I'm Going Gaga for Grid Drafting

Chriskool

Chriskool

Med Mage & M-Origin Grids updated in Forum Games

The Med Mage Grid's power level seems to be steadily creeping up. The primary changes were (1) removed one of each of the four main guild multicolor cards for more monocolor cards, (2) gave a big bump to blue (including Vendilion Clique and traditional Counterspell) and (3) added some THS Ordeals to couple with Hero of Iroas.

In


Out

The M-Origins changes were removal-based (in the subtraction of cards that kill things). I am pretty excited to cast Greel's Caress (and add to thecombat spell arsenal), too! (Yeah, I am a weirdo.) This grid really feels like it is about at its conclusion; just need to get in some reps to ensure all cards have their places and that no color is clearly the best.

In


Out
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

Had a good grid session with M-Origins#1 in the games forum, but I think that Fill with Fright needs to become either a better discard spell or something (1) probably not a creature, (2) not removal and (3) not card advantage. I don't see the card ever being selected on purpose (and then rarely played). Also, probably going to cut one Dragon Engine.

Lastly, Siege Wurm and Orcish Bloodpainter are on the watch list. I have yet to see them played satisfactorily but have hopes for Wurm in GW or GB. I honestly don't know where Bloodpainter would shine, though, as only 13 creatures (that aren't red or tokens) have toughnesses of 1. I think Red would need a bit of a restructuring if Bloodpainters were cut for other sacrifice pieces to keep the curve healthy. (Please note that I am unwilling to add creatures with Devour as I do not want any +1/+1 counters in this grid.) Maybe this restructuring hits black some too, as the black-red sacrifice deck hasn't even hinted at coming together yet.

Considering these cards at the moment:



Any suggestions?
 
Grillo_Parlante

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
I hope geistcatcher's rig makes it, I really like that card. A lot of times those G/x decks will want a way to deal with flyers, and a surprisingly bad card becomes quite good, though this is a non U grid, so maybe the dreaded U/x flyers deck isn't enough to warrant its inclusion?

I like most of the rest as cards. Mes. fiend I will have to defer to you on, because its kind of picky about the formats it wants to go into: you kind of need to be playing that card to punish removal light deck building, and in creature formats I kind of like it to have the ability to buff its own stats or otherwise make the body relevent.

I like cultist a lot, its just a very nice red card that can either pressure or control, which is my favorite type of red card. Its just a question of if the 4cc cost is too high for such a body, and the turn delay too slow.

Disappointing to hear about siege wurm, that really undermines the GW color pair :(
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

After the games this weekend (go #1, go #2), I am thinking about a *large* update again... In actuality, I think very little is changing, but I want to address some low performers, tweak numbers and build on auras more. Also, the 6$ Predatory Nightstalker is getting the ax for a more exciting black 5cmc (which comes with a bit of a boost to black-red sacrifice).​
​
Is Sylvan Primordial GRBS at low power levels? I wanted something at 6+cmc that kills enchantments. Maybe Destructor Dragon is more in-line with what I am doing.​
​
What about Propethic Flamespeaker? I have wanted to play Fire Finkel for a while and hope he slots into this environment (as an aura enabler)...​
​
OUT​


IN​
 
Kirblinx

Kirblinx

Developer
Staff member
Chris: MTGO Academy said:
@Kirblinx,

What did you think of Stonecloaker?
Click to expand...
Well from your update I don't think it really matters anymore :p
In my deck that I drafted last time, it was pretty mediocre, as I had a low creature count so it would just get stuck in my hand. I like the card in general though. Combat trick, cost efficient evasive beater, graveyard hate and possible value from reuse of EtB effects makes it a winner.
I don't think it really suited your grid though, as the graveyard hate was irrelevant and there isn't really anything of value in the grid to rebuy.

All the changes look sweet though, although that is maybe because the power level of all the cards seemed to have increased. Unsure if this is a good or bad thing, only one way to find out... Draft!
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

Kirblinx said:
Well from your update I don't think it really matters anymore

All the changes look sweet though, although that is maybe because the power level of all the cards seemed to have increased. Unsure if this is a good or bad thing, only one way to find out... Draft!
Click to expand...
It could come back in!

Yeah, i am a little wary about the increase in power, but hopefully it will lead to better drafting and games! We will see.
 
GiftsForgiven

GiftsForgiven

Chris: MTGO Academy said:
Is Sylvan Primordial GRBS at low power levels? I wanted something at 6+cmc that kills enchantments. Maybe Destructor Dragon is more in-line with what I am doing.
Click to expand...

