FASTEST Deck ever (+How to win in 3 turns?)

[kiszol]

I've been working on this deck for a couple of weeks and I tested a lot of variations heavily. I wanted to find the fastest deck possible, and after a lot of testing and optimalizing I can tell you that I found it.

There are 3 main results:

-> We have the fastest deck possible
-> We have a deck, that's not even capable to win in 4 turns, but it can win in 3 turns!
-> We have a stable and fast AI3 grinder deck with only about 1 loss in 100 games

In details:

I guess you are excited by now, so let's see the deck:

by kiszol

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

6rl 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dh 7dh 7dh 7dh 7dh 7dh 7di 7di 7di 7di 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 8pm

There are some similar decks on the forum I know, but I started testing this one over a month ago and I did the long long optimalization.
I didn't want to post the idea without the results, the proof.

Before this deck, there were 3 very very fast decks:
- Chivas's Mono Fire (16 Burning Tower, 6 Ruby Dragon, 6 Brimstone Eater, 2 Long Sword - Mark of FIRE)
- Skillgannon's Speed Earth (14 Stone Tower, 6 Elite Graboid, 6 Elite Antlion, 4 Elite Shrieker - Mark of TIME)
- Turin's Lidicrous Speed Earth (16 Stone Tower, 6 Elite Graboid, 6 Elite Shrieker, 2 Long Sword - Mark of TIME)

The first one created by Chival is far the "slowest" of all four (it wins in ~6,3-6,4 turns on the average (ota)) but that's still pretty good of course.

Here are the testing results of the remaining 3:

Turin's Lidicrous Speed Earth:

Wins in 5,84 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 50%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 72%
Loses: 1%

For Scaredgirl: I found that you have 3 Elite Shriekers by the end of turn 3 in approx. 15% of the games. It's not too common, but I can't tell that it's very infrequent.

Skillgannon's Speed Earth:

Wins in 5,92 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 32%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 80%
Loses: 2%

Kiszol's Speed Fire:

Wins in 5,69 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 52%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 87%
Loses: 1%

I've tested all of the 3 decks with 100 games against the computer level 3 AI. All cards were upgraded. Both player and computer had 50 won and 50 lost coin tosses.

From the data, you can see, that my deck is not just fast, but very stable too. From 100 games, I only lost one with this variant, and that only lose was against the gravity AI who had 2 Otyugs in play by the end of turn 2... (very rare)
The deck is able to handle 1 Otyugh or 1 Maxwell's Demon or 1 Elite Queen.

Why to choose this deck for Lvl3 farming (and maybe for PvP)?

-> This is the fastest deck you possibly could have. You don't have to worry about the balance. I worked a lot for it. I played more than 1000 games with the variants of this deck (I mean the variant with 5-6 Dragons or with 2 Gavels or with Swords or with Photons etc.) This is the fastest (ota).

-> There is a great chance to finish your first turn with one of these in play:
- 2 Lava Destroyers and a Gavel
- 1 Ruby Dragon, 1 Lava Destroyer and a Gavel
- 3 Lava Destroyers
- 2 Lava Destroyers.
It sounds good, isn't it?

-> The sound of the Ruby Dragon's hit is better than the sound of the Shrieker's hit

-> Finally, if you modify the deck a bit, you'll have the (small) chance to win in only 3 turns!

by kiszol

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

6rl 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7dg 7di 7di 7di 7di 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7jp 7jp 7jp 7jp 7jp 7jp 8pm

So, how is the 3 turn victory possible?

Here are 2 variations:

1. Variation (Destroyers)

You lose the coin toss.
First turn
You play 2 Ray of Lights and use 2 Cremations, than you play 3 Lava Destroyers and a Gavel.
You have 18 Fire quantums, you use 15-17 (depending on the Gavel's usage)
Damage: 3*7 + 6 = 27
Second turn
You have 3 Fire and 3 Earth Q if you are lucky. You draw and play a Burning Tower.
Damage: 3*9 + 6 = 33
Third turn
You have 5 Fire and 1 Earth Q. You draw and play a Lava Destroyer.
Damage: 7 + 2*9 + 11 + 6 = 42

Total Damage: 102.

2. Variation (Dragons)

You lose the coin toss.
First turn
You play 3 Ray of Lights and use 3 Cremations, than you play 2 Ruby Dragons.
You have 27 Fire quantums, you use 24.
Damage: 2*15 = 30
Second turn
You draw and play a Gavel.
Damage: 2*15 + 6 = 36
Third turn
You draw and play a RoL.
Damage: 2*15 + 6 + 1 = 37

Total Damage: 103.

I hope you enjoyed this post and the deck too!

[Demagog]

Here are the testing results of the remaining 3:

Turin's Lidicrous Speed Earth:

Wins in 5,84 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 50%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 72%
Loses: 1%

For Scaredgirl: I found that you have 3 Elite Shriekers by the end of turn 3 in approx. 15% of the games. It's not too common, but I can't tell that it's very infrequent.

Skillgannon's Speed Earth:

Wins in 5,92 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 32%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 80%
Loses: 2%

Kiszol's Speed Fire:

Wins in 5,69 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 52%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 87%
Loses: 1%

I'm no statistician, but explain to me how your percentages add up to over 100%.

[Bloodshadow]

What about unupgraded? Is this deck faster than Turin's ludicrous speed deck?

[Uncle Jellyfish]

I'm no statistician, but explain to me how your percentages add up to over 100%.

Well, here's an example to try to explain it.

Turin's Lidicrous Speed Earth:

Wins in 5,84 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 50%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 72%
Loses: 1%

72% of the matches were won "by the end of turn 6." Since turn 5 is before turn 6, part of that 72% involves the 5th turn wins, which is why the total percentage appears to be above 100%.

I'm not very good with percentages either, so if I'm wrong, someone should correct me, lol.

I really like this deck. Chival's deck may have been the slowest in terms of the number of turns, but in reality, if you were to take a stopwatch and time each game, you'd find that Chival's deck is probably faster than many others, in the respect that all you need to do is play cards from your hand, so turns could last less than a couple seconds.

[Demagog]

Oh ok, that makes sense. I kinda thought about that, but I kept losing my train of thought and was thinking he was saying he was winning on those turns, not by them.

[Scaredgirl]

Good job. The deck looks pretty good. One question:

-> We have the fastest deck possible
-> We have a deck, that's not even capable to win in 4 turns, but it can win in 3 turns!

Aren't those two different decks you are talking about here? I assumed the first deck you posted is the "fastest" one, and the second (with RoL) can win in 3 turns.

Having only 100 matches means there is an error or margin so these numbers are not actually 100% fact, but no doubt the deck is fast.

Also you have to take into consideration that your deck requires..
1. More clicking (because of Cremation)
2. More thinking (on what card to use Cremation on) (yeah, takes a split second, but still slows you down and hurts your brain)

What I'm trying to say is that in how many turns you win is irrelevant. Only thing that matters is how much time it takes to win.

I personally would choose an Earth deck because it's easier for me brain and I can do other things while I play.

Nevertheless good job with coming up with this deck.

[Dragoon]

Hey good job on the decks.  Nice to see the stats behind the claim too.

SG, the number of turns to win does affect how long the game lasts, so it's not completely irrelevant.  If it takes an extra turn most games to win, that's a turn of waiting for a slow AI to draw, think about what to play, play cards and abilities, then for the game to give you your turn, and you wait as it animates your card being drawn.  You can play super fast, but the AI will always play slow, so limiting the number of turns it plays will speed up your game.  But when they're so close to being the same amount of turns, yeah, fewer clicks and thinks is faster practically.  I imagine in real time the Earth/Time deck is the fastest at making money.  Both Golems and Graboids need to be clicked on.  But the fire deck also has the Cremations to activate.  0.15 is probably not enough to compensate for the quick and mindless clicking of the Graboid deck.

[kiszol]

Aren't those two different decks you are talking about here? I assumed the first deck you posted is the "fastest" one, and the second (with RoL) can win in 3 turns.

Yes, technically speaking those are two different decks, but very similar ones. I didn't try to tell you, that one deck has all of the 3 results, I just tried to sum my experiences with this kind of deck (fire/cremation/golem/dragon variants). If you would like, you can take the latter deck with the RoFs, that's almost as fast as the first one, and it also has the potential for the 3 turn win.

Having only 100 matches means there is an error or margin so these numbers are not actually 100% fact, but no doubt the deck is fast.

