The owner of this deck hasn't added a sideboard, they probably should...
Start typing a card name and use the auto-complete feature to quickly select the card you're trying to add. Enter a quantity and add that card to your sideboard!
Submit a list of cards below to bulk import them all into your sideboard. Post one card per line using a format like "4x Birds of Paradise" or "1 Blaze", you can even enter just the card name by itself like "Wrath of God" for single cards.
Red burn/control deck, focusing primarily on small amounts of repeatable damage. In playtesting, it has only lost twice out of 15-20 games, and has consistantly kept control of the table against two opponents. I made it from spare cards, and I know I'm missing things like lightning bolt, and some 4-ofs, but any other suggestions would be appreciated.
This deck has been viewed 1,865 times.
Hi Rakkan, As you have already pointed out yourself, your deck needs four-ofs instead of one-ofs and two-ofs. Lightning Bolt, as you mentioned, is strictly better than Shock. So why do you run one copy of Shock over four Bolts? You'll also really improve your deck's consistency if you run 60 cards and eliminate the single copies of cards. Other staple spells of Mono Red decks include Magma Jet, Browbeat, Incinerate, Mogg Fanatic, and Grim Lavamancer. Consider these cards over the more subpar spells that you run. Otherwise, your deck does a good job of applying early pressure with beaters and Burn. Hope these suggestions help, Azen
Permalink
There's also something strange about the title of your deck, isn't there? Mono Red Decks are supposed to be aggressive, early-game builds. I've never even heard of "Red Burn Control." Perhaps you should consider that.
I have shock in there because I made this from random cards I happened to have lying around (not a good supply of red). And I call it control because, although it seems like it'd play as a straight fast burn, with all of the repeatable damage in it, the deck can usually pretty easily keep control of the field. The few really threatening creatures I can take out via combinations of abilities and spells.
Oh, so you constructed this from a random collection. My apologies, then. I guess my suggestions weren't really helpful to you. :( If this deck is doing so well against your playgroup, then your decklist is fine. I would recommend cutting out the more useless spells, though, so that you can play the standard sixty-card list. It'll increase the consistency of your draws. Hope this helps, Azen
yeah, as Azen said, just cut down the deck. I would suggest removing sparksmith and then get rid of some of the more expensive cards. If you are ever looking for cards to improve it, definitly go with azen's suggestions. Thumbs up.
Thanks for the suggestions. I have been thinking about cutting Latulla and a few others because they almost never see play, so I'll definitely do that. Sparksmith I might cut down, but I like him because he has a damage ability, and can come out on turn two, instead of three, because otherwise I don't get a creature until turn three. But, with all of the cheap burn spells, I don't really need a turn two creature, so he's up for the chopping block, too, I suppose.
This deck looks good but............... http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=38001 This one is betta =)