Duress Hymn vs Hymn Duress

[clavio]

You always hear about people going swamp ritual duress hymn on their first turn. Isn't going hymn duress better? You have over 50% chance of taking their best two with hymn duress while only about 33 with duress hymn. Am I missing something obvious?

[Wakkarr]

Playing Duress first lets you see if they have permission and take it so your Hymn will hit. Playing Hymn first also makes you vulnerable if they are forced to discard their only non-creature spells in hand, so playing the Duress second greatly increases your chance of whiffing.

[sunshine]

Furthermore - a turn one Hymn is most devastating if it hits initial mana sources (typically lands) thereby crippling development and possibly creating enough of a tempo advantage to put the Hymn player in a very commanding position. Duress obviously can't hit lands so removing a non-land before the two random cards are selected improves your chances of hitting your opponents lands wit Hymn.

There's also the fact that Duress can only take certain types of cards whereas Hymn is not so picky. Playing Duress first means you're most likely to actually find a card to take with it.

[MMogg]

Moreover, if you Duress your opponent and see:

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=19693&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=136153&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=3500&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=3176&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=3266&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=159311&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=8862&type=card

you may want to reconsider your Hymn. :wink: Yeah, that's a joke. A bad one, but a joke nonetheless.

I know it doesn't really see play anymore, but back in the day Misdirection was a problem, and Duress cannot be Misdirected, whereas Hymn can. As I said, not as relevant in today's meta.

Wakkarr and sunshine pretty much hit all the key points.

[lordofthepit]

Always Duress (or Seize) before Hymning barring weird effects like Daze, Force Spike, Divert, or Misdirection which benefit one line of play more than the other.

In the final analysis, it has nothing to do with Hymn hitting better cards before or after the Duress, but if you Duress after Hymning, sometimes you'll completely whiff (i.e. no valid choices).

Edit: I retract what I wrote above.
I was going to write a really long and rigorous proof about why Duress->Hymn was better than Hymn->Duress in all cases, provided that your opponent doesn't respond with an instant (which is largely zero-sum) and that there is no "negative value" to hitting a card as opposed to whiffing (as would be the case with Basking Rootwalla or Guerrilla Tactics). But it then occurred to me in the course of writing it up that there are some instances in which Hymn->Duress is superior: your opponent has four cards, one of them being a land and three spells, and in this case the land is by far the worst card such that your ideal move is "hit all three of his business spells". You have a 50% chance of doing that with Hymn->Duress whereas you have only a 33% chance of doing that with Duress->Hymn.

However, you wouldn't know that in the course of a real game and it's dependent on a certain type of valuation of cards (often, you want to hit the land or creature, or you simply can't risk whiffing with Duress in an attrition battle by Hymning away all non-land, non-creature cards); thus, in the vast majority of cases, it is better to go Duress->Hymn.

[markbris]

You have over 50% chance of taking their best two with hymn duress while only about 33 with duress hymn. Am I missing something obvious?

I don't even get this.

[Nihil Credo]

I was extremely bored right now, so while the strategical implication of the choice (read: interaction with Force of Will) should be discussed on their own merits, I figured I'd also run a rough simulation of the outcome. The results are interesting:

72

X axis = individual chance of each card of being a valid Duress choice

Red line = #Simulations where playing Duress first gave better value
Blue line = #Simulations where playing Hymn first gave better value
Green line = #Simulations where both got the same score

Assuming the model isn't bugged, by far the biggest problem is that I generated each hand by picking seven random numbers from 1 to 100, each representing the "value" of a card for the Duress/Hymn player. Obviously this is horribly inaccurate, since card values aren't usually going to be so uniformly random and diverse - and that's without taking into account that a card's value depends dramatically on the rest of the hand (Force of Will can be worth 100 or 0 dependin on whether there are other blue cards left). Also, whether a card is Duresseable is not independent from its value, but this correlation is probably so complex that it's more justifiable to leave it random.

Here is the MATLAB code, if anyone wants to fiddle with it:


Results=zeros(3, 100);
PDuresseable=0;
for i=1:100
DWins=0;
HWins=0;
Draw=0;
PDuresseable=PDuresseable+0.01;
for Sample=1:20000
Hand = randi(100, 1, 7);
DuresseableHand=Hand;
for j=1:7
if rand >PDuresseable DuresseableHand(j)=0; end
end
% Duress first
[DFirstScore,DuressedPos]=max(DuresseableHand);
DuressedHand=Hand;
if DFirstScore>0
DuressedHand(DuressedPos)=0;
k=randperm(6);
else k=randperm(7);
end
DuressedHand=nonzeros(DuressedHand)';
DFirstScore=DFirstScore+DuressedHand(k(1))+DuressedHand(k(2));
% Hymn first
k=randperm(7);
HFirstScore=Hand(k(1))+Hand(k(2));
HymnedDHand=DuresseableHand;
HymnedDHand(k(1))=0;
HymnedDHand(k(2))=0;
HFirstScore=HFirstScore+max(HymnedDHand);
%Comparison
if DFirstScore > HFirstScore DWins=DWins+1; end
if DFirstScore < HFirstScore HWins=HWins+1; end
if DFirstScore == HFirstScore Draw=Draw+1; end
end
Results(1,i)=DWins;
Results(2,i)=Draw;
Results(3,i)=HWins;
end
hold on
plot(x, Results(1,x), '-r')
plot(x, Results(2,x), '-g')
plot(x, Results(3,x), '-b')

[edgewalker]

Isn't ritual --> Duress ---> Hymn kinda whack because you're trading 3 cards for 3 cards against decks that recover better than black does?

[Aggro_zombies]

Isn't ritual --> Duress ---> Hymn kinda whack because you're trading 3 cards for 3 cards against decks that recover better than black does?
Put another way, you could say that your deck is whack because the vast majority of decks playing all three of these cards are suicide aggro decks, which are all worse than Zoo against everything but combo.

[markbris]

Isn't ritual --> Duress ---> Hymn kinda whack because you're trading 3 cards for 3 cards against decks that recover better than black does?

Well you can be taking lands which might screw them over and you can be taking their very important cards for your 3 cards. It's more of a tempo thing though so you can punish them before they recover.

[edgewalker]

Well you can be taking lands which might screw them over and you can be taking their very important cards for your 3 cards. It's more of a tempo thing though so you can punish them before they recover.

No, the point I'm trying to make is it's not tempo or card advanatage. Most decks play blue these days which means they're gonna have a better top deck than you. You're better off turn 1 duress (1 for 1) turn 2 hymn (1 for 2) than doing it all in one turn. Save that ritual for a tombstalker or something instead of blowing your load too early.

[dahcmai]

Nihil, that is entirely too much thought on this. lol Nice looking set up though.

[Rune]

No, the point I'm trying to make is it's not tempo or card advanatage. Most decks play blue these days which means they're gonna have a better top deck than you. You're better off turn 1 duress (1 for 1) turn 2 hymn (1 for 2) than doing it all in one turn. Save that ritual for a tombstalker or something instead of blowing your load too early.

If you are against an unknown opponent, I think it's much safer to lead with Dark Ritual and play both discard spells. Against combo you might just get killed when you pass the turn after only having played the Duress. Against Ichorid you could potentially steal game1 if you randomly hit their only land or their Imp/Tribe with hymn, whereas Duress on its own will do nothing. Playing both Hymn and Duress on turn 1 usually also means it's easier to make a 2 cmc dude stick the next turn.

[Rico Suave]

Isn't ritual --> Duress ---> Hymn kinda whack because you're trading 3 cards for 3 cards against decks that recover better than black does?

Without the Ritual the black deck is facing a 2nd turn Goyf or something which could have been prevented if Ritual got the Hymn out a turn earlier.

[pi4meterftw]

No, the point I'm trying to make is it's not tempo or card advanatage. Most decks play blue these days which means they're gonna have a better top deck than you. You're better off turn 1 duress (1 for 1) turn 2 hymn (1 for 2) than doing it all in one turn. Save that ritual for a tombstalker or something instead of blowing your load too early.

Ritual is already a -1. Saving it until later won't change this.

[majikal]

I think the idea is that you sacrifice card advantage in the short term for power in the long term. By crippling their hand you have free reign to do anything you want, basically. I would start by including Hexmage/Depths and Dark Confidant. These more than make up for the neutral card advantage of Ritual>Duress>Hymn.

As for whether to play Duress or Hymn first, I say it really depends on the situation.

[mujadaddy]

I don't even get this.

^^ That. Clavio needs to show his work.

Duress first. It's more narrow. You can Hymn two legal Duress targets out of their hand if you do it first, leaving you to whiff.

[edgewalker]

Again, you're trading 3 cards for 3 cards against decks that top deck better than you do. period. full stop.

You're blowing your load too early. So you steal a turn because they have to discard a land, "oh shit!" What are you playing turn two? Not your hymn, or anything else above a cc of 2. Mean while they top decked into something better.You're not "sacrificing card advantage in the short term for power in the long term," because decks recover too easily these days. Sure you blow them out turns 1-3, but what are you playing in the meantime to take advantage of assumed tempo you've created. The reason I would duress then hymn and save the ritual is it allows me to unload later in the game. Consistent discard over multiple turns is better than one huge move in the beginning because black based decks don't recover as well as their opponents

Personally, I think duress, then hymn then ritual into tombstalker is a much better play. Instead your down 3 cards on turn one, with most likely nothing come down turn two (sinkhole, confidant maybe) I don't mean to be redundant but your blowing your load too early.

You're all operating under the assumption that the hymn is going to something of importance, sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. What if they topdeck goyf instead of having it in their starting seven, I hope you have snuff out. Assuming everything is going to go your way and disregarding counterfactual statements is just bad theory.

[edgewalker]

If you are against an unknown opponent, I think it's much safer to lead with Dark Ritual and play both discard spells. Against combo you might just get killed when you pass the turn after only having played the Duress. Against Ichorid you could potentially steal game1 if you randomly hit their only land or their Imp/Tribe with hymn, whereas Duress on its own will do nothing. Playing both Hymn and Duress on turn 1 usually also means it's easier to make a 2 cmc dude stick the next turn.

Double post sorry, what 2cc dudes are black decks playing these days? Goyf and shade?

[markbris]

Consistent discard over multiple turns is better than one huge move in the beginning because black based decks don't recover as well as their opponents

I'd prefer just to take the card before they can play it rather than dragging it out and giving them a chance to play important cards, especially combo

Personally, I think duress, then hymn then ritual into tombstalker is a much better play. Instead your down 3 cards on turn one, with most likely nothing come down turn two (sinkhole, confidant maybe) I don't mean to be redundant but your blowing your load too early.

If you drop 2 fetchlands in turns 1-3(not hard) you can go ritual duress hymn first turn and still play tombstalker third turn. Once again I'd prefer to use the discard early.

You're all operating under the assumption that the hymn is going to something of importance, sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. What if they topdeck goyf instead of having it in their starting seven, I hope you have snuff out. Assuming everything is going to go your way and disregarding counterfactual statements is just bad theory.

[Rico Suave]

If you're trying to say that sometimes it is better to save the Ritual, then you are correct.

If you're trying to say that it is never correct to Ritual out Duress/Hymn early, then you are wrong.

[dahcmai]

I'm just of the opinion that if you Duress first you will get a non-land card of course. Then with the Hymn you have increased your chances (however minimal) that you will hit lands. Lands are almost always the best thing to hit with a Hymn.

[EssKay]

Again, you're trading 3 cards for 3 cards against decks that top deck better than you do. period. full stop.

