One to Pass

Hey everyone. I'm new here and I know that guarding for one to pass against a grade three is just plain bad but what about grades 0-2? Should I just take the damage and save my card or is the probability of them getting a trigger off of a single drive check low enough where guarding for one to pass would be fine?

It depends on the total power of G1/2 boosted by G0/1.

Let says the opponent G1 is 7k, boosted by G0 5k, that means 12k. Let say your G1 is 8k. If I have a G0 10k shield, I will guard for no pass. Basically, I guard with 1 card, and still gain +1 from a draw and a drive check.

Let say the opponent G1 is 8k, boosted by G0 5k. My VG is G1 7k. Obviously, I won't guard, because a single 10k shield is one to pass, and the opponent might drive check a trigger. So, I let it slide.

It is still pretty retarded guarding for one-pass outside of the most desperate situations.

Why bother? You have a 1/3 chance during early game for your guard to fail (pretty likely) when instead you could just guard something that ISN'T going to fail...like a rear-guard.

There is one situation that I guard one to pass,
and that is when they have RG that is weaker then my VG without a booster and a VG (G1 or G2) that can hit my VG for a stage and I have no other RG. He attacks VG first to hope for a trigger to power up his RG, but I guard one to pass (A draw trigger works perfectly).
-No trigger and I take no damage that turn
-Non-Critical: I take 1 damage that turn because RG can't attack me
-Critical: I take 2 damage, but but his RG can't attack (I'll take my risk)

2/3 chance of no trigger and the outcome is much greater and this only applied if the VG have no pressure ability (i.e. Wingal Brave, Vivian, CB2 to draw cards, etc.) or I don't need the damage for next turn

This is my personal strategy and people don't have to follow my way or say my way is stupid, but I am just telling a situation that I would apply one to pass.

You're forgetting that in the two scenarios where your guard fails, you also take a -1. So it's not all equalized just because their other rear-guard had one less stage. This is unoptimal and you're not immune from criticism just because you said "This is my personal strategy". Those words don't mean anything and act as a cheap cop-out of having to be accountable.

Uh... I don't think so. Usually I take the lower grade vanguard attacks. The only time I'd ever guard the VG early is if I can throw down 5 or 10 for a no-pass.

Alice wrote:

You're forgetting that in the two scenarios where your guard fails, you also take a -1. So it's not all equalized just because their other rear-guard had one less stage. This is unoptimal and you're not immune from criticism just because you said "This is my personal strategy". Those words don't mean anything and act as a cheap cop-out of having to be accountable.

But it's a -1 you would have taken to guard the next attack, anyway. Guarding the first attack for one to pass in his exact situation is essentially preemptively guarding the next attack while also having a chance to guard both at the same time.

Your field: vanguard, no front row rear guards
Opponent's field: vanguard attacking for one stage, rearguard that cannot hit your vanguard without a trigger's boost

No trigger:
-One to pass: -1, no damage
-No guard: -0, 1 damage

Non-critical trigger:
-One to pass: -1, 1 damage
-Don't guard: -1, 1 damage or -0, 2 damage

Critical trigger:
-One to pass: -1, 2 damage
-Don't guard: -1, 2 damage or -0, 3 damage

In all cases, one to pass is either equal or better than no guard. Of course, if I'm missing something here that makes this all wrong, let me know.

In tourney scenarios I've seen lots of players throw down 10k shields to block things like Wingal Brave or Viviane just to try and get an easy leg up. Some people even throw down 15 to stop that dang Wingal Brave.

NavyCherub wrote:

In all cases, one to pass is either equal or better than no guard. Of course, if I'm missing something here that makes this all wrong, let me know.

You're forgetting the potential that you might damage a trigger from the Vanguard, if no guarding, therefore not needing to -1 for the next attack despite the fact they got a trigger too. I think. If it isn't a Critical, you've only taken 1 Damage.

doomboykhoi wrote:

This is my personal strategy and people don't have to follow my way or say my way is stupid, but I am just telling a situation that I would apply one to pass.

Ehh no. V-Mundi is about calling people out on dumb things. How else do people get better if not from knowing their mistakes?

3XXXDDD wrote:

You're forgetting the potential that you might damage a trigger from the Vanguard, if no guarding, therefore not needing to -1 for the next attack despite the fact they got a trigger too. I think. If it isn't a Critical, you've only taken 1 Damage.

So the only situation where you could be considered better off without guarding would be if both you and your opponent got triggers, and even that is debatable because it seems smarter to me to -1 and not take that damage if you can spare it instead of relying on the chance that you damage check a trigger. Damage is more important than cards.

Yes.

Wouldn't you be able to each in of your situations no guard the Vanguard and guard the rearguard and still come out the same?

