I think in MtG terms what Quick Draw is is closer to sealed, which is largely recognized as a quicker, easier, and less skill-intensive limited format than real drafting. Whether a draft format comparable to MtG's drafting (or Hearthstone's arena, or what have you) may ever be officially supported is unknown, but this isn't meant to replace that: as Farbs said, it was a low-hanging fruit that produces an enjoyable gameplay experience.
Imo, more close to the casual format where you open a booster and play with only that (any card being able to be played as is or as a land of its color).
Completely agreed. Quick Draw is a lot like Oozeball, a fun way of stretching the existing design. Jon has a real talent for finding these entertaining variants. But at least in part, I think the couple pages of suggestions (many of which quickly suggested adding more cards into the deck) are perhaps driven by a competing desire for more strategic choices.
Just tested the above in the new build. Did nothing but the blind drafts. Pros: Pick 1 of 3 is MUCH better alto since its blind picks, the choices are still straightforward. I can still memorize all the cards for both teams w/o looking at battle log, building in parallel was fine even if cards from first char were not shown. Not sure about the casual player. The initial 'blur' of 'why there were 4 cards in hand' after I've alr picked my 1st bomb was quickly replaced by understanding. The learning curve is now more gentle. Clicking to keep is also more intuitive. The ratio of 1:1:2:2:2 feels balanced but I'm sure card quality is smthg that will need attention in future. Cons: Still predictable, the multiples based on card quality only tell me that the opponent has 2 boost traits when he's alr played 1. Bomb picks were straightforward, I guess its cos of blind draft. The most extreme (as below) that I got even before the last paper card draft is a 43 dam elven warrior. The other team's best card was a Volcano. I really think emeralds shouldn't be in the selection, the power gap between gold and emerald hasn't been seriously addressed since beta. At this point, I'm split between having duplicates and uniques. The former streamlines the 8 card deck and makes the interface and draft process easier on newcomers but still isn't much of a challenge. Then again, I don't know if 8 unique cards would promote more build flexibility. My former gripe still remains, blind picks are great for fun but more serious draft should be players fighting/strategizing for a common pool of resources. I think there's a way to get there...
Hey Quick Draw testers! Be sure to check out the updated version of this mode on the test server. Picking has changed a bit, as have decks. We'd love feedback on the new process.
I was meaning to ask: what tags are implemented so far? If tags show up in the API, we can use them for Guild ceremonies.
Ok, been testing this more the last couple of days. The choice of 3 cards seems to work a lot better, I find I have to actually choose more between a couple of good options. It might have an unfortunate impact on the black border card selection, by often including 1 not so bad option. Warriors are beasts in this format. Given the added selection options, they consistently have lots of attacks and added movement. I really think there should be a limit of a single warrior to each team, not much can be done to stop them. Some classes just have more or more varied card options than others. Personally I find that the classes card options impact their draft experience. - Warriors have very limited options; often choosing between Attacks, Armor, Blocks or Movement. The best attack is often the correct choice (making sure to add in some extra movement), but overtime all warrior drafts start to feel the same. Even with attacks it's rarely all that close of a choice, bashes and chops have limited usage compared to high damage attacks. - Wizards have some interesting choices. At least here you are often choosing between a purely damage option in comparison with a more controlling spell option (WoW or Encumber etc..). - Priests have been the most interesting to draft for me. I think this class is still the most prone to getting 3 "bad" choices (which I think says something about priest card design in general), but you do get to draft very different types of priests. You might have lots of card advantage, or lots of heal, or vampire attacks, or melee buffs or others... Similarly it seems that only wizard and priest drafts have a great chance to result in a "bad" deck. Warriors seem to create a lot more consistent decks.
Given that there's no item set to worry about, classes are nothing more than labels with no real meaning. Which is why drafting cards based on classes doesn't really make much sense. Wouldn't mind a warrior casting magic spells, at the very least...it would be more unpredictable and maybe give rise to more atrocious combos.
Classes currently determine what cards are considered valid for a character, by way of items, by way of item slots. If you zoom a card in quick draw you should see what item that card "belongs" to, which will be an item that could be equipped by that character (ignoring overall slot and power token counts).
I'm aware (c.f. my first post in thread). Which begs the question: How does the item info impact the user experience in QD ? Unlike usual MP, item infos actually lead to knowing which other cards the opponent might have. Other than an algorithmic convenience, I can fathom no other reason for its existence in QD. Might as well just pick cards where Slots !="" as per the csv files. The playing experience is very different w/o class restrictions.
I have seen racial trait cards show up as well, I've been assuming you're including the characters race into the consideration too.
