Im with Marshall I have had a worse than usual win% but still having a blast, I think its because the draft portion is pretty interesting and thats my favorite part.
On levelling up your decision making, if you're playing in person, ask your opponent what they thought of a key play after the match concludes. A lot of the time you're trying to evaluate based on knowing only half of the information. Your opponent can often fill in the gaps and offer a different perspective.
The one combo I've gotten with Norin, Swift Survivalist is Arabella, Abandoned Doll. Attack with it, drain for a bunch, they block, you exile it, replay it, do it again next turn. If they can't stop it, it's over real fast.
In drafting, I feel like analyzing losses is even harder. You have to analyze if you should even have been playing the cards you’re playing in a deck. It does help to understand that it’s often a culmination of a few things happening at once.
My first draft in the format was a Survival deck, and i went to 7 games. Granted, I had Tyvar, Rip and two Baseball Bats, but if played aggressively, Survival can be potent.
I had a random GW deck with three baseball bats and it was clean 7 wins. Don't know how much it had to do with survival though. My dedicated survival deck with no Bats crashed fast
Also note idk how regularly you play but for me I’m normally reset down to silver or bronze when a new set comes out. My first drafts do well pretty much no matter what I do. Not sure if this applies to you but I’d wait til you get up to platinum to actually decide if things are good or not.
Tyfar is the reason I bet. I had him in a gruul deck and if I played him I won the match. Helps that people didn't read and tried to kill it immediately when I had an untapped creature
I didnt play any boros aggro this set yet and I was doing really bad mostly playing black X because I felt it was open everytime. After listening to the podcast today I got my first trophy 7/2 with boros aggro. Thank you guys!!!
Shoutout to “untimely malfunction.” You frequently see it 7-12 pick, but it’s an all star. Lot of removal and engine cards in this set, so the 2nd mode comes up more often than you expect, and is often game determinative. Since turning a removal of your best thing into removing one of their best things is awesome. Also, it having utility of the 2 other modes means it’s rarely a completely dead card.
gotta say, really enjoying this one. its interesting that most often the formats both marshall luis and i enjoy the most tend to be those with the ability to pivot easily in the draft portion and play cards in multiple different decks, rather than the on-rails type draft experience found in a set like ONE or Bloomburrow. Not the end all be all, but an interesting thought.
Glimmerlight seemed great to me, similar to Thraben Inspector but a step down for power and a half a step up for colorless. Happy to hear that validated!
11:00 I would argue for the Basketball thing the decissions were correct, but since not missing shots is part of playing basketball well as much as good decissions are, there is still a flaw and something that went wrong and that he should improve. I would argue he should work on his ability to hit the shots, not on his decission making (assuming he was right about all of these shots being reasonable to take)
Wanted to add onto what LSV said: He stated that WotC disbanded the RC. They did not. In the wake of the bans, the members of the RC began getting threats to their safety including getting Doxxed and death threats (mentioning this just for anyone who wasn't aware of that). The RC went to Wizards after they began getting harassed and worked with them and those series of conversations resulted in the transition over from control to WotC.
It's funny what LSV said about how bad it feels to lose to an on-board trick like his opponent in the GP did when he just attacked into LSV's on-board -2/0 trick. I did precisely that against a Tyvar during prerelase. I was so caught up with Tyvar giving the opponent an Overrun mechanic to hit with during his turn that I totally spaced on it being used defensively, so I just sent a creature in to die for nothing.
On the basketball point, i think the similarity is that the results you should pay attention to are the long-term ones. Missing 5 shots in a row happens to the best players in the world, but they always regress to the mean. Its the same in magic: did i make the decision that works most of the time is something you can really only answer after youve been in that situation enough to see the average outcomes
I'm being nitpicky here, but I'm noticing a lot of dropped frames from both of your webcams. I don't know if it's the webcam itself, or if it's because you encoded this in 24 frames per second and there's maybe a mismatch with your webcam screen recording framerate, but it's a little jarring to watch sometimes. The issue is visible all the time, but I would say the motion of Marshall at 15:15 makes it quite noticable.
I feel like people don’t know how to play/build blue red, every single time I’ve done it it’s been an excellent control deck however it’s the lowest in the data.
