4 out 10 is a pretty fair assessment of this format. as far as aggro formats go this isn't the worst but, you're so much more dependent on getting your archtype signpost cards than other aggro formats. playing out on the curve is very important in this format which was the most annoying part. missing on 3 or even 4 can really feel bad
Sometimes the oval just didn’t have a signpost card and you’d get wrecked. Or you try to wheel something and someone takes it as an add on. This format felt wayyyyy too dependent on being in your archetype, if you went squirrels you took squirrels and nothing else. Maybe 1 card from another archetype. It became very redundant
The exception felt like white. The artifact builders talent deck was kind of fun and usually just required getting good white and usually green for food cards. Things like the 2 mana removal + food blast artifact.
the main issue was that you effectively needed to draft for two colors at once. you somehow had to use one pick per pack to monopolize two different lanes or else you were screwed. without synergy, decks in this format are quite literally nonfunctional. if you didn't draft the right cards for your archetype, or you were playing one of the 5-7 playable archetypes and you had to pivot halfway through because they were too contested, then your draft was pretty much over on the spot.
> You're so much more dependent on getting your archetype signpost cards than other aggro formats. This is what really has made the format sub-par to me. I've had squirrels completely open to me a few times, like getting Camilla 8th pick levels of open, and still not seen a single Vinereap Mentor, which completely tanks the deck quality. But if you encounter a squirrel deck that happened to have all the signposts in their pod you get completely run over. Not to mention all the other "mono-color" cards which are only playable in a single deck, which you also need to open for your deck to function. It just makes the deck quality so wildly unbalanced because no matter how well you identify your lane, you may just not open the good cards for it. So sometimes you get every card you need and completely steamroll, other times you're like Nummy in the last game puttering out your hybrid commons while the opponent plays Longriver into Lilysplash into Port Mage into Season of Gathering into Mistbreath, a draw better than his deck could possibly have despite him finding his lane.
@@serenolopez-darwin1975 you pretty much hit the nail on the head. not only do the archetypes not function without the specific synergy pieces, signposts, etc., you have to somehow draft into two colors at once because so many mono-color cards are useless in half of the archetypes of that color. and all of that isn’t to mention that you can just lose to a pack god who got every card for their archetype, and God forbid they’re playing rabbits or squirrels. i’ve lost more than one game to people playing token generator into burrowguard mentor into rabbit mythic into season etc. and this is after drafting a decent lizard deck with gev, fireglass, hired claw, etc.
I'm hopeful! There seems to be a lot of interesting overlap in the draft archetypes + a cycle of duals at common (which can lead to creative deckbuilding and variety imo) and first impression is that the set doesn't seem too fast.
Haha, to be honest, it's fun to see you calling out the last time drafting twice. The last draft going mythic really showed you how fun the format can be... I must say I loved it, I just feel like there was a double learning curve, it was quick to get to a decent declining level but many players caught up and I struggled winning 4+ games consistently. Then in the end I managed grasping those tiny edges and understanding synergies, playing cards not rated well on 17lands but being well according to my gut feeling, that helped me still beat very good players, reaching another curve. But I didn't quite make it to mythic, I think rather because I am not playing as good as you then not having drafted so well (well still clearly you are a better drafter). I think if you struggle, it is actually a sign that this was a great format, don't you think?!?! That's the format that makes you give up or become a better player. In the end you also managed to find a deck that would rather have you be on the draw then on the play many times... Looking forward to see you attack the next one!
The tricky parts of having such a high synergy format is if certain colour combinations are so much weaker than the rest, the drafting experience will be very lacking. Blue/red is almost always open. Same with blue/black and green/red. It means that even if you have those colours all by yourself, you are likely to end up with a bad deck regardless. Especially since alot of non synergistic pieces are getting drafted elsewhere (removal pieces for example). And if you want to go for a stronger combinations, you have to be ready to fight for it. And you are limited in your choices regardless. If you go green, you know that red is probably not going to be an option most of the time. The set really needed more fixing. That way you could much more easily include pieces elsewhere to support lackluster combinations.
I feel that the formats with high synergy that function best are the ones that don't "allow" for drafting all 10 colour combinations. For instance Ravnica formats or Capenna.
