Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

Thkiir
|
Posted - 2006.08.25 15:14:00 -
[1]
My first reaction at seeing some of the decklists posted here was that they tended to be very light on locations; some decks had as few as 7. How many, really is enough? You want to be able to play something into your home region on your first turn, but anything cheap and limited enough to be playable in your home region is probably weak enough that you don't want to be drawing a lot of it all game.
I can't really playtest around here until the commercial release of the game but I've done some test-draws and come to the conclusion that only drawing one card per turn means that deck balance is very, VERY important, especially in the earlygame. I crunched some numbers, and here's what I came up with. The first number is the number of first-turn-playable locations in the deck, and the second is how often, including the mulligan, at least one of those locations will wind up in your starting hand assuming that it's the top priority, i.e. that if your first hand has no playable locations you throw the whole thing back. The third number includes your first draw.
1 - 25.1% - 26.8% 2 - 44.3% - 46.7% 3 - 58.8% - 61.5% 4 - 69.7% - 72.4% 5 - 77.9% - 80.4% 6 - 84.0% - 86.1% 7 - 88.5% - 90.3% 8 - 91.8% - 93.3% 9 - 94.2% - 95.4% 10 - 95.9% - 96.8% 11 - 97.2% - 97.9% 12 - 98.1% - 98.6%
How high should the chance be before a deck is considered to play consistantly? Should it have a predictable start 80% of the time? 90%? 95%?
Perhaps more importantly, if you have to play with that many "starting locations" in your deck, how many "advanced regions" (more expensive or outer-region-only) can you get away with playing before your deck becomes too location-heavy?
I don't think there's any one answer to this, but I'd be interested in any discussion about it. Personally, I think 7's a reasonable compromise between both sorts of reliability. I guess I should probably run numbers on how likely you are to get flooded with the cards too. Maybe that's a post for later today. 
|

Thkiir
|
Posted - 2006.08.25 15:14:00 -
[2]
My first reaction at seeing some of the decklists posted here was that they tended to be very light on locations; some decks had as few as 7. How many, really is enough? You want to be able to play something into your home region on your first turn, but anything cheap and limited enough to be playable in your home region is probably weak enough that you don't want to be drawing a lot of it all game.
I can't really playtest around here until the commercial release of the game but I've done some test-draws and come to the conclusion that only drawing one card per turn means that deck balance is very, VERY important, especially in the earlygame. I crunched some numbers, and here's what I came up with. The first number is the number of first-turn-playable locations in the deck, and the second is how often, including the mulligan, at least one of those locations will wind up in your starting hand assuming that it's the top priority, i.e. that if your first hand has no playable locations you throw the whole thing back. The third number includes your first draw.
1 - 25.1% - 26.8% 2 - 44.3% - 46.7% 3 - 58.8% - 61.5% 4 - 69.7% - 72.4% 5 - 77.9% - 80.4% 6 - 84.0% - 86.1% 7 - 88.5% - 90.3% 8 - 91.8% - 93.3% 9 - 94.2% - 95.4% 10 - 95.9% - 96.8% 11 - 97.2% - 97.9% 12 - 98.1% - 98.6%
How high should the chance be before a deck is considered to play consistantly? Should it have a predictable start 80% of the time? 90%? 95%?
Perhaps more importantly, if you have to play with that many "starting locations" in your deck, how many "advanced regions" (more expensive or outer-region-only) can you get away with playing before your deck becomes too location-heavy?
I don't think there's any one answer to this, but I'd be interested in any discussion about it. Personally, I think 7's a reasonable compromise between both sorts of reliability. I guess I should probably run numbers on how likely you are to get flooded with the cards too. Maybe that's a post for later today. 
|

Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive
|
Posted - 2006.08.25 17:17:00 -
[3]
I have 14 locations in my deck, but it's 60 cards, so once I get down to 52, it'll most likely be more likearound 10 cards for locations.
|

Thkiir
|
Posted - 2006.08.25 17:35:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia I have 14 locations in my deck, but it's 60 cards, so once I get down to 52, it'll most likely be more likearound 10 cards for locations.
How many of those locations could you conceivably play on your first turn?
|