You're blowing your load too early. So you steal a turn because they have to discard a land, "oh shit!" What are you playing turn two? Not your hymn, or anything else above a cc of 2. Mean while they top decked into something better.You're not "sacrificing card advantage in the short term for power in the long term," because decks recover too easily these days. Sure you blow them out turns 1-3, but what are you playing in the meantime to take advantage of assumed tempo you've created. The reason I would duress then hymn and save the ritual is it allows me to unload later in the game. Consistent discard over multiple turns is better than one huge move in the beginning because black based decks don't recover as well as their opponents

Personally, I think duress, then hymn then ritual into tombstalker is a much better play. Instead your down 3 cards on turn one, with most likely nothing come down turn two (sinkhole, confidant maybe) I don't mean to be redundant but your blowing your load too early.

You're all operating under the assumption that the hymn is going to something of importance, sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. What if they topdeck goyf instead of having it in their starting seven, I hope you have snuff out. Assuming everything is going to go your way and disregarding counterfactual statements is just bad theory.

Assuming every blue deck will have a flawless top-deck recovery on turn 2 is every bit as absurd as assuming they won't. The correct play is entirely situational. I've had plenty of games where I go T1 Ritual -> Thoughtseize -> Hymn, T2 Hymn. If I start with Tombstalker in hand, then I'll probably save the ritual, otherwise I'm probably going to be as agressive with discard as possible.

Most people base their early game plan on their opening hand, and won't keep something without at least a couple strong plays, and the more you can disrupt that early plan, the more likely you are to put them in top-deck/recovery mode. Sure it's one-for-one, but unless you kept a hand full of discard with no threats to back it up, you're generally gaining the advantage.

Also, Bob is a common 2cc dude, and it can be a real bitch to get him to stick around for a few turns, so clearing out potential answers can really help.

[edgewalker]

The fundamental flaw that I'm trying to point out is that while you're putting them into recovery/topdeck mode you're also putting yourself into the same position. Turn 1 you have 3 cards in hand to their 4 + 1 that they will draw once you pass your turn. In addition most decks outside of combo get out of topdeck/recovery mode better than your deck does.

I will say that Turn 1: ritual + duress/thoughtseize + 2cc threat is a good play. If you replace Bob with hymn the scenario gets much better.

@Esskay: I'm simply trying to keep the situation consistent for both players. If we're going to assume the best case scenario for our side, why not assume the same for theirs? The problem is that everyone always has a knee-jerk reaction to assume what if things go their way without positing what if they don't. In this scenario I believe it's not going to go your way more often than it will.

[EssKay]

unless you kept a hand full of discard with no threats to back it up, you're generally gaining the advantage.

I don't think you read my whole post. You don't put yourself in recovery mode because you have a threat to follow up with. Now if they get lucky and draw an answer the next turn (something like a 45% chance to pull something that's a 4-of at that point in the game, provided all 4 are still in the deck), then yes, you've gained no ground. I think statistically though you're better off forcing them to draw answers rather than leave them in their hand.

You're not really keeping the situation consistent if you assume that the opponent's hand never has more than one play for turn 1/2, which Duress will handily take care of. Really by your logic, why play Duress at all? It's always a 1 for 1 and apparently almost every deck out there will have no trouble recovering.

[edgewalker]

I don't think you read my whole post. You don't put yourself in recovery mode because you have a threat to follow up with. Now if they get lucky and draw an answer the next turn (something like a 45% chance to pull something that's a 4-of at that point in the game, provided all 4 are still in the deck), then yes, you've gained no ground. I think statistically though you're better off forcing them to draw answers rather than leave them in their hand.

You're not really keeping the situation consistent if you assume that the opponent's hand never has more than one play for turn 1/2, which Duress will handily take care of. Really by your logic, why play Duress at all? It's always a 1 for 1 and apparently almost every deck out there will have no trouble recovering.

I'm not against trading 2 for 3 for multiple turns. The problem is doing 3 for 3 in one large swing. The scenario would be much different if everyone's hand was only 3 cards, but they're not. You have 3, but they have essentially 5. Did you really come out on top? Was it really worth it?