I have updated my Dark Draft, Core-Only, Tier Charts article to include my Sage tier charts, included below. Check out the main article for explanations on when and why I draft specific alignments.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Dark Draft Saturday (5/13/17)My favored Epic Constructed playstyle varies significantly from most other people I have played against. Usually, my constructed decks are hyper-distilled versions of my Get Ahead, Stay Ahead limited playstyle. I also favor tribute/loyalty -> draw a card champions higher than most. The best example of this is my Core Epic Humans deck based off of my Combative Humans deck.
On Saturday 5/13/17 I plan on streaming 6 hours of constructed from 11am CST to 5pm CST primarily highlighting my Core Epic Humans deck. Just like last time, I will be taking challenges from my Twitch Chat. Those that challenge me are welcome to “stream snipe” by remaining in chat and playing with the stream video and audio on while I explain my plays and give advice. Whether or not a challenger chooses to “stream snipe,” I’ll provide feedback at the end of each game.
It is also possible I might break out some of my other Core-Only decks or try out some chat submitted decks.
The stream (Saturday, 5/13/17 from 11am CST to 5pm CST) can be watched live at: twitch.tv/tomsepicgaming
At minimum, the raw footage will be uploaded to YouTube.
As I reminder, I will be taking on World Champion John Tatian in a best of 7 showmatch on 5/20/17 at 2pm CST. For full details click here.
For links to all of my Epic content click here.
I have updated my Dark Draft, Core-Only, Tier Charts article to include my Good tier charts, included below. Check out the main article for explanations on when and why I draft specific alignments.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
EventI, Tom’S Epic Gaming, have challenged the World Champion, John “Tatdaddy” Tatian, to an Epic best of 7 showmatch on the Epic Digital Alpha. This will be the first time we have ever played against each other. We will be live streaming the showmatch on our respective Twitch channels listed below.
Who will win, the Prolific Blogger or the Undefeated World Champion?
Saturday, May 20th starting at 2pm CDT (UTC -5)
Tom’S Epic Gaming’s perspective will be live streamed at twitch.tv/tomsepicgaming
World Champion John Tatian’s perspective will be live streamed at twitch.tv/johntatian
This showmatch will consist of a best of 7 games with 7 different decks:
Each game of Dark Draft will be preceded by a new Draft.
Each game of constructed may not feature the same primary alignment.
For example, if my first constructed deck has 33+ Evil, my second and third constructed decks may have, at most, 27 Evil each. If my second deck has 33+ Good, my third deck may have at most 27 Evil and 27 Good.
If I win, John Tatian has agreed to write a guest article here on Tom’S Epic Gaming.
If John wins, I have agreed to treat him to lunch at a restaurant of his choice at either Origins, Gen Con, or Worlds.
So far we have my raw stream footage uploaded to Youtube, John’s raw stream footage can be seen on his blog, and both streams can be watched simultaneously with commentary from cnoz + CJ Moynihan.
My Stream: Part 1, Part 2
John’s Stream
cnoz + CJ’s stream (audio starts at 47:00)
Edited videos are planned as well.
As a matter of transparency, I have updated my “Subscribe to Blog Via Email” text to read: “At least 1 post per week (frequently 2 or 3): Primarily Epic Card Game strategy articles. Game reviews and other game-related posts are possible as well.” As opposed to “Approximately 3 posts per week: strategy articles (frequently Epic Card Game), game reviews, and other game-related posts.”
At this point, new content will primarily focus on Epic related topics (at least for now), and these articles generally tend to take longer to write. By going down to “at minimum 1 post per week,” I should be able to more easily and consistently produce high-quality articles without the need to count short announcements like these to artificially reach the 3 posts per week goal. (This also frees up a bit more time to stream and work on learning video editing. On that point, expect a big announcement in the next few days.)
I have updated my Dark Draft, Core-Only, Tier Charts article to include my Evil tier charts, included below. In addition, I have added a bit of clarification to the article. I did decide to go with 2 charts per alignment, a pick 1 chart and a pick 2/3 chart since there is enough difference to warrant it based on how I draft.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
ForewordNow that I have had a significant amount of time to play a bunch of core-only dark drafts, I have updated my ratings. If you want even more dark draft content, check out my main dark draft article.
Instead of my overall ranking scheme ranging from Always First Picakable…Situationally Desirable…Rarely Playable, I have broken down the cards by tier based on overall power level and how highly I value them. In addition, due to the dramatically shifting value of cards throughout a dark draft, I have decided to create 9 tier charts:
Every draft begins with the Pack 1 Pick 1/Uncommitted Chart. Once you have decided to commit to an alignment, you then switch to that alignment’s charts and ignore the other charts.
Cards within a tier (S-Tier, Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, Tier 4, Tier 5, Tier 6, Tier 7) are roughly equivalent in power. Inner-tier differences are minor and vary based on other cards in the pack and my mood that draft.
