FoD replacement

[BioLogIn]

I've been thinking lately that paraFoD problem can be fixed not only with weakening para, but with altering FoD as well. Toyotami apparently thought along this lines as well, and he suggested
PWPFSSSP
and
PWPFSSSF
in this thread: slarty.proboards56.com/index.cgi?board=league&action=display&thread=254&page=1

To me it is still too good for FoD (and first one isn't affected by last-moment Fear, which is bad IMO), because it will cripple cw defense even more.

PWPFSSSS
gives less advantage to FoD player, but it is unaffected by last-moment amnesia (and it is not as cool as original PWPFSSSD - FoD should end with D after all =)))

What I am about to suggest is
PWPFSSWD
It is now unaffected by SWD on PWPFSS turn, but now it is affected by DPP both on PWPFSS turn and on PWPFSSW turn (and by FFF on PWPFSSW turn).

So, what do you think?

[Derfel]

Simple - add in a double gesture somewhere in the weave.

Say:
PWPFSSSD
XXXXXXSX

Or a clap...
PWPFCSSD
XXXXCXXX

[awall]

Ooog, the clap would ruin it. Whatever we do to nerf ParaFoD, we should make every effort NOT to weaken the other, much more elegant FoD weaves:


PWPFSSSD
xxxPDWPP (specifically SPFPDWPP)

PWPFSSSD
xxSPPFD

PWPFSSSD
xxDPPWPP


Unfortunately, there isn't really any double gesture that would help with this.

[Dubber]

How about

PWPFPSSD
xxDPPWPP

[QnanG5284]

Aug 1, 2008 8:11:27 GMT -5 Dubber said:

How about

PWPFPSSD
xxDPPWPP

The only problem I see it's that it REALLY gives a chance to your opponent, doesn't it? LOL

How about having a couple of options (such as Blindness or counter, which can be done in two different ways)? I was thinking in either:

PWPFSWSD
XXXXXW

or

PWPFSFSD
XXXXXF

Doesn't break any "elegant" FOD, as awall suggested, makes it more vulnerable to DPP, is affected by "panic-time" SWD, FFF will still affect it... The only problem, maybe, is that the second one is like a gift to P-FOD, but in ParaFDF may work better...

What do you think?

[Rycchus]

Jul 31, 2008 6:28:39 GMT -5 BioLogIn said:

not as cool as original PWPFSSSD - FoD should end with D after all =)

From a purely aesthetic point of view and nothing to do with spellflow, W would work just as well - "Byebye, sucker!"

[xade]

wouldn't it be the wave of death then?

[Rycchus]

Five fingers of death?

[saypin]

well, why not PWPFSFSD or even PWPFSFSC (yeah, C, not c) ?
Vulnerable to DPP, SWD, PSDF and paraFC

[BioLogIn]

Oct 9, 2008 2:24:12 GMT -5 saypin said:

well, why not PWPFSFSD or even PWPFSFSC (yeah, C, not c) ?
Vulnerable to DPP, SWD, PSDF and paraFC

1) well, it is still safe to para self on PWPFSFS turn... and while being affected by DPP, in becomes unaffected by DSF on PWPFS turn. And, What is more important, Gives FoD player a totally free goblin option (and some fine fireball thread in FoD is defended with cw)
2) fine except for not ending with D (it is a finger after all =)) and the same free goblin (which is quite a big issue IMO).

[saypin]

Hmm... not ending with D? PWPFSCSD (giving a half-clap a chance:)

[Dubber]

Aug 1, 2008 8:11:27 GMT -5 Dubber said:

How about

PWPFPSSD
xxDPPWPP

I was joking with the DPP on the "off" hand, but I kind of like the look of:

PWPFPSSD

as it's a big threat with lots of little side threats the FPS hints at Troll, for example, and there's still some risk in the pattern, 3 or 4 places where a disruption would to block it?

[BioLogIn]

I wouldn't call a free troll 'a little side threat' )

[Dubber]

Oct 9, 2008 9:37:21 GMT -5 BioLogIn said:

I wouldn't call a free troll 'a little side threat' )

But is it a "free" Troll? What would the effective defenses become?

Someone with a more devious mind than me might consider mocking up the various scenarios -- I think there are several effective disruptive defenses and Dispel will still be effective against either threat.

Plus, the P in the FoD string prevents a worthwhile DPP block of the various options.

[Derfel]

The last gesture should be a stab...?

PWPFSSS>?