Deckbuilding 101 Part 1: Using Statistics to Build a Competitive Deck

Deckbuilding 101 Part 1: Using Statistics to Build a Competitive Deck



As we all begin exploring the Final Fantasy TCG, we are introduced to a ton of complex questions. For some of you, this may be your first trading card game you’ve ever played. For others, you may be familiar with TCGs and CCGs, but unfamiliar with how the new resource engines and game mechanics shake out in terms of how you approach deck building. This article aims to use hypergeometric calculations (statistics in card game probability) to create some general rules of thumb players can use when deck-building from scratch. Please note that my goal here is not to create objective rules on how a deck should be built, but that you use this guide as a scaffolding tool as you get comfortable with developing lists in this game.

Before we continue, we need to establish assumptions. Of course I am assuming that anyone reading this is aiming to build a deck competitively. While Organized Play does not currently exist, these statistics are calculated for the average player with ambitions of winning 7 out of 8 rounds in a best ⅔ event. Under a Swiss tournament format, this would be an event with 129-226 players. For those of you familiar with Swiss tournaments, this should be the standard you keep yourself to when aiming to top 8 an event.



Other assumptions we are making:



-Only cards used from Opus 1 Set



-All statistics on hand size are assuming the player goes first. If you can consistently draw well going first, you can draw consistently going second. I used this hypergeometric calculator for all statistics. http://stattrek.com/m/online-calculator/hypergeometric.aspx

-A playable hand is defined as any hand that draws at least one Enabler (defined later)

-If your hand meets the criteria for being “playable” we will consider a good hand as any hand that does not meet the following criteria in the first six cards

-Drawing 0-1 Forwards

-Drawing 5+ Forwards

-Drawing 0 Backup

-Drawing 4+ Backups

-Drawing 3+ Summons

-We will infer it is correct to mulligan 100% of the time that you do not start with a playable hand. The Final Fantasy Trading Card Game has a unique mulligan system for two reasons 1.) There’s no penalty to doing it (generally you draw one less card when you mulligan) and 2.) The cards are not shuffled back into the deck, but stacked on the bottom. The benefit to not having to shuffle before a mulligan is that you will not draw any of those “bad opening cards”.

-Any deck that opens with a good hand has the potential to win any game. Of course, this depends on your deck building decisions. Some run a lot of 1-2 cost cards, some run a lot of 5-7 cost cards, and everything in between. These calculations assume all styles of decks have the same credentials to draw well consistently and the same chance of winning. While this ideal does not work out in practice, it is a necessary assumption to make generalizations.



Defining Consistency in a Competitive Environment



Consistency is a difficult term to quantify, as different realms define it differently. In academics, consistency is generally defined as “90%”, the baseline for receiving an A grade, and demonstrating you can consistently perform the tasks in a course with near-perfection. In most research fields, 95% is the frequent baseline to determine if a correlation is statistically significant. But how do we define consistency in card games? And why is consistency so hard to spell consistently?

Let us pretend that we are prepping for the hypothetical 8 round, best ⅔ FFTCG National Championship. If we are playing competitively with the intent to win, our goal is to lose as few games as possible. If you lose 2 games in a round, you lose the round. If you lose 2 rounds in a Swiss format tournament, you probably will not top the event. Thus, the safest assumption to make is that If you lose more than 3 games in an 8 round event, it is possible to not qualify for top 8. In actually, you can lose as many as 9 or 10 and still win an event, but assuming the lowest numbers seem imperative for consistency.

On that stipulation, you need to win 21/24 games to win. Because of the variance in card games, match-ups, sub-optimal drawing, player error, being outplayed, and miscellaneous penalties, I think it’s reasonable to attribute one loss at an event to these factors. Thus, I believe 22/24 should be the standard for consistency, or 91.7%. Because of how division tends to work in a 50 card deck, there are a lot of times where 91.5 appears, and we will use this number to define consistency as being able to achieve a desired result 91.5%+ of the time.

If you believe 91.5% of the time is not a reasonable standard for consistency, remember, we are only looking at the games in which you go first and only have six cards. In practicality, some half of your games will be played going second, where you will have an extra card to work with and many of these percentages will increase 2-4+ percent.



Forward/Backup/Summon Ratios:

Forwards-I am currently of the position that the optimal starting point for a FFTCG deck consists of 25 Forwards/16 Backups/9 Summons. With 24 Forwards, you have a 92.2 ( Operationally consistent) chance of opening less than 5 Forwards in your opening hand. With 26 Forwards, you have a 92.2% chance of drawing at least 2 forwards. 25 is the happy median, almost meeting our standard of consistency on both sides of the spectrum.

It is worth noting that if the highest count of a single name of a Forward that you run is 9 copies (Say Cloud 9 Fire Earth Light.deck), having a total count of 26 monsters is the requirement to consistently draw a second forward with a different name in your first 3 turns.

Backups: 16 consistently appeared as a golden number across statistics. 16 gives you a 92.6% chance of drawing 3 or less Backups in your opening 6, and a 91.6% chance of opening with a backup. 24 is, in my opinion, the highest viable ceiling for Backups, because it gives you a 92.2% chance of opening 4 or less Backups. If your deck can reliably function with 4 Backups in your opening hand, consider increasing your count to accommodate for it.

Summons: I found 3 valuable benchmarks regarding summons:

-4 Summons is the most you can run and consistently open 0-1 (93.4) Summon in your opening 6-card hand.

-9 Summons is the most you should have if your goal is to consistently open with no more than 2 Summons (93.7), and draw one Summon in your first four turns (93.5).

