⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
(Bah, my browser flipped out because of the fact I accidentally hit backspace and I lost like half of this and had to re-type it.)
No, I still do not see the logic here: All you are stating is that, at best, Gnomish Experimenter functions as a Novice Engineer + remove a card from your deck if hits a minion, as the difference between Novice Engineer and Experimenter is irrelevent when digging to the next card as BOTH get to the Bow faster, but one turns a minion into "never gets drawn" and the other does not. Let me use one of your own examples.
"Assumptions:
1) We have two cards left in the deck and Gnomish Experimenter in Hand. The Gnomish Experimenter itself (on board) doesn't influence the game. Neither does the card drawn, if it's not Alexstrasza, nor does fatigue. Can we still play the Gnomish Experimenter or is it too risky?
Yes, of course! It's always risk-neutral!
Chance of drawing Alexstrasza next turn without GE = 50% WIN (2 cards left in the deck).
Chance of drawing Alexstrasza next turn with GE play now = 50% WIN. Because if we draw Alex and Chicken it, we lose right away (50% Chance). Or we don't (50% Chance) and draw Alexstrasza with 100% chance next turn and win."
Let us assume, as stated, that fatigue does not matter, meaning we can enter it fine (AKA it does not matter if Alex is last or 2nd to last). As stated, Experimenter's body does not matter. All that matters is if you draw Alexstrasza. If that is the case, compared to Novice Engineer, Gnomish Experimenter DOES add risk of losing: Novice Engineer will win 100% of the time, if drawing Alex on either turn wins, as you will either draw it with Engineer OR you will draw it the turn after due to Engineer, while with Experimenter you MUST draw it 2nd (As drawing it first turns Alex into a chicken and you lose). Yes, Experimenter digs you deeper, but so does EVERY DRAW CARD, which is why it is a downside compared to other draw cards and why probability kicks in.
Novice Engineer: Wins 100% of the time
Gnomish Experimenter: Wins 50% of the time (Alex 1st is a loss, Alex 2nd is a win, there are no other options.)
No Card Draw: Wins 50% of the time (Alex 1st is a win, we will assume Alex 2nd is a loss here because it takes an extra turn.)
Looking at it this way, the Experimenter does not actually increase your chances to win at all (Both are 50-50s, as you said), BUT a card draw without drawbacks (Which is what it is being compared to) wins 100% of the time (Alex 1st OR Alex 2nd wins!). See? That is where the risk comes into play: A no risk card draw will always get the good result here, while an Experimenter's risk causes the result to be tilted to have more bad results (Which in this specific scenario causes it to equal having not played an Experimenter at all).
"2) We have three cards left in the deck and Gnomish Experimenter in Hand. The Gnomish Experimenter itself (on board) doesn't influence the game. Neither does the card drawn, if it's not Alexstrasza, nor does fatigue. Can we still play the Gnomish Experimenter or is it too risky?
Chance of drawing Alexstrasza next turn without GE: 1/3 WIN (3 cards left in the deck.)
Chance of drawing Alexstrasza next turn with GE played now: 1/3. Because if we draw Alex and Chicken it, we lose right away (1/3 Chance). If we don't (2/3 Chance), there is only 2 cards left now. So the probability of drawing Alexstrasza has just increased by 50%! That means our overall chance to draw her is 2/3*1/2=1/3 WIN.
Still identical!"
Novice Engineer is STILL better here. The probability of drawing Alexstrasza still increases by 50%, but THERE IS NO 33% CHANCE TO LOSE. That is the WHOLE POINT of it being a risk.
Experimenter: Alexstrasza 1st is a loss, Alexstrasza 2nd is a win, Alexstrasza 3rd is a win. (T1, T2, T3)
Normal: Alexstrasza 1st is a win, Alexstrasza 2nd is a win, Alexstrasza 3rd is a loss due to time (T2, T3, T4 as there is no "T1" draw)
Novice Engineer: Wins with all three (Same as Experimenter but no T1 Chicken means wins on T1)
In essence, they are 2/3rd wins compared to 100% wins, unless there is no (non-fatigue, as we are not counting fatigue) element of time (In which case only Experimenter can lose) in play. Note that in all these cases, the Experimenter is NOT helping your odds to win, and that it decreases in odds if you add in a creature (IE if a Doomsayer could prevent lethal) and increases in odds to win if you add in a spell (IE if a topdecked Ice Block means you also win), which is in part where the element of risk comes from and why you run this in a spell happy deck.
I do not need to do this for every other scenario, but I will do it in response to your Hunter example, because it assumes the ONLY card that matters is the Eaglehorn Bow, which is taking it in a vacuum to ignore the drawback. First off, again, the effect to get to the Bow can be accomplished without downside by any card draw card, which means if P/T is not an issue (As with all above examples) Experimenter should only be run when Novice Engineer and Gnomish Inventor are maxed as he has no bonus over those two aside from body. You essentially netted 22 cards, minus the two Chickened cards and plus the two cards after, BUT if you played any other draw card you would have netted 22 cards and kept the two chickened cards (Which I believe you would agree, or we can generally assume to be, superior to the chicken). In this case, Experimenter is ALWAYS inferior to Novice Engineer and Gnomish Inventor unless body is taken into account, as his best case scenario is their every case scenario, while his worst case lessens the quality of the card you drew (into a Chicken).
Note that your Eaglehorn Bow example is, in fact, exactly what I mean by risk: Experimenter, at best, keeps the odds the same, but loses to any other card draw, while he does not actually improve your odds at all in this case! (You are 50/50 either way) This means that he would, if we assume the odds are the same the both ways, ONLY be useful at all for his body, which is a 3 mana 3/2: Below average. This can be said to be made up by the fact he lowers your future amounts by 1, but this is what I mean by probability: He increases the odds of all future cards drawn as if it was 1 (For example, if you would have a 2/30 chance to draw something, you now have a 2/29 chance as it has one less "card", where the maximum here is just HS' max deck size for simplicity), but adds in the risk of making it so if those cards are a minion he may make it so it is "never drawn" (IE You have a 2/30 chance to draw something, which can be lowered to a 2/29 OR if the Experimenter hits it is lowered to a 1/29).
FURTHERMORE, this must always assume there is a specific card that will matter and not a general sense, such as for example that the Knife Juggler you "would" have drawn could still potentially clear out a minion and thus would still win if you drew the Eaglehorn Bow, which would chance the odds in favor of not playing the Experimenter if so (The odds are 50/50 vs. 50/50 + the odds that, say, Knife Juggler or w/e minion will survive and allow you to play the next draw). Hence why Gnomish Experimenter should be played in decks with low minions (As you have a lower chance to hit a "minion" that may have a positive aspect and a higher chance to hit a spell which will and thus gain the full effect of a card draw). Let us use an Alexstrasza example similiar to before.
Example )
We have three cards left in the deck and Gnomish Experimenter in Hand. The Gnomish Experimenter itself (on board) doesn't influence the game. Neither does the card drawn, if it's Alexstrasza you win BUT Doomsayer "buys you" a turn (Lets just say you have a Frost Nova in hand, a not uncommon Freeze Mage scenario), nor does fatigue. Ergo, you win if you draw Alexstrasza and Doomsayer gives you a "second chance", but you cannot lose Alexstrasza (As Doomsayer does not cause you to "win", just get a chance to draw Alex: Not drawing Alex still loses, it is just meant to simulate a "stall" card here.). Can we still play the Gnomish Experimenter or is it too risky?
Playing Gnomish Experimenter: The possible outcomes are: Doomsayer 1st, Alex 2nd (Win), Alex 1st Doomsayer 2nd (Loss), Doomsayer 1st Alexstrasza 3rd (Loss, as the Doomsayer cannot 'stall" to get to Alex since it cannot "stall" to Alex due to being 2 cards away even if it wasn't a chicken), Alexstrasza 1st Doomsayer 3rd (Loss), Doomsayer 2nd Alexstrasza 3rd (Win), Alexstrasza 2nd Doomsayer 3rd (Win). The odds are 3/6 (You win if you get to chain Doomsayer + Alex together, plus if Doomsayer is burned and Alex is 2nd).
Playing Normal: Alex 1st, Doomsayer 2nd (Win), Doomsayer 1st Alex 2nd (Win), Alex 1st Doomsayer 3rd (Win), Doomsayer 1st Alex 3rd (Loss), Alex 2nd Doomsayer 3rd (win), Doomsayer 2nd Alexstrasza 3rd (Loss, on the assumption the player dies before Doomsayer can stall.). The odds are 4/6 (You win as long as Alex is not on the bottom, as you will either draw Alex or your stall to Alex)
Playing Novice Engineer: Wins 5/6 of the time (Doomsayer 1st Alex 3rd still loses as Doomsayer cannot stall to "bridge" to Alexstrasza)
Note that my math could be wrong here so I would enjoy if you double checked, as it is now 5:48 AM here and I had to run this in my head a few times. But in this scenario, Experimenter loses a small amount of the time (1/6th) due to the fact that adding in an extra target to chicken increasing the risk of playing Experimenter, though note that if I am calculating right it doesn't actually matter if it is a minion or not and just the chickening affects it (Stall 1st, Alex 3rd always loses as it does not "stall" into Alex because they are off by two draws, meaning Stall 1st Alex 3rd doesn't draw you Alex before you lose, while Doomsayer 2nd Alex 3rd does because it "stalls" you a turn to the turn you win. while Experimenter has two additional "loss" options from chickening compared to NE and one compared to normal: Note that Doomsayer 2nd, Alex 3rd loses on normal because it is "behind" a turn in card draw.).
Note that this may be somewhat easier to understand with a scenario that does not involve stalling: The basic idea is that, if you need to draw certain cards that are minions to keep you alive OR the minion that wins you the game, the Experimenter adds risk compared to normal drawing because it creates more results where you lose, because it has a higher likelihood of hitting chicken (IE instead of 1/3 vs. 1/3, it becomes 1/3 vs. 2/3, essentially, though as the above calcs show it is something more like 3/6 vs. 4/6). Note that in most scenarios, Experimenter should be equal to drawing IF one of the cards you need is a spell and not a minion (As it becomes 2/3 vs. 2/3).
Anyway, that's where the risk comes in, and why at the least this card should only be added if A. the body matters or B. you need cards like this on top of 2 NE and 2 Inventor as those two cards always have better odds to draw into pure "outs". Also note that Experimenter gains additional risk with Inventors/NEs because if he chickens one of them, he did not thin the deck compared to drawing them normally (As they would normally thin the deck by 1, but since they are a chicken they cannot, and thus the deck is the same size as if they were drawn and played normally, but is thicker by 1 compared to if Experimenter was another draw card).
Note that the (1) here is essentially what I said in my analysis, but shorter: You only want Gnomish Experimenter over Engineer/Inventor due to body OR if you run 2 of each of the other two cards, as otherwise Novice Engineer/Inventor are superior at digging for any single minion (As it eliminates any "chicken" misfires) in all circumstances. Also note that as the number of minions go down, the better Experimenter's effect is (Lesser odds of chicken misfires if digging for a minion) and thus is arguably a 3rd addendum to the first two notes, though it is still strictly worse than the other two at digging for a minion (If digging for a spell and without needing a minion to survive, they are the same and thus only body/mana cost matters).
That's what I've been saying this entire thread. I don't know why so many people were disagreeing with me.
Thing is, Gnomish Experimentor isn't a draw card in the sense of Novice Engineer. If you are hoping to draw Alex, it's exactly as effective as Razorfen Hunter (what people were comparing it to in the first place). The point is that it isn't as bad as people say it is (but not very good obviously), and as long as the deck doesn't hit fatigue, your chance of drawing Alex through the course of your match is unchanged, as if you had run Razorfen instead.
That said, I don't agree of GE in Freeze Mage. As I mentioned before on this thread, Freeze Mage would much rather play Novice Engineer than GE. Also the assumption that fatigue is not hit doesn't hold in Freeze Mage (the last card is sometimes drawn).
Edit: Also: if the chicken is 1 mana, this card is obviously poor. I was originally working on the assumption that Chicken costs 0, until Ben Brode twittered the news.
7 pages? Really?
I thought this card is pretty bad, why this many posts?^^
Fine. I thought that saying that the chances are unchanged would cause the claim to be more easily swallowed, but it seems it had the opposite effect. :P Anyway, of course you're right and this card does cause you to have the better chance of drawing than if Razorfen had been put in that slot (assuming no fatigue as before). But I wanted to bring out the point that even if the deck was composed of only minions, the chance would still be same as Razorfen. Some people might think that this argument only works for spell decks.
Also, thanks for helping the cause of the Gnomish Experimentor! :D :D Seriously people, it's not as bad as you think it is (unless chicken costs 1, in which case it probably is).
You must've been misunderstanding me then. I'll quote myself from an earlier post:
That is the point I've been arguing the entire time. Every reply I got was seemingly disagreeing with me so I was defending it.
Not sure I understand. What "same post as before" are you talking about, and what did I say that was exactly the same as what you said?
If you are referring to my argument then all I have to say is that it was just a big misunderstanding. All I was saying is that I didn't like the card in a deck that heavily relies on a certain minion or minions to win the game. I don't know how that could've been misconstrued, but I must have not worded it properly. If you can point out the part in my argument that is implying something else, then please do so. I want to clear this up.
Could you tell me why my math in the following is wrong, please? Not trying to be condensending but I was actually having trouble doing the math since it was so late and I am now curious what the actual math is. (Where you win with Doomsayer -> Alex, but not Doomsayer -> Card -> Alex).
