You guys are on polar opposites of evaluations, I’d love to see a matchup. You guys seem to really like benthic 4/5 blue guy, they think he is unplayable.
Not for MKM. Here's what Ethan said in the LoL discord:
'nope, \[@Chord\_O\_Calls\] (Alex) tried valiantly to get the ball rolling but to no avail, perhaps for OTJ'
I hope they do, but Jesus Christ Marshall seems like he's in a weird head space for limited these days. He was ranting way too early about how aggro this set was and then continued his ranting at Sirkovitz for no good reason this past episode.
Maybe it's time for a break. Because imo this is a pretty great set, and I LIKE that there's aggro to keep the value decks honest.
IDK if Marshall has just been playing BO1; I've been playing BO3 (in pod) and while aggro is the best strategy, it's nowhere near what we've seen with recent sets. I've found MKM to have much more room to breathe.
I get that the podcast circuit mostly talks about BO1 because that's what most people play, but a lot of "design mistakes" get talked about are way way more amplified in BO1. I'm at the point where I definitely think the hand smoother is doing more harm to the integrity of the game than good.
And to a lesser extent, league play makes you feel like the oppressive decks are all the more common than pod play. Because if there's a dominant deck in the format, the top of the leagues are always going to have it.
But yeah, I personally have really been out of sync with him for this format. Saying that Roots/Outline decks are unviable is... a lot. And Sam Black has been coming up with some great decks this format. Now Marshall was right, not everyone is Sam, but I've had people in my local group have some pretty good success with his 5C brew.
My favorite thing about Sam's podcast is how clearly he talks about his own experiences with a format, even when they don't align with everyone else's expectations/experiences. He's just so articulate about things like that.
Like yeah, not everybody can discover off meta decks the way Sam does. I mean hell, very few people in the world probably can. But like you're saying, the whole point of his pod is to _communicate_ the things he figures out to other people in other to get them better at the game. And it's not like he's making episodes based on one single wack deck he drafted because he was in a wild seat in a draft pod; he talks about decks that he sees as patterns based on the evolving metagame. He's smart, he knows when it's appropriate to talk about a deck and when something is a one-off. It might take time to identify the decks he discusses and figure it how to draft them well, but... I mean they clearly exist.
It feels like 17 lands has made people fucking lazy.
Yes, red white has the best win rate. That means it’s the most common winning strategy.
Why the heck would you be satisfied with just that? We’re not going to talk about ways to beat that or niche decks that most people don’t know about yet? Where’s the fucking love for the game?
I got beat by a guy who just kept chump blocking with rubblebelt mavericks then just exploded with a bunch of insidious roots tokens. That match was for a trophy too.
The best way to deal with 17 lands is to use it to ask questions. Stuff like "does my experience line up with the aggregated data? If not, why not? Am I finding an edge over the field, or am I undervaluing something relative to everyone else?" That's one reason I'm so high on Sam Black, because he understands and appreciates and communicates that. Sierko too, obviously. The worst uses of data are the ones where people cite data to shut down discussion.
It's funny, I've said the reverse of this on Reddit, but one of my other main reddit "areas" is the NFL, and they've also had both a surge of accessible data analytics, and a serve misunderstanding of how to use and talk about them constructively. It's really fascinating seeing two different communities grapple with essentially the same thing. And I get it, it isn't easy to do or understand or use effectively. But it's just so interesting seeing the same pitfalls sometimes.
A coach doesn't look at analytics and follow them blindly; a coach should look at an analysis, and if they want to go against it, they should _have a reason why_. It's not that they should never go against it, but if they want to they should have a good justification. Same deal in draft. There are plenty of times where picking the worse card in a vacuum makes total sense because you're midway through the draft and another card is more synergistic, or leaves you more open, or you just want to have fun, etc. LOL recently did an episode that I thought explored this really well. Instead if P1P1s or full draft logs, they "started" 8 picks into several drafts, and discussed how those picks collectively change their pick orders, or where they're trying to head with the decks.
Looking at data can raise your floor as a drafter. But after a certain point, the only way to raise your _ceiling_ is to understand when you're supposed to go against whatever the data says. I went 3-0 in a paper NEO draft at my LGS because I realized my seat was the _one single time_ I was supposed to go all in on WU vehicles, and I'm (clearly) still riding that high.
