Studying the game

[Jao]

Zailen Crusader, after being nerfed, hardly seems viable now. she can't stay on the board long enough to give the benefit of her ability. so you have to use her on the turn you are summoning an attachment. that means you can use her "safely" T5 at the earliest.

what made her so great pre-nerf was that she gave tempo and board advantage at T3. that's why almost all Human heroes were using Zailen pre-nerf.

now, idk. she seems like a throwaway to me.

Shattered Fates has also shafted Lance pretty heavily. Dark prophecies gave the cards that would shaft Lance, but Shattered fates brought the imprimatur that would make players use those cards.

[Airact]

I dunno.


Like, sure, 3cc 3/4 is better than 3cc 3/3 but that ability is pretty good.

Sure, you can't use it in every Human deck in the history of this game, like you would do with every 3cc 3/4 purely because of their stats, but I think there are decks that want to run the card.


Human side attachments are pretty shit tho. It's not the stats that might make this card bad, it's the fact that this card is a Human side ally.

I could play Amber with this card, or I could play decks that are fun to play without this card. Let's just say I didn't find the Dark Prophecies metagame that fun.

[jacqui]

/me cannot tell if airact is trolling or not

[Airact]

About 50/50.



At least I've figured out what the key part is now.

I have an extremely hard time separating variance and me playing bad. Like, I can play like 20 games and I pretty much gain no information, apart from the obvious stuff, about my gameplay or my deck.


It kinda came up when I was playing Poker a while back. Like, I would play a hand in one way, conclude it and have no idea whether or not I played it right at any point in the hand, or after it. Then I play a similar hand afterwards with the same thing repeating. I learned nothing from Hand 1 so I did the same thing in Hand 2 and after both I still have no idea whether or not I'm playing those kinds of situations right or not.


Applies to most games I play, in fact. Like, it's hard to know whether or not a decision was right or not when I don't know what the right decision is in a given situation.

[Gondorian]

About 50/50.



At least I've figured out what the key part is now.

I have an extremely hard time separating variance and me playing bad. Like, I can play like 20 games and I pretty much gain no information, apart from the obvious stuff, about my gameplay or my deck.


It kinda came up when I was playing Poker a while back. Like, I would play a hand in one way, conclude it and have no idea whether or not I played it right at any point in the hand, or after it. Then I play a similar hand afterwards with the same thing repeating. I learned nothing from Hand 1 so I did the same thing in Hand 2 and after both I still have no idea whether or not I'm playing those kinds of situations right or not.


Applies to most games I play, in fact. Like, it's hard to know whether or not a decision was right or not when I don't know what the right decision is in a given situation.

I think you are over thinking it. If it pays off, it was right for *that* situation. Will it be right next time in a new situation? Who knows. You get confidence in yourself by getting it right more often, since that implies you know what you are doing. This is why practice is key, for the confidence in how good or bad you really are. Without enough games you can't even try to objectively estimate your skill or judgment. It will be down to variance.

But does it matter anyway? Play each game as it comes. At worst, you are getting some practice. At best, you might enjoy yourself and win something.

[jacqui]

In games of probability, a decision is correct if it has the highest probability of giving your desired outcome. In games such as poker and SE, where opponent hands are not visible to you to make a 100% informed decision, you'll have to do some guesswork and think about things they could have. In poker, it is often coined "range of hands" which you narrow down as the hand continues with each street. The easiest but most fallacious thing to do is become outcome oriented in these types of games. This is when you think you made the correct play because the outcome came in your favour. A simple example being, holding 2/7os and calling a pre-flop all in, flop comes 777, you win the hand and think you made a great play.