite as sure I want to buy this article.  This comment makes its seem like I'm relying on recognizing the perfect line of play and my shops opponent misplaying for me to have a good shot in that match up.  This doesnt seem too far off from other ritual lists I've played.  Is there something big I am missing here?

Yes, you probably want to reconfigure the SB slightly with more tactics for Shops if Shops are a heavier part of your metagame AND/OR if the Shop players have a better sense of what you are doing.

Is there going to be addendum to this article fixing the sideboard for workshops and possibly addressing the chalice of the void issue?

[Smmenen]

Yes, you probably want to reconfigure the SB slightly with more tactics for Shops if Shops are a heavier part of your metagame AND/OR if the Shop players have a better sense of what you are doing.

Is there going to be addendum to this article fixing the sideboard for workshops and possibly addressing the chalice of the void issue?

[/quote]

Look, alot of these issues are endlessly iterative.  

What I said in the article is that the decklist I posted is the deck I would play in a tournament tomorrow, but maybe not a month from now.    It's a fact that people will adjust to you over time in a dynamic environment and metagame, and as they do, you need to make further adjustments.   I played an Oath deck at the 2nd SCG P9 tournament that flat out lost to Platinum Angel.   Teammates urged me to build a solution to Platinum Angel, but I told them -- correctly -- that no one would have it at that tournmaent, so you don't need to waste a slot.  For the next tournament, you need it.

I probably under optimized -- as Emidlin pointed out -- a few of my sideboard slots, which I will correct.  Also bear in mind that this article was finished last Friday -- barely more than a week since the announcement.  Had I had a few more days to do even more tuning I would have had a slightly better sideboard.  

I tested against people and a bunch of two fisted testing against Shops, and as I said before, this Long list has the best Shop matchup of any Long list ever.  Previous long lists lost to Spheres.  This obviosly doesn't.   If anything, this is the best adapted Long list to Lodestone Golem there ever was, and not just because of the 2 mana tactic, but also because of the more recent printings that I talk about here.  

The list can be adjusted to play more lands over a few of the moxen to allow for more 5c lands. More 5c lands (specifically, you want 13-14 postboard vs workshop decks) allow you to sideboard more Shattering Spree to bring in instead of junk like Ancient Grudge/H.Recall. This goes a long way towards increasing your ability to beat workshops on the draw. The list I've been playing has something like 5 traditional anti-stax cards in the maindeck as well as being able to side up to 14 land and add in 3 shattering sprees to be drawn. I haven't noticed an issue with beating workshop's more average draws (hint: you're still unlikely to beat them if they open turn 1 chalice + lodestone into anything else; we call this a "nut draw" and reboard for being on the play in the next game).

Yes, a few of my sideboard cards in the final list are probably suboptimized at this point, but were included for a reason.  I could cut a few of them for more 1cc answers, since its now much clearer that that's whats need post-board, since Chalice is always going to hit for 0 or 2 (not to mention Shat Spree doesn't care about Chalice).   I'm not sure if I'd mainboard Shattering Spree, but one more of the land in my sideboard that Marc referenced could certainly help.  

I will ask Jaco to send around an updated addenda and slightly improved list for the future.  

[AmbivalentDuck]

Shattering Spree seems far worse than Pulverize if you go with a non-5C mana base.

[Smmenen]

Yes, Heiner uses Pulvarize as a sicko B-Wish target, but I play 5c mana base for the reasons discussed in this article. 

[JACO]

Shattering Spree seems far worse than Pulverize if you go with a non-5C mana base.

My sentiments exactly, but it's damn near impossible to do a correct fetchland manabase to support Pulverize as well as all of the other bombs in this deck.

[heiner]

Pulverize has been hilllarious in testing but not in burnng Long. It forces you to play 3 Volc, 4 scalding +1 Mountain in the SB which means you are playing a different dec.

[Smmenen]

I drafted an addenda with an updated sideboard and explanation (4 cards cards changed), and sent it to the editor.   Thanks for the feedback. 

[evouga]

Am I supposed to get an email with a link to the article? I paid about 15 minutes ago and haven't received anything.

[JACO]

Am I supposed to get an email with a link to the article? I paid about 15 minutes ago and haven't received anything.

The shopping cart software automatically sends an email to the email account that you logged into PayPal with. Please look in that account's Inbox and Junk/Spam folders. If you don't see anything please email us at eternal.central@gmail.com and we can resend it. Thanks for supporting EC and Vintage!

[Smmenen]

Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oo...


Blaine Christenson and I just played a long set of games against my deck (using the slightly revised SB that will be distributed in the addendum (it's only 4 cards difference -- I cut the Ancient Grudges for more Shat Sprees basically)).

And we split exactly 50-50 all of the pre-board against against his Workshop deck (that he got 2nd place with at Gencon) (I won every game on the play).

But here's the kicker.  I won EVERY SINGLE Post-board game.  Yes, I went undefeated post board, even on the draw, and he was on the play in a majority of games.  

I beat all kinds of scenarios, including permutations of Chalices, Spheres, and Golems.

Someone asked: can I beat a Workshop master with my deck?   Answer is unequivocally YES.  

Ancient Tombs post board were obviously really good, but the key is just my mass of acceleration.  

Blane Christenson is obviously in the running for best Workshop player in the world right now, having finished 2nd at Vintage Champs.   He even said after our testing that it seems unwinnnable for him post board.  

BOAM!   Rits are back baby!

[BC]

...He even said after our testing that it seems unwinnnable for him post board. 

