Is a rush or stall index possible?

[jmdt]

So I had an idea to make a program to optimally build a deck.  Its easy to give it a set of cards and have it distribute pillars/pends.  My next though was what if it could optimally find the balance of cards and pillars and essentially generate a deck based on a rush and or stall index given to a card.  basically, you tell the program what cards you want to use and the type of deck you want and it finds the optimum number of each card and pillars.  You'd give it a desired rush and or stall index and QI and it outputs a deck.

With that line of thinking, a rush index and stall index would have to be assigned to each card for a means of mathematically selecting between cards.  So the question is, how we go about assigning a rush or stall index to cards. i.e. how would a Jade dragon relate to a frog mathematically.

[TStar]

It would be complex because you'd have to program in element synergy and such as well otherwise it could toss out a lycan with a vampire with a frog and give you like different pillars.  Programming that aspect alone sounds like a big headache.

[TimerClock14]

It would be complex because you'd have to program in element synergy and such as well otherwise it could toss out a lycan with a vampire with a frog and give you like different pillars.  Programming that aspect alone sounds like a big headache.

Headache: yes
Big deal: no

If you're motivated enough, you can code the most complex program in a matter of weeks.

[jmdt]

Well you'd have to make some limitations on what it can do for the sake of time.  For example, it can work pretty easy for monos and duos the way pendulums work, but past that it would become a nightmare to program; trios 'Might' be possible if I felt like taking the time.  I was planning on sticking to monos and duos for this exercise.

Ultimately, we need to find a way to 'value' cards to make it work.

[jumpoffduck]

Some factors:

• Damage:Quanta ratio is always something you can look at as a factor for rush index
• OldTrees's resilience study
• ratcharmer's stall study

So a frog would outclass the dragon in D:Q, but the dragon would win out in resilience.

[jmdt]

Some factors:

• Damage:Quanta ratio is always something you can look at as a factor for rush index
• OldTrees's resilience study
• ratcharmer's stall study

So a frog would outclass the dragon in D:Q, but the dragon would win out in resilience.

Exactly my line of thinking, I'm trying to figure out a way to combine damage, speed and resiliency into 1 'smart' number for each card.  I may be asking to much, and need several variables for each card, but we'll see what the more design oriented oriented folk have to say.

Ideally, I should select that 2-3 cards for a popular rush and desired QI and it come out exactly the same build (or close) to the accepted build.

[OldTrees]

Damage:Quanta+c [c=1-3 probably 3] would be a better ratio to represent the cost of drawing.

My resilience study will, with more input, be useful to determine relative and average lifespans of card effects.
Cards with higher (Effect x Resilience) over the relevant frame of reference [5-10turns for rush, 20+ for stall] will tend to be more effective subject of course to what the effect in question is.

I will be working on measuring the value of Effect x Resilience in the Design Theory section. I would love it if a more gameplay experienced player joined the project.

[Falcon4415]

You deck helpers are awesome and whatnot, but I feel this is a little over the top. A program capable of building good decks? What would be next, one capable of playing them optimally? When humans are not needed anymore, what is the point for them to even exist play?

This is awesome as a programming challenge, but IMO it is neither necessary nor more useful than a couple of test games against the AI. We all know you are very capable of doing it, but the question is: to what purpose?

Not that I am mad at you or anything, but this is what I think about the idea (I know it sounds like ranting, sorry for that).

[OldTrees]

@Falcon4415
Well the theory behind such a program would be useful in balancing the game.
The actual program could be useful at verifying the model.

[Ekki]

Some factors:

• Damage:Quanta ratio is always something you can look at as a factor for rush index
• OldTrees's resilience study
• ratcharmer's stall study

So a frog would outclass the dragon in D:Q, but the dragon would win out in resilience.

Exactly my line of thinking, I'm trying to figure out a way to combine damage, speed and resiliency into 1 'smart' number for each card.  I may be asking to much, and need several variables for each card, but we'll see what the more design oriented oriented folk have to say.

Ideally, I should select that 2-3 cards for a popular rush and desired QI and it come out exactly the same build (or close) to the accepted build.

I think each card should have more than 1 number. And that different numbers should be combined differently to make a Rush or a Stall.
Also, the amount of cards could be decided by the program, but I recommend that you can input a min/max(6) to it, it may simplify things.

You deck helpers are awesome and whatnot, but I feel this is a little over the top. A program capable of building good decks? What would be next, one capable of playing them optimally? When humans are not needed anymore, what is the point for them to even exist play?

Well, I don't think our understanding of the game/complex maths can be enough for that to happen after every update. This would be just a program capable of building a skeleton for a deck, or a mediocre/mid-range deck. I guess it would turn into another deckbuilding tool, and nothing else woops, as OT said, balance can be an use too.


As I see it, there are lots of index's going around and just starting to grow, and I think this should wait until some of them are ready-ish to be effective.

[jmdt]

You deck helpers are awesome and whatnot, but I feel this is a little over the top. A program capable of building good decks? What would be next, one capable of playing them optimally? When humans are not needed anymore, what is the point for them to even exist play?

This is awesome as a programming challenge, but IMO it is neither necessary nor more useful than a couple of test games against the AI. We all know you are very capable of doing it, but the question is: to what purpose?

Not that I am mad at you or anything, but this is what I think about the idea (I know it sounds like ranting, sorry for that).

As I have said before, elements is all math.  Once you understand the math you are one step ahead in card design, deck building, and even PvP.   I started the ttw thread to mathematically calculate the speed differences under load of various decks as an attemp to better understand what makes deck faster to help in building increasingly faster decks..

I use a lot of complex math in my spreadsheet to build some of my decks.   This thread is more of extention of my own curiosity on how my spreadsheet could be made into a program to automatically figure this out without me having to take the time to manually interpret the data and test.  The program could help new players learn deck design by showing the optimal way to build a deck.  I rarely use the spreadsheet anymore as I don't need to, but it could be a helpful tool IF I can make it work.

[coinich]

I once tried to quantify every single creature in the game to figure out what was worth playing and what wasn't.  Here are my results, though they are a little dated.  I haven't followed up much because no-one showed any interest at the time beyond a few scattered posts.  Perhaps it can give you a ground for starting your own creature comparisons.

http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,6386.msg73038#msg73038