- Registered User
Member for 3 years, 7 months, and 25 days
Last active Mon, Jun, 18 2018 02:06:27
- 5 Followers
- 536 Total Posts
- 209 Thanks
Jun 5, 2018Should definitely drop some more details about your stats, 77% is a very nice number but the sample size matters a lot. Me and shok have had similiar numbers, but you might have a better sample size than either of us. Although it might be difficult to compare the competition if you're not playing on MTGO.Posted in: Control
May 24, 2018Let me try to translatePosted in: Control
Hello, I have two questions.
The first question: should I use the new Karn and how many should I play in my deck? I have one in my deck right now and the option to play another. Also I have Karn Liberated in my sideboard, would you replace that?
Apr 3, 2018So your argument is that the percentage only changes a little bit, and that games go long.Posted in: Control
First point makes no sense, as you are correct the change is small, but that applies to your perceived "better mana base" as well as the less consistency. So you can either say the better mana base matters or the percentage points barely change. You can't say both, that's hypocrisy and double standard.
Second of all about games going long: quite a few matchups only go long when we make them. If you don't find that Hurkyl's Recall in your top 10 cards the affinity match won't go long.
I am not saying you are wrong, perhaps the mana base is better, but for me the advantage is questionable while the disadvantage is obvious.
Mar 7, 2018I didn't mean your numbers are random numbers, I think it is great you are doing this and it can definitely be a tool to be used to make better decisions.Posted in: Control
It's more people look at some numbers they don't understand, so it's basically random numbers and then make to me bad assumptions.
There are also more U Tron matches on the Magic Gathering Strat Channel where I played. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2yiMyr7Tn8&list=PL2jQrD9SkZONsMYAXyOa8yy-_wn65bE9o
Mar 7, 2018I tried to point this out before but it seems like people are going way too crazy about this new data and interpreting things that do not necessarily follow from the data.Posted in: Control
First of all correlation is not the same as causation.
Secondly, the data can be extremely misleading, you can't just look at the win% delta of a card and judge it on that, you have to examine the numbers and think about the context of the card. (See my earlier post about Hurkyl's Recall numbers, how misleading the numbers are!)
Thirdly, the data is about starting hands. Quite a lot of cards can be bad in your starting hand and still be good cards in the deck.
Then there is the issue of low sample size. People jump to conclusions when they see the data but then after 50 more matches are entered the data is completely different. Maybe be a bit more patient until there is more data.
I want to talk about the Island data because apparently it's a bad sign for the deck that island correlates with less win% than no Island?!
That's just nonsense and here's why:
So the correlation is hands I keep without Islands are better than hands I keep with Island. Now those who may not understand my 1st point about correlation =/= causation say "That means Island is bad!". No it doesn't mean that. The causation is actually the opposite way. The hands without Islands are better because I only keep really good hands without a blue source. It has nothing to do with how good an island is (yes absolutely ZERO) and depends 100% on my mulligan decision making. You can make a very good argument that I am keeping mediocre hands with a blue source too often and I am not keeping decent hands without a blue source enough. If I would change that behavior then this winrate delta would vanish! So how can this be an indicator of how good the card is when it depends mainly on how I mulligan...
Thirst being worse than Supreme Will is another thing that kind of annoys me, or rather how people react to this. It doesn't mean you should cut Thirst, it just means Supreme Will is a better early game card, but imo Thirst is still the better mid and late game card, by far, and I wouldn't run less than 4. All the threats (Mindslaver, Angel, Ugin, Engine, Gearhulk) I expect to have negative correlation because they are bad cards in the starting hand. Same for Snapcaster. Those are still great cards you should be running.
The data is cool to have but I really don't agree with how it is being used, what weird ideas people have. It seems people blindly follow some random numbers rather than think themselves.
Mar 5, 2018There was a big discussion about Steel Wall 2 years ago in this primer, mostly initiated by me starting to play 2 Steel Walls in my sb and also trying Sidisi's Faithful. I don't mind to give you a quick summary:Posted in: Control
1. One mana is less than two mana.
2. Against fast creature decks (burn, zoo) you need to do something in the early turns.
3. Turn 2 you already are doing stuff (Condescend, Spatial, Repeal)
4. To better this MU you need to do something good turn1.
So comparing Steel Wall, Sidisi's Faithful, Oona's Gatewarden to TITI, Spellskite, etc doesn't make sense. You are playing these 1 drops to play them turn1 against fast decks, turn 2 you already have many things to do with your mana. If you do have the 1 drops in your starting hand they will buy you a lot of time in those MUs. I really liked them when RG Zoo and Naya Burn where the 2 most popular decks!
I have a good example of how much the Steel Wall can do in one of my old videos on MGS
Mar 3, 2018Posted in: ControlQuote from thnkr »
For your numbers:
Are those from your own personal tracking? I ask because one of the decks I tested against last night was Affinity, all preboard games, and they felt completely lopsided in our favor. I didn't keep track of how many games I played, unfortunately, but if memory serves me right, I only dropped one game. Between Condescends, Supreme Wills, Spatial Contortions, Repeals, and Commits, I was able to easily control the gamestate until just landed a Wurmcoil, Angel, Gearhulk a Memory, or Mindslaver. I would imagine that a rather major difference in our lists would have a very important role in our difference in observations of the matchup.
No I just made up those numbers to show the problem.
My actual data against affinity from a year ago:
50% match win
49% game win
41% on the draw
55% on the play
Mar 3, 2018Posted in: Control
This kind of data analysis is certainly interesting but it has some major flaws that need to be accounted for when interpreting the data. Just to show one of the problems, I will show an example with some made up numbers. Let's assume:
- the only MU we bring in Hurkyl's Recall is against Affinity
- we have 45% winrate without Hurkyl's Recall in the starting hand
- we have 55% winrate with Hurkyl's Recall in the starting hand
- our overall winrate across all matches and matchups is 60%
So now the winrate increase we would expect the data to show us is 10% (45% -> 55%). But that's not what the data shows, the data shows a -5% winrate change, because it will look at all starting hands without Hurkyl, not just the ones where we brought it in. Since our average winrate is 60% it registers a 5% decrease to 55% giving the unknowing reader of this data a completely wrong idea about the impact this card has. So a sb card that is boarded in for bad MUs will not be shown correctly at this point and needs to be manually compared to the winrate in those MUs. One way to combat this would be to separate the winrate changes per MU but that would require an insane amount of matches played to provide any meaningful data.
Additionally, this only tells you what is good in your starting hand, not what is good in your decklist. Rather than adjusting your decklist to this data I believe you should use this information to make better mulligan decisions. If you were to make this kind of analysis with all cards drawn during a game rather than just the cards in the starting hand it would be more meaningful for overall deckbuilding.
Anyway more data is always good but people have to be aware of what the data actually represents and where the weaknesses in the methodology are. Don't just look at the numbers and take them as they are, you need to understand why, and which factors are at play.
Jan 27, 2018Champion is really bad tho? Draw 2 discard 2 is not good. Like it wouldn't be good for 1 mana. It's unplayable for 3 mana and a small body. Eternalize is 5UU sorc speed... for that mana you can have Gearhulk casting Thirst at instant speed and same value.Posted in: Control
Jan 11, 2018Posted in: ControlQuote from Meddling_Maxe »
Against rg titanshift i feelalittle unfaired instead. They ramp ramp ramp and play scapeshift wich i cant remand or condescend for enough. :/
How is ur boarding haymakers beside Dismissal?
Against Titanshift just counter Titan and Scapeshift... Make sure you have enough blue to cast both Remand and Condescend against Scapeshift if they have enough mana to recast in one turn. I board in 1 Slaver, 1 Negate, 2 Summariy Dismissal and I board out like 1 Chalice, 1 Rift, 1 Walking Ballista, 1 Angel
Quote from okoSheep »
how do we do against emeria titan?
I am 2-0 against Emeria Titan and the MU is pretty easy. should be 80-90% in our favor if not 100%
Jan 11, 2018Posted in: ControlQuote from Meddling_Maxe »
@did we have somewhere hiding an "up to date!" matchup analysist? Like we are favoured vs xyz and so on
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.