I don't think the post-board matchup is unwinnable, but it's definitely unfavorable.  I did not feel like I was in control.  The MUD player basically needs to be on the play and have a really strong hand (or have a REALLY strong hand on the draw).  That never happened to me during our games.

I will need to test against the deck a little more before I make up my mind about it, but my first impression is that it's very fast and fairly resilient.  Certainly a viable deck, and could fit nicely into the top tier of Vintage.

[desolutionist]

Steve, isn't Gifts Ungiven better than Windfall?

[Smmenen]

Windfall is critically important especially on the play.   I use it all the time, including many games against Blaine.  Hurkyl's You -- Windfall   I do, however, sideboard out Windfall on the draw against Shops -- but I even Burning Wished for it against Blaine as well.  

At worst, Windflal is like a Thirst for Knowledge, but at best it does more than a draw7 - it can draw 10, 11, 12 cards or more.

Regardless, I don't think Gifts is what this deck is trying to do -- although you should feel free to test it.   Gifts would be much better in a Pitch Long like shell.  This deck is far more aggressive and is trying to win ASAP. 

[voltron00x]

Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oo...


Blaine Christenson and I just played a long set of games against my deck (using the slightly revised SB that will be distributed in the addendum (it's only 4 cards difference -- I cut the Ancient Grudges for more Shat Sprees basically)).

And we split exactly 50-50 all of the pre-board against against his Workshop deck (that he got 2nd place with at Gencon) (I won every game on the play).

But here's the kicker.  I won EVERY SINGLE Post-board game.  Yes, I went undefeated post board, even on the draw, and he was on the play in a majority of games.  

I beat all kinds of scenarios, including permutations of Chalices, Spheres, and Golems.

Someone asked: can I beat a Workshop master with my deck?   Answer is unequivocally YES.  

Ancient Tombs post board were obviously really good, but the key is just my mass of acceleration.  

Blane Christenson is obviously in the running for best Workshop player in the world right now, having finished 2nd at Vintage Champs.   He even said after our testing that it seems unwinnnable for him post board.  

BOAM!   Rits are back baby!

How many games is a "long set" and how many were post-board?

[Smmenen]

Is this a sarcastic question?  

About half of the set was post-board, and while I don't have the notes in front of me, my recollection is that we played 8-10 games.   After those games, he said he wanted to switch decks because he had felt he had played enough to get a sense of the matchup.  So he played a Grixis Control deck and I went 3-1, and we called it a night.  

Those results generally accord with my testing against Heiner, and my own personal testing.   in the post-board games against Heiner, he was on the play a majority, and in fact, I had won all of my games in that set on the draw.  The one game I lost in the set was a game I was on the play, and a Mind's Desire fizzled. 

In any case, you heard what BC had to say about how he viewed the matchup from the Workshop perspective.  

[voltron00x]

No, it wasn't meant to be sarcastic at all.  I believe that more than any other format, Vintage requires a large data set before you can draw conclusions about match-ups, so I was curious as to the sample size, only because those results against Shops are so dramatic.  Then again, Shops lists also vary in their strength against an opponent with Rituals - for example, Triskelion is not really gangbusters against a combo deck - so that may also come into play. 

I probably would not consider 4-5 games post-board a "long set", so that's why I asked the question, so that I understood your choice of language.

[Smmenen]

Yeah -- he told me he sbed out Trikes.  I sideboarded out Duresses.

The main concern is with Chalice at 0 on turn one.  Lodestone Golem is especially easy to play around because I have 17 artifact accelerants.  

In a sense, it's very similar in principle to Turbo Tezzeret: the density of artifact acceleration makes it very difficult for a Workshop player to bottle me up without a turn one Chalice on the play.  Whereas other Long decks in more recent years have relied more heavily on Rituals.  That's perhaps the key advantages of this deck.  My artifact mana allows me to have consistency in the face of opposition rather than going "all in" on one big turn.   There are advantages this deck even has on the original long.   

But in the case of Chalice at 0, a Shattering Spree is a very effective answer, and easily supported by my mana base.  Likewise Ancient Tombs help even under extreme duress situations.  

[vaughnbros]

This list goes against a lot of recent convention and I applaud you for the creativity in this list.  After reading this article and testing the list a little bit I think I agree that in this current metagame this deck seems like it should have the best match win percentage across the field.  The only thing I don't like is winning the die roll seems to drastically changes your match win percentage in every match up not just workshops.  I'd agree that workshops doesnt seem to be a bad match up at all.  Decks with free counter spells along with flusterstorm/duress effects, namely landstill, seem much worse given with how the sideboard is built.  There isn't a sideboard plan in the article so I could be wrong with how many cards are there purely for wish, but the wish board seems to be larger than I'd be comfortable playing with.

[Smmenen]

While I will take the compliment, this list is much more a product of hard work and intense motivation.  Long is my favorite archetype of all time, and after a bit of initial tinkering, and one key discovery, I became convinced that it could work.  I was relentless until I figured it out.  I also had faith -- faith in the design principles of original Long (having actually played it in tournaments and partially designed it) and knew enough not to be swayed by more recent design tropes (one might say traps).  

That said, this deck remains deceptively difficult to play. It is probably - or very easily - the most skill intensive deck in the format.  I wrote this primer to really try to teach those skills.  

Also, I have no doubt that this is just the first volley in what could be a renaissance for Rituals in a seeming very hostile meta game.  In other words, I expect many variants on this foundation.  This is why, for example, I sketched out alternative possibilities in this article, like Pitch Long and Ad Naus etc