The Best Best Of
I have no idea how I heard about Magic: The Gathering. I am fairly certain that it was an ad of some sort because the first time I walked into a game shop to buy MTG products I had to find the store on my own, and I went alone, and I needed the guy at the register to help me. I had no friends that played. I made two decks to play with my then girlfriend. She and I played chess and scrabble regularly so I figured another game would be fun. Little did I know that I stumbled onto the most interesting game I have ever come across. Aside from many other issues, she and I would eventually break up, in part, due to my obsession with MTG. It did not take long for me to get the fever and have the drive to play magic at the highest competitive level I could muster. This is how I met Ty. I joined a message board for Texas magic players (RIP TMZ you were the worst). Ty and I would first have a friendship on TMZ and later we'd chat on Magic Online, so it feels quite appropriate that we would be here talking about another online magic offering: MTG Arena. Specifically, the current focus on single game matches over best of three matches. I like taking the scenic route when I am making a point so strap in.
In my heyday I played magic about 15-20 hours a week. I would test constructed with my team on Magic Workstation (the software that basically pirated MTG) and I would do in person drafts and testing every weekend on both Friday nights and Saturdays. I was 100% in the semi-pro camp of magic players. In those days it was quite irritating to have the DCI or Wizards make changes to the game that, in the view of most competitive magic players, was "dumbing down" the game. Every time the DCI changed a rule or banned a card or that time Wizards said they didn't want combos that could win prior to turn 4 or when pro tour coverage during Lorwyn talked so much about how the new focus on good creatures makes Pro magic look like kitchen table magic, and many other times I was with the hoard decrying "the end of magic!" Magic grinders have declared the death of magic so often that I am pretty sure we're in a Halloween film.
These days my life has changed. I no longer can devote 15-20 hours to this game I still very much love. I work longer hours, I have a wife, we have a daughter and being able to carve out 1 or 2 hours a day or even just finding any random 1-2 hours I have nothing going on is pretty difficult. My time as a competitive magic player is pretty much over. Then I heard about MTG Arena. It was supposed to use the free to play but buy extra stuff if you want it model. I personally really like this model of gaming. I am grinder and always have been so ya, I will grind out the free mode with pleasure. The issue with grinding like this is finding the time to do it, but MTG Arena has solved this problem for me by having single game matches that provide prize support and thus support for a grinder with little time such as myself. More often then not when I play MTG Arena it is literally one game at a time. My playing currently looks like this:
I might have 30 extra mins to spare before work. Play Arena
Take a coffee break for 20 min. Play an arena match
Go to lunch for an hour: Play an arena match (maybe a best of three if I am feeling it, but more likely best of ones so I can grind out more prizes in the same about of time)
Waiting for my wife not sure how long it will be: Join a draft. PAUSE THE DRAFT when my wife is back and ready for the whatever. Finish the draft later.
This is all while MTG Arena is still only on PC. If/When MTG Arena is a phone app I suspect I will play even more. Waiting in line? Start a draft! Taking the 20-30 min train ride to a soccer match, play a match. Bored at Jury duty but not sure exactly how long it will be? Play single game matches because they are so quick!
The time commitment of best of three matches is by far the biggest deterrent for me to play. I gave you all my personal history and experience specifically to demonstrate that I do love best of three magic. I am a competitive grinder at heart even if life isn't allowing me to commit to that right now. I like deck design the most of magic and sideboards are one of the most challenging part of deck design so I do truly love best of three magic. I miss going to GPs and grinding the PTQ scene (ya I have literally never played an RPTQ because I simply cannot commit the time to play a qualifier that does nothing but give me an invite to ANOTHER QUALIFIER! God the DCI really killed magic with that change...).
Best of one matches with a decent prize support are tailored made for me. They are also better for the casual player. Other than reducing the time commitment single game matches also reduce the number of cards needed to win stuff. When I first started playing Arena I looked up decks to see which ones would be easiest to assemble using my wild cards and small collection. I could not build a single 75 card deck. Not one. I could build a 60 card deck though. It is a real bummer for a semi-grinder to have to spend wildcards are some random SB cards that I use in one matchup. When I realized I couldn't build the SB for my deck I thought I was stuck until I earned more wilds. But then I realized that I could play constructed in a best of one format and suddenly I am grinding for gold so I can draft to earn gems and earn wilds and buy more packs etc. I can do all of this in small increments of time.
I remember any time I felt like drafting in the way way back days I would have to wait until the weekend or call up a bunch of folks and try to make a team draft happen. Then MTGO made it so that I could draft whenever, but I had to have at least 3-4 hours free in case I played all three rounds. The worst was if I lose in round 1 after like an hour and a half. I now have to find something else do to for the other 1.5 hours because joining another draft is not an option. Then draft leagues became a thing and suddenly I could draft and then play games when I had the chance. Again though I definitely need 45ish min free to complete the draft portion. Then if I wanted to play a match I had to be sure I had 50-60 minutes in case the match went long (I am a slow player so it always goes long).
Now? Now I have Arena. I can instantly start a draft whenever I want and pause it if I have to, and not having to wait for other players makes the draft go so fast. On the opposite side of this, I love being able to take as long as I want to make a pick. It is a great way for someone very familiar with magic, but not familiar with a set to learn the cards while drafting. I literally read and reread cards every pick until I have an understanding of the pool. Once the draft is done all I need to do is find 15-20 min to run a single game. Often the games are less than 15 min. It's freaking great!
From my perspective, there is a place for best of three competitive magic. If ever my life affords me the time to play competitively again I will certainly look for best of three magic. It is far superior to best of one with regard to skills testing. It takes away some of the variance and allows the skillful deck builder to improve their winning percentage by giving them sideboard games to tweak their build and also allows the more skillful player to take advantage of knowing what they are against. There is no doubt that best of three is the better format to determine who is the king of all these nerds. The thing is not everyone wants to be the king of the nerds, and even some that do (like me) simply don't have the time to do that. For people like me or other casual types, best of one is perfect.
This whole blog post was brought about when Ty and I discussed the stat recently released by the developers: 97% of games played on MTG arena are best of one matches. Ty talked about how the app design encourages best of one play. I definitely agree with this notion. The question at hand though is how much of an impact is app design making? It is certainly much easier to find best of one matches. It's the default offering after all. I can easily concede that the design has an impact. The thing is those that prefer best of three either a) are a small percentage or b) of those that prefer best of three a big portion of them don't prefer it enough to take make even the smallest of efforts to find best of three. That is pretty clear in the data. It becomes even more clear when you realize that the stat is talking about *games*. This means for any bests of three match the stats count at least two games. To have an even game count those playing best of one need to play twice as many *matches* as those playing best of three because again each best of three counts as two games at least. What this says to me is that the number of players satisfied with best of one is far greater than the number of player dissatisfied. In our discussion, Ty argued that since best of one players likely don't have a preference Arena designers should listen to the best of three players because they do have a preference and are expressing that preference. This is actually a common misconception about how customer satisfaction works. Having worked in customer service management for several years now it has become apparent to me that those that are having their preferences met by a company do not do anything to say thank you to that company or pressure them to maintain the status quo. They just keep using the products as always without comment. Those that are dissatisfied, however, are always very vocal. If companies guide themselves by their complaints they will certainly fail because complaints will never stop no matter what you do. It is the reason that "you can't please everybody" is a well known concept. It is important then that companies guide themselves by more than their complaints. In this case, I think Arena is making a smart business decision. They see the data that shows their user base is satisfied with their offering so they are just going to keep on trucking even in the face of criticism. If their user base begins to decrease then I am sure they will review comments to try to figure out why, but for now, they seem to be doing what they think will keep them in business. They aren't non-profit or a charity after all. They are a business and if we want to keep getting new cards and services from Wizard's of the coast then I think it is important to trust their business decisions. Definitely keep voicing your concerns because it will possibly guide them (in fact they decided not to change prize structure after the backlash), but don't expect that your comments alone will drive their decision making. Magic has existed for a quarter century not just as a game, but as a business. Lasting even a decade as business is hard. I mean who is still playing VS System? Is anyone still slanging Star Wars CCG cards? It seems to me Wizard's and Hasbro are interested in keeping their game alive. Part of that is providing offerings that best fit their users' needs.
I think it was really interesting to get that stat. I wish they offered more. It would be super interesting if they released all their data so players could comb throw it looking for things that interest them. We could, for example, look into the match choices of players after they have acquired all new player experience decks. I suspect a significant portion of the 97% comes from new players trying to accomplish the quests to get new decks. This I assume could possibly reduce that 97% figure and give a more accurate picture of what is happening. I would also be interested in looking for anyone that played at least one best of three match. Of that group, I would want to know the percentage of best of one play versus best of three play. Basically, I would want to answer the question "of those that are aware of best of three how often do they choose each format." We could even go deeper and review those that played constructed best of three. Constructed best of three was the hardest to find (though I don't think it was that hard). I would be interested in knowing what percentage of each format did any player that played best of three in constructed plays. I suspect that even those that found best of three still play best of one more often.
I feel that those specific reviews of the data would help us determine how much players care about best of three matches. Without that data analysis, it is hard to truly understand why that 97% figure exists. That said 97% is incredibly high, and with only that I figure would also feel pretty confident in supporting any format with that kind of track record.
I have no idea what Ty will say about this topic, but I am certain I will agree with much it. Best of three is the superior skills testing format. It may also be the more fun format, though honestly, I enjoy both them about the same. If I were deck designing more then maybe I would want to think about sideboards. What I am also certain of is that Wizard's decision to focus on best of one seems reasonable given the data they decided to share. Even in the face of the obvious design decisions that could inflate that stat, it still to me seems like a stat that is pretty hard to ignore. I personally have a great use for best of one. I am quite grateful for it, and I suspect I am not unique in this regard. I very literally cannot play magic otherwise.
Thanks for reading my first foray into blogging about MTG. I hope it was as interesting to read as it was to write.
-José
P.S. Ya I love reading my own writing or hearing myself talk. As a deck designer, I also like how best of one changes the deck design. Combo decks that have silver bullet weaknesses suddenly are more appealing. Often silver bullets are SB cards with a singular focus. Your opponents can either play those singular focus cards in the main and weaken themselves against everyone else, or just try to dodge your combo. Decks that rely on graveyards comes to mind and that UR phoenix deck is the first to come to mind of active decks in standard. That deck is not unbeatable without hate cards but it is tough. That said, I cannot see how it has a chance at all in games 2 and 3 against decks with some semblance of a game one plan and also graveyard hate in their SBs. To me, UR phoenix decks are simply unplayable in best of three, but much more appealing in best of one. I like that this quirk exists.
No comments:
Post a Comment