PDA

View Full Version : IDEA: Asynchronous Swiss Draft



Yoss
04-30-2014, 12:49 PM
Credit to Reifu and Mach for helping come up with this idea:
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=35143&page=13&p=361294&viewfull=1#post361294

To be clear, this is not about the Competitive Draft Queue (8-4 payout, single elimination). This is only about the Swiss Draft Queue taking advantage of the digital environment, in exchange for some small loss of the normal Draft interaction that would be over the heads of most non-competitive drafters anyway.

We propose to change the Swiss Draft queue to the following structure.

Tournament Flow
1. Queue up in the Draft queue. (That's what the swiss is currently named, right?)
2. Wait for 8 players total.
3. Draft normally.
4. You can now take a break if you like, or continue to an untimed Deckbuilding.
5. When done with Deck, queue up for "Draft Round 1".
6. Wait for 2 players total.
7. Play a match.
8. May now take a break. When ready, queue up for "Draft Round 2".
9. Wait for 2 players total. (System makes sure you don't have a repeat opponent, and tries to match you with someone in your 8-man pod when queue times are low.)
10. Play a match.
11. May now take a break. When ready, queue up for "Draft Round 3".
12. Wait for 2 players total. (System makes sure you don't have a repeat opponent, and tries to match you with someone in your 8-man pod when queue times are low.)
13. Play a match.
14. Collect payout.

What is lost:
You no longer have a closed pool of cards. You don't really know what your opponents have in their pools, because they could have come from a different 8-man drafting pod. As a consequence, there is almost no point in counter-drafting. All your drafting strategy is purely for the purpose of improving your own pool, not for sabotaging others. This might hobble the new player learning experience (not sure). Another problem is that you can have imbalance between 8-man card pools, which leads one 8-man group to have better decks on average than another 8-man group.

What is gained:
Most of the normal benefits of Asynchronous play, discussed at length here:
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=32002
In short, you cut down on per-player queue times, assuming equal participation. (Note that because the first queue here is 8-man, some of the asynch benefit discussed in the other thread is lost.) You allow time-challenged players to join, which increases the player pool, which drives queue times down even farther and brings more dev money to CZE.

Discuss: are the gains worth the losses?

EDIT:
Changed queue names to 1, 2, 3 instead of Quarter, Semi, Final.
Added pool imbalance as a negative consideration.
Added stipulation to avoid duplicate opponents and to attempt in-pod matches when possible.

Khazrakh
04-30-2014, 12:52 PM
Discuss: are the gains worth the losses?

In my opinion: They are!
As a new player the finer nuances of drafting will be way beyond you anyway and since Swiss is meant to be the casual queue I'd say anything that helps make it more accessible is a good thing!

oncewasblind
04-30-2014, 12:57 PM
Yup. Make it happen CZE! Though instead of quarterfinals and semifinals, etc. I think a Round 1 - 3 system would make more sense. A huge benefit of an asynchronous system is that it doesn't force players to stay locked in for a set time. As such, you could now allow players who've lost their first matches to continue on and fight for 3rd place within their own individual queue.

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 12:59 PM
People should be learning in the Swiss queue so they can move up to the competitive queue after a time.

This doesn't eliminate the 8 man queue time which. And furthermore it exacerbates it by allowing people to effectively stay inside a draft for an unlimited amount of time, rather than having to queue up again.
Finally Cze has said they have a killer mode that will be the quick asynch format.

Kilo24
04-30-2014, 12:59 PM
I like the idea. I'd really like to have asynchronous play for drafts in some form, and not only does this do that this also offers a different playstyle for people who don't want to play with counter-drafting tactics.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 01:04 PM
Good to see at least some people here get it now, was beginning to think I was all alone. :eek:


Discuss: are the gains worth the losses?

For me, yes absolutely. I don't care much for the "lost" part of drafting when playing for fun anyway, only during bigger tournaments. I get 90%+ of the enjoyment of normal draft but I can probably play 2-3 times as much each week. Not to mention during times I otherwise couldn't (lunch etc). That is a big overall win in my book.

Also Round 1, Round 2 etc would probably be better names for Swiss-style playing.

Yoss
04-30-2014, 01:08 PM
Queue names updated. Continue discussion.

Miwa
04-30-2014, 01:21 PM
I would be more likely to play async drafts, simply because there is far less time commitment. There's also no reason to limit them to 3 rounds if the rewards were different. With Hearthstone existing, future card games are just going to have to provide a similar draft experience if they want to win over the masses. There are lots of people who want to play some cards, but don't need it to be as super-competitive as they need it to not take all day.

I understand that it provides a different experience than playing in a closed 8-person draft, but it gives players a way to play limited with only a 3 pack commitment, and still only have to build a 40 card deck. Playing in a sealed tournament is a completely different feel.

I doubt I'll ever play much constructed vs. random people, as that's like running the gauntlet through the different netdecks.

Daer
04-30-2014, 01:25 PM
Good to see at least some people here get it now, was beginning to think I was all alone. :eek:


People got it in the original thread, they just didn't think it was a good idea.

mudkip
04-30-2014, 01:26 PM
I'd rather see sealed as the Async format.

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 01:27 PM
I think the thing we can all agree on is that hex needs a way to play games pretty much instantly against random opponents in a limited mode with bite sized chunks. Queuing up for 8 people then drafting a deck so you can play a synchronously sometime later doesn't fit that bill for me. And if they went that route I would be extremely disappointed. It's a strictly worse arena from hearthstone.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 01:30 PM
People got it in the original thread, they just didn't think it was a good idea.

"Get it" as in understanding the need and agreeing it would be a good idea, which they clearly did not. Semantics.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 01:36 PM
I think the thing we can all agree on is that hex needs a way to play games pretty much instantly against random opponents in a limited mode with bite sized chunks. Queuing up for 8 people then drafting a deck so you can play a synchronously sometime later doesn't fit that bill for me. And if they went that route I would be extremely disappointed. It's a strictly worse arena from hearthstone.

I totally agree that we need something like that. I am sure they have something planned. If that something would replace my desire for asynch drafts or just be an even more casual newbie friendly alternative to it I do not know. Depends if it is as much fun and varied as draft.

I know some people think that asynch drafting would be the most casual thing ever that hardly anyone would want to do, but I really do still think they are mistaken. Drafting is so much more fun than anything else. Just doing something similar to arena would not satisfy my need to draft (asynch or otherwise), just like you don't think asynch drafting would satisfy your need to do "real" drafting.

Yoss
04-30-2014, 01:36 PM
I'd rather see sealed as the Async format.

Constructed and Sealed are both no-brainers to use the Async format. This would be in addition to, not instead of. The idea is that embracing digital (asynch) is the right thing to do in every place we can reasonably do so.

The idea proposed in this thread is not a "slam dunk" for asynch the way Constructed and Sealed are, but is still worth thinking about.

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 01:38 PM
you could just as easily hit a button, see 15 cards, pick one, then it shows u 14, u pick one, 13, 12 etc and then make a deck and then hit another button and face other people who did this as well, why have the 8 person requirement, and since your initial plan basically eliminates counter-picking i think my solution is much simpler.

