The next generation of Cost Theory- Net effectiveness?

[Thalas]

Well, I never use Cost theory, but if I can note something. There are much more criteria such as synergies which can increase card's cost a lot or on the other hand it can decrease its cost.
 just my opinion....

[Zaealix]

Hrm...Cost theory....
I wonder...I've an idea on an alternate idea on how to go about it, and unfortunatly, due to the way elements works, it's probably not the most accurate way to go about things...
But the idea is basically this: Figure out the average quanta production a deck would have, and subtract the cost of cards from the total amount.
Granted, there ARE complications like quanta going over the limit and getting wasted, but it's a start to something, I think...
Wait, nevermind. That's more of a Deck Cost theory. If anyone can find a use for this ideal, then work with it, I've more thinking to do.

[darkrobe]

I just spent a bit looking at the following formula for evaluating attack versus cost.

Damage cost = Turns to kill 100hp opponent * Cost/100hp

Im gunna summerize my findings. (all unupped here, havent started looking at upped or cards other than creatures. no zero attack creatures or zero cost creatures are included)

most creature come out at about 1.

Cheapest attackers
0.42 : forest scorpion
0.45 : lava golem + growth
0.5 : ash eater
0.54 : Horned frog + adrenaline
0.54 : Deja vu + CP + dv skill
0.56 : graboid + evolve
0.68 : Lycanthrope +lycanthropy

Most Expensive attackers:
6.84 : Wyrm + dive
5.00 : armagio
3.78: Pegasus + dive

[OldTrees]

@darkrobe
Did you include the extra quanta spent via activated abilities?

How did you account for the extra card used in Frog + Adrenaline?

Obviously creatures that don't cost quanta do still cost cards. All creatures cost cards. This might allow Photon to be calculated.

How does dive + buff compare?

Do creatures with non damaging abilities have higher costs than expected using this formula?

[darkrobe]

Yes, I included the extra quanta spent on activated abilities (if they related to damage)

extra card use was not included except for added quanta cost (I hope to get a cost for (extra) card use out of these formulas by re normalizing everything to 1).

Ill lay out wyrm.

1.36 : Wyrm (no dive)
6.84 : Wyrm +dive
1.89 : Wyrm + dive + 1 chaos power (1 quanta for 3 extra damage on average)
1.26 : Wyrm + dive + 2 chaos power (2 quanta for 6 extra damage on average)

so adding in a buffing mechanism can drastically help the damage cost of wyrm (and other double buff benefit cards)

For special abilities....
1.5 : Immortal
3 : Artic Squid
2.7 : Pharoah + scarab spawn (not including devour by scarabs)
2.5 : Crusader
1.7 : maxwell demon
1.68: FFQ + FF spawn
1: mindflayer

Still trying to sort out some of the balancing mechanisms.