BTW, I do 4322 because I've been drafting Urzas for the last 6 months and it's the only thing available. I get past round 2 maybe twice a month, so if Swiss were available, I'd do that instead. I'd never win packs in 8-4.
I really dont understand the people saying they do 4322 because of time constraints. You are drafting because you like to play magic, not because you are trying to make money. If you like drafting/playing magic then the obvious choice is swiss since you are guaranteed the most games. If you really want to a draft but only have 2 hours instead of the 2.5 that swiss requires, then do an 8-4. But saying you do 4322 because of time constraints is idiotic and a lie. 8-4s take less time than 4322 due to round 3 being split the majority of the time.
@walkerdog You are ignoring basic facts. Your whole little rant is based on you "feeling" like you have a better chance in 4322. So instead of looking at reality/math/facts you are going by a "feeling" you have that 4322 is better for you. Cant get much dumber than that.
I thought I did the picture correctly, but I guess I didn't?
And my article is interesting to the readers. It is for the lower priced players and how to make money on getting cards early, and how to not lose money. It benefits the players and the sellers.
I have a thought on the 8-4, 4-3-22, and swiss. There are always going to be games where you get a bad draw, and if you don't draft anything, you get kicked out in the first round. And if you don't get a card worth anything, you lose not just the money involved, but also any rares you pass. For example, I played a 4-3-33 today and won the first game, but lost the second because I had a miserable draw.
(I could have taken a Dungrove Elder with P3P1 but chose a doom blade because I didn't need the Elder)
But even though I won 2 packs, the best card I had drafted was "celestial purge".
If you play M12, like most people seem to be drafting, it is based on 90% luck, 10% skill, and 20% hoping the person to your right is stupid.
When it comes down to it, good deck or bad, just based on percentages, you have a better chance of winning 2 packs in Swiss than you would have in 4-3-22. Although I am a good drafter, my first pack today was the worst pack ever. The 3 uncommon's were sideboard at best, the rare was a dual land, and the best common was just a 2/2 red bloodthirst creature. While the guy I eventually played and was next to me picked up a Primordial Ooze with his first pick.
Swiss allows you to have that one game where everything that can go wrong does go wrong, but you still have the chance to win 2 more games, and you have the liberty to draft a rare instead of a better common. I mean in a 4-3-2-2, I was passed a inferno Titan one time P3P3 because I was the only one playing red atm. And there is always the dreaded...
...Shuffler!!!!
I have figured out the shuffler though. If you sacrifice a lamb to him, he will grant you a possible top deck.
There is absolutely no way 4-3-22 gives you a better chance of winning when Swiss will guarantee almost everyone playing at least 1 pack. I would rather take my chances on a swiss than getting unlucky and having to sacrifice a lamb to the God of Shufflers.
And btw, unlike the people who draft online and get credits to play for free from sites like MTGOtraders, most people would rather not play an 8-4 where your P1 rare is a dual land and another guy gets a Gideon or Garruk, then is passed a oblivion ring, pacifism, arachnus web, gideons lawkeeprs, and then takes 2 auramancers. Then on P3P1 picks up either a Solemn or a Titan. By the time I get his first pack, the best card left is flight.
To be honest I think most of the real criticism of 4-3-2-2 comes from the higher end players who can realistically expect to get at least 4 packs a time from 8-4 drafts. And that's fine. I'm not going to say those guys are wrong at all, just they have more of an interest in the top end than most of the average shmoes do.
The majority of people playing aren't those guys, and the numbers of people playing in 4-3-2-2 shows that.
4-3-2-2 is WAY more fun to play than swiss, and gives you a decent shot at coming out of the draft with a prize even if there are a couple of 'sharks' in your draft.
Personally, I am fine with the prizes available for 4-3-2-2. I'm a pretty decent player, not the greatest but I hope above average, and placing third or forth is pretty much my expectation in any random 4-3-2-2 draft that I run in. Obviously that's not how it always goes because luck plays a part, but I think that as long as I draft pretty well I will normally win a couple of games but very seldom go the distance.
Swiss isn't a bad format, and doesn't have bad prizes, but it is slow and my feeling is that if you can take the max from swiss, you may as well have played 4-3-2-2 and enjoyed it. Similarly if you bomb out, you'll get curb stomped a bunch of times when you knew going in you had a bad deck.
4-3-2-2 is definitely a compromise, and a rookie friendly format, but that's why its popular. For a lot of people, it's just nice to get something for your trouble, even if you don't make the top table, and (as I have often felt) if you do make the top 2 it was more due to getting favorable matchups than anything you really did.
Similarly, if you just got screwed on colours or otherwise ended up with a deck that will only beat very bad players, I am ok with just dropping after one match and having another crack at it.
For people who are hardcore into MTGO, I can see why 4-3-2-2 isn't as attractive, because there is the potential to either win more packs or to play more games, both of which are attractive when you take Magic seriously.
I wonder which will get banned first, Vesuva or Cloudpost? I don't think you can have them legal in a format that lacks Wasteland and truly fast combo decks (Belcher, ANT etc). The deck was designed in Legacy to stomp control decks like CB/Top. When you have it crushing aggro and combo, you have a serious problem. If the metagame becomes built around Blood Moon, you have an even bigger problem.
Pyro Ascension is very easy to hate out and beat, and besides obviously awesome cards like Krosan Grip, simple discard can destroy the deck and yet is very poor vs 12post since lands are very hard to force from players hands, and the deck is extremely redundant.
It looks like an extremely combo dominated format, which is historically the worst thing possible. A lot of combo decks that attack the format in very different ways is a great way to kill it.
With Loam and Crucible playable, I don't think Ghost Quarter is going to be enough to stop 12-post, so my money is on a ban. The other option is a format dominated by hawks, but in this case, Aven Mindcensors.
