3-1 Legend lineups make no sense.

[Dennis Hawk]

Ok, I've seen some decklists with a groundbreakingly looking 3-1 lineups of Legend halves. The logic behind this decision seems to be to Rescue the other half when the Legend goes down, with having a lot of the other half to be added straight from the hand by stocking them there when the Legend is still up and running.

In this post, I am to demostrate why 3-1 lineups are worse than 2-2 lineups in all aspects and should not be used in any circumstance where you actually own a 2-2 line.

1. 3-1 is prized far more often.
Think about it. People are running 2-2 Luxrays, 2-2 Garchomps and all that 2-2 stuff, just because there are things to be put in prizes. Logically, 3-1 lines have made sense due to wanting to start with the basic form of the pokémon, but now basically every Worlds Luxchomp was running 2-2 lineup. Yes, there is Azelf, but the propability for Azelf and the single Legend half being prized is far more than Azelf and 2 Legend halves.

2. You don't even get to start with it.
Suppose there are decks that are running 3-1 lineups just as you would need to start with something. Well, you can't do it here. No matter which half - the 3 or the 1 - you happen to get into your starting hand, you still can't put it down to the active position or even to the bench before the game begins. This negates the advantage of a 3-1 lineup.

3. ...and it is more impropable of drawing into it.
While having 3-1 lineup seems to increase your changes into drawing the other half, it also decreases your changes for drawing into the single copy of another half. We can demostrate this with the scenario with 2 random Legend halves getting drawn into one's hand and their compability to form a complete Legend.

3-1 line: [x1][x2][x3][o1]
2-2 line: [x1][x2][o1][o2]

When counting propabilities, see all possibilities of these cards ending up to your hand (6). These will form the following combinations.

3-1 line: 1. [x1][x2] 2. [x1][x3] 3. [x1][o1] 4. [x2][x3] 5. [x2][o1] 6. [x3][o1] = 3/6 valid combinations.
2-2 line: 1. [x1][x2] 2. [x1][o1] 3. [x1][o2] 4. [x2][o1] 5. [x2][o2] 6. [o1][o2] = 4/6 valid combinations.

Thus, when randomly drawing, in 33% of the occurrences more the 2-2 lineup provides a complete legend.

4. The Rescue argument
So the basis of the 3-1 lineup has been being able to rescue the half you only have one of and having your hand packed with the other half you are playing three of. Here's a counter: When you have a complete Legend in the discard pile and any half in your hand, wouldn't the Pokémon Rescue complete it anyway? Or even better - if you had 2 of the remaining Legend halves in your hand when your Legend goes down, you wouldn't even need a Rescue - you could just play the Legend halves down as a whole, not needing to trick yourself into believing that the Rescue gets you the important part of the Legend that you have most cunningly gotten in to the discard pile.

Same goes with all the search arguments. When you have one half in hand - doesn't even matter which half - you will always want to look for the other half. And there are no cards that can only get the lower or upper half of a Legend, they will get you the one that you need to complete it, and thus 3-1 lineup is not valid.

Please do not play 3-1 Legends.

 

[waynegg]

Umm, you didn't factor in the Azelf that is also included with the line up for the sole purpose of if your 1 in the 3-1 is prized. This effectively gives you a 3-2 Legend. The premise of running the 3-1 is that the Legend is being used as your primary attacker, not just a supporting role. This gives you a greater chance of having that Legend to attack with for the whole game. There are also up to 9 Pokemon Search (Lux, Comm, Bebe) cards in the deck so you don't have to rely on drawing into it.

So before you go throwing a bunch of math at it (or do the math, but this time factor in the extra random variable), and while looking at it as if none of the other cards in your deck factor in on that decision, step outside the box and look at it from a different angle.

Or you can do what I did when I first came up with the idea, and before I started suggesting it to anybody. Build a deck and test it both ways and see which is the most consistent in doing what you want it to do. This wasn't some pulled from where the sun don't shine revelation.

For the record, there is a .8% chance of BOTH the Azelf and the limited necessity card being prized. If that happens to you, you were supposed to lose the game.