-10 Summons suggest should draw into one in your first three tuns.

Enablers and a playable starting hand:

My standard for a playable hand is one that consistently opens with an “Enabler”. I define an Enabler as a card that, under most circumstances, will allow me to end turn 1 going first with either 6 resources on the field+hand, or having 5 resources in field+hand, and the opponent having 4. The latter is generally only going to happen if you play a card that forces the opponent to discard.

As of Opis 1, my list of Enablers are:

Every 1 and 2 CP Backup, Argath, Nora, Amodar, Sage, Viking, Zangan, 3 CP Forward Serah, Mog (XIII-2), Brother, Wedge, Jessie,

Of course, an aggressive deck will consider being able to play a 1-2CP Forward as an Enabler as well.

I do want to note a handful of 2 CP Forwards that, under certain circumstances, can generate advantage comparable to an Enabler. I call these cards “Psudeo-Enablers” :



Gadot-playing a 2 drop for free is essentially like getting 2 free CP

Devout-pays for itself later if it doesn’t get destroyed

2 CP Yuna-Forward, T1 Yuna, T2 Backup, T3 Summon

Serafie-Much more consistent Enabler going first than second, you can discard a forward to play Serafie, draw it again. It’s much worse when your opponent can fetch a card as well, though.

Gordon-Exception to the advantage rule, but I value it’s ability to block multiple threats regardless of power level, while simultaneously resisting removal, to have a high probability of generating advantage

3 CP Water Geomancer Usually replaces itself when it leaves the field,matchup dependent

Leila– If they don’t play a forward on their t1, you replace a card you loss

Mime- If you follow up with a Haste Forward, you can quickly generate advantage turn 2 or 3.



I personally do not consider any “Psudeo-Enablers” in opening consistently. The baseline for consistently opening with one Enabler in your opening 6, after a mulligan, is 9 (91.5%) To draw a playable hand 95%+, you need 13 Enablers- Perhaps aiming for 13 Enablers+Psudeo Enablers should be the benchmark for opening consistently.

Note that you would need to run 16 Enablers to have a playable hand without mulliganing. I believe this is a poor approach to deck building because there are no penalties to using your mulligan (and there’s an argument for it being the correct call because you get more information about your draws) but that your deck may not be even be powerful enough to win consistently with so many low-level cards.



Color Ratios:

At the point, the vast majority of FFTCG decks are going to be 2 color. The game does not easily support including a third color bar splashing a couple copies of an off-color card and hoping Chaos/Cosmos allows you to play it. However, a deck builder has to ask themselves “What are the fewest number of cards I can run in my less dominate color and still play them consistently?

Assuming you are running cards in both colors to count for your Enabler package, Statistics suggest you should run at least 19 cards in any color you are playing in which you may want to play a card in that color turn 1. Doing so gives you a 92% chance of opening a second card in that color from the remaining 5 cards in your hand.



EX Bursts

EX Bursts are a unique mechanic in this game. It’s both a way to maintain momentum and create reversals. However, EX Bursts are one of the more luck-based mechanics in the game, and not something I want to count on to help me to win, but to support me when I am in a position that I may lose.

If you were to lose 2 games in a tournament set, there are 12 opportunities for EX Bursts to resolve (Note the win condition is 7 rewards, but the 7th EX Burst will resolve at the same time you lose) So, I calculated how many EX Bursts you would have to run to consistently resolve a Burst in 12 rewards. The benchmarks I found are as follows:



9 Bursts- 93.5% Chance of resolving at least 1 Burst in 2 games.

14 Bursts- 92% Chance of resolving at least 2 Bursts in 2 games.

16 Bursts- 91.5% Chance of resolving at least 1 Burst in 1 game.

19 Bursts- 92.3% Chance of resolving at least 3 Burst in 2 games.



Note that these statistics are all conservative estimates when compared to their in-game practicality. Every time you play a card that specifically searches your deck for a non-EX Burst card, you increase your chances of flipping an EX over. Of course that will probably be offset by the Bursts lacking legal or viable targets, so it probably ends up being a net zero in the grand scheme of things.

TL:DR

Generally: Run 24-26 monsters. Don’t run more than 10 Summons. 16 is a REALLY good number for Backups. Always run at least 9 cards that you want to see one of turn 1. Always run at least 19 cards unless you never want to play a card in that color turn 1. 9,14,16, and 19 are nice benchmarks for EX Bursts.



Conclusion



What I want to stress here, more than anything else, is that this guide is not suppose to act as a definitive ruleset, but as a foundation for how you should approach deckbuilding, and modify as you become more comfortable with the game. As different decks develop unique win conditions, resource engines, and anti-metagame tactics, your decklist will probably shift away from these numbers. And if you are entering an event where you expect to play more than 24 games, your definition of consistency will have to increase. But as you start creating decklists and contemplate what the best use of your last few slots would be, I hope this guide helps you objectively decide what the best decisions for you could be.



Keep your eyes peeled for Part 2, where we try to answer the questions “How many different named Forwards should I run?” and “How many high/mid/low costed CP cards should I run in a good deck?”



Bio: Richard “Zappdos” Zapp, career counselor and massage therapist by day, and competitive gamer most of the day, too. My experience and deep understanding of competitive gaming stems from 10 years of semi-competitive Smash Bros. Melee, 5 years of Yugioh back in the day, testing partner for a member of the best Naruto TCG player. Most recently, I had tremendous success playing Kaijudo – where I had arguably the most consistent record nationally during the games last pro tour. I am ecstatic to provide quality content for the Final Fantasy TCG community and help prepare players for competitive play.