Faya
|
Posted - 2006.08.25 21:39:00 -
[5]
You also have to consider that if you have 4 sansha's, you will likely only be able to use two of them :)
I personally go for about 10-12 locations and maybe a couple of starbase structures that generate income. Also if you use insurance frauds or heaven, you may not need so many.
There is no exact way to say when a deck is playing consistently :) What's consistent enough for you? :)
|

Thkiir
|
Posted - 2006.08.25 23:26:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Thkiir on 25/08/2006 23:26:43 Edited by: Thkiir on 25/08/2006 23:26:23 I asked first. 
Seriously, though, I don't think there's one good answer to that. Putting a deck together is always a job of balancing between your odds of a good early-game and the odds that you'll have anything worthwhile to play on turns 3 and on. Personally, I feel like losing out on the first turn in particular totally cripples a deck for the rest of the game, and so I'd rather err on the side of getting things started early. I wouldn't put any less than 7 first-turn-playable locations in a deck.
|

creativegamingevents
|
Posted - 2006.09.12 23:26:00 -
[7]
Just like in any other game you cannot hope to have a perfect draw every time. that is why when you build decks they should be the minimum amount of cards and have as many multiple copies of cards as possible that way you draw consistantly. as far as locations go, the number you play would change depending on your deck and how important locations are to you..i mean wouldnt it be possible to make a deck with none at all? well maybe not but still there is no definite number that you should be playing...
|

Ryuteki2
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 17:07:00 -
[8]
Originally by: creativegamingevents Just like in any other game you cannot hope to have a perfect draw every time. that is why when you build decks they should be the minimum amount of cards and have as many multiple copies of cards as possible that way you draw consistantly. as far as locations go, the number you play would change depending on your deck and how important locations are to you..i mean wouldnt it be possible to make a deck with none at all? well maybe not but still there is no definite number that you should be playing...
It would be possible to play a deck with no locations or income-making structures. It would be inadvisable though at this point in time. Even a super-lean deck should probably be running 8 locations, and most decks seem to need 12-14 to be consistent. You WANT to be consistent - if you don't have acceptable income structures in place by the start of turn 3, you're generally going to have a very hard time with the game. I've a deck that has a turn 4 backup plan that CAN work (involving Dam Torsad and miners)... but it's more likely to get blown out of the water by what my opponent's deck has in play by that point in the game. -------------------------- Just here for the CCG. :) |

Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 00:39:00 -
[9]
I've played a deck with 1 Sublet Station and 4 Emperor's Decrees.
It worked decently unless anyone was playing location destruction :P
Really, 8 locations/structures works fine for some decks, but most decks need 8-14.
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|

DenBrown
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 09:47:00 -
[10]
READ THIS!
|
|

DenBrown
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 09:49:00 -
[11]
READ THIS!
|

DenBrown
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 09:50:00 -
[12]
READ THIS!
|

DenBrown
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 09:50:00 -
[13]
READ THIS!
|

DenBrown
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 09:50:00 -
[14]
READ THIS!
|

DenBrown
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 09:50:00 -
[15]
READ THIS!
|
|

Jacques Archambault
Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department

|
Posted - 2006.10.08 11:17:00 -
[16]
thread cleaned of spam.
-Jacques'
forum rules | [email protected] | Our Website! Want to be an EVE-Online forum moderator? click here! ISD Volunteer of the Year, 2006
|
|

Draaken
Caldari hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.25 16:41:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Testy Mctest I've played a deck with 1 Sublet Station and 4 Emperor's Decrees.
It worked decently unless anyone was playing location destruction :P
Really, 8 locations/structures works fine for some decks, but most decks need 8-14.
What about 1 Sublet Station, 4 Sanshas Scout Outpost and 4 Emperor's Decree? If you get the Sansha's first, you'll get it back when playing Sublet, which enables you to put it into an outer region if you wish to. Sounds a bit "safer" on the income part to me, while still keeping a lot of space for other cards. ____________________ first!!1!! -Capsicum
Originally by: Wrangler I lock, therefor I am.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |