Team Chat / Archive

[ddevans96]

https://webchat.freenode.net/

Channel: ##teamwater
Password: madoor26076

/join ##teamwater madoor26076
or on the entry screen, type '##teamwater madoor26076' into the channel box

Any conversations about war in chat should be posted in this thread, for people who weren't there to look over.

[rob77dp]

Status ##teamwaterX
[Welcome to Atlantis! Private forums: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/team-water/]
[21:58] == rob77dp [18fd35b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.253.53.177] has joined ##teamwater
[21:58] == mode/##teamwater [+ns] by herbert.freenode.net
[21:58] == mode/##teamwater [-o rob77dp] by services.
[21:58] == mode/##teamwater [+t-s+k madoor26076] by services.
[21:58] == ChanServ [ChanServ@services.] has joined ##teamwater
[21:58] == mode/##teamwater [+o ChanServ] by services.
[21:58] == ChanServ changed the topic of ##teamwater to: Welcome to Atlantis! Private forums: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/team-water/
[22:19] == Malignant [67fcc983@gateway/web/freenode/ip.103.252.201.131] has joined ##teamwater
[22:19] == ChanServ [ChanServ@services.] has left ##teamwater []
[22:19] <Malignant> Hai
[22:21] <rob77dp> ahoy Mal!
[22:21] <rob77dp>
[22:23] <rob77dp> brb...
[22:28] <rob77dp> back
[22:31] == LEGITT [4ca7a5ae@gateway/web/freenode/ip.76.167.165.174] has joined ##teamwater
[22:31] <LEGITT> ok
[22:31] <LEGITT> testing time
[22:33] <rob77dp> yee-hawwww!
[22:34] <LEGITT> so rob choose one of our decks
[22:34] <LEGITT> and I'll randomly choose an enemy deck, unless you want to specify an element or deck type or specific deck
[22:36] <rob77dp> give me 5 minutes to finish this deck brainstorming post
[22:38] <LEGITT> aight
[22:41] <rob77dp> ok, ready?
[22:42] <LEGITT> yep ign Legit
[22:42] <rob77dp> <-- ign
[22:54] <LEGITT> gg
[22:54] <rob77dp> so Pandebonium >>> Chrysa-dials
[22:54] <rob77dp> gg Legit
[22:54] <LEGITT> can I test a deck now?
[22:54] <rob77dp> ah yeah, sure
[22:55] <LEGITT> I like your deck though, think we shuold run it
[22:55] <rob77dp> I"ll pick something to oppose with (any requests?)
[22:55] <LEGITT> random please
[22:56] <rob77dp> readu
[22:56] <rob77dp> *ready
[22:56] <LEGITT> searching
[22:56] <rob77dp> same
[22:56] <rob77dp> any reason for two T's in the nick here?
[22:57] <LEGITT> mix it up a little
[22:57] <rob77dp>
[22:59] <LEGITT> so I tested the gravity duo earlier, and it was very situational
[22:59] <LEGITT> it counters a few decks but loses hard to others
[22:59] <LEGITT> I'm not sure it's optimal to use
[23:00] <LEGITT> if we have extra cards it could be a good counter though
[23:00] <rob77dp> it gobbles up Grabbows
[23:01] <rob77dp> desync on our Duel?
[23:01] <LEGITT> I think you won, I can't deal with the nymph
[23:01] <rob77dp> Red Nymph strong in this matchup
[23:02] <LEGITT> ill test the dark duo later
[23:02] <LEGITT> your turn to choose a deck
[23:03] <rob77dp> ready here
[23:08] <rob77dp> gg
[23:08] <LEGITT> gg
[23:09] <rob77dp> my hiding Dims
[23:09] <rob77dp> just in time to get blown up!
[23:09] <LEGITT> I had 3 pc cards
[23:10] <LEGITT> (in the deck)
[23:10] <rob77dp> PU-boids is very strong
[23:12] <LEGITT> yeah I think I compiled too many strong decks, unlikely we will face many of them in a single round
[23:14] <rob77dp> perhaps
[23:14] <rob77dp> it is still good to start testing somewhere though
[23:15] <LEGITT> I wonder if its more efficient to test against ai
[23:16] <rob77dp> maybe faster, but AI does some really really silly things with good PvP decks
[23:16] <rob77dp> and handles critical game situations quite poorly
[23:17] <LEGITT> very tre
[23:17] <LEGITT> true
[23:18] <rob77dp> I have one ready to oppose your chosen Water deck
[23:19] <LEGITT> i didnt get in the match
[23:21] <rob77dp> I hadn't hit search yet :-P
[23:26] <rob77dp> gg - I had a pretty good draw
[23:26] <LEGITT> gg
[23:26] <LEGITT> can you test your life duo
[23:27] <rob77dp> oh, sure!
[23:27] * rob77dp summons dd
[23:27] <rob77dp> loaded now

[Legit]

[23:35] <LEGITT> gg
[23:35] <rob77dp> gg
[23:36] <LEGITT> I think this deck has potential
[23:36] <LEGITT> if we can maybe add 2 heals to the vault, or other life cards
[23:37] <LEGITT> and take out the shields when we are facing certain teams, it could work
[23:37] <rob77dp> hmmmm, yeah - Heals can really buy an extra turn per instance played
[23:38] <rob77dp> and the Emerald is situational but good against Air/Aether
[23:38] <rob77dp> brb - 3 minutes
[23:42] <rob77dp> back
[23:42] <rob77dp> another couple matches?
[23:43] <LEGITT> brb as well
[23:43] <rob77dp> ah OK - I am probably signing off in next 15 minutes or so
[23:43] <rob77dp> but on-and-off here until then
[23:46] <LEGITT> doing laundry atm
[23:51] <rob77dp> ditto
[23:51] <rob77dp> same with dd too, I think
[23:51] <rob77dp>
[23:57] <rob77dp> this Fast Grabbow is very quick
[23:58] <rob77dp> 8 TTW just now vs AI3 drawing only 1 Nova
[00:05] <LEGITT>
[00:05] <rob77dp> the lycan/flayer version is my favorite
[00:07] <LEGITT> ok sorry im back now
[00:07] <rob77dp> alas, I have to go now
[00:07] <LEGITT> NOOOO
[00:07] <rob77dp> however, the testing was good/fun
[00:07] <LEGITT> indeed
[00:07] <rob77dp> I plan to be on tomorrow similar times!
[00:07] <LEGITT> ill try to be here every night
[00:08] <LEGITT> good night rob
[00:08] <rob77dp> ditto
[00:09] <rob77dp> bye for now
[00:09] <rob77dp> oh, Legit - can you copy/paste this chat log into the related private War topic?
[00:09] <LEGITT> sure
[00:10] <rob77dp> gracias
[00:10] <rob77dp> hasta
[00:10] == rob77dp [18fd35b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.253.53.177] has quit [Quit: Page closed]

[ddevans96]

Long posts are long:

Spoiler for October 9th:

[21:56] <rob77dp> hiya
[21:56] <rob77dp> kaboom
[21:56] <@ddevans> Where?
[21:58] <@ddevans> Anyways, hey rob
[21:58] <rob77dp> haven't seen Absol in a while... just doing a kaboom for the fun of it
[21:59] <rob77dp> who's ready for a test match?
[22:00] <Malignant> I might as well, before dd kills me
[22:00] <@ddevans> You need to do the decks though
[22:01] <@ddevans> That's what I'm pushing you on
[22:01] <rob77dp> "do the decks"?
[22:01] <Malignant> Since when have I ever been a good deckbuilder
[22:01] <@ddevans> Sorry, bad wording
[22:01] <@ddevans> Select 4-6 decks, like you/the others did
[22:02] <@ddevans> Mal, I'm not asking you to build decks, I'm asking you to look through decks that have been suggested, and pick 4-6 that would make the best core of the vault
[22:02] <rob77dp> ah, so building if you like otherwise simply using reasoning to select preferences?
[22:02] <rob77dp> where "best" = your preferred core of the vault
[22:02] <@ddevans> The decks are all built, or are easily buildable, we just need to pick which ones are actually in the vault
[22:03] <Malignant> Alright
[22:04] <Malignant> Do people run that 24 Water Pillars 6 Nymph's Tears deck in war ?
[22:04] <rob77dp> it _could_ be run, but it is a bit fragile to popular perms like Dims
[22:04] <rob77dp> Wings
[22:04] <rob77dp> and Lobo
[22:05] <@ddevans> Yeah, you can run a mono, it just has to be more fleshed out
[22:05] <@ddevans> Mono w/ deflag/steal splash better
[22:06] <@ddevans> I'm gonna add some decks to my own, and we'll cut the pool down to only decks that one of us has chosen - 15-20, probably
[22:06] <@ddevans> We can cut it down further from there
[22:06] <@ddevans> of my own*
[22:07] <@ddevans> Just need to make sure we have a good amount of PC, basically
[22:07] <@ddevans> And other perm evasion/bypass
[22:08] <Malignant> Jesus, so many Dimensional Shields and Grabbows
[22:10] <@ddevans> They be good
[22:13] <rob77dp> workin' up a modified version of Spiel's Entropy Duo with nymphs
[22:13] <@ddevans> rob: Nymphs how?
[22:13] <@ddevans> NT entropy?
[22:13] <rob77dp> via Tears
[22:15] <@ddevans> Ah, so purple nymphs? Awesome
[22:17] <rob77dp> ayup
[22:17] <@ddevans> Used a deck like that during Trials :3
[22:18] == Leg [4ca7a5ae@gateway/web/freenode/ip.76.167.165.174] has joined ##teamwater
[22:19] <Leg> hi
[22:19] <rob77dp> left or right?
[22:19] <Leg> so I posted on the deck layout thread, is what im doing correct?
[22:19] <Leg> @rob uhhh
[22:20] <Leg> left?
[22:20] <rob77dp> good evening Left Leg :0
[22:20] <rob77dp> *
[22:20] <Leg> good evening to you as well rob
[22:24] <rob77dp> alright, I'm ready to PvP-test this thing
[22:24] <@ddevans> Yep, good so far
[22:25] <rob77dp> who's up for opposing?
[22:25] <@ddevans> ./me pokes Malignant
[22:25] <@ddevans> Is doing the thing?
[22:25] <Malignant> Hmm?
[22:26] <Malignant> Thinking
[22:26] <@ddevans> Didn't mean to put that dot, ah well
[22:26] <@ddevans> Alright, great
[22:26] * rob77dp calls out Legit... let's test this :-)
[22:26] <rob77dp> *out = on
[22:27] <Leg> can anyone edit my posts?
[22:28] <rob77dp> usually General has edit rights on private section
[22:28] <@ddevans> I can, yeah
[22:28] <rob77dp> actually, it would let ME edit your posts, Legit
[22:28] <@ddevans> No one else
[22:28] <@ddevans> rob: Wait, you can?
[22:28] <rob77dp> just tested - I could
[22:29] <rob77dp> is it OK if I do a quick test and actually click "save" to see if it would really allow it?
[22:29] <@ddevans> hm. Legit, Mal, go to someone else's post in our section and see if you can modify it
[22:29] <Leg> ok thats good, edit the WIP deck layout when you make changes
[22:29] <Malignant> I can edit everyone's post
[22:29] <rob77dp> --^
[22:29] <@ddevans> rob: Yeah, just add a note at the bottom of some text post
[22:29] <rob77dp> in Team Water private section
[22:30] <rob77dp> http://elementscommunity.org/forum/team-water/deck-layout/msg1159328/#msg1159328
[22:30] <@ddevans> Alright, give me a second
[22:31] <Leg> rob I'm ready to test
[22:32] <rob77dp> searching
[22:36] <@ddevans> k, made an announcement, but I'll duplicated it here
[22:37] <@ddevans> DON'T edit posts, except Legit's WIP deck layout
[22:37] <@ddevans> And say your name, time, date, and changes made at the bottom of it
[22:38] <Leg> sounds good
[22:38] <rob77dp> gg Leg
[22:39] <Leg> gg
[22:40] <rob77dp> I think that version may be better than Spiel's posted deck
[22:41] <@ddevans> Code?
[22:41] <rob77dp> 4vl 4vl 4vl 4vl 4vo 50u 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5i4 5ie 5ie 5ie 5ig 5ig 5ig 5io 5io 5jm 6ts 6ts 6ve 7gk 7gk 7i6 8pj
[22:41] <Leg> also how many water nymphs do you guys have
[22:41] <@ddevans> Actually, hold on, let me try something
[22:41] <rob77dp> it represents what Legit has in his Dom B slot right now
[22:42] <rob77dp> <-- 3 Nymph Queens
[22:42] <Malignant> 3 Nymph Queens
[22:42] <rob77dp> 0 Water Nymphs
[22:42] <@ddevans> I have 7
[22:42] <Leg> I also have 3 lol
[22:42] <Leg> ddevans the oracle has rewarded your loyalty
[22:42] <@ddevans> We're 100% putting a small handful of them in the vault
[22:42] <rob77dp> 3 is a good qty for Queens
[22:43] <rob77dp> tree has some too, I think
[22:43] <@ddevans> Indeed he has. Felt nice to finally have one upped
[22:43] <Leg> so it should be no problem to run decks with 2-3 nymph queens
[22:43] == ddevans changed the topic of ##teamwater to: Welcome to Atlantis! Private forums: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/team-water/ Deck generator: http://dek.im/
[22:43] <rob77dp> dd - your deck layout "numbers" are a running total, yeah?
[22:43] <@ddevans> There, that way you can easily post images here
[22:43] <@ddevans> rob: Yes
[22:43] <rob77dp> http://dek.im/d/z34vl4vo50uz85i4z25iez25igz15io5jmz16ts6vez17gk7i68pj
[22:44] <rob77dp> possible to get "section total" / "running total"?
[22:44] <@ddevans>  hm. Second BE?
[22:44] <@ddevans> Yeah - I'll make that change in the OP, one of you do it in Legit's post
[22:44] <Leg> BE can only work on purple nymphs tho
[22:44] <rob77dp> purple a QUeen
[22:44] <rob77dp> bam - Butterfly it
[22:45] <rob77dp> *AM a Nymph Queen, now it can butterfly
[22:45] <rob77dp> next run can be AM'd back
[22:45] <Leg> thats smart. although you still need a purple nymph out in the first place
[22:45] <@ddevans> Admittedly I just toss steammies in there for BE. Drives a lot of vets insane, but it gets the job done
[22:46] <rob77dp> hmmmm, how many Purples do we all have?
[22:46] <@ddevans> Chrys works too, they're just really CCable
[22:46] <@ddevans> I have 8 purples
[22:46] <@ddevans> Legit, don't you have 13?
[22:47] <rob77dp> might be better to just play Queens and Purples -- queens to swarm and a purple or 3 to play instead of using QUeen ability to make 'em
[22:47] <Leg> I have more than enough purples
[22:47] <Malignant> I only have 1 Purple
[22:47] <rob77dp> <-- 3 Purple
[22:48] <@ddevans> hm, we can put one or two in there
[22:48] <@ddevans> I would still like the deck to have entropy quantaperms though
[22:48] <@ddevans> Gets discord out faster
[22:48] <rob77dp> hmmm, OK
[22:49] <rob77dp> I wonder if x3 Disco would suffice?
[22:49] <Malignant> k, lunch time
[22:49] <Malignant> Posted 2 of my choices
[22:49] <@ddevans> It may, but I really like 4, for draw consistency
[22:49] <Malignant> Will continue later
[22:49] <@ddevans> Mal: Thanks :3
[22:50] <@ddevans> Something I should note - we want the sanc stall in there, and then if we choose to use a sanc rush, just pull some cards out
[22:51] <@ddevans> I wouldn't like having just the rush, 5-10 extra cards for versatility is worth it
[22:51] <Malignant> That's why I put them in the same spoiler~
[22:52] <@ddevans> Exactly
[22:53] <rob77dp> OK, I have a few tweaks done - anyone for another spin against this?
[22:53] <@ddevans> btw, Sundials have the alternate use of being upped and put in the light stall
[22:53] <@ddevans> I just need to put that out there
[22:54] <Leg> we're only taking 4 atm, do you think we need 6?
[22:54] <@ddevans> I would, yeah
[22:54] <@ddevans> Well...hm
[22:54] <@ddevans> Maybe
[22:55] <@ddevans> Once we get all the decks in the layout, we can add in all the support cards, and see where it stands
[22:55] <@ddevans> I'd like to have 6 thought, yeah
[22:55] <@ddevans> though*
[22:55] <Leg> noted
[22:56] <@ddevans> (the 6 lighting and 6 RT will also go in support)
[22:57] <Leg> yay
[22:57] <@ddevans> Those are basically essential
[22:58] <@ddevans> Especially considering the lightnings can be swapped into the aether duo, and both can be dropped in any bow
[22:58] <@ddevans> In addition to just being mark splashes
[23:00] <rob77dp> also, note that BE can be used as soft-CC against an opponent that has no Entropy quanta
[23:00] <@ddevans> This is true
[23:00] <rob77dp> like Forest Spirit
[23:01] <rob77dp> or Lycan
[23:01] <rob77dp> (Lycan is entropy, but 3 to use the ability is very steep to a Grabbow running Lycans)
[23:01] <rob77dp> or squid
[23:01] <rob77dp> oh wait
[23:02] <@ddevans> Heh, we might see squid against us, you never know
[23:02] <Leg> can I test this experimental deck against someone
[23:02] <rob77dp> adrena'd staff...
[23:02] <@ddevans> It is our best card after all
[23:02] <@ddevans> (well...one of three)
[23:02] <rob77dp> the entropy, Legit?
[23:02] <@ddevans> Legit: Sure, anything in particular you want me to use
[23:02] <rob77dp> Wardens... Otyughs
[23:02] <Leg> random
[23:03] <Leg> or your choice
[23:03] <@ddevans> k, gonna randomize from your post
[23:03] <rob77dp> my latest version: http://dek.im/d/4vcz34vl4vo50uz85i4z15iez25igz15io5jmz16ts6vez17gk7i68pj
[23:04] <@ddevans> rob: Sweet, want to post that somewhere?
[23:04] <@ddevans> It seems a bit low on damage, not sure though
[23:05] <Leg> you can edit my post to change the entropy duo in there
[23:05] <rob77dp> damage is all dependent on Queen-ing up
[23:05] <rob77dp> and dropping a few toads
[23:05] <rob77dp> in-game decision is to spam Queens first or get a Purple ASAP
[23:05] <@ddevans> k, Legit, ready
[23:05] <@ddevans> ign = ddevans96
[23:06] <rob77dp> a General-version may gain lots of strength though
[23:06] <@ddevans> Yeah, definitely
[23:07] <rob77dp> General maybe this: http://dek.im/d/4vc4vo50uz85i4z25igz15io5jmz16tsz36u56vez17gkz17gm7i68pj
[23:08] <@ddevans> Yeah, something around that
[23:10] <@ddevans> Legit?
[23:10] <rob77dp> just used BE on an AI3's Oty and double-Purple'd to avoid twin Oty's early
[23:10] <Leg> sorry
[23:10] <Leg> ready
[23:14] <rob77dp> another note:  if you expect to need to use the AM-self + BE + Destroy trick on your own creature, save up the Entropy a turn or two in advance
[23:14] <rob77dp> it takes 4 (AM) + 5 (BE) + 3 (Destroy ability) = 12
[23:15] <Leg> ok actually this deck idea is too silly lol
[23:15] <rob77dp>
[23:15] <Leg> it can only win against fractix with no RoF
[23:15] <@ddevans> Heh, yeah, I don't think it'd stand up in war
[23:15] <@ddevans> Thought about it in Trials though
[23:15] <rob77dp> it would beat a PU-gons I think?
[23:16] <rob77dp> I guess after game 1 opponent would hold back for a OTK or TTK though?
[23:16] <Leg> it works best with life/light because of the spammable creatures
[23:16] <@ddevans> PUgons are deceptively fast
[23:17] <rob77dp> PU-gons was Death's 2nd best deck last two Wars
