PDA

View Full Version : Evaluating decks: A two-dimensional approach


Final Darkness
04-30-2011, 04:33 AM
How do you tell if a deck is good or bad and what separates tier 1 decks from tier 5 without having to see the results? In this thread, I will present a two-dimensional model to evaluate any decks, so you won't have to waste valuable resources trying to find cards to build crappy decks again.

1. The two dimensions: "Power" and "utility"
In order for a deck to be good, it needs power cards. You may be saying "duh, I already know that", but power cards usually comes at the price of utility.

The First Law: Adding power to a deck by including power cards comes at the cost of utility. Adding utility cards to the deck comes at the cost of power.

Power cards are those that have the potential to greatly effect the game, but the usually comes with condition or need other cards to bring their effects live. Any cards that are exceptions to this rule are usually banned. In contrast high utility cards are those whose effects are always live, but they usually change the game in less drastic ways. In other words, power cards are strong but usually situational and utility cards are weaker but less situational. An example of a power card would be Starlight Road, a highly situational card but will usually win you the game when it goes off. A high utility card would be D.D. Warrior Lady, it always does something whether it be attacking or removing an unsuspecting attacking monster from the game, it is playable the moment it is drawn.

Like I said, very few cards are both high in power and utility. The few that are high in both are either banned or are staples. Examples for such cards are Monster Reborn and Dark Hole, both are nearly always playable and you can improve a deck's performance by herping derping adding them to your deck.


The Second Law: Themed cards are usually lower in utility and higher in power.

Most theme cards don't do anything by themselves. They need other cards to make their effects live. Flamvell Firedog may be a good beater, but by itself it is just a beater, only when you include other cards that it works well with would you make its effect live. In contrast, Thunder King Rai-Oh may not be making you level 8 synchros, but it has higher utility than Flamvell Firedog because it is good in more situations. If you add Flamvell Firedog and its buddies to your deck you increase the deck's power level but if you add Thunder King Rai-Oh to your deck, you increase its utility level.

2. The good deck equation

Good decks try to maximize both power and utility. As The First Law stated, you can't have everything, but you want to have as much of both as possible.

Equation 1: D = P + U, where D stands for Deck Effectiveness, P is its power level and U is its utility level

Because power and utility is inversely related, you can try to maximize a deck's power, maximize its utility, or try to balance both. Say deck 1 with P = 50 and U = 1 has a D of 51. Deck 2 with P = 28 and U = 25 has a D of 53. So Deck 2 will usually outperform Deck 1 in the field (although it may not in a head to head match due to match-up related variables).

An example of a deck maximizing on power is an Exodia deck. The deck has a potential to have a "Turn 0 win" but none of its cards do anything by themselves. A deck that maximizes on utility would be Anti-Meta, with every single one of its cards either beat faces or destroy stuff, it rarely gets a dead draw but most of its cards only have marginal effects on the game. While every other deck falls somewhere in between.

The more you can push both power and utility the better your deck will perform. An example of a deck that are both high in power and utility is Tele-DAD. Most of its cards do something by themselves: Krebons and hold the fort, PWWB can remove most threads, Diamond Dude can randomly plus you. But even the great Tele-DAD needs to make utility for power. Its name sake monster Dark Armed Dragon is a low utility but high power card. Its a card that is dead in your hands during most of the turns, but when it becomes live, can single-handedly win you the duel.

To use a more recent example, let us consider two decks that are neck to neck in the current meta: Six Samurai and X-Saber. Six Samurai is a higher in power compared to X-Saber, its cards are designed to put the opponent in an unwinnable situation as early as turn one. All its cards work together for that single goal. At the same time, many of its cards simply do not do anything by itself: Kagemusha is just a 1800 DEF wall, Kageki's butt is a little bit bigger, and Kizan is just a vanilla beatstick. No wonder Six Sam never wins a topdecking war. X-Saber is a little less powerful than Six Sam (but still considerable more powerful than most other decks), it has power plays, but usually comes much slower compared to Six Sam, but its makes up for this against Six Sam by simply been higher in utility. Many of its monsters function to search others out while others are consistent attack blockers. Converting this into arbitrary numbers:
Six Samurai: P = 50, U = 30, D = 80
X-Saber: P = 40, U = 40, D = 80
Timmy's Phantom Beast Deck: P = 3, U = 4, D = 7

No wonder Six Samurai and X-Saber are neck to neck but both do considerably well compared to Timmy's deck!

3. Power and utility management
The Third Law: A card's utility is more malleable but a card's power is more rigid

Modern power cards are usually combo cards, and thus their utility can be increased if you can find a shorter route to reach the combo. For example, Royal Tribute is undoubtly a power card, but it needs Necrovalley to be activated. Although the effect of Royal Tribute stays the same no matter how you play it (i.e. it wins you the duel), you can increase its utility by making Necrovalley more accessable, hence the inclusion of both Pot of Duality and Gravekeeper's Recruiter. Still you are making a trade-off. By including an utility card like Pot of Duality, you are forfeiting room for power cards such as Malefic Cyber End Dragon. But the main point is: YOU ARE NOT SIMPLY TRYING TO INCREASE THE DECK'S UTILITY (U) OR POWER (P), YOU ARE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE DECK PERFORMANCE (D)!!!! If adding Malefic Cyber End Dragon increases P by 5 and decreases U by 3, but adding Pot of Duality increases U by 6 and decreases P by 2, then you add Pot of Duality!

But of course the numbers I used are arbitrary. It is up to the player's intuition to decide the power and utility level of each card. By doing so, you deck's performance will be maximized!

The Fourth Law: Synergy between cards increases utility

Although power cards are usually characterized by low utility, but adding support cards can increase overall utility, provided the support cards are not low utility themselves. Adding Gravekeeper's Recruiter to support Royal Tribute = good idea, adding Owl of Luck to support Royal Tribute = bad idea.

4. Power and utility ceiling
Power of cards and decks are preset. Lightsworn can blow up opponent's field, but it is unlike to also discard their hands. Thus each deck has a power ceiling on what it can do. One typically way to increase power is to increase the deck's speed. If you can do something faster, then the deck is more powerful. But increasing speed also hurts utility: those Trade-In in your Krystiasworn may help you get to your JD faster, but they can also be dead-draws.

A better way to improve a deck is by improving is utility. For most decks you can improve utility as much as you can (sacrificing power, of course). Playing a single copy of Swap Frog in Genex Monarch increases the things you can do, and doesn't hurt the power of the deck too much either.

5. Why some decks suck
Ever wonder why your Crystal Beast deck can't win? A power/utility analysis might answer the question! What are some power cards in the deck? Rainbow Ruins and Crystal Abundance. High utility card? Sapphire Pegasus, and every other card literally does nothing by itself! Now you know why it sux.

Batteryman? High power cards are plenty: Short Circuit, Industrial Strength, Inferno Reckless Summon, Batteryman Charger. Utility card? Just Micro-cell. Now we know where the problem is. Since its power ceiling is pretty high, you are unlike to increase it by much more, add some high utility card suck as Thunder King Rai-Oh and now your deck is better.

Dark World, has literally no high power cards. Get to work.

In closing, find the right balance of power and utility and your deck will be the strongest it can possibly be!

chunwilly
04-30-2011, 01:57 PM
I like the articles. The skeletons of your approach is pretty well laid-out.

I would love to have additional details on how to rate a certain card or deck in terms of utility/power. That would be the next million dollar question. Thanks.

mirasaki
05-01-2011, 02:02 AM
subbing for now, will reply later.

Additional Comment:


But of course the numbers I used are arbitrary. It is up to the player's intuition to decide the power and utility level of each card. By doing so, you deck's performance will be maximized!


After having read your whole post, this was pretty much the main flaw in your argument. The quality of a card's power and utility is simply subjective, so the average player won't be able to distinguish the relative points of one from the other all that well just by reading this article.

Not to say that your argument was bad, I completely agree that utility is what all decks need, in fact I daresay that power is almost irrelevant compared to how important utility is but you made good points. I know that all decks need to have a certain ratio of power to utility but for the most part, for whatever arbitrary rating or ratio, there will always be a higher utility rating in a top tier deck than the need for a high power rating. So it isn't necessarily 50: 50, but it's more like 60:40 in favor of utility. Some decks like Fabled won't ever be competitive because although they have Grimro to search, the utility of the deck as a whole is pretty insignificant, and almost beyond repair.

Serendipity
05-02-2011, 03:46 AM
Nice article,
I think your formula for Deck effectiveness is a bit off though, considering your examples.
You are stating that you need to find a balance between Power and Utility, but your formula states that either will do. Meaning that your formula treats (P=80;U=1) the same as (P=41;U=40) or (P=1;U-80). While your argument would state that the best of those 3 is (P=41;U=40)

Therefor I think it would be more effective to Multiply the numbers, making --> D = P x U
(P=80;U=1) --> D=80
(P=41;U=40) --> D= 1640

Problem with this formula is that it makes a 50-50 balance the best while that isn't necessarily true. For which I haven't figured out somethng yet :P

Starblade Phantom
05-02-2011, 08:03 AM
Misread the title, thought it said ejaculating decks LOL. Subbing for interesting topic.

