Dazings No Upgrade Rainbow[Not a good deck]

[icybraker]

But statistics don't force you do do anything its the fear of losing that makes you use your "statistics" to make that fear go away, using personal experence you already know how you play, how muck luck you have and what YOU need to win.

Indulge me for a second here.

You see a coin that is heads on one side and tails on the other. You flip it. It goes to "heads".
Using "personal experience", you extrapolate that the coin must always come up to heads.

Obviously, you are wrong. Say you flip it 7 times and get 5 heads, 3 tails. Do you conclude that the next time you flip it seven times you will get 5 heads and 3 tails?

What I am trying to say is that personal experience will only get you so far. Experience has a limit. Statistics does not. Puppy and yala are presenting to us TESTED and TRUE deckbuilding elements that augment the ability of an FG rainbow to perform better overall. You're giving us opinions. In a battle between science and personal viewpoint, science wins.

[Lluis83]

Hourglass has to be 5+ at least on a 50+ card rainbow

Who says?

I prefer to have 4 horglasses in starting hand than no one. You can discard the ones you don't need and then in a few turns you have draw a lot of cards. And with only 3 hourglasses, against goods with permanent destruction, you are lost.

[marcoslayer]

Lol what i ment was that aparently ststistics says that you need 5+ HG's but it's only through person experence that you learn what your deck should look like to you. A rainbow deck is like art, it reflects the artist, if you take just from the statistics you won't get anywere.

I know that experence will only go so far, but in every FG rainbow deck there is a basis of cards that are a must, that was proven through your "statistics". There is probably no person who hasn't used the basics of FG decks.

If you read the previous post you would see that everyone has their own way of doing things.

[PuppyChow]

Lol what i ment was that aparently ststistics says that you need 5+ HG's but it's only through person experence that you learn what your deck should look like to you. A rainbow deck is like art, it reflects the artist, if you take just from the statistics you won't get anywere.

I know that experence will only go so far, but in every FG rainbow deck there is a basis of cards that are a must, that was proven through your "statistics". There is probably no person who hasn't used the basics of FG decks.

A rainbow deck is not an art. This game isn't an artsy game.

Deck building is math, not an art. Its foundation is statistics. The reason my rainbow deck is good isn't because it looks cool or is really artistic. It's because I slimmed it down to 34 cards to give better chances of a good draw according to statistics, and then developed a way to play cards fast with supernovas. (Okay, maybe I didn't develop that strategy >_>).

[Artois]

Awesomeness... sweet... but back on topic. 

3 HG's can work, however, regardlesss of statistics or a little pointless arguing, more than 3 HG's in a deck of 50 cards would be optimum, as Yaladilae says, for the simple reason that you have more chance of drawing an early HG if you have 5 in a 50 card deck than if you have only 3.

Further and to put it in simple terms, yes you can draw all 5 in your opening hand. Conversely with 3 its just as possible to draw 1 early, have it destroyed/stolen then wait another 40 cards before the next one appears... but if you had 2 more in your deck, you might draw another earlier!

Any newbies reading?  Listen to Yaladilae & Puppychow, you know they make sense.

[icybraker]

it's only through person experence that you learn what your deck should look like to you.

Is it really? I can just take a deck off of the forums or the wiki and it can work very, very well.

if you take just from the statistics you won't get anywere.

Simply not true. An advanced computer, using statistics and data, can easily make a better deck than an experienced player. Scaredgirl and her usage of Quantum Index, along with PuppyChow's future java program, have/will created/create better decks using statistics than experience.

in every FG rainbow deck there is a basis of cards that are a must, that was proven through your "statistics". There is probably no person who hasn't used the basics of FG decks.

Exactly. It was due to these statistics that have created the very core and best FG decks.

If you read the previous post you would see that everyone has their own way of doing things.

Read Puppy's most recent post. Of course there are personal preferences, but based on statistics, one can derive the BEST way to make a deck. Just because decks are individual doesn't mean that they're better. This is why you shouldn't give information based on experience unless you have enough of it to form reliable statistics.

[marcoslayer]

Is it really? I can just take a deck off of the forums or the wiki and it can work very, very well.

Those decks that are up there were made though experience. How do you know weather to take out a card or to put one back in? Not through "statistics" but by playing more and more with that deck and building on it making it better, yes the foundation of the deck was made through "statistics" but the improvement of it was not.

Simply not true. An advanced computer, using statistics and data, can easily make a better deck than an experienced player. Scaredgirl and her usage of Quantum Index, along with PuppyChow's future java program, have/will created/create better decks using statistics than experience.

Are you an advanced computer?, No, though so and they had to use experience to learn HOW to do those things and with thir own experience on life and other websites this forum wouldn't be the way it is today.

Exactly. It was due to these statistics that have created the very core and best FG decks.

Not disagreeing with you there.

Read Puppy's most recent post. Of course there are personal preferences, but based on statistics, one can derive the BEST way to make a deck. Just because decks are individual doesn't mean that they're better. This is why you shouldn't give information based on experience unless you have enough of it to form reliable statistics.

I've been reading every single post and i probably do have enough personal experience to form those statistics.

[PuppyChow]

Those decks that are up there were made though experience. How do you know weather to take out a card or to put one back in? Not through "statistics" but by playing more and more with that deck and building on it making it better, yes the foundation of the deck was made through "statistics" but the improvement of it was not.

No, I make changes to my decks based on statistics too.

IE The hourglass example. For a 50 card deck, I would decide on the best number of hourglasses based on statistics. With 6, it's 67 to draw one. With 5, 60%, and with 4, 51%. Which % you want is a personal preference, but for me I would go for 6 hourglasses.

[marcoslayer]

Even so ive managed to get a moderate score with some coins and upped cards and ive only used a premade deck once and that was the one i got from the beginning so i don't realy care what you say if you set out to chage my mind well, you failed, if not then oh well there was no point to this conversation.

[icybraker]

so i don't realy care what you say if you set out to chage my mind well, you failed, if not then oh well there was no point to this conversation.

Well, that's a perfect attitude, eh? Not only are you unwilling to learn, you are unwilling to accept the fact that science plays a larger role in this game than personal "experience". Well, if I had known this, I wouldn't have started this conversation in the first place. Good day.

[marcoslayer]

Oh i accept it i just don't realy care.

[Qohelet]

In game like elements math give right tools when you plan your deck. Still you can (if you want to) think that there isn't any reason for calculate things (you are lucky guy, so you don't need math at all). Having lot HG's is good thing - FG's destroy few and slow you down => for example: if you have only 3 in big deck time is your enemy nro 1. HG's are one reason why I like pharaoh deck (50 cards, 6 HG's) and with time towers (+eternity and pharaoh/scarabs) I can draw as much as I like/need.

16 quantum towers/pillars are max in any size of anti-fg deck, IMO. You really don't need more. Just think how you beat most FG's. List of control types / FG is very useful tool along math (you can find it from Butterfly Angel thread). BTW: Only two quantum towers in my pharaoh deck.