A debate on the disruptive power of Mill
Standard forum
Posted on Jan. 21, 2014, 4:03 p.m. by SwampHippie
"It doesn't change the probability of drawing a particular card" is a line I've heard regurgitated all too often.
I've taken Stats and am well aware of the fact that I can't just will myself to mill good cards. But how can anybody with basic deck building skills suggest that repeatedly deleting random cards from their deck isn't going to cumulatively mess up their game plan.
Who hasn't sat there and pondered if that 25th mana was what won/lost them the game or if they had only a full playset rather than 3 of their powerhouse card they could have prevailed. Decks are often finicky and people keep hands partially based on what they SHOULD be drawing in the next few turns.
But that's all my personal opinion based on my experiences, perhaps I'm just abnormally lucky when it comes to mill but I doubt it. I'm very interested in hearing people's opinions on the matter so long as it doesn't devolve into "mill is booooring" and "I wreck in limited with mill" XD
Epochalyptik says... #2
This is the reason I just kill people with combos.
January 23, 2014 1:50 a.m.
Thought scour and snappy worked because at any time you could manipulate the statistics by giving you another chance or two to draw what you needed. If your deck is full of great cards then instead of piling another load in you should opt for card draw so that you can cycle through it quicker.
It seems reasonable to suggest that fewer large mills will have more of an impact than a lot of small mills.
The maths above shows what it does because milling for 5 isn't that disruptive. However I'm pretty sure the numbers would get significantly smaller if we started milling for 15. This is because the probability of not losing what you wanted would get smaller. As milling starts sampling more cards it's more likely to hit something. If, however, you mill small the effect is basically negligible - it's like someone reshuffling your library.
Try this - load up on Phenax, God of Deception , killspells like Doom Blade and walls like Hover Barrier . Play walls T1-4. Play Phenax T5 -> mill them straight away for something between 15 and 20. Obviously this is dependent on board state but if you use Phenax in a 'surprise, I'm here now' kind of way then proceed to mill a third of their library it effectively puts a very short clock on the game.
January 23, 2014 6:27 a.m.
SwampHippie says... #4
Yeah, I've used Jace, Memory Adept
this way for a while now. The new PW rules only made things better.
It's just nice to have a reason, besides trial-and-error, why this strategy is often more successful for me than early game mill.
But I digress, I feel like we've beaten this horse into a Fleshmad Steed . Thanks for the clarification, maybe this'll help others with similar questions. In any case I now feel I have a more comprehensive understanding of mill which can only be a good thing.
January 23, 2014 8:35 a.m.
IonImplant says... #5
The probability changes but the randomness does not. With scry so popular in standard right now it can have a big effect. You scry and keep and I mill it away and you lose that advantage.
January 23, 2014 10:18 a.m.
SwampHippie says... #6
@ IonImplant you are correct but we were attempting to have as pure of an argument as possible therefore we are not taking into account many complex interactions with mill. Now that core mechanics are exposed we can expand upon what we know without things getting too convoluted.
January 23, 2014 2:28 p.m.
hungerwolf says... #7
When I started, I started with Mill. While true, it is not deliberate removal, it is still very powerful removal. It's functionally land destruction, creature removal and hard counter to spells and instants. The downside is that you don't know which of those you will be doing, and to which cards. It does require a strong inclusion of control and blockers, of course, to answer what the opponent DOES draw into.
But I can say that early game land removal is very powerful. If you hit a land or two with a mill spell, it can slow down an opponent massively. This has been hindered by recent focuses on extreme aggro, as those decks can easily swing for lethal on turn 4 or 5 with 2 manna on the field. (Frankly, I think that's dumb and magic needs to slow itself down. Also, I think Wizards is caught in a positive feedback loop and things are only going to get more and more aggro-intensive until we see standard legal turn-1 wins. That's not the point though)
January 23, 2014 2:41 p.m.
I'll have to go back and review all the previous posts for the details (just skimmed for now to get the general feel of the conversation), then try crunching some numbers - likely by writing a script to do simulations . . .
My basic feel based just on theory, though, is this:
All else being equal, any single 'milling' event is equivalent to cutting the player's deck. With no prior information, the player being milled won't experience any difference in their game.
Information is the real key to determining if milling is more advantageous for the 'miller' or the 'milled.'
If a deck is a dedicated mill deck and plans to win that way as a primary win-con, then it's irrelevant how the odds change for the milled player drawing any particular card. It's simply a race to the bottom of his deck before he can win against you.
If you don't know the position and frequency of cards in the deck before the milling action, then the probability of drawing any particular card sooner or later does not change after cards get milled. You can't pretend to know where the cards are in the deck before calculating probabilities.
