Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All

Author Topic: Need Help Developing a Ranking System  (Read 21081 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Bowi

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
  • Respect: +55
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #50 on: September 23, 2017, 12:00:41 pm »
+4

I also disagree that their is no META game in Dominion. Most Effective Tactic Available does show up in this game.

What?  That's not what "meta" means.  "Meta" is not an acronym.  "Meta-" means that there is something above, outside of.  Think about "metaphysical".  In a competitive game's meta, it's not about "most effective tactic available", it's about knowing what everyone else is playing.  So in Hearthstone I might include a card that destroys Pirates because a lot of people are running decks with Pirates.  That's what meta means - it's any gameplay decisions that aren't based on the specific match you're playing, but the overall, overarching competitive scene.  "Metagame" literally means "the game outside the game".

And that just doesn't exist for Dominion, not in the same sense as for CCG's, because you're given a random set of cards to play with.  You might make decisions like "They'll probably get Witch, so maybe I should get a Moat", but that's not nearly on the same level as "I'll probably play a bunch of people running a Pirate deck today, so I should include this card that destroys Pirates, even though it doesn't really fit the theme of my deck".

In competitive games, META is indeed an acronym that means "Most Effective Tactic Available".

Well, that just tells me competitive gamers are stupid and need to take more humanities classes.

I've played many different competitive games (and browsed forums for said games) for about a decade and I have NEVER seen that acronym.
Logged

filovirus

  • Coppersmith
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
  • Respect: +36
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #51 on: September 23, 2017, 12:11:14 pm »
0

I also disagree that their is no META game in Dominion. Most Effective Tactic Available does show up in this game.

What?  That's not what "meta" means.  "Meta" is not an acronym.  "Meta-" means that there is something above, outside of.  Think about "metaphysical".  In a competitive game's meta, it's not about "most effective tactic available", it's about knowing what everyone else is playing.  So in Hearthstone I might include a card that destroys Pirates because a lot of people are running decks with Pirates.  That's what meta means - it's any gameplay decisions that aren't based on the specific match you're playing, but the overall, overarching competitive scene.  "Metagame" literally means "the game outside the game".

And that just doesn't exist for Dominion, not in the same sense as for CCG's, because you're given a random set of cards to play with.  You might make decisions like "They'll probably get Witch, so maybe I should get a Moat", but that's not nearly on the same level as "I'll probably play a bunch of people running a Pirate deck today, so I should include this card that destroys Pirates, even though it doesn't really fit the theme of my deck".

In competitive games, META is indeed an acronym that means "Most Effective Tactic Available".

Well, that just tells me competitive gamers are stupid and need to take more humanities classes.

I've played many different competitive games (and browsed forums for said games) for about a decade and I have NEVER seen that acronym.

A quick google search can clear up any confusion. Just one example of many: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20747845699
Logged

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1971
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #52 on: September 23, 2017, 12:17:23 pm »
+3

I think the overarching issue is: Does relying on any sort of tier system to make in-game decisions actually make you a better player? I don't think I've made a single in-game decision by comparing cards' Qvist rankings. I make all my decisions based on intuition and experience, and I think all the top players do as well.

I think somebody actually pointed out on the Qvist ranking thread that the rankings are mostly just made for fun. There's just so much information that a ranking can't tell you: How many copies of a card to buy, at what stage of the game to buy a card, how your opponent's strategy affects things, niche cases that make a weak card good, etc. Looking at a list and seeing that a card you were ignoring is actually really good might be helpful to a beginner, but I'm not sure it's actually THAT helpful. A player could buy Governor solely because of its high ranking and still lose because they don't know how to play a Governor deck. It's not enough to know a card is good; you have to know WHY it's good.
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1795
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #53 on: September 23, 2017, 12:36:41 pm »
+1

I also disagree that their is no META game in Dominion. Most Effective Tactic Available does show up in this game.

What?  That's not what "meta" means.  "Meta" is not an acronym.  "Meta-" means that there is something above, outside of.  Think about "metaphysical".

Literally, meta means beyond, or after.
Funnily, metaphysics doesn't mean "beyond the physical world". Aristotle's works on the argument were generally placed right after the book on physics, and were thus aptly named "the book that comes after physics".
Aristotle himself called metaphysics "the first philosophy".

