Guest posts by Nume

133

Rainbow Decks / Re: (1.24) CC? Why bother?

« on: November 10, 2010, 11:33:02 pm »

I think you are over estimating it. With a miracle most nonEM games will net 59 electrum. With a EM it becomes 120. So basically a profit of 61 electrum. So if you can get more EMs without losing more, no-brainer.

I just did some quick math on my spreadsheet. I multiplied the number of cards I have won by 1100(conservative) and came up with 68,200Electrum. I then multiplied my total wins by .75 (this is to assume that 75% of games would be EM) then multiplied that by 120. This came out to 15,030Electrum. For the sake of arguement and easy math lets say with this scenario Cards are giving me 4 times more Electrum.

According again to my spreadsheet I win a card on average 37% of the time when I win. Again for easy math lets say on average I win a card once every 3 games. So 3 won games equals roughly 1100Electrum. it takes 10 EMs to win 1200Electrum.

So if I am reading this correctly (and I may not be) roughly to make up for losing a single game you need to turn 6 otherwise wins into EMs. Since the wins would otherwise net about 59ish Electrum.

If my math or assumptions are wrong please tell me in a polite way. I am trying to figure out the best way to farm electrum with this deck. Not prove someone wrong. PS all my assumptions and easy math disfavor my point, except the 75% EM rate which I couldn't imagine obtaining.

I said it was probably less electrum if you do indeed lose that much, just that its closer than you might think. The biggest benefit is score. I dont even care that much about farming electrum myself, but at the same time I hate ai3 so I generally use FGs to farm for score too . Also I dont have my deck code with me, but you can look back a few pages if you want to see the version I use. LS has also saved games that would likely be losses otherwise due to using on things like an early physalia against scorpio or dream catchers first BE creature to slow them down and allow me to gain control.

134

Round 3 / Nume (death) 2 - 0 (air) Truddy02

« on: November 10, 2010, 11:22:45 pm »

Code: [Select]

52h 52h 52p 52p 52q 52q 52r 52r 52r 542 542 542 542 542 542 542 542 542 542 542 542 542 5f6 5f6 5f6 5f8 5f8 5fb 5fb 5fb 5fc 5fc 5fcGood games. My deck just was a pretty tough counter for his. Lots of cc and bone wall versus dragons and such .
First game: I had a pretty slow start with just 2 pendulums. Eventually he had a dark dragon and air dragon out with eclipse, so both had 6 hp. I played a plague, then next turn I played bone wall and 2 rage potions to kill both, which was pretty much the game since he didnt have enough to get through that bone wall.
Second game: I had a much better start with 4 pends, and was able to control most of the game. He had an early vampire and pest, and I had a phoenix out. He LS'd the phoenix, so next turn I played a bone wall and rain of fire, killing his creatures and giving me a 13 stack bone wall. Again I was able to just control it after that since he wasnt able to power through it (I did kill more of his creatures but yeah thats the general flow of the games).

135

Morte / Re: Oracle : Morte

« on: November 10, 2010, 06:53:07 pm »

He has 11 attack dragons which work pretty well for it.

136

Rainbow Decks / Re: (1.24) CC? Why bother?

« on: November 10, 2010, 08:03:18 am »

Chimera also helps against any god with a shield in that it lets you fractal an often more efficient creature than your destroyer and still have its full effectiveness. Such as if you have a bad game against ferox, and you're going to deck out, with a fractal of frogs you can get 35 extra damage out which would only be 21 without the chimera by fractalling his frogs (5 damage x 7 with chimera, 3 x 7 without). Also it makes it easier to time for miracles and such since the ai doesnt expect you to be able to ignore their shield. All of that aside, I think you underestimate the amount of benefit EM's give. You definitely would get more score with a high em rate losing 4 percent more (which I doubt would happen with the deck I use but yeah), and the electrum would still be pretty close.

137

Death / Re: Round 3 - Decks

« on: November 10, 2010, 05:05:00 am »

As far as the deck vs air, the fire deck originally in there probably would work. If you think the one there now will work better though I'm open to whichever. I'm really not sure between them tbh, but the more I played the fire deck the more I liked it . I played a similar deck to the one thats there now against earth first round, and it didnt work then but that was because he used a poison stall, but yeah I'm comfortable using that if thats what you guys think will work better.

138

Duo-Decks / Re: Inception

« on: November 09, 2010, 07:35:10 am »

Yes, but the key thing to understand is you can control their draw as well as your own using the eternities/rewinds. For example, if I was playing against a mono life rush or something, as soon as I mindgated a pillar I'd use all my mindgates and then rewind a creature. The next turn, the pillar would still be at the top since the creature took its place the last turn, so I'd again use all mindgates then rewind. I would do this until I have a decent number of pillars/quanta, then I'd do the same thing except I would rewind whatever creature I want of theirs, then use the mindgates to take it (rewind puts it at the top of their deck, so in mindgate spot). The same thing would apply to useful spells/perms that you do with pillars, so for example if they have an SoD at the top, you'd take as many as possible then rewind to do it the next turn, and after a not very long time you can have huge amounts of hp.

Edit: Just to add, you do need to be careful if you take SoG's/other perms as you dont want to take up all your permanent slots if you dont have at least 4+ mindgates out yet.

139

Patch Notes and Development News / Re: AI improvements

« on: November 09, 2010, 05:30:44 am »

It has, but so has most of the things people add to this thread . All the improvements could easily fit on one page if there were no repeats heh (not saying I dont see why there are repeats, just that its funny ).

140

False Gods / Re: Remaking the gods

« on: November 09, 2010, 05:29:16 am »

Lol well technically it would be 500 since thats the max, but yeah that deck looks awful tough to me, especially with added cc in it (the BBs/eternities).

141

Death / Re: Round 3 - Decks

« on: November 09, 2010, 02:58:38 am »

Yeah I actually think it has a decent chance of working now after more games with it . Once you get ~4 pendulums up, you can gain pretty solid control with all the pc/cc and bone walls, plus hard to kill creatures and poison damage.

142

Death / Re: Round 3 - Decks

« on: November 09, 2010, 12:35:08 am »

After a bit of testing (dont have much time, at work) I have to say I think the proposed deck vs air may have too much of a quanta issue to be very good. It has a tough time playing much of anything for 5+ turns, and even then its slow because most cards cost 5+ quanta and all it has for generation is pendulums.

Edit: After a few more games I may be wrong. It definitely is very slow starting, but I did win almost every game (albeit I was playing ai3 not air team but yeah). Once it gets control its pretty tough. It would still probably be very vulnerable to any kind of rush though so I dont know.

143

Duo-Decks / Re: Inception

« on: November 05, 2010, 11:56:14 pm »

Lol this was one of the most entertaining games I've had. My opponent had a massive stall type deck with mindgates included, so for most of the game we each had 4 or 5 mindgates, a fire buckler, and an eternity . Finally one of the last turns of the game, he had a steal at topdeck so I stole all his perms except the pillars/pendelums , and finally won the game.

(http://imageplay.net/)

144

Round 2 / Re: hrmmm (life) vs. Napalm Granade (Gravity) 2 - 1

« on: November 05, 2010, 07:21:56 am »

Lol sneaky sneaky . You might want to post it where it can actually be found by someone not searching your post for it though so you dont get into any trouble .

Edit: I will admit, I was proud of myself when I did find your code .