Instead of taking a irrelevant Shatter I would've hate drafted anything else relevant as this is a 4-3-2-2 draft and wouldn't want to be stopped in your tracks by a Horned Turtle would you?
Pack 1 Pick 8:
To me Telethopter seems much more playable than Marsh Lurker as you only have to tap a creature you control rather than sacrificing a swamp and decreasing your board position.
Pack 2 Pick 1:
Dauthi's are underrated in this format although from my view of the format and playing in numerous drafts and sealed events Disturbed Burial is uber insane. It allows you to have mediocre creature base and a long term plan that you can base your attacks and defense on.
Pack 2 Pick 2:
Defineatly I would've taken Gravedigger in your acceptance of making a mistake as removal is fine although 1/1's are easily dealt with in this format and won't win long games as this format has many large creatures.
Pack 2 Pick 7:
This pack seemed very weak yet Abandon Hope is useless to you and would've assumed you would of taken the Manakin, or Coiled Tinviper.
Pack 3 Pick 1:
I find that this format is quite fast and Shiftign Wall is quite absurd as it is usually never bad and your Dungeon Shade is so risky in a lot of situations.
Pack 3 Pick 2:
You should never assume that a Tortured Existence will table as it is quite good and would've taken this easily over a mediocre Foul Imp.
Pack 3 Pick 4:
You had 3 other possibilites as noted by you, and I would've taken any of those over this yet your draft would've been drastically different if a different pick was taken earlier on and then it could've been a lot easier to draft a solid deck. At this point your deck was lacking a creature base yet your removal should get you far.
Your Built Deck:
It seemed very mediocre and why would you play Marsh Lurker over such cards as Disturbed Burial? You understimate that card a lot and you should try it out since at it's worst it's a bad Gavedigger and late game it's decimitating!
ElRamuuusa:
How I would've figured you are the only one to bash a draft and call his deck horrible, and not even accepting the fact he acknowledged he made some mistakes. Your quite kind to say the least....
Nice article and I can't believe theres an actual Horse deck lol.
Too bad Painter's Servant is a Scarecrow and not a Human for the all Prot white deck. I think he would have worked quite well if he was in the correct tribe.
Intriguing insights I've also notice the same thing regarding playing Mulldrifter to some extent. Do I Evoke him, or play him seems to depend on the player, and deck I'm facing but there seems to be times it's far better to Evoke then to play him.
I'll elaborate, since it was a conversation with me that prompted Alex to write about Chittering Rats. They are indeed a difficult card to evaluate because their effectiveness depends on hidden information that you may never find out in the course of a game.
I noticed that, when facing off against MBC (with or without blue), the value of the opponent's Chittering Rats seemed to vary greatly based on the skill of the MBC pilot. Against weak players, Rats were rarely more than an annoyance, yet against good players, the Rats often felt like a nail in my coffin. From this non-scientific observation, I concluded that the good players must be doing something differently.
The simplest way to explain how to play Chittering Rats effectively is exactly what Alex said: cast them when they will hurt the most. This goes beyond the examples you gave (when opponent has no cards in hand, or an Expanse in play). What you want to avoid are situations where the opponent already has a scripted, proactive play for his next turn. In those cases, Chittering Rats will not actually provide any disruption or tempo gain. For example, let's say your opponent has 4 cards in hand: 2 lands and 2 spells. His next turn is very likely to be the same as if you had not cast Chittering Rats.
On the other hand, Chittering Rats is absolutely brutal if the opponent still has cards in hand but is lacking a specific resource. Typically that means he is either 1) out of creatures; 2) out of land and bottlenecked with spells such that he can only cast one per turn; 3) waiting defenselessly for a combo part or sideboard card; or 4) uninterested in committing to the board because of Crypt Rats or lack of counterspell backup against your removal cards.
It's your job as the MBC player to read the opponent and determine if now is the right time to Chitter, or if you're better off making a different play and sandbagging the Rats for later when it will hurt more. Of course, sometimes you just play it turn 3 because it will trade with another creature, and sometimes you can't afford to wait because the opponent will have no cards at next opportunity.
