Official Amonkhet Survey

>The draft environment is awesome though
Drafted a BG deck with 3 trials and 4 cartouches, splashing red for the red god. Just my kind of value deck.
Decimated the other players, fun as fuck

I had 2 black and 2 red Cartouches with a Red Trial, recurring a black or red trial can lock down a game easily.

The Cartouches themselves are all just great value on their own.

Red cartouche is probably the weakest, but it is worth playing for the trial recurrance, I think.

You'd be surprised, between two of those, a Crop Crasher, and a Merciless Javelineer I was able to keep people off blocking long enough to run them over.

I had a game where I just slapped it on the 1 drop black zombie T2, curved onto Crop Crasher T3 and started smashing for 5 a turn, game was over real fast.

Oh and the advantage of costing R often let's you replay the Trial you bounced on the very same turn.

already sent it, sadly.

I used to write long statement on these surveys, I just keep simple now:
>invocations are ugly
>I'm tired the Jacetice League
>set has a low power level but I understand why you did it

So basically not getting too autistic and making it easy for the guy to read it.
>implying they'll read it

I totally forgot to mention the invocations and aftermath cards.

I'm sure they pick well articulated feedback and pass it around one way or another.

There is a difference between constructive criticism and "YOU SUCK", however.

I had specific questions about what I thought about invocation/aftermath cards.

Made sure to give the Aftermath card the worst possible score for art.

>The draft environment is awesome though, so I commended them there

I dunno, it seems like you have to draft White-Green or you lose. Has anyone had any luck drafting a color combination WITHOUT green in it?

Drafted 3 times and won it all
WG, UW and UB.

>aftermath
I made sure to tell them whatever card scheme they try that reduced the art into an even smaller space is unacceptable.

I went 3-0, losing only 1 game with RB

black is overall really strong this set, what with all the under-costed creatures at common and uncommon

If you can pick up a Happy Croco-demon, the black trial and a couple Scorpion-Kings you are pretty much half way to a decent draft.

I really fucking suck at Sealed and I feel like in Draft it's because I never have good cards in my packs where I get to them early, and then by the time a pack is down 3 cards there's bullshit-all left anyways. Regardless of the format, I cobble together this 2-colour jank pile that I can't really make any meaningful sideboarding/cutting choices because after filtering out all the literal garbage I only have fucking 15 creatures in those colours and then I throw in all the removal I managed to find in those colours.

So then I send off my jank pile and I meet a planeswalker, a deck with 3 gods in it, and a token aggro deck that floods my board. I go 0-3, and while I still have fun playing, I'm not winning at all. I know what a mana curve is, I know what BREAD is, I know you should have roughly 17 lands in a 40-card deck, but other than that I'm not sure how to go about building better decks that can actually win a game. Although this past weekend was I think the 4th or 5th time I've played Limited and this draft went better, I went 0-2 in close games, 2-0'd some poor unfortunate soul who never seemed interested in attacking me, and went 2-1 in two very good games and one utter curbstomp after I had to mull to 5 and didn't have play until turn 4 somehow. I feel as though I had no business taking as much life off as I did in those games given that my draft strategy was literally "take as many decent-looking creatures as you can and then get burn damage, and creature removal" and that's it. Like, I'm not looking at mechanics really because nothing I ever need to interact is ever both in my hand at once in Limited.

How do I progress strategically, or, barring that, how do I build better decks? Do I just netdeck the hell out of the set and know it inside and out so I can see more viable "deck builds" emerge from the jank pool?

>because I never have good cards in my packs where I get to them early
maybe start by stop looking down on it and think it's all about luck.

Let me rephrase:
I have a difficult time acquiring high-quality bombs in Draft and I don't know why. How can I work around this and cobble together jank more effectively?

>netdeck
kinda sorta. I always listen to lrcast for the common/uncommon review. They're not always right but it gives a pretty good insight.
Also, watch videos of pros drafting mtgo, there's a shitload of it on youtube.

I told them what I've been yakking on for ages, great Limited feel but power level just makes you feel bad, and Aftermath cards were a waste of potential- at least one or three of them should've been horribly broken just so decades on after their ban people can still debate that they were a fair card and should have been unbanned. THAT'S how you create a memorable mechanic that people will talk about for eons to come.

Tell them tumblr sent you, then they might take your answers more seriously.

I felt like there were a lot of minotaurs in this set though. Not as many jackals as you'd think however. which is kinda weird considering minotaurs, not even ramheaded beings as far as I know, have anything to do with egypt. I haven't actually counted anyway.

Adding to this, say you're female and your primary interest is the plot. If they think their social justice pandering is failing to win the hearts of the fairer sex maybe something will change. Or at least Rosewater will get butthurt again.

>What formats do you play?
Ok looks like I see a box for everyone who plays MTG regardless of competitive or non-competitive like "casual multiplayer or casual one-on-one." But then I see-
>Do not play

Why the fuck is this even a selectable option? They should immediately disregard anyone who selects this box.

I wouldn't be surprised if they have people read every single one and give feedback to the team, they probably use the same survey crew as the D&D ones, and those have demonstrably been read and commented on directly by Mearls/Crawford.

>>Do not play
Much like with video games, streaming magic is a growing culture. Sure, most people who watch play at some level still, but a small and growing subset are more interested in watching interesting matches than ever playing, especially since they know they
>don't need to spend money
and
>don't need to spend ridiculous amounts of time getting good
It's like when the chess championships are on, you don't need to PLAY chess to understand the rules and enjoy commentary.

Does that nigger really think the Weatherlight saga was bad?

Weatherlight is the goddamn Iliad compared to the fucking desu-desu manga Yugi-Jace team is.

>Much like with video games, streaming magic is a growing culture. Sure, most people who watch play at some level still, but a small and growing subset are more interested in watching interesting matches than ever playing, especially since they know they
>It's like when the chess championships are on, you don't need to PLAY chess to understand the rules and enjoy commentary.

Sure but all these are entirely relevant when attempting to shape the balance of the game and overall direction of the game. A spectator of Chess has no business of dictating any form of feedback for championships, just like a person who does not play MTG has no business dictating any opinion on what is good or not good for the format or game overall.

I agree with you for the most part, but spectators can have equally valid opinions on things like themes, artwork, naming conventions, story, and, to some extent, things like game mechanics via clarity, and how diverse the meta is, because watching a diverse play field is more interesting.

Remember to put a Very poor rating in vanilla creatures and cards with the Gatewatch.

To say nothing of the fact that The Wacky Adventures of Jace and Friends: Featuring Magic The Gathering™ has been going on for like twice as long as Weatherlight ever did.

Even if you didn't like Gerrard and company, you didn't have to live with them getting a new pushed Legendary creature card every single set.

That's not what the bulk of these questions are asking though. I don't think if you play MTG that you are at any level qualified to have input on factors like whether X card is playable or not and to have input regarding design of future sets.

If you don't play MTG I don't think you have any business evaluating whether a card is playable or not.

Then give us a Cliff's notes.

>their face when i made it clear that I only play draft and sealed

To be fair they probably aren't taking those who mark the don't play box as seriously as everyone else

>If they think their social justice pandering is failing to win the hearts of the fairer sex maybe something will change.
DOUBLE THE TRANNIES IN EVERY SET
RELEASE THE FLOODGATES

It's for them to know that these opinions are the one that hold no impact to our sales, a.k the ones we can safely don't give any fuck about.

>vanilla creatures
I think you mean common creatures.

If you already spend much money on the game there's no reason to listen to you as you'll probably spend regardless.

Over thrice as long, actually. Weatherlight to Apocalypse was roughly three years, by my recollection.

I mean you would think that but this is Wizards "we want more data for Standard before deciding to ban the Felidar Guardian despite the fact that the data shows that deck has been dominating for the last several months of Standard." of the Coast.

Outside of a few flavor texts, you wouldn't even notice the shit was going on at the time if you weren't reading the novels.

understand what the high priority cards in the set are and then grab them early
understand what colors are more powerful than others in the set (though with this set that is still kind of up for debate) and see if you can get into them early
also understand what you are being passed though and if you see a particular color completely open around haflway through the first pack realize that the last pack is probably also going to have this color open and maybe be willing to switch colors to move into this open territory

basically don't be afraid to first pick a common if it is the best card in the pack, try to get into red early with amonkhet but don't be afraid to get out of red if you aren't seeing any red cards by around the end of pack 1
prioritize removal early and filling out the curve later
don't hatedraft unless it is in the first pack because you are gonna need to take your best possible pick later on just to fill out the deck and making sure your deck is good is a higher priority than making sure others decks are worse when odds are you aren't even going to play against the bomb card you pass

>What is your favorite card in Amonkhet?

Glorious End

Knowing your picks and having a feel for the draft is importat, but it still feels like a significant luck factor. There's always that one fuck that opens three bombs AND gets passed amazing stuff by the retards sitting left and right of him.

Unless you are living in the 'tg we made up stories' thread, that kind of thing happens way way less than you think.

Oh sure, I imagine they have a checklist and whenever they read something like:
>Invocations where a mistake because... (followed by a 8 page essay)
And,
>Invocations are ugly.
They just make a mark it as "players don't like Invocations"

They should have made Samut, Voice of Dissent a Khenra that survived her twin.
Got all the way to the final trial and then... left unclear if she is the losing one that somehow survived or the winning one that had remorse.
Hell, if you want your diversity points you can have her suffering from personality disorder from the trauma/guilt or something.

You do think someone would care about Samut? IMO she's one of those characters that no one would remember.

I'm ok with this

There.
Posted that they should be ashamed of themselves and fire every artist who painted a white egyptian