 

[PkB_]

Umm, you didn't factor in the Azelf that is also included with the line up for the sole purpose of if your 1 in the 3-1 is prized. This effectively gives you a 3-2 Legend. The premise of running the 3-1 is that the Legend is being used as your primary attacker, not just a supporting role. This gives you a greater chance of having that Legend to attack with for the whole game. There are also up to 9 Pokemon Search (Lux, Comm, Bebe) cards in the deck so you don't have to rely on drawing into it.

So before you go throwing a bunch of math at it (or do the math, but this time factor in the extra random variable), and while looking at it as if none of the other cards in your deck factor in on that decision, step outside the box and look at it from a different angle.

Or you can do what I did when I first came up with the idea, and before I started suggesting it to anybody. Build a deck and test it both ways and see which is the most consistent in doing what you want it to do. This wasn't some pulled from where the sun don't shine revelation.

For the record, there is a .8% chance of BOTH the Azelf and the limited necessity card being prized. If that happens to you, you were supposed to lose the game.

2/2 legend with azelf is actually like a 3/3 =]

 

[Dennis Hawk]

Well congrats for the idea, as flawed as it is.

You're saying Azelf effectively gives you a 3-2 Legend. That's true - Azelf either gives you 3-2 or 4-1 Legend. But when you're playing 2-2 lineup, Azelf gives you 3-3 Legend. 3-3 > 3-2. Azelf and your single Legend are prized (2/6 prize cards) against Azelf and two of your Legend halves are prized (3/6 prize cards), this should be pretty obvious.

Ok, so you have 9 Pokémon Searches. With 3-1 Legend, you then have 10/60*12/60 to draw it (not percents, just relatively comparable numbers) as opposed to 2-2 lineups 11/60*11/60. 2-2 still has better odds to get drawn.

This is just simple math. No random variables. 2-2 lineup is better in every way and if there were random variables in your opponent's deck (trainer lock, power spray) they would just highlight the 2-2 superiority.

 

[waynegg]

2/2 legend with azelf is actually like a 3/3 =]

No, It's really not.

Well congrats for the idea, as flawed as it is...

You obviously haven't tested either to see which actually works better. I follow your theorymon, but it isn't correct. 2-2 Legend plus Azelf doesn't give you a 3-3 Probability. It gives you the same 3-2, but limiting you to the same results as with a 2-2 build. You realistically get only 2 chances of running your main attacker. Period. Recovery to your deck (Flower Lady and Palmer), find and set up again with a Legend takes so long the game is already over. The chances of recovery to your hand (2x Pokemon Rescue simultaneously) are thin.

With a 3-1 you easily get 3 chances at your main attacker. Then you just recover to your hand (1x Pokemon Rescue) and keep on trucking which is so easy to pull off it's almost automatic.

Please- actually build a deck and try it before bashing it. Bullados had the same thoughts you did before he tried it. Only difference is he gave it a shot before outright slamming the idea, and in the process he saw it was more consistent.

Or don't test it and only see what's on paper. Whatever. I'm not trying to convince you, but don't run something down that you haven't even tried in the face of those who have and know better.

 

[Dennis Hawk]

You obviously haven't tested either to see which actually works better. I follow your theorymon, but it isn't correct. 2-2 Legend plus Azelf doesn't give you a 3-3 Probability. It gives you the same 3-2, but limiting you to the same results as with a 2-2 build. You realistically get only 2 chances of running your main attacker. Period. Recovery to your deck (Flower Lady and Palmer), find and set up again with a Legend takes so long the game is already over. The chances of recovery to your hand (2x Pokemon Rescue simultaneously) are thin.

Obviously you're not following the logic here. Azelf won't give you an extra half if it's sprayed. Rescue won't let you set up another Legend it you're trainerlocked. These are just the special cases that highlight the superiority of 2-2 lineup. And as for Azelf not giving me 3-3 lineup - why will it then give you 3-2? If your single half is prized, there's only one card in your deck which can equal getting it, which is Azelf. It's not 3-2 then, it's 3-1 anyway.

