Card Counting

[RisingPhoenix]

Yah, devices are right out in my book. If you can do the trick, fine. But using computers is using outside assistance.

[Mr_Smigs]

Then just leave up that ruling for organizers of events and leagues. If your opponent is fine with you using such tools, then go right ahead. I know most judges will not let such devices in.

So the argument for that can pretty much stop now.

well, tourney runners have weighed in on this,

and i'm still terribly curious if this is an acceptable practice to them.

really.

the spreadsheet mentioned by RisingPhoenix

if a player prints that up and brings it to the game,

is that going to be considered cheating?

what if the player has a glass stone they move about the chart to track where in the deck they are so they can quick-find their probabilities?

how would that be any different from an ipod app?

really. what makes "outside assistance" wrong if doing it in your head is right?

why?

[Justin]

it's a very dangerous moral game you're playing here,

where, and when do you draw the line?

why is using an aid considered worse than the act of counting cards itself?

Because it's annoying.

Yes, it's that simple.

I don't think it's in any way unfair, but it would slow down the game to the point of being un-enjoyable. If I am not enjoying a game, I will stop playing.

Same as I would stop playing if someone looked up every single word on their character cards in a dictionary. It's not cheating...but I'm not going to sit there while you do that.

so again.

where do you draw the line?

why is one "simple mental trick" (remembering cards) allowed, when another "mental trick" (reading the patterns on the back of the cards) denied?

Two reasons:

1) Marked cards give you exact knowledge of which card is to be flipped, not the likely hood that a card will be flipped.

2) Your opponent does not have equal access to this information. Anyone can calculate the probability of the next flip if they were paying attention and are capable of doing sixth grade math. (if one player had a learning handicap, or was under the age of 12 then yes, I would actually say card counting was unfair, as both players did not have access to it) However, both players do not know how you marked your cards. It is an unfair advantage given to one player and not another. Now, you could argue, "you could both mark your cards!" And, if both players agree to that, who am I to argue? But if one player is doing it secretly then, yes, that player is taking an unfair advantage.

Edited September 17, 2010 by Justin

[Murphy'sLawyer]

I think this is all silly since 99% of people don't have the capability to perform a decent card counting for one deck let alone know what level of risk to take when the averages "look" good. And do all of this while following what is happening on the board; your opponents moves and your own.

But if it provides a fun discussion go for it.

Bring in tools to perform counting for you is a big no no in my book. Humans suck at math when they multi task their thinking. Machines don't.:soapbox:

[Mr_Smigs]

Because it's annoying.

2) Your opponent does not have equal access to this information.

not everyone learns card counting in 6th grade math.

by your definition (a 12 year old, or someone handicapped) there are select times when it's unfair?

so, cheating's OK so long as you both do it equally?

how do you know that 12 year old CAN'T count cards?

or that the handicap isn't faked?

or that the average joe standing on the other side of the table has ever even considered card counting as an option for this game?

[Justin]

not everyone learns card counting in 6th grade math.

by your definition (a 12 year old, or someone handicapped) there are select times when it's unfair?

so, cheating's OK so long as you both do it equally?

how do you know that 12 year old CAN'T count cards?

or that the handicap isn't faked?

or that the average joe standing on the other side of the table has ever even considered card counting as an option for this game?

Everyone learns the skills required for card counting in sixth grade math. (changing probability) Choosing to put it to use is the only question.

Just because my opponent doesn't consider his options doesn't make the fact that I considered mine cheating. You could say the same of any tactical situation. Am I cheating because I thought to hide my models behind terrain and my opponent didn't? The question is: is it outside of the social norms to keep track of the odds of drawing a specific card? I think most would tell you no, it is not. Now, if my opponent specifically asked me before hand, "Hey, buddy, don't count the cards." And I did anyway then, yes, I would call that cheating.

And actually, yes, cheating is ok so long as you both do it equally. To back this up, I would first have to define cheating. I would define it: an unfair advantage gained by one player over another that falls either outside the rules of the game, or the social norms surrounding it. By that definition, if you both cheat "equally" no unfair advantage is had and no cheating has occurred. If both players agree to premeasure for the duration of the game, is premeasuring still cheating simply because the rulebook disallows it? I would say no, both players did it. It was fine.

Yes, there are select times when it is unfair. When your opponent is unable to do it. Similarly, I think there are even times when using good tactical judgement is unfair. If you're teaching a 4 year old how to play and you obey all the rules but play your best and beat the shit out of him...were you being fair?