@@Wedelinskyj iagree. It makes for way less ”dead cards” in the right colours aswell. However, if the synergies dont work aswell as intended, then it is very rough to be drafting in a 5-archetype set. So it is a bit of a tradeoff in the end.
32:16 maybe I’m missing something, how would pumping the cultivator be lethal? Your token would’ve been bounced, your 1/3 would’ve connected, bringing them down to 7, and your cultivator would’ve been pumped to a 6 power creature and had to go through the 1 toughness token, making their life total 2. You would’ve had 1 fewer creature because your token would be gone, and your 1/3 wouldn’t even be a lethal threat. You 100% made the correct choice.
4/10? How would you rank the last 4 or 5 sets by comparison? I enjoyed modern masters quite a bit but didn’t end up getting mythic during that set. I’m not sure how the new one is looking.
Giving a 4/10 is pretty harsh for the set but understandable. Watching Sam Black get 7 trophies in 9 runs on his recent twitch vods with 3 and 4 color decks has opened my eyes that this format has so much more depth to it and thus giving me more optimism of new discoveries for myself.
but thats just what sam black does, he always finds weird, underdrafted archetypes and color combos in any set... if thats what makes a good set, every set is good
bloomburrow is the first set i've ever drafted, and my overall assessment of the set is that it is a fickle and mercurial format. on a surface level, bloomburrow seems as though it would serve as a good introduction to drafting, with clear draft archetypes, good signpost cards, and easily identifiable synergies, but any player with just a few drafts of experience will come to realize just how harsh the valley can be. in my experience, i found that bloomburrow was an asymmetrical format, with clearly dominant archetypes eclipsing their clearly unplayable counterparts, leading to multiple hotly contested lanes with not enough cards to go around. the format also rewards synergy over everything, exacerbating the resource strain when trying to identify a lane with a color that is both open and playable at the same time. the format is aggro-heavy and heavily punishes you for not being able to play on curve every turn, making the slower archetypes even weaker from turn one. in a vacuum, the set design of bloomburrow was fun and inspired, and the different archetypes felt cohesive and synergistic almost to the point where they could be mistaken for constructed decks at times. in practice however, the experience of actually drafting a viable deck was often frustrating to me as someone who lacked understanding of the nuances of draft. while i do think that 4/10 is a fairly harsh rating, i'm inclined to agree that this set is most likely a 6 at best. bloomburrow had fun cards and engaging designs, but the format itself was, frankly, quite unbalanced, and the punishment for failing to identify an open lane while also collecting enough synergy pieces led to some painful experiences that felt almost unfair. with all of that being said, i feel as though bloomburrow was a good point of reference for beginning my draft journey, and a quintessential format in terms of taking my first steps into limited magic: the gathering.
Setting aside anything else you wrote, this was not color-unbalanced format. Difference between worst and best 2 color archetype is just 5% winrate, this is below average. In OTJ it was 7%, in MKM 6% etc. There are no unplayable archetypes and you absolutely should draft "worst" color combination if this is what you get passed.
one time in draft, the bat lane was WIDE open. i ended up drafting TWO of the white rare bats that get a counter every time i gain life and the black rare bat that draws extra. even had the signpost uncommon and everything... except that there was no synergy whatsoever, because there were absolutely none of the lifegain cards, no lifelinks, sonar strikes, or the signpost commons. in effect, my bats were functionally just fliers with no rules text... despite all that, i managed a 4-3 run because it turns out curving out and aggroing out your opponents from the sky wins you games. which is a lot of text to say, that was extremely unfun and one dimensional. i could pretty much tell how the game would go by turn three.
As a new player starting with bloomburrow being my first draft, id be interested to hear your reasons for a 4/10 as I have nothing to compare it too :)
The good players perfer a more "open" set with more possibilities in terms of game play. I perfer more guild type limited but I also can't get out of plat 4 so ya
The format combines too many things experienced drafters usually dont like - "on-rails" draft, fast aggro format, color imbalance (it wasnt as bad as other sets, but it wasnt good) and high play/draw variance. I think wotc made it intetionaly like to appeal for people just starting out, but personally i find myself getting actually bored in every single limited game in this format.
