General Westchester Draft Outline

FlowerSunRain

Contributor
I figured I'd make this into its own thread because I still like the format and maybe someone who wasn't around for the old group will be interested in it.

Westchester Draft

Number of Players: 4-8

Number of Cards Needed: Theoretically you need 60 per player. Realistically you probably only need 55, but it is possible that you could run out before drafting is finished.

Time Needed: About that of a Rochester Draft.

Set up: Shuffle the cube. You do not need to count out the exact number of cards. Using the cards, make a grid four cards high (columns) and as wide as the number of players (rows). Example: For an eight player draft, make an 8x4 grid with 32 total cards. Establish a top and bottom of the grid. Keep the cube nearby. Determine a start player.

The draft process: The start player selects a card from the grid. In turn order each other player selects a card. The last player then selects a second card. In reverse turn order each other player also selects a second card. Once every player has selected two cards, the round is complete.

After the round is complete, remove all of the cards in the bottom row and put them to the side. They can no longer be drafted. Slide all the remaining cards down in their columns to the lowest open row. Replace all empty spots with new cards from the cube. Pass the start player clockwise one seat. Draft again in the same manner as the first round.

Repeat this process for 20 rounds, giving each player 40 cards. If this creates too much flexibility, the number can be lowered.

Pros:
· Has all of the usual advantages of a face up drafting format.
· Great for team drafts.
· Tension over losing cards to the bottom row sweep.
· Decks tend to be very focused and have space for a sideboard.
· Posionous cards get flushed away and waste no one’s picks.
· After playing it a few times, you really get a sense of which cards no one wants.

Cons
· Has all of the usual disadvantages of a face up drafting format.
· Time consuming.

· Uses a variable number of cards, meaning you can’t utilize it for a static format.
 

Jason Waddell

Administrator
Staff member
Ah, neat! Have you actually done one of these yet? I wonder how well the bottom row tension really comes together, considering that you'll have already drafted the best 50% of the pile. Either way, it seems like a good mechanic for cycling the cards out of the pool.
 

FlowerSunRain

Contributor
I've done it about 4 times with 4 people and am looking forward to doing a full table in December. I admit, its not THAT much tension, but you do have to weigh the idea of deferring a card to the next round against the risk that two more awesome cards will pop up next round. The main advantage in it (over Rochester which is clearly the closest format) is that you don't have a large chunk of each round dedicated to throwaway picks. Even the last pick of each round is usually relevant.

Another advantage is that since you see a lot more cards in the draft, the 4 man drafts play a lot closer to a full table draft so you get a better sense of how the cube would play with an 8 people booster draft.

I'm somewhat worried that the deck quality will be a little too tight at the full table and wonder if this will be an issue. At the very least it should knock the rose colored glasses off of some my cuter picks.
 

Jason Waddell

Administrator
Staff member
Well, as you know from the formats I have designed (Grid, Tenchester), I am a big proponent of presenting more cards than will be drafted, particularly when doing a small table draft with a cube that is designed for 8. The bottom row clear is the mechanism for achieving this, so it seems like it'd be worthwhile even with no tension involved.

I doubt that I'd want to do it with 8 players though. The regular booster draft feels pretty close to perfection, dynamics-wise, and I'd have a bit of a mutiny on my hands if I tried to rob my players of that.
 
Sounds interesting but I will never get to do this with the people who make up my 4-person drafts; two of them absolutely hate face-up drafting and won't even try the utility land draft.
 

FlowerSunRain

Contributor
Played another four man last night. If you can stomach the extra draft time, its definitely much better then a booster draft when you don't have a full table.
 

Chris Taylor

Contributor
threadjack: anyone try 5 packs of 9 for a smaller draft?

5 packs of 9 is okay, but sometimes you run into problems that come with small sample sizes. I haven't done an 8 man in a while, and I keep getting shafted where all the fixing in my colors is in the undrafted portion of the cube :p
 
I actually don't think 5x9 solves any problems, functionally.

The best it has done for my 4-man drafts is lessen the impact of a pack being a color/gold/fixing that no one in the draft actually wants (six or more cards). It would be more effective to shrink the pool a bit, I believe, but no one wants to cherry pick cards when they can just shuffle up and start playing.

"More first picks" is one of my players' arguments for it, and I can't say I disagree when I see how often powerful cards get hated simply because the packs go around so much: A naya aggro drafter will open two very specific cards for their deck, say "well no one else wants these" and take the Drana that the player next to them needed to cut it out of the pool while their wild nacatl and curse of predation both table.
 

Jason Waddell

Administrator
Staff member
Somehow I've found 5x9 or 4x11 really improves the signalling in smaller drafts. It's been swell.

Hmm... this is the only legitimate seeming advantage I have heard so far. I wonder if it's actually true though. I guess it's easier to notice what's gone from an 8-card pack than a 14-card pack.
 

CML

Contributor
Three people being all up in each other's shit is a way bigger deal for a 4-man than an 8-man, that's the entire premise of 9x5 Wadds ;)

Another solution we've used to some amusement is 15x5 -> 60-card decks
 

Jason Waddell

Administrator
Staff member
Three people being all up in each other's shit is a way bigger deal for a 4-man than an 8-man, that's the entire premise of 9x5 Wadds ;)

I don't really see how they're more up in each other's shit. It's still 4 people drafting 180 cards. I think it just feels different because you shorten the misery of each pack, while having nearly identical drafting dynamics.
 

James Stevenson

Steamflogger Boss
Staff member
I really do not have a good reason for why the signalling should be better, which makes me think it must not be. But I know every time we've draft large packs with few people the signals have been a mess and we've been all up in each other's shit. With packs of 9 it's always been much clearer. I don't know why!
 
Top