PDA

View Full Version : Super Hero Effectiveness - Game Result Stats



LexLuthorJr
03-18-2013, 02:17 PM
Even before the game's release, there have been talks about how good the SuperHeroes are. So when I received the game, I decided to keep track of game results. So far, my friends and I have played 50 games. I kept track of all the scores, characters, and players. Keep in mind that this is just the base information. However, at face value, the results are interesting and my surprise you.

Aquaman was on top, winning 40% of the games he was in. The Flash came in second at 35%. Here are the rankings...

Aquaman - 40%
The Flash - 35%
Green Lantern - 27%
Wonder Woman - 21%
Cyborg - 21%
Superman - 19%
Martian Manhunter - 18%
Batman - 15%

My thoughts based on what I observed...

Aquaman was consistantly effective because of his ability. First, he doesn't favor any card type, so he can gain whatever the best card is available without worrying about making the most of his ability. He can also gain a great early game advantage. For example, if Aquaman has three power on his first turn, he can buy a kick to use immediately on the following turn. That would give Aquaman five or six power, allowing him to buy most cards in the line-up. Aquaman also doesn't need to wait for better cards to roll back arround such as Locations and Defensive cards.

The Flash and Green Lantern also seem to do well simply because of not needing to worry about any specific card type. The Flash's draw ability takes a little time to start, but runs pretty consistantly afterwards. He seems to do better when consentrating more on buying a lot of small draw cards rather than the bigger, better cards. Green Lantern also takes a little time to get started, but his ability is easy to trigger. Green Lantern can be held back if he cannot destroy the Starter cards of gains too many Weaknesses.

Wonder Woman is risk versus reward. There are a large pool of villains to pull from, so it is reasonable to have her draw six or seven cards a turn. The disadvantage is that the card draw is so tempting that she may pass up on Defensive cards and gain several Weaknesses. She would also not benefit as easily from Green Arrow or Utility Belt.

Cyborg has a consistant card draw and power increase, and trigger off the Defensive cards even when not used defensively. The disadvantage is a low power increase (it will only be a maximum of 1) and he must compete with other characters for defensive Equipment and Super Powers.

Despite no other character triggering from Heroes, Martian Manhunter is not as effective as previously thought. That seems to be due to deck randomness not allowing his ability to trigger, as well as Heroes being grabbed to ensure Green Arrow's victory points. And like Wonder Woman, Martian Manhunter may pass up on Defensive cards for the sake of getting his ability to trigger.

Surprisingly, Superman did a little better than Batman. Both characters struggled because of type-specific abilites and competing with other characters for Defense cards and generally good Super Powers and Equipment (ie Heat Vision and Green Arrow's Bow). I think Batman fairing a little worse had to do with no real heavy-hitting Equipment, as well as competition from other characters to trigger victory points from Utility Belt. There is no Super Power equvilant to Green Arrow, Suicide Squad, and Utility Belt, so that's why I think Superman ended up a little better. (That and Kick always being available.)

Final thoughts...

Having said all that, there doesn't seem to be any real domination by a certain character. Aquaman was clearly the best, but I don't see a 40% win pecentage as being anything to worry about. Many games come down to luck. Also, the tides can turn depending on the number of players (Wonder Woman dominates games with fewer players) and the game's match-ups (Martian Manhunter will do better if going against the competing Cyborg and Batman). While Superman and Batman may be harder to use, I don't think any character is "bad" as long as you can adapt and play smart.

IAmTheGreat
03-18-2013, 02:47 PM
The stats are interesting, but there are a lot more factors you have to look at


Number of players : If Aquaman was used more in games with less people his numbers would be skewed. Playing a 5 person game reduces your chance of winning. where as a 2 player game makes it much more likely.

Other characters being used: If Batman is used but is directly behind Cyborg in turn order thats going to hinder him greatly during the game.

Card availability: If you play as Superman but you dont see any Super Speeds/Bulletsproofs/Etc in the early game thats going to diminish his chances of winning.

Other players strategy: If theres a certain person in your group who plays very well with Flash (for whatever reason), yet the Cyborg player is buying stupid shit like Banes over Green Arrow Bows, that plays a factor

Trashing effects availability: Certain charcters excel more with less starters (Lantern, Martian, etc), so depending on the trashing cards that are made available, that changes the results greatly.

