By wicked darkman on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - 04:43 am:| By wicked darkman on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - 04:43 am: |
If you look down the list of discussions in your forums, you rarely find anything usefull, its discussion after discussion about topics that really has no gaming impact, its just lowlife knowledge that we probably all know already.
The human knowledge on moleculare science is still incomplete, but serious scientists are constantly searching for new ways to twist materials and atoms as well.
It is a little known fact that the "universe" of magic actually consists of more components than our own universe (this is possible because it is a artificial universe), which means that magic in effect is even more complicated than our own universe, several times even...
And most people think we know what magic is about, but in reality, we dont even know how to play it, its too big to understand as an individual, we can research it more than we have researched reality and we will keep on finding new things...
The problem is that people think everything in magic has been discovered, that the only things remaining is to build decks and learn the newest combo, but with each new game-mechanic the game expands its own structure manifold, interacting directly or indirectly with every single existing game mechanic. Its like living in a universe where god changes the physics each day...
Do you really think we know it all in a system like that ??? then you are arrogant in the extreme.
--------------------------------------------------
What do I want from you ???.
I want you all to be more structured, I want you to think new ways, I want you to be scientists every one of you.
Each day you post in here think about what you add to the magic community, is it important? is it just boredom? is it research in any way?
There are five types of magic you can dig into if you want to be serious.
BUILDING:
How do you build decks?, and I dont mean the classic methods of finding the right cards and chosing the right decktype, no, I mean there are thousands of ways to build decks. Personally I build decks based on computergenerated manacurves, (sort of like pouring melted materials into a form and watching what kind of material comes out of it). play with handicap, each time you win a gauntlet against your testdecks, make one of your cards blank, then test again, when you start losing you will know your handicap limit, also, you know what cards your deck could exchange with new cards. think about it, thousands of deckbuilding methods have not been used ever, and out there the future deckbuilding method is just waiting to be discovered... (I use evolution and computation)
TESTING:
You know the goldfish??? kill your opponent in as few turns as possible, while you pretend that they are totally helpless. I once stated the theory that If your deck was tested against decks better than those existing it would win easily against normal decks, so I made a testdeck that could just about kill any deck in existance easilly, then the point was to see how long my testdeck survived. the longer the better. Use your imagination, i once saw a goldfish variant that could fight back with counterspells each time it rolled 1-2 on a 6-sided dice. somewhere out there the ultimate way to test a deck is also waiting to be found.
RESEARCHING:
This is my favorite area. There are a lot of phenomenons in magic (psychological, mathematical, combo-interaction). The point of researching is to create a GUT
Great Unified Theory) that all aspects of magic can fit into.
This is where the really important work is waiting. Discoveries of mechanics like mana-weaving, mana-curves, metagaming, mindgaming, color-curves, and yadda yadda is waiting. If wotch suddenly stopped printing more cards there would exist a mathematically "best deck" and it would be owned by those who had money enough to get it. This also covers mechanics in the cards and the discovery of new radical decktypes. If you work hard, you will be the next sleigh or weissman.
PLAYING:
You are probably thinking, "I know how to do that!", but in reality, noone really does. There is not a single person that knows how to play every magiccard ever printed or how to respond to an cardplay each time, I have meet more than 50 persons in my lifetime that could have killed me game after game if they had only been more agressive. They needed a rule of thumb on when to attack and recognize a weak defence. We need to create a huge "PLAYERS MANUAL" in which we can put all the right ways to play against anything.
This work will be shifty as hell, and will change again and again, but some parts of it will be GOLDEN RULES, that never changes, and If we learn those by hearth we become pro's...
MANIPULATING:
We need to take control of the future. The R&D of wotch is probably stressed to its limits. They are a monetary organisation, they know we will buy more if we get happy, so we have to agree as a consumer organisation on what makes us happy.
Some mechanics die if the consumers hate them, and if we love them enough they will have comebacks from time to time. We have to discuss what kind of game we want. Do we want powercards to lose their impact ? It would give a lot of new players a better chance to win, and everybody would have to buy the new cards, a few old powerplayers would stop playing, but a huge amount of powerless players would become more competetive, wotch would sell more, and winning would no longer be a matter of money but of mind?
Its things like these we can control if we start to work in unision. And for the record, I have 8 of the power ten, but I want it to go away, its not funny to win because you own some expensive cards...
--------------------------------------------------
This is when you start your own thinking. You all have talents, very different talents, and you should use as many of them as you can to improve the five areas of magic that can be developed...
Now as two brainteasers i will leave you with two tasks...
Chose what color each of these areas should have.
Look deep within your mind, look at CYCLOPEAN MUMMY and its mechanic. Tell me why I would like to see more cards like that, because i really want it. Its not a crappy mechanic, and its creator was a genius, but band waggon hatred has killed its popularity, wotch will not print hated mechanics, they dont sell. But if you really analyze this mechanic you will discover that it will sell. A hint, recycling-cards...
Yours,
Wicked darkman...
P.S.
Puschkin ??? Are you from BD a long time ago ???
If you are, long time no see...
| By Homelands Bookie (Psycho) on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - 07:28 am: |
I like ponies, and I wanna become a really good terrorist.
| By Puschkin (Puschkin) on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - 10:28 am: |
Yeah, I am! Wicked Darkman ... I thought i would never meet you again! Holy sh1t, Wicked Darkman!!!
Whats up? WHat happened to your experiment with the random deck mutations? I was very interested in that project but I guess you were unable to generate enough games, right?
About your article, how can you say that there are some sort of "golden rules"? Shouldn't you be the first one to admit that there just can't be something than the golden rule? The guys that could have killed you if they had been more aggressive could as well have lost if they played against someone else but in the same situation. You know, Magic is a game of incomplete knowledge of the game components, you don't know what you will draw next, you don't know the opponent's hand and you don't even know the opponent's deck content. So there really is no "right move".
I don't have time to comment on everything, but from what I read I can be sure that nobody is impersonating you, that was pure Wicked Darkman stuff 
Oh and the guy was called "Sligh", not "Sleigh" ;)
| By Lord Priest (Xdritex) on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - 01:15 pm: |
Wicked Man, twas a truly great posting. I like the way your thinking. I have to dissagree with you in a certain aspect though, sort of along the lines that Puschkin stated.
For me though, I think you have your sights set too narrowly. From what I got out of it, your focusing upon one on one duels. Guessing from Puschkin's recognition of you, and just from what you wrote, you obviously know that there is a lot to the game.
What you've left out is consideration for the various formats out there. Two on Two, Two Headed Giant, Chaos, Six v Six, etc. etc. upon all the various and many different ways to play the game.
I've once played a game with a total of 22 players; it was 12 teams of two, with everyone sitting in a very large circle (team mates obviously seated next to each other). All attacking went to the left, with the team mate sitting on the right deffending, and team mate on the left attacking. Spells had a range of two teams away from yours, except global spells (ex. Wrath of God).
I explained the format so much, because i wanted to give you a perspective on how different this game is, than most games you will ever play. The "golden rule" for one format, has no place in this format, yet another "golden rule" to another format, would be the ruling factor to which you should play by.
My point is, the game isn't about duels, it's about doing anything and everything, is which ever odd way you can come up with. I think you need to understand that as a whole for an approach to "researching" the game as you say, before you ever begin to touch even just a single aspect of the game with intensified "research" in how to play.
| By Dark Lord (Apprentice) on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - 01:54 pm: |
Good article but If I may I would like to dispute a few points.
Quote:It is a little known fact that the "universe" of magic actually consists of more components than our own universe (this is possible because it is a artificial universe), which means that magic in effect is even more complicated than our own universe, several times even...
Quote:Each day you post in here think about what you add to the magic community, is it important? is it just boredom? is it research in any way?
Its called playtesting against your metagame. The only sure-fire way to help your deck is to play against your opponent's decks, and even play with your opponent's decks.
Quote:somewhere out there the ultimate way to test a deck is also waiting to be found.
Quote:Discoveries of mechanics like mana-weaving, mana-curves, metagaming, mindgaming, color-curves, and yadda yadda is waiting.
Quote:We need to create a huge "PLAYERS MANUAL" in which we can put all the right ways to play against anything.
Quote:If wotch suddenly stopped printing more cards there would exist a mathematically "best deck" and it would be owned by those who had money enough to get it.
| By ApocalypsePrime (Jestergoblin) on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - 10:23 pm: |
Please stay. I love reading posts that aren't stupid.
| By Wicked darkman on Wednesday, April 19, 2006 - 12:13 am: |
PUSCHKIN:
I'll make another post about my evolution-project. Im still programming in basic (the c64 basic) using an emulator on the pc. I have a fulltime job, so I never have time to learn a higher programming language...
THE GOLDEN RULES:
This is statistically. If you were to make a deck using only mons's goblins and mountains there is a statistically perfect mix of these two cards. The same is true about more advanced mixes, but the simulation programs I run are very slow (25.000 games in each hour). There are a lot of other magic-phenomenae that has eternal value of knowledge (still statistically)
LORD PRIEST:
other game formats both enter the "PLAYING" and "RESEARCH" areas. You have to treat each of the five areas as really big areas, covering a huge lot of stuff related to that area...
Where I play multiplayer, its free for all, and you can bribe, beg, show cards, support, threat and a lot of other human "diplomacy skills".
When you declare attack you declare on how many players. (all attacks and blocks are simultanious) when priority is "yielded ???" players get priority clockwise...
-------------------------------------------------
DARK LORD:
You are a very thorough man.
I have not studied enough quantum theory (and already here, the word theory sets a certain tone) I do however treat it as a possible way on how things may be. I also stated that our analasys was incomplete, so we are all hanging on theories.
BUT: Im speaking about *this* particular univers, (not the multiverses) and in an einstein space-time way... (like from the "beginning" to the "end" the universe is a set product (meaning this universe could very well be a simple poster on a wall in gods home).
I do admit that all artificial worlds are actually just extensions of the real thing, but I cant help using big words .
PICKING ON YOUR COMMUNITY ???
Nah, not really, I use riffleshot tactics when posting, I have been pasting this post into a lot of forums on totally different magic-sites...
It increases my chances of spreading "the word"
I like to provoke and make people think at the same time... This post is also meant as an inspiration, its not just for pro's, but realistically it does sound so, doesnt it? Even the novelest players needs to change their way of thinking, from time to time. Non-Pro can spread into "Researching", "Building", "Testing" and "Manipulating", without problems...
PLAYTESTING AGAINST THE METAGAME:
Well this could get complicated, first of all, all your knowledge about the metagame is slowly being updated, so you have to be on the net and do a hell of a lot research, secondly, You need to play against a skilled opponent, and you have a lot of decks to test against, and how would you test against ROUGE decks unless you have omnipotency or psychic abilities. I talk about a general decktest that covers almost everything in the game, and would cover a lot of decks in one compact test, a test you can play against alone... It is not easy to make a test like that, but if noone tries, we will never get one. I think puschkin might even remember a test like this i made back in BD.
PSYCHOANALYZING THE GAME:
I care about researching every aspect of the game, because it makes me a better player. If you can get an edge somewhere I try to grab it and adapt, evolution never stands still, so I try to run the long neverending way of adaption.
And Yes a computer will probably not understand bluffing in our time, but a program can make it a very adaptive bluffer and its better at reading you statistically, as long as you have a personal playfile it can refer to. I should know because I have made a lot of AI simulations, and not the usual way people does, I THRIVE on chaos.
PLAY ERRORS ARE NATURAL:
This is true, but errors should be avoided. the best players makes less mistakes than the rest, and some people could memorize a compiled book on playing...
| By Homelands Bookie (Psycho) on Wednesday, April 19, 2006 - 08:18 am: |
I stopped playing Shandalar because it became too easy to figure out what the computer would do in certain situations. Winning became too easy.
Plus, I got a new computer and am currently unable to transfer the game from the old to the new one...
| By MORT (Ashtok) on Wednesday, April 19, 2006 - 03:40 pm: |
Shanadalar (well, the true name is just Magic: The Gathering), I love this game... old rules and this atmosphere...
