|
Post by Rycchus on Aug 28, 2007 10:27:44 GMT -5
Banning opening D/P would certainly allow for more viable openings, but it seems a bit inelegant. I'm not downright opposed to it, but are there any other possible solutions? I haven't thought through any of these, but I'll toss a few ideas out for consideration: 1) Each player's opening must include a null. This would totally change the game's opening strategy, so it might be interesting to have both this variant and the "no opening D/P" one. 2) Each player starts out the game maladroit. Effectively disallows opening P. Unfortunately, this reduces it to only 5 possible openings, so I dislike this one. 3) Instead of opening by bowing, each player opens with a Clap. No idea what this would do, although I'm worried it might not be a great idea. As I said, I haven't really thought these out. I'm 2 and 3 don't seem like particularly good solutions, as they'd be liable to lead into equally degenerate openings, but I'm sort of curious as to 1. If there's interest, we could try it as the second league variant (after "No opening D/P"). I like your first suggestion. I'd be interested to see that played. Third would be interesting too, although I get the feeling it would quickly degenerate into one set option better than all the others. After all, it's basically the same thing except with the option of Dispel. CDPP/CPSD might still be the best course and if so you're back to where you started. Certainly CDP/CPS would seem to be the strongest route. It'd be interesting to look into though.
|
|
|
Post by Dubber on Sept 2, 2007 11:00:41 GMT -5
After all, it's basically the same thing except with the option of Dispel. CDPP/CPSD might still be the best course and if so you're back to where you started. Certainly CDP/CPS would seem to be the strongest route. It'd be interesting to look into though. Exactly, the Dispel option allows one to break the chain and end up in a pretty good position to prevent the Delay. cDPW cPSD cDPP cPSD Also, it looks like this weave punishes the cDPP opener enough to demand a different weave. Though if both open with Dispel the temptation to go straight for FoD is pretty high. Lots of neat possibilities with this option, imho.
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Sept 2, 2007 11:17:11 GMT -5
This doesn't punish the cDPP opener at all. If the charms trade (which is likely) then either the boards are equalized, or the cDPPer gets a little initiative -- as he continues cDPPS and the other player's charm has to hit his left hand, whereas he can go either way. If the charms bounce or aren't fired at all, starting from PP rather than PW still gives him an advantage.
|
|
|
Post by toyotami on Sept 2, 2007 21:26:52 GMT -5
I have been opening with DP, SW and SP for a while, favoring SP...unless you are playing somebody who calculates likely outcome (ie. an perfectly programmed AI, ie. Slucker/ExDeath) there is nothing to worry about. And even they can be defeated after a less than perfect opening with a bit of risk-taking.
OR you could make an easy trigger that switches between Maladroit and Confusion, something like FFD, although this might over complicate strategies. I dn't actually see the problem...of my last 50 games, none have looked the same and that AI vs AI Slucker Exdeath loop thing is unique, too. Even with both warlocks opening with D/P (worst case scenario), sooner or later a warlock wil either make a mistake or take a calculated risk (nonwithstanding that Exdeah and Slucker's foray)
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 3, 2007 7:30:44 GMT -5
Even with both warlocks opening with D/P (worst case scenario), sooner or later a warlock wil either make a mistake or take a calculated risk (nonwithstanding that Exdeah and Slucker's foray) Well, actually, my research so far has indicated that you have to either bite the bullet and make a weak play early, or risk a forced double death. If the D/P trend continues, there will be many more double deaths in high-level ladder matches as even if you make the optimal play on the optimal turn, your opponent can just turn around and kill you both. If it was anyone but Slartucker, I would've continued the loop, and maybe he hasn't totally figured it out yet either..but..I didn't want to risk being outplayed, or taking a DD after outplaying my opponent. S/P seems a reasonable opener to avoid the whole catastrophe in the first place, but whoever opens D/P still has the advantage. I guess it's worthwhile if you feel your skill can overcome the initial deficit, but in that case, it doesn't really matter what you open with. Every turn that the loop continues favors the weaker player, as there is less time for the disparity in skill to take effect, so certainly using a suboptimal opener is better than letting the D/P loop recur 5 times and then deciding to break it with a bad play.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Sept 4, 2007 22:17:48 GMT -5
Wow, I'd meant to respond sooner. Awall -- your option #1 reduces things to five possible openings as well, no? I suppose it does. When I wrote that, I was considering an "opening" to be one's first two gestures (although I apparently wasn't when I suggested the starting maladroit variant, so my oops). Forcing one hand to open null reduces the total number of possible openings, but I think it has the potential to shake things up a bit. As I understand it, the strength of D/P comes more from the P than the D (as the double Charm/Ogre threat is quite powerful). However, P/- is a risky opening as it leaves you in a poor position against an opponent who opens D/- or F/-. An alternative (and probably much more interesting way) to weaken D/P might be to try out Yaron's charm variant: you can only charm somebody to D, F, P, S, or W, but you get to choose the target for the affected hand. I've heard this is weaker than standard charm (I haven't worked out the mechanics of it, although I think I can see why this would be at a conceptual level). It might make D/P slightly weaker, as trading Charm for another disruption on turn 4 would become a viable play.