Game distribution: Unless you used each character in the same number of games as each other character, their percentages wont be as accurate as they could be.

And of course sample size. 50 may seem like a lot, but in a game of such variety and with 8 different characters, 50 games is a pretty low amount to try and base findings off of. Sure its certainly interesting, but not concrete.

Clavaat
03-19-2013, 12:26 PM
Both posts are very accurate. OP, your statistics are actually very close to mine, and for pretty much the same reasons.

Now, IAmTheGreat: You forgot a big factor: Luck. This game relies heavily on the right cards coming out at the right time, and actually being able to draw the cards that you need at the right time. Hell, it starts from the very beginning with who gets the better Starter draw. Of course, with any other DBG, there is strategy as far as what to grab, knowing whats in the Main Deck, and whether or not it is a good time to just buy a Kick instead of filling in a space. But really, a Man of Steel coming out, or a Suicide Squad at JUST the right time can make or break a game.

LexLuthorJr
03-19-2013, 01:50 PM
You forgot a big factor: Luck. This game relies heavily on the right cards coming out at the right time, and actually being able to draw the cards that you need at the right time.

That actually kind of sums up what I was trying to say. I don't like using the word "luck", though, because that isn't a strategy and a lot more complicated than what card comes up next. What I was basically trying to say is that various factors can dictate the outcome of the game in any direction. I'm saying that every character has a reasonable chance of doing well and that no character is "bad" and ensures a loss.

IAmTheGreat
03-19-2013, 02:19 PM
Now, IAmTheGreat: You forgot a big factor: Luck. This game relies heavily on the right cards coming out at the right time, and actually being able to draw the cards that you need at the right time. Hell, it starts from the very beginning with who gets the better Starter draw. Of course, with any other DBG, there is strategy as far as what to grab, knowing whats in the Main Deck, and whether or not it is a good time to just buy a Kick instead of filling in a space. But really, a Man of Steel coming out, or a Suicide Squad at JUST the right time can make or break a game.


Card availability: If you play as Superman but you dont see any Super Speeds/Bulletsproofs/Etc in the early game thats going to diminish his chances of winning.

And of course sample size. 50 may seem like a lot, but in a game of such variety and with 8 different characters, 50 games is a pretty low amount to try and base findings off of.

Both of these points cover the luck factor.

Rtsands45
04-02-2013, 07:47 AM
Both posts are very accurate. OP, your statistics are actually very close to mine, and for pretty much the same reasons.

Now, IAmTheGreat: You forgot a big factor: Luck. This game relies heavily on the right cards coming out at the right time, and actually being able to draw the cards that you need at the right time. Hell, it starts from the very beginning with who gets the better Starter draw. Of course, with any other DBG, there is strategy as far as what to grab, knowing whats in the Main Deck, and whether or not it is a good time to just buy a Kick instead of filling in a space. But really, a Man of Steel coming out, or a Suicide Squad at JUST the right time can make or break a game.

I believe in his post iamthegreat did say that games really come down to probabilities. People attribute small probabilities of an event happening as luck. For example, a person would say a lottery winner was lucky that they bought the winning ticket.

Speaking of probabilities and outcomes how does the OP's percentages add up to 196%?

LexLuthorJr
04-02-2013, 02:30 PM
Speaking of probabilities and outcomes how does the OP's percentages add up to 196%?

The percentage for each character is determined by the amount of wins in the number of games that character played in.

For example, out of the 50 games I've played with my friends, Aquaman was used in 25 of them. Out of those 25 games, Aquaman won 10. So Aquaman won 40% of the games he was used in. Does that make sense?

IAmTheGreat
04-02-2013, 04:40 PM
Except you need to play each character in the same number of games as well as the same number of games with "x" players for those percentages to be relevant.

boba_fouts
04-02-2013, 06:50 PM
Except you need to play each character in the same number of games as well as the same number of games with "x" players for those percentages to be relevant.

...and you need to play thousands & thousands of game to have any statistical significance to win percentages.

