Shakey's Pizza in Takadenobaba (tokyo), near the station of the same name, every Weds night there's a gang playing sealed, EDH etc. I think bill stark wrote about it once on his site, and I've been a few times when I used to live there.
And yes, just go to the hobby shops mentioned above, most have FNM. You'll be fine. Worth learning the current set though as they obv will probably use Japanese cards!
Agree with the original post; it's easy to hypothesise situations where almost any card is good or to recount a time you saw a card work...All of the cards in the first post are going to be very poor maindeck options in most decks. Part of becoming a good limited player is seeing beyond the time a poor card served you well and recognising that in a higher proportion of normal draft situations it would have been a blank. I've won an m10 draft finals with Jump to my shame... doesn't mean I ever want it near my maindeck again!
Yuuya Watanabe, who has just top-8'd 3 consecutive Grands Prix, mentioned on the mothership it's the card he most wants to open in m10 sealed. Draft is obv very different but that's a ringing endorsement from a player with a player with a decent record in the format of late...
If you're losing huge amounts of ratings points in swiss/4322 it's of course just as likely that you're losing to bad players- remember, losing to a low-rated player costs you many more ratings points than losing to a higher-ranked player. This is why attempting to get your rating high in swiss/4322 is harder than in 8-4 assuming you are a decent drafter. When you lose in 8-4 you lose fewer points than the other queues, and when you win you win more.
M10--regardless of how you feel about the format-- is almost certainly more luck and less skill-based than your average non-core set format. Therefore ratings swings will feel more random, and you'll lose more often with decks that seem 'good'. That's what a format full of game-ending uncommons paired with too-simple commons does to you..
(I've lost about 80 points on m10, partly because 8-4 never seems to fire in my time zone and partly because I keep thinking I can beer-draft it, but I still quite enjoy it).
But the access is not equal! The scouting system as it currently works rewards those who win but finish their matches last. No one has an opportunity to scout them. Unless you can't play replays while you're in an active match, but that's not a restriction as far as I know.
Doesn't this system encourage you to stall in killing your opponent to prevent scouting of your deck? That's a bad incentive.
But presumably if you finish last you're too busy playing to scout, whereas opponents waiting for your game to finish could scope your games from earlier rounds. So he who plays last, neither scouts nor is scouted...
It is odd that these things aren't publicised more though... I first found out about it when an opponent offered to split a finals, and after a bit of pressing I discovered it was because he didn't like the look of the matchup. I was short on time so accepted, but it was a shock to find out he knew my deck so well.
Regular REL is mainly FNM, right? I suspect that the practise of mid-pack reviews was already pretty widespread there- I know it's rife where I draft. It helps that it brings it more in to line with mtgo. i think this will help people draft decks with better curves, helping to avoid the problem where you get to the end of the draft and realise you have no good 2 or 3 drops. Of course good drafters remembered their picks: so the net effect of the change is to make things easier for newer drafters at the REL where they are likely to first encounter 'proper' drafting. Makes a lot of sense!
Was going to say the same things, except with Infest over Capsule.
Kiss is simply better than Soul's Fire btw, and closer to your first pick in colour.
That was my reaction too- Kiss is one of the cards I'm more excited to see after 1st pick o-ring because both cards are great in Esper and 5 colour- and decent enough in UWx aggresive which I think is a different deck to Esper.
I'd rather Soul's Majesty than the Elder Mastery at that stage, though from the game reports seems like the grixis card did well enough for you. Both cards are a burst of card advantage that leave you open to being blown out if they have removal. BUt majesty is easier to cast, though granted not great without the support of fatties that you're lacking.
@Best limited format: I liked Triple Lorwyn, you pretty much always got a good deck and had a chance. CBS was fun too, if mostly for the flavor.
Didn't you get bored of the decks though? Maybe I didn't play enough of the format to get some if its subtleties but it felt like you were playing the same matches over and over in that format and if we're talking about blowouts there were some nasty tribal god-hands that left you with little chance but I suppose that's true of any limited format with strong linear mechanics.
