Forums
Guides
Features
Media
Zelda Wiki
Patreon
    General Card Games Thread
    • Sabbo wrote:

      Spinning Witch is not found in booster packs of any set, but rather is essentially a "reward" for people who buy three boxes. (note: the cost of a FoW box in USD is somewhere near $80 I think, for 360 cards? More expensive elsewhere though.) This "reward" is being panned by pretty much the entire community, in addition to the chance of getting a ruler in a box being lowered from 1 per box to 70% chance of a box having one.

      Dredging up old posts >>

      So WotC also does the "you can only get this card if you buy a box" thing and occasionally catch some flak for it as well. It's not a huge sticking point; at any given time in standard there are ~10 cards from different sources which are legal and not available in boosters, but these cards are always developed for casual play: explicitly too weak to possibly effect the format.

      Drama time!
      I was playing Arena the other day and got my ass kicked by a card I'd never seen cast before - Nexus of Fate. I'd passed over the card in the M19 spoiler because, well, "take an extra turn" effects generally need to be 5-mana to be even hypothetically standard playable. It looks exactly like what shitty promos usually look like. But my opponent here certainly used it to good effect, taking *full* advantage of the card's speed to put me in a really bad spot. I was impressed and thought "hey, that looks fun, maybe I'll build that deck".

      And I guess I wasn't the only one.

      Yesterday evening I saw this tweet floating to the top of reddit. Because the promo standard cards released outside of packs don't have an easy way to make it on to MTGO other than through random rewards in treasure chests the supply of Nexus of Fate online is minimal. The price of the card spiked at over $60 in the online market yesterday, and WotC emergency announced that they'd drastically increase the drop rate in chests for the next 2 weeks in an attempt to create a real supply.

      Meanwhile, the IRL price of the card keeps trending up with online listings topping $40 this morning. This is definitely a bubble - stores have stacks of these things ready to give away to anyone who buys a box and a forty dollar off coupon on a booster box just doesn't make for a tenable economy - but it's an absolutely terrible time for a bubble in the price of a standard playable card because the pro tour is tomorrow.

      Anyway, some serious vindication for everyone who's ever said that standard-legal cards outside of boosters was a bad plan that WotC would eventually fuck up. The case of Nexus shows that one of these cards doesn't even have to be good - just have the outside possibility of maybe, possibly being good for a single week - and that can be enough to break everything.
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Foo ().

    • Foo wrote:

      So WotC also does the "you can only get this card if you buy a box" thing and occasionally catch some flak for it as well. It's not a huge sticking point; at any given time in standard there are ~10 cards from different sources which are legal and not available in boosters, but these cards are always developed for casual play: explicitly too weak to possibly effect the format.

      Foo wrote:

      The case of Nexus shows that one of these cards doesn't even have to be good - just have the outside possibility of maybe, possibly being good for a single week - and that can be enough to break everything.
      ...Interesting. Ten seems like way too much, but if all of them are normally unplayable it could be excused I suppose. But then this bubble shows up and throws everything into chaos.

      I can compare this with the Time Spinning Witch easily enough: She is one of three key pieces in a popular rogue deck (For what those words together can mean >_>) designed to prevent the opponent from being able to play for three or more turns. These three pieces are The Time Spinning Witch herself (primarily the first J-ruler side, as linked here), Mosasaurus (with deck-to-field play via Dinosaur Surfacing, if necessary), and The Distortion of Time. Players expecting it can play around it easily enough, but people not expecting it are in an awkward position. Note that God's Arts can only be used once per game, even if cancelled.

      ...That said, the Time Spinning Witch as a card seems to be running at a similar singles cost to other recent rulers, and at a similar level of supply.
    • Ten seems like way too much, but if all of them are normally unplayable it could be excused I suppose

      Yeah, this number shot up a couple of years ago with the move to Planeswalker decks as the primary intro product to MTG. R&D had a problem for a decade where they'd try to release pre-constructed decks for new players and would either make the contents too powerful (so enfranchised players would buy them and run up the sale price) or not exciting enough (and then no would buy them, or new players that did would feel bad).

      The solution was to print cards like Teferi, Timebender in supplemental products while releasing Teferi, Hero of Dominaria in the main set. No competitive deck is ever going to play Timebender over Hero, but Timebender is still interesting enough to move product (the casual players I met in Ireland actually loved the PW decks) *and* the newer players are free to try to run it in a standard tournament if they'd really like.

      Like I said, people gripe about this a little bit but overall I thought it was a net good... until yesterday lol.
      (Although you could argue that PW deck cards are still OK and only buy-a-box promos are a problem)
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Foo ().

    • Never in English. In French I know both ponder and contemplation have the same name. Magic's Russian translation is notorious error-filled and I *think* I've heard about cases there as well but I don't know them off the top of my head.

      What English *does* have is cases where the entire name of one card is the root name of another card. This lead to a rather lengthy ethical debate a couple years ago:

      Bob Huang wrote:

      My opponent named “Borborygmos” with his Pithing Needle when he meant to name “Borborygmos Enraged.” I chose to have a judge enforce the choice he made rather than proceeding with the game without calling a judge and assuming Borborygmos Enraged had been named. The judge enforced the rules without making an exception, and my opponent was not allowed to name the card he wanted. I don’t feel great about winning that way, but I don’t feel that bad either. I see it as functionally similar to getting a game loss for a deck reg. error if somebody just puts “Borborygmos” instead of “Borborygmos Enraged.” To me, he made a “verbal misplay” rather than a “strategic misplay” and I capitalized on it. Of course, perhaps I should have just let it slide. Thoughts?

      If you ever hear a magic player randomly add "enraged" to the end of their card names in discussion, it's a stupid meme pointing at this :P
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Foo ().

    • I see. I imagine that those French cards are ruled as having different names, for the sake of how many can be included in a deck?

      And that second case is interesting, as FoW actually has a few instances of this. For instance right now in New Frontiers we have "Mephistopheles" (who also has a reverse side with the same name) and "Shining Demon, Mephistopheles", along with in Wanderer "Mephistopheles, the Demon Collaborator" and "Mephistopheles, the Abyssal Tyrant". Or for Red Riding Hood (in Wanderer) there are like... four different cards which include those words in that order in their name including one where that is its whole name, four "Little Red"s (all with extra words in the title), two "Dark Riding Hood"s (one is plain), and one "Little Dread" (who has more words as well). Five of those are currently in rotation, including both "Red Riding Hood" and "Dark Riding Hood".

      That said, the reason I mention all this is because I recently discovered that while in the latest set we have the card Restoration, we also had a card of the same name in the first set of the first cluster. (which was not released in the US. US judges don't like ruling on any format involving that cluster.) I haven't gotten any word yet on how this is ruled as far as deckbuilding goes... although I will note four things:
      1) The names are not the same in Japanese. They are 復興 and 再臨 ("reconstruction" and "second coming").
      2) An old card's Japanese name was errataed when a new card was made with the same name. (In English these are "Elvish Exorcist" and "Elven Exorcist")
      3) This issue was seemingly intentionally avoided about a year ago when a new card "The Manticore" was named differently than a card from the first cluster, "Manticore".
      4) Finally, there is a card in Wanderer which interacts with any card with the word "Apple" in its name. In Japanese, it looks for "ringo" (their word for apple). There is a card which is otherwise pretty much unplayable named Amy Apple, or transliterated from Japanese, eimii appuru. It has been ruled that this card is a valid "Apple" card in any region, despite not having ringo in its name.
    • I see. I imagine that those French cards are ruled as having different names, for the sake of how many can be included in a deck?

      Yeah. Every card - no matter what it says or looks like - ultimately has the game impact of the English oracle text of *whatever card it is* and *whatever card it is* is actually at the discretion of the head judge of your event. So if you open this in a draft:



      The head judge decides whether its a Sudden Demise or a Foster.

      I did track down more examples of translations giving rise to multiple cards with the same name in mtg's foreign translations, so I guess it makes sense that a non-English game would have the same issues when localized here. Cool case study really.

      ---

      boxes and I currently in a six hour layover, so I'm catching up with the Pro Tour goings on. The silver showcase happened yesterday and was about as disastrous as predicted, but there's no point me piling on. You can read all the hit pieces which'll be written in the next week if you really want :P

      The actual PT has been really good in its first few hours. The round two match between (second greatest of all time) Kai Budde's team against (Hall of Famer and "father" of Latin magic) Will Edel's team was gr8. S'live on twitch if anyone is interested.
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Foo ().