And the rescue argument was already in the main post. Did you even read it? With a rescue in your hand, you have equal recovery. You can rescue one half of the legend if your legend goes down and play it down with the second half you have in your hand. I don't need to play 2 Rescues simultaneously if I don't play down the other 1-1 Legend - which already gives me an advantage over a 3-1 build as I can actually build up one Legend while attacking with other if I ever need to. If I don't, I can play 2-2 line just the same way as the 3-1 line is played here.

With a 3-1 you easily get 3 chances at your main attacker. Then you just recover to your hand (1x Pokemon Rescue) and keep on trucking which is so easy to pull off it's almost automatic.

Again, this doesn't differ in any way for the 2-2 build. Have a legend half in your hand, Rescue the other half, ready to go again.

Please- actually build a deck and try it before bashing it. Bullados had the same thoughts you did before he tried it. Only difference is he gave it a shot before outright slamming the idea, and in the process he saw it was more consistent.

If there is not a mathematical argument which would prove 3-1 lineup to be, in any way, better than 2-2, there is no need for me to test it. You're yet to give me one legit case where 3-1 lineup would be better than 2-2.

Or don't test it and only see what's on paper. Whatever. I'm not trying to convince you, but don't run something down that you haven't even tried in the face of those who have and know what's better.

What's on paper should be the basis of all testing. That's why we aren't playing 1-4-3 evolution lines. If there's a way to cut out the needless testing in order to achieve an optimal list, I would do so. Mathematics and calculating propabilities are the way to limit the amount of testing, which in this case should be pretty self-explanationary. Testing is always inaccurate, and will only get more accurate with the amount of test games played.

I would understand the arguments between 3-1 and 2-2 lines of SP+Lv.X lines, but as 3-1 Legend is - in otherwise identical builds - in all cases worse than 2-2, I don't think there is a need for testing it any futher.

 

[Sabett]

No, It's really not.



You obviously haven't tested either to see which actually works better. I follow your theorymon, but it isn't correct. 2-2 Legend plus Azelf doesn't give you a 3-3 Probability. It gives you the same 3-2, but limiting you to the same results as with a 2-2 build. You realistically get only 2 chances of running your main attacker. Period. Recovery to your deck (Flower Lady and Palmer), find and set up again with a Legend takes so long the game is already over. With a 3-1 you easily get 3 chances at your main attacker.

Please- actually build a deck and try it before bashing it. Bullados had the same thoughts you did before he tried it. Only difference is he gave it a shot before outright slamming the idea, and in the process he saw it was more consistent.

Or don't test it and only see what's on paper. Whatever. I'm not trying to convince you, but don't run something down that you haven't even tried in the face of those who have and know what's better.

:nonono: You're telling half truths of the numbers. In a 2-2 line whenever any legend piece is prized it's like running a 3-2 line. A 3-1 line is only like that when that lone half is prized, every other time it's like running a 4-1 line.

Also, you do bring up the point that a 3-1 line has an actual advantage over a 2-2 line, and no it's not anything to do with azelf or pokemon rescue, because a 2-2 line is better in that instance. What you did bring up is the ease of running the legend a third time. However, unless we're running lugia or ho-oh , you really only have two runs of a legend anyway, unless you expect to only lose one prize other than legends. Which tbh is unrealistic. Now you can say that it's worth it on the off chance of that happening, but that's only one pro a 3-1 line has on a 2-2 line, and it's not even something exclusive to a 3-1 line either since you can still take the legends out of the discard for a third time with a 2-2 line, a 3-1 line just makes it a little simpler. IMO, with all of the benefits we're getting from a 2-2 line, and the larger disadvantages from a 3-1 line, I'd run 2-2 everytime.

One huge disadvantage that should be brought up from a 3-1 line, if that lone half is prized, then you're also relying on a power to get that legend piece out, so if they spray that azelf, you're done. This is also true for the occasional azelf+lone legend piece, but that's so rare compared to all the other 3 legend pieces being prized.

