i actually made an account just so i could comment on this article right here and say that i completely approve of your methodology for applying statistics to the game of Magic. luck, chance, and math are all very interesting to me, but they don't seem to play well with one another. also too, in this case, you're attempting to complete a function with one arm tied behind your back. you only know as much as displayed, and thus you can't produce a full analysis, but this gives a very good estimate.
to be honest, you're the only person i've seen that's even attempted to take this approach to this game, and for that, i applaud you.
I certainly agree that there are problems, but it really is the only feasible method to acquire data. I wish I could do better, but the reality is I can't.
That aside, I think you interpret this effect on Safe Passage incorrectly. If Safe Passage is sitting in your hand not being cast, then it is not contributing to your victory. Thus, you would be better served with another card. And when it is being cast, you are only winning a third of your games. It is hard to imagine a card with worse qualities than that.
I don't know about the sharks in Constructed theory. I was thinking about that on my walk home after the announcement (Thinking about BEING the shark that is) but the prospect of netting a maximum $6 profit for ~2+ hours of my time really just wasn't appealing... It may only be me thinking that way, but still.
William,
First of all I like what you are trying to do here. I think it is valuable information. But I have one complaint with your approach.
You are only considering cards that are played. Let us take an extreme example. Let us say that I have a card that costs 30 red mana and it says: you win the game. By your methodology this would be a 100% card. It would only be played to win the game, but I think that we would both agree that such a card would be a bad card. Most people that put it in their deck would never play it and having a dead card is bad, in general.
Let us think about Overrun. Now obviously Overrun was a great card in M2010. But your method overrates its value. Why? I played with Overrun a bunch in M2010 and there were times that I would not play it even if I could. Why? It sometimes didn't win me the game. And especially in game 1, I don't want my opponent to know that I have it. So when Overrun is in my deck, I play it to win, but I won't play it (and so you don't see it) when I won't win or the game is lost. It will also get played less when you are losing.
Now let us consider safe passage. I don't believe that this is a bomb, but your method understates its value. Safe passage is always played when you are losing. It can act is a fog. So if you are already losing it might not save you. But when I am winning it often sits in my hand! Do I think it is a great card no, but it is not the dog your method makes it out to be.
Another card that would be understated in your method would be Wrath of God. If you start off great in a limited to game and draw your wrath latter there is often little incentive to play it. Your method might still give a high ratting to Wrath, but it will understate its usefulness.
Obviously the best method would be to know the actual decklists. I know that this is not possible, so let us move on.
A better approach is to consider all games a player plays in a tournament when they play a card once over the entire tournament. Is this perfect? No. But it is better than your method. Although it is harder.
In summary, I like what you are trying to do, but I feel your method overstates cards that help when winning and understates cards that help when losing. You can think of this is a systematic error.
Thursday Night Magic will be awesome. It is probably the best idea that WotC has implemented since the 2-man queues.
I also share the concern that the constructed queues will not be casual. I think adding the MOCS point to the queue will mean it's an even easier target for high level players. I'm also wondering why they are doing it with a 128 person maximum. How do you do a draft online without a multiple of 8? Or maybe they are just assuming the drafts will max out.
As for From the Vaults Relics, how much do you want to bet that Sol Ring will be conveniently banned in 100 singleton 2 weeks after the online release of the set? Sorry, still getting over the whole Demonic Tutor incident....
" Casual-ish events are a great addition to the game so that new players can get their toes wet and the more experience players can get a little silly without worrying too much about their points and whatnot."
I like the idea of product only drafts with casual prizes... in constructed though, I don't see how you can keep the spikes from beating up the "new players getting their toes wet". In pants land on FNM you can bring a rogue deck or budget deck and its likely that you can have fun and do ok. In mtgo land, with a HUGE pool of players with nothing better to do, I don't see how these queues will be any different than the regular constructed queues.
As disappointed as I was last week in the "CAW" stuff, that's how cool I think this Thursday Night Magic stuff is. I actually think they made it a little too good by offering a QP (which the target market "casual" player wouldn't care about), but that's not a terrible position to be in.
Holding my breath a little, but it sounds exciting.
