Show Posts
Quote from: cssamerican
I am one of these people that believe when I sit across from a player of equal skill that is playing a good deck my odds of winning are 50%. Granted this is not always the case, some decks do have highly favorable or unfavorable match-ups, but on average I would say this is true. If it isn't then get ready for the DCI to come in and destroy your deck. So this brings me to my point. I notice some people are paranoid about losing their win conditions, so to ease you mind lets look at the worst possible scenario. (Note: This scenario will never happen)
You have only one win condition left in your deck and you only have twenty cards between your hand, library, and graveyard. You then cast a Diminishing Returns, now you have a 50% chance of winning or losing the game. That is about what you odds where before you ever set down and started playing the game. Granted this is a very simplistic way of looking at it, but your odds of losing the game doesn't even increase above which they were in the beginning game anyway. Moral of the story, you are going to lose many more games to bad match-ups, opponents going broken, and play mistakes than you will to win conditions being removed.
You have only one win condition left in your deck and you only have twenty cards between your hand, library, and graveyard. You then cast a Diminishing Returns, now you have a 50% chance of winning or losing the game. That is about what you odds where before you ever set down and started playing the game. Granted this is a very simplistic way of looking at it, but your odds of losing the game doesn't even increase above which they were in the beginning game anyway. Moral of the story, you are going to lose many more games to bad match-ups, opponents going broken, and play mistakes than you will to win conditions being removed.
There are really two things this post makes me want to say --
(1) That's a load of etc.! The fact is that, if you've gone through 40 cards from your deck and are casting a draw7, your odds of winning should NOT be 50%, they should 95%. The example is flawed, the analogy is flawed, and the whole idea is irrelevant.
(2) The last series of posts seems to be a group of people (myself included, sadly) arguiging with no one. There is no one here arguing that the potential to remove one's win conditions is a good reason not to play Diminishing Returns! My first post was a comparison of DR and Meditate which I tried to make as thorough as possible, including listing their drawbacks. I think it's pretty clear that Meditate carries the more severe drawback. So, given that, the question remains:
Is Meditate a useful card for Draw7?
One further note: while I compared Meditate to DR in my first post, it was not because I felt they should be a 1 for 1 replacement. I used DR simply because I felt it was the most similar card already in the deck. Assuming meditate is useful at all, the card(s) to cut for it must still be considered.
--oberon
