Card Counting

[RisingPhoenix]

Can anyone else think how to phrase it? Gatekeeper?

He is literally telling people not to play the game if they won't play the way he likes to play. Like literally. Quit. Don't buy models. Don't paint them. Don't play with him. Don't play with anyone he knows. Don't play with anyone he doesn't know. Just go somewhere else and do something else.

I think "Arrogant Gatekeeper" is entirely apt description of that attitude. Trust me, were I trying to be actually insulting, I could think of much, much worse.

As for name calling, he called people who actually try to win when they play a competitive game "Junkies" and "pitiful." That? That would be actual namecalling.

[WEiRD sKeTCH]

Lets get back on the topic, please. Or the thread will close

[icemantis99]

Can anyone else think how to phrase it? Gatekeeper?

He is literally telling people not to play the game if they won't play the way he likes to play. Like literally. Quit. Don't buy models. Don't paint them. Don't play with him. Don't play with anyone he knows. Don't play with anyone he doesn't know. Just go somewhere else and do something else.

I think "Arrogant Gatekeeper" is entirely apt description of that attitude. Trust me, were I trying to be actually insulting, I could think of much, much worse.

As for name calling, he called people who actually try to win when they play a competitive game "Junkies" and "pitiful." That? That would be actual namecalling.

Listen. Easiest rule to debate is "don't get upset". No matter what your opponent says, no matter what they call you, don't retort on the same level. Stick to your original arguments, counter what actual points they bring up, and ignore any personal attacks. You look a lot smarter when you're speaking calmly and your opponent is shouting.

Anyways, +1 to closing thread. We've stopped talking about counting cards pages ago.

[Ciaran]

Card counting: We've seen one solid technique in the past ten pages. Is there another that might be as easy to impart?

At what point does it move from "I have an idea of what I've played." to "I'm a cheater because I mentally track the probability of getting the numerical cards I need." in your minds?

Edited September 24, 2010 by Ciaran

[Daniele]

I totally respect other views on gaming than my own (but sadly, you seem to have a problem with other opinions RisingPhoenix).

I never meant to insult anybody who wants to play hard. I just said it's more interesting for gamers that want to max out their play if they have a gaming partner who thinks the same way

This has nothing to do with being arrogant or telling others to play my way. I never said that, i said I prefer to play with people that have the same interest in the game as I do.

You actually said the same thing, only that you are more the kind of power gamer and I'm more casual. No problems there, I guess.

And having an easy time playing doensn't neccessarily mean that you don't think or don't build strategies. We're not playing Yatzee here (not just because it's no dice game).

I think on strategies as well but I wouldn't try count cards to foresee what cards my opponent might play next. I'd rather focus on setting up my crew on the terrain to optimize my chances.

Anyways the cards are shuffled so many times during a game that i can't imagine how counting cards really imporves your chances

But if I have offended anybody with my previous statement, I apologize for it.

But counting cards comes quite close to manipulating dice to win in other games... if you want to play a game with no random factor at all I'd recommend checkers

Sorry for disturbing your discussion.

[Justin]

But counting cards comes quite close to manipulating dice to win in other games... if you want to play a game with no random factor at all I'd recommend checkers

Totally ignoring whatever else is going on...

This, I think, is the common misconception that leads to the whole debate.

Counting cards is in no way comparable to dice manipulation.

Counting cards does not make the game less random.

All that counting cards does is allow you to understand the probabilities. With dice, probabilities are very easy to understand. Dice have six sides, and you don't have to deal with changing probability. The ability to understand the probabilities surrounding them is so simple that it's implicit. "Should I take the armor save on the guy who will make it on a 2 or higher or a 3 or higher? Hmm, I think I'll take it on the guy with a 2 or higher, as he has better odds of living." That scenario is analogous to card counting, or as analogous as you're going to get in a dice game anyway.

Dice manipulation is more akin to physically stacking or marking the deck, which is an entirely different discussion all together.