Another problem that you didn't mention is the way 4322s affect supply.
I have no idea how man 4322s fire in the day, but if 100 fire (which seems low), that means that 100 less packs are distributed into the market. This has both positive and negative effects on drafts: First, it inflates the cost of packs. This definitely hurts drafters, because they need to purchase packs to keep on drafting. Having 5322s instead wouldn't create a huge change, but it is still going to mean more packs in the system, lowering the cost of packs and making drafting more affordable for everyone. Second, it inflates the cost of singles, since there are fewer packs going into the system. This helps drafters, because it means their singles are worth more, but it only helps the drafters that are selling their singles in order to keep on drafting. The people who hold on to them in order to play them in constructed really get no benefit from this.
I think that too many people misunderstand the position of opponents of 4322s. I hear a lot of people calling such Whiners and Complainers. But really, the point is that the only reason why we have 4322s is because people continue to draft them. As long as Wizards makes more money by running an event with a smaller payout, they are going to keep doing it. Would boycotting 4322s make Wizards change them to 5322s? Probably not, but that is what opponents of 4322s are hoping. It's hard to belief that people would think that this is an ignoble goal (from the view of the consumer).
The matter has two important truths:
1. There is a subset of players for whom 4322s represent better EV than either Swiss or 84s.
2. This subset is an extraordinarily small portion of the crowd.
I think the biggest problem that pro-4322ers have is that they are afraid that if people migrate away from their preferred queue, that they won't be able to draft the way they want to. But trust me, that isn't going to happen. There is no way to educate all the people that are incorrectly playing in 4322s and actually convince them to change.
re: thedirtysecret: This!!!! For all the time these "infinite" drafters put into grinding on Modo, they could easily just educate themselves and get a better job, and then draft as much as they want. I personally play well enough that I could probably go "infinite" and I play well enough that I could probably make a name for myself on the Pro Tour. But my job pays me more for the time that I put in, and that means I can do other things I want to do. Playing swiss means that I can play as many drafts as I care to for about 30 dollars a month, which is perfectly fine with me.
For the record, I am not calling people who draft 4-3-2-2 idiots. They are clearly evaluating the value of drafts beyond just packs and tickets, and the difference in value is not enough for them to want to draft in a different prize payout, that is all.
If WOTC suddenly made Swiss payout an extra pack, thus making it clearly the best choice in terms of "EV" (I hate this term btw) I would still not draft it, I would be drafting 8-4 regardless. The time spent in Swiss is not worth the extra pack to me personally, and I certainly don't consider myself an idiot for valuing my free time so highly.
As far as "What's the blue there for?" I agree... for last night's FNM, I actually cut it completely and ran a pair of swamps with Doom Blade replacing Into the Roil and Skinshifter replacing Mana Leak. I didn't fare so well... 1-2 drop, beating Vampires and losing to Valakut (got crushed) and Tempered Steel (lost game three due to a terrible misplay). I have tried a red-green version of this, but wasn't satisfied with my results. I might give it another shot, since you mentioned it... nothing wrong with giving it another run now that some of the top tier decks have evolved. The biggest issue I have with a red or white splash is the lack of a good fetch land... Terramorphic Expanse is cool, but coming into play tapped is a real pain for an aggressive deck like this one.
Skinshifter is another janky card, BTW. I love it... it has a lot of potential... but I never really felt satisfied with it.
I usually find Thrun to be a smaller, more expensive Dungrove that regenerates. Regeneration can be cool, but given the choice, I'll take Dungrove. Perhaps I should cut the "fatties," run both, and just make Garruk the top of my curve... I guess that's an option.
About the Emissary: I've found that in matches where the ramp is needed (aggro), he always ramps... and in matches where a cheap threat is needed (control), he's still better than a BoP when carrying a sword. I can't think of any mana ramp that is a useful draw on turn ten (BoP, Llanowar Elves, Rampant Growth, Cultivate, etc), so I'm not sure about that part...
In any case, you've definitely given me some things to ponder. Thanks for the input!
I agree with you, but you're really just nitpicking a matter of semantics. You are defining Math as using numbers and equations to come up with solutions, and I am defining Math as something that people use to make conclusions and assumptions that are inaccurate and justifying it with voodoo math.
The dirty secret of drafting is that no one is infinite. You can go on a hot streak or be ahead of the curve for a while in a particular format, but in the long run, pro's and joe's are all losing tix when they draft.
I guarantee you WOTC shaves a pack from 4-3-2-2- simply because it is their most popular draft type. If it was 5-3-2-2 and 7-4 or 8-3 instead, people would flood the 5-3-2-2 and the 8-4's would never fire. They want you to draft for the least value possible - that's why you can now pay purely tickets to draft (except for out or print sets, where people would actually want to do this, thanks WOTC!).
Drafting isn't always bad, and it is probably equivalent value to draft the packs won from constructed events as it is to sell them to bots, but constructed is the only way to stay afloat, and grinding events is a tremendous timesink. You would probably get more "value" going infinite for minimum wage at McDonald's and buying tickets.
The real value is coming from your enjoyment. Are people that are drafting 4-3-2-2 cheating themselves out of some amount of prizes? Absolutely, without a doubt, if you are just interested in value in terms of tix and packs, you would have to be an idiot. Do people enjoy drafting and winning prizes more frequently? I suspect so, although I don't presume to know exactly the reason each person who enters a 4-3-2-2 is willing to give up a slight amount of value, and the reasoning itself is unimportant.
Looking at drafters as strictly rational actors is ridiculous, especially for something as silly as a card playing hobby. Boiling it down to just value is equally silly, just like the ELO rating they use is silly in a game that is definitely not pure skill. Tylenol convinces millions of people to buy it instead of a chemically identical acetaminophen for half the cost. Politicians convince people to vote against their own economic interests. It isn't a stretch to me that WOTC can convince people to enter a draft for slightly less value.
"Almost as cheap as standard."...say what? Standard has never been cheap and the prices of those cards rising due to the Modern format is just insane. I'm sure the people who have their playset of Tarmogoyf are happy, but I can't say I like it that new players have to invest sooo much money just be competitive.
@magicdownunder- I think I am going to play Ub this week. I have gotten a list that I like for the dailies that I play, which are chock full of red. Good job on your 4-0 last night. I don't like SoWaP in our deck, but it seems to have done pretty well for you.
People were complaining about the music, rather than have a spammed comment thread about subjective tastes in music, I opted not to do music this week. I will start with the commentary this week.
@ Phroggie- This is the kind of dialogue I hoped to open. First of all,I totally agree that Green was a decent color in my draft, and I can get behind most of your picks as well.
as far a s your draft, I think you got some sick wheels and I I would have been RW. You got like 5 Griffins and a Griffin Rider passed to you, not to mention the shocks, Incinerate, and your open of Chandra.
All in all, I think you had a decent deck and I understand how alluring blue is.
I've done the analysis.
Of the 88 first round opponents in the 4322 queue 4 were below 1400, 8 between 1400 and 1500, 9 between 1500and 1550, 11 between 1550 and 1600, 15 between 1600 andd 1650, 16 between 1650 and 1700, 8 between 1700 and 1750, 13 between 1750 and 1800 and 4 above 1800.
Average rating: 1625.
The numbers are a bit rough. Method: I calculated what a certain rating change tells about the opponents rating. For example: If i gain 11 ratingpoints, my opponent outranks me by a number of rating points between 112 and 163. I took the average of that spread and added that to my original rating to get to my opponents rating.
Disclaimers:
Taking the average of the spread is a very rough estimate. For example the smallest spread (when the opponents rating is closest to your own) is still 44 ratingpoints wide.)
I have cleaned up the data, but some results may be wrong (typing errors etc.)
The matches were played over about 2 years time (release of Zendikar until day before yesterday.) Any creep of average rating will not be shown.)
Last disclaimer: I play at evenings in Europe. Other playtimes may give other results.
I have a 1800+ limited rating and I CANNOT, ABsolutly cannot!!!!! play swiss.
Players do not know how to draft in swiss and I rarely end up winning 1/3 games.
Often times I see a player with a deck 10x better than anyone else at the table, and it makes you wana punch the people sitting next to that player.
I have limited resources so I usually play 4322's cuz losing in the first or second round of an 8-4 is brutal and like tarmotog said, its very rare that you'll go 3-0 in an 8-4.
and the diff. between 2-1 in an 8-4, and 2-1 in a 4322 is a pack. but!!!!! the chance of you going 3-0 in a 4322 is significantly higher than in a 8-4.
It's truly risk vs. reward and how much you want to "GAMBLE".
Lets say you win a 8-4, get second, and then lose in the second round twice and in the first round once.
8+4+0+0+0=12 packs
Lets then apply this to 4322
4+3+2+2+0= 11 packs
The difference is only one pack, but assuming that it's easier to make it past the first round of a 4322 or win instead of lose in the finals:
:.
win = 4+4+2+2+0=12 packs
make it out of first round = 4+3+2+2+2= 13 packs
Imo its way better to do 4322's based off a risk vs. reward analysis.
Grant it my stats are hypothetical and maybe biased, it should give you some food for thought.
Also, drafting is moreso gambling than anything else. There are soo many ways to lose playing that you don't have control over even if you have a very good deck. Like mana screw, poor matchups, lack of answers( removal usually for specific cards), mulligans, misclicks, flooding, and The insane bombs your opponents open like elesh-norn, or the classic, your opponent topdecks a forest so he can untamed might for x=8 in his UB splash g infect deck on his blighted agent for lethal, when hes dead on board next turn.
So much of the Sturm and Drang i see here are the vehement opponents of the 4322's insisting that we share their outrage at the 1 pack difference in total payout when that one pack isn't going to matter to 7/8ths of the players in the draft. To me at least, the difference in EV is what comes after the 8-4, two big fat zeros. For a causal player, one who maybe drafts once a week at best, that reward for pulling out the first game is a huge difference. In an 8-4 game I have to be the second best player at the table to get ANYTHING back.
All this will be moot to me when we get LEAGUES back.
These birding videos definitely have a purpose, as you can get a pretty good glimpse of the metagame. Also, your commentary is very good, so thank you!
Well, I took a totally different tack seeing those first few cards. I try to let the rare-bombs guide me in draft - but if you don't get one early then it's really tricky to get direction.
Some of the blue was solid, especially the Drakes - strong flyers in draft is game winning... but otherwise I didn't see much that was game-changing for black.
This is how I faux-picked it, seeing the Simulacrum first up - I think green and fast mana... following the cards I ended up G/W:
Pack 1)
1 - solumn simulacrum
2 - (w) grand abolisher
3 - (w) benalish veteran
4 - (g) birds of paradise
5 - (g) garruks companion (close call with swiftrider boots)
6 - throne of empires (again close with: swiftrider boots, but going white said this might work well)
7 - (w) armored warehorse (griffin rider is tempting but needs grifs to go, don't want to count on it and still not sold this is my direction)
8 - (g) plumet (or naturalize)
9 - (w) guardians pledge (awesome if i get throne of empires happening)
10 - (g) titantic growth (lifelink is tempting, but in draft your very quickly likely to loose that enchanted critter)
11 - rubbish!
12 - siege mastodon (he's big cost but effective, need at least 1 for g/w deck, boars are handy but not as critical)
13 - swamp (not going to use those other cards anyway!)
