By - Crasha
Kinda sad that the community is so down on this set. I was really looking forward to it and have been enjoying it a lot so far. Lots of really down to the wire games with lots of small decisions. I’ve also found navigating the drafts to be pretty interesting
My disappointment is that this is a 3-color set with a ton of fixing. That makes me want to take the lands highly and be in a given family.
But the best decks seem to be 2-color decks that turn sideways. So what's it all for? The games where you play a couple tap lands and get run over feel surreal, because you're supposed to take those lands highly and you're supposed to be doing some family synergies. But if your mana is a little awkward it's so hard to catch back up.
I don't' hate the set, I'm not even down on it. I'll keep playing. It's just been frustrating.
Honestly the general direction in limited has been to keep upping the efficiency of the threats which increases the punishment for stumbling on mana, which in turn means that playing more than 2 colors is often a mistake regardless of the amount of fixing. The power creep in limited has really been putting me off the game, I often just scoop if I miss my 3rd land drop on the draw because it's almost impossible to come back from that in modern limited sets. It was never easy, but it recently feels nigh impossible to do so. The power creep is really souring me on the game in general.
Yup agreed. I always loved modern cause it was like yeah it crept but really slowly cause you have to compete with a lot of history but then they did the MHs and it's like now I have no power capped format; they're all racing up and it sucks. My kithhkins were suboptimal enough without fighting solitude and grief.
Isn't Pioneer kind of in the old modern space? Fewer cards so you can't have specifically a kithkin deck, but I think it's not ramping up in power nearly as quickly. I could be wrong though, I don't play the format just follow what people say online.
In theory it sits between standard and modern in power level but it just feels like modern with all the fun not-seen-coming sets taken out. I woulda rather they just been more liberal with modern bans to lower the power level than increasing it to differentiate it from pioneer (aka MH). Pioneer was their excuse for removing the been-through-standard requirement from modern.
I will say, I tend to be in favor of more bans in basically every format I play which most people disagree with. So I'm with you, though I guess modern is probably too far gone when they have to ban like 50+ cards to get to a point that I feel is reasonable.
3 color sets is where power creep can be okay. If it is on the 3 color gold cards.
Picking fixing and building a good mana base should feel rewarding.
But this set has too much power on 1 and 2 color cards. Why stretch my mana when I can play inspiring overseer?
This set has some nutty curve outs at common in 2 color combinations. How do you beat rafines informant into celestial regulator? Loosing to powerful rares and mythic, is part of limited. But this set you get to experience it at common
Something like half the interesting gold cards are just bad because of three color generally not being good.
They arguably could have pushed all the ascendency cards more. The best of the bunch also has the best commons, the others should have had similar power.
I like the gameplay so far. I'm usually more a fan of the drafting section than the play section but I found this set's gameplay to be very engaging. In constructed I like metas where the beatdown-control roles can change during a game and this format feels like it does do that.
I think this set's big problem is that you are supposed to entirely throw away its set mechanic. We have had bad werewolves in MID, bad mutate in IKO, imbalanced guilds in guid sets, but I dont think we have had a set that completely invalidates its own selling point.
I think it's because people just play *so much*. The draft has been out for a week and a couple hours, so if everyone has 10+ drafts under their belt before most of the people even get to learn the cards and experiments, of course the tier 1 deck that emerges won't be contested.
When people take a strike against a format 3 days in because "X deck is top tier, just force that, format has no depth, too bad" it baffles me.
Maybe they should just to their 20 drafts and then take a 7-10 days break for other players to catch up and the format to adapt to early takes, then?
I disagree in that I like the format now with 20 drafts in more than I did at first.
Agreed, it always makes me sad that the community doesn't seem to like tempo-based formats. I've had so many incredible games where every decision mattered, and the set has only been out for a week!
I don't think it has anything to do with it being "temp-based" as you say. Pretty sure it's the color imbalance, game ending bombs, and poor synergy support in many colors.
Hear me out on this, the color balance on Arena specifically is completely screwed up. They dropped all the artificial smoothing even though it’s still in there in paper. We don’t have a guaranteed common for each color on Arena but there is in paper. I’ve seen packs with 4 common lands even though the paper maxes on 2. The unreliability forces you to go for the safe strat because Arena dropped the ball.