Knowing the field isn't just for pure spikes. Also the term netdeck has stigma attached to it that it shouldn't. Mainly because in some formats netdecks are really the top tier and no one wants to face top tier when it means an auto loss. Also people like having a reputation for original deck building. (That's a very Johnny POV I think.) I am guilty of Anti-netdeck sentiment to some extent but I think it is obvious that if you seriously intend to test for a particular format you at least must be very familiar with the decks in that format. All of them. If someone introduces tech that affects the format...you need to know about it and whether it hurts your ideas or helps them.
Anyway my 2.5 cents is know your enemy, and know yourself. Even if you are the most rogue builder ever you need to acknowledge and accommodate the field or be prepared to lose.
"It has evolved from a single day of rafting into a night of camping, where those lovely 21 and older American activities can occur without fear of recourse of the law."
Hence the reason for the :) and the phrasing saying "I believe..." instead of something like "poker is more skill based because of...". I believe that Magic in general is more strategically intricate in many ways, especially in some of the games you refer to.
I'm not a very good drafter at all, but I enjoy it because it's a fun way to build my collection. I managed to pick up two Mind Funerals in one draft, with the idea in the back of my mind that it wasn't the main point of my deck, just an alternate win condition, especially in a stalemate situation.
The first round, I got it off around turn 7 or 8 and managed to take out 20 cards at once. Land, four cards, land, four cards etc etc. I drew the second one a few turns later and finished him off.
Every time it came up after that it did maybe 5 - 7 cards max and didn't help at all. I think to be of any use you'd need 3 or 4 of them, and if you can take that many, surely there was something better to take.
Good article. However one odd thing, you mention a "good" time to play chittering. As an MBC player I'm curious when you think the time is correct, as I feel the only time chittering isn't at its max effect is when 1) the opponent has a terramorphic expanse or other shuffler in play that he clearly intends to use at my EOT 2) the opponent has no cards in hand 3) the player is clearly going to counterspell it. I can't think of any other scenerio where I wouldn't gleefully cast the dude, he reeks of awesome in MBC's gameplan.
I've found that pauper is the perfect environment for developing my magic skills. To be able to afford to build just about any netdeck and playtest it, dissect it and work out what makes it tick is priceless.
As an example I worked on white weenie for a whole month. WW is a deck that previously held no appeal to me, I was only interested in red burn and fast results. WW was at that time one of the decks to beat though, and I needed to understand how to build it and play it well so that I could play against it better. Eventually I stopped playing WW like it was sligh without burn, and once I'd done that I found I liked the WW mindset after all. I've pretty much discarded any prejudice I had to any unfamiliar deck now, and I have a more positive view of netdecking.
It also helps that people like yourself and many of the PDC crowd want to share knowlege and so raise the average level of skill in the format.
I your analysis of what makes winning players in any format win: knowing the format and all the decks inside and out.
I too have began on my process in Classic using a similar strategy. Not just as a deck builder, but also a net-decker, playing more than one deck will gain you so much valuable knowledge on how certain matchups play. You can predict your opponent's draws and make a read on their cards simply because you are aware of how the deck operates, which cards they have played, and how they responded to your cards.
One example of this has been Classic Zoo vs Aggro Loam. I had The Fear in this matchup because I wasn't sure I'd be able to survive until turn 4 to not lose. So I embarked on building the Zoo deck, playing it, and learning its in's and out's. This gained my the knowledge to know how much burn it draws, how often you draw lands, and which threats are played in which order. Then, using this knowledge I crafted my specific Loam vs. Zoo matchup. Attack the mana base, lock them out with Chalice, and destroy threats as they appear.
Another very valuable skill to be gained is knowing what decks you will face when you play. If you can easily expect say 20% of all the decks you play in a tournament to be MBC, then you can tailor your deck and sideboard to account for this matchup.
Both of these skills are indispensible to a winning Spike.
It sure seems to be! The reason I asked Worth about it is due to seeing a LOT more new player threads on the MTGO Messageboards and a lot of new posters in general, which usually happens after a set release, not before a release like M10's new release.
