How do you define a "mono" deck?

[PuppyChow]

I would say those rewinds do indeed make it a duo deck. How the heck can an EARTH element REWIND time? Sounds more like part of time than earth . Therefore, even though it is minorly duo, I still say it is a duo.

But since you're saying you're editing the idea, I'll hold off on claiming "AMG YOUR IDEA SUX!" .

[Scaredgirl]

I say:
1 pillar type, same mark: Mono-Deck

I don't like this definition because of one reason:

mono-decks cannot use all the cards available in their element.

Just think about it. It's ridiculous. I'm supposed to be a mono-time player who specializes in time but I cannot even use all the time cards? Any rainbow player can choose from all the cards, while mono-players cannot take Anubis or Scarab?

That definition is what we use on the forums now and it's what makes mono-decks boring and weak. We need to give mono-decks the ability to have a different mark because it makes mono-decks relevant and makes sense.

[Essence]

The problem, Teffy, is that we're not talking about what you see in-game. We're talking about the decks that you see posted here in the forum.  In that case, you really do see every card in the deck, and you really can just look at them and say "OK, that's what this does."

That's why casting cost really is the only reasonable way to judge the mono-ness of a deck.  Casting cost is the absolute determinant of what quanta the deck NEEDS to produce to function.  And the rule really is simple:

1 elemental casting cost = monodeck.
2 elemental casting costs = duodeck.
3 elemental casting costs = triodeck.
4+ elemental casting costs = rainbow.

No complexity at all.  No counting cards to figure out if something is primary or tertiary.  All you gotta do is look at the corner of the card, and if you don't see a little elemental symbol there, it doesn't count toward the number of elements in the deck.  Activation costs are ignored because by and large the deck can still do something without activating a specific off-element skill, but it can do nothing if it can' t pay it's casting costs.

It's DEAD SIMPLE.  And it works perfectly.

[Scaredgirl]

The problem, Teffy, is that we're not talking about what you see in-game. We're talking about the decks that you see posted here in the forum.  In that case, you really do see every card in the deck, and you really can just look at them and say "OK, that's what this does."

That's why casting cost really is the only reasonable way to judge the mono-ness of a deck.  Casting cost is the absolute determinant of what quanta the deck NEEDS to produce to function.  And the rule really is simple:

1 elemental casting cost = monodeck.
2 elemental casting costs = duodeck.
3 elemental casting costs = triodeck.
4+ elemental casting costs = rainbow.

No complexity at all.  No counting cards to figure out if something is primary or tertiary.  All you gotta do is look at the corner of the card, and if you don't see a little elemental symbol there, it doesn't count toward the number of elements in the deck.  Activation costs are ignored because by and large the deck can still do something without activating a specific off-element skill, but it can do nothing if it can' t pay it's casting costs.

It's DEAD SIMPLE.  And it works perfectly.

Yep, that's it.

I could have sworn that I tried that yesterday and there was something wrong with it but now that I think about it, it's perfect.

Maybe my beef with it was that it's difficult to put into words? "1 elemental casting cost"? That could be interpreted in many ways. Is there an easier way of saying it?

Then we can hopefully lock/delete this thread before I lose my mind.

[teffy]

But if the forum definition is different to the ingame definition, we have a problem. Everybody, who talks about it has to say, which definition, he or she uses: The forum one or the one for ingame.

@ Scaredgirl
You can put
1 pillar type, different mark to Mono-Decks if you want.
Its something between Mono and Duo.

If players want to talk about a topic, why should you lock it?

[PuppyChow]

Lol. A lot of us were leaning that way too, but then you kept rejecting that idea so I, at least, moved on .

Elemental casting costs... Number of types of quantum needed to cast cards? I think I just made it more wordy  . But elemental casting costs makes sense, and isn't too hard to figure out. If you really had to, in the sticky you could make those definitions real big and bolded and then write "and if you don't understand..." and then give some little examples.

[Delreich]

I would say those rewinds do indeed make it a duo deck. How the heck can an EARTH element REWIND time? Sounds more like part of time than earth . Therefore, even though it is minorly duo, I still say it is a duo.

And how can a LIGHT element make weapons FLY?

I don't see what the cost of a card has to do with anything, really. Sundial stops time (sort of, movement at least), therefore it's a time card whether it cost 1 or 0.

No wonder everyone says mono-air is weak, when they give every other element access to its card but don't allow for the reverse.

[Scaredgirl]

But if the forum definition is different to the ingame definition, we have a problem. Everybody, who talks about it has to say, which definition, he or she uses: The forum one or the one for ingame.

This is true. We need a definition that the whole community accepts and uses in all situations. It makes life easier.

But if the forum definition is different to the ingame definition, we have a problem. Everybody, who talks about it has to say, which definition, he or she uses: The forum one or the one for ingame.


If players want to talk about a topic, why should you lock it?

A) Because I'm evil?
B) Because it was a joke?

Lol. A lot of us were leaning that way too, but then you kept rejecting that idea so I, at least, moved on .

Elemental casting costs... Number of types of quantum needed to cast cards? I think I just made it more wordy  . But elemental casting costs makes sense, and isn't too hard to figure out. If you really had to, in the sticky you could make those definitions real big and bolded and then write "and if you don't understand..." and then give some little examples.

Did I miss something? I though you talked about Pillars? If you said this same thing before, you should have said it like this:

"1 elemental casting cost = monodeck.
2 elemental casting costs = duodeck.
3 elemental casting costs = triodeck.
4+ elemental casting costs = rainbow."

It doesn't get much simpler than that.

I think the "competition" is over and Essence won. I'm not sure about that "elemental casting cost" though.. I'd like it to be something a noob can understand without reading any definitions from a sticky thread but I guess that's not going to happen.

[jmizzle7]

I think the "competition" is over and Essence won.

*Ahem* and jmizzle7... Essence crunched my final definition into something we all (finally) agreed on.

+1 Essence

[PuppyChow]

All one type of quantum.

That was my very first sentence on this topic .

My next post a few posts down from that was pretty much giving those definitions, just not outright stating it, since the conversation hadn't evolved to the point of making up new categories yet.

[Scaredgirl]

I think the "competition" is over and Essence won.

*Ahem* and jmizzle7... Essence crunched my final definition into something we all (finally) agreed on.

+1 Essence

Lol, are you talking about this:

"The number of elements present in a deck is exactly the number of elements intended to be produced and used during a match by that player."

Yeah.. I think Essence got the prize

You talk about production, intentions, etc.. none of those matter anything. Only thing that matters are the quantum icons on the top-right corner of the cards. It's simple and beautiful.

Only downside is that there doesn't seem to be an easy way of explaining this with one sentence but at least we have a good definition now.

[jmizzle7]

The number of elements in a deck, for the purposes of forum topics and tournament play, is the number of different elements among casting costs of cards in the deck. So cards like Photon, Spark, and upgraded Sundial don't count. Simple enough.

All right, here's the perfect definition (as per JMizzle):

A deck is defined by the casting costs of the cards it contains.

One elemental type in the casting costs = mono deck.
Two elemental types in the casting costs = duo deck.
Three elemental types in the casting costs = trio deck.
Four or more elemental types in the casting costs = rainbow deck.

This manages to concisely deal with strange outliers like Nymph decks that carry pillars that have no purpose except to be turned into Nymphs, but only have Water casting costs in the deck's cards -- those are Mono decks -- as well as bizarre decks that are pillarless but have Pegasus/Werewolf/Fire Master/Forest Spectre/Graboid in order to maximize the use of Novas and Cremations -- those are Rainbow decks even if they have no QPs in them.


Simple, effective, doesn't raise any questions.  Does it?

Stop getting stuck on pages 1-2. I moved on and came up with a simple solution, which Essence reiterated a few posts later. So we both win.