I dont know if you realize this. But when your local store sells a Jace for 80 bucks, wizards does not see any of that money. It goes directly to the store owner. So maybe you should ask yourself, "Self, why are people paying $80 for a card?" Because If you want to win, price is no object. Also this is Wizards or at least, Mark Rosewater's current stance on mythics
"The two main things that tend to determine rarity are complexity and specialness. The lower the rarity, the simpler we like the card to be. Specialness though is a much more subjective quality. The way I've learned to describe mythic rares is that I like them to have a potential for awesomeness. Mythic rares want to feel like cards that can just do something crazy given the right circumstance. In addition, mythic rares want to feel like things that wouldn't be commonplace in the world where you would find them. All planeswalkers by definition are mthic rare as are the majority of legendary creatures and items. The rest is really a feel. Note that there are many cards that fall in the grey area where they could work as rares or as mythic rares and R&D has to make a call on which side of the line it falls. Could a card like Vengevine be rare? Of course, it's on the line.
One final note—some people wanted to interpret my original article on mythic rares to say that there never would be powerful mythic rares. That isn't what I said. The actual quote was "They [mythic rares] will not just be a list of each set's most powerful tournament-level cards." Every rarity gets good cards. That means that some mythic rares will be tournament quality as will some commons, some uncommons and some rares. My promise wasn't that mythic rares wouldn't get good cards but that we wouldn't limit the good cards to only being mythic rare. The most played tournament card from Magic 2010, for instance, isn't Baneslayer Angel, a mythic rare, but Lightning Bolt, a common."
That draft is amazing, I think.
It is swiss and gives 4-2-1 AND a promo. Compare it to 4-3-2-2. And remember that you do not pay more than product (so winnings are +2 tix for swiss)!
If you win all you get the same - 4.
If you win 2 out of 3 it depends on the one you lose.
If you lose the first you get two in swiss and 0 in 4-3-2-2.
If you lose the second you get 2 in both.
If you lose the 3rd you get 3 in 4-3-2-2 and 2 in swiss.
Swiss average: 2 4-3-2-2 average: 5/3.
If you lose 2 out of 3 it depens on the one you win.
If you win the first you one in swiss and 2 in 4-3-2-2.
If you win the second or third you get 1 in swiss and 0 in 4-3-2-2.
Swiss average: 1 4-3-2-2 average: 2/3
If you lose all you get 0 packs in both.
If we assume that your winning % is independent (it proberly isn't, but...) of the round we see that Swiss>4-3-2-2, even if we look away from the 2 tix you didnt pay and the promo, because it is better in all case except if you win or lose all (in which case they are equal).
If you win 50% of the time, you get 13/8 which is >3/2 in swiss, a promo AND you paid 2 less to join. If you played 4-3-2-2 you get 11/8 which is <3/2.
If you win 75% of the time, you get 171/64>5/2 in swiss, a promo AND you paid 2 less to join. If you played 4-3-2-2 you get 159/64<5/2.
So you need to sell a promo and your draft deck for less than 2 tix (assuming a booster cost 4 tix) to go infinite in swiss if you are a 75% player, but you need above 4 tix (boosters are still assumed to cost 4) for your deck and do not have a promo if you play 4-3-2-2...
in aspect for the future of the game and M11 (which i actually love) there should be a serious discussion about the ridicul prices for tournament staples, autoincludes, 4-of supercards, whatever you call them.
WOTC said a year or so ago, that mythic rares are all about the flavor and when i look back at the ALA block when they first came it was quite like that. well... the planeswalkers were mythic also, and when we look at the usefulness of ajani vengeant and elspeth, i think it is safe to say that they are miles ahead in usefulness to the "vanilla"walkers from lorwyn. also, they had a (for that time) quite a steep price tag (if i remember right, it was around 15tix). only the figure of destiny (32tix), cryptic command, bitterblossom and maybe wrath of god where more than 10tix. all rares and staples for sure, as faeries was quite a winner. a deck was pretty expensive.
but now? it lasted one block to already destroy every statement about the mythic rares WOTC made before ALA. now we see tournament staples like mindsculptor (75-80tix, not seldom 3-4 times in a deck, HELL! if you could have 5 of them in a deck you would probably play 6!!), baneslayer(30+) vengevine (20+), cobra(20+), gideon(20+), m.pulse (rare, going down from 20+ due to rotating ro jund decline, whatever), elspeth (20+, going down, too), persecutor, all is dust, avenger,eldrazi monument and kargan (ca. 10 tix), and whatever there is. easily, a tourney deck is now 400+tix, and it isn't even including 50% of the bombs it could have. OF COURSE we will see the maybe best cards in M11 again with a orange symbol, like the titans (primeval will be 20+ for sure, grave titan won't be resonable priced either me thinks). compare that to the rares, the supposed to be staples (according to WOTC, mythics are not supposed to be staples) and i see a big time difference in card power... they are even overshadowing rares in mana/effect-wise.
