• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Community Reputation

156 Excellent

About FrankTrollman

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Shadowverse Information

  • Shadowverse User ID
  1. Pre-nerf Alice Blood mirror matches went to the first player more than 60% of the time. Against the rest of the field, Alice Blood had an overall positive winrate going second. The most popular deck that had a positive winrate against pre-nerf Alice Blood after winning the coinflip was Alice Rune - with a whopping 1.98% of the meta and 51.8% chance of victory if Alice Blood went second. The extent of complete dominance of Alice Blood is hard to even conceptualize. Most of the time when you thought you saw any kind of weakness at all it was just an artifact caused by the fact that when Alice Blood fought itself the only possible outcome was one deck winning and the other deck losing.
  2. Alice Sword has a negative winrate going second, but it's not a tire fire. In Masters there are better odds going second with Alice Sword (48.3%) than with Carabosse (46.5%) or Eachtar (46.3%). But of course, Alice Sword has lots of good plays on turn 4. Alice herself, but also Maisy or Feria. Even Lyrial can turn things right around. The other Sword decks don't have that. Face Sword and Ambush Sword don't fight for the board at all - they just go for the face every turn and try to race. These decks lose about 10 percent in winrate going second, because of course all they are doing is counting to 20 before their opponent kills them or stabilizes. Starting a turn behind on that plan is absolutely crippling. Sword decks with a lot of defensive plays don't lose much by going second. Control Sword's winrate falls by just 2.5%. Commander Sword's winrate doesn't change at all. And if these decks weren't rarely played and pretty awful, you probably wouldn't see such a big drop in winrate going second. But while Alice Sword is the best and most popular Sword deck, it's still only a quarter of the overall Swordosphere. All the other positive winrate Sword decks lose more than 10% of their winrate going second. Because they are completely uninteractive decks that just go for face.
  3. Forbidden Ritual has always been good against Midrange Shadow and Nephthys. Those decks are full of understatted followers with overpowered last words effects. And those decks can spend their shadows to do overpowered things (Nephthys spends Shadows on Death Brands, Midrange Shadow spends them on Eachtar's Zombie army). Forbidden Ritual kills both lives of an Attendant of the Night and removes both shadows and also takes out a Lurching Corpse without giving you a revenge kill or a shadow for that either. It's amazing. It's completely worthless against Alice though. You play Forbidden Ritual, Alice buffs the defense of all the Goblins. Now they are a bunch of 2/3s and don't even die when the Ritual goes off. And of course it's just always been bad against Vengeance Blood because the only cards it really kills are Blood Wolves. Yurius, Vengeance Devils, Spiderweb Imps, and Meme Dealers are just all naturally defense 3+. Forbidden Ritual is bad in this meta because it's only actually good against the second most played deck last week.
  4. Temple Defender saw some play when the aggressive threats were piles of 1/1 skeletons back in Tempest. Decks that ran Temple Defender had a positive winrate against the most played deck at the time. The problem is that Temple Defender isn't much different to a 2//3 Ward against Alice, and a 2/3 Ward isn't good enough. Turn 4 Alice makes Goblin a 2/3, Feria a 3/3, and Grimnir a 3/4. So you play the Temple Defender on turn 3, then your opponent Alices and Feria kills your Defender without even dying in the process. Going second you don't get a chance to kill anything until turn 4 if you just play on-curve followers. And on turn 4 you are facing 4 followers with a total attack of 11 and you have an empty board. Going secind, Heretical Inquiry is better than any 3-drop follower. At least it trades with something.
  5. Ginger Rune is a pretty cool archetype. If the game is to be busted, it should be busted by that.
  6. It's never Dragon's time. Dragon has zero positive winrate decks, which makes you wonder why more nerfs have been targeted at Dragon than any other craft over the last few months. Forest may have some positive winrate decks, but usage rates are so low and terminology so bad that they might not. I'm not sure Combo Forest is different from Tempo Forest, since those are classically two words to describe Roach. I'm absolutely positive that White Wolf Forest and Wolf Bolt Forest are the same deck. But in any case, even if you add all the things that are probably Wolfbolt together it's a lower sample size than Tyrant Combo or Seraph. Haven still has positive winrate Storm Haven, but only barely and the entire craft is sitting second worst in playrate and winrate, being worse in overall measures than everything but Forestcraft. Nerfing Snow White looks like a real bad idea because the decks that depended on her are all garbage now. We'll know more after this eekend when we see whether there is any answer to Alice Rune at all. But the bottom line is that the nerfs on Blood weren't harsh enough to make it stop being oppressively good, and the nerfs on Haven and Dragon were obviously unjustified. So Cygames gets a big fat F for the last round of nerfs. They took way too long to come and failed to hit a sweet spot on every count.
