Welcome aboard! The church of IGMCULSL welcomes you as well!
You shall find what you seek among Dirk's threads, there's a few pretty zany attempts not to punch down among them.
Welcome aboard! The church of IGMCULSL welcomes you as well!
I think Erebos (and all good midrange/control decks) is near the top tier of EDH before cEDH decks that is still ok to play against most decks arround without stomping everything. If I were to put in numbers I'd say it's a high 7 low 8 or something close. It is really hard to estabilize against 3 other decks. but you run a variety of different ways to disrupt stuff. I do think you may be a bit to vulnerable to graveyard decks. You have like 2 ways of dealing with the yard, right? Also a well timed counterspell seems like it can fold the plans. Any particular reason not run something like Boseiju, Who Shelters All?TheGildedGoose wrote: ↑1 year agoWhat power level is Erebos, God of the Dead? Use whatever metric you feel comfortable with.
Well, the reason I give it an 8 is because it's probably closer to cEDH than it is to a precon.duducrash wrote: ↑1 year agoI think Erebos (and all good midrange/control decks) is near the top tier of EDH before cEDH decks that is still ok to play against most decks arround without stomping everything. If I were to put in numbers I'd say it's a high 7 low 8 or something close. It is really hard to estabilize against 3 other decks. but you run a variety of different ways to disrupt stuff. I do think you may be a bit to vulnerable to graveyard decks. You have like 2 ways of dealing with the yard, right? Also a well timed counterspell seems like it can fold the plans. Any particular reason not run something like Boseiju, Who Shelters All?TheGildedGoose wrote: ↑1 year agoWhat power level is Erebos, God of the Dead? Use whatever metric you feel comfortable with.
Yeah, I think we get really into our creations and take offense sometimes. But a decks powerlevel being lower ins't anything bad. it has its place and its suited to specific styles of play. MTG has a bit of a rock papers scizor to it too, another thing that the numeric scale no scale is perfect if we think about it. so we gotta run with whatever works for us when choosing a specific scale we should treat like socialism whatever lands we have in standard atm, maybe it isn't the perfect system, but it's the best we got
I'm not sure any of those generals are better than mono blue Canadian Highlander but they certainly are not competitive with jvp, urza stax, teferi stax, or even kefnet turns.duducrash wrote: ↑1 year agoNot to derail the thread but I think the best mono color in cedh is actually red. I constitently see Magda, Brazen Outlaw and Godo, Bandit Warlord . Birgi, God of Storytelling // Harnfel, Horn of Bounty was also the flavour of the moment for a while.
I typically factor cost reducers like Delve (or similar mechanics a la Blasphemous Act ) as half cost.
My current calculator takes self-reducing spells at face value, and X-spells as their standard MV where X=0. It may move the needled a couple tenths here and there not counting for the average mana cost paid in-game, but in some cases they cancel out. I'm not trying to be super strict on average MV, just looking at some trends since excel makes calculations like that easy.
Also, delayed costs (like Pact of Negation). . . count as 0 or 5?
So, do you think a trimmed mean would be appropriate, or actually calculating for outliers and removing them from the average
Pact counts as 5 because that's what you're really paying. Force counts as 0 because that's what you're really paying. Fortunately, most decks that want one want both, so you rarely have to adjust your cmc. 5 pretending to be 0 and 0 pretending to be 5 balances out.Treamayne wrote: ↑1 year agoAlso, delayed costs (like Pact of Negation). . . count as 0 or 5?
So, do you think a trimmed mean would be appropriate, or actually calculating for outliers and removing them from the average
SPOILERShowHideWhere Trimmed Mean is the average of the center 80% of values, ignoring the bottom and top 10% where outliers would appear
vs
lO<Q1-1.5(IQR) and uO>Q3+1.5(IQR)
maybe! It's a problem for someone more mathy than me. But that sounds close. I was just thinking that a straight mode would tell you a lot so a trimmed mean seems rational if I understand it right.Treamayne wrote: ↑1 year agoSo, do you think a trimmed mean would be appropriate, or actually calculating for outliers and removing them from the average
SPOILERShowHideWhere Trimmed Mean is the average of the center 80% of values, ignoring the bottom and top 10% where outliers would appear
vs
lO<Q1-1.5(IQR) and uO>Q3+1.5(IQR)
Here are the deck stats as I calculated them:
Item | Calculation |
---|---|
Land | 35 |
Weight | 71% |
Source Min | 25 |
Source Qty | 30 |
Weight | 55% |
Source Min | 19 |
Source Qty | 20 |
Mean | 1.68 |
Non-Land Average | 2.55 |
Median | 2 |
Mode | 2 |
Trimmed Mean (TM) | 2.33 |
Lower Quartile (Q1) | 1 |
Upper Quartile (Q2) | 3 |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2 |
Q1 Mild Outlier | 0 |
Q2 Mild Outlier (MO) | 6 |
MO Average | 2.35 |
Q2 Extreme Outlier (EO) | 9 |
EO Average | 2.6 |
I think there's some real interesting numbers there. I imagine an automated tool that applied those stats to a big pool of decks would probably coalesce on which numbers are the most meaningful.Treamayne wrote: ↑1 year agoHere are the deck stats as I calculated them:
Assumptions and DefinitionsShowHide
- Costs are based on the highest possible mode (e.g. Mizzix's Mastery uses the Overload cost for MV)
- Color Weight uses all non-exclusive costs on the card, not just casting costs (e.g. Mystic Retrieval has a color weight of and , but Mizzix's Mastery uses the higher Color Weight of )
- Mean uses the whole deck (for comparison to all other calculations)
- Trim Mean uses the non-land cards (since the large qty of 0 will skew calculations)
- Outlier Calculations use the non-land cards
- Lower Outliers stop at MV
Item Calculation Land 35 Weight 71% Source Min 25 Source Qty 30 Weight 55% Source Min 19 Source Qty 20 Mean 1.68 Non-Land Average 2.55 Median 2 Mode 2 Trimmed Mean (TM) 2.33 Lower Quartile (Q1) 1 Upper Quartile (Q2) 3 Interquartile Range (IQR) 2 Q1 Mild Outlier 0 Q2 Mild Outlier (MO) 6 MO Average 2.35 Q2 Extreme Outlier (EO) 9 EO Average 2.6
Of course, I just have formulae in Excel - so I add the data and let it do the work.