Board 8 > Marvel Snap Topic 11: Shuri You Can't Be Serious

(+) Yeah! (+)

As long as you dont fall below 100, thats correct

But a cubes leaderboard is coming!

Oh, Infinite isn't like Legend in Hearthstone where you're locked in?

I'm at 108 so I'm not in danger, but I guess I'll have to make sure not to go too nuts with snaping

You can't fall below 100 once you get there

That should demonstrate that Ive never been there!

Thanks for the correction. Must feel bad to be the worst Infinite player

foolm0r0n posted...

I just saw Moon Girl & Devil Dinosaur show on Disney+ and I totally want to watch it because of this game. It also looks super good

I watched the first two episodes, its definitely made by people who care and it looks very very good

Theres a link to a weird little stats section for the season in the News feed

Lopen posted...

If people are noticing things that are supposedly completely unlikely statistically often enough it becomes implausible to that it's a matter of Frequency illusion because even with biases you wouldn't have enough appearances of the rare event for people to notice it at that clip.

It's literally the exact opposite. You notice it more with extreme low or high frequencies.

The bigger effect imo is what I mentioned before, which is failing to do Bayesian analysis. It's not about how much Cosmo is being played, but about how much GIVEN that you played Wong.

The best analogy is with poker. People have been complaining for decades that every time they get aces, someone else gets trips. They just don't understand how statistically dependent those events are. So they accuse the dealer of rigging the game somehow. It's just funny seeing the exact same arguments with poker used for this game, as if they are new or not debunked.

Btw absolutely NOTHING in this world becomes implausible just because a few thousand humans subjectively feel a certain way. That's a super fucked up scientific method. But I guess it's a common idea.

OTA Update

Shanna
4/2 -> 4/4

Lizard
[Old] 2/5 Ongoing: -3 Power if your opponent has 4 cards here.
[New] 2/5 Ongoing: -4 Power if your opponent has 4 cards here.

Sandman
5/5 -> 5/3

Enchantress
4/4 > 4/6

Enchantress power buff oh yes

Enchantress buff is interesting, means White Queen has actual competition if youre looking for a good 4-cost thats not purely a tech card

Lol Lizard

Luke Cage and Sauron dont care!

You can Enchantress your own Lizard too if you want

Why they gotta buff Enchantress like that.

Its been particularly telling to us that in a world where Armor, Patriot, Darkhawk, Devil Dinosaur, Sandman, Blue Marvel, and even Knull are major players that Enchantress is a poor performer
on both popularity and actual winning.

LOL that actually is sad

Dude foolmo you just don't get it and you're going to pretend you're smart just like usual

Here's the last post I'm giving you on this. I'm going to give you a completely absurd example so you can (hopefully) get why you can find anomalies in data by anecdote in extreme circumstances.

Let's say Cosmo's overall play rate was something minuscule like 0.01%. Say people never see Cosmo in games. Say you've got hundreds of reports from the playerbase where people swap to decks with Wong and claim they see him 50% of the time.

Now you can either say duh huh frequency illusion duh huh confirmation bias or you can realize that maybe some these people are reporting what's actually happening and that if Cosmo's play rate was actually 0.01% the odds of this happening in widespread numbers would be so small that you wouldn't be seeing it in random samples even if people were being biased because they would have to outright be making things up to see him that often.

Now obviously we have snap.fan's data to compare to and it does give us a decent starting point. For example, valkyrie's play rate is supposedly 6% so it does become a bit odd if I see her play rate increase to 50% if I use cards she counters-- but it's not foolproof because we don't have the data broken down well enough and there could be a higher rate of Valkyries at my matchmaking tier despite not seeing her much at all when I play other decks. It's not a low enough percentage to be ironclad.

Now if it was not Valkyrie and instead Shadow King at his 0.53% play rate I was seeing the argument is stronger. Considerably so. Because the odds of seeing multiple Shadow Kings in a short time frame is very small.

That's why if we had more confirmed data in general this becomes way more testable even with the small sample sets the playerbase has, but doesn't until then. Otherwise you have very smart people who even when presented with tallies will always call it RNG and that we should say the earth is flat because the people who know better said so until we have something that clashes as hard as a Shadow King. Valkyrie at 6% (keep in mind she was higher rarity then so even lower play rate) won't be enough to appease anyone to dive into it further, especially since the explanation then can be hand waved with "well shes in more decks but people are holding her more often when you're not using your destroy deck with big stompies"

Unfortunately because the game is reasonably well balanced you don't have a lot of cards that are basically never used, and if you do it's often because there are better options to do what you want like Shadow King vs Valkyrie. That's why we need more data. If we get breakdowns by Tier and Collector Level we could probably find a lot more low percentage counterpicks to investigate.

Just saw Yellowjacket in a Galactus deck for the first time. Pretty smart idea to use him with Chavez to stop Shang-Chi stuff.

But my opponent played Yellowjacket, then Chavez, so I killed her with Shang-Chi. So maybe Galactus players are too stupid for that combo.

Enchantress buff is unexpected but welcome

Still crazy to me that Yellowjacket exists as is.

Also, all the Enchantress buff is gonna do is make Cosmo get played even more often.

Cosmo is already one of the most played cards anyways last I saw

Enchantress buff will make me actually run her once in a while

What I was finding is she didn't really do what she needed to do because you lost too much power. I greatly preferred Rogue because she converts a lot of her steals to powet for you.

At 4/6 she's usable.

