The Perfect Curve Series 25 Preview #2: It's Real Emotion!

[Genre]

Originally Posted by killerkimimaro

arent u like a math teacher at a college lol.......and theres a guy trying teach u about probability

that is irrelevant; i don't like using that as leverage in this kind of an argument as he did make good points, but the argument was weak because we're talking about a card game that involves TWO players where cards can be milled, discarded, removed, tutored and destroyed, etc... too many things can happen at any point in the game to make the probability of anything all skewed and messed up.

again, my entire argument is this: cue the south park ski instructor meme-->

"if you rely on probability to determine your chances of drawing into cards you need to win the game (aka more luck than skill), you're going to have a bad time."

[NextoftheLegacy]

Originally Posted by Genre

Professor Einstein, probability is still a prediction. Thanks for the math lesson, but probability is still not a 100% concrete branch of mathematics (like Algebra, Geometry or even Set Theory is). Its applications are great and all, but the outcomes are percentages that are based off chance happenings (predictions). Yes, it makes sense and is a great tool, but if you simply rely on probability (like drawing into your next drop, or a mission, etc) you're "going to have a bad time" (southparkmeme.jpg) ...

Before I go further, I find it necessary to cite Thomas Veazie's g3 match in Gencon 2010 finals vs. Eric Melone, where he drew an OK opening hand then proceeded to draw trash for several turns in a row only to have his Asuma discarded from hand later on (this didn't even really matter, as his hand was abysmal regardless. Probability indicates he should not have drawn into his Dreams pieces (the same mission, nonetheless) on back-to-back turns, but he did.

Thanks for talking down to me. Keep in mind your own argument was weakened (in the context of this game, especially) in your last sentence of "After that [the first few turns of the game], there are far too many variables to come to any sort of reliable figure." -- yes, that was my point. You just posted this entire research paper only to compromise the integrity of the argument by posting that sentence. That was my point - to not rely on probability in regards to a card game.

Even in poker, you can get badly beat repeatedly just because you relied too heavily on the probability of catching a pair on the flop or a flush on the river. I never play with probability on my mind because I'd rather rely on skill than luck. If it means I play conservatively, then so be it.

You're missing the point. This thread has become a conversation about early-turn plays where probability is crucial to the combo's success. I'm not saying you should examine every probability ratio in your deck, i.e. drawing into your T7 Dreams or whatever. Poorly designed decks CAN perform well and well designed decks CAN perform poorly. Probability measures consistency of a deck in this case. Get off your high horse and use half your brain. Simply because you analyze and optimize probability ratios doesn't mean you're relying on luck. I shouldn't have to say more on this matter to get through to you.

1. I prefer Schrodinger over Einstein, if you catch my drift
2. I did not weaken my argument by stating that final point. I indeed strengthened it by conceding a point I knew to be a pitfall. By getting it out of the way before it is attacked beyond repair. Real argumentation is rarely seen on forums these days, eh?

[Tsu Kiyo Me]

Originally Posted by avatar7

You don't have to draw 4th in your opening hand... You are almost certainly guaranteed to draw it by turn 2-3 if you played a couple of draw missions plus ninja draw effects, not to mention any jutsu draw effects as a bonus. And the fact here is with 3 Rasengan, 3 Emotion Wave, 1 Pump, you are guaranteed to draw at least one of them to do the 4th + late game jutsu combo. I'm really amazed how you cannot see this...

I could just turn your argument on you and say that there's also a chance that I could not draw it.

I'm really amazed how YOU cannot see this. . . (This further shows how fragile all of your arguments have been in this thread. You cover no bases and everything you are saying is basically speculation or just assuming things will happen...which is why I'm telling you top players will deny your actions so you can basically assume NOTHING in top level play).

You completely missed my entire argument though which was not the probability of hitting 4th, but that the sheer number of ways to stop the 4th are more common and have a much higher chance of occuring (because they take up 20~30% of a deck rather than the 2~6% the 4th takes up).

The 4th's results show that he's good but not this broken card you keep seeming to imply.

I'm going to take my leave from this thread for good. If you still think I'm in the wrong, that's fine.

Regardless of what you say though you cannot ignore the fact that:
-The 4th has far less wins and tops than many other cards in the format

-The card has been out for 9 months. Since the beginning of Block format, Bandai has almost always taken action on a problem card within 2 sets of it's release (and this is at the absolute latest). We're about to be at the 3rd and still nothing. It's safe to say that the 4th Hokage will remain at 3 until GenCon 2013.