IAmTheGreat
04-05-2013, 07:20 PM
Obviously more games reduces the statistical variation, but you can still get a good idea of who is the best with 50 or so games. However having those factors I mentioned not controlled makes the testing null and irrelevant

JesusChristMD
04-08-2013, 05:53 PM
50, with 9 different choices, would not be even close to enough games to get a good idea.

From 4 different tournaments we have 4 different super hero's the winners used this weekend at DMF St Louey.

atheist4thecause
08-12-2013, 02:48 AM
I'd love to get more information about these stats. There have been faults listed about the stats about other things that aren't being incorporated, but I think some of the complaints are very minor. I'm big on the NFL Draft, and I use a lot of stats to try and figure out who's going to be good and who isn't in the NFL. There are TONS of variables and of course I could never have a stat that will tell me everything, but that doesn't mean stats are worthless.

The key is to try to weed out a few big key variables that will have a big impact on the final win % here. Someone mentioned it but it was never answered, so I'd really like to know what size of games the OP was playing or if a variety of games were played. If the OP played 2 player games (or at least mainly 2 player games) like I suspect, then that will weed out a HUGE variable, and that's an easy variable to weed out as well as the OP should easily be able to tell us what type of games he played (at least somewhat). Some of the variables that I would spend much less time worrying about are variables like luck. Luck is almost impossible to quantify, and normally luck will even itself out over time. Things that seem like luck often times have good explanations, so lets not unnecessarily complicate the issue.

I have to say that although my group has not kept specific win ratios like the OP, but I know that we've had significantly different results. Superman is one of our top Super Heroes. Then again, we play with 4-5 players almost all of the time. Also, affecting the strength of the Super Hero but not the strength of the win ratio, Superman often finishes in 2nd place when he does lose and he rarely finishes in last. Flash, on the other hand, will occasionally dominate a game but also consistently finishes in last or second to last when he does lose.

My take on why some of the Super Heroes succeed or fail in 5-player:
8) Batman: I think Batman is the worst, because he has to share with Cyborg if there is one. Not only that, everybody wants the Dark Knight, because he's so strong. Worse, if the player in front of Batman gets the Dark Knight then that player will consistently be wiping out all of the equipment on the board. Wonder Woman has the same problem with the Princess of Dianna, but I don't think the Princess of Dianna is as good as the Dark Knight.
7) Wonder Woman: Although her ability is card advantage, she has to work pretty hard for it. She also gets seriously hurt by Captain Cold, and if he comes out early he can do a lot of damage to her. Also, as I noted before, if the player in front of her gets Princess of Dianna it really hurts her. She also shares card type benefits with MM.
6) Martian Manhunter: He's just too hard to get going. Maybe my group hasn't figured out how to play him well enough yet, but I just don't see how he's as good as Green Lantern. He's significantly better (and I'd say to the point of overpowered) in the Super-Surprise Super-Villain variant, though. Obviously the longer the game goes the stronger he is. He also technically shares card type benefits with WW.
5) The Flash: He used to be lower, but I think we figured out how to play him better and now he's moving up a bit in results. He still has very erratic results, though, sometimes dominating and other times placing very low. He's probably one of the hardest Super Heroes to play (at least IMO...either that or he just doesn't fit my play-style).
4) Aquaman: Aquaman has a lack of focus, which offers him versatility, but if the game drags on he's really in trouble. If the wrong cards come out early, or the wrong Super-Villain comes out early, it can really stall him out and ruin his game. What he gains he versatility he loses in bonus power, so I don't think having an ability that is non-card type specific is as good as it initially sounds.
3) Green Lantern: He's like a Martian Manhunter that gets going much more quickly, and sets his ability off much more easily. Sure, that one +3 modifier isn't as good as two +3 modifiers, but one is usually enough to take down the Super-Villain anyways, which is a successful turn.
2) Cyborg: Cyborg's versatility and card draw is really what gets him through. I think he'd be one of the best even if he didn't have the "+1 Power if he played a Super Power" ability just because card draw is always strong.
1) Superman: Superman is just so good in so many respects. There is almost always a Super Power available to him due to the Kicks. There is no card like the Dark Knight that steals all of of his cards. The cards that he wants are strong on their own, but get significantly stronger with him, and a Kick going from +2 Power to +3 Power is one of the best increases in the game IMO. The cards that work well with him that others want, such as Man of Steel, work significantly better with Superman than any other Super Hero. (This is unlike a card like Aquaman's Trident, which is actually worse for Aquaman than it is any other Super Hero.) Superman has more consistency than any other Super Hero. Superman gets going more quickly than almost all Super Heroes as well. Aquaman gets going a little more quickly, but Superman gets much more long-term sustainability. Superman can really use any strategy and win, whether you try to end the game early or let it drag out for a long time. Better yet, rarely is going to give a game away while employing that strategy because you didn't get the right cards or some reason like that.