That said...aren't Swiss Drafts even more ridiculous than 4-3-2-2 because it's mostly new players? Like perfectly good cards tabling with regularity?
An interesting discussion going on here. From my experience Swiss drafts tend to have the weakest players of all 3 kinds: your average 'Spike' won't be attracted by the payout or the level of competition. Note that if you are playing to play, Swiss is fine but it has the worst payout of all since a 3-0 will just get you your packs back... at least with 4322 you can profit a pack. I also find the time constraint with swiss a problem- the rounds tend to run very slow, almost always going to time.
The main problem at the moment in the draft world on MTGO is the depressed market for singles: it used to be that you could get close to going infinite with the odd judicious raredraft but now two factors prevent that. firstly the market for singles is down due to fewer people playing constructed; secondly with the new rarity system the average rare is worth much less. Even the good rares in Alara that are tournament played like broodmate go for around .5; you need a planeswalker to get double digit tix and even then tezzeret only goes for 5 or so.
Seconded on the squire pick, my evaluation of that guy has just gone up and up since Con entered the mix. It's hard to beat akrasan into aven squire; as you said he leads to a lot more busted starts. The old exalted heavy deck was often bad becaus there were so many ways to chump your one attacker, but now that U/W has so many good fliers that's not a problem.
You have to realize that the decks in 4-3-2-2's are going to much more polarized to Insane Decks (made by good players who take the good cards bad players pass) and Terrible Decks (made by the bad players taking bad cards over good cards). So yes, you often end up with much more insane decks in a 4-3-2-2, but the odds of someone else having a nuts deck are also higher.
In an 8-4, the decks look far less impressive because high pick cards are usually taken high and, thus there is much more parity between the decks and the average power level is lower.
Ha, was just typing out a response trying to articulate exactly this but you beat me to it and did a better job! Also the gap between the two is really narrowing at the moment, at least at the times I play (evening in Asia). I had an 1846 opp round 1 in my most recent 4322, and the draft before that I (around 1750) was the lowest rated player in another 4322.
I too had a lot of fun during TTT and TPF; the former had some silly decks but the timeshifted cards added some spice and the latter was just chock full of interesting cards- morph is great for limited and gathan raiders developed the theme nicely. Shame about sprout swarm- not so much that it was 'broken' but that it made for very dull games.
Overall vote must go to RGD, although I could wish it had slightly fewer garbage cards. You might say it added to the difficulty and complexity of the format but there were a few too many unplayables for a format that had such testing mana bases.
I'm really enjoying shards-shards-conflux so far- I don't remember a format where there were so many viable decks and where you could pick your main colours and gameplan so late. That might be a flaw to some but I enjoy the mental exercise of constantly evaluating your total cardpool on the fly.
I'm guessing he won from the thread title... Yes, 8-4s are generally where the better players hang out though the distinction blurs a lot since often the 4322s fire much more frequently and players join whatever's closest to starting. I did a 10th edition 4-3-2-2 the other night with 3 players over 1850 and none below 1700 !
I also take the thoctar at pick 5, and would also have strongly considered the nacatl at 3 having gone bull-bull.
Well, this is quite interesting. Reworked core sets, rarities, grammar, even, new cards? (Silence seems ridiculous, btw). This could be the beginning of a beautiful relationship. Glad I still have my Garruks...
I hope these lands are allied only, though. Or if not, at least uncommon (sad painland face).
Yes, that's the only other thing that bothered me... yet another cycle of dual lands? Seriously? Shocklands, painlands, Cairns lands, futuresightLands, tribalLands, trilands, panoramas...
Most of the changes look very sensible to me; the core sets have been ignored by the established player base (other than as a list of cards legal in standard, as the article points out) for some time now and any changes that try to reverse that situation are welcome. A lot of the new artwork looks fantastic, printing new cards will entice a lot more players to buy the set and if they've tried to make it more interesting to draft then that's all positive.
My chief concern is that the turnover is changing to once per year: clearly WotC making a profit is a good thing to those who want the company--and the game-- to survive, but I don't like the idea of the core set cycling through so many cards so fast, it's going to be an added strain on the wallet.
