|Forums:||Index → General Yu-Gi-Oh! Discussion → +1 Advantage makes me want to divide by 0|
|Please sign your comments with ~~~~. See Help:Signature and Help:Talk pages for further information.|
|This forum thread has been unedited for 3263 days and is considered archived. Please don't add to the discussion, unless absolutely necessary.|
Someone please explain to me how the hell "+1 Advantage" is supposed to work. All I know about it is that it counts how many cards you get on your hand/field against how many cards you lose as a result, and counts the card you activate as part of the loss.
Now that last part is what gets me; to me, it makes sense that, in order to get the benefits of a card effect, you need to USE that card, so how can the card being used be counted as a loss? For example, people call Pot of Greed a +1 advantage, because you're "losing" Pot of Greed to gain 2 cards, but you'd never be able to get those two cards WITHOUT activating Pot of Greed, so how can it be "losing" Pot of Greed to play it?
Or, here's another one: Horn of Heaven is supposedly a -1 advantage, because you're losing two cards (Heaven itself plus the monster you tribute to activate it) to negate the summon of an opponent's monster, but again, you have to use Horn of Heaven to activate its effect, so how can it be counted as part of the loss?
In my opinion, the card being activated itself should be neutral, not even counted as part of the equation. What SHOULD be counted, though, is the advantage you gain from the effect and the other costs you need to pay for the card's activation and/or effect. So, in the above cases, Horn of Heaven would be a 1 for 1 (sacrificing one of your own monsters to negate the summoning of one of the opponent's monsters), while Pot of Greed is a +2.
Also, why isn't life points considered part of advantage? There are several card effects that activate through an LP payment, and there's been plenty of times where someone has gotten screwed over by said payments (because, y'know, your LP is your main source of life in this game, and if that's gone, you lose), so why are people so flippant with LP payments, but so staunch with card payments? SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 18:35, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
Advantage is determined by how many cards you start with and how many cards you end with. Let's say I activate Pot of Greed on my first turn. I had 6 cards, and I ended with 7. 7 minus 6 equals 1, making Pot of Greed a plus 1. The same with Horn of Heaven. Let's say those are your only two cards. You start with two, end with zero, and your opponent has one less. 2 minus 2 plus 1 equals negative 1. Life Points is not part of card advantage because card advantage, as the name so heavily implies, is determined by the number of cards. People don't care about Life Points, because if the situation is right it doesn't matter. That's why Six Sam decks run Upstart Goblin. The extra Life Points don't matter because it allows them to summon Legendary Six Samurai - Shi En more consistently, and once that's done it makes it very difficult for the opponent to come back. Also, it's well worth the 2000 LP to negate Black Rose Dragon's summon in order to protect that field, because if you lose that field you will likely also lose the game. Lappyzard (talk • contribs) 19:07, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Again, why would you count the card you're playing as part of the card loss if YOU CANNOT GAIN THE ADVANTAGE OF ITS EFFECT WITHOUT PLAYING IT?! THAT is what I have issue with; the belief that playing the card you're planning to gain the benefits of somehow makes you LOSE some of those benefits. It's the classic "can't have your cake and eat it too" belief; you can't activate a card effect without playing it, and you can't play it without losing it from your hand, so why even count its activation as a loss? By that logic, you shouldn't play ANY cards, because playing them would be a -1 advantage, right off the bat. Do you know how stupid that sounds?
- And again, I have already stated how people have been screwed over by LP payment costs, so why is paying LP considered to be much less of a risk than "losing" cards? If your Shi-En's effect is negated, that's a bunch of LP lost that you typically can't gain back in the decks that use him. I've heard first-hand accounts of how the LP payment for Solemn Judgment ultimately caused players to lose, even when Judgment was successful. So how can you tell me that "LP doesn't matter if used as a cost"? Obviously, it DOES matter. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 19:15, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
Let me simplify this: You activate Pot of Greed. You draw 2 and Pot goes to the Graveyard. Do you have Pot of Greed anymore? No. It is gone. If you don't have the card anymore, you've lost it. And although Solemn Judgment can have a steep cost, paying out 4000 LP is better than losing on the spot. If you prevent Black Rose Dragon from nuking your field, it's worth it because you still have the cards you need to win. It doesn't matter if you take a hit to your Life Points if taking that hit helps you win. I'd rather win the duel than not pay 4000 LP for Solemn and lose because of it. Lappyzard (talk • contribs) 19:29, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- And again, I've heard firsthand accounts from pleople who HAVE paid the 4000 LP for Solem AND lost, because of it. I'm not saying you SHOULDN'T pay LP for an effect, just that that should count as part of advantage as well, say...1000 LP = 1 card's worth of loss?
- I'm not stupid, I know how to count. I think I know why advantage is so goddamn important, and how you guys keep on counting it in number of cards: that's ALL you count it in, not actual advantage. To me, Pot of Greed isn't a +1, because I lose 1 and gain 2, it's a +2, because I gain two more cards that I can use to further my strategy with no cost other than playing Pot, which I don't count as part of the advantage, because - as I need to activate it to gain its effect - I classify it as NEUTRAL. Similarly, Horn of Heaven is even to me, because I lose one of my monsters as the cost of activating Horn to stop one of my opponent's from being summoned, with Horn being neutral in the equation. Benefits of the effect - the cost of activating the effect/having the effect resolve, that's how I calculate "advantage", not by how many cards in my hand at the end. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 19:41, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
You're right. Card Advantage: It only counts cards. Nothing else. It is not the same thing as whether a card is beneficial or not, nor does it determine the right move. I had a player MST his own face-down in order to drop Gorz, and I lost because of it. Card Advantage with Pot of Greed works like this: without Pot of Greed, you would have a different card instead. With Pot of Greed, you have two different cards instead, which is one more than without Pot of Greed. Lappyzard (talk • contribs) 19:49, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- No, with Pot of Greed, you have Pot of Greed; after playing Pot of Greed, you get two cards you could potentially use. That's how I label advantage, nothing else.
it is simple: the more cards you have the more options you have. And if you have more cards than your opponent you'll most likely have more options then them which results often in a great advantage. Of course it is not always so, even at disadvantage you have the chance to turn around the table, but it is more likely to win if you have more options. It is as simple as that.
Here are some articels which I highly recomand reading, besides the whole thing of + and - they explain a lot of other stuff:
- ...That doesn't say anything that hasn't already been said, and most of it sounds like what I've been arguing; it's not the number of cards in your hand that matter, it's how you use them. So why should I bother with this? As far as I'm concerned, the only time I should count cards in my hand is if I'm PLAYING a card or deck that benefits from having several card sin my hand, like a Muka Muka deck. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 20:03, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Played with and against deck destruction, and I still don't get what the point of your statement is. It's not a "fact" that more cards = more advantage, otherwise why won't people play more than 40 cards in their deck? Duh, it's how you use those cards that gives you advantage, pure, plain, and simple. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 20:08, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- More in deck, harder to draw a card you want to use. 40 cards is best suit for the main deck to running. And "Deck Destruction" leech your deck down quickly if they played it right. They can taken your best cards away if you didn't paying attention very well. They can control your hand, they can control your deck and ever they can control your Graveyard, don't get me wrong. --FredCat 20:14, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Not necessarily so; I've tried playing 40-44 card decks, and I find them way too inconsistent for me, and I end up wasting my cards way too often. I'm much, MUCH comfortable at 50 cards, since it's not too high that I'll get dead draws, but not too low that I won't lose consistency.
- And I know how a Deck Destruction deck runs, buddy; as I said, I've played with and against them. Still doesn't mean I agree that card counting = advantage. Hell, the more we argue about this, the more I realize just how backwards I find the elitist idea of "advantage" to be; I am perfectly comfortable with adding cards back to my deck, if it means I can reuse them, whereas elitists would add that to the "disadvantage" category. I guess, as I said, I'm thinking more pragmatically about this whole card advantage thing than the bean counters that are duelists, nowadays. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 20:21, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, NOW who's being rude, here? I've never told anyone in this threat to STFU, like you have. And here is the last reason why I hate elitists; they're so absorbed in their self-centered belief that they ARE the elite among duelists, that they look down at the casual players with disdain and won't hesitate to crush them underfoot, insult their intelligence, dueling skill, deck, and opinions, and kick them when they're down, as well. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 20:26, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Their set up, their decides. Now get over with it, and stop being a baby about it. I would just troll my deck with Pot of Greed and just five piece of Exodia, lol'd at your face. If you don't like it, then ignoring it and move on to different duelist, which are not elitist. And look, you have your own limitation that most duelists don't like, just accept the shit! --FredCat 20:30, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
Fred, seriously. Could you TRY and have a bit more tact in these discussions? I know you mean well, but I get pretty sick of seeing any debate you enter devolve into flames. Not that it's all your fault, mind.