Like I said, I'm going off of the results that I'm guesstimating that we've played. I've probably played at least 100 games. I wish I had kept statistics like the OP. :( A few other things, too, are that WW and Batman seemed to get punished harshly for having cards that take their card types that everybody can use, because in the 5-player games the likelihood is that someone other than WW or Batman will get that card. I really hope the designers notice this and either refrain from printing these guys of gathering cards or make one for each Super Hero so that things are even. (I hope they also refrain from designing cards like Aquaman's Trident that benefit others MORE than Aquaman himself.) Another thing I notice is that the Super Heroes that add power are towards the top of my list.

Overall, when you combine my findings with the findings of the OP, it's easy to see the difference between his list and my list. And if I'm right in my assumption that he tends to play smaller games (and I tend to play bigger games), it shows that different Super Heroes are strong in different games sizes, and as I expressed to an extent, different game variants as well. That's a good thing.

PS: Oh, and one more quick thing I almost forgot is that if the OP was doing bigger games, it could be that his play-style was catering too much to the Super Heroes with card type focuses. If your WW, maybe getting that Super Strength is better than getting that Lobo. Player error obviously can, and definitely does, effect both of our lists quite dramatically.

kmonarq7
08-12-2013, 11:40 AM
Statistically, to reach a +/- of 3%, you would need around 180 games played to truly determine a good set. But there are also variances in the shuffle of the deck, the way people play the game, and the value of the cards not only to the specific hero, but to the player who plays them. I'm not saying it impossible...but getting a good statistical measure is hard with that much variance.

atheist4thecause
08-12-2013, 01:45 PM
A +/- 3%? Who says that the variant needed? Even political surveys don't achieve that most of the time. A statistic could have a variance of +/- 10% and still be useful. After all, this game is still a hobby for people. If statistics were to be done to "truly" figure out what Super Heroes were strongest then the statistics would be done completely differently as well, but most people aren't qualified to do statistics in a professional manner, and I don't think it should be expected that people do statistics in a professional manner in this sort of setting, either. I mean, if you have a better data set with a smaller variance then by all means, please share it. But if you don't, then the OP's numbers are the best we have and they are better than nothing.

Ironfist
08-12-2013, 08:41 PM
Overall, when you combine my findings with the findings of the OP, it's easy to see the difference between his list and my list. And if I'm right in my assumption that he tends to play smaller games (and I tend to play bigger games), it shows that different Super Heroes are strong in different games sizes, and as I expressed to an extent, different game variants as well. That's a good thing.


The more players, the more luck is involved. You say it evens out, but when that utility belt or green arrow comes up 3 turns before yours, you know you won't get it. This game is entirely played on luck of what cards come out and whether the player(s) before you buy them or have the ability to buy them. The heroes that offer +power each turn have an advantage over others, with the exception being that the longer the game, the better Manhunter and Lantern are. Batman, Cyborg and Superman have a distinct early advantage. You rated your starting characters based on what cards are bought, thereby assuming bad luck. If you look at the hero as itself, not based on what cards are played, then I think it would be different. In any number of people playing, I will put the flash last. If you do not get early draw cards for him he is completely worthless. He is completely based on specific drawing cards.