14 - counterspell cause i'd rather it not used against me
Pack 2)
1 - (w) spirit mantle (i *love* rites of flourishing but its never won me a game, almost tempted to take it for a casual deck)
2 - thran golem (divine favour might wheel, and if i can ever get this golem and spirit mantle making the whoopy i'm a very happy man)
3 - (w) lawkeeper (troll is very tempting, but he can't nullify a creature bomb)
4 - (g) basilisk (pegasus is really tempting but i'm now worrying about not having enough big critters)
5 - rootbound crag (not overly thrilled on the pick here, stave off may wheel, so i'd go the land because i want them for casual and it gives me an option to splash red if a rare bomb turns up)
6 - (g) carnage wurm (he'll end games)
7 - (g) sacred wolf (dragonskull summit tempts me because i'm still after my 4 of each dual-land for collection and casual play)
8 - (g) fog (rarely played, but this will save you and possibly turn a game around)
9 - (g) runeclaw bear (still tempted by rites of flourishing, but i need to move on from my base desires!)
10 - thran #2
11 - hating on others
12 - (g) autumns veil
13 - hating to the end of this pack
Pack 3)
third pack, choice got really interesting, do i want to splash red? i'm starting to worry about my lack of creature count, and not many white creatures at that. By this stage I'm starting to think I've lost my previously clear direction...
1 - (g) giant spider (hate letting that land go, 2nd carnage wurm is probably unneccessary, pegasus was really tempting but in the end i've got minimal flyers and need to protect myself)
2 - (g) trollhide (hello thran!)
3 - chandra's pheonix (greedy-rare grab only, neutralize was next option)
4 - automation (almost picked peregine griffin because i need flyers, but at worse this guy gives another guy in play +1/+1)
5 - (g) elves (fast mana is good, close call on the benalish veteran though)
6 - (w) stonehorn (or sacred wolf... both feel a bit lacklustre at this stage)
7 - greatsword (basilisk and pegasus are close calls but I'm thinking that I'm struggling to get any big damage in with my creatures)
8 - (w) lifelink (for thran)
9 - (w) roc egg (maybe stave off, at least this gives me a wall and maybe flyer)
10 - hating
11 - (g) fog
12 - hating the rest
So I think there was a chance there - but aside from 1 carnage wurm I don't see much that's going to win me the game. On the white side it really needed a bunch of griffons or an angel to do the job. On the green side it needed to be accompanied with an Overrun or Jade Mage. I've got barely any removal and only 11 or 12 creatures which I find isn't enough in draft. An enchanted thran golem or bloodthirsted carnage wurm is the key to success here - hopefully by that time the oponent would have spent all their direct removals.
I think it would have had a good chacne at winning a couple rounds but it would really come down to who it was against.
Appendix C—DCI Rating and Ranking Systems
ELO Ratings System
The ELO player-rating system compares players’ match records against their opponents’ match records and determines the probability of the player winning the matchup. This probability factor determines how many points a players’ rating goes up or down based on the results of each match. When a player defeats an opponent with a higher rating, the player’s rating goes up more than if he or she defeated a player with a lower rating (since players should defeat opponents who have lower ratings). All new players start out with a base rating of 1600.
The DCI uses the following equation to determine a player’s win probability in each match:
This probability is then used to recalculate each player’s rating after the match. In the equation below, players receive 1 point if they win the match, 0 if they lose, and 0.5 for a draw. Players’ new ratings are determined as follows:
Player’s New Rating = Player’s Old Rating + (K-value * (Scoring Points – Player’s Win Probability))
The K-value is the maximum number of points a player’s rating may go up or down based on the results of a single match.
The default K-value of all Magic tournaments is 16. Specific tournaments may have a higher or lower K-value. These can be found in that tournament or tournament series fact sheet.
All players are rated at the beginning with the first match in which they play. Further ratings are calculated chronologically from that first match.
Drafts are generally all 16K. Premier events are 24k. I'm not sure about TNMO - those might be 8k.
I have run that combo quite a bit (in 2hg classic though). 1 alone provides both the life gain of 2 angels AND a reasonable fast clock and it makes removel better :)
Maybe i can shed some light on the average rating in the 4322 queue. Ive been tracking my results including rating change for more than a year. I think that from my rating before and after a game I can deduce the rating of my opponent (within a certain range.) Since i mostly play 4322's that should yield about 100 datapoints. It'll take some work. I mostly play evenings in Europe, so results for other times may vary.
Does anybody find this useful?
If anyone has the formula for calculating rating change, it would save me looking it up :)
Also, what really amazes me, is that I have played against 260 opponents in that period. There is not a single opponent I played twice. What does that say about userbase?
"Another interesting tidbit is that I'm like 78% in match one, but only 71% in match 2. I can't remember the match 3 numbers, since I'm at my laptop instead of my desktop, but its around 75% too, but that changes things a lot. I figure its because I face more good decks and players round 2, but in round three, I guess I have a good deck that's passed two rounds, so I win more often."
It is quite interesting, because it suggest that the model in the article is worse than the simpler model where one just fixes a win-probability for all rounds (at least it is worse at modeling for you)...
"The problem is that math doesn't account for "Wife says we gotta go..." or "Good players think they need to avoid swiss" or "8-4s are more intimidating" or any of a million other factors."
Just to nitpick (sorry) that is actually not a problem for the math, but the model...
BTW, I do 4322 because I've been drafting Urzas for the last 6 months and it's the only thing available. I get past round 2 maybe twice a month, so if Swiss were available, I'd do that instead. I'd never win packs in 8-4.
How do you get over 1000 views on an article? Talk about 4322 drafts. Mtgo players' favorite topic to argue!
