Guest posts by CLRose

1

Elements Articles / Re: A bit of game theory behind rush decks

« on: September 07, 2010, 08:47:37 pm »

Which is all fine and well, except Bolts aren't exclusively creature control.  While they do have that use, they can also be used directly on your opponent, thereby never making it a dead draw (sans a reflective shield). If there's no threatening creature on board, use it against your opponent for some quick damage.  If there is, it's nice to have that option.

And the difference isn't as great as it would seem, especially in a metagame that consists of many creature control cards.  Let's just set up an example.  You've got 10 quantum.

For 10 quantum, you could put down a dragon that hits for 12 and is vulnerable to just about every creature control out there.  At 3 health, the only effects that don't outright kill it are low level drain lifes and ice bolts, and the latter has a chance to freeze the dragon. And that's not taking into account time reversal (which kills the momentum of a dragon rush), any amount of shields (dusk, fog, and phase being the big ones), or creature effects like Devour, Paradox, or Freeze.

For the same 10 quantum, you could hit your opponent for 6 with the Fire Bolt, unstoppable except for one or two select shields. Or you could take out any creature with 6 or less health, taking out those nasty Otyughs or Demons that seem to have no problem paradoxing your dragons/golems. Plus, after using the Bolt, you have 7 quantum left over, giving you the option of playing another card or getting a head start on next turn's play.

I understand the concept and the need for speed in a rush deck. However, with the vulnerability of the dragon in combination with the versatility of the Fire Bolt, it just seems like a smarter option to go with the Bolt.

2

Elements Articles / Re: A bit of game theory behind rush decks

« on: September 06, 2010, 03:03:35 am »

Very well written.  The only problem I have is with this one little section:

Phew, I know that this is a long and hard-to-understand post, but I want to say only one thing before I bid you farewell. And this is a shout-out to all my fellow aggro-players: 'Don't dilute your deck with creature removal!! Don't use Firebolts/Fire Lances, or Drain/Siphon lifes etc. in your aggro decks!' I know that it seems like a great idea to kill off opposing aggro creatures, but in reality you just diluting the threat density in your deck. consider this: The opponent plays a 5/1 Lava Golem. Which one would you rather draw: a Bolt to kill it, or a Crimson Dragon to outrace it? Of course you'd rather draw the Dragon. (Let's assume it's midgame and you have the quanta for playing the Dragon). If you say "but I don't have other creatures, and I should kill the Golem so I can buy more time", then I answer that your deck is wrongly assembled. You should have your own Lava Golems down on the battlefield. If you don't, that's maybe because the opponent killed them. That means s/he's the "slower deck" and you should "outrace" him/her anyway. Remember what I told you about racing? You don't need Bolts to race.

Assuming that the opponent you're facing is also a rush deck (and it's a good assumption, given the use of Lava Golem), they could very well set up their rush equal to yours, with one key difference of using Bolts instead of Dragons.  You may have the quanta to play the dragon, but if they have a Bolt waiting in the wings to kill off your dragon, then they have invariably slowed down your rush.  You have wasted 12 quanta on a creature that's no longer there, and they only wasted 3 to kill it.  A net gain of 9 quanta for them, despite their 12+ life loss because of the Dragons one attack. 

And while you're attempting to recover quanta to play another Golem or Dragon, the 9 quanta they didn't waste may have been enough to deal the "X" amount of damage they needed to finish you off that turn with a Bolt and their rushed attack.  While creature control may slow a rush deck down, if that same creature control can help you damage your opponent, it's not a wasted card in your hand.

Of course, I could be speaking out of my..., simply because I'm partial to a quantum control deck (Pests and the like), so I find more value in quantum than damage.

3

General Discussion / Re: Second Upgrade

« on: September 04, 2010, 07:46:05 am »

It'd also cause problems with opponents to battle. One would farm false gods until they had enough to create a 2nd upgrade deck.  Then, to balance things out, the false gods would either have to be upgraded to 2nd themselves (which would put an end to all farming of them for a good bit), or there'd have to be another opponent higher than the false gods (which, as already stated) would simply be too much work.

4

Forum Archive / Re: RARE CARD FARMS - updated daily by the community!

« on: September 02, 2010, 02:47:33 pm »

eshajouri doesn't appear to be running the farm at the moment.  Looks like your prototypical rainbow deck.

5

General Discussion / Re: Money gaining

« on: September 01, 2010, 11:55:08 pm »

You can actually use the deck your using right now against T50.  It'll put up a fight against some of the "real" decks there and there's always a chance you'll come across a farm deck, which usually leads to weapons/shards/rare card in the slots and a elemental mastery.

6

General Discussion / Re: Weekly Featured Cards poll - Aether

« on: August 31, 2010, 10:23:18 pm »

Well, if the weekly card can't be changed, could we correct the one that's currently displayed there?  Someone mistakenly believed the Devourer's Eclipsed Attack/HP was its base stats, and put as much in the beginning of the Devourer article.

NOTE: The above card is incorrect for pest!  They are actually 2/5!  Can somebody update the picture?

7

General Discussion / Re: Question about upgrade order

« on: August 31, 2010, 02:40:44 am »

Well, shortly after posting my last message, I did manage to hit a streak of what seemed like farm decks.  Either that, or simply bad draws for good decks.  Managed to win a couple more rares, including a couple Miracles and an Arctic Squid.  Still, decided to try a different deck, and while I doubt it'll have much success in T50, it's getting me a lot of EMs in AI3, which just seems like a fast money gain to me.

Thanks for your help.

8

General Discussion / Re: Question about upgrade order

« on: August 30, 2010, 06:13:36 pm »

Maybe I'm simply missing something, but I don't seem to be getting a chance at many rares. Despite everyone using upgraded cards, the slot is only producing their unupgraded versions.  And with the exception of the shards, I'm not really seeing anything in these decks that I haven't been winning/couldn't win from grinding AI3.

The only rare I've won thus far has been a pharaoh, and while it's a good card in it's own right, the amount of losses it took to get the card didn't seem worth it.

Is there a time I should be playing these T50s? I know about the rare farms, but it seems even if I play during the times when the farm is apparently happening, 9 times out of 10, I'm facing a player with a legitimate deck that wipes the floor with mine.

9

General Discussion / Re: Question about upgrade order

« on: August 29, 2010, 09:10:23 pm »

My only concern with that is that it seems like almost every T50 I face has all upgraded cards. And just by planting down their towers, they're narrowing the speed advantage this deck would have over non-upgraded decks. Especially when it seems every deck out there has 6 SoGs.  On the rare occasion that I do manage to beat those upgraded decks, I do have a higher chance at rare cards (though I haven't one one yet), but I win less coins (since I'm typically far below what's the norm, health-wise, against AI3) and I win less often.  That may just be me though.

I would ask what modifications could be made to the deck to make it work, but then it becomes a deck help topic, which should probably be moved to the deck help forum.

10

General Discussion / Question about upgrade order

« on: August 29, 2010, 08:29:23 pm »

First of all, I'm not really sure if this is suppose to go in this forum or the newbie forum, since I suppose technically it's a newbie question.  If it's in the wrong forum, I apologize.

I've been playing Elements for a while now, mostly on and off, playing until my short attention span wanders elsewhere.  More recently, I've taken a more in dept attempt at it and it's grabbed my attention for longer.  So I went ahead and forewent the free play and formed an Elements account.

After reading a lot of the topics here and a lot on the Wiki, as well as testing out a lot of the more common decks posted on the trainer, I decided to start farming the AI3 using this deck:

Code: [Select]

4vh 4vh 4vj 4vj 4vj 4vj 4vj 52q 5c1 5c1 5f6 5f6 5f9 5f9 5f9 5f9 5f9 5fa 5fa 5fa 5fa 5fa 5l9 5l9 5l9 5l9 61p 61p 61p 61t
This deck was posted by someone on here before, but I'm having trouble finding the post, so full credit to them.  It's worked out great.  The only real trouble I come across is the occasional poor draws and Maxwell Demons.

Right now, I'm at a little over 200 wins, and have almost 4500 electum. However, it's starting to get to the point where the AI3 is becoming a little tedious, so I'd like to start farming either the Half-Bloods or the False Gods.  Judging solely off the trainer, I've found the most success with the RoL/Hope deck, a deck I understand can be worked mostly unupgraded (with the RoLs being the obvious exception). I would go with some of the other Half-Blood/False God decks, but many include an Eternity, one of the few weapons I haven't had the luck to roll.

However, I also realize I don't have enough coin to upgrade the photons needed for the deck, so I've come here with a question. Is it better to wait it out, keep farming AI3 with my current deck until I get the electum needed to make a mostly unupgraded RoL deck, or should I use the amount I have now, upgrade what little cards I can to either make my current deck (or perhaps another deck) a little faster in farming AI3?

So that's my rant and question.  Thanks for listening.