The importance of card advantage - Banebow tech

[Jovai]

They do not need to be the same cost... I mean rather, there can still be a point spread. So long as there are multiples with the same resource cost. Ie something that is, 2 + isn't net trap. I wouldn't mind seeing card drawing mechanics, card discard mechanics, etc introduced this way. I don't see why it need to be exclusive to hunters either. Since SE is it's own game I think some very interesting control type mechanics could be introduced this way without going the "Counterspell", "Pacifism", "CoP", "Duress", route of MtG.

Man, this game is really going to come into it's own over time.

[Fry]

The problem is that, while you may be drawing a lot of cards, they aren't very GOOD cards. It will take you a great many turns to actually kill someone with this deck, and if you are feeding them tons of cards with Bazaars and Bad Santas, they are not going to have any trouble dropping a resource every turn, and eventually the superior quality of their 4+ cost cards is going to make the "card advantage" you've gained meaningless.

Zaladar rush decks are conceptually similar to this one, but they are actually able to close out the game in short order with 8 one-drops, Shard of Power, and Bloodlust.

[Doublea]

I like the idea. Are you into hunters blanket effect? Cause you know there's a guild for that.

[Kadun]

Just a few comments, the first being, as stated previously your use of the term "meta" here is incorrect.

Second, you do not add your graveyard count to your total when determining card advantage. If you have zero cards in your hand, 10 in your 'yard, and zero on the board compared to me with one on the board and one in my hand, I have card advantage.

Something that Fry also alluded to, allies inherently provide card advantage. A Belladonna swinging every turn at your opponent is like a Fireball every turn. A Blake that is killing Fire Snakes and Sparks is trading zero for one card every turn.

Your card advantage principles are good, but the execution of them could be better.

Here's a must read for every CCG player by the grandfather of card advantage himself, Brian Weissman:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/magazin...ily/feature/60

On a side note: Holy crap the "Black Summer" of Necropotence was 15 years ago. I'm old.

[Jovai]

That is a fantastic article, I just wish sometimes that this game had some of the crazier card interactions. . .

I guess that's neither here nor there, as this is SE, not MtG. The theory still applies, only it's much, much simpler here.

[BlanketEffect]

Just a few comments, the first being, as stated previously your use of the term "meta" here is incorrect.

Second, you do not add your graveyard count to your total when determining card advantage. If you have zero cards in your hand, 10 in your 'yard, and zero on the board compared to me with one on the board and one in my hand, I have card advantage.

Something that Fry also alluded to, allies inherently provide card advantage. A Belladonna swinging every turn at your opponent is like a Fireball every turn. A Blake that is killing Fire Snakes and Sparks is trading zero for one card every turn.

Your card advantage principles are good, but the execution of them could be better.

Here's a must read for every CCG player by the grandfather of card advantage himself, Brian Weissman:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/magazin...ily/feature/60

On a side note: Holy crap the "Black Summer" of Necropotence was 15 years ago. I'm old.

On the misusage of "meta"- my mistake. Thank you for the clarification. I've been misusing the term for nearly twenty years now lol!

On graveyard count - it certainly should be in the count, and these are cards that have been used, and therefore drawn. The comparison I was outlining is to measure which player has drawn (and in this case, used) more cards. just because my cards are in the grave and yours are in hand doesn't have anything with card advantage, other than immediately and situationally. Presumably, if you have five cards in hand, and I have 7 in my grave, I've used those 7 cards against you, to some effect. Perhaps the count method I described doesn't give a measure of "card advantage" per se, but it does certainly measure who is drawing more cards, and therefore who has access to more options up to that point in the game.

As for the hunter cards being weaker than their counterpart's, all I can say is that I rarely have issue controlling the board against human allies, even the stronger ones. The only time Eladwen outruns me in terms of board control is if either I just have subpar draws, or if my opp gets above average draws. I'd rather play a snake, a brutalis, and a gargoyle w my six resources than one aeon. Aeon can be neutralized w any number of single cards and/or a subsequent attack against him. Less situations/cards lend themselves to killing 3 allies, weaker though they may be. Frankly, when it comes to the hunter selection of cards, I think they're nearly as good as a mage's; they just need to be played differently to achieve the same level of effect/control.

Oh, and a sidenote about Net Trap - When you have a Portal down and cast a creature who gets netted, he can still attack on that round, just not the next. I cannot count how many times this situation has occurred and the opp just ends their turn without ever attacking.

(edit)
Finally, Black Summer - the first tournament I ever won came about in 1996 playing a Necro deck. I won a Mox Sapphire for that. Ah, good times.

[Fry]

On graveyard count - it certainly should be in the count, and these are cards that have been used, and therefore drawn. The comparison I was outlining is to measure which player has drawn (and in this case, used) more cards. just because my cards are in the grave and yours are in hand doesn't have anything with card advantage, other than immediately and situationally. Presumably, if you have five cards in hand, and I have 7 in my grave, I've used those 7 cards against you, to some effect. Perhaps the count method I described doesn't give a measure of "card advantage" per se, but it does certainly measure who is drawing more cards, and therefore who has access to more options up to that point in the game.

Example: for whatever reason, you have no cards in your discard pile, and the only card in your hand is Surprise Attack. I have one ally in play. How much card advantage does Surprise Attack give you? Answer: none. Not +1 card, not +2 cards. (+3 cards is right out.)

Furthermore, if that's all you do on your turn, that also means my ally gets to attack your hero. This gets into "Philosophy of Fire" stuff, but it can be considered about +1 card for every 3 or 4 damage I deal to your hero, so you're actually falling behind.

[Kadun]

Sure, if you want a simple count of cards drawn, count the 'yard, but you can't simply count cards drawn as a measure of card advantage.

If you drew 10 more cards than me, and I destroyed them at a zero for ten trade (as in my example), you have no net gain in card advantage.

If you leave out your count of cards in the graveyard, you'll get a more accurate measure of card advantage gained/lost.

[Fry]

Heck, for that matter, say you have 20 cards in your discard pile, and then play Eternal Renewal. That's not -20 card advantage, it's only -1 card advantage.

Theoretical card that says 1: Do nothing. By your logic this is neutral on card advantage.

[BlanketEffect]

Example: for whatever reason, you have no cards in your discard pile, and the only card in your hand is Surprise Attack. I have two allies in play. How much card advantage does Surprise Attack give you? Answer: +1 card. Not +2 cards. (+3 cards is right out.)

Furthermore, if that's all you do on your turn, that means my two allies get to attack your hero. This gets into "Philosophy of Fire" stuff, but it can be considered about +1 card for every 3 or 4 damage I deal to your hero, so you're actually falling behind.

I agree with the Surprise Attack statement. I didn't say it gives me a card advantage of 2. It gives me a 2:1 card advantage. In that, I spent 1 to get two, for a net gain of one.

As far as the cost of waiting vs the damage done by enemy allies, I don't even really pay attention to damage I've take until I'm below 15 life or so - unless the board is very much not in my favor and it behooves me to otherwise monitor my life. For the first half of my life, my goal is to establish long-term control of the board. I don't care if you hit me for 15 points of damage over the first 5 turns if, by turn 6, I have established a good control of the board via traps, cards in hand, and hero ability/shadow points. After I've done that, barring any great draws you may get that are above the normal expected blend of cards, I am free to run over your board.

Incidentally, that is a techinque that playing Necro during Black Summer taught me. It doesn't matter how low your life gets, as long as you've established great card advantage and control over your opponent. Unless I'm within instant burnkill range, I'm not too concerned with giving up my life points to win the game later.