[Justin]

Hmm...I hope I don't come off as condescending saying any sixth grader has the math skills to count cards.

But I think most people are smart enough to do so, if they choose to.

[Zorlath]

The problem with using a simple +/- system to count is that you're trying to look for something specific, which supposedly you want to use for a specific action. However, if you're holding off preforming your specific action, who's to say by the time you have the deck set up how you want it, you still need it that way? If you're trying to get a +6 to activate Colette, it's possible you hold off her activation until she's the to last to activate, but you still don't have your +6, you could activate your second to last model and even worsen your odds.

The best way to card count is to simply remember all the cards you've already flipped. Believe it or not, it isn't hard to do with a 54 card deck. Most competitive Magic: the Gathering players can do this without it slowing the game.

As for bringing tools to help you. It's like having a tape measure. You're constantly supposed to be using your judgment to determine distances until you commit yourself to an action that requires the distance to be known by everyone.

[Berman]

Think of it this way, when playing poker. You can count cards in your head and are expected to do so.

Using an outside resource to do so is a strict no no.

One is a mark of intellect and skill, to play well and track what you think are your probabilities. Same as having a good eye for distance.

Pre-measuring, computer/spread sheet aids for card counting are akin to the same thing. Both would slow the game down. Both take from the skill of a player. Beyond that its bad form. Akin to the player who never shows you what he played, or incorrectly tells you what his figures abilities are or how they work.

Anyway that is all just personal opinion, but this being a miniatures game and not a computer game. A core element of the rules is that you can't premeasure, I'd warn a player using outside help to count cards once then kick them from a tournament if they persisted.

[Wodschow]

Well... There's a reason that there's a rule against looking through the Discard Piles.

If you could just write the order of the cards in the pile down, then what use is it?

[icemantis99]

There's a rule against looking at the discard pile? Huh. *shrug*

Anyways. They way I think about it is like this:

Let's look at measuring distances as a example.

If you're experienced at wargaming, you can judge distances pretty well in your head. You can tell if two given models are within a foot prety easily, and could make a good guess at any given range.

If my opponent is sitting there staring at the table for 5 minutes before declaring his/her action, it's pretty shady. I'm gonna ask him/her to try and speed up, or I'm not going to play with them, they're obviously pre-judging distance. It's not specifically against the rules, but it's against the spirit of the rules, it's annoying, and it slows the game down.

If my opponent pulls a ruler out before declaring his/her action, I'm crying foul. That's blatant cheating.

Summary: Keeping a running tally in your head? Not cheating, just good battle awareness. Deep-analyzing the cards? Sorta cheating, not exactly good sportsmanship. Using a outside device, be it a pencil/paper combo, a spreadsheet, or a calculator? Blatant cheating.

And Smigs, please, don't use "slippery slope" arguments. It's terrible logic, and it makes my head hurt. "If we do y, what's to stop us from eating babies?" Makes very little sense, and sides, I can use it against you.

"If we don't allow counting cards, why don't we disallow thinking about the batlefield at all?"

[icemantis99]

Back on topic...

I haven't found it really practical to count cards in Malifaux. I play Ramos/Levi a lot, and it's just too much work, to be really honest. I mean, for Levi, it can be nice to count crows for some triggers, but it's no worh the hassle a lot. Just my personal opinion, of course.

[Keltheos]

I really hope we don't have to put some long list of "Do's and Do Not's" when it comes to card counting and skirting the border of honest game play, the fact that this thread has turned into a morality debate is a little frightening…at the end of the day, Malifaux is just a game – one that is intended to be enjoyed by all players, including those who can’t count cards.

Card counting is effectively premeasuring your Deck and/or your opponent’s Deck. Some folks excel at guessing distances without the aid of a tape measure, the same goes true for cards (although for me dedicated card counters drift closer to the cheating arena than the ability to eyeball distances well does). If you're bringing an 'aid' to the table (the length of a book off to one side, or your hand span placed strategically during a turn - for measuring; a spreadsheet or some other means of physically tracking cards played (stacking innocuous counters in a certain way off the table, etc) - for counting cards) you've crossed from 'being good at' something to 'exploiting/cheating' it in my book.

That isn't to say folks good at mentally counting cards aren't taking advantage of a system, regardless of what the 'norms' are for that player's local area. But, just like poker, where a good knowledge of what cards are in play and how that changes the odds for a hand it has to be acceptable on some level. There is no benchmark to say where that acceptable level is other than a person’s own moral compass (well, that and I’m sure Vegas could pass on some hard fast rules on how to spot a card counter).