Odd to me that you find the U landcycler the least playable. Feels like I'm always happy to have it in UG or UB, while I feel like the R one i almost only want in GR (I mean, you play them beyond that, just saying where you want to go out of the way for the cycler)
Is it weird to say that I've mostly found it good in "bad" blue decks? The strongest blue deck I think is blue/white, which can get really aggressive. That pair/build doesn't want a six-drop like Shark. Next-best I think is blue/green, which is more value-engine focused. Flipping up a manifested shark with a counter on it is okay but kind of expensive. It's blue/black I've had the most success with it, and largely just as a big ol' meatball for once I've hit their threats with Unable to Scream or Stay Hidden; 5/7 Vigilance does a little door-knocking and doesn't leave an opening for retaliation. Blue/black is apparently the worst color pair though so take this all with a grain of salt, "It's good in the bad deck" is not exactly high praise.
Choosing the highest winning archetype versus the lowest for the elegant card introduces some complications. Because 58 is average for blue white and 52 is average for black white
Isn't is better to take a pretty good red uncommon out of a pack with no red cards, instead of taking a very good gold uncommon when there is another great gold uncommon and great white cards?
I think part of why what he said was correct is because of the play booster era. With play boosters you really aren’t sending a signal for at least the first 4 picks most of the time because there is a real chance that an opened pack could have 0 cards of one color to start. #2 that gold card has a way higher ceiling and is a auto win button if left unchecked. But I think in general my statement stands true.
I'm quite easily om my journey, but I got to thinking about keeping my strongest one two and three drops on curve rather than playing a weaker drop it simply hold them to bait or removal. I've been thinking I don't want to give them more draws to get their removal, but that can't be right if they mulligan to prioritize removal rather than curve.
I started the format off pretty well, after a failed Jund Delirium draft I had 4 trophies in a row with UW, RG, RW, RW. Tried rooms after that and it went terribly. Still have yet to draft black lol
17:47 yes Marshall you and Luis should write ✍️ that book. Chapin wrote one on playing constructed Magic. Next blockbuster book should be you two! Could have section on in life and how it can be applied to Magic limited.
Biggest knock on the format is the Bomby nature of the rares. So many good games just obliterated by unreasonable cards. I get that is what some people like
So far, I think I've hated Enduring Courage the most. (2RR 3/3, whenever another creature enters, it gets +2/0 and haste). They play that, and if you don't exile it (can't destroy, as it returns as an enchantment) that turn, you can pretty much just pack it in. Everything getting +2/0 and haste is just nuts. Really hate the feeling of losing to one card in that way.
I really just disagree. Bomby rares are in every set, but in this set the removal and uncommon synergies are just so strong that it doesn't matter as much. And there's no Bonny Pal in this set that just destroys you. The last two sets have had some really egregious rares and no good answers; I haven't felt that way yet this set.
@@nikmidclayton5933 From the way you've chosen to speak to me, you need a life lesson much more than you need Duskmourne. But however you choose to speak to me, you don't speak *for* me, nor do you speak for anyone else, even those who might agree with you. So you pipe down, little one. And if you or anyone else wants to post timestamps for the video, you can do so respectfully.
I doubt there is any skill that can safe you from "Arena decides your next 10 cards are lands". But maybe I needed to run 12 lands and that was my mistake
boy do i enjoy playing 10+ one and two drops every format. let's see what your estimation is. 50:30 yep, white and red and blue, every time. Low cost synergy or aggro pieces, that's how you win.
Yes we have. "reasonably" is very subjective, and we've seen many sets with good color balance. Also, they do playtest beyond just Limited, just not to the same degree. No need to be hyperbolic.
It just feels like im losing a lot of games I had in the bag to rares and mythics tbh. 20k gems normally lasts me 3-6 months of intensive play. Burned it all in 2 weeks :/
I actually feel like ghost vacuum on it's own is partially responsible for BW not having a great showing. Would be nice to hear some thoughts about this!
On the comment that 23 random UG cards is a playable deck, my belief is the pushing of commander is mainly responsible. The trap spells have been replaced by Legendary creatures that are fine stats but with nonsensical abilities, and the power floor of the average Common and Uncommon has increased over the last few years to keep the bombs in check.
i make the fundamental mistake for not being able to be on the play most of the time on the rigged shuffler (bo1) !!! :) :) :) also why cant wizards make the bo3 playable and ranked in arena is beyond me ....
Would be such a better format if the aggro decks weren't so effing good. once again there is literally zero time to durdle around and set up any kind of value engine or grind out strat. Half the games just end early because one person curved out with a removal spell after 1/2/3 drop.
With ~20 drafts under my belt i really disagree with that. Yes there are good aggro decks but id say overall this is right down the middle as far as format speed goes. Aggro control and midrange strategies are all viable and ive had a number of games end by decking.
Haven’t had a format in recent memory were people died to decking so often after basically just playing card draw. This format is molasses compared to the last couple sets. Aggro is there, as it should, but many great archetypes are super grindy.
Keep Limited formats skill-based, not pay-to-win. Introducing penalties for retiring decks ensures that players can't endlessly redraft for stronger decks without consequence, preserving competitive integrity and creating a more balanced experience for all players. I understand that people will do it, otherwise they will just give others advantage. But we should really try to stop this. 1. Draft Integrity is Fundamental to Limited Formats Drafting is the essence of Limited Magic, where skill in card selection, deck building, and gameplay are all tested. The integrity of the draft process is what makes this format special. In traditional, real-world Magic events-whether they are Grand Prix (GPs), Pro Tours, or local tournaments-once a draft begins, players are locked into their deck, and there is no chance to abandon a bad draft without consequences. The current system in Magic Arena allows players to "retire" their drafts after poor performance or poor card selection, leading to a situation where only strong decks are played competitively. This undermines the core principle of Limited formats. In a real-world Grand Prix, players must live with their draft and fight through challenging situations, including suboptimal card pools. This is how the format is intended to be played: with the possibility of failure based on your drafting decisions, deck building, and gameplay. Allowing players to repeatedly draft until they find a strong deck-by retiring after a weak draft-fundamentally breaks the fairness of the format. 2. Magic Should Be Skill-Based, Not Pay-to-Win Magic has always prided itself on being a game of skill, strategy, and decision-making, not a game where players can buy victory. In constructed formats like Standard, Modern, or Pioneer, once a player has acquired a non-budget deck, spending additional money doesn’t directly increase their chance of winning. You compete on an even playing field where skill matters most. However, the current structure of Premium Draft on Arena allows players to effectively "buy" their way to stronger decks by retiring poor drafts and redrafting. This creates a pay-to-win environment that is contrary to the spirit of Magic. In paper Magic, the barrier to success is largely about the cost of acquiring a deck or entering an event. Once that barrier is overcome, success is determined by skill, strategy, and experience. The current draft system on MTGA introduces a financial advantage that lets wealthier players bypass losses and increases their chances of winning by repeatedly drafting. This turns what should be a skill-based format into one where financial resources can provide an unfair edge, distorting competition and diminishing the experience for players who rely on their skill rather than their wallet. 3. Introducing Consequences for Retiring Decks Restores Balance To address this imbalance, Premium Drafts in Magic Arena should implement consequences for "retiring" a deck early. A system where players are given losses based on when they retire their deck would add fairness back into the process. Here's how it could work: Retiring a deck at 0 losses (x-0): The player is penalized with 3 losses, simulating a full failure in that draft. This discourages players from endlessly redrafting until they get the perfect pool without suffering the consequences. Retiring a deck at 1 loss (x-1): The player is penalized with 2 losses, meaning they are still penalized but have the option to step away from a particularly bad situation. Retiring a deck at 2 losses (x-2): The player is given 1 loss, allowing them to cut their losses while still accepting some consequence for retiring. This system aligns more closely with how real-world Magic tournaments work. In a Grand Prix, once your deck is built, you're locked into it. You can't simply quit after building a suboptimal deck and start over. This proposed system would introduce accountability and preserve the competitive integrity of the format. 4. Preventing a Pay-to-Win Structure Benefits the Entire Player Base For new players or those with limited financial resources, the current pay-to-win structure in MTGA Premium Drafts is particularly harmful. Drafting is one of the most skill-intensive formats and should serve as a level playing field for all players to test their abilities. However, the ability for some players to "cheat" the system by retiring weak decks and redrafting means that the playing field is skewed in favor of those who are willing or able to spend more money. This discourages participation from players who want to compete fairly and diminishes the overall quality of competition. Magic has always been about community and fair competition, where skilled players can rise to the top regardless of financial background. However, the current structure of Premium Drafts undermines this ethos. Allowing players to redraft without consequences erodes trust in the fairness of the format and could alienate players who feel that they cannot compete on even terms. By introducing consequences for retiring decks in Premium Drafts, Magic Arena would restore balance to the format and ensure that Limited play remains about drafting skill, deck building, and gameplay, rather than financial advantage. This change would enhance the experience for all players and maintain the integrity of Magic as a strategy game first and foremost, not a pay-to-win product.
