|
|
Post by omnicloud7strife on Apr 20, 2012 16:04:46 GMT -5
Okay. First post here, but I've been working on tweaking this deck, and I'm not quite sure how to. The deck list is 71 cards, and I know, that's about 21 cards bigger than it should be. I'm here asking for thoughts, help, advice, and critiques of my deck.
5: Plentiful Crop
5: Knowledge has a Price
2: Daring Experiment
3: Coy Courtesan
2: Engineer's Workshop
2: Knowledge is Power
3: Scientific Method
1: Forced Charity
2: Vicious Sneak Attack
4: Quick Study
2: Mob Justice
4: Corrupt Herald
5: Underground Passage
3: Brilliant Burglary
3: Nicolaus Copernicus
3: Scholar's Den
2: Giovanni Auditore
2: Fabio Orsini
2: Monteriggioni
5: In Depth Analysis
2: Condottiero Tactics
2: High Profile Assassination
5: Collateral Damage
1: Strategic Assault
1: Target Practice
Phew. The goal of the deck (and, often times, its actual function!) is to outright deny players the chance to play cards. Often times, I get opponents down to 0, and then keep them there, and they either quit, or leave their device. However, the deck is, clearly, too slow, and obviously has flaws. Clearly, more consistency would be nice, but it's hard to get that, and still have some of the important aspects of the deck (and, without spending about 8k credits).
Anyway, help would be nice.
My rank on the leaderboards is (approximately) 296. And, hopefully, rising.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Apr 20, 2012 16:13:37 GMT -5
Lol, at least you're honest about it. I don't like this goal of trying to get people to quit the game, never ever built a deck to make people quit, so can't help you here  Making it 50 maybe will make you run outta cards while you're boring ppl to death, so maybe keep it high count |
|
|
|
Post by omnicloud7strife on Apr 20, 2012 17:12:26 GMT -5
Well, it's not like I want them to quit! They just... tend to. I mean, it just keeps them locked down, and is a straight up denial deck. "You can't play cards" is a pretty vicious way of playing. But, they tend to give up at that point. Just like I tend to give up when I'm sure, knowing my deck, that they'll win. There's just no reason, for me, to continue. And, typically, that's what happens to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Apr 20, 2012 17:29:15 GMT -5
Dude, you were on such a roll with playing what you say you play and saying it straight. If you're gonna say that youre expecting to win with your little nicos, orsinis and heralds, you're making a very poor joke.
I'm not here to judge your strategy, I'm just saying that I don't run it personally and I even gave you advice for it to the best of what I know.
So... Be proud of what you're doing, unless it's not the strategy you want, in which case your deck completely missed the mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brontobeuf on Apr 20, 2012 19:28:57 GMT -5
Instead of adding cards, just try to remove them and reach 50. Simple tip: each time you play a few games, remove the cards you don't like drawing.
|
|
|
|
Post by omnicloud7strife on Apr 20, 2012 19:34:59 GMT -5
I'm proud of my deck, overall. I just tend to find that, every time I draw a hand that works against one opponent, it spirals miserably out of control against another. It's rather tedious. I was wondering if people had advice on what to remove, rather than what to add. Adding is, mostly, pointless in this deck. It's really me trying to figure out precisely what to pull out. But, if there's nothing specific that people see as 'wrong' with the deck, then I'll just keep working on it, card at a time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Apr 21, 2012 0:39:05 GMT -5
Dude it has EVERYTHING in it, I really don't see anything specific in terms of strategy other than "there is no particular winning card" or even "winning strategy". So just like you said, it gets other people to leave by boredom.
Again, if that is your goal, chuck stuff that doesn't serve that purpose. When you see games that "spiral out of control", analyses it, is it the same kind of decks that give you trouble? Is it not? Is it the same kind of cards you draw that you don't need? Analyse your own play.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Apr 21, 2012 0:44:07 GMT -5
Read the article "how to build decks by playing" in the academy section if you haven't yet. It addresses what you're working on.
|
|
|
|
Post by ericluah on Apr 21, 2012 6:57:09 GMT -5
Dude it has EVERYTHING in it, I really don't see anything specific in terms of strategy other than "there is no particular winning card" or even "winning strategy". So just like you said, it gets other people to leave by boredom. Again, if that is your goal, chuck stuff that doesn't serve that purpose. When you see games that "spiral out of control", analyses it, is it the same kind of decks that give you trouble? Is it not? Is it the same kind of cards you draw that you don't need? Analyse your own play. My first deck had that problem lol |
|
|
|
Post by omnicloud7strife on Apr 21, 2012 10:46:34 GMT -5
My first deck had that problem lol The problem is that I'm not spending large sums of actual money on the game (I think I've spent maybe $15, and that was before the single card shop opened), and that the deck is specifically control. The decks I have the most trouble with are the ones with ultra rapid growth. Scholar/Media is particularly nasty. I admit, it's a very, very good deck. But, the fact that, on average, my deck allows me to get to 7+ before my opponent, and then launch a Collateral Damage (-4), is typically good. After that, it's card draw, to Heralds/Giovanni, and then a slow, but efficient beat down, while I prevent them from playing sites and units. If the game progresses long enough, that I run out of cards that reduce their ability to have gold, then I'll typically have two or three times their resources. (I've had one occasion of my 60 gold to their 0, and one of 40 to 10. Most often, it's 20 or so to 0.) The fact that there's no significant beater isn't really a problem. I just need a way to make sure they can't counter everything I play. Typically, all actions are surprises takes care of that for me. So, again, I'm still tweaking the deck. I've gotten it down to 65 cards, and I'm trying to push it lower. It's just difficult. Anyway, hope I can get some really sage advice here. Rank's gone up to 293. Slowly working on cracking 200. |
|
|
|
Post by Brontobeuf on Apr 21, 2012 11:11:11 GMT -5
Ressource destruction is hard to build (I hope it will get more viable in a near future). It's an interesting strategy for sure, but maybe you should try another one until you get a strong deck to farm your daily credits.
Basically, things never go the way they are supposed to go (and that is even worst if you have a deck with 80+ cards). An opp with 2 Forced Inheritance, a Political Patronage in his starting hand or a few quick Agents will pose you too much problems to deal with while you try (in vain) to reduce his ressources to 0.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Apr 21, 2012 11:27:48 GMT -5
Also, income destruction decks should be one of those "quick growth" decks that you're talking about - the current pool of decent income kill cards are very few, and then if you're playing 80 cards you're really not likely to get them in your opening hand. And then building up to 7 income to drop a collateral or 4 to drop a corrupt herald (who can easily get sudden exhaustioned) is not a quick thing. And if your opponent is packing any resource boosters, well, your income denial strategy will work maybe once every 5 times you have it in your opening hand, which would be every 10 draws or something. Trim out the excess if you want to focus to income denial, but it's a difficult strategy to build on budget. You actually do need Political Patronages. For now, better build a consistent, daily farming deck. Noble rushes are VERY good still. Borgia Towers give Bronto headaches |
|
|
|
Post by gamemaestro on Apr 21, 2012 12:45:35 GMT -5
Tuism makes good points, as always. I tried a fairly tight income denial deck a month or so ago and gave it up because too many people pack income growth cards. Since the meta has shifted to an even faster game now, I imagine that income control has to be even tougher. If you want to keep playing it, I'd cut the deck down to its core (cards that enable income control and those that give you income) and then flesh out the deck to 50 cards. My basic philosophy on deck building is that every card need to fulfill a specific purpose, and if they don't give me card advantage, that had better be a very important purpose.
|
|