[23:19] <@ddevans> Behind what?
[23:19] <rob77dp> *sigh* Grabbow :-/
[23:20] <@ddevans> Ah, of course
[23:21] <Leg> btw this is the most op war deck ever: 4vj 4vj 4vj 4vj 4vj 4vj 4vl 4vl 4vl 50u 50u 50u 50u 50u 50u 590 590 590 590 590 590 593 593 5ia 61q 6u1 6u1 6u1 7dm 7dm 8pm
[23:22] <rob77dp> Leg - I would go -1 Graboid +1 EQ in that to go full-OP :-D
[23:22] <Leg> this was my inspiration for the fastbow
[23:23] <rob77dp> what will our Disco-deck be for Vault?
[23:24] <rob77dp> i.e. - what Entropy duo?
[23:25] * rob77dp 's working on one now
[23:27] <@ddevans> Should have entropy quantaperms
[23:27] <rob77dp> ... pillar/pend?
[23:27] <@ddevans> Yeah
[23:27] <@ddevans> ...how do I scan pictures on this computer
[23:28] <@ddevans> Ah well, whatever
[23:28] <@ddevans> Anyways, yeah, should have those for NT>Purples
[23:29] <rob77dp> balancing such a deck is proving VERY difficult
[23:29] <rob77dp> as the mark basically has to be Entropy so it can be >=50% water cards
[23:29] <rob77dp> but... maybe not
[23:31] <@ddevans> hm. Look at my match against Sci in trials
[23:31] <@ddevans> Used a 50% water, water mark version there
[23:32] <rob77dp> wait, it's already built?  why am I struggling with re-building it?!?  :-o
[23:32] <@ddevans> ...sorry, I should have mentioned that sooner X)
[23:35] <@ddevans> http://dek.im/d/z14vc4vlz14voz250uz15i4z25idz25igz15iiz15jmz16tsz26u5z16vez27gm8pp
[23:35] * rob77dp dug up your match summary post
[23:36] <rob77dp> already set for a 6-up version AI3 test
[23:47] <rob77dp> marco?
[23:49] <@ddevans> polo!
[23:49] == rob77dp [18fd35b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.253.53.177] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[23:49] <@ddevans> Sorry, was just scanning the newsletter puzzle and submitting it
[23:49] == rob77dp [18fd35b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.253.53.177] has joined ##teamwater
[23:49] * rob77dp is back
[23:50] <@ddevans> [23:49] <@ddevans> polo! [23:49] == rob77dp [18fd35b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.253.53.177] has quit [Quit: Page closed] [23:49] <@ddevans> Sorry, was just scanning the newsletter puzzle and submitting it
[23:50] <rob77dp>
[23:50] <rob77dp> this entropy duo is a tough cookie to get to flow smoothly :-/
[23:50] <@ddevans> Solved the puzzle itself the first night
[23:50] <@ddevans> Didn't actually get the clue until now
[23:50] <@ddevans> hm
[23:51] <@ddevans> What do you have right now?
[23:55] <rob77dp> so far, this: http://dek.im/d/z14vcz34vlz14voz250uz25i4z25idz25igz15iiz15jmz16tsz16vez17gm8pp
[23:55] <@ddevans> What's making it less smooth?
[23:57] <rob77dp> I think it may have been my play method
[23:57] <@ddevans> hm. Elaborate on that?
[23:57] <rob77dp> the NT's need not be done on water quanta as the damage comes from dragons and crawlers
[23:57] <rob77dp> but if a short-on-damage draw occurs, then one needs to weigh opposing deck and game conditions (HP's, etc)
[23:58] <rob77dp> at least, that is my current working theory
[23:59] <@ddevans> Yeah, agreed
[23:59] <rob77dp> however, Dims and strong perms are still causing lots of trouble
[00:00] <rob77dp> Dims, OE, Dusk
[00:00] <@ddevans> hm, the damage is actually really low on that
[00:01] <@ddevans> Do you find yourself lacking in water quanta?
[00:01] <rob77dp> not if I avoid Queen-spamming
[00:01] <Malignant> What do we have against Adrena-Titans?
[00:02] <Malignant> Or Adrenaline + Momentum anything
[00:02] <rob77dp> RT?
[00:02] <@ddevans> Alright, so the issue is not getting BE soon enough
[00:02] <@ddevans> Yeah, we put RT in the vault for decks like that
[00:02] <rob77dp> against Dims/Wings/OE - the Destroy combo is 'slow' or low odds I suppose
[00:02] <Malignant> Oh k
[00:09] <@ddevans> hm
[00:10] <@ddevans> Maybe that deck needs CC
[00:10] <@ddevans> Don't know how you'd put it in though
[00:13] <rob77dp> I'm sub-.500 winning ratio so far vs AI3 :-/
[00:14] <rob77dp> I'll hand it back in this state:  http://dek.im/d/z14vcz34vlz14voz250uz25i4z25idz25igz15iiz15jmz16tsz16vez17gm8pp
[00:16] <Malignant> kay, post edited, +2 more decks
[00:24] <@ddevans> Yeah, it doesn't have enough damage then
[00:25] <rob77dp> where is the build for Nymphcord?
[00:25] <@ddevans> No reason that deck should lose to ai3
[00:25] <@ddevans> Unless it's not getting damage quickly enough
[00:26] <@ddevans> Nymphcord? Community-recommend > War Decks Archive > War 3
[00:32] <rob77dp> http://dek.im/d/z14vez34vlz255kz2576z75i4z45iez25igz15jm8pj
[00:33] <rob77dp> what about the entropy duo as a stall?  http://dek.im/d/z14vcz24vgz44vpz150uz15i4z45i8z25iaz15ioz95jmz36u7z17h38pj
[00:33] <@ddevans> Yeah, that
[00:33] <@ddevans> If I was going to stall, I'd put in squids
[00:34] <@ddevans> I don't really like water/entropy stalls, though
[00:34] <@ddevans> Even though they make flooding useful
[00:35] <rob77dp> squids get steamrolled by Pande
[00:35] <rob77dp> (is why I don't have them in that build)
[00:49] == Leg [4ca7a5ae@gateway/web/freenode/ip.76.167.165.174] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[00:50] <@ddevans> So, 100% in our vault right now: Sanc stall (can be cut to rush), grabbow (can be modded to speed or control), PUgons (can be modded with lightning/silence)
[00:52] <rob77dp> alright, if we go Nymphcord I like this one (performing well vs AI3 at least...): http://dek.im/d/z14vfz34vlz255kz2576z45i4z45iez15jmz27gkz27h08pj
[00:59] <@ddevans> hm, alright
[00:59] <@ddevans> I can dig that
[00:59] <@ddevans> Dragons coming out okay?
[01:00] <rob77dp> yep
[01:01] <rob77dp> I observed the Aboms didn't pack enough punch
[01:01] <rob77dp> also, Wings