Card counting will NEVER give you a certain answer as to exactly which card will be flipped, unless there is only one card left in the deck. And who among you, having flipped 53 cards without seeing the red joker, would ignore the fact that the last card must be the red joker? That is the prime example of card counting.

Now, there are some rare situations in which every single card left in the deck gives you a favorable outcome. But in those situations one of two things is occurring:

A) You are performing an action with a ridiculously low cost. (example: you only fail on the black joker, you already flipped the black joker, you know you will succeed)

You had a HORRIBLE turn up to that point and are probably losing anyway, as you apparently flipped nothing but low cards for most of the turn.

B is the only situation in which card counting might be construed as unfair. And in that situation, well, you're probably boned anyway. Also, B would be obvious even on an intuitive level. Without a mathematical system to tell you that the last 12 cards were 11s or higher, an average player could probably still figure out, "Huh, there aren't many cards left. I haven't seen higher than a 10 this whole turn. I guess they must be in there." Which is, in itself, rudimentary card counting.

Card counting gets its bad rap from Vegas, where the casinos have a vested interest in giving it a bad rap. Also, it is most efficiently executed by a group of people. A team, most of whom spread out among the black jack tables and make minimal bets every hand until situation B (described above) happens for one of them. (As it will eventually with enough people. Also black jack players don't stop to move models around, so they tend to go through cards faster). So, eventually one of the decks gets to a point where all the cards are favorable. At this point that team member signals their real player to sit down and tells him the "count" through some covert means. he acts like a high roller and takes the casino to the bank, bouncing from table to table only when the decks are hot.

I think it is obvious why this is seen as unfair, and why card counting has a bad rap. But there is really no comparison between this and Malifaux. You can't signal your friend to randomly take over for you, win for half a turn, and then leave. If your deck gets "hot" it means you sat through a turn of shit pulls. There is no avoiding that. No bouncing from table to table and cashing out when the deck cools off. In Malifaux, you may know the count, but unless you can play the tactical aspect of the game all that it's going to tell you is how likely you are to get ****ed. Which, it turns out, is probably pretty likely.

Edited September 24, 2010 by Justin

[Ciaran]

Lalo: At that point isn't counting just another aspect of the tactical game?

I agree completely. It's not manipulating chance, it's keeping an eye on the odds, which IS a lot easier in dice games.

[Justin]

Lalo: At that point isn't counting just another aspect of the tactical game?

I agree completely. It's not manipulating chance, it's keeping an eye on the odds, which IS a lot easier in dice games.

I wouldn't say so, no. But that's purely semantic.

It's kind of hard to phrase this right...

Card counting is nothing but the calculation of the odds. Tactics is the logical application of where those odds are best positioned. They're not really the same skill set at all. One a calculator can do, the other is much more complex.

They are related and should both be used together. And they're both definitely parts of the game. But I wouldn't consider either one an aspect of the other; I see them as separate.

[Ciaran]

Gotcha, I was looking at it from a slightly different angle I think.

Nice to have a thread on track!

[Daniele]

I understand your point. Like that it really has nothing to do with manipulation.

But then again it seems to be just checking whether the jokers are left inside the opposing/won deck. There always stays the uncertainty of the opoonents hand. Even when the really valuable cards haven't been flipped, they could still be there. But then again you can be pretty sure that your opponent has a certain card in his hand when it didn't flip and the deck is reshuffled after being empty.

Nothing requiring a certain technique or something...

Maybe i have over interpreted the intentions when reading "card counting".

I thought you were going for something like cheating-in-Vegas-card-counting, which would be much more of a schience of it's own.

I think everyone tries to keep track of the high cards that have already been flipped or cheated during the game.

But on that view... is it worth a discussion at all?:hmmmm:

[Justin]

I understand your point. Like that it really has nothing to do with manipulation.

But then again it seems to be just checking whether the jokers are left inside the opposing/won deck. There always stays the uncertainty of the opoonents hand. Even when the really valuable cards haven't been flipped, they could still be there. But then again you can be pretty sure that your opponent has a certain card in his hand when it didn't flip and the deck is reshuffled after being empty.

Nothing requiring a certain technique or something...

Maybe i have over interpreted the intentions when reading "card counting".

I thought you were going for something like cheating-in-Vegas-card-counting, which would be much more of a schience of it's own.

I think everyone tries to keep track of the high cards that have already been flipped or cheated during the game.

But on that view... is it worth a discussion at all?:hmmmm:

The only real question is: how good are we allowed to be at card counting?

To put it this way: if you had a photographic memory and could actually remember every card flipped, that would be the best form of card counting possible in Malifaux. (or anything for that matter) All of those Vegas style systems exist precisely because most people don't have memories that good, so a system is easier.

[Morgan Vening]

Card counting could also be limited by use of precursor cards. Start of your turn, shuffle the deck, discard your unwanted, draw up to your control card hand size, and then deal the top X cards from your deck face down into your discard pile.

A good number is probably 6 or 8, and could even be tied to your Hand Size. By being face down, anything more than minor counting becomes irrelevant, because the knowledge won't be able to take those cards into account. With a 6 discard, and 2 cards left in the undrawn, it goes from a 50/50 chance, to a 1/8 chance. If that's the best odds a card counter can expect, it's not likely to be a problem.

I don't have enough experience with the game to know if not running through the full sequence of cards before reshuffling is a problem for the designers, or not, but for the turns where you DON'T run through them all, they all get reshuffled early anyway.

Morgan Vening

[Wodschow]

I don't see why you shouldn't be allowed to keep track of the cards in your head..

I mean.. Everyone notices the important ones anyway (Jokers and high suits they'd need for certain spells).

I remember a fair bit of what's gone by subconsciously.. More so than most other I know, I couldn't possibly blame them for using a system to count cards with, and I have no idea as to how I could make myself not notice the cards I flip (other than getting drunk before every game..).

@Lalo: I think agree with you entirely on the matter, but I feel you forgot a few things.

You mention flipping favourable cards as being the only thing you gain from card counting.

For instance: If you've had a blast of a turn with good flips entirely or the enemy have had a real bad turn thus far..

Then you know it's probably best not to move your remaining models in to harms way.

@Morgan: Burning cards is an interesting idea.. Can't help but feel it's kind of an overreaction though.

@quotemyname: Because... Every post on a forum would have to be compilable? I believe none of them are.

=/= is approximately how you'd write it when doing math on the paper so it's a notation that people with no clue about programming should get aswell.

[David.Hanold]

I take my games very seriously,

Card counting is dirty. You want to play dirty by all means do so. But don't complain when players start to break the game or a math wiz with a major photographic memory wins every tourney.

Why would you even want this?...ugh

You are just asking to ruin a game when you look for ways to break it. Players looking for that unbeatable deck and crying about how it make tourneys stale are the number one cause for innovative card games dying.

The main reason you play a game is to have an enjoyable sit down and fair game against the opponent. If your opponent isn't having fun then how can you be? Unless your just being a jerk...but that will eventually net you 0 friends/opponents.

I won't call card counting "cheating" but I will say it is "cheese".

There is a huge difference between a gentlemen's duel and a street brawl but both are competitive fighting styles. Which do you prefer to be a part of? That is the question you must ask yourself.

IMO you will only turn people off this game or scare people from playing it with ridiculous topics like this in the games forum. Funny you want this stickied ... I want this closed asap. I had to convince 3 of the people in my group how hard card counting is in this before they purchased it. If they wonder about it...I am sure other potential customers do too, and the last thing you want them seeing is a topic on card counting.

[David.Hanold]

I don't see why you shouldn't be allowed to keep track of the cards in your head..

