I land my first recorded 3-0 this week, even if it was due to a technical time-out. The draft portion went well, but my attention to detail is still lacking.
The Draft
Looking back over the draft section this week, I don't really see any choices I would have made differently. Pulling Jace in p1p1 was the right call, as it was just a tier higher in power than every other card in the pack, and pivoting into green halfway through pack 1 paid dividends in pack 3.
Pack 2 looked like black was relatively open, between a Nantuko Husk, a couple late Shambling Ghouls, and even that very late Reave Soul. Even the first few picks in pack 3 would have supported a pivot into black. But over the multiple drafts I've run in this new format, I've noticed that if you go deep into a color pairing in pack 1, even if one or both of those colors seem cut off in pack two, they often flow again in pack 3, making it very easy to fill out 7-8 playable slots in your deck. It's something that is especially evident in my previous draft, where red looked cut in pack 2, putting me in that awkward position where I didn't know if staying red was the right call or not, but ended up flowing again in pack 3.
Probably the only pick I would have redone is picking up the Llanowar Empath in p2p1 instead of Grasp of the Heiromancer. Grasp didn't see much play during my games, and many times I just had it sitting in my hand, waiting for the "perfect time" to surprise my opponent with it. Some extra card draw probably would have gone further, especially since I only really had two 4-drops in my deck at the end of the draft. Although, I couldn't have known that would happen at the time, since this set has a plethora of great 4-drops.
I think even the late Bonded Construct over Joraga Invocation was correct. Had I been able to take that second Cleric of the Forward Order in p2p4, I would have been in the perfect position to take Joraga Invocation, but again, it's one of those, "I couldn't have known that when I drafted it," situations. But really, would I have traded Citadel Castellan for a Joraga Invocation? It's kinda hard to say, because the Castellan played a big role in a lot of my games, forcing certain beneficial trades, or just straight up locking my opponent out of attacking. Were my deck more aggressive, the answer probably would have been "yes," but as a more mid-range type of deck, my strong suite of 3-drops really carried the game for me, so the answer isn't so clear-cut.
Pack 2 looked like black was relatively open, between a Nantuko Husk, a couple late Shambling Ghouls, and even that very late Reave Soul. Even the first few picks in pack 3 would have supported a pivot into black. But over the multiple drafts I've run in this new format, I've noticed that if you go deep into a color pairing in pack 1, even if one or both of those colors seem cut off in pack two, they often flow again in pack 3, making it very easy to fill out 7-8 playable slots in your deck. It's something that is especially evident in my previous draft, where red looked cut in pack 2, putting me in that awkward position where I didn't know if staying red was the right call or not, but ended up flowing again in pack 3.
Probably the only pick I would have redone is picking up the Llanowar Empath in p2p1 instead of Grasp of the Heiromancer. Grasp didn't see much play during my games, and many times I just had it sitting in my hand, waiting for the "perfect time" to surprise my opponent with it. Some extra card draw probably would have gone further, especially since I only really had two 4-drops in my deck at the end of the draft. Although, I couldn't have known that would happen at the time, since this set has a plethora of great 4-drops.
I think even the late Bonded Construct over Joraga Invocation was correct. Had I been able to take that second Cleric of the Forward Order in p2p4, I would have been in the perfect position to take Joraga Invocation, but again, it's one of those, "I couldn't have known that when I drafted it," situations. But really, would I have traded Citadel Castellan for a Joraga Invocation? It's kinda hard to say, because the Castellan played a big role in a lot of my games, forcing certain beneficial trades, or just straight up locking my opponent out of attacking. Were my deck more aggressive, the answer probably would have been "yes," but as a more mid-range type of deck, my strong suite of 3-drops really carried the game for me, so the answer isn't so clear-cut.
Deck Construction
Getting back to the topic of Grasp of the Heiromancer, I think that's probably the one card in my deck that really underperformed. However, it also gave me options that Orchard Spirit wouldn't have given me, had I decided to cut the Grasp from the final deck list, instead. There were a couple times when the card came in handy, and I'm not sure that a pseudo-evasive creature would have made much of an impact in any of my games, as filler creature #17. Plus, being able to tutor up a third enchantment when both Suppression Bonds were already in my hand really made Totem-Guide Hartebeest feel like a solid inclusion in my deck, since it basically meant he was never a dead draw.