Final Darkness
05-02-2011, 08:23 AM
Nice article,
I think your formula for Deck effectiveness is a bit off though, considering your examples.
You are stating that you need to find a balance between Power and Utility, but your formula states that either will do. Meaning that your formula treats (P=80;U=1) the same as (P=41;U=40) or (P=1;U-80). While your argument would state that the best of those 3 is (P=41;U=40)

Therefor I think it would be more effective to Multiply the numbers, making --> D = P x U
(P=80;U=1) --> D=80
(P=41;U=40) --> D= 1640

Problem with this formula is that it makes a 50-50 balance the best while that isn't necessarily true. For which I haven't figured out somethng yet :P

I wasn't saying that a 50/50 balance is the best, but rather that each deck should find the best ratio to maximize the performance, and the best ratio is completely dependent on the cards that the deck has exclusive access to.

mrxtothez
05-02-2011, 11:07 AM
True stuff u wrote there.
The math stuff seems off tho.

dragonbane
05-02-2011, 04:16 PM
Reading your article now makes me want to look through each and every one of my decks and scrutinize every card in them. I could say that I am mildly annoyed, but I think several decks will end up better because of it!

Cyberzilla
05-02-2011, 09:47 PM
You give no way to rate a d or p. What's the scale? How do you determine the number.

I have always been intrigued with using formulas to measure a deck's efficiency.
I would have used a lot more factors though, and based the numbers of of time/deck thinning/destruction/life points etc so they had a real world basis

That said, I like your simple approach and agree with the underlying rule.

katamura
05-03-2011, 02:42 AM
you are also forgetting the two factors of speed and consistency.

you can have a deck with cards that have good "power" and "utility" but the deck as a whole may be slow as hell and the central win condition may be inconsistent.

StrappingYoungLaDD
05-03-2011, 07:47 AM
Another HUGE factor is the meta. Some decks do a lot better because of the amount of good match ups they have and some that would normally be good can't survive because other decks exist. A good example of this would be how gks affect the meta so much.

Wanboar
05-03-2011, 05:30 PM
Heres how to fix your math: determine which is more important, u or p. I think most people agree its u. Lets Take that 40:60 ratio given earlier (not necessarily the best ratio, but im using it as an example). That means a p is 2/3 of a u. So a power card adds two to your d. A utility card adds three to your d. However, they vary in effectiveness, so it gets more complicated. Lets Multiply their value by two if they have no drawback. Monster Reborn becomes a 4, Witch of the Black Forest becomes a six. Now if they affect multiple cards for no additional cost, Lets add a single unit per extra card. So Royal Tribute, being a normal spell, can 99% of the time hit only up to 6 cards. Lets go with the average there because it could be anything. Round up, it equals a 4. Draw two cards are also fours. JD would be a 3. Why? Because for every card it takes from your opponent, it also takes one from you. ( on average)However, it cant kill itself, so, assuming the field is full, everything but one card would cancel out, and you get a +1. Obviously, this is variable, it could be anywhere between a 3 and around 10, but id stick closer to three due to a lack of overextension, and the difficulty to summon it this format.

Still has arbitrary pieces, but i think this is a good way of measuring decks. Well written OP.

arkhamgoth
05-03-2011, 06:26 PM
Two factors I think should be taken into account, possibly under the utility category are:
Splashability- Is the card versatile enough to be used in more than one deck?
One example is Ryko, Lightsworn Hunter. It is a high power card with excellent splashability. This also increases its utility.

Disruption- Does it greatly affect your opponent's cards/strategy enough to create a better opportunity to win.
One example is Crystal Beasts. They do not have to be sent to the graveyard when destroyed, so it disrupts cards like Blackwing Shura and Flamvell Firedog. Thunderking Rai-Oh prevents cards from being added to the hand and saw a boost in popularity when X-Sabers took over the meta, due to its disruption of Darksoul plays and SS negation. This increases the utility of the card in question, making it more valuable to you the player.

Wanboar
05-03-2011, 06:39 PM
Two factors I think should be taken into account, possibly under the utility category are:
Splashability- Is the card versatile enough to be used in more than one deck?
One example is Ryko, Lightsworn Hunter. It is a high power card with excellent splashability. This also increases its utility.

Disruption- Does it greatly affect your opponent's cards/strategy enough to create a better opportunity to win.
One example is Crystal Beasts. They do not have to be sent to the graveyard when destroyed, so it disrupts cards like Blackwing Shura and Flamvell Firedog. Thunderking Rai-Oh prevents cards from being added to the hand and saw a boost in popularity when X-Sabers took over the meta, due to its disruption of Darksoul plays and SS negation. This increases the utility of the card in question, making it more valuable to you the player.

Spashability doesnt increase a decks effectiveness though. It merely makes a card more commonly played.

arkhamgoth
05-03-2011, 06:52 PM
The splashability of some cards directly affects the effectiveness of some decks. The prime example of this is the multitude of Plant vriants. How effective would those decks be if Ryko was not a splahable card? The same can be said of Card Trooper. Its mill effect makes it valuable in Plants, but it is also effective in other decks, making splashability a factor in these cards utility. It's a bit situational since there are so few cards outside of "all-deck staples" like Monster Reborn or Dark Hole. Maybe it is a minor factor in determining effectiveness, but I think it should be a factor for consideration.