And, I'm sure someone who's good at tracking model interactions, strategic planning, AND able to track up to 108 cards at once should be using those skills in Vegas, rather than at the Malifaux tables. Rain Man would approve.

Edited September 18, 2010 by Keltheos

[icemantis99]

I really hope we don't have to put some long list of "Do's and Do Not's" when it comes to card counting and skirting the border of honest game play, the fact that this thread has turned into a morality debate is a little frightening…at the end of the day, Malifaux is just a game – one that is intended to be enjoyed by all players, including those who can’t count cards.

Card counting is effectively premeasuring your Deck and/or your opponent’s Deck. Some folks excel at guessing distances without the aid of a tape measure, the same goes true for cards (although for me dedicated card counters drift closer to the cheating arena than the ability to eyeball distances well does). If you're bringing an 'aid' to the table (the length of a book off to one side, or your hand span placed strategically during a turn - for measuring; a spreadsheet or some other means of physically tracking cards played (stacking innocuous counters in a certain way off the table, etc) - for counting cards) you've crossed from 'being good at' something to

'exploiting/cheating' it in my book.

That isn't to say folks good at mentally counting cards aren't taking advantage of a system, regardless of what the 'norms' are for that player's local area. But, just like poker, where a good knowledge of what cards are in play and how that changes the odds for a hand it has to be acceptable on some level. There is no benchmark to say where that acceptable level is other than a person’s own moral compass (well, that and I’m sure Vegas could pass on some hard fast rules on how to spot a card counter).

And, I'm sure someone who's good at tracking model interactions, strategic planning, AND able to track up to 108 cards at once should be using those skills in Vegas, rather than at the Malifaux tables. Rain Man would approve.

*applause*

[Justin]

I really hope we don't have to put some long list of "Do's and Do Not's" when it comes to card counting and skirting the border of honest game play, the fact that this thread has turned into a morality debate is a little frightening…at the end of the day, Malifaux is just a game – one that is intended to be enjoyed by all players, including those who can’t count cards.

Card counting is effectively premeasuring your Deck and/or your opponent’s Deck. Some folks excel at guessing distances without the aid of a tape measure, the same goes true for cards (although for me dedicated card counters drift closer to the cheating arena than the ability to eyeball distances well does). If you're bringing an 'aid' to the table (the length of a book off to one side, or your hand span placed strategically during a turn - for measuring; a spreadsheet or some other means of physically tracking cards played (stacking innocuous counters in a certain way off the table, etc) - for counting cards) you've crossed from 'being good at' something to 'exploiting/cheating' it in my book.

That isn't to say folks good at mentally counting cards aren't taking advantage of a system, regardless of what the 'norms' are for that player's local area. But, just like poker, where a good knowledge of what cards are in play and how that changes the odds for a hand it has to be acceptable on some level. There is no benchmark to say where that acceptable level is other than a person’s own moral compass (well, that and I’m sure Vegas could pass on some hard fast rules on how to spot a card counter).

And, I'm sure someone who's good at tracking model interactions, strategic planning, AND able to track up to 108 cards at once should be using those skills in Vegas, rather than at the Malifaux tables. Rain Man would approve.

Some of us just enjoy morality debates.

Next rulebook though, you guys should totally have an entire section on how much card counting is allowed.

[Bigmike]

I really hope we don't have to put some long list of "Do's and Do Not's" when it comes to card counting and skirting the border of honest game play, the fact that this thread has turned into a morality debate is a little frightening…at the end of the day, Malifaux is just a game – one that is intended to be enjoyed by all players, including those who can’t count cards.

Card counting is effectively premeasuring your Deck and/or your opponent’s Deck. Some folks excel at guessing distances without the aid of a tape measure, the same goes true for cards (although for me dedicated card counters drift closer to the cheating arena than the ability to eyeball distances well does). If you're bringing an 'aid' to the table (the length of a book off to one side, or your hand span placed strategically during a turn - for measuring; a spreadsheet or some other means of physically tracking cards played (stacking innocuous counters in a certain way off the table, etc) - for counting cards) you've crossed from 'being good at' something to 'exploiting/cheating' it in my book.

That isn't to say folks good at mentally counting cards aren't taking advantage of a system, regardless of what the 'norms' are for that player's local area. But, just like poker, where a good knowledge of what cards are in play and how that changes the odds for a hand it has to be acceptable on some level. There is no benchmark to say where that acceptable level is other than a person’s own moral compass (well, that and I’m sure Vegas could pass on some hard fast rules on how to spot a card counter).

