When I began the “Drafting With LSV” series I didn’t realize how much it would change the way I draft. By the time I began the series I had already done a large amount of triple Shards drafts enough that I actually wouldn’t be doing almost any online if I didn’t have the series to do. I figured I had learned the format and even had Grand Prix: Atlanta to reinforce my belief where I went 8-0-1 in the drafts by forcing Esper/Grixis. You can imagine my surprise when my win percentage in the first bunch of drafts was much worse than I expected which prompted me to take a look back at what I had been doing and what I could change.
In fact a post on the forums from “Majiqman” summed it up quite well:
Incidentally we’re 15 drafts in and the loss in round X record is:
R1: 11111
R2: 1111
R3: 1111
Win: 11
Hardly an impressive record for one of the best players in the world. 45 packs in and 32 packs back… and 30 tix in entry fees if it wasn’t nix tix for most of them.
The above was actually posted after I had already changed my draft preferences but it was still a good point. I had been doing less well than could be expected as the above winning percentage translates into just 58%.
One important point to note when discussing both these numbers and the ones for the entire series is that the drafts are single elimination so the overall percentages are skewed when compared to a draft at a Pro Tour or swiss event. Variance plays a bigger role in a single elimination draft since a very good deck could lose round 1 due to excessive mulligans or the like and is thus denied the opportunity to improve the record to 2-1. Overall the exercise would be more useful if these drafts were all three rounds but even looking at the numbers as they are still helps give a good picture of what seems to work and what doesn’t.
When I mentioned above that I had changed my draft preferences here is what I mean. I looked back on the first 15 drafts and decided that my affinity for artifacts (Esper) was the main culprit. It isn’t that Esper isn’t a playable Shard and is much better than Bant but that I was overvaluing Esper. I went into Esper when I really didn’t need to which left me with decks that just weren’t as good as they could be. I think most of my card valuations are fine within each Shard and those in fact didn’t really change as my drafts progressed. The problem I found was that I would draft Esper too heavily going into it when I didn’t have any business doing so.
At this point (draft 15 onwards) I changed my focus and instead of drafting Esper as kind of the default I drafted RG-base decks. Naya preferably but Jund was acceptable as well. I still did draft Esper/Grixis since they are kind of the same shard in my eyes but not with the sort of regularity I did before. This also had the side benefit of increasing my win percentage with Esper decks themselves as I was generally now in Esper when it was the right shard to be in making my average Esper deck much better than before. Bant was still not a shard I would touch and in fact I drafted zero Bant decks over the course of these thirty drafts! The results from the last 15 drafts ended up as such:
Using the same description the loss in round X record was:
Round 1: 1111
Round 2: 111
Round 3: 1111
Win: 1111
With an overall win percentage of 70. That was definitely a vast improvement although the sample size in either case isn’t that big. Still going from 58% to 70% is a pretty marked difference and I am much more satisfied with the second set of results. I think the way I ended up drafting is more flexible and less reliant on certain cards being opened which is often a function of Naya/Jund being less dependant on specific cards than Esper is. This leads me into the next way we can look at results: A shard-by-shard analysis of records.
Over the course of the thirty drafts my win/loss record with each shard was:
Jund: 9-9 (9 Drafts) Win %: 50
Naya: 14-6 (10 Drafts) Win %: 70
Esper: 9-4 (5 Drafts) Win %: 69
Grixis/Esper: 9-4 (6 Drafts) Win %: 69
Bant: 0-0 (I think I have drafted Bant something like twice lifetime counting all my live drafts and all drafts online)
I listed Grixis as Grixis/Esper since almost all of the Grixis decks I drafted had a White component. When a Blue-Black deck has just about equal parts Red and White it is hard to classify it as one or the other. In terms of purely Grixis I only drafted it twice so it seemed to make more sense to lump Grixis in with Esper somewhat. The Esper category had decks that were straight UWB or UWB with maybe a one-card splash but definitely “Esper.”
The shard-by-shard look basically says that I should avoid Jund although my conclusions on Esper and Grixis differ because of what I described earlier. When I now go into Grixis or Esper I have a good success rate but that is partially due to the fact that I only go into those Shards when I have a good reason to do so. Overall I learned that Naya is just the most reliable of the shards. I think that the biggest reason that Naya is awesome is its creatures which are definitely big. Instead of needing specific cards or combinations to work Naya really just tries to cast huge monsters and crush the opponent. Synergy is all well and good and Naya certainly has cards that work together well but there is a huge advantage to having all your cards be good on their own. You are much less dependent on opening specific cards which is Esper’s biggest weakness.
A good Esper deck is based off synergy since its cards individually are less powerful. You therefore need to assemble combinations of cards to essentially achieve what Naya does in one card. Etherium Sculptor is a prime suspect since he is pretty weak on his own but really is needed to make the best of Esper decks. Even Sanctum Gargoyle requires a critical mass of artifacts to reach its full potential which leaves you somewhat at the mercy of the packs. If you are in Esper you take cards based on the reasonable expectation of seeing enough synergistic artifacts to make your deck good but sometimes that just doesn’t happen. None of Esper’s cards are really good enough on their own so they need to work together. Puppet Conjurer plus Astrolabe Sculptor plus expensive artifacts Sanctum Gargoyle plus various Capsules these are all the engines that Esper really needs to be competitive. On the other hand Naya just casts a Cavern Thoctar or a Jungle Weaver and goes to town.
