Agreed with thread, this set is amazing to draft. So many archetypes that I can pick up on just by reading signals correctly. For instance, last night I drafted the BW lifegain deck after opening a horrible Pack 1. The BW deck was handed to me from the guy on my left, I didn't open a single key card for the archetype in my packs except an Ob Noxilis, who is great in any black deck. So far, I've tried the following decks:
BW lifegain aggro > drafted 2 times with great results
Mono red 'colourless' eldrazi
UB eldrazi > this one sucked but was fun. No decent acceleration in the set sadly to make this work.
UG tempo > fantastic archetype
UW flyers > always good in every format it seems
For me the big disappointment so far is the Eldrazi, the big ones. They are absolutely horrible and they are suppose to be the selling point of this set.
I think that overstates the situation. The selling point of the set is in the name, the Battle for Zendikar. That would include both sides, and the smaller Devoid Eldrazi as well as the larger ones.
You would have a much better argument if this set were named, say, Rise of the Eldrazi.
I think I like this format. I'm not entirely certain, but I think I like it because I am absolutely atrocious at it. I'm just not grasping it. Synergy is such a bigger piece of the pie in this set, and I haven't got that down. At least, I think that's the issue. Regardless, I was pretty well able to handle myself in limited for the last couple years, and now I just get monkey stomped every match. It's been a humbling endeavor.
The weird thing about this format is that I can't tell what's a great draft and what's a poor draft. I will 3-0 with something that is duct taped together then scrub out with a deck that seemed to be wide open. Maybe it's just variance as I'm only about 10 drafts deep.
For me the big disappointment so far is the Eldrazi, the big ones. They are absolutely horrible and they are suppose to be the selling point of this set.
I disagree. I think most of them are playable, sometimes even exactly what you want.
UB Devoid - Ruin Processor is good here, given the deck's tendency to play a more controlling game. I've been on the wrong end of that a couple of times now, where I am the aggro deck and get them very low but can't quite finish the job before the Processor comes to play and ends my chances.
Gx Ramp - I LOVE the inevitability that having an Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger or a Desolation Twin gives this build. And getting there in green just isn't as difficult at it would appear thanks to all of the cards that ramp you by 2x on top of the typical 1x ramp effects. Devastator, Breaker, and Winnower are also playable here, but not as exciting given how much easier they are to answer. I've been able to ramp to the really big guys (Ulamog/Twins) 3 times now, and in two of those cases I was happy to be able to play a Plated Crusher over one of the weaker eldrazi.
The weird thing about this format is that I can't tell what's a great draft and what's a poor draft. I will 3-0 with something that is duct taped together then scrub out with a deck that seemed to be wide open. Maybe it's just variance as I'm only about 10 drafts deep.
I have seen more games lost to mana issues in BFZ than in any other recent set, and I think this leads to more variance (luck). Even getting stuck on 4 lands can ruin some decks. That was true in KTK but at least you could cast a morph for 3 to sometimes stay alive long enough to get enough lands in play, but in BFZ it can mean just going nowhere.
Also, in swiss drafts I am seeing way too many 3 color decks which do not include enough fixing (since there is very little fixing in BFZ other than in green), leading to more variance due to color mana screw.
With all of that said, I am also seeing, in my own games and on the many draft videos I watch, more very close games than in any other recent set. If there are no significant mana issues, then games often come down to one last turn which could have gone either way. I do not know why this is the case, maybe it's just what I happen to have seen and experienced.
I absolutely am not seeing what you're seeing re: mana issues; in fact, I don't think I can remember having played a format where it has been less of an issue (sample size at this point: 25 drafts). Almost all the games are real games.
then my finisher is usually a pair of Kalastria Nightwatch. Fill in the other 10 cards or so with draft playables and you will win quiet a few matches as the stalling of the wall/life strategy into the repeatable removal is really strong. The best card against it so far has been the 7/6 hexproof trampler.