Thank you, I see my problem now just like you said: I listed Doomsayer 2nd, Alex 3rd as a win for normal when it is a loss. That explains it (I wasn't sure on my GE calcs so I was checking them more and I must have missed the normal calcs). Thank you for helping. :)
I put this card in the same boat as deathlord. In theory it can be very good, but in practice it can screw you over (i.e. burning auctioneer or rag)
Drink your school stay in sleep don’t do milk and get eight hours of drugs
A lot of interesting discussion on this card that made me think more about it than I originally would have. Even so, I don't rank the card highly, and I think it will see very selective to almost zero competitive play. Of course, that's because of what decks are currently powerful and what strategies work, and I don't know if those things will even be comparable to our current meta post GvG.
That said, I'll try to add some interesting takes on the card, even though most of what needs to be said has been said already. Card draw as a mechanic is obviously quite powerful, so much so that minions pay significant stat prices to have this effect. The stat price here has already been beaten to death though, so no need to go over it.
In very simple terms, card draw is powerful because of (a) it gives you chance at obtaining the card(s) that you want to answer the current state of the game/increasing your advantage, or, failing that, and much more often (b) gives you increased chance of obtaining the card(s) on your future turns. In terms of the effect, this card draw is not the same as standard card draw, because you remove the (a) possibility for any minion. There are so many different situations you could be in, doing math to rate them all is nearly impossible here, simply because you would need to weigh the value of all your minions, spells, how important they all are to get in the immediate future vs sometime later during the game, and how much it would hurt you to have one of your key minions sheeped. You can go with the simple example of you have 10 cards left and 1 of them is Rag, do the math, do you play it? But that doesn't paint a picture close to what game situations are really like.
Obviously whether or not its a 1 or 0 mana chicken will also affect the card. If it is actually 1 mana, I think it will be virtually unplayable.
EDIT: Thinking about it a little more, maybe a very spell heavy shaman deck could make this card work. They have ridiculous spell/minion ratios compared to most decks and the loss of any one minion can't hurt them as much as it could other spell heavy decks like miracle or freeze mage.
I would have designed it to create 0 mana chickens because that only makes sense! If they are 1 mana, the creative team have had a complete FAIL.
Just imagine that card would be at a bottom of deck and would never be drawn. Tracking discard 2 cards, and it's still good, because those 2 cards would stay at a bottom of deck.
So this card is 3/2 draw a spell or free chicken card. That Giant would anyway stay at a bottom of deck and would never see play.
This card is very good in aggro decks.
It would be okay, if the Chicken kept the stats and abilities but just looked like a Chicken, or if they release some crazy Chicken buffing creature, but otherwise I'd play a Novice/Loot Hoarder or other card draw over this any day.
Correct me if im misunderstanding you, but with your logic, rag COULD have been the last card, but it wasnt. You will have a higher win % in the games you draw rag than in the games you dont. A perfect example of this is miracle with auctioneers. If they are the last card in your deck then you lose. That being said i think this is good in arena, cuz there are no key cards.
Drink your school stay in sleep don’t do milk and get eight hours of drugs
Wow, the amount of work going into these explanations is impressive, and somewhat disturbing.
I do understand how the downside might not be as bad as it looks, at least in aggro decks. Still, and what many people seem to want to express and is the source of confusion here, it is simply not enough to qualify for deck inclusion. Its somewhat complicated game value effect isn't powerful enough.
I dont think you understand what im saying. Key cards DO matter. Your right that it doesnt change the probability of drawing them, but the fact that you got lucky and you would have drawn it is taken away from you. It means that your auctioneer is on the bottom of the deck, which is very unlucky. If someone was infinitly unlucky in card draws, then yes the card is great. However, most games you will get better rng than that. If you transform auctioneer (yes auctioneer is VERY important, and if it is the last card you lose), then you are basically simulating it as the last card in your deck. Burning your auctioneer is like playing that game with the worst rng possible.
Drink your school stay in sleep don’t do milk and get eight hours of drugs
You forget that in 29 games you will get key card one turn earlier, and in only 1 game it will turn key card into chicken. So you loose 1 game 90% but 29 games win 53%. On average you win more. Profit.
Your logic is flawed. A 3 mana 3/2 draw a card isnt good enough to win you the game 3% more of the time. Also, you can have more than 1 important card. There is a rather new mage OTK mage deck on ladder. It runs double sorcerers apprentice and ancient mage. If you burn any of those cards, or alextrasa, you are in deep trouble. This means that every game you play him, you have a 10% chance to lose. This means that it decreases you win percentage by about 8%. This is just one example but there are a lot of decks with multiple very important cards that need to be drawn before turn 30.
Drink your school stay in sleep don’t do milk and get eight hours of drugs