I still think WotC should do another such a game.
| By Dark Lord (Apprentice) on Wednesday, April 19, 2006 - 07:09 pm: |
Ok, well you seem to have good intentions. My arguments were more on the nit-picking side, so go ahead and ignore most of what I said. I like how you think even if I dont necessarily agree on the semantics of things. Please stick around as Phyrexia could use a good deck-helper. Right now we are down to a few great players to help out all the newts.
I will read your Deckhelp thread soon.
-Apprentice
| By wicked darkman. on Wednesday, April 19, 2006 - 09:27 pm: |
DARK LORD:
Thank you, feel free to pick on me any day.
one thing that really drives me besides evolution is opposition. A deckhelp thread ???, I dont remember promissing that, but I could try to make one. I promise though that it would not be very ordinary...
MORT:
I agree with you, and they should add a part where the computer could play games against itself while you were playing, using evolution, so that you would constantly meet new decks, this would be good practice at metagaming. they should also include a card creation option where you could create your own cards based on already existing mechanics...
HOMELANDS BOOKIE:
You are right, its way to predictable, they didnt give the computer a way to bluff, its qute sad... But if you builded totally weird decks (like I have, or evolution had) It could actually outsmart you. The computer has a very specific thoughtpattern, it plays decks different than humans do, give it a deck totally designed to its playstyle and it will kick ass...
| By Homelands Bookie (Psycho) on Thursday, April 20, 2006 - 05:01 am: |
Please, call me Psycho.
| By MORT (Ashtok) on Thursday, April 20, 2006 - 09:24 am: |
I'm not sure if I'd like to see Create Your Own Card option, but I would like to see evolving decks definately.
And something like planeswalking, so you could visit other planes and gather spells from them.
Ulgothra with Homelands expansion,
Kamigawa with its expansion,
Ravnica, etc.
If you could visit Dominaria, expansions could change with time, so you would be able to play with cards from older and new ones gradually.
| By Dark Lord (Apprentice) on Thursday, April 20, 2006 - 01:45 pm: |
I thought your existing thread was in the Deckhelp Sphere, but its not, its n the General Discussion Sphere. Sorry.
-Apprentice
| By Wicked darkman on Thursday, April 20, 2006 - 03:41 pm: |
SO ???
Has anyone figured out why cyclopean mummy actually is a brilliant card ???
Its not a joke, and im not the designer of it
| By MORT (Ashtok) on Thursday, April 20, 2006 - 05:35 pm: |
Its better than Filthy Cur anyways
| By wicked darkman on Thursday, April 20, 2006 - 09:30 pm: |
MORT:
Yes, it has a nice pow/tough for its cost, considering it is black. But I was thinking about its ability, which is NOT a backside...
In the right deck it actually interacts in a very interresting way with DARK CONFIDANT...
| By wicked darkman on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 06:00 am: |
APOCALYPSEPRIME/JESTERGOBLIN:
Hmm, those words that so boosted my ego !!!
I have visited the fourth sphere today.
Are you by any chance related/attached to SQUEEMAN ???
| By Puschkin (Puschkin) on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 07:23 am: |
Squeeman is one of our local heroes, yes. Unfortunately, he is lost in the shuffle and nobody knows how to revive him.
| By Homelands Bookie (Psycho) on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 12:30 pm: |
I had a Demonic Tutor I could have used on Squeeman, but I tutored a Pony instead...
| By MORT (Ashtok) on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 02:48 pm: |
Ponyfil!!!
| By wicked darkman on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 04:50 am: |
Hey, that would be tutor torture...
Anyways I might just as well break down in sillyness and tell you the reason why I like CYCLOPEAN MUMMY...
It is a small earlygame threat that you dont want to see lategame. In decks with recycling like feldons cane, or timetwister it really rules...
Because if its removed from the game instead of in the graveyard then it will yield space in the deck to more mid- or late-game oriented cards...
Imagine if you could have a mix of bolts and cyclopean mummies, then when the game neared the end you could feldons cane and most cards you would draw would be bolts.
CYCLOPEAN MUMMY is a void-card, its non-existance in the graveyard could affect the way your deck is drawn, and that is a really powerfull concept.
Imagine MANALEAK with the same ability...
