Define:Initiative

[mikeEB]

We talk about initiative a lot during theory discussions, but don't have a solid definition. We should get one. For now I propose:
(positive) Progress towards casting useful spells or
(negative) a forced delay before one can begin casting useful spells.

[Dubber]

(positive) Being in an advantageous state
(negative) Being in a disadvantaged state

[eliotn]

Apr 25, 2012 21:04:21 GMT -5 mikeEB said:

We talk about initiative a lot during theory discussions, but don't have a solid definition. We should get one. For now I propose:
(positive) Progress towards casting useful spells or
(negative) a forced delay before one can begin casting useful spells.

Actually, not quite right. Initiative means that you are in a position where the opponent must respond to a threat or come closer to losing the game. For instance, monsters are said to be initiative grabbers because the opponent takes damage, if they don't defend with a shield.

[mikeEB]

Apr 26, 2012 11:26:49 GMT -5 eliotn said:

Initiative means that you are in a position where the opponent must respond to a threat or come closer to losing the game.

"Closer to losing the game" isn't well-defined, nor is it accurate. Landing Amnesia puts your opponent at an initiative disadvantage, even though it doesn't threaten damage or death.

Apr 26, 2012 8:46:10 GMT -5 Dubber said:

(positive) Being in an advantageous state
(negative) Being in a disadvantaged state

This is wrong. Landing a Cause Heavy Wounds puts someone at advantage but costs them initiative.

[eliotn]

I think I was close. Initiative = amount of options you can take without sacrificing the game.

[mikeEB]

I can C/> on the first turn, or I can F/W. These both have an equal number of game-sacrificing moves next turn against S/W (0), but they are not equal in initiative. Try again.

However, I think we're getting close. "Number of good options" does overlap with "Progress towards spells" in a lot of states.

[eliotn]

Actually, initiative belongs to the player who can make threats that can't be ignored. Monsters are initiative by definition as they threaten damage if the opponent doesn't shield. Someone who has permanency up often has initiative, as they can threaten a kill by permanent amnesia, etc.

[mikeEB]

I can ignore anything I want as long as it isn't a resolved mindspell. It may not be a good idea, but that's beside the point.

Try again.

[Dubber]

Apr 26, 2012 17:17:44 GMT -5 mikeEB said:

Apr 26, 2012 8:46:10 GMT -5 Dubber said:

(positive) Being in an advantageous state
(negative) Being in a disadvantaged state

This is wrong. Landing a Cause Heavy Wounds puts someone at advantage but costs them initiative.

Arguably, having completed WPFD does not put one in an advantageous state. Yes, the caster is up on damage points, but unless the recipient is at ~4 points or lower (and the caster has more points than any potential incoming damage) having a finished WPFD is, counter-intuitively, a disadvantaged state

[BioLogIn]

(positive) Progress towards casting useful spells

That will not suffice. Magic Mirror is 100% useful to cast when threatened with FoD, and having clapped I've greatly progressed towards casting it, but hardly I have an initiative advantage after that.

Initiative can be measured as the number of attack options (or attack angles) you have on your opponent. D/P opening presents possibly the widest array of attack options; W/W presents almost none. Having PS on one of the hands gives you awesome array of options and a good deal of initiative, etc.

Spells that gain you no initiative when cast (add no attack angles): cures, counters, mirror
Spells that gain you initiative when cast (add more attack angles): most mind-affecting spells, invis, delay, permanency, etc.
Spells that can gain you or lose you initiative depending on the situation: monsters, direct damage, etc.

Also while trivial, it should be remembered that initiative is a relative (not absolute) value. It can be used only in comparison to one of your opponent. W/W gives you little initiative, but still more than >/W.

[mikeEB]

May 8, 2012 2:53:49 GMT -5 BioLogIn said:

(positive) Progress towards casting useful spells

That will not suffice. Magic Mirror is 100% useful to cast when threatened with FoD, and having clapped I've greatly progressed towards casting it, but hardly I have an initiative advantage after that.