Kilo24
04-30-2014, 01:40 PM
I think the thing we can all agree on is that hex needs a way to play games pretty much instantly against random opponents in a limited mode with bite sized chunks. Queuing up for 8 people then drafting a deck so you can play a synchronously sometime later doesn't fit that bill for me. And if they went that route I would be extremely disappointed. It's a strictly worse arena from hearthstone.
I agree with you. If this was the sole asynchronous tournament option, I wouldn't be happy either.

But I personally was looking more at it as a replacement for swiss drafts, not as a replacement for another asynchronous mode. I didn't think that this proposal was intended as anything else.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 01:42 PM
you could just as easily hit a button, see 15 cards, pick one, then it shows u 14, u pick one, 13, 12 etc and then make a deck and then hit another button and face other people who did this as well, why have the 8 person requirement, and since your initial plan basically eliminates counter-picking i think my solution is much simpler.

How would the game pick what to show you? Do you get rares from other packs than your own? What have they picked out? Random cards? Where is the strategy in that? How do you read/send signals to a computer? How do you learn to adjust your strategy depending on what is passed? Surely you have to agree that the other 7 people in a draft do more than just pick random cards from their packs and send the rest your way?

I really do think people overestimate the value of counter-picking stuff. That is a very small and quite advanced part of drafting. The rest is still there with this alternative.

shocker455
04-30-2014, 01:51 PM
Mixing draft pods makes the game way to luck based. Id played in drafts where it seems like every pack had 7 'first pick' cards, and all 8 people end up with very powerful decks. Then there is drafts were just about every pack is complete garbage. How ever the matches are still fairly balanced because everyone's deck's power level is around the same(excluding op bomb mythics/legendaries). If your in a weak pod, and vsing a guy from a strong pod, odds are you will be crushed no matter how well you play.

Yoss
04-30-2014, 01:53 PM
Mixing draft pods makes the game way to luck based. Id played in drafts where it seems like every pack had 7 'first pick' cards, and all 8 people end up with very powerful decks. Then there is drafts were just about every pack is complete garbage. How ever the matches are still fairly balanced because everyone's deck's power level is around the same(excluding op bomb mythics/legendaries). If your in a weak pod, and vsing a guy from a strong pod, odds are you will be crushed no matter how well you play.

I'll add this to the "what you lose" list.

b1uepenguin
04-30-2014, 01:57 PM
Would love to see synch as either draft or sealed. Would definitely make sure I use those draft tickets every week. My day is full of bursts of free time when I would love to sit down and play a game or part of a tournament, but not many 2 hour stretches where I can sit and draft and play a full tourney.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 01:58 PM
Mixing draft pods makes the game way to luck based. Id played in drafts where it seems like every pack had 7 'first pick' cards, and all 8 people end up with very powerful decks. Then there is drafts were just about every pack is complete garbage. How ever the matches are still fairly balanced because everyone's deck's power level is around the same(excluding op bomb mythics/legendaries). If your in a weak pod, and vsing a guy from a strong pod, odds are you will be crushed no matter how well you play.

Well the thing is that there are clearly people willing to add a bit more luck to it rather than not play as much. Also half the time it will be the other way around. Just like sometimes all the bombs are on the other side of the table and your side gets crap, and sometimes it's the opposite. Sometimes you sit next to newbies who pass you bombs all day long, and sometimes you sit between two world class professionals. It evens out in the long run and you can still have fun no matter what happens.

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 01:58 PM
I agree with you. If this was the sole asynchronous tournament option, I wouldn't be happy either.

But I personally was looking more at it as a replacement for swiss drafts, not as a replacement for another asynchronous mode. I didn't think that this proposal was intended as anything else.


Several downsides with this, The more queues there are the thinner the user base is spread. Very early on this will matter at least, maybe not later, so having this in addition to normal swiss and competitive draft formats, and asynchronous sealed and constructed, and potentially normal sealed and constructed, and this other mode that is supposed to be fun, and bitesized, what are we gaining really from making drafts asynchronous? You still have virtually identical time investment required, it is in fact identical if you draft and drop, and just a tiny bit more flexible if you don't. As far as I can tell asynchronous drafts is all downside in that it eats up a valuable queue slot for our user base, and provides nothing better than another mode will.

Quasari
04-30-2014, 01:59 PM
How would the game pick what to show you? Do you get rares from other packs than your own? What have they picked out? Random cards? Where is the strategy in that? How do you read/send signals to a computer? How do you learn to adjust your strategy depending on what is passed? Surely you have to agree that the other 7 people in a draft do more than just pick random cards from their packs and send the rest your way?

I really do think people overestimate the value of counter-picking stuff. That is a very small and quite advanced part of drafting. The rest is still there with this alternative.
Just an idea:
Async players are fed packs drafted by other players. So you open your pack, pick your card and that pack goes to a pool of second pick packs of which you are fed a pack from. Downside is that there needs to be some packs or an initial group to start the pooling process. Would be quite different from a normal draft.

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 02:02 PM
Mixing draft pods makes the game way to luck based. Id played in drafts where it seems like every pack had 7 'first pick' cards, and all 8 people end up with very powerful decks. Then there is drafts were just about every pack is complete garbage. How ever the matches are still fairly balanced because everyone's deck's power level is around the same(excluding op bomb mythics/legendaries). If your in a weak pod, and vsing a guy from a strong pod, odds are you will be crushed no matter how well you play.

This puts it much better than I could. This is why I HATE Hearthstone Arena. Ever pick mage and then get 0 Flamestrikes 0 Fireballs? Ever have a decently good arena picks and then face double Tyrion Fordring + Faceless Manipulator? http://i.imgur.com/TiYhP5B.jpg Lack of context for what you will be playing your potential drafted deck against is more frustrating than fun.

Yoss
04-30-2014, 02:05 PM
Several downsides with this, The more queues there are the thinner the user base is spread. Very early on this will matter at least, maybe not later, so having this in addition to normal swiss and competitive draft formats, and asynchronous sealed and constructed, and potentially normal sealed and constructed, and this other mode that is supposed to be fun, and bitesized, what are we gaining really from making drafts asynchronous? You still have virtually identical time investment required, it is in fact identical if you draft and drop, and just a tiny bit more flexible if you don't. As far as I can tell asynchronous drafts is all downside in that it eats up a valuable queue slot for our user base, and provides nothing better than another mode will.

The idea in this thread is listed as a replacement, not an addition, for the very reasons you specify. It's the same reason why Constructed and Sealed should be asych and not offer synch as an option. We are already looking at 6 queues (Swiss and 8-4 for each of Constructed, Sealed, and Draft). 4 of those 6 are obviously better as asynch (Constructed and Sealed, Swiss and 8-4). The proposal from this thread would make the 5th out of 6 and leave only Competitive Draft as synchronous because it has to be.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 02:05 PM
Just an idea:
Async players are fed packs drafted by other players. So you open your pack, pick your card and that pack goes to a pool of second pick packs of which you are fed a pack from. Downside is that there needs to be some packs or an initial group to start the pooling process. Would be quite different from a normal draft.
Same thing there, you lose almost all of the strategy of drafting. You can't try to force colors for future rewards or assess what colors are open and go into them, which actually is the biggest part of drafting.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 02:08 PM
This puts it much better than I could. This is why I HATE Hearthstone Arena. Ever pick mage and then get 0 Flamestrikes 0 Fireballs? Ever have a decently good arena picks and then face double Tyrion Fordring + Faceless Manipulator? http://i.imgur.com/TiYhP5B.jpg Lack of context for what you will be playing your potential drafted deck against is more frustrating than fun.