Also, there's no point arguing testing VS. theorymon when basic math beats it hands down. SSU might work better in testing than working 50% of the time, but that doesn't change the fact that it really does 50% no matter how many heads you get. So yes, you could've easily gotten good results from a 3-1 line than when you tested with a 2-2 line, but that doesn't change the facts, you're using the gambler's fallacy. Just because you got straights three times in a row, that doesn't mean you're lucky and you're on a winning streak which ensures you'll win again. The numbers are the same, they don't change.

EDIT: I'd also like to point out that as far as this whole azelf equaling 3-2/3-3/4-1 stuff, this isn't in relation to drawing it from your deck this is directly in relation to things being prized.

EDIT 2: LOL I fell into the fallacy of the 3-1 line again! You get 3 chances with your attacker with a 2-2 line. Play it once, then it dies, draw any random piece, play it again, then it dies, draw last legend piece, play it again. ROFLMAO!!! There's absolutely no reason to run a 3-1 line. Everything I said about the 3-1 line having one advantage was all wrong!

 

[baby mario]

For what it's worth, I've tested Waynegg's idea and I found that 3-1 w/ Rescues DOES work out better.

Dunno the maths, just going by what I experienced.

 

[Dennis Hawk]

For what it's worth, I've tested Waynegg's idea and I found that 3-1 w/ Rescues DOES work out better.

Dunno the maths, just going by what I experienced.

I would think this is psychological.

With 3-1 lineup, you are obligated to use Rescue every time when your Legend gets KO'd, making it a bit easier to play.

However, you could play the 2-2 lineup just the same way. It just takes a bit of mind adjustment, and of course you can't rescue the same part over and over like with 3-1 line, but otherwise, it should have no effect in the gameplay. Rescue still gets you another full legend if you have the 1-1 line in discard pile and 1 half in your hand.

Maybe it's all about learning to play the 2-2 line like the 3-1 line which is the optimal way to go.

 

[waynegg]

I would think this is psychological.

I respect your prowess as a player, but you're dead wrong on this. Like I said I'm not going to even try to convince you. If you can't take direct testimony from those who have played it as such and instead choose to go off nothing but your theory, then so be it and there's no help for you. I realize the majority are going to believe your theory, and that's fine. I've said my piece.

Until recently, historically speaking, the vast majority believed the Earth to be flat. That too was a flawed belief which was proven wrong through testing. That's why you test instead of just relying on conventional wisdom and paper theories.

 

[Sabett]

For what it's worth, I've tested Waynegg's idea and I found that 3-1 w/ Rescues DOES work out better.

Dunno the maths, just going by what I experienced.

HOW? It's impossible. It's exactly the same with a 2-2 line.

Play Legend #1
It get's KO'd
You draw another legend piece
Play pokemon rescue to get the opposite of the one you drew
Play Legend #2
It get's KO'd
You draw the last legend piece
Play pokemon rescue to get the opposite of the one you drew
Play Legend #3

LOL this is from a 2-2 line. The 3-1 line has no advantage, and only disadvantages.

I respect your prowess as a player, but you're dead wrong on this. Like I said I'm not going to even try to convince you. If you can't take direct testimony from those who have played it as such and instead choose to go off nothing but your theory, then so be it and there's no help for you. I realize the majority are going to believe your theory, and that's fine. I've said my piece.

Until recently, historically speaking, the vast majority believed the Earth to be flat. That too was a flawed belief which was proven wrong through testing. That's why you test instead of just relying on paper.

This is insanity! Tell me one thing that is wrong with the play that I demonstrated in this post. One thing in comparison to the 3-1 line.

 

[waynegg]

This is insanity! Tell me one thing that is wrong with the play that I demonstrated in this post. One thing in comparison to the 3-1 line.

Quoted me before the edit, and I wasn't replying to your post. Sorry if you took it that way.

I think you missed the part where I said I wasn't going to try to convince you. I put it out there. Explained why it works. And then I leave it at that. It's up to you what you do with the info.

 

[prodigal_fanboy]

Umm, you didn't factor in the Azelf that is also included with the line up for the sole purpose of if your 1 in the 3-1 is prized. This effectively gives you a 3-2 Legend.