The balance of advantage for a single (non-winning) mill action is slightly in the milled player's favor because he can look through the graveyard and see which cards are there, and know what's left in the library and can recalculate probabilities for drawing his win-con later. (The miller has access to almost the same amount of information. If his opponent is using a well-known 'archetype' cough netdeck cough then after a look through the graveyard to see what was taken out can help the miller know what's left in the library as well . .)
If milling is just happening like this 'in a vacuum,' then it doesn't really make much difference to how the game will play out in the next few turns.
When used with supporting strategies, e.g. milling after the other player has scried, or otherwise manipulated his deck, can wreck plans. On the other hand, if you're playing against someone with a lot of dredge, reanimator, Crucible of Worlds , etc. then milling is definitely a benefit to the milled.
That's all I have time to mention right now. I'll try to work on the specific problems mentioned in this thread when I get some more time.
I saw the Monty Hall problem mentioned, and I think the only similarity is in how gaining new information changes probabilities.
February 7, 2014 2:05 p.m.
Enlightened_Jedi says... #10
I personally think Mill is awesome. For me. Not for the opponent, or losing to.
Jace, Memory Adept nuff said.
February 7, 2014 10:12 p.m.
deathtouch_roadrunner says... #11
Let's say you're milling 10 cards a turn and your opponent is drawing 1 card a turn.
They have 40 cards left in their library, 3 of which can stop your game plan.
Which is more likely?
That they draw one of the 3 cards, or that those three cards get milled?
February 8, 2014 2:27 a.m.
Arachnarchist says... #12
deathtouch_roadrunner: I would Redirect you to post #12 on page 1.
In your scenario your opponent is dead in four turns from mill, so they get 4 draws. If your opponent was dead in four turns from damage, they would still get 4 draws. In either scenario if they draw an out they win, otherwise they lose. Hence, Mill is just another clock separate from the life total.
February 8, 2014 8:58 a.m.
Ultimaodin says... #14
Not necessarily a slower clock though.
I think Mill is an entirely viable win-con, so long as you do something that effects the game state as well.
For example, Tome Scour does nothing but 5 cards into the grave at random. It doesn't affect the board state in anyway, compare this to Thoughtseize , Elvish Mystic , Cloudfin Raptor and a bunch of other 1 drops it's nowhere near as good. The same goes for Breaking when you can play Doomblade etc.. Cards like Pilfered Plans though is a win-win. It mills and nets you cards for the same cost as a regular Divination . Then there is Grisly Spectacle which is actually a lot better in the current meta than you'd expect. It's a kill spell that kills most things in standard and once more mills.
Then there is the new Phenax, God of Deception who makes mill pretty viable, and you don't need to play bad cards. (people will, but you don't need to) and then there is Siren of the Silent Song who attacks your hand and your library. (this card is sweet)
That said my standard mill is definitely more fun than anything
February 8, 2014 12:50 p.m.
deathtouch_roadrunner says... #15
I agree mill is just a form of clock. But the practicability of mill of a strategy is a function of its consistency and reliability more so than its speed, I think.
A control deck is happy to take a ton of turns to stabilize and then clock out. Similar to control, mill can be a viable strategy if it can reliably stabilize and mill out. The reason it's usually non-viable is that the cards involved in milling someone out are so numerous they take away reliability, consistency, and ability to stabilize.
The main advantage to mill (if it can overcome the other issues) is that it should be harder for the other player to interact with it, especially since it's not expected in most metas. (This is what makes some mill cards interesting: they potentially provides a win condition for some sort of pillow fort/control shell without making it open the drawbridge, so to speak.)
But what I was trying to suggest was that there can be a much higher chance of milling the answer cards than having them drawn without there being a change in the abstract chance of drawing them.
Incidentally, I think it would have been interesting if Wizards had started blue/black down the road of scrying your opponent's deck rather than milling as it's go-to flavor ability.
February 8, 2014 1:13 p.m.
Arachnarchist says... #16
deathtouch_roadrunner: With regards to Scrying your opponents deck:
They did this briefly in Future Sight (Spin into Myth , Mesmeric Sliver . And also with Jace, the Mind Sculptor . However, in his Drive to Work podcast on Future Sight, Mark Rosewater stated that it's unlikely this mechanic will ever return, especially not on a large scale. Because Wizards doesn't really like things that allow one player to manipulate anothers library (note that this doesn't include mill because mill is largely random).
February 8, 2014 1:20 p.m.
