TCG Strategy & Decklists

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1279444 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:39:50 GMT

1576609:
Also how exactly is a one cost quest important to have in your opening draw?

If you don't have early plays, it means on the turns where you normally wont have cards to play, you can activate quests. So, let us say you're a deck without a lot of 1 cost cards. Quests give you something to do during that pause in your game. It allows you to smooth draws, draw cards, discard cards (If you needed cards in the graveyard, or whatever else options that quests give you on that turn where you don't have anything to do.

If you have a lot of 1 cost cards, it becomes less important as you have other things you could be doing. The deck design decides when you have an opening to complete quests, as well as what quests are able to work and which ones don't. You find that out through play testing.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1576609 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:53:20 GMT

Also how exactly is a one cost quest important to have in your opening draw?

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1576609 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:49:42 GMT

Ok link to this type one stompy list with so few lands then.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1279444 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:22:21 GMT

"Actually, that was sarcasm. I think what you are actually missing is that I am suggesting anything you play when you have only one resource counts as a one drop."

When the discussion is purely on one drops that are important to have in the opening draw, yes Fizzle becomes relatively irrelevant. I agreed with LankyBrit with the card being good against Felshroud Decks. But on the turns that it would be great as a an opening card in your hand its a Taste for the Arcana at best, and a blank card at worse.

"You do realize that Glous allows you to do both, while not locking you into any specific quest you don't want to complete? So if you're playing Glous T2 (~40% of the time), you don't want to play Kilandra T1. Kilandra is also stronger when played later (more selection in resources you can pick to inspire is better, especially if you draw into Circle of Blood or multiples of a specific quest)."

You do know that you could play both? So that when your opponent uses his removal on Glous over Kilandra (Since they both have the same number of HP) you can still have your inspire ally?

"It also dies without trading to virtually any ally or weapon your opponent plays, something that is much more difficult to protect against before you have Fracture up (and if you use your flip to save it, your flip won't be up to save Water Elemental or Myriam)."

It actually trades with the allies of its weight class (That of 1 cost allies) and actually survives against 1 damage weapons better than most other 1 drops. It also allows you to not have to mulligan for a Glous if you're being dependant on Glous to win because she can also acts as Glous numbers 5-8 as well as your first turn 1drop.

So basically to make it good T1 you must meet these requirements:

1) have a location, a duplicate quest, or a quest you're confident you don't want to complete in the next 5 turns.
2) have no relevent openings in your curve to play it later (when it is stronger and easier to protect).
3) didn't draw Glous.
4) have a plan to protect it from getting eaten without trading by 2 drops.

The first one is only difficult if you always complete your quests in the first 5 turns and only if you draw only 1 quest.

The second is actually an interesting comment because your curve becomes easier to stick to if you play Kilandra turn 1 because you'll always have the Interrupt/flip mana.

As for the third one, if you have a second quest (Which isn't that hard to do in the course of three turns) you will be able to use both. It isn't just one or the other.

As for the 4th one, you could always trade it with your opponents 1 drop so that their Merry doesn't trade with your Glous.

So its actually rather good to have her early.

1279444:

Oh I get it, when you tried to talk about 9land stompy decks you were thinking about 9land stompy decks that no one played anymore.

Oh I get it, math got invalidated and stopped working correctly in the the year 2001. I mean, it's not like math is a pure discipline where answers derived thousands of years ago in Greece are still taught today or anything.

The question is ... why did old school Stompy run 10 Forest, 4 Land Grant when it wanted to eek out the maximum number of cheap threats versus land? Answer: because 14 mana sources make it 86% consistent playing a Forest T1 pre-mulligan.

Actually, what happened was that people tried cutting down on lands. At some point it was 14 mana sources, until they realized it could go lower. And so they did. They went as low as 8-9 green sources and the rest was non-green sources such as wastelands and stripmines. This was because in type one, the ability to disrupt the opponent's mana was important. You using an archaic design that was weeded out does not mean that you found a flaw in my argument, but simply goes to show that playtesting circumvented yours.

"My, that was relevent to the discusion at hand (while completely invalidating the point you were trying to make by bringing up Stompy as if it ran 9 mana sources only). The current playability of Stompy remains irrelevent, which is no doubt why you keep typing 5000 word essays about it."

All you proved to show was that archaic designs were put together with your 85% concept, and then chopped down because it was not necessary to have that kind of consistency. It cut down to less then that because it just didn't need that many land drops. The irrelevance of Stompy now is due to what it is forced to evolve to now that it no longer is able to drop the largest allies the fastest (Which was what it was attempting to do initially in comparison to Sligh decks). If it ran 14 coloured mana sources then it would have been running as many as the sligh decks whose goal was to get to 5-6 mana by turn 7-8 in order to get Cursed Scroll active. Green stompy decks did not need that much land and hence was able to cut down on coloured sources. Don't pretend to think that metagame does not affect deckbuilding sir, it just makes you seem ignorant; and I don't want that.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1406143 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:52:18 GMT

1279444:

Your opponents play Eye of Kilrogg on turn one when they only have 1 resource? The same with invocation? Tell your opponents that they're cheating. You need at least two resources to play those cards.

You know your opponent can have two resources when you only have one, right? That generally happens when they go first. I suppose if you have loaded dice and lose 100% of the time, you wouldn't experience that.

Actually, that was sarcasm. I think what you are actually missing is that I am suggesting anything you play when you have only one resource counts as a one drop.

1279444:

Is it also possible for you to not play her turn one and istead abuse Glouse? Yes. That's a player choice. Deciding that completing quests is more important than keeping a resource up to counter spells.

You do realize that Glous allows you to do both, while not locking you into any specific quest you don't want to complete? So if you're playing Glous T2 (~40% of the time), you don't want to play Kilandra T1. Kilandra is also stronger when played later (more selection in resources you can pick to inspire is better, especially if you draw into Circle of Blood or multiples of a specific quest).

It also dies without trading to virtually any ally or weapon your opponent plays, something that is much more difficult to protect against before you have Fracture up (and if you use your flip to save it, your flip won't be up to save Water Elemental or Myriam).

So basically to make it good T1 you must meet these requirements:

1) have a location, a duplicate quest, or a quest you're confident you don't want to complete in the next 5 turns.
2) have no relevent openings in your curve to play it later (when it is stronger and easier to protect).
3) didn't draw Glous.
4) have a plan to protect it from getting eaten without trading by 2 drops.

1279444:

Oh I get it, when you tried to talk about 9land stompy decks you were thinking about 9land stompy decks that no one played anymore.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1279444 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:39:56 GMT

1189990:

You do realize that he's talking about the opponent going first, and so he plays Eye turn 2 and you fizzle it because you have 1 resource, right?

Cheers.

Nope. Thanks for the clarification.

So yes, when playing against aggressive control decks, going second, fizzle is comparable to Taste of the Arcana. Otherwise, Taste of the Arcana does everything and more.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1189990 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:14:53 GMT

1279444:

"Eye of Kilrogg, Invocation ... nobody plays janky things like that, right? Or you just always play first when testing?"

Your opponents play Eye of Kilrogg on turn one when they only have 1 resource? The same with invocation? Tell your opponents that they're cheating. You need at least two resources to play those cards.

Oh wait! That's right. Fizzle is good for things past turn one while the other cards are great for turn one itself. Which is what I was saying.

You do realize that he's talking about the opponent going first, and so he plays Eye turn 2 and you fizzle it because you have 1 resource, right?

Cheers.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1279444 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:09:58 GMT

1576609:
I love the way working out how many quests you need to have one in your opener at 85% confidence isn't good enough. But somehow just using the numbers other decks have used in the past is fine. Even when you are using number of one drops rather than quests. Even if this was a good idea surely you should take the number of quests those decks ran rather than taking their one drops and changing it to quests. Not that you are even taking one drops in any sensible way, picking what to count so you get to the number you like. Looking over this the number of things you are getting wrong is almost unreal.