And that was all for today's lesson in history of philosophy.
See you in a couple of months.
Logged

filovirus

  • Coppersmith
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
  • Respect: +36
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #54 on: September 23, 2017, 12:52:33 pm »
0

I think the overarching issue is: Does relying on any sort of tier system to make in-game decisions actually make you a better player? I don't think I've made a single in-game decision by comparing cards' Qvist rankings. I make all my decisions based on intuition and experience, and I think all the top players do as well.

I think somebody actually pointed out on the Qvist ranking thread that the rankings are mostly just made for fun. There's just so much information that a ranking can't tell you: How many copies of a card to buy, at what stage of the game to buy a card, how your opponent's strategy affects things, niche cases that make a weak card good, etc. Looking at a list and seeing that a card you were ignoring is actually really good might be helpful to a beginner, but I'm not sure it's actually THAT helpful. A player could buy Governor solely because of its high ranking and still lose because they don't know how to play a Governor deck. It's not enough to know a card is good; you have to know WHY it's good.

Yes, I agree completely. I however, don't know all the ins and outs of card interaction, nor even their over all power. I think it could actually help someone like me. Yeah, I'll eventually outgrow it's usefulness, but I'm not at that point yet.

It would also be a good way to see where different types of cards rate in the overall META. Are gainers mostly rated as B's? Are attacks mostly rated as A's. What about sifters? Are they mostly rated as C? Are alternate treasures all over the board for ratings, or are they mostly A's? It would be a good way to be able to compile a bunch of data quickly.
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1795
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #55 on: September 23, 2017, 01:04:18 pm »
+4

More on topic, I've suggested a rating system before, based on "how heavily does this card influence the kingdom?"
The hypothetical potential usefulness would be to help new players read kingdoms and know what cards to look for in a glance, to start analyzing a kingdom. Something that experienced players do thoughtlessly.

Then I pretty much gave up on the idea. It would be kinda fun, but I came to realize that at this point dominion doesn't need more consensus-based power estimating tools. Dominion needs hard, councilroom-like data.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2017, 01:06:11 pm by Accatitippi »
Logged

chipperMDW

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
  • Respect: +813
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #56 on: September 23, 2017, 01:56:06 pm »
+6


I've played many different competitive games (and browsed forums for said games) for about a decade and I have NEVER seen that acronym.

A quick google search can clear up any confusion. Just one example of many: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20747845699

I'm pretty sure that's just a backronym. Meta did not originally "stand for" anything; that phrase you found is just some cute false etymology somebody came up with that was vaguely reminiscent of what the term already meant. Sorta like how people retrofitted Acme to stand for "American Company Making Everything," or Perl to stand for "Practical Extraction and Report Language." Those words don't really stand for those things, but they're humorously appropriate, so people have tongue-in-cheek pretended that they did, and as time passed, other people have gotten confused and mistakenly believe that's how the terms originally came about.

In fact, a quick Google search on "Most Effective Tactic Available" tends to give me people parroting that phrase followed by other people correcting them:

https://forums.warframe.com/topic/635199-i-give-up-what-does-meta-mean/
Quote
Not that the joke is inaccurate, but this is called a "backronym". The word "meta" is older than the funny acronym "Most Effective Tactic Available"

https://forum-en.guildwars2.com/forum/game/gw2/Meta-does-not-mean-Most-Effective/page/2
Quote
Except that’s not where the term came from. It is not an acronym at all.

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/d3/topic/20757697689
Quote
Actually, it entirely had to do with the prefix until randoms decided to make it something other than what it was. It's never been an acronym.

https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/63w3zk/fyi_meta_is_not_an_acronym_for_most_effective/
Quote
FYI: Meta is NOT an acronym for 'most effective tactic available'. I don't know why people started saying it, but please stop.

https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/128933/what-do-meta-and-op-mean
Quote
No. Meta is not an acronym. Most Effective Tactics Available is a backronym. It's origin is from the Greek word.

Your definition shows up in Urban Dictionary somewhere in 2015. So, wherever it comes from, it must be pretty recent.

Logged

FemurLemur

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 163
  • Shuffle iT Username: FemurLemur
  • Respect: +196
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #57 on: September 23, 2017, 02:00:04 pm »
0

I think the overarching issue is: Does relying on any sort of tier system to make in-game decisions actually make you a better player? I don't think I've made a single in-game decision by comparing cards' Qvist rankings. I make all my decisions based on intuition and experience, and I think all the top players do as well.