I'd also like to thank the people who came out to the PureMTGO clan meet and greet last night. It was very successful and I look forward to building more community interaction as we go forward! :)
I am pretty sure my deck was the original version of elves in Std. van. Mine DID also have Noble Hierarch and Devoted Druid and a 2rd finisher (there are better choice when blaze tho). See http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/events.aspx?x=mtg/daily/decks/mol3... - the first event Arcanis-elves was played in. The changes are a rework of the mana base (which was needed honestly), removing loyal sentry (which is very very unfair vs. agro that does not fly - which was that I expect at the time, I suppose it might be time again though with those decks...) for 2 PtE and 2 Elvish hexhunters (which wasn't needed at first).
Ohh and if you want to see deadly in ext van play mono-green maro, t2 wins isn't that uncommon for the deck and you should mulligan hands that can't kill t4 at the latest (or t3 if they got less when 20 or so life).
"Drawing my first spell of the game would be nice, and manage to do so with my second rioters. I can work with two 3/3s and an Obelisk of Alara on , even at 5 life. He complicates matters by untapping and casting Breath of Malfegor, though, forcing my to use my obelisk activation now on life gain, treading at 5."
If he had waited for you to activate obelisk he would have won. It's that simple. I'm surprised no one talked about this.
I found Darklit Gargoyles very useful in combination with exalted in a white deck with some black mana ... once you have 2 black + exalted this creature really hurts the life totals of your opponents.
Great draft report. I like the way you analyse the situations you are in and come up with the right play. Well done playing around that Soul Manipulation in the last game.
Pack 1 Pick 6:
Instead of taking a irrelevant Shatter I would've hate drafted anything else relevant as this is a 4-3-2-2 draft and wouldn't want to be stopped in your tracks by a Horned Turtle would you?
Pack 1 Pick 8:
To me Telethopter seems much more playable than Marsh Lurker as you only have to tap a creature you control rather than sacrificing a swamp and decreasing your board position.
Pack 2 Pick 1:
Dauthi's are underrated in this format although from my view of the format and playing in numerous drafts and sealed events Disturbed Burial is uber insane. It allows you to have mediocre creature base and a long term plan that you can base your attacks and defense on.
Pack 2 Pick 2:
Defineatly I would've taken Gravedigger in your acceptance of making a mistake as removal is fine although 1/1's are easily dealt with in this format and won't win long games as this format has many large creatures.
Pack 2 Pick 7:
This pack seemed very weak yet Abandon Hope is useless to you and would've assumed you would of taken the Manakin, or Coiled Tinviper.
Pack 3 Pick 1:
I find that this format is quite fast and Shiftign Wall is quite absurd as it is usually never bad and your Dungeon Shade is so risky in a lot of situations.
Pack 3 Pick 2:
You should never assume that a Tortured Existence will table as it is quite good and would've taken this easily over a mediocre Foul Imp.
Pack 3 Pick 4:
You had 3 other possibilites as noted by you, and I would've taken any of those over this yet your draft would've been drastically different if a different pick was taken earlier on and then it could've been a lot easier to draft a solid deck. At this point your deck was lacking a creature base yet your removal should get you far.
Your Built Deck:
It seemed very mediocre and why would you play Marsh Lurker over such cards as Disturbed Burial? You understimate that card a lot and you should try it out since at it's worst it's a bad Gavedigger and late game it's decimitating!
ElRamuuusa:
How I would've figured you are the only one to bash a draft and call his deck horrible, and not even accepting the fact he acknowledged he made some mistakes. Your quite kind to say the least....
Nice article and I can't believe theres an actual Horse deck lol.
Too bad Painter's Servant is a Scarecrow and not a Human for the all Prot white deck. I think he would have worked quite well if he was in the correct tribe.
RagMan
I actually forgot there was that fee to create a new account ha ha.
Thanks for the article i really appreciate it.
Nice reference to the singing blog.
Good article to boot.
but hey, haven't you run out of creature types yet? :p
I see variations of the Third deck in extended all the time usually using Doubling Cube.
