# Some EC day2 analisis

09 Mar 2016 15:27 - 09 Mar 2016 15:29 #75894
by elotar

NC Russia

*Some EC day2 analisis*was created by

*elotar*

To continue eternal discussion "dominate is broken and combat is weak".

Why EC day2?

Because it's the only tournament where we have top players motivated to play as good as possible (to win as much as possible) with the best decks, so the contents of the decks will be significant factor and so there is a point to analize it.

For example day 1 got much more diverse players field, some of whom are just aming to get into top 40, so are chosing to play unbalanced decks to maximize chance to "steal" GW.

Original data from Pascal's post:

www.vekn.net/forum/event-reports-and-twd/72816-ec-day2-metagame

Obviously got no information about deck contents so have to improvise. But i think I'm not too far from the truth.

1. Deck types

Bleed - 8

Politics - 8

Toolbox - 8 (imbueds here)

Rush combat - 6

Wall - 6

Ally - 3 (khazar here)

Turbo - 1

So, suddenly, nearly total ballance here. And combat is present in like 50% of all decks. Looks not so underpowered to me.

2. Clans

Tremere 5 (both)

Mix 4

Malkavians 3 (both)

Lasombra 3

Toreador 3

Gangrel 2

!Gangrel 2

!Ventrue 2

Brujah 2

Guruhi 2

Settites 1

Assamite 1

Imbued 1

ahrimanes 1

True Brujah 1

Kiasid 1

HoS 1

Akunase 1

Giovanny 1

Baali 1

Nosferatu 1 (sudenly !nos were more present)

So very small tremere dominance, but it's a number for both cam and sabbat and for walls, ally and bleed decks, so kind of like total balance here too.

Assamites and !nos are present!

No mono Ishtarri but they (Undele) was present in many decks.

Only two prominent clans not present are Ventrue and Tzimisce. Nobody thinks that they are too weak?

No Blood Brothers, !brujah, !toreadors, DoC, Osebo, Salubri, Samedi, Ravnos.

But with 1-3 presence of all clans it all just can be statistical fluctuation.

3. Disciplines

dom 14

aus 14

pre 9

obf 9

for 8

ani 8

cel 7

tau 4

pro 4

pot 4

obt 4

nec 3

ser 1

qui 1

spi 1

dem 1

tem 1

myt 1

dai 1

Yea, DOM is popular, but, suddenly, as much as AUS. Can not remember "nerf AUS" threads (actually i remember one from ector like 10...12 years ago, when Bowl ofC was published, lol)

tier 2: pre, obf, for, cel(!), ani - one of them just for combat, other mostly for it at the same level of presentation as second best bleed discipline, multiaction discipline and best stealth.

tier 3: tau, pro, pot, obt, nec - second mono-combat discipline here equally presented as "weaker" stealth disciplines. Necromancy is cool.

Just 1 deck using kindred spirits. No chimestry even it has both bleed and stealth. Bleed is not so effective against good players?

And who got into top 5?

1. Marcin Watras (POL) — 1 GW 5.5 VP — 1.5 VP — Goratrix Aus/Ani Wall

2. Pierre Tran-Van (FRA) — 1 GW 5 VP — 1.5 VP — Euro-Brujah

2. Marius Iscru (FRA) — 1 GW 7 VP — 0.5 VP — Toreador AAA

2. Danilo Torrisi (ITA) — 2 GW 8 VP — 0 VP — Mistress Fanchon/Luna Vote

2. Giulio De Cicco (ITA) — 1 GW 5 VP — 0 VP — Brujah G4/5 Obf Vote

1 Wall (17% chance to get to the final)

2 Toolboxes (25%)

2 Politics (25%)

Rush combat is bad

So aus, ani + dom, pot, cel + aus, pre + nec, obf + obf, cel, pre=

dom 1 (7% chance to get into final)

aus 2 (14% chance)

cel 2 (29%)

pre 2 (22%)

ani 1 (13%)

pot 1 (25%)

nec 1 (33%)

obf 1 (11%)

Dominate is the discipline with the smallest chance to get you to final

Brujah, as a clan, got 100% chance to get there.

Real conclusion from all of this is that the game is qiute fine as it is.

We just need to solve card availability problem.

Why EC day2?

Because it's the only tournament where we have top players motivated to play as good as possible (to win as much as possible) with the best decks, so the contents of the decks will be significant factor and so there is a point to analize it.

For example day 1 got much more diverse players field, some of whom are just aming to get into top 40, so are chosing to play unbalanced decks to maximize chance to "steal" GW.

Original data from Pascal's post:

www.vekn.net/forum/event-reports-and-twd/72816-ec-day2-metagame

Obviously got no information about deck contents so have to improvise. But i think I'm not too far from the truth.

1. Deck types

Bleed - 8

Politics - 8

Toolbox - 8 (imbueds here)

Rush combat - 6

Wall - 6

Ally - 3 (khazar here)

Turbo - 1

So, suddenly, nearly total ballance here. And combat is present in like 50% of all decks. Looks not so underpowered to me.

2. Clans

Tremere 5 (both)

Mix 4

Malkavians 3 (both)

Lasombra 3

Toreador 3

Gangrel 2

!Gangrel 2

!Ventrue 2

Brujah 2

Guruhi 2

Settites 1

Assamite 1

Imbued 1

ahrimanes 1

True Brujah 1

Kiasid 1

HoS 1

Akunase 1

Giovanny 1

Baali 1

Nosferatu 1 (sudenly !nos were more present)

So very small tremere dominance, but it's a number for both cam and sabbat and for walls, ally and bleed decks, so kind of like total balance here too.

Assamites and !nos are present!

No mono Ishtarri but they (Undele) was present in many decks.

Only two prominent clans not present are Ventrue and Tzimisce. Nobody thinks that they are too weak?

No Blood Brothers, !brujah, !toreadors, DoC, Osebo, Salubri, Samedi, Ravnos.

But with 1-3 presence of all clans it all just can be statistical fluctuation.

3. Disciplines

dom 14

aus 14

pre 9

obf 9

for 8

ani 8

cel 7

tau 4

pro 4

pot 4

obt 4

nec 3

ser 1

qui 1

spi 1

dem 1

tem 1

myt 1

dai 1

Yea, DOM is popular, but, suddenly, as much as AUS. Can not remember "nerf AUS" threads (actually i remember one from ector like 10...12 years ago, when Bowl ofC was published, lol)

tier 2: pre, obf, for, cel(!), ani - one of them just for combat, other mostly for it at the same level of presentation as second best bleed discipline, multiaction discipline and best stealth.

tier 3: tau, pro, pot, obt, nec - second mono-combat discipline here equally presented as "weaker" stealth disciplines. Necromancy is cool.

Just 1 deck using kindred spirits. No chimestry even it has both bleed and stealth. Bleed is not so effective against good players?

And who got into top 5?

1. Marcin Watras (POL) — 1 GW 5.5 VP — 1.5 VP — Goratrix Aus/Ani Wall

2. Pierre Tran-Van (FRA) — 1 GW 5 VP — 1.5 VP — Euro-Brujah

2. Marius Iscru (FRA) — 1 GW 7 VP — 0.5 VP — Toreador AAA

2. Danilo Torrisi (ITA) — 2 GW 8 VP — 0 VP — Mistress Fanchon/Luna Vote

2. Giulio De Cicco (ITA) — 1 GW 5 VP — 0 VP — Brujah G4/5 Obf Vote

1 Wall (17% chance to get to the final)

2 Toolboxes (25%)

2 Politics (25%)

Rush combat is bad

So aus, ani + dom, pot, cel + aus, pre + nec, obf + obf, cel, pre=

dom 1 (7% chance to get into final)

aus 2 (14% chance)

cel 2 (29%)

pre 2 (22%)

ani 1 (13%)

pot 1 (25%)

nec 1 (33%)

obf 1 (11%)

Dominate is the discipline with the smallest chance to get you to final

Brujah, as a clan, got 100% chance to get there.

Real conclusion from all of this is that the game is qiute fine as it is.

We just need to solve card availability problem.

NC Russia

Last edit: 09 Mar 2016 15:29 by elotar.

The following user(s) said Thank You: Brum

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

09 Mar 2016 19:03 #75898
by brettscho

Check out my VTES blog: Gaming with BS

I also host a google doc which separates the TWDA into clans . That means I track how often clans win, which crypt groups get used, and how many people attend events. You can access all of that info here:

Replied by

*brettscho*on topic*Some EC day2 analisis*
Interesting analysis, although it of course suffers from having such a tiny sample size. But it's also going to be impossible to get perfect data in this case, so I'm willing to go with it. That having been said, I'm confused about this:

If 14/40 decks had access to Dominate, then how did you calculate that it only has a 7% chance to get into the finals? To me, it would be (14/40)+(14/39)+(14/38)+(14/37)+(14/36) = 185% of at least one deck with Dominate getting into the final. It would be shatteringly unlikely that none of those 14 decks made it into the final. And then 3 decks in the finals actually had Dominate.

