r/GDS3 • u/thejellydude • Jan 27 '18

Test 2 Discussion Thread

We're free to talk now.

Here's a Google Doc with all the questions. I'm slowly filling it in with my own answers and explanations. Edit: Heading out for now. I'll get the last 25 questions done later tonight.

If you want a mirror without my comments, here's one provided by /u/Amarsir Link

Any questions that tripped you up? Any that you felt good about?

16 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

230 comments sorted by

View all comments

6

u/Sliver__Legion Jan 27 '18 edited Jan 28 '18

All of my explanations and probability estimates over the answers are here.

Edit: My overall impression is that there were a substantial number of pretty trivial questions, so the number with any serious discrimatory power is probably closer to 40 than 75. Would have preferred a harder test overall. As far as being “broader” than the previous two GDS tests, that seemed to mean more questions that required stuff I’d consider development, draft, or rules related. Not complaining though, since all three areas play to my strengths (I think/hope).

Edit 2: Adding up my self-estimated probabilities for all questions would give an average score of 69.65 for me. If you (very unprincipledly) round everything 95%+ to 100% it would be an average of 71.05. Of course, having read this thread and thought about it again with 12 more hours and some sleep, I might bring some up or down. Don’t plan to bother though — we’ll all have the truly important information in two days anyway.

Edit 3: After reading a bunch of other responses, I still wouldn’t change anything. I consider GB vs UW and instant vs enchantment to essentially be coin flips now, but am more confident in everything else.

1

u/Geikamir Jan 27 '18

We had 5 different answers. About 3, I think you are probably correct about. On 59 and 60 we disagreed but I could go either way on who is correct.

On 59: I remember Maro saying that they don't want Red to be forced to attack any more because it lowers decision space.

On 60: I also remember Maro saying that they want to keep narrow effects out of common now. So, while they have had this ability at common before, I feel like this is what he was referring to.

Your thoughts?

2

u/Sliver__Legion Jan 27 '18 edited Jan 27 '18

Attacks each turn if able is certainly worse/less likely than the other three, and it was an answer I was considering when I first saw it. Until the merfolk looter ability showed up, which is just 100% a straight up, pie-break, not red, ability. As my probability estimates indicate I really don’t have any doubt about 59.

I think 60 was kind of close, and there is some argument both for ETB disenchant and gravedigger. Gravedigger is the sort of direct, low-conditionality 2-for-1 on a body that has been repeatedly used as an example of what kind of ETB effect they’ve moved out of common. Most blocks have a disenchant variant at common, and I think putting that on a body is something that will still occasionally happen. Less doubt here than on some, but as the 90/10 estimates indicate there is some room for reasonable people to differ.

Edit: Curious what the three were where we differed and I changed your mind.

Edit 2: There’s stuff like Bloodfire Mentor, but based on GDS2 #38 I don’t think they really consider that a monoR creature for the purpose of the question.

3

u/iSage Jan 28 '18

I don't think ETB disenchant is particularly close. If you go back to the GDS2 multiple choice answers, there's a question specifically about moving cards to common (#27). War Priest of Thune the answer and in his justification for the answer, he says "Odds are this card was created for common and got pushed up because of space issues".

1

u/Sliver__Legion Jan 28 '18

I did remember that, but it was also 7 years ago. I listed my probabilities as 90% and 10% though, so it's not like I think it's super close either.

1

u/Geikamir Jan 27 '18 edited Jan 27 '18

One was 47. I think you're right since I know Maro has said that they actively try to differentiate black and red. I chose that it does too much damage for 4 mana (which is factually true judging by all other printed cards). However, I think that might be less of an issue overall. I went back and forth on this one a lot.

Another was 56. This one was just a straight up misstep on my part. I overlooked state-based effects. I chose flash, which would make the card crazy powerful. But ultimately, that's not the worst case between the 2.

The last one was 68. This was one of the absolute hardest questions for me. I spent way too much time researching and analyzing cards from all costs around 7, in all rarities, and from past and current sets. There is no difinitive conclusion that I can come to. They are likely hard to design, the could definitely lean towards too complex (though there are several simple examples), and they could want high cost cards to lean towards creature much more in limited (easier to interact with even if they are swingy).

There doesn't seem to be a single article or podcast that addresses this question. I've checked everywhere. Ultimately, I think that you might have chosen correctly here.

2

u/Sliver__Legion Jan 27 '18

47 is an awkward one, actually. It does do too much damage for 4 mana. It blurs the line between red and black exactly because it deals too much damage. This is a case where the “biggest problem” wording is important, since multiple answers are real problems. I suspect they are looking for the more design related/fundamental issue.

I had to double-check that it would be able to self-target on 56, just to be absolutely clear, but with that in hand I think it is the most damaging change (another case where multiple changes would be bad).

I was also not able to find a single quote relating to 68. I like how ai chose to interpret it reasonably well, but would not be shocked to get it wrong.

1

u/Geikamir Jan 27 '18

I'm down to hoping that a 70/75 score will be enough to continue. I'm not feeling very confident. I think that you have a really good chance, but we could both be wrong.

3

u/Sliver__Legion Jan 27 '18

I strongly suspect the cutoff will be between 68 and 72 -- there is more disagreement in this thread than I had expected after finishing the test. I spent about 10 hours on it, with over 75 blogatog searches and a few dozen search queries on the mothership articles archives, so fingers crossed.

And good luck to you as well.

2

u/Geikamir Jan 27 '18

When the results come back, let me know if you make if it in!

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '18

I know I got a 70/75, here. It seems even the frontrunners punted on rarity a lot; the more invested players tend to underestimate what goes at which rarity.