|
Post by madstryfe on Mar 29, 2012 1:38:52 GMT -5
I don't know if you'll be interested but do you think you could either calculate or research what the speed of gold regeneration is per +1 income? It's just another one of those things you never really think about until you actually just think about it.
For example +1 income yields you +1 gold per half day. However, as we know the rate of gold regeneration increases based on the amount of gold you have.
So I would like to know what the rate increase is per income increase. I hope that's not confusing.
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 29, 2012 1:53:34 GMT -5
Not really gonna work like that, cos the timeline changes speed depending on a few things like how much is going on on the board, time is not practical. Did you notice that it grinds to a halt when there's a pile of agents on the board, then after a wrath or animus reoot it speeds up tremendously? I'm more interested in what kind of income boost is needed to pump out what when, and what order income boosters should be played at (2 cost +2 first or 1 cost +1 first, for example) when for best effect, etc
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 29, 2012 2:10:52 GMT -5
You gain all your gold in 1 day, or half your gold in. Half a day. Having more income makes it faster as in 18 income nets you 9 gold per half day.
|
|
|
Post by madstryfe on Mar 29, 2012 2:20:20 GMT -5
Ok I'll except that explanation Pete. So if I want to launch a Cesare in a half day's time, I should expect to have at least 20 income to do that right?
I think I was getting hung up on wanting to know how many gold/second we were regenerating. But I think the explanation of half your total gold in a half a days time makes more sense.
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 29, 2012 2:34:06 GMT -5
Plus time is relative in Recollection. They believe in einstein's relativity
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 29, 2012 2:50:37 GMT -5
Ok I'll except that explanation Pete. So if I want to launch a Cesare in a half day's time, I should expect to have at least 20 income to do that right? I think I was getting hung up on wanting to know how many gold/second we were regenerating. But I think the explanation of half your total gold in a half a days time makes more sense. yeah u got it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2012 5:24:25 GMT -5
Here are some thoughts which occured to me. It all started when i was playing my forced influence deck. Everyone know that the speed of gold regen is full goldpool a day - half goldpool a halfday. It all depends off course on the cards you play - basically you watch your deck scheme over and see for example:
My key agent is 3 gold cost means i need 6gold total to get his gold cost in a half of day. now the situation: i start with this agent in hand: sit#1 i use my 1 gold in exchange for +2 to overall gold pool. Meaning at the beginning of day 1 i will have 1 gold 4 gold pool - in a half a day i can play my 3gold agent. That's the thoughts that i run while making a deck. So then i choose income boosters accordingly.
Basically calculation is needed till you get to 10goldpool.
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 29, 2012 6:01:14 GMT -5
Basically I've been operating on the assumption that it's always better to play all my boosters before starting to play game cards - but I kinda think that's not really always the best thing. So I had been trying to work out timing formulas, but then it became more "if I need to drop a wrath I'll try and drop one when I get to 7 and not continue boosting". I wish I had a more scientific method about it
|
|
mana
Full Member
Posts: 367
|
Post by mana on Mar 29, 2012 6:24:19 GMT -5
i thought about that too. imo it is also best to get out all income boosts asap. the only exeption i made is when playing counterdecks against discard. i get my pool to 4 or 6 ( depends on the counters i have ) and then wait until i got enough gold to play my next income boost and beeing able to counter just in time. as for what income boost to play first it should be clear that the ones that pay back the fastest should be played first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2012 6:37:35 GMT -5
I came to the same conclusion... EXCEPT political patronage. It is kinda booster i do not always drop in the very beginning. I tdepends on the timing of the card i play afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 29, 2012 6:41:21 GMT -5
Yeah of course, if you're not getting something 4 or 5 cost out in first turn (or 2 PPs and a 7 cost), there's really no point in dumping them first.
|
|
|
Post by thest4lker on Mar 29, 2012 8:50:15 GMT -5
Tuism, not sure a more scientific way to calculate would work, because it is just so fluid and game dependent. I do always try to get my income boosters out first as well, but if someone starts dropping, for e.g., pp and big sites, you have to respond. I just work on pure gut feel, works most of the time I think mana's point is gold: keeping an eye on what counters you have in hand, and making sure you have enough gold/income that you can drop them in a hurry. If you have total income 6, and a court order, think very hard before you use that 6 gold to play in depth analysis, because it means your opponent could play anything he wants, and your court order won't be ready in time. As to which income boost is best to play first, I believe there is another thread that argues waiting (at the start), to play forced inheritance, instead of a 1/2 day plus 1 income for 1 cost, is faster overall gold. I assume thought that a + 1 1/2 day one cost card is better to play immediately rather than waiting for 2 gold to play forced charity first, but someone else can work it out if they feel like it
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 29, 2012 9:14:07 GMT -5
Yeah I know, the scientific method only works so far. You need to know what to play, if you have it to play, and wonder if your opponent has a counter too
|
|
mana
Full Member
Posts: 367
|
Post by mana on Mar 29, 2012 10:38:47 GMT -5
we forgot to mention that heathen foloower should always be played first
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Mar 29, 2012 12:59:00 GMT -5
I play heathen a lot and that's not always true.
|
|