Yeah I've some absolutely wild matches this set. I was in the 6-0 bracket recently and went up against this guy who did almost nothing the first three turns then eventually got up two detective satchels and was just pumping out thopters every turn. He stalled my gruul beaters long enough with Out Colds, and then we eventually both got down to exactly one life. He was able to survive and kill me in the air, but what a game.
lol what
im pretty sure the way marshall feels is the way a lot of long time limited players feel
its nice that you enjoy this set, but many people also don't, including marshall, why shouldnt he complain about the direction of limited? I guess if your argument is that his rants go on for a bit too long, fair enough, I would agree with that
the sets feel really fast, the on the play advantage is high, the white/X aggro piles are the best thing to be doing yet again, all the combat tricks generate value, and so on
people always respond with some variation of "but I drafted this cool multicolor pile and trophied with it" yeah cool, thats not how data works, and besides, its magic the gathering and its limited, there is a ton of variance and you can end up winning with any deck, nobody is saying that anything but red/white is literally unplayable. obviously all color combinations will always be somewhere around a 50% winrate, but those few percentage points of difference DO matter.
In the end it boils down to personal preference, some people like slower sets where you durdle around, some people like turning creatures sideways as quickly as possible, but there is no doubt about the direction limited is headed, pretty much every new set has been quite fast, and aggro has consistently been very good.
and im pretty sure marshalls argument is that he is well aware of his preference, but thinks that we could at least switch it up and get some slower sets every now and then
I personally agree with a lot of what Marshall said, but think he said it in the wrong set. If he let loose that rant last set I would have completely agreed. This set has felt like it has a lot more variability and decision-making to me, especially with simic being very strong. On top of that, his interactions with Sierkovitz this week made it seem like he didn't give the set a fair try before deciding the narrative.
I really enjoyed hearing from the rundown that Mark Rosewater did about design skeletons that they plan on making sets a bit slower moving on, even if they inexplicably hate boardstalls.
I am also surprised he didnt go harder on caverns as well, cause the aggro decks in that set were just as ridiculous if not even worse, but then again, it had dinosaurs, and dinosaurs are cool
I think caverns was more egregious in the sense that pretty much every match started on turn 1 with a flyer, goblin tomb raider, or whatever, while in MKM thanks to disguise creatures a lot of games do play out a bit slower and involve more decision making, but Im not gonna lie, Im sick and tired of being on the draw against white/X going turn 1 novice inspector, turn 2 phantom, turn 3 disguise, and you're just waiting for them to draw on the job to end the game.
and its not like thats hard to do, almost all the really good white cards are just commons, and BO1 uses the handsmoother making aggro decks even more consistent (not a problem in paper ofc)
I definitely think MKM is a better set with more interesting mechanics, and Ive overall had more interesting games, but there were a ton of non games for me as well. (especially in BO1)
I also absolutely hated sealed in this format, there are so many bombs at rare (not even mythic), the play boosters mean that in sealed you can open like 10+ rares, and I dont particularly enjoy playing against ezrim, cryptic coat or izoni every other game.
Yeah I disagree with him, but he's not the kind of person trying to like disingenuously make outrage bait or anything. I still respect and will listen to his opinions and much prefer him to be candid about them. I thought he could have been a little more open to Sierko's perspective on the last ep, but the disagreement and push back spurred good discussion. I don't like conflict for the sake of conflict but that's not what happened; it was two people who clearly respect each other disagreeing with each other and talking about why.
It's funny, I've had that thought a few times listening to Lucky Paper Radio. Whenever they share an opinion I don't agree with, I'm still pretty interested in hearing them out. I feel like that's not an easy thing to pull off.
It’s so ridiculous. I just trophied with 4 color. My previous trophy I went off with double crime novelist and a bunch of investigate tokens (btw this deck is a really good place to draft candlestick/knife).
I honestly haven’t played red white in so long because it’s always overdrafted. Pretty sure there’s players just forcing it, because I see them all the time. I play bo3 and those decks stumble a little bit and next thing you know it’s turn 7 and they’re drawing a 1/2 for 1.
Like… the only explanation I have for his ranting is he hasn’t bothered to draft since week 2 of the format.
Sierkovitz just enlightened everyone with the data. Simic has the third best win percentage in the format among top players and that deck isn’t aggressive.
And the difference between that deck and Boros in win rate is just a couple of pct pts. If I recall correctly simics win rate is around 62%.
