[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 379: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 379: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 379: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 379: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
MTG Commander/Elder Dragon Highlander • View topic - Theoretical Probability as Win Condition

Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2020-Jan-18 7:29 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-07 12:19 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
I'm missing something huge here. Banning a set of cards because they are used in a competitive deck (the kind of deck that the format is NOT catered to supporting) and because some people piloting the deck want to use those cards to try and argue that they should be allowed to cheat?

It seems that banning those cards will solve literally nothing. You have a bunch of people who aren't playing the format as intended by the founders or the banlist, and those people are literally trying to argue that the rules don't work the way they do so they can make their bullshit combo even more powerful than it already is. Players like them will suck the fun out of the game regardless of what the banlist looks like or what the format is.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-07 1:46 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
They will suck the fun out of the game in a random pod, sure. But for those of us who enjoy crazy, cutthroat games who play with like-minded players, those decks are fun as hell to pilot. Not saying that the non-deterministic randomizer combo is not an issue, but don't try to make it out that people enjoying playing the format the way they find to be fun are a cancer on the format.

I don't take Gitrog to the LGS. I take my Angus Mackenzie politics pile. I know the meta at my LGS and have decks to play there. My favorite part of playing at the LGS is busting out weird cards other players may not have seen before (current favorite: ). I am not there to combo kill the pod on turn 4. I'm there for fun, interactive and interesting games. But when my best friend is in town, it's on. Spike City. I know what decks to play where and what kind of fun I'm after in each context. Just because there are competitive players who are scumbags doesn't mean we all are. It's a social format and this competitive player has social skills. Don't lump me in with those who don't.

TL;DR: Competitive players are not the problem, anti-social douche canoes are. Stop playing with them.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-07 2:54 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-08 10:13 am 

Joined: 2014-Sep-13 7:28 am
Age: Elder Dragon


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-08 12:02 pm 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-09 10:29 am 

Joined: 2014-Sep-13 7:28 am
Age: Elder Dragon


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-09 3:35 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Again, I don't have a problem with cEDH players generally, nor even the combo/combo deck specifically. I do have a problem with people trying to shortcut something that is very obviously not a shortcut, and especially in the case of OP's original question where the person appeared to be literally arguing that infinite shuffles should just be treated as "let me stack the deck how I want".


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-10 7:23 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Jan-25 4:50 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
I remember the first time I was at my local store right after the Eldrazi were released and some guy was able to infinitely mill himself and tried to pull this trick until his eldrazi was one of the last 10 cards remaining in his deck. It left such a bad taste in my mouth because they basically forced me to tell them whether I had interaction or not. It's not a fair position to put players who are trying to run answers in their decks. If you say "yes," they know to try and play around it, if you say "no, but play it out anyway" then they complain to high heaven that it's basically guaranteed to happen...


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-11 7:33 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
The internet ate my long answer, so here's the short version:

What is the best use of your time at the LGS? Is it arguing theoretical probability with someone whose mind you probably will not change or would that time and energy be better spent switching pods, shuffling up and playing a new game?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-11 8:50 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Jul-18 9:59 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Switching pods is not always an option.

_________________
"Degenerate, unfun decks generally come from degenerate, unfun players in my experience." - Cthulus Thrall

"- if this spell is played ten times in a given game then I suggest you warm up the tar and pluck some chickens" - tarnar

The internet's great at making noise, and poor at operating pants. There's gonna be half-dressed mobs screeching half-assed arguments for the rest of the 21st century - Kemev


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-11 9:02 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Jan-25 4:50 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
When I sit down at a table of randoms at my local store there is an agreed sentiment that we are all playing a game of Magic. The best way to address it is for that player to ask the table before the game even starts if everone wants to play “Magic” or “Magic*”. I don’t want to be forced into an awkward situation midway through the game. Some people love playing “Magic” and others like “Magic*”, but everyone has to agree which one they are playing before the game starts.

It works the same for extra free mulligans or people who proxy, they always should inform/ask the table if it’s acceptable or not before they do anything. Couldn’t someone feel a bit offput when all the other players are using 100% real decks, but one guy wins off a proxied card. Meanwhile the whole table spent the time/money building 100% real decks only to lose to some player who proxied a card and is only telling you as it resolves.

For the record I have no problems playing “Magic*”, but there has to be consensus before the game about what that “*” means. If there isn’t consensus, then yeah find another group and avoid that bad taste in your mouth, no harm done(if possible).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-11 10:06 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Feb-19 6:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2017-Mar-11 6:43 am
Age: Dragon
So this thread started on the premise that it's arrogant(?) or foolish to use clear communication with a playgroup about doing something bonkers. Honestly, all that's needed is to ask said person to demonstrate through gameplay. I used to play , because it's about as fair as an extra turn card can get- and it pushes the game away from stalling tactics. At a certain point in the game, I would have to demonstrate my ability to cast a Beacon, find it, and force it through on my first extra turn. In this example, it would have been absolutely rude not to mention that I've taken 2 extra turns, with addition card filtration available to find and play the beacon once more.

Most of the argument here seems to be in a pretty similar vain. It isn't about kingmaking yourself before the game actually ends- if you can close to infinite, it's just polite to demonstrate it, and then tastefully show "all these", without the "Had all deez" attitude. Most people like shuffling up and getting another game in.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Mar-03 9:34 am 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I haven't got a lot to add to the overall discussion that wasn't covered on the first page.

What I do want to add is that "Approaches 100% probability" and "is guaranteed" are not the same thing. There will always be a non-zero chance that they miss.

Unless the person can also prove that time is infinite and that they will live long enough to complete the require infinite iterations, then they can't even get to the point of attempting the theoretical "approaches 100%".

If they can prove that time is infinite and they will live forever then please let us know what it's like playing against Einstein's mind downloaded into a futuristic cyborg.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Theoretical Probability as Win Condition
AgePosted: 2019-Mar-03 1:26 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Aug-20 7:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Hampshire

_________________
"The President's job - and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this - is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it." -- Douglas Adams, predicting the future.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: