General Multi-Picks

[Diakonov]

I've begun to implement the mechanic of "draft one copy, receive an extra copy after the draft." Here's what I'll be testing out first (may be a bit aggro-heavy, but aggro can't seem to win a goddamn draft anyway):



Triple Pick:

and I might try and/or

I also plan to experiment with "draft a card, receive copies of other cards." For example:

Draft and receive

Draft and receive

Draft and receive

...or, what I'm most excited about:

Draft and receive

Also, Myr Servitor seems potentially interesting.

EDIT: Perhaps three Nissa's Chosens is too many?

 

[anotak]

once i played an m12 draft and got an arachnus spinner, 4 webs, and 2 dungrove elders

i dont know what this really has to do with the discussion in this thread because ive never done this but it seems cool. i'm using my complexity elsewhere so i can't try it

 

[Soshi]

I saw your list & meant to comment but haven't managed to do so. I'd be interested in hearing if players feel like aggro is 'boring' with gauranteed/nondrafted duplicates, or what player reactions to that are (outside of cards like Squadron Hawk).

 

[Diakonov]

In theory, the idea would be to make things LESS boring for the aggro player. Instead of needing to auto-draft as many 2-power one drops as possible, they can relax a little bit after taking a few and focus on other cards that will help improve their match-ups. I will provide feedback from the players once we've had a chance to test it a couple times.

 

[Goldenpineapple]

My opinion on this is that it's kind of interesting but a slippery slope of 'where does it end?' I've played cubes with a printed list of extra-copy cards because there were so many. It was more than a little frustrating. The only time I've seen it 'underdone' was the copy of explore having "2 explores: Exploring with Alex" written on the sleeve.

Mostly I think this cheapens drafting. If the amount of 2-picks is too large, especially to support a single archetype (aggro, in your list's case), you get to spend so few picks on your actual deck vs. anyone else that the tension is almost non-existent. This is especially dangerous with +3 cards, like people often do with hawks. I don't think it's worth sacrificing the draft tension to be cute, so I believe (without testing) the only way these kinds of cards would work would be having a 360 and only draft with 8 people.

 

[FlowerSunRain]

I do the same system and I can tell you it hasn't been a problem. However, draft tension is about the lowest priority on my list. Remember, I don't even put lands in my cube and draft those separately, so scrambling for playables is something that just doesn't happen. If you are ok with that, doubling the gridfiller aggro cards works really well.

One alternative you can use (that I found unneeded but ymmv) is to increase the minimum deck size of people using multi-picks by some amount, Either 1:1 (every multipick you include in your deck increases your minimum deck size by 1) or 1:2 (every two multipick you include increase your deck size by one). If you don't include more then one card of the multi-pick, there is no penalty.

This gives you the increased early turn consistency of the duplicates in exchange for slightly less later consistency from a larger deck.

 

[CML]

I agree with Ano, I'd worry about complexity creep and try to solve your design problems (chiefly "aggro can't win a damn draft") by other means, working your way up from "singleton card choices" to "multiples of cards you draft one at a time" to "here."

Where's your list?

 

[ahadabans]

If I had aggro lovers at my table, I think I would totally do this as it makes sense. But right now, I have aggro as more a specific deck that comes together sometimes versus something that is always represented. For better or worse.

 

[Diakonov]

Where's your list?

Here is my list: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/34

 

[Jason Waddell]

My opinion on this is that it's kind of interesting but a slippery slope of 'where does it end?' I've played cubes with a printed list of extra-copy cards because there were so many. It was more than a little frustrating. The only time I've seen it 'underdone' was the copy of explore having "2 explores: Exploring with Alex" written on the sleeve.

Mostly I think this cheapens drafting. If the amount of 2-picks is too large, especially to support a single archetype (aggro, in your list's case), you get to spend so few picks on your actual deck vs. anyone else that the tension is almost non-existent. This is especially dangerous with +3 cards, like people often do with hawks. I don't think it's worth sacrificing the draft tension to be cute, so I believe (without testing) the only way these kinds of cards would work would be having a 360 and only draft with 8 people.

Yeah, this would be my concern. There are already so many cards cut in the drafting -> deckbuilding process, that adding multipicks would contribute to more wasted picks.