Finally, some tiers have multiple columns. For instance, Tier 1 has a neutral column and a ‘-‘ column. Cards in the ‘-‘ column are a bit weaker than cards in the neutral column. Tier 3 has a ‘+’ column, neutral column, and ‘-‘ column. Cards in the ‘+’ column are a bit stronger than the neutral column, and cards in the ‘-‘ column are a bit weaker.
Below I touch on why some of my card ratings are different here than in my main article.
In Core only, there is a higher concentration of burn cards than in any other format. Due to this, it is much easier to assemble a large amount of burn. Against unprepared opponents, this can be very strong; however, burn can also be fairly easy to counter with cards like Inner Peace. Therefore, the worthwhile health gain cards are fairly high on my list.
0-cost champions like Dark Knight, Guilt Demon, and Thrasher Demon are even harder to effectively answer in core-only than they are in other formats. This makes them some of the best cards to create early pressure without committing your gold. Recycle 0-cost cards work in a similar way: they let you develop a threat while neither committing your gold nor losing a card in hand. Therefore, all of these cards are tier 1 cards.
In other words, these are frequently the best cards to play to get ahead, since they allow you to hold your gold and use it to stay ahead. They take the place of 1-cost establishing champions allowing you to more aggressively use powerful gold-punishers.
Due to the greater value I place on Evil’s 0-cost blitzers, I am more likely to be able to support Evil Loyalty 2 cards now. This makes going Evil less risky than it was for me in the past. In addition, Evil has the absolute best rewards for committing to it…hmmm, thematically interesting.
Since this is the Pack 1 Pick 1 chart, I attempted to organize all of the cards in a tier from my first pick in that tier to my last pick. That being said, the cards are so similar in strength that choosing between them is largely a matter of personal preference. Further, as you get deeper into a draft, these intra-tier rankings break down quite quickly based on what you have already drafted and what you still need.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Once I commit to an alignment, my valuation of certain cards change. Primarily, powerful in-alignment Loyalty 2 and Ally effect cards dramatically increase in value, while off-alignment Loyalty 2 and Ally effect cards drop in value. In addition, certain off-alignment cards change value because they either work well with that alignment (Ancient Chant in Evil) or work poorly with that alignment (Inner Peace in Pick 2/3 Wild).
I love to counter draft. This can either involve drafting cards to counter what your opponent is doing (taking Flash Fire to stop a Courageous Soul->Secret Legion strategy), or it can involve drafting cards your opponent would like to draft. For these tier charts, I am focusing on the latter.
The primary reason there is a difference between my Pick 1 and Pick 2/3 charts is I firmly believe in taking the best overall card in a pack as opposed to the best card for my deck, in pick 1 (most of the time). For example, say we are drafting an Evil-Alignment deck and get the pack above. Angel of Death is the best card for my deck because it is a board clear that leaves behind a 6/5 airborne body. Generically however, Palace Guard is the best card with Divine Judgement being strong as well. (Burrowing Wurm and Dark Leader are bad.)
If I take Angel of Death, my opponent easily takes Palace Guard and Divine Judgement. I get 1 amazing card for my deck and my opponent gets 2 great cards for theirs. Instead, I would usually take the Palace Guard here. This leaves my opponent with a snap pick Divine Judgement, and unless they are also going Evil (which is unlikely if I am going Evil), they have a choice between 3 bad cards for their deck. In this scenario, I get 1 very strong card, and my opponent gets 1 strong card and 1 weak card. I much prefer this second outcome.
In Pick 2/3 of a pack, since my opponent can’t get any of the cards I don’t take, I can freely take the strongest cards for my deck.
In addition to the usual adjustments for Loyalty 2 and Ally effect cards, Ancient Chant, Winter Fairy, and Djinn of the Sands move up a tier in Evil. This is due to the fact that Evil has no “draw 2 and” cards in Core only, and their draw overall is weak.
If you notice any other cards that changed tiers that you don’t understand/agree with, feel free to ask me about it in the comments below, and I will go into more detail about those cards.
I commit to Evil when I draft a Medusa, Murderous Necromancer, or Necromancer Lord, usually in pick 2/3 of a pack, preferably by pack 4ish. These are 3 of the most powerful cards in core set only.
If I see that my opponent passes me one of these cards early in a draft, that is a pretty large signal that they are not going Evil, and I am immediately rewarded for going Evil. Even if my opponent tries to deny me Evil cards for the rest of the draft, I have plenty of time to gain enough Evil cards to be able to hit my loyalty effect(s) reliably. In addition, if my opponent doesn’t also try to draft Evil, cards like Necromancer Lord, Angel of Death, Murderous Necromancer, Dark Assassin, and Plentiful Dead are nearly worthless to them so they are more likely to be passed to me.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
In addition to the usual adjustments for Loyalty 2 and Ally effect cards, card draw effects are slightly reduced in tier (for example Ancient Chant and Winter Fairy) due to incredibly powerful Good cards with draw effects like Noble Unicorn and White Knight.
