ivalmian's Rainbow SpeedDeck (kills almost all FG with elem master for v1.17+)

[ivalmian]

Ok.. i tried to make a small or even equal sized deck that has more quantum and yet is still fast/shardless... and I failed :p

But, i did make an EXTRA-fat deck.. I think it may play a bit better than my current fat deck, but I need people to volunteer to test run it and record statistics!!

Some major changes are:
- no more sn.. For this large of a deck, they loose their appeal
- 5 more qt
- One more glass.. I find that this is critical
- Permafrost... I think it is amazingly useful.. seriously, a number of gods just choke on it.. an early permafrost more or less makes a win against scorpio,morte,incarnate, ferox, and ffq... didn't try against dg, but it should work too...
- Purify... while a little bit unrelated to the major theme of the deck, I am just sick and tired of loosing because I have 20 poison.... even though my creatures are dominating
- One more sundial... to make the numbers more round


SINCE PEOPLE KEEP ASKING, NO, DON'T PUTT ALL 5 GLASSES ON FIELD, IDEA IS TO PUT 2-3 EARL ON.. OTHERS ARE PROB NOT NECESSARY (but you need 5 in deck so there is high probability of drawing them early)

The idea of this deck is similar to the fat version, although now more than ever it is critical to get an hourglass out.. with an extra hourglass, probability of getting the hourglass is even higher than before, so this should not be a big problem... 9 shielding cards are also nice since the games are now a bit longer.. again, the hope is draw through all 45 cards in about 15-20 turns

[clawver937]

The win ratio for this deck(s) is actually MUCH lower. I was skeptical about the win ratios, so I talked to Ivan about the win ratios, and he said he excluded divine glory, rainbow, and graviton. That means the ACTUAL win ratio is MUCH lower. Another thing he mentioned, was the fact that he only played about 60 games. Let's see...that averages out to.....5 games per false god. Misleading results, indeed.

[ivalmian]

The win ratio for this deck(s) is actually MUCH lower. I was skeptical about the win ratios, so I talked to Ivan about the win ratios, and he said he excluded divine glory, rainbow, and graviton. That means the ACTUAL win ratio is MUCH lower. Another thing he mentioned, was the fact that he only played about 60 games. Let's see...that averages out to.....5 games per false god. Misleading results, indeed.

um.. 60 games is more stats than most decks have.. and i ask for more... i also explicitly say that ignore those gods.. even in the title i say "almost all"... the winning ratio if you include ALL gods is like 55% (according to compilation of statistics by me, jangoo, and yoyobro )

[clawver937]

60 games is definitely not "more stats than most decks have", but his win/loss ratio is about 55%
(30:25). That doesn't seem so good when you have THIS http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,1748.0.html (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,1748.0.html)

[ivalmian]

60 games is definitely not "more stats than most decks have". The stats ARE forged if you don't include ALL the false gods, and I have no idea how you get 55% from the games he loses against Rainbow, Divine Glory, and Graviton. Let's do this the hard way...his win/loss ratio to false gods is currently 27:13. He loses to Rainbow, Divine Glory, and Graviton about 80% of the time. Let's assume he plays 5 games against them (average number of games played against each false god). He wins three games, and loses twelve games....27+3=30, 13+12=25. New win ratio, is 30:25. Hmmm... seems a LOT lower than that 67.5% he had before.

-hiss

Um..

(A) i say i ignore those gods.. so everyone knows

(B) 30/25 is 55% win rate.. which is EXACTLY what i said in my last post..

(C) People, please check a new variant (from previous page) and tell me what you think (stats against gods)


Bah.. you modifier your post..

PuppyChow's deck has almost EXACT same stats, but it uses shards, which some people don't have (like me)...

[Vreely]

Ivalmian, I like your deck better than PuppyChows.   I played about 10 games with each of your initial decks, (thin and fat), and like the fat version better.  Then I decided to modify it a bit and collect some stats with a few shards thrown in.

After testing 50 games, I am starting to think that my shard variant is not even as good as your non-shard variant.  More speculation on why later.

