What will 'top' decks look like?

Discussion in 'Codex' started by SpicyCrab, Feb 24, 2016.

  1. SpicyCrab

    SpicyCrab Well-Known Member

    (Can a mod please change title to 'top' decks)

    right,warning, theory crafting ahead.
    So it strikes me that over time the penalties for multi-coloring will almost certainly be outweighed by unintentional synergies.

    I know one of sirlins design goals is for mono-color to be 'very good' among competitive players.

    Right now, that certainly seems true... But in a few months or after the online client has been out for while my intuition is that all of the best decks ( top twenty let's say) will be multicolor combos with various insane synergies with maybe a few mono colors somewhere in the pecking order.

    For competitive players, this may mean that at tourney level mono-color ends up being largely unpickable.

    Now, it's possible I am wrong,but it seems that in any game with so many moving parts players will find a way.

    Is it acceptable for the meta to shake out in this way? Do you think my intuition is wrong? Or maybe eventually there will need to be mono-color only tourneys as an avenue for mono-color players to play competitively?
     
  2. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    That sounds wrong because the entire band of power from best to worse is probably way smaller than the band of power in any normal customizable game. Obviously the worst decks in Codex are much, much better than worst decks in other games because in Codex they are made of coherent chunks. So the worst you can build is like the equivalent of "ST Cammy" in Street Fighter. The best decks can have more synergy, but not as much as if you could fully build *anything* card-by-card. So maybe you're really overestimating the power differences here and saying the sky is falling without any actual basis.

    The word "unpickable" is a VERY strong word there. Unpickable. To translate that it means "maybe no one can win a tournament with a monocolor deck." Because if they could, it would of course not be "unpickable." That's a huge claim though. Anyway the goal that mono-color is within striking distance of winning, and if it's in the top HALF of power level, that seems more than enough for it to do that?
     
  3. Technik4

    Technik4 Active Member

    And you could always increase the multicolor penalty to apply to each tech upgrade (instead of just tier 1). The penalties are all gold based and if tournament play was edging out monocolor (if for instance every tournament was won with a multicolor deck) you just increase the penalty. Similarly if multicolor decks can't compete, you can lessen the penalty.
     
  4. CloudCuckooCountry

    CloudCuckooCountry Well-Known Member

    I mean, I'm not averse to the idea of monocolour-only or multicolour-only tournaments.

    Even if one of these ends up dominating the other.
     
  5. Archon Shiva

    Archon Shiva Well-Known Member

    Snake Eyez+Zangief+controller. Sirlin balance.
     
  6. Fenrir

    Fenrir Well-Known Member

    I'm not worried about balance in Codex at all. Like, at all. I think that people have bad ideas about what balance means. They think that it means "all option equally strong" or something. It doesn't. It's perfectly fine to have really, really strong options. No matter how strong some strategy or move is in a game it's only a problem when there's no way to counter it.

    Let me give an example: In Street Fighter 2 Honda has a really hard time with Guile. It's a really, really tough match. I'd say that it's a problem. The reason Honda struggles so much is that he has a really tough time closing range on Guile. Does this mean Guile's fireball is too powerful? No. Not at all. There's just an inherent problem that Honda has no good counter to Guile's fireball spam.

    It's the lack of counter-play that makes it a bad match, it's the inability to meaningfully interact and respond that makes the gameplay a problem.

    So, that's unlikely to be a problem in Codex no matter what weird deck you make because in Codex you always have counters. You can always do something. Destroying a tech building is a like a counter spell for certain units. Killing heroes is a counter for specific spells. Having heroes in the command zone means you always have access to some decent sized bodies when you need them and the various upgrades can be used to counter other strats in a way which is always available. Upgrades are useful to counter certain other strats and the patrol zone can be used to play around still others.

    Notice that all of these universal counters are available to every single deck/faction/spec and that none of them rely on having specific cards or effects either in your Codex or available at a specific time. Because you always have real options you should never find yourself in a situation where you don't have a reasonable chance to win.

    Which is not to say that there won't be stronger and weaker army set ups. There will. But the design of the game is such that it should be very difficult to find anything in either God Tier or Trash Tier even before the years of balancing work that has gone into the game.
     
