Forum Index
Forums of Magic-League: Free Online tcg playing; casual or tournament play.
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Mirrian White

Goto page Previous  1, 2
Reply to topic Forum Index -> Standard (T2) Decks
Author Message

Joined: 02 Feb 2011
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Engrishskill wrote:
Wow...people are seriously trying to posit that an aggro deck doesn't benefit from increasing its odds of drawing threats?!

Countless professional decks have utilized cards, like fetches and cantrips to have better odds of drawing business spells. Anyone who disagrees with fetches being good in mono colour aggro needs to seek-out information on their own because they clearly need to do some homework.

With that said: fetches are good, but obviously might lose their spots if colourless lands were to be added. Edge could be good, since it could keep an opponent off of a Gideon for a turn or something. Making a deck as fast and consistent as possible is a good bet right now, I think.

Add a bit more of a mystic toolbox and the 60 look good, in my opinion. I figured that collar would be good because it forces creatures to be traded and lets you race other aggro decks.

Umm...maybe you need to do some homework. It's been proven that fetchlands do not have a statistically significant impact on your draws. There's lots of info about it but this is the best one IMO, here. Just because the "best" players do it doesn't mean it's correct. Actually, saying the best players all play fetches for thinning isn't even true. For example, take a look at legacy aggro decks (i.e. Goblins). For the most part only dual colored lists play fetches. Standard aggro decks (and extended to an extent) play fetches for landfall. In every top 8 list I've seen from extended PTQs aggro decks either play geopede/steppe lynx and fetches or no fetches.

That being said, @op maybe cutting fetches would give you a better red matchup. All they are really doing for you is being plains that cost a life to play.
Back to top

Joined: 02 Feb 2011
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, I'll admit I forgot about stifle impact on 1.5. However, it seeks to me like you didn't even read the link I posted. It says that in average a mono colored deck with 12 basics and 8 fetched (pretty similar to ops build) does not draw an extra spell (vs a deck with 20 basics) until turn 25 and at a cost of 4.3 life. I have never seen anyone claiming that deck thinning provides a real effect back it up with any kind of numbers, just anecdotal evidence and the "all the pros do it" argument. If you can show me some data to support your claims I will gladly reconsider. Until then I will stick with my basics and you can have fun paying 1 life for all your lands.

Last edited by rupus on Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:26 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top

Joined: 02 Feb 2011
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So I did some calculations of my own comparing a deck with 12 basic/8 fetch vs a deck with 20 basics. Here's what I've found (note that this is all average case):

Over 10 turns, fetches thin your deck by ~2.14 cards (paying ~2.14 life). You draw ~0.16 more spells. The chance that your next draw will be a spell is ~69.45% compared to ~66.66%.

Over 20 turns your deck is thinned by ~3.44 cards (paying ~3.44 life). You draw ~0.55 more spells. The chance that your next draw will be a spell is ~72.20% compared to ~66.66%.

I'm not sure what you want to make of that but it seems like paying 2 life for such a small percentage increase is not worth it. Keep in mind that 5% is the general consensus for statistical significance in other card games (i.e. poker, black jack, etc). If you want to see my data I can post up the spreadsheet and formulas I used somewhere. So, over 20 turns you still haven't gained a whole card advantage vs the no fetch deck and you've bolted yourself. Plus you don't even hit the 5% mark until ~turn 19. Again, take this information however you want but if you want to keep arguing that fetches are good it would be cool to have some data supporting it.

When you talk about "that one topdeck" keep in mind your opponent can have "that one topdeck" too. Therefore you have to consider that fetches deal you damage for a very small increase in your chance to topdeck a spell instead of a land. Every damage you deal to yourself potentially increases your opponents ability to topdeck for a win. A very simple example being a deck with 20 mountain 20 shock and 20 lightning bolt. By dealing yourself just 1 damage yourself you could potentially turn an additional 1/3 of their deck into a lethal topdeck. 1 fetch corresponds to an increase of about 1.4% chance of you topdecking a spell. Of course this is just a very basic example but the situations where that small percentage is more important than the damage you incur I would imagine are much smaller than the ones where that damage becomes relevant.