Spoiler for October 10th:

[23:34] <@ddevans> Basically, we need to decide the other 6 decks
[23:35] <rob77dp> I'm closing in on making a major edit (logged and labeled / trackable) to Legit's WIP deck layout post
[23:35] <@ddevans> Alright
[23:35] <@ddevans> What have you and Legit talked about today?
[23:35] <@ddevans> Fill me in while I get something to eat, actually
[23:35] <@ddevans> Can't work on a growling stomach X)
[23:37] <rob77dp> [21:51] == Legit [4ca7a5ae@gateway/web/freenode/ip.76.167.165.174] has joined ##teamwater [21:51] == ChanServ [ChanServ@services.] has left ##teamwater [] [21:52] <rob77dp> oh!  a Legit! [21:52] <rob77dp> good evening [21:52] <Legit> hey rob! [21:53] <rob77dp> what are your thoughts to replacing the Entropy Discord duo listed in your Deck Layout with a BB/Trident duo? [21:54] <rob77dp> specifically, this one: http://elementscommu
[23:37] <rob77dp>  http://elementscommunity.org/forum/team-water/deck-brainstorming/msg1159470/#msg1159470 [21:54] <Legit> hmm, if it performs better than I'm all for it, but I do think we need discord in the vault [21:55] <rob77dp> def. Discord has a place in the support section [21:55] <rob77dp> if not in a deck [21:55] <Legit> for sure [21:56] <rob77dp> also, that Disco duo can be built very easily if Disco is in the support [21:56] <Legit> so
[23:37] <rob77dp> what other decks to add? [21:57] <rob77dp> well, at the moment I was going through your Deck Layout post and preparing some edits (well documented, labeled, and trackable changes) to it... [21:59] <Legit> good work [22:32] <rob77dp> this takes longer than I thought [22:32] <rob77dp> I'm zero-ing in on a suggested "full deck layout" post now [22:33] == ddevans [47e58d0d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.71.229.141.13] has joined ##teamwater
[23:37] <rob77dp> like that?
[23:37] <rob77dp> oh wow, that is ugly all-on-the-same-lines :-/
[23:40] <@ddevans> All readable for me, so no worries
[23:40] <@ddevans> I would also like to have both Discord and Trident/BB in the vault
[23:43] <rob77dp> http://elementscommunity.org/forum/team-water/deck-layout/msg1159327/#msg1159327
[23:43] <rob77dp> take a gander at that then General, sir
[23:45] * rob77dp crosses fingers that it is not wrong or way off...
[23:46] <@ddevans> Looks pretty good. My only concern is a lack of spare quanta
[23:46] <rob77dp> hmmmmm
[23:46] <rob77dp> unlimited conversion is available?
[23:46] <rob77dp> perhaps that does not excuse having no quanta spare
[23:47] <rob77dp> (what is the loss-discard for Rounds 1, 2?)
[23:47] <@ddevans> It helps, but we should still have some (10-20 cards worth) as a backup
[23:47] <@ddevans> We have about half that, actually
[23:47] <@ddevans> In QP/entropy/gravity
[23:48] <@ddevans> I'd definitely like the gravity pends, since we're already so close to a functioning nymphcord
[23:49] <@ddevans> And some arsenics for the bows/death splash would also be welcome
[23:49] <rob77dp> those are there
[23:50] <@ddevans> hm, where?
[23:50] <@ddevans> Silences as well - helps against dims/miracles
[23:52] <rob77dp> OK, modified
[23:54] <@ddevans> Alright - the last thing I really miss is a second fractal
[23:54] <rob77dp> forgot silences/fractals... modified again
[23:54] <rob77dp> ninja'd! :-)
[23:55] <rob77dp> does this webchat have a PM function?
[23:55] <@ddevans> We still have some refining to do - for example, I'm looking at the backup air cards, thinking whether I'd rather have that, or make the other decks more stable
[23:55] <@ddevans> Yes - /query
[23:55] <@ddevans> You can click my name on the side and that option will show up
[23:56] <@ddevans> But yeah, this is a really good place to start working with, thank you rob
[00:00] <rob77dp> do you feel like any specific deck is being unfairly or unjustly left out at this point?
[00:01] <@ddevans> I think every deck that's really going to work well is at least partially in there
[00:01] <@ddevans> From the decks suggested, we're missing...
[00:01] <@ddevans> Basically, just a siphon life duo and adrenapuffers
[00:01] <@ddevans> And to me, neither of those are huge losses
[00:02] <@ddevans> We can even send Chrysadials round 1 if we choose to (I think - haven't quite check that out 100%)
[00:02] <rob77dp> Legit - what say you?
[00:03] <Legit> sorry i was playing dragon age lol
[00:03] <rob77dp> just checked - Round 1 loss discard is NINE CARDS!!! :-o
[00:04] <rob77dp> so to have a deck be able to fully survive a R1 loss, it would require backups of nine cards from the deck...?
[00:05] <Legit> oh nice, you fit in all the cards we wanted
[00:06] <@ddevans> Have you made sure that all those decks fit under 24 copies in water, 9 off-element?
[00:08] <rob77dp> I attempted to follow that while editing
[00:08] <rob77dp> it is certainly possible I made a mistake
[00:08] <rob77dp> (key is, I _was_ eye-ing those limits as I edited)
[00:09] <rob77dp> cue Mal entry?
[00:10] <@ddevans> SUMMON MAL!!
[00:10] == Malignant [67fcc9a1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.103.252.201.161] has joined ##teamwater
[00:11] <rob77dp> with our powers combined... WE ARE CAPTAAAAAAIN PLANET!
[00:12] <rob77dp> Mal, check out the updated Deck Layout from Legit with team mods... http://elementscommunity.org/forum/team-water/deck-layout/msg1159327/#msg1159327
[00:12] <rob77dp>
[00:13] <Malignant> Yeah, looking through it
[00:15] <rob77dp> another note:  that 'vault' would provide NINE independent decks
[00:15] <rob77dp> simultaneously field-able, I think
[00:16] <@ddevans> Indeed
[00:16] <@ddevans> And then we can swap out support cards to make other ones
[00:16] <rob77dp> with a maximum of 6 matches any given round
[00:16] <@ddevans> Like I said, my goal was 15 viable choices for round 1
[00:16] <rob77dp> hmmmm, we might be near that 15 goal
[00:17] <@ddevans> Well, we have those 9 - mono - nymphcord - gravity duo - lightning splash - RT splash
[00:17] <@ddevans> Is there another?
[00:18] <@ddevans> Oh yeah, Chrysadials
[00:18] <Malignant> There's that Sanctuary rush thing too
[00:18] <rob77dp> ding!
[00:18] <@ddevans> So, at LEAST 15
[00:18] <rob77dp> ah yes
[00:18] <@ddevans> Yeah, 16 if you make that distinction - air duo, done right, could be 17
[00:18] <@ddevans> Point is, we have OPTIONS
[00:18] <@ddevans> And that's important
[00:19] <@ddevans> hm. 'Point is, [stuff]'
[00:19] <@ddevans> Channeling my inner SG there
[00:23] <Malignant> Are we not including Dry Spells?
[00:23] <@ddevans> How many are in there right now?
[00:23] <Malignant> 0, if I'm not blind
[00:23] <@ddevans> We should definitely have a few
[00:24] <@ddevans> As I said, some details to work out
[00:24] <@ddevans> We are Frankenstein - and the bones are there, we need to make the flesh
[00:25] <@ddevans> (that analogy is for you, rob )
[00:25] <Malignant> Seems like our only AoE is Thunderstorm
[00:25] <@ddevans> Well, UG, but...
[00:26] <@ddevans> Yeah, we'll have to work some in there
[00:27] <rob77dp> hmmmm, minus-what to plus-Dry Spell?
[00:28] <@ddevans> Not sure yet
[00:28] <Legit> we have 10 nymph queens
[00:28] <rob77dp> -1 RT -1 Lightning +2 Dry Spell, perhaps?
[00:28] <Legit> maybe take out 2 and add 2 dry spell
[00:31] <@ddevans> Alright, that's a start - 10 is indeed a lot
[00:31] <@ddevans> hm...dunno if we want to cut down the splashes - but with squids, we could manage it
[00:32] <rob77dp> x5 is the typical "splash", right?
[00:32] <rob77dp> *is a
[00:34] <Legit> we also one 1 for rainbow
[00:34] <Legit> and you are correct rob
[00:35] <rob77dp> ah, so it seems -2 Queens +2 Dry Spell is acceptable?
[00:36] <@ddevans> Yep
[00:37] <@ddevans> Queens are just so damn useful though, especially since we're probably packing 24 NT
[00:37] <rob77dp> hmmmm, NT count?
[00:38] <rob77dp> I find just FOUR?
[00:39] <rob77dp> dd/Legit/Mal - one of you make the Queen/Dry Spell edit?
[00:39] <rob77dp> :-D
[00:39] <@ddevans> Wait, what? 4 NTs?
[00:40] <@ddevans> That seems really low
[00:41] <@ddevans> ...huh, that's the case
[00:41] <@ddevans> Odd...
[00:41] <@ddevans> We'll have to add more of those two, then, because it's our best offensive card
[00:41] <@ddevans> too*
[00:41] <@ddevans> Alongside Crawlers
[00:42] <rob77dp> Toad
[00:42] <rob77dp> but yes, NT is very good
[00:42] <@ddevans> Well, Toad's there too
[00:43] <rob77dp> flexibility (ability to field MANY multiple deck options) is inversely proportional to "stout-ness" of the vault (quantity of specific cards)
[00:44] <@ddevans> True
[00:45] <rob77dp> just making a note/observation
[00:53] <Legit> im gonna count up all the cards right now
[00:53] <Legit> in the layout
[00:53] <rob77dp> make a "list style" vault in the brainstorm topic?
[00:54] <rob77dp> or edit one in at the bottom of your deck layout post in a spoiler?
[00:59] <@ddevans> hm. Put it in a new post in the deck layout thread
[01:03] <rob77dp> Oracle TIme
[01:03] <rob77dp> spin those Nymphs people!
[01:03] <Legit> done
[01:04] <rob77dp> Nymph Queen!!!
[01:04] <rob77dp> :-D
[01:04] <@ddevans> Really?
[01:05] <rob77dp> indeed-y
[01:06] <@ddevans> I got precog
[01:06] <rob77dp> http://i.imgur.com/Xmtvp6G.png
[01:08] <@ddevans> Woo
[01:09] <rob77dp> my first Nymph with 4 or more qty
[01:16] <rob77dp> one last note:  our vault is currently 229 count Water cards
[01:16] <rob77dp> which is good and meets the 50% requirement