This is why I want people to rethink the image of CYCLOPEAN MUMMY. Remeber, if players find a mechanic to be popular and use it in their decks, then the R&D will look at the popular mechanics and recreate them, popular mechanics equals money, and R&D is a monetary department (they want happy players so they can keep their jobs)
Im not telling you to play CYCLOPEAN MUMMY (actually I am, but I wont force you), but you could spread the word about its original intent, untill mouth by mouth the concept would reach R&D, we have that power you know, Its all about one grup starting a focus, then other people will eventually band waggon...
| By MORT (Ashtok) on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 03:53 pm: |
Concept is interesting.
Heh, I never thought in this way.(I havn't thought about Feldon's Cane...)
| By Dark Lord (Apprentice) on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 07:13 pm: |
Well, that seems like a fun idea, but in the same way:
People dont play with pitchlands for the sole perpose of thinning out a deck. Well, some do actually, but statistically speaking, the effect of those lands not being in your deck is negligable. While the advantage is there, it hardly affects the game. I think this might be true with the Mummy too. Of course this would change if RnD printed more cards like it.
Were you serious about you being the one that designed the card?
-Apprentice
| By wicked darkman on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 07:49 pm: |
DARK LORD:
I stated that I was NOT the designer
And In one burn simulator I used FETCHLANDS. They have a really huge impact on your deck, believe me. Its worth the damage and gives you versatility like hell...
| By Dark Lord (Apprentice) on Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - 01:15 pm: |
Thats odd because I read an article that tested the effectiveness of sligh that used fetchlands and it revealed that the effect was negligable.
-Apprentice
| By wicked darkman on Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - 04:22 pm: |
APPRENTICE:
Did they use computerpower???
What was the sligh curve?
When I let my computer design manacurves the first time, I discovered that there are litterally thousands of manacurves almost equally efficient, the variety is so stunning that its no wonder people do not study them, the chances of discovering one by incidence is unbelieavable high, but most only find the lower manacurves, the most efficint ones are so weird that people would be considered insane when showing a deck made of one...
One of my oldest project was a burn simulator, and the comp always used 5-8 fetchlands, never below that, so I would really like to hit those article posters in the face...
| By Dark Lord (Apprentice) on Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - 05:16 pm: |
I think it was tested by hand with a standard sligh deck. Iirc, it was done on StarCity. Maybe search there, or TheManaDrain.
-Apprentice
| By wicked darkman on Tuesday, April 25, 2006 - 06:56 pm: |
APPRENTICE:
Never trust a post that is based on below 300 games. My manacurve generator use exactly that number, and it it a very simple program really, so analyzing the impact of a fetchland would need even more testing...
The reason is this...
If you insert a single fetchland in a deck you have a 7 in 60 chance to draw it at your starthand. Lets say you have 4 turns to kill or be killed then you draw 10 cards totally, thats 1/6 of your deck, so you would have to play 6 "test" games to actually draw it, and you would see the impact of the card ONCE...
Lets say you need to see the card in action 5 times to measure its impact, then you would need 50 games total for your analysis...
Go even further now, you test the deck with 1, 2, 3 ... 8 fetchlands in the deck. Now figure how many games those suc.... would have to play by hand... Now do you really think they tested fetchland proberly, or did they just cheat ???
Computersimulations will become a future ressource, and people will have to buy them just to compete, but this future lies maybe 3-8 years into the future. Imagine the cashflow simulations can bring into companies!!! Someone will do it... Its just a matter of time...
| By Dark Lord (Apprentice) on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 01:20 pm: |
Maybe they were flowed results. I dont know. All I know is that logically it seems unlikely that you will notice any difference when using fetchlands. Even if there is a effect and you get to draw a few cards that aren't lands, will if be worth the life you paid?
-Apprentice
| By wicked darkman on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 04:19 am: |
Okay, If you want to know the impact of it try this...
Have a friend build a deck with 52 cards instead of 60, your friend starts with 8 life less.
none of you may play the power nine...
What it does is that it focuses the deck, and focus can mean a ..cking lot of difference, and you will know that difference if you try to play against your friend like this, just make sure he/she is an average deckbuilder !!!