673
Tournament Archive / Re: Eastern Tournament - May 14th - Speed-building - Upgraded
« on: May 14, 2011, 08:41:03 am »
kirchj33 - 2
TStar - 0
TStar - 0
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.
674
Budokan / Re: Stage I: For Honor ROUND 7
« on: May 14, 2011, 01:31:43 am »
kirchj33 2 - Legit 1
First Game: LOSS
He brought a bigger stall. Mine had no damage. I quit out after 1 turn.
Second Game: WIN
2nd turn discord was countered by 1st turn nova.... then he had a fallen elf/mutation deck vs. rush so... yeah. Hilarious deck.
Third Game: WIN
Same deck for me because I only made 2... 2nd turn discord again was countered by 1st turn nova. He pulled 5 or 6 of his 8 pillars in his first 13 cards. 7 turn win.
First Game: LOSS
Code: [Select]
4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vi 4vi 4vi 4vi 4vn 4vn 5oo 5oo 5oo 5oo 5oo 5oo 5pu 5pu 5pu 5pu 5pu 5pu 5pu 5pu 61t 61t 61t 61t 61t 61t 6u7 6u7 6u7 6u7He brought a bigger stall. Mine had no damage. I quit out after 1 turn.
Second Game: WIN
Code: [Select]
4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4ve 4ve 4ve 4ve 4ve 4ve 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vn 4vn 4vn 4vn 50u 50u 50u 50u 50u 6ts 6u5 6u5 6ve2nd turn discord was countered by 1st turn nova.... then he had a fallen elf/mutation deck vs. rush so... yeah. Hilarious deck.
Third Game: WIN
Code: [Select]
4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4vc 4ve 4ve 4ve 4ve 4ve 4ve 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vf 4vn 4vn 4vn 4vn 50u 50u 50u 50u 50u 6ts 6u5 6u5 6veSame deck for me because I only made 2... 2nd turn discord again was countered by 1st turn nova. He pulled 5 or 6 of his 8 pillars in his first 13 cards. 7 turn win.
675
Life / Re: The Ultimate Speed EM Deck
« on: May 14, 2011, 12:21:39 am »*And for the record (because I seem to have come across this way in the past), no I'm not saying I don't trust your stats, no I'm not urging other people not to rely on your stats, no I'm not trying to come across as objective or critical of you just because you've posted information which attempts to contradict (even if insignificantly) my data, I'm simply trying to dig for answers because this peaks my curiosity.Agreed. I found it very interesting as well, which is why I thought it would be good to post the data. Thank you for posting this last bit, I did not think you were having any mal-intentions, but simply following your scientific curiosities. Big-ups.
676
Life / Re: The Ultimate Speed EM Deck
« on: May 13, 2011, 11:08:08 pm »The differences between our statistics are exactly what I was referring to in my USEM versus USEMosis discussion.(I felt like I should quote something, but not the whole text)
I am assuming you mean this statement:
"Even though I managed to provide stats which support the fact that USEMosis makes more score/electrum per hour over the original USEM, I would still suggest using the older variation unless you are extremely experienced with AI3 grinding."
Not really sure I need to defend my experience here, but my ~3000ish games of USEM and ~1000ish games of USEMosis definitely pale in comparison the the number you have played. On the other hand, I am closing in on 400k score and have only played since mid-December, most of this of which has come from AI3 farming as well.
I feel like the actual strategy behind playing USEMosis requires no actual thought in developing after a couple hundred games. From that point forward, it is all instinctive (meaning you shouldn't encounter anything that actually slows you down to think through).
While you certainly are the USEM master, I don't think the difference in speed for USEM can be explained by experience or play style, where the deck play itself is mainly point and click. If we are truly playing with the same CPU capacity, I would say the difference would be that you are faster at maneuvering a mouse than me? While I don't claim to be the most adept clicker in the world, I doubt I fail to the point of a 2 second difference per game. I always get the mouse in place and ready to go before my turn hits. To me, there is obviously something else at play, which I believe still has to do mostly with a hardware difference. (my laptop is 4 years old?)
In reference to our difference in USEMosis stats, as stated before, this is my 4th time I've run the comparison and USEMosis has performed quite differently on each occasion. Once, I got the most rediculously efficient stats (sub 7.0 TTW, 83% EM), another time it underperformed USEM. I chose to post the latest one I did because I felt it was a good representation of the most common performance. Naturally, the makeup of USEMosis leads to much more variation in games. There are bad times you are stuck with two mitosis and no creatures, mitosis with not enough quanta to play/activate it, or there are glorious times you start with a bunch of quanta, a creature, and a mitosis to go crazy with while not hitting CC.
All in all, the difference between our posted stats is only a matter of a couple of seconds. The main point is that I wanted to reaffirm your original assertion that USEMosis is more efficient than USEM, supported by in-depth stats.
678
Round 5 / Re: (Time) Lt. Jen-i 2 - (Entropy) BluePriest 0
« on: May 12, 2011, 06:01:57 am »
Really well thought out deck for this matchup. Gratz 
!
!
680
War Archive / Re: War #3 - Feedback
« on: May 11, 2011, 08:57:50 pm »Yes, from what I'm reading.... the vault is war. According to a post made by SG on the upped war thread, she views vault as one of the two main components of war (element vs. element being the other). I kind of despise the way the vault functions but I would guess I am in the minority. It's overly complicated, predetermines too much, and is extremely time-consuming....Sounds like a fun event, but it doesn't sound like War. Maybe as a separate event, this could be really fun.
681
War Archive / Re: War #3 - Feedback
« on: May 11, 2011, 06:51:35 pm »Perhaps a good idea would be to allow ALL players to use a certain amount of upped cards. General a whole deck, leutenant half deck, and then the peons only 1/4 - 1/8 a deck. Certain upped cards create a whole new play experience, and create much more versatility when considering your deck.I think this may be crossing over more towards upped war, which apparently is another event in development. I put some more thought into my idea of removing vaults and think I have come up with a good solution. To summarize.
Masters (Generals) will pick their teams as captains in a schoolyard game would pick their football teams. A random order of draft would be determined and then teams would be selected. Generals would start with 8 upped cards and each subsequent selection on their team would have to fight with 8 - n upped cards. n = the order they were drafted in. Players would then be put in a large double elimination tournament where standings would be determined by the reverse order of when the last person on your element's team lost. There would be no vault restrictions; however, players in each element would need to stay true to the format of having at least 50% of your deck represented by your element. This would allow more variation in deck choices and remove the tediousness of vaults.
Event cards could still play a role in the process. Some examples would be: resurrection - revive one of your "dead" players who has lost twice, traitor - ability to play a deck with only 25% of the cards from your element, etc.
Allowing generals to have more upped cards and those selected at the beginning of the draft allows the Elements community to feed their status/title/reputation obsession, but as war progresses (either as a rule or event card), those who win could have the ability to mimic the amount of upped cards for the next round if they beat someone from a higher status than themselves (possibly until they lose). Those who have a higher "status" (more upped cards) could never drop down below their number of ups upon losing. It is only a way others can benefit.
How does everyone feel about these ideas?
682
Light / Round 6 Strategy
« on: May 11, 2011, 03:22:18 pm »
I had heard someone mention earlier that Coin now has the opportunity to run vader saders. Everyone should have that same opportunity without using upped cards. This was a deck I had posted on the forums some time ago and I think we only lack 1 momentum? It is probably a stronger deck than a duo vs. many different types of opponents, it just requires a little bit more RNG love, but it's consistent enough to win often.
That is, if we aren't holding these back for a "last stand" deck. Which I think is a good idea btw, we just need to get our vault right so we can focus on fielding proper decks without suiciding first.
Code: [Select]
4vj 4vj 4vj 4vj 4vj 55q 55q 5l8 5l8 5l8 5l8 5lf 5lf 5lf 5ll 5ll 5ll 5ll 5mq 5mq 5mq 5oi 5oi 5oi 5oi 5ur 5ur 5ur 5ur 5urThat is, if we aren't holding these back for a "last stand" deck. Which I think is a good idea btw, we just need to get our vault right so we can focus on fielding proper decks without suiciding first.
683
Light / Re: Round 5 - After Action Report
« on: May 11, 2011, 01:17:35 pm »
I believe the fact that we have sancs, miracles, saders, and vaders should be enough to make the fact that we have no purify inconsequential.
Regarding the suicide issue... we should do our best to deflect the attention to the situation within the community and handle the rest internally. It will eventually go away as people find something else interesting that is war-related. I think I was not taken seriously because of the time deadline / people already had their minds made up that this was the best choice. I hope that moving forward, you all will take my suggestions as well-thought out and intelligent ones. I didn't get my medical degree from blindly filling in multiple choice answers!
Another small issue I see, on a personal note, is that of my position in war.... I was originally made dogsbody, even though I was certainly not the person with the lowest bids. I assumed this because the roles I had put as a preference were already filled - by frankly more qualified individuals than someone learning in their first war (deckbuilder, strategist). As a result, I believe I might be filling our last position in battles as well? I am hoping this is not the case, but just wanted to seek clarification.
Regarding the suicide issue... we should do our best to deflect the attention to the situation within the community and handle the rest internally. It will eventually go away as people find something else interesting that is war-related. I think I was not taken seriously because of the time deadline / people already had their minds made up that this was the best choice. I hope that moving forward, you all will take my suggestions as well-thought out and intelligent ones. I didn't get my medical degree from blindly filling in multiple choice answers!
Another small issue I see, on a personal note, is that of my position in war.... I was originally made dogsbody, even though I was certainly not the person with the lowest bids. I assumed this because the roles I had put as a preference were already filled - by frankly more qualified individuals than someone learning in their first war (deckbuilder, strategist). As a result, I believe I might be filling our last position in battles as well? I am hoping this is not the case, but just wanted to seek clarification.
684
Round 5 / Re: (Aether) (Point) EvaRia 2 - (Light) kirchj33 0
« on: May 11, 2011, 01:04:41 pm »We all agreed this was the best short term option to hopefully keeping my teammates in the War, which frankly I view as more important than winning at this point.Everyone except the sacrificial lamb agreed. I made my points clear in chat, forum pms, and in private message boards. Those which I mentioned were almost to a tee what SG stated. I felt we were doing others a disservice and the penalties for suiciding far outweighed the potential benefits. I believe they went largely ignored because it is hard not to view it as a personal complaint when I was the one chosen to be the kamikaze bomber.
I believe Boingo stated best for us, retrospective analysis always gives easier clarity of results. I urge the community to go "lightly" on team
with this one. We were left with no formal leadership on day 1, a poor vault, and seeing the process of deckbuilding as a democratic one, I could see I was clearly outnumbered on this one. The team has done a fantastic job of bonding together to figure out how we can make the best of what we've got. We have been airing this out internally, and I believe that is where it should remain from this point forward.If it makes others feel better, I was basically chosen to suicide against
in round 2 on a weekend of deckbuilding where I was out of town for a wedding. I guess we just need to suicide vs. 10 other teams to even things up.... forgive me if this war has somewhat soured my experience and my jokes are poorly chosen.