How Kit, Leto, Dimitri and Jmart can improve your game in four easy steps

One of my favorite aspects of Star Chamber is the ability to observe games. I often leave SC on while I work on other things, and glance at games in the mezz. I've found this to be an effective way to be inspired by new ideas of possibilities. Most of the time, I learn very little, but every now and then, I learn something important.

Obviously, an article about learning by osmosis isn't a terribly good use of your time. So instead, I'm going to reveal four very fundamental truths about Star Chamber that the great players have taught me. To paraphrase the great Isaac Newton, if I've 'sploded someone, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants.

Kit's Theorem

Kit taught me an essential truth about building a solid deck - your goal should be to play 1 card per turn, until turn 12, and then it should be to play two cards per turn. Why you ask? Because that is the rate at which you draw cards. This is Kit's concept of deck flow. In practice, what this means is that the median tech cost of the cards in your deck should be about 4 without tech boosters. To phrase is slightly differently, try to make sure half of the cards in your deck cost 4 tech or below, and half cost 5 tech or above. The reason for this is simple: it helps ensure you have enough cheap tech cards that you're playing things early, but you're not ignoring the higher power cards that you find you've brought a scout to a cruiser fight if the game goes beyond turn 12. In addition, try to make sure your average tech cost is close to 4.

Kit's Theorem is a good rule of thumb, but don't forget about cards with activated costs, cards that bounce when played on a flag, and hand enhancers like Brain Goop. Also, if you're splashing, things immediately get more complicated.

Leto's Cut

Leto taught me another, crucial, insight into deck building. I used to throw in between four to ten 1 tech cards in my 40 card decks. It was great to be able to play something on turn 1, but by turn 2, a full 20 to 25% of my cards were underpowered. Leto's Cut stipulates that the majority of 1 tech cards are too weak to merit inclusion in your deck, and unless the card is strong enough to be worth it if it were costed 2 tech, don't use it. Why 2 tech you ask? Because you will have at least 2 tech on turn 2. So by ditching the 1 tech cards in favor of something stronger that costs 2 tech, you're only disadvantaging yourself, at most, for 1 turn.

Leto's cut is particularly useful when evaluating 1 tech cards to include. Scrapyard Scavengers would probably make the cut at 2 tech because they're great. Mounted Laser? Maybe you should consider ditching them in favor of Mounted Pulse Guns.

Dimitri's Theory of Actual Cost

Dimitri wrote a classic and powerful article which kit has recently republished here. In this classic article, Dimitri elucidated the idea of actual tech cost, versus printed cost. The insight is simple and powerful.

While building your deck, you should consider the order in which you'll select your tech breakthroughs. Thus, suppose, I'm playing a human deck and I want to use Industrial Nexus, a 6 Order card, because it looks great. I then look for other things to put into my deck and I see Steward McDougal, a strong voting hero which will help me with the destiny penalty from Industrial Nexus, plus gain tons of voting power from all those flags I want to be planting anyway. So they work well together, right? Most likely, the answer is no.

The reason for this is that Stuart McDougal (Trusted Diplomat) costs 1O 4L - 5 tech. Now suppose I rush up to 6 Order tech. I devote my first 6 tech breakthroughs to Order to get the Industrial Nexus out as soon as possible. Well, then I have to gain another 4 tech breakthroughs in order to play Stu. In other words, in my Industrial Nexus deck, the actual cost of Stu isn't 5 tech, it is 10 tech. That's Propaganda-level tech costs for a card that is decidedly not Propaganda-level powerful.

Dimitri's Theory is, in many ways, the logical expansion of Leto's Cut. When evaluating whether or not to include a card in your deck, consider the actual tech cost, and not the printed cost. If that card does not deliver value you'd be willing to spend the actual cost on (versus the printed cost), consider removing it for something else.

Jmart's WinMore Hypothesis

Some time ago, Jmart elucidated to me his 'WinMore' hypothesis. The Hypothesis itself is simple: you should include cards that help you win more often, but not cards that help your margin of victory. The reason for this is that a close win counts just as much as a win in which you blow your opponent off the board.

Obviously, in a perfect world, you would have both. But Star Chamber isn't a perfect world and you have to make very real choices. A classic example is comparing Pork Barrel Politics and Spreading the Message. Both are Ferrier cards that cost 9 tech. But PBP is terrible compared to StM. The reason is that while both have an effect that is very powerful, PBP is unlikely to tip the balance of a close game toward you. StM on the other hand can almost single-handedly turn a close game into a win for you.

The reason is because for PBP to be effective, you essentially have to already be winning. You have to have enough industrial planets for it to be effective, and you have to have won one or two power plays. And while the extra production is nice, it is unlikely to turn around a losing situation. If you're already winning, it makes the margin of victory that much greater, but so what? StM is much more powerful because it provides Ferrier decks with a ton of strength on their traditional weakness; territorial influence. Suddenly, your heroes have unbombable influence. Add a Mark to them and they become even more powerful.

But the WinMore Hypothesis is more powerful than just deciding what to put into your deck among two cards. It can also help you decide on the amount of cards you should put in your deck devoted toward your chosen victory condition. Perhaps you have a droid deck full of weapons mods. Is adding another one going to help you as much as adding some ship-based influence? Maybe, but probably not. Ship based influence will help make sure your beefy ships will actually be able to take planets and not just hover over them.

Zorro's Equation

The great thing about Kit's Theorem, Leto's Cut, Dimitri's Theory, and Jmart's Hypothesis is that when you put them all together, they provide an excellent set of guidelines for building strong decks. Give it a try! Next time, I'll share one of my stronger decks and show how each of the element's of Zorro's Equation was used in its development.