Feels like we should have cut Three Tree Rootweaver in favor of the 4/3 rat. Neither of them are great cards but Rootweaver does nothing for the deck since we have so many 2-drops and there's nothing we want to accelerate out. At least the 4/3 would be top end.
@@NumotTheNummyYT I guess I might just like the set a lot more then what we've been given recently! Thank you for the great content though, really love watching you play!
If only it were your last MTG draft ever. The game has only become significantly worse since they introduced wokeness a politics into it. Get into a better game!
![ทุกครั้งที่หลับตา (Lucid Dream) - AYLA's [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4i1OBAQyv58/mqdefault.jpg)
This was a pretty good masterclass in great drafting habits. Not a lot of people would pivot out of blue and you were well rewarded in pack 3
4 out 10 is a pretty fair assessment of this format. as far as aggro formats go this isn't the worst but, you're so much more dependent on getting your archtype signpost cards than other aggro formats. playing out on the curve is very important in this format which was the most annoying part. missing on 3 or even 4 can really feel bad
Sometimes the oval just didn’t have a signpost card and you’d get wrecked. Or you try to wheel something and someone takes it as an add on. This format felt wayyyyy too dependent on being in your archetype, if you went squirrels you took squirrels and nothing else. Maybe 1 card from another archetype. It became very redundant
The exception felt like white. The artifact builders talent deck was kind of fun and usually just required getting good white and usually green for food cards. Things like the 2 mana removal + food blast artifact.
the main issue was that you effectively needed to draft for two colors at once. you somehow had to use one pick per pack to monopolize two different lanes or else you were screwed. without synergy, decks in this format are quite literally nonfunctional. if you didn't draft the right cards for your archetype, or you were playing one of the 5-7 playable archetypes and you had to pivot halfway through because they were too contested, then your draft was pretty much over on the spot.
> You're so much more dependent on getting your archetype signpost cards than other aggro formats.
This is what really has made the format sub-par to me. I've had squirrels completely open to me a few times, like getting Camilla 8th pick levels of open, and still not seen a single Vinereap Mentor, which completely tanks the deck quality. But if you encounter a squirrel deck that happened to have all the signposts in their pod you get completely run over. Not to mention all the other "mono-color" cards which are only playable in a single deck, which you also need to open for your deck to function.
It just makes the deck quality so wildly unbalanced because no matter how well you identify your lane, you may just not open the good cards for it. So sometimes you get every card you need and completely steamroll, other times you're like Nummy in the last game puttering out your hybrid commons while the opponent plays Longriver into Lilysplash into Port Mage into Season of Gathering into Mistbreath, a draw better than his deck could possibly have despite him finding his lane.
@@serenolopez-darwin1975 you pretty much hit the nail on the head. not only do the archetypes not function without the specific synergy pieces, signposts, etc., you have to somehow draft into two colors at once because so many mono-color cards are useless in half of the archetypes of that color.
and all of that isn’t to mention that you can just lose to a pack god who got every card for their archetype, and God forbid they’re playing rabbits or squirrels. i’ve lost more than one game to people playing token generator into burrowguard mentor into rabbit mythic into season etc. and this is after drafting a decent lizard deck with gev, fireglass, hired claw, etc.
I'm hoping Duskmourn is kinder to us than Bloomburrow was
I'm hopeful! There seems to be a lot of interesting overlap in the draft archetypes + a cycle of duals at common (which can lead to creative deckbuilding and variety imo) and first impression is that the set doesn't seem too fast.
¹¹@@felizpanda
@@felizpanda after watching nummy do a game i think it may be a just as tribal kind of format but this time we just care about enchantments? idk
That was indeed an mtg arena limited format
Day 1 of asking nummy to make a draft tier list
Would you ever be interested in a ranking of the draft format sets? Or have you done that already?
Crumb of the gods😂
best brain fart
When they go back to Bloomburrow they gotta print that card.