Instead of having all sorts of complicated pieces of which specific ones are needed Naya just wants a certain amount of five-power guys. The beauty is that all of them are basically interchangeable to a certain limit. If you have like six in combination of Cavern Thoctar Mosstodon Rakeclaw Gargantuan Jungle Weaver Ridge Rannet etc you are pretty good to go. I mean it is more complicated than just that but the basic idea is that Naya has so much greater flexibility due to all of its cards being very solid on their own. Drafting Naya isn’t as simple as just taking the biggest guy out of every pack of course and keeping a watchful eye on your manafixing and removal is also quite important. A rough sketch of the priority I put on each piece of the puzzle is as follows:
1. Bombs: Battlegrace Elspeth Sarkhan Vol etc.
2. Premium Removal: Oblivion Ring Resounding Thunder Branching Bolt Magma Spray Skeletonize (although this one really wants one or two Black sources in the deck to maximize it).
3. Woolly Thoctar: This guy gets his own category! Thoctar is special since turn 3 Thoctar is an enormous beating but I am hesitant to necessarily take it over either removal or Jungle Shrine depending on the deck. If you already have sufficient fixing I would say that Thoctar can move even higher than all the non-Oblivion Ring removal (including Branching Bolt).
4. Jungle Shrine (and to a lesser extent Savage Lands/Seaside Citadel): Trilands are amazing and now that Conflux is out I would take them even more aggressively. Moving Trilands above some of the removal spells might even be warranted since aggressive-ish decks like Naya really need their mana on demand.
5. Boom-Booms: All sorts of five-power dudes which vary in demand based mostly on casting costs and curve. Cavern Thoctar is basically my favorite since I think it is generally better than the rest. Still all these guys pretty much go anywhere. Knight of the Skyward Eye is an honorary boom-boom and actually ranks the highest of them all due to his low casting cost. I generally don’t worry about picking up the rest of the two mana aggressive type guys since you want to kill them with Thoctars.
There is more to drafting Naya but if you keep an eye on having the right proportions of manafixers removal and huge guys you should be good. Wild Nacatl is also really good even in the big Naya deck that I like because it just bashes for infinite starting on turn 2.
The problems I have Esper also translate to Jund as Jund also suffers from the “weak cards with synergy” issue that makes draws inconsistent. Devour is a pretty risky mechanic by nature since it is inherent card disadvantage. The good Jund decks require significant amounts of “food” for all of its cards that take advantage of sacrifice effects so you need a bunch of Dregscape Zombie/Dragon Fodder/Elvish Visionary type cards. Aside from Visionary cards like that are pretty unexciting and drawing them midgame when you have no Bone Splinters or Thunder-Thrash Elder in hand is just miserable.
To sum up my AAA drafting experiences I go into every draft with a relatively open mind but a tendency to draft Naya. I won’t ignore signals or take much weaker Naya cards over better Esper cards for example but I also will try and get into Naya if it is possible. How this specifically will change with Conflux I don’t know yet although I have gotten three AAC drafts in thus far.
As I mentioned when talking about the trilands earlier the reduction of the number of Panoramas and trilands in the draft puts a little more stress on picking them up during the two packs of Shards. Rupture Spire is a very excellent replacement since even though it takes up your second turn it is basically just a super Panorama. It costs the same amount as cracking a Panorama but gives you all the colors instead enabling all sorts of sweet splashes without the need to waste a slot with an essentially off-color basic. The landcyclers are good at fixing as well although the colored mana requirement to cycle them makes them much less reliable than colorless fixers. Nothing is more awkward than not having the correct mana to cast your fixer since that pretty much guarantees that by the time you find that mana the fixing will no longer be needed.
A few cards that impressed me more than I expected are worth talking about since just reading the cards on the spoiler doesn’t always give one the full picture. Of course sometimes a card looks decent and is worse than that and talking about that is important as well.
Wretched Banquet is pretty conditional but being able to kill the first creature they play regardless of what it is (as long as you haven’t played a guy of course) is pretty nice. I had my turn 3 Woolly Thoctar blown up which was pretty good for a one-mana spell that usually seems to go late.
Darklit Gargoyle is quite a beating. In all three of the drafts they just kept going around the table and each time a Esper deck put them to good use. A three-power flier is nothing to laugh at and only costing one mana to pump isn’t bad at all.
Lapse of Certainty is a card I tried to play in a aggressive GWr deck to little effect. Leaving mana up to counter a spell is such a burden and doing so to just deal with the spell again next turn is pretty bad. This might be good in Constructed but is worse than Cancel most of the time in Limited and Cancel rarely makes my maindecks.
Exploding Borders is awesome since it often is fixing/acceleration when that is relevant and a Lava Axe when you no longer need the land. Having cards that fulfill multiple roles is nice and finding ways to make manafixers good even late is no joke.
I look forward to drafting more Conflux and really understanding the full effect of the new set but these were my initial impressions. Doing the Drafting With LSV series has definitely challenged my perception of knowing the format and it makes me wonder if there are other formats that I think I know but in reality just stopped drafting without really doing a thorough examination. It also leads me to suggest that anyone who is serious about improving their Limited game track their drafts since MTGO v3 makes it fairly easy to do so. Just doing something as simple as turning on the draft recorder and noting your record with each archetype of the current format (be it shard tribe two-color combination or whatever the theme of the set) might lead to interesting results. It certainly changed the way I drafted AAA and will hopefully have a positive impact on how I draft AAC as well.
Thanks for all of the comments about my drafts; that is definitely part of the process as well!
Until next week…
LSV