well, i do not want to whine about that, but i see a severe problem here. i am willing to spend money for my hobby, no doubt about that, but the problem imo is, that the real top deck contenders (maybe RDW/Blightning is cheap in comparison... as usual every RDW is cheap) are as usual the most expensiv decks to play... but now at double+ the deck price of other decks in the past (looking at std solely, i know, force of will and real duals are way more stup.. expensive). i would even say, that a faeries deck most probably beats the super decks from today into the dirt ;)
my question, is this necessary to squeeze that much money out of people? why is the mythic rare power creeping that much? why isn't there a card which says explicitly "destroy target planeswalker"? why isn't there any discussion WITH wotc people about that? only thing you read from them are these stupid propaganda articles on their website (more selling advertisements than information)... "look at how great we made this ultra-rare super-duper mythic rare, but this 10/10 one mana critter without any drawback will be probably only a one-of in decks" (MaRo, 2012-20xx).
btw, i am really happy that mana leak comes back. at last a decent counter that will teach the "turn3/4/5: tap all my mana, play jace/baneslayer/titan/etc)-decks a lesson.
Orzhov Blink came before "Grand Entrance" and it too does the same thing. O-blink, Stars n Cogs, Cogs n Strips, Grand Entrance... Can't we just call it Blink? (Color Combination) Blink to be more specific if you want. They all do the same thing. Nobody calls UBw Teachings something different than Teachings.
I actually didn't know that the name "grand entrance" came from those lists, thanks for telling me. Now that I think of it, it almost makes no sense calling this deck grand entrance seeing how different it is from these old lists (and I can see the point about bonespliter since he is mandatory in these).
Oh yeah, that's the other problem I have with being the shark... I'm not very good XD
i actually made an account just so i could comment on this article right here and say that i completely approve of your methodology for applying statistics to the game of Magic. luck, chance, and math are all very interesting to me, but they don't seem to play well with one another. also too, in this case, you're attempting to complete a function with one arm tied behind your back. you only know as much as displayed, and thus you can't produce a full analysis, but this gives a very good estimate.
to be honest, you're the only person i've seen that's even attempted to take this approach to this game, and for that, i applaud you.
well westane i think the shark come in on the qp
I certainly agree that there are problems, but it really is the only feasible method to acquire data. I wish I could do better, but the reality is I can't.
That aside, I think you interpret this effect on Safe Passage incorrectly. If Safe Passage is sitting in your hand not being cast, then it is not contributing to your victory. Thus, you would be better served with another card. And when it is being cast, you are only winning a third of your games. It is hard to imagine a card with worse qualities than that.
I don't know about the sharks in Constructed theory. I was thinking about that on my walk home after the announcement (Thinking about BEING the shark that is) but the prospect of netting a maximum $6 profit for ~2+ hours of my time really just wasn't appealing... It may only be me thinking that way, but still.
As for the 4 pack sealed, LOVE IT!
William,
First of all I like what you are trying to do here. I think it is valuable information. But I have one complaint with your approach.
You are only considering cards that are played. Let us take an extreme example. Let us say that I have a card that costs 30 red mana and it says: you win the game. By your methodology this would be a 100% card. It would only be played to win the game, but I think that we would both agree that such a card would be a bad card. Most people that put it in their deck would never play it and having a dead card is bad, in general.
Let us think about Overrun. Now obviously Overrun was a great card in M2010. But your method overrates its value. Why? I played with Overrun a bunch in M2010 and there were times that I would not play it even if I could. Why? It sometimes didn't win me the game. And especially in game 1, I don't want my opponent to know that I have it. So when Overrun is in my deck, I play it to win, but I won't play it (and so you don't see it) when I won't win or the game is lost. It will also get played less when you are losing.
Now let us consider safe passage. I don't believe that this is a bomb, but your method understates its value. Safe passage is always played when you are losing. It can act is a fog. So if you are already losing it might not save you. But when I am winning it often sits in my hand! Do I think it is a great card no, but it is not the dog your method makes it out to be.
Another card that would be understated in your method would be Wrath of God. If you start off great in a limited to game and draw your wrath latter there is often little incentive to play it. Your method might still give a high ratting to Wrath, but it will understate its usefulness.
Obviously the best method would be to know the actual decklists. I know that this is not possible, so let us move on.
A better approach is to consider all games a player plays in a tournament when they play a card once over the entire tournament. Is this perfect? No. But it is better than your method. Although it is harder.