  7. fodazd

    fodazd Active Member

    Obviously it is much too early to make substantial claims about what decks will be good, but my intuition says that most of the best decks will most likely be monocolor or "monocolor" with neutral. This depends mostly on how valuable the additional gold for tech I will turn out to be, and I predict it will turn out to be pretty valuable.
     
  8. Domon

    Domon Patreon Supporter

    As far as we know, top level codex could be a lot more about having a lot of di0fferent answers and a lot less about sinergies. Besides, any kind of sinergy or tactic in codex is breakable via killing the enabling hero or building.

    In italy we call this "bandaging one's own head before breaking it"
     
    Yamabushi, ap49 and CarpeGuitarrem like this.
  9. EricF

    EricF Well-Known Member

    To answer just the title of this thread: the best decks will be the ones that use the best cards, with the best synergies for those cards.

    Which cards are actually the best is not knowable at this time - it will require the efforts of the community trying to break things in a hardened environment. How best to utilize those will take even longer.

    Since the balance point is individual "specs" and starter decks, I predict that there will be 2-5 specs that eventually rise to the top as the best specs to build your deck around, and there will be a tier list of various starters, with a best 1 or 2 for each viable macro strategy (rushdown, control, econ, tech rush, etc.).

    From there, you are looking at cost/tech curve, covering your bases, and synergy bonuses (Midori + Lich's Bargain says "hi")
     
  10. Archon Shiva

    Archon Shiva Well-Known Member

    Also, some players may be better at playing some styles, such as having an innate sense of cycling. In expect a lot of imperfect play in Codex.
     
  11. Fenrir

    Fenrir Well-Known Member

    Yeah, even after only a few games I can tell that the skill cap in Codex is bonkers.
     
    mysticjuicer likes this.
  12. CarpeGuitarrem

    CarpeGuitarrem Well-Known Member

    I like this saying. :D
     
  13. SpicyCrab

    SpicyCrab Well-Known Member

    This post reminds me a lot of sirlins article on why guilty gear balance works so well. I never noticed the parallel in codex design. Very cool.
     
    mysticjuicer likes this.
  14. Bryce "The Rice" Fieldworker

    Bryce "The Rice" Fieldworker Patreon Supporter

    To find out what top decks look like in Codex, watch Bob199 play.
    He always top decks.
     
    zem, Bob199, enomus and 9 others like this.
  15. mysticjuicer

    mysticjuicer Well-Known Member Ambassador

    omg :heart:
     
  16. Shadowfury333

    Shadowfury333 Active Member

    It occurs to me that in Codex one always top-decks. Granted, it's 3-7 cards at a time, but I think it's still topdecking.

    That or we never topdeck.
     
    rabid_schnauzer likes this.
  17. Bucky

    Bucky Well-Known Member

    Finally, an edition where Sirlin wants mono-purple to be strong.
     
    LK4O4, Leontes, Reaverb Tau and 11 others like this.
  18. enomus

    enomus Banned

    Bringing a whole new meaning to 'topdeck DeGrey'
     
  19. Zejety

    Zejety Patreon Supporter

    If I had to define the Codex version of topdecking, I'd probably make it refer to going down to 0->2 cards.

    This thread makes me think that we should start a Codex Social thread.
     
  20. ap49

    ap49 Active Member

    In my opinion, the "top decking" thing or no real "top decking" in Codex is just another element that reduces the randomness and the inherent "salt" from opponents because they can't say "well, clearly they won because they top decked X". It just removes the topic from the conversation, and it actually helps to allow players when they lose or win, to really analyze their match to determine what they did and what can they do differently. To really intenalize the game, while getting rid of the baggage.
     
  21. Bryce "The Rice" Fieldworker

    Bryce "The Rice" Fieldworker Patreon Supporter

    Ok so true story, top decking still exists in Codex. I was playing against enomus, and I teched in double Crashbarrow, built a tech two, cycled, drew one from the new cycle (of five cards), and had a technician... I had a 2/5 on the first draw, 1/2 in the second draw... and I didn't draw a single Crashbarrow.
    By the next turn I had lost board presence and my tech 2, couldn't play either Crashbarrow and lost the game shortly after.