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Sept 5, 2007 0:29:03 GMT -5
No. Although surrounding spells like Charm help make D/P powerful, what makes it impossible to dislodge by other openings are the threat of PSFW and the immovability of DPP.
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Oct 26, 2007 4:49:35 GMT -5
I've registered here two weeks late, I see ( Too bad I decided to re-read entire forum only today. Thanks for good discussion, folks.
|
|
|
Post by Rycchus on Oct 26, 2007 6:55:34 GMT -5
Er hang on, what? That wasn't what Taliesin was saying at all. He was talking about PSF/DPP - that is, P/F when para is FF instead of FFF. I think if para was FF we'd all be opening with F/x - it's powerful enough as is.
F/P is strong, but it's been shown to be inferior to D/P (and S/W?)... It may become a more viable possibility if people get frustrated enough to play "No D/P!" games.
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Oct 26, 2007 7:04:57 GMT -5
Rycchus Thanks for correcting me on what taliesin actually wrote. I misread, sorry for that =(
"F/P is strong, but it's been shown to be inferior to D/P" I'll ask just to make sure I understood you right: inferior in terms of versality vs multiple openings (which is most probably) or inferior in F/P vs D/P match?
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Oct 26, 2007 15:40:46 GMT -5
I see F/P as a gambit-type opening, one which carries a lot of risk of losing outright or winning outright.
Consider FFF/PSF vs DPx/PSD. If you guess correctly you're getting an ogre, if you don't then your position is losing, although I think F/P has the advantage in this gambit.
FFF/PSD seems really bad if they go DPS/PSD. If you paralyze yourself, you're forced to go F/D and if they go F/S, you paralyze left to allow Maladroit and a goblin the following turn. If you paralyze them, you pretty much have to paralyze left since you have no way of stopping the ogre, so then you end up with some other poor guessing situations on where they'll target their charm or if they'll just dummy it. But it is possible to come out ahead.
FFF/PSD vs DPP/PSD if you hit each other with the mind spells, I don't know, I'm getting tired. Maybe I'll come back to this later.
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Oct 26, 2007 15:52:40 GMT -5
I did out F/P vs D/P once. I have the papers somewhere. My conclusion was the same: a gambit.
|
|
|
Post by rasteroid on Jun 20, 2008 12:02:17 GMT -5
I also like the idea of a one-handed opening, I wonder if it would offer more variety from the get go.
The issue with the repetitive DP opening, as I see it, is life points become arbitrary. It reduces both life scores evenly until one or both decide to break the chain. A faster process would be for both warlocks to agree on a lower amount of life to start with, it could be posted with the initial challenge. Xade and I agreed on 10 recently, I think that would be a common value, or possibly 5 for being the most damage a single spell can do. The other thing I like is that it trivializes FoD.
What amazes me about this game is, despite the finite commonly emerging patterns a small number of fine minds can observe in it, still it holds such vast charm.
There's just something about the fantasy land setting, superimposed on some serious mental gymnastics, that appeals to the trembling bespectacled autistic in all of us.
I'm surprised nobody has devised a similar game, maybe adding more variety or a different premise. Does anybody here play Go/Wei Qi/Badook? If you enjoy warlocks, you'll almost certainly find yourself completely hypnotized by that game, as I do. It's insanely fun.
Another interesting thing about these games is the potential "God's Algorithm", a theoretically perfect game. Such a thing is understandable for a rubik's cube, but in a multiplayer game involving no chance, I think the potential strength of other strategies in unseating this theoretically perfect approach, and the resultant set of different end-game scenarios, is a measure of its worth. Warlocks doesn't seem to do so well in this regard.. or does it?
When I think of Warlocks, I think about:
1) PS** 2) Juggling shields and the above, on self and monsters, ie. balancing spell flow and damage 3) Avoid your opponent's FFF.../PWP...
If you can do those three things, you're gravy. Maybe once a match there's a bit of excitement like an invis or a giant, but the core enchantments definitely see the most action.
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Jun 20, 2008 12:12:48 GMT -5
welcome back, r-asteroid!
|
|