Appreciate the sign off. More level headed than most commander focused content out there.
That was one of the best first questions and discussions I've seen yet. Very relatable so awesome to hear your opinion and knowledge on that topic
Im with Marshall I have had a worse than usual win% but still having a blast, I think its because the draft portion is pretty interesting and thats my favorite part.
Hahaha yeah it’s weird, I love slower formats but my attention span just isn’t made for long, drawn out games
On levelling up your decision making, if you're playing in person, ask your opponent what they thought of a key play after the match concludes. A lot of the time you're trying to evaluate based on knowing only half of the information. Your opponent can often fill in the gaps and offer a different perspective.
100% agree. It’s the foundation behind why hard testing with other good players is essential to staying sharp and getting better
Yeah but the opposent having infos u dont (even whats in his deck is an info), its not always a reliable pov
I had that mana dork that makes spiders and use Marvin to ramp and make a bunch of spiders between the both of them lol
I lost a reasonable amount of gems so far, but still liking this format. It's bizarre
The one combo I've gotten with Norin, Swift Survivalist is Arabella, Abandoned Doll. Attack with it, drain for a bunch, they block, you exile it, replay it, do it again next turn. If they can't stop it, it's over real fast.
43:15 Marvin sees play in Pioneer with the 13 life black tree thing
In drafting, I feel like analyzing losses is even harder.
You have to analyze if you should even have been playing the cards you’re playing in a deck.
It does help to understand that it’s often a culmination of a few things happening at once.
My first draft in the format was a Survival deck, and i went to 7 games. Granted, I had Tyvar, Rip and two Baseball Bats, but if played aggressively, Survival can be potent.
It's weird, baseball bat has terrible stats. Maybe it's because of the 3 mana equip cost.
I had a random GW deck with three baseball bats and it was clean 7 wins. Don't know how much it had to do with survival though. My dedicated survival deck with no Bats crashed fast
Also note idk how regularly you play but for me I’m normally reset down to silver or bronze when a new set comes out. My first drafts do well pretty much no matter what I do. Not sure if this applies to you but I’d wait til you get up to platinum to actually decide if things are good or not.
Tyfar is the reason I bet. I had him in a gruul deck and if I played him I won the match. Helps that people didn't read and tried to kill it immediately when I had an untapped creature
@@ajfox84it's because the color pair is not good compared to others. The card itself is great but survivor is just not a great mechanic in this set.
Just here to drop a hi to producer Jeff
I didnt play any boros aggro this set yet and I was doing really bad mostly playing black X because I felt it was open everytime. After listening to the podcast today I got my first trophy 7/2 with boros aggro. Thank you guys!!!
Shoutout to “untimely malfunction.” You frequently see it 7-12 pick, but it’s an all star. Lot of removal and engine cards in this set, so the 2nd mode comes up more often than you expect, and is often game determinative. Since turning a removal of your best thing into removing one of their best things is awesome. Also, it having utility of the 2 other modes means it’s rarely a completely dead card.
Yeah I had a deck with two of them and they absolutely turned games around every time. Great card.
gotta say, really enjoying this one. its interesting that most often the formats both marshall luis and i enjoy the most tend to be those with the ability to pivot easily in the draft portion and play cards in multiple different decks, rather than the on-rails type draft experience found in a set like ONE or Bloomburrow. Not the end all be all, but an interesting thought.
Glimmerlight seemed great to me, similar to Thraben Inspector but a step down for power and a half a step up for colorless. Happy to hear that validated!
11:00 I would argue for the Basketball thing the decissions were correct, but since not missing shots is part of playing basketball well as much as good decissions are, there is still a flaw and something that went wrong and that he should improve. I would argue he should work on his ability to hit the shots, not on his decission making (assuming he was right about all of these shots being reasonable to take)
Wanted to add onto what LSV said: He stated that WotC disbanded the RC. They did not. In the wake of the bans, the members of the RC began getting threats to their safety including getting Doxxed and death threats (mentioning this just for anyone who wasn't aware of that). The RC went to Wizards after they began getting harassed and worked with them and those series of conversations resulted in the transition over from control to WotC.
