Author Topic: Banlist Brainstorming (Read 15496 times)

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #25 on:** November 21, 2012, 08:55:08 PM »

Quote from: Westy on November 21, 2012, 05:31:56 PM

Could be you, but it's far more likely to be the person that drew more.

False. Either it could be you, or it couldn't. That's a 50% chance.

Source: My physics TA makes me do error analysis by writing everything in terms of logarithms then taking the derivative. Or something like that. I'm not sure because he barely speaks English. But he did an example on the board, and that's what it looked like to me. The point of this story is that this event essentially makes me an expert on statistics.

Master KChief · « **Reply #26 on:** November 21, 2012, 09:48:02 PM »

Quote from: Westy on November 21, 2012, 04:45:40 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on November 21, 2012, 02:55:34 PM
Westy, why does Pale Green have a favorable matchup against TGT?
Assyrian Camp

ASA
Assyrian Survivor
Assyrian Archer
Egyptian Magicians
Damsel

Forgotten History
Death of Unrighteous
Achan's Sin
That one Interrupt from Disciples
Invoking Terror
2KHorses

Charms

A simple 13 card defense that will discard TGT and win a load of battles. All you really need to do is sidestep He is Risen! but there are 3 interrupts for that. You'll get to block most of the time because your characters are safe (between Charms and Camp).

Assyrian Camp is of course a great soft counter to TGT, but it relies on you to draw into it before your opponent starts going off with TGT and territory destruction (which the deck would have a plethora of) and does little to nothing post-TGT/territory destruction. It's also a 3 card combo (Camp + 2 Assyrians to effectively be worry-free of TGT, more if you want to count an actual battle winner to even win the battle) that is less likely to show up in hands, especially without tutors and only 3 Assyrians in the defense to begin with. 5 Evil Characters feels very light to combat TGT...TGT typically has no problem at all picking off at least 4 of those with ease, especially with those 2 super Dom's that do most of the heavy lifting for them.

I think right now the best method to counter TGT and force an actual battle is to flood a territory with more Evil Characters than a TGT player can possibly nuke in a single turn...but that considerably slows down any deck if you're focusing on creating blocks more than actually winning rescue attempts, which pretty much means you lost the game in Type 1. One of the biggest problems with TGT is the return of investment associated with it is absolutely phenomenal compared to the resources necessary to actually block against it. And most of the territory destruction TGT has available to them is powerful stuff that can be dropped in battle, so it's not like it's expending any additional resources outside of the norm to fuel its freebie walk-in theme. At this point in the T1 meta, I feel any player is fighting an uphill battle severely not in their favor once TGT is dropped against them and becomes live.

In regards to the advantage connected to Mayhem, Westy makes an excellent point: let your opponent start a game with double the amount of cards as you and tell me if that would be fair. In Type 1, the only advantage that matters is hand advantage, as typically every single card drawn will be as useful and good as the next. The 'randomness' of Mayhem really matters little if at all...it's the drawing itself that reigns supreme in Type 1. The fact it can neg your opponent in the process puts the icing on the cake.

cookie monster · « **Reply #27 on:** November 21, 2012, 10:22:59 PM »

I think instead of banning TGT they should make more drawing evil characters so that people make bigger defenses and don't think that they are being ripped off if they are playing anything other than TGT. And this would take care of AOCP since there would now be a good reason to have a protect fortress in your deck. And if more evil cards said "regardless of protection" then AUtO is now not a problem. People can also block mayhem with RBD and/or Gifts of the magi. if they did most of this in evil cards then the game would be much more balanced between good and evil.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #28 on:** November 21, 2012, 11:02:17 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 21, 2012, 08:55:08 PM

Quote from: Westy on November 21, 2012, 05:31:56 PM
Could be you, but it's far more likely to be the person that drew more.
False. Either it could be you, or it couldn't. That's a 50% chance.

Source: My physics TA makes me do error analysis by writing everything in terms of logarithms then taking the derivative. Or something like that. I'm not sure because he barely speaks English. But he did an example on the board, and that's what it looked like to me. The point of this story is that this event essentially makes me an expert on statistics.

You aren't taking into account all the factors. It'd be 50/50 if we had the same number of cards in hand before and after, as well as the same amount of cards in deck and territory. Practically speaking, you're going to have 40 cards left in your deck while I'll have 30 by just playing one simple card, and thus I have a better chance of having better cards because I've gone through more cards. It's the whole philosophy behind speed.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #29 on:** November 21, 2012, 11:26:12 PM »

No. The philosophy behind speed is it makes you lucky. So even though the chances are 50/50, you win more often than not. I'd know, I played speed almost exclusively.