Generally, if you are the only red drafter in the table, it benefits you greatly to have 1 red common per pack rather than some packs with 2 and some packs with 0. AND the collation tricks made it easy to read signals to find the open reward color. Missing that means it’s better to just force. Pop that into a format with fewer safe archetypes and it’s a disaster.
Unless there is a bug I'm unaware of, Arena mimicks paper packs for drafting. It has done that for every previous format (though I think there was a collation issue in one where they only copied one print run instead of two or three).
Did they announce that they were changing something with this set?
MTGO packs are close to paper but Arena has its own thing, afaik the only pattern we've discovered from Arena is 1 common of each color (and there used to be some goofiness with the uncommons). However, I'm looking at my draft logs and things aren't lining up.
I think the problem is that Arena counts the multicolors as representing each of their colors but in paper you're guaranteed an actual monocolor for each color.
I'm mildly surprised as well. We're on pace for similar color imbalance to AFR and MID with *way better* gameplay than either, and people are acting like it's one of the worst ever. I'm really enjoying it still and I'm having a hard time seeing this end up worse than MID or AFR for me unless the imbalance gets worse. Maybe it doesn't end up a great like NEO, but "third worst in a standard rotation" isn't a crisis either.
It's weird; people were higher on AFR at this point, and I just don't think with distance they'll even be in the same tier of quality. I'd bet a nickel this ends up being regarded as mediocre while AFR will go down as truly bad.
Agree - we’re just at peak “5 out of 6 games are Bant/Esper mirror matches determined by who plays the 2nd Overseer first”.
I just drafted twice - UW and GW base - 2-3 each time and EIGHT out of ten games were vs Bant/Esper.
Yeah lol I really dont understand all the anger about one archetype being stronger after everybody was simping for MID so hard. At least here the draft portion is actually still fun and challenging instead of just taking every UB common you see and getting an A+ deck.
I have also loved this set a ton. I’ve really enjoyed all the families aside from Naya.
I’ve been basically forcing GW, and sometimes that means I pick up Naya cards, but it’s by taking the Red cards I can play off-curve and/or late. Strangle, the rares, staying away from the 2-drops.
I’m also getting Civil Servants criminally late, so that’s helping my color discipline a lot.
I do think if this set had followed VOW it would be viewed more favorably than having to follow NEO.
It had a steep learning curve for me. I've also just given up on BR and focus on Brokers decks.
I would say 1/10 of my games actually play out interesting. The rest either the aggro deck overruns the slower deck, the aggro deck runs out of gas, we stall and someone drops a bomb, or someone gets Mana/color screwed. Definitely lost some games to horrid mana bases that just happened to draw all their colors against me.
On the other hand, part of me really wants to figure out how to "beat" it and I keep playing it. The drafts are pretty interesting. Deck building has a lot of choices.
Great episode. I thought LSV and Marshall did an excellent job of explaining how the format has played out. I think I’m a little higher on the format than them, because I kind of like tempo-y formats. But their descriptions rang true to me.
I will say that, although I like the format more than LSV does, I did agree with both of his rants about set mechanics. The 5 mana value in the graveyard thing is kind of interesting during the draft portion, but hilariously clunky during gameplay. It involves tons counting and recounting of the graveyard. And it feels too luck-based.
On Citizen tribal, too, I have to agree—this is not a great one. You’re telling me [[Backup Agent]] is a Citizen but [[Wingshield Agent]] is not? Cards with names and art like [[Social Climber]] somehow don’t get the Citizen type? Alright then.
I can't even imagine trying to do the 5-cost thing in paper magic. It's annoying enough to have to think about online.
I almost think it would be easier. You pull aside one card of each cost you have so that you can check it quickly. Since you can't reorder cards in your graveyard on Arena, you have to scroll through the whole thing to see what you're missing.
You should really be able to easily see exactly which mvs you have on arena rather than just how many
Oh yeah, they could implement the UI better for sure. It's unfortunate because the threshold counter thing they added with this set and theme is very nice imo it just does not actually help very much in this specific instance or with delirium which is the other time this comes up a lot I find.
Really the simplest solution I think would be to list what MVs are in the graveyard and, where it makes sense, which ones are missing when you hover the card in the same way that Arena has popouts that explain keywords or provide the flavor text for a card. Maybe also the number of cards with those MVs/types so that, if you're changing the contents of a graveyard, you can easily see what to avoid or target, depending on your goal.
I haven't played tournament paper in years and years, but you can reorder your graveyard now, right? I'd think you could just line up 0, 1, 2, 3 and be able to see it at a glance.
Nah it's way easier in paper in my experience because you can just have your graveyard descend in a way to see the mana costs on all the cards unlike Arena where you have to click on it and look through them one by one
Yeah but at least the enchantment creatures have an extremely recognizable border.
Casting Rogues Gallery in a moderately size graveyard when you have the 5 mv payoffs is an absolute nightmare, there's too many goddamn things to consider.
I agree. And while that's an extreme example, even small decisions get bogged down by this. Like before I exile my Expendable Lackey I have to double check if there's another 1 in there, etc.
I have constantly screwed my self because I think the expendable lackey cost is 2 (cos I see the 1U activation cost). This has happened like twice. >.> it’s frustrating.
Social Climber is wearing jewelry that was probably dug up from precious land (not something Druids would be okay with!), is highly conscious about what others think of her (not very in-tune with the world of nature, as Druids would be!), and probably has her own Instagram with thousands of followers! *How is she a Druid instead of a freakin' Citizen??!*
Especially since it's not like she would break the format as a citizen
Ahh, yeah, Social Climber is especially egregious. Having played this et quite a lot, I've learnt a lot of the Citizens. Social Climber not being a Citizen just feels wrong, I have to double check it all the time.
[Backup Agent](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/2/a/2a46af75-3880-4141-b26e-19834d67e7a8.jpg?1650029720) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Backup%20Agent) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/snc/2/backup-agent?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2a46af75-3880-4141-b26e-19834d67e7a8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text)
[Wingshield Agent](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/b/9/b9ec36ec-1a9c-41db-b304-c23286a4d182.jpg?1650025116) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Wingshield%20Agent) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/snc/64/wingshield-agent?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b9ec36ec-1a9c-41db-b304-c23286a4d182?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text)
[Social Climber](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/a/9/a9fb74fd-767f-4dd4-822a-828d59f633ad.jpg?1649801788) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Social%20Climber) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/snc/157/social-climber?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a9fb74fd-767f-4dd4-822a-828d59f633ad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text)
^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Great episode - LSV quite neatly summarises what I've been unable to articulate about the shortcomings of this set ie. the lack of space to play true multicoloured decks because of the speed as well as the general colour imbalance (which also expresses itself with poor variety of decks).
This set has also felt extra punishing on the draw. It's not uncommon for an opponent to be attacking on turn 3 with a 3 power creature. Backstreet Bruisers and Make Disappear have felt like good ways to counteract this, and I've been using them quite a lot, despite how mediocre they initially looked (I've always liked Moat Piranhas, to be fair!).
This format that feels a bit stale already, and we're right at the start. Hopefully it self-corrects and there's some space to try some other things.
I also remember being very down on VOW at one point, and came around in the end (I actually like it more than MID now, surprisingly). I'm hoping the same happens here.
My last draft pod cut white incredibly hard (barely saw any white cards past pack 6 in either direction) so maybe the word is getting out/the self-correction is starting?
Same here, last 2 pods not a white card to be seen!
Yeah my last draft white was cut hard. Ended up with a janky but really fun 4 color RG treasures deck I went 5-3 with.
do you think you can articulate some of what changed your feelings about VOW, from being low on it to begin with, to liking it more than MID at the end?
I think I was just very salty about the bombs initially, but over time realised that there was much more to the format than I first realised. I liked how all the colours were viable and there was a good variety of decks.
MID was a very solid format but I found it really tiresome to play match after match against Dimir decayed decks. The variety of the format felt very limited, especially given red was quite weak (but not as unplayable as many thought).
Yeah, so this is not a very well supported 3 color set but each pack has a lot more gold cards which then become unplayable so there are less playables in each pack.
I feel like the signal (things you can control) to noise level (the shuffler, being on the draw, what playables you see later in the draft) is much lower in this set which means there is a much larger random element to games. This in turn makes it hard to tell which decks are good. This is the first set I've had better performance in sealed than in draft.
