1333
Rainbow Decks / Re: PuppyChow's FG Rainbow
« on: January 24, 2010, 01:47:41 am »
Updated with your stats page 
.
.
Guest Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by a guest. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
1334
General Discussion / Re: How do you define a "mono" deck?
« on: January 24, 2010, 12:55:48 am »
Oh and if you're worried about my idea being too complex, it's really not 
. All you would have to do is copy-pasta this little tidbit:
Ask yourself, does my deck have quantum towers?
Yes: Congrats! You have a rainbow deck.
No...
Does my deck have pillars that are the same type as my mark?
Yes: Count your types of pillars. That's your deck type.
No...
Does my deck have cards that cost the same type as my mark (not including skills)?
Yes: Count your types of pillars and add one. That's your deck type.
No: Count your types of pillars. That's your deck type.
. All you would have to do is copy-pasta this little tidbit:Ask yourself, does my deck have quantum towers?
Yes: Congrats! You have a rainbow deck.
No...
Does my deck have pillars that are the same type as my mark?
Yes: Count your types of pillars. That's your deck type.
No...
Does my deck have cards that cost the same type as my mark (not including skills)?
Yes: Count your types of pillars and add one. That's your deck type.
No: Count your types of pillars. That's your deck type.
1335
General Discussion / Re: How do you define a "mono" deck?
« on: January 24, 2010, 12:39:15 am »Quote
Mono: One type of pillar AND cards of different elements must have 0 cost or cost other quantum.This is the definition I was proposing versus yours. The rest of the post was just explaining the reasoning behind it and the problem with yours.
Duo: Two types of pillars OR one type of pillar and (different) mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum.
Trio: Three types of pillars OR two types of pillars and (different) mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum.
Rainbow: Uses quantum towers.
1336
General Discussion / Re: How do you define a "mono" deck?
« on: January 24, 2010, 12:24:45 am »
I agree with that definition. About the trio decks, though, I have a few that use 3 kinds of towers (I don't use those decks very often though). But the definition still fits; could be something like:
The number of types of pillars/towers there are in your deck determines what type it is (mono, duo, etc). Decks with quantum towers are rainbow decks.
Or, if we wanted to get more complex (which I don't think we do), we could solve this grouping's problem: life/aether, for example. Let's say it splashes aether for quintessence and uses adrenalined flying druid staffs. That is clearly duo; it uses *quintessence*, the alchemy card for aether. Alchemy cards are kinda like (insert element) in a bottle. However, going by your idea, it would be a mono life deck even though it is actually duo.
To solve this, the definitions could be...
Mono: One type of pillar AND cards of different elements must have 0 cost or cost other quantum.
Duo: Two types of pillars OR one type of pillar and (different) mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum.
Trio: Three types of pillars OR two types of pillars and (different) mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum.
Rainbow: Uses quantum towers.
(Your deck's type is determined by the number of different types of pillars OR that number minus one if your mark is different from your pillar types and that mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum. Rainbow decks use quantum towers.)
With those definitions, it would still be fairly easy to make a decision, and deck's like life/aether would still be life/aether. Since even though it only uses 1 type of pillar, it also uses quintessence which costs 3 AETHER. Since your mark is aether (which is different from your pillar type) and quint costs 3 aether (which is your mark's quantum), it fits the definition of duo.
At the same time, earth/time with time mark for graboids only would still be mono, but then if you added in rewinds, it would be duo since rewinds cost your mark's quantum and your mark is different from your pillar type. And a deck using animate weapons would still be mono since they cost other quantum.
Still, though, that might be too complex for your tastes.
The number of types of pillars/towers there are in your deck determines what type it is (mono, duo, etc). Decks with quantum towers are rainbow decks.
Or, if we wanted to get more complex (which I don't think we do), we could solve this grouping's problem: life/aether, for example. Let's say it splashes aether for quintessence and uses adrenalined flying druid staffs. That is clearly duo; it uses *quintessence*, the alchemy card for aether. Alchemy cards are kinda like (insert element) in a bottle. However, going by your idea, it would be a mono life deck even though it is actually duo.
To solve this, the definitions could be...
Mono: One type of pillar AND cards of different elements must have 0 cost or cost other quantum.
Duo: Two types of pillars OR one type of pillar and (different) mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum.
Trio: Three types of pillars OR two types of pillars and (different) mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum.
Rainbow: Uses quantum towers.
(Your deck's type is determined by the number of different types of pillars OR that number minus one if your mark is different from your pillar types and that mark fuels cards that cost the mark's quantum. Rainbow decks use quantum towers.)
With those definitions, it would still be fairly easy to make a decision, and deck's like life/aether would still be life/aether. Since even though it only uses 1 type of pillar, it also uses quintessence which costs 3 AETHER. Since your mark is aether (which is different from your pillar type) and quint costs 3 aether (which is your mark's quantum), it fits the definition of duo.
At the same time, earth/time with time mark for graboids only would still be mono, but then if you added in rewinds, it would be duo since rewinds cost your mark's quantum and your mark is different from your pillar type. And a deck using animate weapons would still be mono since they cost other quantum.
Still, though, that might be too complex for your tastes
.
1337
Patch Notes and Development News / Re: Elements 1.18
« on: January 23, 2010, 09:57:41 pm »
What about precognition? Anyway, sweet!
Edit: Just checked the beta, and you haven't added the new cards yet. When will they be added? Tomorrow?
Edit: Just checked the beta, and you haven't added the new cards yet. When will they be added? Tomorrow?
1338
Rainbow Decks / Re: PuppyChow's FG Rainbow
« on: January 23, 2010, 07:27:58 pm »
To those of you taking statistics with variations, please use the website mentioned here:
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,2237.0.html (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,2237.0.html)
Title the deck something like PuppyChows Rainbow (+1 PA) or something. That way I can just post the link to that stat page in the first post and any statistics you take will be automatically updated on this topic.
Oh and thanks for testing these variations. I was planning on doing it as soon as I have a lot of games with the original build, but you guys helping will be a big... help
.
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,2237.0.html (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,2237.0.html)
Title the deck something like PuppyChows Rainbow (+1 PA) or something. That way I can just post the link to that stat page in the first post and any statistics you take will be automatically updated on this topic.
Oh and thanks for testing these variations. I was planning on doing it as soon as I have a lot of games with the original build, but you guys helping will be a big... help
.
1339
General Discussion / Re: How do you define a "mono" deck?
« on: January 22, 2010, 01:22:50 pm »Quote
If I have a deck with 5 different Elements, but am only able to use cards from one element (very bad deck), by your definition that's a mono deck because it uses only one type of quantum, right?1) Yes. It is still a mono deck, albeit a very bad one. You can only play cards from *one* of those elements. Then again, I might not even call that deck so much as a bunch of random cards thrown together
Now lets say I know for a fact that my opponent is going to use Discord, and I'll build a mono-pillar-deck BUT I take cheap cards from all elements so that when my opponent hits me with Discord and I get other quantum, I can play those cards.
Is my deck a mono-deck or a rainbow deck? Does my opponents deck define what kind of deck I'm using?
.2) Your opponent's deck has no bearing on what kind of deck yours is. You are still a mono deck, even if by some stroke of luck you end up being able to play a card from a different element. Let me ask you this: If you TU an opponent's creature and they rewind the creature you got, is your deck suddenly duo? Or even just TU an opponent's creature so you have one from a different element? No, because then your opponent's deck would be affecting yours.
1340
General Discussion / Re: How do you define a "mono" deck?
« on: January 22, 2010, 02:02:53 am »
In that case, SG, better make a quad deck section . Because I have a few decks that are trios and use animate weapons.
If a deck uses ALL gravity quantum, it is mono gravity. IMO. Basically, you want to use a definition that has no bearing on how a deck's quantum usage is. I do. I want to be able to tell by what forum it is in what type of quantum the deck uses. If it's in the mono deck section, I want to be able to know it uses only one type of quantum. Not two types with one being fueled by the mark. Two = duo. If it's in the duo deck section, I want to know that it uses exactly two types of quantum. Not one type of quantum with some animates or purifys thrown in.
It's really just a matter of how you look at it. Both methods are rather simple to implement. I just think that the quantum usage deciding what deck type it is gives some information about the deck, whereas yours doesn't. Sure, it would tell you what types of cards it uses, but what's really the use in that? Knowing if it will be affected by eclipse?
. Because I have a few decks that are trios and use animate weapons.If a deck uses ALL gravity quantum, it is mono gravity. IMO. Basically, you want to use a definition that has no bearing on how a deck's quantum usage is. I do. I want to be able to tell by what forum it is in what type of quantum the deck uses. If it's in the mono deck section, I want to be able to know it uses only one type of quantum. Not two types with one being fueled by the mark. Two = duo. If it's in the duo deck section, I want to know that it uses exactly two types of quantum. Not one type of quantum with some animates or purifys thrown in.
It's really just a matter of how you look at it. Both methods are rather simple to implement. I just think that the quantum usage deciding what deck type it is gives some information about the deck, whereas yours doesn't. Sure, it would tell you what types of cards it uses, but what's really the use in that? Knowing if it will be affected by eclipse?
1341
General Discussion / Re: How do you define a "mono" deck?
« on: January 20, 2010, 09:35:02 pm »
All one type of quantum. Just because you have the air card animate weapon doesn't make it any less mono. You're just basically making it a one cost gravity card.
In addition, I have a *trio* deck that uses *four* different types of cards. Flying eternities, quicksands, aether towers. If you go by the logic that only the card types count, it would be a quad element deck. And those don't have a forum section, so pretty much don't exist. If we defined a deck by the card types it carries, we would need to add a quad element section, and possibly even a five element section if I added purifys (which I don't, but it's possible).
In addition, I have a *trio* deck that uses *four* different types of cards. Flying eternities, quicksands, aether towers. If you go by the logic that only the card types count, it would be a quad element deck. And those don't have a forum section, so pretty much don't exist. If we defined a deck by the card types it carries, we would need to add a quad element section, and possibly even a five element section if I added purifys (which I don't, but it's possible).
1342
General Discussion / Re: Elements Statistics
« on: January 19, 2010, 03:41:33 am »
Could you make the "stay logged in" time longer? I'm using it and it's great, but sometimes to submit a stat I have to relog in.
And could you make an "overall" row? To show the overall win percentage and such?
And could you make an "overall" row? To show the overall win percentage and such?
1343
Rainbow Decks / Re: PuppyChow's FG Rainbow
« on: January 19, 2010, 03:36:29 am »
Updated with some statistics. Though I just started today, I think that link auto updates. Eventually it will have reliable ones.
1344
Rainbow Decks / Re: Working Nymph Deck -- Still in development
« on: January 18, 2010, 08:26:27 pm »
True. Adding some perm control and quintessences is probably in order. Like I said, it can't really be tested since there are no shards of gratitude in the trainer.