Wanboar
05-04-2011, 04:05 PM
The splashability of some cards directly affects the effectiveness of some decks. The prime example of this is the multitude of Plant vriants. How effective would those decks be if Ryko was not a splahable card? The same can be said of Card Trooper. Its mill effect makes it valuable in Plants, but it is also effective in other decks, making splashability a factor in these cards utility. It's a bit situational since there are so few cards outside of "all-deck staples" like Monster Reborn or Dark Hole. Maybe it is a minor factor in determining effectiveness, but I think it should be a factor for consideration.

Not really. It's one more card that works. If Ryko had an added clause that said: "this can only be used in plant variants." It wouldn't make it any less useful in plant decks.

Troop_Dupe_Scupe
05-08-2011, 11:59 AM
That article helped me a lot when deciding between Card Trooper or Debris Dragon in my Flamvell deck.

On one hand, Debris Dragon combos brilliantly with Ryko to make Iron Chain, or Reaper to Black Rose. But other than that he isn't good.

Trooper is power/utility rolled into one. It has a 1900 body, fuels Rekindling and I get to draw when he dies.

Deck with Debris:

Power 42 Utility 30

Deck with Card Trooper

Power 41 Utility 32

Wanboar
05-08-2011, 07:01 PM
That article helped me a lot when deciding between Card Trooper or Debris Dragon in my Flamvell deck.

On one hand, Debris Dragon combos brilliantly with Ryko to make Iron Chain, or Reaper to Black Rose. But other than that he isn't good.

Trooper is power/utility rolled into one. It has a 1900 body, fuels Rekindling and I get to draw when he dies.

Deck with Debris:

Power 42 Utility 30

Deck with Card Trooper

Power 41 Utility 32
I think this is the farthest extent to which the number system works: Choosing between individual cards.

Cyberzilla
05-08-2011, 07:19 PM
That article helped me a lot when deciding between Card Trooper or Debris Dragon in my Flamvell deck.

On one hand, Debris Dragon combos brilliantly with Ryko to make Iron Chain, or Reaper to Black Rose. But other than that he isn't good.

Trooper is power/utility rolled into one. It has a 1900 body, fuels Rekindling and I get to draw when he dies.

Deck with Debris:

Power 42 Utility 30

Deck with Card Trooper

Power 41 Utility 32

You're forgetting the factor of chance. Trooper loses points because he can possible discard Rekindling/darkhole/Mirror Force or other good cards

Wanboar
05-08-2011, 08:00 PM
You're forgetting the factor of chance. Trooper loses points because he can possible discard Rekindling/darkhole/Mirror Force or other good cards

Deck thinning is deck thinning, no matter what was thinned.

Cyberzilla
05-08-2011, 08:16 PM
Deck thinning is deck thinning, no matter what was thinned.

Tell that to any gadget/stun player and they'll disagree. Some cards are important. If you milled all three rekindlings you would probably lose. That's just a scenario to make my point though.

Wanboar
05-09-2011, 05:51 PM
Tell that to any gadget/stun player and they'll disagree. Some cards are important. If you milled all three rekindlings you would probably lose. That's just a scenario to make my point though.

Well, yeah, you would lose. But the deck he was describing (one where he has to choose between Debris and Trooper) obviously is graveyard reliant. Either one being put in the deck would mean he has a lot of grave cards, and Card Trooper belongs in that kind of deck. It will help more than it hurts. If it isn't helping, the build is the problem, not trooper.

Saifullah
05-13-2011, 08:40 PM
I prefer the actual hands-on method: You test the deck in the current meta. If it works, its great. If you lose constantly, then it isn't.

Wanboar
05-14-2011, 06:22 PM
I prefer the actual hands-on method: You test the deck in the current meta. If it works, its great. If you lose constantly, then it isn't.

Takes too long when you're making a one-card choice. It can take 50 duels before you know how well the card works in the deck.

Patrick Murray
05-14-2011, 11:37 PM
interesting read. I can see some parts of this being used in actual play.

KillerGecko
07-11-2011, 12:20 AM
This thread makes some good points. I was about to write one on a similar topic actually, but ill just make a post here. Basically, a card can be seen as more useful if you don't have to combo with it, giving it more utility. If a card has a lot of combos that must be used to get there, it has a lot of power, but all the power in the world means nothing if you can't use it. Its like how the Russians had powerful nukes, but no delivery system to actually use them. Like, others said, utility seems to be more important. My best deck probably only has 3-5 power cards. Everything else can be used as soon as I draw it so I never have a dead hand. Eliminating dead hands is very important.

SameSongNDance
07-14-2011, 02:07 AM
IMO Plant variants have found the sweet spot when it comes to both utility and power.