11/09/2010 LI: "Role Models"

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Limited Information, which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
Wow, zero comments after 18 hours? Oh well, that's zero negative comments at least!

Great article as usual. It's kind of a follow-up to the last, since it's partly about commitment, but that element is so important in this format that I don't mind people returning to it again and again.
Magic The Gathering DCI Lvl 1 Judge Don't hesitate to post rules question in the Rules Q&A forum for me and other competent advisors to answer : http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75842/134778/Rules_Q38A
I just find Steve's content and style to be boring. Every new set gives him 3 - 4 articles of reevaluating what's important to that environment, then its the same repeated flack. His good articles are few and far between.
Yeah, I used to look forward to Limited Information more than anything else all week, but under Sadin's captaincy... I just skim read it.  

It's not that he writes BAD articles, they're just kind of drab and predictable. 
Harsh but true. This felt phoned in.
It's a good article but I think it leaves the more experienced/regular drafters wanting for more. This all seems v obv to anyone who's drafted 3/5 times but to a newer drafter I'm sure it's good to be told "Cards have more use then you first give them credit for" type stuff.

to be honest I feel entirely uninvolved with the articles, I show up and read every week but there's no interaction, compared to say Scott Wills who had a booster pick every week followed up by the previous. The in-and-out of that article made me first excited about booster drafting, because I remember going from "it's random, anyone can win" to "this actually matters. Why not pass the 3WW angel, no one's going to want to splash it!"

Even another "you do the draft" then posting your results here.
I have to say that I was genuinely unimpressed by this article.  I think it is right that certain articles are geared towards less experienced drafters but I really don't feel like I gained anything from this weeks article at all and we are now several weeks into the set and still no draft walkthrough.

The walkthroughs provide valuable assistance to both new and more experienced drafters and often allow for interesting debate afterwards.
Oh well, so much for the lack of negative comments... I should have just kept my mouth shut.Foot in mouth

I am an experienced drafter and I already have dozens of SoM drafts under my belt, but I still found this article useful. In my opinion, it was fine format-specific content. Even when I don't learn anything new, I don't mind reading stuff I know and agree with from a pro; at the least, it validates the theories I've built for myself about the format.

[...]we are now several weeks into the set and still no draft walkthrough.

The walkthroughs provide valuable assistance to both new and more experienced drafters and often allow for interesting debate afterwards.

Ok, time to quote myself. I know you read me the last two threads, but I'll just keep hitting the nail on the head until you get it.
Steve does not do draft walkthroughs. He has done one in two years and it sucked. He hates them and he's bad at them. You can ask all you want, he won't do it.

Let him stick to what he's good at, Limited theory. There are plenty of draft walkthroughs from pros out there for your viewing pleasure. If you don't want to pay for them, try Blackborder.com and Channelfireball.com. If you can afford to pay a small fee, Starcitygames.com's premium section has some good stuff there too, with less ads since you're paying.

If you think Steve is getting worse at theory and that he should be replaced by someone who's not only good at that but also does draft walktroughs, now that's a legitimate opinion, even if I don't agree with it and I think Steve's work is fine. My point is that Steve leaving the LI column is the only way you'll ever get a draft walkthrough on said column, because Steve doesnt do them. Period.
Magic The Gathering DCI Lvl 1 Judge Don't hesitate to post rules question in the Rules Q&A forum for me and other competent advisors to answer : http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75842/134778/Rules_Q38A

I am an experienced drafter and I already have dozens of SoM drafts under my belt, but I still found this article useful. In my opinion, it was fine format-specific content. Even when I don't learn anything new, I don't mind reading stuff I know and agree with from a pro; at the least, it validates the theories I've built for myself about the format.



Before answering, I reread the article to see if I was being unduly unfair in my last post and I really don't think I was.  The summary of the article is pick good, flexible cards at the outset and this will stand you in good position to take advantage of what you get passed or open up in subsequent packs.  This is pretty basic and only the newest drafters wont be aware of this.

Take, for example, Necropede.  If this card said simply Poisonlesspede , 1/1 when Poisonlesspede is put into the graveyard put a -1/-1 counter on target creature, people are still going to take it very high up.  It becomes akin to a Perilous Myr with a small body that has a bonus when it goes into the graveyard.  The fact is Necropede has infect makes it 9/10 better than Poisonlesspede and therefore an even higher pick but even someone not going infect should take these high up.  I cannot believe that this is particuarly insightful (but I may be wrong).


Ok, time to quote myself. I know you read me the last two threads, but I'll just keep hitting the nail on the head until you get it.Steve does not do draft walkthroughs. He has done one in two years and it sucked. He hates them and he's bad at them. You can ask all you want, he won't do it.



I cannot understand how a pro player can be bad at drafting (and if the pro player is bad at drafing but, say, amazing at constructed, they shouldn't be writing the LI column).  Being good at drafting is all you need for a walkthrough.  I accept that a pro may not be able to articulate very well why they would pick something over something else but I cannot accept that a person writing an LI column cannot do a walkthrough. 

Why do you think Steve is bad at them?
I remember the walk through, and there was nothing wrong with it. I was waiting very eagerly for the next week and then nothing came. I like Steve, and enjoy his writing, but I find the articles lacking in advanced information, just beginner news.
Sure it's fun to read what a pro says and have your thoughts verified but I've always just drafted how I felt and won that way. Getting a "good job" from reading a pros work only works so long, eventually you have to cut your own teeth.
And I don't think it's good for the magicthegathering site, the start of it all, should have it's Limited Information forums pretty much saying "Look elsewhere for draft." Channelfireball et al are good, and I read them too but I still come here every tuesday for that delicious nugget of Limited Information.
Lately it just feels like I've been reading kids meal instead of McValue whatever's.

Also everything I've written is as constructive feedback, not bagging Steve out. Writing articles for Magic, every week, and knowing how many millions of readers are going to pick out everything you might screw up on? It's like being a newb and playing LSV with all his homies watchin'.
Sign In to post comments