-No amount of crying will put 4th on the rogue list as Tylar has learned his lesson from bending to the will of the community. Most restriction lists are now based on play testing in the office & results from top players at top level play. The sooner you realize this fact, the sooner you can quit complaining and move on with your life. If you don't believe me, ask him yourself. I know I have.

So as I've said earlier in the thread and I'll say it one last time before I leave for good:

On the issue of the 4th Hokage + ANY JUTSU:
DEAL WITH IT.

[Genre]

Originally Posted by NextoftheLegacy

Get off your high horse and use half your brain.

^ Telling me to get off my "high horse" when he called me incompetent (and i haven't bashed him once) and is bashing me because logic overrides the application of probability in card games, even if you 3-of all broke cards in your deck and 1-of all OK cards in deck. Knowing to put 3-ofs, 2-ofs and 1-ofs in deck and the right ratios of each is not probability-based (it's common sense based); it's being a good player putting the best cards at the highest amounts and the tech cards at the least amounts. Even THEN you're not guaranteed to draw the 3-of cards you have in deck!

Here, let's make a deck with and (in an Unlimited deck) and, given that you can filter your deck quite readily in Unlimited, I should be able to get this combo off consistently. OH WAIT, probability doesn't account for responses my opponent may have (or the fact that I may actually not draw into all my pieces even though probability "says" I should most of the time). Good argument man!

See you at Gencon!

[ChaosInsanist]

In response to what you lot are stating, the entire basis of a game is about probability, even in, yes, games with a "deck of 52." The goal of a successful and properly functional deck should be to try to minimize the probability as much as possible by utilizing methods such as draw and search to thin the deck and reach the essential components of victory. Even my deck has bad pulls, obviously, but it usually works pretty well because I have draw and search to pull past a bad opening into what I need. For example, the people I play against have been doing Fire Lightning spam with Anbu and Biscuit and that god awful 5 on the 0 Sasuke. I usually have the crap beaten out of me in the opening, seeing as I have yet to order my other two Buying Time and Crying in Vain, but I usually manage to stabilize over the next few turns. If you start bad, you can recover, and if you start well, you can draw poorly. To argue about probability is pointless because it can go either way. But, hey, if you really like arguing about probability, why not just cheat and deckstack, to ensure perfect pulls 100% of the time? Clearly there is a problem with the shuffling method, or something. Seriously.

[avatar7]

I made a random water/lightning deck, using a proxy for this jutsu (3 copies), and the usual water/lightning suspects for an aggro rush deck. Guess what, it worked extremely well right off the bat and in 7 simulated games, I got the 4th + late game jutsu in 6 of them, within turn marker 1 to 3. With the necessary chakra to play it (usually 2-3 water/lightning cards). With full hand and proper field presence. Heck, on some I could even play 2 late game jutsus and still have cards in my hand left. And on the game that I didn't get 4th, I had Naruto with Rasengan, lots of low entrance ninjas and high amount of chakra.

Oh and that's without using any of the new set cards with multiple symbols which would probably make the deck even better.

Telling me you can't pull this off consistently is the biggest joke I've ever heard. Before you continue insisting on this I suggest you actually test it and see for yourself. Your opponent better have a negation or they simply lose. So yeah, if you really believe the game should focus around stopping this OP combo instead of going for a variety of deck strategies that are not reactive but pro-active, you are going to have it soon.

Might post the deck list in the appropriate section, although it's nothing original, but works great, even more than I expected while arguing with you without having tested it yet.

[Sai'ix Renkai]

Originally Posted by Tsu Kiyo Me

On the issue of the 4th Hokage + ANY JUTSU:
DEAL WITH IT.

Sir, you managed to present the most well thought out argument that I have seen on these forums.

It seems that once a card finally becomes a "problem", it becomes a group consensus that the ONLY way to deal with it is NOT to adjust your deck or strategy to combat it, but to beg for its ban so they don't HAVE to play against it. The 4th isn't ban or limit worthy. I come back from it 9/10 times. And I run decks that 90% of the people on here would call weak. Because I don't focus on competitive status. So if my deck, which doesn't run the "staples" of the game or individual elements, can beat this "OP" card, why can't the top decks? Oh wait, like Tsu said, most of the top decks DO beat it.

So....how is it a problem?

TL;DR
Tsu is right. DEAL WITH IT.