Today, I'll be going over tips and tactics for one of the most popular decks in the Standard format, Red Deck Wins. Why RDW? Because people love cheap aggro decks, and Red always gets a bad rap for being brain-dead easy when often it's one of the harder decks to play optimally. First, let's start with the go-to list, Patrick Sullivan's winning deck list.

"RDW by Patrick Sullivan"

• Creatures (16)
• 4 Ember Hauler
• 4 Goblin Guide
• 4 Plated Geopede
• 4 Spikeshot Elder

• Planeswalkers (4)
• 4 Koth of the Hammer

• Spells (16)
• 4 Burst Lightning
• 4 Lightning Bolt
• 4 Searing Blaze
• 4 Staggershock

• Lands (24)
• 12 Mountain
• 4 Arid Mesa
• 4 Scalding Tarn
• 4 Teetering Peaks

• Sideboard (15)
• 4 Ratchet Bomb
• 4 Manic Vandal
• 4 Arc Trail
• 3 Mark of Mutiny

Buy This Deck Export text format

Deck and Card Valuation

This deck is as straightforward and basic as it comes in terms of deck construction for the Red archetype. It does two things well. The first is punishing slow starts and being the best "on the play" deck in Standard. The second is that RDW is the best board-control deck in the format, with a whopping twenty-four spells that directly affect creatures and can keep Planeswalkers in check. No control deck of any sort can even come close to boasting those types of numbers. Even if they could, they can't double as actual threats, meaning the number for them is superfluous.

That's really the key to the deck that people misunderstand; even with a minimal board presence, RDW can stifle the opponent's plays for far less mana while advancing the main gameplan of damaging the opponent. Cards like Searing Blaze, Spikeshot Elder, and Staggershock all promote this cross-capability, an ability to kill off threatening on-board creatures like Fauna Shaman or Stoneforge Mystic before they become threats, and to keep equipment usefulness to a minimum.

There's only one card missing I could see a really strong argument for, and that's Kargan Dragonlord. I wouldn't fault anyone for finding room in the sideboard for it, as it's a very strong threat in grinding matches. I would hold back on chopping main-deck cards to make room for it, though, as Dragonlord is still a significant mana investment and the high number of board-control cards is important to the deck. It can be invaluable for long, grinding matches, and if your opponent can't kill it right away, Dragonlord provides a mana-sink that is unparalleled. Molten-Tail Masticore exhibits some of these qualities as well, but the addition of a drawback for a long-game plan tempers the amount of damage he can do. Masticore also falls under the mana-sink trope, but unfortunately 'Core doesn't do a lot when you aren't sinking substantial resources into it.

Knowing Your Role

One of the most common questions that pops up as a RDW player is when to go all-in. For those living under a rock, going all-in means dumping all your resources onto the field as quickly as possible, throwing away all prospects of controlling the board and trying to kill the opponent as quickly as possible. The most common scenario for this is when there's an on-board threat you could kill (say a Titan) with a pair of burn spells—or, you could put your opponent to a life total where a single top-decked burn spell will kill him. At that point, you have to make a choice as to what's more likely: you top-decking a burn spell, or you winning with what remains on the table after you kill your opponent's threat. This is simply a matter of doing the math based on the number of burn spells you've used and the likelihood of the opponent's having something to stop you from winning off a topdeck.

More complicated decision trees for this stem from earlier points in the game. One example that's also somewhat common is when the opponent goes for a Kor Firewalker on turn three or four, where he may have already taken a significant amount of damage. Do you want to try to throw all your burn at the opponent in response, hoping to force through the last few points, or kill off every non-Firewalker creature and win off a Dragonlord or overloading the Firewalker with other creatures?

This type of decision is more suited to figuring out what your opponent may have rather than what you can do. Do you believe the opponent has ways in hand to gain life or otherwise subvert dumping all your resources into play? Do you think he has a Day of Judgment if you need to drop three creatures on the board? Can you afford to drop a Koth down, bash for 4, and then lose the Koth on the crackback? In most matches, it's fairly simple to tell when to play control and when not to, but in a few—like against Boros or G/W Quest—it can be a real question.