And yes, just go to the hobby shops mentioned above, most have FNM. You'll be fine. Worth learning the current set though as they obv will probably use Japanese cards!
M10--regardless of how you feel about the format-- is almost certainly more luck and less skill-based than your average non-core set format. Therefore ratings swings will feel more random, and you'll lose more often with decks that seem 'good'. That's what a format full of game-ending uncommons paired with too-simple commons does to you..
(I've lost about 80 points on m10, partly because 8-4 never seems to fire in my time zone and partly because I keep thinking I can beer-draft it, but I still quite enjoy it).
But presumably if you finish last you're too busy playing to scout, whereas opponents waiting for your game to finish could scope your games from earlier rounds. So he who plays last, neither scouts nor is scouted...
It is odd that these things aren't publicised more though... I first found out about it when an opponent offered to split a finals, and after a bit of pressing I discovered it was because he didn't like the look of the matchup. I was short on time so accepted, but it was a shock to find out he knew my deck so well.
That was my reaction too- Kiss is one of the cards I'm more excited to see after 1st pick o-ring because both cards are great in Esper and 5 colour- and decent enough in UWx aggresive which I think is a different deck to Esper.
I'd rather Soul's Majesty than the Elder Mastery at that stage, though from the game reports seems like the grixis card did well enough for you. Both cards are a burst of card advantage that leave you open to being blown out if they have removal. BUt majesty is easier to cast, though granted not great without the support of fatties that you're lacking.
Didn't you get bored of the decks though? Maybe I didn't play enough of the format to get some if its subtleties but it felt like you were playing the same matches over and over in that format and if we're talking about blowouts there were some nasty tribal god-hands that left you with little chance but I suppose that's true of any limited format with strong linear mechanics.
An interesting discussion going on here. From my experience Swiss drafts tend to have the weakest players of all 3 kinds: your average 'Spike' won't be attracted by the payout or the level of competition. Note that if you are playing to play, Swiss is fine but it has the worst payout of all since a 3-0 will just get you your packs back... at least with 4322 you can profit a pack. I also find the time constraint with swiss a problem- the rounds tend to run very slow, almost always going to time.
The main problem at the moment in the draft world on MTGO is the depressed market for singles: it used to be that you could get close to going infinite with the odd judicious raredraft but now two factors prevent that. firstly the market for singles is down due to fewer people playing constructed; secondly with the new rarity system the average rare is worth much less. Even the good rares in Alara that are tournament played like broodmate go for around .5; you need a planeswalker to get double digit tix and even then tezzeret only goes for 5 or so.
Ha, was just typing out a response trying to articulate exactly this but you beat me to it and did a better job! Also the gap between the two is really narrowing at the moment, at least at the times I play (evening in Asia). I had an 1846 opp round 1 in my most recent 4322, and the draft before that I (around 1750) was the lowest rated player in another 4322.
Overall vote must go to RGD, although I could wish it had slightly fewer garbage cards. You might say it added to the difficulty and complexity of the format but there were a few too many unplayables for a format that had such testing mana bases.
I'm really enjoying shards-shards-conflux so far- I don't remember a format where there were so many viable decks and where you could pick your main colours and gameplan so late. That might be a flaw to some but I enjoy the mental exercise of constantly evaluating your total cardpool on the fly.
I'm guessing he won from the thread title... Yes, 8-4s are generally where the better players hang out though the distinction blurs a lot since often the 4322s fire much more frequently and players join whatever's closest to starting. I did a 10th edition 4-3-2-2 the other night with 3 players over 1850 and none below 1700 !
I also take the thoctar at pick 5, and would also have strongly considered the nacatl at 3 having gone bull-bull.
Yes, that's the only other thing that bothered me... yet another cycle of dual lands? Seriously? Shocklands, painlands, Cairns lands, futuresightLands, tribalLands, trilands, panoramas...
My chief concern is that the turnover is changing to once per year: clearly WotC making a profit is a good thing to those who want the company--and the game-- to survive, but I don't like the idea of the core set cycling through so many cards so fast, it's going to be an added strain on the wallet.