|
qbert posted:Literally every decision you make in a Magic game is based on percentages. Actually, yeah. The marginal odds are always relevant. The trap is when you're concentrating on the marginal factors to the detriment of more significant ones. Like, when you're building your monocolored deck and put fetches in for the thinning. Thinning is still a thing that happens, but it's overshadowed by more important things like having less life to work with. However, once you're actually there playing a game, and you're confronted with the decision to crack a fetch right now or next turn, the only difference is deck thinning.
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:56 |
|
|
Well no the point of the article is that there's also the factor of stuff you've scryed to the bottom.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
People want deck thinning to be a thing so bad, and I have to ask why? Is it just really that hard to let go of a conclusion you came to? Do you secretly wish to run less than 20 lands in all decks? What is the reason, "deck thinning is actually better in spite of math" people?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
So is buying a box of MM2015 the same as buying a box of a standard set in that it'll generally be more economical to spend the money on singles from the set?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
SSL is starting in a few minutes. LSV and Brad Nelson chatting on stream right now.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Corte posted:So is buying a box of MM2015 the same as buying a box of a standard set in that it'll generally be more economical to spend the money on singles from the set? Buying singles is always the cheapest way to assemble whatever deck you want to build. Buying a box of modern masters is better value than normal if you like to play limited though!
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:People want deck thinning to be a thing so bad, and I have to ask why? Is it just really that hard to let go of a conclusion you came to? Do you secretly wish to run less than 20 lands in all decks? What is the reason, "deck thinning is actually better in spite of math" people? People put Sylvan Library in their legacy decks for the privilege of paying 4 life for a spell, you can also accomplish a similar thing by putting fetch lands in your deck without ever having to cast a 2 mana enchantment. e: also as a mathematician I take issue with the idea that it's mathematically settled because a guy did a computer simulation.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Starving Autist posted:People put Sylvan Library in their legacy decks for the privilege of paying 4 life for a spell, you can also accomplish a similar thing by putting fetch lands in your deck without ever having to cast a 2 mana enchantment. Sylvan Library lets you break the action economy and a fetchland doesn't, I guess they don't teach action economy in mathematician school.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
First round feature match is Gerry Thompson on Unwritten Dragon Ramp vs. Brad Nelson on No Testing Exact 75 Mardu Dragons From The GP. Also Randy's connection died again this week.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
4 life for a spell is a better exchange rate than 1 life for 1/10th of a spell.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
Starving Autist posted:People put Sylvan Library in their legacy decks for the privilege of paying 4 life for a spell, you can also accomplish a similar thing by putting fetch lands in your deck without ever having to cast a 2 mana enchantment. Please do not compare running fetches in your mono color deck to Sylvan Library TIA
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:4 life for a spell is a better exchange rate than 1 life for 1/10th of a spell.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Sylvan Library lets you break the action economy and a fetchland doesn't, I guess they don't teach action economy in mathematician school. I googled that and yeah, I didn't have to learn anything about Dungeons & Dragons to earn my PhD.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Also you can use Sylvan Library to draw land and spells at the same time, draw multiple lands to get through them in one turn, and protect a draw from Mind Sculptor. I've done all of these before. It's pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:People want deck thinning to be a thing so bad, and I have to ask why? Is it just really that hard to let go of a conclusion you came to? Do you secretly wish to run less than 20 lands in all decks? What is the reason, "deck thinning is actually better in spite of math" people? It is a thing though. A tiny thing that isn't worth paying 1 life for, to be sure; but if you're already in a game where you know you're going to use that fetchland (and what you're going to get with it) it's literally free to do it now instead of after your draw step to get that tiny edge. A benefit with no cost is worth taking, even if it's small. It's literally the same reasoning as to why you break your fetchland before casting Dissolve (even when you don't need the mana from the fetch). If you reject one you have to reject the other.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Starving Autist posted:I googled that and yeah, I didn't have to learn anything about Dungeons & Dragons to earn my PhD. Okay, well get this. Normally you're only allowed to draw one card a turn in MTG, but with Sylvan Library you get to draw more. It's like using fetchlands, actually, Jabor posted:It is a thing though. A tiny thing that isn't worth paying 1 life for, to be sure; but if you're already in a game where you know you're going to use that fetchland (and what you're going to get with it) it's literally free to do it now instead of after your draw step to get that tiny edge. A benefit with no cost is worth taking, even if it's small. People seem to be emotionally invested in the idea though, quite a lot get angry and start comparing it to Sylvan Library if it's pointed out the dubious value of fetches in a deck that doesn't get any value beyond "thinning." rabidsquid fucked around with this message at 02:15 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
The simulation (if we're talking about Johnson's Monte Carlo article here) also focused almost exclusively on using fetchlands in mono-colored aggro decks and ignored color-fixing, graveyard filling, etc. Didn't even scratch the surface of card-draw spells and effects on thinning.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
Mr. Jive posted:The simulation (if we're talking about Johnson's Monte Carlo article here) also focused almost exclusively on using fetchlands in mono-colored aggro decks and ignored color-fixing, graveyard filling, etc. Didn't even scratch the surface of card-draw spells and effects on thinning. I agree that when discussing using fetches for other reasons that there is value, but that's not what I was talking about!
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Now I'm not saying "put fetches in every deck always YOLO" but I think there theoretically are decks where the thinning (which admittedly is very marginal) is worth the life loss.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
Action economy isn't named such in Magic theory but the concepts are very much there. We usually call it tempo. It's still about trying to make your actions more effective than your opponent's.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
Unwritten Dragons 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
Wrapter's deck is a 3-card combo that doesn't even guarantee a win. Conifer Strider + Become Immense + Temur Battle Rage.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Starving Autist posted:Now I'm not saying "put fetches in every deck always YOLO" but I think there theoretically are decks where the thinning (which admittedly is very marginal) is worth the life loss. Name a single deck / format where the card you draw on turn X is worth the life you paid for it consistently. The fact that you compare it to Sylvan Library is pretty telling that you don't play enough with Sylvan Library to understand it's regular use cases or why it's different than paying 4 life to not draw a land many turns later. Fetches have a ton of useful things they do besides just fix mana that encourage their play in monocolored decks but playing them exclusively for the thinning is not something I think any deck will ever want.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
qbert posted:Wrapter's deck is a 3-card combo that doesn't even guarantee a win. All the jokes on LSV's stream last night about Wrapter not having a deck are a lot funnier now. edit: "Cuneo's deck is doing exactly what it's designed to do... cast a lot of cantrips and not actually do anything at all"
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Swagger Dagger posted:All the jokes on LSV's stream last night about Wrapter not having a deck are a lot funnier now. "Cuneo is winning without really doing anything." I love LSV coming up with really complicated lines and Efro is like "I am sure some of what you said is true but I don't really care." rabidsquid fucked around with this message at 02:41 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, Wrapter won with the combo. Love it.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
Standard Super League is the best. I'm going to send a tweet to Randy and see if they could do a "no rares" week, although I guess that would just be everyone playing mono red or heroic.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
Corte posted:So is buying a box of MM2015 the same as buying a box of a standard set in that it'll generally be more economical to spend the money on singles from the set? I think the likely answer is yes, but there is a small chance that it stirs up enough interest in Modern that it increases demand enough that the EV of the packs ends up higher than MSRP.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
Someone in the SSL chat said that Josh's deck cost about 4 drafts on MTGO, and seeing the deck, I believe him.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
Please just let LSV and EFro commentate every week. And only feature jank matchups. The amount of making GBS threads on both these decks is glorious.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:Name a single deck / format where the card you draw on turn X is worth the life you paid for it consistently. I think it's mainly for super aggressive decks with fewer than 20 lands. Maybe the line is actually 16 or 17 lands, I don't know. With those decks, drawing extra lands is just the worst, so paying life to minimize that seems worth it at a certain point.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
These decks were assembled from draft leavings on their MTGO account, so they don't sully their actual decks.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
Pharohman777 posted:These decks were assembled from draft leavings on their MTGO account, so they don't sully their actual decks. Wrapter didn't even have the cards for his deck and had to ask LSV how to trade in MODO.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Wrapter didn't even have the cards for his deck and had to ask LSV how to trade in MODO. That is the best part, really. Edit: and strength of the fallen on den protector lets Cuneo tie it up in our kitchen table edition of SSL. Pharohman777 fucked around with this message at 03:07 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
And Cuneo wins Game 2 buy triggering Strength of the Fallen on his Den Protector, then putting a Nighthowler on it to swing a 24/23.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
I don't care if I'm just fanboying out, I could listen to LSV commentate anything
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Anybody else not surprised to see this deck displayed on a table that looks to be dumpster dived? Nice Bolts.  I'm not quite there unfortunately. The Clique and Bolt are the most tilting things.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Unwritten Dragons Is that the RG deck that uses see the unwritten to land Atarkas? edit, right stream is up. yeah it is. Rimusutera fucked around with this message at 03:37 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Apparently on Star City, Lightning Bolts are $2 a pop. Surely they can't be that rare? I've got like 20 or so from a local shop that I bought for that much because they had so many of em.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:56 |
|
|
EatinCake posted:Apparently on Star City, Lightning Bolts are $2 a pop. Surely they can't be that rare? I've got like 20 or so from a local shop that I bought for that much because they had so many of em. Its less that it is rare and more that it is one of the more popular cards in modern and is incredibly splashable with several decks running it.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 03:57
|
|
