Guest posts by genraenera

61

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Implement Mark in Deck Code

« on: October 23, 2010, 07:51:31 pm »

Yes yes, and yes.  It seems like every time I change my deck I forget about the mark, and go off to fight FGs with my Rol-Hope and a life mark.  Or CCYB with aether mark.  Or my life rush with an entropy mark... and so on.

62

Rainbow Decks / Re: Ninja's Mutation Deck

« on: October 23, 2010, 07:47:31 pm »

[sarcasm] 7 elements is close enough to fit into the mono section [/sarcasm]

63

Buff This Card! / Re: Fire Spirit | Fire Spectre

« on: October 23, 2010, 07:26:17 pm »

As is I'd consider putting unupped Spirits in an otherwise fully upped deck.

Can you explain this please?  The way I see it there is no such situation where a spirit is better than a spectre.
Possible situations:

1.  You have 3 , and will gain more  every turn.  Spectre starts at 2|3 and gains +2|+0 each turn, spirit starts at 0|2 and gains +2|+0 each turn.  Spectre does 2 more damage than spirit will do at any given turn, meaning it will do more damage over any given period of time.  Spectre wins here.

2.  You have 3 , and will not gain more next turn.  Spectre starts at 2|3 and does not gain anything for an indefinite amount of time.  Spirit starts at 0|2 and gains +2|+0 on its next turn, then does not gain anything more.  The spectre got that 2 damage one turn earlier, therefore it will have done 2 more damage than the spirit over any given period of time.  Spectre wins here.

3.  You have 2 and will gain more  every turn.  Spectre must wait for one turn to play, after that it gains +2|+0 per turn indefinitely.  Spirit can be played immediately, and gains +2|+0 each turn after that indefinitely.  Both will have done the same damage over any given period of time, assuming the same quanta conditions for each.  Spectre ties Spirit here.

4.  You have 2 and will not gain more  next turn.  Spectre cannot be played.  Spirit can be played, however it cannot grow, so it sits at 0|2 indefinitely.  Spectre ties Spirit here.

Here's a table showing each of these four situations.  1, Spectre means the first situation with the card being a Spectre, and likewise to the rest of the chart.  As you can see, the Spectre is always equal to, or better than the Spirit.

attack on turn ->	1	2	3	4	5	total damage
1, Spectre	2	4	6	8	10	30
1, Spirit	0	2	4	6	8	20
2, Spectre	2	2	2	2	2	10
2, Spirit	0	2	2	2	2	8
3, Spectre	0	2	2	2	2	8
3, Spirit	0	2	2	2	2	8
4, Spectre	0	0	0	0	0	0
4, Spirit	0	0	0	0	0	0

I'm not going to type out every situation, but these are the most critical ones, where the difference in cost supposedly makes a difference in which is better.  In situations where neither can be played, obviously they are equally bad.  In situations where  quanta abounds, spectre will do 2 more damage per turn than the spiritwill do, because it started at 2 damage/turn higher (see rows 1 and 2 of the table, they model infinite quanta).


In every situation, offensively the Spectre is either equal to or better than the Spirit.  Defensively, the Spectre is ALWAYS better than the Spirit.  No buff needed.

64

Buff This Card! / Re: Pharaoh

« on: October 23, 2010, 06:46:36 pm »

Yeah, Pharaohs are simply too expensive to play outside of a mono/duo.  I voted -2 cost, that would make them usable.

65

Buff This Card! / Re: Guardian Angel | Archangel

« on: October 23, 2010, 02:20:30 am »

I agree that this card is somewhat weak outside of RoL-Hope, but its not terrible.  I could actually see its ability being able to heal the player for 1 health per use.  That isn't game breaking but it would be a serious buff as it would be a great EM tool.

66

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Improve chance to get upgraded cards in AI5

« on: October 23, 2010, 02:16:11 am »

100% agree with the OP.  AI5 is useless, I've been doing it a bit to play around with my scarab deck, but realistically its terrible electrum, terrible score, and the decks are stupidly made (they have no cohesive strategy due to the 12x12 format for generating a HB).  I'd advocate remaking their decks entirely, and putting them at 50% upped 50% unupped with variations to give them something of a strategy to work with.  I'd happily settle for a simple increase in probabilities of an upped card from them too.

67

Nerf This Card! / Re: Hope | Hope

« on: October 23, 2010, 02:03:24 am »

There is no need for a nerf on Hope.  It is very easily countered, easily outrushed, and requires large amounts of either aether or life and air to work effectively.
The arguments here to nerf it are just the same as at black hole, fractal, and many others; namely people crying that "my one deck got wrecked by it, and there was NO WAY for me to counter it with my current deck, therefore it is overpowered."  If your deck gets wrecked by a certain card or combo so much, CHANGE YOUR DECK.  It's really that simple.

Sorry to be so blunt about it, it's just these "card X is OP" threads get under my skin..

68

Duo-Decks / Re: Perpetual Light (standard RoL/Hope)

« on: October 22, 2010, 10:02:52 pm »

Yes, most people believe that the hopes should always be unupped because once you have it out, the difference between, say 13 and 14 damage reduc is irrelevant.  You just want to get that hope out ASAP.

69

Duo-Decks / Re: Perpetual Light (standard RoL/Hope)

« on: October 22, 2010, 09:11:12 pm »

Here's the deck I'm running now:

Code: [Select]

5lk 5lk 5lk 6rn 6rn 6rn 6rn 7jp 7jp 7jp 7jp 7jp 7jp 7ju 7ju 808 808 808 80e 80e 80e 80i 80i 80i 80i 80i 81q 81q 81q 81q
Its the OP deck, with the towers differentiated.  Splitting the towers into pendulums and towers isn't all that big of a deal, but in the long run any extra benefit for no costs (once you have the pendulums upgraded, that is) is worth it.  After trying out angels, I LOVE them.  They are so much faster than dragons, its ridiculous.  I believe this build is close to the "best" possible with the current set of cards, and would recommend it to any new FG farmers looking for a good deck.

Note, it doesn't matter if you go with 3 towers and 4 pendulums or 4 towers and 3 pendulums, its irrelevant.

70

Buff This Card! / Re: Chimera

« on: October 22, 2010, 01:20:00 am »

While I do agree that it could use a buff of -1 cost to each form, it IS a useful card.  For example, throw it + liquid shadow into your FG rainbow, and you've got a nice EM tool on your hands.  Also fractal Ball Lightning + an armagio or two with chimera is pretty deadly.

71

Trio & Quartet / Re: Smash it all!

« on: October 22, 2010, 01:09:20 am »

Looks fun, and as much as I'd hate destroying the 5x6 awesomeness, you shouldn't have 6 animates in there.  I'd go with 5 animates + 1 explosion or 1 lava destroyer. 

72

Duo-Decks / Re: Towers? Pfft

« on: October 22, 2010, 12:58:45 am »

The Best Avatar EVER Award!! goes to you Celidion.  Thats so beast.

Aaaanyways... Looks fun.  I can't help feeling like you're going to have too much earth quanta late game though.