If you're struggling with this concept, there's a good dailyshow segment about it, the LHC, and John Ellis. I'd link it, but there's a naughty word in it.

Master KChief · « **Reply #30 on:** November 21, 2012, 11:31:33 PM »

Isn't that like saying the odds of winning the lottery is 50/50, as in it could happen or it couldn't? But we know that isn't close even close to reality.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #31 on:** November 21, 2012, 11:44:59 PM »

No. I don't play the lottery, so it can either not happen or not happen.

I haven't read more than like two posts in this thread, but I hope no one supports banning sog. That'd make starter decks illegal.

Westok Kiok · « **Reply #32 on:** November 21, 2012, 11:47:50 PM »

SoG has to stay. It's a staple card. And what is a biblical 'Christian' card game without God's son? Just saying.

Master KChief · « **Reply #33 on:** November 21, 2012, 11:49:46 PM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 21, 2012, 11:44:59 PM

No. I don't play the lottery, so it can either not happen or not happen.

If you did play the lottery. Or the chances of getting struck by lightning.

Quote from: Westok Kiok on November 21, 2012, 11:47:50 PM

SoG has to stay. It's a staple card. And what is a biblical 'Christian' card game without God's son? Just saying.

I think the fact we have cards we call 'staples' in the first place is a dead giveaway at a meta centralized around certain overpowered cards.

JSB23 · « **Reply #34 on:** November 21, 2012, 11:55:19 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on November 21, 2012, 02:14:14 PM

JSB, I like where you're going with the drawing Heroes. Although, I may suggest something along the lines of 'Draw X, then discard X-1 cards'. I just feel discarding off the top of deck is actually an empty cost to most and won't detriment the speed player much at all in terms of current hand advantage. 'Draw X, discard X-1' can possibly help mitigate the obscene unchecked plusses those kind of Heroes create.

I think both solutions have merit. Yours works to negate the card advantage, while still leaving the sifting properties of speed unchecked. My solution allows players to still build up a card advantage, at the cost of of not getting to use every card in their deck. In my experience, speed players always have extraneous cards, so having to discard from hand isn't always a real penalty.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #35 on:** November 22, 2012, 12:07:18 AM »

Quote from: Rawrlolsauce! on November 21, 2012, 08:55:08 PM

Quote from: Westy on November 21, 2012, 05:31:56 PM
Could be you, but it's far more likely to be the person that drew more.
False. Either it could be you, or it couldn't. That's a 50% chance.

Source: My physics TA makes me do error analysis by writing everything in terms of logarithms then taking the derivative. Or something like that. I'm not sure because he barely speaks English. But he did an example on the board, and that's what it looked like to me. The point of this story is that this event essentially makes me an expert on statistics.

This is fairly bad statistics. Statistics is all about what the chances of something happening when you don't have perfect information. Yes, any given event will either happen or it won't, but that doesn't mean those event have equal chances of happening. To actually figure out probabilities in card games you need hypergeometric distributions.

Master KChief · « **Reply #36 on:** November 22, 2012, 12:29:34 AM »

Quote from: JSB23 on November 21, 2012, 11:55:19 PM

I think both solutions have merit. Yours works to negate the card advantage, while still leaving the sifting properties of speed unchecked. My solution allows players to still build up a card advantage, at the cost of of not getting to use every card in their deck. In my experience, speed players always have extraneous cards, so having to discard from hand isn't always a real penalty.

I don't know, to use a similar example I think most Type 1 decks are hit hard when Generous Widow makes a rescue attempt...due to all of the Dominants and uber powerful battle winners clogging up the hand, it truly does take a calculated decision to decide what to pitch. However, discarding the top X cards a deck means almost nothing if a player doesn't deck out and would have not seen all of the cards in his deck anyway...it just means the X cards you/they discarded now becomes the bottom of their deck. Outside of relying and expecting to see Sog and NJ, I rarely think discarding cards from deck has ever done much damage to most any Type 1 Redemption player. I'm more concerned about the actual amounts of hand advantage gained and kept for free from all of these ridiculous floaters in the game. Isn't the game fast enough with a Draw 3 phase? Why do we need floaters that generate even more hand advantage every single turn? My love relationship with Oak has clouded my judgment far too long on passing the banhammer on him too soon, but he truly is an overpowered beast. What other floater in the game can also tutor, make the battle fight by the numbers, create a bulletproof hero, and recur? Too much reward at no cost.

