Still might be worth considering adding 1 more land to make it 41/18 instead of 40/17. (Keep in mind that our average cmc is just under 4, and that 20% of our deck is 5cmc or higher)


With 40/17 (25.5 land) we have a...
70% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.
~55% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.
~28% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.
74% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.
31% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.
27.5% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.
32.3% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.
35% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.
32.6% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


With 41/18 (26 land) we have a...
74% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.
58% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.
31% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.
73% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.
30% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.
~27% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.
32.1% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.
32.1% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.
35.7% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


and just for kicks with a 43/19 (26.5 land) we have a...
74.5% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.
60% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.
32% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.
71% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.
~28% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.
25.5% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.
32% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.
31.5% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.
36.5% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


Honestly I think the percentages in general just look better with the 41/18 over the 40/17. The big ones are a ~75% chance to drop land 4 on T4 over a 70% chance, and a significant reduction at the chance of getting screwed (I'd rather take flood over screw in a deck like this, especially when you start to factor in mulligans).

The downsides to 41 are negligible enough that I'm cool tossing a forest back in for 41. Honestly, it hurt a little to cut out.

How's everyone else feeling?

That being said, if you are on the draw definitely drop back to the 40/17, and maybe even to 41/17 or even 40/16.


On the draw with a 41/18 we have a...
82.5% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.70% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.43% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.77% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.35% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.29% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.28.7% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.21.2% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.50% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


On the draw with a 40/17 we have a...
80% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.66% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.39% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.78% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.36.5% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.30% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.29.75% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.23.9% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.46.3% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


On the draw with a 41/17 we have a...
77.5% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.62.5% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.35.5% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.77% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.35% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.29% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.30.2% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.26.1% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.44.7% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


On the draw with a 40/16 we have a...
74% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.58% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.31% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.78% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.36.5% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.30% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.30.9% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.29.1% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.39.9% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.

I mean, this one just depends what you feel more comfortable with depending on the deck you are against, and whether you want to risk trading CA for a higher chance of losing some tempo.

Derp, formatting fail.


On the draw with a 41/18 we have a...
82.5% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.
70% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.
43% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.
77% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.
35% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.
29% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.
28.7% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.
21.2% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.
50% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


On the draw with a 40/17 we have a...
80% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.
66% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.
39% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.
78% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.
36.5% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.
30% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.
29.75% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.
23.9% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.
46.3% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


On the draw with a 41/17 we have a...
77.5% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.
62.5% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.
35.5% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.
77% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.
35% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.
29% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.
30.2% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.
26.1% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.
44.7% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.


On the draw with a 40/16 we have a...
74% chance of dropping a 4th land on turn 4.
58% chance of dropping a 5th land on turn 5.
31% chance of having more than 5 land on turn 5.
78% chance of having a cluestone on turn 3.
36.5% chance of having more than 1 cluestone by turn 3.
30% chance of having any 1 card in our deck in our hand by turn 5.
30.9% chance of having exactly 3 land in our opening hand.
29.1% chance of having less than 3 land in our opening hand.
39.9% chance of having more than 3 land in our opening hand.

that's a lot of numbers. i'm good with what you guys decided

It is interesting how similar 41/18 on the play and 40/16 on the draw are.

The only thing that really changes are the opening hand statistics.

I don't know supersun. Whatever you deem best fit.

Well, I already said why I think on the play 41/18 is better. I'd much rather deal with flood then screw in a deck like this, and 75% is much better then 70% in a deck that NEEDS that 4th land drop.

In regards to on the draw, it just all depends on what the opponents running. If we are against some stupid blitz aggro deck that we need a 5th land drop on turn 5 to drop a sentinel then that's different then if we are fighting a similar slow deck where the sacrifice of the tempo of a T5 land drop is worth the added threat count, and the deck should be tweaked accordingly.

Fair enough. Can do 41/18 main, 40/16 on the play game two, and 40/17 any other time.

+1 Forest

Think you mean 40/16 on the draw game two.

I don't imagine that going 40/16 on the play with a deck like ours would fare to well :P

Seems like we've got a pretty good plan here. Supersun seems to know all the maths >_>

Is anyone else having trouble fishbowling with the deck in the playtester? I keep getting a deck load error :/

Yes, that's what I meant. Bloody brain-finger miscommunications. :p

@zephyrkey - Didn't have any issues fishbowling myself. But being page creator may have something to do with it. And I will say that the fishbowling I did was beautiful, too.

I find the tappedout playtester to be pretty hit and miss when it comes time to actually do some goldfishing.

Moving onto a little Q&A before we get to the real fun.

1 - What colors do you predict were most open, and least open?

red and blue were definitely most open. we weren't seeing too many black cards i think. but i don't pay too much attention to this stuff so disclaimer alert! supersun probably knows the best

2 - How many match wins (7 total possible) do you think you'll accumulate in this round-robin event?

we have a really slow deck. i'm hoping for 4 wins (at least %50).

3 - What do you suspect to be the colors of the player to your right (that you were getting your cards from in the first and third packs), and the player to your left (that you were getting your cards from in the second pack)

i honestly don't know. like i said, don't pay too much attention to detail and color signaling (first draft... ish) so i'm going to leave this question to other more experienced people

4 - Pick apart your own draft a bit for me. How did it start, what strategies were you thinking of, how did they evolve? How did your discussion process go/how did your group work together and come to decisions? How did you like the Cluestoney madness of DGM-DGM-DGM

with our first pick, ready / wiilling, it looked like we were going to be in jund, then renounce the guilds came so it was pretty much for sure we were in white. black wasn't too open and we had much better options in green and white, but we didn't really start drafting red until pack 2. from then on, it was GW and either r or b. got more in red so we went more red and splashed just a bit of black for willing. naturally, we added in some of the better black cards we got and this deck is the product of about a month's work

1 - What colors do you predict were most open, and least open?

Green was the most open. Selesnya, Golgari, and Gruul multicolored cards tended to rotate pretty far before being snatched.

2 - How many match wins (7 total possible) do you think you'll accumulate in this round-robin event?

Our deck is slow, but I don't think that's going to be a major issue in 3xDMG since Pillarfield Ox will likely set the benchmark and anything that has less then 3 toughness will be vulnerable to getting +1ed by the black gatekeeper, and I would assume that most groups should have realize this fairly early on which should deter aggro decks more then normal in a draft. What really concerns me though is that any aggro deck in the air will probably have us flat out beat since our deck doesn't have a lot of answers to an air raid (not that there are a lot of answers to the blue common bomb that I'll talk about later).

I hope we at least go at least 50%

3 - What do you suspect to be the colors of the player to your right (that you were getting your cards from in the first and third packs), and the player to your left (that you were getting your cards from in the second pack)

I suspect that someone to our near right is Blue/White, someone else is Blue/Green, and someone else is Blue/Red. One of those people is also running black as well, probably the person closest to our right. That may have changed as the draft went on and any bombs that were opened may have easily caused a group to switch colors.

To our left I'm not as sure, but If I were to guess someone to our left was Black/White, and one other person was ....maybe Black/Red?

4 - Pick apart your own draft a bit for me. How did it start, what strategies were you thinking of, how did they evolve? How did your discussion process go/how did your group work together and come to decisions? How did you like the Cluestoney madness of DGM-DGM-DGM? etc. etc.

We started out really early trying to see if we could choke white or green out from the people to our right since our first pack had a Ready / Willing which was largely the only card that had white or green in the first pack that anyone would want to take, and get some good passes to us in pack 2. That plan failed rather quickly when the Protect/Serve flood came.

Towards the end of pack 1 we got passed some red cards that had no business getting passed that late (2x Rubblebelt Maaka and a Scab Clan), and we picked those up.

From pack 2 we were hoping that we might be able to draft some gatekeepers that people didn't want. Unfortunately someone else had that idea and gatekeepers and gates were pretty slim pickings after pack 1.

From pack 3, due to the fact that we had like 2 Armored Wolf Riders table to us, we decided to go for a more ramp based strategy using the piles of cluestones that we got and the giant creatures that were kept being passed our way.

One thing to note though is that part way through the 3rd pack I sorta noticed something rather gamebreaking about 3xDMG, and that was this was as RICEy of a format if I've ever saw one. The problem is that blue may very well have a card that will amount to being a common level bomb, Maze Glider. I mean seriously? A 3/5 flier in a format with garbage removal option. How on earth do you kill a 3/5 flier in 3xDMG? It's not like Blue is slower then everyone else either. They have just as good (read:bad) of ramp options as everyone else (cluestones), and this is probably a format where the best common level removal spells are blue with Runner's Bane, which conveniently enough stops Maze Glider, and Hands of Binding. Unfortunately we realized this far too late. The only thing is though is that this isn't exactly immediately obvious and no one else may have seen this at all in time to abuse this. If someone's group did notice this early on though I expect them to be handily getting first.