In summary, I like what you are trying to do, but I feel your method overstates cards that help when winning and understates cards that help when losing. You can think of this is a systematic error.
Cheers,
Youper
Agreed.
Thursday Night Magic will be awesome. It is probably the best idea that WotC has implemented since the 2-man queues.
I also share the concern that the constructed queues will not be casual. I think adding the MOCS point to the queue will mean it's an even easier target for high level players. I'm also wondering why they are doing it with a 128 person maximum. How do you do a draft online without a multiple of 8? Or maybe they are just assuming the drafts will max out.
As for From the Vaults Relics, how much do you want to bet that Sol Ring will be conveniently banned in 100 singleton 2 weeks after the online release of the set? Sorry, still getting over the whole Demonic Tutor incident....
" Casual-ish events are a great addition to the game so that new players can get their toes wet and the more experience players can get a little silly without worrying too much about their points and whatnot."
I like the idea of product only drafts with casual prizes... in constructed though, I don't see how you can keep the spikes from beating up the "new players getting their toes wet". In pants land on FNM you can bring a rogue deck or budget deck and its likely that you can have fun and do ok. In mtgo land, with a HUGE pool of players with nothing better to do, I don't see how these queues will be any different than the regular constructed queues.
As disappointed as I was last week in the "CAW" stuff, that's how cool I think this Thursday Night Magic stuff is. I actually think they made it a little too good by offering a QP (which the target market "casual" player wouldn't care about), but that's not a terrible position to be in.
Holding my breath a little, but it sounds exciting.
I dont know if you realize this. But when your local store sells a Jace for 80 bucks, wizards does not see any of that money. It goes directly to the store owner. So maybe you should ask yourself, "Self, why are people paying $80 for a card?" Because If you want to win, price is no object. Also this is Wizards or at least, Mark Rosewater's current stance on mythics
"The two main things that tend to determine rarity are complexity and specialness. The lower the rarity, the simpler we like the card to be. Specialness though is a much more subjective quality. The way I've learned to describe mythic rares is that I like them to have a potential for awesomeness. Mythic rares want to feel like cards that can just do something crazy given the right circumstance. In addition, mythic rares want to feel like things that wouldn't be commonplace in the world where you would find them. All planeswalkers by definition are mthic rare as are the majority of legendary creatures and items. The rest is really a feel. Note that there are many cards that fall in the grey area where they could work as rares or as mythic rares and R&D has to make a call on which side of the line it falls. Could a card like Vengevine be rare? Of course, it's on the line.
One final note—some people wanted to interpret my original article on mythic rares to say that there never would be powerful mythic rares. That isn't what I said. The actual quote was "They [mythic rares] will not just be a list of each set's most powerful tournament-level cards." Every rarity gets good cards. That means that some mythic rares will be tournament quality as will some commons, some uncommons and some rares. My promise wasn't that mythic rares wouldn't get good cards but that we wouldn't limit the good cards to only being mythic rare. The most played tournament card from Magic 2010, for instance, isn't Baneslayer Angel, a mythic rare, but Lightning Bolt, a common."
Yeah today, on my birthday I begin to see what you mean.
Grand Entrance is originally a white/blue deck. Stars and X adds red. OBlink adds black and possibly loses blue. Seems quite simple to me.
That draft is amazing, I think.
It is swiss and gives 4-2-1 AND a promo. Compare it to 4-3-2-2. And remember that you do not pay more than product (so winnings are +2 tix for swiss)!
If you win all you get the same - 4.
If you win 2 out of 3 it depends on the one you lose.
If you lose the first you get two in swiss and 0 in 4-3-2-2.
If you lose the second you get 2 in both.
If you lose the 3rd you get 3 in 4-3-2-2 and 2 in swiss.
Swiss average: 2 4-3-2-2 average: 5/3.
If you lose 2 out of 3 it depens on the one you win.
If you win the first you one in swiss and 2 in 4-3-2-2.
If you win the second or third you get 1 in swiss and 0 in 4-3-2-2.
Swiss average: 1 4-3-2-2 average: 2/3
If you lose all you get 0 packs in both.
If we assume that your winning % is independent (it proberly isn't, but...) of the round we see that Swiss>4-3-2-2, even if we look away from the 2 tix you didnt pay and the promo, because it is better in all case except if you win or lose all (in which case they are equal).
If you win 50% of the time, you get 13/8 which is >3/2 in swiss, a promo AND you paid 2 less to join. If you played 4-3-2-2 you get 11/8 which is <3/2.