It's funny what LSV said about how bad it feels to lose to an on-board trick like his opponent in the GP did when he just attacked into LSV's on-board -2/0 trick. I did precisely that against a Tyvar during prerelase. I was so caught up with Tyvar giving the opponent an Overrun mechanic to hit with during his turn that I totally spaced on it being used defensively, so I just sent a creature in to die for nothing.
@1:14:15 : Marshall, from a maths POV, u're using GIH WR but maybe IWD would be more appropriated since UW is better than BW
Came for the cards stayed for the life lesson :D
Waiting patiently for yall's book now
Marshall with the great basketball analogy
That was a hell of rant to start the video. Love y'all
On the basketball point, i think the similarity is that the results you should pay attention to are the long-term ones. Missing 5 shots in a row happens to the best players in the world, but they always regress to the mean. Its the same in magic: did i make the decision that works most of the time is something you can really only answer after youve been in that situation enough to see the average outcomes
I'm being nitpicky here, but I'm noticing a lot of dropped frames from both of your webcams. I don't know if it's the webcam itself, or if it's because you encoded this in 24 frames per second and there's maybe a mismatch with your webcam screen recording framerate, but it's a little jarring to watch sometimes.
The issue is visible all the time, but I would say the motion of Marshall at 15:15 makes it quite noticable.
So far I've gotten 7 wins with Blue-White, Red-White, Red-Green, and Black-White. All the Red decks seem good.
@@rinmathews9337 red green is really bad
@@rinmathews9337 and blue white is the best by far
@@SanguineYoru Red green is NOT bad. What are you on
@@Lemon-qs3uzagreed. Gruul has been solid in sealed and was pretty ok drafting so far
@@SanguineYoru clown shoes
I feel like people don’t know how to play/build blue red, every single time I’ve done it it’s been an excellent control deck however it’s the lowest in the data.
LSV, what is your smoker set up? Any favorite cuts? Down here in Texas, we love nothing better than a brisket.
18:00 Luis enjoys learning how to smoke weed better 😲
Well he is from Colorado so I would expect nothing less😂😂
Odd to me that you find the U landcycler the least playable. Feels like I'm always happy to have it in UG or UB, while I feel like the R one i almost only want in GR (I mean, you play them beyond that, just saying where you want to go out of the way for the cycler)
Is it weird to say that I've mostly found it good in "bad" blue decks?
The strongest blue deck I think is blue/white, which can get really aggressive. That pair/build doesn't want a six-drop like Shark. Next-best I think is blue/green, which is more value-engine focused. Flipping up a manifested shark with a counter on it is okay but kind of expensive.
It's blue/black I've had the most success with it, and largely just as a big ol' meatball for once I've hit their threats with Unable to Scream or Stay Hidden; 5/7 Vigilance does a little door-knocking and doesn't leave an opening for retaliation. Blue/black is apparently the worst color pair though so take this all with a grain of salt, "It's good in the bad deck" is not exactly high praise.
Trial of agony is 56.5% in boros, you can check that on 17 lands
It's probably "low" because there's room for misplay too
Choosing the highest winning archetype versus the lowest for the elegant card introduces some complications. Because 58 is average for blue white and 52 is average for black white
Do we know what date the vintage cube stream will happen? Super stoked to check it out live if so!
Isn't is better to take a pretty good red uncommon out of a pack with no red cards, instead of taking a very good gold uncommon when there is another great gold uncommon and great white cards?
I think part of why what he said was correct is because of the play booster era. With play boosters you really aren’t sending a signal for at least the first 4 picks most of the time because there is a real chance that an opened pack could have 0 cards of one color to start. #2 that gold card has a way higher ceiling and is a auto win button if left unchecked. But I think in general my statement stands true.
I'm quite easily om my journey, but I got to thinking about keeping my strongest one two and three drops on curve rather than playing a weaker drop it simply hold them to bait or removal. I've been thinking I don't want to give them more draws to get their removal, but that can't be right if they mulligan to prioritize removal rather than curve.
I started the format off pretty well, after a failed Jund Delirium draft I had 4 trophies in a row with UW, RG, RW, RW. Tried rooms after that and it went terribly. Still have yet to draft black lol
Im so bad at this format but doesn’t stop me from playing!
