Welcome to the first ever Back to the Drafting Table! This week's deck was a white-green midrange deck with bolster themes that finished with a respectable 2-1 record. It performed reasonably well, but there were definitely some questionable decisions I made that kept me from going 3-0.
The Draft
My first instinct is always to look back at the draft. Did I draft the best I could? Was I in the right colors? Did I miss any signs that I should have been in another color pairing? Did I make any questionable picks that weakened my deck?
After looking through the first pack, I honestly believe that I would have ended up in white-green, no matter what I did. I took Secure the Wastes out of pack 1, but if I'd taken Draconic Roar instead, I'd still be up against either Stormwind Dragon or Defeat for pack 2, then an insta-pick Pacifism in pack 3 over the still-good Atarka Efreet. From there, I'd end up either pulling mediocre (or very situational) red cards just to stay in red, or grabbing green because it's open. And since all the good red dries up by pick 5, I'd end up falling back on Green-White anyway. There's always the chance I may have revisited red in packs 2 and 3, but I'd have still ended up with a lot of mediocre red. I don't think there's enough good red going around to make the switch after the first pack.
My biggest issue, really, are the picks I threw away at the end of pack 3. I cut 2 Grim Contests instead of taking two high-end creatures I might have actually made use of, when it was obvious that nobody else was playing Black-Green. The two big losses I suffered in the second round had a lot to do with only drawing into little pingers that could do little more than chump block. It may have been worth taking, say, a Krushok over one of my 3-drops, to make my deck more deadly at the high end. Hell, even taking the Wardscale Dragon over the Ainok Guide would have done that, though it would have put me in a position to have a weaker early game. The Guide managed to fix my mana once during an unlucky draw, but I'm not convinced he did much for those games where I fished for mana "just in case."
After looking through the first pack, I honestly believe that I would have ended up in white-green, no matter what I did. I took Secure the Wastes out of pack 1, but if I'd taken Draconic Roar instead, I'd still be up against either Stormwind Dragon or Defeat for pack 2, then an insta-pick Pacifism in pack 3 over the still-good Atarka Efreet. From there, I'd end up either pulling mediocre (or very situational) red cards just to stay in red, or grabbing green because it's open. And since all the good red dries up by pick 5, I'd end up falling back on Green-White anyway. There's always the chance I may have revisited red in packs 2 and 3, but I'd have still ended up with a lot of mediocre red. I don't think there's enough good red going around to make the switch after the first pack.
My biggest issue, really, are the picks I threw away at the end of pack 3. I cut 2 Grim Contests instead of taking two high-end creatures I might have actually made use of, when it was obvious that nobody else was playing Black-Green. The two big losses I suffered in the second round had a lot to do with only drawing into little pingers that could do little more than chump block. It may have been worth taking, say, a Krushok over one of my 3-drops, to make my deck more deadly at the high end. Hell, even taking the Wardscale Dragon over the Ainok Guide would have done that, though it would have put me in a position to have a weaker early game. The Guide managed to fix my mana once during an unlucky draw, but I'm not convinced he did much for those games where I fished for mana "just in case."
Deck Construction
Two glaring issues stick out to me when I look back at the decisions I made while putting my deck together. To begin with, Servant of the Scale should never have made it to the final cut. Yes, it synergizes with the bolster theme. But the ceiling is a heck of a lot lower than the ceiling for Secure the Wastes would have been. In addition, the latter is an instant, which allows me to surprise my opponent with blockers that can wipe out his board at an opportune moment. I was never happy drawing into Servant of the Scale, and the minor benefit I got from shifting counters around never really outweighed the drawback of just being a terrible, underpowered card.
Secondly, I'm not sure that Inspiring Call was the right card to run. The problem is, since the only time I drew it was when I didn't have any counters on the board, it's hard not to feel like the card was worthless to play. On the other hand, I had no other draw engines to keep my hand full, and I had 10 sources of +1/+1 counters I could have used it with. I'm not sure if this is just a matter of getting extremely unlucky, or if the card itself is underwhelming and not worth the card slot. In the end, it may play like Skywise Teachings, where it's strong if you can make it work, but just requires too much setup to be worth a card slot in a Limited format deck. If I hadn't run Inspiring Call, I probably would have run Battlefront Krushok instead, giving me more top end, and maintaining some synergy with my bolster theme.
I'd just like to give a small nod to Sight of the Scalelords. I drafted it partly because I wanted to test it out for myself, after seeing it perform well once at my local FNM, recently. Even though it wasn't a huge bomb like it could have been, given a better deck to operate in, I think it did a fantastic job of providing a lot of extra pressure on the board for very reasonable investment. Obviously it's a card that only plays well with high-toughness creatures, but it's definitely something that I may look into drafting again, especially if I end up in GW or GB. It's synergy with cards like Student of Ojutai and Colossodon Yearling shouldn't be dismissed lightly.
Secondly, I'm not sure that Inspiring Call was the right card to run. The problem is, since the only time I drew it was when I didn't have any counters on the board, it's hard not to feel like the card was worthless to play. On the other hand, I had no other draw engines to keep my hand full, and I had 10 sources of +1/+1 counters I could have used it with. I'm not sure if this is just a matter of getting extremely unlucky, or if the card itself is underwhelming and not worth the card slot. In the end, it may play like Skywise Teachings, where it's strong if you can make it work, but just requires too much setup to be worth a card slot in a Limited format deck. If I hadn't run Inspiring Call, I probably would have run Battlefront Krushok instead, giving me more top end, and maintaining some synergy with my bolster theme.