I'm not going to nitpick either way in terms of the count because frankly decks focusing on Legends aren't worth my time until somebody else proves them to work, however I will state that you are not incorrect, but just kind of glossing things over.

The odds of prizing all three of your half are less than 1/1000. The odds of prizing the one half that you run one of are about 1/10.

Assuming Azelf isn't prized, running 3-1 with Azelf gives you a 3.003(?)-1.1 line going into any given game.

 

[czech59]

I think that because the Legend is two cards, and therefor both halves go into the discard pile when it gets KO'd, there basically is no difference when it comes to recovery. Like Sabett said, if a legend is KO'd, you get half a legend in your hand, then rescue the other half. Whichever half is in your hand is irrelevant, whether you searched out one of the two other tops or one of the other one of each's you have in your deck (3-1, 2-2 respectfully). No matter what, there is one of each piece you can rescue, so you are always able to rescue into a full legend.

The one large advantage I see with 2-2, and is why I am playing 2-2 of a legend in the deck I'm making (besides the fact I have no choice to otherwise change that count) is that if one is active, there is a possibility to build one up on the bench as well. While not all legends are used in this way, if it is the main attacker, and everything else is mostly support, what would happen when your legend dies and you can't power it up in one turn?

I'm not saying either way is right or wrong, or that one way is so much better than the other. Maybe I'm a simpleton so I stick to 2-2 because its... normal. But I do think that both ways work, and that there really is no noticeable difference either way. Both have their theoretical advantages and disadvantages, but I think the whole argument may be somewhat moot and not necessarily the difference between victory and loss, but more of just a preference and a way to cater to one's playing style.

 

[waynegg]

I'm not going to nitpick either way in terms of the count because frankly decks focusing on Legends aren't worth my time until somebody else proves them to work, however I will state that you are not incorrect, but just kind of glossing things over.

The odds of prizing all three of your half are less than 1/1000. The odds of prizing the one half that you run one of are about 1/10.

Assuming Azelf isn't prized, running 3-1 with Azelf gives you a 3.003(?)-1.1 line going into any given game.

That's why I said effectively. Meaning Azelf acts (in a way) as your second in case the single half is prized. The chance of both the Azelf and the single half being prized are less than 1% and that's a number any TCG player can live with. With a 2-2 you have a much greater chance of 2 of your halves being prized. Almost a 1 in 5 chance using ExoByte's numbers.

 

[darthtace]

Actually, the best way to run a legend is 2-2 with a Dialga PL (Reverse Time) and Legend Box. When the Legend dies, put it back on top and replay it, hopefully ready to attack if it gets enough energy. Works great with the Dogs since they need less energy. If you can get one legend on the bench and one in play, you just attack til the front one dies, put the other one forward, then pull it back.

Admittedly, it's vulnerable to Power Spray and Trainer Lock, but it still works much better than Pokemon Rescue since 2 pieces is better than one. Also, if you're sprayed, just use an SSU or Hunter; if you're Locked, just draw into them, a bit slower than the Box, but still faster than using rescue if you don't have a piece in your hand.

If you're Trainer Locked and get Power Sprayed (or Mesprit I suppose) then you're screwed, but I don't know any decks that run both, and Azelf and Rescue isn't going to do anything with them either.

 

[Dennis Hawk]

I respect your prowess as a player, but you're dead wrong on this. Like I said I'm not going to even try to convince you. If you can't take direct testimony from those who have played it as such and instead choose to go off nothing but your theory, then so be it and there's no help for you. I realize the majority are going to believe your theory, and that's fine. I've said my piece.

Until recently, historically speaking, the vast majority believed the Earth to be flat. That too was a flawed belief which was proven wrong through testing. That's why you test instead of just relying on conventional wisdom and paper theories.

Quite a way to take the "world is flat" argument here. It's not rocket science, propability theory were initially developed in 1600s, and although we're come a long way from that sciencificially, the theory essentials are still the same.