    • Magic: the Gathering turned 25 years old yesterday. Part and parcel, it was a stupidly busy weekend, which I quite enjoyed. Let's have some #HotTakes.

      On Nexus of Fate

      Six players brought the hottest new meme deck in standard to the PT, and although it's impossible to collect non-anecdotal data (as WotCStaff was incredibly quick to remind us) it seemed to be pretty fucking dominant. I put the deck together yesterday in Arena and recorded a game this morning where my opponent actually let me go off:

      Display Spoiler
      No sound cause I was recording my whole grind waiting for a game that really showed off the combo. Really recommend you watch this at 2x speed.

      I open on 2x Irrigated Farmland, Island, 2x Glimmer, Nexus of Fate , Gift of Paradise on the draw. No green mana is a beating. If my opponent comes out quickly and I don't draw a forest I'm 100% dead so I have to ship this back.

      Draw Irrigated Farmland, Plains, Forest, 2x Teferi, Chart a Course. The Chart does an amazing job of making the second Teferi OK in what-would-otherwise be an effective 5 card hand. I keep, see another chart on top, leave it there. I'm gonna have a big tempo deficit with this draw, but I like my chances of putting the combo together assuming I can live to turn six.

      Opponent opens on swamp go. Good news. A one drop probably would've killed us here. They develop into a Viashino Pyromancer and then, on turn three, miss a land drop and lightning strike my face. As will become apparent, they're hoping to sequence another burn spell into Ghitu Lavamancer turn four. Given the lack of a 1-drop black instant or sorcery in their deck, they *need* to hit a third land to make this possible. They do hit, though, and their aggro plan is off to the races.

      Meanwhile, we chart a course on two to find a bunch of mana. Gift of Paradise on turn three gets us to a turn four Teferi which in turn opens up mana for our first fog of the game, a Root Snare.

      From here I have a steady steam of fogs, so my opponent's creatures never matter again. It's all about their burn spells against my nine life. Best guess they're playing 10-12 3 damage burn spells; they've played two at this point and need three more over the next three turns to kill me. Nothing I can do but sweat as I set up the combo with cycled Haze of Pollens and Irrigated Farmlands, Anticipate, and a Search for Azcanta. He hits me for 3... 6... 8 damage! We're at one, be we'll almost certainly be winning this one.

      My first sequence of four consecutive turns doesn't end things, but it gets me back up to four life and removes all my opponent's threats. They can't deal four damage from an empty board so I'm happy to pass back. My next sequence goes infinite, and I end up with six extra turns banked by the time I deal the final points of damage. Cards of interest: Karn, The Mirari Conjecture, and Karn's Temporal Sundering.



      So the deck is fun and its probably good. Currently 4x Nexus of Fate will run you $150 in paper, which is steep but not any steeper than a chase mythic that *wasn't* a promo would be at this point in the season, so it's probably presumptuous to shout "disaster" just yet. If the card stays popular and the price goes *down* then it will be an objective win for WotC but they'll still probably take a ton of heat from people looking to criticize for criticism sake. If the card stays high in price and people who want to play it can't access it then this'll probably go down as one of the year's biggest disasters and WotC won't soon live down the "I told you sos".

      With Arena, meanwhile, life is good which is a great advertisement for the platform.
      (Maybe this was WotC's plot all along?!?!?)

      On Legacy

      Legacy is the Magic format I care about the least, in part because its prohibitively expensive to the point where it always seemed like it would be dead as a competitive endeavour within the next five-to-ten years. I don't think I've watched Legacy tournament since 2014 or so?

      But the legacy portion of this ProTour was absolutely great, with weird-ass gameplay, nigh-incomprehensible tech (the best deck of the weekend played sideboard Throne of Geth despite the fact that it played no other artifacts and no cards that utilized counters) and cheap decks running the show. Even just in yesterdays finals (semi-finals, finals) the legacy matches were consistently amazing.

      Excited for the possibility of a bit of a legacy revival.