I didn't say that 85% wasn't good enough. I said that if the OP wanted to draw a card decently enough, about 9 was enough. Other decks have used that number, such as number of 1 drops in rush decks that need to play them on turn 1. It isn't about picking and choosing which cards count or not, its about which cards are the kinds you actually want to see and use on turn 1 since the OP was asking about opening hands, not on how many quests do people usually run.

1576609:
Well if you define one drops as being whatever you feel like counting so your numbers look right then clearly it is pretty hard for you to fail. How exactly is swfit disipline a one drop when stormshock isn't?

It isn't just any card, it is cards that you actually want to be casting on turn 1. There is a simple reason as to why I didn't include Stormshock in my list. I didn't see the Stormshock. My bad.

1576609:
Well if you define one drops as being whatever you feel like counting so your numbers look right then clearly it is pretty hard for you to fail. How exactly is swfit disipline a one drop when stormshock isn't?

I define an opening hand one drop as the one drop you play on your first turn. Hence why it is relevant to have in your opening hand. Just because something costs one mana does not mean that its meant to be cast on turn 1. Tewa Wildmane for example. Just because she costs 6 resources does not mean you have to cast her on turn 6.

--------------------------------------------

"Eye of Kilrogg, Invocation ... nobody plays janky things like that, right? Or you just always play first when testing?"

Your opponents play Eye of Kilrogg on turn one when they only have 1 resource? The same with invocation? Tell your opponents that they're cheating. You need at least two resources to play those cards.

Oh wait! That's right. Fizzle is good for things past turn one while the other cards are great for turn one itself. Which is what I was saying.

"On Turn 5 when Myriam is active? Nobody does THAT, am I right?

You do know if you play here Turn 1, all you can do is name the resource you played, and if you ever complete it she becomes useless unless you draw another quest with the same name or it happened to have one of the 2 locations?

But if I play it T1, I can put the opposing hero on a 25-31 turn clock, right?"

Actually, playing it in turn one means that on turn two you can play whatever you want and have fizzle/heroflip mana up on their turn. So you can play your Water Elemental and not have to worry about it dying because the resource untaps on your opponents turn allowing you to keep the pet protected. You can also use her to complete quests and draw a card early, if that was needed. And if you draw her late, you can use her with your late game cards such as Myriam.

Is it also possible for you to not play her turn one and isntead abuse Glouse? Yes. That's a player choice. Deciding that completing quests is more important than keeping a resource up to counter spells.

"Unless I play her and name the resource that I used to play her, which means unless they use instant ally kill on her, she can be resource neutral the turn she comes out, and then keep my fizzle/taste threat going for as long as she's alive."

She also does the whole keeping a resource up trick for interrupts as early as turn 1. You don't have to wait for turn 5-6 to do that.

vichiers:
(typical build from the old school days was always 10 Forest, 4 Land Grant btw ... can you guess why?)

1406143:

you who made the statement that they simply ran 4 land grants and 10 forests, which wasn't true.

"I bolded the differences between what I said (first quote) and what you claim I said (second quote). I know you have reading comprehension difficulties, but do try to keep up."

Oh I get it, when you tried to talk about 9land stompy decks you were thinking about 9land stompy decks that no one played anymore. Gotcha. Sorry for misinterpreting what you said, I thought you were trying to be part of the discussion and not just stating irrelevant statements. My bad, label them next time to promote clarity.

"Blah blah blah, how exactly is the current playablility relevant to the fact that every significantly successful version of green stompy in the history of Magic ran at least 13 green mana sources?

But I'm sure there were a bunch of brilliant decks posted on now defunct forums that would prove this wrong."

The playability comment is important because none of the type one tournaments in the past few years have had enviroments that are suitable for playing a type 1 stompy deck and so I am not inclined to depend upon any of the more recent stompy decklists since I am not familiar with them. Decks change according to the metagame. I'm simply saying that it doesn't need 13 green mana sources. I've tested it, others have tested it. If you don't believe me, then lets agree to disagree.

1189990:

The English language is such a tricky thing. If only he had said "How many quests do I need in a 60 card deck to be sure of having one my opening hand" (which was clearly his intent). Oh well.

That's what I've been saying.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1406143 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:24:00 GMT

1279444:
On the first turn Fizzle stops.... um.... Surprise Attack? Predatory Strike?

Eye of Kilrogg, Invocation ... nobody plays janky things like that, right? Or you just always play first when testing?

1406143:

You wouldn't play Kilandra on the first turn if you could? I guess we play differently. So when do you prefer to play your Kilandras? On turn two when casting your 2drop allies, on turn 3 when your casting Water Elemental or on turn 4 when your casting Myriam?

On Turn 5 when Myriam is active? Nobody does THAT, am I right?

You do know if you play here Turn 1, all you can do is name the resource you played, and if you ever complete it she becomes useless unless you draw another quest with the same name or it happened to have one of the 2 locations?

But if I play it T1, I can put the opposing hero on a 25-31 turn clock, right?

1406143:

Maybe on the later turns when your saving that resource to counter spells? Oh wait, you can't cast her because your saving your resources to counter spells.

Unless I play her and name the resource that I used to play her, which means unless they use instant ally kill on her, she can be resource neutral the turn she comes out, and then keep my fizzle/taste threat going for as long as she's alive.

With some very specific hands I would play her T1 inspiring a resource. For example if I'm on the play with Xanata, Water Elemental, Myriam, Weldon as my curve and a Fizzle in hand. However if the plan T2 is Glous, definitely save Kilandra to inspire the Elemental or Myriam.

vichiers:
(typical build from the old school days was always 10 Forest, 4 Land Grant btw ... can you guess why?)

1406143:

you who made the statement that they simply ran 4 land grants and 10 forests, which wasn't true.

I bolded the differences between what I said (first quote) and what you claim I said (second quote). I know you have reading comprehension difficulties, but do try to keep up.

1406143:

The only time you would be running 9land stompy outside of casual type 1...

Blah blah blah, how exactly is the current playablility relevant to the fact that every significantly successful version of green stompy in the history of Magic ran at least 13 green mana sources?

But I'm sure there were a bunch of brilliant decks posted on now defunct forums that would prove this wrong.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

996018 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:21:24 GMT

Storm Shock is a perfectly valid turn 1 play for Kil'zin.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1576609 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:21:22 GMT

Well if you define one drops as being whatever you feel like counting so your numbers look right then clearly it is pretty hard for you to fail.

How exactly is swfit disipline a one drop when stormshock isn't?

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1576609 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:19:00 GMT

I love the way working out how many quests you need to have one in your opener at 85% confidence isn't good enough. But somehow just using the numbers other decks have used in the past is fine. Even when you are using number of one drops rather than quests.

Even if this was a good idea surely you should take the number of quests those decks ran rather than taking their one drops and changing it to quests. Not that you are even taking one drops in any sensible way, picking what to count so you get to the number you like.

Looking over this the number of things you are getting wrong is almost unreal.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1279444 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:17:33 GMT

Hero: Kil’zin of the Bloodscalp

Allies

2 Tatulla the Reclaimer

4 Jo’jabee

Abilities
4 Storm Shock

4 Lightning Arc

3 Tremor Shock

Equipment
4 Retainer’s Blade

4 Black Amnesty

4 Perdition’s Blade

Locations

4 The Circle of Blood

Quests

4 One Draenei’s Junk…

4 Torek’s Assault

4 Orders from Lady Vashj

Side Deck

3 Death Shock

3 Grounding Totem

1 Tremor Shock

1 Tatulla the Reclaimer

2 Crackling Purge

This deck runs 11 one drops, but four of them are Skumm Bag'Go. A one cost ally that is used to flip over quests and more importantly, locations. I can see you cast him on the first turn if your going second and if your opponent plays a location. Otherwise you'd hold him back. Since not all decks depend on Locations he will mostly be held back so he can hit juicy targets. So he doesn't really count as a one drop that you want to cast early because if you cast him too early, then his come into play ability wont hold its weight.

So this deck actually runs 7 cards that he wants to play in the first turn.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrew Farrell

Hero – Witch Doctor Koo’zar

Abilities

3 Dispel Magic

2 Power Word: Shield

3 Shadow Word: Death

4 Shadow Word: Anguish

Allies

4 Broan Charges-the-Fight

Quests

3 Finkle Einhorn, At Your Service!

3 Falling to Corruption

4 Orders from Lady Vashj

Side Deck

2 Dawn’s Grace

This deck runs 23 allies/abilities that cost 1. 9 are abilities so that leaves 14 allies. Of those 14 allies 2 are Skum'Bag'Go which, as I have already said, are allies that are not meant to be played on the first turn, but to wait until a good target shows itself.

So a deck that is attempting to abuse its hero's flip power of untapping 3 resources runs 12 one drop allies. That way in can drop one in the first turn, and more on the third turn when its hero flips to empty his hand. So it makes sense to run more than 8 to take advantage of a hero's flip power. Kind of like how Ogrimmar Decks run more Orcs that it normally would because of the Location.

I don't see anything wrong with either one. The first deck runs 7 one drops because after the first turn he focuses on casting weapons 3drop allies. The second deck runs more than 8 one drop allies because he needs them to maximize his hero's flip. How does this contradict me?

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1189990 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:06:57 GMT

OMG - You really don't get it, do you.

OK. I give up.

The English language is such a tricky thing. If only he had said "How many quests do I need in a 60 card deck to be sure of having one my opening hand" (which was clearly his intent). Oh well.

Cheers.

Re: Math Question on Amount of Quest

1279444 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:58:58 GMT

1189990:

(If a percentage is required, use 85%)

Oh right, that one. If something is required, use this. Nope, not required. Move on.

You are totally mis-understanding his question, and I really don't know why I'm trying to convince you anymore.

If I were to say "How many times must I flip a coin to get a Heads at least once? (If a percentage is required, use 85%). I am obviously asking obout how many times I must flip to be pretty sure I'll get a Heads, and to further clarify, what if I need to have an 85% chance of getting a Heads.

He's obviously not asking how many quests he needs to run to get one in his opening hand (literally), because the answer would be 1. Because of the (If a percentage is required...) he's looking for 'a good probability' he'll get one in his opening hand.

I just don't understand how you fail to get this.

Cheers.

We know not to take him too literally because we know an overly literal translation of his question would produce an unhelpful/jerk-ish answer. However, one must also understand that since he doesn't place the percentage up front, that he's just throwing a number out there in case we ask for one. A number that sounds good but is not necessarily tested. Otherwise the specificity of his question would be different. Being that that is the case, we need to use a historical model to answer his question because it will provide an answer much closer to his implied "consistently enough" than to his random choosing of 85%.

We know that decks that want to see something in their opening hand usually run about 8-10 of those cards. So we know that that is the answer from a historical model, a model which is defined by what players feel is "consistent enough" and not simply a number with a fancy symbol beside it. This number would then give him the consistency he is searching for more accurately than his numerical estimation of desired consistency.

You guys feel that its okay to place all the emphasis on his question on the phrase "if a percentage is required make it 85%" instead of placing emphasis on the question itself. Which does not carry a sense of exact percentage but a sense of desired consistency. Why not take the consistency of already field tested numbers and give him that. Application is always more accurate than math, at least in carpentry.