I'd just like to give a small nod to Sight of the Scalelords. I drafted it partly because I wanted to test it out for myself, after seeing it perform well once at my local FNM, recently. Even though it wasn't a huge bomb like it could have been, given a better deck to operate in, I think it did a fantastic job of providing a lot of extra pressure on the board for very reasonable investment. Obviously it's a card that only plays well with high-toughness creatures, but it's definitely something that I may look into drafting again, especially if I end up in GW or GB. It's synergy with cards like Student of Ojutai and Colossodon Yearling shouldn't be dismissed lightly.
Playing
While the above issues definitely influenced my draft to one extent or another, I can't deny the role my own in-game mistakes had on my results. Most plays were well-considered, with some limited foresight on my end preventing some potential blowouts. However, I completely allowed my emotional state to wreck any chance I had of pulling out a win in the second round, giving way to sloppy play and huge mistakes that even most novices wouldn't make.
Otherwise, I think my biggest issue is considering the best way to play around removal. Attacking before playing more threats is one large factor, but it's equally important to know which creatures to attack in with, for the best outcome for yourself. If I'm against a white deck, attacking in with my biggest threats may leave me open to being Sandblasted or getting a creature blown out with Enduring Victory. Against blue, I have to contend with Whisk, which can set me back a lot of mana, or resources, depending on what I've dumped into that specific creature. If the opponent is in a position where they're sitting on multiple cards, and just draw and say "go," it's hard not to wonder what they're holding in their hand, especially if they're not expanding their board state.
This is equally important to consider, not just for removal, but for pump spells. In game 1 of round 2, I got my Ainok Guide eaten by Artful Maneuvers, after I blew all my mana to play a Dragon Bell Monk that turn. I assumed it'd be better to get another creature out, but given the circumstances, it might have been better for me to hold my mana and sandblast his 2/3 off the board. Mind, I wasn't sure he'd have an enchantment in his hand to buff it with, but I did see two Abzan Runemarks go around, so it wouldn't have been out of the question for him to have one in his hand. He would have had to save the enchantment for something else later in the match, and who knows how that would have gone, but it would have saved me a lot of face damage at the beginning of the game, giving me more time to come up with answers for his future plays.
It's a tough thing to consider mid-game. It's hard to know when to play around something an opponent might have, and when to just play out your board and hope they don't have an answer. Knowing when to go defensive or aggressive is almost more art than science, and unfortunately we lose some of our ability to read our opponents when we play online, rather than face to face.
Otherwise, I think my biggest issue is considering the best way to play around removal. Attacking before playing more threats is one large factor, but it's equally important to know which creatures to attack in with, for the best outcome for yourself. If I'm against a white deck, attacking in with my biggest threats may leave me open to being Sandblasted or getting a creature blown out with Enduring Victory. Against blue, I have to contend with Whisk, which can set me back a lot of mana, or resources, depending on what I've dumped into that specific creature. If the opponent is in a position where they're sitting on multiple cards, and just draw and say "go," it's hard not to wonder what they're holding in their hand, especially if they're not expanding their board state.
This is equally important to consider, not just for removal, but for pump spells. In game 1 of round 2, I got my Ainok Guide eaten by Artful Maneuvers, after I blew all my mana to play a Dragon Bell Monk that turn. I assumed it'd be better to get another creature out, but given the circumstances, it might have been better for me to hold my mana and sandblast his 2/3 off the board. Mind, I wasn't sure he'd have an enchantment in his hand to buff it with, but I did see two Abzan Runemarks go around, so it wouldn't have been out of the question for him to have one in his hand. He would have had to save the enchantment for something else later in the match, and who knows how that would have gone, but it would have saved me a lot of face damage at the beginning of the game, giving me more time to come up with answers for his future plays.
It's a tough thing to consider mid-game. It's hard to know when to play around something an opponent might have, and when to just play out your board and hope they don't have an answer. Knowing when to go defensive or aggressive is almost more art than science, and unfortunately we lose some of our ability to read our opponents when we play online, rather than face to face.
Wrap-up
I made a wash of the second round, but playing well in rounds 1 and 3 made up for the deficiencies I created for myself during the deckbuilding process. If I want to win more consistently, not only will I have to work on keeping a level head when things don't go my way, but I'll also need to reconsider how I evaluate cards that make it to the final cut of my deck's mainboard. Putting too much stock into synergies that may or may not come into play during an actual match only end up lowering the overall win-% of your deck. (That said, Sight of the Scalelord was definitely an interesting experiment.)
Thanks for reading this trial run of our first ever draft breakdown! We'll be posting another article series after the release of Origins, so check back in with us soon!
<--Jump back to Assembly Line
<--Jump back to Nuts & Bolts
<--Jump back to Stress Test
Thanks for reading this trial run of our first ever draft breakdown! We'll be posting another article series after the release of Origins, so check back in with us soon!
<--Jump back to Assembly Line
<--Jump back to Nuts & Bolts
<--Jump back to Stress Test