Every play group has those people who always buy cards just to hurt the player after him. I do it too. I have bought a utility belt while ending the game with just 3 equipment. It happens, but i bought it to hurt another player. This happens more the more people who play. The reason I think batman is good here is because not many people buy Nth metal, my favorite under rated card. A lot pass on the lasso and batmobile also. My point is that it is hard to value the heroes because the game is entirely based on luck of what comes on the board, and what you draw. That green arrow on the first turn may sit there 3 rounds waiting for the first person to get 5. A lot of the time that is bought on the second turn when that guy playing aquaman put his kick on top of his deck the first turn.

atheist4thecause
08-13-2013, 02:11 PM
I'd have to disagree with you on your emphasis of luck Ironfist. I think what you are referring to is probability, and sure, there is some luck in the way probability plays out, but a player can greatly increase or decrease their chances of winning through strategy in game of probability. In a game of 5 players, you see many more cards than in a game of 2 players so that really reduces the a lot of the randomization. Sure, a Green Arrow might come up T1 and an Aquaman might get that T2, but whether Aquaman gets Green Arrow active is not luck. It's about how hard he tries and how hard his opponents try to stop him. I guess I just really don't agree with the concept that card games are luck games. If you look at games like Magic: The Gathering, there are certain pros that are consistently at the top because of their skill.

Also, I did not rate my Super Heroes based on bad luck. I rated them based off guesstimations of results, and I tried to give explanations of why I thought things worked out the way they did. Also, it's not assuming bad luck to assume you aren't going to get a specific card (such as the Dark Knight) in a group of 5 players. There are 4 players that are not you, and only 1 player that is you. If it's a card everybody wants, there's about an 80% chance that you won't get it in games where it comes up.

It can be pretty dangerous to chalk everything up to luck, as it that can sap a player from thinking that they can have any control over the game at all. If you play really seriously and pay attention to all of the cards that are dealt out and know all of the cards in the deck then you would be shocked at how you can improve your odds. And we haven't even talked about other things such as versatile strategies allowing you to adapt while specific strategies can punish you a lot harder. Going for all the Suicide Squads is great if you can a bunch, but if you only get 2 because others take a few then you might have been better off working towards a more versatile strategy.

Ironfist
08-13-2013, 06:13 PM
It can be pretty dangerous to chalk everything up to luck, as it that can sap a player from thinking that they can have any control over the game at all. If you play really seriously and pay attention to all of the cards that are dealt out and know all of the cards in the deck then you would be shocked at how you can improve your odds. And we haven't even talked about other things such as versatile strategies allowing you to adapt while specific strategies can punish you a lot harder. Going for all the Suicide Squads is great if you can a bunch, but if you only get 2 because others take a few then you might have been better off working towards a more versatile strategy.

How is it strategy when the third to the last card is Man of steel, dark knight, or amazon princess. You based your rankings using specific cards that are totally random when they come up. Everyone has played a game where you buy superman and get 5 turns after it and never get to play it. Explain strategy of using cards that are 1 per deck that might not come up untill 80% of the cards are gone. Everyone keeps track of who has belts and arrows, everybody knows who has the big cards. What if you play superman twice in a game and the first time it's right after you shuffle your deck and draw. what happens when you play amazon 6 times in a game and net total 7 villains....it happens. It's not strategy of when you play amazon, it's luck of what villains are up. The same with dark knight. At least he is worth 2 power, but if there are no equipment cards, he's basically catwoman.

There is some strategy and when people don't pay attention, stuff happens. But if you play with the same people you learn how they play and learn a lot about the game. Every card is powerful depending on what is on the board/what you draw/what you have/when int he process of the game you draw it. I have had that awesome turn where i got to double the power of my 2 punches and get an awesome 4; that's not strategy, it's bad luck. I win a lot of games because late in a game someone buys the dark knight when he has 6 points, and on my turn i buy a lasso, poison ivy, harley quinn....sure you got a great card that is worth 1 point, i got 3 cards worth 3 points that I will never have to play. Strategy matters to a point, but the game is completely luck of the draw/cards on the board.

kmonarq7
08-14-2013, 07:51 AM
I only mentioned the +/- 3% because that would provide a pretty thorough examination of the data. And election polling is pretty flawed anyway, as Nate Silver showed us all last fall.

Just saying that the +/- on this current batch is still pretty high.

atheist4thecause
08-14-2013, 02:50 PM
Well Ironfist, you don't start the game at the end. You start the game at the beginning, and sure, your rankings of a card or two might be really high going in, and sure, you might never see that power card such as a Dark Knight, but that doesn't mean you can't win. Your strategy can overcome that. And if your strategy is adaptable then are more likely to win. If your strategy is really dependent on that one power card, and if you don't have a way to switch strategies halfway through, then you will probably lose. If you build strategies, like I have, around buying cards that are likely to come up because there are many of them then you won't have this problem as much, so it is an avoidable situation. Also, there is strategy in how much your opponents allow you to play a card. Superman just got Man of Steel? Lets all take out the Super-Villains and end the game.

But sure, I'll admit that there is always going to be some sort of random and "luck" element to the game. It's not chess, checkers, or tic-tac-toe. But your complaints are complaints that fit pretty much every single card game out there, and if that's the case then you really aren't complaining about DC, but you're complaining about the game genre itself.

But the reason I say these games are probability more than luck is because I think the term luck is more of something that can't be measured, controlled, or responded to at all. Probability can be measured, controlled, and responded to. If I'm employing a Suicide Squad strategy and I see other people getting SS's, I change my strategy because I know that I most likely won't get enough of them.

About your Parallax situation, I think that's a lot of your strategy. There are a lot of things that could help you prevent the 4 power hand. First of all, how come you only had 2 punches and a Parallax late game? You must've been hit with attacks. So is just bad luck that you didn't have defenses or is it your deck building strategy that didn't get you enough defense cards? So more defense cards could have helped, and that's strategy. Also, why did you still have punches late game? That's because you chose not to get deck-thinning cards. Some of those would have helped prevent this situation. Other things that could have helped are things like Robin, Bat-Signal, Fastest Man Alive, and Locations. If you had the Villain-triggering location out who knows what would have happened?

You end by saying "Strategy matters to a point, but the game is completely luck of the draw/cards on the board." This is really a contradiction. If strategy matters then the game can't be COMPLETELY luck of the draw/cards. Lets say you are going for suicide squads. Did you know the % of a SS popping being the 1st card in the line-up to start the game is 5.26% (assuming you use all 114 cards)? If a SS doesn't pop into the starting line-up at all, the chances of the next card being a SS in the 109 cads left jump from 5.26% to 5.5%. So lets say that you play last because the guy to your left is The Flash. Lets say that no Suicide Squad popped up in the opening line-up or for each of the 4 players in front of you. What are the chances one will pop for you assuming they all take 1 card from the line-up? There would be 105 cards left in the deck, so the there would be a 5.71% chance. Look at that. You haven't even taken a turn yet and your chances of drawing the SS have already grown by .5% chance (about). Imagine what happens when someone after 15 turns, and then someone Clayfaces the Anti-Monitor.

Now lets say that you are getting down to the end of the game and have 3 SS's, 1 other person took one so there are 2 left, there are 40 cards left in the main deck, and you need 1 more SS to win. What are your chances of getting it? If you only see 1 card because the player before you had a bad turn, then you have a 5% chance. If the player before you bought the entire line-up so you see 5 new cards then you have a 22.44% chance.

And that brings me to my last quick point, did you see how if a player bought one card then you had a 5% (1/20) chance of getting that SS but if they bought the entire line-up you had a 22.44% (around 1/4-1/5) chance? That's a huge difference! So that is huge strategy on the opponents parts of whether they want a Cheetah late game for 1 VP and allow you to see an extra card.

Ironfist
08-15-2013, 04:26 PM
About your Parallax situation, I think that's a lot of your strategy. There are a lot of things that could help you prevent the 4 power hand. First of all, how come you only had 2 punches and a Parallax late game? You must've been hit with attacks. So is just bad luck that you didn't have defenses or is it your deck building strategy that didn't get you enough defense cards? So more defense cards could have helped, and that's strategy. Also, why did you still have punches late game? That's because you chose not to get deck-thinning cards. Some of those would have helped prevent this situation. Other things that could have helped are things like Robin, Bat-Signal, Fastest Man Alive, and Locations. If you had the Villain-triggering location out who knows what would have happened?


And that brings me to my last quick point, did you see how if a player bought one card then you had a 5% (1/20) chance of getting that SS but if they bought the entire line-up you had a 22.44% (around 1/4-1/5) chance? That's a huge difference! So that is huge strategy on the opponents parts of whether they want a Cheetah late game for 1 VP and allow you to see an extra card.