Testing is not optimal if you don't play optimal game. Easy line doesn't equal optimal line. Optimal lines can be hard to play and figure out, but when you do, they will prove better than suboptimal - even if easier - lineups. As a player, I would expect nothing less from my deck.

This isn't even a matchup question. It may be a state of mind question, or matter of shuffling, but as long as there is nothing to back up the theory behind playing 3-1 line over 2-2, I won't. Compared to 3-1, 2-2 does everything and more - thus 3-1 is, in every way, suboptimal way to deckbuild a Legend.

I do realize that in Pokémon, it's all about drawing the right cards, which is a random activity. You may draw the right cards with 3-1 lineup. I'm just saying that the propabilities - all of them - are against playing 3-1, and as long as there is nothing to back up the arguments other than subjective testing results, this shouldn't even be anything to argue about. It's just worse in a deckbuilding point of view - where you should do everything capable to use the cards as efficiently as possible in order to increase the odds of you winning the games consistently.

That's why I said effectively. Meaning Azelf acts (in a way) as your second in case the single half is prized. The chance of both the Azelf and the single half being prized are less than 1% and that's a number any TCG player can live with. With a 2-2 you have a much greater chance of 2 of your halves being prized. Almost a 1 in 5 chance using ExoByte's numbers.

So when playing Azelf with 2-2 lineup, you would need 3 cards to get prized in order to render the lineup unusable (2 of the same half + azelf), which is basically so small that there is nothing to worry about when playing 2-2 lineup.

With 3-1 lineup, the effect of Power spray has a huge impact on propability. When playing against SP with Legend deck this is just something that you just can't allow as they tend to have a huge advantage from the start anyway. Same goes with trainer lock - inside Plume/Deafen/Spiritomb lock getting 2 legends out instead of 1 will be game-deciding (or 4 legends instead of 2 when playing Palmer's, or 3 Legends instead of 2 when playing Dialga PL). You just can't ignore these facts in a harsh lock-based metagame environment we are heading into.

Edit: Also have to mention starting with Azelf, which is even more propable in a Legend deck as Legends aren't basics you can play down on the start. Playing 2 Azelfs just to be able to play 3-1 line consistently effectively takes you a card spot away.

 

[waynegg]

Quite a way to take the "world is flat" argument here.

That's not what I said and you know it. There's no reason to be childish, taking something I said completely and purposefully out of context and then using it in an attempt to twist my words. I haven't disrespected you, and I expect the same in return.

 

[Iinin_Hero]

Who play legend-cards, more than 1-1 RaikouEntei anyways?!

 

[darthtace]

That's why I said effectively. Meaning Azelf acts (in a way) as your second in case the single half is prized. The chance of both the Azelf and the single half being prized are less than 1% and that's a number any TCG player can live with. With a 2-2 you have a much greater chance of 2 of your halves being prized. Almost a 1 in 5 chance using ExoByte's numbers.

1 in 5? No sir. That's not how it works.

Okay, children, time for a lesson in figuring chances.

The chance of any particular card being prized are the odds of it not being in your hand (59/60*58/59*57/58*56/57*55/56*54/55*53/54) which is about 88%, then multiply that by the chance of it being in your prizes, which is 1- the odds of it not being in your prizes (52/53*51/52*50/51*49/50*48/49*47/48) or about .89. 1-.89=.11. .11*.88 is about .0986, or the 1/10 previously mentioned.

However, the odds of 2 particular prizes being prized are the odds of one being prized times the odds of the other being prized. Simplifying the math, that's basically saying .0986*.0986 (it's not really that, it'd be less than that) which is about a 1/100 chance of prizing two particular halves of a legend. The odds are only slightly better if you prize either half of either legend pair, about 2.5/100.

Also, the odds are no different playing 3-1 as playing 2-2. You're just as likely to prized 1 Piece in either, and just as likely to prize 2 pieces in either. It’s just in one that if you prize a Piece and an Azelf (1/100 occurance, same as prizing 2 pieces) you’re out your decks focus, whereas prizing 2 of the same piece and Azelf is 1/1000. Thus, the odds of the 2-2 having an auto-loss are much less than the odds of the 3-1.