Asynch draft experience results

    • Drafting is already the way to go if you want to climb the limited ladder this season...

      Anyways, I think the mileage you get as a new and casual player playing EVO is so much higher than draft. And that kind of investment where they eventually trickle into the "competitive" side of limited (draft) is worth? I don't know.
    • Yasi wrote:

      Drafting is already the way to go if you want to climb the limited ladder this season...
      Not sure about this because one of my friend who plays 90% Evo and 10% Draft is currently among the top 16(not naming name) of Limited ladder. And he hits number 9 when he hits Cosmic playing mostly Evo. He played more draft after cosmic.
    • I've been trying to play more draft the last few weeks. But every time I log in it's at 0 or 2 players in queue and it's just easier to play evo instead of waiting for what could be 20+ mins. I don't really think grinding rank is a big factor in why draft doesn't fire as often as we'd like.
    • Goliathus wrote:

      Not sure about this because one of my friend who plays 90% Evo and 10% Draft is currently among the top 16(not naming name) of Limited ladder. And he hits number 9 when he hits Cosmic playing mostly Evo. He played more draft after cosmic.
      I'm currently ranked 9? and 13 on my accounts just from drafting. Unless your friend did a "few" EVO to reach that rank, draft is probably (still no confirmation if it's intended) the way to go. I also meant playing drafts to climb the cosmic ranks. Playing EVO is the way to go if you want to reach Cosmic.

      @GobBluth, I haven't had much trouble getting 2 or 3 draft games every other day this last month. The last few days the queue have been slow though so I haven't drafted.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Yasi ().

    • Yasi wrote:

      Goliathus wrote:

      Not sure about this because one of my friend who plays 90% Evo and 10% Draft is currently among the top 16(not naming name) of Limited ladder. And he hits number 9 when he hits Cosmic playing mostly Evo. He played more draft after cosmic.
      I'm currently ranked 9? and 13 on my accounts just from drafting. Unless your friend did a "few" EVO to reach that rank, draft is probably (still no confirmation if it's intended) the way to go. I also meant playing drafts to climb the cosmic ranks. Playing EVO is the way to go if you want to reach Cosmic.
      I meant he landed on rank 9, not he is rank 9 now. If Draft is better and worth more points, I think a EVO-based player would have landed on say rank 30(or any number on the back end) than rank 9 in Cosmic when they hit it. I am pretty sure the system doesn't just randomly land you on some place. What you did on your way to Cosmic would have affected your starting position in Cosmic.
    • While I recognize and acknowledge that the new draft format is more convenient for players than the old format was, I absolutely detest the changes to prize structure, as well as the loss of proper pod balance that the new format has brought. I used to draft as often as I could afford the time to play. Now, I only draft when I absolutely have to (weekly tickets), and would never even consider doing it for fun - because it's NOT fun. It's a hateful experience.

      There are few worse feelings in this game than drafting what you think is an amazing deck from the cards you had access to, and getting your ass kicked by someone from a completely different pod that just had purely better packs than you. At least in the old draft, you saw all the cards going past and had an idea of what else was going to show up and how strong the archetypes were looking. Here, you have no control at all - you just get blindsided, and it saps any possible fun out of the experience.

      No thanks. I'll save my money for if constructed gauntlet ever actually comes back.
      --ossuary

      "Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none."
      - Shakespeare, All's Well That Ends Well
    • I did not read all the thread but what I can say is if they could I would love to have a full asynchronous draft. Exactly how sealed are done, just join and draft no waiting. We have to stop to think like 1990 when we needed to be 8 to draft because you could simply not do it alone.
    • Ossuary wrote:

      While I recognize and acknowledge that the new draft format is more convenient for players than the old format was, I absolutely detest the changes to prize structure, as well as the loss of proper pod balance that the new format has brought. I used to draft as often as I could afford the time to play. Now, I only draft when I absolutely have to (weekly tickets), and would never even consider doing it for fun - because it's NOT fun. It's a hateful experience.

      There are few worse feelings in this game than drafting what you think is an amazing deck from the cards you had access to, and getting your ass kicked by someone from a completely different pod that just had purely better packs than you. At least in the old draft, you saw all the cards going past and had an idea of what else was going to show up and how strong the archetypes were looking. Here, you have no control at all - you just get blindsided, and it saps any possible fun out of the experience.

      No thanks. I'll save my money for if constructed gauntlet ever actually comes back.

      That's exactly how I feel and what I am doing as it's only a task that needs to be done because of weekly tickets. I don't even play after loosing first round not for a rare card the prize structure is not worth the effort and the time.
    • Treasure wrote:

      The wait time at 2-0 is impossible often i simply stop waiting after 10 minutes of no opponent last time I waited over 30 minutes to finally get loaded into a game. Never had those problem in the old system. Also the queues are always at 0/8 and i have to be online at peak time to have the chance to join one in where it is 5/8 already in it.
      I feels like the old system was way better in every way even time wise and used time to finish it.
      I've waited over an hour multiple times at 2-0. It is insanity.
    • Problem
      It takes too long to find an opponent in draft, especially if you have 2-0 wins.


      Solutions
      Let players queue multiple games at the same time. This can be multiple game modes (i.e. constructed, draft, evo, etc.), multiple drafts (one deck with 2-0 wins, one deck with 0-1 wins, etc.), or both. If it's multiple drafts, then you would need to let players start a new draft before they finish their current draft.

      Queuing multiple game modes at the same time is a common suggestion in many games. Just google it.
    • Perandus wrote:

      Problem
      It takes too long to find an opponent in draft, especially if you have 2-0 wins.


      Solutions
      Let players queue multiple games at the same time. This can be multiple game modes (i.e. constructed, draft, evo, etc.), multiple drafts (one deck with 2-0 wins, one deck with 0-1 wins, etc.), or both. If it's multiple drafts, then you would need to let players start a new draft before they finish their current draft.

      Queuing multiple game modes at the same time is a common suggestion in many games. Just google it.
      Woudnt that mean that you could possibly never find a 2-0 game becaue you are constantly going into a different format?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Pandaemonium ().

    • Pandaemonium wrote:

      Perandus wrote:

      Problem
      It takes too long to find an opponent in draft, especially if you have 2-0 wins.


      Solutions
      Let players queue multiple games at the same time. This can be multiple game modes (i.e. constructed, draft, evo, etc.), multiple drafts (one deck with 2-0 wins, one deck with 0-1 wins, etc.), or both. If it's multiple drafts, then you would need to let players start a new draft before they finish their current draft.

      Queuing multiple game modes at the same time is a common suggestion in many games. Just google it.
      Woudnt that mean that you could possibly never find a 2-0 game becaue you are constantly going into a different format?
      If you queue for different game modes and they have faster queue, then yes. But multiple queue would be optional. If you want to, you can still queue only for your 2-0 game like you do right now.

      I suggest we let players prioritize their queues too. So if Amy and Bob queue for constructed and their 2-0 game, and they prioritize their 2-0 game, then we match them for their 2-0 game. It should be easy to program.
    • Short Rant:

      I like how everyone assumes things are easy to program without seeing the code Hex currently has or knowing how introducing new code to it would effect it. Not entirely related to this thread but I keep seeing people say this over and over it just starts to get annoying.

      End Rant
    • Sukebe wrote:

      Short Rant:

      I like how everyone assumes things are easy to program without seeing the code Hex currently has or knowing how introducing new code to it would effect it. Not entirely related to this thread but I keep seeing people say this over and over it just starts to get annoying.

      End Rant
      Counter Rant:

      I hate how some people assume the Hex programmers are so incompetent that every change (no matter how small) will take massive amounts of time/resources to implement.

      End Counter Rant
    • Mach wrote:

      Sukebe wrote:

      Short Rant:

      I like how everyone assumes things are easy to program without seeing the code Hex currently has or knowing how introducing new code to it would effect it. Not entirely related to this thread but I keep seeing people say this over and over it just starts to get annoying.

      End Rant
      Counter Rant:
      I hate how some people assume the Hex programmers are so incompetent that every change (no matter how small) will take massive amounts of time/resources to implement.

      End Counter Rant
      I never said they were...you are putting words in my mouth. My rant at least did not put words in anyone's mouths. It is simply a fact that coding is more difficult than most people assume and unless you have worked on the code in question yourself you do not know how it is set up and therefore cannot say what is easy and what is hard. You are better than this mach, you usually at least stick to what is posted and not put words in peoples mouths.
    • Sukebe wrote:

      I never said they were...you are putting words in my mouth. My rant at least did not put words in anyone's mouths.
      You put words in everyone's mouths ("I like how everyone assumes"). In contrast, I limited my criticism to "some people" and did not call you out specifically.


      Sukebe wrote:

      unless you have worked on the code in question yourself you do not know how it is set up and therefore cannot say what is easy and what is hard.
      Thus it is both true that

      1. Sometimes it is harder to make a change than uninformed people assume.
      2. Sometimes it is easier to make a change than uninformed people assume.

      You criticized everyone for the former (even though not everyone assumes that) while ignoring the latter. Hence my noting of the latter, which is just as big of a problem in these discussions.
    • Mach wrote:

      Sukebe wrote:

      I never said they were...you are putting words in my mouth. My rant at least did not put words in anyone's mouths.
      You put words in everyone's mouths ("I like how everyone assumes"). In contrast, I limited my criticism to "some people" and did not call you out specifically.

      Sukebe wrote:

      unless you have worked on the code in question yourself you do not know how it is set up and therefore cannot say what is easy and what is hard.
      Thus it is both true that
      1. Sometimes it is harder to make a change than uninformed people assume.
      2. Sometimes it is easier to make a change than uninformed people assume.

      You criticized everyone for the former (even though not everyone assumes that) while ignoring the latter. Hence my noting of the latter, which is just as big of a problem in these discussions.
      I never said it was easy or hard. Only that people don't know either way. You chose to read more into that than I actually wrote. I only mentioned it could be harder than thought because so many say it is probably easy. By your own logic and your own posts there is nothing wrong with doing that so I fail to see why you take offense to it.

      I admit I should have put "so many" instead of everyone though. But did it really deserve all of this from you? While I usually disagree with you this hardly seems like your usually well thought out posts.