Yes, but 100 matches with each deck... it's far enough as I see. Of course, mathematically you won't get a 100% correct result even if you play a billion times with each deck... so you have to make it simple somehow. Or, another option is to calculate the whole thing with a very complex mathematical method, but I don't have the time for that (and I'm not completely sure that I could do that). I'm sure that you all know what the opinion polls are. You ask only a few thousands of people and you can predict the opinion of the whole population. This deck and the 100 games are something like that.

About the time to win. Yes, you're right, this deck requires more clicks than the earth speed decks. But you have to consider, that one more turn will lead to about +10s game time while for 2-4 clicks in the whole game (1-2 Cremations) all you need is about 1-2s in total. Well, my deck is only 0,15 turns faster than Turin's, and 0,15*10 cca = 1-2s so the decks are very similar in total time I guess...
But my primer goal was to set up the fastest deck on the paper, and I didn't care much about the time you need for the win
Every player can decide, which of this 4 decks suits best his/her gamestyle All of these are very good for AI3 grinding.

For easy play with this deck, you have to follow this easy guide:
1. If you can play a Dragon, play it.
2. If you can play a Destroyer, play it.
3. If you can use Cremation on a Brimstone Eater, use it. (In advanced mode, you should check your quanta number and your playable monsters.)
In some (rare) cases, you should use Cremation on a Destroyer in order to play a Dragon. But this is absolutely advanced level...

What about unupgraded? Is this deck faster than Turin's ludicrous speed deck?

I didn't do much testing with unupgraded cards unfortunately. Anyway my estimation is that both deck loses cca 1,5 turns in the average time to win, so this one still could be faster (on paper). But if you start upgrading this, you should start with half of the Pillars, than the Cremations, than the other half! Later on Golems, Eaters etc... end it with the Dragons.

I'm no statistician, but explain to me how your percentages add up to over 100%.

Uncle Jellyfish found the correct explanation to this

Nevertheless good job with coming up with this deck.

Hey good job on the decks.  Nice to see the stats behind the claim too.

Thanks a lot, I tried my best

[plastiqe]

This deck looks great, well done kiszol.  I was thinking about doing something along these lines once I had the cards.

If you have the cards, why does it matter how fast you can grind against level 3's?

(rhetorical question, I wouldn't want anybody hurting their brain while thinking up a response)

[Demagog]

It's good for PvP and some T50's. Maybe a couple FG's like miracle and incarnate...

[Scaredgirl]

Yes, technically speaking those are two different decks, but very similar ones. I didn't try to tell you, that one deck has all of the 3 results, I just tried to sum my experiences with this kind of deck (fire/cremation/golem/dragon variants). If you would like, you can take the latter deck with the RoFs, that's almost as fast as the first one, and it also has the potential for the 3 turn win.

Having Rays of Light might have a bigger affect on the winning percentage than you think. RoL's are basically useless unless you get a Cremation. Brimstone Eaters on the other hand are not useless because they produce Fire quantum (and do more damage). This is a big difference imo, and I would be very surprised if that RoL deck would have a similar winning percentage as the first deck.

[kiszol]

Having Rays of Light might have a bigger affect on the winning percentage than you think. RoL's are basically useless unless you get a Cremation. Brimstone Eaters on the other hand are not useless because they produce Fire quantum (and do more damage). This is a big difference imo, and I would be very surprised if that RoL deck would have a similar winning percentage as the first deck.

During the optimalization, I tried some variants with Photons (Ray of Lights) instead of Brimstone Eaters and some mixed variants too. I found that the Ray of Light card isn't that bad in this deck that people just think. Well, it's a Light card in a Fire/Earth deck, that's true, but it costs nothing. It's a serious advantage while you can play it in the first turn without any quantum and you can instently use cremation! But finally I found that Brims are better in overall because of the fire Q production and the double damage.

Anyway, I tested the deck with 6 Ray of Lights again (exactly the deck with RoLs in the first post) and found that it's pretty good.

The results after 100 games, 50-50 wins and losses at coin toss:

Wins in 5,81 turns (ota)
Wins by the end of turn 5: 42%
Wins by the end of turn 6: 80%
Loses: 2%

So I have to say that this variant is still extremely quick (still faster than any other deck except my first one) and effective in farming and PvP. In addition to this, you have the (small) chance to win in 3 turns (I nearly managed to do that in one of the 100 games!), what is absolutely cool