I mean.. Everyone notices the important ones anyway (Jokers and high suits they'd need for certain spells).

I remember a fair bit of what's gone by subconsciously.. More so than most other I know, I couldn't possibly blame them for using a system to count cards with, and I have no idea as to how I could make myself not notice the cards I flip (other than getting drunk before every game..).

This is fine. Because you are still playing with you and your opponent's enjoyment in mind. You are not trying to break a game and even if you do you haven't revealed the system publicly for how you do it. In other words you are still being a gentleman.

This topic on the other hand is about trying to break the system. The TC is asking for a system...and now we head down a slippery slope. Just like meta in trading card games.

What will happen next is once a system is in place people will start using the system to figure out the best faction and what the best crew will look like...then follows the "THIS UNIT/CREW is OP" and the demand for FAQs and Errata. Then Wyrd has to hold out and hope they have a competitive community by the time the next book (which is now being used for balance rather than fluff and fun) is released. That wouldn't be a factor if the competitive community wasn't so vocal, but that is just the way the gaming community is. The casuals make up the most revenue and are less vocal, but they still read and reflect on the competitive discussions happing in the forums.

Edited September 25, 2010 by David.Hanold

[Zethal]

Curator....

There has been pages of discussion about this, it's more then a bit rude to enter the a discussion 12 pages in without reading pretty much any of it.

Every single one of your points has been addressed, most even within the last few pages. It would require many more pages to go through all the arguments and socratic questioning again.

[Justin]

I don't see why you shouldn't be allowed to keep track of the cards in your head..

I mean.. Everyone notices the important ones anyway (Jokers and high suits they'd need for certain spells).

I remember a fair bit of what's gone by subconsciously.. More so than most other I know, I couldn't possibly blame them for using a system to count cards with, and I have no idea as to how I could make myself not notice the cards I flip (other than getting drunk before every game..).

@Lalo: I think agree with you entirely on the matter, but I feel you forgot a few things.

You mention flipping favourable cards as being the only thing you gain from card counting.

For instance: If you've had a blast of a turn with good flips entirely or the enemy have had a real bad turn thus far..

Then you know it's probably best not to move your remaining models in to harms way.

@Morgan: Burning cards is an interesting idea.. Can't help but feel it's kind of an overreaction though.

@quotemyname: Because... Every post on a forum would have to be compilable? I believe none of them are.

=/= is approximately how you'd write it when doing math on the paper so it's a notation that people with no clue about programming should get aswell.

Right, this is true.

But the point is: card counting only gives certain outcomes if all the high cards in your deck are in one place.

In which case...your game was going to be pretty weird anyway. And you would have noticed that without even really trying.

[RisingPhoenix]

There's some advantages to be had. Imagine you're playing as Perdita versus Lilith. It's late in the turn, and you have a shot at getting Lilith. You're in a situation where you can sit Perdita tight and gun Lilith, or run away and avoid a Mature that's going to be charging you.

If your deck is positive, and your opponents is negative, you have a much better chance of getting through Lilith's defense then if the reverse is true. This can and will influence your decision making process.

I do like the dice analogy. No one think's its cheesy to know the standard deviations in a dice game, as opposed to just the averages. If you know there's a 40% chance a key vehicle could survive and wreck a squad, you might run them away, even though "on average" they destroy the vehicle.

[Justin]

There's some advantages to be had. Imagine you're playing as Perdita versus Lilith. It's late in the turn, and you have a shot at getting Lilith. You're in a situation where you can sit Perdita tight and gun Lilith, or run away and avoid a Mature that's going to be charging you.

If your deck is positive, and your opponents is negative, you have a much better chance of getting through Lilith's defense then if the reverse is true. This can and will influence your decision making process.

I do like the dice analogy. No one think's its cheesy to know the standard deviations in a dice game, as opposed to just the averages. If you know there's a 40% chance a key vehicle could survive and wreck a squad, you might run them away, even though "on average" they destroy the vehicle.