      On Beta Drafts and the Silver Showcase

      The first beta draft, in vegas, was super entertaining for reasons I'm now struggling to put a finger on. Both the oldshccol drafts this weekend - the "Silver Showcase" at the PT and the beta draft at GenCon - were boring and bad.

      I think what makes this sort of even work is hyping it up as a rare *credential* up for grabs. A beta draft costs so many tens of thousands of dollars, so participating in one is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and getting to say "I won one of the only two beta drafts that took place this decade" is a pretty cool thing to have on a magic resume: uber-nerds in pursuit of that cred bring a really contagious excitement that was incredibly palpable all weekend in vegas.

      The GenCon beta drafters were faceless ghosts. The Silver Showcase drafters were payed advertisers. Necessarily, commentary tried to put attention on the cards and the gameplay instead of the event and the people, and that just. didn't. work.

      (That all said, Cifka winning with Eggs was absolutely hilarious)
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens
    • So Boomsday came out yesterday and i actually got really good rips from my 150 packs - 13 legendaries (16 including promos). Only missing like 2 that i remotely want, so this should be a really cheap expansion for me lmao. (the avg is like 1 legendary every 25 packs, so i got over double the avg)



      There were three main goals i had with this expansion. Build a solid Warrior deck involving Mad Genius, a Divine Shield deck in Paladin and win a game with Mecha'thun. The first two are still in progress but i just achieved the last after 3 attempts. It's scarily consistent from what i've seen online lol, but i think it's largely in part to people not expecting it. Luckily the version i built came with two v strong win conditions but i wanted to win with Mecha'thun before anything else.

      I also recorded it if anyone is interested in watching - i tried to keep my turns visible(not skipping cards, hovering cards before using them) for anyone unfamiliar with hearthstone, but some habits are hard to undo lol.




      edit: holy shit the game was 17 minutes? it felt v long to me but i thought that's just cause i was so close 8)
      also i will remember to turn on in-game sounds if i record again 8))))



      why would trump support the vikings

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Keith ().

    • It's actually proving to be really easy to trigger
      With the deck i crafted above, which will likely be considered unoptimised in a month, I can draw my entire deck reliably by turn 11/12, in which case I play Mecha'Thun>Bloodbloom>Cataclysm, which is ten mana when you use Galvanizers to reduce Mecha'Thun a couple turns in advance.



      The main drawback is playing Galvanizer gives away your gameplan since Warlock has no mechs, and since you're taking 2 damage every turn from your own hero power and you need at least 5 to pull off the combo, you just kinda die lol.
      hero power is normally 2 mana; draw a card, take 2 damage but costs only 1 mana in this deck with Genn Greymane.

    • Lol, v. nice Keith.

      First of all! Noticed that nice 2-for-1 at 6:30 punishing your opponent for magnetic, supporting my fears about the mechanic :P And going tall didn't really seem to protect him from your damage-based control options either.

      Admittedly the legendary Zilliax guy opponent plays at 12:00 is pretty sweet (and exactly what I thought a magnetic unit would have to look like to be competitive) but it's easy to note that the effect of that minion is diluted by the needs of the deck - unless I'm missing something, if the final spell opponent played (Kangor's Endless Army) had hit the mech dragon with Ziliax attached you'd've been dead, but the target pool was large enough after a whole game of deploying mechs that you were OK? Maybe I'm missing something tho.

      On your side of the table, deck seems sweet! I assume the ability to set up a single turn Mecha'thun + Cataclysm is huge: doesn't look like it was necessary here but in general I'd worry a lot more about this combo as a win con if you had to spread it across two turns. General worry that you're just playing a worse version of the best control deck (I mean, you clearly would've won to milling out your op. if you traded up the combo pieces for more reactive elements, and might have even been in position to beat a rez'd Ziliax dragon as well) but obviously the cool factor here can't be dismissed. And maybe your opponent was bad an overcomitted and should've ginded harder with their hero power and you needed the combo to beat the best version of them. In any case, GG!
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Foo ().

    • There's two things to consider looking at any coverage of hearthstone this month and more importantly this week - decks are really bad, and the meta favours aggro. The former is obvious to any tcg player in that people are experimenting a lot and willing to lose more to learn and the majority become angled towards timmy because the obvious cool effects like Mecha'Thun are easy goals to set. The second i think is more specific to hearthstone. Take these for example~

      Your Mech Hunter games have a winrate of 55% and games last 2-4 minutes on average.