EDIT: I thought of a better and probably more fair example. Consider 2 decks that are just lands and lightning bolts. One has 8 fetch/12 basic the other is all basic. Over the course of 20 turns the deck with fetches gains about .5 of a card advantage over the other deck from the deck thinning. However, in exchange for this it pays ~3 life. 3 life is one bolt, therefore you have put yourself one card closer to lethal. Essentially in exchange for .5 of a card you have given them 1 card. That's 2 for 1ing yourself. Still just a simple example but it illustrates the point I think.

Another way to think about it is that it takes ~19 turns and ~16% of your life to even get what most professional card players would consider a statistically significant advantage.

EDIT EDIT: I did a best case scenario where every land drawn was a fetch.

Chance of topdecking a spell vs a deck with no fetches hits 5% around turn 6 having paid 3.50 life. You gain an extra spell by about turn 17 at a cost of ~6.37 life.

Honestly, even the best case scenario isn't very good.

One more scenario, if you're playing vs ANT cracking 2 fetches means they need one less storm count. So in an average scenario a .16 card advantage for you equates to a 1 card advantage for them.
Back to top

Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

owned, pretty hard Smile
Back to top

Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 4:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote$5K%20%283/5%29

Just sayin'
Back to top

Joined: 02 Feb 2011
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 4:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IanStraka wrote:$5K%20%283/5%29

Just sayin' is that relevant? U/W plays fetches for shuffles, RUG has enemy colors + lotus cobras, and valakut has lotus cobras and khalni heart expeditions. It is interesting to note that the G/W quest has no fetches...

EDIT: I've been thinking and

"Professional players know that regardless of skill, there is always room for a crazy top deck that wins a match.

That's it."

is exactly the attitude that perpetuates false beliefs such as deck thinning. Someone top decks a bolt when their opponent was at 3 life and thinks "wow these fetchlands did this for me" and of course that one example is what sticks because it's memorable and highly positive. Games where you lose by one or two or three damage aren't remember by most people and aren't as closely associated with fetchlands as the "topdeck ftw" game. I think another problem is a misunderstanding of statistics and averages. The incredibly low percentages I was talking about are below any kind of statistical significance in a complex system such as magic. The damage they deal you, however, is not.

To even begin to show a difference between fetches and fetchless builds you would have to play 100s and 100s of games. At that would there are so many variables that the small percentage that emerges is negligible. You can't look at the data I've given you and say "alright I run them because they might give me a win once every hundred games." There is A LOT of statistical noise and only a very small signal. In real life fetchlands have no effect whatsoever on your draws. On the other hand, the damage taken from fetchlands is significant enough to have an effect visible above the random chance inherent in a game of magic.

Last edited by rupus on Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:50 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top

Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're right. I think I misunderstood what this argument was about.
Back to top
Level 1 Judge

Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 99

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm curious now.

That article you posted was for a Sligh deck; That is, it ran 20 lands total. Have you run the numbers for a 24 or 23 land deck? Additionally, how does it fare when you have more than 1 card/turn draw?

Also known as, are fetches viable in MBC or BR Vamps with Tutelage?

Oh, uh, and on-topic: Looks like an interesting deck. I know I've been trying with Honor of the Pure, so not using it is an interesting twist on white weenie. (It's pretty weird when honor is too slow)
Back to top

Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 864

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rupus wrote:
realistic fetchland stats


how many times have you watched some kid lose cuz his mono red deck ran out of steam and you watched him rip three lands in a row, even tho he took 3 dmg off fetchlands to "thin" his deck? random means unpredictable, not that you're only gonna draw gas after cracking a bunch of fetches just because you have percentages to back you up.

actually, keep getting pissed off when you've lost a game to mana flood before I can actually win it. i love free wins.
Back to top

Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 7:08 am    Post subject: Mox opal Reply with quote

If you want metal craft triggers add mox opal in place of lands, it will get you there and accelerate you against the faster explosive decks like elves and kuldotha
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Forum Index -> Standard (T2) Decks All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

All content on this page may not be reproduced without consent of Magic-League Directors.
Magic the Gathering is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved.

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy