@dshin What your are describing is the definition of "undecidable" and I agree with it. I also agree that the article prove that Magic is undecidable.

My points are:

- If a game always have a finite number of possible move then it is decidable
- Magic with Swamp, Rat, unlimited deck size and randomness only produce finite possible moves during a full match

Consequence: Magic with Swamp, Rat, unlimited deck size and randomness is decidable.

So my claim is:

Undecidablility of Magic is not already contained in unlimited deck size and randomness.

We need more than only unlimited deck size and randomness to prove undecidablility and it is done in the article.

@protoaddict MTGO is limited by the memory of player's computers and/or the memory of the MTGO servers.

The claim of the article has nothing to do with the randomness or size of decks.

Take two decks with any number of Swamp and Relentless Rats. You can construct a list of all the possible moves for both players for all the possible starting hands and top-decks. This is a very big (exponential in the size of the deck) but finite and computable list.

The article prove that for any method you could to compute such list there is a stat of the game (using this deck) where the method take an infinite amount of time to finish. The game is called undecidable.

In practice no human player can distinguish between exponential complexity and undecidable complexity. The purpose of the article is only to prove something in game theory.

Narset, Parter of Veils

Each opponent can't draw more than one card each turn.

-2: Look at the top four cards of your library. You may reveal a noncreature, nonland card from among them and put it into your hand. Put the rest on the bottom of your library in a random order.

5

Look like a really good planewalker for blue mirror matchup.

@Thewhitedragon69 Synergies already exist between liquimetal coating and gorilla shaman but do not see a lot of play. Maybe Karn can improve this a little.

@13nova said in London Has(n't) Fallen:

That said, little focus, outside small groups on Facebook, has been on how this rule would/does impact Vintage.

There is this topic on the mana drain. This may interest you if you missed it.

I tried in Solitaire. With "yield through this turn" you have to select the dragon to attach the aura every loop, everything else pass automatically.

@k0dy said in MTGO Vintage Challenge compiled results:

I am actively working on a clean solution to the data filtering problem.

You can use "filter views". They change the way we see the data but not their true positions so no problems with formula.