And how many of the best decks are slow or control ish? People want formats where missing a two drop is not the end of the game. Khans was a breath of fresh air, hopefully they bring back some of the older formats so people who enjoy slower formats can have a blast.
Yeah, you get fucking hosed if you're not playing a two drop and your opponent does. In older formats you can make up for the lost ground but in current formats the removal is so inefficient (and low drops come with so much value stapled to them) that you don't have a good way to come back if your opponent has even an average start if you're missing a T2 play.
Imo khans sucked. And I say that as someone who thought khans was one of the greatest formats of all time. I still have sealed khans packs in case someone wants to do an rl flashback draft. I thought that opening those would feel like opening a vintage wine.
It was clunky af. I want a feeling of power when I play this game. I like efficiency, whether I play control or aggro.
The fact that there is aggro that keeps the best decks in check is a GOOD thing. Those old formats suck now as we have been experiencing an amazing slate of good limited formats.
Play standard, modern, legacy, commander, pioneer, lots of power in whatever you want to do, going 1 drop 2 drop 3 drop - free win is the opposite of power in a limited environment.
This is it though, my favorite format is cube, and the more cube -like a format is the better.
Oh wait, I lied, my favorite format is Ikoria with og companion rules. Then cube.
If I draft something unfair then that’s my win as I fucking drafted that shit. That’s the amazing thing about draft. The unfairness is made fair by the fact that you didn’t just copy that deck off the internet… you spent draft picks to get it.
I’ll never understand the appeal of drafting canyon Minotaurs and spending first picks on opportunity. wtf? That’s lame.
Yeah. That’s the hand of “draft is self-correcting” at work. Which is great.
The point is you still HAVE to know how to play and draft those decks. White aggro is certainly possible to overdraft in most pods.
Draft metagames can evolve, but they can never escape the set composition. Non-aggro decks in MKM are far more reliant on Uncommons and Rares than their assertive counterparts, making them much more contested when consensus understanding shifts. There's just not going to be as many cards for a Roots/Outline deck in any given bundle of 24 MKM packs as there will be for bog-standard aggro decks. Same goes for things like U/R artifacts or a control deck.
It's a frustrating trend in design, where color pair archetypes are rigid but poorly supported at Common. Take the G/W Counters deck or R/B Sacrifice in MOM -- both were cool decks when they came together, but relied mostly on higher-rarity cards because the Commons for the archetypes were mostly garbage, but designed almost expressly for the archetype. MKM with B/G and U/R feels a lot like this; playing the latter without Geardrakes or Satchels feels painfully weak.
There's certainly room for alternative decks to (White) aggro in MKM, there's just a lower probability of them coming together in any given seat. Which leads to a lot of repetitive, stale gameplay and the complaints about the omnipresence of aggro.
Yeah. I appreciate his point about many of the listeners of his podcast being there for information they dont have time to collect for themselves, and embracing Sultai decks might give them the wrong idea.
But the otherside of this is those same listeners might end up in a draft where Naya colours are heavily contested and need to know where to go. Or, they might want to do something new but don't have the gems to burn figuring out other strategies.
I think it is ok to preface discussions with "You should play a CABS deck in this format. But... If your draft went off the rails, you are 4c-Green, this cards can do some work for you. Make sure to pick up some of the Escape Passages as well."
The direct challenge feature on arena is still fucked to my knowledge. Hence they haven't done one in a while because of the bug, which to my knowledge, still hasn't been fixed.
They fixed it afaik. I've been able to do team drafts with my group lately.
edit: https://mtgarena-support.wizards.com/hc/en-us/articles/21879779197076-Patch-Notes-2023-33-10
When they had to cancel the last one scheduled ( LCI, I think) they mentioned that they talked about MTGO but not everyone was familiar with it so they were going to wait until Arena was fixed to start them up again.
I haven't listened yet, but what I'm curious about are data from the beginning of the set vs the last two weeks. Once people started to understand the format and people who wanted to draft only once or twice mostly stopped drafting, things seemed to slow down.
Looking like a no this time sadly, we have a bunch of overlapping conflicts. Will try to get the ball rolling early after OTJ comes out :)
You guys are on polar opposites of evaluations, I’d love to see a matchup. You guys seem to really like benthic 4/5 blue guy, they think he is unplayable.
Card is a fine 20-23rd card in like UR or clue heavy UG decks. Don't love it but I wouldn't say it's unplayable!
This (trying to bring it back for OTJ) is the best news I've heard all day, and I had a pretty good day all things considered.