Isildur · « **Reply #37 on:** November 22, 2012, 12:53:38 AM »

I have played Redemption for way too long and the only card I fully believe that should be banned is Mayhem.

In the 100's of games ive played where Mayhem has been played either myself or opponent playing I have lost. This include playtesting! I HAVE NEVER WON A SINGLE GAME!!!! This is one of the main reasons I havnt been competitive since before Texp came out lol

Im even fine with NJ not being banned since I never use it anyways as a gentlemens agreement with myself :p

Master KChief · « **Reply #38 on:** November 22, 2012, 01:25:34 AM »

From what I understand Isildur, you play non-meta decks, right? Slower decks with an actual defense?

Isildur · « **Reply #39 on:** November 22, 2012, 02:54:49 AM »

Uh..... my decks are all over the place but yeah non meta would fit the bill :p

Master KChief · « **Reply #40 on:** November 22, 2012, 05:36:35 AM »

Well I'm curious about the effects Mayhem has towards decks that develop a bit slower and aren't speed.

cookie monster · « **Reply #41 on:** November 22, 2012, 10:12:57 AM »

I think they should make more defensive cards that people will want in there decks, to promote defense.

Master KChief · « **Reply #42 on:** November 22, 2012, 10:32:11 AM »

I agree, and to add to that Cactus should promote and reward decks that develop a bit slower than the current meta and play with actual defenses. Making defensive options playable is definately a good thing, but this game certainly doesn't need anymore splash evil characters for defense.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #43 on:** November 22, 2012, 12:02:52 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on November 22, 2012, 10:32:11 AM

I agree, and to add to that Cactus should promote and reward decks that develop a bit slower than the current meta and play with actual defenses. Making defensive options playable is definitely a good thing, but this game certainly doesn't need anymore splash evil characters for defense.

Don't be so naive. There's plenty of great defensive options, the problem is that adding an offensive card is always marginally better in T1 than a defensive card, and that will always be true.

CJSports · « **Reply #44 on:** November 22, 2012, 01:17:07 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on November 22, 2012, 12:02:52 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on November 22, 2012, 10:32:11 AM
I agree, and to add to that Cactus should promote and reward decks that develop a bit slower than the current meta and play with actual defenses. Making defensive options playable is definitely a good thing, but this game certainly doesn't need anymore splash evil characters for defense.

Don't be so naive. There's plenty of great defensive options, the problem is that adding an offensive card is always marginally better in T1 than a defensive card, and that will always be true.

Unless they start making cards grossly OP on defense where they can let you win with only a 5 card offense.

Master KChief · « **Reply #45 on:** November 22, 2012, 09:48:53 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on November 22, 2012, 12:02:52 PM

Don't be so naive. There's plenty of great defensive options, the problem is that adding an offensive card is always marginally better in T1 than a defensive card, and that will always be true.

Yeah, oxymoron. If adding a card offensively makes it better than adding a card defensively, how exactly does that equate to defense having 'great' defensive options?

It doesn't. It makes defense over offense a subpar choice. Decks that play with bigger defenses, thus develop slower than meta decks, have little merit and advantages over a deck that plays more offense in lieu of defense. If there were enough good defensive options that fit inside a chunky defense, don't you think more balanced decks would be top tier? There aren't, and that's because a chunky defense is not capable of stopping rescues as consistently and steady as a meta deck can make rescues. Even meta offenses pancake meta defenses, and they're supposedly the cream of the crop, the best of the rest. Cookie is spot on, there aren't enough good go-to defensive options in the game, and it may very well stay that way since the game has always been slighted in favor of aggro over defense. We build the card pool based on not timing out in games? That's just ridiculous, the best games both players walk away from feeling good whether they won or lost have always been the grind games with high strategic value...not the ones where I walk-in for 3 free and they go to scoop phase. If a balanced meta is truly desired, then one thing that sorely needs to be addressed is the games need for more incentive and a bigger payoff to play with bigger defenses over splash defenses.

Quote from: CJSports on November 22, 2012, 01:17:07 PM

Unless they start making cards grossly OP on defense where they can let you win with only a 5 card offense.

If people start playing with 5 card offenses, it still slows down the meta tremendously, which seems to be the goal in the first place.

CJSports · « **Reply #46 on:** November 23, 2012, 09:53:04 AM »

So I guess that's a good thing because they already made grossly OP'D cards on offense.