 

[Eric Chan]

Yup. It's the reason I haven't done multi-picks, even for obvious candidates like Squadron Hawk. Unless you decrease the pack size to something like 12 or 13 cards - which then has its own set of problems - I still don't really buy the argument that some spells aren't "worth a pick but are worth a slot in your deck". The utility draft addresses that issue for lands, obviously, but aren't spells what you should be drafting with your 45 carefully hand-picked selections?

Unlike in regular Limited, it's very rare the case where I see someone struggling to come up with 23 playables. It's almost always the opposite - agonizing over those last two or three cuts to bring down the spell count from 25 or 26. Multi-picks would just exacerbate this problem.

 

[ahadabans]

The only benefit I can see to the multi-pick thing is specifically to support (i.e. push) hard aggro. Because if you want the traditional aggro/midrange/control theatre model where each is 1/3 of your meta, you need to dedicate a bazillion slots to narrow aggro only dudes to make those decks consistent enough to compete. And IMO that has two issues:
1. In larger cubes, it means you run rubbish like jungle lion unless you break singleton
2. With less than 8 drafters or if you run a large cube, the aggro drafter often ends up with a bad deck because they simply can't get enough 2 power 1 drops. Which requires you to dedicate EVEN MORE slots to narrow aggro cards just to make it viable. And if no one drafts aggro, you wind up with Jackal Pups and co. going last pick in every pack.

I personally wouldn't consider multi-pick outside a very narrow group of cards (aggro specific and probably just the 2 power 1 drop guys).

For me personally, I just don't care to push aggro that hard. I don't think it needs to be 1/3 of the meta unless your group really likes playing it (which mine does not). So I've just avoided the debate entirely.

 

[Diakonov]

snabadaha is right on. I'm mainly doing it for hard aggro, which some people in my playgroup like to run. One of the early complaints about the aggro picks was exactly what you're saying about Jackal Pups wheeling around and around, and it effectively made the packs less interesting because there were so many obvious non-picks for people who aren't going hard aggro. With multi-picks, someone can get the one-drops they need without cluttering the packs.

The goal is not for an equal three-part division of theatres. In my ideal world I picture a bell curve of deck speed, with the majority of options benefiting the mid-range decks; but, I want hard aggro and hard control to still be options. And, as far as the rock/paper/scissors thing goes, I don't mind it existing but I want to keep it minimal. If I could manage it, the perfectly built hard aggro would have a 55%/45% matchup against the perfectly built hard control.

The devil's advocate would say, "then why not let the one hard aggro player trainwreck all the one-drops without double-picks?" But, that is still relatively boring for the aggro player. I'd rather they have opportunities to fight over things like Caller of the Claw and be able to diversify their deck and sideboard. They don't HAVE to play all the double picks.

 

[Chris Taylor]

My favorite of these:




But hey. Don't knock random savannah lion type guys. 2/1 is the average size of a creature in my cube and it leads to some really interesting gameplay

 

[Dom Harvey]

One way to use multi-picks: suppose I have a Waddellite love of Zombies but also want to have an enchanted evening. Instead of having my black 1-drops be:

+

they could be:

[ + ]

+

[ + ]

That way, if you have sac outlets and the like you can take Gravecrawler as usual, but if you're in the Hero of Iroas or Prophetic Flamespeaker deck you can load up on Minotaurs. Alternatively, the black aggro player can take both packages and have a lethal curve.

 

[Suicufnoc]

Anyone made a pick where you get to choose out of a group of cards? Like painland of choice or something? That's probably too good. Maybe split into friendly and enemy.
Scryland of Choice.
Vivid land of Choice.

Not sure if any non-land options make sense.

 

[CML]

I'm not sure where to go with this. The main objection my drafters have had is that this is "confusing," though I'm not sure how much of this is legit deference to new drafters and how much is inertia to bad old dumb norms. The Squadron Hawks are intuitive and funny enough that they'll stick around, but they're not played often, and the Demigods (Demigod of Revenge) may be on their way out. I disagree with Chan that "it's worth a pick or not" but I find myself often agreeing in practice.

 

[anotak]

is that supposed to say llanowar wastes because it says llanowar elves instead

 

[Jason Waddell]

Fuck Golgari.