      Your Control Warrior games have a winrate of 65% and games last 10-15 minutes on average.

      This means in an hour, you can play at least 15 games of Mech Hunter, and win an average of 8.25 games an hour. Alternatively you can play at most 6 games of Control Warrior, and win 4 games an hour. The win streak benefits go some way to alleviating this, but for the most part it's better to play aggro if your sole intention is to climb the ranked ladder. And during the period where everyone is playing weaker and experimental decks, everyone is more vulnerable to aggro. Especially aggro like the new Mech Hunter lol, where it's unlike any previous aggro deck and people don't know how to play against it.



      The deck abuses a new mechanic and people will eventually wise up and optimise decks towards it until it loses favour, but right now no one has the healing to survive it. If it's not obvious the baseline is swarming the board with lots of weak minions, using magnetic buffs and wide buffs to keep them alive. In tandem, any number of goblin bombs followed by a void ripper results in a lot of damage that most opponents can't deal with. Mass silence is only available to priest (and it's weak) and most people don't run enough healing to survive it.



      Anyway i got sidetracked - my initial point was that the decks are poorly optimised. People want to play cards like Kangor's Endless Army without considering how best to use it. If you shove a bunch of mechs in your deck without considering vulnerability to silence or a win con not involving that spell, you're bound to lose. That game for example I had him beat from early on - he was never threatening enough that I needed to use my twisting nether, so i kept it in hand on the off chance that he had ripped Kangor's Endless Army. Even then it was never threatening enough to kill me because no mechs have charge, only Rush (charge but can't attack players). Summarising his deck runs midrange/control cards, but plays like an aggro deck. He milled himself so quickly and ran out of resources while being so slow that i could react efficiently to everything.



      My deck however wasn't built on a completely new idea - it's a deck i've been playing to great success (66% winrate across 70 games) with a handful of card changes. I traded some proactive early minions for the Mecha'Thun combo, some board removal and a silence. Normally board removal is bad in this deck, but removing minions makes it better. Honestly I'm okay with the deck being weaker in favour having a secondary 'fun' win con lol, but i think the deck is much stronger in it's previous iteration.


      EDIT: also one thing i really like about this expansion is that there are some decks only pros are playing at the moment. It sounds odd, but the fact that people are experimenting with such complicated decks that the average player won't go near it bodes well for the competitive scene i think - the competitive scene becomes ever so slightly more skill oriented and less rock paper scissors. Not to say it's rng who wins, the best players win consistently across the year but these sorts of decks really seperate the skill levels lol



      the cards involved in this combo are here:



      like i've watched that clip 3 times now and while i understand the combo, it's mindboggling that on a 75 second timer he can plan and execute it. The deck has a 27% winrate currently, and i'm completely unsurprised.



      why would trump support the vikings

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Keith ().

    • Fun new topic: Power creep. How well or poorly do the game/s you all play handle power levels between old cards and new cards?

      In Force of Will, we've got this year by year comparison I've compiled:




      Year 5, set 2 of 4

      Via a ruler effect, this card can be RFG from the graveyard in order to produce one Wind will. Two if by the J-ruler.



      Extra notes: There were no 1-cost fliers in the first year, with the cheapest vanilla-like being Griffon and the cheapest Flying-only being Wondering Soul. Also, the only 1-cost Wind flier in year 3 seemed to be awkward to compare (not that it was intentional that every other entry in the list was Wind). Also also, a reminder that in this game, "banish" is directly equivalent to MtG's "sacrifice".

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Sabbo ().

    • The way win rates are reported in HS have never made sense to me lol. A quality match making system and the tendency for a good deck to attract players should both pull the win rate of a given deck towards 50%, and although there are plenty of factors to stop the WR of any given deck from landing *exactly* at 50% it's only small perturbations.

      So how do these 65% numbers happen? Are people reporting their non-mirror-match win rates? Like, if deck X is 80% of the field and has a 65% win rate against non deck X decks then I buy the non-mirror win rate of 65% because that translates into an overall win rate of 53% exactly. That would make sense as an explanation if these numbers were reported for a single "best deck" but I often see HS meta reports with *multiple* decks with win rates over 55%.