Civil servant + agent = turn 3 4/4 lifelink attacker!
might be the most damning first impressions show i can remember
I think it’s similar to Midnight Hunt and AFR. IIRC, all three shows were ‘this colour pair is busted, draft it and let’s hope the format self-corrects’. Streets actually has an advantage in that it has two colour pairs that are busted (or maybe that’s a disadvantage... I guess it means it’s harder for them to get overdrafted)
All of the top decks are usually base white. If white gets heavily contested, it should reduce the powerlevel of UW, WG and Brokers at the same time, at least in theory.
As well as Obscura and Cabaretti, theoretically. Which isn't the worst thing in the world but is sad.
Little frustrating that of the past three classic faction sets we have had (GRN, RNA, and SNC) two have had serious imbalances in the power level of the factions. SNC certainly still has time to adjust, but I wish it had come out of the gate a little stronger.
EDIT: I'm sorry, completely forgot about STX. That also was imbalanced but I feel like it wasn't as bad as GRN or SNC so I'll chalk it up as a win. Makes me feel a little better.
Yeah Lorehold was a mess in STX but even witherbloom could be nuts if you had it to yourself with the right rares. The archives also helped make the set interesting
They certainly felt like they had a higher opinion of at least MID. I can't remember exactly how they felt about AFR initially, though I think there was some slight disappointment that it felt a lot more like a core set despite looking significantly more complicated initially.
I could be misremembering though, and it might just be that I am more frustrated with SNC since all of my drafts so far have gone badly lol.
So Unlucky Witness is confirmed bugged? I wasn’t sure if I just didn’t get the wording, as in ‘next’ end-step meant next turn’s end-step.
For what it's worth, the latest patch has fixed this + Riveteers Charm
Looks like Grisly Sigil was fixed, too. It used to enable the 3 damage mode after combat damage.
I've heard reports that it's still bugged, just in the opposite direction this time. If you kill it during the end step, the cards immediately disappear. It seems to be either treating it as "until end of turn" or thinking the current end step is the "until your next end step" it should wait for.
That's good to hear! I was really confused in my opponent got an extra creature because the effect was lingering.
I keep hearing / seeing that Raffine’s Informant is strong, but how should it generally be played? I guess the same question applies to other Connive cards, but especially to this one as it’s a two-drop and not a flyer. Assuming it’s turn 2, you’re on the play and the board is empty, would you often loot away an actual card to make it a 3/2? Or is it more common to just ditch land cards?
Edit: thanks guys, this makes sense. I think I tend to underrate looting in general, actually. It might not be great for me because it’s skill-testing- I always feel like I’m ditching the wrong card...
I think it is situational. One thing that probably makes it strong and connive in general is that it smooths your draw. If you keep a two lander and need to hit a third land then its correct to ditch a spell. If you are in danger of flooding, it's probably correct to ditch a land. There is also the consideration of if you have any counter matters 3 drops. Like if you have the fish making card, you might want to ditch a card to put a counter on informant so one of your fish comes in with a counter. Also the 2/3 flier that taps a creature etb cares about counters.
I will usually discard a land unless I have an Expendable Lackey or Raffine's Guidance in hand. I often end up trading it off for an opposing 3/2, in which case the extra +1/+1 doesn't matter. This might change if you have counter synergy cards in hand.
>Assuming it’s turn 2, you’re on the play and the board is empty, would you often loot away an actual card to make it a 3/2?
Almost always. If I kept like a 4 land hand and then drew another one I probably would ditch the land but I'd be bummed. Informant is not generally that good when it's a 2/1 on turn 2. It's good when it's a 3/2 on turn 2 or a 2/1 late that effectively drew you a card because you ditched an excess land.
And in general, it's tempting to try and skew towards using connive to loot away lands because traditionally that's generally the best strategy with looting, but the +1/+1 counter really changes things. That's like 1/3 or a 1/2 a card right there, so if you're conniving away lands you're technically losing value. I try to connive away spells as much as possible, especially early. This is easier to justify when you have lackeys to loot away and when you have card draw to make use of those extra lands you are keeping.