I really dont understand the people saying they do 4322 because of time constraints. You are drafting because you like to play magic, not because you are trying to make money. If you like drafting/playing magic then the obvious choice is swiss since you are guaranteed the most games. If you really want to a draft but only have 2 hours instead of the 2.5 that swiss requires, then do an 8-4. But saying you do 4322 because of time constraints is idiotic and a lie. 8-4s take less time than 4322 due to round 3 being split the majority of the time.
@walkerdog You are ignoring basic facts. Your whole little rant is based on you "feeling" like you have a better chance in 4322. So instead of looking at reality/math/facts you are going by a "feeling" you have that 4322 is better for you. Cant get much dumber than that.
Losing game 3 to a misplay is not getting crushed. Sounds like an improvement. Tectonic Edge for Valakut in the sb maybe?
I thought I did the picture correctly, but I guess I didn't?
And my article is interesting to the readers. It is for the lower priced players and how to make money on getting cards early, and how to not lose money. It benefits the players and the sellers.
I have a thought on the 8-4, 4-3-22, and swiss. There are always going to be games where you get a bad draw, and if you don't draft anything, you get kicked out in the first round. And if you don't get a card worth anything, you lose not just the money involved, but also any rares you pass. For example, I played a 4-3-33 today and won the first game, but lost the second because I had a miserable draw.
(I could have taken a Dungrove Elder with P3P1 but chose a doom blade because I didn't need the Elder)
But even though I won 2 packs, the best card I had drafted was "celestial purge".
If you play M12, like most people seem to be drafting, it is based on 90% luck, 10% skill, and 20% hoping the person to your right is stupid.
When it comes down to it, good deck or bad, just based on percentages, you have a better chance of winning 2 packs in Swiss than you would have in 4-3-22. Although I am a good drafter, my first pack today was the worst pack ever. The 3 uncommon's were sideboard at best, the rare was a dual land, and the best common was just a 2/2 red bloodthirst creature. While the guy I eventually played and was next to me picked up a Primordial Ooze with his first pick.
Swiss allows you to have that one game where everything that can go wrong does go wrong, but you still have the chance to win 2 more games, and you have the liberty to draft a rare instead of a better common. I mean in a 4-3-2-2, I was passed a inferno Titan one time P3P3 because I was the only one playing red atm. And there is always the dreaded...
...Shuffler!!!!
I have figured out the shuffler though. If you sacrifice a lamb to him, he will grant you a possible top deck.
There is absolutely no way 4-3-22 gives you a better chance of winning when Swiss will guarantee almost everyone playing at least 1 pack. I would rather take my chances on a swiss than getting unlucky and having to sacrifice a lamb to the God of Shufflers.
And btw, unlike the people who draft online and get credits to play for free from sites like MTGOtraders, most people would rather not play an 8-4 where your P1 rare is a dual land and another guy gets a Gideon or Garruk, then is passed a oblivion ring, pacifism, arachnus web, gideons lawkeeprs, and then takes 2 auramancers. Then on P3P1 picks up either a Solemn or a Titan. By the time I get his first pack, the best card left is flight.
To be honest I think most of the real criticism of 4-3-2-2 comes from the higher end players who can realistically expect to get at least 4 packs a time from 8-4 drafts. And that's fine. I'm not going to say those guys are wrong at all, just they have more of an interest in the top end than most of the average shmoes do.
The majority of people playing aren't those guys, and the numbers of people playing in 4-3-2-2 shows that.
4-3-2-2 is WAY more fun to play than swiss, and gives you a decent shot at coming out of the draft with a prize even if there are a couple of 'sharks' in your draft.
Personally, I am fine with the prizes available for 4-3-2-2. I'm a pretty decent player, not the greatest but I hope above average, and placing third or forth is pretty much my expectation in any random 4-3-2-2 draft that I run in. Obviously that's not how it always goes because luck plays a part, but I think that as long as I draft pretty well I will normally win a couple of games but very seldom go the distance.
Swiss isn't a bad format, and doesn't have bad prizes, but it is slow and my feeling is that if you can take the max from swiss, you may as well have played 4-3-2-2 and enjoyed it. Similarly if you bomb out, you'll get curb stomped a bunch of times when you knew going in you had a bad deck.
4-3-2-2 is definitely a compromise, and a rookie friendly format, but that's why its popular. For a lot of people, it's just nice to get something for your trouble, even if you don't make the top table, and (as I have often felt) if you do make the top 2 it was more due to getting favorable matchups than anything you really did.
Similarly, if you just got screwed on colours or otherwise ended up with a deck that will only beat very bad players, I am ok with just dropping after one match and having another crack at it.
For people who are hardcore into MTGO, I can see why 4-3-2-2 isn't as attractive, because there is the potential to either win more packs or to play more games, both of which are attractive when you take Magic seriously.
I wonder which will get banned first, Vesuva or Cloudpost? I don't think you can have them legal in a format that lacks Wasteland and truly fast combo decks (Belcher, ANT etc). The deck was designed in Legacy to stomp control decks like CB/Top. When you have it crushing aggro and combo, you have a serious problem. If the metagame becomes built around Blood Moon, you have an even bigger problem.
Pyro Ascension is very easy to hate out and beat, and besides obviously awesome cards like Krosan Grip, simple discard can destroy the deck and yet is very poor vs 12post since lands are very hard to force from players hands, and the deck is extremely redundant.
It looks like an extremely combo dominated format, which is historically the worst thing possible. A lot of combo decks that attack the format in very different ways is a great way to kill it.
With Loam and Crucible playable, I don't think Ghost Quarter is going to be enough to stop 12-post, so my money is on a ban. The other option is a format dominated by hawks, but in this case, Aven Mindcensors.
Another problem that you didn't mention is the way 4322s affect supply.