For me the biggest downside of arena is that it is a lot more random than draft, and there is hardly a chance to use good strategy other than the basics to get a better deck than other people. In a draft (asynch or not) you have much more influence.

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 02:08 PM
Same thing there, you lose almost all of the strategy of drafting. You can't try to force colors for future rewards or assess what colors are open and go into them, which actually is the biggest part of drafting.

I guess I just don't see where you're coming from, you want all of the competitive and strategy aspect of drafting, but in the end your picks have no context to what you're going to be playing against in the actual matches?

Yoss
04-30-2014, 02:08 PM
This puts it much better than I could. This is why I HATE Hearthstone Arena. Ever pick mage and then get 0 Flamestrikes 0 Fireballs? Ever have a decently good arena picks and then face double Tyrion Fordring + Faceless Manipulator? http://i.imgur.com/TiYhP5B.jpg Lack of context for what you will be playing your potential drafted deck against is more frustrating than fun.

This argument sounds like "it wouldn't be competitive enough, too much luck". Well, if you're so competitive, why are you in the Swiss queue in the first place? (That's an honest question, not rhetorical.)

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 02:08 PM
Okay, replacing standard swiss draft is not an option, it is the queue to learn to draft competitively in, you need to be able to learn to pick up on signaling and whatnot in order to have a shot in the competitive queues... Taking that away from people is just not an option.

Quasari
04-30-2014, 02:08 PM
Without some sort of a async drafting, I don't know how queue times would fair due to the desync between gameplay and the pod. Queue times to enter this queue would likely suffer and kill it by itself.

Yoss
04-30-2014, 02:11 PM
I guess I just don't see where you're coming from, you want all of the competitive and strategy aspect of drafting, but in the end your picks have no context to what you're going to be playing against in the actual matches?

From what I can tell, he's only accepting the loss because of schedule demands.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 02:11 PM
Okay, replacing standard swiss draft is not an option, it is the queue to learn to draft competitively in, you need to be able to learn to pick up on signaling and whatnot in order to have a shot in the competitive queues... Taking that away from people is just not an option.

How is signaling not a major part of asynch drafting? It is in fact THE biggest part. It's just counter-drafting that you don't learn. Which is an advanced skill that is probably wasted in swiss anyway, since you are probably that much better than everyone else already that you don't need it. If you know everything except counter-drafting and predicting which decks you will meet, you are more than ready for the competitive queues.

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 02:13 PM
This argument sounds like "it wouldn't be competitive enough, too much luck". Well, if you're so competitive, why are you in the Swiss queue in the first place? (That's an honest question, not rhetorical.)

You said, this is a replacement to swiss sync drafting. How do I learn to draft competitively then? Any picks I make in async drafting have no context to who I am playing against. I can't SEE that hey I should have drafted that removal because now I am facing overwhelming troops. I can't SEE the mistakes I make and learn from them. I just say, well clearly his draft pod was better than mine and move on.

Yoss
04-30-2014, 02:13 PM
Okay, replacing standard swiss draft is not an option, it is the queue to learn to draft competitively in, you need to be able to learn to pick up on signaling and whatnot in order to have a shot in the competitive queues... Taking that away from people is just not an option.

You can still signal. You can still assess pools. You can still do the majority of things that need to be learned. (Let me know if there's a particular one you think is missing.) All of the things that a newbie needs to learn will still apply. When ready for the next level, the more subtle skills can be learned in the Competitive Queue.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 02:14 PM
I guess I just don't see where you're coming from, you want all of the competitive and strategy aspect of drafting, but in the end your picks have no context to what you're going to be playing against in the actual matches?

Exactly. I am more than willing to give up this small (and for me quite boring) aspect of drafting in order to enjoy it 2-3 times more a week. It is simple math for me.

Kilo24
04-30-2014, 02:17 PM
Several downsides with this, The more queues there are the thinner the user base is spread. Very early on this will matter at least, maybe not later, so having this in addition to normal swiss and competitive draft formats, and asynchronous sealed and constructed, and potentially normal sealed and constructed, and this other mode that is supposed to be fun, and bitesized, what are we gaining really from making drafts asynchronous? You still have virtually identical time investment required, it is in fact identical if you draft and drop, and just a tiny bit more flexible if you don't. As far as I can tell asynchronous drafts is all downside in that it eats up a valuable queue slot for our user base, and provides nothing better than another mode will.

Hence why I said as a replacement (which is how the original post framed it as well). Swiss drafts and 8-4 drafts are already confirmed. Changing Swiss drafts to an asynchronous mode leaves just as many queues available.

Since you don't need to wait for all the other members of the 8-man draft current game to finish their round 1 or round 2 match to move on to the next round, that saves time otherwise spent waiting even if you draft and drop.

It's also that the time does not need to be continuous. It lets a player who can only spare an hour each day still play drafts without having to concede. That's quite a bit more flexible than the standard draft structure and not just a "tiny bit more flexible", IMO.

Quasari
04-30-2014, 02:17 PM
Exactly. I am more than willing to give up this small (and for me quite boring) aspect of drafting in order to enjoy it 2-3 times more a week. It is simple math for me.
That's if you can get into a drafting pod to actually queue for games. A synchronous component required for an asynchronous mode will probably be a disaster,

TJTaylor
04-30-2014, 02:22 PM
That's if you can get into a drafting pod to actually queue for games. A synchronous component required for an asynchronous will probably be a disaster,

This. It really doesn't make sense to me. The whole point of async is to allow people to play on the fly whenever they want in a competitive format. Async draft as it has been laid out means still having to wait for 8 people to gather to draft your cards which nullifies the benefit of async over a traditional format.

Async sealed, sounds logical. Async constructed, sure I can get behind that too as long as normal constructed options are available as well. But this just seems to further dilute the player pool for no real tangible benefit IMO.

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 02:22 PM
You can't actually verify if any of those skills did any good though, you're going to end up in completely different pods, you won't ever see someone who has a massive blue deck, and wonder if that's why you ended up not getting any sapphire. You cannot learn necessary skills in asynch, and get feedback on how well you're internalizing that knowledge when your games are completely outside of the draft experience.

You can't replace standard swiss draft with asynch. There have been a lot of bad ideas thrown around on this forum from time to time, but they all were at least trying to solve something, or do something, this makes you wait just like normal, destroys the learning experience of new players, and is just inferior to any other "pure" mode be it synched or asynched. It's the worst of all worlds for no tangible gain.

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 02:25 PM
But this just seems to further dilute the player pool for no real tangible benefit IMO.

