Post by: thatnewguy on November 02, 2010, 06:21:07 pm
AI3 version:
Post by: xdude on November 02, 2010, 07:00:55 pm
Post by: thatnewguy on November 02, 2010, 09:17:43 pm
So... DL's? Except that the deck seems OK, maybe except overusage of Water (would replace at least 1 Puffer with 1 Phisalia)Yeah, DL's might not have been the best choice. I have it halfway upgraded atm and found that either fire lances work better, or if you want PC and explosion and improved steal. As for puffer i did sub it out for a physalia and it works better as far as not having to wait for 2-3 snovas. Thanks
Post by: Baily18 on November 04, 2010, 12:25:50 am
Post by: willng3 on November 30, 2010, 04:47:59 pm
Games (AI3): 200
avg. Sec/Game: 82.170
Sec/Turn: 10.355
Clicks/Game: 16.095
Clicks/Turn: 2.0283
Score/Min: 9.6202
Electrum/Min: 9.6933
Time overall (min.): 273.900
Wins: 177
Ems: 4
Losses: 23
Score: 2635
Electrum: 2655
Avg ttw: 7.734
ttw Details:
ttw 3: 0
ttw 4: 0
ttw 5: 3
ttw 6: 35
ttw 7: 53
ttw 8: 43
ttw 9: 21
ttw 10: 15
ttw 11: 2
ttw 12: 2
ttw 13: 0
ttw 14: 2
ttw 15: 0
ttw 16: 1[/color]
I ran across myself getting quanta screwed quite a few games (nearly every single loss) either because I didn't get a SN in my opening hand or antimulligan failed and I didn't receive a Pendulum (which is bizarre because I've tested several decks like this and not had the same issue with Pends despite them having < or = to the number of pends in this deck). It is fantastic when it gets the launch though; 5ttw with Scorps is too good to resist. Oh, and I tested the AI3 version for obvious reasons. You should expect the T50 version to fair slightly slower due to more control possessed by the opponent; but it should have better winrate because of both the extra control here and the Quantum Towers should prevent you from sitting and waiting to play things until you draw a SN more often.
Post by: thatnewguy on November 30, 2010, 08:48:32 pm
Post by: willng3 on November 30, 2010, 09:09:23 pm
thanks will i appreciate you doing stats. I know it took you a long time due to computer failure.Well, while it took a considerable amount of time to do and I kept getting distracted while attempting to complete it, this certainly wasn't the worst experience with testing I've had. When I first started deck testing I really screwed up the calculations and ended up having to do the TTW for the same deck 3 times over after I had reached over 100 games because I hadn't realized my mistake beforehand. Luckily I didn't have that problem here. I had another experience where I was testing an unupped deck (SLOW) and had my computer randomly decide to restart in the middle of the test...I lost so much score from that because I was offline at the time and had to redo the entire thing from scratch (I had completed about 140 games beforehand as well).
So even though this took up a lot of my free time, it was nowhere near my worst test yet; I enjoyed testing it in fact :)
Post by: Davop on February 21, 2011, 05:51:00 pm
Post by: jmdt on February 21, 2011, 06:38:01 pm
I just got 99 poison damage with a mostly unupped version of this deck. Thanks for the link.What deck was the opponent using to allow you to get 99 poison counters?
Post by: darkfrogger on February 21, 2011, 06:48:33 pm
Post by: Davop on February 21, 2011, 07:01:04 pm
They were using a stall deck where they got 440 max health. It had Miracles, SODs, stone skin, and SOGs.I just got 99 poison damage with a mostly unupped version of this deck. Thanks for the link.What deck was the opponent using to allow you to get 99 poison counters?
I also found that this deck does really well against Half-Bloods if you add 6 SOGs.