I absolutely am not seeing what you're seeing re: mana issues; in fact, I don't think I can remember having played a format where it has been less of an issue (sample size at this point: 25 drafts). Almost all the games are real games.
I agree with this.
The introduction of the Vancouver mulligan is certainly part of it, so I think we can look forward to fewer mana issues in future formats too. But for this format specifically, all the mana sinks go a long way to mitigate flood (and let you get away with playing more land), and scions do a lot of work covering for missed land drops, so delays in hitting a crucial land are often much less painful (lose 1 or 2 tokens instead of doing nothing for a turn or two).
I like BFZ draft but it's either very hard or extremely high variance (I cannot tell which) It seems that sometimes you just get a very bad seat and end up in "no archetype" or a mix of two and your deck is awful. Other times, you jump the the correct lane early and have a finely tuned machine. Very often it's clear late pack 1/ early pack 2 that you are in the wrong deck, but it's extremely hard to switch because you can't just jump a single and take what's open. What's open might be a mix of 2 colors.
Well, if you feel that putting off choosing an archetype even if you have to choose a subpowered card in the pack is preferred, then you can quite easily run into the situation that everyone else picks the archetype cards and you end up with cards that, while good, have no synergy.
I honestly think that BFZ works a bit better with 'forcing' an archetype... if you can truly discern what the cards the archetypes really want that others don't actually are. There are two types of major signals in BFZ draft: late gold cards and mid-to-late 'synergy' cards. Good examples of the former would be Drana's Emissary and Forerunner of Slaughter. If you see these after the first few picks, you can nearly guarantee that the players who passed it aren't likely in that archetype. So move in. An example of the second type would be the controversial Halimar Wavecaller. If you're Awaken, you want this. If you're not, it's a playable but not much more than that.
TL, DR: You can't wait for an archetype to 'fall into your seat'. You have to work for it, and you have to know how to shift.
DSF: There was a conversation in a thread here that some people wouldn't take Wavecaller until they had the Awaken cards to 'make it good'.
My argument is that that approach is wrong, because then it can leave you with a bunch of cards of 'okay power level' and not a cohesive deck that will generally lose to such decks.
Another way to view my argument is that the 'correct' approach to draft BFZ is to be more forcing than not in the environment, subject to the 'right signals'. Those signals are, however, much harder to read in this format than in most.
I didn't realize Tidecaller was controversial. I thought it was widely recognized as an outstanding card in that archetype. Am I missing something?
It is in the Awaken archtype.
The problem is, if you see it pick 4 or 5, you are in no way guaranteed an open archtype if you move in. Reason for this is that people will draft the good awaken cards before the wavecaller. When presented a pick 3 where the pick is Wavecaller vs Sheer Drop or Wave Caller vs Coastal Discovery, I'm taking awaken card every time. The person next to me might see this as a signal that UW awaken is open, while in fact it's not and if he then moves in that archtype, he'll end up with a terrible deck.
BFZ is great if you´re in the correct archtype for your position at the table and get to draft a cool deck. It's absolutely terrible if you're not and it's not really you can exert a lot of control over. My rough guesstimate is that 3 out of 8 drafters are in the latter position in your average pod. Which also matches Zenbitz' experience that it's a very high variance (almost binary) format.
I disagree with this in a couple of regards:
1. I'm taking the Wavecaller over all but the best Awaken cards. Early I'll take it over all of the commons, including Drop and Clutch. It is that good, and in my experience you can regularly pick up enough Awaken cards later to make it worthwhile.
2. Part of drafting BFZ is figuring out which archetype you should be in. So those 3/8 players, or whatever, who aren't in the right archetype for their seats aren't just SOL, they should be looking to switch.
3. While drafting a sweet archetype deck is ideal, it isn't necessary. You can do fine with goodstuff decks too, especially if you are playing blue and/or white, which just have a high enough individual card power to carry a deck sans synergy. So even if someone else it taking your archetype cards and that doesn't come together for you, you don't autolose (i.e. it is not binary).