The benefit is that they don't have to have multiple hours in a row of time saved to be able to draft. They can draft with an hour or so at a time. The only downsides are that you can't really learn anything and that your picks have no context to what you face. If you aren't fine with those downsides, just do 8-4 competitive drafts. Simple and easy.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 02:28 PM
That's if you can get into a drafting pod to actually queue for games. A synchronous component required for an asynchronous mode will probably be a disaster,

You guys seem to have very little faith in the game. I don't expect a whole lot of waiting around for a meager 8 people.

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 02:29 PM
You guys seem to have very little faith in the game. I don't expect a whole lot of waiting around for a meager 8 people.
Then why can't we have both sync and async swiss?

cferejohn
04-30-2014, 02:30 PM
That's if you can get into a drafting pod to actually queue for games. A synchronous component required for an asynchronous mode will probably be a disaster,

Point of order: actually playing a game is synchronous as well. I thought the point here was to avoid having to make a ~3 hour commitment to play a draft. Making several ~30-40 minute commitments on your schedule would probably be easier.

I can see playing outside of my draft pod - hate-drafting isn't really a viable thing to do anywhere but the very end of a pack anyway. It does take away a little of the skill - some draft pools are just better than others. Personally, I don't think it's worth it - this sounds exactly like something that would work great in sealed though.

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 02:34 PM
Honestly, hate drafting is pretty effective in this set a lot earlier than you might expect, there are so many playables that I am often cutting very good cards from my deck, so why not replace those with extremely good cards from someone elses deck, since I won't be playing them anyway.

Quasari
04-30-2014, 02:35 PM
You guys seem to have very little faith in the game. I don't expect a whole lot of waiting around for a meager 8 people.

The first bit of time I'm sure it'd be OK, but in the long run you'd have to find players who meet these requirements:
1. Have some spare time to draft
2. Aren't already locked in one of their three games
3. Are casual enough to not care about synchronous draft.
4. Is willing to sit in queue (async is all about short queues)

There are going to be times where an individual might have to wait for others in the same boat to queue.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 02:37 PM
You can't actually verify if any of those skills did any good though, you're going to end up in completely different pods, you won't ever see someone who has a massive blue deck, and wonder if that's why you ended up not getting any sapphire. You cannot learn necessary skills in asynch, and get feedback on how well you're internalizing that knowledge when your games are completely outside of the draft experience.

You can't replace standard swiss draft with asynch. There have been a lot of bad ideas thrown around on this forum from time to time, but they all were at least trying to solve something, or do something, this makes you wait just like normal, destroys the learning experience of new players, and is just inferior to any other "pure" mode be it synched or asynched. It's the worst of all worlds for no tangible gain.

That was quite unnecessary. Nothing you stated is fact, merely your personal opinions. You presented them as absolute facts though, and is in my opinion one of the worst kind of argumentation tactics. Try adding a "in my opinion" or "I think" every now and then.

Also, thanks for belittling all of us who really think this would be an important addition.

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 02:43 PM
It isn't my opinion. I even backed up why I believe every point is a fact

Can't learn necessary skills, and then verify them -> you're playing completely unrelated decks, so you cant see how well you drafted vs the rest of your pod

Since you can't learn necessary skills, if you entirely replace the standard swiss queue with a draft queue, people who are seriously interested in learning draft have no where to go but the competitive queues, which hurts those people. You should learn to draft in swiss. IE this is just causing problems for players, and not fixing any issues, since other asynch queues can replace the experience of this pseudo-draft.

dogmod
04-30-2014, 02:45 PM
That was quite unnecessary. Nothing you stated is fact, merely your personal opinions. You presented them as absolute facts though, and is in my opinion one of the worst kind of argumentation tactics. Try adding a "in my opinion" or "I think" every now and then.

Also, thanks for belittling all of us who really think this would be an important addition.

Makes veiled ad hominem attack. Accuses opponent of ad hominem attack. Doesn't debate points in post. Classic internet. When can we go back to crying about PvE not being here yet instead of crying about draft not being here. I want my draft :(

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 02:49 PM
Makes veiled ad hominem attack. Accuses opponent of ad hominem attack. Doesn't debate points in post. Classic internet. When can we go back to crying about PvE not being here yet instead of crying about draft not being here. I want my draft :(
based on this thread, I'd say when CZE decide async swiss > sync swiss.

vickrpg
04-30-2014, 02:57 PM
To re-itterate my post from the other thread:
I would LOVE it if there were async drafts, but NOT at the expense of the Swiss draft format, as it already is.

You're suggesting it as a replacement to how Swiss draft works, not as another feature. Which is IMO, even worse than having another mode.

You are removing the only casual option for draft lovers, by changing the draft into something else, that removes a core part of the draft experience. You may not consider it a core part of the experience, but many do. Competitive draft is very high risk, an I want a low risk option for normal drafting, you propose removing it, and replacing it with what sound more like hearthstone arena mode.

What people who are for this suggestion do not seem to understand about me and the people who agree with me is:
If there is no limited card pool to play against, why pick against a limited card pool? a disconnect between the deck building and the playing does not feel like a draft, no matter how competitive you are. It's not about winning, or losing, it's about fairness and common experience. It's about learning and knowledge, and about being able to have a low risk environment for "true draft".

IMO, sealed and constructed should be asynchronous. right now we have 6 formats, 3 Swiss and 3 single elim, none are asynchronous. Idealy The non drafts should be asynchronous, the drafts should be synchronous, putting us at 4 vs 2.
I do not support this idea because it suggest that it should be 5 asynchronous vs 1 synchronous

heck, I would even support it more to have a 7nth option, 5vs 2, but please don't remove my Swiss draft.

Reifu
04-30-2014, 03:05 PM
It isn't my opinion. I even backed up why I believe every point is a fact

Can't learn necessary skills, and then verify them -> you're playing completely unrelated decks, so you cant see how well you drafted vs the rest of your pod

Since you can't learn necessary skills, if you entirely replace the standard swiss queue with a draft queue, people who are seriously interested in learning draft have no where to go but the competitive queues, which hurts those people. You should learn to draft in swiss. IE this is just causing problems for players, and not fixing any issues, since other asynch queues can replace the experience of this pseudo-draft.
I have no opinion on replacing swiss or not, that was never my suggestion. I also never said this was the ultimate final version of asynch drafts. I am only here because I am very interested in the format of asynch drafting.

But good to know that you promise us all an asynch experience that rivals draft in the future. I am looking forward to it. Please don't suggest that sealed or anything else like that is a replacement for a draft experience, because that would just be a lie and you know it.

Guess it is time to bow out again, I don't know what it is that makes people so upset about this. I should have stayed out but got pulled into the discussion again. Not gonna happen again.

Peace out and have fun.

Gwaer
04-30-2014, 03:08 PM
Honestly, asynch sealed is a bit like asynch draft, I mean it's a little different... But not that much. Either way, I don't think Asynch sealed or draft meets the requirements for a truly casual Asynchronous mode that is addictive and affordable.

Rycajo
04-30-2014, 03:08 PM
I agree with vickrpg. I don't think we should be talking about removing sycnhronous swiss draft as an option.