I think somebody actually pointed out on the Qvist ranking thread that the rankings are mostly just made for fun. There's just so much information that a ranking can't tell you: How many copies of a card to buy, at what stage of the game to buy a card, how your opponent's strategy affects things, niche cases that make a weak card good, etc. Looking at a list and seeing that a card you were ignoring is actually really good might be helpful to a beginner, but I'm not sure it's actually THAT helpful. A player could buy Governor solely because of its high ranking and still lose because they don't know how to play a Governor deck. It's not enough to know a card is good; you have to know WHY it's good.

Yes, I agree completely. I however, don't know all the ins and outs of card interaction, nor even their over all power. I think it could actually help someone like me. Yeah, I'll eventually outgrow it's usefulness, but I'm not at that point yet.

It would also be a good way to see where different types of cards rate in the overall META. Are gainers mostly rated as B's? Are attacks mostly rated as A's. What about sifters? Are they mostly rated as C? Are alternate treasures all over the board for ratings, or are they mostly A's? It would be a good way to be able to compile a bunch of data quickly.
(Emphasis added)

Other, better players can feel free to chime in, but in general, all types of cards are all over the board. There are powerful and weak attacks, villages, sifters, alternate treasures, trash for benefit, throne rooms, remodelers, gainers, pseudo-attackers, durations, reactions, etc. Part of what has given Dominion so much longevity is that Donald X has done a great job at throwing wrenches in any rules of thumb. Each new expansion not only adds new mechanics, it adds some cards which incentivize certain behaviors that would previously be losing strategies, or deincentivizes the common winning strategies.

To get to intermediate level play, rather than trying to worry about which cards tend to be the best most often, I feel that your best bet is to learn what mechanics each card plays nicely with. Knowing what to look for to see if you can make your Tunnels trigger, or to make your Gardens work, or to build that Poor House strategy, is going to be far more beneficial (and a more efficient use of your time) than learning/compiling a tier list so you can buy the card that has the highest tier. In each game, you have to be able to look at each card and try to find all of its supporters and counters. Once you've done that for all 10 Kingdom cards, you'll end up seeing a handful of approaches you could take. It's then your job to try and figure out which of those will work best. And when you're new to the game, you're going to make the wrong choice a lot. That's just how we learn.

I love analysis, and I love that you want to analyze the cards, but I think that the vast majority of Dominion cards are in a huge middle tier- one which is highly situational as to whether the card is good or bad. It's just not the type of game that lends itself well to this specific type of analysis. I think that's what some here are trying to explain to you.

If you're mostly just looking for a beginner overview of what cards are generally very good and which ones aren't, you really are best off following the Qvist rankings. I don't see what you have to gain by trying to reinvent the wheel there. And that's not to say that we couldn't use a different type of ranking. But it sounds to me like the thing you're aiming for has already been done well enough. When you're in 100% doubt on what to do, feel free to pick the highest rated card on the Qvist rankings, try it out, and if you lose, then you've learned a lesson in one of the thousands of exceptions that Dominion has to offer.

That's just the best way to learn right now. Read articles, try to find cards that play nicely together in the Kingdom (just based off of their language), play a lot of games, and pay attention to the advice of people like Mic Qsenoch (currently the 2nd highest on the Dominion Online Leaderboards), who handed you his personal list of rankings for Base Set on a silver platter based on his years of experience. No need to split hairs over whether or not he gave too many cards the S rank. If he tells you that Chapel, Throne Room, Sentry, Witch, and Artisan are all top-tier, I would take his word for it ;)
Logged

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1971
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #58 on: September 23, 2017, 02:49:55 pm »
0

Other, better players can feel free to chime in, but in general, all types of cards are all over the board. There are powerful and weak attacks, villages, sifters, alternate treasures, trash for benefit, throne rooms, remodelers, gainers, pseudo-attackers, durations, reactions, etc.