I didn't realize Tidecaller was controversial. I thought it was widely recognized as an outstanding card in that archetype. Am I missing something?
It is in the Awaken archtype.
The problem is, if you see it pick 4 or 5, you are in no way guaranteed an open archtype if you move in. Reason for this is that people will draft the good awaken cards before the wavecaller. When presented a pick 3 where the pick is Wavecaller vs Sheer Drop or Wave Caller vs Coastal Discovery, I'm taking awaken card every time. The person next to me might see this as a signal that UW awaken is open, while in fact it's not and if he then moves in that archtype, he'll end up with a terrible deck.
BFZ is great if you´re in the correct archtype for your position at the table and get to draft a cool deck. It's absolutely terrible if you're not and it's not really you can exert a lot of control over. My rough guesstimate is that 3 out of 8 drafters are in the latter position in your average pod. Which also matches Zenbitz' experience that it's a very high variance (almost binary) format.
I disagree with this in a couple of regards:
1. I'm taking the Wavecaller over all but the best Awaken cards. Early I'll take it over all of the commons, including Drop and Clutch. It is that good, and in my experience you can regularly pick up enough Awaken cards later to make it worthwhile.
The "good" awaken cards are clutch of currents, sheer drop, ondu rising, and coastal discovery, and every single one of these cards are typically gone by P3 in my drafts. Rush of Ice and encircling fissure are extremely mediocre in a UW typically fliers deck since the fliers don't generally interact with your opponents board, meaning that you do not want a falter or combat trick type of effect.
[quote from="MissMua »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/limited-sealed-draft/643137-bfz-draft-is-great?comment=42"][quote]
3. While drafting a sweet archetype deck is ideal, it isn't necessary. You can do fine with goodstuff decks too, especially if you are playing blue and/or white, which just have a high enough individual card power to carry a deck sans synergy. So even if someone else it taking your archetype cards and that doesn't come together for you, you don't autolose (i.e. it is not binary).
It's really just archetype "card" right? UW only has the halimar tidecaller as a payoff card for being in those two colors specifically since all of the other themes in the two colors conflict. I suppose tightening coils might be considered a UW card but thats stretching it. With UW i expect to be a goodstuff deck the majority of the time, which is fine since fliers are really good in this set, but you aren't going to get any degenerate synergies with the deck like you do with others.
MissMua: While I hear that, saying that 3 of every 8 people drafting (37.5%) basically get screwed in drafts does not make a good draft format, and I think that nearly everyone would recognize that as such. The fact that so many people, particularly people who in general would not like high variance formats like the BFZ format you postulate, say that BFZ is a great format makes me believe that your hypothesis is incorrect.
"BFZ is great if you´re in the correct archtype for your position at the table and get to draft a cool deck. It's absolutely terrible if you're not and it's not really you can exert a lot of control over." -MissMua
I mostly agree with this, although I think you can still have a decent shot at winning without an archetype deck. In my view BFZ drafts end up with more haves and have-nots than other recent sets.
I agree with others' comments that a good amount of skill is involved in drafting, probably more so than in most recent sets, but there is in my view still plenty of luck involved and if the drafting luck does not fall your way then you are much less likely to win.
All of this can occur in other recent sets, I just think that it is more the case in BFZ.
With that said, I am enjoying BFZ drafting a whole lot for many reasons. The haves and have-nots issue is not one I like but it's not too bad.
I love BFZ. I'm kinda new to drafting, but this is great. My favorite deck is defintely UW control. I don't have many opportunities to draft and don't play onine, so I only had 5-6 drafts and 2 prereleases so far. I played UW control three times - and each time was a different experience. The first deack was an awaken deck with 5 awaken spells, Halimar Tidecaller and Noyan Dar, Roil Shaper. The second deck was a classic limited control deck, with high-end like Drowner of Hope and Felidar Sovereign and about 10 removal spells (white was ridiculously open). And yesterday I drafted a UW ramp deck that played Spawning Bed, Shrine of the Forsaken Gods, Kozilek's Channeler and Hedron Archive and tried to stall into Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger. I had good results with all three decks. As people have said, the format is also very deep, and I got some amazing cards very late just because no one played their deck. This is one of the bast formats I'e drafted, but then again, I haven't drafted a lot of formats.
Sheer Drop and Coastal Discovery *are* the best awaken cards.
I'd put Clutch of Currents above Sheer Drop. Sheer Drop can be very good, but sometimes it just rots in your hand (Makindi Patrol triggers, Deathless Behemoth, Ghostly Sentinel).
[quote]
I didn't realize Tidecaller was controversial. I thought it was widely recognized as an outstanding card in that archetype. Am I missing something?
It is in the Awaken archtype.
The problem is, if you see it pick 4 or 5, you are in no way guaranteed an open archtype if you move in. Reason for this is that people will draft the good awaken cards before the wavecaller. When presented a pick 3 where the pick is Wavecaller vs Sheer Drop or Wave Caller vs Coastal Discovery, I'm taking awaken card every time. The person next to me might see this as a signal that UW awaken is open, while in fact it's not and if he then moves in that archtype, he'll end up with a terrible deck.
BFZ is great if you´re in the correct archtype for your position at the table and get to draft a cool deck. It's absolutely terrible if you're not and it's not really you can exert a lot of control over. My rough guesstimate is that 3 out of 8 drafters are in the latter position in your average pod. Which also matches Zenbitz' experience that it's a very high variance (almost binary) format.
I disagree with this in a couple of regards:
1. I'm taking the Wavecaller over all but the best Awaken cards. Early I'll take it over all of the commons, including Drop and Clutch. It is that good, and in my experience you can regularly pick up enough Awaken cards later to make it worthwhile.
Sheer Drop and Coastal Discovery *are* the best awaken cards.
2. Part of drafting BFZ is figuring out which archetype you should be in. So those 3/8 players, or whatever, who aren't in the right archetype for their seats aren't just SOL, they should be looking to switch.
Yes. And sometimes there just isn't an archtype available, because there are not few of the actual key cards you need. Sometimes you just don't get to see any of those key cards. And by the end of pack 1, it's too late to switch and yes, then you're going to be drafting a generic 2-color deck. Which isn't neccesariy bad, but it's gets ten times better if you get to replace your 21-22-23rd card with archtype enablers. And that's the decks you're going to face at 1-0 and 2-0.
Which leads us back to the have vs not-have argument.
I stand by my opinion that BFZ is absolutely awful if you're just not getting a deck passed.
</blockquote>
I just think you are really overrating the power level that the archetype decks gain over the others. IMO one of the beauties of the format is that balance, the way synergies matter, but not to such a degree that you are doomed without them (ala MM2).
Something that could be happening--I would be doing it if I saw it--would be to draft highly not the cards that are the 'best' cards of their archetype, but cards that let you shift archetypes.
So, e.g., let's say you start with trying to go UR because of strong blue Devoid cards you pick early. But let's say the Red dries up and you need to pick another color. White is likely out because you've been focusing on Eldrazi, so let's think about the cards you're looking for that actually make you want to play UX.
UG: You want Scion tokens here, or Converge. Hopefully neither because 'Green is bad', but if you see a lot of the Green Scion producers, it could work. But what if there is a GB sac player? He's likely to be drafting the green Scion producers as sac fuel. In fact, my argument is that he should value those more highly than, say, GB multicolor cards once he knows he's in the archetype, because someone wanting to add G to either W or U will want the Scion cards a lot more than a gold card that doesn't share a color with their current major color.
Basically, I am viewing the cards of BFZ as a network, in a 'what goes with what' archetype fashion, and trying to find the cards that bridge the archetypes. Not necessarily the 'goodstuff' cards, but the ones that work in two archetypes. Dominator Drone, e.g., works both in RB Devoid Aggro (due to trigger and fairly aggressive stats) but also UB Processors (due to Ingest). What you want to do--and perhaps what others are doing to you, meaningfully or not--is to cut the bridges, so that if someone does gamble with entering an archetype early, they're 'stuck' with the results of their gamble.
BW lifegain aggro > drafted 2 times with great results
Mono red 'colourless' eldrazi
UB eldrazi > this one sucked but was fun. No decent acceleration in the set sadly to make this work.
UG tempo > fantastic archetype
UW flyers > always good in every format it seems
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
You would have a much better argument if this set were named, say, Rise of the Eldrazi.
UR Blue-Red Control
Modern:
UBR Grixis Control
UWR Jeskai Control
I disagree. I think most of them are playable, sometimes even exactly what you want.
Bane of Bala Ged and especially Deathless Behemoth are fine finishers in most decks.
UB Devoid - Ruin Processor is good here, given the deck's tendency to play a more controlling game. I've been on the wrong end of that a couple of times now, where I am the aggro deck and get them very low but can't quite finish the job before the Processor comes to play and ends my chances.
Gx Ramp - I LOVE the inevitability that having an Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger or a Desolation Twin gives this build. And getting there in green just isn't as difficult at it would appear thanks to all of the cards that ramp you by 2x on top of the typical 1x ramp effects. Devastator, Breaker, and Winnower are also playable here, but not as exciting given how much easier they are to answer. I've been able to ramp to the really big guys (Ulamog/Twins) 3 times now, and in two of those cases I was happy to be able to play a Plated Crusher over one of the weaker eldrazi.
I have seen more games lost to mana issues in BFZ than in any other recent set, and I think this leads to more variance (luck). Even getting stuck on 4 lands can ruin some decks. That was true in KTK but at least you could cast a morph for 3 to sometimes stay alive long enough to get enough lands in play, but in BFZ it can mean just going nowhere.
Also, in swiss drafts I am seeing way too many 3 color decks which do not include enough fixing (since there is very little fixing in BFZ other than in green), leading to more variance due to color mana screw.
With all of that said, I am also seeing, in my own games and on the many draft videos I watch, more very close games than in any other recent set. If there are no significant mana issues, then games often come down to one last turn which could have gone either way. I do not know why this is the case, maybe it's just what I happen to have seen and experienced.
A normal draft core for me when I draft this archetype has been:
2 Pathway Arrows
1 Fortified Rampart
3 Stone Haven Medic
1 Serene Steward
2 Nirkana Assassin
1 Malakir Familiar
then my finisher is usually a pair of Kalastria Nightwatch. Fill in the other 10 cards or so with draft playables and you will win quiet a few matches as the stalling of the wall/life strategy into the repeatable removal is really strong. The best card against it so far has been the 7/6 hexproof trampler.
The introduction of the Vancouver mulligan is certainly part of it, so I think we can look forward to fewer mana issues in future formats too. But for this format specifically, all the mana sinks go a long way to mitigate flood (and let you get away with playing more land), and scions do a lot of work covering for missed land drops, so delays in hitting a crucial land are often much less painful (lose 1 or 2 tokens instead of doing nothing for a turn or two).
I honestly think that BFZ works a bit better with 'forcing' an archetype... if you can truly discern what the cards the archetypes really want that others don't actually are. There are two types of major signals in BFZ draft: late gold cards and mid-to-late 'synergy' cards. Good examples of the former would be Drana's Emissary and Forerunner of Slaughter. If you see these after the first few picks, you can nearly guarantee that the players who passed it aren't likely in that archetype. So move in. An example of the second type would be the controversial Halimar Wavecaller. If you're Awaken, you want this. If you're not, it's a playable but not much more than that.
TL, DR: You can't wait for an archetype to 'fall into your seat'. You have to work for it, and you have to know how to shift.
My argument is that that approach is wrong, because then it can leave you with a bunch of cards of 'okay power level' and not a cohesive deck that will generally lose to such decks.
Another way to view my argument is that the 'correct' approach to draft BFZ is to be more forcing than not in the environment, subject to the 'right signals'. Those signals are, however, much harder to read in this format than in most.