And, I'm sure someone who's good at tracking model interactions, strategic planning, AND able to track up to 108 cards at once should be using those skills in Vegas, rather than at the Malifaux tables. Rain Man would approve.

My Hero!

[Mr_Smigs]

And Smigs, please, don't use "slippery slope" arguments. It's terrible logic, and it makes my head hurt. "If we do y, what's to stop us from eating babies?" Makes very little sense, and sides, I can use it against you.

"If we don't allow counting cards, why don't we disallow thinking about the batlefield at all?"

gotta draw the line somewhere.

but there we go,

card counting = premeasuring.

Card counting is effectively premeasuring your Deck and/or your opponent’s Deck.

i have to admit, i was kinda distressed when the people who would be in charge of tourneys (henchmen) were talking like this was an acceptable practice.

Edited September 19, 2010 by Mr_Smigs

[Justin]

And Smigs, please, don't use "slippery slope" arguments. It's terrible logic, and it makes my head hurt. "If we do y, what's to stop us from eating babies?" Makes very little sense, and sides, I can use it against you.

"If we don't allow counting cards, why don't we disallow thinking about the batlefield at all?"

The slippery slope argument sometimes has some merit.

To take the baby eating example:

Let's say we were arguing about cooking the babies. Now, once the babies are already cooked, the next logical step is to marinate them. And from there, eating them just makes sense.

Now, if we DIDN'T marinate the babies, we would have an entirely different situation.

[icemantis99]

gotta draw the line somewhere.

but there we go,

card counting = premeasuring.

I have to admit, i was kinda distressed when the people who would be in charge of tourneys (henchmen) were talking like this was an acceptable practice.

Um. No, it's not equal. We never said that. in fact, we really kinda specifically didn't say that. We said something to the effect of "using outside tools to count cards is pretty flagrant cheating, but in the end, it's all up to how you and your opponent(s) play the game; so long as you're having fun, who cares?"

Also, I prefer a slow-roasted baby, myself, usually with a apple-juice/peach nectar marinade. Them's good eatings!

[Justin]

Um. No, it's not equal. We never said that. in fact, we really kinda specifically didn't say that. We said something to the effect of "using outside tools to count cards is pretty flagrant cheating, but in the end, it's all up to how you and your opponent(s) play the game; so long as you're having fun, who cares?"

Also, I prefer a slow-roasted baby, myself, usually with a apple-juice/peach nectar marinade. Them's good eatings!

Surprising thing about babies: good for stew.

It's that baby fat. Just melts into the broth.

It's my personal favorite after a long night of counting cards in games of Malifaux against handicapped orphans.

[icemantis99]

Surprising thing about babies: good for stew.

It's that baby fat. Just melts into the broth.

It's my personal favorite after a long night of counting cards in games of Malifaux against handicapped orphans.

They also make good shoes! That soft spot just cushions your feet like you were walking on a cloud.

[Berman]

Gotta go to K-mart... gottaa get some underwear at K-mart.

[nilus]

Thank you Kelthios for that very concise response.

I just wanted to add that perhaps my intial comment was little overzealous. I was thinking more in terms of card awarness rather then a true card counting system. Although strictly not against the rules I can see where some people would have a problem with it. In thr future I plan to refrain from any comments that might imply I am encouraging the practice.

Peace out everbody. And please stop eating those babies.

[icemantis99]

But they is so delicious!

[Justin]

Thank you Kelthios for that very concise response.

I just wanted to add that perhaps my intial comment was little overzealous. I was thinking more in terms of card awarness rather then a true card counting system. Although strictly not against the rules I can see where some people would have a problem with it. In thr future I plan to refrain from any comments that might imply I am encouraging the practice.

Peace out everbody. And please stop eating those babies.

The thing about card counting is: it's thinking.

It's in your head.

There is no way a game could or should have a rule, implied or otherwise, against a form of thought. How do you know what people are thinking? How do you even police that?

Sure, having an actual system (which, by the by, traditional black jack systems wouldn't even work for Malifaux) is a whole lot sketchier than just being aware of the cards. But at the same time, they are the exact same principle. And there's no way to police one without policing the other.

The idea of having any sort of rule or trying to call your opponents on counting cards is ridiculous. The only time it would become a problem is if they sit for five minutes in between every. single. decision. But then, I would have a problem with them taking that long no matter what was going through their head.

If babies weren't meant to be eaten, they wouldn't be made out of meat.