SwampHippie says... #17
@Ultimaodin and deathtouch_roadrunner I agree with your assessment of effective mill. Too many players try to build mill as if it were a burn deck. Even pure mill is too slow to survive long... a favorable board state needs to be established first using either removal or defense (you can't take a van to a racetrack and expect to compete without some twisted metal shenanigans).
February 9, 2014 2:05 a.m.
...Interesting thought...
If milling can be used to offset the power of scry.... can't scry also be used to offset the "disruptive" power of milling? (or "gain" a probability advantage)
I.e. - Example of milling being disruptive for scry: I scry 2, and leave both on top, because I like both cards... before I get the chance to draw, my opponent mills me for 3, and 2 cards I wanted are now gone. - Back to random top deck, but with less chance to get a needed card, because 2 are gone.
Example of using scry to offset disruption of milling: I scry 2, I want neither but leave both on top KNOWING my opponent is likely to mill me... before I draw these cards, my opponent mills me for 3, and now 2 cards I didn't want are gone. - Back to random top deck, but with a greater chance of getting a needed card, because 2 unwanted cards are gone.
February 9, 2014 3:25 a.m.
SwampHippie says... #19
It's a reasonable scenario, I've had a similar thought when wondering what to scry when getting milked (that was a fun typo). The only caveat would be that a savvy opponent may pick up on it and decide not to mill a turn or two. If that be the case then you've found yourself in a classic battle of wits. Just remember "Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line!
February 9, 2014 9:18 a.m.
Ultimaodin says... #20
How I play mill at the moment:
Step 1, play BUG.
Step 2, Ramp into Phenax.
Step 3, Play Master Biomancer.
Step 4, bestow Nighthowler on Master Biomancer.
Step 5, Watch the expression on rival's face as they realise what this means.
Step 6, wait for removal
Step 7, repeat previous steps
Step 8, Win in a very hilarious fashion
One day I'll make a normal deck... maybe, probably not. Decks that win by doing stupid stuff or being in theme and win are just much more fun.
February 9, 2014 9:45 a.m.
SwampHippie says... #22
but I am too susceptible to the temptations of the Dark Side... sometimes I just want to dominate all others. Then I realize I'm taking the game too seriously and start having fun again.
@Ultimaodin why not throw a Prime Speaker Zegana
in the mix XD
February 9, 2014 12:49 p.m.
MadScientist says... #23
I have been playing with milling in one of mydecks
No Fate But What We make Playtest
Standard
SCORE: 1 | 5 COMMENTS | 1313 VIEWSthe main focus is not milling but it is a win-con for the deck and also used as a pump for the Nighthowler , removal provided by Agent of the Fates .
There is plenty of milling and potential to hold out a game long enough to mill out the opponent or combat damage for the win.
When the milling also provides bonuses to your board it has double potential. A Traumatize when you have a Nighthowler on the board could be the win-con.
Or Jace, Memory Adept 0 cost after a Traumatize could completely deplete a deck late game say turn 10 a 60 card deck is down to 43 cards a traumatize drops it to 22 cards then the jace drops it to 12 cards. The opponent basically has to win that turn or you have the potential to mill them out on the next turn.
Lets say you have jace, Phenax, God of Deception , a nighthowler in play and a traumatize in hand. Its pretty much game over 1/2 deck depletion, 10 from jace, pumping up the nighthowler and their goes the rest of the deck. That is a pretty late game play but still has potential. My No Fates deck has pulled some pretty late games out with Agent of the Fates removing creatures, the games have routinely gone to 10-15 turns where the potential is there to deplete a deck to nothing.
There is a place for mill in standard and it can be very disruptive or even a win-con but I think it should be a secondary condition of the deck and not the main purpose.
Anyway that is my 2 cents.
February 9, 2014 3:37 p.m.
Ultimaodin says... #24
@SwampHippie - Already have Zegana in the deck :D
February 9, 2014 11:27 p.m.
ChrisHansonBiomancin says... #25
The one "disruptive" element that milling can bring to the current Standard environment is that Scry-ing becomes a potentially useless mechanic for your opponent. I guess the same can be said for other forms of deck manipulation in other formats. Otherwise, it doesn't really affect the odds in a definitive manner, although various cards' odds do change as they get milled. Before the milling begins, however, predicting which cards will have better or worse odds due to milling is essentially impossible.
SwampHippie says... #1
Also the "maths" you've provided ChiefBell also explain why Thought Scour + Snapcaster Mage is/was so deadly. Not only does it put fodder in the graveyard that Snappy can grab out at moments notice but it also INCREASES YOUR PROBABILITY of putting something better directly in your hand. Its no revelation but it does help explain mechanically why it worked SO well.
January 23, 2014 1:46 a.m.