Points System?

[Lanidrak]

This is relatively simple.

How about each card is given a value in 'points'. This will give us a way of determining the strength of a persons deck.

Pillars / Towers
Pillars = 1 point
Towers = 2 points
Quantum Pillars = 2 points
Quantum Towers = 3 points

Vanilla (no ability) Creatures are worth their ((Attack + Defence) / 2)
Black Dragon = 7 points
Blue Crawler = 3 points
Abomination = 5 points
Graviton Mercenary = 4 points

Creatures with an ability are worth their ((Attack+ Defence) / 2) + 1d5 depending on ability)
Devour = 4 points
Lobotomize = 2 points
Burrow = 1 point
Dive = 3 points
Antimatter = 5 points
Improved Mutation = 3 points

Some Permanent's have a derived value - by the number of creatures in your deck:
Nightfall = 1 point for each Death/Darkness creature in your deck
Empathic Bond = 1 point for each creature in your deck, and an additional point for each creature that can spawn creatures (eg. Firefly Queen)

Most spells are worth their effect.
Firebolt/Icebolt/Thunderstorm = 2 points
Rain of Fire = 8 points
Quintessence = 4 points
Momentum = 3 points
Gravity Pull = 3 points

Example Decks

30 Card Mono Aether
18 Aether Towers = 54 points
6 Phase Dragons = 60 points
6 Phase Shields = 30 points
Total = 144 points

30 Card Speed Rainbow
8 Quantum Towers = 24 points
6 Supernovas = 36 points
2 Abyss Crawler = 12 points
1 Phase Spider = 4 points
1 Flesh Recluse = 4 points
1 Lava Destroyer = 10 points
1 Elite Wyrm = 8 points
4 Sundials = 16 points
2 Bone Walls = 14 points
1 Rain of Fire = 8 points
1 Firefly Queen = 6 points
Total = 142 points
 

This is not an exhaustive list... But, it will allow us to see the rough value of someone's deck. The two examples (given above) are relatively similar. They both rely on speed to get a lot of creatures in play as fast as possible. The rainbow can do this quicker than the Aether - thanks to the Supernova's. But the Aether has more defensive capabilities because his Dragons are Immaterial and his Phase Shields work like a 3 turn Sundial.

A 60 card Rainbow Deck will have a much higher 'Point'-Value than a 30 card Mono Fire deck.

We could then maybe have tournaments etc between certain 'Point' valued decks? This would make people think long and hard about what cards they want in their deck - and make their decks as efficient as possible

What do you think?

[Scaredgirl]

I'm not really sure what the point of this system is.

You say it measures "the strength of a persons deck", but in reality it basically measures the cost of cards in a deck.

If I built a 60 card deck with nothing but dragons, I would get insane score, but the strength of my deck would be zero because I couldn't play any of them. Well, I might be able to play one..

And a big problem is also how to give those points to individual cards. For example why does Quantum tower have 50% more points than a mono-Tower? How did you come up with those points for different Abilities?

If we wanted a system like this, why not just use card cost? For example have a competition where your total card cost cannot be more than 30.


P.s. I moved this thread (like that other thread of yours) out of "Design Theory" because that section is meant for card idea design theory, not general game theory or suggestions.

[Lanidrak]

Cool, thanks SG.

Well, my initial post was just me rambling off numbers. We can of course make it more complicated. It should not measure the Cost, but the STRENGTH of the persons deck. I made Quantum Pillars/Towers cost more than Mono Pillars/Towers because it is a well known fact that on average, Rainbows can have a lot more diverse playing technique (using a lot of different cards) - making it harder for your opponent to guess what cards you are using. Whereas, a Mono Aether (in the Example) is pretty easy to read.

I could just be over-complicating things. But I think there needs to be a difference between a cards Cost and it's derived Point value or Strength.

In your example, 60 Dragons, no pillars. That deck would theoretically score very highly in Points... Maybe someone more mathematically inclined than myself could offer an equation which works out the ratio of pillars to creatures/spells/permanents and generates a point value for each pillar that way.

[xdude]

Cool, thanks SG.

Well, my initial post was just me rambling off numbers. We can of course make it more complicated. It should not measure the Cost, but the STRENGTH of the persons deck. I made Quantum Pillars/Towers cost more than Mono Pillars/Towers because it is a well known fact that on average, Rainbows can have a lot more diverse playing technique (using a lot of different cards) - making it harder for your opponent to guess what cards you are using. Whereas, a Mono Aether (in the Example) is pretty easy to read.

I could just be over-complicating things. But I think there needs to be a difference between a cards Cost and it's derived Point value or Strength.

In your example, 60 Dragons, no pillars. That deck would theoretically score very highly in Points... Maybe someone more mathematically inclined than myself could offer an equation which works out the ratio of pillars to creatures/spells/permanents and generates a point value for each pillar that way.

...And this is where the QI comes in...

[Scaredgirl]

Yes, you should look into QI theory explained here: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,5676.0.html

Although QI doesn't really measure the "strength" of a deck, but its speed and efficiency.

[xdude]

Yes, you should look into QI theory explained here: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,5676.0.html

Although QI doesn't really measure the "strength" of a deck, but its speed and efficiency.

Yeah, I was thinking at dividing the strength by the QI or something in that line of thoughts (but more complex, and better).

[kyborek]

I must say that this value, although nice, would say nothing. Players could be scary just because opponent wants to scare them and if you would want to make tourneys with specific score then it would need more balancing. feral bond and eclipse should have static value or players could simply build frightening deck (6 eclipses, 6 feral bonds, as much death creatures as possible) and also players could use feral bonds with firefly queen and score would be very low even with many creatures.


But that low-card-cost-tourney is a GREAT idea, i would definitely like to see some tourney with low quantum costs

[Wardead]

This just makes Elements more confusing. Bright Idea, wrong method.