There's not a lot of options for those criteria, unfortunately. You've basically got:

woodfall primus
terastadon

destructor dragon
sylvan primordial

and

Woodland bellower if you count searching for reclamation sage as a thing.

Of those, D. Dragon is probably the least heinous, power level wise.
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

Got in quite a few grids this vacation weekend (of which I will slowly use to update)! The big takeaway was the med mage grid's "aura" theme could not be supported, and in an effort to make the creature decks interact more with the Replenish deck, there is an archetype change: black-white is now Death & Taxes. My pending changes are as follows:

OUT



IN



The power level has been elevated significantly, but after some high octane games of BW versus UR, I am excited to see how things develop...

Maybe fetches/shocks are in the future. :eek::eek::eek:

The M-Origins and Rav grids may need a small amount of balancing around card advantage; the games with both seemed run away when one deck had a slower, card-advantage-based plan.
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

Fulcrum said:
Click to expand...

It's on the bench; to come in if slide control is underwhelming!

I want to tighten up the color pair strategies some (and get more synergies involved); the chopping block to that is:

Wall of Omens (prefer Thraben Inspector in this roll, as it's aggressive and mana is required by the Slide deck.)
Drift of Phantasms (3cmc tutoring doesn't help reanimator or madness)
Jhessian Thief (seems out of place)
1 Archaeomancer (2 seems a crowd; want to think about Living Lore if I can add some big CMC white spells that sneak into the yard)
Echoing Truth (boring, doesn't fit themes)
Welcome to the Fold (prefer low impact blue madness & Confiscate)
Big Game Hunter (prefer spell that cycles or works with sacrifice)
Falkenrath Noble (a bit heavy on creatures in black)
Trophy Hunter (might cut as only card that uses +1/+1 counters at the moment)
maybe Wild Mongrel to Noose Constrictor

I have also been told I should cut Titania, Protector of Argoth and Kira, Great Glass-Spinner, but if I do, I'd prefer to replace then with legends that have color-restrictive mana costs.
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

After drafting the Nonred Ode to Odyssey/Onslaught Standard grid, I have a few more thoughts on both that particular environment and grid in general:

  • The microcosm of grid defines power level on a much more defined scale than typical cubes. Removal, card advantage, tempo-per-archetype and power-toughness matrices of the "best" cards clearly draw lines as to what is playable and what is questionable. For example, 2/1s for 2cmc didn't perform well in the Ody/Ons grid as the general creature population at 1-3cmc matched up equally or favorably and 4+cmc trumped. This generally weakened aggressive decks to the point that card advantage was a priority to a cohesive, low-to-ground strategy.
  • When addressing power disparities among archetypes, the strongest archetype should set the floor. WR Astral Slide and UG Madness paired off in historic Standard competition (and Slide performed in Vintage Masters draft), but my grid didn't fully take into account how new cards would morph the strategies. The black removal appeared to define the interactions for non-Slide cards, crowding out decks that could not leverage playing them or Slide. Since I really want to have a white-black Slide control deck with Gray Merchant of Asphodel, all other strategies must be elevated. (Maybe, a better solution would've been to weaken the WB deck, but Slide is a disaster when it doesn't approach a critical amount of cyclers and i've enjoyed some of the splashier plays; lowest power design is really hard from a self-control standpoint.)
  • Grids should support at least 2 of the combo/control/aggro triangle with each color (and a good portion of the best cards should overlap strategies). There needs to be TENSION when picking beyond which row/column has the best cards of my color(s). Overlap in deck strategies in each color should drive players to look at pivoting strategies within their color or competing with one of the colors the opponent is choosing at least once during a draft.
I'm going to make a change affecting about 1/3rd of the Ody/Ons card population in hopes of increasing the viability of more strategies. Here are some of the new goodies incoming:

 
Chriskool

Chriskool

Odyssey/Onslaught experiment failed ... dialed back the power some.

Also, threw together a few thought exercises as introductions to grid:

Current/contemporary set limited (to appeal to traditional limited players and possibly those of varying skills).. Kaladesh sans blue draft (with very few non-block cards). Supported "archetypes" are br artifact aggro, bg counters midrange, wb stax/control, wg token midrange, rw vehicles aggro, rg energy midrange: http://www.cubetutor.com/visualspoiler/73564

Also... MONO BLUE GRID. In theory, this should be pretty accessible so long as the opponent is familiar with the general archetypes and has a wide breadth of card knowledge (thinking Legacy players or traditional cube enthusiasts). Supported archetypes: draw-go, High Tide, Tinker/artifact ramp, Delver/Faeries, Grim Monolith-ramp control, Dynavolt Tower, slight reanimation theme: http://www.cubetutor.com/visualspoiler/73782
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

Got to see a grid in action last night! .. kinda.

But first, after talking with a few locals, it seems that the format might have some legs! Draftin' folks are tired of boxes and boxes of worthless, unplayable cards idling in closets and under beds. And mini-cubes meant for grid drafting are the wake-up call everyone needs! Or something; we'll see.

I mostly spoke about lower-powered, draft-emulating grids after introducing the format in the context of 1v1 cubing, so the true insanity of grid (Meddling Mage tribute) is still in the wind. But a recent draft format "explored" through grid seemed like a solid introductory point. The toughest sell was the removal of a color; everyone has a favorite color or two for limited formats, and one of those ending up removed seems like heresy!

The one grid of the night was with Nonblue Kaladesh and featured two non-me players! Here is the full list:

Nonblue Kaladesh Grid

Both players drafted a bit loosely, as to be expected without knowledge of the format and card pool, but it seemed like they *really* enjoyed the concept and the bit of added "spice" (higher impact, non-KLD inclusions). Player A ended up with a white-black control deck splashing Release the Gremlins while Player B forcused on green and ended up with a deck splashing one black and one red removal spell. Both decks felt a bit light on 2 drops. Both players actively hatedrafted while somewhat shifting their deck's focus during draft. I believe the green player was planning on red-green until deck build.

And, unfortunately, only one game was played as the shop was closing, so I was unable to get a good idea of how the format could play out. In the one game that was played, Renegade Freighter took over quickly after the black-white deck. I am going to knee-jerk respond with some vehicle downgrades and a bit of fiddling (maybe 10 changes max) based on what I saw combined with how the format was played out in my head. Here were both players' decks:

Better vehicles deck

Creatures (15)
1 Greenbelt Rampager
2 Narman Cobra
1 Longtusk Cub
1 Servant of the Conduit
1 Pilgrim's Eye
1 Thriving Rhino
1 Maulfist Revolutionary
1 Snare Thopter
1 Armorcraft Judge
1 Mistform Wonder
1 Lifecraft Cavalry
1 Cultivator of Blades
1 Riparian Tiger
1 Aetherwind Basker

Vehicles ("some" of which are stupid) (3)
1 Cultivator's Caravan
1 Renegade Freighter
1 Untethered Express

Spells (6)
1 Pacification Array
1 Blossoming Defense
1 Prey Upon
1 Prophetic Prism
1 Harnessed Lightning
1 Battle at the Bridge

Lands (16)
14 Forest
1 Swamp
1 Mountain

(0)

Deck with different vehicles

Creatures (13)
1 Aegis Automaton
1 Metallic Mimic
1 Aether Poisoner
1 Syndicate Trafficker
1 Vengeful Rebel
1 Master Trinketeer
1 Deadeye Harpooner
1 Aerial Responder
1 Aetherborn Marauder
1 Braids, Cabal Minion
1 Dawnfeather Eagle
1 Airdrop Aeronauts
1 Cataclysmic Gearhulk

Vehicles (2)
2 Bomat Bazaar Barge

Spells (8)
1 Renegade Map
2 Die Young
1 Caught in the Brights
1 Live Fast
1 Yahenni's Expertise
1 Fumigate
1 Release the Gremlins

Lands (17)
2 Aether Hub
7 Plains
7 Swamp
1 Mountain

(0)
 
NimbusToad

NimbusToad

Can you explain a bit your process for coming up with a novel grid cube?

Like do you start with a handful of cards you want to explore, or maybe just some mechanics or archetypes? It sounds like you are using historic standard/limited metagames to inform some of the cubes.

How do you decide how niche you want to go with your themes? Like, I see that a lot of your grids are meant to play in certain very specific ways with a handful of specific archetypes. I have been working on a similar grab-n'-go micro cube project and I have sort of swung fairly far the other way, in that I am expecting people to construct decks less in line with archetypes and more in line with "pillars" (agro, midrange, control). I like the idea of being more archetype and theme focused (so as to include fun fringe interactions), but I am also looking to have high replayability with limited design space.

Anyhow, I like what you're doing.

Cheers from Yukon Territory, Canada
 
InfinityBlack14

InfinityBlack14

Hey there. I've been working on a grid cube that plays all 5 colors, but when you burn (veto) a color, all instances of the color are removed and the cube goes down to 162 cards. A perfect 18 grids. I'd like to hear of your efforts if you'd be willing to pm me.
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

Thanks for the interest and kind words!

NimbusToad said:
Can you explain a bit your process for coming up with a novel grid cube? Like do you start with a handful of cards you want to explore, or maybe just some mechanics or archetypes? It sounds like you are using historic standard/limited metagames to inform some of the cubes.
Click to expand...
I have a few muses when it comes to inspiration, but I tend to anchor the design in past constructed or limited.

Existing limited formats have been the easiest to explore due to all of content available. The brainstormed designs usually spawn from fond memories or a recent draft outing. My research will include intended archetype design articles (if WotC has any posted), winning decks (from GPs/PTs if available) and some articles on interesting designs or the metagame. From that information, I sketch the color pair/triad identities and define linchpin cards. Then, I'll construct the rough draft of the grid, looking at removal, card advantage and power-toughness ratios to make tweaks. (Unfortunately, I haven't delved too deep into analyzing these numbers to come up with some quick guides.) Then, it's build, play and tweak!

Historic constructed formats have not resulted in a final product of which I am excited to share. I believe this is due to exotic strategies not having enough overlap to create tension in drafting and the reliance on efficient, dull spells to police most constructed formats (like Duress or Lightning Bolt). I am in the process of attempting to change my Odyssey / Onslaught Standard grid to feel more like a "Masters" draft set than a duel deck exercise, but it isn't really clear what needs to occur.

How do you decide how niche you want to go with your themes?
Click to expand...

The Meddling Mage grid started focus on card interactions/specific cards and has went through two HUGE redesigns (yet feels as though it is still in shambles). I've had some really fun games with it in the past, but it's never really been due to Med Mage. Additionally, often a noticeable percentage of the grid has felt priced out due to either lack of support or power level disparities. My takeaway is that more general themes provide a better experience (at least until enough work is put in to properly design a grid focused on a plethora of niche interactions).
 
Hathaway

Hathaway

Hey Chris, thanks for the inspiration. My main cube doesn't get played often enough as we often have 4 players instead of 8. We have started grid drafting it lately, and this post has gotten my wife and I working on a 3 color cube for 1vs1 play.

We shot for 162, but are currently 50 cards over that, and still need to sneak in another dragon or two. (want to use Sarkhan's Triumph as a wonky tutor) I would appreciate any insight you have, based entirely on a list throw together over an afternoon and not yet played.

http://www.cubetutor.com/cubeblog/89946
 
Chriskool

Chriskool

InfinityBlack14 said:
Hey there. I've been working on a grid cube that plays all 5 colors, but when you burn (veto) a color, all instances of the color are removed and the cube goes down to 162 cards. A perfect 18 grids. I'd like to hear of your efforts if you'd be willing to pm me.
Click to expand...

Hi Infinity!

I've considered and started down this path before, but I didn't make it too far! Until now, I've enjoyed 144 cards as my "Magic number" (16 perfect grids) for drafting, with grid card populations having 162 cards and then removing 18 at random prior to drafting to add some variability into the pool. With those target numbers in mind, 200ish seemed like a good goal for a 5-color-remove-one grid.

The problem I ran into was how the synergies should slot into modules. Suppose you have 200 cards, where each color has 32 monocolored cards (160 of your total cards): when you veto a color, you'd probably want to take out the 32 mono-color cards and some number of cards in the other 4 colors/multicolored/colorless that specifically support the removed color. My mind hasn't quite parsed how this can be done in an elegant manner. :)
 
InfinityBlack14

InfinityBlack14

Chris: MTGO Academy said:
Hi Infinity!

I've considered and started down this path before, but I didn't make it too far! Until now, I've enjoyed 144 cards as my "Magic number" (16 perfect grids) for drafting, with grid card populations having 162 cards and then removing 18 at random prior to drafting to add some variability into the pool. With those target numbers in mind, 200ish seemed like a good goal for a 5-color-remove-one grid.

The problem I ran into was how the synergies should slot into modules. Suppose you have 200 cards, where each color has 32 monocolored cards (160 of your total cards): when you veto a color, you'd probably want to take out the 32 mono-color cards and some number of cards in the other 4 colors/multicolored/colorless that specifically support the removed color. My mind hasn't quite parsed how this can be done in an elegant manner. :)
Click to expand...


I did it, and it wasn't too difficult to cut the colour as it could be removed when revealed if you miss any. The problem that I had was making more than one viable archetype in each colour. I have a list made on CT:
http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/88137
Apologies for not making it a click link, I'm sick and can't remember how.

Edit: It occurred to me that it might be better to have the mono colours support dual colour archetypes. I'll certainly be testing after recovery.
Edit 2: Woah! it's a click link on it's own!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top