Intriguing insights I've also notice the same thing regarding playing Mulldrifter to some extent. Do I Evoke him, or play him seems to depend on the player, and deck I'm facing but there seems to be times it's far better to Evoke then to play him.
I'll elaborate, since it was a conversation with me that prompted Alex to write about Chittering Rats. They are indeed a difficult card to evaluate because their effectiveness depends on hidden information that you may never find out in the course of a game.
I noticed that, when facing off against MBC (with or without blue), the value of the opponent's Chittering Rats seemed to vary greatly based on the skill of the MBC pilot. Against weak players, Rats were rarely more than an annoyance, yet against good players, the Rats often felt like a nail in my coffin. From this non-scientific observation, I concluded that the good players must be doing something differently.
The simplest way to explain how to play Chittering Rats effectively is exactly what Alex said: cast them when they will hurt the most. This goes beyond the examples you gave (when opponent has no cards in hand, or an Expanse in play). What you want to avoid are situations where the opponent already has a scripted, proactive play for his next turn. In those cases, Chittering Rats will not actually provide any disruption or tempo gain. For example, let's say your opponent has 4 cards in hand: 2 lands and 2 spells. His next turn is very likely to be the same as if you had not cast Chittering Rats.
On the other hand, Chittering Rats is absolutely brutal if the opponent still has cards in hand but is lacking a specific resource. Typically that means he is either 1) out of creatures; 2) out of land and bottlenecked with spells such that he can only cast one per turn; 3) waiting defenselessly for a combo part or sideboard card; or 4) uninterested in committing to the board because of Crypt Rats or lack of counterspell backup against your removal cards.
It's your job as the MBC player to read the opponent and determine if now is the right time to Chitter, or if you're better off making a different play and sandbagging the Rats for later when it will hurt more. Of course, sometimes you just play it turn 3 because it will trade with another creature, and sometimes you can't afford to wait because the opponent will have no cards at next opportunity.
This is one of the best articles I have read on the art of mulligans. Keep them coming!
Knowing the field isn't just for pure spikes. Also the term netdeck has stigma attached to it that it shouldn't. Mainly because in some formats netdecks are really the top tier and no one wants to face top tier when it means an auto loss. Also people like having a reputation for original deck building. (That's a very Johnny POV I think.) I am guilty of Anti-netdeck sentiment to some extent but I think it is obvious that if you seriously intend to test for a particular format you at least must be very familiar with the decks in that format. All of them. If someone introduces tech that affects the format...you need to know about it and whether it hurts your ideas or helps them.
Anyway my 2.5 cents is know your enemy, and know yourself. Even if you are the most rogue builder ever you need to acknowledge and accommodate the field or be prepared to lose.
Thanks guys, glad you are enjoying the column!
"It has evolved from a single day of rafting into a night of camping, where those lovely 21 and older American activities can occur without fear of recourse of the law."
Details please!
Hence the reason for the :) and the phrasing saying "I believe..." instead of something like "poker is more skill based because of...". I believe that Magic in general is more strategically intricate in many ways, especially in some of the games you refer to.
-M
I'm not a very good drafter at all, but I enjoy it because it's a fun way to build my collection. I managed to pick up two Mind Funerals in one draft, with the idea in the back of my mind that it wasn't the main point of my deck, just an alternate win condition, especially in a stalemate situation.
The first round, I got it off around turn 7 or 8 and managed to take out 20 cards at once. Land, four cards, land, four cards etc etc. I drew the second one a few turns later and finished him off.
Every time it came up after that it did maybe 5 - 7 cards max and didn't help at all. I think to be of any use you'd need 3 or 4 of them, and if you can take that many, surely there was something better to take.
Good article. However one odd thing, you mention a "good" time to play chittering. As an MBC player I'm curious when you think the time is correct, as I feel the only time chittering isn't at its max effect is when 1) the opponent has a terramorphic expanse or other shuffler in play that he clearly intends to use at my EOT 2) the opponent has no cards in hand 3) the player is clearly going to counterspell it. I can't think of any other scenerio where I wouldn't gleefully cast the dude, he reeks of awesome in MBC's gameplan.
imo, Deserted Temple > Temple of the False God in colorless big-mana decks.