I think what ended up being the most open was white which is why we picked up alot of the white cards we saw.

We have some good ramp so I'm thinking 4 wins.

The player to the left should be using some combo of BUR I'm so pissed we passed them 2 far/away. I stopped paying attention early in pack 2

This was pretty much Supersun's deck. The first pack we had the most disagreements, I thought we should be taking some good UR coming our way but Supersun's arguments persuaded the rest of the team otherwise.

zaddos i'm sorry you thought of it like that. i don't know, i personally don't like far/away. maybe because i don't have experience with it or because i just don't like those colors. you have to admit, supersun did have a lot of good arguments. i don't want to sound like i'm lecturing, but i just want to say that i was open to any suggestions, and if you had convinced me, i would work to convince others. anyways, whats done is done and i'm really sorry this draft was a bad experience for you.

I'm not saying it was a bad experience and some of the time Supersun made me question what I thought was best also. All I'm saying is that his decisions dominated the direction of our deck. If we win I'll give him 90% of the credit the other 10 goes to GurieScion for playing the games.

I do take responsibility for not convincingly arguing my perspective. I know when I draft I try to stay away from the colors I'm uncomfortable with but far/away is the best removal in this set maybe all of ravnica and we took two terds instead imo. Not mad this was still fun and I'm still excited to see how we do.

I was already ridiculously close for voting Far / Away over Ready / Willing in that first pack that it really wouldn't have taken much to convince me to switch my vote. That being said in a deck like ours Ready / Willing is 100% a bomb, and probably one of the best cards that we've seen all draft.

In hindsight I probably would have picked Far / Away over Ready / Willing now that I have a little more experience with 3xDMG though.

Also, I don't think it would have been incredibly difficult to convince me to go U/R, but looking back in hindsight at the cards that we've seen I think we made the right choice to stay away from it. The Instants and Sorceries from U/R that I remember seeing weren't that impressive.

In general though we probably saw the worst cards out of anyone at the table, I mean our first pick in pack 3 was atrocious, and we were forced to take a card that tabled in the previous pack.

I remain unconvinced that Ready/Willing is a bomb. Hopefully our team leaders gameplay will prove me wrong.

We will never know how things may have been different. I don't think we were impressed to much with any of the cards we ended up seeing.

One thing that we've seen a lot of were combat trick cards. We saw like what, 4 Protects and Serves, a Profit and Loss, and at least 1 Rubblebelt Maaka that we didn't get to grab?

Ready and Willing pretty much says to all of those, too bad, I still win.

Using a combat trick against a combat trick does not turn a combat trick into a bomb. Two things I like about the cards you just mentioned more than I like ready/willing:

Less to cast.

easier to cast.

But like I said there's no use worrying about what might have been. That was then and we have taken a different road.

I think we have made the best possible deck out of the cards we drafted and I have complete confidence in our pilot.

Good job team

(Clearly you guys are better at answering these than I)

1 - What colors do you predict were most open, and least open?

• Blue seemed the most open throughout, with red here and there. Black was almost certainly the least open.

2 - How many match wins (7 total possible) do you think you'll accumulate in this round-robin event?

• I'd like to go for a full 7, but optimism aside, I'm confident in holding our own enough to hit at least 4.

3 - What do you suspect to be the colors of the player to your right (that you were getting your cards from in the first and third packs), and the player to your left (that you were getting your cards from in the second pack)

• Ugh, this has always been my weak suit in draft and memory alike. Deferring to everyone else here.

4 - Pick apart your own draft a bit for me. How did it start, what strategies were you thinking of, how did they evolve? How did your discussion process go/how did your group work together and come to decisions? How did you like the Cluestoney madness of DGM-DGM-DGM? etc. etc.

• Well, we grabbed Ready / Willing as a bomb over Far / Away for pick one, and that more or less set our colors from then on. Tried nabbing some black, but ended up heavier in the white. Had a fairly loose strategy early on, but during pack two (where it was clear black was a splash at best), we started going for the "ramp into heavy hitters" strategy, which ended pretty decent as far as I imagine.
  Decision-wise, I'm pleased to say that we got some heavy discussion in, but rarely did we hit a point where two / three choices were even worth arguing about. I think the simple voting system worked fairly well, though I suspect that once or twice we may have had a few reservations from some based on an already-clear majority.
  As for the Cluestones, we couldn't have done this strategy without them, but respectfully, never again (DGMx3).