Someday I hope to be able to get a draft going with a bunch of friends of the more casual TCG nature. I don't want single elim tournaments to be the only option of sitting around the cyber table and all playing within the same draft pool for the duration of the tournament.

Xenavire
04-30-2014, 03:30 PM
Hold up here, I had a really good idea - make this a guild option for games. (Regardless of whether it has an official queue or not.)

Because I think there is a lot of merit to having a casual drafting event between guild members, without being stuck in the client waiting for slower players. Imagine that draft night where someone needs to go take a deuce - guildies will understand, but enforced timers between rounds will stop that player running off to drop a log. In casual, fun environments like that, people should have every right to sneak off for a dump without pissing off a group of people or forfeiting.

So I can give my +1 to this mode for guilds, regardless of whatever else happens.

stiii
04-30-2014, 03:38 PM
I think people really exaggerate how much difference playing people outside their draft pod matters.

hexnaes
04-30-2014, 04:03 PM
I think there is definitely a need for async tournament gameplay. If there isn't some sort of async tournament play with rewards, I will probably put this game on the sidelines and play Hearthstone's Arena.

I don't think we should be trying to adjust current know drafting models into something that "kind of" fits for async gameplay. This is a digital TCG and should be treated as one.

Why not take a page from the Hearthstone Arena success? Have very cheap entry into async tournaments that award prizes based on performance, but you don't keep the cards. $3 or $4 dollars grants you access. You're guranteed a pack when you finish, plus additional rewards based on your performance.

TLDR: Keep standard drafting as it has always been, don't change it to fit an async model. Introduce a new gameplay mode that is built around being a digital TCG. Everyone wins?

Gorgol
04-30-2014, 04:19 PM
I think there is definitely a need for async tournament gameplay. If there isn't some sort of async tournament play with rewards, I will probably put this game on the sidelines and play Hearthstone's Arena.

I don't think we should be trying to adjust current know drafting models into something that "kind of" fits for async gameplay. This is a digital TCG and should be treated as one.

Why not take a page from the Hearthstone Arena success? Have very cheap entry into async tournaments that award prizes based on performance, but you don't keep the cards. $3 or $4 dollars grants you access. You're guranteed a pack when you finish, plus additional rewards based on your performance.

TLDR: Keep standard drafting as it has always been, don't change it to fit an async model. Introduce a new gameplay mode that is built around being a digital TCG. Everyone wins?

Best idea yet!

Yoss
04-30-2014, 04:30 PM
I think there is definitely a need for async tournament gameplay. If there isn't some sort of async tournament play with rewards, I will probably put this game on the sidelines and play Hearthstone's Arena.
There will be Asynch Constructed and Asynch Sealed, so you're safe.


I don't think we should be trying to adjust current know drafting models into something that "kind of" fits for async gameplay. This is a digital TCG and should be treated as one.

Why not take a page from the Hearthstone Arena success? Have very cheap entry into async tournaments that award prizes based on performance, but you don't keep the cards. $3 or $4 dollars grants you access. You're guranteed a pack when you finish, plus additional rewards based on your performance.

TLDR: Keep standard drafting as it has always been, don't change it to fit an async model. Introduce a new gameplay mode that is built around being a digital TCG. Everyone wins?

Not everyone wins. Players who want to draft but can't because they don't have 4 hour blocks lose out unless there's an asych draft option.

Also, standard drafting is already going to be around $5 if you use the AH to get your packs. And you'll be getting a whole heck of a lot better game than crappy HS, so it's worth the extra couple bucks.

That's not to say they can't invent some new "copy HS" mode, but such a thing doesn't interest me at the moment. I want to draft.

hexnaes
04-30-2014, 04:42 PM
There will be Asynch Constructed and Asynch Sealed, so you're safe.

Not everyone wins. Players who want to draft but can't because they don't have 4 hour blocks lose out unless there's an asych draft option.


Wut? You just contradicted yourself.




Also, standard drafting is already going to be around $5 if you use the AH to get your packs. And you'll be getting a whole heck of a lot better game than crappy HS, so it's worth the extra couple bucks.

That's not to say they can't invent some new "copy HS" mode, but such a thing doesn't interest me at the moment. I want to draft.

I don't think you should dismiss HS's success so easily. There's a lot to be gained from taking note in the success of your competitors. To say "crappy HS" when it gets 30k + viewers on twitch tv daily is not accepting reality.

The important take-away is that you can have competitive traditional TCG drafts AND have digital only style drafts that cater to a more casual crowd that can't set aside 3 hours straight in one day.

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say here?

cavench
04-30-2014, 05:15 PM
How about a semi-phantom Asynch Seal? Players each bring 3 packs and the other 3 packs are phantom, this will bring the cost of entry and payout to the same level as drafts. Just a thought and I haven't think through the negatives yet.

Voormas
05-01-2014, 02:28 AM
I think this would be a bad suggestion for CZE to adopt for reasons others have already mentioned, but on top of that I feel like it is just kinda pointless and not something I would have any interest in playing (and which would only take players out of the queues that I DO want to play)

Can't argue with my feelings man, and it just wouldn't feel like a real draft to me

YourOpponent
05-01-2014, 06:41 AM
I think I suggested this in February or so and think it's a good idea, but the down side of it though is it wouldn't feel like there is as intense as a regular draft. The main reason being the longer the time is between rounds the lower the likelihood that you are challenging somebody from your original tournament "pool." But it's such a small downside I think that it's still worth doing.

malloc31
05-01-2014, 11:31 AM
I fully support the original posters proposal.

As some one who loves draft but never has 3 hours to actually complete one this would be perfect for me (and I bet many other people). I think they should keep both options available for people who prefer it the other way too.

Yoss
05-01-2014, 12:38 PM
Made edit to OP, requesting to avoid duplicate opponents and to attempt in-pod matches when queue times are low.

SriSyadasti
05-26-2014, 10:57 AM
Anyone else play 'zoom' or 'rush' poker? It's an online mode where each hand a new table is created populated at random from the pool of available players and upon folding or showing down a hand you immediately return to this pool to be assigned a new table, usually within a second or two if enough people are playing. Imagine something similar being done with Hex, if the player base ever got sufficiently large to support it. You'd join an asynchronous draft pool, make your first pick, then be queued for the next available 2nd pick which could be passed from any other player in the pool and so on till you had a full deck. You'd then be queued for matches against others with your win record until the draft was completed.

I believe this would solve the issue with imbalanced draft pods. Other advantages would be a slightly faster and much smoother feeling card picking experience since you would no longer be waiting for the slowest podmate each card, players could even take a break mid pick if something unexpected comes up or they suffer a disconnect. You could also run open ended single or double elimination drafts similar to hearthstone that rewarded long winning streaks. Downside would be that you'd completely lose core elements like signalling and that to be viable it would probably require a much larger playerbase than we're likely to have for some time, also I guess it'd be a pain for engineers to implement but that's not the kind of issue we armchair developer types tend to be overly concerned with. I do reckon it could be a very popular option at some point in the future, definitely feel the game could benefit from some form of asynchronous draft, 3 hours+ in one go is a big demand on a lot of people's time and attention span, particularly when so much of it is spent waiting for games to start

Zomnivore
05-27-2014, 02:51 PM
IMO. Draft is a format with a limited pool of players by design.

