Guest posts by Ozaku

1

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Randomization issues

« on: March 17, 2010, 10:16:15 am »

Again, OF COURSE mana weaving pays huge dividends when used.  Mainly because it is NOT RANDOMIZATION.  You are putting cards in an order and then shuffling them a few times.

But this is all nonsense, YES Elements uses REAL randomization to "shuffle" a deck.  Shuffling real cards is rarely truly randomized.  You can not possibly truly randomize a deck.  This concern is the same even on Magic Online.

...Then you shuffle this deck in e specific way, but you still preserve some of the initial order in this deck and by this having a more equally distributed deck sequence.

This is one thing what can't be emulated by an algorithm easily. One thing what should help...

I would just like to mention that it is nearly impossible for a computer to truly randomize anything without an outside source of entropy (my element lol  ...but I meant entropy in the "randomness" context) and therefore everything elements runs on is most likely a complex algorithm, which would be extremely easy to limit (ie: no less than 2 pillars in first turn, no more than 5 in first turn, etc.) or some outside source of entropy which is still possible to limit, but admittedly a bit more difficult.

and as for the reasons to use it or not: well suppose you have a deck that needs to run multiple types of pillars (like mine, which entropy, life, and quantum pillars for the purpose of having a mutating deck) you automatically have enough pillars to draw nothing except pillars until a false god kills you, or draw only pillars with one or two other cards that you can't use (like "improve" without any friendly monsters, or photon without a way to mutate it) until a level 5 kills you. this is also enough to draw only a few useful cards before a level 3 can severely damage you to the point where winning would be difficult. on the flip side, you could also draw absolutely no pillars and have a false god kill you before you play a card (usually you have a multi-type deck in this case)

2

Entropy / Re: New Card: Purple Nymph

« on: February 06, 2010, 06:11:55 am »

yes you did, very good explanation...*looks under text box*... ... ...bot protection? ..... well that was random...

um...anyway, yeah good explanation. I was kinda hoping it would recover entropy quantums lol

3

Entropy / Re: New Card: Purple Nymph

« on: February 03, 2010, 03:46:07 am »

you know why I like this nymph? it means I don't have to burn X amount of  quantums every time I get hit.

also...does anyone know what happens when creatures with negative attack hit the entropy shield? I've been meaning to test that.

4

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Randomization issues

« on: February 03, 2010, 03:42:14 am »

well I can't quite fit my strategy into 30 cards, but I only have 45 cards and I still have that problem. no matter how few pillars you have, if it's enough to support any deck then it's enough to draw continuously until a false god kills you.

...as for the chaos seed/mutate issue, I know how those are supposed to be used; I've had an entropy deck now for nearly half a year I know chaos seed is used on opponent monsters (or your own if someone used antimatter on it) and it's upgrade is used on your own monsters, while mutate can go either way depending on the monster and improve is always on your own guys unless you have an antimatter to spare (and even then I would just save the antimatter until I see a dragon)

...as for the false god randomization thing; well thats not too much of a problem for me, but I think it might be better if you could pick which element you fight for testing purposes.

5

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Randomization issues

« on: February 02, 2010, 08:47:00 am »

while I realize that true randomness rewards good deck building, I don't think true randomness agrees with me. without editing my deck at all I can get nothing but pillars in one match and then get no pillars at all in my next match, so I really couldnt win even if I had a perfectly designed deck.
as for the pvp thing, that is actually quite a simple thing to do and easy for a computer to figure out. just set limits on how high or low past the target player's score you can go for the opponent.

...the only thing it screws up is when someone like jmizzle7 wants to go and let people get free points from him


as for the druid and elf, try using mutate on your photons and skeletons in a desperate situation, or perhaps using improve on your opponents if you can then use lobotomy and antimatter on them. or what if the opponent just used antimatter on your 15|2 photon that has growth (which would obviously be caused by improve)? wouldnt that be a good time to use a chaos seed on your own creatures?

6

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Randomization issues

« on: February 01, 2010, 05:17:38 am »

I also have a few problems with the randomization system as follows...
  would it be at all possible to choose pvp enemies based on how close they are in points or something?
  what about shuffling? would it perhaps be possible to create limits on how many of each card type you can draw so you dont make more than half of your deck pillars and STILL end up with none?
  what about the chaos seeds and mutations? would it be possible to lower the chances of killing my monsters every time I kill another one or perhaps lower the chance of using freeze every time I get that effect? freezing and killing seem to be my most popular chaos seed and mutate effects.

basically what I'm saying is, perhaps the amount of true randomness should be reduced a bit; it's easier for computers anyway. (also, please dont murder me in my sleep if some of these issues have already been addressed elsewhere; I didnt really have time to read the whole thread)