  7. If you redraw 0 cards, you have seen 3 cards and know none of them is Aegis. So you're asking the odds of two cards being in specific places in a 37 card deck. If you redraw 1 card, you're drawing from a 38 card deck because there's only 2 cards you know are not Aegis.
  8. I'm assuming that they were playing Take 2, where the deck is 30 cards. Games of constructed don't normally go to the last two cards in a haven deck. In any case, the general case is that your chance of having both copies of Aegis in your deck be the last card in your deck is: Chance of no muligans times 2 / (deck size - 3) / (deck size - 4) plus Chance of Redrawing 1 card times 2 / (deck size - 2) / (deck size - 3) plus Chance of Redrawing 2 cards times 2 / (deck size - 1) / (deck size - 2) plus Chance of Redrawing 3 cards times 2 / (deck size ) / (deck size - 1) 1/780 is the special case where you have a 40 card deck and you always redraw all 3 of your opening cards.
  9. That's not right. What you're asking for is the chance of both Aegis copies to be in two specific spots in the deck. Asking the odds of both copies being the last two draws is the same as asking the chances of them being the first two draws. There are 30 cards, the chance of one of the two Aegis copies being in the first slot is 2/30 (because either copy of Aegis will do). Once we're in the set of decks where one of the two copies is in the first slot we're looking at, the chance of the other copy being in the second slot we care about is 1/29 because there are now one less copy of Aegis and one less unknown slot. So the chances are 1/435 of both copies of Aegis being in any particular slot. But wait! Aegis is actually a special card because it costs 9 and most people would want to redraw it if they saw it in their opening hand. You have a 19.3% chance of drawing at least one Aegis (1/145 chance of drawing both), and if you redraw an Aegis you're asking what the odds of both copies of Aegis being in two specific slots of a 28 card deck (if you draw and then redraw both copies, you're asking the chance of them being in specific slots in a 29 card deck). The chances of both being at the bottom of a 28 card deck are 1 in 378. But the 80.7% of the time you don't have any Aegis in there, you are are then asking where Aegis is in a 27 card deck or 1/351. So it's actually about 1/356 or 0.28% assuming you mulligan away all copies of Aegis in your opening hand and keep the rest. Obviously if you mulligan more aggressively than that, the chances drop a bit. But even if you always mulligan every card in your opening hand, the chances are never worse than 1/435. But the take home is that for every 72 to 80 people who do a Take 2 run with Aegis, they'll have one game where Aegis is the last two cards. Of course, their chances of actually knowing that are very very slim, since few games go long enough to find out you're screwed in that particular way.
  10. No. This is just totally wrong. Imagine that D-Shift doesn't have their shift and Insight in the opening hand and has to pass turn 1. Then they play Freshman Lou on Turn 2 and don't have any spellboosts going into Turn 3. To go off, they need to play at least 2 spellboosts per turn on turns 3-7. Let's say they don't draw two copies of any cards they need to play before going off on Turn 8. T3: Summon Golem, Insight (Spellboosts: 2) T4: Golem Assault, Guardian Golem (Spellboosts: 4) T5: Levy, Evolve, Crimson Sorcery to face, Kaleidescopic Glow their own Levy (Spellboosts: 6) T6: Levy, Evolve, Crimson Sorcery to face, Sorcery Creche (Spellboosts: 8, 10 on D-shift) T7: Angellic Snipe to face, Fire Chain hitting nothing, Fate's Hand (Spellboosts: 11, 13 on one D-Shift) If you just let D-Shift play solitaire for 8 turns, they win the vast majority of the time. Your claim that this is a realistic plan aainst D-Shift is simply wrong.