I never said parallax was late game, i just said i have played a hand where i had parallax and 2 punches, because sometimes parallax comes out as the second villain, sometimes third. It had nothing to do with strategy, it was what was in my deck after I shuffled. Like your hero evaluations, you seem to base things on a fantasy land of what cards i could use to do something when it was merely bad luck. If I have 18 cards and one of them is parallax, it is possible that i have 5 cards and a total of 4 power, it happens. It's not deck thinning needed, it's not preventing attacks, it is just an early game bad draw. It counters the early game good draw used to get parallax, which was a kick, high tech hero, catwoman, punch punch draw with green lantern. Getting parallax was luck of the draw, along with my poor draw that was parallax, punch punch vulnerability vulnerability. It may have been strategy that i bought catwoman and two-face on the same turn to help with green lantern, but it was total luck that i got the combo needed to buy parallax. Strategy to a point, but luck of the draw to get the villain.

No idea why you are bringing more card examples into a discussion about heroes. I rank the heroes based on what they inherently are. You keep bringing up cards in the deck. Let's do the absurd bringing of cards in the deck. I use parallax and have 33 power, i then play riddler and take 11 off the top and do not buy the last super villain. I get unlucky and get a total of 13 points off these cards, whereas i then lose 2 turns later to a guy who buys the last villain. Or let's flip it. I buy 11 off the top and get 24 points because i get a utility belt and a green arrow. This is not strategy this is luck of the draw. I used the same scenario to show 2 different ways bad/good luck can win/lose the game doing the exact same thing. Using strategy , why not buy the villain and cards off the top? What if I have to go for luck because I am 13 points behind the leader? That is also a strategy....based purely on luck.

Luck plays a huge part in this game. Any hero can win based on luck of the flop. I rank my heroes by who can play any board, any cards. If there are no draw cards or locations, flash is nothing. There are less draw cards then villains total. I am probably wrong , but i would bet there are more equipment cards also. Equipment cards are cheap with the highest being 5. Super powers are abundant but the best ones are 6/7 cost. These go into ranking a hero for the sole purpose of playing any game. I rank cyborg the highest and flash the lowest mainly because cyborg plays any board well with the ability to makes the first kick +1. If no draw card comes up for awhile or gets bought because they are defense cards, flash is next to worthless.

atheist4thecause
08-16-2013, 09:51 AM
You're looking at things in way too much of a vacuum IMO. You look at a situation, and then you look at the result, and you say, "See, that's bad (or good) luck!" The point I've been trying to get across is that you can create your own good or bad "luck" based on your decisions that led up to that event. That's why I mentioned deck-thinning and defenses in regards to your Parallax situation of having only 2 points in your hand. I've literally had games where that was impossible for that to happen to me because I thinned my deck so much I didn't have enough punches, vulnerabilities, etc. left in my deck for that to happen.

Yes, I'll admit again like I have before, there is an element of luck. If you thin your 50 card deck down to 4 yellow cards and you get Parallax and 4 yellow cards, that's pretty bad luck. But the reason this game isn't a "game of luck" is because there is plenty of room for strategy. You even mention strategy and then call strategy luck. If you choose not to go with a S-V and you riddle, that's strategy. Sure there's a luck element to whether your strategy works out or not, but I don't see how you could say there's no strategy there. It's just like when you say you bought Catwoman and Two-Face to get Green Lantern active. That's strategy.

You keep saying things have "nothing to do with strategy" and it's that absolutism that really bothers me and gets you in trouble. Well yeah, if you are just randomly buying cards and not thinking about what's left in the deck and what you have (which maybe you do) then maybe the game is more luck-based, but then is that more of the game's fault or your own fault? For someone like me that keeps these things in mind the game is much more of a game of strategy.

I looked up luck on dictionary.com, and here's one of the definition's it has (the definitions are all pretty close):
a combination of circumstances, events, etc., operating by chance to bring good or ill to a person

So what is chance:
the absence of any cause of events that can be predicted, understood, or controlled: often personified or treated as a positive agency

The reason I bring this up is that we can actually both be right. If you play the game a more casual way where you don't pay attention to as many details then the game really will be luck. There will be no way to predict what's going to happen if you don't know what cards are left in the deck.