Asynchronous Sealed makes sense because what you're picking isn't based on what other people are picking its just the packs you get.

Now maybe there's a design that warps draft into an interesting thing that you sorta get the flavor of in an Asynchronous format.

I think you have to create some sort of thing that connects the drafting portion to the experience. Somehow.

hexnaes
05-27-2014, 03:04 PM
I don't think the solution propose by the OP really does much but divide the draft pools.

This is a digital TCG. I'm glad that traditional draft is available, but we should really take advantage of the digital space.

I'd like to see an alternate gameplay that doesn't revolve around the draft idea. There's no reason to have an 8-man pod to pick from when we already have a game mode that uses that.

Why not something similar to Hearthstone's Arena? That would be incredibly fun and inviting for new players. You don't keep the cards you used during the matches you play, but you can have increasing rewards based on the performance (gold, packs, random cards).

It would give new players a way to discover the cards, but not have to devote as much time as a draft would take.

Yoss
05-27-2014, 05:38 PM
By the way, the OP specifically does NOT divide the queues. It takes the Swiss Draft queue (which is already going to exist whether you like it or not) and changes it.

Gwaer
05-27-2014, 06:25 PM
By the way, the OP specifically does NOT divide the queues. It takes the Swiss Draft queue (which is already going to exist whether you like it or not) and changes it.

Yep, instead of just splitting the queues it removes all feedback for learning to properly draft in a low risk swiss, so you can graduate to 5/3/2/2 or 8/4. Honestly, I'd prefer the queues being split over this.

Luckily CZE is working on game modes to provide this smaller time commitment required gameplay, without totally obliterating the draft learning progression. I am very much looking forward to those more casual options myself.

Yoss
05-27-2014, 06:27 PM
Such gross exaggeration. ("removes all feedback" "totally obliterating")

Gwaer
05-27-2014, 06:36 PM
It does, you now do not have a low risk draft format. The best one is 5/3/2/2 which is not ideal at all for new players. You've removed their option to learn to draft properly in a place where 7 out of 8 people are guaranteed at least 1 pack. Now you just have a luck based queue, if you managed to snag a great deck, you'll do well vs other people who are rocking the queue. But your picks have no bearing on anyone elses decks, hate drafting doesn't matter, honestly almost none of the skills of drafting matter in that format, just luck.

Yoss
05-27-2014, 07:35 PM
More accurately (from the OP):



What is lost:
You no longer have a closed pool of cards. You don't really know what your opponents have in their pools, because they could have come from a different 8-man drafting pod. As a consequence, there is almost no point in counter-drafting. All your drafting strategy is purely for the purpose of improving your own pool, not for sabotaging others. This might hobble the new player learning experience (not sure). Another problem is that you can have imbalance between 8-man card pools, which leads one 8-man group to have better decks on average than another 8-man group.

What is gained:
Most of the normal benefits of Asynchronous play, discussed at length here:
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=32002
In short, you cut down on per-player queue times, assuming equal participation. (Note that because the first queue here is 8-man, some of the asynch benefit discussed in the other thread is lost.) You allow time-challenged players to join, which increases the player pool, which drives queue times down even farther and brings more dev money to CZE.

Gwaer
05-27-2014, 07:53 PM
More favorably written toward your viewpoint does not make it more accurate.

You lose the ability to influence any other deck you play against. Making the entire format luck of getting paired up with someone who got a bad deck because of their own actions or the actions of others that aren't you. Or against others who had the good fortune to have amazing picks from packs that were unhindered by others.

Every loss in that format will boil down to thinking the other player incredibly lucky, or that you got screwed by your options where they did not.

hexnaes
05-27-2014, 08:02 PM
A huge flaw with the OP is that it makes no sense to have a 8 man synchronous draft for an asynchronous tournament model.

BossHoss
05-27-2014, 08:08 PM
Why not just make it async constructed?

This all just sounds like a longer (defeating the purpose of creating this format for the time restricted individuals) sealed format only you are choosing the contents of your 3 packs rather than 6 randoms. There is no strategy whatsoever other than "this is the best card for me... Next". Async players are gonna want to get the show on the road. Open packs, build a deck and game on.

Refugee
05-27-2014, 08:36 PM
I'm not going to take the time to read through this entire thread (sorry). I will just say I have traditionally played normal drafts and having experienced async drafts via hearthstone and solforge. In comparison Hex drafts are very large time commitments and a very low fun to time ratio. In solforge I click draft, pick my cards, get playing, can stop whenever I want, finish whenever I want etc. It's quite nice. Clearly async queues break some of the traditional draft skills. However, I feel that if you want the full draft experience (long wait times for games to finish included) that queue should exist for you. If you want the click, pick, go experience I think that has a place as well.

Honestly I would probably play both. The traditional style when I had large blocks of time I could set aside and the async when I wanted to play some competitive hex but didn't have 3 hours to kill.

Either way being able to do something while waiting for games to complete (PvE hopefully) would solve a lot of the worst part of the current drafts.

So there ya go, some input from a customer about what they would enjoy without any particular agenda.

Thraeg
05-27-2014, 10:11 PM
This just seems like an awkward middle ground that doesn't really need to exist. The planned async sealed mode will fill the necessary niche of catering to smaller time blocks, and draft will continue to occupy its traditional role. When I have limited time, I'd rather play a mode designed from the ground up for that situation than something with a mechanical structure that's basically "draft, but worse". And that's what this is -- it sacrifices a significant chunk of the draft experience and all the advantages it gains are logistical/convenience in nature.

meetthefuture
05-28-2014, 12:49 AM
What is lost:
You no longer have a closed pool of cards. You don't really know what your opponents have in their pools, because they could have come from a different 8-man drafting pod.

Read as following:

What is lost:
The entire point of drafting

/thread

Voormas
05-28-2014, 01:04 AM
This just seems like an awkward middle ground that doesn't really need to exist. The planned async sealed mode will fill the necessary niche of catering to smaller time blocks, and draft will continue to occupy its traditional role. When I have limited time, I'd rather play a mode designed from the ground up for that situation than something with a mechanical structure that's basically "draft, but worse". And that's what this is -- it sacrifices a significant chunk of the draft experience and all the advantages it gains are logistical/convenience in nature.+1 to this, again I feel like async draft would be a bad direction for CZE to go down

Barkam
05-28-2014, 01:42 AM
I agree. Async should be limited to sealed and constructed. They can also do async for a sealed type of format where you don't get to keep the cards.

TOOT
05-28-2014, 12:12 PM
I agree. Async should be limited to sealed and constructed. They can also do async for a sealed type of format where you don't get to keep the cards.

+1

Thrawn
05-28-2014, 12:33 PM
Asynchronous draft doesn't even really make sense, if the draft itself isn't live with a shared pool getting passed around, you're pretty much just playing a bastardized version of sealed.