I've found that pauper is the perfect environment for developing my magic skills. To be able to afford to build just about any netdeck and playtest it, dissect it and work out what makes it tick is priceless.
As an example I worked on white weenie for a whole month. WW is a deck that previously held no appeal to me, I was only interested in red burn and fast results. WW was at that time one of the decks to beat though, and I needed to understand how to build it and play it well so that I could play against it better. Eventually I stopped playing WW like it was sligh without burn, and once I'd done that I found I liked the WW mindset after all. I've pretty much discarded any prejudice I had to any unfamiliar deck now, and I have a more positive view of netdecking.
It also helps that people like yourself and many of the PDC crowd want to share knowlege and so raise the average level of skill in the format.
Good article, thanks.
Interesting article, with some very original ideas. I think that might be first horse deck of all time, congrats!
I your analysis of what makes winning players in any format win: knowing the format and all the decks inside and out.
I too have began on my process in Classic using a similar strategy. Not just as a deck builder, but also a net-decker, playing more than one deck will gain you so much valuable knowledge on how certain matchups play. You can predict your opponent's draws and make a read on their cards simply because you are aware of how the deck operates, which cards they have played, and how they responded to your cards.
One example of this has been Classic Zoo vs Aggro Loam. I had The Fear in this matchup because I wasn't sure I'd be able to survive until turn 4 to not lose. So I embarked on building the Zoo deck, playing it, and learning its in's and out's. This gained my the knowledge to know how much burn it draws, how often you draw lands, and which threats are played in which order. Then, using this knowledge I crafted my specific Loam vs. Zoo matchup. Attack the mana base, lock them out with Chalice, and destroy threats as they appear.
Another very valuable skill to be gained is knowing what decks you will face when you play. If you can easily expect say 20% of all the decks you play in a tournament to be MBC, then you can tailor your deck and sideboard to account for this matchup.
Both of these skills are indispensible to a winning Spike.
Yep!
Full transcript is here:
http://puremtgo.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1684
Player list by Format is here:
http://puremtgo.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1683
:D
Hey Hammy,
Are you going to post CLan minutes, or at least a run down or what was discussed last night? I wanted to make it but couldn't get to the meeting.
It sure seems to be! The reason I asked Worth about it is due to seeing a LOT more new player threads on the MTGO Messageboards and a lot of new posters in general, which usually happens after a set release, not before a release like M10's new release.
I'd also like to thank the people who came out to the PureMTGO clan meet and greet last night. It was very successful and I look forward to building more community interaction as we go forward! :)
I am pretty sure my deck was the original version of elves in Std. van. Mine DID also have Noble Hierarch and Devoted Druid and a 2rd finisher (there are better choice when blaze tho). See http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/events.aspx?x=mtg/daily/decks/mol3... - the first event Arcanis-elves was played in. The changes are a rework of the mana base (which was needed honestly), removing loyal sentry (which is very very unfair vs. agro that does not fly - which was that I expect at the time, I suppose it might be time again though with those decks...) for 2 PtE and 2 Elvish hexhunters (which wasn't needed at first).
Ohh and if you want to see deadly in ext van play mono-green maro, t2 wins isn't that uncommon for the deck and you should mulligan hands that can't kill t4 at the latest (or t3 if they got less when 20 or so life).
"Drawing my first spell of the game would be nice, and manage to do so with my second rioters. I can work with two 3/3s and an Obelisk of Alara on , even at 5 life. He complicates matters by untapping and casting Breath of Malfegor, though, forcing my to use my obelisk activation now on life gain, treading at 5."
If he had waited for you to activate obelisk he would have won. It's that simple. I'm surprised no one talked about this.
I found Darklit Gargoyles very useful in combination with exalted in a white deck with some black mana ... once you have 2 black + exalted this creature really hurts the life totals of your opponents.
Great draft report. I like the way you analyse the situations you are in and come up with the right play. Well done playing around that Soul Manipulation in the last game.