|
F/S
May 15, 2008 2:00:41 GMT -5
Post by BioLogIn on May 15, 2008 2:00:41 GMT -5
I'd like to discuss an opening idea I've been fancy about for a few days. The core thought is that all popular openings (thanks to P-dominance) nowadays provide everybody with disruptions on turns 3 and 4. An attempt to get out of this can be made like this. FFFFFF PPSxx
Basically you're defending in turns 3 and 4, then you have a chance to get something going on turn 5. Evolving the idea, I've came to realize S can be even better here: FFFFF SPSxx or SPFPS or even timestops, but SPS is main flow here VS D/P and S/P
The level of disruption control of this opening is very good. I'm not sure is there are good answers to it involving monsters (and some successful clashes for non F\S player): DSF?? PSFWx
or even
SWDPP PSFWx
VS
FFFFF SPSDx
or even
FFFFF SPSFW
While in most situations (save only SWDPP/PSFW that is unaffected by para on turn 4??) you'll be able to take any monster they summon by turn 5, I'm not sure if I'm not overlooking something big here... And that's the game plan VS S/P and D/P. I haven't finished examining branches of possibilities in FF/PS vs F/S so I can't really say for now if it is possible for F/P to secure an ogre in play or not. But as an added bonus of F/S VS FF/PW we have built-in fool-proof paraFoD protection )) Please post your thoughts on the subject. Mind you I'm not telling that this opening is great or something. For now I just say that it can make standard openings (mainly D/P and S/P) run for their money... unless I overlooked something, of course )) In which case, feel free to throw it into my face )
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 2:59:02 GMT -5
Post by xade on May 15, 2008 2:59:02 GMT -5
I came to the same conclusion play Succat... F/S is a fantastic opening against F/P Though yeah, I didn't think of trying it against D/P before... at a quick glance, it looks the goods.
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 9:40:54 GMT -5
Post by Slartucker on May 15, 2008 9:40:54 GMT -5
You're overlooking something huge. The turn 3 decision point. In this case, you risk either (1) being badly disrupted, or (2) letting your opponent's spellflow go unmolested. Amnesia is robust. PSD is robust. That's why D/P has been so strong for so many years. Let's take a look.
F/S vs D/P:
FF SP
DP PS
D/P will probably continue DPP/PSF, as doing otherwise risks being hit with a free para/antispell. F/S can defend the amnesia and trade antispell for ogre (very bad) or accept the amnesia and nerf the ogre hand. This seems to put F/S ahead as D/P has a clapping hand, however the other hand can start an ogre, so F/S is still on the defensive as the amnesia limits his options for dealing with PSFW:
FFFF SPWW
DPPS PSFCC
F/S will likely break off the para at this point to nab a little initiative, but D/P can easily get it back by dummying (or successfully casting) the ogre -- the PSF vs WWP decision point favors him. Continuing para is not productive given the need to counter the ogre. WWPSDD will not work; the amnesia delays it just enough for D/P to have PSFWPP ready. So this route is not really great for either player.
There are a number of other turn 3 possibilities, depending on whether each disruption (para and amnesia) are cast at the opponent, self-cast, targeted at nobody, or dummied entirely. Obviously, many of these options are risky. I don't have time to do out an entire matrix, but from a brief glance I fail to see many outcomes that favor F/S.
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 9:48:35 GMT -5
Post by BioLogIn on May 15, 2008 9:48:35 GMT -5
No, no, no! I'm not suggesting going antispell here! I don't think xxxx/SPFP worth something save VS some rare openings, and D/P certainly isn't one. What I'm basically suggesting is xPSxx where PSxx starts on turn 2, not turn 1. Look: DPPx PSFW
FFFF SPSD
Here F/S para self on turn 3. In _worst_ case scenario (FFF at self, DPP at nobody) we go down 1hp on turn 4 (-2ogre,+1missle) and we take ogre on turn 5. In all other options I see F/S is equal or in advantage.
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 10:16:50 GMT -5
Post by Slartucker on May 15, 2008 10:16:50 GMT -5
Ah. Well here are the problems with that scenario.
1) Only a remarkably bad player would cast an ogre when you have PS/para showing and they can't block the PSDD.
2) If the only disruption you threaten for turn 3 is para, they have no need to complete the amnesia. This is what I was saying above about DPP and PSD being robust. Para does not threaten them much! So "worst case" is not DPP at nobody, it's dummy to DPS:
DPS PSD
FFF (at self!) SPSD
From here, D/P can complete charm or start DPP, and F/S can target himself again or target D/P.
Charm + self-target = further decision points leaving the outcome rather up in the air:
DPSD PSDF
FFFF SPSD
Charm + opp-target = equalized init, F/S down one life:
DPSD PSDFC
FFFF- SPSD
DP + self-target = potential ogre for D/P depending on how charm and para are played. He can have an LH ogre on this turn instead for greater risk, as well.