I'm not saying knowing the odds isn't useful unless you have a guaranteed outcome.

I'm just saying that card counting does not create situations with a guaranteed outcome: those happen on their own, card counting just lets you know that they are there. And, more importantly, that those situations are few and far between. It does not turn the game into checkers.

Knowing the odds of success is always useful, of course. But it strikes me that even the most vehement opponents of counting in this thread have no problem with that, they seem to think that counting actually influences the deck in some way or makes the game "less random." Which it doesn't.

[Q'iq'el]

The bottomline, I think, is that the game already has built-in mechanisms making card-counting not a serious threat to playability. I think Icemantis has already said that early in the thread. At this point, I think, any further "interventions" to make card-counting harder are over-reaction.

So what these mechanisms are?

1. Irregular flip sequence. Unlike most card games where you flip cards in a very strict order, in Malifaux card flips are dictated by the situation on the table. You may think you know how many duels and flips are ahead of you, but one shot into complex melee situation makes you flip several duels worth of cards and completely out of sequence. Never mind an unexpected Terror test or a Morale Duel triggered by Rip in Half-like trigger.

Secondly, Malifaux requires so many flips that even in medium size 35 SS game it isn't unusual to flip through entire deck in one turn. Whenever that happens you reshufle the deck, which means all the previous card counting becomes irrelevant.

2. Soulstones - as long as your opponent has at least one Soulstone left, you can't really predict what numbers he's going to pull. He might have spend that 12 of :crows, but one Soulstone and he effectively ends up with 16 of :crows which isn't even available as a card.

3. Control Hand - Some players spend it whole, some players hold to one or two best cards for the decisive moment. In that later case you can't know what the outcome of the next duel will be. If by any chance your opponent goes through his entire deck and you notice which card he must be holding to, you are still in situation of uncertainty - will he use that card in the next duel? In a way, it's even worse, because now you have to take into consideration possibility of him playing that card you've just guessed in your every duel, which at the very least is resource-intensive, and typically means you will refrain from many, perhaps necessary, actions. (In other words it's like the old joke about GM's computer system calculating costs of future projects, but not the costs of canceling future projects).

This is because the good Hand is not the end on its own, like in most card games, but merely a tool to control situation on the table better. You don't win games by guessing opponent's hands correctly, unlike in many popular card games.

4. All sorts of abilities models have. Even if you remember the opponent has spent all his :masks (however unlikely), you still have to consider the fact he may simply add a :masks to his stats from some other models ability (sure not all models have it). Then there are abilities that buff stats, which change situation on the table without any connection to the Fate Deck.

Sure, some form of card counting gives some small advantage. You can try to guess what cards your opponent is holding to, for example. At the same time you can typically tell if the hand is good by watching them draw it. Heh, there's a lot of people who are virtually telling all their opponents they've got a joker in their hand with their facial expression alone.

The other obvious advantage comes from remembering the cards you've spent yourself. That basically tells you which of your options are still feasible and what do you need to commit to pull them off. Not only I don't think it's a problem, but the game is virtually designed around players doing so and if you're bad at it, you're bad at Malifaux' resources management. That's the skill most people learn and employ without even thinking about it though.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Q'iq'el

[AvatarForm]

The bottomline, I think, is that the game already has built-in mechanisms making card-counting not a serious threat to playability. I think Icemantis has already said that early in the thread. At this point, I think, any further "interventions" to make card-counting harder are over-reaction.

So what these mechanisms are?

1. Irregular flip sequence. Unlike most card games where you flip cards in a very strict order, in Malifaux card flips are dictated by the situation on the table. You may think you know how many duels and flips are ahead of you, but one shot into complex melee situation makes you flip several duels worth of cards and completely out of sequence. Never mind an unexpected Terror test or a Morale Duel triggered by Rip in Half-like trigger.

