« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Why would you want just the minimum  (Read 11898 times)

Offline thestrongangel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 139
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #25 on: September 25, 2009, 11:02:38 AM »
0
Quote from: TimMierz on September 25, 2009, 08:57:23 AM
Quote from: thestrongangel on September 25, 2009, 12:35:18 AM
Quote from: Master KChief on September 24, 2009, 11:53:56 PM
100-card defense-heavy decks will now be known as 'super turtles'. watch this new archetype catch fire. :)

I reserve the right to name my 100 carder "fat boy", barring an objection from the Kory of Lentine.

Isn't he off in some Pacific island doing medical mission work?

No idea.
Logged
The most profound thing I have learned in gaming, if you are not losing, your opponent isn't winning

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #26 on: September 25, 2009, 12:22:36 PM »
0
yes, i believe thats what he said last time he was here.
Logged
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #27 on: September 25, 2009, 04:10:52 PM »
0
The biggest reason to use speed decks, in my opinion, is the time limits in tournaments and the ridiculous amount of time allotted for each turn. A game could time out in six rounds without anyone stalling, legally. It wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so many players who think for an Age of Men before playing anything, and badsauce players who you should be able to whip no problem, but get a timeout win to because they read every card every time it is played, even if it's been played six times before.

Lower the time allotted to play each turn (DRASTICALLY), or raise the time allotted for each round and Speed will not longer be quite such a necessity.
Logged
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline lightningninja

  • Trade Count: (+19)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5397
  • I'm Watchful Servant, and I'm broken.
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #28 on: September 25, 2009, 04:59:30 PM »
0
You know... that's a good idea. I've been pretty frustrated with things like this myself.
Logged
As a national champion, I support ReyZen deck pouches.

Offline Cameron the Conqueror

  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6586
  • Post # doesn't reflect personal theology. Retired.
    • -
    • Southwest Region
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #29 on: September 25, 2009, 05:15:45 PM »
0
I agree.  I don't know the official "phase limits" but it would be nice if someone posted them.  Maybe a overarching game change is needed instead of an in game rule like the hand limit.
Logged

Offline thestrongangel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 139
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #30 on: September 25, 2009, 05:57:22 PM »
0
Quote from: Minister Polarius on September 25, 2009, 04:10:52 PM
The biggest reason to use speed decks, in my opinion, is the time limits in tournaments and the ridiculous amount of time allotted for each turn. A game could time out in six rounds without anyone stalling, legally. It wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so many players who think for an Age of Men before playing anything, and badsauce players who you should be able to whip no problem, but get a timeout win to because they read every card every time it is played, even if it's been played six times before.

Lower the time allotted to play each turn (DRASTICALLY), or raise the time allotted for each round and Speed will not longer be quite such a necessity.

Another idea is to not distinguish between timeout wins and actual wins.  Winning is winning, any way you look at it.  No matter if you win 6-0, 5-4, or 3-1.  By making timeouts the same as a normal win, you make playing other decks more appealing to players.  A defensive deck has the ability to win by actually defending itself and picking up rescues when it can.

Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on September 25, 2009, 05:15:45 PM
I agree.  I don't know the official "phase limits" but it would be nice if someone posted them.  Maybe a overarching game change is needed instead of an in game rule like the hand limit.

In the tournament rules on their website, they acutally do have time limits posted.
Logged
The most profound thing I have learned in gaming, if you are not losing, your opponent isn't winning

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #31 on: September 25, 2009, 06:56:30 PM »
0
That may create a problem with people abusing the system, though. It'd be the simplest thing to build a deck that's all about getting one Rescue and then turtling while using all your allotted time to get a 3-0 or 3-2 win.
Logged
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline thestrongangel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 139
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #32 on: September 28, 2009, 09:24:48 PM »
0
Quote from: Minister Polarius on September 25, 2009, 06:56:30 PM
That may create a problem with people abusing the system, though. It'd be the simplest thing to build a deck that's all about getting one Rescue and then turtling while using all your allotted time to get a 3-0 or 3-2 win.

And is that any less a valid strategy then making a deck that intends to be able to draw itself out in 5 turns and be able to win by playing every card in their deck that way?
Logged
The most profound thing I have learned in gaming, if you are not losing, your opponent isn't winning

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #33 on: September 28, 2009, 09:53:50 PM »
0
exactly. turtling is as much a viable strategy as speed. in fact, its one of the most recognized strategies in other games as well, first and foremost being RTS'. one of the most well-known formulas for deciding which beats which is:

rush > boom > turtle > rush

as such, a turtle (or superturtle) naturally beats a rush.
Logged
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

slugfencer

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #34 on: October 01, 2009, 01:10:06 PM »
0
Quote from: Master KChief on September 28, 2009, 09:53:50 PM
one of the most well-known formulas for deciding which beats which is:

rush > boom > turtle > rush

as such, a turtle (or superturtle) naturally beats a rush.

rush (aggro) > boom (combo) > turtle (control) > rush (aggro)

So aggro beats combo
combo beats control
control beats aggro

Is my interpretation of your formula correct?   ???
Logged

Lamborghini_diablo

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #35 on: October 01, 2009, 10:25:49 PM »
0
I'd just like to add that you all better look out for my new 105 carder deck. It won 5-4 in its first game, and it was the first time I've even tried this offense.  ;D
Logged

Offline thestrongangel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 139
Re: Why would you want just the minimum
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2009, 09:20:33 PM »
0
As an update, took my new deck out to play today.  For now, I am going to nickname it "The Manhattan Project".  Only had a chance to play three games, but in three games I won twice and lost a game that I should have won. 

It's not as bad as you think, if you just give it a chance.

(House of Bethany triggered, Son of God was five cards down, and I discard DoN that was above it.  Opponent draws three with SoG on the top of the deck.  I have deck discard LS and didn't remember I had my opponents Promised Land in my territory that I could have discarded SoG from the deck and made it impossible for him to get 5 rescues)
Logged
The most profound thing I have learned in gaming, if you are not losing, your opponent isn't winning
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
« previous next »
 
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal