Guest posts by Silkenfist

13

General Discussion / Re: False God's Genders?

« on: February 17, 2010, 03:47:19 pm »

So that's how you wanna play this? Allright girl ... you got it.

Uh... I told you I was male, didn't I? Is there a pun I missed?

As a cultural anthropologist by trade *cough I do find an "Allan/Barbara Pease-style dialogue" - as you put it - the much better place to start.
Some biologist viewpoint is just pointless for fantastical deities, especially since Gender is highly a product of social interaction and references to clichees, probably even more so in the world of fantasy. (cultural anthropologist *cough *cough)

Isn't this actually supporting the biologist viewpoint? An analysis of gender differences as a result of biological differences independent of the species might come closer to the truth than an analysis of gender based on anthropological considerations that are valid only for Humans.


But let's turn the tables: From the anthropological point of view - what are the genders of the gods?

14

General Discussion / Re: False God's Genders?

« on: February 17, 2010, 02:49:06 pm »

I don't think this is going to lead anywhere... but let's continue:

Hehe ... just the way you put things in this thread I guess.
E.g., categorizing the fgs by their problem-solving strategies and then associating females with "versatility" and "evolution" does appear to be a bit ... feministic.
 
Maybe it's just my famous male intuition though. ;-)

1) I'm not a feminist, I'm psychologist by trade and an evolutionary biologist by hobby.
2) Your famous male intuition is incorrect, though 

I would say that you are way too much onto that "reproduction" scheme, which might not be all that important here.

It is not? All sex (and gender) differences stem from the complimentary differences of the sexes in the reproductional cycle. If we categorize fantastical entities as "male" or "female", this is a much better point to start than some arbritary Allan/Barbara Pease-style dialogues.

15

General Discussion / Re: False God's Genders?

« on: February 17, 2010, 12:36:47 pm »

You must be a girl yourself right?

How would you come to that conclusion?

Either way, from this perspective Paradox has got to be a girl and that is not only by the name:

If reproducing the same tiny little problem over and over again without ever really getting anywhere isn't a typical female "problem-solving" strategy than what is? 

"without getting anywhere" is an evaluation of the decks quality. I tried to avoid just that... and Paradoxs problem-solving is extremely male. Quantity-based reproduction is an evolutionary strategy most fitting for the male sex and specialization in a single area of expertise/skill is a common characteristic of the male gender.

16

General Discussion / Re: Why this game is going to end up inaccessable to new people.

« on: February 17, 2010, 12:33:10 pm »

- Remove the fee for changing elements. Why stifle experimentation? It's not as if changing elements gives any great benefit, this is just a goldsink in a game that is already stingy with gold.

I want to have some (minor) restrictions on element change. In tournaments, you can benefit somewhat from changing Elements and I want it to have some costs there. What about making it free, but allowing such a change only a few times per day?

- Remove the fee for challenging AI 1-3. For people trying to get a handle on the game, the penalty for failure being the time they invested in that match is penalty enough. After trying out a few bad decks against AI 2-3 and having to grind gold off of AI1 so I could try again was pathetic.

Negative. The "gambling" part about Elements is one of the key aspects of the game. And it really is NOT hard to grind AI2 at least. Use the information in the wiki and you can grind AI3 within 5 minutes from registering. If you start experimenting before having found a "fallback" deck, then it is sloppy strategy.

- An easier, actually fun method to obtain gold beyond having to grind out AI3 with the same exact rush deck. This could easily enough be served by adding additional 500 gold reward quests, promoting experimenting with other elements. and decks "Win a battle against AI3 by only dealing damage by use of poison", "Win a battle against AI3 with every monster slot on your side of the field full", "Win a battle against AI3 after killing 5 enemy monsters", "By making them run out of cards", "Without playing any Pillars/Towers" or "With 500+ total quantum in reserve" are all fine examples.

Seconded. Although you have to keep in mind that is very hard to program quests that look into the gameplay. Still, there might be some room for additional quests. There is one contest right now to create just that.

- Players who are able to beat people with upgraded cards having the chance to win those upgraded cards. Why not, really?

Because it is WAY too easy to grind the Top50. If you were able to win upgraded cards from them, the ramp from starting to infinite richness could be done within a week or so.

I expect this topic is going to be flamed by veterans who have grinded full decks off of false gods before January, so I'm probably not going to be responding to this topic. :p

Yeah right... if we don't agree then it is only because we aren't valid contenders in the topic. Running away from an argument before even listening to the other side is no solution.

17

Forum Game Archive / Re: Re: Vending Machine

« on: February 17, 2010, 11:27:50 am »

You get an Otyugh with a napking tied around its neck.

I insert a strand of DNA.

18

Forum Game Archive / Re: Re: Vending Machine

« on: February 17, 2010, 11:08:07 am »

You get one counterfeit five-dollar bill, drawn with crayons on sandwich paper.

I insert my dirty laundry.

19

General Discussion / Re: Unavoidable Disadvantage Problem

« on: February 17, 2010, 02:15:30 am »

I mentioned that our mind gives us an advantage in this situation, but it is the only advantage.

Does that include the advantage of knowing the exact contents of our opponent's deck and every one of its "thoughts"? That's a pretty good advantage IMO

Despite the number of cards we are presented with, the game allows us a 30-60 card deck, which isn't too limiting considering too few cards limit  strategy and comebacks, while too many cards will cause bad draws. However, I think you're ignoring the fact that although more cards give us the advantage while planning a long-term strategy, we are limited to the cards we will draw before the god can kill us (unlike chess, in which all of your options are presented from the beginning),

Sorry, if I fail to grasp this but - what is your point? That we only have access to the limited of cards that we included in our deck AND drew in the actual game before it finished? That would be obviously true but true for both sides and another factor of complexity that we could use against the AI.

but particularly by the fact that we have to plan for every false god. To keep from designing too complex an AI for one god, new false gods are created, and we now have to plan for each one.

Not really. Of course it is impossible to create a deck that does well against each of the 18 Gods. That's what you call a metagame - there is no optimal choice, at some point any improvement you make against one God will come at a cost of weakening your matchup against the others. Everything else would be pretty dull.

The problem does not stem from the increased number of strategies, in which case, we are able beat every god with ease,

Once again I have to ask you what exactly you mean with this... wouldn't a greater variety of strategies among the Gods make it harder for us to beat each of them?

but rather the way they are handled in the game. I am proposing finding a better way of dealing with the introduction of new cards to keep players and false gods at a good balance, not stopping the production of new cards entirely.

So now we come to your basic point (as far as I can read it): That the new cards are somehow making games against the AI harder. I just fail to see any validation for your opinion. Take the latest additions to the game - the Nymphs, Shards and Alchemy cards. The AI has no access to the Shards and is horrible at handling the Nymphs and Alchemy cards correctly (just for laughs, grind AI5 for a while to see how it tries to use Liquid Shadow). Tell me a concrete example, where the addition of new cards was detrimental to the chances of the humans.

Twenty uncomplicated AI systems given the advantages false gods are find it easier to defeat one very complex, yet very limited mind that must deal with all of them at random.

Once again - what is your definition of defeat? The point of the False Gods is that they are extremely hard, even for players who have achieved everything in the game, already. Currently, with a good deck you can get about 40-60% of the games against the AI, which sounds like a neigh-perfect ratio for me to make the game interesting. What would you want to change about it?

20

Rainbow Decks / Re: PuppyChow's FG Rainbow

« on: February 17, 2010, 01:13:44 am »

As to running out of time quantum, while I'm often stretched for it (usually against Miracle), I've never ran out. What I do is stop hastening at 6-10 cards (depending on whether or not I have the board under control). That gives you time to build up time quantum.

Against Miracle, I've found the Pulverizer to be my best friend. If you keep them below 9 Light Pillars, you can just two-shot it to death. (Not that Eternity would work just as well, if a bit slower)

To three quints, you don't really seem to understand this deck doesn't rely on damage output. It relies on gaining control. THEN, only AFTER you've gained control, do you work on getting fireflys out for damage.

There are some matchups where I found myself unable to establish control and had to rush in the last points of damage. For example Elidnis with some early immortal Specters. Or Scorpio when I had been hit by an early Arsenic for a few turns. Of course, these matches wouldn't be helped by a third Quint either

Notice I said fireflys. I almost ALWAYS quint the oty and FQ. The only time I don't is against Gemini, since you need the druid to stop the dragon spam.

As long as you remember to be careful with improving your critters. Getting beat up by your own TU'd dudes is fun not even once :/

Fireflys are 4/2, and once you get established, they are your main damage. While it isn't the fastest kill ever, it isn't the slowest either. Any mutants you get (if your druid survives) are just icing on the cake.

Don't forget that the Druid can be used to remove opposing threats, too. Together with Otyugh and/or Eternity, it can do a lot for your defense. Or in some desperate situations, even without them - fortunately most elements can't use the mutated abilities.

21

Archived Decks / Re: Entropy-Darkness False God Killer! Nymphomania without the Nymphs! (Unupgraded)

« on: February 17, 2010, 12:51:14 am »

Guys... can you please take Baily as an example and post exact Win/Loss statistics for the gods? It would make following an argument (or even deciding whether a deck might be good) way easier if we have some concrete numbers.

22

General Discussion / Re: Unavoidable Disadvantage Problem

« on: February 17, 2010, 12:45:48 am »

Simply because false gods have all these advantages against players (while players only benefit from having a conscious mind), every new card that is added into the game will be more detrimental than helpful to the us.

Wrong. The more cards that are added, the more complex the game will become. With greater complexity the competence of the player becomes more and more important and our chance against the Gods will increase.

Take at one end, a game that consists of Life Pillars and Horned Frogs only. There would not be any room to misplay or outmaneuver an opponent. Players would not have an advantage at all.
At the other end, take chess. Almost everyone in the world can play better chess than they would be able to write an AI to play against them. Why? Because with increasing complexity it becomes harder (to the point of impossible) to write a reasonable algorithm. The more possibilities there are, the greater the advantage of the human mind.

To take it further, look at Go. So far, there is no AI even remotely being capable of contending against the strongest humans.

What we need are more cards, not some gimmicks that would effectively kill half of the gods.

23

General Discussion / Re: False God's Genders?

« on: February 16, 2010, 09:45:00 pm »

Do beings of spiritualistic and residual power/energy have a gender?

The terms are interchangable any can be a he or a she as these beings would likely be asexual. Unless you are to suggest that the False gods reproduce with each other to create new False Gods.

In which case I foresee this eventually becoming a "who's shafting who?" thread. I don't really want to go down that road...

Gender is only applied to beings which procreate.

I was thinking about asking the same question - then I realized that many cults and religions attribute a gender to their entities. Think of Feuerbach's "Man created God in his own image"

But let's go back to Elements - We should note that the False Gods are indeed "False", which means that they are not actual deities but merely some powerful Elementals that like to think of themselves as Gods. And they can have a gender (since gender is a social construct and does not require a biological distinction from the other gender).

I distributed the gods 9-9 to male and female NOT based on whether their names sound boyish or girlish. I decided whether the deck features typical "male" or "female" problem-solving, survival and procreation strategies. If Chaos Lord needs to be renamed Chaos Lady, then so be it.

24

False Gods / Re: Improving game play against False Gods

« on: February 16, 2010, 08:39:15 pm »

The goal here isn't to make the FG easier to beat, just make the games more interesting.  Any thoughts?

In that case, let's focus on measures that would achieve just that 

Your suggestions, while interesting, would greatly reduce the strength of the gods. They already suffer pretty harsh handicaps from being played by a sub-par AI and the player knowing every aspect of the deck the instant they see the name of their opponent. +1 (or even +3) to creatures stats or shields wouldn't matter much, since they don't really keep the standard rainbow godkiller from establishing dominance with a Bone Wall and a Giant Otyugh (ok, so maybe they would need one or two extra spells to establish it on the board but not nearly enough to really hinder them).

My suggestion to make the False Gods more interesting: Increase the versatility of their advantage. Why does each one of them have the same triple mark/double draw/200 HP bonus? Wouldn't it be cool, if the kind of advantage would be tailor-made for each god? Maybe you start against More with only 50 HP. Maybe Rainbow starts the game with 2 of each quanta. In exchange, some of the other boni could be dropped.