I have no idea how man 4322s fire in the day, but if 100 fire (which seems low), that means that 100 less packs are distributed into the market. This has both positive and negative effects on drafts: First, it inflates the cost of packs. This definitely hurts drafters, because they need to purchase packs to keep on drafting. Having 5322s instead wouldn't create a huge change, but it is still going to mean more packs in the system, lowering the cost of packs and making drafting more affordable for everyone. Second, it inflates the cost of singles, since there are fewer packs going into the system. This helps drafters, because it means their singles are worth more, but it only helps the drafters that are selling their singles in order to keep on drafting. The people who hold on to them in order to play them in constructed really get no benefit from this.
I think that too many people misunderstand the position of opponents of 4322s. I hear a lot of people calling such Whiners and Complainers. But really, the point is that the only reason why we have 4322s is because people continue to draft them. As long as Wizards makes more money by running an event with a smaller payout, they are going to keep doing it. Would boycotting 4322s make Wizards change them to 5322s? Probably not, but that is what opponents of 4322s are hoping. It's hard to belief that people would think that this is an ignoble goal (from the view of the consumer).
The matter has two important truths:
1. There is a subset of players for whom 4322s represent better EV than either Swiss or 84s.
2. This subset is an extraordinarily small portion of the crowd.
I think the biggest problem that pro-4322ers have is that they are afraid that if people migrate away from their preferred queue, that they won't be able to draft the way they want to. But trust me, that isn't going to happen. There is no way to educate all the people that are incorrectly playing in 4322s and actually convince them to change.
re: thedirtysecret: This!!!! For all the time these "infinite" drafters put into grinding on Modo, they could easily just educate themselves and get a better job, and then draft as much as they want. I personally play well enough that I could probably go "infinite" and I play well enough that I could probably make a name for myself on the Pro Tour. But my job pays me more for the time that I put in, and that means I can do other things I want to do. Playing swiss means that I can play as many drafts as I care to for about 30 dollars a month, which is perfectly fine with me.
For the record, I am not calling people who draft 4-3-2-2 idiots. They are clearly evaluating the value of drafts beyond just packs and tickets, and the difference in value is not enough for them to want to draft in a different prize payout, that is all.
If WOTC suddenly made Swiss payout an extra pack, thus making it clearly the best choice in terms of "EV" (I hate this term btw) I would still not draft it, I would be drafting 8-4 regardless. The time spent in Swiss is not worth the extra pack to me personally, and I certainly don't consider myself an idiot for valuing my free time so highly.
As far as "What's the blue there for?" I agree... for last night's FNM, I actually cut it completely and ran a pair of swamps with Doom Blade replacing Into the Roil and Skinshifter replacing Mana Leak. I didn't fare so well... 1-2 drop, beating Vampires and losing to Valakut (got crushed) and Tempered Steel (lost game three due to a terrible misplay). I have tried a red-green version of this, but wasn't satisfied with my results. I might give it another shot, since you mentioned it... nothing wrong with giving it another run now that some of the top tier decks have evolved. The biggest issue I have with a red or white splash is the lack of a good fetch land... Terramorphic Expanse is cool, but coming into play tapped is a real pain for an aggressive deck like this one.
Skinshifter is another janky card, BTW. I love it... it has a lot of potential... but I never really felt satisfied with it.
I usually find Thrun to be a smaller, more expensive Dungrove that regenerates. Regeneration can be cool, but given the choice, I'll take Dungrove. Perhaps I should cut the "fatties," run both, and just make Garruk the top of my curve... I guess that's an option.
About the Emissary: I've found that in matches where the ramp is needed (aggro), he always ramps... and in matches where a cheap threat is needed (control), he's still better than a BoP when carrying a sword. I can't think of any mana ramp that is a useful draw on turn ten (BoP, Llanowar Elves, Rampant Growth, Cultivate, etc), so I'm not sure about that part...
In any case, you've definitely given me some things to ponder. Thanks for the input!
I agree with you, but you're really just nitpicking a matter of semantics. You are defining Math as using numbers and equations to come up with solutions, and I am defining Math as something that people use to make conclusions and assumptions that are inaccurate and justifying it with voodoo math.
The dirty secret of drafting is that no one is infinite. You can go on a hot streak or be ahead of the curve for a while in a particular format, but in the long run, pro's and joe's are all losing tix when they draft.
I guarantee you WOTC shaves a pack from 4-3-2-2- simply because it is their most popular draft type. If it was 5-3-2-2 and 7-4 or 8-3 instead, people would flood the 5-3-2-2 and the 8-4's would never fire. They want you to draft for the least value possible - that's why you can now pay purely tickets to draft (except for out or print sets, where people would actually want to do this, thanks WOTC!).
Drafting isn't always bad, and it is probably equivalent value to draft the packs won from constructed events as it is to sell them to bots, but constructed is the only way to stay afloat, and grinding events is a tremendous timesink. You would probably get more "value" going infinite for minimum wage at McDonald's and buying tickets.
The real value is coming from your enjoyment. Are people that are drafting 4-3-2-2 cheating themselves out of some amount of prizes? Absolutely, without a doubt, if you are just interested in value in terms of tix and packs, you would have to be an idiot. Do people enjoy drafting and winning prizes more frequently? I suspect so, although I don't presume to know exactly the reason each person who enters a 4-3-2-2 is willing to give up a slight amount of value, and the reasoning itself is unimportant.
Looking at drafters as strictly rational actors is ridiculous, especially for something as silly as a card playing hobby. Boiling it down to just value is equally silly, just like the ELO rating they use is silly in a game that is definitely not pure skill. Tylenol convinces millions of people to buy it instead of a chemically identical acetaminophen for half the cost. Politicians convince people to vote against their own economic interests. It isn't a stretch to me that WOTC can convince people to enter a draft for slightly less value.
"Almost as cheap as standard."...say what? Standard has never been cheap and the prices of those cards rising due to the Modern format is just insane. I'm sure the people who have their playset of Tarmogoyf are happy, but I can't say I like it that new players have to invest sooo much money just be competitive.
Looks like a pretty reasonable bell curve, with the average opponent being, well, average! Not terribly surprising, I suppose, but still interesting.
@magicdownunder- I think I am going to play Ub this week. I have gotten a list that I like for the dailies that I play, which are chock full of red. Good job on your 4-0 last night. I don't like SoWaP in our deck, but it seems to have done pretty well for you.
People were complaining about the music, rather than have a spammed comment thread about subjective tastes in music, I opted not to do music this week. I will start with the commentary this week.
@ Phroggie- This is the kind of dialogue I hoped to open. First of all,I totally agree that Green was a decent color in my draft, and I can get behind most of your picks as well.
as far a s your draft, I think you got some sick wheels and I I would have been RW. You got like 5 Griffins and a Griffin Rider passed to you, not to mention the shocks, Incinerate, and your open of Chandra.
All in all, I think you had a decent deck and I understand how alluring blue is.
I've done the analysis.
Of the 88 first round opponents in the 4322 queue 4 were below 1400, 8 between 1400 and 1500, 9 between 1500and 1550, 11 between 1550 and 1600, 15 between 1600 andd 1650, 16 between 1650 and 1700, 8 between 1700 and 1750, 13 between 1750 and 1800 and 4 above 1800.
Average rating: 1625.
The numbers are a bit rough. Method: I calculated what a certain rating change tells about the opponents rating. For example: If i gain 11 ratingpoints, my opponent outranks me by a number of rating points between 112 and 163. I took the average of that spread and added that to my original rating to get to my opponents rating.
Disclaimers:
Taking the average of the spread is a very rough estimate. For example the smallest spread (when the opponents rating is closest to your own) is still 44 ratingpoints wide.)
I have cleaned up the data, but some results may be wrong (typing errors etc.)
The matches were played over about 2 years time (release of Zendikar until day before yesterday.) Any creep of average rating will not be shown.)
Last disclaimer: I play at evenings in Europe. Other playtimes may give other results.
I have a 1800+ limited rating and I CANNOT, ABsolutly cannot!!!!! play swiss.
Players do not know how to draft in swiss and I rarely end up winning 1/3 games.
Often times I see a player with a deck 10x better than anyone else at the table, and it makes you wana punch the people sitting next to that player.
I have limited resources so I usually play 4322's cuz losing in the first or second round of an 8-4 is brutal and like tarmotog said, its very rare that you'll go 3-0 in an 8-4.
and the diff. between 2-1 in an 8-4, and 2-1 in a 4322 is a pack. but!!!!! the chance of you going 3-0 in a 4322 is significantly higher than in a 8-4.
It's truly risk vs. reward and how much you want to "GAMBLE".
Lets say you win a 8-4, get second, and then lose in the second round twice and in the first round once.
8+4+0+0+0=12 packs
Lets then apply this to 4322
4+3+2+2+0= 11 packs
The difference is only one pack, but assuming that it's easier to make it past the first round of a 4322 or win instead of lose in the finals:
:.
win = 4+4+2+2+0=12 packs
make it out of first round = 4+3+2+2+2= 13 packs
Imo its way better to do 4322's based off a risk vs. reward analysis.
Grant it my stats are hypothetical and maybe biased, it should give you some food for thought.
Also, drafting is moreso gambling than anything else. There are soo many ways to lose playing that you don't have control over even if you have a very good deck. Like mana screw, poor matchups, lack of answers( removal usually for specific cards), mulligans, misclicks, flooding, and The insane bombs your opponents open like elesh-norn, or the classic, your opponent topdecks a forest so he can untamed might for x=8 in his UB splash g infect deck on his blighted agent for lethal, when hes dead on board next turn.
So much of the Sturm and Drang i see here are the vehement opponents of the 4322's insisting that we share their outrage at the 1 pack difference in total payout when that one pack isn't going to matter to 7/8ths of the players in the draft. To me at least, the difference in EV is what comes after the 8-4, two big fat zeros. For a causal player, one who maybe drafts once a week at best, that reward for pulling out the first game is a huge difference. In an 8-4 game I have to be the second best player at the table to get ANYTHING back.
All this will be moot to me when we get LEAGUES back.
These birding videos definitely have a purpose, as you can get a pretty good glimpse of the metagame. Also, your commentary is very good, so thank you!
Well, I took a totally different tack seeing those first few cards. I try to let the rare-bombs guide me in draft - but if you don't get one early then it's really tricky to get direction.
Some of the blue was solid, especially the Drakes - strong flyers in draft is game winning... but otherwise I didn't see much that was game-changing for black.
This is how I faux-picked it, seeing the Simulacrum first up - I think green and fast mana... following the cards I ended up G/W:
Pack 1)
1 - solumn simulacrum
2 - (w) grand abolisher
3 - (w) benalish veteran
4 - (g) birds of paradise
5 - (g) garruks companion (close call with swiftrider boots)
6 - throne of empires (again close with: swiftrider boots, but going white said this might work well)
7 - (w) armored warehorse (griffin rider is tempting but needs grifs to go, don't want to count on it and still not sold this is my direction)
8 - (g) plumet (or naturalize)
9 - (w) guardians pledge (awesome if i get throne of empires happening)
10 - (g) titantic growth (lifelink is tempting, but in draft your very quickly likely to loose that enchanted critter)
11 - rubbish!
12 - siege mastodon (he's big cost but effective, need at least 1 for g/w deck, boars are handy but not as critical)
13 - swamp (not going to use those other cards anyway!)
14 - counterspell cause i'd rather it not used against me
Pack 2)
1 - (w) spirit mantle (i *love* rites of flourishing but its never won me a game, almost tempted to take it for a casual deck)
2 - thran golem (divine favour might wheel, and if i can ever get this golem and spirit mantle making the whoopy i'm a very happy man)
3 - (w) lawkeeper (troll is very tempting, but he can't nullify a creature bomb)
4 - (g) basilisk (pegasus is really tempting but i'm now worrying about not having enough big critters)
5 - rootbound crag (not overly thrilled on the pick here, stave off may wheel, so i'd go the land because i want them for casual and it gives me an option to splash red if a rare bomb turns up)
6 - (g) carnage wurm (he'll end games)
7 - (g) sacred wolf (dragonskull summit tempts me because i'm still after my 4 of each dual-land for collection and casual play)
8 - (g) fog (rarely played, but this will save you and possibly turn a game around)
9 - (g) runeclaw bear (still tempted by rites of flourishing, but i need to move on from my base desires!)
10 - thran #2
11 - hating on others
12 - (g) autumns veil
13 - hating to the end of this pack
Pack 3)
third pack, choice got really interesting, do i want to splash red? i'm starting to worry about my lack of creature count, and not many white creatures at that. By this stage I'm starting to think I've lost my previously clear direction...
1 - (g) giant spider (hate letting that land go, 2nd carnage wurm is probably unneccessary, pegasus was really tempting but in the end i've got minimal flyers and need to protect myself)
2 - (g) trollhide (hello thran!)
3 - chandra's pheonix (greedy-rare grab only, neutralize was next option)
4 - automation (almost picked peregine griffin because i need flyers, but at worse this guy gives another guy in play +1/+1)
5 - (g) elves (fast mana is good, close call on the benalish veteran though)
6 - (w) stonehorn (or sacred wolf... both feel a bit lacklustre at this stage)
7 - greatsword (basilisk and pegasus are close calls but I'm thinking that I'm struggling to get any big damage in with my creatures)
8 - (w) lifelink (for thran)
9 - (w) roc egg (maybe stave off, at least this gives me a wall and maybe flyer)
10 - hating
11 - (g) fog
12 - hating the rest
So I think there was a chance there - but aside from 1 carnage wurm I don't see much that's going to win me the game. On the white side it really needed a bunch of griffons or an angel to do the job. On the green side it needed to be accompanied with an Overrun or Jade Mage. I've got barely any removal and only 11 or 12 creatures which I find isn't enough in draft. An enchanted thran golem or bloodthirsted carnage wurm is the key to success here - hopefully by that time the oponent would have spent all their direct removals.
I think it would have had a good chacne at winning a couple rounds but it would really come down to who it was against.
So what do you think? I also had a really odd draft the other night, would love your opinion on it here: http://www.raredraft.com/users/Phroggie
very useful.
From the Magic Tournament Rules,
Appendix C—DCI Rating and Ranking Systems
ELO Ratings System
The ELO player-rating system compares players’ match records against their opponents’ match records and determines the probability of the player winning the matchup. This probability factor determines how many points a players’ rating goes up or down based on the results of each match. When a player defeats an opponent with a higher rating, the player’s rating goes up more than if he or she defeated a player with a lower rating (since players should defeat opponents who have lower ratings). All new players start out with a base rating of 1600.
The DCI uses the following equation to determine a player’s win probability in each match:
Personal Calculation:
win probability = 1 / ((10^(Opponents Rating - Player's rating)/400) +1)
This probability is then used to recalculate each player’s rating after the match. In the equation below, players receive 1 point if they win the match, 0 if they lose, and 0.5 for a draw. Players’ new ratings are determined as follows:
Player’s New Rating = Player’s Old Rating + (K-value * (Scoring Points – Player’s Win Probability))
The K-value is the maximum number of points a player’s rating may go up or down based on the results of a single match.
The default K-value of all Magic tournaments is 16. Specific tournaments may have a higher or lower K-value. These can be found in that tournament or tournament series fact sheet.
All players are rated at the beginning with the first match in which they play. Further ratings are calculated chronologically from that first match.
Drafts are generally all 16K. Premier events are 24k. I'm not sure about TNMO - those might be 8k.
Try Bloodcheif ascension over firemane angel :)
I have run that combo quite a bit (in 2hg classic though). 1 alone provides both the life gain of 2 angels AND a reasonable fast clock and it makes removel better :)
Maybe i can shed some light on the average rating in the 4322 queue. Ive been tracking my results including rating change for more than a year. I think that from my rating before and after a game I can deduce the rating of my opponent (within a certain range.) Since i mostly play 4322's that should yield about 100 datapoints. It'll take some work. I mostly play evenings in Europe, so results for other times may vary.
Does anybody find this useful?
If anyone has the formula for calculating rating change, it would save me looking it up :)
Also, what really amazes me, is that I have played against 260 opponents in that period. There is not a single opponent I played twice. What does that say about userbase?
Johan
"Another interesting tidbit is that I'm like 78% in match one, but only 71% in match 2. I can't remember the match 3 numbers, since I'm at my laptop instead of my desktop, but its around 75% too, but that changes things a lot. I figure its because I face more good decks and players round 2, but in round three, I guess I have a good deck that's passed two rounds, so I win more often."
It is quite interesting, because it suggest that the model in the article is worse than the simpler model where one just fixes a win-probability for all rounds (at least it is worse at modeling for you)...
"The problem is that math doesn't account for "Wife says we gotta go..." or "Good players think they need to avoid swiss" or "8-4s are more intimidating" or any of a million other factors."
Just to nitpick (sorry) that is actually not a problem for the math, but the model...