      Are people reporting their non-ranked win rates? Or their average win rate right from the beginning of the season including their early results against random-quality opponents? That would explain the numbers, but it's also junk data. GwentUp's method of dividing its meta reports into four categories based on the MMR of the competitors seems like it should be the industry standard but maybe not?

      The "best" standard decks in MTG (within a given competitive bracket) have 52-54% win rates, Gwent decks do similar. Breaking that down, my expectation for a stable two deck metagme has:

      A winningest deck, deck A, which has a win rate against deck B of 45%, a win rate against the rest of the field of 60%, and makes up 20% of the meta.
      A most popular deck, deck B, which has a win rate of 55% against deck A, a win rate of 50% against the rest of the field, and makes up 30% of the meta.
      A field of decks C-Z which collectively have a win rate of 40% against deck A, a win rate of 50% against deck B, and makes up 50% of the field.

      This leaves deck A with an overall win percentage of 53.5 % (given .5*.2 + .45*.3 + .6*.5), deck B with an overall win percentage of 51% (given .5*.3 + .55*.2 + .5*.5) and the rest of the field with an average win percentage of 48% (given .4*.2 + .5*.2 + .5*.5). Assuming a ranking system where a 48% win rate against players above-or-equal-to-your-rank is roughly what's required to reach "gold" then these numbers - combined with natural variance, the impact of play skill, and the influence of players oscillating back and forth between their pet deck and one of the meta decks - define a "competitive" metagame with two popular tier 1 decks with winning percentages above 50% that get to meet a range of decks when played in match making. I've seen metagmes like this both in Magic (last winter's A=Ramunap Red//B=Temur Energy meta described here) and in Gwent (this summer's A=Crache//B=Jan Calviet meta seen here) and they make *sense*.

      But if a pair of decks legit have 55%+ win rates against the field then I don't see how - either by dint of everyone adopting them because they're so good or by their prowess driving everyone not playing them out of the top ranks - they don't come to dominate the meta entirely, and there isn't a corresponding drop in the win rate as the two best decks eventually end up only playing each other.

      And if this *is* what's happening, it's far more interesting to report that than to report an inflated "65% win rate", which can cause players who don't know what they're reading to trip. Like, given the data "Deck A has a program-wide 65% win rate and deck B has a program-wide 55% win rate" I don't know if there's a 1-deck meta or a 2-deck meta - it depends on the A vs B match specific win rate.

      If A is 65% against the field *and* >50% against B then the equilibrium is everyone in the top rank playing A. It doesn't make sense to play B to level "fast" because once you reach a certain rank you hit a ceiling where everyone playing at the rank you're targeting is playing deck A and has a positive match-up against you and your rank plateau's regardless of the speed of your games.

      If A is 65% against the field and <50% against B then your equilibrium in the top rank is way more dynamic (its the scenario described above with a winnegest deck, a most popular deck, and a host of decks that mine the tension between them). It does, in this scenario, make a lot of sense to play B and level "fast" because you'll reach and hang in the top tier (skill permitting).

      But clearly you need to know more than naïve win percentages (and average match lengths) to make the call on whether to build deck B.

      ---

      Power creep is a weird topic. Alpha magic contains both Gray Ogre and Uthden Troll: a card and a strictly better card released in the same set. How do you measure power creep going forward from that example? I've heard other game designers suggest that this is a good demonstration of the effect of rarity - the Ogre is common, the Troll uncommon - although I've never seen it confirmed that that was Garfield's intention. The rate's for creatures simply weren't understood all that well.

      Historically the rate on things like free mana, card draw, and extra turns peaked in alpha and has only gotten worse.
      The rate on things like tutors, small utility creatures, and combo win conditions improved from alpha, peaked sometime in the last 25 years and has since only gotten worse.
      The rate on things like midrange creatures with respectable bodies and effects has only ever improved from alpha, and will probably continue to improve.
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Foo ().

    • I think the answer is pretty straightforward and simple if i understand you properly.

      My winrate is 66% because i'm an above average player using an off-meta deck that counters the tier 1 decks while appearing as another deck. This means people mulligan expecting me to be control, then they aren't prepared for the massive tempo plays on turn 3 and 4 with pretty much constant followup. A large part of me winning was simply people not knowing what i was playing.

      The 57% winrate is not from the hearthstone api (as far as i know), but collated from users using hstracker. I don't think the api gives details on what decks people run, only on the classes winrates against other classes, so it's useless if you're trying to track specific decks. Therefore, the 57% winrate is averaged from people using third party software to track their wins and losses, generally meaning they're taking the game more seriously and probably above average players themselves. The software itself also tracks the cards remaining in your deck and what cards your opponents have used, which is a pretty big advantage if you can interpret the data.

      further explanation as to why the latest season was both more skill intensive and more appropriate to use deck tracking software~

      Display Spoiler
      Also it's worth noting that while there were about 5 tier 1 decks last expansion, there were maybe 12 or 13 in regular rotation. It was actually a crazy diverse meta, one of the best we've ever seen from blizzard. It had it's flaws of course, some decks felt uninteractive but i think the bad taste some people had was because a meta that diverse requires a lot more skill to navigate. You can't just grab the tier 1 deck and average out your 51% winrate because you beat most decks. You've got to be able to distinguish spell hunter from aggro hunter from recruit hunter from deathrattle hunter. You need to know how these matchups change your gameplan. It's a skill that previously was unneeded to climb because metas usually have about 4 or 5 decks worth knowing in the rotation, and beyond that it's off-meta decks that you needn't worry about because they probably suck.

      Take KnC meta right before witchwood released - tier 1 has 3 classes. Control and Cubelock played identically, in fact they have 5 different cards if you compare the decklists there. The essential difference is cubelock played a more reliable combo, control played with more removal. The only other class with two decks is Paladin. Both decks were aggro, but used different tribes. They still flooded the board, they buffed the board with tribe-specific buffs and had big swing turns on 5/6. You could even easily tell them apart, because dude paladin is an odd deck that has a big effect before the game starts to warn you lmfao. Looking at tier 2, you only get 2 more classes. 5 in total, and if you look at them all they pretty much use the same keywords. That's 7 archetypes in 10 decks across tiers 1 and 2:

      Warlock Control / Cube
      Warlock Aggro
      Paladin Aggro
      Priest Control
      Mage Aggro
      Hunter Midrange

      Compare to the meta at the end of the witchwood - there are 4 classes in tier 1. The second deck is actually the one i was running lol, which reminds me that the list isn't entirely based on popularity, but a critical examination by professionals on what the tier list is. However split into archetypoes you see this:

      Druid Combo
      Druid Aggro
      Druid Taunt (technically a combo deck, but one combo is game ending and Taunt is more like infinite endless value and plays kind of like a midrange deck)
      Warlock Aggro (we will call my deck aggro for the sake of humbling my explanation, though I would argue it isn't if i was making a bigger point)
      Warlock Control
      Shaman Combo
      Rogue Aggro
      Rogue Combo (miracle)
      Paladin Aggro
      Priest Control
      Hunter Egg
      Warrior Combo
      Mage Control
      Mage Aggro

      That's 14 different archetypes all in regular play and ranked highly on the tier list, with duplicate classes playing opposite ends of the spectrum.
    • Started building a joke deck, I think it turned out surprisingly cohesive and playable.

      tappedout.net/mtg-decks/fallow-fields/?cb=1534363515

      Stock the field with goats and (evil) farmers, power them up, then attack en masse.

      You know I'm a sucker for theme decks, especially Lorwyn/ Shadowmoor-- and I've been wanting do do something with Scarecrows for a while. Turns out Red/ White gave me the answer: the red/ white cross section of the block is seemingly made up in part, strangely, of farmers and livestock. Hobgoblins and goats. Throw in some scarecrows and done-the whole creepy farmstead is here.

      Not sure if it's too situational. But if all the pieces line up it seems like SO much fun. Blink Springack Shepard and Rise of the Hobgoblins with Flickerwisp to get tokens. Give them a boost with Balefire Liege or Nobilis of War. Or bring out Furystoke Giant once the field get big and tap everything for one big blow.

      The part are certainly all there, but I wonder how practical it is getting them all out in one game.

      A change I'm considering:
      -Coudshift over Duergar Assailant (or anything, really), blinking/ token production over offense/ combat assistance.
      -I know I need to take out some mountains since all except Moonhold and Furystroke Giant can be cast in White. Maybe take out 4 and replace with plains? The Filterlands help take care of the disparity.
      -I'm a huge fan of the land hate with Moonhold when spending red. How would Din of the Fireherd fit in? I convinced myself to put it in haha. It seems like so much fun and it seems like it wouldn't be too hard to play with mana acceleration the deck has. I would only get half of the effect but with a field full of hobgoblins and other monsters it could quell any comeback. What would I replace?

      Let me know your thoughts, Foo! =]

      Currently rethinking Elves. Since making the very white-heavy deck above, the more it makes me reconsider white's placement in the deck. I think I may take out the few white cards and replace them with black. As it stands, I liked Sunblade Elf a lot but I can get more longevity out of black elves. Gonna replace Dywnen with Rhys the Exiled, throw in Shaman of the pack as a wincon, etc.

      Lastly:


      (I'm using Fable of Wolf and Owl as a book mark)

      The post was edited 5 times, last by EmptyStar ().

    • Duuuuuuude

      Springjack Shepherd is one of my favourite cards of all time, probably my favourite lorwyn/shadowmoor card overall. Recurring him to produce a dozen+ goats a turn as Aristocrat fuel is one of the primary win cons in my Teysa EDH deck, both because it's powerful and sacrificing actual goats to fuel orzhovian rituals seems too good. Ask boxes; people know to fear the goats ^^

      You have to decide if this is an aggro deck or a goofy combo/control deck. Moonhold is ultimately a tempo card - it prevents the opponent from using some portion of their turn but does not "trade" for an actual card meaning you end up at card disadvantage overall. If you expect the game to go long, that's very much a losing proposition.

      If it is a more aggressive deck then Deurgarr Assailant is a good addition and Din of the Fireherd is a little slow. If you want to play Din then yeah, ditch the Assailant (and, unfortunately, the moonhold) for whatever (flicker effects are nice, but also things like Trading Post seem like a flavour win as well as a strong choice) and you might also consider the best land-attacking card in modern, Ajani Vengeant.

      (As an aside, attacking mana with modern cards in a casual environment is difficult because most of the options exist to punish "greedy" manabases that play a lot of fancy non-basic lands, and casual players play a lot of basics. The best cards to attack lands in modern are the moons (blood monn, alpine moon, etc) and stuff like sowing salt or price of progress. If we go pre-modern then we get stuff like Armageddon and Wildfire which can attack manabases in general, not to mention wasteland and port which do good general work and prison stuff like Thalia. You can look at Skred as an example of a modern red deck that attacks lands/mana and Death and Taxes as an example of a legacy white deck that does the same.)

      You're actually just fine with 8 mountains. With a 2 color deck you really do want to tend toward an even mix and certainly nothing more lopsided than 2:1, unless you're playing a looooot of cards than cost specifically WW or WWW (which you're not).

      ---

      Elf deck lookin cool! And the novels are a nice pick up lol. Biiig post incoming from me as I'm back in Canada and going through my collection in my overall effort to organize my wordly possessions ^^
      ~~~
      Although postsocratics like St. Augustine and Judith Butler explored a diverse set of ethical and metaphysical ideas, their unifying feature as a movement was a principled refusal to speculate upon which of the four elements the world was made out of.
      ~~~


      boxes is the best human and I am going to get her a kitten or 2 kittens

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Foo ().

    • Ha, goofy combo all the way.

      tappedout.net/mtg-decks/fallow-fields/?cb=1534472902

      Took out the Assailants and moonholds (bummer about the latter, loved the art)- added in Din of the Fireherd, a fourth Flickerwisp, two Cloudshifts, and 3 Trading Posts.

      Trading post is not only a flavor win, but it also works exceedingly well integrating the artifact creatures- it makes them feel less tacked-on. Thanks for introducing me to the card,

      What do you think? Is the CVC too high? Haven't had a strictly control deck like this before. Will it be able to take off the ground?


      Thank you for the advice- looks like I asked the right person!