In general, yes, all types can be weak or strong. Looking at the Qvist rankings I do think some patterns emerge though. Junking and handsize attacks tend to be strong, while trashing attacks tend to be weak. Cards that can trash 2+ cards in a single turn tend to be very strong, while cards that force you to gain a card when you trash are usually pretty weak. In general the cards on the weak side tend to be ones that rearrange your deck and don't do much else (Pearl Diver, Duchess, Chancellor, Navigator, Scout, Harvest) or ones that either are treasures or involve treasures in some way (Beggar, Masterpiece, Bureaucrat, Pirate Ship, Cache, Stash, Harem, Adventurer, Philosopher's Stone, Diadem, Bag of Gold.) There are, of course, a ton of exceptions to the above observations, and knowing these patterns probably won't actually help you be a better player, for the reasons I already mentioned.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12848
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #59 on: September 23, 2017, 03:08:09 pm »
0

There are powerful and weak attacks, villages, sifters, alternate treasures, trash for benefit, throne rooms, remodelers, gainers, pseudo-attackers, durations, reactions, etc.

There are no weak villages, no weak thrones and no weak trashers. Well, maybe Trader is just a B but certainly everything else in those 3 categories is at least an A simply by virtue of being a splitter or a trasher.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

FemurLemur

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 163
  • Shuffle iT Username: FemurLemur
  • Respect: +196
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #60 on: September 23, 2017, 03:38:19 pm »
0

There are powerful and weak attacks, villages, sifters, alternate treasures, trash for benefit, throne rooms, remodelers, gainers, pseudo-attackers, durations, reactions, etc.

There are no weak villages, no weak thrones and no weak trashers. Well, maybe Trader is just a B but certainly everything else in those 3 categories is at least an A simply by virtue of being a splitter or a trasher.

You don't feel that in general Loan or Moneylender are weak? Also, Remodelers are a subset of Trashers, so do you also think that there are no weak Remodelers (Mine comes to mind), or were you just talking about non-Remodeling Trashers?

Also, I'd disagree with there being no weak Villages, but could concede that there may be no weak Throne Rooms (but would still say that they vary more than OP is expecting)
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9625
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #61 on: September 23, 2017, 04:12:18 pm »
+3

There are powerful and weak attacks, villages, sifters, alternate treasures, trash for benefit, throne rooms, remodelers, gainers, pseudo-attackers, durations, reactions, etc.

There are no weak villages, no weak thrones and no weak trashers. Well, maybe Trader is just a B but certainly everything else in those 3 categories is at least an A simply by virtue of being a splitter or a trasher.

You don't feel that in general Loan or Moneylender are weak?

Loan?  Yes.  Moneylender?  That is a solid opener on most boards.  Great for spiking, and Copper is evil.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Bowi

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
  • Respect: +55
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #62 on: September 23, 2017, 04:16:28 pm »
+3

Logged

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1971
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #63 on: September 23, 2017, 04:33:57 pm »
+1

Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #64 on: September 23, 2017, 06:29:54 pm »
+6

I also disagree that their is no META game in Dominion. Most Effective Tactic Available does show up in this game.

What?  That's not what "meta" means.  "Meta" is not an acronym.  "Meta-" means that there is something above, outside of.  Think about "metaphysical".  In a competitive game's meta, it's not about "most effective tactic available", it's about knowing what everyone else is playing.  So in Hearthstone I might include a card that destroys Pirates because a lot of people are running decks with Pirates.  That's what meta means - it's any gameplay decisions that aren't based on the specific match you're playing, but the overall, overarching competitive scene.  "Metagame" literally means "the game outside the game".

And that just doesn't exist for Dominion, not in the same sense as for CCG's, because you're given a random set of cards to play with.  You might make decisions like "They'll probably get Witch, so maybe I should get a Moat", but that's not nearly on the same level as "I'll probably play a bunch of people running a Pirate deck today, so I should include this card that destroys Pirates, even though it doesn't really fit the theme of my deck".

In competitive games, META is indeed an acronym that means "Most Effective Tactic Available".
You can't fool me. In the world of board/card games, "meta" is short for metagame, a term for making decisions based on information from outside the game (e.g. from other games, or about a player's personality). For MtG in particular it refers to picking a deck based on what decks you expect other people to play.