I disagree with this in a couple of regards:
1. I'm taking the Wavecaller over all but the best Awaken cards. Early I'll take it over all of the commons, including Drop and Clutch. It is that good, and in my experience you can regularly pick up enough Awaken cards later to make it worthwhile.
2. Part of drafting BFZ is figuring out which archetype you should be in. So those 3/8 players, or whatever, who aren't in the right archetype for their seats aren't just SOL, they should be looking to switch.
3. While drafting a sweet archetype deck is ideal, it isn't necessary. You can do fine with goodstuff decks too, especially if you are playing blue and/or white, which just have a high enough individual card power to carry a deck sans synergy. So even if someone else it taking your archetype cards and that doesn't come together for you, you don't autolose (i.e. it is not binary).
The "good" awaken cards are clutch of currents, sheer drop, ondu rising, and coastal discovery, and every single one of these cards are typically gone by P3 in my drafts. Rush of Ice and encircling fissure are extremely mediocre in a UW typically fliers deck since the fliers don't generally interact with your opponents board, meaning that you do not want a falter or combat trick type of effect.
It's really just archetype "card" right? UW only has the halimar tidecaller as a payoff card for being in those two colors specifically since all of the other themes in the two colors conflict. I suppose tightening coils might be considered a UW card but thats stretching it. With UW i expect to be a goodstuff deck the majority of the time, which is fine since fliers are really good in this set, but you aren't going to get any degenerate synergies with the deck like you do with others.
I mostly agree with this, although I think you can still have a decent shot at winning without an archetype deck. In my view BFZ drafts end up with more haves and have-nots than other recent sets.
I agree with others' comments that a good amount of skill is involved in drafting, probably more so than in most recent sets, but there is in my view still plenty of luck involved and if the drafting luck does not fall your way then you are much less likely to win.
All of this can occur in other recent sets, I just think that it is more the case in BFZ.
With that said, I am enjoying BFZ drafting a whole lot for many reasons. The haves and have-nots issue is not one I like but it's not too bad.
I'd put Clutch of Currents above Sheer Drop. Sheer Drop can be very good, but sometimes it just rots in your hand (Makindi Patrol triggers, Deathless Behemoth, Ghostly Sentinel).
UR Blue-Red Control
Modern:
UBR Grixis Control
UWR Jeskai Control
I just think you are really overrating the power level that the archetype decks gain over the others. IMO one of the beauties of the format is that balance, the way synergies matter, but not to such a degree that you are doomed without them (ala MM2).
Something that could be happening--I would be doing it if I saw it--would be to draft highly not the cards that are the 'best' cards of their archetype, but cards that let you shift archetypes.
So, e.g., let's say you start with trying to go UR because of strong blue Devoid cards you pick early. But let's say the Red dries up and you need to pick another color. White is likely out because you've been focusing on Eldrazi, so let's think about the cards you're looking for that actually make you want to play UX.
UG: You want Scion tokens here, or Converge. Hopefully neither because 'Green is bad', but if you see a lot of the Green Scion producers, it could work. But what if there is a GB sac player? He's likely to be drafting the green Scion producers as sac fuel. In fact, my argument is that he should value those more highly than, say, GB multicolor cards once he knows he's in the archetype, because someone wanting to add G to either W or U will want the Scion cards a lot more than a gold card that doesn't share a color with their current major color.
Basically, I am viewing the cards of BFZ as a network, in a 'what goes with what' archetype fashion, and trying to find the cards that bridge the archetypes. Not necessarily the 'goodstuff' cards, but the ones that work in two archetypes. Dominator Drone, e.g., works both in RB Devoid Aggro (due to trigger and fairly aggressive stats) but also UB Processors (due to Ingest). What you want to do--and perhaps what others are doing to you, meaningfully or not--is to cut the bridges, so that if someone does gamble with entering an archetype early, they're 'stuck' with the results of their gamble.