Haha, to be honest, it's fun to see you calling out the last time drafting twice. The last draft going mythic really showed you how fun the format can be... I must say I loved it, I just feel like there was a double learning curve, it was quick to get to a decent declining level but many players caught up and I struggled winning 4+ games consistently. Then in the end I managed grasping those tiny edges and understanding synergies, playing cards not rated well on 17lands but being well according to my gut feeling, that helped me still beat very good players, reaching another curve. But I didn't quite make it to mythic, I think rather because I am not playing as good as you then not having drafted so well (well still clearly you are a better drafter). I think if you struggle, it is actually a sign that this was a great format, don't you think?!?! That's the format that makes you give up or become a better player. In the end you also managed to find a deck that would rather have you be on the draw then on the play many times... Looking forward to see you attack the next one!
28:30 what stoped you playing t2 dork, t3 two 2/2 duos???
The tricky parts of having such a high synergy format is if certain colour combinations are so much weaker than the rest, the drafting experience will be very lacking. Blue/red is almost always open. Same with blue/black and green/red. It means that even if you have those colours all by yourself, you are likely to end up with a bad deck regardless. Especially since alot of non synergistic pieces are getting drafted elsewhere (removal pieces for example). And if you want to go for a stronger combinations, you have to be ready to fight for it.
And you are limited in your choices regardless. If you go green, you know that red is probably not going to be an option most of the time.
The set really needed more fixing. That way you could much more easily include pieces elsewhere to support lackluster combinations.
I feel that the formats with high synergy that function best are the ones that don't "allow" for drafting all 10 colour combinations. For instance Ravnica formats or Capenna.
@@Wedelinskyj iagree. It makes for way less ”dead cards” in the right colours aswell.
However, if the synergies dont work aswell as intended, then it is very rough to be drafting in a 5-archetype set. So it is a bit of a tradeoff in the end.
Hey Numot, what were your favorite draft formats? Where would you rank Neon Dynasty?
Fun fact, his favorite from back in the day was Invasion block :) early multicolor-themed set
Crumb of the gods sounds hard.
32:16 maybe I’m missing something, how would pumping the cultivator be lethal? Your token would’ve been bounced, your 1/3 would’ve connected, bringing them down to 7, and your cultivator would’ve been pumped to a 6 power creature and had to go through the 1 toughness token, making their life total 2. You would’ve had 1 fewer creature because your token would be gone, and your 1/3 wouldn’t even be a lethal threat. You 100% made the correct choice.
can't wait to add "crumb of the gods" to my deck, is that from Theros?
When the gods eat their divine bread, the crumbs fall on Earth and are collected by mortals who turn them into stimulants and tonics.
Hi Nummy! Which sets do you consider as top-tier sets for drafting?
No one jumped on the "our green squirrels are kind of nuts" comment? XD
4/10? How would you rank the last 4 or 5 sets by comparison? I enjoyed modern masters quite a bit but didn’t end up getting mythic during that set. I’m not sure how the new one is looking.
Giving a 4/10 is pretty harsh for the set but understandable. Watching Sam Black get 7 trophies in 9 runs on his recent twitch vods with 3 and 4 color decks has opened my eyes that this format has so much more depth to it and thus giving me more optimism of new discoveries for myself.
but thats just what sam black does, he always finds weird, underdrafted archetypes and color combos in any set... if thats what makes a good set, every set is good
How were there two Dazzling Denial in the same pack? No foils on Arena....
bloomburrow is the first set i've ever drafted, and my overall assessment of the set is that it is a fickle and mercurial format.
on a surface level, bloomburrow seems as though it would serve as a good introduction to drafting, with clear draft archetypes, good signpost cards, and easily identifiable synergies, but any player with just a few drafts of experience will come to realize just how harsh the valley can be. in my experience, i found that bloomburrow was an asymmetrical format, with clearly dominant archetypes eclipsing their clearly unplayable counterparts, leading to multiple hotly contested lanes with not enough cards to go around.
the format also rewards synergy over everything, exacerbating the resource strain when trying to identify a lane with a color that is both open and playable at the same time. the format is aggro-heavy and heavily punishes you for not being able to play on curve every turn, making the slower archetypes even weaker from turn one.