In defense of the 'progress' formulation:
You've progressed towards casting a Magic Mirror. Call that one initiative point. You also maybe have progress towards a dispel if you correctly predict your opponent breaks off the FoD - not as relevant but still useful. Call it one and a half initiative points total.

Your opponent has made a lot of progress towards FoD, and a bit of progress towards summoning a goblin or antispell or whatever if he aborts the FoD, and probably has something on his other hand. That's a lot of progress overall, far more than one and a half initiative points, so your opponent is at an initiative advantage.

However, if you'd gone PS/DP instead of clapping, you would have zero initiative because while you have more progress towards casting spells, none of them are useful.

Initiative can be measured as the number of attack options (or attack angles) you have on your opponent. D/P opening presents possibly the widest array of attack options; W/W presents almost none. Having PS on one of the hands gives you awesome array of options and a good deal of initiative, etc.

Disagree; WW/x may not be a good platform to attack from, but it is still worth some initiative because it restricts (or weakens) my opponent's attack options.

Also while trivial, it should be remembered that initiative is a relative (not absolute) value. It can be used only in comparison to one of your opponent. W/W gives you little initiative, but still more than >/W.

I agree... mostly. However, I think there are states where both players have high (key decision point) or low (mutually anti-spelled) absolute initiative, and the distinction here is meaningful.

[salvor]

I have another try.

Initiative - "number" of options which (if they suceed) significantly changes (the bigger change is, the more initiative you have) the state of the game in your favour.

As a quantitive characteristic of a "state of the game" you can take a winrate from this position.

The word "number" was a quotes for a good reason. Remember that moves are simultaneous and it needs to be taken into account.

If attacking player has three different attacks, defending player has three possible defences and
A)Defending player's defences defend only from 1 possibility
B)Defending player's defences defend from two attacks simultaneously
Then in case A attacker has bigger initiative even when sheer number of options (three) is the same. You need to take into account whole decision point.

That way, having a DFFD vs WP gives first player initiative, he has two options (DFFDD and DFFDPP) which, if suceeded change game into his favour.

[mikeEB]

So PDW has better initiative than PSD? PSD only has charm, while PDW has blindness, poison, delay and a defensive remove enchantment.

[salvor]

Nov 26, 2013 15:01:40 GMT -5 mikeEB said:

So PDW has better initiative than PSD? PSD only has charm, while PDW has blindness, poison, delay and a defensive remove enchantment.

Of course not, two reasons are stated below.

First of all, succesful charm changes the "state of the game" much more than succesful blindness or remove.

Also note, that my definition of initiative involves taking into account the defensive possibilities.
PSD is a fork between charm or amnesia, and usually you can't defend from them simultaneously.
PDW is a fork between blindness, poison, delay and a defensive remove enchantment, but since usually you can defend from all possibilities at once (e.g. by casting amnesia), they do not provide initiative at all.

In some bizzare situations, when defender can't defend from all these options at once, PDW will give more initiative than PSD (suppose there is a giant in play and defender has 1 hp and permashield, than it is quite possible that PDWP and PDWFP can't be defended simultaneously, hence provide an initiative greater than PSD)

[salvor]

Apr 26, 2012 8:46:10 GMT -5 Dubber said:

(positive) Being in an advantageous state
(negative) Being in a disadvantaged state

After a brief analysis of DFFD vs WW decision point (I guess everyone agree that DFFD-player is one with initiative), I saw one notable feature.

Namely, if everyone sticks to "best worst case" strategy during decision point, DFFD-player will have more advantageous state after it then WW-player.

So, we say that one player has the initiative if he improves his board position as long as both players stick to "safest" options.

This definition is a bit non-canonical, if you use it then in DFFD vs WW situation first player have an initiative and in DFFDP vs WWS first player gained not an initiative, but an advantegeous position. We often call such "spellflow" advantage an initiative, but I guess it is betterr to separate the terms.