If you notice any other cards that changed tiers that you don’t understand/agree with, feel free to ask me about it in the comments below, and I will go into more detail about those cards.
I don’t commit to Good often in draft. This is partially because, unlike Evil, there are no Good Loyalty 2/Ally cards that are strong enough to get me to commit to Good by themselves. Instead, to commit to Good I must have already incidentally drafted 2+ overall decent Good cards (Noble Unicorn, White Knight, Angel of Light), and then get passed a strong commitment reward card like Angel of Mercy or High King for a pick 2/3.
Good is a risky alignment to draft, particularly in Core Only. This is because so many of their best cards (Noble Unicorn, White Knight, and Angel of Light) are strong enough in a non-Good deck that your opponent could counter draft them or just incidentally take them without much downside.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
In addition to the usual adjustments for Loyalty 2 and Ally effect cards, generic draw 2 cards are slightly decreased in value since Sage has great drawing cards. Board clears are slightly increased in Pick 1 Sage because counter-drafting board clears helps to protect your big untargetable champions, namely Steel Golem. There are also a few other small differences between charts. For example, Ancient Chant is higher in Pick 1 chart because Psionic Assault is strong in a Sage deck, and Ancient Chant almost completely negates Psionic Assault. Avenging Angel is also higher than usual because with the forced discard and control in Sage, Avenging Angel is frequently harder for your opponent to effectively remove while staying competitive in other aspects of the game.
If you notice any other cards that changed tiers that you don’t understand/agree with, feel free to ask me about it in the comments below, and I will go into more detail about those cards.
I have not been committing to Sage often in Core only. The main reason for this is, while Sage has all 4 of the S-Tier cards Amnesia, Sea Titan, Thought Plucker, and Muse in addition to Ogre Mercenary, Erase, etc., the Sage commitment cards aren’t as overwhelmingly powerful as other alignments. Committing to Sage also doesn’t dramatically increase the draftable card pool for you, unlike Evil and Good.
Generally, I commit to Sage when I’m midway or further through the draft, I haven’t committed to a different alignment, I have already drafted a decent number of generic Sage cards, and I come across cards like Steel Golem, Psionic Assault, Juggernaut, Time Walker, Ice Drake, or Warrior Golem. However, since only Time Walker among these is terrible without Loyalty or a plethora of ally triggers, I occasionally shift my alignment commitment later in the draft if I come across powerful non-Sage alignment cards that I can support. For instance, if it is pack 8 and I come across Medusa while I have 8ish other incidental Evil cards, there is a decent chance I take Medusa and focus on supporting Evil going forward.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
In addition to the usual adjustments for Loyalty 2 and Ally effect cards, Wild’s card evaluations are heavily based around their goal of burning out your opponent, particularly in Core-Only. Strafing Dragon and Hunting Raptors are rewards for going Wild, and they help you reach a critical mass of burn at the same time. The more burn you have, the stronger it becomes (to an extent) since you can kill your opponent from a higher health total without having to get as much attack damage through.
Due to this burn-slanted evaluation, health gain is a high-priority counter-draft in pick 1, but it drops off significantly in pick 2/3. Not only do you not need to counter-draft health gain pick 2/3, but if you draft most of the burn and deny it to your opponent, health gain is significantly less valuable. I also value board clears a bit less in Wild because a significant amount of Wild’s damage doesn’t rely on maintaining champions in play.
If you notice any other cards that changed tiers that you don’t understand/agree with, feel free to ask me about it in the comments below, and I will go into more detail about those cards.
I practically never go Wild in Core-Only. I feel like Wild can be incredibly devastating against opponents that don’t prepare for the burn kill, but I think countering the burn kill isn’t that hard to do. Drafting Inner Peace can make a burn out victory nearly impossible, and a well-timed Drain Essence can give a player enough time to out-race burn.
That being said, Raging T-Rex is absolutely incredible. If I get passed T-Rex when I haven’t already committed to a faction, I get very tempted.
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
Searchable Spreadsheet
(Click picture for full size)
I still need to create charts for Good, Sage, and Wild, but feel free to ask for clarification/ask questions on anything I have included so far in the comments below. Always happy to answer Epic questions.
Was about to start rerating all of the cards for Core-Only Dark Draft after my experiences with the Digital Alpha. Then, I figured I might as well stream this first part. I’ll be going live at 11:10am CST today (4/21/16): twitch.tv/tomsepicgaming
Recently WWG updated a few of their rules partially based on their experience with the app. These are fairly minor changes that help speed up the game, and I like them. You can check out their article on it here. Rob and Nathan also discussed the changes, took some questions, and played some Epic on a recent twitch stream.
