Jump to content
Urza's Mine

Hardest Mirror Match In the History of the Game? (So Far)

Recommended Posts

Urza's Mine    14

Just wanted to see what people's thoughts were on the subject. I would honestly have to say that the shaddoll mirror is the hardest that I have played. It has been the only mirror match where you can slowly but surely feel all control and momentum slip away from you if you aren't playing immaculately. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squiddy    9171
baby dragon rulers for sure. dolls and nekroz are complex to a degree but once u get down the basics ie. not leaving carts/fusion monsters on board its a lot easier then dragons were, since theres only a handful of plays / things to play arund but in dragons there were endless possibilitys and lots of diff tech carts (|:|)
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    618
Define hard.
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Tygo    14119

Define hard.

Fully erect.

  • Upvote 37

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    618

Define hard.

Fully erect.
Oh, then it would definitely be TenguPlants. When you get off on your opponents established field with a better combo you should be hard.

Lol at any kid who says harpies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dirk    1956

It is going to be difficult to answer that question because there are a lot of mirrors that haven't been over exposed, because the deck wasn't good as a part of a format.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess hard would be something that relates to having to make the most decisions in regards to your own options of what your cards allow you to do whilst also having to take into account what cards your opponent has and how they may limit you and then how they are going to react to what board you do assemble and how you'll live through it. This would all be potentially exacerbated by the depth of the card pool on offer to the deck, so something like Nekroz mirror matches are lacking here as most decks have the same 30 cards in the main and most extra decks have at least 10 cards the same. This being because it means you have to play around more cards so the element of surprise will be greater. This definition may seem more appropriate for more combo/aggro orientated decks, but with something more like the HAT/Goat mirror which was more control inclined perhaps a greater weight needs to be given to resources conservation and then optimal uses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dirk    1956

Well the ideal mirror would be lots of decisions, lots of turns, no auto wins, mistakes are punished by auto wins but non interactive auto wins do not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    618
I think sometimes a mirror can be good if you have an autowin that is read correctly. It shouldn't be risk free with recovery and stuff. But if I see your hand ifs weak, of course I want to auto win.
Granted, you can argue just win normally. But we all know longer games means chances to come back.

I mean, my decisions change a bunch of the deck across from me is threatening an auto win at any moment, vs knowing I have turns to get into it so I can take damage.

I mean if we all want to agree a slow format is the most skill intensive. We can go that route. But managing your life resource and hand all matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Dragon    312

Isn't the 'hardest' mirror match the best one if you're a bad player, but the worst one if you're a good player?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RobertM    86

Isn't the 'hardest' mirror match the best one if you're a bad player, but the worst one if you're a good player?

 

No, it should be literally the opposite.

 

Pretty much the only thing you need to take into account is the size of decision trees.  This accounts for the influence of various kinds of autowins, the length of the games, number of options present, size of skill curve, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarthChocoboz    292

Surely a "hard" mirror match is one where there are lots of decisions and opportunity costs? 

 

I'd have to say baby rulers as well. You basically played with 2 hands and had hundreds of options every turn. Also there was a lot of different stuff to play around and sometimes not always possible to play around the same thing so one had to stay on top of the metagame to make a correct play. For example when electric virus would see play, people would wait until they could summon Colossal Fighter or Abyssgaios to set their emptiness. But when virus wasn't played poeple would just use dracossack.

 

Another thing i liked about that format was there was multiple win conditions. You could lose by life points, decking out, being locked out of the game or running out of resources. Also bluffs and baits were really important in that format. Although not many would happen every game, forcing your opponent into 1 sub optimal play would often just open it up for you to swing the tempo back in your favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SQUIDS~    381
Baby dragons by a mile. Ravine rulers without 6S or return were hard too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Satchmo    3220

 

Isn't the 'hardest' mirror match the best one if you're a bad player, but the worst one if you're a good player?

 

No, it should be literally the opposite.

 

Pretty much the only thing you need to take into account is the size of decision trees.  This accounts for the influence of various kinds of autowins, the length of the games, number of options present, size of skill curve, etc.

 

Then we are defining "Hardest" as "Most Skillful", which is not the only definition of "Hardest".

But it's also probably the best definition to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
herbie ✌    1340

Baby dragons by a mile. Ravine rulers without 6S or return were hard too

A game where your opponent gets a 6 on Sense would definitely be the hardest mirror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
herbie ✌    1340

Or 15+ cards off Rejuv and a Vanity's set.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    618
Who uses Vanity is Baby Rulers pre-Nats. Come on.
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skullvarnish    378

The one that stands out to me is the Infernity mirror, and yes I know I have literally 5 seconds to explain myself.

 

I know the deck has a bad reputation as being "skilless", "thoughtless" or whatever variation of those words. I maintain that the deck took considerable brainpower to pilot optimally. Not so much so for the mirror, though. Now clearly, in most cases, whoever combos off first should win. But this mirror becomes incredibly skillful when one specific thing happens: both players brick. It becomes a very slow duel, where both players know the other could go off at any moment, and you damn well better be prepared. And what makes it interesting is that the longer the duel goes, the more prepared each player will be, which mans whoever goes off first has less and less chance to just instantly win from their wombo combo as time passes. On top of that, you'll be drawing tons of backrow. Now, in the Infernity mirror when both players have bricked, you probably won't be using a whole lot of that backrow. So it can start to build up in your hand. But you need to be handless as much as you can so you can combo as soon as possible. So you end up having to actually just simply waste cards, which makes the whole thing trickier, because you need to know what you absolutely need to keep, and what cards you can "waste" and still technically get some sort of value from. Just a reminder that this all only applies to both players bricking.

 

So I guess I feel that the mirror is hard not only because you are sort of coin flipping on who wins, but because if neither player opens combo, it can become an incredibly intricate mirror, though probably not near the level of say, Rulers.

 

I'm actually sad Infernity was never tier 0. See, if you only had to really build for the mirror, solutions to the problem of almost always losing if you could not combo first would have likely been found, and the mirror would theoretically become very skilled in most cases. But I guess I'm in a small minority that would actually want that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TFJ    618
Uhhhhh, I don't think we are putting that many stipulations. I mean games are always different based on draws. We probably mean going through x rounds on average.

That said, you shouldn't be bricking if you want tier 0.
But wasn't Spiritualism the answer to the mirror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skullvarnish    378

Uhhhhh, I don't think we are putting that many stipulations. I mean games are always different based on draws. We probably mean going through x rounds on average.

That said, you shouldn't be bricking if you want tier 0.
But wasn't Spiritualism the answer to the mirror.

Well, obviously the deck could never be tier 0 for various reasons, brick hands being the largest factor. I'm merely stating that it would have been interesting to see what people came up with to make the mirror less shitty. If only because I love the deck more than anyone should. As for stipulations, I only bring the Infernity mirror up because it's my favorite deck, and as such I've played the mirror a lot more than most would be willing to do, and it's probably the mirror I personally know the most about, and have had the most difficulty playing. 

 

Spiritualism is very could in the mirror because it gives you a chance to play. Also, since you commonly know where Barriers are set, backrow hate in general helps. But, it doesn't come close to eliminating most of the luck in the mirror. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Souji Seta    673

Who uses Vanity is Baby Rulers pre-Nats. Come on.

People who want an unfun mirror.

Vanity in Baby Ruler is like Trap Dustshoot in Plants.

You just don't.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
crowstar    25

I think one difference between some mirrors is sort how in chess you either have sharp, tactical games, or you have more strategic games.

 

In a sharp game, making ANY mistake usually results in a loss, and there are often specific moves/plays/ideas that must be seen in order to win (Like a 10 move checkmate. Chess engines are good at these). These types of game seem to me most similar to mirrors like D ruler, Tele-DaD, combo decks.

 

In a more strategic game, moves are less clearly defined, and advantage only becomes apparent over many turns, slowly implementing an idea (setting up a series of exchanges to put a knight on a certain square safely). These seem more similar to goats, HAT,  maybe magic? 

 

I suppose my point is most people seem to define hard as the first one where you are punished extremely hard for any mistake, but that's not necessarily harder as often there is a strictly 'best' play to make, whereas the  other often maximises player interaction more.

 

Just some thoughts 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×