Wait I think it comes out the same in each situation except the first where they don't check a trigger.

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I usually don't guard for one to pass early on but I've never actually heard if that was bad or good. How about first turn and your opponent only rides and then attacks with his VG with no rear guards on the field? Would it also be bad to try and block for one to pass if that's all your hand will allow you to block for? Like with a draw trigger?

Question is, the risk vs benefit. It's like people trying to break two to pass.

Usually this situation is early on when you can't really afford to guard for 2 to pass/no pass.
For example your G2 9k VG against a Blaster + Wingal Brave. Or your G2 9k VG against a vivane/tripp + spring breeze. Other examples might be like heatnail salmander, flame seed salmander, saishin, linchu etc.

You really don't want that search to go off *coughexculpate the blastercough* or a potential Pellinore play.
However if it actually goes through then you are kinda screwed because you minus 1 for the guard, you take the damage AND they get to pull the effect off.

Is it worth the risk? Well that is up to you to decide. Can you afford to guard it?

A great example of guarding for one to pass is when the RG can't hit you unless they get a tripper.
Say for example:
Kiara ----------Kiara
White Tiger
against my Wiseman. They attack with Kiara first. I can drop a 10k and all triggers go to RG Kiara, so I have to drop 10k + 5k guard against the attack or I could drop 10k and take 1 damage, or take one damage and possibly drop another 5k.
You could also drop a 5k guard for one to pass and if they get a trigger you take a damage (or two if they crit) but you don't take damage from the RG.
That isn't accounting if yo get a trigger on your damage check yourself but there is an even possibility of both players getting triggers on their respective drive/damage checks.

3XXXDDD wrote:

Yes.

Wouldn't you be able to each in of your situations no guard the Vanguard and guard the rearguard and still come out the same?

Wait I think it comes out the same in each situation except the first where they don't check a trigger.

If the opponent checks a trigger and you don't, it's the same.
If they don't check a trigger, it's better to guard for one to pass as you lose just 1 card to prevent 1 damage.
If you both check triggers, it's better to no guard because you took damage from VG and wasted a card for nothing as the RG wouldn't hit either way.

So about 66% (2/3) probability of 1-to-pass being better, and 11% (1/3 * 1/3) probability of no guard being better.
If you can guard 1-to-pass with just a 5k shield in that specific situation, then that's definitely better on average.

LightLightning wrote:

Yes.
So about 66% (2/3) probability of 1-to-pass being better, and 11% (1/3 * 1/3) probability of no guard being better.
If you can guard 1-to-pass with just a 5k shield in that specific situation, then that's definitely better on average.

Ok, so just to put this out there, the odds of someone getting a trigger on a twin drive is about ~55%, so a bit more than half, say your at 4 dmg against a deck that runs crit triggers, would you really want to risk a game loss against a deck by 1 passing and hoping that they get unlucky and gambling on a 45% chance of survival? Due to this situation it's better to 2 pass most of the time against VG's if you are going to block, since the odds of dbl trigger off a twin drive is ~11%. These numbers were taken off of Alices and TehNacho's blogs.

[quote="VesperGhoul"]

LightLightning wrote:

3XXXDDD wrote:

Yes.
So about 66% (2/3) probability of 1-to-pass being better, and 11% (1/3 * 1/3) probability of no guard being better.
If you can guard 1-to-pass with just a 5k shield in that specific situation, then that's definitely better on average.

Ok, so just to put this out there, the odds of someone getting a trigger on a twin drive is about ~55%, so a bit more than half, say your at 4 dmg against a deck that runs crit triggers, would you really want to risk a game loss against a deck by 1 passing and hoping that they get unlucky and gambling on a 45% chance of survival? Due to this situation it's better to 2 pass most of the time against VG's if you are going to block, since the odds of dbl trigger off a twin drive is ~11%. These numbers were taken off of Alices and TehNacho's blogs.

He probably means early game where opponent only get to drive check 1 card when VG is still G1 or G2.

In some cases, onepassing can be a necessary evil. Late game, situations can crop up where, if they get a trigger, you're going to lose, because you just don't have enough to guard with and the alternative is death (5 damage, a 5k interceptor, 2 5k shields and a 10k shield, other guy has a 18k vanguard column and a 16k rearguard column against your 11k vanguard - you need to guard none to pass, because otherwise you're dependent on a heal trigger to not lose)

LRN2QUOTE Gaiz.

Hey there everyone.. I'm just new to this forums. I tried building Alice's swan soul build for royal paladin.
well... I think it's pretty much balanced. and good for scaling...

but what do you guys think though?... is it already good for tournament play?

Why did you post this twice and the second time in the wrong place?