The informant feels like the lowest-impact loot decision - the difference between a 2/3 flyer and a 3/4 flyer is huge, putting extra counters on a double-striker is obviously ridiculous, and the psionic thingy goes from being a complete garbage card to at least an okay surprise blocker (0/3 vs. 1/4). A 2/1 vs. a 3/2 is going to trade with a lot of the same things anything (though obviously bigger is better).
If they are likely BR I'm deathly afraid of party crasher and will pitch a spell vs land. Late game almost 100% land pitch unless I'm racing.
You should be making him a 3/2 most of the time on turn 2. A lot of the power of the card comes from the good body, and that early in the game it’s not necessarily helpful to loot away a land. You want to hit your third and fourth land drops on time, after all.
In the late game he’s much more likely to be a 2/1 that loots away a land.
Always a land if you can afford it unless there's a specific reason not to (more than 1 toughness needed/3 power needed/5th mv for a payoff/card that does nothing on the board and you need the land(s)
It depends, as always. your decisions are different if you are manaflooding/manascrewing, if opponent has 1/1 or 2/2 or 3/3 on the ground (or if it is g2 and you have seen such cards in the deck), if you have something useful to discard (I often discard the lackeys), if you have counters matter cards (often I have metropolis angel for gaining again the card I discarded), if your deck contains many other connive card), if your game plan is of being aggro on the ground or winning with flyers...
Well, you can't put the genie back in the bottle but WotC can. They have done it a lot in the past with constructed formats by limiting the data that came out of Magic Online (and I think Arena too). If they feel 17Lands is having a severe negative impact on limited (and thus causing people to play less) I could see them removing some of the data that the API puts out.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that we're too far down the rabbit hole of shared information to succeed in fighting it, so WotC should take the opposite route of providing lots of information so that we could better see what answers exist for problematic decks, but that's more of an issue in constructed.
when they say that something might change in the format over time, what does that mean?
For example, people could realize how good the white cards are, and white could be fought over by 3-4 drafters in each draft pod. This then makes it harder to put together a focused two-color white/x deck, which makes the bant-colored tempo-aggro decks clunkier and less powerful, opening the way for other decks to compete with them more evenly.
Eg if a certain well-known podcast were to dedicate its first episode to talking about white colour pairs being busted....
This was a minor bummer for me as I was out of town when the set dropped and I had just started to figure out that Bant was the best when the episode dropped. I barely got to abuse the broken deck!
Unlike constructed, you have to assign priority on obtaining cards in your pool through picks. Obviously amazing cards definitely get prioritized and do not get passed like bombs across any rarity.
A lot of times we need tiebreakers in "dud" packs or determining between two mostly equitable strength cards. Inspiring overseer and jewel thief are both super pushed commons, which one is better? The tie breaker is color preference, in this case white is a lot more preferred than green.
A more extreme example might be taking something like backup agent, a middling common, over a top common like strangle or mayhem patrol of an avoided color. You would do this because you really are trying to be white even with early picks and letting good red flow elsewhere.
When the general population exerts preferences, the draft self corrects. In this example, white would be gone from packs by pick 6 and extremely good not white cards will go picks 7-10.
This causes two things to happen. Some amount of drafters will off ramp into not-white decks and have very good white cards in their pool and unplayable. These not-white drafters will also have an abundance of strong cards since their lane is not contested.
So white decks lose lots of good cards by the whole table speculating early, and the not-white decks get "more" good cards that are usually early picks. Self correction is both a nerf to the strong deck and a buff to the weak deck.
Sometimes, formats also have non-obvious ways to build decks for specific colors. Midnight Hunt red started very poor until 3-4 weeks in when we discovered festival crashers and that most red decks are spells matter decks. After these decks got socialized, the format shifted since red became more desirable even if it wasn't the best. Neon Dynasty also had a deck emerge with "mono" red for a more recent example.
I've noticed Strangle being passed a lot now, when it was completely unavailable in the first week! I've probably only cast it once or twice. Clearly some self correcting is going on.
Looked at LSVs 17lands and saw this beauty - anyone know if this was on stream? Would love to see the games play out live https://www.17lands.com/draft/8b37bdb2f57247f5aa0cf351b11047a8
* Did LSV describe this as the most color imbalanced formats he's ever played? I can't get there. This seems very similar to AFR and MID at this point in their lifespans, and while those weren't good, they also weren't close to all-time bad color balance by the end.