in a vacuum, the set design of bloomburrow was fun and inspired, and the different archetypes felt cohesive and synergistic almost to the point where they could be mistaken for constructed decks at times. in practice however, the experience of actually drafting a viable deck was often frustrating to me as someone who lacked understanding of the nuances of draft.
while i do think that 4/10 is a fairly harsh rating, i'm inclined to agree that this set is most likely a 6 at best. bloomburrow had fun cards and engaging designs, but the format itself was, frankly, quite unbalanced, and the punishment for failing to identify an open lane while also collecting enough synergy pieces led to some painful experiences that felt almost unfair. with all of that being said, i feel as though bloomburrow was a good point of reference for beginning my draft journey, and a quintessential format in terms of taking my first steps into limited magic: the gathering.
Setting aside anything else you wrote, this was not color-unbalanced format. Difference between worst and best 2 color archetype is just 5% winrate, this is below average. In OTJ it was 7%, in MKM 6% etc. There are no unplayable archetypes and you absolutely should draft "worst" color combination if this is what you get passed.
one time in draft, the bat lane was WIDE open. i ended up drafting TWO of the white rare bats that get a counter every time i gain life and the black rare bat that draws extra. even had the signpost uncommon and everything... except that there was no synergy whatsoever, because there were absolutely none of the lifegain cards, no lifelinks, sonar strikes, or the signpost commons. in effect, my bats were functionally just fliers with no rules text... despite all that, i managed a 4-3 run because it turns out curving out and aggroing out your opponents from the sky wins you games. which is a lot of text to say, that was extremely unfun and one dimensional. i could pretty much tell how the game would go by turn three.
As a new player starting with bloomburrow being my first draft, id be interested to hear your reasons for a 4/10 as I have nothing to compare it too :)
The good players perfer a more "open" set with more possibilities in terms of game play. I perfer more guild type limited but I also can't get out of plat 4 so ya
@@DRealPk3 yeah, this format was a bit too on rails for the draft portion. makes it hard to stay open and draft correctly
@@thelifedragon2156 if not for rails I draft piles
The format combines too many things experienced drafters usually dont like - "on-rails" draft, fast aggro format, color imbalance (it wasnt as bad as other sets, but it wasnt good) and high play/draw variance.
I think wotc made it intetionaly like to appeal for people just starting out, but personally i find myself getting actually bored in every single limited game in this format.
What makes a format good or replayable?
What are your favorite formats from the last few years?
Feels like we should have cut Three Tree Rootweaver in favor of the 4/3 rat. Neither of them are great cards but Rootweaver does nothing for the deck since we have so many 2-drops and there's nothing we want to accelerate out. At least the 4/3 would be top end.
9:23 nice
can he sit on his rank and be top 250 til season ends?
Hashtag Crumb of the Gods Edit: Honestly, I liked Bloomburrow by the end of it. Not too bad in my book.
Kenji will never like any format where Izzet is bad. :)
W vid
#CrumbOfTheGods
I loved bloomburrow drafts
Pretty sure he played a few more after this draft
nope, I have not :)
hey numot, why do you not play constructed?
Please rank all arena drafts.
kamigawa
others
All will be One #1
i remember wilds of eldraine getting 4/10, but bloomburrow is still worse
Getting your third cashe grab is quite the feeling on the squirrels deck
Cringe bot got first comment
Why bother with this pointless botting
banned the bot, now you're 'first' :)
Taking cache grab over overprotect is wild. That card had won me an insane amount of games and is just super good. Unbelievable that it wheels.
cache grab is nuts in GB though, fueling forage turns on all the cards which makes the deck pop. its a close pick but i dont disagree with his choice
@@thelifedragon2156 Ya that's actually true especially with 2 of those 1 1 dudes. It probably is real close I just really like protect.
@@LumieX yeah, if it were me, over protect would have the slight edge
4/10?! Really!?
slightly below average? seems like a fine rating for limited gameplay
@@NumotTheNummyYT I guess I might just like the set a lot more then what we've been given recently! Thank you for the great content though, really love watching you play!
If only it were your last MTG draft ever. The game has only become significantly worse since they introduced wokeness a politics into it. Get into a better game!