Deck Building with a Purpose

All of my articles are written with a purpose. Perhaps I just did well at an event or I had a conversation that inspired me to write on a less tangible topic. Today’s another instance where I’ll be discussing something less tangible. Like my articles, my decks are built very purposefully. I don’t usually make a choice without weighing the pros and cons, thoroughly testing each of my options and, more recently, mathematically quantifying the value of my card choices.

Sometimes a card might be great in theory, seem okay in practice but when I apply the math to it, I realize what a terrible card choice it is. Take my decision not to use Genex Ally Birdman in Geargia (something I talked about in my YCS Ausitin article), for example. The synergy with Armor, Gearframe and triple Call of the Haunted gave me hope that the card, often a poor draw in already worrisome hands, might actually be playable now. I tested it out. The results were alright but I noticed that I was drawing multiple tuners quite often—something you generally don’t want. That’s when I decided to do the math. I found out that adding a 4^th tuner doubled my odds of drawing multiples in my opening hand. At a difference of 5% or 1-in-20 games, I couldn’t justify the marginal benefits from the card. Especially since, the negative effect on drawing into multiple tuners (after turn 1) was even more disheartening.

After my Top 16 finish in Austin, there was a resurgence of Karakrui Geargia—a deck otherwise left for dead. But I noticed Birdman in almost all of the knock-offs. Why?

I couldn’t wrap my head around it. Perhaps it’s my fault. Maybe I should have spent more time detailing my card choices—Birdman, especially—explaining why they shouldn’t be run. If you’re still not convinced, let me give it another attempt:

Adding just one Birdman doubles your odds of drawing multiple tuners. But why is this bad? Remember that you only have six cards to work with in your opening hand. If you have multiple tuners then you only have four cards left. Better hope one of those is Armor. Problem is, you only have a 65% chance of opening Armor or Arsenal! You won’t open with either of them every 1-in-3 games.  Multiple tuners and no Armor? Ouch. Even if you do have Armor, one of a couple things needs to happen:

(a)     You need Armor, Birdman and Accel. Odds?

Armor or Arsenal                        65%

Birdman                                     15%

Accel                                          39%

Odds                                          04%

(b)     You need to be able to protect Armor so that next turn you can flip summon him and attempt to use your tuner

Scenario (a) is a 1-in-25 combo—that can only be pulled off safely if you’re going first. Is it worth running a card that with ruin your hands once in every 20 games? Of course not. Now consider scenario (b). How are you going to keep Armor on the field if you only have three other cards in hand? It’s possible, but it’s going to be an uphill battle because the tuners you have in hand aren’t doing anything to help the cause.

“But he’s searchable!”, proponents of the Genex Ally say. Birdman’s a nice option to have, but remember you can search for Strategist or Watchdog just as easily and the only value lost is having to use your normal summon to make a field of GGX, Burei, Bureido and Watchdog. Who cares? That’s over 8,000 already.

I’ll be honest, it irks me that my build brought Geargias back yet people just ignore some of the fundamental attributes that enabled me to achieve a Top 16 finish in Austin. Call of the Haunted played a major role, but somebody can’t just throw a couple copies into an average Geargia deck, along with other subpar choices, and expect the deck to perform at its best. To be clear, I’m not saying to just copy my build without evaluating card choices and how your own playstyle interacts with the cards, but I am saying there are key concepts people shouldn’t just be ignoring if they want to maximize their success with Gears (or really any deck).

I wouldn’t want my build to be anymore than a template for others to make their Geargia decklist. But when I see a Geargia thread in the forum’s Deck Discussion or make the cut at a regional, I’m eager to see what tech others have come up with—I am consistently disappointed to see that they are generally just the recipients of good fortunate in spite of their poor card choices.

It’s as if “personal preference” outweighs actual reasoning and performance.

Personal preference is something that’s thrown around all-to-often but there should always a reason. Recently a couple of cards choices in one of my friend’s deck were questioned. My friend gave some half-hearted explanation but his use of “player preference” made my heart sink. Despite being a good duelist, he didn’t have a sufficient grasp of why his card choices were justified. I thought this was especially surprising because, to me, the reasoning was clear! Player preference is just a cop out. Even if it comes from a good player. Either there’s reasoning, and you just need spend some more tie being able to understand it, or there’s not.

                                                                                                                       

I just want to encourage everybody to really think through their card choices. Have sound reasoning for each of your cards. If you can’t provide any, or it doesn’t stand up to the counter-arguments, then you probably shouldn’t be running it.

That goes especially for forum goers. All too often I see people discussing card choices without actually detailing their reasoning and, like sheep, people follow. Rather, start making decisions for yourself and if you have a disagreement, you’ll both be better on in the long-run by actually discussing the merits of each card rather than dismissing it as preference. (This is where quantifiable value comes in handy, since it can break what might otherwise be a standstill.) Make sure you understand all of the most important factors and how they weight against your alternatives.

·         Pros and cons

·         Performance in testing

·         Quantifiable value

Generally, you’ll theory-oh a list of pros and cons before even testing. Then, through testing, you’ll come across scenarios you hadn’t thought about that add to your list. Each of these items can be quantified in one way or another.

Build your deck with purpose. Good luck!

Samuel