 

[Diakonov]

I disagree with Chan that "it's worth a pick or not" but I find myself often agreeing in practice.

Well it's not so much that it isn't worth a pick (in most cases) but rather it makes the drafting process far less boring while still allowing reasonable access to competitive aggro. If I put all those double picks into the cube as regular breaking-singleton picks, the cube would be full of aggro 1-drops that the aggro player must draft while at the same time they clutter the pack for non-aggro drafters.

 

[CML]

Well it's not so much that it isn't worth a pick (in most cases) but rather it makes the drafting process far less boring while still allowing reasonable access to competitive aggro. If I put all those double picks into the cube as regular breaking-singleton picks, the cube would be full of aggro 1-drops that the aggro player must draft while at the same time they clutter the pack for non-aggro drafters.

now this is true, but double lion is pretty powerful, so then you run into a development issue. who knows. the apes are pretty solid getting one at a time over here and my power level is a little higher than yours, not sure why aggro needs the extra kick looking at your list either.

 

[Jason Waddell]

I also don't think that having "too many one-drops" is really diluting your draft pool. How many slots do you even open up by doubling? Especially when you consider cube drafts already have 24 more cards than retail drafts.

 

[Eric Chan]

Yeah, there are only four one-drops that I run more than one copy of - Champion of the Parish, Delver of Secrets, Gravecrawler, Experiment One - and aggro does pretty well for itself over here, while not completely crowding out other archetypes. Each of these one-drops is actually pretty good, so I wouldn't feel comfortable giving drafters more than one copy per pick.

I don't really feel like I need to award people, say, an extra Dryad Militant or Firedrinker Satyr or what have you, because those cards tend to be somewhat marginal, anyways. I might not run that second Elite Vanguard even if you handed one to me for free.

 

[ahadabans]

I think it all depends on how consistent you want aggro decks to be and how difficult you want to make it for people to draft that level of consistency. 2 power 1 drops are the backbone of these decks, so making those cards easier to get will make those decks incrementally better.

Part of what will play in here though is how many drafters you have, what percentage of the cube gets drafted each time (i.e. how many of the 2 power 1 drop guys show up in packs), and how your group tends to build decks (is aggro sought after or is there just one hard aggro guy at the table?). There are a lot of variables, so I'm not sure one size fits all here.

Only one guy in my group will go all in on hard aggro, so I support it pretty loosely. Wasting half of my 1 CC slots on Elite Vanguard type cards just reduces the number of draftable cards in my packs. I had more aggro support a long time ago, and those cards just ended up last picks. Guys then struggled a bit to fill in their mana curves which just made the game more midrangy. So I started taking out the weaker 2 power 1 drop dudes and replacing them with interesting 1 CC cards that could be used in a variety of decks and it improved drafts for us while helping a little to speed the game up a tiny bit (as dudes weren't just wasting turn 1 with nothing to play but a land).

 

[Jason Waddell]

I think it all depends on how consistent you want aggro decks to be and how difficult you want to make it for people to draft that level of consistency. 2 power 1 drops are the backbone of these decks, so making those cards easier to get will make those decks incrementally better.

Part of what will play in here though is how many drafters you have, what percentage of the cube gets drafted each time (i.e. how many of the 2 power 1 drop guys show up in packs), and how your group tends to build decks (is aggro sought after or is there just one hard aggro guy at the table?). There are a lot of variables, so I'm not sure one size fits all here.

Only one guy in my group will go all in on hard aggro, so I support it pretty loosely. Wasting half of my 1 CC slots on Elite Vanguard type cards just reduces the number of draftable cards in my packs. I had more aggro support a long time ago, and those cards just ended up last picks. Guys then struggled a bit to fill in their mana curves which just made the game more midrangy. So I started taking out the weaker 2 power 1 drop dudes and replacing them with interesting 1 CC cards that could be used in a variety of decks and it improved drafts for us while helping a little to speed the game up a tiny bit (as dudes weren't just wasting turn 1 with nothing to play but a land).

My approach is to make playing aggro more fun. People used to be similar in my cube, now they love being the beatdown. It's not really a power-level issue (but that helps)