I made the following changes to your fat deck:

• Add 3x SoG
• Remove 1 Sundial
• Remove 1 Phase Shield
• Remove 1 Super Nova
• Change Graveyard to non-upped Boneyard

Note:  I left the FB in.  It is a mistake to take this out.

I think removing the SN was the right move.  They choke you initial hand when you are waiting for entropy quanta.  Still a good card, but I think it runs better 1 SN lighter.   Removing both the SD and the Phase Shield may have been a mistake.  Most of my deaths are due to getting overwhelmed early, and I think the extra SD would help this.... also help me draw to that first hourglass faster.  I think I am OK with taking out the Phase Shield... with your setup, I can usually draw to it by the time I need it, and leaning on it is a huge risk against those explosion oriented gods.

Important!!  Keep the FB in.   SoGs do not give you life until AFTER the battle.  This means that you do not finish with EM nearly as often as the FB since it gives you life DURING the battle.  The FB is responsible for a very high percentage of my wins coming with Elemental Mastery.

Granted, I did not play with your original fat deck, but I have followed this thread.  Here are differences I am noticing with the SoGs:

• Increased win rate against Scorpio & Morte (SoGs help this a lot to counteract poison)
• Decreased win rate against Ferox, Miracle, and Chaos Lord, and Gemini....  the initial rush is the reason.  Another SD would possibly give me that 1 extra turn needed to get that fireball/bonewall up, or whatever.
• Siesm is probably a tiny bit harder due to having 1 less Super Nova, but I doubt this is a big difference
• Rainbow, DG, and Gravitron do not get any easier.  I agree with you that its not worth the time.

I will keep playing it and collecting stats for this thread, but the initial results are starting to make it look like your non-SoG deck is better.   After I hit 100 games, I may make a minor switch and take out another SN to put back in a Sundial.  I think it may be better this way.

Here are the statistics. (http://elementsstatistics.comxa.com/getstatistics.php?dv=3147126446)
Elemental Mastery:  15
Wins:  6
Losses:  29
Win Rate:  0.42

Details are in the link.

[ivalmian]

Ivalmian, I like your deck better than PuppyChows.   I played about 10 games with each of your initial decks, (thin and fat), and like the fat version better.  Then I decided to modify it a bit and collect some stats with a few shards thrown in.

After testing 50 games, I am starting to think that my shard variant is not even as good as your non-shard variant.  More speculation on why later.

I made the following changes to your fat deck:

• Add 3x SoG
• Remove 1 Sundial
• Remove 1 Phase Shield
• Remove 1 Super Nova

Note:  I left the FB in.  It is a mistake to take this out.

I think removing the SN was the right move.  They choke you initial hand when you are waiting for entropy quanta.  Still a good card, but I think it runs better 1 SN lighter.   Removing both the SD and the Phase Shield may have been a mistake.  Most of my deaths are due to getting overwhelmed early, and I think the extra SD would help this.... also help me draw to that first hourglass faster.  I think I am OK with taking out the Phase Shield... with your setup, I can usually draw to it by the time I need it, and leaning on it is a huge risk against those explosion oriented gods.

Important!!  Keep the FB in.   SoGs do not give you life until AFTER the battle.  This means that you do not finish with EM nearly as often as the FB since it gives you life DURING the battle.  The FB is responsible for a very high percentage of my wins coming with Elemental Mastery.

Granted, I did not play with your original fat deck, but I have followed this thread.  Here are differences I am noticing with the SoGs:

• Increased win rate against Scorpio & Morte (SoGs help this a lot to counteract poison)
• Decreased win rate against Ferox, Miracle, and Chaos Lord, and Gemini....  the initial rush is the reason.  Another SD would possibly give me that 1 extra turn needed to get that fireball/bonewall up, or whatever.
• Siesm is probably a tiny bit harder due to having 1 less Super Nova, but I doubt this is a big difference
• Rainbow, DG, and Gravitron do not get any easier.  I agree with you that its not worth the time.

I will keep playing it and collecting stats for this thread, but the initial results are starting to make it look like your non-SoG deck is better.   After I hit 100 games, I may make a minor switch and take out another SN to put back in a Sundial.  I think it may be better this way.

Here are the statistics. (http://elementsstatistics.comxa.com/getstatistics.php?dv=3147126446)
Elemental Mastery:  15
Wins:  6
Losses:  29
Win Rate:  0.42

Details are in the link.

Ok, thanks, did you try my extra fat deck? I have a feeling it MAY be better than the regular fat one

I do need more stats though!!

[Scaredgirl]

That looks pretty good to me. Quintessence is definitely the "hip" card at the moment. It's on top of my "needs a nerf" list.

[Jangoo]

@ Vreely:

Very good analysis indeed!
I also had the feeling that SoGs dont help as much as they should.
While they may certainly be invaluable in any pvp, t50 or lvl5-deck, the gods are generally just too brutal and fast to make it up with some puny 15HP healing per turn.

Concerning the supernovas, I also removed one in my second version of the fat-deck and I think it performs better now than having to discard a SN anyways while you gain any quantum-supply but 2 measly entropy-quants.

@Scaredgirl:

Aaaah come on!!!
Quint already got nerfed enough by firewall (and soon permafrost) to impact on it.

[ivalmian]

That looks pretty good to me. Quintessence is definitely the "hip" card at the moment. It's on top of my "needs a nerf" list.

haha.. may be 1 quanta more expensive, but definitely not a big nerf! Anyways, I think with the nymphs getting out, there will be a whole new type of fg grinders... although it strongly depends how rare the nymphs will be...

[Vreely]

Ok, thanks, did you try my extra fat deck? I have a feeling it MAY be better than the regular fat one

No I did not try it.  I will stick with what I have because switching all the time makes it harder to get valid statistics. I'll continue to gather and report on the SoG variant I am using, at least until I hit 100 games.   On you extra fat deck, I would be interested in the stats, but I like the looks of the 40 card version better.   The bigger the deck, the harder it is to match up quints w/ creatures, the slower it is to get an immortal Oty out, slower to your boneyard, etc.   Perhaps my impression will be wrong.

On another note, one other change I made in my SoG variant that I forgot to mention in previous post (will edit it next) is to put a non-upped boneyard instead of the graveyard.  Its cheaper & therefore faster, and your deck simply does not rely on skeleton damage.  Instead they are there to prevent deck out and also to get improved.  Typically, if I survive to the boneyard/oty setup, then the game is mine regardless of skeleton damage.

Thoughts?

[Jangoo]

On another note, one other change I made in my SoG variant that I forgot to mention in previous post (will edit it next) is to put a non-upped boneyard instead of the graveyard.  Its cheaper & therefore faster, and your deck simply does not rely on skeleton damage.  Instead they are there to prevent deck out and also to get improved.  Typically, if I survive to the boneyard/oty setup, then the game is mine regardless of skeleton damage.

Thoughts?

It's a common perception that Boneyards are more useful than Graveyards against FGs.

Personally, I rarely get to the point that I really dont have enough Death-quants to play my graveyard though. The problem is that the critical death-card is the Bonewall which will cost you 5 quants either way.
Very seldom it happens that I would sure like to play my Yard AND the Wall (mostly shortly before RoFing the oppo setup) but that I am short of 1 or 2 quants. This is the exception to the rule that I eventually manage to get out both of them at ease.

On the other hand, I would claim that Skelli-dmg is heavily underestimated.
Especially with a deck like this where you only have 1 Druid and 1 FFQ your only dmg-source are slowly evolving Firefly-Swarms and turn by turn "possibly crushing" mutants.
Many FGs have either no shield or rely on a shield that blocks only 1 dmg or none. Given that background I sure like to see my mob of say 15 Elite-Skellis pounding in a nice 15-30 dmg per turn while the Druid once again fails to produce anything better than 1/5 momentumed mutants.