If you win 75% of the time, you get 171/64>5/2 in swiss, a promo AND you paid 2 less to join. If you played 4-3-2-2 you get 159/64<5/2.
So you need to sell a promo and your draft deck for less than 2 tix (assuming a booster cost 4 tix) to go infinite in swiss if you are a 75% player, but you need above 4 tix (boosters are still assumed to cost 4) for your deck and do not have a promo if you play 4-3-2-2...
in aspect for the future of the game and M11 (which i actually love) there should be a serious discussion about the ridicul prices for tournament staples, autoincludes, 4-of supercards, whatever you call them.
WOTC said a year or so ago, that mythic rares are all about the flavor and when i look back at the ALA block when they first came it was quite like that. well... the planeswalkers were mythic also, and when we look at the usefulness of ajani vengeant and elspeth, i think it is safe to say that they are miles ahead in usefulness to the "vanilla"walkers from lorwyn. also, they had a (for that time) quite a steep price tag (if i remember right, it was around 15tix). only the figure of destiny (32tix), cryptic command, bitterblossom and maybe wrath of god where more than 10tix. all rares and staples for sure, as faeries was quite a winner. a deck was pretty expensive.
but now? it lasted one block to already destroy every statement about the mythic rares WOTC made before ALA. now we see tournament staples like mindsculptor (75-80tix, not seldom 3-4 times in a deck, HELL! if you could have 5 of them in a deck you would probably play 6!!), baneslayer(30+) vengevine (20+), cobra(20+), gideon(20+), m.pulse (rare, going down from 20+ due to rotating ro jund decline, whatever), elspeth (20+, going down, too), persecutor, all is dust, avenger,eldrazi monument and kargan (ca. 10 tix), and whatever there is. easily, a tourney deck is now 400+tix, and it isn't even including 50% of the bombs it could have. OF COURSE we will see the maybe best cards in M11 again with a orange symbol, like the titans (primeval will be 20+ for sure, grave titan won't be resonable priced either me thinks). compare that to the rares, the supposed to be staples (according to WOTC, mythics are not supposed to be staples) and i see a big time difference in card power... they are even overshadowing rares in mana/effect-wise.
well, i do not want to whine about that, but i see a severe problem here. i am willing to spend money for my hobby, no doubt about that, but the problem imo is, that the real top deck contenders (maybe RDW/Blightning is cheap in comparison... as usual every RDW is cheap) are as usual the most expensiv decks to play... but now at double+ the deck price of other decks in the past (looking at std solely, i know, force of will and real duals are way more stup.. expensive). i would even say, that a faeries deck most probably beats the super decks from today into the dirt ;)
my question, is this necessary to squeeze that much money out of people? why is the mythic rare power creeping that much? why isn't there a card which says explicitly "destroy target planeswalker"? why isn't there any discussion WITH wotc people about that? only thing you read from them are these stupid propaganda articles on their website (more selling advertisements than information)... "look at how great we made this ultra-rare super-duper mythic rare, but this 10/10 one mana critter without any drawback will be probably only a one-of in decks" (MaRo, 2012-20xx).
btw, i am really happy that mana leak comes back. at last a decent counter that will teach the "turn3/4/5: tap all my mana, play jace/baneslayer/titan/etc)-decks a lesson.
Humor Paul whats that? Whilst being up early I found myself wondering what you mean.
Masticore is "new" to MTGO too.
Just finished 2nd in EPDC 2.01 with the decklist:
http://pdcmagic.com/gatherling/deck.php?mode=view&id=13238
:)
Orzhov Blink came before "Grand Entrance" and it too does the same thing. O-blink, Stars n Cogs, Cogs n Strips, Grand Entrance... Can't we just call it Blink? (Color Combination) Blink to be more specific if you want. They all do the same thing. Nobody calls UBw Teachings something different than Teachings.
It's the name of the archetype, so it's fitting. It does almost the same exact things
Excellent read as usual !
Thanks for all the feedback !
I actually didn't know that the name "grand entrance" came from those lists, thanks for telling me. Now that I think of it, it almost makes no sense calling this deck grand entrance seeing how different it is from these old lists (and I can see the point about bonespliter since he is mandatory in these).
Rules 1.5 is when they introduced Unearthed Arcana.
I have a 4.0 players handbook and thats it.
wow.. was not aware of that. Been playing a long time, and I don't recall that ever coming up, but it seems pretty relevant to know. lol
Correct.