Secondly, Malifaux requires so many flips that even in medium size 35 SS game it isn't unusual to flip through entire deck in one turn. Whenever that happens you reshufle the deck, which means all the previous card counting becomes irrelevant.

2. Soulstones - as long as your opponent has at least one Soulstone left, you can't really predict what numbers he's going to pull. He might have spend that 12 of :crows, but one Soulstone and he effectively ends up with 16 of :crows which isn't even available as a card.

3. Control Hand - Some players spend it whole, some players hold to one or two best cards for the decisive moment. In that later case you can't know what the outcome of the next duel will be. If by any chance your opponent goes through his entire deck and you notice which card he must be holding to, you are still in situation of uncertainty - will he use that card in the next duel? In a way, it's even worse, because now you have to take into consideration possibility of him playing that card you've just guessed in your every duel, which at the very least is resource-intensive, and typically means you will refrain from many, perhaps necessary, actions. (In other words it's like the old joke about GM's computer system calculating costs of future projects, but not the costs of canceling future projects).

This is because the good Hand is not the end on its own, like in most card games, but merely a tool to control situation on the table better. You don't win games by guessing opponent's hands correctly, unlike in many popular card games.

4. All sorts of abilities models have. Even if you remember the opponent has spent all his :masks (however unlikely), you still have to consider the fact he may simply add a :masks to his stats from some other models ability (sure not all models have it). Then there are abilities that buff stats, which change situation on the table without any connection to the Fate Deck.

Sure, some form of card counting gives some small advantage. You can try to guess what cards your opponent is holding to, for example. At the same time you can typically tell if the hand is good by watching them draw it. Heh, there's a lot of people who are virtually telling all their opponents they've got a joker in their hand with their facial expression alone.

The other obvious advantage comes from remembering the cards you've spent yourself. That basically tells you which of your options are still feasible and what do you need to commit to pull them off. Not only I don't think it's a problem, but the game is virtually designed around players doing so and if you're bad at it, you're bad at Malifaux' resources management. That's the skill most people learn and employ without even thinking about it though.

BOOYAH!

/thread?

[Ciaran]

Avatar, no. It's not even close.

Q' Nothing you posted makes me think it's not useful to keep a running hi-low count. Suits and the like would be next to impossible for me, having an idea of number ranges would make a lot of sense though.

So with that in mind: I think that the "standard" technique used by Blackjack counting teams might well work, with the exception of having a team to signal a player to hop onto a hot table.

Before I dig up that (easily found) information does anyone have any thoughts as to an actual system to keep track of numeric card ranges?

[Dolomyte]

99% of the people who play malifaux (and people in general) are not mentally capable to count cards.

If you desperately need to learn how to do it, go out and buy one of the many books available about it. or, and this is simple, just google it. It's been stated by the wyrd people they dont want the nuts and bolts of how to do it in this thread, on their boards.

Also, based on the game mechanics of cheating fate, and soulstones, and the importance of suit specific draws, it makes card counting near worthless. It's really only a boon in blackjack. I welcome you to try it in a casino.

[Justin]

99% of the people who play malifaux (and people in general) are not mentally capable to count cards.

This is just blatantly incorrect.

[AvatarForm]

99% of the people who play malifaux (and people in general) are not mentally capable to count cards.

If you desperately need to learn how to do it, go out and buy one of the many books available about it. or, and this is simple, just google it. It's been stated by the wyrd people they dont want the nuts and bolts of how to do it in this thread, on their boards.

Also, based on the game mechanics of cheating fate, and soulstones, and the importance of suit specific draws, it makes card counting near worthless. It's really only a boon in blackjack. I welcome you to try it in a casino.

Im offended by your statement (marked in bold), I believe the majority of Malifaux players would be perfectly able to do so. Afterall, the system works in favour of a higher mental capacity, as opposed to d6 rollers.

However, I agree with the remainder of your post. Particularly the paragraph that recommends not posting How To on these forums.