Win Time Study - Pro Stats for Pro Grinders.

[jmdt]

We've got a good first salvo of decks up.  I will try post the mono life epi rush and mono light pegasus rush tomorrow. may do a few more if I have time.

[TheoCT]

I'm looking at the stats and it seems to me that there are only 2 real main stats that people need to actually look at to see which deck is best. The score/min and electrum/min. By the looks of it(so far I mean) Essence's EM darkness reigns supreme; Score/Min: 19.573, Elec/Min: 21.280. Have to say, I'm surprised that the V2 fire rush and antlion/shrieker rush didn't beat out an EM darnkess deck.

Great test jmdt and hrrrm and everybody else thats helping. Wish I could help but I'm just way too busy right now. Keep up the good work!

[wavedash]

Perhaps the EMs really make a difference when it comes to farming. I'd be interested in seeing how Life EM and the Healbow decks turn out.

[jmdt]

Have to say, I'm surprised that the V2 fire rush and antlion/shrieker rush didn't beat out an EM darnkess deck.

I was surpriesed too I knew the mono life speed EM would win this, but I had no idea the mono dark would out earn V2 fire rush and shriekers.

Once I post the healbow and mono life EM, the stats will move further in the direction of EM deck owning grinding.  I remember when I started, people used to say EM decks weren't worth it.  I think I have officially proven them wrong.

[TheoCT]

I remember when I started, people used to say EM decks weren't worth it.  I think I have officially proven them wrong.

I remember hearing that at the beginning and have always thought that myself, but as you said I think you've proved that theory dead wrong.

[Amilir]

Given that the spins you ditched in the name of statistics are a significant portion of non-EM deck earnings, no, you have not proved that wrong yet.  I will happily bet that 50% more spins will more than make up for the 10% advantage the EM deck has.

[Scaredgirl]

Nice. This gives much more relevant data than the turns to win study, and it's interesting to see the results.

And to everyone who is saying that number of clicks doesn't matter that much, keep in mind that the click delay was removed just before this study was launched. If we still had click delay, the results would be very different.

Given that the spins you ditched in the name of statistics are a significant portion of non-EM deck earnings, no, you have not proved that wrong yet.  I will happily bet that 50% more spins will more than make up for the 10% advantage the EM deck has.

Yep. Spins are why non-EM decks own EM decks. I agree with Amilir, extra spins generate more revenue than EM bonus. But this is of course just based on my own experiences, not on any real statistics.


Anyways, keep up the good work.

[Kuross]

The reason spins are being left out of my testing, and I think out of all testing, is that it gives a clearer picture of the decks being tested themselves. Since the variables in the spins can not be truly approximated, any results of spins, and the electrum/cards won, could throw off the core deck statistics. However, one must agree that if an advantage were to be gained by spininng with decks like frogtal or mindles dragons, that don't have ways to get EMs, it is then logical that those same benefits and advantages would also be gained by decks designed to win fast EMs, like mono-darkness and Life rush. Thus, so far in testing, one must agree that EMs are essential to gaining high electrum/score per game/minute.

[Scaredgirl]

The reason spins are being left out of my testing, and I think out of all testing, is that it gives a clearer picture of the decks being tested themselves. Since the variables in the spins can not be truly approximated, any results of spins, and the electrum/cards won, could throw off the core deck statistics.

We know the probability of winning a card in a spin. We know the value of cards in AI3 decks. We can easily calculate the average revenue generated by spins.

However, one must agree that if an advantage were to be gained by spininng with decks like frogtal or mindles dragons, that don't have ways to get EMs, it is then logical that those same benefits and advantages would also be gained by decks designed to win fast EMs, like mono-darkness and Life rush. Thus, so far in testing, one must agree that EMs are essential to gaining high electrum/score per game/minute.

I find that to be highly illogical actually. There are no real "fast EM" decks. EM decks are always slower because they have healing cards. It's impossible to have both very fast and EM.

The only question here is, do extra spins generate more revenue than EM bonus?

My guess is "yes".

[jmdt]

There are no real "fast EM" decks. EM decks are always slower because they have healing cards. It's impossible to have both very fast and EM.

The mono dark had a 9.3 ttw and 50% EM rate.  I have 2 more EM decks to test that are quite a bit faster than than the mono dark I posted; 7.2 ttw with a 60% EM rate and 6.4 ttw with a 70% EM rate.  I consider ~7 ttw and under to be 'fast' for an upped deck, so I would say these are both pretty fast EM decks.

I was saving the 'good' EM decks for last.  There stat gains will be signifigantly higher.

[wavedash]

We know the probability of winning a card in a spin. We know the value of cards in AI3 decks. We can easily calculate the average revenue generated by spins.

Well, this seems like a good way to prove your argument, SG.

[jmdt]

We know the probability of winning a card in a spin. We know the value of cards in AI3 decks. We can easily calculate the average revenue generated by spins.

Well, this seems like a good way to prove your argument, SG.

Yeah, I'd be interested to in these statistics.

Honestly the only way to do this right is to do 3-5 hour runs with and without spins with a fast EM deck and with the fastest deck, say V2 fire rush and compare notes.  That is an entirely different study though.