Yoss
05-28-2014, 02:04 PM
Asynchronous draft doesn't even really make sense, if the draft itself isn't live with a shared pool getting passed around, you're pretty much just playing a bastardized version of sealed.

The draft itself IS "live". Did you read the OP? It is only the deck building and matches that are split off, you still start with an 8-man pod.

Thrawn
05-28-2014, 02:30 PM
The draft itself IS "live". Did you read the OP? It is only the deck building and matches that are split off, you still start with an 8-man pod.

I read it, I just misunderstood the negatives as you don't have people drafting in the same pod together when you actually were referring to people from different draft pods playing against each other, my bad.

Turtlewing
05-28-2014, 02:34 PM
On the balance I tend to think that it is probably better to not do async drafts.

If for no other reason that it looks like sealed really needs some love, and it seems like a better fit for an async format in general. So why not make that part of the differentiation (sealed for the less competitive play when you can types, draft for the more competitive types who can sit down to a tournament and see it through in one go).

dogmod
05-28-2014, 02:50 PM
On the balance I tend to think that it is probably better to not do async drafts.

If for no other reason that it looks like sealed really needs some love, and it seems like a better fit for an async format in general. So why not make that part of the differentiation (sealed for the less competitive play when you can types, draft for the more competitive types who can sit down to a tournament and see it through in one go).

Async sealed seems a better fit I would agree as well. I fail to see the point in drafting with people when you won't be playing with them (And yes Yoss I did read your "preferential matching with people from your pod"... its pretty noncontributory point in the grand scheme)

Also if you are doing async you can get into some interesting scoring mechanisms that aren't beholden to the one time tournament structure.


Asynch Scoring Proposal

So I think that a good portion of the current community favors an asynchronous sealed format for competitive play with entry fees and prize support.

One of the issues I have seen is that some people feel that an extended scoring system where you could rack up wins with the current best of 3 matches would make playing with one deck for up to 14 or 11 matches feel like quite the slog. One way I feel to make the format go faster without losing the complexity and sideboarding element of the best of 3 series is to make each individual game in a best of 3 match count towards your score.

It might work where your run with a deck finishes when you reach 12 wins or 3 losses.

Each best of 3 would be played to completion regardless of whether or not an individual player reaches there limit while in the actual match. (which could result in 13-1, 13-2 records or x-4 records) To address this prize support will not solely depend on win totals but will be based on final record or ratio if you prefer. (So that a 13-1 is not worth as much as a 12-0 and a 6-3 is worth more than a 6-4) I think this is important as I feel that it would be a bad play experience to start up a match and if you win the first round and the opposing player reaches their loss total to have the match end or vice versa to lose the first round and if they reach their win total to have the match end. Not to mention the fact that if you are doing asynch you may only have time for 1 match and if it ends prematurely you will feel that you missed out on a play experience.

I would also like to see a way for you to prematurely end your run with a deck.. I.e. if you are 10-0 there is a risk involved with going for 12-0 in that you could possibly lose rounds which puts you into a lower prize pool. So that 10-0 is worth more than 12-2 but 12-0 is worth considerably more than 10-0. This would help counterbalance the fact that you can go over/under on wins and losses and would prevent people throwing games if they have reached their win total or loss totals and makes each game meaningful even the ones where you have reached your total. It would also add that feeling of risk each time you went to begin a match as you are risking ending up with a worse loot pile to go for a truly amazing haul. I think that the difference at lower levels should not be very significant. I.e. the difference between 2-0 and 2-4 should be negligible where as the difference between 10-0 and 10-4 should be very large.

And obviously you would be match with people in queue who are near as possible to your win/loss totals.

This would mean that the most rounds you could play would be 15, and the largest number of matches would be somewhere around 7 or 8 (brain getting tired writing all of this, can't do math.) This would not be an extremely onerous total I don't think and would run 8 hours at the very likely shorter runs. To prevent stalling anyone who runs out of time automatically loses any remaining games in that match. (I.e. if someone stalled out in the first round of the match and ran out of time their opponent would get a 2-0 for that match... not satisfying but appropriate)

I think that this proposal would make for an extremely compelling asynchronous experience and addresses some of the issues brought up by various members of the community.

Arbiter
05-28-2014, 04:00 PM
I agree with Gwaer. This is such an unusual occurrence that it should be enough to end the argument right here.

It completely destroys the whole concept of the draft, in the end you are actually just playing sealed with some time wasted drafting at the start. You don't gain any of the play advantages that you should have for skills such as reading the draft, knowing when to switch colours, when to hate draft (it is a tactical skill), etc. You completely miss out on the play skill tests in draft - you no longer know over 50% of the drafted cards! and in a draft you should have a significant idea about your neighbour's cards. It is such an important thing in draft, knowing that your opponent will have certain cards, and taking that into account in your play.

Taking a limited pool format and making it into an unlimited pool format is just a bad idea. You don't gain more than you lose.

There is a solution to asynchronous drafting, it involves using a draft format that is asynchronous.

Solomon drafting is two player drafting. Two players bring three boosters of cards which are combined to make a draft pool. Four cards are turned face up; player one picks one of these, then player 2 picks two cards and player one gets the last. Four more cards are turned up; this time player two picks one first, player one gets two and player two gets the last. Continue alternating until all cards are picked. The last pick will be a set of two, where the first player picks one and the other gets the second.

Players build there deck and play each other. At the conclusion of the match, each player will have 45 cards, that make their booster contribution to the next round of asynchronous play. They queue with their cards, get paired against a player with a similar record, Solomon draft the combined pools of cards and play each other.

The con is that each round is a draft/build/play combination, which is a longer commitment, although you are active the entire time. Also, you could decide, for time reasons, to make each round best of one, which would cut the total time to around that of a three round match.

The benefits are that you get an asynchronous draft experience that is completely fair to all and a good test of skill. It is not limited in rounds, and is scalable to as large or small an experience as you want. Your deck is constantly changing for variety, and if you like drafting, each round is a draft.

dogmod
05-28-2014, 04:56 PM
I agree with Gwaer. This is such an unusual occurrence that it should be enough to end the argument right here.

It completely destroys the whole concept of the draft, in the end you are actually just playing sealed with some time wasted drafting at the start. You don't gain any of the play advantages that you should have for skills such as reading the draft, knowing when to switch colours, when to hate draft (it is a tactical skill), etc. You completely miss out on the play skill tests in draft - you no longer know over 50% of the drafted cards! and in a draft you should have a significant idea about your neighbour's cards. It is such an important thing in draft, knowing that your opponent will have certain cards, and taking that into account in your play.

Taking a limited pool format and making it into an unlimited pool format is just a bad idea. You don't gain more than you lose.

There is a solution to asynchronous drafting, it involves using a draft format that is asynchronous.

Solomon drafting is two player drafting. Two players bring three boosters of cards which are combined to make a draft pool. Four cards are turned face up; player one picks one of these, then player 2 picks two cards and player one gets the last. Four more cards are turned up; this time player two picks one first, player one gets two and player two gets the last. Continue alternating until all cards are picked. The last pick will be a set of two, where the first player picks one and the other gets the second.