But when I play, I can often times predict what my opponents hand is to an extent. I try to pay attention to what cards are gone and what cards are still left, and if a player hasn't played a big card like Man of Steel and he's down to the last few cards then he's probably got his Man of Steel. You can even use this information to try to attack him more if you can to get him to have to shuffle that discard pile back into his library, although I will admit there aren't too many options for something like that. (Actually doing the attacks you have, even from a Poison Ivy when the Weaknesses are gone, and maybe Clayfacing an attack over something else are a couple of things you can do, though.)

So I've actually demonstrated to myself (obviously I can only tell you about it) that I can predict what people have in their hands, what I will have, what the main deck will have, etc. to some extent. Although, of course, there are things I can't predict, so there is still the element of luck in my games as well. It's just that my games might have a lot less luck than your games have. (And I want to point out that I'm just using you and I as an example. I don't know actually know how you play the game. Maybe you play it very competitively where you do try to remember all the cards that have been bought and who has what. I'm not trying to say that I'm better in any way as I don't know who you are outside of this forum.)

Ironfist
08-16-2013, 06:46 PM
Yes, I'll admit again like I have before, there is an element of luck. If you thin your 50 card deck down to 4 yellow cards and you get Parallax and 4 yellow cards, that's pretty bad luck.



I give up. this demonstrates why I give up. I specifically mentioned that it was early in the game and if I have 18 cards, 10 of which are starting cards it is not uncommon to draw 2 punches and 2 vulnerabilities at any time. It is impossible to thin your deck on your 5th or 6th turn if you have no card destroying abilities, but I guess that's my fault for bad strategy. YOU WIN-I GIVE UP. I won't even bother reading this page any more, you obviously are way smarter then anyone who plays and I could not possibly ever hope to win against you as you would have destroyed every starting card to thin your deck on the 5th or 6th turn, thereby leaving yourself about 8 or 9 cards. You win, I obviously have no clue how to play.

atheist4thecause
08-16-2013, 07:07 PM
Well, thanks Ironfist! I love winning! But in your case where you have a Parallax by T5 or T6 or w/e the situation is, is it really bad luck to only have 2 power with your Parrallax? Not really. If your saying your deck consists mainly of yellow cards because you couldn't thin the deck, then the strategy comes in of maybe you shouldn't have bought Parrallax on T5 or T6. Otherwise accept the small amounts you will have in the beginning for the long-term investments. I think the fact that you are turning to a sarcastic and defensive tone shows that my explanations of strategy make sense.

houjix
08-16-2013, 07:31 PM
If you can get Parallax on turn 5 or 6, short of anything less than 2 Heat Visions in the line-up, it is always the correct choice. One very low percentage hand is going to be quickly forgotten by the great turns later. And while deck thinning is important, I've won many games where I've had little to none and lost just as many while having deck thinners. Sometimes the RNG of this game will get you sound strategy or not.

atheist4thecause
08-16-2013, 07:40 PM
Houjix, I'm actually not huge on deck-thinning in this game, but I'm just pointing out that there are strategies that can be employed to change the fate of "luck". And this situation of buying and playing a Parrallax is a rare one if it's even reasonably possible. I think it's more likely that you would see that situation through something like a J'onn J'onzz. I think there is much more evidence that there is lots of strategy than there is evidence that DC is nothing but a game of luck. I think I'm better now than the first time I played, and that shows that strategy is involved.

kmonarq7
08-19-2013, 07:06 AM
@Athiest

Deck-thinning isnt always a good strategy. I watched a game at C2E2 this year where Scott (I think it was Scott) from the Cryptozoic team was thinning his deck rapidly, and burning through it every 2-3 turns. But in the end, he didnt have enough VP to overtake his opponent. There are too many multipliers in the deck to make it worth your while. Unless you clear out the Super Villian deck in 15-20 turns, then you're likely to lose with a deck-thinning strategy.

I mean sure, thin out the Punch/Vulns/Weaknesses...but thats it.

slaughterica
08-19-2013, 01:36 PM
Hmmm..interesting. I am not surprised about Aquaman and Green Lantern. I would say, I personally like using Wonder Woman but Flash is VERY surprising considering you can only use his ability to draw 1 extra card. One would think Wonder Woman and Cyborg wouldd efinitely be ahead of him.