Let's talk about how people screw up.

Kysuke posted a thread this week that started a minor firestorm of argument over when it was best to complete Falling to Corruption. He was incensed that people were doing this at the end of turn step when they could simply hold onto it and draw their card for turn, giving them an opportunity to use that second resource before it went bye-bye. Eventually, the argument was settled best, I think, by BLyons when he said “Falling to Corruption should optimally be the second thing you do on your own turn.” Of course, this is assuming that the first thing you did cost at least one resource, but that is a very fair assumption.

Note the specificity: the second thing. Sometimes, the “second thing” will be the “last thing,” and those are the cases where it is correct to wait until your opponent's end step to activate Falling to Corruption. What I found interesting wasn't the myriad of arguments, some logical and some misguided. What I found interesting was the specificity of this play. Because the vast majority of the time, that exact play will be correct. If activating Falling is correct, then the activation should nearly always be second, with few exceptions.

How many things are that solid in our play? Not many, I'd wager, but that's what makes it so difficult for some people to correctly manage their plays. This particular argument centered on the relevance of “free information.” If you simply wait a few more seconds to draw your card, you might find a better use for those resources on the top of the deck. That's the basic premise of the theory. It's an accurate one: just today I saw someone play a Jeleane Nightbreeze and then complete A Donation of Silk, exhausting all four of their resources.

In what world is that correct? If you are going to explore your options, do so before you commit to a play. If you plan to play a dude and Purloin, Purloin first to make sure you are playing the right dude. If you're going to play Parvink and Jeleane this turn, play Parvink first. Maybe you draw a better use for those two resources! If it's turn four and you want to play Parvink, do so before you play a resource. Sure, there are random exceptions, especially when interrupt effects are involved. Just watch out for such botches.

Now compare with a new card: Orders from Lady Vashj. Many, many players will play out everything they have on their turn, then activate Orders before they draw. That play is correct often enough, but it looks, for our purposes of abstract examination, exactly like a Falling to Corruption prior to your draw. Sure, you lose the two resources permanently on Falling, and blah blah blah. But no one even seems to criticize that usage of Vashj, as far as I know. Isn't that an interesting comparison?

So few things in our play are concrete, but the best players have certain things on lock. I like to refer to the nuances of gaming as operations. These are the tiny things that should generally be somewhat rote in execution. Here's a scenario:

Earlier this week I played the Serpent Form mirror. In one game, I decided to keep a hand with three copies of Cyclone that had a diminished aggressive potential. I controlled his Form but had to race the attackers carefully, employing a very measured counting process. On the turn where he went for that win I used the third Cyclone to turn the tables and narrowly outrace his allies. He was incensed of course, and gave a scathing “Nice rip, lucksack.” I responded, “Yeah, it was a good draw.”

What motivation could I have to tell the truth? I could care less as to whether this guy thinks I play well or not; my goal is to beat him. It serves my interest to feed him disinformation and make him believe I entered a race that I wasn't going to win. Not only wrong info, but the sort of stuff that can occasionally put players into fits of anger, like “I can't believe you ripped that third copy!” Angry players think less clearly, and this guy asked every few turns “Got a Cyclone?” I knew I had gotten under his skin a little. The effect intensifies at events where prize is on the line. In a single-elim TCG cash tournament some years ago I won my way into Top 4 on the back of just such a manipulation.

Another example:

On turn 1, you play and complete Dr. Boom, revealing One Draenei's Junk.... Yeah, probably a bad hand. Anyway, you draw another One Draenei's Junk... on your turn, and play it. Misplay! And it's one nearly everyone makes on occasion.

So many players don't shuffle their hand after they draw that card, and you've just given away information by playing it immediately. To top it off, maybe your opponent is particularly astute and noticed that the Junk you revealed was printed off-center, and the one you played is not. The most common blip I see in this vein is due to EAs. I will never play a deck with EAs unless I can use an EA for every copy of the card in my deck. There is absolutely no reason for me to give up a random edge to my opponent just because I slipped. These slips are where percentage points come from.

Too often, people bandy about numbers and percentages like they are concrete information. For one, people baselessly guesstimate matchups all over the place one the forums. Just because you won 8/10 games against your buddy doesn't mean that matchup is favoring your deck 80-20. Percentages are only truly relevant when they have three elements: a large sample size, correct lists, and optimal plays. And even then, percentages are usually useless because of the third element. Optimal play is difficult to evaluate and guarantee. I could hand my sister Matignon's Paladin deck and she would probably lose 100% of the games played against a good Rotun pilot. Numbers are nothing but a general baseline, and that's assuming they are from a reliable source!

The one way that I do like to look at numbers is as a ladder. Being a 40-60 dog doesn't mean you are favored to lose: that is a defeatist attitude. It means you have to gain 10 “points” in order to win. Sometimes, slips like the one I mentioned above can provide you those percentages. More often, your opponent's misplays compared to your correct plays will determine who ends up favored. Darkmoon Faire Orlando, with the surprise victory of Boomkin in a Halavar-flavored field, is a fair example. Did Brad get lucky? Sure, at times we all do; it's a card game. But how many percentage points did he gain just by sitting down and playing at his usual level of skill?

I find this sort of thinking a lot more relevant as we look towards Realm Champs. When you put players on that level all in a big field, like the World Championships, the edges gained by pure skill start to diminish after a few rounds as the players near the top become closer and closer in talent. Round 1 might be a scrub, but by Round 6 any undefeated player should be a worthy competitor who does not give up a margin so easily.

The Realm Champs are not the World Champs. It varies with Realm of course (aka the NE/East Coast debacle), but for the most part these fields will not be flooded with a lot of high-level players. For the most part, these will be the players who attend the local tournaments religiously and play the decks they like or get off the internet. Most of all, these players will often be mistake-prone.

Put two bad players side-by-side. One is playing Serpent Twig, and the other is playing Holy Paladin. Which one should you be prepared to defeat? I think it is generally accurate to say that the Serpent Twig player is going to be more concerning. An aggressive deck offers fewer opportunities to punt the game, while an inexperienced player trying to muddle his way through the complexities of a Solanian's engine will often crumble under the weight of their own decisions.

Your concern at Realms will be getting past the worse players while being prepared to fight the best ones. A deck that only narrowly defeats optimally played aggressive decks, but crushes control, will be a very viable choice for the above reasons. Your narrow wins will get a lot easier as you decrease the skill of your opponents, and most of the best players tend to like control decks because it gives them many opportunities to make better decisions than their opponent. Now, if a great player comes packing an aggressive strategy then you may be in trouble, but the theory is sound.

Well, I've bandied at length a bit, and now have my own work to get to regarding Realms. I've narrowed it down to about three options now, but am still pretty unsure about just where to land. The best of luck to everyone not in the Southeast Realm, and a perfectly fair if modest amount to those who are.

-Glenn Jones
magicwease1 on AIM
magweasel on Star City
magicalweasel on WoW TCG