The Metagame: a multi-purpose community project

[silux]

Fire now is less powerful.Fire bolts now can't do more than 24 damage.
Unupped phoenix-immo is nerfed and explosion is less splashable.
The only thing i don't feel right is shard of gratitude.Life has already bonds and heal.Shard of gratitude was powerful because was splashed in stalls.

[The_Mormegil]

We've still to see the true impact of 1.29. Also, 1.30 is probably going to be pretty soon, too.

[Pineapple]

Meh, I though I'd post in here, even if it may be off-topic by now.

Defining the meta-game
How I define the meta-game would be what "pros" (the omniscient deck-builder that knows all about cards, decks, etc.) consider as "viable" decks in the environment (unrestricted unupgraded PvP aka PvP1, War rules, Rules of the tournament last week, etc). In this way, the meta-game is, as mentioned in the quote by OldTrees, a collection of competitive decks. In a way, each deck in the meta-game must beat able to beat another deck in the meta-game. In this way, how "viable" a deck is comes from how many other "viable" decks it can beat. So, if Deck A wants to "viable", it has to be able to consistently beat Deck B, which was already proven to be "viable." How was Deck B proven to be "viable"? Because it can beat Deck C, and so on. Soon, you have this large tree, with everything starting at the root. So, what's at the root?

The first thing to consider: Rushes
I think the first deck that is considered should be a rush. But not just rushes in general, the first thing to consider is the fastest deck that can possibly be made. Why? Because you cannot build a rush (deck with no control) slower than the fastest rush, or you will lose. Those decks are not "viable", so the only decks left are those with control, ranging from a smidgen to a ton. But what is the control used for, if not to defeat a rush? As you can see, everything starts at the fastest rush.

The rush
So, the rush is usually a collection of 30 gears designed solely for being the engine that plows ahead to victory. As you know, each deck must consist of quanta sources (immolations, novas) and damage sources, whether direct or indirect. The rush is always composed of direct damage sources, solely because those are the best damage sources for speed. That means high attack, low cost creatures, HP being something to ignore. While the rush may be composed of 16 quanta sources (e.g. 4 novas, 6 immos, 6 photons) and 14 damage sources (all the non-photon creatures and an arsenic), any deck that hopes to beat the rush must add a foreign element: control sources.

Countering the rush
However, these decks are also limited to 30 cards, since it is impossible to keep the rush from dealing a total of 100 damage within 23 turns. (Or is it? Introducing: deck-out decks! But that's later.) So, while this deck may have 14 quanta sources (pillars) and 16 damage sources (direct, in mummies and dragons, and indirect, in poisons), it won't be able to defeat the rush unless it has control. So take out a few of the damage sources and add enough control sources to make up for the difference in speed, while keeping the quanta balanced. This may mean increasing the quanta sources (by two pillars), decreasing the damage sources (by 6 poisons), and increasing the direct damage (since the rush only uses direct damage) control sources (by 4 skull shields). What's this, the deck became slower (only 24 out of 30 gears are designed solely for being the engine that plows ahead to victory)? Although it became slower it is more "viable." As you can see, speed really only matters when determining what is the rush and what needs more control.

The control has you
A deck that wins by slowing down the enemy's direct damage while outracing them using their own direct damage can only be beaten by devoting more of your deck to control direct damage. This is one of the main branches of the tree, with each new deck trying to one-up the other. However, the 30-card decks that focus solely on control will later be shown to be less viable, because they're still using direct damage sources to win, which means that they have less direct damage sources that need to be countered.

After I wake up, I'll explain how...
As more and more decks focus more and more and control sources, the average speed of decks becomes slower and slower. Soon, deck-outs become easier and easier, they become more and more "viable."
Also, indirect damage sources, because you're basically turning most of the counter-rush's deck into dead cards.
Also, denial, because slow start-ups mean that you may be able to start-up your denial before you die.

[OldTrees]

+53 rep patchx94

Another thing I would suggest adding to your post would be sections discussing Evasion/Counterdefense (Aka: Momentum[Indirect damage which you mentioned], Quint, Deflag that Shield, etc.) where a deck can sacrifice speed of offense to be able to be slowed down less by Control.

[RootRanger]

This looks great so far, patch, and I hope you continue it.
There's just one thing I don't fully agree with.

Because you cannot build a rush (deck with no control) slower than the fastest rush, or you will lose. Those decks are not "viable"

A deck based purely on damage can be viable even if it is slower than another deck based purely on damage. For example, Grabbix and Offensive Flying Titans are both purely rush decks with no control. Grabbix usually loses to Pandebonium, but Flying Titans usually beats Pandebonium.

[Pineapple]

Actually, does anyone else want to finish it? I know I haven't done much, scratching only on Rushes and Domins, but I think someone with more PvP experience would be able to write it more accurately, since I'm basically taking note of the steps I take when building decks for an event. Also, I'm lazy.

This looks great so far, patch, and I hope you continue it.
There's just one thing I don't fully agree with.

Because you cannot build a rush (deck with no control) slower than the fastest rush, or you will lose. Those decks are not "viable"

A deck based purely on damage can be viable even if it is slower than another deck based purely on damage. For example, Grabbix and Offensive Flying Titans are both purely rush decks with no control. Grabbix usually loses to Pandebonium, but Flying Titans usually beats Pandebonium.

Yeah, although I had always thought that it starts with rushes, I really have no valid reasoning for why it starts with rushes ^^;

The way I'm trying to twist it to fit my reasoning is that Grabbix is fast because it uses direct damage sources, while the Titans in the Flying Titan deck shouldn't be considered direct because they're not the fastest (measured by how fast you kill the opponent, measured by card advantage and cost-to-damage ratio). Usually, these types of damage sources have some sort of gimmick, in this case momentum (making it an indirect damage source that isn't affected by direct damage counters such as Bonewall) and resilience (high HP that again makes it less affected by direct damage counters such as damage CC). Therefore, since the Flying Titan rush doesn't use direct damage sources, it's a viable deck in that it counters domins.

So counter-domins are some clumsy name I made up for decks that currently fit under rush, domin, and stall. Actually all stalls are counter-domins, right? Is a deck with quints considered a rush? You don't use quints to counter an opposing rush (unless you count fractix as a rush and you're Dogg), but it's getting late so I think I'll stop thinking hard now.

[OldTrees]

Your point of view and writing style is a useful combination to form a bridge between Theoretical and Practical metagame discussion. (and I would not be able to write whole paragraphs for each of those sections)

You are right to start with discussing Fragile Rush decks because they have only 1 of the 3 general types of strategic tools (Offense, Defense, Counterdefense/Evasion). Resilient Rush decks enter the meta by using Counterdefense or Evasion to remain faster that a Rush/Control hybrid.

Offense < Defense < Counterdefense/Evasion < Offense

[The_Mormegil]

Very good work, patch! I'd love it if you continued it, but if you don't want to, I'll try to complete it myself - with proper help.

I agree on the notion of Flying Titans focusing on alternate damage rather than being a pure rush: it's main selling point is catapulting the titans behind every enemy's defensive tool...

[Dwerg]

Pretty strong in the CL meta now are TADAbows

by Dwerg

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u5 6u5 6u5 74f 74f 74f 8pj

Add 2~3 PC cards of your choice, fill the rest with cheap attackers maybe a shield, an hourglass and some CC and you have a winner.
Death decks such as the aforementioned poison dial do stand a good chance against it but it's not a definitive counter.
It is a speedbow to some extent but the main strength of this kind of deck is not only the speed in it, but mainly the denial+healing provided by bh;discord.
As a rainbow it's as versatile as it gets, can be modded depending on what you're expecting to face(purify for poison stalls, additional CC for immorushes, etc) and still will stand a good chance against anything else.