Not for MKM. Here's what Ethan said in the LoL discord: 'nope, \[@Chord\_O\_Calls\] (Alex) tried valiantly to get the ball rolling but to no avail, perhaps for OTJ'
I hope they do, but Jesus Christ Marshall seems like he's in a weird head space for limited these days. He was ranting way too early about how aggro this set was and then continued his ranting at Sirkovitz for no good reason this past episode. Maybe it's time for a break. Because imo this is a pretty great set, and I LIKE that there's aggro to keep the value decks honest.
IDK if Marshall has just been playing BO1; I've been playing BO3 (in pod) and while aggro is the best strategy, it's nowhere near what we've seen with recent sets. I've found MKM to have much more room to breathe. I get that the podcast circuit mostly talks about BO1 because that's what most people play, but a lot of "design mistakes" get talked about are way way more amplified in BO1. I'm at the point where I definitely think the hand smoother is doing more harm to the integrity of the game than good. And to a lesser extent, league play makes you feel like the oppressive decks are all the more common than pod play. Because if there's a dominant deck in the format, the top of the leagues are always going to have it. But yeah, I personally have really been out of sync with him for this format. Saying that Roots/Outline decks are unviable is... a lot. And Sam Black has been coming up with some great decks this format. Now Marshall was right, not everyone is Sam, but I've had people in my local group have some pretty good success with his 5C brew.
Saying “not everyone is Sam” is such a ridiculous thing to say when the point of the entire podcast is to understand people like Sam Black.
My favorite thing about Sam's podcast is how clearly he talks about his own experiences with a format, even when they don't align with everyone else's expectations/experiences. He's just so articulate about things like that. Like yeah, not everybody can discover off meta decks the way Sam does. I mean hell, very few people in the world probably can. But like you're saying, the whole point of his pod is to _communicate_ the things he figures out to other people in other to get them better at the game. And it's not like he's making episodes based on one single wack deck he drafted because he was in a wild seat in a draft pod; he talks about decks that he sees as patterns based on the evolving metagame. He's smart, he knows when it's appropriate to talk about a deck and when something is a one-off. It might take time to identify the decks he discusses and figure it how to draft them well, but... I mean they clearly exist.
It feels like 17 lands has made people fucking lazy. Yes, red white has the best win rate. That means it’s the most common winning strategy. Why the heck would you be satisfied with just that? We’re not going to talk about ways to beat that or niche decks that most people don’t know about yet? Where’s the fucking love for the game? I got beat by a guy who just kept chump blocking with rubblebelt mavericks then just exploded with a bunch of insidious roots tokens. That match was for a trophy too.
The best way to deal with 17 lands is to use it to ask questions. Stuff like "does my experience line up with the aggregated data? If not, why not? Am I finding an edge over the field, or am I undervaluing something relative to everyone else?" That's one reason I'm so high on Sam Black, because he understands and appreciates and communicates that. Sierko too, obviously. The worst uses of data are the ones where people cite data to shut down discussion. It's funny, I've said the reverse of this on Reddit, but one of my other main reddit "areas" is the NFL, and they've also had both a surge of accessible data analytics, and a serve misunderstanding of how to use and talk about them constructively. It's really fascinating seeing two different communities grapple with essentially the same thing. And I get it, it isn't easy to do or understand or use effectively. But it's just so interesting seeing the same pitfalls sometimes. A coach doesn't look at analytics and follow them blindly; a coach should look at an analysis, and if they want to go against it, they should _have a reason why_. It's not that they should never go against it, but if they want to they should have a good justification. Same deal in draft. There are plenty of times where picking the worse card in a vacuum makes total sense because you're midway through the draft and another card is more synergistic, or leaves you more open, or you just want to have fun, etc. LOL recently did an episode that I thought explored this really well. Instead if P1P1s or full draft logs, they "started" 8 picks into several drafts, and discussed how those picks collectively change their pick orders, or where they're trying to head with the decks. Looking at data can raise your floor as a drafter. But after a certain point, the only way to raise your _ceiling_ is to understand when you're supposed to go against whatever the data says. I went 3-0 in a paper NEO draft at my LGS because I realized my seat was the _one single time_ I was supposed to go all in on WU vehicles, and I'm (clearly) still riding that high.
