Few things seem to bring out the ire of good players like the doolist who insists on playing a rogue strategy. The most vociferous comments come from anonymous posters. However, castigation has also emanated from some of the game’s biggest names. The longest and most articulate of these arguments is by Johnny Li, an ARG writer who posted a three part treatise that drew heavily on David Sirlin’s Playing to Win. Since this post is something of a rebuttal, I would encourage you to read it for yourself.
Mr. Li’s attack on rogue decks is part of a much larger
thesis on competitive play. The central premise
is that players lose because they handicap themselves with restrictions that go
beyond the rules. Sirlin refers to such
players as “scrubs”, a term that Mr. Li recognizes as inflammatory. Scrubs, in this sense, have a moral or
aesthetic code that keeps them from playing certain cards or taking advantage
of certain situations. For example, a
scrub may refuse to play Qlipharts because their mechanic is unfair. While some may disparage the deck, playing it
is certainly within the rules of Yugioh.
Other players may feel it is immoral to watch their opponent shuffle
because they might reveal one of their cards. Again, this is a game. There is no moral and
immoral, only permissible and impermissible.
The most succinct summary of Li’s writing is that only
scrubs play rogue decks. Though he seems somewhat baffled by the practice, he
does offer the following explanations:
- Scrubs value originality over winning. They would rather impress others with their creative deck list then their number of tops.
- Scrubs value fairness over winning. Scrubs like to hide behind a moral veneer by disparaging unfair decks as sacky or helmet.
- Scrubs don’t want to face their shortcomings by playing mirror matches. Playing a rogue deck gives them an excuse for losing.
- Scrubs are hipsters who think the less popular decks must be better.
- Scrubs believe in player preference. They feel that there is no “best” answer when it comes to defining the best deck.
Such reasoning is not without merit. After all, it is easier
to get props for creativity than it is to top a YCS. I know.
Somewhere in the bowels of the Yugitube universe is a profile of the
deck I took to Nationals. While the
feature was flattering, it was not my intention to be original. I wanted to win.
I would posit that there are legitimate reasons for doolists to choose rogue decks. Despite Mr. Li’s protestations, not all of us are scrubs.
Cost
Top tier decks are expensive. You can spend $300 and have little more than
five cards from the Burning Abyss Extra Deck.
Successful players will counter that their investment is a sign of their
desire to win. Nevertheless, an investment that you will not likely recoup is a
major impediment. Many players will go
rogue simply because it’s all they can afford.
Price pressure has an impact on archetype choice the moment
the cards are released. Players are often
forced to choose a deck early before scarcity drives the price beyond their
means. Dante was a $25 card for about
one week. By September it was in the $50
to $60 range and many doolists were locked out.
Again, one could rightly argue that good players saw value in the
archetype and took advantage of the release price. Nevertheless, Mr. Li does not consider
economics in his characterization of rogue players.
Strategic Edge
A color commentator at the World Series of Poker noted that
expert players would occasional make a lower percentage play because it throws
off their opponent. Rogue decks can have
the same effect. Many players use rogue
strategies because they know how difficult it is to win a straight-up mirror
match against an elite player. By introducing an element of unpredictability,
they hope to even the odds. This
strategy is not completely relegated to unknown scrubs. Billy Brake’s YCS
success with a 60 card deck qualifies as a rogue strategy. It is worth noting the length of time between
this win and his previous YCS successes.
Rogue players may also get a strategic edge by using a deck
they know very well. One of our locals
is attended by a doolist that plays Six Samurai to the exclusion of all
else. His cards are almost worn past
legal play. Nevertheless, he plays the
deck amazingly well. His familiarity
with the deck frees him up to concentrate on his opponent. While you are trying to decide which BA
monster to summon, he can pick up on your tells. Again, I would not advocate taking Six Sams
to a YCS. However, this type of
reasoning seems to escape Mr. Li.
In Search of the Best
I have certainly met many players that fit Mr. Li’s description
of a scrub. In fact, I share some of his
bewilderment when local doolists describe their latest “broken strategy”. While I do try some unconventional builds, my
deck choices are not far from the mainstream.
That said, I recognize the impossibility of knowing the best build of
the best deck.
To put Yugioh into context, consider Heads-Up Limit Texas
Hold’Em, a simpler variant of the popular Poker game. This game was recently “solved” using the
language of game theory. (The best
example of a solved game is Tic-Tac-Toe, where no one over the age of 8
loses.) The solution only took a cluster
200 2.1 GHz AMD cores and 900 core years of computing. That game had 1.47x10e13
information sets. Yugioh has 1.67x10e106
40 card combinations. The number of
information sets is several logs higher.
This game is not getting solved anytime soon.
On a more practical level, most statements about builds do
not incorporate sound statistical reasoning.
In a previous post, I pointed out that statistical significance required
sampling 384 hands. Deck lists (including my own) get changed with sample sizes
that are far below this threshold. This
is not a criticism of the game so much as a statement of fact. Given these uncertainties, players will
continue to seek for an advantage by experimenting with unconventional choices.
Most will fail, but some will succeed and
define the next meta.
