Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 10

General Game Discussion / Re: Ask a Simple Question, Get a Simple Answer v2.0

« Last post by serprex on Today at 06:34:43 pm »

Naii made a QI tool: https://etg.dek.im/forum/index.php?topic=1061

In original the idea was to go for ~5 QI & go from there. Bit higher for rushes, bit lower for stalls

12 pillars was people just riffing off MTG, being able to play all pillars asap makes it better to run way more quanta. But player's having so much health somewhat tempers that

I tend to calculate how copies I need per card based around getting the desired quanta/cards played in first few turns. For stalls that's how fast you can shutdown opponent's first few turns

Studies and Statistics / Re: OUEI Study - Arenas - 3/2015-CURRENT

« Last post by Septima Rhay on Today at 03:08:28 pm »

Spiderwingsbow, Arena 1, tested by Septima Rhay
OUEI: 2.07 WR: 66.00% Plies: 17.32 Time: 40.39 Games: 50

056qq056u3016ue027130277g027ae017al017e9027hf017h9027ki037n8027ti017t9018pj

Good winrate and nice win streaks (5-10 wins) going for bonus. Main issue is time to complete games due to decision making and active usage. May see if it fares better in Arena 2. Quanta felt good.

Spoiler for 50 games vs. Arena 1:

Decks / Re: Demigod Prediction Decks

« Last post by Septima Rhay on May 01, 2024, 09:42:47 pm »

More reliable than original Shard Ready Purple nymphs.

Kichomo

065000f6ts036tt036u7036tv018pj

General Game Discussion / Re: Ask a Simple Question, Get a Simple Answer v2.0

« Last post by Denver on May 01, 2024, 10:32:55 am »

(sorry if this question already been posted/answered before but forum search gives me database error)

Is there any known information on optimal pillar statistics? IIRC the original game it was about 12 pillars for a mono-deck, and 7/7 for a duo deck. Anything more then Quantum pillars were more optimal. But I'm not even sure if that's correct or even ever was.

And with the addition of Pendula, and 4-way pillars, are there any other optimal generic rules for things like tri-decks, tetra-decks (outside of Material/Cardinal/Spiritual), and more?

Game Suggestions / Re: Equipping a weapon/shield returns any currently equipped back to your hand

« Last post by Denver on April 29, 2024, 01:58:42 pm »

Yeah those are the kinds of negative interactions I knew I wouldn't be able to foresee.

Charged and Stack shields would definitely have to be excluded. Reduce I can't think of a reasonable accommodation to prevent it being abused with shield swapping. Maybe it could be treated as a charge/stack shield? e.g. "On play, become a random number of stacks from 0-3, reduce damage by number of stacks". Then additionally wouldn't get returned to hand as stack shield are excluded from the return to hand rule. Although I'd imagine that'd come with it's own stack of problems, obvious one being 0 damage reduce would have to be 0 stacks...

Same with playing shields to clear hand up, would be a significant change for some decks. Perhaps caveat that playing the same shield/weapon as you have equipped neatly removes it from your hand as usual? But that feels like a major new mechanic/rule to the game in addition to weapon/shield return to hand mechanic.

Another troublesome interaction I thought of is Wicked Shield, would it preserve reduction in hand? If so, would it tick down in hand? Lots of unforeseen considerations for what I initially thought wouldn't have been too major of a change

Light / Re: [Buff] Crusader

« Last post by Denver on April 29, 2024, 01:35:58 pm »

Thanks for the response

Yeah I agree Crusaders are a lot better than originally, it's just they feel a bit weird is all I'm saying. For instance, I feel like so many cards were given more freedom (not necessarily in a buff sort of way) in their targeting choices in ways that make sense. Endow definitely follows conventions in that it restricts targeting cards in hand, but given that it can only target weapons, which are perhaps one of the smallest subsets in the game, it feels incredibly restrictive to have a choice in hand that would have to delete your current weapon just to give to your creature. Of course it's with good reason if they would be too powerful otherwise though; my own knowledge of what is and what isn't is limited I think so I appreciate the insight