Anyway. It seems like this isn't going to reach a peaceful conclusion anytime soon. So, I think this is one of those times where Timmy goes off to play in his corner, and Spike goes off to play in his. The 2 viewpoints aren't going to agree, so why drag it out? ChaoticCrosswinds (talk • contribs) 20:38, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
- My mistake, go along with your elitist lives. —This unsigned comment was made by SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 20:33, June 22, 2011
Card advantage exists in most Decks. Most points made here are good ones. Its not about how many cards you have its how you use them. Drawing two cards with Pot of Greed is great. Using Divine Wrath on an Effect monster my opponent plays is also good. I lose a card with Divine Wrath but stopping a Monster like Cyber Stein works for me. Bottom line is its your Deck, put what you want in it. Garchomp87 (talk • contribs) 03:08, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
Enough is enough.
Are you guys really that stupid to argue Card Advantage?? Can you really be THAT bad a player????
- Garchomp, Fred, and Silver Glaceon are Exempt from the following Flaming.
Okay retards, let me point out the bullshit I've noticed:
- 1 I Ctrl+F "Pot of Greed" and found it 20 times not counting my own. (Literally) And you all STILL argue abut card Advantage.
- 2 SynjoDeonecros, I don't know your Education, nor do I care, but No. You ARE stupid and CANNOT count. Imagine: No cards in hand, you draw Pot of greed. Are you with me? You Play it. BEHOLD! -1. You draw 1 card, you're back at neutral. Still here? you draw another. now your +1. We good???? Can you understand my Math???
- 3 No shit you DON'T COUNT LIFE POINT FOR CARD ADVANTAGE!!! LIFE POINTS ARE NOT CARDS!!
EVERY GODDAMN TIME I TRY TO DEFEND THE REP. OF THIS GAMES, SOME NEW RETARD COMES UP TO MAKE THIS GAME LOOK LIKES A FUCKING JOKE, EVERY! FUCKING! TIME! Fuck it, I'm out. No more, I can't deal with this special ed. bullshit anymore.--Helix-king (talk • contribs) 18:21, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
- no worries helix, he's quitting the wikia, Forum:Tired of teh abuse, want out
- -Resk (✩) 19:18, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
Simple Explanation of Card Advantage
Card advantage is what we use to determine the effectiveness of cards. When you activate a card, or activate a Monster's effect, you can gain or lose advantage, and you can also create neutral advantage. Let's look at examples of this:
- Gaining Advantage - You can gain card advantage when you activate a card or effect that increases the amount of cards you have, or decrease the amount of cards your opponent has. Let's say you have no Monsters on your field, and your opponent has 4 Monsters on his/her field. If you activate "Dark Hole", you will lose 1 card (it goes to the graveyard, giving you one less card to work with), so you take a -1 from where you were before activation. Your opponent will lose 4 Monsters, so you now have 4 less cards of your opponent's to work around (or, they have 4 less cards to work with). So, to take it from your perspective, you removed 4 cards from your opponent's field, giving you a +4. Now, take the sum of the actions from that 1 play: -1 from activation, +4 from resolution = +3 in card advantage/play. If you and your opponent had the same number of cards as each other, hand and field combined, say, 7 total cards, you're now at 6, while they're now at 3.
- Creating Neutral Advantage (Also called "One-for-ones") - If you control a total of 5 cards, and your opponent controls a total of 5 cards, one of which is a face-up Monster, and you activate a card like "Smashing Ground", you will not gain or lose any card advantage. You will take a -1 from activation, but get a +1 at resolution. This results in a 0. Both players still have the same amount of card advantage. This does not mean that a one-for-one card cannot impact the game. If you were to Chain a "Mystical Space Typhoon" to the activation of your opponent's "Royal Oppression", you will have created a one-for-one, but also created an 800 LP swing, and removed a Limited card from their use.
- Losing Advantage - Let's say your opponent controls one face-up Monster. If you were to activate "Lightning Vortex", you take a -2 (discard for a Cost [-1] and the activation [-1]), and gain a +1 at resolution, giving you a net -1 in card advantage from the play. You can, lose card advantage on purpose to create more card advantage. Let's say that you discarded a "Dandylion". You would then get another +2 off of "Dandylion"'s effect, giving you a net +1. There are ways to mitigate losing the card advantage to turn it into positive advantage.
Hopefully this helps you learn what card advantage is and how it is created. Remember, card advantage can only take you so far in a Duel. If you can't convert that advantage into actual plays that go toward winning the game, then you may need to tweak either your Deck or how you play. DemonGodAsura (talk • contribs) 19:36, June 23, 2011 (UTC)