17:47 yes Marshall you and Luis should write ✍️ that book. Chapin wrote one on playing constructed Magic. Next blockbuster book should be you two! Could have section on in life and how it can be applied to Magic limited.
Biggest knock on the format is the Bomby nature of the rares. So many good games just obliterated by unreasonable cards. I get that is what some people like
reminds me of some of the bonus sheet sets in that way
So far, I think I've hated Enduring Courage the most. (2RR 3/3, whenever another creature enters, it gets +2/0 and haste). They play that, and if you don't exile it (can't destroy, as it returns as an enchantment) that turn, you can pretty much just pack it in. Everything getting +2/0 and haste is just nuts. Really hate the feeling of losing to one card in that way.
Bomby rares are in every format. This one is less egregious than most.
I really just disagree. Bomby rares are in every set, but in this set the removal and uncommon synergies are just so strong that it doesn't matter as much. And there's no Bonny Pal in this set that just destroys you. The last two sets have had some really egregious rares and no good answers; I haven't felt that way yet this set.
@@setharoth114 thats true the commons are also very good
Probably not a surprise but I would buy that book.
Episode starts at 19:35
Episode starts at 0:00.
@@AstaraBrightwingpipe down, we're here for Duskmourn not a life lesson
@@nikmidclayton5933 From the way you've chosen to speak to me, you need a life lesson much more than you need Duskmourne. But however you choose to speak to me, you don't speak *for* me, nor do you speak for anyone else, even those who might agree with you. So you pipe down, little one. And if you or anyone else wants to post timestamps for the video, you can do so respectfully.
@AstaraBrightwing like I said, pipe down.
It’s weird, black felt like the second strongest color after green to me, though Boros has definitely felt the strongest color pair.
And thank you for great content :)
5:17 you can always blame mana screw! Haha
Love the set.
Great show!!!
I doubt there is any skill that can safe you from "Arena decides your next 10 cards are lands". But maybe I needed to run 12 lands and that was my mistake
boy do i enjoy playing 10+ one and two drops every format.
let's see what your estimation is.
50:30 yep, white and red and blue, every time. Low cost synergy or aggro pieces, that's how you win.
This set makes Bloomburrow look even worse
Wotc only playtests for limited and yet we haven't seen a set that all colours are reasonably balanced.
Yes we have. "reasonably" is very subjective, and we've seen many sets with good color balance. Also, they do playtest beyond just Limited, just not to the same degree. No need to be hyperbolic.
@@Mordalon i think they can do better than 52-58.
It just feels like im losing a lot of games I had in the bag to rares and mythics tbh. 20k gems normally lasts me 3-6 months of intensive play. Burned it all in 2 weeks :/
Norn is great in rw but not worth first picking
White is the best color IMO, and it's not even close. It has the most generically powerful cards, good in any deck, and lots of interaction.
Write a book! WRITE A BOOK! WRITE. A. Book!!
I actually feel like ghost vacuum on it's own is partially responsible for BW not having a great showing. Would be nice to hear some thoughts about this!
On the comment that 23 random UG cards is a playable deck, my belief is the pushing of commander is mainly responsible. The trap spells have been replaced by Legendary creatures that are fine stats but with nonsensical abilities, and the power floor of the average Common and Uncommon has increased over the last few years to keep the bombs in check.
Williams Jason Smith John Anderson Sarah
i make the fundamental mistake for not being able to be on the play most of the time on the rigged shuffler (bo1) !!! :) :) :) also why cant wizards make the bo3 playable and ranked in arena is beyond me ....
im currently 18-1 in bo3 matches. that means the format is great (1-0 in current draft)
Would be such a better format if the aggro decks weren't so effing good. once again there is literally zero time to durdle around and set up any kind of value engine or grind out strat. Half the games just end early because one person curved out with a removal spell after 1/2/3 drop.
With ~20 drafts under my belt i really disagree with that. Yes there are good aggro decks but id say overall this is right down the middle as far as format speed goes. Aggro control and midrange strategies are all viable and ive had a number of games end by decking.
Yea i disagree also. Green is really good for what you are trying to do and black is not good in this format.
Haven’t had a format in recent memory were people died to decking so often after basically just playing card draw. This format is molasses compared to the last couple sets. Aggro is there, as it should, but many great archetypes are super grindy.
