It’s been just over two weeks now since Wizards of the Coast released the first draft of its new Brackets system for MTG Commander. Since then we’ve had the full release of Aetherdrift and first looks at both Final Fantasy and Tarkir: Dragonstorm. In other words, this massive news has been somewhat buried. At MagicCon: Chicago this weekend, however, players got the chance to test the new system for themselves.
Based on first impressions, it’s looking like an elegant solution. Players are finding it easier to structure their pre-game conversations, and thus have the kinds of games they’d like. There are problems to be ironed out, of course, but this is only the first draft. Impossible as it sounds, Wizards may have really solved one of Commander’s longest-running problems with this one move.
The Commander Brackets System In Action
Plenty of MTG players got to acquaint themselves with the Commander Brackets system at MagicCon over the weekend. Joseph Bradford, for instance, documented his experience with the new system, and how it worked at different power levels, noting how it improved the pre-game discussions. In response, players took to Reddit to praise the system and share their own experiences in turn.
“For the most part, I agree with the assessment. I was in the Con too, and everywhere there were people playing Commander, you heard the bracket conversation. There were expectations when everyone declared their bracket, and the expectations were largely met.”
Delorei
This event was a great showcase for the Bracket system. Players were using the new Bracket terminology often, which meant they got the kinds of games they came for. That so many players are trying out the new Brackets right out of the gate is very encouraging. Since Commander is a casual format with no serious rules enforcement, the success of a system like this comes down entirely to whether players are willing to “buy in” or not. According to Delorei, players at MagicCon: Chicago certainly were.
Not only that, but the system appears to have improved their games as well. By setting expectations up front using the Brackets as a guide, it appears that many players had great Commander experiences. YaGirlJuniper noted “Honestly, I think the system’s brilliant now that I’ve actually thought about what the brackets mean.” LifeNeutral added “Sounds like a success.” The extra pregame guidance on offer here appears to be a huge hit with players.
In that respect, the system is working perfectly. The idea behind it, as Gavin Verhey stressed in a series of follow-up tweets, is to help players have the kinds of games they want. Specific experiential goals are just as important as power level, if not more so.
A Numbers Game
That’s not to say power level doesn’t come into it, of course. The new numerical Brackets alone, devoid of additional context, serve as a formalized version of the Commander power level scales we’ve all used in the past. In many players’ eyes, they’re a big improvement, too.
“The advantage of the new system is a truly shared language. There are/were multiple different versions of the “1-10” system floating around previously and the lack of any sort of rigid expectations (named game changer cards) meant that even high power players could claim they were a “7” because they weren’t playing “cEDH.””
PasDeDeux
PasDeDeux makes a very good point here. The previous numerical system for determining Commander power level was, broadly speaking, useless. Since it wasn’t a formalized system different players and groups weighed things differently. This made it difficult to balance games even for players in the same local group, never mind strangers at big events.
“Honestly regardless of how much better or worse someone may think this is, it’s drastically better than “my decks a 7/10.” I’ve seen borderline cEDH decks and barely upgraded precons being hauled as 7/10. The bracket system, for whatever faults, is MUCH clearer.”
vastros
This has long been a common complaint in the Commander community. The difficulty of boiling a 100-card deck down to just a single number has resulted in a strange phenomenon where most decks average out at around 7. Or at least their builders think they do. If you’ve seen any “it’s a 7, I swear!” memes over the years, this is why.
“I would say that largely, the brackets serve to keep unwelcome B4s out of B2/B3 space by giving more definition. It can’t be perfect because it can’t stop bad actors, but it’s still better than treating all of these as “7s” with a slice of “if you’re not having fun, get good”.”
Spekter1754
More clearly defining the power levels via Brackets seems to be helping more players correctly evaluate their own decks. As Spekter1754 mentions above, Commander tables of the past often featured a power imbalance due to players missing the mark in this regard.
The new changes won’t solve this problem entirely, of course. There will always be hustlers in Magic who enjoy misrepresenting their decks. For those willing to engage in good faith, however, the system appears to be a roaring success so far.
Wrinkles To Be Ironed
Of course, no system is perfect. The Commander Brackets system is a massive undertaking for MTG, and it would’ve been nothing short of miraculous if Wizards got everything right straight away. Many players had complaints about the new system as well.
“Trying to use the terms “casual” and “optimized” to set expectations is just reintroducing the vague bullshit that undermined the old power level concept. To some people “casual” = anything that isn’t cEDH, to others it means do-nothing meme decks. It is simply a term so broad as to be useless in this context.”
Hotsaucex11
Among the negative feedback on the Brackets system at this early stage, this was by far the most common complaint. Players noted a lack of full clarity on Wizards’ part, especially when defining Brackets 1-2, or the casual Brackets.
One player’s idea of a casual game is, naturally, going to differ from another’s. The descriptions of each Bracket do help to define the idea somewhat, but evidently, there’s more work to be done before everyone is happy.
“I still think bracket 3 is going to become the new 7/10. Mainly because the gap between 2 and 3 is very large. And people will build decks that belong in 4 but fit the strict limitations of bracket 3.”
blastatron
Some players simply don’t think the new Brackets change enough. Many think along the lines of blastatron above, who sees the Brackets as vague substitutes for the vague numerical system we had before. As they note, players are likely to exploit this lack of clarity to stomp games with strangers at events. In some cases, they may not even have to engage in bad faith to do this.
“Yeah if you strictly follow only the guidelines and not the goals of your ddcm the bracket system is probably worse than what we had before. Strictly by the guidelines my by far strongest deck is a 1 because the game plan doesn’t require combos or tutors, and my weakest deck is a 4 because it uses game changers to compensate for how shit the main game plan is.”
Dying_Hawk
Dying_Hawk’s point here has been another common one since the Brackets system was launched: that tying power level largely to a small handful of cards isn’t a great way to accurately represent a whole deck’s power. This is a valid point, as are all the criticisms here. As a first pass, however, I think it’s safe to say that the Commander Brackets system is a success, even if it does have a ways to go yet.