* Could not agree more on the typing around citizens, and they missed some of the worst offenders. Social Climber is a druid and Backup Agent is a citizen, it's just madness.
* It wasn't clear to me whether they were upset about the design or power of the 5MV threshold mechanic. I agree that it isn't a fun play pattern but the cards are totally fine in power.
* Not a ton of surprises in what they like and dislike in terms of cards. I really thought the point about giving r&d the benefit of the doubt in regards to the obviously broken commons was extremely important. I also assumed there must have been some context in the set for why they printed obviously insane commons. Nope, they're just as insane as they looked.
* Topic suggestion for next time: it's obvious why white is good. I'm curious why RG is so bad! There are good red cards and good green cards and Blitz is very strong. How did the combo end up so shitty? Seems like there's a good discussion there.
* I'm not sold that by contemporary standards this format is as fast as they say. Yeah, you need a two drop, but when don't you? The 17l metrics don't put this as unusually fast and Obscura and Maestros present some of the more viable traditional control options in recent memory.
* Loved the discussion of arcane bombardment. I tend to side with Marshall on that one but one of the reasons I'm such a Luis fan is that he'll try it, have fun with it, and turn it into seven wins.
I thought this was a pretty great episode, but I think the format is surprisingly controversial so it's not a surprise that I'm not in lockstep with the Resources on this one as I often am.
I don't think it was a problem with the power. The 5mv is a pain to track. It's already a hassle on arena as far as not accidently turning it on and off, I can imagine the headaches and missed thresholds that would happen in paper.
My guess for RG being weak is the lack of testing/QA like most of their recent products.
Could just be me, but I've found [[Stimulus Package]] in conjunction with stuff like [[Sticky Fingers]] and alliance creatures to feel pretty good, both playing it myself and playing against it. Maybe there is something there as a direction to go with red-green?
[Stimulus Package](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/e/c/ecbe7459-8613-4ab8-84dc-deab19c08511.jpg?1649799753) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Stimulus%20Package) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/snc/225/stimulus-package?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ecbe7459-8613-4ab8-84dc-deab19c08511?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text)
[Sticky Fingers](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/3/6/3678fa3d-d41f-4b7a-b25e-6fc5f78876c7.jpg?1650121187) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sticky%20Fingers) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/snc/124/sticky-fingers?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/3678fa3d-d41f-4b7a-b25e-6fc5f78876c7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text)
^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Personally speaking I find this format to be a huge disappointment. When your biggest theme is tri-color families and yet the best plan is to aim for two-color decks, something has gone seriously wrong.
I'm also of the mind that WotC should experiment and release a rebalanced version for an Arena event, like a phantom queue with nerfs and buffs, just to see how it would play. As it is, I really dislike formats where you have to actively ignore colors or color pairs during the draft. It's just a miserable experience.
Starting to realise I don’t align with majority in sub. I hated MID and VOW and did so terrible with NEO that I took a break.
SNC has been great, my fav set since STX. The colours feel balanced and the cards feel good to play.
For reference, KTK is my all time draft set so that might explain my love for SNC
Let’s check back in a week after you get wrecked by and simultaneously never see for yourself to draft blue white ev-er-y time. Sometimes maestros. Sorry sometimes you’ll get wrecked by maestros.
This format is dead. And the worst thing about MTG arena is that when a format is dead the result is that you’re going to lose a lot of money drafting.
It’s great that lsv got in his 28 drafts and 17 brokers drafts over the past few weeks. Me too. I got in a lot of great games and great drafts. Connive was fun. It was great. As a lot of the posters in this thread comment, they had great games.
But that was then. You know what my drafts today were like? Yeah lsv, grab that brokers hideout P1P1. I did today. It was the last brokers card I saw. No decent white commons no white uncommons. There were some meastros cards early but even that was getting cut hard midway through pack 1. So I ended up trying to shift into maestros with some of the decent blues I got, but it didn’t come together. Not a single strangle not a single murder not a single decent two drop. Nice picking up Carmela when you haven’t seen a single removal spell.
Then the games. 0-3 against two ultra fast maestros decks and then the guy who did manage to go brokers. The rabble rousing on a socialite and two fencers was just insult on injury.