DPSD PSDPS
FFFF SPSDD
DP + opp-target = F/S still can't get the ogre off safely, and is getting pinged without getting anything done
DPSD PSDD
FFFF SPSD
Again, I've simplified a few things here, but I fail to see any way in which this favors F/S.
-- In general, when you are trying to carve out a new opening, you have to remember that your opponent is NOT stuck doing the "traditional" weave through turn 3. Sure, some people will do that the first time they encounter your weave, but that leaves you with a one-shot solution that won't work at all on better players. Better players will analyze the matrix of possibilities and adapt their spellflow starting on turn 2, and certainly on turn 3.
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 10:37:36 GMT -5
Post by BioLogIn on May 15, 2008 10:37:36 GMT -5
Slartucker Sorry, but when I wrote 'worst case', I was barely answering your post, where you made an example of opponent's DPP/PSD weave. I afraid you're viewing the situation as a little one-sided. Of course turn 3 is risky decision point in this match up. Consider D/P player dummies DPP, as you suggest for a strong player, and F/S player doesn't dummy antispell: DPSD PSDF
FFFF SPFP
whoops, we're one life down, but we have a weave advantage. This may seem contrary with what I wrote about SPFP previously, but it is not. It is the same thing as with F/P beginning - while opponent can be 99% sure a skilled player will not go for paraFoD, he still will alter his weave to prevent possible paraFoD. SPFP is a lesser threat then paraFOD, of course, but still dummying DPP here is not "clearly the best" option for D/P player. Sure para doesn't threaten DPP much. But so does amnesia to a para. In D/P vs F/P, for example, worst case for D/P is to actually cast amnesia, because it does nil effect there.
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 13:50:47 GMT -5
Post by Slartucker on May 15, 2008 13:50:47 GMT -5
Bio -- this is all true, for that contingency. What is necessary is to do out a matrix and look at which possibilities favor which player. In this case, the options on the table include:
FFF/SPF (para at self) FFF/SPF (para at opponent) FFF/SPS (para at self) FFF/SPS (para at opponent)
DPP/PSD DPP/PSF DPS/PSD DPS/PSF
Some of the other options, like self-targetting amnesia, can safely written off unless we want to do a really rigorous analysis.
This is a 4x4 matrix. Pointing out individual cells that happen to favor one player or the other does nothing to support the thesis that that player has an advantage overall. I haven't done the whole thing out, which is why all I've said is "I don't see how this favors F/S." There are some obvious cells that favor F/S and some obvious ones that favor D/P. So what I haven't articulated well, is that I'm not saying your idea is bad; it's just insufficiently proven, and I'm not sure the proof exists.
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 14:04:24 GMT -5
Post by BioLogIn on May 15, 2008 14:04:24 GMT -5
Slartucker Yes, agreed with everything.
Note that I haven't said myself anything like 'this opening is particially good VS D/P'. All I said was like 'hey, I checked few individual cells of few of matrices for F/S VS D/P and F/S VS S/P and F/S VS F/P and I've found equal number of good and bad cells, and none of the cells I looked at very especially bad for F/S, so maybe this F/S worth further investigating'.
You didn't expect me (or anyone) to suddenly come up with fool-proof ready-to-play D/P killer, right? But still I might try to evolve this game a little, or at least improve myself while doing so )
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 14:19:50 GMT -5
Post by Slartucker on May 15, 2008 14:19:50 GMT -5
For now I just say that it can make standard openings (mainly D/P and S/P) run for their money... Note that I haven't said myself anything like 'this opening is particially good VS D/P'. Okay, that's enough pettiness out of me for one day. t
|
|
|
F/S
May 15, 2008 14:35:21 GMT -5
Post by BioLogIn on May 15, 2008 14:35:21 GMT -5
Err, it appears I always misunderstood meaning of "run for one's money" phrase, which apparently is "a serious challenge to one's supremacy" (as Merriam-Webster says). And I always thought it barely means "being able to compete with one evenly". And that is I wanted to say about F/S, actually ((
|
|
taliesin
Ronin Warlock
Grand Master
Posts: 156
|
F/S
May 17, 2008 21:02:19 GMT -5
Post by taliesin on May 17, 2008 21:02:19 GMT -5
Ah. Well here are the problems with that scenario. .. Charm + opp-target = equalized init, F/S down one life: DPSD PSDFC
FFFF- SPSD
No, what you actually get will be: DPSx PSDD
FFFFF SPSxand F/S has the edge here. If D/P attempts to continue DPSF, this is potentially very bad in the SPSD case, and a little weaker in the SPSF case. If D/P attempts to continue DPSD, they land in a fairly even but bogged down game in the SPSD case and in a troublesome situation in the SPSF case. There are no outcomes that strongly favour D/P whereas there are outcomes that relatively strongly favour F/S. And this is without considering the more dangerous FFFF/SPFP given a DPS dummy. Let's consider DPP completion with an ogre attempt: DPPSDD PSFCxxx
FFFFFPS SPSSPFPand I'm inclined to give F/S an edge here. The F player can switch para hands relatively straightforwardly after all, and overlooking this is one main reason that much historical para analysis has been a bit weak. Even if F/S plays SPF, the disadvantage is nowhere near that inflicted on the D/P player should the latter dummy into DPS and face SPFP. This definitely bears looking into further. While I am not yet certain that it yields an overall edge against D/P, some superficially attractive lines for D/P may prove to be weaker than suspected.