Finally, I'd suggest that this kind of analysis isn't indicative of power level. If we look at all the disciplines that were likely used by the decks in the finals, we get the following chart:

Auspex: 3 (Goratrix, AAA, Mistress Fanchon)

Celerity: 3 (Euro-Brujah, AAA, Brujah Vote)

Dominate: 3 (Goratrix, Euro-Brujah, Mistress Fanchon)

Potence: 2 (Euro-Brujah, Brujah Vote)

Presence: 2 (AAA, Brujah Vote)

Thaumaturgy: 2 (Goratrix, Mistress Fanchon)

Animalism: 1 (Goratrix)

Obfuscate: 1 (Brujah Vote)

This chart would indicate that Celerity and Dominate are equally powerful in the game, and have an equal effect. Is that true in your experience? Is that true in anybody's experience? I guess my point is that this analysis is interesting, and if combined with EC Day 2 data from several other years might be of increasing interest, but I'd hesitate to make too many sweeping statements based on it.

But I do agree that rush combat sucks, and I think we're in agreement that it should continue to suck until it's goal isn't to prevent other players from playing the game. Maybe cards that gained you a benefit but didn't require that you put the opposing minion into torpor....

dom 14

[...]

dom 1 (7% chance to get into final)

If 14/40 decks had access to Dominate, then how did you calculate that it only has a 7% chance to get into the finals? To me, it would be (14/40)+(14/39)+(14/38)+(14/37)+(14/36) = 185% of at least one deck with Dominate getting into the final. It would be shatteringly unlikely that none of those 14 decks made it into the final. And then 3 decks in the finals actually had Dominate.

Finally, I'd suggest that this kind of analysis isn't indicative of power level. If we look at all the disciplines that were likely used by the decks in the finals, we get the following chart:

Auspex: 3 (Goratrix, AAA, Mistress Fanchon)

Celerity: 3 (Euro-Brujah, AAA, Brujah Vote)

Dominate: 3 (Goratrix, Euro-Brujah, Mistress Fanchon)

Potence: 2 (Euro-Brujah, Brujah Vote)

Presence: 2 (AAA, Brujah Vote)

Thaumaturgy: 2 (Goratrix, Mistress Fanchon)

Animalism: 1 (Goratrix)

Obfuscate: 1 (Brujah Vote)

This chart would indicate that Celerity and Dominate are equally powerful in the game, and have an equal effect. Is that true in your experience? Is that true in anybody's experience? I guess my point is that this analysis is interesting, and if combined with EC Day 2 data from several other years might be of increasing interest, but I'd hesitate to make too many sweeping statements based on it.

But I do agree that rush combat sucks, and I think we're in agreement that it should continue to suck until it's goal isn't to prevent other players from playing the game. Maybe cards that gained you a benefit but didn't require that you put the opposing minion into torpor....

Check out my VTES blog: Gaming with BS

I also host a google doc which separates the TWDA into clans . That means I track how often clans win, which crypt groups get used, and how many people attend events. You can access all of that info here:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Mar 2016 06:58 - 10 Mar 2016 07:03 #75903
by Ankha

The math is not correct here.

If 14 decks out of 40 have dominate in it, it means that 26 decks don't have dominate.

The chances of NOT having

Explanation: the first deck must be one of the 26 decks w/o dominate out of 40 AND the second one of the 25 other decks w/o dominate out of 39 AND the third...

The AND leads to a multiplication of the probabilities:

So the chances of having at least one deck with dominate in finals are the inverse probability :, that is : 0.900031611

So 90% of chances.

We're far from the 7% initially computed. It means that the whole conclusions are wrong and can be rewritten

Replied by

*Ankha*on topic*Some EC day2 analisis*Interesting analysis, although it of course suffers from having such a tiny sample size. But it's also going to be impossible to get perfect data in this case, so I'm willing to go with it. That having been said, I'm confused about this:

dom 14

[...]

dom 1 (7% chance to get into final)

If 14/40 decks had access to Dominate, then how did you calculate that it only has a 7% chance to get into the finals? To me, it would be (14/40)+(14/39)+(14/38)+(14/37)+(14/36) = 185% of at least one deck with Dominate getting into the final.

The math is not correct here.

If 14 decks out of 40 have dominate in it, it means that 26 decks don't have dominate.

The chances of NOT having

__at least one__deck with dominate in finals (if it were truly random) are:

`(26 * 25 * 24 * 23 * 22) / (40 * 39 * 38 * 37 * 36) = 0.099968389`

Explanation: the first deck must be one of the 26 decks w/o dominate out of 40 AND the second one of the 25 other decks w/o dominate out of 39 AND the third...

The AND leads to a multiplication of the probabilities:

`P(A AND B)) = P(A) * P(B))`

So the chances of having at least one deck with dominate in finals are the inverse probability :

`1 - 0.099968389`

So 90% of chances.

We're far from the 7% initially computed. It means that the whole conclusions are wrong and can be rewritten

Last edit: 10 Mar 2016 07:03 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Mar 2016 09:15 #75905
by elotar

NC Russia

Replied by

*elotar*on topic*Some EC day2 analisis*
Holy crap complicated math!