  11. Lamp Dragon, Running Ramp Dragon, and Satan Dragon are all the same deck. If a deck plays ramp cards or expensive cards such that it was obviously hoping to draw ramp, then it's Ramp Dragon. If it does that and also plays Forte, it gets called Storm Ramp. If it does that and plays Prince of Darkness, it gets called Satan Dragon. In other words: Ramp Dragon decks get classified differently if they successfully play their ramp cards and their wincondition cards than if they just play one or the other. But obviously all the Ramp decks have both in the actual deck. There aren't Ramp decks that don't pack Forte because that would be dumb. Obviously a game where the Dragon player successfully ramped up to play Prince of Darkness or Genesis Dragon is one which they are more likely to win than one where the game ended before it got to that point. But it's not really a different deck, it's just a different tick box on Shadowlog. Now truth be told, there actually are a couple of really different ramp decks. There are ramp decks that are pretty controlling with a lot of removal and heavy hitters. And there are ramp decks that are more midrange with more aggressive storm followers. But Shadowlog does not and can not distinguish them. It presents three categories that are completely in overlap. This is a problem it has classifying Dragon decks which it has had for its entire run. This isn't the only similar problem that Shadowlog has. "Face Sword" and "Aggro Sword" are the same deck, and people randomly log the results in one pile or the other. And even Dragon has another one where "Face Dragon" is sometimes logged as "Storm Dragon." But by far the biggest issue is the inability to classify Ramp Dragon decks correctly. So what you actually do if you wanna see how Ramp Dragon is doing is you add up all the "Ramp + Win Condition Played" entries to the base Ramp Dragon entry and do your own division. Back in Tempest, that gave Ramp Dragon an overall winrate north of 52%, which is fine. Post-nerf WD, overall Ramp Dragon has had a negative winrate. Worse, there are actually no Dragon decks with a positive winrate. Literally the entire class is meme tier.
  12. Discard Dragon has a 27% winrate. Not against a particular bad matchup, just overall. And that's not an aberration or anything, 10 months ago it had a 22% winrate. Winning about one game in four is just what the deck is capable of. The free wins that you get because your opponent doesn't draw any playable cards for the first five turns or gets a phone call in the middle of the game and gets a disconnect loss are a noticeable share of the deck's total wins. It's only a slight exaggeration to say that the deck is so bad that it can't win on its own merits at all.
  13. There are actually plenty of discard effects. There are seriously 12 Dragoncraft cards that make you discard cards, plus you can use altered fate, angel crusher, and Queen of the dead sea if you really want to. If you for some reason thought this was a good idea you could have 38 of 40 cards in your deck make you discard one or more cards. And three of those discarding cards repeat every turn (Scholar, Pucewyrm, and Den). What there isn't enough of is payoffs for discarding. There's Kit, there's Trail, there's Dracomancer's Rites, there's Wildfang, and there's Noxious Dragon. And that's really weak sauce. For starters, a lot of those are anti-synergistic. It's hard to use Noxious Dragon and Kit at the same time because Noxious Dragon will kill your Kit on the very first activation. It only takes him two activations to kill Wildfang. And then there's the issue that many of the most impressive discard effects are things like Dragonslayer's Price which kills Kit, Wildfang, and Noxious Dragon! But mostly there just isn't enough in the way of cards that you can discard and have that not be a terrible value loss. You just can't consistently discard cards to things like Fist or Griffon Knight and have that not be terrible. You need cards like Luxfang Kit in hand or cards like Dracomancers Rites in play, and there simply are not enough of those to make it viable. If you think big and throw crap at the wall, you end up with a crap covered wall. Design is tedious and exacting, because you have to make sure that you make all the pieces to make a functioning engine. Otherwise you end up with decks like Commander Sword and Discard Dragon where some key portions of the deck just don't exist and the whole deck sucks and never stops sucking. Or you end up with stuff like Alice Spawn where players make unholy hybrids where they take the cool new Control Blood finisher and graft it onto the cool new aggro platform and make a deck that literally has no weaknesses and we get a one deck metagame for a solid month.
  14. Unica x 1 Feria x 1 Looking Glass x 1 Nightmare x 1 Boy Who Cried x 1 Tove x 1 Razory Claws x 1 Vampiric Kiss x 1 Hungering Horde x 1 Axe Fighter x 1 Angelic Knight x 1 Mini Soul Devil x 2 Frogbat x 1 Disagreeable Demon x 1 Sadistic Night x 1 Lethal Blade x 1 Humpty Dumpty x 1 BKB x 1 Crimson Purge x 2 Lucius x1 Feena x1 Soul Navigator x 1 Vlad x 1 Airjammer x 1 Scarlet x 1 Bandersnatch x 1 Emeralda x 1 Zeus x 1 So the wombo combo where you throw down Bandersnatch with enhance and then he procs Zeus the next turn came up twice. That was amazing and the games were not close after that. I also got to do the combo where I played Into the Looking Glass to make a post-airjammer board full of Blood followers count as Neutral and then play and evolve a Feria. That comes out of nowhere and the opponent conceded right after. But mostly it't just what we already knew: Blood is real good and they have so many good cards that you're just very likely to get some of them. Even stuff like Mini Soul Devil and Frogbat consistently punches above its weight.