Platinum_Angel · « **Reply #47 on:** November 23, 2012, 11:49:39 AM »

If Mayhem was so OP then everyone would be playing it. But they don't. Did anyone see the T1 2P Nationals Tourny winner??? Red Dragon Thorn doesn't use it in his AuTO ^2 deck and his defense is only 9 cards. I would suggest banning it if you had a format where you could have 3 or more of each card in your deck including Mayhem but In T2 you can only have 1 Mayhem. T1 Redemption is basically Singleton.

The only card I haven't seen printed yet that possibly should be printed is a dominant card that will get rid of a fortress. We have one to get rid of artifacts.

Banning SoG would also get did of NJ and you can't play one without the other. Also someone was right about starter decks they couldn't be played as well. (Unless we are talking about banning in certain formats.

I could see Hamans Plot getting banned. Unless you get rid of the 'ripping' part. What does AoCP do for the opposite side???

AuTO is a very very good card. Because of the restriction of dominents in the game I see more and more people NOT playing with CM. Because this is a singleton format I can see where getting rid of AuTO would be hard. (You can't have 4 CM's)

The affects of having a deck with 50 cards in it up against a deck with 56-75 plays a big role in what you draw. It's all about averages. The Law of Averages. I'm more likely to draw my staples and/or battle winners with less cards in my deck. With lost soul tricks like Hopper, Uzzah, TAS, Malchaus, etc it makes it easier to get your rescues to 5 sooner. In any card game the point that if you draw more cards you will win more times than the other guy doesn't always work out that way. It will ALWAYS involve time and experience. You can't throw a rookie in with 'The Deck' or 'Gardenciples' and expect them to win.

As far as ANY banning of cards in Redemption??? I say NO. R&D in my opinion is doing a great job of controlling the formats and not letting any cards get out of hand. The fact that you only have one set a year released is good considering MTG has four sets a year released and has a terrible time banning or restricting cards because so many slip through the cracks.

Rob made Redemption formats and rules simple. And not banning cards is the simplest in any card game. In any card game you will have the most POWERFUL cards and the least powerful.

Master KChief · « **Reply #48 on:** November 23, 2012, 01:14:01 PM »

Quote from: Platinum_Angel on November 23, 2012, 11:49:39 AM

If Mayhem was so OP then everyone would be playing it. But they don't.

I'm curious how you arrived at this conclusion.

Quote

Banning SoG would also get did of NJ and you can't play one without the other. Also someone was right about starter decks they couldn't be played as well.

Banning Son of God does not make starter decks unplayable. They are still quite capable of functioning as starter decks.

Quote

I could see Hamans Plot getting banned. Unless you get rid of the 'ripping' part.

If this was 5 or so years ago, I would so be for this. However, as someone made an excellent point earlier in this thread, offenses completely overpower defenses at this point, and Haman's Plot is one of the last lines of a legit block against many of the aggro decks of today.

Quote

R&D in my opinion is doing a great job of controlling the formats and not letting any cards get out of hand.

I have to disagree there, Angel Under the Oak and Mayhem being the most recent examples.

Quote

The fact that you only have one set a year released is good considering MTG has four sets a year released

Could you elaborate on this point a bit more? I'm always of the opinion more sets is always exponentially better than less sets.

Quote

and has a terrible time banning or restricting cards because so many slip through the cracks.

Not sure what you mean by this, there are currently no banned cards in Standard block. The last time a card was banned in MTG was over a year ago, and if this isn't a testament to how well R&D designs expansions four times a year, then I do not know what is.

I'm also under the impression banning (or restricting/issuing errata) a card is certainly not a sign of weakness, but a necessary function to balance an overcentralized meta.

Quote

And not banning cards is the simplest in any card game.

Unfortunately the simplest road to take is not always the best road to take. I also wouldn't argue that such a model fits every card game, as all mainstream CCG's have had no reservation of giving the banhammer when necessary.

Quote

In any card game you will have the most POWERFUL cards and the least powerful.

This is indeed a true statement. However, how do you possibly bring that margin closer and closer (especially with the power creep of every set released in favor of offense) without possibly banning a card or two to balance the meta?

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #49 on:** November 23, 2012, 01:25:25 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on November 23, 2012, 01:14:01 PM

Banning Son of God does not make starter decks unplayable. They are still quite capable of functioning as starter decks.

Aren't Starter Decks 50 cards?

News:

Author Topic: Banlist Brainstorming (Read 15496 times)

Rawrlolsauce!

Warrior_Monk

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!

Rawrlolsauce!