[furballdn]

Pretty strong in the CL meta now are TADAbows

by furballdn

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u5 6u5 6u5 74f 74f 74f 8pj

Add 2~3 PC cards of your choice, fill the rest with cheap attackers maybe a shield, an hourglass and some CC and you have a winner.
Death decks such as the aforementioned poison dial do stand a good chance against it but it's not a definitive counter.
It is a speedbow to some extent but the main strength of this kind of deck is not only the speed in it, but mainly the denial+healing provided by bh;discord.
As a rainbow it's as versatile as it gets, can be modded depending on what you're expecting to face(purify for poison stalls, additional CC for immorushes, etc) and still will stand a good chance against anything else.

Why do I have a feeling sanctuary will soon be in the metagame as well?

[OldTrees]

The below is highly condensed and refers to terms discussed more in depth in this thread: Which elements are "Complete"? (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,30640.msg416531#msg416531) If anyone is able to explain the below better, please do so.

The metagame as predicted by theory
The metagame is the decks used in PvP. Different PvP formats will have their own metagame. Rational competitive players in the metagame will change the decks they use when another deck has a better chance of winning in the metagame. Eventually this settles into something resembling a very complex version of rock paper scissors (like RPS 25 played with 20 people simultaneously).

In EtG the first deck to complete its win condition receives all of the victory regardless of the progress of the other deck. As such the EtG metagame revolves around win condition speed and manipulation of win condition speed.

Non Interactive decks
The simplest deck design is the deck that ignores the opponent completely in its pursuit of its win condition. Two non interactive decks duel by racing each other to see which deck will complete its win condition first. Obviously the deck(s) with the fastest average win condition will be the strongest deck(s) in a Non Interactive metagame. As such these decks only contain win conditions (Offensive Tools) and cards that speed up those win conditions (Accelerating Tools). Accelerating Tools do not contribute to a win condition in the absence of Offensive tools. Thus while additional Accelerating Tools will speed up the maximum potential of the deck, they will also reduce its consistency. Various ratios of Offensive/Accelerating Tools may have equivalent average win condition speeds.

Interaction
To win a deck must be faster than the opposing deck. Notice being fast is not required only faster than the opposing deck. Non interacting decks do this by fine tuning their win conditions to be as fast as possible. Interacting decks have cards that are not just Offensive or Accelerating Tools. Each of these additional cards replaces a purely Offensive or Accelerating Tool. Thus interactive decks are sacrificing some speed. Each interactive card needs to have some benefit that compensates for the speed lost. Obviously interaction is a multidimensional continuum based on the added cards of each interaction type. One way some interactive cards compensate the user for the sacrificed speed is by slowing the opposing deck down more (Defensive Tools). Defensive Tools might be targeting Offensive Tools, Accelerating Tools or both. Between two interactive decks, the deck that succeeds in being slowed down the least (including sacrificed speed) relative to the opposing deck will win. This is where the second compensation (Evasion/Counterdefensive Tools) for sacrificed speed emerges. Evasion/Counterdefensive Tools cause the opposing decks's Defensive Tools to not slow down their (The Evasion/Counterdefense Tool's) deck as much.

Results
In the end you will see decks with varying concentrations of Offensive, Accelerating, Defensive and Evasive/Counterdefensive Tools forming a very complex RPS metagame.

Notes: Cards are not limited to one tool type. Many cards have varying concentrations of Offensive, Accelerating, Defensive and Evasive/Counterdefensive potential.

[silux]

There are cards which aren't Rps like.
'Heal' gives 20 hp and  the player, who knows who is going to battle, will choose if this card is worthy or not.
In RPS any thing you play has the same chance of winning, while heal is a bad choice almost always if you are going to battle fake gods.

Then experienced players wouldn't make pure Papers or Rocks, because their deck will surely lose against one kind of deck.
In arena and tournaments is way better to have few chances to beat all that a sure chance to beat few.
This way rps element is countered in arena and tournaments, by the gameplay itself.

However this kind of deckbuilding will come out often with superdecks, which can even beat Rocks and Papers.
When this happens, some of the key cards of that deck get nerfed, and begins the search of another superdeck.

The thing that I dislike about this cycle is that nerfing those keycards will choke other potential decks.
I'd prefer much more the  superdeck to be countered by having more counter cards or counter strategies, because the deck became so powerful not because of the cards but because there where few or no counters.