For reference: Decks where you're primarily the aggressor:

U/W, U/W/B, R/U/G, Valakut

Decks where you're primarily the control:

RDW, Quest, Elves

Decks where it's hand-dependent:

Vampires and Boros

Note that this is a basic list with some basic assumptions about the game state; every game should be looked at on its own without a preconceived notion of how it "should" play out. I single out Vampires and Boros because their matches are especially hand-dependent, not just regarding your own resources, but what the opponent has at his disposal. A Game 2 situation against Vampires is primarily going to be a long, grinding affair, but you'll still typically be the aggressor, because Vampires has multiple cards that you have to deal with ASAP.

As a result, you often can't afford to sit around and let your opponent draw more Highborns and Nighthawks unless you've sculpted the game to be able to ignore his other cards. If he has a hand full of removal and I kill off the life-gaining cards, then it isn't so much of an issue whether or not I stick a threat, and in fact, it may be better to simply have draw-go be the norm until my hand is loaded. Koth of the Hammer is a very interesting card here because Vampires only has a single* card that can kill it off without having multiple attacks or teaming with another card.

* Vampire Hexmage. Burst Lightning also counts, but that card has been sidelined as of late.

Boros is the same way with some hands they draw; especially in Game 1, you have to be willing to sacrifice early damage and go for trades, even if it seemingly helps your opponent out. Taking 4 to 6 damage from a Steppe Lynx or 7 from multiple Geopede hits is not conducive to staying alive in a match where your opponent can slowly peck you to death. Even if you're willing to take the early damage and leave your opponent with mostly dead cards on the table, losing enough life early means you have to deal with the card-advantage forces brought into play later. A single Squadron Hawk can force multiple cards to deal with it, and if you choose not to, you'll likely die in 3 to 4 turns.

If you maintain the higher life-total, however, you have far more control over the resources you need to allocate to keeping Squadron Hawk from becoming a threat. The same can be said for equipment and creatures, trying to prevent Sword and Collar hits from happening too often. Boros has many ways to make you pay for ignoring your own defense and merely sitting on your burn compilation, as a defense may not be enough if you've lost half your life early. On the flip side, if you spend all your burn on these early threats, there's really no answer available when equipment does become a factor, outside of drawing more burn or Manic Vandal.

Of course, I've largely been talking about playing the control here; that's fine and dandy, but what about the Boros hands where Squadron Hawk and Stoneforge Mystic are the main threats instead of early beatdown? Well, then, role reversal—you need to be the one forcing through as much early damage as possible. By putting your opponent in a position where a few burn spells can end the game, equipment attacks are suddenly less of a threat, Squadron Hawk won't force your hand on wasting removal, and cards like Spikeshot Elder and Ember Hauler have a chance to excel.

Speaking of card value . . .

Card and Hand Valuation

Cards like Goblin Guide dramatically lose value in the mirror, because the odds of it dealing a relevant amount of damage before being dealt with or trading with an opposing creature is typically lower than the card advantage you give the opponent, and because of the dead late-game draws it sticks you with. Cards like Spikeshot Elder can be the same way; if you throw it on the field early, it'll probably get a poke or two in and then get taken out of the game. If you hold onto it until you have a significant amount of mana and some cards have been exchanged, it can be a serious threat that sneaks out there.

Oh, sure, everyone wants to kill Elder before it does too much damage, but throwing it down with ping mana open is getting value from anything your opponent chooses to kill it with outside of Searing Blaze. That's one fewer spell your opponent can save for Koth or eventually burning you out, but if he doesn't deal with it quickly, the card soaks up all the excess mana that goes to waste in a showdown and turns it into free damage. The same goes for the people who still throw down a turn-two Ember Hauler in the mirror to "stay on curve," which makes no sense. All you do is give opponents a chance to kill your threats on their terms instead of getting sure value out of it. Just like an Elder with open mana, nobody wants to waste a Lightning Bolt killing off an Ember Hauler, but they have to unless they want to automatically assume the aggressor role.