Their dev talk just makes it sound like anti-Ongoing needs more help? The fact most of them are On-Reveal to activate means they can be stopped by Cosmo fairly easily. Why cant Enchantress just be Ongoing: Remove Abilities From All Other Ongoing cards at this location? If stopping all On-Reveals isnt broken enough surely stopping all Ongoings isnt

Yeah I've never really understood why Cosmo gets the ability to stop future On Reveal effects and Enchantress costs more to only stop current Ongoing effects.

Sure Ongoing has a higher overall value than On Reveal typically but why does that translate to the removal being more expensive too?

Design symmetry:

Cosmo is an Ongoing that stops On-Reveals
Enchantress is an On-Reveal that stops Ongoings.

It has symmetry there sure, but Enchantress has a higher cost and nothing can stop Cosmo that early.

It's not design symmetry because Cosmo defeats enchantress outright. That's an asymmetrical interaction in favor of dog.

Even if you go for similar cost he shits on Rogue too because she cant disable a card until its revealed and when Cosmo is revealed shes powerless. Enchantress doesnt even function like Cosmo either because she only cancels Ongoings when revealed that turn and doesnt disable them for the lane altogether. Its no wonder she saw little play/victories when she struggles to do what she was designed for

Enchantress buff is sick. I like the Lizard nerf too, makes the counterplay pretty valuable where before it wasn't too big of a deal.

Lopen posted...

or you can realize that maybe some these people are reporting what's actually happening

Would you really be saying this if you personally weren't one of those people? It's a rhetorical Q obviously. Glad to leave it alone from here.

I just played against a bot and their name was "PilpyLachlan"

It was 100% a bot because they had impossible gold and inked splits. So idk how they name these bot accounts anymore.

They just use actual player names I assume. Pretty much any game does that these days

skullbone posted...

I just played against a bot and their name was "PilpyLachlan"

It was 100% a bot because they had impossible gold and inked splits. So idk how they name these bot accounts anymore.

I just saw someone on Reddit showing off a Cerebro deck with every single card inked.

I can't even imagine how much time that would take.

foolm0r0n posted...

Would you really be saying this if you personally weren't one of those people?

Yes because I've literally seen broken rng hand waved away by a bunch of very intelligent people who were eager to regurgitate stuff from their freshmen psych class happen in other mobile games and then being silently patched and fixed.

This is extremely basic statistics stuff. Random samples are unlikely to contain very unlikely events so if you have a lot of people reporting that it's more likely a problem with the algorithm than a bunch of people collectively experiencing a psychological phenomenon.

Well I hope that's true then, and that Bicycle finally patches my aces getting cracked

I'm not even sure it'll be patched because I'm not sure if it's a bug or intended. Like I said there is merit to doing it intentionally if they want performance data among other things.

Honestly this discussion has motivated me to harvest my own data to test. Next few times I have play sessions I'm gonna try to play 10 of a patriot deck and 10 of my destroy deck and record cards seen.

Managed to get to 89.9 before dropping back down to 89.0

Really want infinite for the card back but not sure it's doable.

Use Galactus to get 1 cube wins all the way up

Hadn't ran into Sandman a single time in all my climb this month.

Hit 95 and have run into Sandman 3 times in 6 matches. All 3 times dropped on T5 to match my Wave being dropped when I had She-Hulk and Death or Devil Dino in hand. Sometimes multiple. All 3 times followed up by Doom for them to win.

Mainly salty because all 3 were 4 cube losses where Doom was basically the only card I could lose to. And I'd have won if I hadn't tried pulling off the wave combo and had just dropped shit naturally on curve.

crazy you never ran into him pre-nerf

basically every other deck I faced was Sandman

Yeah, I actually going to post about the fact that I had never ran into him yet. More surprising because it's a hard counter to my deck.

I had run into a ton of Patriot decks (even before the hot location that amplified them) and they stick out too as they beat my deck a lot. So much so that I may swap Enchantress in for Shang (who I haven't actually used a lot this month).

I've also ran into 2 Spectrum / Ongoing decks and I had only seen them once all climb previously. Those also typically beat my deck

Good players will recognize what kind of deck youre playing and just not play the Sandman in their hand if its not gonna help them much, since its low power. Like of course you use it against Negative, Bounce, Hit Monkey, Deathwave, but something like Spectrum/Destroyer for example its just not doing much for you, so drop a stronger card instead

That data thing in game has me at 13% snap rate and 13% retreat. Surprised I've climbed 40 > 95 with those numbers because that makes it sound like I just brute forced my way up via win rate and that definitely isn't the case

it says i snap 43% of the time and retreat 23% of the time. checks out, i love me some variance

and honestly i probably don't snap as often as i want to, because sometimes i don't want somebody to retreat before i get the quest i want done (like stupid 20+ power at a location quests)

How does Shadow King interract with locations that reduce power? Does it override for the cards already played there or does the location override again?

I don't have him but just got him from a Coulson and wasn't sure how it would go if I dropped him on necrosha

https://youtu.be/eN9kihJu9dc

Shattered posted...

How does Shadow King interract with locations that reduce power? Does it override for the cards already played there or does the location override again?

I don't have him but just got him from a Coulson and wasn't sure how it would go if I dropped him on necrosha

someone can correct me if Im wrong but I dont think he negates locations that are like Ongoing effects like Necrosha, the same way he wouldnt negate Devil Dinosaur or Darkhawk

That's what I figured would be the case and I wasn't sure so didn't drop him.

Also got my first gold background just now

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/1/1/1/AAFutCAAEbOv.jpg

They need to get variants on the theme song like that synth wave version into the game

So demoralizing losing an 8 cuber on a 50/50