|
3 years ago ::
Mar 22, 2010 - 3:33PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2008
|
This thread is for discussion of this week's Limited Information, which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 22, 2010 - 9:46PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Feb 25, 2010
|
This is an interesting article, well-argued and thorough. However, I'm slightly disappointed that in what is apparently "Draft Week" on mtg.com, the column dedicated to Limited play is given over entirely to discussion of an example from a Sealed game.
Ok, so most of the logic and strategy here are applicable to both sides of the Limited coin, but it's still a shame that something exclusively draft-y (like signals, pick orders, working out what might wheel etc) wasn't part of the dedicated Limited column in Draft Week.
"Personally, I believe $50 is the roof that someone will pay for a Standard card, Mythic or otherwise." - Ben Bleiweiss, StarCity Games
----------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 22, 2010 - 10:52PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 12, 2006
|
Well, there go my hopes for an actual draft walkthrough for once!
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 23, 2010 - 4:18AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2006
|
Indeed....even in draft week no draft walkthrough. Even if this article is ok (at the max), the limited column at the own Wizard site has lost appeal to me already for almost a year I guess....
Often I gave the author the advantage of the doubt, sometimes he has to make a paper related to the theme of the week. But now he lost that credit as well.
Not doing something very draft related in the limited column of the own Wizard site in DRAFT week is something I just don't understand...
Luckily there are other sites where excellent draft walkthroughs and strategic discussions are posted.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 23, 2010 - 8:32AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2006
|
Steve doesn't do drafts walkthroughs. In all of his 2-3 years run on the column, he did ONE, and it sucked. If you're comng here week after week hoping for a draft walkthrough, you'll never be statisfied.
However, if you're lookind for Limited strategy, you've come to the right place. I find that the other writers on sites that do draft walktroughs seldom ever provide strategy on the same level of detail and depth that Steve does, in a way that can both greatly help newer players and refine seasoned players' thinking.
I've been playing Limited on a weekly basis for more than 6 years and I still learn at least a little something from Steve every week. This week, in the context of the exercise, I learned why Stonework Puma was not the obvious turn 3 play contrary to my thinking, and that the second Marauder was better if you didn't plan to block on a short term and were confident that you could just keep racing, as it's harder to stop.
That said, I do find it weird that Steve wasn't on theme this week, but I don't think it's that big of a deal.
 Magic The Gathering DCI Rules Advisor 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
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 23, 2010 - 8:47AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jan 28, 2010
|
Draft is basically the only format I ever play competitively, so I too am disappointed that the column I most look forward to every week didn't stay on this week's theme. I have learned a lot from Steve's writing but I do wish there was more content in some of the articles, especially today's. I feel somewhat cheated that the entire piece was dedicated to a rehash of a "bonus" exercise from last week, especially when the posts on this board following that exercise were almost unanimous in agreeing with the conclusions he came to.
I know, I know, Steve likely didn't know that when he wrote the bulk of the piece since deadlines for this site are at least a week up from the publishing date. But my argument that the question he asked was ostensibly a bonus still stands. Today's article leaves me extremely underwhelmed, which is rare for this column.
(Don't worry, Steve - I'll still be reading next week's, and the week after that's, etc. Nobody hits a home run every time they're at bat, after all. And despite my bitching, the content that was included is solid and useful, particularly for those readers who don't visit the forums, a group that included me until recently. So I guess you can't please everybody...)
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 23, 2010 - 9:25AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Feb 14, 2010
|
I know, I know, Steve likely didn't know that when he wrote the bulk of the piece since deadlines for this site are at least a week up from the publishing date. But my argument that the question he asked was ostensibly a bonus still stands. Today's article leaves me extremely underwhelmed, which is rare for this column.
Writers usually get warning if they're writing about a particular theme. Given that Serious Fun isn't particularly on-topic, either, I'm even more surprised that Steve didn't at least include a a question about pick choices or something similar.
Also, as much as I appreciate the in-depth strategy of Steve's articles, there are times when he could (and probably should) back off a bit, and focus on the basics once in a while. A lot of people come to the site not knowing Limited from Legacy, and Draft Week would be the perfect chance for a primer. Or at least a link to a primer.
Finally, the situation last week wasn't so complicated that it needed an entire article written about it. I understand the importance of using correct logic when analyzing plays, but the correct logic in this play was hard to divine. Both decks want to race; he has no Sparkmage (or other obvious removal), and you have a strong racing hand with excellent removal/finishing burn. Ergo: don't block. If the opponent drops a creature, you drop the Puma to block; if the opponent doesn't drop the Puma, drop the 2nd Marauder to keep the pressure on. There, article written.
Sorry Steve, it just felt like you were sleeping through this one.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 23, 2010 - 10:30AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Mar 23, 2010
|
Whereas the last guy signed up to the forums for the express purpose of bashing the article, I have done the same with an entirely different and singular purpose.
Steve, I would just like to take this opportunity to give you an internet high five for not only referencing one of my favorite shows of all times, but also one of my favorite episodes from that show.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpzjLtzuk1I
And I'll race against myself... and I'll race... and I'll race...
...
...
Awoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! RACE!
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 23, 2010 - 12:10PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jul 19, 2001
|
Didn't we get a very similar article about racing not too long ago?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Mar 23, 2010 - 2:41PM
#10
|
|
|
I am meeting with a guy tomorrow who is learning the game, so the discussion about racing got me in the right mindset. I knew I wanted to talk to him about racing anyway, but this just steered me in the right direction.
|
|
|