I durdle all game, you must be durdleing incorrectly
There is time for that. The statistics show how much slower it is than recent sets.
Keep Limited formats skill-based, not pay-to-win. Introducing penalties for retiring decks ensures that players can't endlessly redraft for stronger decks without consequence, preserving competitive integrity and creating a more balanced experience for all players. I understand that people will do it, otherwise they will just give others advantage. But we should really try to stop this.
1. Draft Integrity is Fundamental to Limited Formats
Drafting is the essence of Limited Magic, where skill in card selection, deck building, and gameplay are all tested. The integrity of the draft process is what makes this format special. In traditional, real-world Magic events-whether they are Grand Prix (GPs), Pro Tours, or local tournaments-once a draft begins, players are locked into their deck, and there is no chance to abandon a bad draft without consequences. The current system in Magic Arena allows players to "retire" their drafts after poor performance or poor card selection, leading to a situation where only strong decks are played competitively. This undermines the core principle of Limited formats.
In a real-world Grand Prix, players must live with their draft and fight through challenging situations, including suboptimal card pools. This is how the format is intended to be played: with the possibility of failure based on your drafting decisions, deck building, and gameplay. Allowing players to repeatedly draft until they find a strong deck-by retiring after a weak draft-fundamentally breaks the fairness of the format.
2. Magic Should Be Skill-Based, Not Pay-to-Win
Magic has always prided itself on being a game of skill, strategy, and decision-making, not a game where players can buy victory. In constructed formats like Standard, Modern, or Pioneer, once a player has acquired a non-budget deck, spending additional money doesn’t directly increase their chance of winning. You compete on an even playing field where skill matters most. However, the current structure of Premium Draft on Arena allows players to effectively "buy" their way to stronger decks by retiring poor drafts and redrafting. This creates a pay-to-win environment that is contrary to the spirit of Magic.
In paper Magic, the barrier to success is largely about the cost of acquiring a deck or entering an event. Once that barrier is overcome, success is determined by skill, strategy, and experience. The current draft system on MTGA introduces a financial advantage that lets wealthier players bypass losses and increases their chances of winning by repeatedly drafting. This turns what should be a skill-based format into one where financial resources can provide an unfair edge, distorting competition and diminishing the experience for players who rely on their skill rather than their wallet.
3. Introducing Consequences for Retiring Decks Restores Balance
To address this imbalance, Premium Drafts in Magic Arena should implement consequences for "retiring" a deck early. A system where players are given losses based on when they retire their deck would add fairness back into the process. Here's how it could work:
Retiring a deck at 0 losses (x-0): The player is penalized with 3 losses, simulating a full failure in that draft. This discourages players from endlessly redrafting until they get the perfect pool without suffering the consequences.
Retiring a deck at 1 loss (x-1): The player is penalized with 2 losses, meaning they are still penalized but have the option to step away from a particularly bad situation.
Retiring a deck at 2 losses (x-2): The player is given 1 loss, allowing them to cut their losses while still accepting some consequence for retiring.
This system aligns more closely with how real-world Magic tournaments work. In a Grand Prix, once your deck is built, you're locked into it. You can't simply quit after building a suboptimal deck and start over. This proposed system would introduce accountability and preserve the competitive integrity of the format.
4. Preventing a Pay-to-Win Structure Benefits the Entire Player Base
For new players or those with limited financial resources, the current pay-to-win structure in MTGA Premium Drafts is particularly harmful. Drafting is one of the most skill-intensive formats and should serve as a level playing field for all players to test their abilities. However, the ability for some players to "cheat" the system by retiring weak decks and redrafting means that the playing field is skewed in favor of those who are willing or able to spend more money. This discourages participation from players who want to compete fairly and diminishes the overall quality of competition.
Magic has always been about community and fair competition, where skilled players can rise to the top regardless of financial background. However, the current structure of Premium Drafts undermines this ethos. Allowing players to redraft without consequences erodes trust in the fairness of the format and could alienate players who feel that they cannot compete on even terms.
By introducing consequences for retiring decks in Premium Drafts, Magic Arena would restore balance to the format and ensure that Limited play remains about drafting skill, deck building, and gameplay, rather than financial advantage. This change would enhance the experience for all players and maintain the integrity of Magic as a strategy game first and foremost, not a pay-to-win product.
First