|
|
|
F/S
May 17, 2008 22:28:40 GMT -5
Post by Slartucker on May 17, 2008 22:28:40 GMT -5
Taliesin -- wrong. Check the post you are replying to. Those four situations all assumed the turn three paralysis was targeted AT SELF, so there is no reason for the D/P player to go PSDD, while the F/S player is *forced* to go SPSD. That's the particular line that was being examined there.
|
|
taliesin
Ronin Warlock
Grand Master
Posts: 156
|
F/S
May 18, 2008 7:32:53 GMT -5
Post by taliesin on May 18, 2008 7:32:53 GMT -5
Taliesin -- wrong. Check the post you are replying to. Those four situations all assumed the turn three paralysis was targeted AT SELF, so there is no reason for the D/P player to go PSDD, while the F/S player is *forced* to go SPSD. That's the particular line that was being examined there. Ah yes, the first situation is indeed in response to FFF at self, apologies there. However, I fail to see why you make the assumption that the third turn para is most usefully directed at yourself. You go directly to examine those four lines without paying much attention to opp-para on the third turn, with the exception of the mildly flawed PSFC analysis. Certainly in the DPS case it is not particularly valuable. Looking at para on your opponent in the DPP case, even assuming PSDD instead of PSFC, we get: DPPSDD PSDDxx
FFFFFF SPSSxx
and F/S can push the Antispell through though potentially at the cost of forcing his own hand into a clap (or favourably getting Para-Anti if D/P isn't sharp enough to direct all disruptions away from him): DPPSDFW PSDDPP>
FFFFFFC SPSSPFP
or summon a goblin DPPSDDP PSDDPSDD
FFFFFFF SPSSFWPP
and generally seems to be doing fairly well. Paralysing yourself on the third turn, however, and successfully neutralising Amnesia, leaves you open to the possibility of PSDF getting through: DPPSF PSDFC
FFFFF SPSD-or, if F/S is blocking the PSDF with another self-para: DPPWS PSDWS
FFFFFF SPSDDMy initial investigation suggests to me that third-turn self-para is much weaker in its major lines so far, and that we should concentrate on third turn opp-para.
|
|
|
F/S
May 18, 2008 14:18:47 GMT -5
Post by Slartucker on May 18, 2008 14:18:47 GMT -5
However, I fail to see why you make the assumption that the third turn para is most usefully directed at yourself. I did not make that assumption. I was examining Bio's assertion, in the previous post, that F/S paralyzing himself third turn would result in a favorable outcome. I would be kind of amused (and I have to admit, quite pleased) if F/S turned out to have an advantage over D/P, but a disadvantage to S/W. We'd be back to (a much more crenelated version of) rock paper scissors.
|
|
taliesin
Ronin Warlock
Grand Master
Posts: 156
|
F/S
May 18, 2008 16:57:22 GMT -5
Post by taliesin on May 18, 2008 16:57:22 GMT -5
My bad. Sorry, I've been pretty inattentive this thread. I should've paid more attention to Bio's post.
I'm not seeing the disadvantage to S/W so far, I've got to confess, and I've had a brief look at that as well.
WWS SWD
F/S self-paralyses third, and paralyses on the fourth turn, and can go toward ogre without hassle. Self-paralysis is not particularly harmful should the SWD not be aimed at F/S, as F/S merely moves into PSDF.
WWP SFW
This looks awkward if F/S goes for Antispell:
WWP>x SFWP-
FFFFP SPFPS
and is also not particularly convincing against a straightforward FoD attempt:
WWPPSD SFWWPP
FFFFFFFFF SPWPFSSSD
I can't find more than one 50-50 in that line from a brief examination and there's not nearly enough damage potential to let S/W clean things up that way.
Of course, WW/SP is mildly inferior:
WWSD SPFP
FFFF SPFP
and F/S trades a single health point for starting with two gestures against one.
|
|