I’m a 60% win rate drafter over the last 4 sets. This is exactly like AFR at this point in the set when everyone just started going blue black. And it sucked. This makes we want to quit magic. Because as you sit there with nothing but valets coming by and you’re like, great maybe I can try again by paying more money.
I really wish lsv or Marshall would engage in these forums with advice. The things they are observing in their YouTube content is making their audience shrink - because I’m done with this crap.
Huh... I think most drafters *welcome* the word about busted archetypes getting out, because then the busted ones get overdrafted and you get a chance to try out other things. Would you really want to just keep winning with Brokers for week after week? Sounds like the format is self-correcting, which to me is the opposite of being dead.
I do get some of what you mean- on Arena, you’ll sometimes face people who got lucky and were in pods where the brokers deck was open. But you have an equally good chance of being that person, you just have to look for it.
Edit: also, is WU in this set as good as BR was in AFR? IIRC that deck had basically everything- the best removal, the best mana fixing, the most consistent synergies at common. Not sure if this set is quite that unbalanced (though it might be)
I've been having decent success with BR - if brokers is contested you might be able to put together a fast aggro BR deck.
Is anybody else sick of this meta where every content creator is chomping at the bit to have hot takes? Seems like the first week of the format is people just throwing shit takes at the wall to see what sticks. Bonus points if it’s about the format being the best/worst of all time? It’s so boring. Pre-GRN or so nobody ever talked about this. Now every streamers chat is constantly “STREAMER IS THIS THE BEST SET OF ALL TIME???” starting on day 1 and continuing the duration of the format.
Really sad to see LR do this yet again. We’re like a week into the format. Just chill out and enjoy your drafts. Why can’t we just play and enjoy the sets anymore?
I couldn’t disagree more. This episode was far from a hot take. You could tell LSV had done the work, putting in a ton of drafts, and he was able to back up his opinions.
For what it’s worth, they weren’t nearly so dogmatic or sensationalist about it—they explained why they weren’t loving the format, but granted that other people might be more fond of tempo-oriented gameplay, and also that the format might improve over time.
But beyond that, part of the reason I listen to these podcasts is to get the well-reasoned opinions of good players! If this was an hour of LSV and Marshall saying “it’s too early to have any takes about the format,” I would not have listened.
You can have an initial impressions show without a “one archetype is definitively the best” every single time a set is released. Looking at statistics for a meta that hasnt settled is completely 100% meaningless. It’s not “well researched”. It’s just an obnoxious hot take for clout.
I only say that when it's true - check back in 1, 2, 3 weeks and see if this holds up (it will)
First of all I will say my comments are much too rude. Sorry about that, I can do better. I’m having my own hot take for clout. (Ironic!)
The thing is I agree with almost all of your opinions on the format. I really enjoyed the second half of the episode where you talked about all the other stuff that’s been good. Like, Yes, overseer is a huge mistake. Yes, brokers is the best deck right now and that’s unlikely to change. I’m just annoyed that the overarching message of the first episode of the format is “you should never try to draft anything other than brokers”.
Maybe at the end of the day I’m just frustrated at the speed of the Arena age bringing us to this conclusion within 2 weeks instead of 4 months, which is even something you guys touched on in the intro to the episode. Like if there is a deck that overperforms by far, that’s fine. Formats were just so much more fun and enjoyable when we knew this on month 2 instead of week 1, you know?
I’m a big fan of how you complain about ‘hot takes’ and then say things like
>Looking at statistics for a meta that hasnt settled is completely 100% meaningless
Also LSV specifically says he *avoids* the stats to get his own early impressions.
> chomping at the bit
Man I guess I never got the memo because my R/G and B/R decks are doing fine you just have to prioritize the two color two drops into jewelry thief and magician. Also LSV never needing to never use the destroy an enchant on the bant charm I guess he has not run into the busted bant enchants that often.
I fucking love this set lol.
I'm platinum and I literally get passed maestros every single game at this point.
I was running white but it looks like everyone eats that up real fast.
Bit of constructive feedback for marshall and /u/LSV__ . I don't always know what the rares and mythic rares do, especially early in the set run and I can't look them up if I'm driving (which is pretty much the only time I listen to podcasts). I would appreciate it if ya'll could read the text on the rares and mythics for scrubs like me.