[ddevans96]

Spoiler for October 22nd:

[22:54] <ddevans> So, you want grids?
[22:55] <rob77dp> well, I was contemplating them
[22:55] <rob77dp> then decided we probably want to decide discard/salvage first
[22:55] <rob77dp> from which I ran some numbers...
[22:55] <rob77dp> Round 1 we used 59 water pend/pill and 6 air pend/pill
[22:56] <rob77dp> our starting vault was 119 water pend/pill and 6 air pend/pill
[22:56] <ddevans> I was actually just telling Mal
[22:56] <ddevans> We want to decide decks first, then salvage and discard
[22:56] <rob77dp> basically, we could discard only water quanta, do no conversion, and still field 6 full decks...?
[22:56] <ddevans> [22:53:05] ddevans96 [»] Malignant: Anyways, we want to decide decks first, so we don't discard cards we intend to use [22:53:13] ddevans96 [»] Malignant: And then we have to go back and undo that and it's kinda messy [22:53:45] Malignant [»] ddevans96: Right
[22:56] <rob77dp> either order, you end up doing both more than once to balance properly, usually
[22:56] <ddevans> Yeah, but that could be bad for us later
[22:57] <rob77dp> what could?
[22:57] <ddevans> If we discard only quanta - then what do we discard later?
[22:57] <rob77dp> we have unlimited conversion in any round
[22:57] <rob77dp> so I think it is safe to keep decks now and run slim on quanta and leave deck-discarded/scrapping for later when we HAVE to convert / convert-a-lot?
[22:58] <rob77dp> *slimmer
[22:58] <ddevans> hm, I guess
[22:58] <rob77dp> oh, and hi Mal
[22:58] <rob77dp> if we drop only quanta we are at 74 in-vault water quanta (plus the 6 air quanta)
[22:59] <rob77dp> which is 15 more than it took to field all our Round 1 decks...
[23:00] <ddevans> Is that how you did it last war?
[23:00] <rob77dp> well, bluntly, no
[23:01] <rob77dp> but politically, "kind of"
[23:01] <rob77dp> last War was limited conversion so we attempted to "ramp-up" or "scale" the non-quanta (i.e. - deck) discarding
[23:03] <ddevans> hm, that makes sense
[23:03] <ddevans> I still don't think we should discard -entirely- quanta
[23:03] <ddevans> For example, if we lost with a deck we had backup cards for
[23:04] <ddevans> But mostly quanta seems okay, given limited conversion
[23:04] <rob77dp> but with _unlimited_ conversion I anticipate waiting to drop non-quanta until you HAVE to drop it as advantageous...
[23:04] <rob77dp> *unlimited? 
[23:04] <ddevans> shh, I said nothing
[23:05] <ddevans> hm. Perhaps
[23:05] <ddevans> Mostly-quanta or all-quanta, for sure
[23:06] <rob77dp> hmmm, also we want to remember that transmuting is TWO-to-one
[23:06] <rob77dp> conversion is one-to-one, right?
[23:06] <ddevans> Yes
[23:07] <ddevans> Is the Deck Compilation updated to the end of round 1?
[23:07] <rob77dp> only in-element on BOTH?
[23:07] <rob77dp> yep, opponents' decks used is complete through ROund 1
[23:07] <ddevans> Awesome
[23:07] <rob77dp> for future reference, I estimate it is about 1 hour per every 9-to-10 matches in a round (to do the decks used updating)
[23:07] <ddevans> I'd be okay with doing grids
[23:07] <ddevans> but a lot of work
[23:08] <rob77dp> yeah, I started one for my match
[23:08] <ddevans> Yeah, that's about what I expected
[23:08] <rob77dp> then quickly realized it was not a speedy method
[23:09] <ddevans> Ideally, we take the six decks they used, add two or three more they may have saved, and then cross those with all our decks
[23:09] <rob77dp> bingo
[23:09] <ddevans> And that's just...100 squares of nope, basically
[23:09] <ddevans> Oh, do you know who I had lunch with yesterday?
[23:09] <rob77dp> approx. 9x9 table
[23:09] <rob77dp> hmmmm, what city/where?
[23:09] <ddevans> One General of Gravity :3
[23:10] <ddevans> Visiting family in Denver, so he drove to my suburb and we had lunch
[23:10] <rob77dp> oh sweet!!!!!!
[23:10] <rob77dp> I was just PM'ing him in EtG chat at the moment
[23:10] <ddevans> Ah, really?
[23:11] <rob77dp> yep - simple inquiry about his War experience so far, being in the same boat as I on a diff element and not General (since last War)
[23:11] <rob77dp> there's a few players I like to keep up with if I see 'em in chat
[23:11] <rob77dp> so, does me bearing down on my Fire matchup grid seem a good idea now?
[23:11] <rob77dp> *for right now
[23:12] <ddevans> Yep, if that'll help you/us, go for it :3
[23:12] <ddevans> So, tree and I made some deck proposals
[23:12] <rob77dp> I did see... that spurred my thought towards the tables
[23:12] <ddevans> Could you two (pokes Malignant) comment on/add to thosde?
[23:13] <rob77dp> that's my plan from the grids... but I"ll do my Fire grid and then give "from the cuff" thoughts on the rest at the same time that I reply
[23:13] <ddevans> Alright
[23:19] <Malignant> k, in a few mins
[23:20] <ddevans> So, idea
[23:20] <ddevans> What if we bring a darkness STALL against aether?
[23:20] <rob77dp> 0.0
[23:21] * rob77dp 's eyebrows raise in curiosity
[23:21] <ddevans> I mean, we have really good salvage
[23:21] <ddevans> Some drain lives, we can run 5-6 steals, squids and desi to shut down psions
[23:22] <ddevans> I don't know, just an idea
[23:25] <ddevans> I need to plug in decks to the OP, one second
[23:38] <rob77dp> heya dd, might should mention in your recent post we can get TWELVE of those darkness cards you list
[23:39] <ddevans> hm?
[23:39] <ddevans> Oh, right
[23:40] <rob77dp> oops, *(2) groups of cards from each we could grab 6
[23:48] <rob77dp> deck name:  Black Ice?
[23:50] <ddevans> hm, sure
[23:54] <Malignant> "Your session timed out while posting. Please try to re-submit your message." wat
[23:56] <ddevans> lolwut
[00:19] <Malignant> Seems like I'm too tired to even be able to think
[00:25] * rob77dp deep into table research
[00:34] <rob77dp> gotta go for now
[00:35] <rob77dp> until later teamies!!
[00:41] == rob77dp [18fd35b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.253.53.177] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[01:26] * ddevans pokes Malignant
[01:29] <Malignant> ?
[01:34] <Malignant> ddevans ddevans ddevans
[01:36] <ddevans> Alright
[01:36] <ddevans> Do you have anything to post?
[01:37] <Malignant> Not really
[01:38] <ddevans> Nothing? D:
[01:38] <Malignant> Nope
[01:39] <ddevans> Alright, let me help
[01:39] <ddevans> tree and I have both discussed possible decks to use on that thread, look at those, say if you like one idea better than the other
[01:39] <ddevans> Also, I posted a VERY rough build for a darkness stall, post your thoughts on refining that
[01:40] <ddevans> Also, Legit just posted - wrap his comments in with mine and trees
[01:40] <ddevans> Think you can do these?
[01:40] <Malignant> Trying~
[01:41] <ddevans> Thank you <3
[01:47] <Malignant> If Aether expects a Darkness stall, what would they bring to counter that?
[01:48] <ddevans> hm, not sure
[02:00] <Malignant> The Aether/Sanc seems pretty much a counter
[02:06] <ddevans> To our darkness stall?
[02:07] <Malignant> Yeah
[02:09] <ddevans> Yeah, reflectives could be troublesome
[02:10] <Malignant> The deck doesn't have reflectives
[02:11] <ddevans> hm, what makes it troublesome then?
[02:14] <Malignant> Sanctuary, basically no creatures
[02:15] <Malignant> Do you want to chat in EtG chat
[02:15] <Malignant> With the chrome notification thingies
[02:17] <ddevans> I disabled those tbh
[02:18] <ddevans> But yeah, if that's easier for you, definitely
[02:19] <ddevans> Or we can invite Spiel in here
[02:20] <Malignant> Well if it's only the 2 of us, then chrome. If Spiel comes, then here
[02:20] <Malignant> EtG*
[02:24] <ddevans> k, I invited him
[02:25] == Spielkind [d9ff8efb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.255.142.251] has joined ##teamwater
[02:25] <Spielkind> heyhoo ^^
[02:25] <Malignant> Woo
[02:26] <Spielkind> im writing my thoughts in forum atm
[02:26] <Malignant> But yeah, about the Darkness Stall vs Aether: That deck has too many Sanctuarys -> Nightmare useless, if we steal those, then Dims/Sundials -> no damage to them
[02:28] <ddevans> hm, fair enough
[02:28] <ddevans> It would be a hard matchup, definitely
[02:32] <Spielkind> aether is a mess in each rounds... so i think we need that darkness stall
[02:33] <Spielkind> guess not they sundial us...
[02:35] <Spielkind> i mean, look at their opponents.
[02:35] <Spielkind> they has air, fire and darkness to prevent... earth they wont stall, but the others...
[02:36] <Spielkind> their stall too good to field it here...
[02:37] <Spielkind> what you are right is that nightmare... second round or never
[02:37] <Spielkind> if sundial comes to us
[02:38] <Malignant> Lobo's a pain too
[02:38] <Spielkind> steal
[02:38] <Spielkind> we need not to steal all sancs etc
[02:38] <Spielkind> what we need are those dims in last rounds
[02:39] <Spielkind> playing early steals is dumb.
[02:39] <Spielkind> there will be more lobos, i guess
[02:40] <Spielkind> so 5-6 steals auto include
[02:40] <Spielkind> we just need 2 dims to steal
[02:40] <Spielkind> cause we need in late game that damag prevention from the dragons
[02:41] <Spielkind> but in every case, the need to draw that cards...
[02:41] * ddevans is reading, just not responding yet
[02:42] <ddevans> I think you're right, they won't use a stall like that against us
[02:42] <ddevans> At least it's unlikely
[02:42] <ddevans> I think if we build it right, we stand a good chance against almost anything else
[02:43] <Malignant> Damn Vamp Dagger too stronk
[02:44] <Spielkind> indeed
[02:45] <Spielkind> is there a chance to slavage one fog from your salvage for grabbow, dd?
[02:45] <Spielkind> or is one in vault, dont know yet ^^
[02:45] <Malignant> We have 2 Fog Shields
[02:46] <Spielkind> oh well, thx ^^
[02:46] <Spielkind> me is going to sports and shower, later!
[02:46] <ddevans> Later man
[02:52] <Malignant> Here's the random Darkness Stall I have right now: http://dek.im/d/z95i4z25i8z15i9z45ibz25igz45jmz45upz25v17gkz27h3z17tb8pt
[02:54] <ddevans> No Drain Lives?
[02:56] <Malignant> Didn't really like it
[02:56] <Malignant> Might be cause of the lousy quanta balance, but Drain Life felt useless
[02:57] <ddevans> hm, fair point
[03:10] <Malignant> Wow, Freeze stops Devourer, didn't know that

[treebeard xiii]

Chunk of convo between me and mal incoming mainly me talking at mal but convo nonetheless. Note not sure how much is relevant I lost trac so just posted the lot I think mainly the first 1-11/2 hours are the most relevant

Spoiler for 07/11/2014:

[16:29:18] Malignant: Hai?
[16:29:25] treebeard_xiii: alright
[16:29:40] Malignant: Easier to copy paste into the chat thread later
[16:30:06] treebeard_xiii: so currently I've got a modifiable sanc duo that needs a team decision on I've done my best with it
[16:30:28] Malignant: Modifiable as in?
[16:30:30] treebeard_xiii: and am currently in the process of thinking of a couple of pc decks
[16:30:33] Malignant: Using the event card?
[16:30:51] treebeard_xiii: it's got 40 cards where most are not 100% fixed
[16:35:49] treebeard_xiii: and the cards in it can play sanc rush, small stall or a combination of both using event card
[16:35:49] Malignant: Sounds interesting
[16:35:50] Malignant: .
[16:35:50] Malignant: asdasf
[16:36:18] Malignant: Damn chat bork making me panic
[16:36:41] treebeard_xiii: and I have just come up with a weird bow that uses pc without giving to much tasty salvage and we could still sends steamers with some pc
[16:36:50] treebeard_xiii: against fire
[16:37:05] treebeard_xiii: do note the bow is something I have never used ever
[16:37:16] Malignant: Have a deck image link?
[16:37:21] treebeard_xiii: and highly doubt many people have used
[16:37:29] treebeard_xiii: Deck Image
[16:37:57] treebeard_xiii: thats the bow i'll post it on the thread as well when I'm finished coming up with decks
[16:38:14] Malignant: So many bows we can use this round
[16:38:32] Malignant: That's vs Darkness right?
[16:38:33] treebeard_xiii: two I thik thats why i was going to come up with something non bow
[16:38:39] treebeard_xiii: yeah darkness
[16:39:11] treebeard_xiii: odii's tricky to read he likes control decks but in war thats not all they can use
[16:39:49] treebeard_xiii: it has answers to most things dark could potntially bring that I feel is viable
[16:40:04] treebeard_xiii: might be able to shove in gavel for a weapon
[16:40:21] treebeard_xiii: or arse for a weapon depending how many we take for poison decks this round
[16:40:36] Malignant: Myeah that deck seems viable
[16:40:40] treebeard_xiii: I'm working on theory
[16:40:58] Malignant: I have no idea what to work on @.@
[16:41:21] treebeard_xiii: only other source of pc we have is deflags I believe as we can't reliably shock lock weapons
[16:41:51] treebeard_xiii: but if we send steamers against fire we lose most of our deflags in that matchup
[16:42:41] treebeard_xiii: another option is a steamer bow but we can only send two reliable bows this round
[16:42:59] Malignant: Well I don't think we really need to use that many Deflags vs Fire
[16:43:02] Malignant: Even with Steamies
[16:43:24] treebeard_xiii: true though dimtix could be problematic
[16:43:38] Malignant: Damn Dims always ruining things
[16:43:46] treebeard_xiii: how many steamers do we have again
[16:43:55] Malignant: 8
[16:44:20] treebeard_xiii: eight right so we would send ideally 4-5 in a steamer deck which gives use three spare
[16:44:53] treebeard_xiii: which means we could technically send another steamer deck with deflags against dark
[16:45:09] Malignant: Gotta be careful with the Steamies deck though
[16:45:22] Malignant: IIRC, had slight quanta problems in Round 1
[16:45:34] treebeard_xiii: but it would be a slightly more glass cannoney deck
[16:45:56] treebeard_xiii: I was thinking mainly a deflag splash with a steamer or two for damage ramp
[16:46:12] Malignant: That could work
[16:46:15] treebeard_xiii: but mainly a mono as such
[16:46:46] treebeard_xiii: that way with a couple of pends we could fuel deflags and steamers without much issue
[16:47:10] treebeard_xiii: and then the main attacking force of the deck would be monoesque
[16:47:41] treebeard_xiii: which means we could use slightly less tears and nymphs as a damage ramp source
[16:48:04] Malignant: Myep
[16:48:06] treebeard_xiii: ad if we want to be really smarmey maybe an upped toad or two
[16:48:21] treebeard_xiii: but I think the deck would be getting slightly too complex
[16:48:37] Malignant: Eh, not really?
[16:49:05] treebeard_xiii: and I intend to persuade the team to destroy life this round so we can salvage some source of adrena so we then have an additional poison deck
[16:49:42] treebeard_xiii: which I suggested in the pre building stage but we decided against it
[16:50:21] Malignant: Hmm
[16:50:32] treebeard_xiii: so I shall go build my deflag suggestion and that should give the team plenty to ponder on
[16:50:59] treebeard_xiii: it would mean instead of one suggestion we have three which means the vault is more flexible for this round
[16:52:21] Malignant: So possibilities: WeirdBow vs Darkness, Steammies vs Fire and/or Darkness
[16:52:41] treebeard_xiii: yup or the sanc duo as I initially suggested
[16:53:11] treebeard_xiii: I'll be posting on the thread in a sec anyway so you can see clearly my suggestions
[16:53:19] Malignant: Alright
[16:56:29] treebeard_xiii: done posted now everyone can see it
[16:57:09] treebeard_xiii: they are all fully unupped because up distributio will depend on the deck and whether we use the ec or not
[16:57:46] treebeard_xiii: and damn is it good to get ivolved in actual deck discussion instead of posting in a thread
[16:58:05] Malignant: I don't feel like I am discussing much though, sorry
[16:58:23] Malignant: I don't know how to deck x.x
[16:58:47] treebeard_xiii: it's fine I'm very passionate about my deckbuilding even full deckbuilders struggle to get a word in edgeways
[16:59:38] Malignant: Feel free to poke me if you feel like discussing with me then
[16:59:55] Malignant: Anyways about the decks: I think the deflag splash might have too little damage?
[17:00:54] Malignant: Possibly -1 Dry Spell +1 damage source
[17:01:04] treebeard_xiii: it's got a bit puffers providing increasing damage like arse steams grow incredibly fast if fueled, and nymphs ramp reasonably
[17:01:24] treebeard_xiii: they are all drafts open to adjustments
[17:01:51] treebeard_xiii: my decks have a tendancy to fare a little better in slightly longer games
[17:02:23] treebeard_xiii: they are mainly mid-late game bloomers but good draws can make them very fast
[17:03:03] treebeard_xiii: it is a bit lacking in damge I'm sure but its hard to squeeze in several answers that if aren't drawn is game over
[17:03:45] treebeard_xiii: I was using 3 spells because last round they bought that weird fractal thing against use and it needs on average two speels to slow it p enough for use to recover
[17:04:20] treebeard_xiii: and not sure why the random two ice bolts mabe to slow up a vagger on occasion
[17:04:35] treebeard_xiii: or maybe because I rarely ever use ice bolts
[17:04:47] Malignant: Not a fan of those 2 lone icebolts
[17:04:57] Malignant: And we have Deflags, might be enough
[17:05:25] treebeard_xiii: I'll see what everyone else says they are all still open to modifications
[17:06:05] treebeard_xiii: they are what I'd call skeleton builds the basic idea of the deck but probably not the optimum build
[17:06:51] treebeard_xiii: also the ice bolts can act as single cc if wasting a dessi is not optimal
[17:07:19] Malignant: I don't think they would do much though
[17:07:41] treebeard_xiii: that fact is we have to spread out the vault too much because we can't afford to field full monos just ye
[17:08:06] treebeard_xiii: they prolly wo't and in the fianl build they may well be removed
[17:08:07] Malignant: Uh, what do you mean by that?
[17:08:20] Malignant: The part about spreading out the vault
[17:08:47] treebeard_xiii: if we field a full mono in a bad matchup that we lose our water vault takes a massive hit
[17:09:07] Malignant: Oh, right
[17:09:34] treebeard_xiii: what I really mean is we have to distribute our off element cards widely to make sure our water vault doesn't take a massive hit causing heavy conversion
[17:10:14] treebeard_xiii: thats more due to me and ddevs fearing a reapeat of last war where first round we had to mass convert meaning a lot of our deks took a massive hit
[17:11:00] treebeard_xiii: we lost all other weapons and at least 2 decks from our vault
[17:11:04] Malignant: Mmm k
[17:11:32] treebeard_xiii: ddevs was having a hard time irl and eva did a lot f the deckbuilding
[17:11:49] treebeard_xiii: ddevs regrets bidding on eva massively
[17:12:13] Malignant: Eva -> EvaRia?
[17:12:18] treebeard_xiii: he/she basically built and illegal vault and disappered after round 1
[17:12:21] treebeard_xiii: yup
[17:12:33] Malignant: Woah, weird.
[17:13:02] treebeard_xiii: safe to say the whole team last war except me a ddevs disappeared after round 1 or 2
[17:13:32] treebeard_xiii: and you wonder why ddevs drafted me this war I was basically 50% general last round
[17:13:47] treebeard_xiii: *war
[17:13:59] Malignant: Nice~
[17:14:41] treebeard_xiii: and ddevs said if he'd listened to me a bit more we would've done well my predictions were pretty damn good last war i was correct roughly 50-60% of the time
[17:15:12] treebeard_xiii: I basically built the deck from scrap that kept us alive for the rest of the first part of war
[17:15:25] treebeard_xiii: which was the sanc rush I hold so dear
[17:15:44] Malignant: And Water still ended up higher than Light eh
[17:16:06] treebeard_xiii: yup we basically won a game every round until round 8
[17:16:28] treebeard_xiii: taking out a gravity catatitans a grabbow or two along the way
[17:16:42] Malignant: Woo Water~
[17:17:16] treebeard_xiii: so thats why I've suggested th sanc rush a lot so far
[17:17:45] treebeard_xiii: I probably hold it too dear
[17:18:15] Malignant: What is the Sanc-Duo W/L in this current war?
[17:18:50] treebeard_xiii: unfortunately this war I haven't predicted to strongly which may have caused my recent case of negativity
[17:19:22] Malignant: Guess we should have included Mindgates in our vault
[17:19:23] treebeard_xiii: I think it's 1-2
[17:19:45] Malignant: Seems like people learnt from last war or something
[17:19:51] treebeard_xiii: we avoided aether like the plague this war only briging the mandatory cards every team has
[17:20:16] treebeard_xiii: the sanc duo might have done so well this war because we became underestimated
[17:20:24] treebeard_xiii: *last
[17:20:51] treebeard_xiii: it came out of a 0-5 round so the teams expected we were as good as dead
[17:21:20] treebeard_xiii: toads became our heroes we used so few upto that point we had like 12 leftover
[17:21:47] Malignant: Can't really that war though
[17:22:29] treebeard_xiii: but we've taken some nasty hits already our vault is more stretched than we'd like at this point
[17:23:07] Malignant: Starting to feel tired, 1:22AM
[17:23:35] treebeard_xiii: oh wow currently the sanc duo is actually 100% winrate admittedly we only used it once and agaisnt gravity
[17:23:50] treebeard_xiii: alright I'll let you get of to bed then
[17:23:51] Malignant: Was that rush or stall?
[17:24:03] Malignant: Nah, I can still survive!
[17:24:07] treebeard_xiii: rushey I believe it was agaist a dbh
[17:24:29] treebeard_xiii: it was my suggestion so yeah rushey
[17:24:50] treebeard_xiii: I don't like the water sancstall that much because ice bolts are pretty shit
[17:25:21] Malignant: They are pretty weak in low amounts
[17:25:34] treebeard_xiii: we don't have the nice vagger that dark has to draw out the game to bolt range
[17:26:18] Malignant: We have 2
[17:26:59] treebeard_xiii: yeah but you can't splash random vaggers into a water sanstall dark is fortuanate that vagger is in element
[17:27:08] treebeard_xiii: thats what i meant
[17:27:22] Malignant: Oh right xP
[17:27:42] Malignant: But we do have Permafrost Shield
[17:28:04] treebeard_xiii: plus they also have nightmare to give additional healing on top oh and vamps
[17:28:25] treebeard_xiii: yeah permafrost is either stupidly good or terribly bad
[17:28:56] treebeard_xiii: and doesn't heal of the damage we take in between the turn it takes the opponent to play an creature and us to freeze it
[17:29:21] treebeard_xiii: dark can make a better sancstall than we can
[17:29:54] treebeard_xiii: we actually have on of the weakest damage stalls out there
[17:30:02] Malignant: Yeah, healing + healing too stronk
[17:30:23] treebeard_xiii: our deckout stall is perhaps one of the stronger because we get trident and tears i element
[17:31:12] treebeard_xiii: unfortuantel we can use the trident deckout stall to our advantage becase we can have very few earth quanta i a war deck
[17:31:15] Malignant: But so rare to find the opportunity to use the deckout stall
[17:31:34] treebeard_xiii: yeah as it needs some earth pends or pillars
[17:31:53] treebeard_xiii: or we need a fair few aubrns in our vault
[17:32:15] Malignant: Would be cool to have Tears -> Auburn
[17:32:56] treebeard_xiii: some of our available nymh duos are potentially a massive threat but we need to fit i the quanta for them
[17:33:25] treebeard_xiii: as we saw with nymphcord we had like 5 gravity quanta because that was all we could legally fit
[17:34:12] Malignant: Yeah but Nymphcord was a trio
[17:34:33] treebeard_xiii: just like our liquid antimatter could be potential very nasty but we need to fit the quanta
[17:35:06] treebeard_xiii: our most effective nymph war legal duos are earth to an extent and adrenafish
[17:35:33] treebeard_xiii: and we might be able to pull a death one reasonably well thanks to permafrost
[17:36:03] treebeard_xiii: ragequit ftw
[17:36:18] Malignant: MrSexington's RQ deck~
[17:36:39] treebeard_xiii: flooding and aflatoxin
[17:36:58] treebeard_xiii: problem is it needs time to set up
[17:36:59] Malignant: Why didn't we put in Floodings !
[17:37:18] treebeard_xiii: I am noting that as a potential deck if i get genralship
[17:37:37] treebeard_xiii: because they are so niche in use the vault space wasn't available
[17:38:14] treebeard_xiii: the only viable deck can think of is the death rq
[17:38:27] treebeard_xiii: and maybe an antimatter duo
[17:38:54] Malignant: Why not a Time duo and have a crazy rush
[17:39:37] treebeard_xiii: hmm noting all this down for another war
[17:39:59] treebeard_xiii: note to self experiment with these decks next leagues
[17:40:52] treebeard_xiii: yeah I use leagues as pvp testing grounds because why not if you can win with them in unrestricted meta odds are you can win in restricted
[17:41:58] Malignant: Btw, Spiel posted his thoughts
[17:42:13] treebeard_xiii: ah good I can peruse over them
[17:43:24] treebeard_xiii: so spiel is for the sanc duo as well
[17:44:21] treebeard_xiii: and against the event card hmm I get a feeling that is going to be the general consensus with the ec
[17:45:20] Malignant: Well, upgrades are pretty important~
[17:45:46] treebeard_xiii: I say they are only important if the deck needs them
[17:46:04] Malignant: But then upgrades make decks more consistent and stuff
[17:46:17] treebeard_xiii: I'm someone who plays the upgraded meta with nowhere near enogh upgrades available
[17:46:29] treebeard_xiii: so I'm more open to reduced upps
[17:47:19] treebeard_xiii: I think I have a grand total of 70 upped quanta split amongst all twelve elements and they are mainly split between other, entro, water and light
[17:47:40] treebeard_xiii: with a few i time and a few in aether
[17:48:14] Malignant: I think I might be around that number too
[17:48:44] treebeard_xiii: so yeah I'm used to playing against people who have a tonne more upgrades then me so am more open to the concept of key ups where needed
[17:49:15] treebeard_xiii: and personally I feel most of the decks we have planned this round don't need all the upgrades available
[17:49:51] Malignant: Maybe
[17:49:54] Malignant: Anyways, sleepy
[17:49:58] treebeard_xiii: but it is a team decision and most of the team is against it
[17:50:10] treebeard_xiii: I'll let you get of to sleep then if you want
[17:50:24] Malignant: Well you could always change before Game #2 and so on
[17:50:40] Malignant: Using Game #1 to see if the upgrades are needed or not
[17:50:42] treebeard_xiii: you wanna post this convo or should I
[17:50:55] Malignant: But then we have to properly decide on what upgrades to use... hmm
[17:51:07] Malignant: Idk, anything's fine~
[17:51:41] treebeard_xiii: yeah the issue with the ec I think is th fact those six upps have to be fixed and we lose those cards if we reduce the deck
[17:52:07] Malignant: You post it
[17:52:10] Malignant: My internet's dying
[17:52:28] treebeard_xiii: I have lost track where the relevent portion of this conve finished
[17:53:42] Malignant: I have no idea too
[17:53:54] Malignant: Manmode: Post everything
[17:54:13] treebeard_xiii: I've got what I feel is enough relevence to ge tthe gist of what was discussed