I think you bring up a good point with the duplication of buffs, which can be a powerful strategy. My ideas however were not to buff an already strong strategies, but merely open more options for alternative strategies that make multiple weapon choices more flexible and easier to use rather the better single weapon focus. But then of course creating flexibility usually makes the already strong choices even better in some ways

Light / Re: [Buff] Crusader

« Last post by serprex on April 29, 2024, 02:18:40 am »

saders are way stronger than in original

1. accelerated when endowing
2. cheaper
3. more weapons to choose from
4. being able to buff weapons means saders get to duplicate buffs, making tempervadersader quad a tier 1 deck vs arena
5. living weapon

Most likely direction I'd go is allowing endowing on morning star, doesn't impact existing decks while opening up a slow durability option, would have to make sure it isn't too strong with SoW

Not going to remove being able to target opponent's weapon. That takes away from design trying to create novel decision making scenarios rather than having cards force decks to play out in specific ways

Game Suggestions / Re: Equipping a weapon/shield returns any currently equipped back to your hand

« Last post by serprex on April 29, 2024, 02:11:06 am »

would have to be limited to shields without charges, since being able to put phase shields back in deck seems a bit much

would want to preserve current Give behavior

would make Reduce? a lot stronger

sometimes shields get played to clear up hand, would hurt rolhope

not really opposed to it, but seems pretty minor, would be annoying to preserve difference with Legacy code

Game Suggestions / Re: New demigod decks

« Last post by Naii_the_Baf on April 28, 2024, 10:31:53 pm »

Vulcan

016rk016rl016rr016rt016qu016qv016uk0171a0174c0177f017b30b7f2067dv017dn057e1017gs017ke017n5017q8017tb0180e018pi

Would love to fit Blacksmith in here but couldn't get the quanta to work out.

Light / Re: [Buff] Crusader

« Last post by Denver on April 28, 2024, 12:49:45 am »

I like the idea of Crusaders, but they still feel a bit outdated. A lot of other old cards as well as newer cards seem to have great interactions and targeting options, but Crusaders still feel a tiny bit wonky. Some possible (individual) changes:

[buff] Crusader Endow could allow targeting of your own immaterial weapons. They currently can't be endowed with Morning Star, the OG Light weapon!
[nerf] Crusader Endow could only allow targeting your own weapon rather than getting the opponent's for free, in exchange for having an additional buff. It seems a bit wonky to just be able to PU your opponent's weapon for very cheap (1 ply of summoning sickness + 2 Quanta).
[buff] Crusader Endow could target weapons in hand, but like Dispersion, requires the base cost of the target card to be paid too.
[change] Upped Crusader Endow could destroy the target weapon (as if physically being given it), in exchange for a substantial buff, such as additional minimum strength buff upon Endow, like the base +0|3 Health.
[buff] Crusader could also gain any passive effects of the targets shield, in addition to weapon effects. This would be more for flavor if anything, because most creatures are probably far less targeted compared to the amount of targets and attacks players receive. Therefore damage reduction and the like on a single creature wouldn't provide much mechanically. _{And probably require a lot of programming work. In addition to other considerations: should shield effect block instant kills (Devour) or reduce their damage to maxHP-damageReudction? An alternative would be to increase health by 2*Damage Reduction of the shield, or other similar formula. Perhaps too much time, thought, and work would have to go into this one.}
[change] Crusader could enter the battle at a measly 1|X, but get instant Endow with 0 cost. (Your troops can't fight if you don't supply them with weapons!) However would definitely require target card cost to be paid and then destroyed to be balanced. However Crusader strategy would change drastically from "double up on your equipped weapon" -> "arm your soldiers to make them useful".

Some of these suggestions work better as a lone change, some might work better when combined.

I'll admit these suggestions are not coming from a mechanically sound place, but more of a "I just think Crusader is a funny li'l guy and I want to play fight with my own personal army of funny li'l guys" kind of place :3

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 10