The rest of the deck pretty much built itself. Most of the cards in my sideboard were sub-par filler or pure sideboard cards anyway. I actually like Heavy Infantry more than most seem to, but it's one of those cards that you sort of want to cap your mana curve with, in something like an aggressive white/red deck. The body isn't completely irrelevant, but if I'm not playing it to try to end the game quickly, 5 mana is a pretty big setup cost for the stat distribution. And with four other 5+ mana cost cards in my deck, it's just not something I felt I could comfortably support at the top of my curve.
The rest of the deck pretty much built itself. Most of the cards in my sideboard were sub-par filler or pure sideboard cards anyway. I actually like Heavy Infantry more than most seem to, but it's one of those cards that you sort of want to cap your mana curve with, in something like an aggressive white/red deck. The body isn't completely irrelevant, but if I'm not playing it to try to end the game quickly, 5 mana is a pretty big setup cost for the stat distribution. And with four other 5+ mana cost cards in my deck, it's just not something I felt I could comfortably support at the top of my curve.
The Games
Most of the games went pretty smoothly, my well-constructed mana curve rewarding me with great opening hands, which curved into strong finishers. Especially in this format, it's very important to get a strong turn 2 start, and this deck had that in spades.
Proper drafting and deck construction went a long way with this draft, but I still nearly managed to botch the whole thing with some very easy-to-overlook mistakes, especially in the last round. Many of the pro players say that you should think through every permutation of your turn before even dropping your land, and the play that killed me in R3G2 proved that adage to be 100% correct. Discard effects don't come up often in Limited, but even if you're not concerned with having to discard something, there's plenty of value in holding excess lands in your hand, just to force your opponent to play around the chance that you might have a combat trick or removal spell. Sometimes they'll call your bluff, but many times the game is close enough that they can't take the chance that you'll be able to blow them out, so they'll make an otherwise sub-optimal play, just in case.
And even if you do know you'll need to play your land for the turn, it's often the correct course of play to play out your attacks first. Sometimes, you'll run into situations where your opponent has to decide if you're going to have enough mana for a follow-up if you also have a combat trick to play during the combat phase. Holding back that one land gives them less information to work with, and forces them to make a decision based on incomplete data, which could easily swing things in your favor.
In the case of this draft, it was a simple discard mechanic that I didn't play around probably. But thinking through all lines of play before even playing your land for the turn is a great habit to get into, no matter the reason or end result.
Proper drafting and deck construction went a long way with this draft, but I still nearly managed to botch the whole thing with some very easy-to-overlook mistakes, especially in the last round. Many of the pro players say that you should think through every permutation of your turn before even dropping your land, and the play that killed me in R3G2 proved that adage to be 100% correct. Discard effects don't come up often in Limited, but even if you're not concerned with having to discard something, there's plenty of value in holding excess lands in your hand, just to force your opponent to play around the chance that you might have a combat trick or removal spell. Sometimes they'll call your bluff, but many times the game is close enough that they can't take the chance that you'll be able to blow them out, so they'll make an otherwise sub-optimal play, just in case.
And even if you do know you'll need to play your land for the turn, it's often the correct course of play to play out your attacks first. Sometimes, you'll run into situations where your opponent has to decide if you're going to have enough mana for a follow-up if you also have a combat trick to play during the combat phase. Holding back that one land gives them less information to work with, and forces them to make a decision based on incomplete data, which could easily swing things in your favor.
In the case of this draft, it was a simple discard mechanic that I didn't play around probably. But thinking through all lines of play before even playing your land for the turn is a great habit to get into, no matter the reason or end result.
That wraps things up for this week, I'll be back next Tuesday with an all new draft. Don't forget to add me on Facebook or Twitter for updates!
<-Assembly Line
<-Nuts & Bolts
<-Stress Test
<-Assembly Line
<-Nuts & Bolts
<-Stress Test