    If I'd drawn a Crashbarrow, that game could've gone quite differently.
     
  22. Caphriel

    Caphriel Well-Known Member

    Yeah, draw variance is still real. That's pretty unavoidable. Or for something more like top-decking... shuffling your discard and only drawing 1 card after, and drawing exactly the thing that was in your discard that you need. There's also Puzzle Strike-esque bottom-bagging like Bomber describes, where you fail to draw any of the things you needed despite pretty good odds to do so.

    That's life in card games, I guess.
     
    ntillerman likes this.
  23. Griffin

    Griffin Well-Known Member

    I mean, you could minimize draw variance even further with a rule like, "each turn you can discard a card to draw a card" - an ongoing mulligan like Duelyst has. Might be a decent map card?
     
  24. umbralAeronaut

    umbralAeronaut New Member

    Maybe that's what the Vortoss Ruins map card does. Cycling is a thing for purple, Geiger's mid-band after all right?
     
  25. Archon Shiva

    Archon Shiva Well-Known Member

    It was never intended to address this issue, but I've just played a game against EricF with perfect draws and it seems perfectly playable at the noob level.
     
    FenixOfTheAshes and Zejety like this.
  26. Bob199

    Bob199 Well-Known Member

    :menelker:
     
  27. enomus

    enomus Banned

    Are there any practical setups to ensure that you will draw a specific card or combo of cards in the next turn(s)?
     
  28. Sotek

    Sotek Well-Known Member

    Yes, sometimes. Vir Garbaeran and Bigby can both ensure you draw two cards together - you can't guarantee which turn, but you can guarantee that it's either turn X or X+1.

    Or you could use Geiger's ultimate. >_>
     
  29. Shax

    Shax Well-Known Member

    or go nuts with some sort of setsuki+surplus+shrine of forbidden knowledge+Bigby to draw literally your entire deck. I might have different idea of "practical" then you....
     
  30. Griffin

    Griffin Well-Known Member

    Geiger's ultimate feels the definition of impractical to me. Like, I need to be using a bunch of 0/1-cost Tech Is to justify it, maybe for Knights+Seers? If you're doing Purple low-cost, that means time runes and you already have a great 2-cost draw that doesn't require setting up an ultimate. Have people made effective use of it? In mono-purple or was it multi?
     
  31. Sotek

    Sotek Well-Known Member

    Geiger's ultimate has won games for me, playing a bit later. Like, turn 5-6, where you have 8-10 gold available, you can start doing stuff like Now!+Void Star, or the like. You don't need all your cards to be super-cheap - one decent thing and then haste or TD or whatever on top of it is pretty strong.
     
  32. Griffin

    Griffin Well-Known Member

    So, talking about top Decks. 4 heroes can realistically affect the opponent's board before hitting maxband, on the turn they are summoned (using their hero card, not spells/etc):
    Zane,
    Drakk,
    Midori
    Orpol Gloor,
    Quince kinda can depending on what his token copies?

    Midori requires tokens/Tiger Cub, etc, but can make for some good turns from the command zone. He's the most expensive of these, though.

    Gloor before maxband is a single -1/-1 rune at a cost, but it's something

    Zane does it by throwing his face at stuff which has its own assorted downsides.

    Drakk is just... it's not hard to have three units, at which point it's already quite impacting. When combined with good flood Decks, his midband can easily make blow-out turns. I predict a LOT of Blood in top multi-colour Decks, possibly never touching Blood Tech II, and maybe not much of their Tech I - the hero and spells are astounding to put with other specs. Area-of-effect style removal is pretty rare in Codex. Doubly so when you're attacking relentlessly and most of their targets aren't patrolling.
     
    ntillerman likes this.
  33. ntillerman

    ntillerman Banned

    I think Drakk is one of the best heroes, and Kidnapping is one of the best non-ult spells (it's up there with Doom Grasp imo). Blood Tech I and II both seem pretty mediocre, but who cares if you're playing multi?
     
  34. Bryce "The Rice" Fieldworker

    Bryce "The Rice" Fieldworker Patreon Supporter

    Crashbarrow disagrees.
    Because, CRASHBARROWWWWWW
     
    Bob199 likes this.

Share This Page