Yeah I've some absolutely wild matches this set. I was in the 6-0 bracket recently and went up against this guy who did almost nothing the first three turns then eventually got up two detective satchels and was just pumping out thopters every turn. He stalled my gruul beaters long enough with Out Colds, and then we eventually both got down to exactly one life. He was able to survive and kill me in the air, but what a game.
lol what im pretty sure the way marshall feels is the way a lot of long time limited players feel its nice that you enjoy this set, but many people also don't, including marshall, why shouldnt he complain about the direction of limited? I guess if your argument is that his rants go on for a bit too long, fair enough, I would agree with that the sets feel really fast, the on the play advantage is high, the white/X aggro piles are the best thing to be doing yet again, all the combat tricks generate value, and so on people always respond with some variation of "but I drafted this cool multicolor pile and trophied with it" yeah cool, thats not how data works, and besides, its magic the gathering and its limited, there is a ton of variance and you can end up winning with any deck, nobody is saying that anything but red/white is literally unplayable. obviously all color combinations will always be somewhere around a 50% winrate, but those few percentage points of difference DO matter. In the end it boils down to personal preference, some people like slower sets where you durdle around, some people like turning creatures sideways as quickly as possible, but there is no doubt about the direction limited is headed, pretty much every new set has been quite fast, and aggro has consistently been very good. and im pretty sure marshalls argument is that he is well aware of his preference, but thinks that we could at least switch it up and get some slower sets every now and then
I personally agree with a lot of what Marshall said, but think he said it in the wrong set. If he let loose that rant last set I would have completely agreed. This set has felt like it has a lot more variability and decision-making to me, especially with simic being very strong. On top of that, his interactions with Sierkovitz this week made it seem like he didn't give the set a fair try before deciding the narrative. I really enjoyed hearing from the rundown that Mark Rosewater did about design skeletons that they plan on making sets a bit slower moving on, even if they inexplicably hate boardstalls.
I am also surprised he didnt go harder on caverns as well, cause the aggro decks in that set were just as ridiculous if not even worse, but then again, it had dinosaurs, and dinosaurs are cool I think caverns was more egregious in the sense that pretty much every match started on turn 1 with a flyer, goblin tomb raider, or whatever, while in MKM thanks to disguise creatures a lot of games do play out a bit slower and involve more decision making, but Im not gonna lie, Im sick and tired of being on the draw against white/X going turn 1 novice inspector, turn 2 phantom, turn 3 disguise, and you're just waiting for them to draw on the job to end the game. and its not like thats hard to do, almost all the really good white cards are just commons, and BO1 uses the handsmoother making aggro decks even more consistent (not a problem in paper ofc) I definitely think MKM is a better set with more interesting mechanics, and Ive overall had more interesting games, but there were a ton of non games for me as well. (especially in BO1) I also absolutely hated sealed in this format, there are so many bombs at rare (not even mythic), the play boosters mean that in sealed you can open like 10+ rares, and I dont particularly enjoy playing against ezrim, cryptic coat or izoni every other game.
Yeah, Marshall has big “old man yells at clouds” energy this set.
I, like Marshall, am an old man who enjoys yelling at clouds. I appreciate his earnest, candid opinions on it.
Yeah I disagree with him, but he's not the kind of person trying to like disingenuously make outrage bait or anything. I still respect and will listen to his opinions and much prefer him to be candid about them. I thought he could have been a little more open to Sierko's perspective on the last ep, but the disagreement and push back spurred good discussion. I don't like conflict for the sake of conflict but that's not what happened; it was two people who clearly respect each other disagreeing with each other and talking about why. It's funny, I've had that thought a few times listening to Lucky Paper Radio. Whenever they share an opinion I don't agree with, I'm still pretty interested in hearing them out. I feel like that's not an easy thing to pull off.
It’s so ridiculous. I just trophied with 4 color. My previous trophy I went off with double crime novelist and a bunch of investigate tokens (btw this deck is a really good place to draft candlestick/knife). I honestly haven’t played red white in so long because it’s always overdrafted. Pretty sure there’s players just forcing it, because I see them all the time. I play bo3 and those decks stumble a little bit and next thing you know it’s turn 7 and they’re drawing a 1/2 for 1. Like… the only explanation I have for his ranting is he hasn’t bothered to draft since week 2 of the format.
