Check out our Event Calendar! View birthdays, holidays and upcoming tournaments!
Quote from: Westy on August 21, 2013, 08:48:27 PMSoul drought? No, just a slower game pace.One encourages and one is a product of the other. They're essentially one and the same.QuoteLost souls being always available isn't healthy for the game either. How frustrating is it when you have no defense but all of your lost souls? Do you not have the chance at defending those drawn souls? You're creating a hypothetical situation that is a statistical outlier if you've constructed your deck with proper defense. How about the reverse when you're staring at an empty candy shop on the opposite side of the table?
Soul drought? No, just a slower game pace.
Lost souls being always available isn't healthy for the game either. How frustrating is it when you have no defense but all of your lost souls?
I think you're defining soul drought wrong. 2 turns is not an extended period of time (which is what a drought implies). 2 turns is just a slower game pace.
It's really not a statistical outlier. Let's suppose you play 7 evil characters (a fair amount, probably a bit lower than average). Your odds of drawing an evil character are exactly the same as a lost soul, and thus soul "drought" is equivilant to ec drought.
You pretty much have to rely on your speed so you can draw into it OR you can slow the game down by not drawing and stalling the souls out.
Aren't these all going to be hypothetical situations?
Again, remember that this rule isn't going to go very far for stopping soul drought. It will affect about 2%* of games while also killing a cool deck type coincidentally.
QuoteAgain, remember that this rule isn't going to go very far for stopping soul drought. It will affect about 2%* of games while also killing a cool deck type coincidentally.Totally agree, which is why I have little problem making a rule change that will only affect 20 out of a 1000 games for the sake of reducing text clutter and providing a slight cushion against the possibility of a simplified gamestate with no player interaction.
I'm tired and going to bed soon, but I will say that changing the status quo for such a small reason seems silly. Especially right after a rulebook just came out.
Again, remember that this rule isn't going to go very far for stopping soul drought. It will affect about 2%* of games while also killing a cool deck type coincidentally. *No, I'm not going to make a less than 0% joke. You better not either.
Saying that we don't know how to play with proper defense (ignorant of the fact that Defense is typically at least 1/3 of our decks) is rather condescending.
As to the difference between the two situations, they are hardly comparable.
Please keep in mind that there are some of us who are perfectly happy playing in house games and local tourneys because that's the level we both enjoy and can afford to play on.
QuoteIt's really not a statistical outlier. Let's suppose you play 7 evil characters (a fair amount, probably a bit lower than average). Your odds of drawing an evil character are exactly the same as a lost soul, and thus soul "drought" is equivilant to ec drought.Using your previous example of 7 lost souls per 56 card deck, 1:8 is a lost soul, and considering lost souls are negative deck space since they're inherently floaters, wouldn't that be 1:7 is an EC using your example?
Soul drought isn't inherently bad.
Quote from: Master KChief on August 21, 2013, 11:39:37 PMQuoteIt's really not a statistical outlier. Let's suppose you play 7 evil characters (a fair amount, probably a bit lower than average). Your odds of drawing an evil character are exactly the same as a lost soul, and thus soul "drought" is equivilant to ec drought.Using your previous example of 7 lost souls per 56 card deck, 1:8 is a lost soul, and considering lost souls are negative deck space since they're inherently floaters, wouldn't that be 1:7 is an EC using your example?I wanted to address this quick. When two independent events have the same probability, it does not mean that if one event happens X number of times, the second event also happens X number of times. It just means that they will have the same average over time.And the probability of drawing ECs and LSs are actually not quite the same. I won't go into the details, but for a 56-card deck with 7 LS and 7 ECs:Probability of drawing 0 ECs with your opening D8: 26.2%Probability of drawing 1 or more LSs with your opening D8: 68.3%And since these two variables are independent of each other, 17.9% of the time you will draw at least 1 LS with no EC with your initial D8. That's almost 1 in every 5 games. And if your opponent is playing a 50 card deck with AotL, then there is almost a 20% chance they have AotL in their starting hand as well...
I agree. And I am not talking about drought. I'm talking about lock. I'm talking about being 5 minutes into a game and realize there is no way you can possibly win, since 3 of your opponent's lost souls are in his discard pile and you have no way to get them out.
If my opponent isn't playing hopper, Dungeon of Malchaiah (or the like), or one of the ECs that becomes a lost soul, then I only need to Bury 1 lost soul and discard 2 off the top of my deck, and my opponent is locked. With the shuffler and underdeck souls, and other ways to return lost souls to your deck, plus ways to stack your deck, it is fairly easy to actually lock your opponent out of getting 5 lost souls. It isn't as reliable as winning with another strategy, but it is no where near impossible. If future cards make this even easier, then I'd rather see a rule like this implemented than a string of errata or restricted cards.
No exposing state secrets!
My main reason for liking the rule is that it keeps players from being able to lock the opponent out quite so easily. Not that it is easy now. But it could be.Maybe we should only revisit this as a rule option IF this strategy becomes too easy in the future.I like Lost Soul availability, as it allows for battles and keeps both players in the game. Being locked out 5-10 minutes into a 45 minute game isn't a positive game experience. While I like Site strategies as an option for defense, I mainly like them as stall tactics with only a glimmer of hope for a lock. I hope that a full lock stays challenging. Battles are fun. I learned my lesson after my TGT mistake.
Quote from: Bryon on August 22, 2013, 12:52:33 PMI agree. And I am not talking about drought. I'm talking about lock. I'm talking about being 5 minutes into a game and realize there is no way you can possibly win, since 3 of your opponent's lost souls are in his discard pile and you have no way to get them out.I can't envision any way within the realm of statistical possibility that that could happen.
I'm more for getting behind the original idea of reducing text clutter on future cards.
The remark was public, so the apology will be as well. I would like to apologize to Master KChief for my remarks last night/this morning. I read too much into your words in my tired state,and proceeded to say something that didn't need to be said the way I said it.
No worries, I probably could have used a better choice of words. YMT cleared it up for me and I appreciate that.