There's an online version, but it's not a video game, and anyone saying "meta" in a Dominion context is not using the term as you are.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #65 on: September 23, 2017, 06:44:34 pm »
+3

I love analysis, and I love that you want to analyze the cards, but I think that the vast majority of Dominion cards are in a huge middle tier- one which is highly situational as to whether the card is good or bad. It's just not the type of game that lends itself well to this specific type of analysis. I think that's what some here are trying to explain to you.
The intention was to have the power level curve be completely flat; the cards will naturally be distorted based on the set of cards available, and that was supposed to be what dictated everything. You get the best chance for something interesting if by default the cards are all in contention.

That isn't how things turned out for a bunch of reasons:
- It's not really possible; you can only fine-tune so close.
- I made a bunch of mistakes, especially early on.
- I made some categorical mistakes, which new cards somewhat cling to, so that e.g. a new trasher doesn't automatically go untouched if an old trasher is out.
- Shifts in power level based on what other cards are out favor some kinds of cards more than others.

You can obviously still get entertainment and conceivably information from ranking cards, as people have done endlessly, especially Qvist's project.

You can also rank cards in non-power-level ways. For example you could look for what cards are especially broad (go in lots of decks), what cards are especially narrow (don't go in many). You can look for what cards you tend to want just one of when you want it, and what cards you tend to want lots of.
Logged

Gazbag

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 735
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +1003
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #66 on: September 23, 2017, 07:00:14 pm »
+1

There are no weak villages

Shanty Town.

no weak trashers

Trade Route.

Have you ever decided to not go for an engine because Shanty Town is out instead of regular old Village? If a card adds a unique effect to the board you'll still go for it if the payoff is there so sure these two may be weaker relative to other villages and trashers (debatable in Shanty Town's case I think) but it doesn't matter because the base effect of +2 actions or trashing is so good. I think this is the point Awaclus was making.
Logged

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1971
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #67 on: September 23, 2017, 09:06:29 pm »
+1

There are no weak villages

Shanty Town.

no weak trashers

Trade Route.

Have you ever decided to not go for an engine because Shanty Town is out instead of regular old Village? If a card adds a unique effect to the board you'll still go for it if the payoff is there so sure these two may be weaker relative to other villages and trashers (debatable in Shanty Town's case I think) but it doesn't matter because the base effect of +2 actions or trashing is so good. I think this is the point Awaclus was making.

When it comes to Shanty Town, I agree that it opens up new strategies simply because of its +2 actions. It's unreliable enough, though, that other strategies might be better.

Trade Route is so bad that it's often not worth it even if it's the only trasher. Especially if you have a very limited terminal space, it'll just get in the way a lot of the time.
Logged

filovirus

  • Coppersmith
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
  • Respect: +36
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #68 on: September 24, 2017, 12:16:20 am »
+1

OK, based on feedback from the majority, the community does not want me to create a rating poll, so I won't. It been called a "terrible idea", already done, to "reality-defying".

I was really hoping to offer a different perspective from a rating system. One where a new-comer, like myself, could glean some information. But I guess the Qvist ranking system is sufficient for the majority.

I'll probably hang out in the background for the next little bit, and focus on bot games to get a better feel for the Dominion cards.

Who knows, I may even participate in the next Qvist ranking if I feel I can actually rank the cards comparatively.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #69 on: September 24, 2017, 02:02:59 am »
+2

OK, based on feedback from the majority, the community does not want me to create a rating poll, so I won't.
The system works!

I was really hoping to offer a different perspective from a rating system. One where a new-comer, like myself, could glean some information. But I guess the Qvist ranking system is sufficient for the majority.
What is there that you want to know, that you can't see from Qvist's thing?

I mean, put it like that - "here's what I want to know" - and who knows, maybe someone will know and tell you.

It's just, "what you want to know" can't be "which 3-7% of the cards do you buy 95% of the time," or any other question that presupposes a made-up statistic.
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #70 on: September 24, 2017, 02:12:21 am »
+1

There are powerful and weak attacks, villages, sifters, alternate treasures, trash for benefit, throne rooms, remodelers, gainers, pseudo-attackers, durations, reactions, etc.

There are no weak villages, no weak thrones and no weak trashers. Well, maybe Trader is just a B but certainly everything else in those 3 categories is at least an A simply by virtue of being a splitter or a trasher.

You don't feel that in general Loan or Moneylender are weak?

Loan?  Yes.  Moneylender?  That is a solid opener on most boards.  Great for spiking, and Copper is evil.