Players build there deck and play each other. At the conclusion of the match, each player will have 45 cards, that make their booster contribution to the next round of asynchronous play. They queue with their cards, get paired against a player with a similar record, Solomon draft the combined pools of cards and play each other.

The con is that each round is a draft/build/play combination, which is a longer commitment, although you are active the entire time. Also, you could decide, for time reasons, to make each round best of one, which would cut the total time to around that of a three round match.

The benefits are that you get an asynchronous draft experience that is completely fair to all and a good test of skill. It is not limited in rounds, and is scalable to as large or small an experience as you want. Your deck is constantly changing for variety, and if you like drafting, each round is a draft.


Pretty cool idea... I wonder if cards would become aggregated over time as people brought their 45 cards to the next game resulting in a propensity of colors. The other thing is that the opponent they are playing against my be bringing a fresh 3 packs to the pool and their opponent knows all 45 cards that they personally are bringing to the pool.

Arbiter
05-28-2014, 05:05 PM
You can always let people review their 45 cards first. Also, if you ensure like vs like win/loss pairings, this won't happen.

Yoss
06-18-2014, 10:07 AM
Solomon Draft would be cool too. What would the entry fee and payout structure be since it's just a single 1v1 match?

dogmod
06-18-2014, 10:29 AM
Yoss with the necro of his own threads

Yoss
06-18-2014, 02:44 PM
Yoss with the necro of his own threads

Just answering a request:


You never commented on the suggestion I made at the end of that thread. Basically an asynchronous booster draft is impossible, as a large part of booster draft play is that you know over half the cards in the pool. There are other drafting options suited to asynchronous as I detailed there.

Thanks for assuming the worst though, dogmod.

dogmod
06-18-2014, 02:47 PM
Just answering a request:



Thanks for assuming the worst though, dogmod.

You could have replied in the thread where the question was asked. Still a necro regardless if someone asked you something or not.

Yoss
06-18-2014, 02:52 PM
The loose definition of "necro" is 1 month, so even if you were right about where I should have replied (you're not), you'd still be wrong about whether my post here was somehow out of order. The previous last post was May 28, well under a month ago, and, FWIW, it wasn't even my post (not that double-posting is restricted, but some people frown on it anyway).

Take your trolling elsewhere please.

Xenavire
06-18-2014, 02:58 PM
The loose definition of "necro" is 1 month, so even if you were right about where I should have replied (you're not), you'd still be wrong about whether my post here was somehow out of order. The previous last post was May 18, well under a month ago, and, FWIW, it wasn't even my post (not that double-posting is restricted, but some people frown on it anyway).

Take your trolling elsewhere please.

Not to nitpick, but I could swear the posts are more recent than this. :p (May 29 - otherwise it would be exactly a month today, May 18- June 18.)

Yoss
06-18-2014, 03:27 PM
Not to nitpick, but I could swear the posts are more recent than this. :p (May 29 - otherwise it would be exactly a month today, May 18- June 18.)

Whoops! Fixed.

Celticcross
06-18-2014, 03:33 PM
they where talking about it doing async sealed format here i think it is where i heard it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9TsHWtT2-w

Arbiter
06-19-2014, 12:35 AM
Solomon Draft would be cool too. What would the entry fee and payout structure be since it's just a single 1v1 match?
The thing is that everything asynchronous should be a one on one match... That is why draft doesn't work - because so much of the draft skill is tied up in responding to the card pool, remove that limited card pool and you have something as random as sealed - maybe more random as you have the randomness of the different pods that opposing players drafted in as well as the randomness of their card pools. It becomes less of a skill tester and more "who was in the weaker draft pod".

Don't forget the draft is continuous. The 45 cards that you draft are the pool of cards that you bring to the next round. This of course means that you need to allow people to drop, and admittedly some people just will not get used to the fact that the legendary they have isn't theirs until the end of the tournament.

For prize structure, it depends on what you want. Best of three requires 90 minutes of time commitment, while one game matches take about an hour. As the format is one for those that like to draft, I'd suggest that one game matches are fine as there will in theory be no need to sideboard - you'll know if you need that anti enchantment card, etc. Switching to best of one does mean that you need to allow for more losses in prizes, due to the potential to lose to bad draws.

I'd suggest a booster for the winner if playing best of three, with a maximum of four rounds. For one off games, I think the Hearthstone model works here, and is a reasonable economic benchmark. Play to a maximum of three losses or twelve wins. Get one booster at 3 wins, 2 at 5 wins, 3 at 7 wins, 4 at 9 wins and 5 at 12 wins. Add things like wheel spins or chests to the boosters at other win points, so that you always get something.

Yes, it's a long commitment in time to finish, but the idea is to always have an option when you haven't time for a full draft. Who cares if it takes a month to finish? At least thee is something to do that won't require a whole evening.

Arbiter
06-19-2014, 12:51 AM
Yoss with the necro of his own threads

To be fair to Yoss, I asked him to, as he hadn't responded to my posts at the end of this thread, due (I felt) to the fact that when you are conversing with an eighteen hour time gap, sometimes comments get missed. And then another thread got to the point this one ended at, so I said "look here" :-).

While we disagree on a few things (I don't want asynchronous tournaments just replacing normal ones, and I think I lean more towards league style asynchronous than Yoss), they are still conversations worth having. I think there is a lot more substance in this thread than the more recent one as well.

Yoss
06-19-2014, 09:19 AM
Oh, I didn't catch the part about the always-evolving pool. For some reason I read it as opening new packs each time.

I think I'd still prefer it to be a normal 8-man bracket (single elimintation, best of 3, 3 rounds total) and payout. Swsiss payout structure would make sense. Timer should only be 30 minutes per player per match, not 45 minutes per player (60 minutes, not 90).

Arbiter
06-19-2014, 02:54 PM
I'm adding in half an hour for draft and construction times, so one hour - usually less - for one game (15 minutes per player) and 90 minutes for a best of three. I prefer one game as an hour is a better unit of time, and there is really no need to sideboard or adapt the deck in this format. The best of three is used to minimise randomness, which is effectively done by allowing more losses in single game match play.

Why do you lean towards three rounds for asynchronous play? I would think more play is better and you can adjust the prize pool.

Yoss
06-19-2014, 02:56 PM
I guess that makes sense: you already know what cards the guy has so no need to sideboard. Sure, I can get behind single games for Solomon Draft.

Dinotropia
06-19-2014, 03:21 PM
I don't know how many of you have played solforge, but they have an interesting solution to the asynch problem. Instead of having players pick with a pod, each player is passed packs that are picked from by an algorithm. Basically, they track what cards are considered "must picks" by the playerbase as a whole and mimic that behavior. Note that I am not advocating for or against this method, but I thought I would throw it out there as people argue about the different pros and cons of asynch draft. You can do it many different ways.

The benefit I see from an algorithm like that is that it rewards people who break out of the meta and find powerful uses for underpicked cards. It also arguably standardizes the gap that people noted between players from different pods in the synched pick version.

Of course, implementing such a feature is expensive from an engineering perspective.

Carry on :D