There was 14 decks with dominate and 1 of them got into finals (eurobrujah, cause both Goratrix and Falchion decks has it on main vampire but was not playing dom cards), so chanse to get into final if you have dom is 1/14=0.07

There was 14 decks with dominate and 1 of them got into finals (eurobrujah, cause both Goratrix and Falchion decks has it on main vampire but was not playing dom cards), so chanse to get into final if you have dom is 1/14=0.07

NC Russia

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Mar 2016 09:20 - 10 Mar 2016 09:31 #75906
by elotar

NC Russia

Replied by

*elotar*on topic*Some EC day2 analisis*
Don't count disciplines on vampires, count cards used.

Fixed:

It's possible that there was some dom cards in mistress falchion deck (couple of bounce), we just haven't seen them, but still it'll not be so significant.

Fixed:

Auspex:~~3~~2 (Goratrix, AAA,~~Mistress Fanchon~~)

Celerity:~~3~~2 (Euro-Brujah,~~AAA~~, Brujah Vote)

Dominate:~~3~~1 (~~Goratrix~~, Euro-Brujah,~~Mistress Fanchon~~)

Potence:~~2~~1 (Euro-Brujah,~~Brujah Vote~~)

Presence: 2 (AAA, Brujah Vote)

Thaumaturgy:~~2~~1 (Goratrix,~~Mistress Fanchon~~)

Animalism: 1 (Goratrix)

Obfuscate:~~1~~2 (Brujah Vote, Mistress Fanchon)

Necromancy:~~0~~1 (Mistress Fanchon)

It's possible that there was some dom cards in mistress falchion deck (couple of bounce), we just haven't seen them, but still it'll not be so significant.

NC Russia

Last edit: 10 Mar 2016 09:31 by elotar.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Mar 2016 09:45 - 10 Mar 2016 10:02 #75908
by Ankha

Sorry, but that's completely wrong

Say you had 40 decks with dominate. 5 of them go into final. According to your math, you would have 5/40 chances to get into final if you have dom. But if you have dom, you are necessarily in final since all decks have doml, so the probability has nothing to do with having dom or nor.

In fact, you're trying to extract probabilities from something that happened. It would be like saying: the guy that won the Euromillion has a moustache (=have a dom deck). 7% of the population (= the players) have a moustache (= have a dom deck). So if you have a moustache, you have 7% of winning Euromillion. That is obviously wrong.

Of course, having a dom deck have a greater influence on the outcome of the result (being in final), but the method is the same: you can't extract probabilities from one event.

Maybe you wanted to compute something like:

There are 14/40 : 35% of dom decks

In the final there is 1/5 : 20% of dom decks

and compare those results. So there is slightly less dom decks in finals that there should be. The trouble is that you have only 5 players in final, so rounding is necessarily extreme since there should be 1.75 player in final. Fractions of players are hard to obtain. If there had been 2 players, there would have been 40% of dom decks, which is above 35%. It wouldn't have meant anything neither.

You can't tell anything significant from these numbers because they are too little.

Replied by

*Ankha*on topic*Some EC day2 analisis*Holy crap complicated math!

There was 14 decks with dominate and 1 of them got into finals (eurobrujah, cause both Goratrix and Falchion decks has it on main vampire but was not playing dom cards), sochanse to get into final if you have domis 1/14=0.07

Sorry, but that's completely wrong

Say you had 40 decks with dominate. 5 of them go into final. According to your math, you would have 5/40 chances to get into final if you have dom. But if you have dom, you are necessarily in final since all decks have doml, so the probability has nothing to do with having dom or nor.

In fact, you're trying to extract probabilities from something that happened. It would be like saying: the guy that won the Euromillion has a moustache (=have a dom deck). 7% of the population (= the players) have a moustache (= have a dom deck). So if you have a moustache, you have 7% of winning Euromillion. That is obviously wrong.

Of course, having a dom deck have a greater influence on the outcome of the result (being in final), but the method is the same: you can't extract probabilities from one event.

Maybe you wanted to compute something like:

There are 14/40 : 35% of dom decks

In the final there is 1/5 : 20% of dom decks

and compare those results. So there is slightly less dom decks in finals that there should be. The trouble is that you have only 5 players in final, so rounding is necessarily extreme since there should be 1.75 player in final. Fractions of players are hard to obtain. If there had been 2 players, there would have been 40% of dom decks, which is above 35%. It wouldn't have meant anything neither.

You can't tell anything significant from these numbers because they are too little.

Last edit: 10 Mar 2016 10:02 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.100 seconds

- You are here:
- Home
- Forum
- V:TES Discussion
- Card Balance & Strategy Discussion
- Some EC day2 analisis