#FF Blog - Follow Friday, Epic Draft and Who gotz da skillz?

Friday has arrived. I'm getting pretty pumped for the new set to shake up draft. Probably going to stick to standard until then. But, since the new set is coming up, #FF to @modogodot and @marshallLRCast if you seriously haven't checked out their cast yet, CHECK IT OUT FOR SET REVIEW. SERIOUSLY. They put hours upon hours into this and its extremely detailed. They gather all the relevant info, present all the interactions, make predictions, talk about what types of decks might like a card, etc.

#FollowFriday @semisober. This guy has really stepped it up over on his blog tommartell.com He's previously been posting his drafts, but now he's posting other peoples drafts, and commentating. Its great. He's also beginning to try and breakdown a framework of vocabulary for breaking down drafting decisions. This is going to get interesting real quick.

#followfriday @neiltyson This is one of the NOVA hosts from PBS. I love science documentaries, so this guy is basically my hero, but he always has clever things to say about current events related to science.

#followfriday @rogueinsight His blog is pretty sweet, he's always brewin up something sweet. He has an idea of running mindcrank with bloodchief ascension, and i want to build it so bad. My version would be grixis would tezzeret shell, lots of cantrip artifacts, jinxed idol, perilous myr, bloodghast, bolts, preordain... sounds fun. NOt sure if it will be good, but it will be fun.

#followfriday @dzimet He's a local Level 2 judge, and all around awesome dude. He was my teammate in the 3v3 kamigawa draft, and the two of us were undefeated. We crushed so badly even one of our teammates went home sick...

so at this point in the post, the author fell asleep... *sigh*.

So i'm going to just slam some more #ff's in here, and move on.
@two_eyes
@hobbesq
@samstod
@cardboardwitch
@kstube
@swordstoplow
@bgardnerdurbin
@josephlocascio
@mulldrifting
@kellyreid
@fatecreatr
@chosler88
@auranalchemist
@grant_champion
@cavemankellen
Also the usual caveat, of there being a bunch of people i follow, and nearly all of them are awesome.

Onward, and forward!
Last night I drafted Kamigawa block for the first time. Everyone talked about how weird the format was, and wow, they were right. I got a sick bomb in each pack (Yes, it was nice.) but I found it funny how the power level of some cards was so low, while others was so high. First Pack I opened the Mind Control Dragon, Keiga. Second pack, I obv opened a Jitte, and Third pack, I got an Undying Flames.  My first game, I resolved a Jitte, and my opponent immediately scooped. Second game I cast a turn 6 Keiga, Turn 7 Undying Flames, but just then, David Caruso popped in and said, "This draft is gonna be...." *Puts on his sunglasses* "Epic." YEEEEEEAAAAAHHH
Okay, well I won every game there after by simply casting Undying Flames, and blocking. Epic, to say the least.

"Who gotz da skillz?"
Yesterday a very interesting debate was brought up between @marshallLRcast and @auranalchemist. Their initial debate was about which deck was more skill intensive to play in standard between BUG/RUG and RDW. I mostly played devils advocate in this debate to anyone who said it was an obvious choice one way or the other, because to me, it isn't that obvious.

Some fun excerpts:

@cardboardwitch: "To answer your question in detail my reply: "Play both decks 100 times each and then come laugh with me at how dumb the question is" #truth"

 

and:

'Let's try a few more "Who's a better hockey player; Pavel Datsyuk or my cousin Dave?" how about "What tastes better shit or a ham sandwich?"'

 

Then, @modogodot, in his infinite wisdom, defined a deck's skill intensity as:

"A graph with two axis: "Pilot Skill Level" & "Expected Win % in Meta" would be an interesting way to define it for each deck"

 

And @mrfridays defined it as:

"Number of possible lines of play that aren't readily noticeable or represented by the current or future board states. Roughly."

 

So where do I weigh in on this? I'm leaning towards @modogodot's definition. But ultimately, now does this actually help us answer the question? It really depends on the actual pilots skill level, how skill intensive the deck is. I think a true beginner could play RDW about as well as a average-below average player. I think beyond that, the ability to play RDW well goes in tiers, in a staircase. While with BUG/RUG a true beginner might not be able to even play the deck at all, but with practice their skill with it would increase linearly until it is mastered. Another possible definition would be, "Which deck is more difficult to pilot flawlessly?" I'd say RDW.  But I want to try and illustrate what I'm getting at here, and why there is no cut and dry answer as everyone wants there to be. @marshallLRcast says i'm just trying to be cool by eschewing Bug/rug. But in all honestly, cast a jace. how hard is that? I kid.

 

My contention is that an argument can easily be made for either deck.

 

Arguments for RDW:

A really deep decision tree exists from RDW in which your first turn is going to affect all your possible decisions down the road. It involves planning multiple turns in advance while committing to one plan of action from turn 1.

 

Arguments against RDW:  Just burn and attack! according to marshall: "Just fucking attack"

 

I posed a sample starting hand for RDW and asked what the correct play would be. And while, I admit, this probably isn't even the trickiest decision tree to come up with, but the fact that I got different answers from people, just shows that its not as straightforward as it seems.

 

Opening hand:

Mountain

Fetchland

Goblin Guide

Spikeshot Elder

Geopede

Lightning Bolt

Searing Blaze

 

What would you do Turn 1 on the play against the mirror? I got a few different responses here, while I do agree with @mrfridays that his suggestion of Mountain->spikeshot is probably best, there certainly are  a lot of scenarios to play out in your head to arrive at that decision. If he's tested enough of the matchup where that is now engrained and intuitive, I can see why he snap-called that answer, but in reality, that decision tree goes pretty deep.

 

Arguments for BUG/RUG: Managing a Jace, Cobra and fetchlands is complicated! (i dont agree with this) Any deck with counterspells faces a whole new set of decisions as compared to a deck that doesn't, and the same can be said for a planeswalker that has 4 abilities, 3 of which can be used on nearly any turn. (This i do agree with)

 

Arguments against Bug/Rug: An opening hand that consists of Island Forest scalding tarn, preordain, jace, cobra and a titan has really only one line of play. Turn 2 cobra, turn 3 jace, turn 4 preordain, turn 5 titan.

Anything else is uncivilized. and the deck just plays itself. The cards themselves are so powerful that even misplaying this to play a turn 1 preordain, probably doesn't put you very far behind. I mean,  you have a jace! Jace on his own can be complicated to use correctly, but the bottom line is this deck can win THROUGH punts if you just draw like a champ. Burn spells and 1-2 drop creatures wont do that for you. You have to be focused on each play to maximize the value of every play you make to have a chance.

 

I'm kind of settling in to say that for someone at MY skill level, RDW is mroe skill intensive. I could pick up a RUG deck, take it to an FNM and do just fine. I pick up RDW and I'll likely be kicking myself for punts all weekend. While I might punt just as ofted with RUG, it's more forgiving because of the raw power of the deck. Also because all the real decisions that are hard, happen much later in the game when the board is developed, and you have more information about your opponents situation. I'm certainly in 100% agreement that a beginner is better off picking up RDW at a random tournament, because sometimes brute aggression can just get there, even if poorly played. And its true, its hard to misplay "just fucking attack" so once the creatures are in play, i think even a beginner can attack with them properly, but its setting up your line optimally from the start which is where i think they'll lose most of their games.

 

i'd really like to see what people have to say about this. its a very interesting concept to me. and if i didn't fall asleep writing this last night, i had planned to mock up some charts of this, but maybe another time.

 

Happy weekend, all... I hope its epic.