People overrate the cards that have the best Game 1 stats; cards like Goblin Guide and Lightning Bolt are vastly overvalued when it comes time to sideboard. While they are the most efficient cards at damage dealt for mana spent, that only applies when you are directly attacking the opponent and when the opponent's defenses are weak against such an assault. Cards like Condemn or Kor Firewalker make them into a joke compared to the slower grind cards like Searing Blaze, Ember Hauler, and Staggershock. Since the opponent will no longer let you easily become the aggressor, the onus falls on you to be willing to flex your strategy a bit and fight on the opponent's field.

Don't understand what I mean? Take Vampires versus RDW pre- and post-board. Pre-board is often a race between both sides, and it comes down to the die roll if one side's valued threats live longer than the opponent's and much more on top-decks when both players run out of gas. In Game 2, Vampires can suddenly take out all one-drops that cost life or die to practically everything in the Red deck for free. Instead, it can bring in its own set of removal and larger threats, and shoot for playing a real long game, since the threat density of his deck has gone up. You'll rarely win games against Vampires by attacking out early, because of the increased removal, and your opponent has access to Vampire Nighthawk as another trump spell that must die immediately.

Hand evaluation is the same way; you want to have a plan instead of a handful of good cards. Anyone can see that Goblin Guide, Plated Geopede, Lightning Bolt, Staggershock, and three lands has a plan and the means to execute it. What people don't recognize is when a hand is full of "good cards," but in reality, those cards are effectively blanks without help from the top of the deck. On the play, would you keep this against an unknown opponent? Mountain, Goblin Guide, Spikeshot Elder, Plated Geopede, two Lightning Bolts, Koth of the Hammer.

Look at that hand! Sure, it's only one land, but you've got so many spells you can play, and with a land, you can play out nearly your entire hand by turn three if necessary. What's the actual plan here, though? Kill your opponent with Goblin Guide and a vanilla 1/1? Hope to hit running lands for the nut hand? Right now, I see a Mountain, Goblin Guide, two Lightning Bolt, and three cards that don't do anything. Even if you draw a land in your next two draws, Plated Geopede only receives a slight increase in value—you can actually play it, and that's it. If you draw more cheap spells, that'll help keep you in the game, but unless the opponent is Valakut and dead set on not interacting until turn four, this plan is pretty bad.

What about on the draw? I could see more people keeping it on the draw; after all, you increase the odds of hitting multiple land drops, and you still have a pair of removal spells to keep things under control. Sadly, the hand still suffers from a lack of a plan, and perhaps more so than if you were on the play, because Goblin Guide is that much worse on the draw against half the decks in the field. Instead of trying to get there with one-drops, you effectively have to draw out of your funk, because you can't rely on the opponent's just sucking up early damage from Guide. Is this hand an auto-mulligan? Not necessarily, but a lot of people see Goblin Guide and other cheap spells, and auto-keep.

Meanwhile, I see reasonable hands tossed aside because they don't look sexy or come out of the gates fast, even in matches where it isn't paramount to do so. Remember, the goal is not to get your opponent to 5 life on turn four and then pray you can win through top-decking. Holding on to a "slow hand" of three Mountains, Teetering Peaks, two Ember Haulers, and Koth looks unimpressive, but it's actually one of the best hands against Caw-Blade. You have creatures that don't trade with 1/X guys, you can Shock away guys in response to equip triggers, and people don't like wasting removal on just a 2/2. Throw in the Koth as a must-deal-with threat, and things look pretty solid if you draw any nonland in your next few draws, instead of being hamstrung from doing anything useful.

All right, lesson over for the day. The takeaways in a nutshell:

1. Recognize that your role can change, and often you don't want to be the attacker in certain matches, to the point where cards like Goblin Guide are liabilities.
2. Don't undervalue the "filler" cards like Ember Hauler, Spikeshot Elder, and Staggershock because they aren't sexy or require proper timing to get full value.
3. Make sure your hands have plans, even if it is just reducing them from 20 to 0 as soon as possible or going all-in on Koth. Keeping a hand full of good cards is usually a good thing, but only when those "good cards" are actually good!

If people like this kind of article and want to see more or want me to go more in-depth with matches, let me know!

Josh Silvestri

E-mail me at: josh dot silvestri at gmail dot com