Yeah, don't disrespect Moneylender. It's enough to get the classic Festival/Library engine going in a Base set only game. It works nicely with a trasher that can get rid of Estates, but is likely still a key card in games where it is the only trasher.

Loan...
Loan

Here we go
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #71 on: September 24, 2017, 03:45:17 am »
0

As you can see, according my criteria for each tier, you have far too many "S" cards.
This is reality-defying. It could be that half the cards were "S" cards; the power-level curve can look like anything. You can't simultaneously say "these are cards you want 95% of the time" and "it's 3-7% of the cards." Combined they are data you don't have, that you are trying to find even.

Huh? I could want Chapel 95% of the time. But if Masquerade were in the kingdom, I may choose it instead of Chapel, making up the 5% that I don't want Chapel in my deck. That doesn't take away, nor even interact with the 3-7% that are "S" cards. It just means that even for an "S" card, there may be a better option, which is probably taken by another "S" card. Plus, 95% was just an arbitrary number; something to get discussion going. It could be even higher. 98%? 99%?

By the way, I love the game.
Thanks.

If you graph how powerful cards are - let's say a bar graph, each card gets a bar, height is power level - the graph can look like anything. There are no requirements on the reality of the cards. It could be that they were all equally powerful. It could be that half sucked and half rocked. And so on. It could be that they were all equally powerful and weak, so that you slowly clawed your way to victory; it could be that they were all equally powerful and strong, so that the first player always won when they played their first card.

When you are trying to determine what this graph looks like - that is to say, rating the cards - you don't know ahead of time what this graph looks like. It is the thing you are trying to determine. You don't know if 3-7% of the cards will be goes-in-95%-of-decks. That's something you find out by analyzing the cards. It could be that 0% of the cards go in 95% of the decks - they're all narrow. It could be that 50% of the cards go in 95% of the decks - lots of cards are broad and interchangeable.

You can say, "let's divide up the cards by power level, so that we have four bins, for the best, next best, next best, worst." That's fine; then 25% are indeed in the top 25%, assuming we can sufficiently distinguish the cards. But that's not what you said.


This is much less funny without the bacon comparison.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6357
  • Respect: +25672
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #72 on: September 24, 2017, 03:53:13 am »
0

This is much less funny without the bacon comparison.
Where's 2.71828..... when you need him.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12848
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #73 on: September 24, 2017, 04:46:28 am »
+1

You don't feel that in general Loan or Moneylender are weak?

Loan and Moneylender are both extremely strong cards. IIRC I rated them both 9/10 in Adam's rating, although I'm not sure if Moneylender was a 9 or an 8.

There are no weak villages

Shanty Town.

no weak trashers

Trade Route.

Both of those are strong cards. They are on the weaker end of splitters and trashers, respectively, but that's like being one of the dumbest guys at a Mensa meeting.

Trade Route is so bad that it's often not worth it even if it's the only trasher. Especially if you have a very limited terminal space, it'll just get in the way a lot of the time.

This is just wrong. If you're going for an engine, you buy any trashing that's available. Trade Route can get rid of your Estates, it gives you a +buy and it can act as mediocre payload in the very late game. That's already a lot better than Trader.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2017, 04:54:16 am by Awaclus »
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1795
    • View Profile
Re: Need Help Developing a Ranking System
« Reply #74 on: September 24, 2017, 08:24:47 am »
+1

You don't feel that in general Loan or Moneylender are weak?

Loan and Moneylender are both extremely strong cards. IIRC I rated them both 9/10 in Adam's rating, although I'm not sure if Moneylender was a 9 or an 8.

There are no weak villages

Shanty Town.

no weak trashers

Trade Route.

Both of those are strong cards. They are on the weaker end of splitters and trashers, respectively, but that's like being one of the dumbest guys at a Mensa meeting.

Mmh. Note that the consensus doesn't seem to support this. On Qvist 2016 Shanty Town and Trade Route were respectively ranked 31st and 41st out of the 46 3-cost cards (plus 3 dropouts).
That puts them respectively in the 33rd and 11th percentile. Hardly Mensa material. (to get into Mensa, you must be in the top 2%)

So I guess this means that again, if you, Awaclus, were to rate cards, you'd give more S ratings than those Mensa gives to people. But I personally wouldn't rate these two S, in my own scala.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All
 

Page created in 0.139 seconds with 21 queries.