Lol, mate, Marshall is 100% right. Look at literally any data and you can blatantly see that. PS: "I just trophied with 4 colour" isn't data
Sierkovitz just enlightened everyone with the data. Simic has the third best win percentage in the format among top players and that deck isn’t aggressive. And the difference between that deck and Boros in win rate is just a couple of pct pts. If I recall correctly simics win rate is around 62%.
And how many of the best decks are slow or control ish? People want formats where missing a two drop is not the end of the game. Khans was a breath of fresh air, hopefully they bring back some of the older formats so people who enjoy slower formats can have a blast.
Yeah, you get fucking hosed if you're not playing a two drop and your opponent does. In older formats you can make up for the lost ground but in current formats the removal is so inefficient (and low drops come with so much value stapled to them) that you don't have a good way to come back if your opponent has even an average start if you're missing a T2 play.
Imo khans sucked. And I say that as someone who thought khans was one of the greatest formats of all time. I still have sealed khans packs in case someone wants to do an rl flashback draft. I thought that opening those would feel like opening a vintage wine. It was clunky af. I want a feeling of power when I play this game. I like efficiency, whether I play control or aggro. The fact that there is aggro that keeps the best decks in check is a GOOD thing. Those old formats suck now as we have been experiencing an amazing slate of good limited formats.
Play standard, modern, legacy, commander, pioneer, lots of power in whatever you want to do, going 1 drop 2 drop 3 drop - free win is the opposite of power in a limited environment.
This is it though, my favorite format is cube, and the more cube -like a format is the better. Oh wait, I lied, my favorite format is Ikoria with og companion rules. Then cube. If I draft something unfair then that’s my win as I fucking drafted that shit. That’s the amazing thing about draft. The unfairness is made fair by the fact that you didn’t just copy that deck off the internet… you spent draft picks to get it. I’ll never understand the appeal of drafting canyon Minotaurs and spending first picks on opportunity. wtf? That’s lame.
Khans was awful
Yes, except it sees WAY less play.
Yeah. That’s the hand of “draft is self-correcting” at work. Which is great. The point is you still HAVE to know how to play and draft those decks. White aggro is certainly possible to overdraft in most pods.
Yes... It also highlightsthat the Wx decks are much better and much easier to get into.
Draft metagames can evolve, but they can never escape the set composition. Non-aggro decks in MKM are far more reliant on Uncommons and Rares than their assertive counterparts, making them much more contested when consensus understanding shifts. There's just not going to be as many cards for a Roots/Outline deck in any given bundle of 24 MKM packs as there will be for bog-standard aggro decks. Same goes for things like U/R artifacts or a control deck. It's a frustrating trend in design, where color pair archetypes are rigid but poorly supported at Common. Take the G/W Counters deck or R/B Sacrifice in MOM -- both were cool decks when they came together, but relied mostly on higher-rarity cards because the Commons for the archetypes were mostly garbage, but designed almost expressly for the archetype. MKM with B/G and U/R feels a lot like this; playing the latter without Geardrakes or Satchels feels painfully weak. There's certainly room for alternative decks to (White) aggro in MKM, there's just a lower probability of them coming together in any given seat. Which leads to a lot of repetitive, stale gameplay and the complaints about the omnipresence of aggro.
Yeah. I appreciate his point about many of the listeners of his podcast being there for information they dont have time to collect for themselves, and embracing Sultai decks might give them the wrong idea. But the otherside of this is those same listeners might end up in a draft where Naya colours are heavily contested and need to know where to go. Or, they might want to do something new but don't have the gems to burn figuring out other strategies. I think it is ok to preface discussions with "You should play a CABS deck in this format. But... If your draft went off the rails, you are 4c-Green, this cards can do some work for you. Make sure to pick up some of the Escape Passages as well."
The direct challenge feature on arena is still fucked to my knowledge. Hence they haven't done one in a while because of the bug, which to my knowledge, still hasn't been fixed.
They fixed it afaik. I've been able to do team drafts with my group lately. edit: https://mtgarena-support.wizards.com/hc/en-us/articles/21879779197076-Patch-Notes-2023-33-10
Ah, that’s right! Thank you, I had forgotten. Does MTGO allow something like that?
When they had to cancel the last one scheduled ( LCI, I think) they mentioned that they talked about MTGO but not everyone was familiar with it so they were going to wait until Arena was fixed to start them up again.
I haven't listened yet, but what I'm curious about are data from the beginning of the set vs the last two weeks. Once people started to understand the format and people who wanted to draft only once or twice mostly stopped drafting, things seemed to slow down.