The biggest changes have to deal with passing initiative in combat and at the end of turns.
Previously combat worked like this (AP = Attacking Player, DP = Defending Player):
1) AP Declares attacking champion(s)
2a) AP may play cards and activate abilities (“make plays”)
2b) DP may play cards and activate abilities (“make plays”)
2c) If DP made any plays, return to 2a. Otherwise, proceed to 3
3) DP Declares defending champion(s)
4a) AP may “make plays”
4b) DP may “make plays”
4c) If DP made any plays, return to 4a. Otherwise, proceed to 5
5) Assign damage
Essentially, the Defending Player would always be the last person to pass in order to advance to the next step.
Now combat works like this:
1) AP Declares attacking champion(s)
2a) AP may “make plays”
2b) DP may advance to 3 (declare blockers) or may “make plays.” If they make any plays, advance to 2c
2c) AP may advance to 3 (declare blockers) or may “make plays.” If they make any plays, advance to 2b
3) DP Declares defending champion(s)
4a) DP may “make plays”
4b) AP may advance to 5 (assign damage) or may “make plays.” If they make any plays, advance to 4c
4c) DP may advance to 5 (assign damage) or may “make plays.” If they make any plays, advance to 4b
5) Assign damage
Assuming no one makes any plays initiative passing/choice making looks like this:
1) AP
2a) AP
2b) DP
3) DP
4a) DP
4b) AP
5) –
After combat) AP
Now, the Defending Player has the first opportunity to “make plays” after blockers are declared. Not only does this reduce the number of times initiative is passed in combat by 1 (assuming no one plays anything), but it also slightly buffs the attacker in combat.
For example, I attack with Raging T-Rex while I have Rage in hand. My opponent blocks with Noble Unicorn while they have Hasty Retreat in hand. My opponent plans on using Hasty Retreat no matter what because they don’t want their Unicorn to die.
Previously
As the attacker, I don’t know my opponent plans on playing Hasty Retreat, so I play Rage on my T-Rex since, if my opponent doesn’t “make any plays” I’ll lose my opportunity to play it and lose 10 potential damage. When my opponent then gains the initiative, they play Hasty Retreat and not only save their Unicorn and return my T-Rex to hand, but they also get a free negation of my Rage in the process.
Now
The defender gets the first chance to play events. If they play Hasty Retreat now, they can protect their Unicorn; however, they will not be able to draw out my Rage. If, on the other hand, they know I have Rage because I revealed it for loyalty earlier, they could opt to pass initiative. If I play my Rage, my opponent may then Hasty Retreat my champion. But, I (as the attacker) now get the choice to either accept the current state of combat and break the Noble Unicorn, or I can play my Rage to try to get 10 damage through.
Due to this, the attacker gets a very slight advantage over the defender, or more precisely, the attacker loses a disadvantage they originally had.
Essentially, the non-current player was always the last player to pass before. Now, the turn can end after 2 consecutive passes.
Before, when the current player tried to end their turn and their opponent “made a play,” the current player was immediately thrust back into their main phase. From there, the current player could have either played more cards, made more attacks, or attempted to end their turn again. When the current player tried to end their turn again, their opponent could make another play and repeat this process.
Now, if the current player tries to end their turn and their opponent “makes a play,” the current player can either go back to their main phase in order to play cards/declare attacks, or the current player can immediately end the turn.
In other words, the non-current player no longer gets the last pass before the turn ends.
The main thing this eliminates (besides extra initiative passes in the app) is the ability to play a single card at the end of your opponent’s turn, see if they have a response, play another single card, see if they have a response, play another single card, etc. until you no longer want to play cards.
For example,
Opponent: “I try to end my turn”
You: “Okay, I play Muse, pass”
Opponent: *Sigh* “I try to end my turn again”
You: “No Wither? Okay, I play second Muse, pass”
Opponent: *Longer Sigh* “I try to end my turn again”
You: “Pass”
Now, if you pass after playing your first Muse, your opponent can end the turn before you get the chance to play your second Muse. You either need to risk playing both Muses (hoping your opponent has no Wither), or you can hedge against Wither, but risk only getting one Muse in play.
As I said, I am in favor of these changes. For the most part, they have almost no effect on gameplay (particularly the mulligan order change I didn’t bother discussing: second player mulligans first now), they make defender initiative passes less obvious, and they help attacking a tiny bit.
Just finished uploading the raw footage from yesterday’s Dark Draft Stream Snipe sessions to youtube: part 1, part 2
I was able to get 15 drafts/games in against 13 different opponents. Throughout I provided explanations and commentary on my picks and plays. Let me know if this is something you want to see more of specifically.
